THE BANKRUPTCY LAW.

Evening Post, Volume LX, Issue 114, 10 November 1900, Page 5

THE B A NKR UP TCY LA W.

CHARGES AGAINST L. M. HARRIS. THE CASE DISMISSED. The hearing of the charges of breaches of the Bankruptcy Acfc was continued before Mr. Haselden, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court after we went to press yesterday. In further cross-examination by Mr. Gray, the defendant said it never occured to him to inform the Official Assignee that he had in hand the £18 from Osbprne's p.n. He -was aware that the £400 for the engine was included in the account current in the ledger, and that 9 per cent, was "charged on that as f orming part of the account current. He did not calculate the interest charged, or checli the figures supplied to him. He thought he made a profit of £9 or £10 out of the engine, besides the interest. Ho did not know that Tos had not got the full value in, coal for the £28 2s cheque, and he included it in the bUI of sale beqause he wanted security for it. ** Coley had committed himself to the 21 tons, and would b,aye..had to supply it if required. He did not enquire if it had been delivered, and did not know that it had not been until the estate was assigned. He did not give Tos credit for the balance then. He did not see an easy chance of making £28 2s by keeping the account, open and the security alive. He did not check or examine tjie statemeut purporting to be a oopy oi the ledger account furnished to the Official Assignee. The reduction, off Beil, Gully, and Ball's bill of costs was a commjssion by arrangement with Tos, as a remuneration for his services in the litigation with Allen. Jf he had not got that reduction he should have charged Tos fifteen guineas for his services. He could not account for the fact that although only about £24 was paid to Beil, Gully, and Bell, and would therefore appear in that way in the cash-book, the item appeared in the ledger as £30 16s Bd, the amount of the- bill before it ■was reduced. He did not consider it | necessary to tell the Official Assignee . that he had received the discount. 1 Everything forming the subject of these charges was either accidental or a mistake. He had dealt with a man named Buckman, who was now in. bankruptcy. Mr. Gray; D.id he not complain? Mr. Skerrett objected to the question. Mr. Gray said the question was directed to show system. His, Worship sa\d it might be. urged that it showed the books were very badly kept and mistakes were frequent. Mr. Gray said he might say that. Was lie not to ask any questions about previous transactions? * His Worship : At the very end of the case a further charge is sprung upon him, , i ' Mr. Gray: Not at all. He goes into the box to clear his character^ and I am entitled ' to examine him about matters which either go jn s.uppqrfc of the charge or to his credit.' I ask him if he did not overcharge other flaxmillers. His Worship: You could ask him if other disputes have occurred. My. Gray (to witness) : Have other disputes arisen between you and other flaxmillers, in which you have been alleged to overcharge? Witness : ,Yes. Mr. Gray; And you have made reductions? Witness : Yes. I* think I have made reductions. After some argument, Mr. Gray said, he would not pursue his examination any further in that direction. In reply to his ' Worship, witness said that up till late in August his account was accepted as correct by the Official Assignee. # This closed the.qase for the defence. His Worship said he thought the investigation would probably have a good effect, but the able defence that had been made, had succeeded in answering the charge of fradulent intent on the part of the defendant, which was the essential element in the charge? against him. He did not , think there would be any advantage in giving his reasons at length for this conclusion, and possibly some grave disadvantages wouM arise from so doing. The case was dismissed.