OHAKUNE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 254, 26 October 1937, Page 10

OHAKUNE

“EMBALMING A CHINAMAN” COURT CASE AT OHAKUNE A somewhat unusual debt, claim was heard at the Ohak life Magistrate’s Court .on Wednesday, when Charles Guthrie. Chinaman, a late resident in Raetihi and now a greengrocer’s assistant in Timaru, was sued by Dr. Jordan, of Ohakune, for the cost of embalming Guthrie’s brother, Ah Duck King, of Ohakune, who died in April, 1933. The amount involved was forty-live guineas but ol this an amount of £3 4s lOd had since been paid by the official assignee. Guthrie’s Evidence Guthrie, whose evidence was taken in Timaru, stated that he was resident in Raetihi until 1930, when he went to China. In April, 1933, he received a cable from Ohakune to say that his brother, Ah Duck King, had died and had left a will with defendant as executor. He answered this, stating that he would return to New Zealand and gave instructions for the embalming of the body. His brother had been a greengrocer at Ohakune, and defendant had always considered him to be in a good position financially. Guthrie had interviewed Mr. L. S. Baird, solicitor, Raetihi, who was acting for the estate, and had signed the necessary papers for probate. The granting of this had been held up for six months for some reason and the meantime defendant had to pay board and other expenses, which amounted to about £6O. When probate was granted defendant drew the monies lying at the bank and post office, amounting to a little over £5OO, which he had handed to Mr. Baird. Guthrie had not considered this to be a substantial part of the estate as he knew that there were book debts amounting to about £lOOO and various freehold properties owned by his brother. Before returning to China in October, 1933, Guthrie had received £350 in cash from Mr. Baird, and had signed papers authorising the solicitor to act for him. Out of the £350 Guthrie had paid some small debts, the freight on the body, amounting to £92, his own fare second class £43, and funeral expenses and wharfage fees in China amounting to over £45. “Old Chinese Custom” It is an old Chinese custom of superstition that a relative should travel with the body to guide his soul at the different ports of call, said the defendant in the course of his evidence, but if I knew there was no money in the estate I should not have had my brother embalmed. I would have buried him in New Zealand. Defendant had never personally received a bill for the embalming from the doctor, and had not been told that a claim had been made with the official assignee. He did not know what happened while he was away and had no idea why the estate went bankrupt. Cross-examined, Guthrie said that he knew that the hospital and doctor's accounts were amongst those in the estate, but since he thought there would be a lot of money left to meet all obligations he had not given thought to them. Defendant had always admitted Dr. Jordan’s account as an estate liability, and strongly denied that Mr. Baird had made any serious objection to his taking the £350. About three or four months prior to his return to New Zealand, Guthrie had received a letter from Mr. Baird asking him to send back the £350. Defendant thought that this was bluff on Mr. Baird's part and instead of answering he had returned to New Zealand. If he had known that there was no money left he certainly would not have done so. Deceased’s widow had not received any of the £350 or money in any form from the estate. She and the children had always been resident in China. Re-examined, Guthrie declared that he had no property of any description in New Zealand and was working for a wage of £J. 10s per week and found. Dr. Jordan’s Evidence Shortly after the death of Ah Duck King, said the doctor in evidence, he had received a telephone message from Mr. L. F. Baird, solicitor, who said that there was some £4OO in the bank belonging to the estate ior which he was acting and if the doctor would embalm the body of the deceased, his account for tne work would be all right. The embalming had been carried out and Guthrie had subsequently arrived in Ohakune. Plaintiff had attended Guthrie professionally at the Argonaut Hotel there, the fee for which was £2 2s. At this time plaintiff understood that Guthrie was responsible for both the accounts and when defendant had instructed him to couple this £2 2s with the embalming charge he had done so. This £2 2s had since been paid, after proceedings had been instituted. Plaintiff had billed the estate with the accounts, through Mr. Baird, and the next thing he had heard in this connection was a request for proof of debt from the official assignee. A dividend of Is 4id in the £ had been paid subsequent to this, totalling £3 4s lOd, and plaintiff had forwarded an account for the balance of £44 0s 2d to Guthrie, who repudiated liability.

In reply to a question by the magistrate (Mr. R. M. Watson, S.M.), Dr. Jordan said that this was the first case of embalming which had occurred in his practice. He did not know what other embalmers charged, but in view of the fact that embalming is a specialised job outside the knowledge of the ordinary general practitioner and entails at least three visits after the initial operation, he considered that the charge made was a fair and reasonable one. Questioned further, plaintiff said that the materials used in the operation were not expensive. Some six gallons of preserving fluid were injected after the body had been prepared, the whole operation taking rather longer than the average appendicitis operation. He would estimate the time spent in the initial operation as about two hours and he had made three subsequent visits to the mortuary to see that the fluid was acting efficiently. There were not many incidentals in the operation. Plaintiff had not been required to do