LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1446, 22 May 1912, Page 10

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

RE W. F. EGGER'S PETITION. Sir, —Xot being a party to the bankruptcy petition against Mr. Eggers, and so having no opportunity of being heard at the trial in reply to the charges made against my conduct, I trust you will afford sue tito only moans I have of justifying what was done. *In the first place Messrs. Biggs and Tyler not having at any time consented to the assignment had an undoubted legal right to sav to the debtor that lie must pay them their .£ll2 Bs. 3d. in'full, or, if ho were unable then to submit to have his affairs administered as tlio law directs. Their adoption of that attitude had tliev taken it would liavo been not only legally, but also in the circumstance!, morally, justifiable. Thcv were working brick mud drain layers. They woro well known to the debtor who must have known. that they had no great amount of capital. The loss of a sum such as .£IOO would probably mean ruin to them aiul their families. Yet lie employed them to work on one of his houses shortly before his meeting- when ho must have known t.hat hn was hopelessly insolvent. Ho paid them nothing at all on account. In the event of bankruptcy it would appear that they as manual labourers would have been entitled to rank preferentially. Moreover, they were secured creditors having a lien over the property on which they had worked, this security however being of doubtful value unless timo were taken in realisation. I'nder all the circumstances surely my client's proposal to surrender their security for the benefit of the creditors and (o ask .£(5 in settlement was fair and reasonable.

But the point of the charge against me is apparently that at the interview' when the debtor kind the creditors' trustee refused to pay the .£75, I mads a remark about the debtor going to prison. As set out in the judgment the remark is isolated, but to bo judged correctly must be taken in connection with the circumstances which were these:—Mr. Eggers, as he admitted when ho had to call his creditors together, was considerably behind with his rents collected. lie was Quite frank about the whole matter, nnd indeed on the hearing of the petition made an affidavit that tho shortage on this head was .£437. The deed of assignment to Messrs. Gold nnd Arcus was included to insure that these rent creditors should be satisfied in full in priority to tho claims of ordinary creditors. That the debts of presumably well-to-do landowners who in the event of bankruptcy would rank as ordinary creditors should bo paid in full and in priority to the secured claims of Messrs. Biggs and Tyler aiipeared to me to be unjust: but tho object of the proposal was to help Mr. Eggers .and avoid any consequences that might in the ordinary course follow. My remark wis not a threat; it was a statement of fr.ct made with reference to a proposal propounded by the debtor himself. It is not as though T gratuitously introduced the subject which in fact was the foundation of the debtor's own proposal and was present to tho minds of everyone concerned.

In what I did there was absolutely no F.cerecy or attempt to Mop the other creditors ill the dark.' ~!jfie fact that itwas to the other creditors trustee Hint I made the proposal re acceptance of JE7S in settlement shows that there was no attempt at concealment or secrecy.

A material fact that is not emphasised in the judgment is that Messrs. Bigss and Tyler did not at. any time 'consent' to the deed of assignment. From the first they declined to como into the assignment. Not having assented to the assignment, thoy owed no duty to the other creditors, who were perfectly able to take aire of themselves. This is a most important aspect of the case that, with all respect, I venture to think has been overlooked by the learned .Tuds-<\ inasmuch as tho two cases quoted by him as setting out tho law applicable to the facts were both e.ises where the petitioning creditors joined in the assignment or offered so to do. stipulating for a secret advantage from the debtor, such os-notes for the residue of 'their claims. There was .absolutely nothing of tho kind in this case.—T nni.'ete.. CHARLES PRATT. May 18, lfll 2. A LONG-SUFFERING PUBLIC. Sir,—The travelling public aro truly long suffering, they growl most ominous-' ly, and there it ends, but they suffer ex ceedingly nevertheless. I will only quote the ferry service to Lyttelton, and tho railway arrangements at that port. The Mararoa leaves Wellington at 11 p.m. on Saturday—why that late hour is the problem that has never found solution. If she is fortunate with weather conditions, she lands her passengers in Lyttciton about 12 noon on Sunday. As hustle is unknown in Lyttciton, said passengers are fairly lucky if they reach tho Christohurch station by 1.30, and their hotels by 2, where they sometimes nianago to get dinner, but ,-iro anathema to tho cooks and waiters, who naturally look forward to the Sunday afternoon off.' Why the steamer cannot leave Wellington at 9 p.m. Saturday ha 3 ever been an unsolved puzzle by passengers. Tho s.s. Maori is almost as regular as the clock, and invariably lands her passengers in Lyttelton at G. 45 a.m., yet the Railway Department is unable to get them to Christchurch until a few minutes to 8, to tho worry and annoyance of the traitf through passengers who have lugguge to see to, tickets to get, seats to secure, etc. As an example, on the May 7 the Maori arrived at Lyttelton at 8.45, and the passengers at Christchurch at 8 a.m. delaying the southern express 20 minutes, and the confusion on the station was nndcscribable. Lyttelton is notoriously the worst port in the Dominion for travellers, and their difficulties are enhanced by official indifference, and idiotic arrangements.—l am, etc., ' TRAVELLER.