SUPREME COURT-IN BANKRUPTCY. (Before His Honor Mr Jmtice Williams.) APPLICATIONS KOBOBDKSS CLOBINC *?**£" KUPTcr.—Orders as asked for were made in the following cases :-Rc William Henderson (Mr J. Thom»s Broadway (Mr W. Macgregor); James Thomas Hall (Mr W. i Macgrcgor); Alexander Gunn (Mr W. Macgregor). Oases to Stand Ovm.-Bc John M'Leao, John Wilkie, Proctorp, Jones, and Co. Motions foe ckdebs ov Dischahoe Unopposed orders of ditcharge : were granted in the following cases: —Re John Gray (Mr W. Macgr.gor); Charles Pccey (Mr J. Macgrfßor). .. , . ... Re John Fobd.—Motion for Order reversing decision of Official Assignee in rejecting in put proof of debt lodged by National Bank of New Zealand. Sir R. Stout appeared f r the bankiupt in support of the motion; Mr Haggitt for the Official Assignee. Sir B. Stout, in opening the case, said that m this CBtate the bank had proved for Lloßl9a 6d, overdraft; a promissory note for L 25 4a 10d, ft prortiasory note for L 720, and a promissory note for L2io. Iho Assigiee, however; disallowed the last two ittnw on the followirg : (1) That the L29o|bill represents the same debt as is proved for under the head of overdraft ; (2) that the said bill was taken by the bank \ii.h notice of the circunutanfos under whioh it was given, and the bank gave Ino value f»r the same; (3) that the L 729
bill was given for a debt which had been Bitisfled by a composifcionj and the beak took it with notice thereof; (4) that the bank made no advances on the security of the said hills or either of them exoept L 22 to Gcorgi ford; (5) that the obtaining of these bills on the eve of John Foid's bankruptcy was a fraudulent device to obtain an undue claim in tut estate of John Ford; (6) that the bank was attempting to prove on these bills for the benefit of George Ford, and to. obtain a dividend out of the estate of John Ford npon and in respect of these bills, which the said George Ford could not have done had the bills remained in h's hands. Counsel siid that George Ford was father te bankrupt, but was not a partner of bankrupt. The objection to the L 720 bill was that it was given for a debt that had been tatisfied by a composition, and that the bank knew it. H that were true it was for the Assignea to prov« it; but the bank denied that it was true. Tha bank's main contention was that the bill would pay a dividend that ought to be sufficient to pay eg their dtbt. James Brown, manager of the North Dunedin branch of the National Bank, stated, that bankrupt had an account there sine* February 23, 1888. 1 he previous firm of Ford and Smith had had an account, opened July 28, 1887, and closed on February 25, 1888, when bankrupt bought out his partner Smith. He required advances frcm the bank to do so, and witness agreed to give him advances. Witness had as securities a promissory note for L2OO, lodged bv bankrupt, that had been accepted by George Ford. A new arrangement was subsequently made, on August 8,1688, •> Guarantee taking the place of the note. George Ford had been a customer of the bank for about twelve years. In 1687 George Ford asked for au allowance of L7OO, and he (aid his farm and stock were clear, but demurred to giving a bill of sale of then. Witness then t.uggesten that Ford should get the money outside, atd h'i subsequently told witness that he had done so. In February, 1888, Ford asked for an advance of L2OO on b» son's behalf, in rrder that he might buy out Smith. He told witness that he had as security a bill in the hands of W. D. Stewart for L 709, which represented advances made by hip t« his son, and he promised to lodgfl it as collateral security to the guarantee. Wituera did not get the bill for some time, although ha had frequently a*ked for it. itnesu had n» knowledge that there had been a composition on the bill, and never agreed to anything of tha sort. Witness did not get the bill till the Ist of the present montb, and he received the other bill for L2OO the fame day. The latter wa* deposited in the uauM way by George Ford, and is not due till October. George Ford at th* time owed the bank a small account, including L 22 paid by the bank to Stewart for interest. To Mr Haggitt: G. Ford owed the bank L 6 4s lid in addition to the interest paid on bis account. There hod been no transactions cm his account from January 10 last, when ha paid in L2los, and there had been no withdrawals sinoe November, 1887. Witness never heard of the bill for L2OO till it was paid in ta G. Ford's account. It was lodged for collection. He gave it to witness personally, and sail something about its representing an advance ta bii son. Witaeßß bad beard by tb-»t time tbafc a meeting of bankrupt's creditors had beet called for that day. He did not know that Stewart had refused to part with the L 720 bill till the interest was paid. Witness told G. Fr.rd on the rooming that he lodged tha L2OO bill that he was to get the Lf2o bill, and he went to Stewart and returned with it. At the private meeting of bankrupt's creditors witness was preaeit. Bankrupt said at the meeting that he had not got notice of the bill be'ere the mettirjr; but witness had sent it in the usual way. It appeared that it had been put into his drawer by his clerk, and that he did not see it till ha returned to the shop aft»r the meeting. Witness looked on the L 720 bill as collateral security to the guarantee for the advances mad* by the bank; Btill he allowed it to remain ia Stewart's hands for a year. That waß because he iooied on G Ford as a straightforward and honorable man, and knew that be would bring the bill eome time or other. The hank began ta dishonor bankrupt's cheques a few days before the first meetirig of creditors. George Ford, called by Mr Haggitt, gave evidence rb to making the bill for L 720 and giving it to Stewart. He advanced bankrupt L2OO to go into partnership with Smith, and none of the money advancod had been repaid. He might have received cheques, but only to pay away again. Bankrupt had purchased the debts owing to the firm of Ford and Smith for LIOO, and collected L 15 0; and the extra 169 was paid to Stewart in reduction of the mortgage. Brown repeatedly asked witness to giva him the bill, but he deolin d to giv« ' while things went straight; but as rowof bankrupt's creditors pressed he took _ it to the bank. Brown did not tell him that witness could not prove in competition with the bank. He could not remember that Brown said anything of the sort. Witness paid in the bill on the Saturday, because he was indebted to the bank. Witness had been told on tha Saturday by his son that he was gr ing to have a meeting .. f creditors on the Monday. Witness could not remember if Brown drew his attention to the clause in guarantee preventing him from proving in competition with the bank. Witness was present at the meeting of creditors, but could not remember what was said thereat. To Sir R. Stout: Bankrupt had said that if ! witness would make him an advance to enable him to start in business, he woud repay the old debt of L6OO due to Stewart, and the latter would not make the advance till that arrangement was made. John Ford, the bankrupt, stated that he signed the promissory note for L 720 in favor of Mb father some time in July, 1887. He did sa because he had to get an advance of money, and as his father owed Stewart L6OO odd he could not get any more money till witnesi signed it. j At that time witness had signed a deed of assignment of his estate to his creditors. Witness wanted LIOO to go into business with Smith, and eaeh of them waß to put down LIOO as capital acoount, while three weeks later witness's father put down another LIOO. Witness never heard of the bill again until the first meeting of hu creditors, but he always knew of its existence. Witness did not put the bill down in bis statement to his creditors. Witnew had a notice about the bill sent over to him before the meeting, but _ did not get it, the shopman having put it into the till without witncsi's seeing it. Witness was staggered by the announcement made by Brown at tha meeting to the effect that the bank's claim amounted to about LLIOO. Thomas Kew Harty and G. L. Denniston also gave evidence, and a letter from Stewart to the Assignee having been put in the evidence was closed. Counsel were addressing the Court when we wont to press. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M.) Thomson, Bridger, and Co. v. John Calder.— Claim, L 26 12s 2d, ou a judgment summons. Mr Hosking, who appeared for plaintiffs, said that a dittress warrant had been issued, but with no results, it being alleged that the furniture belonged to the housekeeper. Defendant did not appear.—An order was made for payment by the 29th inst., in default six weeW mprisonment. CITY POLICE COURT. (Before Messrs J. Logan and T. M. Wilkinson, J.P.s.) Dronkknnbbs.— George White (thirteen previous convictions) was fined 10-s in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment; WalterDtKon (six previous convictions), who was stated to be drinking all Mb money away, was given another chance, and was fined 20s, in default four days imprisonment; one first offender was convicted and discharged; while two others were fined ot, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment. Riotous Bbhavioib.— Julia CoUine (one previous conviction) was charged with being s common prostitute, and with behaving in a manner calculated to provoke a breach of the. peace. Sergeant-major Be'yin asked, to be allowed to withdraw the charge, as some ladies
ntended to send her to Chtistchurch.-Mr Logan: Very woll. (To accused:) You are discharged, and it ia to be hoped that you will lend a good life. Obstructing the Police.— Thomati Desmond was charged with obsti noting Constable Gough while tho latter wsb in tho execution of his duty.—Sergeant-major Bevin said that accused had attempted to take the last-mentioned Recused from the arresting conßtabl<\ Po was warned to desist, but persisted in attempting to pull tho girl Collina away. A large crowd assembled, some 200 persons baing pnsont, and the scene was a very disorderly one.—Mr Logan said the police must bo protected from these interferences by friends of parties arrested by tho police. .Accused had rendered himself liable to a fiae of L2O, or. months imprisonment. Sergeant-major Bovin sa:d accused came from North-eat Valley. This was his first appearanca in Court, and nothing was known agunst him by tho po!ice.—Accuse 1 was fined 40s in default one week a imprisonment; a week bsiiig allowed in which to pay the fke. DEiTROYixo YiwvKKiY.-Jvhn Pat/c (four previous convicting) was charged with breaking two panes of glas?, valued at 20s, tho property of Patrick Fag.'iu.—Accutecl pleaded guilty, but Slid in extenuation that he wits shoved ag&in-tt the windows by another person lie hud paid for the window*, and had satisfied Mr Fagai:, the lessee. -Sergeant O'Neill taid that accused was very violent, and had first kicked at tho doors, and then, Leing refused admittance, had kicked and smashed the windows. -Mr Fagan said p.ccuse-.l was very violent, and was being encouraged by otheis outbids- lie (Mr Fagan) did not wish to pres3 the charge Accused was fined 5.<, in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment; tho Roncii remarking that, although Mr Fagan did not wish to press the chaigo, they could not completely overlook the offence. KiOtouk Conduct.— William, Lyons, Allan Lvdd, John Burns, ard John O'Connor (two previous convictions) were cha.ged with behaving in uiiitous iranuer, whoruby a breach of the peace was occasioned. Mr Solomon dofendeu.— Bevin said ttat on Sunday morning tho accused went to a brothel in Stafford street,—Mr So'omon: "I would like all witnesses to leave tho Court, especially the complainant, the arresting constable, &3 I do not wish him to hear tho chargo or the evidence."-Sergeaut-major Bevin objected to the constable being ordered to leave the Court; but, aftor consultation, the Bench said that as a special reason had been advanced by Mr Solomon, it would, pjliap?, bo better for the constable to leave the Court.—Ada Ms>thcaon said that on the morning of the 14th inst. some persons camo to the house where witness resided, and created a great disturbance, eventually smashing four windows. Three of the accused came to the house afterwards and said that they would "square it."—Maty Blackmore gavo corroborative evidenc?.—Constable Mathesonsaid when he infoira.d tho accused of the oharges cgairst them, they admitted being present when tho windows wero smashed, but denied breaking tho windows. Constable Ramsay gave evidence as to accused offering to •Square it."—Mr Solomon said that tho information laid against the accused was for breaking windows, bat it had not been proved that they htd broken the windows as alleged. They were present at the disturbance at tho house in Stafford street, but rather than be mixed up in the matter they had offered to "square the matter" at the suggo.tioa of the police.— Statements bavins been made hf Lyons, Dudd, Burns, and O'Connor, Mr Wilkinson grid that thero w.14 too much rambling about tho town by young men, and after a shoit retirement flnol each accused 2Ls with costs, in default one weal • mpusonment. A Foul, Vauurm.-Annie Murdoch was for this offence fined 2j 6d, without coats.
Permanent link to this item
THE COURTS.-TO-DAY., Evening Star, Issue 7965, 22 July 1889
THE COURTS.-TO-DAY. Evening Star, Issue 7965, 22 July 1889
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.