Chicago Licensed Holding

Thames Star, Volume XXX, Issue 9026, 25 March 1898, Page 2

Chicago Licensed Holding

JUDGMENT FOR COMPLAINANTS

At the Warden's Court this afternoon the Wardeu gave judgment in the case of Bennett and othei\s v. the Chicago Goldmining Company (No Liability) and Joseph Smythe. The Warden said he viaited the mine yesterday and noticed that a considerable quantity of quartz had been thrown over the tip. To all appearances a great deal of it was what was commonly called mullock. It seemed to him that the bulk of it was only of small value. A. good deal of the quartz was not distinguishable from mullock until it had been washed by the rain water. However, he did not think the case rested upon that point. It seemed to him that the work had to be passed by the supervisor, and as the work done had been paid for it was onlyreasonable to suppose that it had been passed by him. Otherwise it would not have been paid for without some deduction being made, As it had been paid for, he thought that the supervisor was satisfied with the work. It seemed to him that it was too late to repudiate now. ' The proper plan was to have retained a certain portion of the money. The contract had been drawn up in a very loose way. The only question was as to the amount the complainants were entitled to receive. He thought they were only entitled to the amount they would have earned during the time they bad been out of work, if they had been employed. He would give judgment for the complainants for £45 10s, and costs as against the defendant Smythe.* The Court costs amounted to 10s. Mr Miller asked for co3ts for the complainants. Mr Clendon said it had never been the justom to allow costs to complainants. The Warden declined to allow complainants costs. Mr Miller asked the Court to. allow a special solicitor's fee as the case had taken a long time. The Warden tixed the solicitor's fee at k 4 43. ' Mr Harper asked for costs on behalf of the Company, in regard to the nonsuit. , Mr Miller said that if ever there was a case in which no costs should be allowed it was the present one. There , was no company in existence when the ' action was commenced. The company I was Mr Symthe and no one else. Mr Harper: Mr Symthe is not the company and never was The company is a bona fide company and I had authority to act for it. Mr Miller: The company has never been sued, and consequently is not c: titled to any costs. The Warden said that whatever trouble the company had got into had been brought upon them by them» selves. He declined to allow any costs. Mr Clendon asked for stay of execution for fourteen days, to enable Mr Smythe to be communicated with. Possibly the company might take the responsibility of his action. Mr Harper said if the company decided to relieve Mr Sajythe of his responsibility under the judgment, a cheque would be forwarded by the middle of next week. Mr Miller : But suppose the company does not? Mr Harper : Then you have your remedy against Mr Smythe, The Warden said he had no objection to the matter standing over until next Court day, April sth. The Cour: then adjourned.