ALLEGED FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY. THE WANGANUI ACTION FOR DAMAGES. PLAINTIFF'S CASE CLOSED.

Evening Post, Volume LXIV, Issue LXIV, 13 September 1902, Page 7

ALLEGED FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY. THE WANGANUI ACTION FOR DAMAGES. PLAINTIFF'S CASE CLOSED.

% Yesterday afternoon Judge Edwards sat in further nearing of {ho Wanganui \ciwe of Thomas Mitchell v. the Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, Erneßt Johnson, and' John Stevenson, a claim that the defendant company he declared trustee for plaintiff in the possession of the Aramoho Freezing Works and other property, and that plaiutiff -be awarded £10,000 damages aguinst defendants ,for alleged conspiracy and fraud. Williani Mitchell;; sou of plaintiff, cor* roboratcd previous evidence as to the events before plaintiff's departure for Home in August. 1900. During plaintiff's absence witness had full confidence in defendant Johnson, who was manager, and who was included with witness and Watt in plaintiff's power of attorney. Close relations grew up between defendant Johnson ana Kcid (plaintiff's cred/'tor and guamutor for £23,000), and witness could* see that Reid deßired witness to be absent from their inteiviews. During plaintiff's, absence, witness showed all letters, received by him from plaintiff, to defendant Johnson, who ndvised witness not to show to dct'eudanb Stevenson (the di-fendant company's manugor) the letter of oth July, 1901, conveying terms of plaintiff's arrangement with Nelson Uros. Witness now knew that defendant. Johnson made a copy aud showed it to defendant StevensonAfter plaintiff returned on 10th September, 1901, defendants Stuven&ou and Johnson urged plaintiff lo utssigu, saying they would oid plaintiffs otforts to dispose of his business after tho [ißHignment, and that if, on the other hand, tUi' ufa&igiunent was not signed, a crisis might come. Plaintiff signed the deed of assignment to defendant Johnson under pressure of ill— health, and of v. statement by defendant Stevenaon that if the deed was not Rigned a writ would bo issued to make plaintiff a bankrupt. The three months' restriction ' on the power, of thu trustee (defendant Johnson) to di»puse of tho business underthe assignment, run out v in December.-/, 1891, and even then witness had cons . denco in defendants Stevenson and Jol^nson, and did not know till January, V-fi-2, that, the defendant company had bo'ao-ht Reid's securities. It was not true /that the expenses of pluintiff nnd his family during plaintiff's absence amounted to £1700 a, year The household e'epensfg from July, 1000, to September, 1001, totalled £368. The £332 charged 'by defendant'Jobnaon under this head c/untranod several sums that did not b£lor tg to household, expenses, including //)2 0,5O ,5 connected with the business." .In cross-examination, witn^«p stated that during the time plaintiff wiy 8 in London, and while the defendant' company was financing -plaintiff, the Lo/ idon realisations were below tUe jjrioeß' and costs in New Zealand. ' Mr. Jellicoe put in a state*' nent proparj ed by the defendant oompy ny, snowing that the estimated profits if i the defendi ant company's consignmer/ ts from the works from April to Auinr $t, 1902, were about £2500; but that tbj s was only an estimate, and that the ny at had not yet been sold. He also put in a statement by fho defendant compatf y that the debt* paid by the defendant co mpany under the nssignmont totalled £81' i, this being paid out of the ordinary rec/.-ipts in the course of carrying on the business. Mr, Jellicoe, by consent, put in o. formal amendment of his statement of claim to the effect that certain acts of, 'fraud and deceit already alleged /were committed by defendants jointly and ,*eve/.uUy in breach' of the duty each ow>d to plaintiff. This closed pkinr'tiff's case, and tfjo Court adjournedT til/, 10.30 a.m. on Monday, when Mr. BeJU will open for the defendant company. Mr. Bell notified that he would Ua-ve ft motion to bring before the Court.