SUPREME COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 3047, 7 November 1896, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

Dunedin, November 5. In Chambers this morning, Mr Young, of Wellington, applied for an order cidli. g on Mr Vigors to show cause why hn should not be removed as liquidator of the Colonial Bank, as such removal would be in the interest of the liquidation. Counsel for the bank took exception to the snmraons on the ground of the indefiuitem ss of the allegations, whereupon Mr Yonug intimated that he relied on the oats transactions, the transference 0f£55,000 on the eve of the balance of the Ward’s Association, the £25,000 draft on Nelsons, and £5,000 draft on Brooks (London) and concealment by Mr Vigors of these and other facts which induced tho court to refuse to sanction a compromise, Mr W. L. Simpson, one of the liquidators, in giving evidence said that. Mr Vigors kept nothing back from the other liquidators. The £35,000 draft and tho £25,000 cheque transactions of the Ward Association were the subject of a report which would be submitted to the Court. That report was being prepared by the three liquidators. There were reasons for not presenting that report a mouth or two ago. One reason was that t tore was an enquiry proceeding by both Houses of Parliament, and the liquidators waited to see if they could get any additional evidence. Their report d also touch upon the conduct ■>( tlm directors and officers of the CoKe.i.i Bank. Their action or m» i -on m wmi commented on. Mr W. B. Vigors, late iuspecto • ' f 1 1 o Colonial Bank, gave evidence concern ng the draft on oat warrants, to tho ;Tuct that he had no reason to suppose that it was other than a legitimate transaction, and that the oats were free oats. Ho did not ascertain if the oats were in store, as it was not usual to do so. Witness knew that the draft was held over, but did not know why. Tho account was redebited in November The cable credi t could have been used in reducing the Ward Association’s overdraft by opening a special account. .Witness read the cable differently to the general manager, but the latter was his senior officer, and there was an end of it. The draft transaction had awaited Mr Ward’s arrival to put it though. When Mr Ward arrived he put a different complexion on it. Mr John Fisher, late manager of the Ward Association, gave evidence, explaining the oats transact!' n substantially the same as in his evidence before tho Council’s Bank Committee. He demurred to give the draft. Unfortunately he gave warrants for the oats. On his part it was not meant to cover a credit, but Mr Vigors understood that it was. Mr Fisher made an explanation about the £SOOO and £25,000 draft given by Mr Ward. The £SOOO draft was a legitimate and proper transaction, and there was cover for it. Tho £25,000 draft had nothing whatever to do with the Ward Association, It was a share transaction between Mr Ward and another purchaser. There were some delay as to the terms of sale, and this caused it to be held over. When ultimately settled, the purchaser paid tho amount in cash and lifted the draft. In answer to Mr Young, Mr Fisher said that, so far as the Wi.rd Association was concerned, the £30,000 draft transaction was absolutely genuine. Addresses were given by Mr Young, Mr Solomon, and Mr Haggitr, and Mr Young having replied, Mr Justice Williams delivered judgment, dismissing the motion to remove Mr Vigers.