CORRESPONDENCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 3881, 24 September 1880, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

QUALMER IN EXPLANATION.

TO THE EDITOE OF THB STAB. Sin,— Knowing that you aro a lover of truth and justice, I wish to call your attention to the leader in the issue of your valuable paper of Sept. 23, referring to a caße tried in the District Court iv re Qualmer's deed of settlement. Aa many errors havo in aome way got mixed with the truth of tho statement, and are likely to do a serious injury to me, I shall feel obliged if you will be kind! enough to allow me to correct a few of them. You say, " When Qualmer commenced business at the Plough he had a capital of £400 to £500," leading to the impression that that was the whole of his capital. The fact is that this was the amount ofi cash in hand, after purchasing the land at Bingsland, and satisfying all demands to that time.

Again you say " that ho sold out of tho Plough in March, 1878, he had about £1400." Now tbe Plough Inn was cold in November, 1878, and not in March, nnd at that time I had capital to the aniouut of £1400. Previous to taking tho Plough I had made application for a license at -Bingsland, which wai refused, and as cortain geutlemen had promised to Bupport my application, I commenced building and applied for license again, which being refused, I built a house for mjself. At that time 1 had not the slightest intention to go into business in tho grocery line. Before contracting for the house, I had! built e tablo, coach-house and cellar at a coat of some three hundred pounds (£300), which waa all paid for prior to March ..1, 1879. When I made the assignment inferred jby your remarks to be fraudulent I waa intending to go to New South Wales aid leave my wife to follow after diepoaing of ht r property. I had a cash balauce at the Bank of £746 8a sd, eubjectonly to a contract of five hundred and sixty five pounds for the building, instead of £900 as inferred by your statements. Again you say, " The balance, in June, at the Bank was only £4," but the Bank bookswere produced in Court and sworn to by the Bank authorities, shewing a balance of £104 or thereabouts. With regard to the " mysterious " furniture business (which was legally cold by Mrs Qualmer as being her own property), it was not "stowed" away for "concealment," as your remarka would lead your readers to suppose, but because it waß not required at the time, as given in evidence. Is it likely that the Trustee would take action ia the Magistrate's Court against tho party buying the furniture if it had been " stowed " with the intentiou of defrauding? Trusting to your sense of rectitude and generosity to insert tho foregoing explanation, I am, &c,

HENBY QUALMER. Bingsland, Sept. 24.