BUYING OUT BAKERS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 186, 6 August 1913, Page 6

BUYING OUT BAKERS.

TRANSACTIONS AT CAMBRIDGE

DISPUTED LIABILITY. Some complicated transactions coitnected with certain bakery businesses in Cambridge were the subject of a case heard by Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court this inuruiug. F. M. Whwtone, of Auckland, merchant (Mr. Stan-ton), sued Jeroiuu Augustine McUlennan, of ilelensvillc, baker, and Arthur Beaumont: Uoycc, of Cambridge, baker, for £~>(> 4/e, for Hour supplied. •Mr. 6. Lcffie, of Cumbridge, appeared for the defendant Boyoe. The statement of claim set out that McClennan was a partner with, Biiyve, and ordered the goods on his behalf, thl» fact being unknown to the plaintiff at the time. Further. Boyce agreed on April 19 last, in consideration of the plaintifTe giving him time, to pay the iuccount by monthly instalments, but he afterwards repudiated the agreement and refused to pay anything. The defendant MeClennan, called by the plaintiff, stated that subsequent to August, 1911, the defendant Boyce bought out two bakery businesses in Cambridge successively in hie (witnees') name, Boyce finding nearly all the money. Witness drew wages at the start, and then took out eueh sums a-s he needed. He carried on the businesses in. his own name, and the understanding was that Boyep was to get half the profits. Prior to April last,- when he bad to give up on account of ill-heulih, Boyce paid one account; of £50 for flour. After h< , had retired he attended, with Boye?., a meeting of at which the plaintiff was present, and Boyce then agreed to take over the book debts ant] all liabilities. He grave Boyce a blank cheque, to he drawn to cover any liability. .but some rnontlie latter he drew a sum of £8 out of his account, the other cheque not having boen presented.

In cross-examination the witness wao asked if it was not a fact that any pro fits accruing were to be devoted to paying off the moneys advanced by Boyc<\ and he admitted that thie was "the caee. Boyce was to receive half or any profits that might accrue if the business were sold before Boyce was paid off. R. G. Clark, of the firm of Robertson Bros, (also creditors), and the plaintiii", F. M. Winstone, who were present at (he creditors - meeting, stated that Boyco made a verbal agreement of the effect stated, though he did not sign any mem orandum.

The defendant Royce stated the relationship between himself and McClennin before the meeting was simply that the latter owed 'him a.bout £400. At the meeting Mr. Stanton drew up an agreement, ajid in consequence of a statement therein that he xvm purchasing the book debte he told the creditors that he would nrrt_ eign it until he had consulted his solicitor. ITe did not conclude the agreement verbally. The book debts ac stated in the final agreement, were not the same as those sot out it the meeting and. seeing this, he refused to sign. "he case is proceeding.