IN BANKRUPTCY

Press, Volume L, Issue 8485, 17 May 1893, Page 3

IN BANKRUPTCY

His Honour sat in bankruptcy at 11 a.ra, RE GEORGE A. PREECE. An adjournment was made in this case, which was an application for discharge, until 6th June. RR JAMES MCSGBOVE. In this case Mr Beattie applied for the discharge of the bankrupt. His Honour, after examining the bankrupt as to bis affairs, granted the discharge as prayed. BE TnOMAS WOODMAN. This case stood over till the next sitting RE M. COOKEY. Mr Fisher applied for the discharge of the bankrupt. His Honour granted the order as prayed. RE HARPER AND CO. In this case, which was an application by Mr Stringer for the consolidation of the estates of George Harper, .T. W. Maude and Leonard Harper, bis Honour delivered judgment as under :—" I should have been glad to have seen my way to making this order, as it is obviously inconvenient that what is practically a joint estate should have to be administered as three separate estates. lam not, however, satisfied that I have power to make it. Section 47 obviously does not apply. It is limited to petitions against a bankrupt. Two of the petitions are by the bankrupts. Besides, the section seems directed not against such a case as the present, that is individual and joint debtors tiling separate petitions, or being separately petitioned against, but against more than one petttijn against individual or joint debtors. If 1 have power.to make the order it must be by what is called the inherent power of the Court to regulate its proceedings. For this re Gowar 1, D. and De G. was cited. This was decided in 1840 under an Act of 1825. The procedure is wholly different to that of existing Acts, and apparently much more in the discretion of the Court. The case is, as far as I iiave been able to ascertain, cited only in one test book, and no authority since -its date is shown for any exercise by the Court of such power. The recent bankruptcy -legislation' is specific as to procedure; it deals with the question of consolidation, and does not give authority to do what is now asked. If it were merely a question affecting the management of an estate by the Assignee the manifest convenience of the course might induce mc to take the responsibility of adopting it. But if the order is made all the subsequent procedure must follow it, and it would be open to any persons interested in resisting any proceedings under any of the bankruptcies to raise an objection on the ground of irregnlatity in form. I think therefore it will be the safer course to refuse the application."