W. Williams's Affairs.

Patea Mail, 19 June 1882, Page 3

W. Williams's Affairs.

At the District Court, New Plymouth, Mr W. Williams was examined as to his bankruptcy, upon an order of the Court obtained on petition from Mr T. North, a debtor. Mr Hughes, with Mr Barton, appeared for Mr North, Mr Govett for the debtor, and Mr Richmond to watch the proceedings on behalf of the trustee. Mr Hughes (as reported in the Herald ) said that the proceedings were taken under section 173 of “ The Debtors and Creditors Act 1876.” The debtor had been sued in the Supreme Court by Mr North, who recovered judgment against him for £1242 13s Id. Upon this the debtor filed a deed of arrangement with his creditors in the District Court of Patea on the 31st May, 1881. It appeared to Mr North that the terms of the arrangement were not satisfactory, and he took proceedings to have the debtor adjudicated a bankrupt. On the 9th July, 1881, an order of adjudication was made by the Court at Patea. On the same day the debtor filed a second

deed of arrangement, but none of these deeds were completed, and the proceed* ings in bankruptcy therefore were under the order of adjudication. It became known to Mr North that there had been a transfer of part of the property in the debtor’s estate within three months of the order of adjudication, and there appeared to be no good reason for this transfer of property, Mr North applied to the trustee to have the debtor examined, in order that the whole circumstances attending this transfer of property might be gone into. Tho trustee examined the debtor, but refused to allow either Mr North or his solicitor to be present. Subsequently, the trustee sold the estate to a person who had formerly been in the debtor’s employment, for tho sum of £7OO. These proceedings did not satisfy Mr North, therefore he had applied to have the debtor

examined. William Williams deposed : I am the debtor in this case, I live in Patea. I entered into business in 1868 as a blacksmith. I left business and gave it to my two sons when the youngest became of age about three years ago. I was also engaged as native interpreter. My sons had been working in the business as blacksmiths and wheelwrights before they became of age. I gave them no formal transfer of the property, but I simply told them they could have it as they had worked all their lifetime with me since they bad left school, and I thought they were entitled to it. I made up no statement of assets and liabilities of the business. It was quite solvent at that time. The public with whom I dealt knew that I had transferred the business to them. My sons advertised the firm as » Williams and Sons.” I did not think it was necessary to advertise that I had transferred the property to my sons. It was understood that my sons were to pay the outstanding liabilities of the firm, and that they should receive all the book debts. At the time I handed the property over to my sons it was a leashold property. I believe I had given a bill to Mr McGuire for section 28, block 40, and my sons met the bill. There was no arrangement made as to my sons paying rent to me for the business premises. They never paid rent as I gave them the premises. The examination was continued on Friday, and again to-day.