BLENHEIM BANKRUPTCY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 18965, 12 March 1925, Page 11

BLENHEIM BANKRUPTCY

JOHN CGRRY'S AFFAIRS. APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE. POSTPONEMENT TO NEXT SESSION f r.y tklegu.u'H. —own coheespokdenT. BLENH F.nr,' VfWrieaday. Considerable public interest was takoil i) an application at the Supreme Court 10-day for discharge from bankruptcy by John" Corry, of Blenheim, merchant. He .vns adjudicated bankrupt in November ast. Mi'. A. W .Blair, of Wellington, ivit.ii Mr. T. F. Helling, of Blenheim, appeared in Mipport- of the application, whiie Mr. 11. E. Evans, of Wellington, opposed it. on behalf of Messrs. Kehvay and Son, m English firm, who were the principal creditors. After bearing counsel on both sides, who fully reviewed the facts leading up to Die bankruptcy, Mr. Justice Ostler said lie had heard no evidence which could lead the Court to find that Mr. Corry had been guilty of any offence under the Act, or any misconduct, in carrying on his business. At the .same time, the business was built round a large number of transactions of an involved nature, into which an investigation was being made. This was not yet complete, and it was hardly fair to expect it to" be complete for it wis only four months since the date of the bankruptcy, and roughly one month o£ that time had been holidays. In addition, the, principal creditor was ari English firm doing business at a long distance from New' Zealand, and he thought soma grace should be allowed them on that account. He was of the opinion that it would be wrong of the Court in all the circumstances to grant an immediate discharge, and that opportunity should be granted for a completion of thq investigations. Therefore, in the interests of justice, and of public policy, lie would adjourn the matter until the next sitting, of the Court. When the subject was reopened, . if the opposing creditor could prove ir.y offence or misconduct, the Court could consider whether or not it should impose conditions on the discharge. If the opposing creditor was not able to provo any offence or misconduct then it seemed to him that the Court should grant the discharge.