13,103. Was that often?-I have had to do it myself.
13,104. When was that?-In 1870. He said he had no money to give me.
13,105. Was that at settlement?-Yes. He had the tack for two years more at that time, and he gave me a receipt for the rent of 1871. Then he failed; and I had to pay my rent for 1871 over again to Mr William Irvine.
13,106. Why did you give Mouat your rent for 1871 nearly two years before it was due?-Because I thought he was to have the tack for two years more.
13,107. But it was your own fault, was it not that you had to pay it twice?-I don't know about that.
13,108. Could you not have got the money from Mouat?-No. I would have had to apply to the civil law to get it.
13,109. You could have got the value of it in goods from him?- Yes. I could have got it in goods; but they were of an inferior quality, and I did not want to take them. [The witness produced a receipt for the rent of 1871 from Mr. William Irvine, and also receipt from Mouat in the following terms: '£5 MOUL, 13<th Jn>. 1871. ' This is to certify that I have from Thomas Halcrow the rent of 1871 in my hands. ROBT. MO.']
13,110. Is that Mouat's signature?-Yes; it is what I got from him.
13,111. Did you see him write it?-I did.
13,112. Do you know any other men who paid rent to Mouat in the same way?-I don't know of any others who paid him in that particular way, but I know some men who had money in his hands.