The Bankruptcy Act.

Thames Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 8603, 6 March 1897, Page 2

The Bankruptcy Act.

CHARGES AGAINST JOHN

RYLEY.

JURY REFUSE TO CONVICT,

(Per Press Association)

Duxedix, March 6

At the Supreme Court, the hearing of charges of breaches of tho Bankruptcy Act against John Ryley were continued.

No evidence was called for the defence.

Mr Sim, in addressing the jury, said the Colonial Bank put Ryley into business, and kept him there after he said he was making losses. Practically it was the Bank's business, but eventually it threw the responsibility on Ryley, and shut him down to seize £3450 of outside creditors' money, and smashed the thing, making a loss of about £20,000 by forced sales. No single act of dishonesty had been suggested. They made a charge in the original information, that Ryley had obtained advances by means of false balance-sheets, but withdrew it because it would have involved the calling of Messrs Ewing, Henry MacKenzie, and Vigors. He pointed out [that in 1890 Ryley was a respected and loved Minister of the Presbyterian Congregation. He had saved and invested money for his old age, sand had many friends. Now he was a bankrupt pauper, and his position in the church was gone, his savings gone, and even his liberty was at stake. He asked the jury not to sacrifice him for the sins of others.

Mi* Justice Williams, in summing up, pointed out that the bankruptcy law here was more stringent than in England. The matters specified in Section 137 of our Act are, for the most part, merely grounds for suspending an order of discharge. The people of this colony, through their representatives, had considered it right, so to speak, to stiffen the standard of commercial morality here, and it was the duty of the jury, and every one concerned iv the administration of the Bankruptcy Act, to see that the intentions of the Legislature were given complete effect to. The jury, after an absence of two hours, returned a verdict of "not guilty" on all counts, and Eyley was discharged.