JACKSON AND URAHAM v. DRANSFIELD. TO THE EDITOR OF THE EVENING POST.

Evening Post, Volume VIII, Issue 84, 10 May 1872, Page 2

JACKSON AND URAHAM v. DRANS FIELD. TO THE EDITOR OF THE EVENING POST.

Sir — In the above ease, as to interpretation of clause 3 of the schedule of wharf charges, ZMr. Draus field has only gained a pro. tern. victory. As Mr. Crawford naturally observed, the clause itself was so ungrammatically and ambiguously worded, it would require an army of experts to construe what it meant without giving a thought as to tbe inteeiion o£ the Corporation in the matter, and although he {MrCrawford) believed, the clause as worded was intended to apply entirely the other way, he was compelled, according to the reading of it, to give a verdict for defendant. However, welntend to bring the matter before the notice of the Council at its sittings this afternoon, so that the clause may be worded in such a way as to convey its ; real meaning. As it is now read, it is in dheet contradiction to a special clause in our lease, and the practical carrying out of the clause would also be prevented by the Harbor Master. Mr. Dransfield's " still small voice," even to himself, must have exercised some influence, or he would hardly have offered to settle the account with our Mr. Graham at the Empire Hotel the evening before the first hearing of the ease came on. We are, &c t Jacksox akd Graham; Lessees of wharf. 10th May.