BANKRUPTCY COURT.

Marlborough Express, Volume XIV, Issue 1122, 5 April 1879, Page 6

BANKRUPTCY COURT.

Tuesday, April Ist, 1879, [Before H. M‘lntire, Esq,, Registrar, in the absence of the Judge;] ■ In re John Campbell. A first meeting of creditors in this estate was held, when 11 claims were filed, and Mr Griffiths chosen as trustee. Re Godwin Geo. Hood, a bankrupt. Mr Sinclair applied for an order of discharge. He said the liabilities were LBl and the assets £lB. The trustee, Mr O’Sullivan, reported that nothing had been or could be got in, nor had any creditors seen fit to prove their claims ; m other respects the report was favorable.* . l ' ’:n The Registrar said the assets appeared to be nil, and consequently the debtor appeared to • have incurred debts without means of paying them. Creditors, however, had not taken the trouble to appear, therefore it was useless taking trouble to say anything, and he did not care to do so. Bankrupt discharged. Re A. Noemanby. Mr McNab appeared in support of a motion calling on the trustee to contribute to the maintenance of the debtor, and Mr Rogers opposed on behalf of Mr Litchfield. Mr McNab applied under clauses 6 and 7 of the Act of 1876 for an allowance to the debtor for the support of his family. It was the intention of the legislature that the creditors should allow the means of support to debtors,’but in this case the creditors had appointed a hard- ' hearted trustee who would do nothing, and he purposed calling evidence to prove this. ; Mr Rogers interrupted. He was there to reply to a certain summons, and did not aaoj how his friend could call any evidence. He re-r. ferred to the Supreme Court rules to show the course of procedure. The Registrar said the case must stand on its own merits. It was not usual to go into evi-: dence in cases of this sort, but if he found it necessary to examine the bankrupt he would 1 call him later. i Mr McNab objected, stating that he had a right to examine. ir t •> Mr Rogers showed how unreasonable it_ was to expect him to answer evidence not yet given. Such notices as the present should be supported by affidavits and filed in the Court. ; The Registrar said it was most unusual in motions of this kind to go into evidence. Should it be found necessary he would make an order on the bankrupt to appear and give evidence.

Mr Rogers then proceeded. He took exception to the form of the summons, no grounds being stated on which the order should be made. The Registrar said he must rule that the trustee had sufficient notice as to what was required. The form was immaterial, so long as the parties understood what it was about. Mr Rogers then said there was no evidence oven to show Normanby was a bankrupt. The Registrar hoped that question would not be raised, as it was patent to all. Mr Rogers said that it was not in evidence that no allowance had been made ; in fact it had not been applied for ; he also thought it should be in evidence that there were funds out of which to make an order. He hoped the Court would not interfere between the creditors and the debtor. It was not difficult for the debtor to come to the Court straight, passing by the creditors. If there were no assets, he took it the Court could not make an order. Out of £23 assets only £5 had been realised ; the greater portion realised had been on stock not disclosed by the debtor. The Registrar said the gist of Mr Rogers’ reply was that no affidavits were filed, so that; the other side did not know what to answer. It was necessary to come to some understanding, either to discharge or to adjourn till a future day. He did not think he would persist after that to push the matter and waste the time of the Court and others concerned. There were many matters on which they could agree, and so go on with the case now. Mr McNab would admit there were no assets, but nothing else. Mr Rogers thought it should be proved that the creditors had been first applied to.

Mr M'Nab denied this. The Registrar considered that fact material. Mr M‘Nab said all the facts in the case were within the knowledge of the Court. Mr Rogers said that was not con-ect as he had shown about the assets.

The Registrar thought they had better begin dc novo and go on with the application. Mr M‘Nab said Mr Rogers held that there was a discretionary power in the creditors, but section 7 provides a means of providing for the debtor, therefore no application to creditors was necessary. The debtor has no power to call a meeting, and was perfectly helpless. It was for the Trustee to take this step and a trustee who was not biassed would do so. He would not prove Litchfield was Trustee,- because it was unnecessary, but he would put in evidence to show that an order had been made on the debtor to pay £2 weekly to his wife. The Registrar would not go into that matter, even if he did so it would be perfect moonshine. Mr M‘Nab would prove the debtor’s necessities.

The Registrar thought it would be much better to leave out all mention of another Court, as calculated to defeat his object. Mr M‘Nab said every shilling the debtor earned had to go to the Trustee, and he had to be supported by his family ; he had given up all his property, and there was a danger of the order being enforced. The Registrar said what was asked was that the Court should intervene to prevent the order of another court being enforced. Mr MfiSTab asked if he wss to live on charity? He was willing to consent to an order for £3 weekly. IT-'-dd he consent ? Mr Rogers ; JN r o, certainly not. The Registrar suggested that an order be made temporarily to protect the earnings of the debtor till the trustee came before the Court, andshowed that the debtor had moans to satisfy his creditors. It seems heard that the debtor should be bound down so that he cannot get the means to live.

Mr Rogers said there were reasons against it. The trustee had never interfered with his earnings, and it would be the height of absurdity to make an order beforehand restraining him.

The Registrar said it prevented the debtor making any exertion. Mr Rogers : Why did he not apply for his discharge ? He branded the order of his wife as an arranged thing, and pointed out as the family was supporting him, there was no call for Jiim to support them. Mr M‘Hab said he did not apply for his discharge because he advised him not to do. His friend stigmatised the proceedings as fraudulent, and now he (Mr M'Nab) stated that Frederick Litchfield dare not appear in the witness box. He would not sit down with such aspersions. The Registrar thought it would be conducive to the interests of the trustee to agree to the motion restraining which would be beneficial to bankrupt. Mr Rogers did not see how the Court could make the order ; the words “if any” referred to the allowance. After some further colloquoy the Registrar said the debtor would have to hand his earnings to the trustee, and he should hand back tho sum awarded by the Court. Mr M‘Hab wanted to put in tho least bit of evidence. The Registrar did not think it necessary to go into evidence. Mr M'Nab would rather not take an order then, if granted without evidence taken. If Mr Rogers was not ready to on he was willing to adjourn. The Registrar asked Mr Rogers to give way and allow evidence to be taken. It would not be fair to allow evidence to be taken that would be a surprise. Mr Rogers would object to bankrupt going into the box because he did not know where it would end, and it might last days; such were | his instructions. i

Mr M‘Nab said his client was not afraid to go into the box, but they could cross examine on affidavits just the same. He proposed to call the bankrupt, his wife, Purkiss and Old. The Registrar did not think their evidence necessary. Mr Rogers would guarantee that the trustee would not touch the earnings of bankrupt, unless he first came to the Court and showed his earnings were in excess.

Mr M'Nab would not agree to any such course ; he knew the trustee well and had dared him to go into the box: Mr Rogers repeated his statement. Mr M‘Nab then asked him to consent to L 3 weekly of his earnings being protected, a note

being made that the motion be discharged, an! the costs of the trustee in tiie motion to be pai i out of the estate. Mr Rogers consented, and the note was made accordingly.