DISTRICT COURT, WESTPORT.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 905, 26 December 1871, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT, WESTPORT.

IN BANKRUPTCY. Friday, December 22. (Before Mr Justice Ward.) IN RE JOHN CURTAIN. The insolvent came up for his final hearing and discharge. Mr Shapter, on behalf of the creditors opposed. His Honour adjournnd the final hearing until the next sitting held at Charleston. Saturday, December 23. in re john rodden. The bankrupt came up for final hearing and discharge. John Braithwaite, the trustee in the estate, opposed. The bankrupt was examined, with a view to show that an alleged transfer of certain valuable mining property to Wardrop was not bona fide and that he (the bankrupt) had all along held an interest in the property. By Braithwaite : I never employed Stephen Butler to work for me. It is an understanding amongst us that all claimholders should assist each other in the event of any unusually large boulders or logs being deposited on the ground by floods. I never had Butler employed for two or three weeks. All the gold that has been got out of the claim has been sent to Wardrop. I have squared my account with Wardrop's partner amounting to £9 10a 6d. I have got goods since for my wife and family, but I cannot say whether they were supplied by Wardrop or his partner, or by both. I have no other property than that contained in my schedule of assets. My wife and little boy have made a sort of a garden which I do not think is a quarter of an acre in extent. The hut I occupy belongs to Wardrop. I know of no owner for the garden. I have not got a claim in Prospector's Creek. There are two boxes there, but I have relinquished all ownership in them, and they belong to anyone. I have not been in the habit of drinking and gossiping instead of working. 1 am not ashamed of my past eonduct. I was not in the ,habit of stopping at home and nursing a baby whilst my wife and child were working in the creek. I worked hard, and it was necessary that we all should do so to enable us to. get a living. The trustee applied that any property of the bankrupt not contained in the schedule should be vested in the trustee. I His Honour informed him that all property under the Act was vested in the Trustee, with the exception of certain household effects.

The trustee then stated that he opposed the bankrupt's discharge in consequence of his dishonesty, intemperance, and generally lazy habits. With the assistance of the Eesident Magistrate at Westport, the insolvent had been successful in defrauding his creditors. The bailiff had seized on.his behalf, but the property was taken but of his hands by the Magistrate. . His Honour: The insolvent defrauded you with the assitance of the Eesident Magistrate who ordered your bailiff to withdraw ? I cannot listen to these allegations, but I can take evidence. If you wish to give' evidence you can do so.

John Braithwaite: I am a storekeeper residing at the Northern Terraces. Eodden has been dealing with me for several years. He has been working in two or three claims. I supplied him with water to work the claims, with money and provisions. At last he turned idle, became intemperate, and would net work. He owed me £SO. After washing for ten weeks he broupht me £5, and said that it was all the money he had. I told him that would not do, that he could pay more, and that I should require more. He then refused to pay, and told me to get the money the best way I could. I consequently sued him in the Eesi-' dent Magistrate's Court for fifty odd pounds, and obtained judgment. I obtained a warrant of distress, and placed the bailiff of the Eesident Magistrate's Court in possession of the insolvent's property. The insolvent, whilst my action was pending, made a transfer of his property to a butcher named Wardrop, to whom he was indebted in the sum of £9 10s 6d. The transfer was applied for in the Warden's Court, and in that Court "Wardrop obtained his right to hold the property. Wardrop then brought an action against me for illegal seizure, and the Eesident Magistrate decided that my bailiff must withdraw in favor of Wardrop ; although Wardrop swore in this box that he held the property on the following terms, namely, that aa soon as Eodden had succeeded in settling with me he should have the property back again. His Honour: Is this hearsay evidence, or were you in Court when Wardrop gave that testimony 1 Wituess: I was in Court your Honour. Eodden has since been working the dam through a wages man, and the assets have become almost diminished to nothing. His Honour: Put the bankrupt in the box. (To Bankrupt) —What was the date of your transfer to Wardrop ? Bankrupt: I think it was the end of July or beginning of August. The Clerk of the Warden's Court was requested to produce the register of transfers. After an ineffectual search he stated that his impression that a transfer had been registered was incorrect. Wardrop produced transfer of a dam from Eodden, and applied to register it. He (the Clerk) could not do so, as Eodden's certiticato of registration for the dam had lapsed. The difficulty was got over by Wardrop applying for a renewal of the registration, his name being substituted for that of Eodden. His Honour: Was it before or after you received the summons that you transferred to Wardrop ? Bankrupt: I believe it was after, your Honour. His Honour : The bankrupt's certifidate will be suspended for three months. IN RE THOMAS JOHNSTONE JONES. Mr Pitt applied on behalf of the above for a declaration of the complete execution of a certain deed of arrangement. He added that the case was one of those very rare ones in which all the creditors in the estate had received 20s in the pound. His Honour said that counsel could take the required order. IN RE ALFRED JOSEPH BROWN. Mr Pitt, on behalf of the creditors, made a similar application as the foregoing. He stated that the requirements of the Act had been oom plied with. Order granted. IN RE ENTERPRISE QUARTZ MINING COMPANY. A winding-up order in the above had been granted, and the official agent had filed accounts, showing the amount of contributions from the shareholders and a list of claims.

Mr Pitt, as the petitioning creditor, objected to the majority of the claims that had been presented to the official agent. His Honour: There is your own claim, Mr Pitt. I presume you will raise no objection to that. Mr Pitt: Certainly not; neither do I object to the claim of John Hughes, for £33,0r the charges of the official agent. Nor would I object to the payment of £3 3s to my friend, Mr Home, for legal advice, were it not that the directors applied for that advice in order to deprive me of my rights as a judgment creditor. I must object to that claim being recognised by the official agent, and all the other claims that were paid by the directors in full subsequent to the winding-up order being granted by the Court. His Honour was of opinion that the claims could be recognized by the Official Agent. It was not improbable that the parties to whom the payments had been made by the directors had consented to refund the money, knowing that the payments had been made in error; and unless there were some other objection to the claims he must decide that they be recognized. 'Mr Pitt's claim could be in no way prejudiced, since if they had not been paid by the directors the claimants would have been entitled to come in and receive their proportion. \ The Official Agent stated that the ouly objection he had to the claims was that they had not been attested in conformity with the Act. His Honour: That will of course bo necessary before any payment is made. The Official Agent then applied to make certain amendments in the accounts presented to the Court, which His Honour grauted ; and it was decided that one month from that date should be allowed to enable the various contributories to pay their proportion under the winding-up.