J. G. WARD’S BANKRUPTCY

Pahiatua Herald, Volume V, Issue 523, 16 July 1897, Page 3

J. G. WARD’S BANKRUPTCY

The Examination. By Telegraph—Press Association,

Dcskdin, This Day. The Hon. Mr Ward was prosse 1 by counsel respecting his letter to tho New Zealand Times stating that his property was not mortgaged in 1892, but refused t.» aav whether it was true or net. His donor remarked, “ You have brought out t ie fact tint th re was a min> random of mortgage in registered in favor of the Colonial Bank over a great part of thr properties, and you have also tho fact that in a letter Mr Ward states that the properties were not mortgag ;d or encuinl <r. 1. You cannot carry it | any fur'll* i than that, can you ?” Mr ; Ward explained he did not consider the j Bank had a right to exercise its power lin the unregistered mortgage. It was ' clearly understoo 1 by the Bank that the ! grain operations of the Association were j to be carried on in his name; beyond I that it was not understood that he was ! to go on speculating after the formation ;of the company. lie owned seven- ! eighths of the association. Respecting ! the overdrafts Mr Ward said that in | 1893 he drew two cheques for £21,000 j for the purpose of reducing the over- ! draft, though he had no recollection of j having carried out the transaction. The effect was to conceal from the nir mbers of the Association the fact that they were indebted to the bank for i £47,000, and to make it appear only ‘ £27,000. He could not defend the I action, but it was done with the full : concurrence of all concerned. He had j no recollection of the directors being ! consulted and did not think it improper. I He had heard of it being done in other j companies. In 1801 the transaction ' was repeated to the extent of £85,000. On that occasion it was at the insiance of Bank manager Birch, who wrote to the general manager. The latter sent ! a letter and his own memo, to the ; witness as follows : “ Invercargill, June 10th, 1894. Dear Mackenzie, —Ward j Farmers will balance on 80th inst., and | Ward proposes drawing his own cheque for £40,000 on that day and lending the liiuoill.t to IMri.i. rs until Mon.lny, 2ml July. I preninif tills transaction will l,e in or.lnr. Wfi must not show nil overdraft to tho public thin tilin', as there ;tno too many limi l people about at present. If 1 do not bear from you I take it silence Rives consent.—(i. A. 111ß. il.” (Brivate/ " \Vclliti"ton, ‘Jtltli June, IH'.H. My dear Ward, —I in tended to show you enelosed b iter, but remembered to do so on.y aft- r t left your otlice. I have not replied to it. Katt i- I cannot, but I have no obpmlion to your wiring tint you have seen me, an 1 I have no objection to matter be.or arranged in the way indicated. Yours, 11. Mackenzie.” Continuing, v. line 01 said lie .lid not wire to Mr Itireli. lie |,ut Hi away. I.ookin" a' the in itte. fr i n the present’ letl fFi.il i.'i' i■,\h, w< old not repeat such a transaction. What, ver lie intention might have been, the | transactions were nit done to deceive tbe shareholders. He knew that liy ; puttin',' Hindi's letter and niemorniwluin from 'Mackenzie n.viy, bis account would be reduce I. The elTeet of keen, ni" back the letter was a reduction in Ins overdraft of ido.HtHI. lie knew the effect of that transaction would be to deceive tbe Minrehold. is, but it was not done with that intention. Respecting tin- i'dli,lKK) debentures sold, tbe witness said th. amount ought to have "one to till d. bent ore account, but was tem porarily placed to bis private account. The effect was lo conceal the state of that account though that was not tbe intention. lie really owed tho Association -fa I,ooa, Imt according to the | ij erx placed before lorn the Association was made to appear indebted to him. Tbe a not drawn on < emit II and Co. wa i placed lo In-aeeonnt. Me wa.not re pi nnble lor tli.it- They ought to ask til.) Ilian who did it. Witness denied that fisher bad drawn to tbe extent of fJO,OOO or 117,000 on persons with whom there bad been no business with the result that tie directors ol the Colonial Bank bad been deceived. As to the overdrafts the instances Riven by the liquidators in bis report had been inipurt d into and Liter.: was no foundation lor tbe statement.