MOKRIS BANKRUPTCY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18709, 15 May 1924, Page 9

MOKRIS BANKRUPTCY.

, TRIAL ON FOUR COUNTS. [ ' i| ALLEGED PLIGHT WITH MONEY. CASE FOR THE PROSECUTION. The ex-builder George Morris, who was I arrested; in Melbourne and? brought back ■ to Auckland for alleged offences against!, i the bankruptcy law, was placed upon; hiis trial in the ' Supreme Court, before Mr. Justice Herdman, yesterday. Mr. G.? P. i Finlay, with him Mr. L. K. Munro, appeared for % the 'accused, and Mr. S. L. I Patterson prosecuted. - *

Th©; indictment was one of considerable length, ? involving counts for, having ; (1) when insolvent, left New Zealand with £20 that ought by law to have been divided .among his creditors; ? (2) fraudulently concealed £10 worth of- property ; ; (3) |; fraudulently removed I property worth £10 from the Dominion; and (4) contracted "? certain specified debts t knowing he had <no reasonable or probable expectation of being able to pay them. On the part of the Grown, it was alleged that accused, who had been in business as a builder, in Auckland on a considerable scale, disappeared from the city in May, v 1923, ' and was arrested in January at Melbourne, where he gave his name as 'Ernest Davis. In the meantime he had been adjudged bankrupt, the deficiency in his estate being £5290. Figures submitted ;by the Crown Prosecutor showed that accused's turnover for the year prior to his disappearance was £6930. and for 'the last six months £4437. Between January and May he received £2079. Though he had a /banking account /up to April,. the greater part of the moneys he received in the ? immediately preceding period, £2000 odd, were not, said the the Crown counsel, passed through that account, while accused cashed bank cheques to the value of •'£9 so. Shortly before his disappearance he opened an account at another bank, but into this Ihe paid only £450, received from «ne man, which, with the exception of , ss, was drawn out by accused just before he quitted Auckland. A statement by accused was read, in which he declared that the cash which he took away with him did not exceed £4 15s. Various persons with whom accused had had building contracts gave evidence as ■to payments made to him in the > period immediately preceding his disappearance. The case will be resumed to-day.