Wanganui Supreme Court

Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 85, 4 October 1894, Page 2

Wanganui Supreme Court

THE CASE OF J. C. MOREY. ACCUSED SENTENCED TO ONE MONTH'S IMPRISONMENT. Wednesday, 3rd October. (Before His Honor Chief Justice Prendergast.) The accused, on being placed in the box, stated that when he started he had a capital of £400 in properties, and his wife had £"200— that was in the early part of last year. He went to Wellington to make arrangements before he opened, and saw Mr Stringer (of Bing Harris, and Co.), and three or four other wholesale merchants, explaining his position, that he had properties in Feuding, and also the values, but did not mention at that time anything about Mrs Morey's property. He told them that if they would renew his bills at the end of five months he would open accounts with them. They said they would like a fresh endorsement, and Mrs Morey endorsed the bills of her own free will, to an extent far in excess of any assets she had. The property of Mrs Morey's had been sold and out of it the creditors realised over £200. His wife had made no claim on the estate, or any attempt to prove. Had he any idea that he would become insolvent he would not have allowed Mrs Morey to endorse bills. Could have taken stock, but only took a rongh estimate, which was between £700 and £800. Looking at his fixtures (shelves etc) he estimated nis stock at £700. His liabilities were between £500 and £600, and on the basis that he had with stock, properties, book debts, &c, he reckoned he was worth some £1200, and consequently well able to pay 20s in the £. Mrs Oliver got no consideration for endorsing the bill given to Mr Notman for the bankrupt stock purchased. Conld not meet the bill, and told Mrs Oliver so, she understanding that she would have to meet it, and she did meet it. Later on, when something had been paid off, he found he conld not carry out what he had said he would, and Mrs Oliver then told him that Mr Notman had threatened to sue her if the money was not paid. In paying Mrs Oliver what he had, he had no idea that he was doing injustice to any other creditor. With regard to his books, he considered they were proper ones. He had been 23 years in business, part of the time in Auckland, Christchurch, &c, not as a salesman, but more in a subordinate position. He banked two, three, and four times a week. His receipt file and bank-book would show exactly what his receipts were. At first he kept his book himself, and in most cases his invoices were entered into the ledger. Latterly this had dot been done, as he himself had not been in a position to do co. The men he employed to do his booking were not skilled accountants, but they had told him that they understood the work. At the time he kept the books himself, anyone could see them and ascertain his position. Cross-examined : He bought £400 or £500 of book-debts from Mr Paul, for which he gave practically face value. Was not certain he told his Wellington creditors of his having to pay Messrs Paul and Co. some .£SOO in three months. He was in a good position in October, when he estimated his assets at £1200 and his liabilities at £600, but in February when he filed he was £1200 to tbn bad. He closed his banking account olthe 9th January, after which he cod lected and paid Mrs Oliver's £100 ane other debts. He had been told by the wholesale people to pay any of the pressing liabilities due in Feilding. He gave ill-health as his reason for ceasing to keep his cash-book after 30th May. Mr Baker addressed the jury on Morey's behalf. The jury returned a verdict on the second charge (not keeping proper books) . Mr Baker, in extenuation of this charge, referred to the severe illness of debtor, and appealed to his Honor's clemency on behalf of bis client. His Honor said ho could not sco that the defendant's health was a sufficient reason for not keeping his books properly. He was not able to pass it over, and he would inflict a sentence ; he would not inflict hard labor. In his opinion the merchants who gave such unlimited credit were more to blame than the individuals themselves. The sentence of the Court would be that the debtor be imprisoned for one calender month, to begin from the commencement of the session. He was aware that it was a hard sentence, and was convinced that it might entail the loss of his situation, but he hoped it would not.— Chronicle.