A. PATTERSON'S BANKRUPTCY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 20 November 1907, Page 2

A. PATTERSON'S BANKRUPTCY.

ACCUSED'S EVIDENCE. Per Press Association. Auckland, Tuesday. Patterson, in a statement made in defence of the charges of breaches of the , Bankruptcy Aot, said lie had set up business at IJawcra in 1896 with his brother and oue Craig. Witness and his brother put in £3OO each, and Craig £SOO. About fifteen months later witness bought Craig out for £750. Two years later lie purchased the interest of bis brother for £IOOO. lie was enabled to do this by his landlord advancing him £2ooll at '2O per cent, lie also borrowed £OOO at 7 per cent. The business was then showing a net profit of £IOOO a year clear of his own drawing. Through selling out at Opunake and Stratford he had an abnormally large stock at Hawera. His finances became congest-1 ed. He gave bills to his larger creditors, spread over eighteen months, involving I a payment of £420 per month. He kept these payments up for seven months, when lie found there was difficulty in obtaining supplies. After a year liad elapsed lie had paid £3OOO on the original agreement. He called another meeting of creditors. Warehousemen renewed their bills for two years on the business, agreeing to put £IOOO into the business, and debtor's, wife offering to sell her property. All his wife's property had gone in the business, and his father had lost £6OO. He denied liavin'g sold stock at under cost price. He attributed his failure to the wareliouse-

men refusing to continue supplying goods. Mr. Buchanan, who was to have gone into partnership with him, finally withdrew. JUDGE'S QUESTIONS TO THE JURY. GUILTY ON ONE COUNT. UNABLE TO AGREE ON OTHERS. Per Press Association. Auckland, Last Night. The accused, in reply to his Honor, stated that in April, 1904, he submitted a balance-sheet to his creditors, showing a debit for the six months of £56. He did not balance again. He took a rough stock sheet in September, 1905, but did not complete it. In acting as he did, he thoroughly believed 'that he could get the business back.

His Honor, in summing up, put the following questions to the jury:— (1) Was the bankruptcy of the accused attributable to rash and hazardous speculations? (2) Did the bankrupt in September, 100 IS, not, to the best of his belief, fully and truly discover to the Assignee the sum of £53 12s lid as alleged ill the indictment ? (3) Did the bankrupt, within three years before the commencement of his bankruptcy, fail 'to keep such books of account as are usual and proper in the business carried on by him as sufficiently set forth his business and disclose his financial position! • (4) Did he, between May Ist, 1905, and September 19th, 1006, contract a debt for the sum of £IB7B 2s 5d with Beath, Scheiss .and Co. when lie could not have had at the time the debt was so contracted any reasonable or probable ground or expectation of being able to pay the same as well as his other debts! (5) Did he, between the same dates, and in the same circumstances, contract a debt for the sum of £52 fls 5d with oargood, Son and Ewen? (0) Did he, between the same dates and in the same circumstances, contract a debt for'the sum of £2O 0s 6d with James Hodgson? The jury retired at 12.15 p.m. to consider their verdict, and remained out until 4.10, when they returned to ask whether it was possible to divide the fourth question in any way. His Honor replied in the negative. The whole thing constituted the one offence. The question, was whether the accused, in contracting the debt, knew he was insolvent, or, in other words, that he had no reasonable ground for expecting to be able to pay the amount as well as his other debts when they fell due. Tin. foreman then'asked whether it was necessary that they should be unanimous in theii fludings. His Honor replied in {lie ailirmative, and the jury again retired. They were called in an hour later, when, the foreman, in reply to His Honor, said they had found a verdict of guilty on the third count, but had failed to arrive at any decision on the others. The prisoner was remanded until tomorrow morning.