Difference between revisions of ".MTQ1.MTY0NzM"
(Replaced content with "e") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | In the Supreme Court of British Columbia | |
| + | The fourteenth day of November A.D. 1878 | ||
| + | [?] The Plaintiff [person's name] by Robert Edwin Jackson his Attorney sues the defendant John Maguire for that this defendant converted to his own use and wrongfully deprived the Plaintiff of the use and possession of the Plaintiff's goods that is to say one chest of tea. And the Plaintiff further sues the defendant for that the defendant broke and entered the dwelling house belonging to the Plaintiff and continued and stayed therein for the space of one day making great noise and disturbance therein and greatly disturbed and disquieted the Plaintiff in the possession and enjoyment of the said dwelling house and then also with force and arms took and seized divers goods and chattels to wit one chest of tea and the Plaintiff further sues the defendant for that the defendant broke and entered the dwelling house belonging to the Plaintiff and continued and stayed therein for the space of one day making great noise and disturbance the Plaintiff in the possession and the enjoyment of the said dwelling house and then also with force and arms took and seized divers goods and chattels one chest of tea then being in the said dwelling house and in certain parts thereof then used as a shop by the Plaintiff in his trade and business of a merchant and which said goods and chattels then were part of the stock in trade of the Plaintiff in the way of his trade and business and of great value to wit five hundred dollars and converted and disposed thereof to his own use to wit under a false and unfounded claim that the defendant was then entitled to seize and take possession of the said goods to enforce payment of a certain license then alleged to be due from the Plaintiff to Her Majesty by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the Plaintiff was greatly by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the Plaintiff was greatly annoyed | ||
Revision as of 04:51, 24 April 2024
In the Supreme Court of British Columbia The fourteenth day of November A.D. 1878 [?] The Plaintiff [person's name] by Robert Edwin Jackson his Attorney sues the defendant John Maguire for that this defendant converted to his own use and wrongfully deprived the Plaintiff of the use and possession of the Plaintiff's goods that is to say one chest of tea. And the Plaintiff further sues the defendant for that the defendant broke and entered the dwelling house belonging to the Plaintiff and continued and stayed therein for the space of one day making great noise and disturbance therein and greatly disturbed and disquieted the Plaintiff in the possession and enjoyment of the said dwelling house and then also with force and arms took and seized divers goods and chattels to wit one chest of tea and the Plaintiff further sues the defendant for that the defendant broke and entered the dwelling house belonging to the Plaintiff and continued and stayed therein for the space of one day making great noise and disturbance the Plaintiff in the possession and the enjoyment of the said dwelling house and then also with force and arms took and seized divers goods and chattels one chest of tea then being in the said dwelling house and in certain parts thereof then used as a shop by the Plaintiff in his trade and business of a merchant and which said goods and chattels then were part of the stock in trade of the Plaintiff in the way of his trade and business and of great value to wit five hundred dollars and converted and disposed thereof to his own use to wit under a false and unfounded claim that the defendant was then entitled to seize and take possession of the said goods to enforce payment of a certain license then alleged to be due from the Plaintiff to Her Majesty by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the Plaintiff was greatly by virtue of the Chinese Tax Act 1878 by means whereof and of the premises the Plaintiff was greatly annoyed
