HATRY FRAUDS ECHO.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20538, 12 April 1930, Page 2 (Supplement)

HATRY FRAUDS ECHO.

DANIELS' HOME TO BE SOLD.

ACTION BY A BANK.

SUIT TO RECOVER £BO,OOO

That t lie home of Edmund Daniels, who was sentenced lo seven years imprisonment at the Old Bailey in connection with the llatry frauds, is to bo sold up was disclosed in tho Court of Appeal, in February where he and CI a ran oo Charles Ha try asked for unconditional leavo to defend action brought against them by Lloyds Bank, Ltd.

Daniels complained of the refusal of Mr. Justice Charles to discharge an order by Master Moseley giving tho bank liberty to sign formal judgment in the action, which was brought to recover £80,138 claimed as balance of £IOO,OOO lent by the bank to Hairy and Daniels jointly last June. ilr. Stuart Bcvan, K.C., who appeared for Daniels, explained that tho £BO,OOO was the balance due on a loan of £IOO,OOO after giving credit for money received by Ihe sale of Birmingham Corporation Stock deposited as security. His caso was that tho bank was in possession of securities to which it should havo recourse in the first placo. Ho also contended that the bank was really in the position of gageo in possession aiid therefore not entitled to judgment until after an account had been taken. Jlost of the securities deposited were -shares jn United Steel Industries, which were worth £1

each. Daniels held somo 400,000 of them There was difficulty in realising them im mediately.

Lord Justice Scrulton: If you tried to sell them you would not get £1 per share? Mr. Bevan replied that ho thought the evidence went to that extent. Daniels had made an affidavit saying that in June, 1929, he had no liabilities and shares worth £250,000 belonging to him personally. In that month the market in the shares of the" Hatrv group required to bo supported. Therefore he borrowed money and deposited securities, but at the present time lie held shares worth £169,000,' without counting any shares in the Dundee Trust or any other Hairy.company. It was a dreadful thing, said Mr. Bevan that a man, who was on evidence perfectly solvent but who had borrowed money from tho bank, should , liavo judgment given against him and bis home sold up when the bank all the timo held .the securities which constituted the man's whole fortune. Application was'being made to tho Home Office for the appointment-erf an administrator to deal more expeditiously with the affairs of Daniels than the latter could hope to do in his unhappy-position. Giving judgment without calling upon counsel for the. bank. Lord Justice Sc'rutton observed that it was ridiculous to suggest there could bo any implied contract that tho bank should wait for payment until.tho securities could be realised. Nor was there any ground for suggestion that this was a mortgage transaction in which the bank could not proceed' to judgment without first rendering an account. " I see no reason," remarked Lord Justice

Srrutton, " for a stay of execution. That Mr. Daniels should bo indulged in a slay because lie lias indulged in a transaction of a very questionable nature I do not understand." Lord Justice Homer concurred, and Ihe appeal was accordingly dismissed with costs.