THE WARD FARMERS' ASSOCIATION.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 10323, 8 June 1896, Page 3

THE WARD FARMERS' ASSOCIATION.

COCJKT PROCEEDINGS. (BY TELEGRAPH.) Dunedin, Saturday. Messrs Vigers, Ward, and Cook were examined to-day. The iirsb mentioned aald in cross-examination, referring to the oata trQnßQOtlon, that he mado tho suggestion to advancs £30,000 againsb fcho oats on the instructions of the general ( msnsger. Ho did not know whotnor the directors of the hank knew of the transnctlono. He did nob know at the time that the oats were uot in store, bat from what ha learned afterwards bhoy were not. Heard about the oata in a general way when he mado an inspection of the asGOcUifcion's posiblou, but ho liad hig auaiiioioiiß aronned hdiuo time ufterwords in September. Mr M'Kenulo suggestion re obtaining a draft was mads in consequence of misreading a cable from the London office in reference to the credit. Had not tha sllghbosb idea when he went dowD to Invercarglll that this transaction was a bogus one, Ib was very good bnaluess so far as the bank was concerned, Was nob aware that any proceedings were taken against Mr Fisher in respect to this transaction. Mr Fiaher waa retained in the service of the association Borne time afterwards. At the lime of the Colonial Bank's balance uheat, prepared for the meeting of shareholders in September, 1895, the £30,000 draft) was supposed to be cood, but he woald not say it was so st the date of the meeting. As a matter of fact he thought the directors and the management of the bank Knew that so far as the Ward Farmers' Associabion's account was concerned it waa In a very ranch worse position than represented to be in the bank's fealance-ohpob, but he could not soy that he knew the loan was sufficient to wipe one the whole of the apparent profit that half-year, A!> all events, he knew 1b on November 18th. At the bank meeting the directors and management did nob know that Mr Ward's promissory note was valueless. In answer to tho Judge, Mr Vipers said that he went to Invercargill at the end of Juno laeb year to get the bssocUtion'n overdrafb reilnced. A cablegram then came to the bank. Mr Fisher, the association's manager, drew .on Mr Conrjell, London, for £30.000, giving warrants for oata purporting to be in the association's possession to the valno of the draff. It had not been forwarded to Mr Connell, but was held far a few i days till Mr Ward's return, and till the bank had farther advice re tho cable. Tbo cable advlco did not read clearly. Witness did not know till early in Saotembev that) the oats were not there. Ho might say there was no new money plvon. I qnitfi understand th'ifc it cams off tho account?— From the bank's point of view It wa» a good transaction. Instead of unsecured security we goo oats as cover. It would have been a very good transaction if the onto were there.— Yes. Can you give any explanation of tlie reßson. wby this bill wat taken by the Colonial Bank from Mr Ward oa October 19bh?~lMunot fiivo any explanation at , all. It did not come within my province. Ib would uot, bat 1 ask you as a banking Expert whether you aim olFsr «ny explanation ?— I do nob think ib comosi within the range of ordinary banking. You are one of the liquidators ua woll as a banksr, Have you any notion of what paragraph 18 of the Bgreement means? What is the polnb of writing off the amonnt of this particular bill, 'or the bill was nob given that day ?— My own impression is that ib was the amount of the accounb supposed to bo short. The result was supposed to be good ? — That is what pnzz'ea me. The account was supposed to be hopelessly bnd. J(exb day the promissory note was taken by the bank for that amount. Ordinarily, it n, promissory note was given by a man of business to a representative of the Colonial Bank it may be presumed he looked at ib aa a valuable security. As the circumstances were probably known to both parbles, this was simply a worthless piece of paper, the giving and taking of which was simply a farce perpetrated between Messrs M'Kenzie and Ward for a not understandable object. Can you as a banker suggest any explanation ?— Not as a banker. I can give yon ray impression, 1 think ib was taken by Mr M'Keuzie just to retain hold of Mr Ward for tbe amoonb. Bub Mr Ward was not liable to the bank before that ?— No, bub he was to tbe company. Ib was written off, but the company were credited: Latee. J. G. Ward waa essmioed by Justice Williams ab some length. Mr Young then addressed tbe Court nrglDg chat? the compromise should nob be agreed to until every remedy had been exhausted against the association and Mr Ward himself. Further examination migbt cansß pther mabters to transpire and other assets disclosed.. Mr MBCgregor briefly addressed the Court, and wao followed by Mr Woodhoneo. Hla Honor asked if he really meant to say bhab bhey were going to pay £62,000 without hope of profit for mere friendship? Mr Woodhouse repeated that they did not expeeb to make profit for themselves, but for the Ward Association. Nothing was to ba Rained by forciDg Mr Ward Into the Bankruptcy Conrb, as he had given up everything. There waa no suggestion of any Impropriety on his part beyond being exfcvemely speculative. Sunday, Mr Haggltt In replying quoted figures to show that the liquidation would be very pxpenolyo, wonld only realise about £60,000 againßt the present offer of £fi2 730, and relief from the guarantee of £5000. Ib could nob be said bbero had been any secrecy. It had been laid before the Court in its nakedness that for a debt of £72,179 the Colonial Bank held as security shares in Nelsou Bros, worth nothing ; that Mr Ward's guarantee for £20,000 was worth notbiDg, or nearly so ; that Mr Ward's promissory note for £55,150 was worbh ao muoh ob his guarantee, and the equity in certain freehold whloh would probably realise £2000. ll' tho Ward Asaoelation was brought to grief ib would tree the accounts in the " B list and also the liquidation of tho bank. As to the bint at proaecution of someone for the Ward Association's balance-sheets, presumably it' yiaa tha late Reneral manager. The agreement did not take away the rlgbb of anyone aggrieved, bnb it was nob the duty of the liquidators. Their dnby was to get as much aa possible for the asFets. As to the compromise screening Mr Ward, what greater injury could be done him than the examination of the past) two days, in which the affairs of the Watd Association hod been ripped up from top to bottom ? As to a rice in oats, be thought it would be dishonorable to back oub of the agreement beoanse of that '