(ute, J. E, Turner to, romain liquidator but Ginelat "Receiver "to supervise winding up).
"Almost Gilbertian" was the description applied by Mr. K. E. Newman in H. M. Supreme Court on June 11 to the process whereby the company called "Newmilks (1996) Ltd." came nto being, Mr. Newman was appearing on behalf of Messrs. ¥, C. Toong and ¥. T. Zung, creditors of Newmilks Ltd, in an application for the removal from office of official receiver and liquidator of Mr. J. E. Turner, who had been appointed to these posts by the Court after an application last year by the same parties.
'Me, 'Turner was not' present. In Court, and in the course of the proceedings Mr, Newman expressed surprise at this. He presented a partial Audit taken of the liquidator's' accounts by. Messrs. Lowe, Bingham Matthews, and agreed with Judge Grant Jones that the auditors' port was "very illuminating." After hearing Mr. Newman, Judge Grant Jones said that he would discharge Mr. Turner only from his. post as receiver, but not as. Liquidator.
"The matter must be investigated, he commented, but left this to the Omeiat Receiver of the Court, who has jurisdiction over all Tiquidators, to take up, he audit taken by Mr. H, R. Cleland, of Lowe, Bingham" Malthows, said Mr, Newman, was made at the request of certain creditors. Of the receipts of the liquida~ tion, the auditors found that only $0,067 was pald to the liquidator's current account in the Hongkong Shanghai Bank; no other amounts were paid in, which was directly contrary to the Winding-Up Rules and to the previous order of the Court, No Cash Payment Certain other items shown as ceipts were not actually receipts in feash, but documents signed by the creditors, discharging the liquidator fof certain preferred debis. The sale price of the old firm of Newmilks Ltd, was $30,000, the sale being made to Me. Rudolph' Mayer—but no. part of this amount whatsoever was paid to the Liquidator in cash, The report went on to say that Mr. Mayer produced various receipt vouchers from preferred creditors, including one for $5,000 for money owing to himself, and handed these over to the liquidator. Mr, Newman's two clients were compradores in the old firm. They maintained that the Tiquidator should not have parted with the title to the assets of the company until he had either been paid in cash or had received a satis factory guarantee, With regard to the accounts, Mr. Newman pointed out, as an example, that he was listed as having received $1,400 for the boneftt of his firm's Tegal services; in point of fact they "never received a cent!" The auditor's statement ended by pointing out that the liquidator had made certain payments without receiving proof that he actually owed those concerned anything.
Decelved by a Rogue"
"It is a very illuminating totter," commented Judge Grant Jones, "and fof great assistance to the Court. Everybody seems have been deceived by a regul referring to Me, Mayer.
undoubtedly," replied Mr, New= man, "I think the learned Judge of the American Court expressed himself in very much the same terms as to, the conduct of this gentleman, said it seems sol" swiftly ro-turned the Judge, with a slight smile.
Mr. Newman agreed, and. went on to elaborate the facts behind the Newman's submission was that Mr. Turner as liquidator had not given 12 good title to these assets and that. the present company had not acquired good title either. He did not think there was anyone who had. really aid any cash for shares in the new company. It was disgraceful that the creditors, who trusted British com-any law procedure, should be vietimised in this manner, "Before they trust a British company, they should investigate the' composition of the company," remarked Judge Grant Jones.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.