Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

"LIGHTS ON MOKAU."

Sir,—The article in the Herald of this day's date headed "Lights on Mokau," in purporting to give a history of the Mokau case makes several inaccurate statements regarding the - part taken in • that transaction by myself and my Wellington firm, Messrs. Travels, Campbell, and Peacock, i "Scrutineer" states that Mr. Flower was a trustee for Mr. Jones, as well as a mortgagee. This is inaccurate. Mr. Flower was in the position of an ordinary mortgagee. In order to terminate litigation, which had been in progress for some years, Mr. Flower's executors transferred his leasehold interests in the Mokau .block to Mr. Jones for £17,500. No money passed, but Mr. Jones executed a mortgage over the property transferred to him to secure payment of the £17,500 and interest. Aocord- ! ing to the judgment delivered by Mr. Jus- I tico Chapman in the'case of in re Jones, 1 reported in 11, C.L.R., at page 36, "the parties (that is, Mr. Jones and Flower's executors) then stood in the ordinary relation of mortgagor and mortgagee and their position was no different from the position of parties who arrive at that relation in the ordinary course of business." The mortgage had a currency of two years. Shortly before it matured it was, at Mr. Jones's urgent request, extended for another 12 months, on tho express ■ condition ' that if the amount thereby secured was not paid at maturity, application should at once be made to the Registrar of the Supreme Court to, sell the property. The extended time was given. Mr. Jones paid neither principal nor ; interest, and some time after the extended period : had expired the property was, on the application of' Flower's executors, sold by auction by the Registrar of the Supreme Court, after _it had been advertised for some weeks in all the principal papers in New Zealand., As to that sale, Mr. Justice Williams, at page 32 of the above-mentioned reports, says: ''There is no suggestion at all of any irregularity, or of anything done, or omitted to be done, by the mortgagees which ought not to have been done, or ought not to have been omitted." ■■■'■ " Scrutineer " says that the sale took place without Mr. Jones's knowledge, and a few lines below says that he (Jones) was willing to pay £17,000 at the time of the sale. If the latter statement is correct, the former must bo inaccurate. As a matter of fact, Mr. Jones had full knowledge of the intended sale of the property, but tho statement that Mr. Jones was willing to pay £17,000 at the time of sale" is either a pure invention, or, if he had any such willingness, he carefully concealed it in his own breast. Tho option to' Mr. Herman Lewis was not for £17,000, as stated by /'Scrutineer," but for £14,000. As to the purchase of the leasehold and the mortgage back, Mr. C. W. Tringham, of Wellington, acted as solicitor for Mr. .Lewis, and. not Travers, Campbel', and Peacock. The transfer of tho leases and the mortgage were both perused and approved 'by Mr. Tring-» ham, on behalf of Mr. Lewis. I did not recommend Mr. Lewis to purchase the property. He purchased after consultation with his Napier friends, and after a careful inspection of the property by . surveyors and land experts. The £4-300 referred to in Scrutineer's " article Was deposited • with ; Messrs. Moorhouse and Hadfield, "tho Wellington firnj of solicitors," prior to my signing the transfer, so that the sale did not, either in form or substance, ataount to a transfer of the mortgage from Mr. Jones to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Lewis did not re-mort-gaso the property to Messrs. Travers Campbell, and Peacock. The mortgage was made to Flower's executors. If any of your readers wish to obtain an accurate knowledge of the history of the Mokau Block, so far as the transactions between Mr. Jones and Mr, Flower's executors are concerned, I recommend them to read the above-mentioned report, and, in particular, the judgments of Their Honors the Chief Justice and Justices Williams, Edwards, Cooper, and Chapman. . ~ , _ J- **• Campbell. Auckland, Deoember 4.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19111205.2.20.3

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14855, 5 December 1911, Page 5

Word Count
685

"LIGHTS ON MOKAU." New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14855, 5 December 1911, Page 5

"LIGHTS ON MOKAU." New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14855, 5 December 1911, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert