A BANKRUPT DRAPER.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 6371, 20 November 1907, Page 8

A BANKRUPT DRAPER.

STATEMENT FOR TUB DEFENCE. FOUND GUILTY OF NOT KEEPING PROPER BOOKS. pnr.ss ASSOCIATION. AUCKLAND, November ID. Alex. Paterson, iu a statement made in defence of chargee of breach of the Bankruptcy Act, at Ikiwcra, said ho sot up business in Hawera in 1896, with his brother and Craig, witness and bis brother putting in <£3oo each, and Craig •£SOO. About fifteen months later, witness bought Craig out for <£7so. Two years later ,ho purchased the interest of ids brother, for =£looo. He was enabled to do tills by his landlord advancing him ££ooo at 10- per cent. Ho also borrowed £6OO at 7 per cent., the business then showing a net profit of £IOO a year, clear of his own drawings. In September, 1103, ho had a face credit of .£4813. Through sailing out at Opunako and Stratford, ho had an abnormally largo stock at Hawora. His finances became congested, and be gavo bills to larger creditors, spread over eighteen, months, and involving a payment of .£430 per month. He kept this payment up for seven mouths, when, ho found a difficulty in obtaining supplies. After a year had elapsed, ho had paid £3OOO on the original agreement. He. called another meeting of his creditors, and tfie warehousemen renewed, the bills lor two years, on a Mr Buchanan agreeing to.put £JOJO into the business, and debtor's wife offering to sell her property. All lijs wife's property had gone into tho business. and his father had lent him £609. He denied having, sold stock under cost price. Ho attributed his failure to the warehouses declining to continue supplying goods. Buchanan, who was to have gone into partnership with him, finally withdrew.

Tlio accused, in reply to his Honor, stated that in April, 1904, he submitted a balance-sheet to his creditors showing a debit for six months of £ 56. He did not balance again. Ho took a rough stock-shoct in September, 1905; but did not complete it. .In acting as he did ho thoroughly believed that he could get the business back. «

His Honor, in summing up, put the following questions to the jury: (3) Was the bankruptcy of the accused attributable to rash and hazardous speculations? (2) Did the bankrupt, in September, 1906, not to the . best of his belief fully and truly discover to the Assignee the sum of .£53 12s lid, as alleged in, the indictment? (3) Did the frmkrupt, within three years before the commencement of his bankruptcy, fail to keep such books of’account as are-usual and proper in the business carried on by him ns sufficiently to set forth his business and disclose his financial position? .(4) Did'he, between May Ist, 1905, and September 19th, 1906, contract a debt for the sum of JCIB7S 2s sd' with Bcath, Scheiss, and Co. when lie could not have hod at the time the debt was so contracted any reasonable or probable ground or expectation of being able to pay the same as well as his other debts? (5) Did he, between the same dates and in the same circumstances, contract a debt for the sum of .£52 Cs 5d with Sargood, Son and Dwon? (Gj Did he, between the same dates and in the some circumstances, contract a debt for the sum of .£2O 0s Gd with James Hodgson? ■ _ . The jury retired at 12.15 p.m. to consider their verdict, and remained, out until 4.10, when they to ask whether it wae possible to divide the fourth question in any way. Hie Honor replied in' the negative. The whole thing constituted the one offence. The question was whether the accused in contracting the debt knew he was insolvent, .or, in.other words,, that ho had no reasonable ground for expecting to be able to nay the amount ae well as hie.other debts when they fell due.. The foreman then asked whether it was necessary that they should be unanimous in their findings. Hie Honor replied in the affirmative, and the jury again retired. They were called in an hour later, when the foreman, in reply to his Honor, said they had found a . verdict of guilty on the third count, but had failed to arrive at any decision on the others. ' - The prisoner was remanded until tomorrow morning.