THE CASE OF FRANCIS SHACKLETON.
I Mr. Francis Richard Shackleton, ex- ! Dublin Herald, and brother of Sir Ernest Shackleton, the famous Arctic explorer, ' made his. appearance in the dock at Bow i Street this week. I The accused was arrested in Portuguese West Africa on a warrant which charged him with having fraudulently converted to his own use a cheque for £1000 entrusted to him for the purpose of investing for Miss Browne. In December, 1909, Miss Browne and Shackleton were both staying at Lord 1 Ronald Sutherland Gower's. house at Panhurst. Hearing Miss Browne refer to £1000, which was due to her under a life policy, Shackleton said, "Whenever you get it, let mc have it and 1 will invest it for you in something good." Miss Browne received the £1000 in February 1910, and sent defendant a cheque for £1000. Meeting her in April he said, ,"I have invested it in the Celtic." i In July, 1910, a receiving order was 1 made against Shackleton, and in. August .he was adjudicated a bankrupt. In his statement of affairs he scheduled Miss Browne as a creditor for £168 for interi est. Inquiries showed that no shares in ! the Celtic Company had been purchased jin her name. The facts of the second j case, in which Lord Ronald Sutherland ] Gower was the sufferer, were simriar. I In February, 1910, Shackleton had an I overdraft at h ; s bank exceeding £40,000. j The bank held as security a guarantee of Lord Ronald Gower. They also held some 60,000 £ 1 shares in the City of Monte Video Public Works Corporation, which at that time were absolutely worthless. The defendant, who was intimately connected with the company, knew this, said counsel, probably better than anybody else. That being the state of affairs, Shackleton called on the authorised clerk for a firm of stockbrokers, and told him that Lord Ronald wished to buy Monte Video shares, and that instructions should be taken from him (Shackleton) to save delay. A written and verbal authority was asked for, and an interview took place at the office, at which Shackleton did all the talking, and Lord Ronald said nothing. The firm received a letter signed by Lord Ronald confirming the interview and asking them to buy 5000 Monte Video shares and send. aU contracts to Mr. Shackleton. In a covering letter Shackleton said the shares were not quotable, but there were "deals about £1 to £1 1/6." They were to be bought only from a firm named. Lord Ronald, counsel pointed out, was to buy the shares at their face value. The purchasers were not to go about in the market and see how cheaply they could get them. They were not to buy the shares from a particular firm, who, as „ brokers to Shackleton's bankers, were to sell the shares held as a guarantee- for his overdraft. Shackleton alone, therefore, would benefit by the use of Lord Ronald's money to purchase those worthless shares. In May, 1911, a creditor obtained judgment against the Monte Video Company, and in July a winding-up ■ order was made. The statement of affairs showed a deficiency of assets as to creditors of £343,000, and as to contributories of £600,000. The result was that Lord Ronald got worthless pieces of paper for his £5000 and Shackleton benefited amount.
(ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.)
Permanent link to this item
THE CASE OF FRANCIS SHACKLETON., Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 58, 8 March 1913
THE CASE OF FRANCIS SHACKLETON. Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 58, 8 March 1913
Using This Item
Fairfax Media is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Fairfax Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.