THE HON. J. G. WARD.

Auckland Star, Volume XXVIII, Issue 259, 8 November 1897, Page 2

THE HON. J. G. WARD.

ORDER OF DISCHARGE

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.)

INVERCARGILL, Friday.

The following are Judge Ward's remarks in the Bankruptcy Court to-day in granting discharge to J. G. Wardt—l am fully aware there have been numberless charges of offences by the bankrupt in connection with the banking legislation, the Colonial Bank and the Ward Farmers' Association. Noneof theseare in question here; the question now is simply whether the bankrupt within a period of three years prior to his bankruptcy failed to keep proper books, that is failed to keep such books as are usual and proper in a business of the kind carried on by him. The situation was very properly described by Mr Solomon in his opening as unique. Here we have a, man in a large way of business selling out his business to .a company and himself being the proprietor of a large proportion of the shares in the Company. He is managing director of the Company, and the Company take over practically the whole of his business excepting certain freezing contracts, which are partly carried on by the Company, but which are eventually taken over by Nelson Bros. It appears since this that the whole transactions of the bankrupt have been through the Ward Farmers' Association, and that the whole of these transactions appear in the books of the Association. There is no question whatever about these books being accurately kept, whatever character of someof entries may have been. That is not for me to decide. What I have to decide now is whether any jury, having consideration for the whole of the facts before the Court, would find that because the accounts of the bankrupt were kept by a Company of which he Avas managing director, and of which be was three-fourths interested, practically the proprietor, whether any jury would find him, taking these facts, guilty of a charge under subsection 4of the Bankruptcy Act. Technically the fact that he allowed his books to be kept by the Association of which he was managing director did not amount to a misdemeanour. I don't think any jury would convict on such a charge. That is the only point of the position. What might have been said if other matters were brought forward I have not to decide. There has been enough said in the press regarding suchaccusations. Those who have made them had had an opportunity to come here and prove them, and have not done so, and I can only say I trust that these proceedings will show the futility of the accusations made elsewhere. According to the assignee's report, it appears to me there is not sufficient cause for delaying the order of discharge, which I consequently grant.