SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA. SITTINGS IN INSOLVENCY.

Grey River Argus, Volume III, Issue 169, 12 February 1867, Page 3

SUPREME COURT, HOKITIKA. SITTINGS IN INSOLVENCY.

We are indebted to the West Cutust ' Times for the following report of .the proceedings in several insolvency cases from the Grey district : — . ' ■ v In re G. P. Fellowes— The insolvent appeared in person and stated that his case had been entrusted to Mr Johnstone, solicitor, to whom he had paid L2O, but who had done absolutely nothing in the matter. His Honor sympathised with the position of the insolvent and said that if an, application were made before him concoining a solicitor of the court, he would punish anyone guilty of misconduct. Adjournment order made, and protection 'continued. - „ In re G. Scott — This was a case similar to the last, the complaint being made against- the same solicitor, and his Honor again expressing indignation at such unprofessional conduct. Mr Harvey believed that all the necessary notices had been posted and affidavits filed, and the ' case was placed at the bottom of the list to .allow time for search to be made. It was subsequently ascertained, however, that* siioir was not the case, and proceedings will have to 'be commenced anew.' In re W. C. Day— Mr Rees stated he had received no instructions in "this case, and he believed the insolvent had 'left the country. . In rp C. H. Rhodes— The insolvent appeared in person, and stated that he had loft the Grey when the seqtiestator- sent up the papers. Adjourned to next hearing; the books (now in Hokitika) to be delivered to the sequestrator. In re J. H. Williams — Mr South applied for an adjournment. Mr Hardcastle stated that' the only asset was the sum" of L22 .in handj but he understood that a | valuable store at Greymouth had been made over by bill of sale about the time of the insolvency, which he thought might bo upset if action were taken. Air order to "cede" was given, with no relief till further order of the court. . In re .C v Freeman — Mr Scmth applied for an adjournment, and read an ajti davit stating that the insolvent was detained in Invercargill, in consequence .of his not being in a position to undertake a journey to the West Coast. * ' In re P. A. Jones— No attendance at meeting of .creditors', and none had proved their claims. Final order made, with immediate relief. In re A. Montgomery — Mr Button appeared for Mr J. Angus in this case, to examine petitioner, who stated : — I have been on the West Coast about <two and a half years. I have been insolvent while in partnership with Messrs Cash, Curtis and Co ; that was twenty months ago ; I made a compromise with my^ creditors — 5s in pound. Before then I was insolvent in Dunedin, four years ago, but did not obtain my final order. I was in business in Christchurch, and my effects were sold ■by the sheriff, after- -which I went'to Otago I did not apply to the Court in Dunedin for protection after, that ; I got my discharge, but not my final order. I had no property to pay expensos. I have returned in my present schedule the assets I had in Dunedin; they consist of interests in mining property and- accounts due. Mr Button : In the debts returned as good, 1 notice " Montgomery and Co" ; what is that .?— luspl vent : I was boating with my mates, David Williams and Robert Gibbs, and that is my share of the money due to us— L4o. The debt due. by Edward Carter was incurred atrßed Jack's in the Province of Nelson. I was. not connected with E: J. Williams, of Greymouth, further than by buying goods. I ( >pened a store. at Red J ack's with Edward Williams; he suj>plied the goods, and- 1 did the packing and boating, but I never received anything from the concern. That was about eight in oh ths ago. The . boats and horses, belonged-to. Alcorn and Co ; one boat was mine part of the time, but it was sqld; more than a year ago. by the baliff. Alcorn and Co bought two of the horses from the, estate of Curtis and Co: I had. five horses and two. boats, eighteen months ago. I gave a bill of sale over one boat to Alcorn and Co eighteen. months ago. On.. the 20th of: June last I sold to them a. property at- -the Arnold — a ferry and hotel: I was. to have it back if I could \jS.v Ll6O, but there was no agreement to , that effect. At that time I was in the habit of haying. constant communication, with 'Alcorn. an d.Co ; I believe they knew the state of my affairs. Tho.hotel and ferry was sold by memorandum of agreement ; it was not prepared by a solicitor. I have assigned nothing besides to Alcorn and Go. There was. a free bridge over the Saltwater.Creek, but that I was in connectioii with the ferry: I did not transfer to them any back debt due to nic by West ; I have not transferred. that to anyone. I was suing West as agent for Alcom for the rent of the .ferry ; it was Alcprh's : debt not mine^it never was mine. I had built the boat- seized with' Alcorn's money, and gave him a bill of sale,overit. To Mr, Rees ,:■ The rent for which I sued as Alcorn's agent had accrued after he had bought the premises from me; Mr Button- stated that he wanted the,insolvent to furnish fuller, particulars'— to fill iii the present blanks ; the place of abode of all the creditors ; the -nature of the debts and consideration -thereof ; when contracted, &c. An order was made, to adjourn to, convene meeting of creditors. In re W. T. Manuel— Order made to take the case bat of court. In re S.M'Crea Wilson— Mr Rees. appeared for the insolvent. There were no assets, and: no creditors had proveel their claims. Adjourned till next Rearing. ,: In re W. J. Watte-— This was a. creditor's petition, the insolvent liaying left the colony. Mr Hislop, examined by Mr Harvey, stated — I was assistant*6>tlie insolvent. Believed that Mr Watts' brother in Melbourne was a. partner, in the business ; but when I asked the insolventon one occasion he said he was not. I last , saw Mr Watts on Sunday, the 6th of January at Greymouth, on his w.ay to Melbourne^ and cannot tell where he is how. Since he left I have received a letter,; dated Christchurch, requesting to have any letters for him forwarded to his brptlier in Melboiume. When I last saw. Mr -Watts I was not his servant— hot. sinc^ ittie 3rd of January. I had nothing to do with the Dunedin business, I was •only a servant then ; ; it was wound up six months ago. t I saw«the insolvent on the stli of Januarj'. I knew something of his affairs. I knew he was indebted to Stevenson and Banks Bros. , in Melbourne, to the" Commercial Bank of NeW Zealand, in Dunedin, and to E. Reevesrand Co, in Hokitika* I owed this lasfesutu, but he

accepted on my behalf. I don't know the aggregate amount of insolvent's liabilities. He owed Stevenson LSOO, Banks Bros. L7OO, Reeves Ll5O, and the Commercial Bank Ll9, on the sth of January last. Previous to the sth of January I advanced .LIOO to meet Banks Bros's bill— altogether he owed me L 390, less L 169 bill to Isaacs. A few days previous to the sth January, Watts said he would go over to Melbourne to see his brother, and If I would give him a fair price for the place he would sell it to me, He wanted L6OO for the store and land ; I would not give him that, but said | I would give him the cost price of the ! stock, with freight and charges added, with L4OO for the store and L2OO for book I debts. I also pffeved to pay all his small debts due, according to the list he gave me, deducting the amount from the sum I was to give him for the stock. I have not the list, with me, b^it the amount was L 146 10s Od. I took stock and found its value was L2,181 18s Gd. What I had to pay •altogether was L 2,236 4s. We executed the deed of sale on the .sth. .January, and 1 gave Mr Watt's fifteen monthly acceptances of the value of L 149 Is 7d each, dated on the Ord January, and dueuh-the Gth of each month, payable at the-3a«k of New Zealand^ Greymouth. IfipoH t possession- on. the afternoon of the sth', He gave me receipts for the bills, : I next saw Watts the following morning, when he was going to HoKitika, en route for 'Melbourne. I took upon myself his liability to Reeves— not that of the Com- , mercial Ban' , I know William Grahair. I requested him to hold over a case against Watts. The Monday on which Watts promised in my presence to send ? Graham L50, --wsJa the.--asiy.6ii v/hicli he left the Griiy. When I bought the store I did not k'SW Watts was going to Melbourne. Watts never told me he intended ' to pay all his creditors .here, and leave those in Melbourne in the lurch. He said lie was going to pay all when he left. ' I understood his brother-would endorse my bills, and that -. they »would pay all his creditors. On Mr Harvey desiring to examine Mr Graham, who held a power of attorney froni Messrs Stevenson, his Honor desired to know the learned counsel's object in adopting hj£ present course. Mr. Harvey was of opinion that the sale effected by Watts was'fraudulent and void," and he wished to show that -Mr Hislop was present on the 3rd— the day in question, when the promise was made to send Graham the LSO, that Qn the sth Hislop bought the premises, and that before the Monday Watts had left. Mr. Graham was then sworn," and stated that he held a power of iittpwiey from Messrs Stevenson and -Banks Brothers, and liad had a conversation with Watts in Hislop^ presence on tlie 3rd January, when he promised to send LSO on the following Monday (the 7th), on Stevenson's .Recount, and pay witness .an amount due^'fp-him of L 34 odd on a dishonored cheque. Ho did not send the money. ;HMop asked me to give Watts time.- ■■'/"■Watts' promised to let witness have the. money that night, but Hislop said it could not be done, that he should have it on -Monday. Mr Harvey said it was not then in his Honor's pro^ vince to question the validity of the deed of salej and he would ask for, no -order upon it that day, but he would ask his Honor to adjourn' the case, and order the delivery to the» sequestrator of all the 1 books and property belonging to. the insolvent in the possession of Hislop . Order made accordingly. ;