SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2996, 16 August 1911, Page 37

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANKRUPTCY. Friday, August 11. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.) ORDERS OE DISCHARGE. An application for an order of discharge made by Thomas John Brosnnn, of Caversham, tobacconist, and supported by Mr W. L. Moore, was granted. His Honor remarking that the creditors unanimously recommended the discharge and the Official / signee stating that there was no objection. In re Dunoan Matheson, of Kaikorai, store keeper.—Motion for discharge, supported by Mr Moore, who said that the Assignee’s report was very favourable. —Order made. A MOTION OPPOSED. William Johnston Rae, of Waitepeka, labourer, applied for his discharge, and was represented by Mr B. S. Irwin, Mr W. L. Moore appearing to oppose the application. Mr Moore said ho did not know whether it would be necessary to examine the bankrupt that day. The Assignee’s report showed that bankrupt ought to pay 20s in the pound to those creditors who had taken the trouble to prove. He was described in the petition as a labourer, but as a fact h© was a rabbiter, and during a great part of the year he made a substantial wage, sometimes running up to £6 or £7 a week, whilst his average for tiro year lound would be £3 or £4 a week. He was a single man, and spent his money in a way that he should not. The creditors, expressed dissatisfaction. He (Mr Moore) represented two of the largest creditors —Gillies, £l2 for wages, and a blacksmith. The wages were a preferential charge only for four months preceding the bankruptcy. The bankrupt appeared to have supported a woman and her child, which was not his, and money had gone to the keep of this woman instead of being used to pay the creditors. The Assignee had given him every opportunity to make payments to the creditors. In April last the Assignee wrote to him on the subject, and after some trouble got an arrangement by which he was to pay 20s a week, but this was not kept up, and the bankrupt was in court to-day because the Assignee had called on him, in terms of the act, to apply for his discharge. The statements made by Ra© as to his property were untrue. It was a case where the bankrupt* should be ordered to pay 20s in the pound to the proved creditors bv instalments.

Mr Irwin said that the facts supplied by the Assignee were not exactly complete. The debts, amounting to £2OO or £3OO, were contracted whilst Rae was cattle dealing. That explained his indebtedness. It was a fact that he was living with a wife who was separated from her husband. If the creditors’ assertions about this relationship were correct, he was under some obligation to maintain this woman. Apart from that, these debts were incurred in cattle-dealing. When the cattle-deal-ing proved a loss he turned to rabbiting. He worked very hard at that, though the life did not suit him, as he suffered from asthma. It was true that he bad been making more than labourer’s wages, but it would bo a hardship if all that he earned by extra exertion was to go to these creditors, for in that case it would be very little benefit to him to go bankrupt. The property talked of was sold for £5, and the surplus of the proceeds was still in the hands of Rae’s solicitor. As for the woman, he was keeping her when well able to do so, and ho kept her after the bankruptcy, but to show that the creditors thought it a case of misfortune, there was the fact that only four of them proved, and for only £2B. Rae now came before the court to have his obligations properly put. His Honor: He was a Tested. What was he arrested for ? Mr Irwin: It was a charge quite apart from the bankruptcy, and he was found not guilty. Mr Moore; The other creditors did not prove because they thought there was nothing in the estate. They were sorry afterwards

His Honor: The report of the Assignee is bv no means favourable. The statements that Mr Irwin has made affect the report to seme extent, perhaps, but not to a vc nr great extent. The Assignee says he of opinion that the bankrupt has come to bankruptcy by extravagant living _ and reckless conduct, and that he is a single man and a splendid worker. I really do not see why the bankrupt should not pay these creditors in full by small amounts per week. Looking at the wages he expects to receive, perhaps £1 per week is too large a sum, but I see no reason why ho should not pav at any rate half that sum per week. The order of discharge will take effect on his paying- by weekly instalments to the Assignee 10s per week out of his earnings until the proved debts have been satisfied. Of course, if he chooses to accelerate his discharge by larger payments, he is at liberty to do so. A PETITION WITHDRAWN. A petition for adjudication was withdrawn at the request of Mr Moore, as the party concerned had paid 20s in the pound to his creditors, and had undertaken to pay the few shillings outside that within a few days. MOTIONS FOR RELEASE. Orders were made releasing Hie Assignee in regard to the estates of Hubert

IDt Vis mo Blathwayt, Alexander Smylie, John Edward Wade, Charles Free, William John and Thomas Dobson, and Thomas Dobson. The next sitting 1 in Bankruptcy was fixed for tho 25th September. IN CHAMBERS. Probate was granted in the estates of the following deceased peiwns: —James Scott Alexander, William John Thomas Henry Martin, Thomas Middleton, Williamina M'Kenzie, Thomas Edwin Diok, James Stewart, Robert Davidson, James , Cox, William MacLeod, George Hamon, Susan M'Ewan, Rosalia Kreft, James Poison, Christina M'Lean, James Galt, William ■ Sutherland, Robert Johnstone, Annie Knipe, William Taylor, Robert Alexander M’CulI lough, Owen Jones Owens, Anders Anderson.

Letters of administration wore granted in re John Thomas Braid, Robert Morrison, John MTnerney, William Fraser, James Henderson, Elizabeth Ann Davey, Robert Keast.

M'Glashan v. M ‘Glasha n. —Mo'tion for .substituted service (Mr Woodhouse). —Accordingly. Horrell v. Louttit. —Motion to change defendant’s solicitor. —Accordingly, by oon- - sent. Blair and others v. Otago Hospital and Charitable Aid Board. —Motion for directions ro Catherine Fraser (deceased) as to service of originating summons (Mr Woodhouse) . —Accordingly. Sinclair and others v. Western Taier? Drainage Board. —Motion to appoint president of Compensation Court (Mr Fraser, K.C.). —Accordingly-, by consent. Simpson and another v. Standard Insurance Company'. —Summons for discovery by plaintiffs (Mr Stewart). —Accordingly. Mr Stewart undertakes to file a similar statement. Gillies v. Malcolm and another.—Summons for discovery by plaintiffs, summons for leave to deliver interrogatories (Mr Cook). —Accordingly'. Perry v. Southland Frozen Moat Company.—Summons for leave to deliver interrogatories.—Mr Maoa-lister). —Accordingly, to be served within 14 days. Cameron v. Ramsay Bros.- amnions for leave to deliver interrogators.a (Mr White). —Dismissed; 2gs costs against plaintiff. Ro Charles M'Lcan (deceased). —Motion for vesting order (Mr Adams).—Order in terms of prayer; order to bo handed to Commissioner of Stamps, and not to be given out to petitioner until the proper duty has been assessed and paid. CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Monday, August 14. > (Before his Honor Mr Justice Williams.) The quarterly criminal sittings were commenced at 10.30 a.m., ill© Giumn being represented by Mr J. F. M. Fraser, K.C. THE GRAND JURY. Tho Grand July consisted of the following gentlemen ; —Mr H. Salmon (foreman) and Messrs W. D. Heenan, T. E. Jcfcoate, J. W. Black, T. D. Paterson, C. Leith, P. J. Blackman, J. Oouchman, W. Thomson, G. W. Sare, A. Ibbotson, G. Crow, G. Gray, D. Finlay, C. K. Couston, J. Hutchison, W. Green, L. D. Ritchie, F. D. Sturdy'. THE JUDGES CHARGE. His Honor said: Mr Foreman and Gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—l am glad to say that your labours this morning will bo very light. There are only three cases, and none of them is of a serious character. There is a case where a man is charged with stealing a steer valued at £7. It appears that ho was seen driving it off, and ho admitted that bo did so, but said it was his own, and. he tried to induce a third person, to make a false statement about it. There is a case where a person is charged with stealing two £5 notes. The case against him is thgt he had an opportunity of stealing; that the £5 notes were missed very shortly after ho was in the room where they wore; and that later on he was in the possession of money, whereas very shortly before he nad absolutely nothing. The other case is a case whore a man is charged with obtaining a small sum, £2 16s 4d, by a false pretence. The pretence was that he was a wine and spirit dealer in Christchurch. In consequence of that representation he obtained £2 16s 4d, for which he gave a receipt. This representation appears by the depositions to be untrue. I do not think that you will have any- difficulty in any of the cases. You will remember that your function is not to decide finally as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, but to inquire whether tho evidence is such that the accused should be called upon to answer it. TRUE BILLS. The Grand Jury returned a true bill in each case, and, finishing its labours by 11.35, was thanked and discharged. THEFT OF A STEER.

Tho first accused placed in the deck was Richard Moore, the younger, who was charged with having, at Naseby, on the Bth Juno, stolon a white-and-black steer. — Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared for accused, who pleaded “Not guilty.” Tho Crown Prosecutor (Mr J. F. M. Fraser) said accused was charged with an offence which was becoming quite common in tho country—the offence of stock-steal-ing. This class of offence was very easily committed, and tho evidence of tho crime was very easily destroyed. Tho skins could be burnt, the heads could bo burnt, and the carcase would go into consumption, and the person guilty of the offence pocketed the profits, and in tho majority of cases it was difficult to detect. That was one of the reasons why the offence was becoming of, rather alarming frequency in certain districts. Added to that it was not always easy for town jurors not used to those cases to grasp all the details of stock cases, which wore sometimes intricate. In the present case the facts appeared to be comparatively simple, and if the jury believed the witnesses for the Crown —and there was a confession from .the accused —there could bo no doubt of accused’s guilt. There was a commcnago at Nasobv upon which the settlers ran their stock. There was a man named Michael Joseph Lennane, who had a steer grazing upon the common, the animal being branded C L and having a bit out of one oar. Ho saw it about tho sth of June, but could not find it afterwards, and reported that it had been stolon. He accused Moore of the theft, and asked him what ho had done with the steer, and Moore denied taking it. Maria Agnes Hewitt, residing in the vicinity of the pound, which was on tho common, on the Bth June, about 3 o’clock in the afternoon, saw accused, going towards Coal Pit G ullv. riding a bav horse. She noticed a white-and-black beast among tho cattle

in the direction in which he was going. A man named Baxter, who was a miner, at Coal Pit Gully, was on the commonage on the Bth June looking for cows, about 4 o’clock in the afternoon, and he saw a man very much resembling accused driving a white-and-blaok steer towards accused's slaughterhouse. He was driving the beast as hard as he could, and Baxter was quite satisfied that it was Lerrnane’s steer. Joseph Hewitt passed through some cattle, among whidh there was a black-and-white steer, and he saw’ accused crossing out of Coal Pit Gully in the direction of Enterprise Gully in the direction of his slaughterhouse'. He was driving one head of cattle. Another man saw r what he believed to be accused going towards the slaughter yard driving one head of cattle. He was coming from the direction of Enterprise Gully. Constable Lemm asked accused what he had done with a certain beast he had killed, and he replied that he had forwarded the hide to Stronach, Morris, and Co.- Afterwards he said he -declined to answer questions, and was told by the detective that he had a warrant for his arrest. When it was said that a statement of what he had to say would be taken, he said ‘ All right, we will have a charge against another man." He said he had bought beasts from Tom Hcaly, and that receipts would show that; Heaiy said that on the 22rid June accused came to him, and told -him_he had got into trouble/ He said that Constable Lemm had come to him, and that he was in a corner, and that he had said to him i.o had bought cattle from Tom Heaiy. Heaiy replied that he had no right to say that he had sold him any cattle for some time. Moore said, “ How is anyone to know you had- not a beast of that description? You say to them you have sold me a beast of late, and you will be well paid for it." It was about two years since Moore had bought any cattle from Heaiy. Evidence was given by Michael Joseph Germane, Thomas Heaiy, Maria Agnes Hewitt, Joseph Hewitt. Francis Charles Hore, and Constable Lemm, the last-named stating that when he saw accused about the steer Moore said Lonnane had almost accused him of stealing it, but he was innocent of it. Witness then asked to see the slaughter book. There was no entry of stock having been slaughtered since March last, and accused showed witness his day and order book, and informed him that he entered stock slaughtered by him there. Witness ©amined this book, but the writing was so small he could not read it. Witness then asked what he had done with the hides, and he informed him he had forwarded five bullocks’ hides to Stronach, Morris, and Co. On the 23rd June witness, in company with Detective Lilly, saw accused at his shop. The detective examined the slaughter book arid asked accused several questions. He did not answer these, and afterwards said something to the effect that .he declined to mswer. The detective informed him that L© had a warrant to arrest, and they took accused to the police office, and, in the presence of the detective and witness, accused said, “ I bought the beast, and have a receipt for it.” Witness asked accused if he wished to make a statement, and said he would put it in writing whether it was for or against accused, but accused replied, “ All right. We will have another' chargeagainst another man.” The detective then left the office. Accused said, “ I bought the beast from Tom Heaiy in December, 1910. Tho receipt will show that.” He also said that Heaiy had asked him for some money tp pay the fine in a Chinaman’s case, and that at the time there was no hack available, and he did not go out to see the beast, but was told where it was, and he went for it. Witness told him he would rather take that in writing, and he replied, “Yes,” and then “ No, it will oome out in the case.”

Debeofcivo Lilly also gave evidence. Mr Hanlon, before addressing tho jury, commented on the fact that the Crown had not' called one witness whose name appeared on the indictment, and whom the Crown Prosecutor had said he did not intend to call. Counsel for the defence said it lay with the Crown to prove accused's guilt. A great deal had been said about accused being seen on tho day in question driving a beast, and there was no doubt that on the dav in question he was driving a beast. Whether the witnesses were sure or not did not make the least difference, because on that day accused did take away a beast from the common which he alleged belonged to him. These people had fone into the box and said that the beast he was taking away vas Mr Lennane’s, but when he (counsel) asked them how they knew that was the case they replied that Mr Lennane had told them it was his beast. Mr Lennane might have told them anything. That dtd not prove it- What accused said was that he had bought two beasts from Healy, one of which was a calf, and was allowed to run on the common. When Lcnnane’s beast was •in the pound it was the duty of the pound keeper to enter the brand. Mr Lennane had released this beast, which was not'his, but belonged to accused, because it had the earmark, but had not brand on it at all. Mr Lennane told tho court the beast impounded was owned by him, and had the brand C.L. He (Mr Hanlon) would call Mr O’Malley, the ranger, who would say that the beast which Mr Lennane released and claimed as his own had no brand at all, but it bad an earmark that was not Mr Lennane’s at all. This beast that Mr Lennane thought was his was not his' at all. It was clear that Healy had sold these two boasts to Moore, and that was what Moore meant when he said another man would get into trouble. He said he bought the beast from Tom Healy, and that was perfectly true. If lie stole this beast he stole it in broad daylight, and it was a most singular thing that if it belonged to Lennane when it was in the pound it -had no brand on it.

Evidence was given by accused, by his son (Richard Moore), by his brother (Henry Moore), James Fleming O’Malley (ranger for the Maniototo County Council), and David M ; Beath Calder (surveyor in the Survey Office, Dunedin).

Thomas Healy, recalled, stated to his Honor that both the cattle h© sold to Moore wore horned. His Honor directed that accused be recalled, and pointed out to him that an entry ns to the black-and-white steer did not appear in the slaughtering book. Accused said ho supposed he had neglected to put it down. His Honor said, turning up the slaughter report for April 20, 1909, a note would be found that accused purchased from Healv a red-and-white steer. Just after that ho bought a black steer from one Carmichael, and gave £4 5s for it, which ■was exactly the price of the black steer bought the same day from Healy. If they looked a little further they would see the

black steer which was , purchased from Carmichael was not bought on the 20th, but on the 26th, and they would see, it they looked at the 26th, that the figures had originally been 20. The nought had been altered into a 6. The beast was slaughtered on the 22nd. He asked accused why he altered the 20tn to the 26th, to which the accused replied that the books were new to him. His Honor: It is a curious coincidence Chat the very same day you should have bought a steer from Carmichael for the same money. , , 'The court rose at 5 p.m. to sit next morning at 10.50. ■