Miller did not ssy j that his business was shwajs transacted with witness' mother, and not with' Ks father. Wit ness did not say: " Surely you rememFer father being present—try and remember." Wifa'eas did tell Miller to call on Mr Sinclair (defendant's solieitoi), but that was simply because Sinclair wanted to se2 him about the lease. Witness did not say anything to MiUer about his being " three sheets in the wind'"',when hs called to see his father. Witness did noi; tall Miller to call on Sinclair because he thought hs would be able to give valuable evidence in the case. To Mr Chapman: Witness never saw his mother writing letters or anything else any more than his father. Johu Davie deposed that he was the manager of a financial company, and had been for many years a partner in the firm of M'LandresS, Hepburn, and. Co. The firm had transactions respecting the property in High street now occupied by Watson's Hotel. The lease wag bought from Miller, and was for 21 years. The firm intended to build on the laud, and thought they could get concessions that would allow valuation. Negotiations went- on for some time between Hepburn and Gailie, and on one occasion witness saw Gailie in the office witt Hepburn. Afterwards the firm sold to M) Watson, and Mr Watson negotiated for an ex tension of the lease through Mr Hepburn. Wit ness did not know Mr Gailie personally. Cross-examined by Mr Fraser: Mrs GalHt was not present with Mr Gailie in the room, His recollection was clear that only Mr Gailie and Mr Hepburn were present. James Watson deposed that he went intc business in what is known as Watson's Hotel it 1873. The business was begun with the pur chase of the lease. There was no valuatior clause in tha lease, and a compulsory building covenant to spend £'500 only. Witness' fira paid £1500 for the goodwill of the lease, anc intended erecting large premises on it. Thej endeavoured to get a valuation clause inserted, but failed. Other schemes were tried, bul failed, arid at last they got a concession oi five years on condition that not less than £4000 was spent on the property. Ii these negotiations he was not brought into' con tact with Mr Gailie at all. Mr Hepburn nego tiated with Mr Galiie. 