MR VIGER'S EVIDENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2206, 11 June 1896, Page 22

MR VIGER'S EVIDENCE.

William Brown Vigors was called and sworn. Mr Young : Can you tell me as to whether the liquidators are all agreed as to the advisability of this ? Witness : Yes ; they say io in their affidavit. I understand there has beeu some difference •-some disagreement, between them ? — Not that I am aware of/ You have seen the balance-sheet of the Ward Farmers' Association for June 1895 ?■«■ Yos. Did you assist in its concoction ?— No. What advantage do you say there is in this over an ordinary liquidation ?— Well, we do - not run apy risk of asiets dißawearing, we lava a lot of interest, and we get an additional guarantee on the amount we have to pay. We faave to pay £5000, and we are getting that guaranteed. You mean the Brooks account ? Are there no assets against that P — No ; we have got to pay it. Do you know the financial position of Messrs jSmifch and Reid P— No. ,{ Are yon quite sure that they are Able to pay j £62,000? j The witness, who spoke indistinctly through- ! ' out its evidence, was understood to say that | they would be able to pay within a fortnight, i Do you happen to. know by whom the money Is being paid P—lP — I do not. Do yon know if the Bank of New Zealand is „ Insisting them ? — I cannot say. I take it that a limited company can never pay more than it has got, and therefore if Smith and Reid take it over they cannot get more out of it than you can P — No, but they can take a longer time. Liquidation means xacrifice. You suggest they can keep the company going ? — I do not suggest ; I think ib probable they will. The fact of its going at the rate at which it has been going means a lons.? — They would probably ehang* the way of doing businecs. You think it^robable that they can liquidate / to better :advant»ge than you can ?— I take ifc tbat'thiy are not going to liquidate, but that they are going to carry .en as a going concern. You weald realise what securities <yoa have got? You have ißecuriti^s-P-^We have a: guarantee by 'Mr Ward.^ Save you'-no other securities P—Noi we n»Te so other eeoority,

[ His Honor t That is so. It is stated In the ' affidavit that there is absolutely no security. | That is nob the fault of the liquidators. Ib is a point that may come up hereafter. Mr Young i Yes, ib probably will. | His Honor ilt is possible — I suppose it is not the case P— that thcsa debentures are & first charge on all the assets of the company. Witness : I believe it is so, on all the uncalled capital and assets. His Honor : They came in In priority to the sundry creditors? - Mr "Woodhouse : That is so. Wituess : The debentures are, I understand, secured by the unoalled capital and assets. Mr Young: The Colonial Bank practically hold a mortgage over the unoalled capital to secure ths debentures?— Witnesß was under • stood to reply in the affirmative. Mr Hftggitt: There is a provision that the debentures became due if the company goes into liquidation. Mr Young (to 'witness) : What waa your oapacity in June 1895— at the time when the balaooe shett'of the Ward Association was prepared? — I waa inspector of the Colonial Bank. Were " you awaie of the bogus draft for £30,000 ?— What do you call a bogus draft P A draft whioh never went on. — I warn aware of a draft that never went on. Ido not know that it was bogus. Is it not the same thing p— l do not think so. Why did it not go on P If you have no objection, I shall be glad if you will explain what the transaction was. — I have no objection. The draft was drawn on a credit for £30,000, supported by warrants for oats that went to the credit of the association. A draft on whom ? Do yon remember ? — A draft on John Concell and 00. (Linsi^ecl). His Honor i That amount was placed to the credit of the Ward Farmers' Association with the Colonial Bank p— Yea. * Mr Young : It was practically a discount ?— Practically a disoount. What was the date ?— About the 29th or 30th June. I cannot bs certain. On the balance day, apparently ?— lt was one of those two days. His Honor : It was not the bank balance day. That had • the effect of reducing the overdraft to £1185 4b Id ? The draft did nob appear as a liability P— lt became a discounted bill. They did not put discounts in at all. His Honor : Bub, then, against that they had ' the warrants for the oats. Mr Young : Would it not appear on the other side of the balance sheet as a draft ngainsb shipments ? — I had nothing to do with making up the Ward Farmers' Association balance sheet. You cannot ask me about that. I am asking you, as an expert, under ordinary circumstances. — If it was not shown >on one side it would not be shown on the other. What beoame of the draft ?—lt;? — It; was afterwards recharged to the Ward Farmers' Association. Was it cancelled ? — Ye«. The transaction was written back P — Yes. Can you say how sooa after the 29th June it was written back ? — I should say about the 19th October. It was some considerable time. It was the 13th October. Should it not have gone on to London in June ?—lt? — It did not go. Ifc was kept in the bank safe, I suppose ?•— Yes. Do you know why ib did not go on ?— Yes. It was not quite clear as to the terms of credit. It was done under cable. Do you know what was the value of the oats ?— No. They were supposed to be worth £30,000. What became of the warrants for the pats ?—? — They were handed back, I understand. Mr MacGregor : Do you tell us that the draft and documents were held by the bank from the 29th June to the 13th October ?— Yes. That is from memory, of course. ' You have no personal knowledge of the value of the oats ? — No. I suppose it would bs the fair market value 1 . That bad the effect of making the Ward Association's balance sheet considerably more favourable than, it otherwise would have been ? —Yes. It did nob show the contingent liability. , Do you know at whose suggestion the transaction was carried out ?— The bank's. Which individual officer of the bank ?— ■ Myself. And you are one of the liquidators ?— Yes. I acted under instructions. From whom ?— The general manager, Mr Mackenzie, who had the cable. ' Were the directors aware of this transaction ? — I do not know, I^m sure. Whom did you advise to do this?— The manager, in conversation aflnvercargill. | You were in communication with tho head office by wire ? — No ; I went down. How did ib happen that this transaction ' occurred on the balance day of the Ward Association ?— Because the cable came that morning. Was the cable in reply to another cable ?— I do not know. I Is it not a fact that what you went to Invercurgill for was to insist that the account should I be reduced as nearly as possible to credit ?—? — I Very possibly we wanted the account in credit. And this providential cablo arrived on the day on which you went down P— On the mornI ing before, I think. I understood that arrange* ments were made in London to have those credits established. ~ I Arrangements with Mr Ward P— Probably. There io an extraordinary coincidence as to ithe date. Do yeu know whom the cable was , from ? — I could not say. | How was it that this draft remained hung up for so many months without the transaction being settled ? — I suppose because ib was not convenient to find the oats. The oats were not forthcoming/ "Where were ] .the oats whioh were represented in the warrants P — They were supposed to be in the stores, - Were they ? — I do nofc know. Have you any reason to believe that they were ?-— Afterwards I had reason to believe that they were fcofc. So that this £30,000 bill was lying in the bank safe with a parcel of worthless bonds attached to it P — We did not know that. His Honor : Were the bonds worthless when you got them ?— They were not so to our knowledge. Were they as a matter of fact ? — I believe so. Mr MacGregor : Do you mean that the oats •were never there at all to represent the warrants ?— I think not, from what I subsequently learnt. What did you subsequently learn ?— That there was considerable difficulty in getting the o?.ts. ' Was it Mr Ward's bond they wero supposed to be stored in ? — They were supposed to be in different places. Did they duplicate the warrants ? — I think the man gave warrants when the oats were nob there. The bondkeeper ? — They do not have bosdk'cepers at these placet. His Honor : They woivld bo free stores.

Mr MacGregor : Who signed the warrants ?—? — Witness : The manager of the company. The manager of the Ward Company P — Yes. And yon took his word that the oats were there P — Yes. And thß Ward Comp»ny had the uso of this £30,000 from Juno until October on the strength of this draft pp — It simply wiped off tho overdraft. It saved interest, I suppose?— The interest would be charged back. Hi* Honor : If the oats bad been there the account would have been £30,000 to the good. Mr MacGregor i Were oats rising at the time P— Wifcoess i I think they were. At the time of this transaction Mr Mackenzie was in Dunedin, aud ha instructed you to proceed to Invercargill to arrange this ?— Yea. Do you* remember when Mr Ward came back from England?— l remember about- the time. At the time he came back were you aware "of the financial position of the company ? — No. When did you first become aware of their position pp — As far as I reoolleob, about the beginning of September. Was this one of the accounts yon had to inspect P—lP — I inspected it once thoroughly, and once the figure? on the books of the bank. When was the thorough inspection ?—ln? — In November. Until September did you consider that the company was in a solvent condition ?— Yes. When did your suspicions btcome aroused about the oats pp — I was told about it. I heard in a general way. When ? —Some time after September. You have heard Mr Ward tell us that in the month of August he reported to the bank the damaging report that his manager had sent. Is that correct? — My own impression is that it was somewhere about the 2nd er 3rd September.. Yon would get to know that a few days after Mr Ward making it ?— Yes. Ib was made to Mr Mackenzie in Wellington. While Mr Mackenzie was away were you acting as general manager ? — I was looking after the office. I was not acting as general manager. There was no one in command except yourself ? — No ; bub there was a man in command in New Zealand— in Wellington. I attended to the routine work. He had other work ? — I presume so. He stayed there for a considerable time. That was tho time of the proposed amalgamation ? — Yes. You say that you made a thorough inspection of the affairs of tho company in November pp — A thorough inspection so far as I could. Did you take out a balance sheet oc a statement of affairs ? — Yes. Can you tell no roughly how it compared with Mr Cook's ? — I made it pretty bad, but not quite so bad. I did not go so thoroughly into it as Ml- Cook did. Were you surprised to find it so bad as you did ?— Yes. Had you anyone assisting you P—lP — I had some aspistancs from the men in our own office, and from the men in Mr Ward's office. There was nobody assisting you from the Bank of New Zealand ? — NoHad not your own office ceased to exist; then ? — No ; it was prior to the 18th November. ' I notice that you, along with the liquidators, concur with Mr Cook in saying that this is tbe best offer you con get. Have you taken any steps to find whether you can get any other offer P— No. You have not called for tenders, for example P<— No ;we have not called for tenders. And this is the only offer you have had p — Yes. Of asked for ? — This is fcho result of our etnrting to pub the company into liquidation. We called on the Bank of New Zealand to take it over. They declined, and we asked them to take steps to liquidate. Then we got this offer. We then stopped the liquidation proceedings in the meantime to consider this, till we thoroughly understood this and saw what was the best that could be done. The Bank of New Zealand had actually commenced to liquidate the company ? — They had not actually commenced. They had received instructions. Was" it through the Bank of New Zealand that yon received the first word of thiß offer? — No. n You received (he notice through the Bank of New Zealand ? — No. And you do not know that the Bank of New Zealand are finding the £62,000 ?— I do ,not know that they are finding one shilling. You have no ideas on the subjeot ? — I have no ideas. Mr Woodhouse : Do you think it would be a wise thing to call for tenders ? — No ; I think ib would be very unwise. You think it would havo a- prejudicial effect ? — Decidedly. Mr Young observed that he did nob wish to aek anything of the other liquidators. Mr MacGregor said he would like to ask Mr .Simpson a few questions. MR SIMPSON'S EVIDENCE. William Lawrence Simpson, one of the official liquidators, was sworn. Mr MacGregor : You have joined with the other liquidators in this affidavit ?— Witness : I have. In making the statement in the affidavit, did you rely on your own inquiries and investigabions or on Mr Cook's ?— As regards what p As regards the value of the estate P—lP — I took the investigation by Mr Cook as a basis. We made an inquiry ourselves. What do you mean ? — We went down ourselves. Did the three of you go down ?— No ; two oJ us— Mr Ramsay and myself — and we went through the books with Mr Cook. Mr Vigers did not go down ?— No. It waa more convenient to keep one here. Air Vigers must have been down since he was appoiuted liquidator? — Yes, but not on this occasion. And I presume we may take it that you ore satisfied that this is the beat offer that you can get ?—lt? — It is the best offer on the basis of Mr Cook's statement which was made on March 20. I do not know now, when oats havo risen 6d, that I would Bay it is the best. Oftts have risen 6d since then ? — They jnmped up last month. Did the company hold large stocks of oats ?— No ; but, dealing with farmers, they must be paid in oats, I think. That has improved the poßition of the debtors P— lt has improved the position of many of them. That would affeofc both the book debts and the capital account ?— Oertainly, so far as the stick is composed of oats 1 You say that if this was a fair offer when it was made it should now be increased considerably ? — To-day, if we had nob closed as ib were, I would think twice before we closed ; but we have" closed,' and we let the court take the responsibility of withdrawing oub of it. Between man and man, it would be a bindiDg contract, and it would be dishonourable to withdraw, j Can you give any idea in pounds of the probaW*i dJflforence ?— I would say, roughly, that a ■

good many of the doubtful debts ought to hare become good. To what extent P — What would require perhaps 600 bnshels to pay an account wonld take about 500 bushels. 'ihat is 20* per cent, better ?— I dare say it is all that, but there are a number of other con« Biderafciona w-hibh must be taken into account. Take the ' book debts.-— There iff nob the slightest doubt that the rise in oats has improved their value, Surely if you got a better offer than this you would be bound to take ib ?— Nob if we have committed ourselves to one offer already. Is there any other reason that you can suggest why you can get a better offer P— None. — Assuming that this was a fair price at the time, you think that Messrs Smith and Reid should make w handsome profit ? — Their position has been improved by the rise in oats. By 20 per cent. P — O*ts may go down again before they are able to sell. Yea ; but they may sell to-morrow ?—lf? — If they realise at once there would be the danger, through their being such large holders, of their knocking the market down. Mr MacGregor : They couia ship to London, not in the manner whi»h has been described, bub bona fide. \ His Honor : I understand the company have a very amali stock of oats, but you say the rise in the price of oats affeots the payment of the debts aud the uncalled capital to some extent P . — Witness t Yes. Mr Cook, who has been handling the thing, will be able to give a better idea. Mr MacGregor t The contracfc was only signed on the - Ist June ? — But the proposals were dated the 20bh April. Mr Woodhouse : Th« rice in oats would only , aff • ot the bad and doubtful debt* ?— lb would only affect the bad and doubtful debts. The extent to which ib would affect them depends upon the quantity of oats tho farmers have?— Yes. You do not know what they have P — No. _ His Honor : Js not this the case : that if a man is hard up he sells his oats as soon as he can ? — Tbe accounts remaining unpaid are ooming in now. When they como in the man who is a debtor demands that tho market price be credited to him, and that price last month has gone up 6d. Would not the weaker men have disposed of their oat 3as soon after harvest a«i possible, and would there not be stocks in hand in respect of thtise ? — They would sell as soon after threshing as they could, but it was nearly the end of April before tho threshing was done, no that they were bringing in jemfc after the rice Mr Woodhousa : And ib is also possible that the selling of large quantities will bring the market down ? — Yis ; I do not say what the exact effect will be, bub it would make me doubtful to-day about selling. j Mr Haggitb : But there is just an much ohance of otts falling as there is of their continuing to rise ?— Not for a f«w mouths. i If the Ward Farmers' Association were put into liquidation, till tho oats would come in at once ?—lf? — If they were'judiciously handled. Is ib not a fact that your co- liquidators do not agree with you on this point ? — They are not of the same opinion as I am.Mr Woodhouse : Do you know if anything has gone down since the offer was made — manures, for example? — Tbore is a very large quantity of guano. We do nob consider that to be of such value as it waa. • You do not know any other persons who would make an offec ?— No". His Honor : You cannot hawk the thing round the country. Witness : I do not see how you could advertise or let it bo known ifc was open for offer. Mr MacGregor : There is some goodwill ?—? — But yon forget we have not a busineso to soil. We have only a small control or interest in ib. So much was that so that #we had some difficulty in getting into the premises at all. ' MR COOK RECALLED. W. R. Couk, recalled, was un/lorst-ood to say that if he valued the accounts fco-d»y he wonld certainly value rtifem higher than he had done. In the case of doubtful Accounts, where a man had 300 acres of oats and 30 bushels to the acre, instead of taking them at Is 3d he would take them at Is 7d or Is 8d per bushel, and so the doubtful debts would be considerably improved ; but then they must take into consideration that if they forced the market they would probably cause a fall. Ib was a very difficult point, bub he must say that if he noade a valuation to-day he would have to take the market rarea to-day as he did then. Mr MacGregor : Can you give an estimate, approximately, of the difference it would make in your statements ? Witness : About £5000 difference. This is only partly guesswork. I do not want to be definibe in this. That would be in the statement. Whether in realisa'ion you would get 'this is a different thing, .because in forcing the market you would probably cause a fall. Guanos have been mentioned. They would be affected the other way. They have gone do.wn, but the proportion is not so great. • j Mr Young ; Approximately in the same way What would the difference ba - £500 P Witness : I should think so. MR RAMSAY'S EVIDENCE. Keith Ramsay was tben called, and stated in reply to Mr Haggibfc that the question of thfl-rise in ttre price of oats since the agreement was entered into with Mr Reid and Mr Smith had been threshed out on several occasions by the liquidators. He was satisfied that notwithstanding the rise in the price of oats that they were getting a good bargain. He woulS not wish to withdraw from the bargain. If oats had fallen, he would nob think it honourable if the purchasers had backed out of their agreement. He thought that the cost of liquidation would be £10,000. The interest item alone would be 6 per cent. Mr Young asked how Mr Ramsay estimated the expenses of the liquidation to be £10,000 ? Witness replied that he based his estimate on 10 per cent, on the amount liquidated. Mr Young i On the assets P Witness : Yes, on the assets. You could get in a lot of these debts in the shape of oats within a week or two ?— Yes ;we could get in a considerable sum in a few weeks, In reply to further questions, Witness said that most of the stock had been in hand for yea-cs. He thought it oould be realised in six months. Then there were some properties to realise, and he fancied that ib would bake over two years to complete the liquidation. Mr Young : Why will ib take so long p Witness: The indebtedness has been running on for four, or five or six seasons, and if farmers are hurried up they would be forced into liquidation them°elveg. Mr Vigers said, in reply to Mr Haggifct, that tbe liquidators had considend the question of the liie in theprice of oats, and he considered it was a gcod thing to sell. Mr Ward gave it as hia opinion that the rise in oats was entirely attributable to.the fact that there were no large speculators this year, and farmers were holding themselves. It waß an inevitable result, if they had to /sell, that oats would come down. Mr Young then pal; ia the following affidavit bl Mr. Br.au.ni,

"I, Victor Maurice Braund, of the City og Wellington, accountant, make oath and say j - "1. That the J. G. Ward Farmers' Association of New Zealand was- formed in November 1892 for the purpose of acquiring, the goodwillot oortain businesses carried on by the. Hon. J. a. Waid. "2. That in consideration of the sale of the) said businesses the said Hon. J. G-. Ward wM allotted 3000 fully paid-up shares of £5 each ia the said association. _ - -- - "3. That I have carefully analysed and coin* pared the bulance sheets of. the J. .G. Ward Faroaere' Association issued by them for the periods ending 30th June 1893, 30th Juna 189*, and 30th June 1895, and have taken extracts therefrom. "4. That> the extracts annexed hereto, and marked « A,' • B,' ' C,' ' D,' • B,' and " F," are correct extracts from such balance sheets and reports. " 5. The nominal capital of the association was originally £100,000, divided, into 20,000 shares of £5 each. Of these 3000 were fully paid up. During the period ending 30th Juoa 1893, 5000 of the balance of such ensures wero subscribed for, upon which £1 per share was called up. The paid-up capital for that period, exclusive of the £15,000 paid for goodwill, was £5276. At the close of the next year (30th June 1894) 18,665 shares had been subscribed*, and the paid-up capital, exclusive of the £15,000, was £12,189. At the close of the nexb year (29 bh June 1895) 12.230 shares had been subscribed, and the paid-up capital, exclusive of the £15,000, was £12,450, leaving 4939 shares unsubscribed. During the last-men-tioned year the nominal capital was increased to £250,000 by the creation of 30,000 new shares, also £5 each, although the increase in the sub' scribed capital was only £846, still leaving 4719 sharts of the oiiginal issue unsubscribed, and in that year tbe association issued deben* tureo to the amount of £40,000, which I am informed and verily believe were underwritten and are now held by the Bank of New Zealand. "6. That exhibits 'A' and 'B' show a comparison of tbe details of the liabilities and assets of the association, taken frem the said balance sheets. Exhibits 'O ' and < D>' show the details of the profit and loss accounts taken from the same. "7. Exhibit 'B' shows the apportionment of the alleged profits for those years, and ex< hibib 'E' is a statement showing a percentage of the gross profits and percentage of the working expenses in relation to the total Reacts in tho naia balance sheets. "8. That sxhibit 'A' thowe that in the baki.co sh^et of the 29th Juue 1895 there are no items corresponding with the items • Drafts against shipments' and 'Bills under discount,' appearing in the two previous balance sheets and in tho last one at £51,645 9s lid and £35,917 le'lOd respectively. That it is highly improbable that such items did not exist, and if they did exist ,ib follows as a principle o£ aeccuuttanoj that tbe amounts must have been deducted from it-ms of the aseeti. That such a course would be misleading and most irre« gular and improper, and would amount to a fnUifi'ation of the balanoa sheet, inasmuch as the omifsion to show each items amongot the liabilities on the debit side of tho balance sheet , would signify a concealment of a contingent liability of tbe sssociation. 4 "9. That this inference is supported by a comparison of the total astets shown iv the balance shft-ts ending 30th Juno 1894 and 29th June 1895 at £166,846 16s 4d and £87,255 19a , 6 I respectively, indicating an apparent falling off of noarlv 50 per cent, in volume of busineifl for the year 1895 ; whilst reference to exhibit <B ' will sbow ' that the gross profits were £14.067 and £12,372, equal to 8£ and 14 per cent, of the total assets respectively. This in« creased profit is inconsistent with the reports of the directors annexed to the balance sheets of 1894 (whioh stated : ' A steady increase in the value of business ha 3 taken place'), the report of 1895 (which stated : • The year just closed has been one of general depression. The depression h&s been felt by the association '), and is also inconsistent with the redaction of the dividend and bonuses paid to shareholders and others for such year. "10. Exhibit 'A' shows that the direct indebtedness of the said association to ths Colonial Bank of New Zealand in 1893 wat £26 278 0a 7d, in 1894 was £26,584 8s lOd, and on the 29th June 1895 wae only £1185 4s Id. " 11. That I *m informed and believe that the figures £1185 4a Id did not represent the true direct indebtedness on that dtfco, but that the said indebtedness was £26,185 4a Id, and that a draft for £25,000 wan negotiated on oc about the 30th day of June 1895 by the Colonial Bank and placed to the credit of the currency account of the said association, and also that the said draft was never remitted, but was cancelled and the transaction written back after tbe balance waa struck ; and this information is supported by the figures of tho balance sheets, which show a reduction in the direct t indebtedness of about £25,000 at the close of! ' the year 1895 as compared with both the previous years. " 12. That exhibit •B ' shows that dividends and'bnuuses have been paid at high rates foe ■the Sfcid three periods, but tho item representing goodwill (£15,000) hss only been reduced by £2000 written off in tho last year. That it is usual and proper to write off goodwill altogether out of profits within about five years, or sooner if profits will admit. "13. That during tha three years the dividends receivable by the said J. G. Ward at the rates declared would amount in 1893 to \ £1500, in 1894 to £1500, and in 1895 to £1050* besides which the said J. G. Ward was employed as managing director. •'14. That in the report of the 29th June 1895 the directors allege that due provision has been made for bad debts; that profits were good, admitting of allocations, to goodwill acconnt and payment of substantial dividends and bonuses, and the directors recommended tha unissued portion of the debentures of tha „ association 'to their shareholders and clients as offering a first-class investment.' " 15. That the balance sheet of the 29th ot June 1895 shows the association to be in * flourishing condition and their auditors' certificate Touches that it is ' fully and fairly drawn up and properly exhibits a true and correct statement of the affairs of the association.' " 16. That lam aware that at the time that this balance sheet was prepared negotiations were pending for (he purchase by the Bank of New -Zealand of the business of the Colonial Bank of New Zealand, and I am further informed and believe that Mr W. B. VigM*, one of the liquidators of the said bank, and late in« speotor of the said bank, assisted in the pre- - paration of the said balance sheet and was cog* nisant of the whole surroundings. "17. That the said Hon. J. G. Ward, as Colonial Treasurer, waa in charge of the bill which passed both Houses of Parliament authorising the purchase of the business of tha Colonial Bank of New Zealand by the Bank of New Zealand. "18. That a term of the purchase was thaft £55,000 should be -written off a list known as ~ the f C list. "19. That it has been publicly rtated -with* out denial that the *O' list contained the) aficounia of the said assooUtlom and tbe Baicl

Sam was written off such accounts, whereby its liabilities to the said bank' has already been • reduced by £55,000. " 20. That I am an equitable shareholder in / the said Dank, and I am of opinion that there v.-.jg:e many matters in connection with the con- \ duct of the business and the balance sheets of the j esid association which require a searching investigation, and that no advantage can possibly fi.be gained by the shareholders of the Colonial ! Bank by a compromise which obviates the '■ windiDg-up of the said association in a regular 4 manner." ,- Feofit and Loss Accoont. Dr.

,*<J O *» 00 O 0000 to o m to© oooe Mr Young addressed the court, citing -numerous authorities to show the principles laid down as applicable to the determination of sack matters as that before the court. Ho Bhould, he said, rely upon these authorities in j contending that there were circumstances sur- i rounding this matter, which he would go into iff hen. the court again sat, which would justifyj his Honor_in withholding his sanction to the Schema proposed, which' there could be no Boubt was an attempt at compromise. 'The following affidavit by Mr Braund was then read by Mr Young :— "I, Victor Maurice Braund, of the City of "Wellington, accountant, make oath and say : "1. That I have perused a - copy of the affidavit ot William Richard Cook, sworn and filed herein, and the balance sheet thereto Attached. "2. That I have made a hurried analysis thereof, and the same is attached hereto and •marked • A.' "3. That I believe that such analysis contains a true account of the position of affaire 'to shown Id the ittid balance iheet. '

"4. That as a result of sach analysis it appears that in consideration of Messrs Reid and Smith's promise to pay £62,750 the agreement proposes to release the association from the deficiency of £48,458 16a 4d, iv addition to the sum of £55,000 now admitted to have already been written off, and tha debtor (the Hon. J. G. Ward) from his liability, upon guarantees and otherwise, of £87,490, and also to release the Hokonui Railway and Coal Company and Messrs Thompson and Hayes and Dr Hanan's estate from their respective liabilities of £4900. . "5. That in view of tbe position disclosed by the said balance sheet, I see no pecuniary advantage, apart from all other considerations, in the proposed sale, but I am of opinion that, upon the facts disclosed alone, the interests of the shareholders of the said bank would be better served if the said association, the said Hokonui Railway and Coal Company were liquidated in the usual manner, .and the liquidators were to exhaust their remedy against the said J. G. Ward and other debtors or guarantors." Analysis of Balance Sheet of Makch 20, 1896. Debt to bank ... i.. ... £92,179 9 2 Debt to sundry creditors 20,617 18 0 £112,797 7 2 Assets (per contra) ... .« ... £54,340 10 10 Deficiency 48,450,16 i £112,797 7 2 Colonial Bank's proportion of deficiency, say £40,000 0 0 Sundry creditora 1 deficiency „. 8.456 0 0 £48,456 0 0 Debt to bank as above £92,179 9 2 Leas proportion of deficiency as . • above ... 40,000 0 0 ~ie527179 9 2 Bank's proportion "^of uncalled capital, say 6,765 0 0 JE55944 9 2 Consideration for purchase... ... 62,760 0 0 £3,805 10 10 Against which the bank -will sell to Smith and Reid Ward's guarantee for £87,490, which he can nwetupto 4,250 o*o Leaving a balance in favour of Messrs Smith and Reid, on their own showing, of £Ui 9 2 At 6.15 p m the court was adjourned until 11 o'clock this (Saturday) morning. - The case was continued on Saturday morning. MR VIGERS RE-EXAMINED. His Honor said at the outset that he desired to ask Mr Vigers one or two questions. (To Mr Vigors) : You went down to Invercarjjill, I : understand, at the end of June to get the j association's overdraft reduced, among other hinfw P Witness : Yes, your Honor. And it was then that a cablegram came to ! Mr Fisher, who was then managing the assoeia- j tion, as to the credit which had been opened P— j I tbiuk the cable came to the bank, but I am not quite clear about it. It was to the bank, your Honor. And then Mr Fisher drew on Connell and Co. for the £30,000 and gave warrants for oats purporting to be of that value ? — Ye§, representing that value. < ' t The draft was not forwarded to Connell ?—? — 'It was'to be held over for a few days till Mr Ward's return, and until we had further ad rice las to the cable. We did not read the cable advice quite dearly as to . ] And that was why it was not forwarded ?— That was why. When Mr Ward returned, why was it not forwarded then P—lP — I could not say that. [ When did the bank find out that the oats were not there ? — About September. Not before ? — I believe not. I did not know anything about it till September. I may aajr that there was no_new money given againßt tbis I bill. x I quite understand. It came off the account P — From the bank's point of view it was a good transaction. Instead of an unsecured account we gotoats as cover. No doubt it would have been a very good transaction if the oats had been there, but they were not there. That is one point I wasted to ask you about. Then I want to ask, can you give any explanation of the reason why this bill w^a taken by the Colonial Bank from Mr Waraon the 19th of October P—lP — I cannot give any explanation at all. It did not come within j my province. No, it would not come within your province. But I R»k you as a banking expert whether you can offer any explanation ? — I do not think it comes Ttithin the range of ordinary banking. You are one of the~*liquidatora as well as baiug a banker. Have you any notion of what paragraph 18 of the agreement means P What is the point of it P What is the point of writing off the amount of this particular bill, for the bill was not given on that day ?— My own impression is that that was the amount the account was supposed to be short. All the rest was supposed to be good. That is what puzzles me. This account on the 18th was supposed to be bad, hopelessly bad. It looks like that ?— Yes. The next day a promissory note is taken by the bank for that amount. Ordinarily, if a promissory note is given by a man of business, it is supposed that he believes at the time he will be in a position to meet it. Also, when a promissory note is taken by a man of baainags, as, of course, the representative of the Colonial Bank was, it may be presumed he looks at it as a valuable security. As the circumstances were, which were probably known to both parties, this promissory note was simply a worthless piece of paper, the giving and taking of which seems to have been a farce perpetrated between Mr Ward and Mr Mackenzie for no understandable object. Can you as a binker suggest any explanation of it? — Not as a banker. I can give you my impression. I think it was taken by Mr Mackenzie just with a view to retain a hold upon Mr Ward for the amount; But Mr Ward was not liable to the bank before that P — No, but he was to the company. That was written off to the company, and the company were credited. His Honor : 1 want to get as much light as I can. Witness r I think it was to retain a hold of Mr Ward. Mr Young : The draft for £30,000,— was it a promissory note for three months or a draft ?—? — far^aa I remember it was a draft on demand. I em not perfectly certain. i Would it not probably be a drafb due in October P— l do not tbink so. Do you know ?— I say I don't think so.' I think it was on demand. Was it returned to the association P—Probably it was. Do you know whether it was returned ? — I presume it was. It was debited to them and if they asked for it it would be returned. Do you know if the draft was included in the , item "pasb due bils " P— This draft was out of

existence. It was redebited to the company. That is all L-kaow of It. If it was returned it would be a past due bill P— lf it was paid it would be a worthleis piece of paper. But it was not paid P — So far as we are concerned it was paid. Can you tell me if it was included in the item "p»«t due bills " P—ltP — It was certainly not. What account was it debited to P— The J. G. Ward Association's current account. Wh=»t puzzles us is that the direot indebtedness to the bank is stated at £9805, in Mr Cook's sWetnent. Should it not inolado the item of £30,000 ?— No ; certainly not. How is the indebtedness of the association ti tho bank so small, except ia respect to tho pant due bills P — The indebtedness in round figures is £72,000. Ido not call that small. It may be included in the item of past due bills ? — I have told you it is not included in that item. There is one point yesterday in which I made a mistake in the matter of a date. I said it was en the 13th October, but I find it wa3 on the 13th November when the £30,000 was debited. What would be the total indebtedness of the assooitition to the bink at the time the £30,000 draft was passed through P— You mean the overdraft ? Yes ; how was it reduced to £9605 P I told you that £55,150 was credited to the account. The association is still a debtor for £9000 odd. If the indebtedness was £30,000, the crediting with £55,000 would put the association in credit. . Instead of that the association is in debit £9605. How is tbat skate of affairs accounted forp Have there been further advances P— There have been further advances from time to time. - To the extent of £35,000? Is it anything liko that, do yon know ?— I should not think it would be so much as that. The £55,150 represented the indebtedness 6i the Association to the bank on the 30fch November ?— No. -- Mr Haggitt: It represented Mr Ward's indebtedness to the Ward Farmers' Association. Mr Young : You cannot say what the indebtedness of the association to the bank w«-s ? — Witness : My memory will not carry me back to any particular date. What advances have been made, rougbly speaking, since that was written* t.ffp Have there been £30,000 ?— I do not know of any particular advance— advances to carry on .the business. ' You see they are still debited with £9605 on the grain and rail account ? — That has been standing for some time. I want to know what the dealings on the account have been since the £55,000 was credited P— Everything since that has been the ordinary working of the account. The orediticg of that £55,000 put the association in credit ?—lt? — It was this way so far as my memory serves me: There was an overdraft, and the £55,000 put tbe accouut in credit. Various items ner-m to have run the account up to £14,000 or £15,000. Suppose it was £15,000. If you take £55,000 off that, it leaves them in credit £40,000. You redebit £30,000, and that leaves them in credit £10,000. That has been reduced, you e*y, by subsequent dealings until there is a further overdraft of £9000 ?— No. The £9000 has been owing for some tim«. Then that £10,000 does not appear any where. What has become of it P — Only speaking from memory, there was about £14,000 overdrawn. His Honor : Is not this the case, Mr Vigers : The bank took Mr Ward's promissory note for cash so far as the Farmers' Association was concerned. The Farmers' Association now only owe the bank £92,000, whereas before they owed the £55,000 P Witness : Thay took the promissory note and reduced the indebtedness of the company by that amount. The bank transferred the indebtedness of the company to Mr Ward P — That is so. His Honor : I confess that until yesterday I did not understand that, for one was informed that on the left-hand side of the "B"list was £78,000, and that on the right hand side there was £55,000. Now it seems there is £90,000 odd in addition to the £55,000. Witness : In all those lists there is no notice taken of British bills. His Honor : The misapprehension wai natural until the explanation came out yesterday. Mr Young : The fact is that Mr Ward's promissory note was. taken as good as cash P — Witness : I have not said to. Is not that the result of the operation on the account P— l do not .think so. His Honor : This agreement is made on this basis, certainly, that the sum of £92,000 is owed by the association, and £55,000 is owing by Mr Ward. - Mr Young : Can you suf geat any reason why the bank should prefer the liability of Mr Ward to that of the company p— Witness ': That matter was entirely done by the general manager. I know nothing about it. Mr MacQregor : You , say that when this transaction took place at lavercargill about the £30,000 you were acting as inspector P — Y«s. Who was the previous inspector P— Mr Wntson. Now the president of the Bauk of New Zealand ?-Yes. When did he leave the service of the Colonial Batik?— Some time in 1894— between August and October, Can you give the exact date ? — Not from memory. Was ho on intimate terms with Me Ward ? — Whitt do you mean by " intimate terms " P Was he a friend of Mr Ward's?— l don't know. . He knew him as one business man knows another. Were you inspector from the time when Mr Watson left until the bank was purchased ?— Yes. Can you tell us who it was that suggested that this £30.000 draft should be obtained ?■— Yes ; Mr Mackenzie, in consequence of a cable he got in reference to the credit Have you got the cable? — No; I do not know where it is. - Would it be among the bank's correspondence P—lP — I suppose so. n And could it be produced if required P—lP — I think so. Had you any idea when you went down to Invercargill that this transaction was in any seDse a bogus one ? — Not the (lightest. Have you had reason to alter your opinion aince ?— How do mean a bogus one ? That it was not a business transaction ; that it was simply a method of bringing the account down to a smaller amount P—lP — I think it was very good business so far as the bank was concerned. „ t What was tbis mysterious difficulty as t> the terms of the credit which resulted in tbe d'af b not being forwarded P — The difficulty qras that the cable was misread, I think, by the general manager. Mr Mackenzie ? — Yes. Was it in cipher ? — Yes. The bank's cipher P— Yes. The bank's private cipher ? — Yes. And it was misread by Mr Mackenzie ?— Yes. I do not mean that he misread it, but that the purport was aofc understood.

It oame from the Colonial Bank ia London P— Ye*. Not from the people ?— We should nob have acted on it if it had bean. Do you know if Mr Ward wati in London at the time P— He was not. Do you know who arranged this matter at the other end, in London ?— I do not know. You tell us the result proved that there was j no oats to represent the warrants, and that they \ were signed by Mr Fisher, the then manager of the assooiation ? — Yea. ! Have auy proceedings been taken against Mr Fisher in respect to this transaction P — Not that I know of. Any steps whatever ?— Not that I know of. How long was Mr Fisher retained in the service of the assooiation after this transaction was exposed P When did he leave ?— I do not know the date. - He was kept there for some in Dnths after, was he not P— l do not think so. Ido not think bo long as that. You do not know accurately ?— No. Now, I notice that in the report of the directors of the Colonial Bank submitted to the half-yearly meeting of proprietors on the 25bh September 1895 they show a net profit available for distribution of £19,980 2<j lOd. Da you know whether the balauoe sheet from whioh these figures are taken included the Ward Association account as represented by tha bajance sheet of the 29iJbt June ?— Our balance sheet would include the association's dehLas shown in our books. Then it would get the benefit of this £30,000 transaction P It would appear an good in your balance sheets to that extent ?— Ye3 ; it was supposed to be good at that date. Was it supposed to be good on the 25th September ? — Our balanoe sheet was dated the 31st August. ' I know that, but I ask you was it supposed to be good on the 25th September when the balance sheet was submitted to tbe proprietors P I should say not. As a matter of fact, did not the directors and the manager know on the date when they presented the rep art to the shareholders that, so far as the Ward account was concerned, ib was at any rate in a much worse position than it was represented in the balance sheet ?—? — 1 think so. To an extend sufficient to wipe out the' whole apparent profit for the half year — viz., £19,000 ?— I should not like to say they knew that. Then I understand that this meeting for the approval of the report was adjourned till some date in November ?— Yes ; I think so. j Mr Haggitt: It was adjourned until after the approval of the agreement. Mr MacGregor: The report was confirmed after the approval of the agreement? — Witness : Ido not think I was at that meeting. Still you knew as a matter of fact it was done ? — I belisve so. So that at the time of the final presentation of the account the directors and the general manager must have known that this Ward account was £55, C00 in round numbers worse off than it -was represented ia the balance sheet P— At what date P The 18th November ? — I presumeySo. 2 And no intimation of anything of that sort was given to the shareholders in any form whatever P — No. Mr Haggitt : Did the directors know at that time that Mr Ward's promissory note was valueless ? Witness : I should not think so. Now aboub these figures, there is no occasion for any mystery. Before this £55,150 was written off, the account fctood at £98,000, or thereabouts, did it not P— That is how it appears inthe"O"lisb. Then you wrote off £55,000, which reduced it to £43,000 ?— Yes, in round figures. The reason of that reduction was that the Bank of New Zealand would take it ovft? at these figures, the £55,000 being written off P—lP — I think so. Then you say that in November the £30,000 was debited, bringing tha account up to £73,000?— Yes. Then the £20,000 worth of debantures guaranteed to the Colonial Bank would bring it up to £93,000, at which it now stands P— Yes; £92,850. MR COOK RECALLED. William Robert Cook was, at the request of Mr Young, recalled. Mr Young : In your statement of the position of the Ward Farmers' Association there ia an item of past due bills, £32,000 odd ?— Witness : Yes. Does that item include a draft on Oonnell and Co. for £30,000 ?— No. Those are past due bills by debtors. Doea it include any large amount in London P —No. MR WARD RECALLED. Joseph George Ward was recalled. Mr Young : I would like to know if Mr Ward has been able to find the letter I referred to yesterday (a letter from Mr John Murray) ?— Witness : 1 have no suoh letter. May I ask if you had such a letter ?— lf I v had such a letter I would have said so. His Honor : I understand, Mr Ward, that this sum of £55,150 represented the balance due by you to the association on your current account with the association after deducting, of course, all sums whioh you had paid into your credit ? — Witness : That is so, sir. And this balance against you was made up partly, I understand, of losses made in various shipments made by you ? — That is so. ' Those shipments were made on your acoount, not en the company's account P — The shipments of grain to London were made in my name. They were debited to me in the association account, so that the association praoLicaily were not making them on their own accouut. If there had been profits they would have gone to your private acoount P — No ; they would not. Do you mean to say that you were to bear the losses (if any) but not take the profits p — The position was this. : the shipments made to London, as far as graiu was concerned, were made in my name, except in cases where they were made for and on behalf of farmers. The debits went to my account. I may further say that I did not know until after I was advised of the position in Wellington that these debits had been made at all. Ought they to have gone to yau ? Why should they have gone to you if the association in your absence U3ed your name P Why should they' have been debited to you ? — My own wish was very well known that the association should not speculate on its own account. A great deal of commission business was carried on among its clients. I was anxious to avoid a speculative business bo far as the assooiation was concerned. g Supposing you bought a lofc of oats and were debited with the price of them, and these were sold in London at a profit, surely that profit! would be credited to you and not to the association P—lfP — If the operation had been carried on for the purposes of my own private account that wou'd have been so, but as a matter of fact that was not so. I understand these operations were carried OUOB tbis bajU ; If tbero was a loss you were ba

bear it, and Jf there was any profit the company were to got it. That is the result, is it not ?— That is As it has worked out. I may state thab the whole of the sheep purchases made by the Ocean Beach Freezing Works were oairied to that aooount. These would be really on your own account ?— Yes, on my own account. Very heavy losses were incurred, and they were debited to me. And if there had been any profits you would have got them P— That is so. Would that not have beonihe oas3 all round ? — The difference is this t I gave to the association, which I regarded as a trading oonoern, the) whole of the ooramiision bueinou attached to the freezing works, amounting to about £2009 a year, and is consideration of their getting that, in which there was no risk, they carried on all the sheep purchases for the freezing works in my name. Either profits or losses in that account would have gone to or against me, but that was not the arrangement bo far as graiu was concerned. The association then did not speculate in grafa?— No, it practically did Jiot. If there had been profit) in grain U0 asiociation weuld have got the credit, but unfortunately there were losses. And you bore them ?— I bore them. The bank seem to have relieved the association from theee ?— I should like again to state with reference to the bank agreement which has been referred to, that I was not told by anyone that it was proposed to put that £55,000 in any particular list. I did not know that list* were to be prepared, and I had no knowledge of the intended operation between the banks. All I knew was that losses had been made, and when the investigation took place, ahowing that £55,000 was the amount, and I was advised of that, I believed that I would be abje to reduce the amount to a very great extent myse'f. When I was asked to give a promissory note myself, I gave it. The effect so far as I can see of putting the amount in the left hand column is to release the association from the amount but put the burden on yourself penoually ? — That i« so. I. gave the promissory note bona fide under the belief that I would be able to meet a (treat portion of it. At that time I held £23,000 worth of shares in the association, which I looked upon aa- being- worth their f*oe value, and £16,000 worth of shares in Nelson Bros, with a reserve of £9 upon each share. But these were pledged p— They come in now ai part of my losses. The depreciation in properties that has token place as the result of the troubles of the association has very materially reducjd the earning power I had aft that data, and the whole of my liabilities in the present position are very different fea what they were then. These transactions took plaoe in October, and your affidavit states your position as at the time the bank went into liquidation in December. You ray that in that time there was thut depeciafcion ?— There has been a direct depreciation in the value of the shares alona since then of £37,000. My own opinion, at any rate, of my private affairs is that they were closely mixed up with the association, and a large business, such as that is, having baoome prcctioally disorganised and written aboub and talked about, rath the usual re«ults, it has depreciated to such as extent that it has affected everything I hava. My business, as a matter of fact, is entirely different to what I contemplated it would be at the time the promissory not? was given. As an instance of depreciation in property, it is well known that the company had aative opposition from another freezing work-i, in which about £40,000 has been lost ia a vary short time. ADDRESSES BY COUNSEL. Mr Young submitted, on the authorities cited by, him, that there were two matters which his Honor would consider— first, the question as to whether the compromise was advisable from a pecuniary point of view; secondly, whether there were any circumitances surrounding the trading of the company and the issuing of its balance sheets, and the trad- - iog of Mr Ward himself, which would justify the court in refusing to sanction the proposed compromise. That it was a compromise he did not think his Honor could have any doubt. As to the flctt question, the only suggestion which the liquidators could make, in order to show that the compromise would ba more beneficial than any ordiaary winding-up process, and the only reason they gave for proposing it was delay and cost, wherefore they considered that the offer of -Messrs Smith an.' Reid wai the best offer. As to delay, it w«* quite ovident that there need not be any great delay. The bulk of the assets of the association could be realised in a short time, and so tta liquidators could reduce the amount of the (iebentures on which they were now paying interest, *. Mr Woodhouse : They have to pay interest on everything. Mr Young pointed out th»l the court had been told by Mr Ojok that his valuation was •l'gbtly lower than what liquidation proceedings would be likely to realise. Mr Cook interposed that he stated distinctly that his valuation was made as nearly as possible on a liquidation basis. Mr Young: It doas not mean allowing for cost of liquidation P Mr Cook: No. The oosfc might oomo ia. That is a' matter of opinioo. „ Mr Young said it was evident Mr Cook did not consider that the oott of liquidation was a serious item. The liquidators had never tried to get a batter offer ; they had simply accepted the first one that came along. The probabilities were that they would have got a barter one if the thing had been left open. Mr Haggitt : What ! aft» thtse exposures. Mr Young said with regard to the question of delay it was quite evident now that a lot of the farmers, iv consequence of the rise in the price of oats, could pay up the amounts owing; by them almost immediately. But the peculiar part of the whole thing was this : that Messrs Smith and Reid were bnjing the debts of the Hou. J. G. Ward and of the association — they were not only buying the securities but the whole of the debts as well. If the whole of the assets that ware to be sold were worth nothing, the dtbfcs of Mr Ward might ba worth something. If the company was to ba pnt^jnto liquidation the directors might be compelled to refund the dividends to the creditors. That was a matter that the liquidators had not taken into consideration. And if Mr Ward became bankrupt it was moat probable that the' wort would suspend his discharge until he paid s> certain amount in the pound, The items had been taken out of Mr Ward's statement of assets and liabilities, and they showed that his estate would pay 8d in the pound, taking into consideration " contingent liabilities," or li in the pound if the contingent liabilities amounted, to nothing. -These were two matters which had not been taken into consideration in considering whether a compromise should be accepted. And as the result of further examination there mighb be other matters come out which the opurt was not at present aware of. As it was, his Honor had already found out, in examination, that there wera some life insurance policies and » small-credit in the Bank of New South Wales. Mr Haggitt s H« puts na valne on th*m whatever.

Hr Woodhouse? Th« nexb payment will Bxbftusb the surrender value. Mr Young (said as to the pecuniary advantages of the compromise, he submitted that no great advantage to the shareholders from a pecuniary point of view had -been shown in favour of 'accepting the compromise- as -against Ebe realisation of the securities and exhausting every remedy sgainsfc the conapmy and Mr Ward himself. Then there was another matter come into consideration — that was the oon<loct of Mr Ward and the company. ' As for Mr Ward, he was managing director of the company. By some extraordinary means or other he became indebted to the company for £55,000, but as it turned out it wax reallj the bank'B money. It' was evident he gave his same to the bank in a most promiscuous way, and he djd not take any menns to ascertain what his position really was ; and now he practiOlly offered to the creditors 8d in the pound. For these reasons he (Mr Young) ' hoped the Court would -not sanction the compromise ko far as-Mr Ward -was. o-meerned. Then, as to the conduct of the ccrmfftny, Mr Cook (who bad investigated their affairs) told the courb that th*t position had been bronght about by reckless trading— during the last two years at anyrata. He could not speak as to -before that. The balanoe sheet that was produced was an extraordinary one,iandwaa'absolutely '"cooked" —no other term could be used — with the assistance of; the 'bogus draft for £30,000, .which w«s Supposed '/to be Secured by warrants for some Imaginary oats. Eivher >an advance was made •gainst those oats or it .was not. If it was tn»do then Ahetoffioials of 'the Colonial .Bank had Dot satisfied themselves, that the pats were in existence. His' Honor: They -took somebody's word for It. Mr Young : They made sn advance. His Honon Well, not an advance. The money <was owing already. It was not a fresh kdvance. Mr Young : They practically took his security Upon a customer's -word that the securities really existed. Eis Honor: They are not in any worse poirition, than they were before supposing the aecurlty 'did not exist. Mr Young : It enabled -the* association to •. show » redaction intheir liability to the bank Of £30,000. His Honor i No donbb it did that. Mr Young proceeded to say that .the com* nftsy -was represented to be in a most flourishing condition, snd paid dividends and bonuses' every year. They recommended their debentures to their shareholders ; and they were a party to this arrangement by whioh £55,000 was transferred by them to Mr Ward. Mr Tigers'* explanation of that transfer now was that -they 'wanted to keep hold of Mr Ward. For -what reason did not appear. Mr Haggitt j He does not say so. He only supposes tbat. ~ * Mr Woodhouse i He suggests that as a possible reason. Mr Young said the real fact appeared to be that the liquidators were most anxious to effect this compromise. They sought to sell these debts to 'Messrs 'Reid and Smith, who were Mr Ward's friends, and might be his nominees. He (Mr Young) therefore, submitted that the court should not be a party 'to a transaction by whioh a company was enabled to avoid the ordinary coutse of liquidation, with its inctmtenienb inquiries, or by which Mr Ward would be enabled toeludo the Bankruptcy Court, with Its.inconvenient inquiries and possibly further proceedings. Mr MacGregor Said he did not propose to trouble the court with any lengthy address after the extraordinary and discreditable disclosures which had come out dnring.tho examination on the, previous day. He would, therefore, leave the matter entirely in the hands of his Honor tojwy whetherit was.aoase on whichthe court Should set the seal of its sanotion. After .quoting "Buckley" to show that these matters .wer« left entirely to the discretion of the judge, he. eaid that he, on behalf of a number of ■ the shareholders for whom .he .appeared, was .prepared to leave it in that position. If the court 'was prepared to grant its sanction to this compromise the thought thab either Mr Ward or the proposed purchasers ought to bear the heavy costs of these proceedings. Why should the shareholders of the Colonial Bank, who were .already losing a great deal, have to .pay the costs rendered necessary on Account of the proposed sale ? This was a compromise of the debts owing by Mr Ward and ~ the .association. It -was an effort on the part of >the friends, of Mr Ward to get him and his company out of the clutches of the Jaw. It had come ont in- evidence that the purchasers had stood to make a very.handsome profit by reason of theorise inthe price of oats. He (Mr MacGregor), therefore, did net see why they should not be compelled 1 to pay out .of this amount the expenses ©f the present proceedings, whioh were !re*lly for, the .benefit only of Mr Ward and the philanthropic gentlemen who had comeforward to help him, and he did jiot propose to disouss Jthe.matter from the commercial morality point of view. It was perfeotly plain. that the transactions of the oompany with the bank and of fix Ward with the bank had been carried on with almost unprecedented looseness, Suoh transactions were altogether inexplicable, except on. the asmmpbion that the parties were, preparing 'for the -smash that must inevitably come, Aiftl -were trying 'to set their house in order accordingly. He would now point oub one very significant thing &9 showing that the court had not sufficient material before it .to sanotion the sale. "Mr Ramsay 'had estimated the coib of liquidation at .'£10,000 ; but Mr Cook had .said that .he had not .been able to estimate the matter dose "enough to ~- say .whether he included the oostof .the liquidation -in his estimate. The business might be worth £74,000 or it might be worth £50;000. 3?hat was the closest estimate 'they could get.'He 'did nob like to taks upon '.himself the Cfieponsibility of sayiqg that the court should refuse the eanction to ,the sale. But it was perfectly plain from the -exposures that, had, taken place-that a 'desire' for .secrecy had been ' evinced all 'through these proceedings ; and ( the action of ,the shareholders had been vindi-' Bated>. Another. significant fact was that in the proceedings for 'the .appointment of permanent liquidators Mr .'Haggitt, who, no doubt, acted according to his instructions, made this statement to the court :— .Mr H^ggiitsald. he had been reaue3red to state that as to tbe .difference between the £272,000 «nd the £327,000-the .£55,000 which had beon written ©ft 'the " O" list— security had been taken 'for the amount the Colonial Bank con&ented to write it off. iMr-MaoGregor : From wham ? $Ir Bftggitt said from ,the persons liable. IfcjOOW .sppnared ,tha.t jthe security was.worfch noimore'tha" 'he paper it -was .written ou, .and that -the -fajurk .-nod HMr Ward kuew that fact, although :hie Jearuedfciend- evidently was not . informed of ifc. .The .security ■ was like one of Sir -Mioawber^/and'the probability -was tbat it was of <as:muoh value (then ias ib ' was now. It was for the court to say whether *uoh #iatements should ibe .allowed , to be cloaked batji-'if -the oourt twere aatisfied from -the evidence that this was the best offer -that aouid be obtniued, be though^ th»t the pur-

' chasers might reasonably ba ordered to pay the oosts of 'these proceedings. Mr Woodhonse said the position of .the purchasers was thist They derived no benefit whatever by tho transaction. Whab had been said by Mr Ward was perfectly true. What they were doing was a matter of friendship to Mr Watd, in the hope of being able to put the association on its feet again. His -Honor : Do you mean to say these gentlemen are going to Day £62,000 without any hope of getting anything for it ? Mr Woodhou?e : Thoy hope to get £62,000 -again, but they do not expact to get any profit. Hie Honor i To pay £62,000 out of friendship without any hope of profit — attoniching ! If ib is so, ib is the oddest thing I ever heard of ; bub I suppose ib is a business transaction, aad that thoy hope to make something out of it.

Mr Woodhouse : I repeat that they do not hope to make any profit for themselves. Mr Young : Then for whom do they make it P Mr Woodhouse : For the Ward. Association. Mr Young; Thoy are the nominees of the Ward Association. Mr Woodhouse :- Mr Ward has nothing to do With it. It is simply to avoid loss and disaster to the association. They have been prompted .by friendship for Mr Ward, and wonld like to -«cc the transaction carried through as proposed.. /There can be no question that this is the best .thing that the liquidators can do. His Honot : The. business of your clients is to get a, good bargain, and as good a bargain as they-oan. - . , Mr Woodhoneee&id MriKeid and Sir Smith ■wero.persons who wero able to deal with this [business. Their experience, knowledge, and resources enable them to deal with it much ' more > satisfactorily i than most persons could do, and they oould .give the highest price for it. There could be no question that the liquidators .had found the very best market that they oould >flud for selling this concern. The only alternative that was to be thought of was the .alternative of liquidation ; and it had been .abundantly, shown that that alternative would be very disastrous indeed to the persons interested— to ttra shareholders of the Colonial Bank. Ths analysis of Mr Cook's statemnnt, which was made by Mr Bcauud, was of itself to induce the icotnmitfree to sanction the sale. .According to that analysis, Messrs .Reid and Smith offered to pay £4600 morn .than the value that; was placed on 'the assets. Then &b regards the position of the Colonial Bank, thera was the further fact to be considered : ' what the cost of liquidation would ba. That cost would no doubt be very heavy indeed. JL much better value would, therefore, be realised by the sale than was likely to be realised by any other means. With ■regard to the other aspect of the matter, sfche commercial morality aspect of ib, he submitted that the authorities oited -and the considerations mentioned did not apply. In the first place, the oases relied upon by Mr Young were .all oases in bankruptcy, and in these cases the compromises were not for the benefit of the estate but for the benefit of the bankrupt. That was the case in every instance. It was not needful to go through the cases «t any length. The reason which sobuatecLfihe court in refusing to giva its sanction was that the bankrupt was going to get 'some advantage out of it, whioh for certain reasons he ought siot to .have ; or because it oould mean the hutsbiug up of some transactions in the -way of 'fraudulent preference or something of that sort, whioh if gone into and exposed would result in a larger .dividend. These considerations did not apply here. The debtor company was a corporate body, and supposing there was anything wrong in the balance sheet referred to or in the >advance on draft it was a wrong the association had nothing to do with ; it was done by ■tha management, and not by the association, ■and if •anyone was in fault it -was not the shareholders. Then whatever remedies the shareholders had would still remain. If they had a grievance ib would afford no remedy to them to force «the association into liquidation. The considerations which applied in .the oase of a compromise with an individual did nob apply in the case of an association. There was no to be held up so far as an association as a corporate body was concerned. It was not suggested here, and could not bo suggested that there were any further assets which could be brought to light by liquidation or by any other proceedings. A most 'exhaustive investigation bad been made into all the affairs of the company, and it was much more easy to investigate the affairs, of a company than of an individual. The hooks disclosed what the assets were. As to the balanoe sheets they certainly were very rosy ; but that simply arose - from this : the figures were right enough, but the values ought to have been 'Written down. His Honor said that as a matter of fact the figures -were not tight -enoqgh. It was not a question of .writing down. Mr 'MacGregor said ib nae a 'question of cooking. - Mr Woodhouse .said, 'however that might fee, it did not affect his .argument very much. With regard to the £30,000, jfche draft which wiw first drawn and afterwards -redebited, that, did not affect the Colonial Bank, there was no advance made. respecting it, nothing was lost. The amount ;simply went to the credit of an overdrawn account, and was afterwards charged to the same account. As far as Mr Ward was concerned. he had been put in the .same position /so far ac his-affairs were -concerned, as if he had been bankrupt. ,He had given up everything, even his wife's property— all his wife's property,— and bankruptcy could have no .greater effaot upon him financially than these .proceedings , had. It .could nob be suggested that he had anything else. He. had made a complete disclosure of his property, and thece was no doubt; everything :would, go from him. There was no suggestion of any impropriety ' at all on Mr Ward's part .beyond the fact .that hoiad .been rather speculative *nd extremely unfortunate in the result. The learned, counsel submitted therefore thatif the court-.was satisfied— aud the court must, from what -had been placed before ib, bo satisfied— thatojb was the mosb benefiqial thing for .the shareholders of- the Colonial.Bankthat this .sale ehould be sanctioned, , then .the courb would sanction it, for there, had been no reason shown why it should nob be .sanctioned. .Mr Haggitt, in addressing the courb, said that ,he .could, he thought, show .by the most convincing -things and, at the game time, the most fallacious things — figures — that this tran&aotion was .the beat possible thing that could be done in the interests of the Colonial Bank on the valuations before the liquidators and the court. The whole matter was now before the court. His learned Mends could not suggest that there had 'been any secrecy in these proceedings tbat there -had been any attempt on the part of the -liquidators or, for that matter, on the patt o£ Mr Ward, who was m isb interested in this respect, — to keep anything back from the -court. Nothiug had been glossed over, everjthing.had been exposed in the barest possible manner. The courb had before it, from the liquidators and from thoae employed by them, the whole of the facts in their nakedness. The result was that ife .appeared that for a debt of £92^ fte Goloai&l Baals

held as- security some shares in Nelson Bros. (Limited), which were worth nothing; Mr Ward's guarantee for £20,000, whioh was worth nothing, or nearly bo; and Mr Ward's promissory note for £55,150, which was worth as much as his guarantee. They held his equity in certain freehold, which was valued by Mr Ward at £3850, but which, if realised, he ventured to say, would not yield more than 10s in the pound of that amount—say £2000. There was no provision for the cost of realisation, so that not more than that sum would be realised. The Hokonui Railway Company's , guarantee was worth nil, so that the whole of the securities did not amount to more than £2000. Mr Young : The uncalled capital. Mr Hsgjptb said he would deal with that presently. According to Mr Cook's figures the actual assets of this company amounted to £112 797, less £4-8,756, which left a balance of £64,040, to which was to be added the uncalled capital, whioh would yield £8457. Adding these aums together they got £72,497. From that they would have to deduct the cost of realisation, which, according to the estimates, would be from £5000 to £10,000. That was not by any means an over-estimata, and he took it between the two at £7500. That left the sum of £65,297 only. The cost of realisation had been dealt with by the English judges, who had a, great deal of experience and knew what such coats were. Hi* Honor : We know a little about it here, - respeoting some companies that have been wound up. Mr Hoggitfc cited from oases showing the opinions of English Judges (ex parte " Tho Merchants' Banking Company of London in re Durham, 16 Ch D., 639 and 643, and others.") These went to show that the costs of liquidation were .recognised aa being exceedingly heavy. Mr Ramsay's estimate was clearly not extraordinary or excessive. To go on with the tQguvsß, there were same contingent liabilities put down at £5498, whioh were not taken into account as liabilities at all. He proposed to allow .something in respect of -these, and had allowed £1500 only ; that was one- fourth. This reduced the value of the assets -to £63,497. The learned counsel here went into calculations, the result of whioh showed th»t th« total assets by" liquidation would net £56,500. If the estate went into liquidation the very most they could expeob to get out of it would be about £61,000, whereas the offer made was J262.750. and relief ifrom a guarautee the Colonial Bank was subject to of £5000 more, so that there was an actual gain of £1750 exclusive of the guarantee, or .£6750 inolnding if;. Mr M«oQragor asked respecting the liability for £5000 whether that had been definitely atoartaiaed. Mr Haggitb aaid ifc was definitely ascertained .and fixed before the agreement of 18th Octobar. If they looked in the "C" list they would find other thing 6 besides actual accounts. Mr MaoGregor said it was not stated that £5000 liability had been definitely ascertained. It was stated as a probable liability ; not as definitely ascertained. Mr Haggitt eaid ib was not ascertained to a shilling or to £500, but it waa clearly ascertained to the extent of £5000 snd upwards— what the upwards amounted to Jhe could not 'tell. There was another distinct advantage in favour of acospting the offer of Messrs Lee Smith and Ueid as against liquidation. If the association was brought to grief that woufd injuriously affect a large number of accounts in. tho " B " list, and would affecb the liquidation of the bank generally. That the liquidators were positive of. - Mr M»eGregor eaid he did nob think that appeared on the affidavits. Mr H^ggib said it appeared in the evidence, and it waa shown mferentially in tho affidavits. His Honor : The particular point to which you refer now is that if the Wsrd Association is forced into liquidation ifc will have a bad effect upon the accounts in the " B " list. Mr Haggitb said that was so, and common sense, he thought, would lead anyone to that conclusion. Of course if there were any Southland Accounts iv the "B " list it must neceisarily be so. They knew very well that a large bankruptcy had a similar effect to that produced by throwing a, stone into a pool of water — the disturbance by the waves in the rings nearest tho place where the stone fell was the greatest, hufe ib spread further and further, getting smaller as it reached the outer edges of the pool. So it would be if the association was forced into liquidation. That was a very important consideration outside altogether the price which the liquidators were getting for what they were selling— avery imporbant-con-sideration. As against all this what had they had advanced ? First, his learned friend Mr Young asked his Honor to consider whether the compromise was desirable from a pecuniary point of view. That he had .answered. Then his Honor was asked to consider whether there were nob reasons surrounding the transaction whioh ought to render it inadvisable that the. sanction of the court should be given to it. Those reasons, so far as he understood his learned friend, were that certain balance sheets of the Ward Association were not .what they ought to be, and tfiat arisiagoafc of these balanoe sheets there might be possible grounds for prosecuting someone — he supposed the late .general manager of that company. Mr MacQrqgor : There might ibo -a return of dividends. Mr Haggitt said that asset must come in. under the -valne of the shareholders' liability, and, if the whole value of the shareholders was only £ELOS7, they could not. got more out of them because they called for a refund of dividends. -- ' Mr, MacGregor : Get it out of the directors. Mr Haggitt replied that a list of the directors had been put in, aud there was only one worth anything a.nd, ac he was a shareholder, he must be valued in the estimate of £8057. That wwats t clear enough. What was there besides ; what had .the liquidators .to look to P They had to look to getting the most money they could for the shareholders of the bank they were liquidating. What -benefit -would it be to them — what pecuniary benefit would it bring to the liquidation of the estate of the Colonial Bank if a prosecution would lie against the late manager of the association, or against any of their direotors. It might be from a strictly moral point, of view that an offence .being committed, it waa samone's duty .to prosecute the j offender, but ha .submitted that was not the liquidators' duty. The duty of .the liquidators was to get as.>much as they could for the assets of the .bank, and to realise them to the best advantage, Jt would not prevent anybody who I had been injured by the action of the manager or directors of the Ward Farmers' Association — if the bink got rid of this liability 1 it could not prevent anybody else prosecuting them, nor could he see how it could prevent the Colonialjßank prosecuting them. They sold the debt, it was true. If a prosecution would lie on account of anything that had been dove previously, the sale of the assets, it seemed to him, would not .affaet that ; so that there was nothing really iv that argument at all. Then it was said that this kind oir thing must not bo done because it amounted to a compromise, and to effect that compromise would ba to screen somebody who ought n6b to bo ecrseued— Mr. Ward, hja ie&Eafi&,

friend pointed at, no 'doubt*. Bab how was he screened, he (Mr Haggitt) would like to know ? What greater injury oould be done to him than to subject him to such an oxunination as he had been subjected to during the last two days P The only thing that oould possibly have been secured to him of axiy value would have baau secrecy and ml ice .with regard to the transactions of the Ward Farmers' Association. Why, they had been ripped np from top to bottom in the proceedings taken during the last two days, so that even that advantage, if it was an advantage, had been absolutely lost. The repetition of theift soandalous doings, for scandalous they wore, would become staler and staler ovary time they were repeated, and lens and less interest would be taken in them. The proceeding* so far no doubt had .been, or would ba, telegraphed all over the colony, and appear in every paper in the colony ; and -would prove intensely interesting -to Mr Ward* political opponents, but the next time anything occurred regarding the matter there would be but a brief notice of it. Looking at this matter, he asked who was beiqg screened ? What was being screened ? What possible motive could be attributed to the liquidator! but to do the be«t in the interests of the liquidation? That was, he submitted, the consideration for his Honor, and the suggestions ta to screening had not only not < been proved, but had been absolutely disproved by the publicity which had been given to the proceedings. It had been said that there wera other assets not mentioned, that there were certain life insurance policies. Those policies had been referred to, and, regarding them, it had been shown that the very next payment which had to be made would cover their surrender value. The liquidator* were certainly not going to keep up these policies at a co«t of fotae £400 a year or thereabouts out of the funds of the bank even if the liquidation of the bank was likely to last for the period of Mr Ward's life, during which these payments would have to be made. Moreover the policies were pledged to seoure Mr Ward's private indebtedness, and not to secure the Ward Farmers' Association, and these policies were in possession of 'the Bank of Nsw Zealand at the present time, and all the liquidators woald have a right to would be the right, after paying off the debt due to the Bank of New Zealand, to come in — in faot they would obtain these with the other equities if they paid off that account. What was there in that P The bank did not consider them of any value, and the proposed purchasers did not consider them of any value ; they were not included in the sale. There was now only one thing to mention, and that was the rise in the price of oats. That was a matter lhat had bean fully considered by the liquidators before this agreement was actually signed. Of course the rise -in oats had been since the agreement was really entered into. The liquidators had bound themselves as far as they could before the rise had taken place, and it would have been, as Mr Simpson had put it, exceedingly dishonourable for a private /individual to try to back out of a bargain simply because the price of the article he had sold had risen after the sale had taken place. If such considerations were to influence the court at arriving at a conclusion, no provisional contract could ever bs entered into ; every contract would have to be entered into with reference to the price of produce, as on the day when the contract came before the court to be sanctioned. The matter, however, only incidentally entered into the consideration of this subject, for the association had no oats or very little— what they had there were more than suffioient outstanding store warrants to cover, — and the price of oats did not enter much into the contemplation of I the parties at the time of the contract, and it now only arose incidentally in .this way : that some ef the debtors of the association were small formers Who had small quantities of oats, and, therefore, with the rise in price, their position was bettered, if they, took advantage of the present market ; .but, if they did not it was just as likely as not when they attempted to realise they vrouW get no more for them than tha price they were at when the contract was originally entered into. He believed oats had risen 5d per bushel, but if in place of ; rising they had fallen 5d and Messrs Smith and Reid had tried to get oub of their contract in consequence of the fall, would -not indignation of the deepest kind have been expressed' against these gentlemen for having tried to get out of a deliberate bargain, because there Had subsequently been a fall in prices P Mr MacGrajror :' They would just havtffforfeited the £500 deposited. Mr Haggitt said it might have been that the whole of the purchase money had been paid, and what would have been said if they had come to the court and. asked for the recision of the contract •because oats had fallen, in price P . His Honor : said the .valuations were on the" 20th March,' and there were negotiations and; agreements by letter or partly by letter, and partly verbal, based on the valuation of .the - 20th (March, but they were. not absolutely.completed. One or two terms were left open, but these negotiations were working up to a final, settlement of terms, ;and the terms were closed and the agreement entered into on the l»t June. ■ Mr Haggitt replied in the s affirmative, and said .that the rise in prioe naver entered into ; the contemplation of the parties until after the agreement had been made. The price w.a« fixed on the statement, and oats did not rise till afterwards. The terms of the contract > were agreed to and the .deposit .paid long Jiefore .there was.any rise,atiall inoat3 ' That, was the position of 'matters, And Jiij .opinion accorded with Mr Simpson's — that-even ifthe .liquidators had power to alter the contract or to baok out of it in consequence of the rise inithe price of I oats, ,it would beta mosb dishonourable: and disreputable -thing to do. His Honor: I understand that. after the original contract there .were letters .from the liquidator? insinliug on something more, and that; they. finally got it. Mr Haggitt said that was bo. That,? however, was not the cause of the .whole delay. He did not suggest that.' The liquidators required balance ...sheets and affidavits from certain people ibefore anything' was finally concluded. It was, a condition from the first, a condition of entering into this contract, that the affidavits should be obtained, and they were obtained only .on the. day beforethe contract-was actually signed. Mr Woodhouse :slhe £5000 between the two banks is a new term. Mr Haggitt eaid the purchasers hud conceded that, >as they agreed thab it would be

[ unfair that they should only pay lls in toft pound in respect to an item in which 20s m the pound might bo paid by the liquidator*. Ha did not know that there was anything more foe him to say in connection with the matter- Ifc seemed to him to ba so absolutely obvious that this transaction was inthe best interests of the bank that it was absolutely unreasonable to dfs« pate it. Csrbnimy the only person who did dispute it was Mr Braund, who had professed to analyse Mr Cook's figures, and had come fed the conclusion that the purchasers would make a profit of ab out £440, bub had made no provisiaril for the expanses of liquidation } and had not taken any account of what Mr Ramsay in hfli .^ calculations had pointed out — namely, thai there would be a ooatiderable loss in interest to 'the bank, which it would have to pay while the liquidation was going on, so Chat | the position would be Altered for the worse bj at least £8000 if the company went into liquidation instead of this offer .being accepted, -Beyond that the only argument urged against the accapbance of the of&ar which had boeit made to the liquidators was whet he had already dealt <with — the balance sheets of the Ward Farmers' Association, That they had nothing to do with. As to the consequences of 'dealing with the Ward Farmers' Association, in respect to any future action against the directors and officers of the Colonial Bank, the liquidators had provided for that as far as they could, and had got a clause inserted in the _ agreement, without exception being taken,. by the purchasers, providing for the production, \i necessary, of books and papers disclosing the transactions betwesn the Association and the - bank and between the association and Mr Ward. As he had already suggested, the liquidators had nothing to do, with possible proceedings which might bs taken against the directors ox manager of the Ward Farmers' Association. That was a matter wbich,iit seemod to him, w*a left open even although this sale was carried out. Mr MaoGregor, referring to the correspondence preceding the (.agreement to purchase', -whioh had been handed tojbim by Mr Haggitt^ observed that Messrs Reid and Lee Smith had submitted, their offer for the assets on behalf of - Mr Ward and his friends. TJiafc waa what ha had tried to get Mr Ward to admit on the previous day. Mr Simpson: They changed their ground •since. Mr MaoGregor said it was -also stated that • the offer was based on the balance sheet of tha 19th March. Mr Haggltt : That was admitted all through. His learned friend had said that the costs in - .this matter should be paid by the purchaser*. He submitted that if such a condition was attached it let the purchasers olean out. The court had no power to bind tfie purchasers to a new term of contraot. The nubject of the payment of Mr Cook's charges had been discussed, and the liquidators had had to give way. Mr Woodhonse aaid that there was no reason , why the purchasers should pay tho costs. The mutter was a<; much to the baneflt of tho Colonial Bank as it was to theirs. Mr Haggitt said Mr Simpson had asked him to mention a thing.whichr he had mentioned before, that liquidation or the acceptance of this offer were the only two things that were open to the liquidators, and proco« dings had -actually been" taken lo put the company into liquidation when this offer wrs made. Mr Young remarked that he did not base any argument upon the price of oats, because it .would be clearly unjust; to back out of the agreement on that account, but he wonld point out that the liquidators were in no worse position. As to the costs of liquidation the B»nkof I New Zealand were bound to liquidate for the Colonial Bank, under clause 26 of "the bank agreement, free of expense except in regard to disbursements. Hi« Honor said he would give his judgment in a day or two. The court rose at IAS p.m.

1893. 1894. 1895. , Salaries and : wages ... ' Advertising, : books, &c I Bent and \ expenses .. i Preliminary ; expenses .. ! Interest ... - Directote & -' auditors... ; Profitto33th i' Jnuo 1895 Bal. profit and 1055.... £2033 14 11 £64 14 7 102313 4 154 17 3 134 5 2 £5329 3 8 623 0 0 ■ 2284 3 3 - _ £4886 18 6 559 10 11 2446 11 5 - 118 6 0 185 5 4 263 7 8 4414 19 1 _ ■ I — 7777 19 8) 6516 17 3 Profit and ioss Account. i". r. 1893. 1894. [ 1895. i ■ 7Mos. ■ Profit on , ra'chn'dise ' Agencies ... ; Commission * storage Discounts, A &0 " Profit & loss account ... From which has been deducted : R'servefund Dividends & bonuses ... Goodwill — 17.F.A.C0. £256419 9 2716 3 l\ 2639 7 6 214 0 0 £5916 15 V 3 ■• 7379 9 1 771 9 0 4414 19 1 ' £5541 8 8 - ■ 6217 15 0 613 10 5 7777 19 8 1000 0 0 1000 0 0 1583 0 6 5219 4 7 - I 1278 3 0 I Di-videi on Paid-u Capita id Refund of p Charges [. on 20% 25% 10% Bonus ot Purchaw of Merchandise a Bonus on s Salaries and ». Wages. 5% 60/ no? 1593 1894 10% 10% 7% ~f% 1883 Total Gross Profits. Profits. £ 67,220 £ 8,15* (7 months) 1(36,846 14,067 87,265 ! 12,372 Percentage Per Annum. 16% Percentage of Working Expenses to Aesets. 7J% 1894 18^5 - W. 5% 9J% 18! 18! !?1 Margin of proßt ] 15 j over expenses ] 10] rcentage J rcentage \ , Margin of Profit. Bay 9% say 5% Ted to in T] le following Are the iffidavit:— etails refei the; -I- % •::a=: • : • : g M-^pT US 00 35 00 to fcQ M M M \ 3 M»3tO -<ItO to- ooa> eoitk-'to SiSioo otoOi tOMto •^{ots gui)> enoi^ tJq>co oteto om». I \ 3 l-x OS ©woo ocn» !I»Hfliiiili !p!Ulli|l ?;:;: ••••::» ::Si: I i g m* isga^l 98IS iiiiii M M M OJOOOtO 0500000 i sews omoooo to «q Mtcps -icoogjK )— 'i— i CoC3O£goo cochmm~*o S^D O) CS &■■* CO T"* Mfroaoo XX •3i3otOt>l© tj MSDOOOO to 00 O3 O bO O MM or omoooo Jl JO W