THE HOOLEY FRAUDS.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11751, 27 November 1903, Page 5

THE HOOLEY FRAUDS.

SOME SHADY TRAN&iOTIONS.

United Presa Association—By Electrio Telegraph—Copyright.

LONDON, November 25,

Before the King's Bench, Mrs E. T. Hooley sued a cotton manufacturer named Booth to recover £2800, alleged to be due upon some shores in the Sapphire Corundum Company, of Western Australia. Booth forced the company into liquidation, alleging that be waa unable to obtain working capital from Hooley, who waa acting for hi* wife, who was one of the (promoters. Booth denied tho alleged liability, and mode a counter claim for £200, paid on five thousand shares, alleging misrepresentation. The Lord Chief Justice commented on the statement made by a witness named Cawstoiv, to the effect that Hooley had urged him to stay away from the trial, and also Hooley 'a contradiction of that statement. Hie jury must, Lord Alverston* added, decide how far they could rely on Hooky's oath. A verdict was returned for defendant upon tbe claim and counter-claim.

Before the Kings Bench, Charles Kelly and Eden George sued Cawston to recover, upon a bill of exchange given at R T. Hooleys instigation, in connection with Kelly's scheme to reconstruct the Sapphire Corundum Company. Mr Justice Lawrence declared that th« transaction was fraudulent, from beginning to end, and George knew it. Judgment waa given for defendant with costs.