H16. Daily Press of 15/4/11
SUPREME COURT.
Wednesday, April 12th.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION,
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE),
TATAM E. HOWELL.
The action was continued in which John Tatom sued Frederick Howell, chief bailiff of the Supreme Court, for an account since 24th September, 1905, of the receipts and disbursements of the defendant in respect of the plaintiffs business of a butcher and com- pradora carried ou under the style of the Hongkong Batchery, and for a receiver.
Mr. M. W. Slade, K.C., instructed by Mr. J. H. Gardiner, appeared for the plaintiff, and defendant was represented by Mr. Eldon Potter, who was instructed by Mr. C. E. H. Beavis (of Messrs. Wilkinson & Grist).
Mr. A. R. Lowe, chartered accountant. again went into the witness-box and was questioned by his Lordship.
Do you object to my method ?--You are quite wrong from the start, sir,
Oh! The only profit made was in October. What do you say P-I make the profit in Oc- tober $786.57, in November there was a loss of $148,82, in December a profit of $95.93, and iu January a loss of $612.62. The losses aggregat. ed $761.44 and the profits $882.50, leaving a profit of $120.
What
Even that does not quite satisfy me. I mean is that when you started, the February working and store account was to be charged entirely to January-In my figures I have not taken working expenses. These are gross profits. Surely this is a perfectly sound way of arriving at a rough--I have taken it exact. In the first mouth the expenses of the business must be high They were $180 more than the
average.
It is extraordinary that in the first mouth there should bave been such a large profit when there were fewer customers? Well, they perhaps did not watch the business (in the following months), or they might have had to fight for prices, or they might have lost it in leakage.
Cross-examined by Mr. Slade, witness said he had not taken from the ledger accounts the total of customers' indebtedness at the end of January, but as the results obtained by thei other accountant were nearly the same he had assumed them to be correct. There might have beau an
error in taking them out, but they might be assumed to be correct. The total amonat, according to the figures, owing the butchery at the end of January, 1896, was $3.263.
They collected more than that on the face of the ledger - Yes, they collected $3,600, prob- ably from cash takings.
How could that be?-Recoveries.
On taking the ledger it became apparent that the ledger accounts show more than he has ' received by cash sales P-It is a very good fault Does it not show rather serious errors? Does it not show, in fact, that they have got ous tomers whose accounts are recorded somewhere else thau in those books ?-It does not show that.
It infers that?-No, not necessarily.
His Lordship-These are the figures which
you have taken from the ledger P
Mr. Slade-Yes, 83,263.
His Lordship--Mr. Lowe makes $3,600. Mr. Slade These are collected from the cash books. What I cannot nuderstand is how this difference is accounted for.
Witness-The inference to me is that there
is some mistake in taking out the balance. The assumption is that the balances are wrong.
His Lordship-The figures are very import- ant, and it is better they should be checked.
Mr. Slade The astonishing thing is that they have not been put in.
Mr. Potter-It is for my friend to prove that. His Lordship-Do you mean to say that Counsel cannot take out âgures and put them ju?
Mr. Potter-I say that Counsel cannot take out figures and put them in as evidence.
His Lordship-I cannot understand your attitude. The figures are taken out by Mr. Siado and put before me, not as evidence.
Mr. Potter-An expert accountant was going to be called, and I should have thought he was the parson who should have done this work.
Hie Lordship-It does not matter whether you thought so or whether you didn't The fact remains they were taken out by Counsel, and we will have thom verified in the Registry.
Mr. Potter said he wished to recall Mr.Tatem
to put some points which had come to his know- ledge yesterday. The information, he thought was material to the case. It had been suggest. ed that Tatem had by his industry worked up a substantial business. He was going to put in certain evidence which might lead his Lordship to believe that Mr. Tatem was not so industrious. His Lordship--I thought Mr. Howell admitt 33 It.
Mr. Petter-Oh, no, quite the contrary. His Lordship --Very well.
Plaintiff was recalled, and in auswer to ques- tious said that in 1903 he was employed in the Dairy Farm Co.
Did you receive a letter from the secretary of the Dairy Farm Co. which stated that "the directors have asked me to write to express to you their dissatisfaction at the manner in which your shop is managed”?
His Lordship-I thought you were talking about 1896 ?
Mr. Potter-I want to show you that Mr. Tatem as manager of a shop is not a successful
man.
His Lordship-If that is the only evidence it is not relevant at all.
143