(1.) This is an appeal from a judgment and order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements, dated March 2, 1915. This judgment and order affirmed the judgment and order of the Court of first instance, pronounced on September 19, 1914.
(2.) The action was brought by the respondent, who is a moneylender, against the appellant for certain sums of money, amounting in all to 29,521 dollars. To this action the appellant lodged a defence that at the time of the transactions sued upon he was an infant.
(3.) The facts briefly stated are these: On March 21, 1912, the appellant s father died, the appellant being his second son. On October 16, 1912, December 13, 1912 and January 17, 1913, respectively, he executed in favour of the respondent three mortgages over his one- twelfth share of his late father s property. The amounts in the mortgages were 6000 dollars, 8000 dollars and 10,000 dollars. Interest was stipulated for at 15 per cent. per annum for the first six months and thereafter at 18 per cent. The respondent swears that at the date of the transaction he "suspected he (appellant) was under age." "I thought," he says, "his mother would prove his age or, perhaps, his brother. I was in doubt even after the Doctor s certificate was produced. It may be wrong. There was still his mother or brother. He wanted the loan, so I did not go to see his mother or brother." Later in his evidence he stated: "I lent because of the high interest, 15 per cent., which was arranged between us"