MISSING FOR 15 YEARS

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22436, 24 June 1938, Page 9

MISSING FOR 15 YEARS

A BENEFICIARY WHO DISAPPEARED ACTION IN SUPREME COURT PRESUMPTION OF DEATH SOUGHT The authority of the Supreme Court to presume dead a beneficiary under a will who had been missing for 15 years was heard yesterday in an originating summons which came before his Honour Mr Justice Northcroft. The missing beneficiary was George Frederick Maddison, who disappeared in 1923, and has not since been heard of. Under the will of his father, Frank Samuel 1 Maddison, he. with two sisters and a brother, was entitled to an equal share in the residuary estate of his father, after an annuity of £2OO a year was set aside for the testator’s second wife. It was stated that George Frederick Maddisbn’s share of the estate now amounted to approximately £6OO. Mr A. F. Wright, with him Mr L. J. Hensley, appealed on behalf of the other beneficiaries—two sisters and a brother—ih the residue of the estate, in support of the originating summons; and Mr R. A. Cuthbert appeared fas the Public Trust Office. Outlining the circumstances of the claim'that George Frederick Maddisor be presumed dead. JVtr Wright said that a similar application had been before the Court in 1933, and had then been stood down so that further inquiries codld be made. Since then the most exhaustive inquiries had been made, but without result

After a disagreement with his father over financial affairs, said, Mr Wright George Frederick Maddison disappeared in 1923, and nothing since had been heard of him by any. members of the family. Mr Wright read a list of advertisements inserted by the Public Trustee and by relatives in newspapers in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the United States, and Great Britain. and also detailed efforts made tc trace the missing man through official channels and through the Salvation Army’s missing persons’ bureau. Disappearance of Brother Ad affidavit of Amy Bertha Maddison a sister of the missing man, stated that on February 2, 1923, her brother, who was a road contractor in Canterbury, did not return to work one day after lunch. The disappearance was reported to her father, who, going to his son’? camp, found that his clothing* money and motor-cycle were still left there The affidavit gave details of an extensive search over many years for news of the missing man—all withou any success. Details of a search made for their brother by another sister, Mrs Ida May Wilkie and a brother, Arthur Samuel John Maddison, were also given by Mr Wright. In addition to the request for presumption of death, Mr Wright also sought a declaration that as there was no proof of the survival of George Frederick Maddison to the time of his father’s death* his share should be deemed to have lapsed. Evidence of their brother’s disappearance, and that they had no clue to his whereabouts and no way of knowing whether hejyas aliye or dead, was given by Ida May Wilkie and Amy Bertha Maddison. Considerable legal argument was heard on both sides on the legal position on the presumption of death of a person after the disappearance for seven years, during which time no tidings were heard of him by friends or relatives. Discussing the legal aspect of the case, his Honour said that it seemed to him that there was reason to believe that the missing man had simply gone off and' possibly adopted some other name. There seemed ho suggestion of suicide, nor did the father seem to think his spn had committed suicide. If the claim was to be dealt with on its own circumstances, and not on the feneral principle that a man who had isappeared. without communicating tc anyone, for seven years could be held to.bp.dead, then there would be some difficulty in acceding to the summons Decision was reserved until this morning sfe that his Honour might Consult the authorities pirt forward by counsel.