Aramoho Meat Freezing Works.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXXXVII, Issue 11741, 19 September 1902, Page 2

Aramoho Meat Freezing Works.

JUDGMENT RESERVED. * Per Press Association." WELLINGTON, September 18. On the Court resuming to-day Mr. Bell, on behalf of the defendants, promised to prepare a trading account of the freezing " works from. 30th September, 1901, td April, 1902, and to de'aver a copy to the Registrar and another copy to the jplaintiff. Mr. Bell elected not to re-examine McPherson, general manager of the defendant company, and closed the case for defendant company. Messrs. Harper and Gully, appearing respectively on behalf of Johnson and Stevenson, alsa decided to call no further evidence, and to close ttheir cases. j Mr. Bell said the retail leakage was 4 shown by t!he balance-sheet of January, 1901, as causing serious aJaim, but after the balance-sheet of July, 1901, had been communicated to the defendant company's head office, the defendant company*! sole deshe was to get out even at a loss before the July balance-sheet. The defendant company, though alanmed, did not wish to facilitate Nelson's entry after that balance-sheet. The defendant company would have gladly facilitated' Nelson's entry if the Nelsons would pay oft the accaurit. The July balamtie-ffheet marked the appearance of a different tone in the correspondence. Defendant. Stevenson, as .a manager who had taken up a bad account, was on his defence, and enedavouring to show it to be a blessing in disguise and to make the best of it. The general manager i(McPheison) was also in a sense on his defence to the London Board. He maintained that the correspondence was the moat upright that was ever searched for and laid before the Court, Mr. Bell reviewed the position of the defence at length. Mr. Harper, for Johnson, maintained that his client was placed in a unique position, such as had never come before ' a Court before. He had carried out his duties honestly. The correspondence sa.id all that Johnson could say if placed m tho box. ft was confidential correspondence, such as would never see the light of day save for the terrible engine of discovery, and it was no use endeavouring to add to or explain what was in writing. , Mr. Gully, for Stevenson, made no ad-

dr&ss. • Mr. Jellicoe said there was an allegation of fraud against Johnson and Stevenson and that the defendant company had the'benefit of that fraud. Therefore his Honour could1 draw Mm own inference from the ia-lure of the defer.jda.nts to put Johnson and Stevenson in the box. lne question watt, Did defendants conspire— (1) To acquire plaintiffs property and Works on their own terms; (2) to take or retain in fraud of plaintiff a secret, profit on the purchase by themselves of the security which plaintiff had executed to Reid? 'if the defendants conspired to injure the plaintiff he was.entitled to both the restitution of his jrjpcgerty and to damages. Mr. Jellicoe enlarged on these points at length. The Coto-t reserved judgment.