BANKRUPTCY OF MAN AND WIFE

Southland Times, Issue 24056, 21 February 1940, Page 4

BANKRUPTCY OF MAN AND WIFE

FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY ASSIGNEE Further investigation of the affairs of Edward Harry Tyrrell and his wife Mabel Bernice Tyrrell, was made yesterday by the official assignee, Mr A. E. Dobbie, who presided at a meeting of creditors. Mr F. G. O’Beirne represented the bankrupts and Mr M. M. Macdonald the principal creditor, Mr A. E. Tapper. In reply to Mr Macdonald the bankrupt said that when his wife went on to Mr Tapper’s property she had 15 head of cattle —four cows, 10 calves and one bull. He had furniture. There were 34 head of Mr Tapper’s cattle on the property. When they left Mr Tapper’s property the stock was taken to West Plains, where a clearing sale was held in his wife’s name. The stock sold did not include any of Mr Tapper’s, which had been sold by his son Henry. The assignee: Who got the replacements? The bankrupt: I don’t know anything about that. Questioned by the assignee the bankrupt said he thought Mr Tapper said his son could sell the stock if he (the son) thought best. That would mean that on the sale Henry was to account to Mr Tapper for the money. Henry had said that he had accounted to Mr Tapper, who did not accept the money. Mr Macdonald: Do you think Mr Tapper meant Henry to keep the money? The bankrupt: I don’t know. Do you think your son should account for the money?—lt is my opinion that Mr Tapper should be paid the money the cows were sold for in the saleyards. Replying to Mr Macdonald the bankrupt said he did not think Mr Tapper expected the stock to be replaced. The stock was sold at the clearing sale in Mrs Tyrrell’s name and realized £499 net. To his knowledge Mr Tapper received nothing back for his stock. To the assignee: The money was received for stock that belonged to his wife. None of that stock belonged to Mr Tapper. Henry had disposed of Mr Tapper’s stock previously. Replying to Mr Macdonald the bankrupt said he could not account for how £5O was spent on his daughter’s wedding. A Social Security account for £l5 was made out in his name and paid by him with money his wife gave him, but he had not earned £3OO. After Mr O’Beirne had put in receipts and other accounts on behalf of the bankrupts, Mrs Tyrrell was again crossexamined by Mr Macdonald. Asked about expenditure for her daughter’s wedding, which had been estimated at £3O, she said that it included presents. If Mr O’Beirne said that she paid him £l5O to meet a judgment if it went against her she supposed that was right. Later she received £lOO from him, but she could not say whether he mentioned that judgment had been given against her and her husband. She did not know why she took the £lOO away. She took the money home, but did not know what had become of it. She kept the money in her bag. She could not explain why she took the money from Mr O’Beirne’s office on the day judgment was given. The. assignee said that the bankrupts had leased Mr Tapper’s farm and stock and made money. Mr O’Beirne: As far as I know the son Henry got the profits. The assignee: And the father paid the tax:. Speaking to Tyrrell, the assignee said

it was up to him to get assistance from his son. He would not recommend the bankrupts’ discharge unless they made some attempt to recompense Mr Tapper. The meeting was adjourned sine die.