Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CHARGES DISPROVED

Undischarged Bankrupt A jury in the Supreme Court at Wellington yesterday acquitted Charles Gordon Mackersack,. who had been charged with obtaining credit while an undischarged bankrupt. The Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers) was on the bench. Mr. 0. Evans Scott represented the Crown, and Mr. J. Meltzer appeared for accused. Accused was adjudged bankrupt on March 2, 1931, and he was committed for trial on two counts —of obtaining credit for £35/9/- from Dominion Rental Cars, Ltd., and of obtaining credit for £45/5/- from the Mutual Loan and Deposit Co., Ltd., since that date without informing the firms that he was an undischarged bankrupt.

Evidence was given by the manager of Dominion Rental Cars, Ltd., that accused hired cars from the firm. On one occasion he kept a car longer than the period for which he had paid. Civil proceedings to obtain repayment of the debt were instituted, and then witness discovered that Mackersack was an undischarged bankrupt. Accused did not tell him that he was an undischarged bankrupt. A mechanic employed by the firm who conducted some of its business with accused also said ha had not been told by accused of his position. Evidence to support the second count was given by the secretary of the firm named in it, it being stated that loans had been obtained by the accused from the firm before it knew he was an undischarged bankrupt. His Honour ruled that evidence by persons who said that they had informed the firms from whom credit had been obtained that accused was an undischarged bankrupt would not be answers to the charge. Mr. Meltzer said that, in that case, he would call no witnesses, but he addressed the jury stating that it was possible that the witnesses called by the prosecution had forgotten that in the numerous conversations that accused had had with the employees of both he had told them of his position, but that they had continued to do business with him and forgotten it.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19350212.2.19

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 118, 12 February 1935, Page 3

Word Count
335

CHARGES DISPROVED Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 118, 12 February 1935, Page 3

CHARGES DISPROVED Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 118, 12 February 1935, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert