INSOLVENCY COURT.—Tuesday. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Kt.]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXII, Issue 2683, 21 February 1866, Page 5

INSOLVENCY COURT.— Tuesday. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Kt.]

RE JAMBS DORAN, BAKER, AUCKLAND. The petition came before the Court on adjourned hearing. Mr. McDonald appeared for petitioner, and applied for hiß discharge. The insolvent had not yet made the usual assignment of his estate. The Court said that the estate must be assigned to an assignee, who would inform the Court on 24th of March of the state of insolvent's affairs. Mr. Vernon was appointed assignee, the insolvent to make final proof of debts, and a meeting of creditors to be held before the 24th March, protection to be extended to petitioner. BB OLIVER OSBOBNE GRANT, PAINTER, AUCKLAND. The petitioner came before the Court for first hearing. Mr. W. McDonald appeared for petitioner, who had been delivered from prison. He applied for his discharge, and there appeared no opposing creditors. A similar order was made in this case. RE DANIEL LORIOAN, PUBLICAN, AUCKLAND. Mr. Weston appeared for petitioner, and applied for a final order. It was arranged that this case should be disposed of in chambers, and, on the final order being filed, the insolvent to receive his discharge. RE ROBERT BRYANT, BUILDER, PARNELi. This was an adjourned hearing. Mr. Connell applied for petitioner's final discharge, on executing assignment to Mr. Vernon, official assignee. The insolvent was examined as to proof of debts which had not been included in the schedule, and which he admitted as due. An order was made for the alteration of the schedule. No assignment had been made, and the Court said that was clearly a case in which an assignment should be executed. It was ruled that final order should issue on an assignment being made to Mr. Vernon, official assignee.

RE RICHARD HENRY HOLLAND, PARNELL. This petition came before the Court on adjourned hearing. Mr. Kenny appeared for petitioner, who had made the required assignment, and the per-centage had been paid. He applied for his final discharge. The application was unopposed. The Oourt ordered the discbarge of insolvent from the debts contained in bis schedule. RE HENRY MAIDEN, GARTER, AUCKLAND. This was an adjourned hearing. Mr. Kenny appeared for the insolvent, and stated that an assignment had been made to Ma Vernon, official assignee, and he (Mr. X.) asked for petitioner's discharge. There was no opposition, and th« application was granted. HE ADAM MCISAAC, CONTRACTOR, KAPANGA. This case was entered for adjourned hearing. | Mr. Keetley appeared f«r petitioner, who was not present; but who had made an affidavit that he had no property and no power to deal with any real or personal estate. The Court said that one creditor had proved his debts, and that, consequently, an assignment should be made to Mr. Vernon, and the further hearing adjourned until 24th March, protection to be granted meanwhile. On the next hearing, should the petitioner afford the trustee every information in his power, and no creditors appear to oppose his discharge, it should be granted. RK ANDREVT ANDERSON, BUILDER, AUCKLAND. This case came before the Court on adjourned hearing. Mr. Weston appeared for the petitioner; Mr. Hesketh appeared for the trustees, to oppose the insolvent's discharge. » His Honor read over his notes of the former hearing. Mr. Hesketh said the accounts had been looked into, and the insolvent had rendered very great assistance. Mr. Weston applied for insolvent's discharge, who bad rendered every assistance to wind up the estate during the last two months. An assignment had been made for the benefit of all the creditors before the petition had been filed. The trustees had had ample time to ascertain whether there was anything fraudulent in the insolvent's transactions, and the petitioner should not be deprived of his discharge any longer. Mr, Hesketh said the trustees did not find any fraud, but they thought they should have further assistance of insolvent to wind up the estate, and he (Mr. H,) would ask that the further hearing be adjourned until next sitting of the Court. The Court did not think the trustees were in a position to ask the Court to hold its hand any longer over the petitioner, and he should, therefore, receive his final discharge. EDWARD KINLOCH AND WALTER P. POOKES, VETEBINARY SURGEONS, NEWMARKET. The petitioners came before the Court for adjourned hearing of petition. Mr. Kenny appeared for petitioners^ who were uu opposed. He stated that the partnership liabilities amounted to £269 18s. 9d., and the assets were £515. The separate liabilities of Kinloch were £310 18s. Bd., and his assets £394 11s. 4d., which consisted of a number of smalt debts. Mr. Fookes's separate liabilities amounted to £119 4s. 5d., and his assets to £576 6s. 4d. He applied that the hearing might be adjourned until 24fch March,sequestration to be extended until that time —on the ground that a large number of creditors were willing to consent to an arrangement to have the estate wound up under a deed of assignment; some of the largest creditors had consented to that arrangement. No person appeared for creditors or sequeatrator. The Court granted the order for adjournment, with

protection. RE JAMEB ANDERSON, STOREKEEPER AND FARMER, AUCKLAND. The petition came before the Court for first hearing. Mr. Keetley appeared for insolvent, whose debtt amounted to £298. He was possessed of a leasehold house and premises in Queen-street, subject to a moitage of £350, and £100 interest; also 200 acres of land, subject to a mortgage debt of £50. He asked for his final discJiarge on making an assignment of real and personal estate. His Honor said he could not give the petitioner his final discharge on first hearing, but order an assignment of the estate, and grant protection until next sitting of the Court. Mr. Vernon consented to act as assignee. RE PETER STORRIER MACKENZIE, AUCKLAND. The petition came before the Court for first hearing. Mr. Jame3 Russell appeared for petitioner, who was not opposed. There had only been one proof of debt. The insolvent had been formerly an hotelkeeper. His total liabilities, including those incurred in Wellington, amounted to £1,141; and the assets amounted to £158. A large number of the creditors had consented to sign a release. Mr. Weston informed the Court that some time ago a number of creditors had consented to sign the deed *nd grant insolvent release. His Honor said there was no one present to examine the insolvent or to set aside the deed. Mr. Russell said the debts contained in the second schedule were all incurred subsequent to the deed of assignment. He applied for insolvent's discharge. His Honor said there must be clearly a second hearing. It was agreed that the insolvent should make an assignment to Mr. Vernon for the benefit of all the creditors named in the schedule; and the further hearing was adjourned until next sitting day. RE ROGER BARRY. PUBLICAN, AUCKLAND. This case was entered for first hearing. Mr. Keetley appeared for petitioner, who was an hotelkeeper. His liabilities amounted to £53; assets, nil. None of tke creditors had proved. The petitioner bad been in custody and discharged, inasmuch as he had been imprisoned for a debt of £15 which was covered by deed of assignment, which was also binding on dissentient creditors. He asked for release from debts due to dissentient creditors. . The Court said protection would be extended until next sitting day. No order could be made for his final discharge, and the case could only be adjourned until 24th March. The creditor who had proved his debts would have to appear at next hearing. RE GEORGE HODGE, HOTEL-KEEPER, ONEHUNGA. The petition came before the Court for first hearing. Mr. Keetley appeared for petitioner, who had made an assignment for the benefit of his creditors, which there was every reason to believe the greater number of creditors would sign. When he had filed his petition he had not fulfilled all the conditions of the 23rd section of the Act. The liabilities amounted to £4,528, and the assets to £5,016 4s. lOd. The estate had passed under the deed of assignment. His Honor said there was no judicial knowledge before the Court that the 23rd section had as yet been complied with, or that the creditors had granted the petitioner release from his debts. Mr. Keetley asked for the discharge of the insolvent without an assignment. Mr. Wynn appeared for the landlord, who claimed for rent. He read the 22nd clause of the new Act,

which, showed that landlords were included among those creditors who should have priority. Unless the petitioner arranged that hid client ahould have | priority, he would oppose the insolvent's discharge. His Honor said that he felt disposed to order an assignment of the estate to a trustee or trustees, and leave them to fight their battle with the trustees under the assignment, instead of attempting to reconcile the various clauses of the Act on collateral arguments. The Court would refuse final discharge, and order an assignment of petitioner's real and personal estate to a trustee ; and that the further hearing be adjourned until 24th March, protection to be extended until that time. Mr. Vernon was appointed trustee of the estate, by consent of both parties. RE JAMES CHAPMAN, HOTELKEIPER, AUCKLAND. The petition was entered for first hearing, but the Court was informed that the insolvent had made an arrangement with the creditors. His Honor said the estate was in the hands of the sequestrator, Mr. Vernon, who would of course have to see that the 10 per cent, should be realised to the Colonial Secretary, under the provisions of the new Act. He asked Mr. Vernon, as registrar, whether he wished to raise any question as to the amount of the fees payable from the estate, as he might be called to account for, and pay intothe Government the per-centage, and unless he rectived it from the estate he would have to pay it out of his own pocket. Mr. Vernon, in reply to his Honor, said he had anticipated that the question would be railed during the hearing of the case, and he had spoken to Mr. Beveridge on the previous day about the matter, and told him that it was his intention to apply to the Court for the payment of the fees. ,Mr. Wynnsaid * substantive motion might be made, under 9bh clause of the new Act, to have the petition taken off the files of the Court, and an arrangement made with regard to payment of per-centage. It would be for the interest of the insolvent, as his estate was in the hands of the sequestrator. On behalf of Mr. Vernon, he (Mr. W.) would like to have the sequestration enlarged. The Court decided that, the petition having been abandoned, it consequently lapsed ; and ordered the further sequestration of the estate to Mr. Vernon until 24th March next.

BE CHBISTOPHBE BULLEN SMITH, GREENGROCER, AUCKLAND. The petition came befora the Court for first hearing. Mr. Keetley appeared for petitioner, who was unopposed. His liabilities amounted to £368, and the assets to £348. He applied for an assignment of the estate, and. protection to be granted, the sequestratior to be made trustee. The Court granted the application, with protection to 24th March next. KE CHABLTtS JOSLIKT, HAIBDRESSEB, AUCKLAND. The petition was entered for first hearing. Mr. Weston appeared for petitioner ; Mr. Wynn appeared on behalf of the landlord, Mr. Kinnear. Mr. Weston asked the Court to make an order of assignment of the estate to Mr. Vernon, for the benefit of creditors, the landlord to have priority. Mr. Wynn did not object to the application. The insolvent proved two debts not included in the schedule. The Court granted the application ; protection to be extended to insolvent until next sitting day. KB MABTIN DONIHER, CONTRACTOR, AUCKLAND. The petition was entered for first hearing. Mr. Hesketh appeared for petitioner. He asked for an order of sequestration of the estate to be made to M. Vernon. H« was not aware that any other debts had been proved. His Honor said one creditor had proved a debt. There were assets sworn to amounting to £80. The Court ordered an assignment to be made, and protection to be granted until next sitting day. RE VALENTINE BLAGROVE, BRIOKMAKKB, AUCKLAND. Petitioner came before the Court for first hearing. Mr. Weston appeared for petitioner, who was not opposed. The liabilities amounted to £422 6s. 4d., and the assets amounted to £201, over which there was a bill o{ sale. There was a claim of £6 omitted in the schedule. Mr. Beveridge opposed the insolvent'! discharge on behalf of one of the creditors. The insolvent was examined as to the contents of his schedule, which, he said, disclosed a true statement of his affairs up to the filing of the petition. He commenced business as farmer and brickmaker about 18 months ago, with a capital of £100. The land belonged to his uncle, Mr. Wright. Mr. Wright had made no grant of the land in writing. The rent was £60 a year, but he had not paid any rent *8 yet. He incurred the liabilities in improving the land and loss on bricks. Mr. Weston asked that an assignment of estate should be made to Mr. Vernon, and protection granted until next sitting day. Mr. Beveridge did not oppose the application, which was granted.

RE BTCHARD TAYLOR. This case came before the Court on an adjourned hearing. The liabilities amounted to £1,181. Mr. Keetley appeared for petitioner; Messrs. Weston and Beveridge represented opposing creditors. Mr. Keetley stated that he had called a meeting of creditors, and only four attended, and nothing resulted from it. Mr. Weston said the case had been adjourned in order to have the schedule amended. It had been amended, but it was nob such a schedule as would enable the Court to ascertain the value of the real and leasehold property. There was no estimate given of the value of the land, and there were no particulars given respecting the property or the mortgages. He would suggest that the case should be adjourned until sitting day, and in the interval the accounts should be properly made up, so that the Court might be'informed of his affairs ; and then, if it were shown that the petitioner was not deserving of opposition, that opposition might be withdrawn. The insolvent was examined by Mr. Beveridge at considerable length respecting the mortgages included in the schedule, and the value of the property. He attributed his insolvency to having been arrested through an accommodation account to John Coleman, on the Union Bank. Mr. Weston also then examined the insolvent. Mr. Keetley cross-examined the insolvent, and afterwards asked for an adjournment until 24th March, with liberty to enter in the schedule a debt of £11 odd. His Honor said it could not be expected that the Court should prepare an insolvent's schedule and accounts, and arrange every detail of his estate, which should be done by the insolvent or by those who took his case in hand. The business of the Court was increasing, and every moment of his time wai occnpied in attending to his own legitimate duties. In future he would remand the insolvent from time to time until he brought forward his affairs in an intelligible shape, and in a manner to enable the Court to deal with them, and give a legal judgment upon the case. The application was granted, with protection, an assignment of the estate to be made to Mr.'Vernon. The Court rose at twenty minutes to six o'clock.