THE ELL COMMISSION.

Press, Volume L, Issue 8487, 19 May 1893, Page 3

THE ELL COMMISSION.

Second Day—Thcksdav, Mat 18. The sittings of the Commission were resumed at 10 a. m. Mr Lusk put in a variety of orders and other documents bearing on the case, which had been produced to the Commission by Mr Bloxam as Registrar. The examination of Mr Ell was then continued. In 1884' he proceeded to Wellington to, take evidence with reference to tbe accounts in Ell v Harper and Ell ▼ Hanmer and Harper. The taking of the accounts was finally concluded on Ist December, 1884. [Registrar's notes of date December Ist, 1884, put in. These notes stated that the Registrar and Accountant find that there had been an ascertained settlement of ac* counts in 1873, but that such settlement was incorrect.} In accordance with the minute of the Registrar witness sent in an account on sth December, 1884, and an acoount was also sent in by the other side. [Accounts produced.} .here was no promise made as to the delivery of the certificate when the accounts were concluded, but about 20th December, 1884, his solicitor advised him that the Registrar would not issue the certificate until the fees were paid. These amounted to £11 6s. Witness had not previously made application for the

certificate. Subscqtientlyhe paid the fees, amounting to £11 ss. These were paid on 23rd December, 1884. The certificates wero Sromised by the- Registrar on the sth anuary, 1885, or not later than 12th January. Witness made a demand for the certificates in January. The reason given by Mr Bloxam for withholding tho certificates was that that the Registrar and Mr Hargrcavcs were not agroed on one or two points, but there was no objection that other fees had to be paid. The certificates Aero not delivered either in January or February of 1885 though applied for. Mr represented witness as counsel up to 4th February, 1885, when his retainer was withdrawn in writing, and notice given to tho Registrar both verbally and in writing. In February a message was sent through Mr MoHaflio by Mr Austin, that the certificates were ready hut that then* would be fcos to pay. On application to the Registrar ho was informed that £88 4s, accountant's fees, had to bo paid before the certificates could bo issued. Witness paid £88 4s on 11th March, and expected to get the certificates, but he did not. The Registrar told witness that he would not give him tho certificates, but would hand them to Mr Austin, as ho was the solicitor on the record. Notwithstanding that, he assured tho Registrar that Mr Austin had nothing to do with his business, but Mr Bloxam declined to give the certificates. In reponse to a request from witness for the amount of each certificate, Mr Bloxam gave him the figures. By these it at once appeared to him that in some way a great wrong had - been done in the accounts. Application was then made by him for copies of the certificates, and he obtained office copies of them. Witness did not know of tho re-opening of tho accounts by the Registrar until he got a copy of his notes ou the 17th March roferring to further meetings on 10th, J 3th and 19th February, 1885, held by tho Registrar and accountant in reference to the accounts, and of these meetings ho had no notice. On 25th March proceedings wore taken to set aside tho certificates. . Tho bankruptcy petition by Harper and Co. against witness was filed on 24th March, 1885, and the adjudication took place on April Ist. That bankruptcy waa annulled on 3rd June, 1885. When witness got the certificates on loth he saw that the order of the Court in 1884 as to settled accounts had been ignored altogether by the Registrar and account-art. He found that a charge of £250 and interest, making some £600, had been charged against him, for which the receipt and absolute proof of payment bad been laid before tho Registrar. There was also a bill for £100 and interest amouuting to a total of £300 was charged against him, but no evidenco of its existence was produced before the Registrar. Mr Lusk put in the certificates of the Registrar on the completion of tho taking of tt-e accounts, and referred to the items spoken of by Mr Ell as having been wrongly allowed in the accounts.

A number of deeds were called for by Mr Lusk as showing the payments of certain amounts in this branch of the case. Application was made to Mr Batham, but it was pointed out that under the Land Transfer Act the District Land Registrar could not produce deeds without a Judge's order.

Some discussion ensued as to whether the Commission should adjourn till next day. Mr Lusk asked if he would have to pa,s

"or the certified copies. Mr Thompson replied in the affirmative.

Mr Lusk thought the Commissioners should call for the documents. ,

Mr Thompson could not see this. Mr Lush* said under these circumstances he must gA certified copies of the deeds. Tho Commission then adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day.