|
[insolvency]
Hart
v. Metcalfe
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Stephen J., 10 November 1840
Source: Sydney Herald,
11 November 1840 [1]
Hart v. Metcalfe. – In this case Mr. W. Hart, Pitt-street, was the detaining
creditor, and Mr. Metcalf, the cabinetmaket, was the insolvent;
Mr. Windeyer for the opposing creditor, examined the insolvent as
to his schedule, and the nature of his transactions with the plaintiff,
when his Honor considered that it was his duty to remand the insolvent
for a few days.
Willis J., 13 November 1840
Source: Sydney Herald, 14 November
1840
Mr. Metcalf, cabinetmaker, who had been remanded
on the preceding Wednesday, in order to enable him to amend his
schedule, which had been objected to by his opposing creditor.
Mr. Hart the auctioneer, was again brought up, when it appeared,
that he had merely signed a carte blanche schedule, and given
it to a young man to fill up. From the statement made by Mr. Hart’s
counsel, it appeared that the insolvent had told his opposing creditor
that he would never pay him, and would give him all the trouble
in his power. His Honor stated, that it was nothing less than trifling
with the court, to put such a schedule on the file as there was
not a word of truth in it; and recommended him to make a settlement
with Mr. Hart, as there was no excuse for any person who had his
health in this colony not being able to pay his lawful debts. His
Honor also informed the insolvent, that it was his intention, whenever
he found parties insulting the court by putting false documents
on the file and swearing to them, to deal with them in such a way
as was most likely to suppress such an infamous practice. The insolvent
stated, that he had no means of paying the debt, amounting to nearly
£60. His Honor said, that it was evident that he could find the
means of paying [LINE OMITTED] as liable as ever to pay the debt;
under all the circumstances of the case, he should formally remand
him for fourteen days, if, in the mean time the insolvent could
enter into any arrangement with his opposing creditor, to pay by
instalment or otherwise, his discharge would not be opposed; he
considered it very bad taste, if not worse, on the part of the insolvent,
to twit his creditor in the manner he had done by telling him he
had consigned over all his effects, and would never pay him a farthing.
The insolvent said, he though that his son, the commander of a vessel
in port, would become security for him during the day. The opposing
creditor said he had no objection to such an arrangement, and if
it was done he was willing to forego the expenses of the two appearances;
if the arrangement is not entered into in fourteen days, his Honor
will entertain the question of costs.
Counsel for the plaintiff
Mr. Windeyer, attorneys Messrs. Chambers and Thurlow; counsel retained
for the insolvent Mr. Foster, attorney Mr. Hayward. The court then
closed.
Notes
|