Difference between revisions of ".MTQ1.MTY0NjI"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | and we distrain parts thereof there used as a shop by the plaintiff in their trade and business of merchants and which said gods and chattels were part of thestock in trade of the plaintiff in the way of their business and of great value to wit $500.- and converted and [?] this to the owner uses to wit under under of also and unfounded claim that the defendant was then entitled to | + | and we distrain parts thereof there used as a shop by the plaintiff in their trade and business of merchants and which said gods and chattels were part of thestock in trade of the plaintiff in the way of their business and of great value to wit $500.- and converted and [?] this to the owner uses to wit under under of also and unfounded claim that the defendant was then entitled to seize and take [?] of the paid goods to [?] their alleged to the due [?] the plaintiff to her Majesty by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the plaintiff was greatly annoyed for [?] injured and disturbed in carrying and conducting his trade and business and prevented and deprived of the gains and profits which otherwisw might and would have accrued to them and the plaintiff claim $500 |
Revision as of 03:27, 24 April 2024
and we distrain parts thereof there used as a shop by the plaintiff in their trade and business of merchants and which said gods and chattels were part of thestock in trade of the plaintiff in the way of their business and of great value to wit $500.- and converted and [?] this to the owner uses to wit under under of also and unfounded claim that the defendant was then entitled to seize and take [?] of the paid goods to [?] their alleged to the due [?] the plaintiff to her Majesty by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the plaintiff was greatly annoyed for [?] injured and disturbed in carrying and conducting his trade and business and prevented and deprived of the gains and profits which otherwisw might and would have accrued to them and the plaintiff claim $500
