A BANKRUPTCY CASE

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10701, 23 August 1912, Page 5

A BANKRUPTCY CASE

SEQUEL TO BREACH OF PROMISE. CBii Tfilenraoh—Freto Association.) PAHIATUA, Last Night. As a sequel to a recent breach ot promise case at Hamilton, in which the plaintiff was awarded £llO damages, the defendant Rupert Peter Smith, now a labourer residing at Ngaturi, recently filed a petition in bankruptcy. A meeting of creditors in tho estate was held in Pahiatua to-day 1-f-o Mr J, D, Wilw l>c-'puty-offieinl Assignee. The liabilities promise case, were set down at £11!) damages awarded in tho breach of promise case, Mere et down at s£l49 Is Gd, and assets comprising furniture at £!•>, leaving a deficiency of £134 Is Gd.

The bankrupt- being sworn, stated that his principal creditor was Miss Clark, whose claim arose, out or* a l)reaeh of promise case at Hamilton, judgment "for £l4O being obtained against him in March last. Ho could not raise the money to defend the case at Hamilton. A judgment summons was issued against him for the amount duo to Miss Clark, and being unable to meet, it, he consequently filed. Ho was a casual labourer, working at Ngaturi, his average earnings during the winter being from £7 to £!) per month. He had been living in the Xgaturi district about six years, and had been engaged in shepherding for part of the time. Ho had originally owned some horses and also a gig. He sold the last horse about Christmas time. Several years ago he had loaned £SO out at interest. The money was repaid by instalments, the balance about 18 months ago. Asked as to what lie did with the proceeds of his horses and gig and money that bad been repaid him, ho said that he was a married man with a family of four, and had house rent to pay. Fie had been married about twenty months. He had no money now, and could not make any offer to his creditors, Mr Westlako moved that bankrupt be recommended for his immediate, discharge. The bankrupt'? case, ho said, must appeal to every man who had an ounce of humanftv. He thought bankrupt deserved their svrhpathy. Tt was impossible for him with his earnings to make any payments to his creditors. He had knoAvn bankrupt for about ten years, and had an excellent oninion of him. The motion recommending bankrupt's immediato discharge was carried unanimously. The bankrupt was allowed to retain his furniture.