MEETING OF CREDITORS.

Patea Mail, Volume IX, Issue 1121, 5 December 1883, Page 2

MEETING OF CREDITORS.

Ameeting of creditors of Mr H A Arthur, Egmont Furniture Factory, was held at the Courthouse on Tuesday afternoon, Mr R A Adams in the chair. The following proofs of debt were handed i n; —Gnthrie and Larnach Co, £Bl 8s lOd ; R A Adams, £67 lls 9d ; W G J Arthur, £512 3s 9d ; Elizabeth Johnson Arthur, £IOO ; Patea Mail , £6 2s 8d ; Elizabeth Anne Arthur, £62 10s ; Jas Williamson, £326 5s 5d ; P Moeller and Co, £l2 8? 6d ; Harcourt and Co, £289 14s 3d ; W W Taylor, £l7 4s 2d ; L S Barraclongh, £9 lls 31; J A McKenna, £5 19» 2d. Mr Barton read over the deed, assigning the estate to Mr R A Adams for the benefit of the creditors.

Chairman reported that ho had ,taken stock, and the value was £9l*7 18s 4d, and the book debts (good) about £SO. He did not value Mr Arthur’s furniture. Mr Arthur: Its value a year ago was £2OO. A considerable portion belongs to my son. Mr Webster (Bank of Australasia) appeared as proxy for Messrs Harconit and Co. and other Wellington firms, who, be said, wished the estate to go into bankruptcy. He should oppose, because Mr Arthur sent a stock list to Harcourt and Co, showing £1552, and excluding furniture £2OO of which there is no mention.

- Mr Arthur: At that time I had forgotten that some of it belonged to my son. The cash book shows that I ceived the money for it. Mr Webster; He (Mr also

sent a list of trade debts, and these showed L 2260, which included LISOO to the Bank of Australasia, secured by mortgage. The balance L7GO Was made up by L 250 to Hafconrt and and sums to other firms in Dunedin, Wellington and Wangariuir The only amounts in Patea were R A Adams L 32, and other items, in all abopt LBO. That is he had trade debts L 760 against stock in hand L 1552. Messrs Harconrt and Co took this as.a bona fide trade statement. The sworn statement of Mr Arthur now shows stock LIOOO, furniture L2OO, and book debts L 164, and three mortgages, in all L 1590, giving a total of L 2954. The liabilities shown are: Mortgages, L 1652; trade liabilities, Harcburtand Co, L 270; others, L 429. Besides these there were liabilities to James .Williamson LS26, W G S Arthur L 530, Mrs Arthnr LSO and Miss Arthur LIOO, making total liabilities, apart from mortgages, L 1765 and thus showing a deficiency on the whole estate of L 463. He should like to ask the debtor a few questions.

Henry A Arthur sworn, said in answer to Mr Webster: In my March statement I showed my stock at LISOO. Mr Williamson advanced roe LSOO, but I gave no security except a promissory note. The reason the stock has deprecated to LIOOO, is because it was over valued in March. X did not find that out until a d*y or 1 two ago, I put a fair value on it then, and assume that it was over valued on the former occasion. t Mr Harcourt was fully aware of my ■* son’s claim. I told him in Wellington of it. I offered it to him as collateral security, but he declined it. He was also fully aware of other claims, Mr James Williamson paid me L 500; I show it now L 326 odd. I sold him furniture, L2OO, that is why. Chairman said Mr Arthur offered him to take his debt out in furniture. Cross-examination continued : I also sent LSO of furniture to ray brother ini Wanganui. The sale to Williamson was bona fide , but I cannot say if be would have bought, had I not owed him LSOO. My son’s claim is correct j I could not have got on without him. He has been working for me for years. That appears in my books. Mrs, Arthur’s claim is for money paid to me by her out of money coming to her in * her own right. My daughter’s claim is. for wages. She did almost the whole , of the work of my house and the . upholstery needlework of the business. As to the deprecation of my stock I wish to sny that I was pressed by the Bank of New Zealand, and I sold some furniture at great sacrifice, I think, between January and March this year. To the Chairman; The .account I sent Harcourt was sent in a hurry, and quite surprised me as to the amount of stock it showed I had. To Mr Webster : I have books showing these things. £2OO bad debts, £2OO to Williamson and £3OO at least error in the statement to Harcourt shew the difference in the value of the stock in March and now.

To Chairman: I could not say how much we sold during the last years. I did not put all through the bank. The amounts lately Were not worth paying in.

To Mr Webster: I have no stock account in my books. Ido not know whether the transaction with Mr Cowern took place before or after the March statement. He paid me £l6O and took furniture to the value of say £290 at trade prices. That sale took place atSt. James’ Hall. The bank book shows what became of this money. To Mr Christie ; During the last four years the sales amounted to about £2OOO, and that is an average of £SOO per annum. Besides this son who claims, another has worked lor me, principally at the building. However, I owe him nothing now. I have paid away wages amounting to about £SOO during that time. I could not say how much of the sales mentioned (£2000) was made up out of the shop. I made up over £IOOO of furniture during the four

years. Mr Christie : Your wages seem to have swallowed up. all your takings and

exceeded the value of your furniture manufactured; Mr Arthur: No, that is impossible. Mr Christie: Yonr books don’t seem to have been very well kept. Mr Arthur: No. Mr Christie: The books show that in May, 1888, the wages account was balanced. Afterwards the account begins again showing as far hack ns 1882 and then down to date. Why is that? Mr Arthur: It was forgotten by my son and was omitted by error. Mr Christie: It looks,very bad. It requires explanation. Mr Arthur; It was an error to hare ommilted it. I bare paid my son nothing on account of this. If my son were here he could explain it better than I.

Mr Webster: The bank hook shows £IBOO paid in during eighteen months. Mr Bcavcn; What is your son’s interest in your furniture? Mr Arthur: About £SO. To Mr Webster: The lime books produced arc copies; the originals do not exist. The time is usually kept on a board and planed off periodically. After some further discussion n motion by Mr McKenna, seconded by Mr Williamson, that the deed he assented to was put to the meeting. In favour there voted nine creditors representing £ll7l 6s 7£d ; against, three creditors representing £319 6s lid. Motion carried. Debtor staled that if the hank would withdraw obstruction and., he were allowed to go on ho could offer a composition. . Mr Webster stated that he had made an offer to Mr Arthur but had received no answer. The offer was that if Mr Williamson were prepared to.guarantee the Bank’s advance, it was prepared to accept L2OO, or say LISO loss than the amount of their advance, ami if past interest were paid they would waive their right to foreclose.. That is all the Brink Has announced its intention of doing. Mr Christie moved, “ That the Trustee be instructed to ascertain from the mortgagees what their intentions are with respect to the securities they hold.” by Mr Barraclongh and oarTho meeting then adjourned with a vote of thanks to the chair.