"THE STORY OF A NEW ZEALAND ESTATE."

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11191, 13 August 1898, Page 7

"THE STORY OF A NEW ZEALAND ESTATE."

MR "MOKAU"' JONES""AiIDIHI^ :^:

WRONGS,

(From Oue Own Correspondent,)

; -■ ; ""ii "London, June.24.:; For some time. past. I. bay? lost sight of Mr Joshua Jones, the: hero of the great Mokau^dispiite; ,;'Biit he, ofratlie* ~iis.case„ ;has'suddenlyicome to; the front ohce more with-a prominence, tliat is'almqst' startling: ' Many months ago Mr' Jo'iies' obtained an introduction to Mr Labouchere, of -Truth, and laid the facts of his case before that gentleman, together with. an immense amount of documentary evidence... Mr Labouchere has "laid himself out" to master the case thoroughly,-and as I have personally been over most, if. not all, of the same ground, I am in a position to appreciate the thoroughness with which he has carried out his task. One thing, however, which certainly do&j puzzle me is, how he or Mr Jones mana^d to obtain possession of the private and "exceedingly damaging correspondence which passed between the persons whom he accuses of conspiring to defraud him of his rights. At anyrate, somebody did get the letters and they are published in full by Mr, Labouchere, whose review of the whole case actually occupies 21 solid columns in this week's issue of Truth.

As related by the mordant pen of that brilliant editor, the adventures and experiences of poor " Mokau-" Jones .become far more interesting .and remarkable than the events of many sensational, novels. The whole history is ■ related with singular clearness and grasp of detail, and the narrator presents with an admirable degree of lucid power the strangeness and hardship of this remarkable.case." .-, Mr Labouchere opens-his case as folloW.s'.----"In the beginning of 1893 there came to' London a gentleman who had, rendered invaluable services to the colony of New Zealand, arid had been, regarded,b'y the jcoiouy with a parliamentary grant ol'.tt'ights over a rich estate, .comprising upwards of 50,000 acres. His^object in coming to England was to get rid of certain small encumbrances, and realise the property by floating companies or otherwise. For this purpose he placed himself in the hands of a most respectable firm of London solicitors. Within three months the whole of his estate passed into the hands of the senior partner of that firm, in conjunction with a gentleman, who had joined him in advancing money to pay off the aforesaid encumbrances; aiid in the bands of these gentlemen it has remained until this day. In the following year the gentleman from New Zealand was made a bankrupt. From bankruptcy he passed into Chancery. From Chancery he passed to the Old' Bailey, where he wa* tried and found guilty of defaming the owners of his property. From the Old Bailey he passed into one of the London t hospitals, and from the hospital he passed.out, penniless and hopeless into the streets, of Loudon. In all this time he contributed nothing to his own misfortunes, beyond one solitary error of judgment. In all this time he had received from

the new owners not one penny in respect of his property beyond a sum of £76 advanced to him on paying off the, first mortgage. These statements may be received with incredulity. They are, however, but a concise summary of an authentic story, resting, at every point upon documentary evidence. The story is so extraordinary in itself, and it involves so monstrous a wrong to the gentleman concerned in it, that I shall offer no apology for now telling it at full length. Then follow ten pages reciting the facts, and next comes a review of the salient points involved. These I think may be classified under two heads.

In the first place Mr Labouchere severely criticises the conduct of Mr Flower, who, while acting as Mr Jones's solicitor and charging him costs' for such action, bought in the Mokau property, when it was sold under foreclosure, and then claimed to have purchased it on account of himself and of other persons associated with him in the transaction, not as Mr Jones's solicitor, notwithstanding that Mr Jones is expressly charged with costs for Mr Flower's part in the transaction. Mr Labouchere points out that if, as appears to be the case from the refusal of the Law Society to take up the matter, a solicitor no longer holds a fiduciary relation to his client, but may seek to make profits for himself out of his client's estate, a question of great public importance is raised and the whole relation between solicitor and client will need review.

Secondly, Mr Labouchere points out that although Messrs Flower and Co. brought forward the evidence of an expert a, few months back to prove as against Mr Jones that the Mokau property was worthless, they how repudiate the whole of that evidence and offer the property for sale on the

strength of gushing statements as to its very valuable character. "I do not impute to Messrs Flower _ and Hopkinson," says Mr Labouchere, "that they are now misrepresenting the value'of the property, but I ask them both, assuming that they believed the evidence which they used at the Old Bailey against Jones, what causes them to disbelieve it now?" He adds that "All acceptable evidence goes to show that the property is of immense value."

After an elaborate review.of the whole case, including the correspondence between Mr Jones's solicitors (Messrs Flower ancl Nussey), and Messrs VV. T. L. Travers and E. G. Jellicoe, of Wellington, New Zealand, respectively, Mr Labouchere concludes as follows :—" At the outset of this article I said that a great wrong had been done to Mr Jones. To that view I adhere. The extent of the wrong is but inadequately measured by the money value of the estate which he bas lost. His home has been broken up; bis large family has been scattered ; his daughters have had to earn their bread by any drudgery they can find. He himself has passeel through five years of incalculable anxiety ancl suffering, with the result that he is to-day impaired in health as well as bankrupt in fortune. What ever the future may have in store for him, the experience ot those five years must embitter' and poison the rest of his life; while, unless the wrong can be redressed, he is left to end' his days in hardship and penury. In the meantime, those into whose hands his property has passed—a property bestowed on him by the State, in acknowledgment of the valuable services to one of the greatest colonies of the Empire—are on tbe eve of realising from it a magnificent fortune. That he should have been thus beggared without contributing in any degree toward his misfortune, would be deplorable in any case. But that the chief instrument in bringing about his ruin should be the members of a firm of honourable professional men in the city of London, to whose guidance and control he entrusted his fortune, seems to me a reproach to tbe profession to which those gentlemen belong I publish, this statement of his case in tbe hope that, by one means or another, that, reproach may be wiped out. In; 1897 the 12 English men who heard the story of Mr Jonep's misfortunes, strongly and unaui motisly recommended him to mercy, What I woiild ask for now on his behalf is not mercy but justice."

It seems almost, certain that this vigorous, I might even say lurid, exposition of so extraordinary an affair will attract a great deal of attention, even amid the stirring events now in progress. 1 hope that one effect may be to cause justice to be done at kst. -:-'.-.'...-• ,-:.■:. ; - ._■<•- July 2. >..-■ ' , In my mail budget of last week, 1 referred at some length to the publication by Mr Labouchere iii Truth of 'a, voluminous ac count of. the extraordinary Mokaii case, iri which Mr Joshua Jones was the hero and the victim. , What has followed may not be a consequence or a result, but only a sequel. It is none the less a strange coincidence. Im.: mediately after the publication in Truth of Mr Labouchere's review of the case, the announcement was made that the banking firm of Hopkinson and Sdns, of which Mr Charles Caesar Hopkinson, is the senior partner, was compelled to stop payment, and that'the affairs of the bank would show liabilities of £203,000 (£51,000 secured) with £150,000 assets. The following notice was posted up on the doors of the bank.: "We deeply regret that owing to a succession of adverse circumstances we have found ourselves compelled to suspend payment. . In order to protect our assets, for-the benefit i of our creditors, we have to-day presented j our petition in bankruptcy, and every'assist- j ance will be rendered by us in liquidating! our affairs to the best advantage. Our books have been placed in the hands of Messrs Price, Waterhouse, and Co., and iMr Sheath, of that firm, has been appointed special manager, and is assisting in the preparation of our statement of affairs."

Now the question which .suggests itself is this: Had Mr Labouchere's exposure of the proceedings in connection with the Mokau estate, which formed part of Mr C. C. Hop : , kinspn'sv securities, including the reproduce, tion of the disparaging accounts given, by :him,and his.legal associates,'bf the value of .the ■ when lhey wished to discredit 'Joshua Jones, 'anythingl to do.ih bringing about this crisis? Tf so'poof "; Mokau" Jones has witnessed the'beginning of the .revanche.' •)"•' < :!■-;,"'«"■ - ■-■•*-.••..

_ — Green garnets are; more valuable than diamonds because they 'are so- exceedingly' ;ra,r& -ThSy'are 6f 'an unsurpassed rich.shade : far beyond that of an emerald, and-are very brilliant. ■'• Ori the 'other hand red, garnets1 are ■so'cdiinmonthat they cost next to nothing.' "■■■ . '^Paper made-from seaweed is a'growing industry'in France.' It is so transparent that .it lias been used in ■ place of-glass.,-' • "