H.—l3

1893. NEW ZEALAND.

CHARGES MADE BY MR. G. W. ELL AGAINST MR. BLOXAM, REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT, CHRISTCHURCH, AND MR. E. C. LATTER, LATELY OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE, CHRISTCHURCH (REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO THE, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE).

Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.

REPORT OP COMMISSIONERS UPON CHARGES MADE BY MR. G. W. ELL Eepoet of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into complaints and charges made by George Waldock Ell against the late Official Assignee in Bankruptcy for the District of Canterbury and the Registrar at Christchurch of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. To His Excellency the Eight Honourable David, Earl of Glasgow, Knight Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Governor and Com-mander-in-Chief in and over Her Majesty's Colony of New Zealand and its Dependencies, and Vice-Admiral of the same. May it please toub Excellency,— Under the Commission issued by Your Excellency, dated the 10th May, 1893, we were appointed Commissioners for the purpose of inquiring into the truth or otherwise of the complaints and charges made by George Waldock Ell, of Christchurch, against Edward Circuit Latter, lately Official Assignee in Bankruptcy for the District of Canterbury, and Andrew Eoby Bloxam, Eegistrar at Christchurch of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, and generally into the conduct of the said Edward Circuit Latter and Andrew Eoby Bloxam respectively in dealing with the estate, affairs, and accounts of the said George Waldock Ell, referred to in a letter dated the 25th February, 1893, from the said George Waldock Ell to the Minister of Justice. We have the honour to report that we opened the said inquiry at Christchurch on the 17th May, 1893, and continued it there on the 18th, 19th, 20th, 22nd, 23rd, 25th, 26th, 27th, 29th, 30th, and 31st May, and Ist and 2nd June. There are twenty-two charges against the Eegistrar, and twelve against the late Official Assignee, referred to in the said letter. The charges against the Eegistrar are, — 1. " That accounts were ordered to be taken by the Eegistrar and an accountant, Mr. William Henry Hargreaves, in Ell v. Harper and another, No. 30, and Ell v. Harper, No. 353." This is not disputed. Orders for taking accounts are dated 27th June, 1884, and were produced at the inquiry (exhibits Nos. 3 and 6). 2. "On the 11th day of July, 1884, the first meeting took place, and from time to time until the Ist December, 1884, when the Eegistrar declared the case closed." This is merely a statement of fact which is not disputed. 3. "On the sth December, 1884, an account was rendered to the Eegistrar, based upon the evidence contained in the Eegistrar's notes by the plaintiff, G. W. Ell, showing a credit balance of £3,177 ss. 4d." This is also a statement of fact which is not disputed. 4. "On the sth December, 1884, an account or statement of items was rendered by Mr. J. C. Martin for the defendants, but not based upon the evidence contained in the Eegistrar's notes." The account here referred to was rendered as stated, but the evidence adduced does not bear out the latter part of the charge. 5. "The certified accounts were promised by the Eegistrar by the 23rd December upon payment of fees to the Eegistrar, £11 55., for forty-five hours at ss. an hour. These fees I handed to Mr. H. S. Austin on the 22nd December, 1884." From the evidence placed before us we are of •opinion that this charge has not been proved. I—H. 13.