63.
63
On the 1st of October they put it to him that they wanted $20,000.00, could they get it, although they had all these promissory notes?. No. They raised a mortgage. True, it is a year and a half afterward, but they have not all become insolvent and yet that is what the Directors did when they wanted money. They had a big capital but it is for you to say if it was cash. The matter rests entirely with you.
As to the Statement being willfully made, Mr. Brewer was in the position of knowing exactly what was done, he deliberately made the statement. Rightly or wrongly, true or false. whatever conclusion you may
come to, he made it knowing all the facts concerned.
Then the other thing, that is the amount which he himself refunded to the Company. He had an agree- ment in which 68,000.00 odd had to be paid.
He came to the conclusion that was not right, so agreed to give back so much to the Company. The net result is that
55,000.00 was either waived or refunded to the Company. He wrote a letter and confirmed verbal state- ments (xhibits NIB 22 & NIB 23 read) It is a genuine debt owing. They must accept this offer before making any request as to what to do with it. *48,000.00 was paid, it was the Company's money. The real facts of the matter was cross entries. No coin or anything passed, merely a book entry. Mrs. Brewer received no coin. This money was not cash received in respect of shares.
-
The Company was in possession of about $9,000.00 in June and received something like 80,000.00 between then and the 8th of August. It purported to make loans of 7 lakhs. Is it possible that they were made in cash? It is absolutely impossible to say that a Company in possession of a few thousands could lend lakhs. As regards the $48,000.00 if it was money at all - it was Company's money. we know that the lady who bought the shares was not in a position to pay the money.
That, Gentlemen, is the issue before you. It is quite clear and you will ask yourshalves the question whether these things were cash. You will remember three different securities or types of docu- ments which passed in connection therewith and you will answer them as to whether these were cash. MY. Brewer knew these things were not true, and if you ar satisfied on that, then your duty is clear.
(MT
(COURT ADJOURNED)
(COURT REASSEMBLLD 2.15p.m
Justice wood's Summing Up.)
Gentlemen of the Jury, I think I may not keep you very long. Before coming to the facts I want to say one or two things, and the first is, that it is very evident that you or I are not concerned with any- thing outside this @ourt. Your duty is merely to
consider the evidence which has been laid before you here and be guided by that and that only. The CrowIE rely on that evidence to prove their case and the Defendant relies on that evidence too.
Now, Gentlemen, we have listen to a very curious financial story, it might be described as a series of financial gymnastics, and though I may say something which sug ests that to you, I don't want you to forget that one of the principal matters herein