THE SUPPOSED ABSCONDING DEBTOR.

Evening Star, Issue 4190, 1 August 1876, Page 2

THE SUPPOSED ABSCONDING DEBTOR.

At the Supreme Court in Chambers this morning, before bis Honor Mr Justice Williams, John Blair was brought up, on warrant, under the 35th section of the Debtors and Creditors Act. Bankrupt was defended by Mr Denniston ; and Mr Edward Cook represented the provisional trustee. John Blair, examined by Mr Cook, said: A liquidation resolution was passed winding up my estate on June 8. Mr Leary was appointed trustee. I was examined by the trustee. I gave up my estate, books, working plant, and all I was possessed of. There was LIOO lost after the first meeting of creditors. That was a voluntary meeting After the meeting I was taken "bad in the head, and continued almost insensible for a fortnight or three weeks. That night I was taken home by a man. This was before I filed. It was about May 10th I lost the money. I had L 52 in silver in my trousers pooket, and LIOO in notes in my vest. The notes were missing when I got home, but the silver was there. My wife found the silver. I do not know who it was that took me home. The LIOO was absolutely lost. The L 52 was used for house expenses; we could not starve. My assets were described cash in the store LlO6. That was at the timo ef the fire, and the money was burnt. After the passing of the liquidation resolution I maintained myself by borrowing money when I was hard up, I did not collect any debts between the passing of the liquidation resolution and my leaving for Melbourne. I gave the collector, who was my son, strict orders not to collect any money because the estate was out of my hands, The bills I received from Air Barnes were all burnt. They were for L7OO or 1800. Mr Barnes refused to pay the bills. There was no arrangement by which the biiia should be kt slip, and I was to have some assistance from Barnes. I went to Melbourne by the Otago on June 18. Mr Guun, a relative, supplied the money. 1

went to Melbourne to endeavor to borrow money from a friend- to settle with my creditors. When I got there I found he had died. I told some of the creditors that I was going to Melbourne. What transpired at the examination by the trustee a few days before did not frighten me and indnce me to go away, otherwise I should not have voluntarily come back. I remained in Melbourne a week altogether. I did not try to get employment or to settle down there. I left word with my wife that when I was wanted she was to telegraph for me, and I would come back at once. I told some of my creditors when I came back. I did not communicate with the trustee before xw We - AWa, y or oa returning. I went to Wellington two or three days after returning from the Bluff. I went to seek woik. I told some of the creditors I was going there. I went alone, taking seme LlO with me. The money was supplied by Mr Gunn. I found no work at Wellington. I purposed going as far as the Hutt, and if I found no work returning to Dunedin. The Fraudulent Debtors and Creditors Act had nothing to do with my movements. I had not been frightened. Since the liquidation resolution I have not paid any money to my creditors, nor have any of my friends to my knowledge offered to pay any debts since then. While I was insensible, and before the liquidation resolution, Mrs Blair had offered to pay 5s in the £, She was going to try to borrow the money. The fire took place in March, and in May I offered 7s 6d, having then Ll5O in my possession. I got L4OO from the insurance offices, part being paid on June 4, and the other part a week before that. I was insured for L6OO, but took L4OO, LSO being deducted for the bakehouse, which wasf saved. The first instalment I received was Ll4O from the South British, which I paid away with the exception of L2. When I got the balance a later other bills had come in, and I paid it away, My debts were set down at L 975 at the time of the fire, I took Ll6O to the meeting of creditors with me and offered 5s cash, and 2s 6d six months after, which offer was refused. Wheu I received the Ll5O I placed it in the bonk, but drew it out again* so that one creditor should not have a preference. I lent no surplus meaus. I never boasted to Mr Gew (Watson and w)w) that I considered I had dot.e my creditors out of several hundreds of pounds. I have not possessed myself of any part of my estate for my personal benefit. By Mr Denniston : At the time Mr Grant |wears I was going on board the City of San Francisco I was on my way back trom Melbourne, Mr Grant’s statement was appa< rently ba ed on information supplied by the Commissioner of Police, 'I he warrant is dated July 1, and I was in Dunedin walking about on July 3. I knew Mr (Detective) Farrell in Dunedin. When I was in WelImgton I walked up to him and shook hands, and he then informed me he had a warrant for my arrest. I had LI 10s on me when arrested.

George Esther, one of the bank.upt’s creditors, was called, but at the outset of uis examination

His Honor said: Mr Cook -You may think yourself justified if yeu Lave other evidence in prosecuting under the Fraudulent Debtors Act. You have brought bankrupt back and examined him, and I do not see you can do any more at present. The section under which you are proceeding is not for the purpose of punishing him. Mr Cook did not wish bankrupt punished, nor were such his instructions. His Honor would see from the examination that -there was amount of indebtedness, and that the assets were very small. There was some portion of the estate totally unaccounted for—<>r at least accounted for under most suspicious circumstances. His Honor said that if the learned counsel could show at any future time that bankrupt was going away he would be entitled to a fresh warrant.

Mr Cook submitted that bankrupt’s previous suspicious conduct and the small amount of his assets were good grounds for compelling him to find good security for his remaining here, or not going away without giving the trustee notice. His Honor; Taking it for granted there is only a small estate, or next to nothing, I doat see that you have established any ground for detaining him further. The evidence you have called justified his being called upon by warrant to give an account of himself; he has done so, and you have had an opportunity of cross-examining him j don t see the estate would be benefited by his being detained further. If, hereafter you can show that you have good reason for believing that he is about to go away with a °, f voiding examination you will bo entitled to a fresh warrant, but it seems to me you have got all you can out of the prosent warrant. r

Mr Denniston submitted tl at the pr. rfio „ swearing the affidavit had acted lessly.

His Honor; The debtor must be discharged now. No order as to costs will be made, as the conduct of the debtor has been snsmoious, and ho has only himself to thank. The trustee is entitled to his costs out of the estate.