BREACH OF THE BANKRUPTCY ACT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10968, 24 January 1899, Page 6

BREACH OF THE BANKRUPTCY ACT.

THREE MONTHS' HARD LABOUR. At the Auckland Police Court yesterday morning, before Messrs. J. H. Hannan and J. Callnan, J.P.'s, Charles Cowan, formerly of Henderson, was charged with committing a breach of the Bankruptcy Act, by failing to keep proper books within three years after being adjudged a bankrupt. Mr. Tole, Crown Prosecutor, appeared on behalf of the official assignee, and Mr. Beale for the defence. The latter decided to consent to tue case being disposed of summarily, and pleaded guilty. He did so, he said, on the ground that lie thought if the Bench heard the evidence they would conclude that the defendant had committed a technical breach of the Act. The defendant was a bush contractor, employing a lot of labour, and could not be expected to keep books like a town merchant. There was no intention to defraud in the defendant's actions.

Mr. Tole said that in his opinion there was no intention of fraud on the defendant's part, but it was his (Mr. Tole's) duty to represent the facts of the case. The wagesmen employed by the defendant were extremely indignant. The official assignee said it was utterly impossible to ascertain anything about the defendant's finances. He (the defendant) had first become bankrupt in 1892, his liabilities then amounting to £610. He paid 2s 7|d in the £, and received his discharge in 1895. In May, 1898, he again went bankrupt, and his schedule showed liabilities amounting to about £550, due to 46 creditors. After filing, other creditors proved for over £2000, and ultimately it was discovered that in addition to the amount owing to secured creditors, some £3000 was owing to unsecured creditors. In wages £179 was due, and the only asset was 4s lOd.

Mr. Beale said the defendant had paid up to 10s in the £ to his wagesmen. Mr. Tole replied that there was still £179 left, and lie thought it should go forth that no matter what business a man embarks upon, he should, in dealing with wagesmen and people supplying him with goods, when seeking the protection of the Court, be in a position to show his financial condition, and that he had been carrying on his business honestly.

The Bench regarded the offence as a serious one, and imposed a sentence of three months' imprisonment, with hard labour.