CLAIM FOR DEBENTURES

Evening Star, Issue 22517, 9 December 1936, Page 2

CLAIM FOR DEBENTURES

COUNSEL QUESTIONS DEFENDANT DENIES BEING N.Z. COUNTERPART OF M'ARTHUR [Pek United Peess Association.] CHRISTCHURCH, December 8. Further evidence was heard this afternoon by Mr Justice Northcroft in the case in which George Ernest Argyle, printer, of Ashburton, claims the return by the defendant, the Australian Investment Corporation, of debentures to the face value of £l7O in the_ Investment Executive Trust, and of dividends paid by the Public Trustee as liquidator of the Investment Executive Trust. Plaintiff’s allegation was that he had been induced to transfer the debentures to the defendant company by the misrepresentations of defendant s agent, Osmond Arthur Bridgewater. Bridgewater, cross-examined by Mr Young, said that M'Arthur might have been interested in the defendant company in that he might have been curious to know what the company_was doing regarding the Investment Trust debentures and assets. Witness admitted that before the formation of the defendant company in 1935 he asked M'Arthur for information _ and assistance in protecting the interests of shareholders. . , Mr Young; Did you tell a single de-benture-holder you had written to M‘Arthur? Witness: I don’t remember. Mr Young: Did you ever write to M‘Arthur offering your assistance to him to New Zealand? . Witness: I don’t remember having done so. , Mr Young: Then will yon explain this telegram received by you from M‘Arthur on August 2, 1935: “Much appreciate and reciprocate your offer co-operation according documents Webber delivered? ” Witness said he had sent the reports of the debenture-holders’ committee meeting and circulars. He did not remember having made an offer of cooperation. Mr Young; Was M'Arthur in the

liabit of cabling you on unimportant matters ? Witness: No. Mr Young: Then can you not tell us what that cablegram meant?

Witness: No. His Honour (to witness)This case is going to be determined on the credence I can attach to your word. I am earnestly anxious to believe, but 1 do wislj that you would try to do yourself justice. Here is an important cablegram and you cannot explain it. Witness said that all he could remember was that Webber, an. agent of M'Arthur, had called and witness had given him some reports and circulars to take to M'Arthur in Sydney. His Honour: This cablegram acknowledges proposals of yours for ciprocal working. Can you tell me wh«» they were? . Witness: I have no recollection or having made definite proposals. His Honour: Then that cablegram is meaningless to you ? Witness: Yes, that is what it amount*

to. . Mr Younig: Is it not true you were the New Zealand counterpart m M'Arthur?. Witness: Certainly not. Mr Young produced copies of several Supreme Court writs and asked witness whether ho would deny he had been involved in several previous writs for fraud. : , - Witness admitted the writs, but said he bad meant he had not appeared in court. Mr Young: You mean you escaped because the money in settlement was paid by the companies concerned out of court ?

The court adjourned till to-morrow.