SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6292, 17 July 1888, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

In Banco. THIS DAY. (Before His Honor Mr Justice "Ward). DISCHARGES. The following bankrupts obtained orders of discharge :— James Willis, on the application of Mr Harper, for Mr Russell ; Thomas M'lntosh, on the application of Mr Bruges. KE EUGENE FRANCIS LE LIEVRE. Mr Beattie, for Mr Thomas, applied for leave to lodge proof of debt, Black and others. His Honor made the order as prayed. BE ROBERT SUTHERLAND. On the application of Mr Harper, for Mr Joynt, His Honor fixed the day for the bankrupt to apply for his order of discharge. BE FRANCIS INNKS. Mr Harper appeared for the Public Trustee, Mr Fisher for the creditors, and Mr Stringer for the bankrupt. Mr Fisher said that ib was his intention to apply for an order to the effect that the debtor had been guilty of an. offence under Section 171 of the Bankruptcy Act, by neglecting to keep proper accounts, and otherwise endeavouring to defraud his creditors, also that evidence would be called to prove the charge. Notice of such intention had been served on the debtor. He called Mr White. Mr Stringer objected that Mr Fisher had no right to call evidence. The application was for the examination of the bankrupt, and under Section 149 of the Act, the evidence. of the bankrupt alone could be taken.

; His Honor said that the Act would be , reduced to an absurdity if witnesses could i not be examined at a final examination. j Mr Stringer said that the Act did not say that any other persons could be examined. Mr Fisher submitted that Section 101 gave the Court ample power to examine any person at any time. - Mr Stringer said that the clause applied only to those matters in which witnesses could be examined. The present sitting was a special one for the examination of the debtor. His Honor held' that the Court had power fco order the examination of other witnesses. Mr Stringer said if the accused were guilty of certain offences, ho should be tried by a jury. His Honor would rule against Mr Stringer. Mr Fisher called William John White, who deposed that on Feb. 1 he bought certain property from the bankrupt, giving him £100 cash, and two bills for £94 13b Bd. The property included nearly everything in the debtor's brewery. John Lee deposed that on Jan. 2S last he took a bill of sale over the debtor's furniture, and paid him £120. W. J. White, recalled, stated that on Jan. 10 he bought some book debts from the debtor, aud paid him £25 cash. Among the debts was one of £28 8s owing by Mr Moir. The fall amount was £44 odd. Eecovered £32 4s up to the present time. E. C. Latter, Official Assignee, deposed that there was no entry in Mr Innes' books of the receipt of a sum of £194 13s 8d from Mr White on Feb. 1, nor of £25 8s received from Mr White for the purchases .of book debts. There was no entry of .any transaction with Mr White. There was no entry of £100 paid to the bankrupt by Mr Lee in respect of the bill of sale over his furniture on Jan. 28. Had compared the bankrupt's Bankbook and cash book. The cash book showed receipts £102 12s 9d for the six months prior to bankruptcy. Mr James Innes became a bankrupt on Feb. 21, 1888. The Bank book showed that he had paid into the Bank during the same period £659 3s 2d. The day book showed the goods sold during the six months to have been of the value of £193 33 6d. The cheques were, in nearly all cases, made payable to numbers. The blocks of the chequebook* were net forthcoming, and witness had nothing to show to whom the cheques had been paid. There was no bill book. Wit- ess had traced bill transactions in several instances. The bankrupt's statement showed assets £190, and liabilities £1630. There was no trace in the ledger in many instances of the amounts said to have been posted from the day book. The The numbers in the day book were false. [Left Sitting.]