'Moreover, they have. had to' make-1 deposit of nearly $3,000 to enable-them to collect: a sum which. ts only 50 per cent. more than that figure, Tt 4s, admitted: that the' tenant had no sounds for refusing. payment of rent and it: wil be recognized that "the landlords were not unreasonable in wanting to squatters rights and' "protect those a abusing the processes "of the courts.
'The landlords'are. now' sri the position: that nearly two years have passed since they first sued for their rent in this case and' their claims are still unsettled... 'Thus it Is clear that when a Jandiord brings, action against a tenant for non-payment of rent the tenant has always' some excuse to put before the court as round of appeal. When. the 4s in the Supreme Court it may take at least six months or a year two: before the court will pass Judgment; and there will then" be more rent: in arrear, 90 that when the landlord decides to have recourse to law he thas to be prepared to start a fresh action every six months and to continue such litigation until {he sludges have reached one. dect= fs asserted that if the courts would give speedy justice Instead of holding up a case for a long time, the tenant would not have the apportunity to make use of the dilatory proceedings for further evasion. of hig Uabilities—and as. costs are not given against the loser in a case, there Is nothing to deter a. tenant from making frivolous appeals,, thus putting the landlord to unnecessary expense.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.