SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2565, 8 May 1871, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

IK BAKKUUPTOY. This Day. (Before Mr Justice Chapman.) DISCHARGES. Gorge Sheriff and Wi'diam Wilson received final orders of discharge. ADJUDICATIONS. Thomas Bradley, of Tokomairiro, Charles C. Armstrong, and Edward Flee wood wen adjudged bankrupts—first meetings of creditors being fixed for the 16th inst. BE JAMES BBATT.E. Mr Bathgate obtained an order for the sale of a quantity of grain, alleged to be in the bankrupt’s order and disposition. RE JOHN T. CHAPLIN. His Honor delivered judgment in this matter as follows I have looked over the deed in this case, and it appears to me to be a complete assignment of tho whole of the effects, r'pal and personal, ftf Chaplin to Job Wipn, for the benefit of all the creditors >vitho’ut any distinction. Now I have been asked to declare that this deed is of no effect, to declare it an act of bankruptcy on principal grounds —one that owing to the very large debt of the opposing creditor, it is manifestly impossible that the deed can be duly executed m time—that is to say, even if the whole four months be allowed to elapse. At present I cannot anticipate any giiclt impossibility or even improbability. The opposing creditor’s cl.bt is no doubt j^rge—l think it is about LI I,o'.!o—but he holds considerable security which may be rendered available within the lime, and thus it might so reduce their debt r,s to render it (mite possible for the other signatures to amount to sufficient to render tho deed good. 1 think, so far as the first objection is concerned, the application is at least premature. Tim other point is that in the words of the Act it is a vexations and frivolous proceeding for the purpose of delay; It b. ing an arrangement for the benefit of a’l the creditors, the effect of it is undoubtedly to take the whole of Chaplin’s property out of his own comrol; and by the fact that the trustee becomes a p rty to the deed, he makes himself responsible to all the creditors. He is trustee for them, and cannot escape that trust, 'i he deed appears to me to be for the benefit of a 1 the creditors. Now undoubtedly the object of the deed is to prevent the judgment creditor availing himself of his judgment. The bankrupt had two methods before him. Seeing that there was a heavy judgment against him, which, if fully executed, without reference to the security ■which the Bank has, would have exhausted the whole of his property, the effect of which would have been to take tb it properly out of the hands of all the other creditors, he ought, if he desired to protect all the creditors, to have done either of these two things, which were both proper under the circumstances of the case—either filed a declaration of insolvency which would have effectually stopped execution, without leave of the Court, or ho could have executed a deed of assignment for the benefit of all bis creditors : That for the present has all the effect of a declaration of insolvency ; it may hereafter never ripen into a deed or have that effect; but for the present, at all events, and during the t me allowed by the Act, it has that force. By the deed or the evidence I can see nothing frivolous or vexations in the proceeding ; nor can I see anything that militates against the hona files of the transaction. No doubt the object of it is to defeat the judgment creditor ; and this is perfectly lawful and proper, where the def< at of the judgment creditor is purely beneficial to the whole of the rest of the creditors. It s ems to me, then, as the whole of the creditors may avail themselves of the deed, the effect is to secure the whole of the property f.r all the creditors, without distinction or favor to anyone. The appl.cation is theref re refused, without costs.