DUNCAN v. HENDERSON.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1953, 28 May 1880, Page 3

DUNCAN v. HENDERSON.

In this case, adjourned from the 14th i'st., futher evidence was taken yesterday at the Resident Magistrate’s Court. L. M. Ollivier, clerk at Messrs Ford and Newton’s, remembered a sale of cattle to one Davies, who afterwards became insolvent. Shortly after the insolvency, Henderson called on him, and in answer to his enquiries, witess told him that Fmd and Newton wore bona fide creditors in respect to these cattle. Cross-examined—He attended the first meeting of Davies’ creditors on behalf of Messrs Ford and Newton, Did not ask Davies any questions as to his transactions with Henderson, Mr Sheath was chairman of the first meeting of the creditors in Davies’ estate. Henderson’s claim on the estate was for rent of cows and for clerical work. Knew Davies had cows in his possession before his bankruptcy. At the meeting, Henderson produced a receipt from Davies showing the sale of the cattle to Henderson. Cross-examined — Davies then gave no satisfactory explanation of what had been done with the money he had received from Henderson. John Grabtree said Mr "Henderson called on him after the insolvency of Davies, and asked him to sign a paper, purporting to be a proof of witness’s claim on Davies’ estate. Witness told him that Davies was not indebted to him, and refused to sign the paper, Henderson called on him twice on the same errand. On the second time, witness saw Henderson write on the paper produced, and understood it was intended to represent a claim on the estate of Davies. Witness told Henderson, on both his visits, that Davies did not owe him anything; notwithstanding which, Henderso i pressed him to sign the paper, but he refused. Mrs Crabtree, wife of last witness, corroborated her husband’s evidence as to the second visit of Henderson. Mrs Davies said her husband filed his schedule on March G.h. On that day Henderson went to her house, and in the course of conversation told her he would act as a friendly creditor to her husband, and protect the cattle until her husband’s present trouble was over. Crossexamined—Henderson took the cattle away the next day (Saturday). He returned on the following Wednesday, when he was very abusive to her about her husband’s having, as ho said, turned informer. M. Henderson, recalled, said that seeing Crabtree’s name down on the list of creditors, he called'on him and asked him for the particulars of his claim, and for a proxy for the coming meeting. Wont to Davies on a Monday, not on Wednesday, when he saw the wife, and merely made enquiries as to the sale of the cows by Clifford, wanting to know what had become

of the money. Mr Stringer, addressing the B nob, said that Henderson finding Crabtree’s name on the filed list o£ creditors, had <one to him in the ordinary course of business o procure his proxy. It was a common ustom on the part of commission agents, ?ho did so in order to obtain, if posihle, the trusteeship in insolvent estates, VI r Loughnan said he had called this oviieoce to show that Henderson had nob been icourate in his statements. His Worship said (.hat the case throughout had been most unsatisfactory. There had certainly been a groat deal of hard swearing, and the evidence disclosed transactions which, to say the least of them, were questionable. Judgment was deferred until the following day.