IN RE COLEMAN AND OTHERS V ARNOLD AND OTHERS.

Colonist, Volume LII, Issue 12767, 13 April 1910, Page 2

IN RE COLEMAN AND OTHERS V ARNOLD AND OTHERS.

The hearing of the application by Mj Maginnity (on beha'.f of Hugh Kenyoii and others) for an order directing the receiver (J. Sharp, junr.) to pay out to the . guarantors of the Nelson Co-operative Dairy Company the amount for which ho had found security, was resumed yesterday morning. Mr C. It. Fell appeared for the receiver.

Mr Maginnity called evidence as follows : —

Hugh Kenyon deposed that he was a farmer residing at Dovedale, and was one of the guarantors of the Nelson Co-operative Dairy Company. He paid ,£35 in respect to the guarantee, and had received a refund of £5 or £6. He received a notice calling a meeting of guarantors of the company. Mr John Win was proposed as chairman of the meeting. _^Mr Hoult was proposed, but withdrew, and Mr Win took the chair. Mr Coleman was present at the meeting. At the meeting he stood up and said that they should stand --by the order of the Court. The voting on the resolution was taken by a show of hands. If the chairman asked for a show of hands in opposition he did not lioar him. He heard several objections in the body of the hall to the resolution. The meaning given to Mir Hayes explanation was that the order of the Court gave instructions for the -q r *- posal of the company's property. He did not hear any resolution put to the meeting that the company's < rdinary creditors should be paid out of the sale. No division was taken. Mr Sharp called for proxies before the biasness commenced. He never heard the chairman ask for a vote of those who were representing the proxies. The names of those who voted were not, to his knowledge, taken down. He understood that some £70 or £80 was owing for petty debts. Mr Sharp said they could be paid by unpaid calls.

Cross-examined; by Mr Fell: He never saw Mr Coleman on the platform. There were none of the company's directors .on the platform, nor any of the seven guarantors. The meeting was called to dispose of the company's property. He understood that the resolution as to the petty debts was the only one put to the meeting. It was known at the meeting that the property had been sold for £1200. He believed it was. It was thought by the meeting that the petty debts would be paid out of the guarantors' money. He was going to vote against the resolution. He did not ask for an opportunity to vote against it. He was on the first seat, near the platform. Whilst he was counting the hands in favour of the resolution he heard it declared carried.

James Farquhar Cowin deposed that he was a farmer at Thorpe, and was one of the guarantors. He remembered being called to a meeting of guarantqrs. Mr Win was proposed as chairman, Mr Hoult withdrawing in Mr Win's favour. He knew Mr Coleman, and when Mr Colema.n said he was chairman he was mistaken. He remembered Mr Haycock proposing that the debts of the company should be paid. He remembered Mr Kenyon objecting to the motion, and stating that they should stand by the order of the Court. Mr Sharp said he did not know what the order of the Court was : he said he had not seen the order. The motion gave rise to considerable disturbance, and some of those present wanted to know what the unpaid debts were. The resolution was carried by a show of hands. He remembered the chairman asking for a show of hands against the resolution immediately after putting it, and several hands were held up against it. Those in the meeting did not understand the* position in regard to the order of the Court from any information given at the meeting. Mr Sharp clearly gave the meeting to understand that some £70''or £80 was all that would be required to pay the debts.

Cross-examined: A meeting had been he!d at Dovedale to consider •matters in connection with the company, but not recently. He voted for the resolution in view of Mr Sharp's explanation.

Joseph Thorn and Appo Lewis Hocton, farmers, of Dovedale, and both guarantors of the company, corroborated the previous witnesses as to what took place at the meeting on July 29th.

This concluded the evidence, and counsel then addressed the Court.

In his judgment His Honour made an order as follows:— Mr Sharp to bring the amount for which security bad been given, £73 Os Bd, into Court ; also to pay the costs of these present proceedings as follows: Counsel £15 15s and disbursements, and witnesses' expenses. Thei fund, after it has been ascertained whether it is chargeable with any proportion of costs of the original action, to 1m distributed among the parties represented by Mr Maginnity, and to be paid over to Mr Maginnity for that purpose., Leave was reserved for either .party to further apply to the Court,' if necessary.