FIVE-DAY CASE IS CONCLUDED.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18339, 16 December 1927, Page 4

FIVE-DAY CASE IS CONCLUDED.

JUDGMENT RESERVED IN WRIGHT CASE DISPUTE. Judgment 'was reserved in the case of the dispute between members of the late Mr E. G. Wright's family. lDonald M’lntosh, called by Mr Upham, said that he was manager of Surrey Hills up to 1925. When the bank put in a manager then, he stayed on in charge of the stock. There was no reason for a statement that things were at a standstill on Surrey Hills when the bank put in its manager. He heard of nobody leaving on account of not being paid. . Sir John Findlay, in reply to Mr Cottrell (for the Hon W. Nos worthy and Mrs H. M. Wright, trustees, and Mrs Nos worthy) said that he admitted that Mr Nosworthy had acted prudently, honestly and with good judgment; also impartially as between all the beneficiaries in his administration of the estate. William Nosworthy, a Minister of the Crown, called by Mr Cottrell, said that there were no complaints in regard to the estate until litigation was begun by Mrs Morgan, a daughter of E. G. Wright, against the trustees. John Morrison, recalled by Mr A. F. Wright (for the bank) gave a comparison of valuations and sale prices of the i four properties involved in the di. ;nite. He said that the prices actually re a : ed at the sale totalled £82,247. The diiference between the prices realised and suggested estimates by Douglas Wright, at £5 7s an acre, was £24,519. or, at £5 6s an acre, £25,355. Details were;— c 1

Sir John Findlay and Mr Upham addressed the Court, and the case was closed at 5.45 p.m., after lasting for five days. Judgment was reserved. THE BANK’S SECURITIES. In connection with the evidence given by Mr John Mac Gibbon on Wednesday, Mr Mac Gibbon states that it was incorrect to say he gave information about the indebtedness of Mr Wright. He emphasised that the Bank of New Zealand, nearly twenty years previously, had made advances to Mr Wright in perfectly good faith, and believed that the securities held up to the date of the litigation in 1925 were unassailable. It was not until the action among the Wright family threw doubts on the bank’s securities that it had to make arrangements with the members of the family to have the securities validated.

Lot 1— Bank's valuation for sale purposes ttof Registrar. t+sSale price realised. ** Surplus. Surrey Hills .. 45,038 56,473 11,435 Lot 2 — Top Block 9.4S0 10,075 595 Lot 3— Lincoln Fields 6,489 6,490 1 Lot 4— River Block .. 9,018 9,208 190 Totals 70.025 82,247 12,222