DISCHARGE REFUSED

Evening Star, Issue 21092, 3 May 1932, Page 6

DISCHARGE REFUSED

BANKRUPT DENIES ALLEGATIONS LARGE SUM LOST RECKLESSLY • Application for discharge from bankruptcy was made to His Honour Mr Justice Kennedy by John M‘Lennan, gramophone dealer, South Dunedin. Counsel for the bankrupt said he could disagree with nothing in the report of the Official Assignee except the statement that the man had been acting as a bookmaker’s clerk since his bankruptcy. The bankrupt said he had never had any transactions with bookmakers. His Honour said he need not hear counsel on that Ipoint. ■ There were other matters in the report which gravely concerned the bankrupt. Called to give evidence, M'Lennan said he had served three months’ imprisonment for a breach of the Bankruptcy Act. Since being released in January he had not had steady employment. He had had ! odd jobs from an oyster agent and pie cart proprietor, and had received about £1 or 15s a week. He had not acted as a bookmaker’s clerk, nor had he had anything to do with bookmakers. In reply to the assignee, bankrupt said he had never been employed in a shop or office about the High street corner. He knew a man named Lawrence, but did not know Lawrence had the reputation of being a bookmaker. He had not been offered employment by his father. Counsel said it might seem strange that the bankrupt’s father had provided him with a very large sum of money which he had lost recklessly. The bankrupt, however, was a child by a former marriage, and the father, after remarrying, made provision for him. The father was not likely to give further help, as bankrupt had already drawn more than the father was morally liable to give him. His Honour said the assignee, in his report, referred to several offences against the Bankruptcy Act. It was clear that the bankrupt himself had committed at least one offence against the Act, because he had pleaded guilty and had served a term of imprisonment. The Act provided that a court should not grant any absolute or immediate order of discharge if it appeared to the court that the bankrupt had been guilty of offences under, the Act, or •where the court was of opinion that the bankrupt had been guilty of misconduct in the conduct of his business. Discharge would be refused, and the bankrupt was not to apply again for his discharge until the expiration of a period of twelve months.