A. F.STILWELL'S BANKRUPTCY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11553, 17 January 1901, Page 3

A. F.STILWELL'S BANKRUPTCY.

MEETING OF CREDITORS.

•A meeting of the creditors of A. F. Stilwell, of the Strand restaurant, was held yesterday. Mr. J. Lawson, official assignee, presided, and there were over 30 creditors present. Mr. Lawson read Stilwell's statement, already published, and also the statement of Henry Oilman, given below, as well as a report by Mr. W. R. Holmes, who was instructed to make an investigation into the estate. ■ Mr. Holmes reported that the books had been carefully examined by him, and with the exception of certain payments which he considered had been irregularly treated, and required adjustment, as ■; between the separate estates and the partnership, the books appeared to be in order and posted up to date. The amounts referred to were 10 claims, ranging from £6 13s to £100, which Mr. Holmes, thought should be carefully considered by the supervisors and the official assignee. Until an adjustment was made on these accounts, as between the separate estates arid the partnership, it would be impossible to arrive at a correct statement of the assets and liabilities of the separate and partnership accounts.

Mr. Lawson said it appeared to him that after discharging all preferential payments there would be about £26 left, and if the business was to be carried on funds would have to be furnished. At present the necessary preferential payments to carry on the business, were exceeding the takings.

Mr. R. Salmon, on behalf of the supervisors, said it was unfortunate that they did nob get the opportunity of carrying oil the business for three months, as he firmly believed they could have brought the business through without difficulty. The supervisors had closed down the bakehouse, and thereby a big saving would be effected. Thev had also discharged three hands. He believed the diningroom could be made a profitable concern, provided it was separated from the shop.

Mr. Lawson said the value of the goods in the bill of sale, granted to Mr. J. 0. Colbeck, was something over £900. The sum borrowed was £550, and if there was a. forced sale he believed the goods would barely realise the amount of the bill.

Mr. Salmon said it was only fair that he should explain that since it became public that Mr. Stilwell was in the Bankruptcy Court the takings had fallen off about £6 or £7 a day.

Mr. Stilwell was then examined by Mr McGregor, solicitor ifor Mr. Hew. He stated that when he started the Strand business he owed about £400, but he had assets worth about the same amount. The unsecured debts now amounted to about £1667. The .stock, plant, and catering gear, forming part of the assets referred to, were worth £250. It was not true, as stated bv Mr. Giiman, that that plant was not worth £50. No independent valuation was made when the plant was transferred to the Strand though he was perfectly willing for such a valuation. He got £169 for the Parnell business, and £34 for furniture. Both of these he paid to his creditors. The £400 referredto -was reduced by this amount, leaving his out-standing liabilities at £197. At the time of the dissolution of partnership a balance-sheet was prepared. He could not say how many balance-sheets were prepared from the time the .business was started up to the time of the dissolution. He could not state from memory what money was owing at the time of the dissolution, but he believed it was about £1300. At the' time of the dissolution he gave a bill of sale to Mr. Colbeek 'for £550. He got £500 in cash for the • bill. He paid Mr. Oilman £200 of that. The balance of £300 was banked. He undertook to give £50 bonus for the bill of sale, and pay 8 per cent, interest. The loan was for six months. The bonus had not yet been paid. In the bill of sale he agreed to pay Mr. Colbeek £2 a week to act as supervisor of the estate.

Mr. McGregor : That amounted to about 50 per cent, you were paying for the money. Mr. Stilwell : Not at all. I was paying for seivices rendered. None of the money has yet been paid to Mr. Colbeek. Before giving the bill of sale he consulted some of ■his creditors.*'"He could not remembar if ho" told them the term? of the bill of sale. The creditors he consulted, were Messrs. Tanfield and Potter, the Campbell-Ehren-fried Company, R. and W. Hellaby. He represented to those creditors that Mr. Colbeek was putting money into the business on security. Mr. Potter and Mr. Wing (R. and W. Hellaby) said they did not understand that the agreement twas to be of the nature now slated by Mr. Stilwell. Mr. Colbeek said it was distinctly understood that he was to take a bill of sale for the whole thing. Mr. Wing : I understood you were to take a partnership ? Mr. Colbeek : I never mentioned such a thing in my life. Mr. Leo. Myors said he understood a bill of sale was to be given. What the terms were he did not know. He had never looked on Mr. Colbock as anything but a mortgagee. Mr. McGregor: A large proportion of the chattels referred to in that bill of sale has never been paid for? Mr. Stilwell said a . considerable portion was paid for. At the time he gave the bill of sale he owed, including private debts, about' £1550. The value of the goods affected by the bill of sale would be about £950. At the time he filed he had about £116 at credit. He kept proper books, which would show all the money he received, and all he paid out. By Mr. A. J. Entrican: To pay out Giiman he wanted only £200, and he raised £500, because it was necessary to bring more capital into the business. The business had never been properly financed from the first. At the outset there were negotiations that Giiman should receive £360. As a matter of fact, Gilman first wanted £500. It was the case that Mr. Entrican advised that Giiman should not get anything, as the business was not worth 20s in the £.

This closed the examination, and, on the motion of Mr. Entrican, seconded by Mr. Bankart, it was resolved, "That tenders be called for the business as a going concern, returnable on January 25, failing a satisfactory tender being received, the official assignee to offer by auction, all goods, stock, and plant, not in the bill of sale ; in the meantime, the present supervisors to continue the business, and have power to accept tenders." Mr. Colbeck said the creditors had employed every solicitor in the town to endeavour to find a flaw in his bill of sale. They might think the terms of the bill of sale hard, but for the small consideration mentioned in the bill, he was taking the risk of whether he got his own money back or not. Mr. Entrican said he had been looked on as one of the leaders in this matter, and he might say that he did not blame Mr. Colbeck in any way. The man he blamed was Mr. Stilwell, for getting close on £2000 worth of credit, and then handing over everything on a bill of sale, to raise a few hundreds. ■Mr. Stilwell: You are all to blame. You imagined Mr. Gilman had a lot of money, and so did I. Mr. McGregor then moved, and Mr. Entrican seconded, "That the official assignee consult the Crown Solicitor, with the view of prosecuting the two debtors, Messrs. Stilwell and Gilman, under the penal clauses of the Act." The motion was rejected by a large majority. HENRY OILMAN'S BANKRUPTCY. Henry Oilman made the following statement before the official assignee in bankruptcy yesterday:—l have been a resident in South Africa for several years, engaged in gold mining, battery work, and also on the Natal Government railways. My earnings would not exceed £4 per week. I have now no property ,or: means in that country or in New Zealand. I am not a married man. I came to New Zealand in May, 1898. I bought a farm of about 40 acres near Pnkekohe from Messrs. Vaile and Sons for £450 in September of the same year. I paid £250 down, and the balance has since been paid. 1 sold out in April, 1900 for about £10 less than cost. The stock on the place was sold for £140 or thereabouts. About 12 months ago I met Stilwell, for the first time. I was then on the farm, and he had a confectionery business in Parnell. We continued a casual acquaintance until about May, 1900, when I mentioned to him that I had sold the farm, and was open to some occupation, upon which he suggested I should join him in a restaurant business, which he contemplated

establishing in the Strand Arcade, saying ! that .he had already obtained a.lO years' lease of the premises—then unfinished; I told him I would take time to consider his proposal. He told me he should expect me "to find £500 as. my share in starting the business. I told Mrs. Waterman' (an.hotelkeeper, who had just sold out at Waiuku, and then resident at Onehunga) of Stilwell's proposal, : and suggested that she should join us. She liked the idea, and ultimately agreed to put in £500. About the beginning of August, 1900, Mr. Gribbin, solicitor,' drafted a partnership deed, in which only 'Stilwell and myself are mentioned, Mrs. Waterman, in the meantime, having withdrawn from her promise to join. This deed was never executed. In goods and money I put in, as near as I can remember, about £460, before the restaurant was opened. Stilwell put in no money— only a quantity of stuff consisting of catering plant and some stock-in-trade, from his Parnell shop, which ho valued at £250. I objected to this valuation, believing it to be not worth £50 at the outside. He objected to an independent valuation. About a fortnight, or three weeks, after October 8, 1900 (the date we opened), we quarrelled over the Waikato show catering, and various other matters, and I told him unless the business was conducted properly, and the expenditure reduced, either he or I must go out. This unsatisfactory state of things continued until the last week in November, when I notified him that unless he repaid my capital I would close the concern. • Upon this he asked what I would take to go out. Eventually I agreed to accept £200 cash, end a promissory note for £50, payable in 12 months, f He then gave a bill* of sale over the furniture and other effects for £550. Out of this I got the £200 referred to, through Mr. Gribbin, on November 29, 1900. I was not a party to the borrowing under the bill of sale. On November 26 a bond was signed by Stilwell, indemnifying me from all further liability or responsibility in connection with the business. A notice of dissolution of partnership was advertised on November 29, 1900. As a matter of form I have put in a statement of the restaurant liabilities, but do not admit being in any way responsible for them. My private debts are nil, and the only asset I possess consists of a £10-share in the Waikato Coal Company, now valued at £6. My drawings under "the alleged partnership, prior to the dissolution, have not exceeded the £2 10s per week stipulated for. I may have overdrawn, as stated by Stilwell, but shall need proof of this. Stilwell never rendered accounts of outside catering. He took from the restaurantstock for this purpose, and returned anything unsold, without any account whatsoever being taken. I complained of this, and his reply was, " I will attend to it tomorrow," but never did it. I never told any creditors that I had " ample means." I did say to some of them that I could get money from friends in Africa and New Zealand, and could have done so if tilings had gone on satisfactorily. I object to Stilwell's statement that "I was incapable of attending to business," if he intends by this that 1 was of irregular habits. It would be true if want of knowledge of the business is meant, but in no other sense.

A meeting of Oilman's creditors will be held on Wednesday.