ALLEGED DUMMYISM

Otago Witness, Issue 2817, 11 March 1908, Page 53

ALLEGED DUMMYISM

♦ A GROUP OF FAMILY HOLDINGS. !W. C. PITCHES BEFORE THE LAND BOARD. _____ i At the afternoon sitting of the Otago Land Board yesterday William Charles Pitches, ex-hotelkeeper, of Clyde, was called upon to show cause why his small grazing run 244j, Tiger Hill district, should not be declared- forfeited. The inquiry was held before the Chief Commissioner (Mr D. Barron), Messrs J Tough, W. Dallas, J. M. M'Kenzie, and G. Livingstone (members of the board). The Chief Commissioner said the inquiry was being held ac a result of a published statement made by W. C. Pitches before the Official Assignee during a bankruptcy examination. The statement referred to was as follows: — "There is a run standing in my name, but I have no interest in it; I have paid nothing for it, nor have I ever received anything out of it. It belongs to my father; it stands in my name. I never owned a sheep, nor have I received a penny rent for it." The present proceedings were being taken under section 50 of the Land Act, and Mr Macessey, Acting Crown Proseontor, had been instructed to be present on behalf of the board to examine witnesses. Mr W L. Moore, who represented W. C. Pitches before the Official Assignee in bankruptcy, asked permission to watch the proceedings for his client, which was granted. Mr W. R. Brugh said he desired to be present on behalf of the Official Assignee in Bankruptcy, who was interested in the proceedings. He had only received instructions that morning, and at a later stage of the hearing he might find it necessary to ask for an adjournment. The Chief Com-nisdoner : At the present stage there ran be no objection to jour appearing, Mr Brugb. The mquiiy was opened by calling . William Charles Pitches, who, after being eworn, said he was lessee of grazing run 244-J. Tiger Hill district. He took the run up in 1893, 15 years ago, when he was about 29 years of age. He made the declaration' produced at the time of taking Tip the run. (The act provides that any person wilfully making a false declaration or obtaining lands not exclusively for his own use or benefit, or anyone aiding or abetting in such breach of the Land Act, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment, in addition to the forfeiture of any land obtained by such false declaration.) To the Chief Commissioner : * The words. as reported, expressed the meaning of what I said before the Official Assignee, but a wrong interpretation has been given to them. Mr Macassey: Will you explain what you meant? Witness: In the first place, when I said I had no interest in the run I meant that I had no sheep. I was thoroughly disheartened and disgusted by the hard and dry seasons that came in succession one after the other and by hard luck in business matters. I took very little interest in the run latterly. I own no sheep myself. I have had other stock on it. In the first place, I intended to reside on the run, but found it impossible. I could not live on a place where there was no water for domestic use, and hardly any for stock. I did work on the run for a long time. I had some horses and cattle on it. I do not think I had more than. a dozen cattle on it. I had horses also. I used to work the run with t-ha other members of the family. We worked it all together. I did at one time have a banking" account of my own, but not at the i time I took up this run. I had little or no money myself, and my father gave me what money I wanted. In reply to further questions Witness said he resided on his father's run, because there were buildings and water there. He had never resided on Run 2241. The sheep of his father, brother, and sister were in the habit of going on hie run. In March of 1898 he applied for exemption from residence on the run on the grounds that he was owner of section, 13, block IV, Lauder district, which he cultivated, and the board granted exemption in terma of applicant's letter. He resided at Lauder for «t lon^ time, anj slewt sometimes at Lauder and sometimes at Ophir. He also assisted in the working of his father's store. Mr Macassey: How long is it since you worked on the run? Witness: I work on the run and farm now. I went away from the section in 1899, I think, and took an hotel in Clyde. I kept the hotel in Clyde from 1899 until 1906. For seven years I never resided on j section 13 or the run, but I used to go there occasionally. I resided on the section at intervals, and I stayed at Lauder several times. If I wanted a load of stuff I would go up for it, but my home and i residence was in. Clyde. Unfortunately, the run has not been a paving concern. Mr Maoa-ssey : What became of your stock while you were in Clyde ? I Witness: Some were sold or killed. I ran horses on the other runs, and other members of the family ran sheep on my run. I had stock up to the time I went out of the hotel. I killed a beast occasionally when it got fat and took it to Clyde. Mr Macassey : Did you ever make any returns of your stock to the Stock Department ? Witness : I made my annual return of j stock out in my own name to the best of I mv belief. j Mr Macaesey : Who paid the rent for the xun? . Witness: I would not like to say that I | paid any rent myself; my father paid it for me. Mr Macaesey : Did you ever refund the money to your father whioh he paid ? Witness: The thing was not a payable concern. There were heavy losses of she«*p on the runs. My father paid the rent with his own cheque to the best of my belief. Mr' Macassey : What use did you make of. the run after you went to Clyde? Witness: My brother managed and. looked after it for me. If it was a payinjr concern I would have come in. Mr Macassey : Is it not a fact that you Bave given up the j*un to your father? , • Witness: Certainly not. My father's »heep run on it. We worked it together — #c worked all the properties together. I ?wetr positively that I hays not given up the run to my father. To the Chief Commisioner: In the best season the run would not carry more than 300 sheep; in a dry season it would carry no rfieep, as there is no water. Ido not genuunber having any sKoaq of my own.

The run could not be worked separately in a dry season. To Mr Macassey: My father's run is fenced off from 'this run; it is quite a separate run. We worked the runs together. To Mr Moore, Witness said that when he took up the run he had little or no money of hie own, and he meant when saying he paid nothing for it, that he received nothing out of it—that it did not pay. When he said it belonged to his father, he meant that all the properties were worked together. They had 4000 sheep on the runs, and 2000 of them perished. His father, brother, and sister and himself had runs, there were between 1100 and 1200 sheep on the four runs, but in winter time 400 or 500 had to be taken off. The dry land prevented sheep from living on it. He did not _ think, when he got exemption | from residence, that he was to reside per- ■ manently on the section at Lauder. At the time he signed the declaration he was taking the run for himself, and he intended to reside on it; but he could not reside on a place where there was no water. After heavy rain a little water came down two I creeks. He was disheartened with the losees in sheep. The Commissioner: How could you be disheartened with results when you say you put no sheep on it? Witness: If there were profits I would get my share. Mr Tough : If you put nothing in it, how could you get anything out of it? Witness: I would be entitled to something for the land. To Mr Brugh: There is some fencing on the run. I would be surprised to hear that some men in the district would give £200 or £300 for the goodwill of the run. In further replies to Mr Brugh, witness said he had agitated to get a water scheme for Ophir township, but the water would come off his brother's land, not off witness's, run. There was a suggestion to take the Bonanza water-race through the run. Mr Macassey: Who paid the rent while you were hotelkeeper at Clyde? v Witness: My father. Mr Macassey: How did you brand your stock? Witness: With my father's brand upside down. — (Laughter.) The Commissioner : Was the cause of 2000 sheep dying due to overstocking? Witness: I do not think the principal fault was overstocking. We had turnips in the bad winter. To Mr M'Kenzie: I paid my father something for oats while at Clyde, but I did not pay for hay, straw, etc. We worked it j all together. John Pitches (sworn) stated that he carried on a store and run, and carried on farming a bit. He provided his son with money to take up the run 244j. Witness thought he bought sheep, but did not put them on his son's run, although he understood some of the sheep got on it. His son put cattle and horses on the run, but witness did not remember whether he had ever put sheep on it. His son lived at home or at Lauder, but so far as witness knew he did not reside on the run he took up. Witness could not say from memory that he had always paid the rent, but of late he had done so. His son never paid him back the rent. Witness's ehcep went on to the run, and had been mustered from there. It had been used in connection with the other runs. If the truth were known, he had paid his son well for running sheep on the run. There I was no agreement as to payment. There ! were four of them in it, and witness bought | too many sheep. His son made a great i mistake when he went into the hotel. Witness would not be surprised if he always paid the rent. His sheep had been on the run; there was no doubt of that. He had been using the run generally with the other runs for feeding stock. To the Commissioner: There was an , understanding that if there was any profit 1 his son would share in it. Witness told « Mr Maitland in 1E95 they were working the four runs together owing to the wool- ! shed being on one of the runs. The run j was so bad that he invited the boa-rd to I visit it, and he tried to get a reduction in the rent. He was informed he could not get a reduction unless he threw the rune j up. Two of the runs were thrown vp — his | son Andrew's and hie daughter's. There ns no application for these when reopened, and they got them back again. The members of the board who visited him said the runs were not worth anything. To Mr Moore : The run 244 J was absolutely his son's; it did not belong to witness. To Mr Brugh: The water coming to Ophir would go through Andrew Pitches's j land, which had no connection with run 244 J. Witness tried to get water in for the township, not for the purpose of irrigating his run. This closed the evidence. Mr Moore sa-H the statement made before the official assignee justified the board jin holding an inquiry. The statements as published in an up-country newspaper left no doubt that it was a case of dummyism and nothing else. His client [Mr Pitches) ■was no doubt confused when under crossexamination before the official assignee at the time of his bankruptcy, and his statements required explanation. For instance, the statement that the run was held in the names of four persons had absolutely no connection with run 244-J ; it referred to the arrangement of working made between the holders of the four properties. When Pitches prot exemption from rpsidence in 1898 he thought it meant for all time, and as he received no notice to the contrary from the board \%hen at Clyde, although the fact of his being there must have been well known, would assist to fortify him in that belief. Patches's evidence in regard to ihp matter before the board that day could be taken to be correct in that, as in other particulars. He had nothing to gain by saving the run was his. or that it belonged to anyone else. If the run was his, and was declared to bo so, his creditors would be entitled to it; it made no difference to him personally how it went. Thp matter of forfeiture was one that concerned the creditors, and he suggested the beard should consider it from that standpoint. Mr Brugh (for the official assignee) said the board, in dealing with the matter, was in a different position than if dealing with Pitches alone. The official assignee represented Pitches's creditors and it was not the fault of the assignee if Pitches had failed to comply with the conditions of his iea.se. There was £70 or so of improvements on the run, and tho jrcodwill of runs on tho goldfields commanded fancy prices. If. as he had reason to believe, £200 or £300 could be got for the goodwill, the creditors - would lose that amount if the run was declared forfeited. 1

The Commissioner: If it is declared forfeited it will be put up burdened with improvements to the amount of £70.. Mr Brugh: One man has stated that he is prepared to give £300 for the property. Some people who have land in me district are al&o inquiring if it is likely to be forfeited. The persons he referred to were not connected with Pitches or the Pitches family. He suggested that the board might reserve it 3 decision and afford him an opportunity of- looking up authorities that would assist the board in considering the position of the creditors. The inquiry was then, by consent adjourned till 11 a.m. to-day.