SUPREME COURT.—THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume V, Issue 1371, 2 July 1874, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.—THIS DAY.

SITTINGSIN BANKRUPTCY,

(Before His Honoi\Sir Geo. A. Arney, Kt., Chief -Justice.) Be Ra>iu#s? and Jacobson. Mr Buddie' nd&e an application for an order for comf>Me execution of a deed of arrangement in thl case. The usual declairltions having been made of the provisions ojthe statute having been complied with, HiaßTonor granted the order, Re Suou Dbyden. The bankrupt in ftis case had promised to supply a fuller statement of his accounts. The case was called, but the bankrupt not being in attendance it was adjourned for another week. * Re THOSiiMACHATTIE. Mr MacCormick ajplied for the disctarge of the bankrupt. B»believed there was no opposition. * • His Honor said hi had no recollection of what particular stagCjlhe bankruptcy of Mr Machattie had arrivedat. Mr Machattie said that the preliminary steps had been taken^five years ago before Mr Gillies was elected(luperintendent. His Honor promisec|to look up the antecedents of the case aid give a reply nexfc week. Re Geo. Tbene, Jun. The bankrupt's examination in this case was resumed by Mr MfcCormick. On the Bth Januaryk payment was made to Messrs Kinross ani} Co. on account of a shipment of flax to li sold in New York on their account. Hi was to account to them for the proceeds £ the sale, and in the event of a loss they T^uld have to account to witness. The flax pas the property of Kinross and Co,, ano formed part of the shipment by le Skimmer of the Waves. The b] a of lading for the whole shipment rere received in in Sydney by the bankr it's father He did not think there was ans igreement betweea himself and Kinross an *Co. as to any advance on the flax on tis occasion. There had been agreements in imilar transactions before. He acted in pu uance of the course of business. He was pr, ared to adhere to that statement. The £;' 0 was paid at his own option. He shotrl fxot have had the commission unless M< frs Kinross had understood they were 1 have^an advance on the goods. He had n lettera to show an agreement. Under ord lary circumstances on receiving wool or flaj to sell for another person he was not prei red to say that it was the custom to maki advances, but on receiving the flax for salefie considered himself legally bound to maje the advance. It was not made because he wished to continue the business after becorr Dg bankrupt. He fixed the amount himself, redid notremember any application for such a urn. He considered it a fair amount to advnce. He did not know as a fact that he hil overpaid Messrs Kinross and Co. There ad been no invoice or statement from Messr Kinross fixing the value they put upon tfe flax. He could hardly tell what the flaxjwould realise when sold in New York. Haknew the value in Auckland. He presuma if he had overpaid Messrs Kinross they wojld have repaid him. When dealing with! men of mean 3 it was not usual to be soparticular about the exact extent of the adva cc. The flax at the time was on the way o New York. The market had since dccli cd. There was no intimation of that at the ;ime. It was usual to make the advances askoon after shipment as possible. In this case the shipment was made on the 13th December, and the advance on the 9fch Jaiiary. In the interval he received no communication from Messrs Kin»ss about the flax. The advance is entered inthe ledger between the 3rd and 12th December. The flax was received some time prior fo December. He thought it was as far backlas September. His Honor asked what tiie counsel understood to be disclosed by t&ledger entry. Mr McCormick said tie only thing he could understand from it was that the advance was made on the 3rd December.

The bankrupt said that the entry of £500 ■was the last entry made by Mr Fletcher, his clerk; the next one was made by Mr Macfarlane. The entry w»s not meant to stand under the date of 3rd. An irregularity in the order of the transactions was caused by some of them being posted from the cash-book, whioh was entered up every day, and others from the journal, which was posted up at longer intervals. In the case of the £500 the date had been left out. In regard to cash payments he thought the correct dates would be found against the entries. It was not so in the case of the entries of the 24th December, because the books were left unfinished by himself and his clerk. The effect, of it was to render it impossible to ascertain the date of the transactions without enquiry from himself. It was not left unfinished for that purpose. Mr Fletcher did not go to New South Wales on bankrupt's business in January. He was not authorised to make any payments on account of bankrupt. He was not aware that he had made any. Witness recollected Fletcher going away. He only knew he was going two or three days before his departure. He tried to detain him because he wanted ■ him to help him to make up the accounts. Fletcher took no cheques 'or drafts of witness's with him. The credit to^ Messrs Kinross for the value of &tjt flax would come out of another boofc^i He fixed the amount of the advance by esti^Tt mation. The flax was entered in the storeman's book, when it came into the possession, of the firm.

Mr MacCormick asked the bankrupt if he' could point out the entry. Bankrupt said he could not. It was there, however.

Mr MacOormick said he must insist on seeing the entry. He had been instructed that no book furnished to the trustees showed it.

The storeman's book alluded to was not produced.

Examination -continued: The flax was valued at the market price. Before gettijiigthe £500 from the cash tyox he had discounted—not sold—two bills one for £118 13s lOd, and another for £500 to Mr Howard. He had endorsed the bills without reoourse.

The money was procured .fin theßth January; the exret sum was £597 2s 4d for bills value £618 13 lOd, making thefcsum paid for the discount £21 lls 6d. At bank^u-ates the discount would be £G 2s Gd, and the commission £15 9s. The bills were good bills. One was Mr Tonks' for goods sold. He denied that the bills were sacrificed. His motive for this transaction, after signing his surrender on the 7th January, was to get the money to pay Kinross and Co., nob to defraud his creditors in bankruptcy. There was no sum due to Messrs Kinross and Co. That firm at the time owed witness £300. (A letter to Messrs Kinross, dated tfie 13th December,

from the bankrupt, -tells them to pay the £__«Su«is^? r some concrete apparatus sent per |gS&fiS_into the bankrupt's credit at the MLJnionTßank, at Napier.] He would not admit that he had a fraudulent intent in paying that money. He could not say why he did not credit them with the £500 instead of taking the money out of the cash-box. The result of the payment seemed to have been that the money came out of the estate in bankruptcy. That was not his intent. Be had no account at the Union Bank. The order for Messrs. Kinross to pay the £250 into the Union Bank was not given with the intention of concealing the payment and preventing the money coming into the estate. Bankrupt told Fletcher to take the £500 out of the cash-box to pay Kinross. He did not think much about how the payment was to be made. The payment was not iJfede by draft. Fletcher told him the money was paid. Bankrupt could not tell when Fletcher told him the money Was paid. He believed that the payment was made on the Bth January. It was not a fact that the sum was paid long after the 10th January by Fletcher. To take the money away and pay Kinross were all the instructions he gave Fletcher. There was no acknowledgment from Kinross for the money. He did not "tell Fletcher to go to Napier. Fletcher did not go so far as he was aware. Fletcher entered the payment the day it was made. He could not recollect what FJetcher's words were when he told him the payment had been made, but witness was at the time satisfied it was made.

Mr MacCormick said the entry appeared to have been made the day before Fletcher paid himself £70. Was that correct ? Bankrupt said he believed it was. The Court here adjourned.