DISTRICT COURT.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2029, 6 July 1875, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

- THIS DAY; (Before Judge Beckham.) ' IN BANKRUPTCY. , BE IHOMAS HBNBT SPEAaUE. : This was an application for order for discharge.. Mr Dodd for applicant. Mr Miller appeared on behalf of Mr Lempriere, opposing creditor. ' ■" i The following is the substance of the Trustee's report:—The Bankrupt is a, miner, and for the last year held an interest in what was called the Tweedside Tribute, and which has been wound up as unremunerative. Since, then and . for eight weeks he had charge of the Tararu Hotel for his brother-in-Jaw. He is now working as a miner at 8s per day. Being pressed he filed his schedule. The deficiency amounts to £98 8s 3d. It appeared that former proceedings had been taken■> by Bankrupt, which fell througli,: so the case was-adjourned for the production of those papers (which the clerk had not brought into Court), Mr Miller pointing out that the; debt must be proved under the former case, with which the assets had gone. .'-•■.-■' BE BICHARD ONYON. - .: This was an application for an order for discharge, Mr Tyler for baakrupt. ■ The report of the Trustee in Bankruptcy was read. Mr Tyler said the Trustee had informed him that investigation disclosed the fact that Holmes brothers were indebted to the estate in something like £120, and I they had agreed to refer the matter to arbitration. His Honor said if that fact could be ascertained it might considerably blunt the opposition of creditors. Mr Tyler said it appeared that the Trustee had been under a misapprehension, and that although. Messrs Macdonald and Miller, who appeared for Messrs Holmes, had agreed to refer the matter to accountants, they would not be bound by the decision of the accountants. Mr Macdonald on looking over thp statement, said the terms of the Act had not been complied with, the bankrupt's signature not being attached, His Honor-~Can we not get over that by his signing it now. Mr Macdonald said the statement should have been " filed " 10 days before" the day appointed, and the "signature" was just as much an essential as the filing. This was merely a technical objection, but he thought the case should stand adjourned until the accounts were properly filed.

Mr Tyler admitted that the signature was absent.

Mr Macdonald subsequently discovered that the description of bankrupt had also, for son'.e reason, been omitted. Mr-Tyler said the nature of bankrupt's business required that he should employ an accountant, who had made out a defective statement; but the question was whether the Court-was satisfied that the statement was substantially in accordance with the section of the Act, although hot specifically so. . Mr Macdonald replied to Mr Tyler to show "that the word " shall" as applied to filing must also apply; to the signature. Some further discussion ensued. ' Mr Macdonald urged his opposition to the case being proceeded with. _His.Honor. > .said,he.,.yrpuldnot i .he.jasti-., fied in proceeding with the case in the face of MrMacdonald's opposition, though ho did not see what good, could be attained by the postponement. The case was allowed to stand over till next Court day. WHITTIKER AND OTHEBS V. BINtfEY. This was a claim by a number of bushmen against their employer, Mr Binney, for payment of money due (£10) on account of work performed by them in his bush. Mr Macdonald appeared for plaintiff; Mr Tyler for defendant. ] Mr MacJonald said a set-off of; £15 8s 9d was- admitted. That amount represented goods received by plaintiffs from defendant's store. ;. The principal items of. defence were^t that the wbrk was not done at defendant's 7 request, and that even if the work had been done, they would not be entitled to the amount sued for. ] Charles Bmney deposed—l am a storekeeper and proprietor of the bush in which the plaintiffs work. These men did it for money. I was to pay them money when they : finished/ their.) work. They were' to square and draw ' out ICO,OOO feet of timber. They were then to square 30,C00, which they could draw out or not as they, pleased. They were. to draw out the 100,000 feet feet at 4s 6d per hundred, and the 30,000 at 2s 6d per. hundred. That "wis the bargain. -I wrote the plaintifls a letter containing the terms 1 have mentioned. This is the letter. ' (Letter put in.) That is the, agreement under which the men went to work — that is, I wrote .them that letter. Two of the party were workiug for me before I wrote the letter. I will not say that the letter was written within three weeks after the ■ time they commenced to work. I had a conversation with plaintiffs the evening before I wrote the letter. After I wrote the letter, the plaintiffs agreed to its terms. They agreed at my store—two of them, Whittiker and Grey. They agreed in consideration of my putting in the postscript about the 50,000. I made a mistake when I said 30,000 in .the first part of my evidence. It is a fact trat the plaintiffs tobKa clump at first, out of which they were to cut 3.0,000 feet, and they did it. (Witness explained that the affairs had become muddled, some of the men going away at times, and the letter was to be a fresh commencement of affairs, the 30,000 feet cut to be included in the 100,000 feet to be drawn .up and squared.) i Hadthe mennot -commenced to draw up the timber, I should have measured up their work and knocked I them off. Before the letter was written the terms were agreed upon. Three of the plaintiffs afterwards wanting to go away, I acted as valuator for them.* I showed them how they stood with regard to one another, and advanced the money to those who were leaving, retaining tne moneyof the remaining two till., the contract was finished as security; The 30,000 feet were to be cut at the rate of 2s 6d per hundred* -(The witness was examined further at considerable length.) The arrangement-regarding the drawing was made with W hittiker for the whole of the contractors. - Cross-examined by Mr Tyler: .With regard to the original 30,000 the contract was given to Miekie and Whooton —the other plaintiffs having no part in ; that arrangement. I did not personally telL Grey to, join the others. • Mason went with Grey. It was about "a fortnight after the 30,000 was commenced that Grey, and: Mason joined the others. T: - The Court adjourned for an hour at this? stage of the proceedings! ■ )' r Before resuming, .the counsel on either^ side had compared, notes, and consulted with the Judge, who, ■ on taking his position on the Bench, stated that a settlement had been come to, and that defendant would pay £42 6s, each, party to pay their own costs! The Court then adjourned.