DISTRICT COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XIII, Issue 1621, 15 October 1873, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

Tuesday, October 14. (Before his Honor Judge Harvey;): MISDEMEANOR UNDER THE BANKRUPTCY '• ■ . ■ ACTS.-- ■■.■;:■. > The adjourned charge against James Hayes of having falsified his books,' so as to conceal the true state of his affairs from his creditors, within three months of his being adjudicated a bankrupt, was ( again 'called on. The case had been ; adjourned because one of the jurors had stated that he was. under age. •Evidence on, the point was taken, and after a legal argument, the Judge ; ordered :a fresh jury to be empannelled to try the .cause; \\. As on the previous day, the right of challenge was very freely exercised, and « hen the panel was exhausted, Messrs Kilgour and Austin were appointed to try whether; the jurors challenged for the Crown iwere or were not indifferent to the prisoner. They found that Michael O'Callaghan and Patrick Hanney were not indifferent to the prisoner, and their services were dispensed with. W. H. Lahman was challenged for n»t being naturalised, which be admitted, ai*d was discharged. Daniel M'Kinty was challenged because he had been offered. as bail for the prisoner. He replied that if his name had been offered as bail it had been donfl without his consent, as he never gave any person authority to do so. Evidence was then given that the juror's name, h;id f been submitted to the Resident Magistrate as bail for the prisoner. M'Kinty explained that he had been asked to go bail for the prisoner, both by, his brother John and by Pat Hanney, but he neither; consented nor refused. <He did not think he had ever ! exchanged ''a word" withTthe prisoner in his life.-. The Tryers found that he was qualified to sit on the jury, ; and he took his seat. ; The case ,was then proceeded with, and 1 the v 'evid6tiW^f' Harry Kenrick, clerk of

the District Court, and trustee in the prisoner's estate, was again taken. Patrick Ryan, lately storeman to the prisoner at Reefton aud. Ahaura, repeated his evidence, which has several times been published, as to his falsifying an entry by prisoner's directions, of goods which were sent, to., Richard Reeves "to. be sold by auction, but re-entered in the name of James Hiiyes for the Ahaura house. He believed that the prisoner and Reeves had ~a squaring up, bu t nothing regarding it appeared in.theboqks. - ! , This was the prosecutor's case. . , ; ; Mr.i South here galled for 4he first depositions of the witness Ryan, and'after' being ; read {they. ;were r by 'him' ? put in as evidence. ...Mr,; Staite applied: that some 1 of the witnesses named_upon the indictmient should be called for cross-examination,; -• 'The Grown Prosecutor' said 1 their evidence was not requisite^ and declined to call them. ' • -' J< • Q ]„, After . discussion, however, , ,Mr South called Mr R: J. 'Reeves, the witnessjreferred to, and said he only tendered him' for cross-examination by the counsel tfor the defence. H. J: Reeves/ examined by Mv.Gvvinness : I' am an auctioneer in Reefton, and have received a subpoena to give evidence against the defendant. During the last 18 .months I have at different periods sold goods for the defendant. ?!■ once received some goods from Hayes at the Oddfellows' Hall, 'which is about 120 yards from Hayes's' store. They came to me. in bags, boxes, and old cases. ITreceived the last 'lot for auction some time in May last: I had ai, squaring: up with Hayes/sbme' time in 'May or June, when Ryan-was present!':' Hayes 1 said; he wanted money to' meet his engagements, as his , credit "wasstppped;at. the Bank of New South Wales. *^Thejre' were, reserves tpm':ifl;'ii^gob^''ljiii|l^||^'tiicl not fetch! vp 3 or 'ne.arly so 'to' the /reserve price, . I did' not s|ll. (X ' What'^were ;'npt sold I kept;:j r: Snmei r ;,time,;a^r ; .May'. :^3,..Bayes aske/d'm&fn^ them for HaifrOunce ior/i3Lhaura.t): I igave them to .him. \. The goods were- mostly old surplus stock, t^with a few good lines among thern.,.-, This method oIE raising money is' hot (; an r unusual biie/iio j b'e 'adopted jby' tradesmen. , The goods were sent in about dußk, but that is- no uncommon time for goods to be sent: M. an auction room,! as few tradesmen! car'e.;;abbut :! letting such transactions be made r too public. Ryan was present at' the' last settlement. Generally goods are sold for cash. Hayes and I went into the?. accounts and settled all matters. .When Ryan /.was -with'/Hayea he was not always sbberl , He .would be sober ; for ; weeks,- and then drunk for weeks. I knew Ryan at Ahaura, as well as at Reefton. When he came to Reefton he was almost imbecile. He was sp : ' up to the time of > Hayes's ; assignment, j I recollect thearrival; of -the Trustees on|a Saturday night at Reefton. I got instructions from them to look after Alcorn's waggon, and to 'see : if any goods were in it. I did so, but did not find any.' : ' ir ' '"'"-- '■-.■ ■■■ ' /;;:;■ \ f Mr Guinness having declined to call any witnessess for the defence,. ) Mr South; addressed the jury for the Crown, and urged uppathom the necessity .of adhering to' the. original: depositions hi llyan, and especially to bear in mind the alteration of the date of the item of July, 1872* when he. (Ryan) was not in Hayes's employiiient;/ thai this was the gist of rthe , whole case/and bore strdhg" r and /evident marks .of rfraud ; wp'on it ; that such evidence was so clearly proved that it haidbecome; stereotyped in^liis mind."' He did- not- . consider^ Mr ißeevesV evide'nc|e was at all necessary, nor did •he' ;: wish to burden 4hejcase with extraneous matter. He believed Ryan had often been drunk*, but as tp ; his. being imbecile ;the:entries in the book entirely ■ „4.ispr.Qved-.that... r ,]!^r PatrJck;Ryan i was.an.Jaccpmrtodatin^ witness, and l he had proved himself such, but the correct caligraphy, .the orderi in. which his b,ppks!^.ere kept, entirely' disproved thb charge : 6f imbecility. The leaniejl gentleman spoke. strongly: upon the fradqlent appearances of the case, and the great comm.erciai importance " attacliing io it |; • were" ' this prisoner '; to be , ' : allowed ; tp . escape, from, .punishment, .all the safe- . 'guards; : for,'" commercial probity wjquld be swept away. He alluded to the pbl,oqu|r and imputations-cast upon Mr ELenrick in acting up to his duty, and defended Mr Kenrick's 1 conduct in the 'strongesl; manner. The learned counsel wound -up by saying that the bankrupt caused his chiefs clerk to make a fraudulent entry for the' purposes of cheating his creditorsl and that this fact could not be gainsaid: Whatever that very unsatisfactory witness mieht afterwards say was 1 to be received with great caution. His first statement was given' voluntarily, when ; he was in his proper senses,' and when he '^tated himself to' be so. It was given ;; in^i,h4 presence of gentlemen who saw no.' signs of imbecility, arid such a' cjharge cciuld. not be ' sustained. Ryan » !was :: :Vttien.'< ciuite\ in his proper senses! ;; '.f r.^V; >■ ; •. ■■■;/ ■ Mr" Staite, for the defence, addressed the jury, and said that the; reaspnof'the counsel for the defence 'calling" no wit 4 nesses was, that the Grown had toot made] out a case sufficiently strong to be put before a jury.-' As ! for ; the witness Reeves,^ it was only. ; after iconsultatiPri with, Mr Guinness that , they, had , decided to 1 him" with regard to the ! evidence of Ryan. Mr South had - stated! that it was only upon it that the prisoner could be i convicted. ? He (Mr Staite) . contended that ., jßyan's :evi-; dence was;' of a most ; untriistwoi'thy character, and was only the evidence of ' an i almost ; "unprecedented "drunkard ;: that he^igyan) had committed acts which! were sflch-ashad to be : brought under the notice of a lawyer, and thatthe exoneration for suchacts had to be drawn. W W that lawyer. "Moreover,. that the offence which is said to have been committed would not have been considered an offence had it been committed a month earlier ; : that; .-the. prisoner was not a bankrupt; .that proceedings were being taken to, annul the steps taken to declare him such; that he had made a deed of assignment, and had handed over all his .property to his creditors '; that his absconding could not be construed as an act of fraudulently attempting to' evade "payment of his liabilities, seeing he had ab;eady, handed ; over all his property to his creditors. He disputed, the opposing creditors' right to appear against the defendant, as by their acceptance of the deed of assignment they had released the defendant from, all liabilities due tp ! them^and in proof thereof he. .-..(Mr. §t^ite), now produced the. f depd. jliegarding^ the entries in Hayes's book, he characterised them as most,'unre!jabje, ; and;that i th.e 1 entry of May 23, WS, could not be asaumed to

be a correction ; Ryan at one time said it was, then he afterwards contradicted himself, and finally he said he was not sober. By the reserve price being put upon the goods, according to the evidence of Mr Reeves, it may be clearly assumed that no fraudulent intent could^be^ proved against" Hay es. as if frauSulently inclined he, would have realised uppnythem for whatever they would fetch at( auction. His Honor then summed,up r and' Stated tKeTthree points unaer^wEicE^lKe^information was ■ laid. . jfle also alluded to Ryan_as a most "disreputable witness, but that in his original- Repositions his evidence wasj&x||icit f etwiiE!h as to the dates, and in this he was ; c6iscpb6rated by Reeves. There was no entry as far as was known to -the ; Court of .any ;Bquaring 7 up of accounts , between • Reeves V an'cU Hayes. .That the goods were : sent to Reevjes, on May 23, and that afterwards, stich entry was made as a .debit,, entry to James Hayes, Anaiira, J was , clearly, proved. This was proved by Ryan'an'd .by^e^vies, and by the book itself, andWwa% lorWjury to say if the ;entry -was made^witK intent to defraud.^ The- entiy 6i> 18^2 ffdr 1873 might have-been a mistake of Jiyan's, but there still remains the fact of no heading having then, been written of any .person ..to whbm.jthe gqpds; were, sold; '.ThVjWant ' of siich.headih^ an intent to deceive^ / It^b|dd ojijy.jjrejer to this .^particular transaction , with Reeves, aiuthere nqotfier ,entry to" Mm. during „ail,that mprith^ and rtbii^nio^th. it has been fully agreed Dy.,bqi;h^paitiM he received goods. After his Honor had read a portion of Mr Reeves's evidence, the jury retired, and, after, being closeted for; one Hour, returned ;a,Yerdict/ofnot}guilty. Mr Guinness applied for a copy of the depositions' of witnesses to be examined upon ,the ,^harge"fo be triedjtp-day.. This^^ CrowhTrosecuter "3irected to furnish them. »^ :^.^^: ;