106
#
If not the whole, of the expenses.
On April 2nd, another Contractor, Foo Sik, applied to Mr. Belilios for a sum of $1,019, showing Mr. Chatham's certificate for that amount. This Mr. Belilios declined to pay. In June following, A-Hok again presented a certificate for payment by Mr. Belilios, this time of $11,200. This also Mr. Belilios declined to pay and was sued for the amount by A-Hok.
Some time previously to the hearing of the case, Mr. Belilios wrote to Government. I do not think "Mr. A-Hok can succeed, as neither the Public Works Department nor Mr. Chatham had any authority from me to order either works or materials beyond the sum of $6,570." It is thus clear that in Mr. Belilios's view, the entire responsibility of such repairs and alterations to Beaconsfield as caused an excess of expenditure over the sum of $6,570, rested with the Government; though, after A-Hok had commenced proceedings against Mr. Belilios, the latter expressed himself willing, on September 6th, to come to a compromise by paying one half of A-Hok's and Foo Sik's combined accounts if the Government would agree to pay the other half. The Government, however, declined to pay any part of these expenses on the ground that it was in no manner or degree liable for Mr. Belilios's private expenditure.
#
A-Hok brought his action against Mr. Belilios because he was advised to do so by his Solicitor, who was the Crown Solicitor, his counsel being the Acting Attorney