ONE LAW FOR THE—ETC., ETC.

Fair Play, Volume I, Issue 13, 27 January 1894, Page 13

ONE LAW FOR THE—ETC., ETC.

What right, we should like to know, has the Christchurch Official Assignee to refuse the reporters admission to the meeting of creditors in the Harper estate ? It looks as if there were something' to hide and that someone —we do not mean the Assignee—is interested in having it hidden. There is an evil odour about the whole of the Harper swindle. One member of the firm, a thoroughly honest fellow, who had nothing to do with the investment of the trust money, and who is quite innocent of the swindles that were carried on, was prosecuted; the other, Leonard Harper, who it is perfectly certain, obtained thousands of pounds for nvestment at a time when he knew his firm was actually insolvent, Leonard Harper, the chief wirepuller, the culprit, i<3 now living comfortably in Jersey, and no proceedings are taken against him. The total dividend in the estate is to be about 7d in the £, the whole affair is wrapped in mystery —and the Assignee refuses to allow the reporters to. remain at the meeting of creditors 1 This all bears out the old saying that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor. Will the Minister of Justice please see into' the matter ? The action of the Assignee in excluding the reporters ought to be condemned by every paper in the country, but we regret to say that a large

n iimber of the so-called “ leading " papers have evidently been nobbled, ana a “conspiracy ofsilonce” is being maintained. The whole affair ought to bo brought up in Parliamant and a satisfactory reason given why it is that a state prosecution has not been undertaken. Of course, in Christchurch itsolf, wo can quite understand that there should bo a desiren ot to press too hardly upon the firm especially as the venerable and rospectod father of the Harpers has but recently gone to his long homo, his dooeaso being no doubt hastened by the shame and disgrace which had boon brought upon the family name. But this is not a case where local sentiment should bo allowed to over-ride the claims of justice. This firm of Harpers woro in tho habit of getting vast sums from England for investment. They, no doubt, only meant to use the monov properly, but with tho haste to make riches that ruins so many of our colonial traders,' thoy gambled in land and other speculations and got complotoly beyond thoir dopth. But intorost had to be paid on tho trust money they had reooived for investment, and so as new suras woro handod to them for investment these sums were dovotod to meeting tho intorost duo on tho oldor investments. Gradually a rogular system of robbing Potor to pay Paul was initiated, but as Peter failed to come quick enough up to the scratoh to enable Paul to do paid, Mr. Leonard Harper wont homo to England to endeavour to raiHO a big round sum which would furthor stave off tho long impending crash. But that good round sum ho could not got in timo and so tho crash camo, and tho firm failed, with liabilities well over a quarter of a million sterling. Reckless trading, wilful malversation of trust monoys thoro was it is certain. Yet tho only proceedings initiated wero brought against Mr. George Harpor, a member of the firm, whoso fine conveyancing and general legal business sufficed to moot his own withdrawals, and who really know hardly anything at all about tho trust money investment branch of the business. The man who is solely and wholly responsible for tho crash, tho man who ought to have been prosecuted—who ought still to bo prosecuted—is new living snugly in Jersey, laughing in his sleeve at the ease with which ho has escaped a prosecution, tho result of which might have boon tho substitution for his broad-cloth of asuitofgroy serge with a prominent broad-arrow on the back ! Tho Harpor name stinks in London, the failure has done tho colony a frightful amount of harm, and yet the chief offender is allowed to go scot free and, don’t forgot this,. the reporters were not allowed to furnish the public with a true account of the meeting of creditors. Will the Assignee at Christchurch ploasc explain ? If he will not then will tho Minister for Justice kindly order him to explain. “ One law for the rich and another for the poor.” The bigger the theft the greater the chance of the thief escaping punishment. These two sayings cannot be kept out of our mind when we think of the Harper failure.