GREAT LEATHER FAILURE.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 136, 25 May 1911, Page 11

GREAT LEATHER FAILURE.

BOWRON BROS.’ AFFAIRS. FIRST MEETING OF ORS. London, April 7. Although Mesrs. Bowron Bros, were adjudged bankrupts on 21st March, they have not yet filed a. statement of affairs, and they have given meagre information as to> their liabilities and assets. The Senior Official Receiver says, therefore, that his figures must be accepted with a good deal of caution. The first meeting of creditors was held this week. The debtors, John Allen Bowron and Sidney Bowron, were leather merchants, fellmongers, etc., trading at Kirby street, Bermondsey, and at Grayford and Tonbridge, Kent, under the style of Bowron Brothers, and as wharfingers at Ratcliff under the style of the Phoenix Wharves Co. According to the Official Receiver, the bankrupts began business in 1885, with a joint capital of, £3OOO, at the Grange, Bermondsey, removing in 1887 to Riverside st. In 1889 they took the Riverside Wharves in Narrow street, and in 1894 purchased Crayford Mills for £B5OO. In 1889 they acquired premises at 19, Tyers Gateway, Lo»don, where they traded as the Home Counties Hide and Skin Co. The London County Council acquired the freehold of their premises in Purbrook street in 1900,. and the bankrupts, after some litigation, obtained £45,000 by way oE compensation. They spent about £20,000 in laying down plant at. Crayford Mills and £15,000 on improvements and extensions; they also carried on business at three farms in Tonbridge, Kent, for the purpose of distributing and utilising the refuse from Crayford Mills. The bankrupts estimated their liabilities to rank for dividend ab between £200,000 and £300,000, including some claims of 4238,00(1, £27,000, and £25,000, and they vuK ued their assets at £12,800. They had been in difficulties for some time, and became aware that their property was insufficient to pay their debts in full in 1908, at the time of the financial crisis in. America. They had, of course, contracted liabilities since then,, and had stated in explanation that they expected an amalgamation of their business with that of Bowron. Brothers and Co. (Ltd.), of New Zealand, when their liabilities would have been discharged.

They knew in 1909 that such &■ scheme could not be carried? through, but hoped with the assistance of that firm and better markets to recover themselves. Messrs, Bowron Brothers and Co. (Ltd.)r had, in fact, assisted them to th« amount of £15,000, and Mr. John; Allen Bowron had acted as agent of that firm until the date of the. receiving order. , The debtors were not present alb the meeting, and Mr. their solicitor, said that there waaa very good reason for their absence. They had been lately ari rested on a criminal charge, andf had not yet been able to obtam bail. They hoped to be released! on bail during the course of th® day. No scheme of arrangement wane submitted to the meeting, and th® debtors having already been indicated bankrupt, Mr. W. H_ Freshwater was appointed trusts®' to wind up the estate in bankruptcy.