I.—2a.

Sess. 11.—1891. NEW ZEALAND.

PUBLIC PETITIONS M TO Z COMMITTEE. REPORT ON THE PETITIONS OF REV. J. J. LEWIS AND 515 OTHERS, AND M. TREVEY AND 120 OTHERS OF WELLINGTON. SESSION II., Nos. 48 AND 143.

Brought up 19th August, 1891, and ordered to be printed.

Petitioneks state that they believe that serious wrongs have been inflicted upon one G. W. Ell by the process of the Court of Bankruptcy having been used improperly to stay him in vindication of certain claims urged by him against Mr. Leonard Harper and others. They pray for relief. I am directed to report: — 1. That one George Waldock Ell was formerly connected in business with the Messrs. Harper,, of Christchurch, in cattle, stock, and other dealing. 2. That on ceasing business operations legal proceedings were commenced by Ell against the Harpers and by the Harpers against Ell. 3. That Ell obtained judgment against Harper and Hanmer for upwards of £2,000, for which,, together with costs—in all, £2,400 —judgment was signed in Christchurch, which judgment still stands, but is unsatisfied. 4. That in the action against Ell accounts were taken by the Eegistrar at Christchurch. 5. That the said Eegistrar, in disobedience to an order of the Supreme Court, went behind a settlement of accounts made between the contesting parties in 1873, and brought in a verdict for the Messrs. Harper against Ell for upwards of £2,000. 6. That thereupon Ell appealed against the said last judgment, and the judgment was set aside by the Court of Appeal, and referred back to the Eegistrar (and Accountant) at Christchurch, on the ground that he had no right to inquire into accounts prior to the settlement between the parties in 1873. 7. That when the verdict of the Court of Appeal, under the hand of the Chief Justice, was transmitted to Christchurch all the papers were then sent to the Eegistrar there by Mr. Cooper, then Deputy-Begistrar at Wellington. 8. That on returning to Christchurch Ell received notice from the Eegistrar to attend for the purpose of completing the accounts. 9. That on Ell attending the office of the Eegistrar for that purpose the Eegistrar stated that he had not received the papers from Wellington, though as a matter of fact he had received them, and they were in his office at that time. 10. That pending the proceeding with the accounts, the delay being thus caused, proceedings in bankruptcy were taken against Ell, and he was adjudicated a bankrupt. 11. That the three debts upon which he was adjudicated and kept in the Bankruptcy Court were proofs : (1.) By T. S. Weston, for upwards of £5,000, arising in three years out of an alleged debt of £103, of which Ell states only £17 was due, as the Trustee in Bankruptcy could have satisfied himself if he had ordered Mr. Weston to produce the books. (2.) A proof for £121, by P. T. Haskins, which was subsequently illegally altered to £21 odd, which £21 odd had already been recovered by the said F. T. Haskins against Ell in the Eesident Magistrate's Court at Christchureh, and paid by him, as the Court proceedings showed. (3.) The whole claim proved in this case had been already paid by Ell's Assignee in Bankruptcy under former proceedings against Ell. 12. That the Eegistrar in Ell's bankruptcy refused to go on with the accounts in the second action, and they have never been taken by the Eegistrar to this day, although the whole of the proofs on both sides have been lodged in Court. 13. That two several Commissions have been appointed, on petition by Ell, to examine into this case, the first addressed to Mr. (now Mr. Justice) Conolly, who reported partially in Ell's favour and partially against him ; the second to Mr. C. C. Graham, the Official Assignee in Bankruptcy, who inquired more minutely into the proceedings of the Bankruptcy Court, and who ordered an investigation into the accounts in the second action by Mr. Kember, a certified accountant.