A BANKRUPTCY CASE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXIX, Issue 14682, 13 May 1908, Page 5

A BANKRUPTCY CASE.

* [Pes Press Association.] WELLINGTON, May 12. William George Tustin, for many years in business as a painter in Wellington, who was recently convicted of an offence against the Bankruptcy Act, was set forward for sentence before Mr Justice Cooper at the Supreme Court this morning. Mr T. Young, on behalf of the prisoner, asked that Tustin should be admitted to probation. There had been a total absence of fraud in connection with the case. The count alleging that there- had been fraud was expressly negatived by the jury, and it was fair comment that the prosecution was not the wish of tho general body of creditors, hut that of a few creditors who were not present when the resolution not to prosecute was passed. The meeting was representative of some £SOOO of dobts, whereas there were only £l3l due to those who wanted the prosecution. There had been no misrepresentation of any kind in borrowing the money, and the bankruptcy was due solely" to large losses on contracts which Tustin entered into. Counsel did not intend to call evidence as to his client s previous good character. It was proof that he had been of good repute to mention that he had been a justice of the peace for twenty years, and had held that position until shortly before his bankruptcy. Mr Young next referred to the varying interpretation placed upon the First Offenders' Probation Act in its relations to such offences, and expressed a hope that Mr Justice Cooper would see his way to adhere to his previous interpretation and extend probation to this prisoner. If, however, his Honor felt bound by Mr Justice Williams's refusal to grant probation for such offences, counsel submitted that a nominal punishment would meet the case. The' charge was laid against him nine months ago, the trial took place six months ago. and prisoner had been in an agony of suspense ever since, and undergoing what was a severe junishment to a business man. What was thought of him was shown by the fact that he was now ! employed by one of his largest creditors. Mr Justice Cooper said he felt that be ought to follow tho example set by Mr Justice Williams in regard to a similar case, and refuse to grant probation. In that instance his Honor had said that if he admitted to probation a bankrupt who had been convicted of i failing to keep proper books and ac- ■ counts it would have the effect of violating the bankruptcy statute, which contomplated that men should suffer punishment for offences of this sort. What Mr Justice Cooper understood from that was that Mr Justice Williams thought there should be no application of the First Offenders Probation Act to such offences, but it seemed to Mr Justice Cooper that if a Judge chose to exercise his jurisdiction under the Act there could be no question of his jurisdiction. It was, however, a point upon which the Judges were agreed, that there should be ho extension of the First Offenders Probation Act to such cases as these. He had, as a matter of fact, consulted with Mr Justice Williams on this point, and was in accord with the suggestion that there should be unanimity of application. _ It was now established that probation could not be granted to an honest and unfortunate man who had offended as Tustin had, and his Honor proposed to deal with the case by sentencing Tustin to six months' imprisonment, to date from November 18, on which date he was

convicted, and under Sections 15 and 16 of the Prisons Act, he would order Tustin to be treated as n misdemeanant of the first division. Ke would time be kept separate from ordinary prisoners, and would not be required to wear prison clothes. It was the policy of the Bankruptcy Act- that when a bankrupt had obtained credit without any reasonable expectancy of being able to pay his debts, there would be some degree of punishment. That was the view of Mr Justice Williams, and that was the view his Honor had taken in this case. Under the circumstances of this case he thought the law would be sufficiently vindicated by the sentence he had passed, though at the same time his Honor'recognised that there might be offences against the Act calling for sentences of imprisonment for. long terms with hard labour. In this case the prisoner's sentence would expire on May 17. Prisoner was then taken into custody by the gaoler.