CARNEY’S BANKRUPTCY

Hokitika Guardian, 30 October 1931, Page 6

CARNEY’S BANKRUPTCY

CONVICTION ON ONE COUNT ONLY.

(By Telegraph—Per Press Association)

CHRISTCHURCH, October 29

Giving evidence in the Gui uey bankruptcy base, the accused, Carney, said that before 1925, lie had been five years Managing Director of Arniouy and Coy. in New Zealand, and had been for 30 years, connected with that firht-i wool business. Since 1925, he had been buying wool for clients, which were big firms in England, the Continent, the United States and Canada. Until the depression oi 192930 he had had a substantial number of’ clients. Then there had been a decrease, as some of the firms had gone out of business. In good years his turnover would be £400,000. but in 1930 it had been £123.000. He had never known so long a period of cle-, dining prices. He had made some losses on account of wool being rejected by his clients. The overhead cost of the wool-buying business was heavy. He had made ‘losses on his farm and on share purchases. The accounting work at his office was very involved, and he always considered his accountant capable and straightforward. He himself gave no attention to the accounts. He had always assumed that the balance sheet presented to him shoved the true position of his business. He estimated that his drawings for personal expenses (pocket money), would not exceed £1 a week for Mrs Carney and £1 10s a week for himself. He had hoped in 1929 that the business would improve, but it had not. Eventually, when tlie mortgagee pressed for interest, he could not pay, and the farm which had cost £lB an acre, was sold up for £ll 10s an acre. He had not recognised he was insolvent till 1931. He said he would as soon as he was able, pay all the debts that he had incurred. 'The jury found Carney guilty on the second count in respect of a debt to Rink Taxis, but not guilty on the third count, in respect of a debt to Hurdley and Sons. The jury disagreed on the. first count. Carney was remanded for sentence.