The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1884-07-13

Ne Dssahs . Cssssass ssA % CsapslisA -
Settle.

Ne 0seAks . Cesspass ssa ss Cs0Delle1 -
yrem ~ London rmas Jaivi.
In the Queens Bench division on June 30,
before Mr., Justice Hawkins and U special Jury.
ne case q S i against James Gordon Ben:
nett came on Tor sriHi; !, xn,cb IN. r,.,na1
sought 10 recover 5000 as remuneration for
services alleged to have been rendered tho do:
fsadfn a. he 20 al paa
Witch Rss ,Ss s% %Ehi hMaTs f'n :t s
sGG and H. H. %S sn 'Sf H. ssn
were counsel Tor the defendant. .,-,-
ss ..sd sss 4. SHS1s s sH AZ Plain n
carry out tha O' work Tor wSlei, h: nov soSsit
R fSs asisnS.n s wan Mr James SrIon ion:
nett. wel!-known American. 81 i9nr n,s9
sppssroa That about tho year 1859 Hsnnsts
had reason TO fear tho rivalry Of Mr.. ]. Gould's
Of news sna wss
AmsriS. and Europs. over which hs , should uk
yiocs Of Capt: clarE. thS pisintin ard
ma. Ss now sGs ousSs :snsss III"
company. the articles Of assoclatIon Of which
i e IA xa. sheass
fishing tho new cable. and had entered Into
fresh plans with u similar object with the
great american sani s MI MactEsy; bit
tifi. should not be adequately paid for all his
trouble with the original scheme. md coinpen-
might have suffered BY reason OF his not having
been able to devote all his time 10 II. ~ he
' Capt. Arthur Hamilton Clark called said that
previously to August; lss2: he had knoxn S!r;
agent TO American underwriters. In August.
1882 he received telegram containing a mos:
s tie Nee rS r @i sa The s.esrs% was put
in. and was dated the ,22d Of August. 1882: It
Ts S% from M bsnss ss ind Ss ps 70
Ssm Hssr co ss % vent s and f Mr ps %e
lines OF tho Western Union Telegraph Company.
h. would b. comEelled to form = new !ino Mr..
ai sS%sa the Atisnie inss Farthsr H.
Bennett said that Mr.. Jay Gould WAS buying up
two or three Of the principal newspapers IN
ton to crush him .IMr. Bennettj. For these
reasons he proposed to lay q now cable, and he
the eg ieWs sMsy Coz fs and rss s
Ssis IL: Il d. 5 +:
matter. Witness continued: Mr. Bennett then
asked me what was making IN my business.
$1,000 year. M. Bennett replied: "Oh. I
~2 RI Isy ysS wyCad l. to put
money into the concern. I, answered that /
but mot ssSS GsD sssu .s Goaf
shsss yoa TO mage H. r w1l
dom on Ike st with The obec. Of
at once setting to work 70 gather all the neces-
q hs To .hs Th x
ness here detailed the various scientific por-
xth apo and
ts assa 8 the s1'tsn's b: s'aS,%
tbs ss n san 10 sRed to
rea! position determined, Shortly after this,
md gone e Paris to see Mr.: Bennett. early In
sa se sepsd xead a He Sse
into The Ths
own private matter but Mr.. Garrett agreed to
the SALARY We also cable matters
nett's views and promoting his new cable.
the l7th q November. / met him u, Queens:
laid before him the correspon dencs. expert re-
ports. and other documents relative to the
scheme. Mr.. Bennett told mo he had seen Mr..
pany, as soon as possible. Subsequently e, this
contained prcyision sppSintins me Is NAM man.
aging director III the proposed COMPANY at q
yearly salary Of $1,000 took these over to
Paris to show Mr. Bennett. at his request Mr..
Bennett made no objection to that provision
These were signed in London By Mr.. Bennett
on the 3Oth ofNovember. 1882.
AT this stage Of tho plaintiffs examination
the Court adjourned for luncheon. and on re-
Stunning the case Mr.. Justice HAWKING said that
ultimately resolve itself into questions OF de-
tail which could much better be dealt with else
where.
At the suggestion Of the learned Judge con-
sultaton ensued tho result Of which was that
the case was referred to a gentleman-to DO
named by the counsel for the pluintin-to set
tie all matters. Mr.. Webster. Q. c.. stating that
on behalf OF Mr.. Bennett. be was prepared to
have the question determined, not upon legal
grounds. but as between gentleman and gem
teman whether the plaintiff was entitled to
any advance on the sum paid into court or not