of a suit brought against Mr. Ellis I. Ezra, British broker, by Mr. B. 7. B. Elias, British exchange broker, in which the plaintiff claims the sum of $31,433.18 from the defen-to be due the plaintiff as a result of the sale and sterling, was resumed in H.M. Supreme Court before Assistant Judge P. Grant Jones yesterday morning. In a counterclaim the defendant claims the return of two promissory notes, which he alleged he was forced to sign under duress, costs and such further and other relief as the court may deem fit. Mr. Ranald MeDonald appeared for the plaintiff while Mr. H. A. Reeks square and play the game and upon receiving an affirmative answer at-vised the defendant to tell the plaintiff he could pay him in full or take him to the defendant's bank, the Chase Bank. This the defendant refused to do, alleged the plaintiff.
"About 1 pale." continued Mr. Elias, "the defendant told me that he had 8415009 in the Chase bank which he was willing to pay me at the end of June. 'This was far in excess of the amount due' but Mr. Ezra said that as he would owe me $268,000 at the end of July, the balance would go towards paying that amount, He then made out a promissory note and wanted to leave the office.
Telephones Wife "Tt was essential that I should receive information from him as to whether he intended to meet his continued the "I asked him when the $268,000 would be produced if he had no Mr. Bias "and he told me that he money but. 17.5.$15,000," continued
could sell shares and other securities and raise from his friends. I still would not let him go as 1 wanted to know the extent of his shares, so he telephoned his wife. She came over about 1.30 and as the door was still locked she waited outside the office. At that time there was a tele-ere- phone call for Mr.
Ezra which I would not allow him to receive. Nothing else happened until Mr. Ezra june what are you going said that if he took me to the Chase 1 told him that it Bank it would discredit him and was his attitude he would stay might prevent him from raising the ce until he gave me a rea-1 saw his point lowed The plaintiff then produced a plan, of the arrangement of the furniture' in his office at the time of the interview, which was duly entered, Quoting from correspondence ex-'Mr. changed between the counsels Mr. him. Mr. Maurice Ezra, according to the plaintiff, then asked the gefendant if he was going to be McDonald said "Elias threw both arr around Ezra and with a fling threw him to the floor."
"That is not true," said the plaintiff.
Mr. McDonald continued "Ezra picked himself up and telephoned to his wife to tell her that he was locked Anti-British Drive in North Abates Tsingtao, Nov. 8.
Indicating a relaxation in the anti-British movement in North China, the English Baptist Mission hospital. at Ching-chow fu, between Tsingtao and Toman on the Kaotsi Railway, has just been permitted to reopen, it is learned here. The hospital was compelled to close some time ago owing to anti-British agitation—Reuter. up but Elias rushed to the telephone and snatched the receiver from his hand."
did not interfere with him at all," said Mr. Elias. He also denied that he had threatened the defendant or abused him verbally.
"Second Pick-up"
Mr. McDonald continued reading, "Elias once more threw Ezra to the floor ena asked the defendant to take him to the bank." This was denied by the plaintiff. "Ezra picked him-She tpt Judge:
"This was the second pickbp?"
Mr. McDonald: "Yes, My Lord."
The plaintiff denied allegations that he had grabbed a ruler and held it in a threatening manner to the defendant.
"Elias once more rushed at Ezra and threw him to the floor," read Mr. MeDonald.
"You don't do a thing like that three times," said the Judge, "surely once is enough?"
"We're only half-way through the bout, My Lord," said Mr. McDonald. "He is alleged to have thrown Mr. Ezra to the floor two more times."
Mr. Reeks here intervened to explain that all this took place in the space of two hours. "You could hardly sit' it out in a theatre," was the Judge's comment.
Mr. Elias denied that he had assaulted Mr. Ezra and in answer to allegations that he left the office with the defendant he replied that he had never left the office at all and that he had lunch in his office.
"This is not a bit reliable," said the Judge, referring to the discrepancy between the statement of the defendant and the evidence of Mr. Elias, "1 am sorry this is between two British Mr. Elias revealed that he had acted in accordance with the rules of the Exchange Brokers Association, and that he had never sold to Mr. Ezra, from him or with him, that he acted solely as a broker.
The examination in chief concluded, the hearing was adjourned until November 16.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.