DISTRICT COURT.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 1963, 20 April 1875, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

THIS DAY.

§T (Before His Honor Judge Bsckham.)

The usual sitting of the District Court was opened at the Grahamstown Court House this morning. The only business on the sheet was in bankruptcy juristic-, tiori, disposed of as follows.

BE MICHABL M'MAHON. In this case there was naappearance of applicant and the case was struck out.

BE DAVID PHILP,

David Philp appeared to pass his final examination and obtain a discharge. Mr R. Laishley appeared for the bankrupt. Mr Thomas Macffarlane, Trustee in Bankruptcy, produced the usual statement of assets and liabilities, and his report thereon; and the applicant was in the witness box to answer to th« correctness of the statements, when— Mr Binney said -&ere were creditors present, who wished_io_Qpp # Qae the bankrupt They did not think it worth while to spend money in employing counsel. Bankrupt had filed in Auckland, while the majority of his creditors were resident in Grahamstown. •

His Honor suggested that the largest creditor should take the initiative.

Mr Laishley would like to know specifically who would oppose. Mr Binney said there were three S resent who would oppose—himself, Mr larahall, and Mr Heed, and others would come. : Mr Binney said the--sfeditbrs wanted to show that when bankrupt incurred the liabilities he had no reasonable prospect of paying. Mr Laishley submitted that creditors must prove their claims before they could offer any opposition. He called the Court's attention to the section of the Act bearing upon this.. Mr Tyler said he had appeared up to a certain stage for the opposing creditors, but, as they had just stated, they had spent a certain sum of money, and they didn't want to spend more as they saw no prospect of anything being got out of it. He would refer to the affidavits which had been prepared under his notice. He submitted that the debts had been proved by affidavit in pursuance of clause 207 of the Bankruptcy Act, and no statement of account was necessary. Those affidavits had been taken as proof of debt, and acted upon already at meetings of creditors. Mr Laishley replied, but the Court ruled that clause 207 overruled 204, as it merely provided for an additional mode of proof of debt. Mr Laishley would not press the point, as bankrupt was anxious (o afford every infovrnation. As to bankrupt's filing in Auckland he had been advised to do that by his solicitor—not by him (Mr Laishley). -. ' David Philp, being sworn, deposed— This is my final statement filed in this i matter. It is a full and fair statement of my affairs in every particular—assets and liabilities as existing on the 22nd July, 1874. It is a true statement of every payment and receipt between the 22nd July, 1874, and 22nd January, 1875; made up in accordance with an order of the District Court. I paid between the above dates £2117s 6d for customs duties on furniture and personal effects left by Miss Agnes Hill of Sterling to my two daughters mentioned in the residuary. I paid that sum. At the time I paid that sum I believed myself to be in a solvent condition, but I find now that I was not in a solvent position at that date. The Trustee in Bankruptcy has applied to me to refund that £21 17s Id for the benefit of my creditors, and I am quite agreeable to aid the Trustee in getting the sum reimbursed. With reference to the insurance policy, that policy is nearly 30 years old, and at my marriage in July, 1856, it was handed over to my trustees and made a part of my marriage contract. The sum was £499 19s. If it had been £500 the duty would have been double. The policy was taken out in August, 1846. (Mr Tyler here informed the Court that he was instructed to appear for the opposing creditors.)

For the last nine or ten years I have paid no premiums on this policy. My marriage trustees paid the premium. With regard to the Onehunga property the title was never in my own name. It was made out in the name of my wife when it was bought. It still stands in the same of my wife.

Cross-examined by Mr Tyler—On the 22nd July I was indobted to certain persons .in the sum of £543 11s. At that time I knew I was indebted, but I had no idea it was so much. I often went into my accounts. I troubled myself about them because I knew there were accounts to pay. I expected to pay them partly from my business and also from the increase in value of mining shares which I held at that time—the shares enumerated in the schedule. I did not expect to pay the £543 out of Mrs Philp's money, but out of my business and from ' the mining 'shares and any asasiatance Mrs Philp might give. My wife has had no money since that time. She expected to have money of the amount of £25 or £30 a year as interest. My business was worth about £200 to £250 a year at that time, 22nd July, 1874, and it has cost ac for the last six months about £6 10s. a week for household, education of children, &c. My income fluctuated very much. My wife derived Her income from house property and. Indian stock. It stands in the name of the marriage trustees. I had 37 shares in the Lincoln Castle, for which I £32 7s. 6d. I had 25 Watchman waich cost £24 15s. Tho Lincoln Castle are of no value, nor are they likely to be, the whole property having been sold the other day for £48. (Mr Tyler here went over a number of other scrips, which witness admitted as having been possessed of.) His Honor wished to know whether those shares would not be rather liabilities than assets.

Mr Laishley said they were not put down as assets now.

Cross-examination continued—lbougkt the Shotovers three years ago, and paid a call since. I purchased the West Coasts. On Queen of the Mays I paid calls up to declaration of my insolvency. The Italians I bought moro than a year ago at 3s 6d a share ; I paid the laat call about six months ago. The last I paid on tho Lincoln Castle was about four months ago. They cost 19s per share. Within the last six month• I bought 50 more to equalise them. I gave 11s for Watchman about a year ago, and hare paid calls on them. I bought Black Angel shares a year ago, and gave 15s a share. Hare paid calls on them. I bought White .Hoses twelve months ago at a shilling per share. I owed a broker, Wm. Foughey, £7 for Black Angel shares. lowed Sam. Turtle £19 5s 9d for 30 Central Italy shares and 35 Colibans. Ido not call this trafficking largely in scrip. I bought to hold —not to speculate. At the 22nd July, 1874, while my liabilities were £543, my assets were £689 12s 6d. 123 acres of land at Arariinu were mortgaged to Mr Owen for £60, and was not available for creditors. My house and land in Mackay street were mortgaged, but that property has been available to the creditors, having brought £23 over the mortgage. The furniture put down at £30 I retained by consent of the Trustee in bankruptcy. It is not available for my creditors. The piano was claimed by my daughters, but the Trustee has got it. The three acres of land put down at £3 were available for my creditors. The safe, office furniture, &C the Trustee has taken possession of. It is valued at £20. The safe brought ten guineas at auction. My assets, irrespective of the scrip amounts to £524; the scrip would be of the value of £165 ss4d. ~

(Some discussion here ensued, and after a timejhe itemsjwjere gone through again, seriatum.)

Bankrupt said—The piano was claimed by my daughters because it was a portion their aunt's property. The Trustee took it, because it was not included in the schedule to the residuary. It is valued at £25, but an offer of £15 has been made for it. The value set opposite the mining shares was what I gave for them. The Watchman are worth a shilling a share, ' and the Nonpareils exchanged for Italians are worth 2s 6d a share. I valued the whole lot of shares at £8. They. were held by the National Bank as security, but they, are now available for the creditors as the Bank did not register them. In July 1874 my assets were £689 12s 3d, and I owed £543 lls. I incurred a liability since July 1874, up to the time of my bankruptcy, of £137, besides receiving £118 in cash. . That is, I went through £255 in six months in cash, goods and calls, my income being from £200 to £250 per annum. I did not pay the freight of the furniture referred to, only the customs charges: The furniture was removed from my house by my daughters after the meeting of creditors. I believe it was on a Monday. It was removed without my knowledge. I will not swear that it was not removed on a Sunday evening because I do not know. • There were lots of this furniture not in use, stored in a bath-room. I do not know that the furniture was removed on a Sunday or Monday. I had no conversation with my daughters before its removal. In fact, I did not approve of the removal. My eldest daughter is 16, and the youngest about 10. They might have done this with the knowledge of their mother. I don't know that the furniture was removed after dark on a Sunday.

Mr Laishley protested against the line of cross-examination. The trustee was satisfied that the furniture was the property of the children. Tho Court said it was not exactly relevant, but it was judicious as affecting the credibility and conduct of the witness. Why was it necessary to remove things at night if they were the property of the children. ?

Bankrupt concurred, and said he did not approve 6f mbvirig the things. Cross-examination resumed —My office was distrained upon for rent. Partof that furniture was given to get rid of the distraint as security for the rent. The piano was amongst the things removed. It was not included in my statement of assets I did. not get a discharge from my creditors when I left Scotland. Privately I was not a bankrupt. There ' was a firm I was connected with in business, and they handed over their assets to a trustee. Some of my liabilities have been existing a considerable time. I incurred the" liability (£7O) with Lamb Brothers three years ago. The liability with Marshall I incurred two years ago, £54 14s 6d. (The amended account showed £65, but bankrupt said it included interest). Seven years ago I contracted the liability to Mr Owen. The liability to the Building Society was incurred partly tw» years ago and a small sum nine months ago. The amount to Lamb Brothers was for money borrowed for purposes of my business, as legal manager. I was also snarebroking. Sometimes legal managers have to advance money to companies. I cannot say it is a part of my duty, but it may be sometimes advisable. The money borrowed from Lamb Brothers went in my I

business—perhaps some of it in buying scrip. t ■;■ Mr Lnishley re-examined the bankrupt touching his statement of assets and liabilities, in tho course of which bankrupt deposed that his assets were, he considered, all good, and he was perfectly solvent in June, 1874. He accounted for spending £6 10s per week for the six months by reason of having to spend money on calls, interest on mortgage and fnmily expenses. The Court adjourned till a quarter to 2.

On the Court reassembling at a quarter to 2 o'clock, Mr Laishley applied that the bankrupt should receive his discharge. Mr Tyler for tho opposing creditors objected at length. His Honor reviewed the evidence and arguments of Counsel, and ultimately suspended bankrupt's certificate for eighteen months. Tho Court adjourned.