Rhyl Journal

ST ASAPH COUNTY COURT. l' 3 AND SON'S DISPUTE.-PROTRACTED HEARING OF THE CASE. A St Asaph County Court, on Friday, His fudge Sir Horatio Lloyd resumed the ir.r f the remitted aotion partly heard at the t I County Court, in which Mr John ov D. Evans sued his father, Mr John vansjfor L78 98 4d, for services rendered er of the North Wales Publicity Associa- r as clerk to his father. Mr F J Gamlin he plaintiff, and Mr Madden (instructed adcliffe) for the defendant, It will be red. that the case for the plaintiff, as the previous hearing, was that on his bankrupt his father took the business I previously by the plaintiff at Station ( and engaged the plaintiff to act as his i < salary of 15s a-week, and as manager to 1 N h Wales Publicity Association he was ther 15s a-week. Plaintiff now claimed k from the 17th of August, 1898, to r, 1897, and 15s a-week from January, August, 1896, during which time he also the advertising business for his father, in amounts which he had drawn during I of service, bringing the net claim to v \1; d. Plaintiff was under cross-examination Lt hearing was adjourned on the previous mlin, on the case being called, said he to announce that the parties had not to come to any terms, and the case must dden said that on the last occasion His vould remember he mentioned a counter ch His Honour would not admit. Since :ourt a summons for what would have 5*' counter-claim had been issued, and it me on for hearing that day. As it matters of account which were inter- vith the present action, he thought it convenient course for both actions to be ether. mlin objected to this, but it was ulti- ranged that the defendant should be lined as to the claim made against him, rwards examined as to his own claim is son, the son being recalled to rebut. .dge: Your claim, Mr Madden, is for Od. tflden: Yes, we have reduced it to that ••sir o as to bring it within your Honour's on. jnlin It is very good of you. .dden then resumed his cross-examination vintiff, who said that up to the 19th of 1 J6, he was in business for himself, when to bankruptcy. At the same time he working for his father in connection with tisicg business, for which he claimed it the rate of 168 a-week. ith regard to that .£50 which you got on .f rent, who did you get it from ?—From lestone, Chester. on any authority to get the JEoO P—Yes; x) my father to Bigbam and asked for whether I should collect it or not. for P—Because it was wanted to pay the te office. ur father reply to your wire asking for ir o™ l ?-He concurred; 1 really forget whether ;mt oy written reply or not. Mr 0 mlin This does not arise in the case at 1- s absolutely irrelevant. This is simply laini )r services rendered. 'Phe ,dge This is the difficulty I foresaw. It r •:y ion of who is to be believed, and I can- t ni> it. Sir > cnlin: Very well, I shall have something and by. T~\ tdge: Of course, I gather there is plenty ru u > be thrown by and by, and that is what paft rious to avert when I suggested a settle- ._1 ,) :u, Mr mlin Your Honour has seen the letter ? d?. •: dant sent to his son engaging him that ole issue. dge: And they say now that he has got v aperly. M r nlin: But they have made no claim for it. dden Just look at that bill book, do. ra he first entry there. There is a bill of In on by Thomas Evans payable to the ,¡, i South Wales Bank on the 21st of Dec. jnr bill ?—Yes. lr. v ch you used your father's money P-No, was iwn by myself. Alio in used your father's money to pay it r- i, it Hit into my own account. I wrote a tar ny father with respect to the cheque, in uch aid, Presuming upon this cheque a eocr ill be sent to the Provident to-morrow." f depended on the other. ot married in September, 1894 ?~ Yes. hat time your father had been keeping ), I had been earning my own livelihood. Xov d been to sear-I had been to a good ses. er, you were about 30 years of age when i. tarried ?-I was 29. Fret well up to that time your father had to 'P "fi i—No, I had always been working. Did not get you several appointments to ferez, companies?—No, I worked for what .i, ?nts I had. These appointments inclu- tary to the Rbyl Steamship Company, y Club, and the Pier Company. It is aat I owed some of them to my father's you got marriad in 1894 you went to echwood Road ?- Yes. as your father's bouse, and he gave it r; Mid you lived there ontil the following I]ng iv rV:' free?—There was no rent, it is true, but ■re an accommodation on both sides. That i m: !r which the Official Receiver can dissect n you. pay the rent P—He paid the rent, no <1: ,auise it was his name that was down for t11 ,). pay even for the gas that cooked your foo am not aware of that. Afie hat you removed to a house of your own did. i An )k all the furniture with you P- 's. 1 ) did not I Did u take the best part o' -No, I did art as divided betwp anti ray- i ? took her par4- ,mgha-„ acd I ther. t. A ad sequel gift* j n-sce it r ha- J. v J '1 •! 'Y4.J" -• •' • •-■1 1 father's, and did vo i try to ti ar.octfj V.0—Poasiiiif 1 ;J3" i i :hl ka--> .} t L;) far. ,I Road P- r :r¡L' J had come to. .t C;ii ■. J ou, then P- They 1 was the deed of gift made? ,nuary, 1896, and the applica- Jan was July 5th, 1895.—In July, L you put an advertisement in the paper ent of yours ^Dted a loan of £ 200 on <•■500 v th of furniture P Wid u swear that was not for yourself?— P isiiLI. t was myself. XbV as one thing your father has done for jou iat money did he advance yoa ti'.jif:? —■ [e advanced very little; he Wa8 jQ my debt 7 same year, August, 18v<>, jou get a chMn- r E597 Is 8d from hIm P- Yea, but it L-, ,-iven to me. I may tell you that the I South Wales Bank were waiting open- r; or this oheque. vv i c account was it in the North and South Wtole" h, ok ?-My father's account. -11 a- ou an account, too, and was it over. draw v. This cheque would have been swamped it i* i gone to the North and South Wales 11 suggested it should be paid into my a^-Cv at ad paid out again, and he agreed to it. Ar. J u paid it into your own account P- I did. Th 1 dge: Do you say that the account was r,vc t i to a larger amount than the cheque P— y; fV bank manager was after my father con- ti asking when this mortgage was going 'aro^gh lè t overdrawn, and was it not about that be was pressing you ?-No. Was he not pressing you to make up this over- draft on your own account, and you were trying to get money from your father to pay into the bank in reduction of your account ?-No, my account was healthy. In October, 1895, did he lend you another 2200 ?-No he did not, He gave me script of the nominal value of R200, but which only realised.t65 at a public sale. What did you do with that. Did it not go to the bank to your own account ?—Yes. In January, 1896, did he pay JE220 for you P— No, he did not. He paid that money, which he owed himself to my father-in-law. Mr Gamlin: All these debts were proved in the bankruptcy, and were withdrawn. Plaintiff: The Official Receiver refused to idmit them. Mr Madden Did you swear in your bankruptcy that you owed your father 21000 1-1 bolstered him up. I don't say any more. Did you swear you owed him £1000 ?-I tell you I bolstered him up, I won't say any more. The Judge But did you swear it ?—I did, your Honour. Mr Madden Did he pay £ 70 in August, 1896, to Mr A 0 Evans?—That was in respect of a mortgage raised on some property of his. As security for you ?—No, it was not security for me. It was part payment of S300 he had borrowed himself from Mr Evans on the Herald property in March, 1895. That is what you say about it.—That is the truth. Did Mr Evans sue for it?—I do not think he sued, but he would have done had it not been settled at onge. Did he ask you about it ?-He may have asked if my father was going to pay it. We come to January, 1896, when you say you were engaged. This time you profess to be in business for yourself ?-Yes, and my father had use of my office. Can you explain, if you say he agreed to pay you 15s. a-week from the 12th January, 1896, to June, 1896, how you got no payment from May, 1895, to Dec' 1895 ? I don't know, that was the arrangement come to in 1896, and which was to be retrospective payment to that extent. From May, 1895, until December 31, 1895, the same business exactly was going on as from Jan. 1896P—We were one and the same, as the Judge said. My father was on the premises. Your father some time ago ceased to be agent for the steamship company, and handed them over to you ?-Yes, he left bis offices in May, 1896. All business outside the billposting business your father handed to you P—Yes. You were doing a lot of business at that time? —Yes. I want to know if you can give me a reason why there should be an agreement to pay you 15s a-week from the 1st of January, 1896, when you had been carrying on the same work in the same office from May, 1895, without payment P—I refer you to his letter to me, in which he autho- rises me to charge it. But that was only a few months ago.—When- ever it was, there is the authority. Was there not an arrangement that he should use the office for the billposting business, and that you should have the hoardings free for the purpose of advertising your steamship agencies P —Yes, that was part of the arrangement. And in return for that you were to manage the billposting business ?-That was part of the ar- rangement. Not a word was said about giving you 15s a- week?—I don't think there was then. When you commenced your business in Janu- ary, 1896, there was no agreement to pay you 15s a-week ?-There is the letter. But the letter is long after that P-That is what I go upon. u Mr Gamlin And the interview afterwards, Mr Madden AVhen was it?—We had a conver- sation about it in August, 1896. When you became bankrupt in June, 1896, you were on the rocks, as the saying is?—Bankrupts generally are on the rocks (laughter). And you had to fall back on your father ?-No, he had to fall back on me. Did you fall back on your father ?-No, he wanted me to continue the connection made on the promises. You had nothing to do, and your wife had gone away to the country because you could not keep her ?-She had gone to the country. Because you could not feed her P-N othing of the kind: 1 was not very flush, it is true. Mr Gamlin It is a most contemptible sug- gestion. She went to some part of Wales, and yon went to live with your father ?—She was in Rhuddlan, close by. Her father did not take her back ?—My wife is a woman of some independence, and would not go But you are not, and you went back to your father?- Yes, I wanted to recoup some of what I bad lost through him. Yoa went to your father's house in June, and bad the use of it while your accounts were being prepared?-He asked me to go. I was saving his head from bankruptcy. He was also paying yon poaket money every week ?-I am not aware that he did, Did he not give you 37s every week, 22s for Fowler, who he kept for your convenience, and 15s a-week for yourself. You were getting 15s a-week then.—I am asking for it. In the condition you were in you had no placp to go to, and you wanted to start again.—I plenty of places. You wanted to start again—I was --in i;,us, as I am now, to get upon my feet agav aere ? had fallen. That is the reason why I .a,le th" 7)r. posal to my father to rent tb,, You wanted to start p. li- bers-Naturally. And you first *ru-l t < !'Si;t Ü, piac- nont your father'- know you are ref"* rug r r'l1 nd -Weipl lp,i"" co accept as tellrl —i" r:, This it ut is -ifa—T e bankruptcy was. do wm je efrort to fresh start in life. Diri not vV the di Receiver to let Too the place) 1 conl-' Of)" .y tell you,because J tv- not sea whst, ?ir'bt to ask him. And yonr father tor ) place-He bought it IYJ an jnf!tJr.1t. He thfil J you had a stool in it- ,bere witfe stools there, yes. This ho ii- be- J6 you said you were hard up —I doi!t v at my father's reasons were, I illy very hard up, because yon had ? Ler to the Official Receiver saying ving upon th j charity of your father- imlin Produce that letter. .ntiff: I wrote that letter at the instigation y father. I have got a copy of it. is that your own writing- Yes, now I look at it the letter never went at all. I remember 'I w t. .J writing tais lener, OuT, it has never goce. Mr Gamlin Your conscience pricked, probably. Mr Madden: You say that it was when your father was going to London that you made the arrangement about his giving you 158 a-week— We had a conversation about it than. What is the date of that conversation—17th of August, 1896. The arrangement was that I should have 158 a-week as manager of the adver- tising business, to date back in consideration of my past management of it. What was the other 15s for-For general work. There was nothing said about that then—Yes there was a general conversation about everything. Have you drawn 30s a-week-I have drawn what I have given you credit for. I should have thought you would have drawn all you were entitled to. According to your story you were entitled to draw 30s a-week—Yes. Did you draw that 30s a-week—No, I just drew what was sufficient. Why did you not draw all-Because the concern would not stand it. Your father could have paid if you had asked him—I don't think he could. I think he was rather tight himself then. Counsel directed attention to the accounts, stating that with two or three exceptions of items of 30s, all the salary drawn by the plaintiff was !lot the rate of 15s a-week, and he asked plaintiff wby, if he was entitled to draw 30s a-week, he only drew 15s. Plaintiff: I had a very good reason for that. This billposting business is worked on credit, and I could let that 15s stand over until the end of the season. There is an item of 27 lis 8d which you have drawn. What is that sum for-I wanted it for J -] T L 1 11 From what business-From my father's busi- ness. Had you any business of your own at this time-No, I was manager for my father. From August, 1896, the place was absolutely your father's, and you were in his employment at 30s a-week, and therefore whatever money you drew from the office was drawn from the whole concern —I really could not apportion it: I took what I got. Did your father know that you had drawn that money—Yes, he knew of it; he had the cash book in London. Is it not a fact that you did not show him the cash book in March, 1897, a month after this- I cannot tell you when, I know he had a cash book in London. What cash book had he in London-There was a cash book in London, that is all I know. I may tell you that it is as broad as it is long. My wife was advancing money to the business. To whose business-My father's business, and rather than give her credit on the money I debited myself with the whole amount. Did your father ask you to get money from your wife-As long as I got the money it did not matter to him where I got it from. Or how you got it, eh-I don't throw that reflection on the old fellow. Did you tell your father all about it-He knew all about it. When did you tell him—I could not tell you the date. Look at your account. For nine weeks in suc- cession you only drew 15s a-weck. Did you write to your father to say that you wanted the other 15s, or say that you used to go to your wife to get it-Yes, I have a copy of a letter I wrote to him in which I stated that but for my wife I ould net get on. Did you ever ask him for the other 15s—I did not press him. I did not like to be too hard on the old fellow. That is not a respectful way to speak of your father, to call him old fellow "—I will say old gentleman, then. He is your father, you know—Then he has treated me very badly. When you made this arrangement with your father in 1896, waj there any arrangement that you should send him a statement of accounts-He used to ask me for a statement sometimes. Did not your father complain that you did not send him statements of accounts regularly-He has always been complaining of everybody from the time 1 remember him. That would be a long time, then-17 years. And he has always been complaining without any reason-I don't say without reason, but quibbling over little things. From the time he left in August until he dis- missed you—I was not dismissed. I thought we had agreed as to that at the last hearing. However, from August, 1&96, until last August, he has been all that time asking you by letter for these statements to be sent to him regularly, aid complaining that he did not know bow his business stood-He was always shown them. In June, was he not very much annoyed-I do not remember his being particularly annoyed. Let us see what led to your dismissal.—Coun- sel then read a letter from the defendant to the plaintiff, stating that he had made repeated ap- plications to him for the cash book and details of the billposting business, and had failed to get it, apart from a brief memo. He must look after his business with great care; he was under pressing necessity to do so, and would not glide along into a deeper mire.—The plaintiff read his reply to that letter, in which he said that the cash book and details of the billposting business would be sent down, and explained that subsequently his father came down and saw them. A Council next read a letter of the 3rd of August from defendant to plaintiff, stating that all busi- ness connections must cease between them. But that should not embitter their relationship, for he should always be ready to give him advice and as- sistance. He requested that plaintiff should take immediate measures to remove all his papers from Station Chambers before he came down. He would not trouble him to send any cash statement, as he mhould be able to do this himself when he came down. Plaintiff received his reply to that letter in which he offered to rent Station Chambers at 150 per annum, and named his guarantee for the rent, provided his father handed over the bill- posting business to him and explained that he was anxious to re-establish himself on the premises where he was so unfortunate through outside speculations. Mr Madden: The whole bone of contention is this bill-posting business ?—No, the whole bone of contention is this wife. Yes, that is what sets the bill-posting going there is a woman at the bottom of everything (laughter). After your letter of the 5th of August your father came down you saw him, and were abusive in your language to him.—No, I was not. Did you abuse him in the office ?-No, I did not. He asked you for your statement.—Everything he asked for I gave him, or promised him. You were promising all along. He came down on the 7th of August and met you on the 9th ?- Yes. And you continued to go to the office between the 9th and 14th of August ?—Yes. Though he told you in his letter of the 4th of August that you were to remove all your things from there ?—I did not act on that letter, as I had more confidence in him. I know him well and thought that when the old gentleman came down, and if the young lady, his wife, kept away, we could settle it all amicably. You cannot leaye the young lady out, she ses all the trouble does she ?—Quite so, you are )unsel read a letter from defendant to plaintiff ;d 11th of August, regretting that his son's duct and language towards him had become so Litolerable, that he requested him not to enter as office again.—Did you, asked Counsel, consider yourself discharged then ?-No, I did not, I have seen so many letters of that kind. Counsel read another letter from the defendant to plaintiff in which he said that plaintiff's conduct had become unworthy of a dutiful son. He had on more than one occasion bodily assaulted him. He had caused him a clear cash loss through his bankruptcy of 92,000. Notwithstanding this he had tried to give him a new start in life. He had tried to forget the past and to assist him far as:it was in his power. He must now ask him not to enter his office again. He had found he had torn a large number of leaves from the invoice letter book belonging to the business of J A Evans & Co, and he must request the return of the 119 pages thus torn, and cancel the appointment which he had made with him for six o'clock that evening, as he did not know when he made the appoinment that he had taken the criminal course of cutting letter books and removing things from the office without his consent and knowledge. Whatever he had thus taken he requested should be returned. The letter was signed Your affec- tionate but much distressed father, J. A. Evans." The plaintiff said that the 119 pages referred to in that letter did not refer to his father's business at all. Did you tear them out of the book ?—Yes they belonged to me. They were matters referring to 1892 and 1893, and did not belong to the business at all. The Judge Have you got them here ? Plaintiff: My father has got them, they were returned to him. In a further letter read by Counsel, dated 11th August, time 8 p.m., the defendant complained that the plaintiff had forced the lock of the door leading from the office to the passage, so that it could not be closed and locked that night. Such conduct was unwarrantable, and he again reques- ted plaintiff not to enter the office again. If he did so be should call upon the police to eject him. He also said that in the event of the plaintiff not im- mediately returning the 119 pages, he should have to take verystrong measures, as they seriously affected his business."—Plaintiff admitted receiving this letter. Mr Madden At this time things were very hot between you and your father. He had come down from London and discovered that those leaves were torn out ?—I have told you that already. Did he not say to you when he came down, Come, sit down with me, and I will take all the papers and divide them. and whatever are yours you can take them ?—No. At this time your father was in possession of the office. You came there in his absence and forced open the door ?—I did not force open the door. I had the key in my possession. How came you to have the key?—It was there. And you took it ?—Yes. And it does not belong to you ?-I have not re- turned it because you make so much talk about this forcing. Was not the key on the inside ?-I could not tell you, I forget. Do you forget that you forced the door open ?— I did not force the door open. Was the lock damaged ?—I could not tell you. I remember that my father was on the spree once and damaged a lock. Never mind talking like that. It is disgraceful. [ have told you once already about talking of yonr father in that way. tween plaintiff and defendant. In one letter the defendant expressed his deep regret that the plain- tiff should have cowardly assaulted Mrs Evans, and thrown her on the floor in the office. Mrs Evans had advanced him JM with which to pay his rates last year, and the least he could do was to lespect her person, as she was the only one he had to look after the office that day during his absence. He was proceeding in a way which would bring him to disgrace, as well as the respectable name which his family had borne. Plaintiff read his reply which was to the effect that he went to the office for a directory, and as he was taking it out, Mrs Evans: rushed at him like a tiger-to use her (Mrs Evans') own definition of herself when she was terrific-and in her excitement he could not say what happened. He returned to the office when she struck him, and tore his coat into tatters, and to prevent further attack he speedily made his exit. "Your wife," continued the letter, "is a violent woman, on whose statements no credence can be placed." Mr Madden That was keeping the pot boiling ? —It was pretty well boiling all the time. You got no reply to that letter ?-They don't reply to letters of that sort. That fairly knocked them out ?—The reply I got was a summons. Voluminous correspondence was then read with reference to the books taken from the office by the plaintiff. Plaintiff said that his father adopted the cruel course of taking criminal proceedings against him. Mr Madden: He adopted the readiest course open to him. A Mr Gamlin Explain what became of the sum- mons. Plaintiff: He withdrew it. Continuing, witness admitted making an agreement to meet his father under the clock in the station, and they went to- gether to the waiting room. Mr Gamlin: On that occasion an assault was alleged to have been committed, and that has been dealt with by the magistrates. The Judge Then I shall not have to deal with the assault. Plaintiff, continuing, denied that while in the waiting room he was rude to his father, and that in consequence of his rudeness his father declined to discuss business with him. He never spoke about business at all. Mr Madden And did he then go out, and you followed him out and kicked him ?-No, I did not. Mr Gamlin He would not admit it if he did. Mr Madden He will be perfectly safe in doing so, seeing that the case has already been dealt with by the magistrates. Plaintiff said that summonses were issued by both parties and both were withrawn. Con- tinuing, the plaintiff said he had complained of notice that had appeared in the newspapers by his father that all business connections between Mr T Evans and himself had ceased, and that he no longer represented the firm. Whatever books he had taken away from Station Chamhers he had returned. He might have a few directories in his possession that his father had given him. Mr Madden: Books or bibles, or whatever they were you must tell me what you have got.—There was not much bible about that office. Mr Madden Don't show your officiousness, sir. With regard to the letter of the 27th of March, in which the defendant told the plaintiff to charge 15s a week from January to June, 1896, salary for managing advertising business, and 30s a week from the resumption of business, the plaintiff denied that that letter was for the purpose of making an income tax ref urn, although he was preparing a return at the time. Mr Madden said that they admitted the second part of the claim, viz., 15s a week from the 17th of August, 1896, to the 14th of September, 1897, leaving only the other two parts to be fought out. His Honour at this stage adjourned the further hearing to the 5th of February at Rhyl when he will sit to resume the hearing of the case.