DISTRICT COURT, WESTPORT.

Westport Times, Volume VII, Issue 1084, 27 June 1873, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT, WESTPORT.

(Before his Honor Judge Harvey.) Tuesday, June 24. In Bankruptcy. lit Pell and Atkinson.—This case had been adjourned from previous sitting of the Court to allow timo to trustee iu estate to eomparo accounts and vouchers; and shew wherein alleged falsifications of accounts existed. The evidence of E. Labatte, as accountaut, was taken, und amonded statements produced, but nothing was brought before the notice of the Court definitely

conclusive on the plea alleged, nor was it shown that a further adjournment of the case would enable the trustoe to elucidate the exact circumstances of the petitioner's estate. Certificate granted ; the Court, on the application of Mr Fisber, allowing costs to February 2Gth inclusive.

Be Crowall and Jacobsen.—Mr Shapter for bankrupts—Mr Fisher for trustee, explained that the creditors in the estate had arranged to give time, and that no necessity existed for the petitioners going through the Court. Charles Crowall, on examination said no regular books had been kept in the estate, and that the statement supplied to the Court had been made from memory and by reference to rough memoranda. He attributed bankruptcy to heayy expences for wages and an undertaking to pay E. J. O'Conor for rent of boat one third of the gross receipts received for loading. He and his partner paying all expences, out of the remaining two-thirds. The case was adjourned until the following day for evidence as to preeiso nature of agreement with creditors, and the Court then adjourned further hearing until the next sitting. Be William Morris. —Adjourned application for discbarge. Mr Fisher opposed for official assignee. John Eome, Government road overseer, was examined as to work performed by bankrupt on road contracts and his claim for certain moneys alleged as due thereon. It appears that for extra work performed on the contracts £IOO had heen allow r ed, hut the bankrupt has estimated the value of the work at £7OO. Deductions had also been made by the Provincial Engineer to the amount of £6IS as penalties for non-performance of contracts. Bankrupt examined, said, Stephen Lowin was a creditor for £29 balance of wages. Lowin had been sued as his partner and judgment obtained in the E. M. Court, but bankrupt denied that any partnership had existed. Bankrupt had received £3500 on the contract, and had paid £2OOO to Stitt Brotherr, previous to insolvency, of which £SOO had been repaid him. The further hearing of the case was adjourned until the next day for the evidence of the Provincial Engineer, and in his unavoidable absence was then further adjourned until the next sitting of the Court. Be B. M. Gill.—Bankrupt was examined by Wardrop and Brown and Mees, opposing creditors. The Court expressed disatisfaction with the accounts produced, and bankrupt's statement as to purchase and disposal of tramway and horses, portions of estate, and suspended granting of certificate for two months.

He Stephen Lowin.—Mr Fisher for trustee —Mr Shapter for bankrupt. In examination bankrupt denied existence of any partnership between himself and Morris. A horse and dray owned by bankrupt he alleged had been disposed of to James Holgate, and on production of a letter from Holgato dated subsequently to bankrupt's declaration of insolvency, wherein Holgate wrote that he had told people the horse and dray were his own, and asked instructions from bankrupt as to whether they appeared as assets on his schedule and what he should do with them, bankrupt endeavored to explain the matter by stating that the letter referred to a prior agreement made by him for the purchase from Holgate of the horse for £3O, and an agreement that payment should be made when bankrupt had finished some work that he had in hand. Further hearing of the case was adjourned for the evidence of Holgate. He Etaveneaux. Bankrupt surrendered, aud an order was made for first meeting of creditors. Civil Jurisdiction. Halligan and other v. Eourke and others.—Special case stated for spinion of Court upon question of encroachment, under Groldfields Eegulations. The Court having read the evidence taken in the Warden's Court, gave opinion that the marking oft' by defendants of a portion of the plaintiff's land applied for by them before the application had been beard or decided, was an entry and trespass within the meaning of Section 108, Groldfields Act, 1866, and that the plaintiffs were entitled to an injunction against defendants to prevent further interference.