RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5347, 17 May 1878, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

' Thursday, Mat 16. (Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., R.M.) ALLEGED FRAUDULENT DEBTOR: Laurence Salmon, builder, was charged, on the information of William Berry, trustee, of the property of Laurence Salmon, a debtor, with committing a breach of the Fraudulent Debtors Act, 1876. ' ■ Mr. Ollivier appeared on behalf of the trustees, and Mr. Barton for the accused. This case was adjourned from last week. The first witness now called was William MoYicar, builder, who deposed that he was formerly in partnership with the accused as builders. He received £IOB for work done in connection with certain contracts. There was ultimately a dissolution of partner- • ship, which was drawn up by Mr. Bowden the bailiff. After the deed had been signed Bowden said that he had better keep the document. Its contents were to the effect that Salmon should become responsible for debts against the firm. Witness proposed that as there was a slight deficiency the three partners should go round and see the creditors, and suggested the advisability of paying all the small creditors as far as the money would go, and give separate "hills for what was owing. This proposition was not agreed to. Accused said he would think oyer it. On the 24th January the partners met at the Prince of Wales: Hotel Bowden was also there. The document drawn up by him was read over. There was some conversation relative to its contents. Witness said that there should be a clause stating that accused was to become responsible for all claims to date. Such a clause was then inserted in the document, which was signed and taken away by Bowden, who said that it could be found at the Resident Magistrate’s Court any time within six months. After Bowden left the hotel witness gave the accused £IOB to pay the creditors. Witness took ho receipt for it. The greater portion of the £IOB was received from Chapman. ;By Mr. Barton : I could not say whether Free was one of the- partners who had left Wellington. There had been some ‘little squabbling between me and the accused at the oommeneement of this business. I received all moneys from Chapman throughout. I never gave accused any moneys to pay out before the £IOB. I made out a statement of accounts that were to be paid. I kept the books of the firm at home, but there was a memorandum book kept on the job that everyone could see. I had a meeting with accused and Free at the Victoria Hotel. This witness was examined at great length, but the facts adduced were of no public importance. ■ William Bowden deposed that at present he was a bailiff. At the time he made the agreement mentioned he was a commission agent. He was employed by the accused and two other partners to prepare a dissolution of partnership. He eventually drew up the paper at his office in Willis-streat. Arrangements were then made for witness to meet the parties, at the Prince of Wales Hotel, between 8 and 9 o’clock of an evening of a day mentioned by accused. On arriving there he met accused and his two partners, and road over the document to them. No objection was made to the terms of the document by any of the parties. There was a slight alteration made in the document. There was no objection made by MoYicar to the terms of the document. Witness wrote something on the back of the document ; which was to appear in the newspaper. '' Witness asked who the accounts were to be f»nt to, and somebody said “Salmon.” The document was then signed, and witness left, talcing the document with him. McVicar paid witness for his trouble. Witness made a true copy of the document, and gave it to’.Mr. Blundell for publication. Witness had searched for the original document, bnt was unable to find it. He could not say how the, document was worded. He never mentioned to any person, to the best of his recollection, that he had made an alteration in the advertisement previous to its insertion. ~

By Mr. Barton : There was no conversation took place in my presence relative to money changing hands., I saw no books in the possession of any of them. Robert Greenfield, timber merchant, deposed that' he knew the accused, who was trading as a builder under the firm of McYiokar and 00. The firm was indebted to witness in the sum of £l4O. No part of that sum has ever been paid by accused. The amount is still owing. This was all the evidence. As there was another charge against the accused, he was remanded until Monday next, at 11 o’clock. :