AGAINST BUSINESS MORALITY

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 296, 14 December 1922, Page 5

AGAINST BUSINESS MORALITY

AUCKLAND CREDITORS' LETHARGY. MT. EDEN BUILDER'S FAJXURJi

A bankrupt builder's application for his discharge from bankruptcy was made before his Honor Mr. Justice Stringer at the Auckland Supreme Court to-day. The case was that of Charles Thomas Spearpoint, Mt. Eden, for whom Mr. Jordan appeared. Mr. M. Reed appeared for tbe opposing creditor.

Giving evidence, Mr. Tahiti said that the debtor owed his firm about £167, the bulk of which debt was incurred this year. At the time the main credit was given, Spearpoint had assured him that his total debts were £200, when, in point of fact, he owed John Burns and Co. £3.19 and his credit had been stopped by that firm. The debtor declared he had a house valued at £900 and a farm of 100 acres valued at £1200. There was actually a mortgage for £575 on the house and the Government valuation of the farm was £335. Witness said he had investigated the bankrupt's affairs, but no proper books had been kept. A record obtained from his solicitor's statements showed a deficiency of £1287. but there were no dates given for the items of expendi-

Cross-examined. witness denied that the creditors were satisfied with the statements submitted. Did the other creditors tell you they had decided to carry on the matter? I called on Messrs. .). J. Graig and ■Messrs. Burns and they said they were behind mc in what 1 did. but they considered their money was lost and they did not see any use going to the Supreme Court to back mc up. His Honor: I am not going to discharge a man who does not keep proper books; be has committed an offence against the Bankruptcy Act on that alone. Mr. Jordan: The bankrupt did keep books. The Official Assignee: In his examination he stated he did not keep books of account. There were none which could be called a proper set of Ibooks of account. Mr. Cahill further stated that he had seen Spearpoint in Queen Street and Vulcan Lane in a drunken stupor on four or five occasions. His Honor: In my opinion this ca»c requires further investigation and 1 hope the Official Assignee, who, 1 see, has funds in hand, will have it done. It seems to mc open to serious question whether this man has not committed several breaches of the Bankruptcy Act. He has kept no proper books setting forth his transactions, it it open to serious question whether he did not obtain credit by fraud and misrepresentation, and it certainly seems that he did not contract some of the debts with any reasonable expectation of being aible to pay.

Under these circumstances, continued his Honor, I think in the interests of the commercial world some further investigation should take place. 1 think Mr. Cahill has adopted quite the right course. It is very desirable in the interests of the community that persons like this man should not be rushed through the Bankruptcy Court. His petition was filed in July, 1022, and he expects his discharge • few months later. T think the creditors who adopted the attitude, "We have lost our money and there is no use bothering about it," are fating up a very improper position and one -quite contrary to the best interests of commercial morality. Mr. Cahill's conduct is to be approved in bringing this matter up so that this man could not sneak through the Bankruptcy Court without proper attention being given to him. I refuse the discharge.

Mr. Jordan protested that he had not had an opportunity of examining the Official Assignee, and pointed out that Mr. Cahill had not attended all the meetings of creditors. His Honor replied that counsel might have an opportunity of showing that the debtor kept proper books in other, proceedings.