JAMES COOPER CAIRNS AND HIS CREDITORS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9117, 27 July 1888, Page 3

JAMES COOPER CAIRNS AND HIS CREDITORS.

An adjourned meeting of the creditors of James Cooper Cairns was held yesterday, at the Official Assignee's office. There were present Mr. Cotter (who appeared for Mr, Mander, a creditor), Sir W. Wasteneys, Mr. Mander, Mr. Thorne (who appeared for Mrs. James Cairns), Mr. E. Cooper (who appeared for the debtor), and Mr. S. Hesketh (who appeared for Porter and Co.). Mrs. Jane Cairns, mother of the debtor, was examined. In reply to Mr. Hesketh, she said she came out here in 1884, and she did not then bring any funds with her, but in 1878, when she sent out £850, the draft of which she cashed herself on her arrival here. It was her own money, part of which she received on the death of her mother, and the rest was received. Her son brought out her husband's trusts in 1882, when £3000 came out. • She was then in England. That money was derived from her. husband's estate, ana she was one of the trustees. The other trustees concurred in this money being sent out by Mr. Cairns. They were Mr. Beith, and Mr. Thompson and Mr. Edmain. It was sent outin order to get larger interest than they got at home. It was to be invested in securities on her behalf here. She could not remember whether any letter : was sent by the trustees to her son, or any instructions given in writing. She received a letter from her son telling her what he had done with the money. He sent an account, but she had not kept it. as it was in the form of letters, not a formal account. He was at liberty to use the money to the best of his judgment. He could take a loan of part of it for himself on security, but not to invest it for himself. She trusted her matters entirely to him. She was now sole trustee, the others having resigned when the money left the country. At her death this money, the £3000, would go to her son James, and her daughter. Sne received interest quarterly from her son, and received it regularly, but she kept no account of it. She. received the interest regularly ever since the money came out, but it was not always the same, the amounts varied, but latterly, prior to the bankruptcy, she had not received it so regularly. She was always apprised of how the money was invested, but had no account. She was only advised of the mortgages and changes, and she knew how the money was invested, although she never received a written account. Her son continued to keep the accounts and manage the affairs after her arrival in New Zealand, but she gradually took the management into her own hands, and they managed it together now. When she came out in 1884 there was a mortgage on the applj farm and Webb's. Her proof against the estate was £1160, less the value of certain securities, leaving a balance of £675. The £460 on Hickson's was her own private money, not a portion of her husband's estate, and the £120 on Government land orders was also her own money. The £400 on the mortgage on the Mount Roskill property was part of the trust money, and the mortgage of £140 on tramway snares was also from the trust money." She knew of all the rest of the securities in which the £3000 was invested. Her daughter was alive, and in New Zealand. There was no other property in her husband's estate beyond the £3000 that she knew of. So far as she knew, that comprised the whole of her late husband's estate.

The debtor explained that when he came of age there was a division between his brother, his sister, and himself, and his share came to £3000, and £3000 was retained to pay his mother's annuity. The witness said she was trustee of the whole estate, and the sum of £2500 was paid to her son James in 1874. He was entitled to £3000 at that time, that being his share, and her other son and daughter at the same time each got the same amount. In answer to Mr. Cotter, Mrs. Cairns said she was one of the trustees under her son's marriage settlement, and as such had an interest in a second mortgage on the Kaiwaka bush, and was aware that part of her security covered a property previously belonging to Mr. Mander. Mr. Cotter: Are you aware whether that property had not been paid for by your son for the transfer ? Mr. Thorne: Don't answer that question. Mr. Cotter appealed to Mr. Lawson. Mr. Thorne said this was not a tribunal at which such a question could be put to lay the foundation for another. The Official Assignee ruled that the question was a reasonable one, and must be answered. Mr. Thorne still advised Mrs. Cairns not to answer the question. Mr. Cotter then said that he would move that the meeting adjourn until Mrs. Cairns came to her senses, and answered the question.

Mr. Hesketh asked whether Mr. Thome's position here was defined. He held no proxy. Mr. Thorne said that- he appeared, as Mr. Hesketh did, for a creditor. Mr. Hesketh said he appeared as proxy for Porter and Co.

Sir W. Wasteneys said that he objected to these constant delays, and moved that Mr. Thorue be requested to retire. Mr. Lawson said, of course Mr. Thome could fret a proxy from Mrs. Cairns. Mr. Thorne objected on principle to such a question being put. Mr Cotter said he declined to proceed further with the examination unless the question was answered. The evidence was then read over to Mrs. Cairns, and signed by her. Mrs. Cairns, junior, being too unwell to be present, her examination had to be deferred. Mr. Cotter said that there was _ evidence now that Mr. Cairns would be entitled to a certain interest in his father's estate, and he suggested that the will might be examined. Mr. Cooper undertook to produce it at the next meeting. The meeting then adjourned to a date to be fixed by the Official Assignee on his ascertaining that Mrs. Cairns, junior, could attend.