ARCHIBALD BENJAMIN BULTITUDE, WILLIAM RUMMELL, Deception > bankrupcy, 28th June 1880.

Reference Number: t18800628-429
Offence: Deception > bankrupcy
Verdict: Guilty > no_subcategory
Punishment: Imprisonment > no_subcategory
Navigation: < Previous text (trial account) | Next text (trial account) >

429. ARCHIBALD BENJAMIN BULTITUDE (28) and WILLIAM RUMMELL (28) , Unlawfully omitting to disclose to their trustee in bankruptcy goods to the value of 8,000l. and 1,330l. 8s. 8d. and other sums; also to obtaining goods on credit within four months of their bankruptcy.

SIR H. S. GIFFABD, Q.C., MR. BESLEY, and Mr. BIGHAM Prosecuted;

MR. WILLIS, Q.C., Defended.

HENRY ALFRED STACEY . I am a superintendent of records in the London Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the defendants' liquidation (The petition was filed December 30th, 1879, the insolvency was for 9,000l., there was no statement of affairs)—I also produce the file in the defendants' bankruptcy. (The petition teas dated 19th January, 1880, the adjudication January 27th, amount of debts l,330l.)—Mr. Leslie, who had been the receiver, was appointed trustee on 13th February—both the bankrupts were examined on the same day—I find here a transcript of the shorthand notes of their examinations. (Read).

HENRY SMITH . I am clerk to Mercer and Mercer, solicitors for Phillips and Webb—I produce a writ issued at their instance against Bultitude and Rummy, which I served upon Rummell on 17th December (This was for 200l. 2s. 2d. as holders of a cheque on the Alliance Bank)—I endeavoured to wire Bultitude at his place of business, Wellclose Square—I went there four times, but never effected service—proceedings were restrained by order of the Bankruptcy Court—this is the order (produced).

JAMES HENRY KNIGHT . I am common law clerk to Johnson and Apley, of Austin Friars, solicitors to Messrs. Risley and Burgman, of South Wales—they had in March, 1879, a claim against the defendants for 535l. 1s. 5d. for goods sold and delivered—I produce a writ issued March 18th, 1879; the action was deferred up to the first week in November, and ultimately the plaintiffs consented to take less than the sum claimed—150l. 14s. 8d. was the amount paid us—we received some bills of exchange, but none of them

were met—I produce a judgment for the balance on 17th December, execution issued on the 18th, and the Sheriff was in possession at the time of their filing the petition in liquidation—nothing was realited on the judgment.

Cross-examined. I believe the defendants pleaded that the credit had not expired at the time the action was brought, and they pleade a counter-claim—Mr. Dutton told me that it would be necessary to examine witnesses in India in support of his case—I have not got his letters here (The letters were sent for).

WALTER FREDERICK CRANE . I am clerk to William Beck, solicitor—William Wilson, of Jubilee Street, Mile End, was a clerk of his in December last—I produce two writs we issued against the defendands—I issued this one (for 250l.) on Rummell on 17th December; I also served this one on the 19th (for 255l. 2s.)—we took out a summons, and both actions were restrained by the Bankruptcy Court.

FREDERICK HOWARD LOVELL . I am clerk to Jenson and Nicholson—the defendants owed the firm money, and gave an acceptance for 136l. 8s. on September 12th, 1879, which was dishonoured—we wrote to them, and afterwards issued a writ and instructed solicitors.

JAMES BOBERTSON . I am manager to Mr. Bruce Dick, a manufacture, trading as H. E. Briggs and Co.—their first dealing with the defendants was on the 1st November, 1879, and the last 19th December, 1879; the total was 1,330l. 8s.8d., none of which has been paid—the last delivery was 73l. 2s.; this is the account (produced) of the goods delivered—in February this year I went to Sharp's Wharf, Wapping, and saw three pipes of oil, price 37l. 15s., which had been delivered to the defendants on 12th December, 14 barrels of rape oil delivered to them on 8th December, and a barrel of lubricating oil on 14th November, value altogether about 120l.

Cross-examined. Some of them were sent in on written orders which I have not got—I think the goods delivered on the 19th May have been ordered a fortnight before they were delivered by a carman—the goods delivered on 12th December were ordered on 11th December by this note (produced).

Re-examined. Part of the goods were delivered to their own carman, and the other portion next morning; we should not have delivered them if we had known that there was a man in possession—we had no idea that there was anything wrong with the firm.

WILLIAM STMONDS . I am a colour manufacturer, of Old Ford—I supplied to the defendants on 27th November, two casks of chrome value 9l. 13s. 9d., two casks of Brunswick green, 9l. 11s. 3d., and two casks of China red, total 25l. 9s. 8d.; and on 5th December Prussian red, 11l. 7s. 3d., and 12 boxes emerald green, 12l. 1s. 3d.—my man has seen them at Sharp's Wharf.

EDWARD LUCAS . I am packer to Mr. Symons—I packed the goods which were delivered to the defendants on 27th November and 5th December—I have since seen at Sharp's Wharf a cask of Chinese red, two casks of green, and two casks of chrome.

HENRY COLES . I am general manager of the oil department of Somers and Co., 95, Bishopsgate Street—in the beginning of December the defendants owed us 150l. 15s. 1d.—there was a balance of account due, and we were pressing them for payment, but they put us off saying that we

should have our money later on—about 5th December they sent us a postdated cheque which I returned, and insisted on having the money or the goods—after that they delivered 10 barrels of rape oil and 9 barrels of varnish at Sharp's Wharf in our name, in part payment of our claim—we got the wharfinger's receipt for them—this (produced) is the receipt for part of them—the rape oil is supposed to be worth 50l. and the varnish 90l. or 100l.

Cross-examined. We had sold goods to them before, and taken goods in satisfaction of our claim; altogether we have had four transactions with them—the goods they sent us were things which we required in the way of our trade; we deal largely in them—I am not certain that we did not receive an invoice for the oil when we spoke about it, we gave them the full price; the transaction was perfectly regular so far as we were concerned—we knew what we were purchasing and getting from them in December—I considered that I held the varnish as security, as we do not do in varnish—I very likely threatened them with proceedings—I told them to send the goods to Sharp's Wharf in our names, and they did so—it was our suggestion—it is known as a place where goods of that sort are warehoused.

Re-examined. We do not deal in refined oils, but we buy and sell—this (produced) is a press-copy from our books—the balance was struck on 3rd December, 153l. 3s. 1d.; the "By 10 barrels of rape oil as security" was written since they have been bankrupt—our books are not here. (The books were sent for.)—we have no warehouse, we send things to Sharp's Wharf—sending there in our name is sending to us—they deal with them by the documents of title—I have not got the wharf receipts here—the only writing between the prisoners and us was the receipt from Sharp's Wharf.

GEORGE HENRY LANK . I am in the employ of Brandrum Brothers, oil and colour merchants, of Philpot Lane—we had had transactions with the prisoners, and on 10th September they gave us a cheque, which was dishonoured—I was present on 18th November when Bultdtude gave an order for five tons of white lead value about 130l.; we delivered part on the 19th which came to 49l. 1s. 3d., but we had our suspicions and delivered no more—we were waiting till we got the money before we sent in any more goods—they were bound to pay in 14 days but we did not get it, they made some excuse—I did not see them before the filing of their petition—the amount is still unpaid.

HENRY OCTAVIUS MORDAUNT . I am an oil broker of St. Helens Place, in partnership with my brother—we have had two transactions with the prisoners, one about 18th November for turpentine, and one on the same day for petroleum oil, amounting to 69l.—the account was to be paid in 14 days—who wrote for it and sent clerks, but have never received a penny—we issued this writ. (Dated 23rd December.)

FREDERICK ALBERT GLAESER . I carry on business as Conrad William Schmidt—on 22nd October I sold the defendants some varnish for 178l. 3s., this is a copy of the invoice I rendered, and I got their receipt for the goods—I had no transaction with them before or since—the goods have not been paid for.

Cross-examined. They were sold on a three months' acceptance in October, which would not mature till January.

THOMAS BEARD . I am an oil merchant of 6, Great St. Helens—on 18th November, 1879, I supplied the defendants with 10 barrels of petroleum, and five barrels of turpentine, value 33l. 11s. 6d. at 14 days' credit—they have not been paid for—my solicitors issued a writ.

Cross-examined. I had done business with them once or twice before and they paid me—it only amounted to 50l.

HARRY WEBB . I am one of the firm of Phillips and Webb, oil merchants—on 5th November I sold the defendants, I think it was 5 tons of linseed oil, value about 150l., on the understanding that they were to be paid for in 14 days—they were delivered immediately after the date of the sale—I pressed for payment, but could not get it, and took proceedings—we have never received anything—we had had prior transactions with the defendants, for which they paid—we had agreed to give them credit to the amount of 1,000l.—we commenced business with them in April, 1879—a bill of sale for between 400l. and 500l. which was due in December was dishonoured.

Cross-examined. We took the bill up ourselves—we knew that it would not be met, and we arranged with the prisoners to take it up—we sold them about 1,500l. worth of goods, besides this bill and the parcel in November, inclusive of the amounts for which we have had to sue—it is most unusual in that business to get money on stock to carry it on—they told me that they were in difficulties and could not sell their stock, and I said if they were perfectly honest in their intentions I should be glad to advance money on the stock—that was the day before the bill fell due—Bultitude came to me.

Re-examined. The entire sum due to us now is 555l.

THOMAS DAVIS . I am in the employ of Hadfield Brothers, varnish manufacturers, St. James's Road, Holloway—the prisoners purchased of them varnish amounting to 241l. 14s. 7d.—the invoice is dated 19th September—there had not been any previous transactions—two acceptances were given, one dated 19th September for 100l. at three months after date, and the other dated 22nd September for 125l. 12s. 1d. at three months—they were both returned dishonoured, and we have never been paid anything.

HENRY JAMES HUNT . I am in the employ of Wilkinson, Huzard, and Clark, varnish manufacturers—on 11th, 15th and 16th September we supplied the defendants with varnish value 73l. 6s. 6d., 100l. 16s. 6d., and 28l. 5s, on four months' bills, which were dishonoured.

WILLIAM WILSON . I am a paint manufacturer of Jubilee Street, Mile End—I have from time to time sold goods to the defendants, to the amount of about 1,135l.—on 19th and 21st November I sold them 500 firkins of red lead, and 500 other firkins of the same value—I have never been paid—I had a cheque, but it was dishonoured on 6th December.

Cross-examined. The order must have been given previously, because we should take some time to pack them—they were for a shipping transaction—we delivered them on board some vessel.

Re-examined. We had instructions from the defendants to deliver them on board a certain steamer, but we sold the goods to them and waited instructions for shipment—it came I think by letter, but I was very unwell at the time.

CHARLES EAWSON . I am clerk to Aldridge and Co., East India merchants—we received this order from the defendants for 1,000 firkins of red lead, which were shipped to customers abroad, and I got the mate's receipt for the defendants—the price was 17l. 7s. 6d. per cwt., subject to 2 1/2 discount; besides that, the defendants agreed to allow one per cent, for cash—I paid by this cheque ("This was for 446l. 15s., dated 29th November, 1879, endorsed "A. Bultitude and Co.")—there were one or two other small matters included.

Cross-examined. They delivered all those goods under an order which I are them, between 3rd and 10th October—the market had gone up quite 10s. between the order being given and the goods being delivered—I had had several transactions with them on the same terms, allowing the extra one per cent.

WILLAM THOMAS ATKIN . I am bookkeeper to Mr. Wilson—I remember the sale of the red lead referred to in these invoices—this is the ledger—I produce a cheque for 250l. on the Alliance Bank, dated 6th December, 1879, which was given by the defendant in part payment for the red lead—it was returned marked "Refer to drawer."

J. H. KNIGHT. (Re-examined by MR. WILLIS.) I have now got the pleadings here—the defence was first that the credit had not expired; also that the goods supplied were not of a merchantable quality, and a claim was made for 244l. 18s. 4d. in consequence of that—the case was entered for trial, and on 21st October I got this letter from Mr. Ditton. (Stating that it would be necessary to apply for permission to examine witnesses in India. Further correspondence was put in, terminating in a promise by the defendants to pay 150l. cash on Saturday, and bills for sums of 501. at stated dates.) We received 150l. 14s. 8d.—the first bill became due about the middle of December—it was not paid—we issued execution—the stamp is 18th December—Mr. Ditton called to ask me to withdraw the Sheriff—he offered some terms, but I cannot say what—he spoke of some undertaking which he was prepared to give if I would withdraw—he asked me to stay until he could call a meeting of creditors.

WILLIAM CHARLES ALLEN . I am cashier of the Central Bank, Whitechapel branch—the defendants opened an account there on 14th November with a sum of 350l.—200l. was paid in on the 15th, 50l. on 20th, 33l. on 21st, 36l. on 26th, and this cheque for 496l. 5s. 3d. on the 29th—November 29th was Saturday, and on Monday, 1st December, there is a cheque to Bultitude for 500l. on the debit side, 496l. having been paid in on the Saturday—the cheque for 500l. would be in the pass book, which would be given to him or to his written order—we paid for that cheque ten 50l. notes, 69104, and 69105 dated 16th May, 1879, and 69250, '51, '52, '53, '54, and '55—the balance on 31st December in favour of the bankrupts was 1l. 19s. 1d.—on 20th November there were two cheques to Mr. Ditton, one of which was for 125l.

Cross-examined. On 15th November, the day after the account was opened, we have payments out for wages, and we have wages in December as well—the last entry for wages is 20th December—I can tell how all these cheques were paid, but we have more than one cashier.

THOMAS COTTER GASH . I am a clerk in the Bank-note office, Bank of England—I produce nine 50l. knifes—No. 69104 is endorsed "A. Bultitude," Chepstow Villas, and was paid in on 16th December through Glyn, Mills, and Co.—69105 is endorsed "L. Ditton, 9, Montpellier Road, Twickenham, and was cashed at Hoare's bank, and paid in on 3rd February—69350 is endorsed "Bultitude" I think, but there is some paper over it—it was paid to the name of Bultitude on 12th March at the Bank of England—69,353 is endorsed "A. Bultitude, Chepstow Villas, Twickenham," and was changed for gold on 22nd December, 1879—69355 was cashed on 3rd December, 1879, in the name of C. D. Rummell, Montpellier Road, Twickenham—69354, 73459, and 73460 were all cashed on 3rd December, and are

endorsed "C. D. Rummell, Montpellier Road, Twickenham"—69351 is endorsed "A. Bultitude, Peckham," and was changed for gold on 23rd March, 1880—69352 is endorsed "G. D. Todd, East Hill Lodge, Wandsworth Common," and was changed on 23rd February for nine 5l. notes and 5l. in gold.

Cross-examined. I have not traced the numbers of the nine fives, bat I can do so—most likely some of them have come back already—they have had notes as well as gold in four other cases—we invariably require persons changing notes to put their names on them, and we prefer them written on the front—we are bound to change them; we cannot refuse.

GEORGE TODD . I live at East Hill Lodge, Wandsworth Common—I know nothing of this 50l. note, nor is this my endorsement; it is "G. L," and my name is George only—my name appears in the directory.

Cross-examined. I had not cashed a cheque for 50l.—I used to meet Bultitude at our club, and always found him a very gentlemanly athlete—I have known him for years—my name is known to nearly everybody in the athletic world.

GEORGE POWELL . I am an upholsterer at Richmond—on 18th November and 5th December I sold Bultitude some furniture described in the invoice (produced) amounting to 50l., which was delivered at 5, Chepstow Villas, where he lived—he was to pay half in cash then and the rest in three months—I have never been paid a farthing.

THOMAS SHELDRAKE . I am a cabinet-maker employed by Mr. Powell—on 21st April I went to 5, Chepstow Villas, and saw the goods he supplied.

JOHN BELL . I am salesman to Thomas Topling and others, of Grove Street, who supplied to Bultitude's order carpets, bedsteads, and other articles, amounting to 99l. 17s. 10d., which were delivered at 5, Chepstow Villas, Twickenham—I have seen the bulk of them there since.

THOMAS GRAHAM RIACH . I am cashier at Messrs. Topling's—the 99l. 17s. 10d. has never been paid. (The marriage settlement, dated 18th December, 1879, between A. B. Bultitude and Louisa Ditton, widow, was here put in; also the registered bill of sale, dated 18th December, 1879, on the goods of William Rummell for 100l. and interest.)

ALFRED OCTAVIUS BAXTER . I am a clerk in the Alliance Bank, Bartholomew Lane—the defendants kept an account there—I have got the statutory affidavit of the manager to a correct copy of the account in our books—this is a correct account of cheques and bills dishonoured. (The total amount of these teas 3,260l. 4s. 7d.)

Cross-examined. On 22nd November there is an acceptance of Garford 729l. 14s. 1d. paid in—I believe that money was paid in expressly to meet that acceptance—money is never paid in after 7 o'clock.

Re-examined. The cash was Garford's, and Garford took up the acceptance.

HENRY BONAR ADAMS . I am a clerk in the Indestructible Paint Company—they had a great many transactions with the defendants before 19th December—we usually paid by cheques—on 19th December Bultitude called for 54l. 12s. 9d., and said that he wished the cheque not crossed, as he wanted to pay some petty cash—this is it (produced).

CHARLES UNDERWOOD (Policeman). I was entrusted with a warrant against the defendants with Oldhampsted—I went to Twickenham on 2nd March, and saw them both walking in Montpellier Road—I told Bultitude

I was a police officer—he said "I know you are"—I said "I moat apprehend you on a warrant for fraudulent bankruptcy"—I found on him this 5l, Bank of England note, 3l. 0s. 6 1/2 d., and these documents and letters, which I initialed.

WILLIAM OLDHAMPSTED . (City Detective.) I took Kummell and found on him two 5l. notes, a few shillings, and a memorandum.

HENRY JOHN LESLIE . I am an accountant—I was appointed trustee of the defendants' estate—I produce a statement of affairs signed by them both at a meeting held at Mr. Woodall's on 20th January—since then I have had several interviews with them, and referred them to the section of the Act by which they were bound to give me every information—Bultitude stated that he had given up everything to the receiver, Mr. Waddell, and Rummell acquiesced in it—I asked them whether they had anything which ought to be in my possession, but I never could get any information from them; they declined to give me any—they said that all the particulars were contained in their statement—I asked Bultitude to go through all the books with me, but he put it off; a day was fixed at last, and they attended—I told Bultitude that the books had not been posted since April, 1879, and it was impossible to ascertain what were his cash receipts or the goods obtained, and invited him to come and assist me in making them up, but he refused to give me information; Rummell also refused, but said he had told me all—I asked them about the receipt of money three or four months previous to the failure, but they each said they did not know—I knew of the Alliance Bank; I asked them if there was another banking account, and they said no—I found out the account at the Central Bank quite by accident, through the crossing of a cheque of Mr. Aldridge's—the assets amount to 700l. at the extreme limit, and the liabilities 9,000l.—among the papers found on Bultitude are some particulars of goods sent to Sharp's Wharf, and the receipts of the wharfingers—I produce the ledger, order-book, stock-book, and letter-book—the last entry in the order-book is on October 28, but I do not know whether it is an order or not—the last account, except F. B. Wheeler's, is in April, 1879—Wheeler's entries go up to June, 1879—the policy of insurance by Wheeler mentioned in the bankrupt's evidence is of no value whatever—Wheeler brought an action upon it, and the Counsel threw up their briefs, and the case has not been heard of since.

Cross-examined. I first saw the bankrupts at Mr. Waddell's office on 20th January, 1880—I did not learn whether they had been in communication with Mr. Waddell, but I suppose so, because he was their receiver—I learned that day that they had placed their books in his hands—I found that a statement of affairs had been prepared; it was handed in at the meeting, and I read it through immediately I got it—I found an account of Smith and Collins, but not what I should call a full and particular account—I read "Holds as security the following dock warrants for goods lying at Sharp's Wharf, 17 barrels of varnish 64l. 1s. 7d.," also "Cartwright and Co., Great St. Helens, 40l. "—I also find entries of Ditton, 9, Ironmonger Lane, holding security for 250l., the amount of goods lying at the wharf—the estimated value of each is given—I find F. W. Smith, of Newington Causeway, goods value 111l., but there are various things in each warrant—Soames and Son held the security of dock warrants for oil—I find no other cases in which the prisoners have not given some information in their

accounts—I asked them on 26th January for further particulars, but there was no entry in the books to which they could refer me, nor can I find any entry to lead me to suppose they could have given me any information—I asked Mr. Waddell, who turned me over to a clerk—I knew pretty well what was in the books, because it was gone into fully at the first meeting on 20th January—I did not decide to prosecute till early in February—I went to the solicitors to the estate, Messrs. Philbrick and Corpe, the day after I got the books, as they seemed very imperfect—I asked Mr. Waddell's clerk if I had everything, who said that all he had had been given over to me, and I got no information from Mr. Waddell—I asked the bankrupts whether they had any reversionary interest or policies, and whether they had given up their banking account, and all their books, papers, shares, stocks, and securities—I asked them at Guildhall whether they had any banking account, and they said "No"—I presume Mr. Ditton was acting as solicitor to the bankrupts at the time I came to know them—the bill of sale to Buck was not settled in bankruptcy; it was settled with me—a claim for 50l. for rent was made by Rummell's mother, and a distraint was put in—the balance over the furniture was very small; it may have been 30l.—I had the furniture valued, and gave her credit for it, and she gave me the difference—I gave Mr. Ditton notice not to part with the dock warrants—I wrote to Mr. Collins and Dr. Smith—Dr. Smith was examined at Guildhall—Kichardson and Co. are the proprietors of Sharp's Wharf, and these are their receipts for the goods lodged there—I went there in February, or it may have been January, and found certain entries—my report is on the file—Mr. Ditton sent me notice of the marriage settlement almost as soon as I was appointed trustee, and also of the bill of sale—I took possession of both houses, and am in possession of the furniture now—nevertheless action had been commenced when I became trustee—Mr. Ditton had charge of it—Mr. Garford is a creditor for over 3,000l., but the account is ruled off in the ledger, as if they owed him nothing, but they return him as a creditor for 2,600l.—he has proved for 3,000l. odd; I could not stop him from proving, but I have not admitted his claim; I have seen his books, and they show that the claim he sent to me is a true one, which is for 3,300l.

Re-examined. 825l. 10s. 3d. is the balance exactly; it is the last transaction Mr. Garford would know of according to their books—this list lamps everything together, and they do not give the weight of a single barrel or cask, or we could identify where they came from—I took possession of the houses of both bankrupts, and as to Kummell's house, I shortly afterwards received a notice from Mr. Ditton stating that there was a bill of sale in existence, that unless I removed he should take possession under the bill of sale, and it has never been pressed either in Court or in Bankruptcy—the March quarter came soon afterwards, and there was some rent overdue from Christmas—Mrs. Rummell, the defendant's mother, claimed her rent, and I did not dispute it—I valued the furniture and she paid me the difference between the rent she claimed and the gross value of the furniture—that put me out, and put me in possession of 20l., and I withdrew from possession—as to Bultitude's house, I was served with notice of the marriage settlement, and there is a lawsuit now pending—I am still in possession for the creditors—I never got the counterfoil of the cheques or the pass-book—I had not a trace of anything to do with the accounts—I never heard of the open cheque paid by the Indestructible Paint Company—no accounts are given of any

cash received by them at that time, or for some time previous—I did not get the return cheque of the Alliance Bank, they have been given up, and the bankers cannot say who to.

ROBERT GEORGE HINDLEY . I am manager to John Green and Nephew, of 107, Victoria Street—on 27th December I supplied Bummell with goods amounting to 16l. 4s. 3d., which were delivered to 8, Montpellier Road, Twickenham.

HENRY COLES (Re-examined). This press copy was made when I went to Guildhall, you will find the original in the book; a copy was made, and this is a press copy of that—I do not know where the original is—here is an entry "By 10 barrels of rape oil and 9 barrels of varnish"—the word security is not here, but we know that it was a security.

Witnesses for the Defence.

AMBROSE GIBBONS DITTON . I am a solicitor in the City, and have practised there a great many years—from the time the defendants started in business I have been more or less acquainted with their affairs—I have known Rummell almost from his boyhood—his sister married my brother 15 years ago, and she afterwards became Mrs. Bultitude—Rummell was not articled to me, but he was in my office for some years—he had money coming to him when he came of age—he has a mother, his father has been dead some years—instead of coming to the law Rummell went to America for a time, then he came back and went into business in the City—I did not know Bultitude up to the time of Rummell's starting in business with him—Rummell had no practical experience of the business—Bultitude was for some years in a confidential position with Mr. Garford, not exactly a clerk, manager or something of that sort—at the time Rummell was entering into business with Bultitude I saw Bultitude—as I understood, Mr. Garford gave them a part of his business, transferred a part of his business only, and gave them unlimited credit—Rummell had a reversion Which wilt be some day of some value—I don't think they had much capital to start with—I think they were chiefly depending on the credit Mr. Garford gave them—I don't know what expectations Bultitude had—Mr. Garford gave them credit up to the very last—at the time of their stoppage, Mr. Garford's solicitor was Mr. Philbrick, who is now the solicitor in this procedure—the claim of 3,000l. of Mr. Garford is, I think, part of the 8,000l. referred to in the statement of affairs, and in this indictment—in June or July, 1879, Mr. Garford was anxious to assist them by enabling them to acquire the whole of his business and business premises—I believe they are very extensive premises; I have never seen them—it is a very old established business—I found that from time to time they required assistance, and I have lent them small sums, 100l., and so on, which I got back, and then helped them again—about 28th August, 1877, they applied to me for a loan of 100l, and I saw Dr. Smith, a client of mine, on the subject—Dr. Smith sent me his cheque, and I paid mine to Bultitude and Co., taking from them a promissory note for the amount, and I think there was a collateral security for the same amount by Mrs. Eummell, the mother; at any rate, there was a charge on his reversion to the same amount—I think the mother became security for the amount; I think her name was on the bill—she assisted them, more or less, during the business—the bill was at three months, and was renewed from time to tone—these (produced) are the papers relating to it—I also lent them 100l.

for Mr. Collins, of Tunbridge, one of my clients—that was paid to them by a cheque on my bank, the same as the other—this (produced) is Mr. Collins's cheque to me, less the discount—it is for 99l. 3s.4d., that was the exact amount I gave them, deducting 16s. 8d. for interest—I think I took from them a bill of exchange for that—I do not know anything of Mr. Cartwright—I know he is a connection of the Rummells, but I never saw him till after this transaction arose—I helped them to enter into this contract with Mr. Garford in June, it was carried out by Messrs. Mark by and Stewart, solicitors—they had to pay an instalment of 250l., I paid that for them, and they repaid me a few days afterwards—it was understood that they were to repay me immediately, as I advanced the money, because Mr. Garford wished to have the agreement settled—at that time the agreement was certainly regarded as a beneficial one; it was to take over the whole of an old-established business—I found that in March they were sued by Risley and Co., in respect of a parcel of goods which had been sent abroad—I received instructions to defend the action—that went forward till October, 1879; it was set down for trial—I was informed by Bultitude that there would be no difficulty whatever in getting the money to carry out Mr. Garford's agreement; I don't know in what way—Mr. Wilson himself subsequently told me he thought it would be worth a large sum—it was a seed-crushing business and oil mills, freehold waterside premises, called Garford's Wharf, with a river frontage of 115 feet—the defendants had large transactions with a Mr. Wheeler—there was a fire on Wheeler's premises; I don't know the date—I was consulted by the defendants with respect to a claim they had against Wheeler—it was settled at 3,000l., and I took a charge by Wheeler dated 22nd October, 1879; he was unable to meet it; I don't know how it comes to be put at 800l. in the statement of affairs; Mr. Waddell will be able to explain that, I think—the non-payment of that money was the substantial ground of their embarrassment—I pressed on the action against the Company on the fire policy as far as I could—there was nothing to make me or Bultitude suspect that there was any impropriety in the nature of Wheeler's claim against the Company; if I had I should not have taken it up—the Company substantially raised the defence that the claim by Wheeler was fraudulent, in the sense that he claimed more than there were goods on the premises—the action was carried on afterwards by Mr. Leslie, so I suppose he had faith in it—I don't know the exact date of the fire which took place on the defendant's premises—I know about the account being opened at the Central Bank in Whitechapel—the defendants consulted me about some bills which they had not been able to meet promptly, and they asked me about the attachment in the Lord Mayor's Court, and I advised them to open a banking account out of the City—in the Mayor's Court the simple commencement of an action enables an account to be attached—there was a bill for 749l. 15s., dated November 22nd, drawn by Mr. Garford on the defendants, and Mr. Garford called on me with Rummell about the time it matured—that was the only time I saw him—we had a long conversation about the matter, and Mr. Garford took a charge on the amount he expected to get claimed by Wheeler, to cover himself for the moneys due—of course he knew perfectly well how the defendants stood at the time—the banking account in Whitechapel was opened under my instructions—you will find two cheques of 25l. and 100l. drawn on that

bank given to me—the 25l. was on account of costs, and the 100l. was in exchange for one I had given them—there was an action of Risley against them, and there was a correspondence with Johnson and Upton as to a settlement of the expense of a commission to take evidence in India—they had a set off of 240l. worth of goods, and there was a dispute as to that—I saw the defendants as to the settlement of that action—I had not at that time learnt from them that they thought they were unable to carry on their business; on the contrary, they paid 150l. in settlement of that claim, and if I had had any doubt of their being able to go on I should certainly not have advised them to pay that money—I had heard the proposed marriage between Bultitude and Mrs. Rummell spoken of months before, but in June I was formally consulted about it—I am one of the trustees of the property, and Mrs. Rummell consulted me about a settlement—I advised that there should be a settlement, and it was carried out—there was a reversion of considerable value, and she had an income, not a very large one, settled on herself and child—Bultitude's furniture was to form part of the settlement—I found there was an execution put in on one of Risley's bills, which they were unable to meet, and I pressed them for payment of the principal due to Dr. Smith and Mr. Collins, and as they could not pay I pressed for security, and they gave me dock warrants on goods which they had at Sharp's Wharf—that was as security for my own costs as well, 25l.—I was not at all aware at the time I got that security that they would be unable to carry on their business; I believed they would pull through; there was no reason, so far as I was aware, why they should not—I was negotiating with Johnson and Upton up to 24th or 25th November to hold over the execution—I asked Mr. Waddell to call a private meeting of creditors—when I found they would not withhold I advised the defendants to place their books in the hands of Mr. Waddell, and knowing that Mr. Philbrick was the solicitor in many matters for Mr. Garth, a large printer, I said, "The best thing you can do is to place yourselves in the hands of Mr. Philbrick," and I took them to him and asked him to take it in hand—at this time I had consulted a gentleman of very high standing, and entrusted the agreement to him, that he might see one or two merchants of the City privately, to see whether arrangements could be made to find the necessary capital to carry on the business—that was from instructions from the defendants—I believe every one at that time thought the business was worth 10,000l.; I know Mr. Wilson told me he thought so, and that was undoubtedly the impression of the defendants—I think the petition was presented on 30th December, and I must have taken them to Mr. Waddell at least a week before, because the first object was to call a private meeting and explain the position of the matter, particularly as to Mr. Garford's agreement—the meeting was not called—I asked Mr. Waddell to see Mr. Garford and ask him whether he would have any objection to his business being turned into a small limited company—Mr. Waddell proposed a statement of affairs for the first meeting at the end of December—Mr. Leslie was appointed receiver at the end of January—I did not know that any portion of the warrants was unpaid for at the time I got them; I asked the question, and Rummell told me they were paid for, and I am satisfied that he believed they were, and I believe they are now—I wrote this letter to Mr. Leslie, dated 14th February, 1880 (read)—I was present at the examination at the Bankruptcy Court—no cash account has been prepared.

Cross-examined. I think five or six charges were brought up at the police-court from time to time, and they all fell to pieces—I have been acting as solicitor for the defendants ever since they have been in business, about two years—the only action that I defended for them I think was Risley's—I don't think they were ever served with a writ till very shortly before this difficulty arose—with regard to Risley, I had notice of trial, I think, in June, 1879—I think the banking account in Whitechapel was opened before the execution was put in—I never saw their cash-book; I never went to the place till after it was in the hands of Mr. Waddell, in fact I did not know where it was—they told me they could not meet Garford's acceptance on 8th November—I was only consulted about one bill of Garford's—the opening of the account at Whitechapel was entirely to avoid the attachment in the Mayor's Court, that was the single object with which I advised it—there was no object of concealment, I think the account will show that, because there are cheques drawn for wages and all sorts of things—I never saw the account till after the meeting—Garford was in liquidation, after this liquidation commenced—it was long after Wheeler's fire that I spoke about trying to form Garford's into a limited company; it was a week or 10 days prior to the petition—I have, the entry here, December 29, that was the day before the petition—the arrangement was, that 2,750l. was to be paid to the vendor by 28th February in instalments of 98l. 4s—3,000l. was to be paid for the good will, but that extends over—it was not intended to pay it down, and that included the lease—I think I heard of Garford going into liquidation after the meeting at Mr. Waddell's—I had nothing to do with Garford's liquidation—I cannot refer you to any entry in my diary that I had directions in June to prepare a settlement; I have looked for it; there is no such entry—I was not aware that Catlin's goods were put into the settlement—I should, not have permitted it had I known that the goods were Catlin's—I knew nothing about Powell's goods being put into the settlement—I had nothing to do with the settlement—I gave the instructions to a gentleman in my office to prepare it, and I recommended that the lady should be advised by Messrs. Wilde, Barber, and Brown—I think I attested one or two of the signatures, and that was all I had to do with it—I wrote the letter of 17th December, 1879 (read)—I have made out some of my bill of costs; my clerk's estimate was over 250l., and I am told that is under-estimated; there is Risley's action, I have never had anything for that—I have not got the 100l. dishonoured cheque of Bultitude and Co. here, I can get it—as to the taking out the 500l. in 50l. notes, I knew nothing of that at the time—I have seen one of the 50l. notes, and it bears the signature of Mrs. Bultitude before her marriage—I sent this notice of 18th December to the Alliance Bank requesting them to hold the funds for my 100l.—I believe it was the next day that I took the warrants to protect myself—I have been told that they are not worth more than 100l.—I don't know how much Dr. Smith's were, not enough to pay his debt, I believe, which was 100l., and 50l. and 10l. for interest; he would be very glad to hand them over against his debt—I know nothing of the other security for Cartwright—he is some connection of Mrs. Bultitude, and is one of the trustees—I don't know the value of Collins's warrants; I have not the—slightest idea; the trustee can have them at any time, both Dr. Smith and Mr. Collins offered to give them up—the bill of sale to Buck was prepared in my office—I read it over, because the Act requires it, that is all I know about it—I should not have put in Green and Co.'s goods if I had known of it.

Re-examined. I believe Mr. Back was in America at the time the claim was made, and there was no one to make the affidavit—you will find a notice about my giving notice of Mr. Buck's claim—I got my instructions from his

GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment each.


View as XML