THE BOWRON CASE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 116, 8 July 1911, Page 5

THE BOWRON CASE.

(Received 8, 8.-5, a.m.) London, July 7. In the Bowron case tho prosecuting counsel said the books showed that Knight was defendant’s dock manager, without whose signature the frauds weye impossible. He borrowed from the firm £BI6O, and his son £2391. Nothing had been repaid-.' ri Mf -Muir, in mitigation of tho sentence of John Bowron, urged his age and the fact that he had not made provision for his family out of the disaster . The turnover of tho business in London had been £300,000 per annum for many years past, and the firm’s capital had not exceeded £35,000 or £40,000. Tho Bowron family had lost £131,000 in tho matter. Sir F. A. Bosanquet, in passing sentence, said defendants were guilty of grave mercantile frauds. It would have eon far better had the firili liquidated when in difficulties instead of continuing in tin speculative hope of a trade boom. There was no difference in the cases or accused, and but for his age and the "act that John Bowron had not been putting by large sums he would In vc pr mount rd penal servitude. [Knight was in charge of the Phoenix Wharf, at jw.tch the Bowrons’ goods by the public' aat there was no connection beteben Knight and the neurons, whereas in fact they owned the wharf. Firms who advanced money on skins accepted Knight’s statements as to the quantities at the wharf as those of an independent person, though in reality his assurances had no more value than those of t lie firm of Bowrons would have had,]