The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1900-09-16

experts to be due to the creditors,
and the sS236 SO, as shown by the
claims proven before the referee TO
he due to the creditors, which would
make the shortage, in the merchan-
disc, s34S0.79.
fiud from the evidence that the
man Whitehurst, who clerked Tor
the bankrupt all the time he was In
business at Wynnewood, had the
same access to this merchandise
that the bankrupt had; that he was
a man of bad character, for honesty
and fair dealing and an admltteo
thief, and in giving his testimony,
before the referee, in answer TO q
question, propounded to him by
counsel, stated, in effect, that II ne
| had sold anything, they could not
find it or prove it on him. The
bankrupt on the contrary, has prov
en- a good character, for honesty
and fair dealing, and it seems, from
testimony. that the bankrupt did not
know of Whitehurst's reputation for
dishonesty until about a month be-
fore he filed his petition in bank
ruptcy.
Under all the facts and circum-
stances, connected with this case,
cannot say that ! am satisneo
beyond a reasonable doubt, that the
bankrupt withholds, or did withhold
at the time he filed his petition IN
bankruptcy, any of these goods
from the trustee.
AS to the s225O cash, which it Is
shown by the evidence and admitted
by the bankrupt, that he had In Dis
possession, during the time he was
in business at Wynnewood, and that
was a part of the s2750 capital, which
1t is admitted that he had when he
started in business, it is shown that
no one, except the bankrupt, had sc-
cess, or control Of this s2250, except
S465, which the bankrupt says he left
in the bank at Ardmore for the use of
his family, and 5000 paid out for his
daughter at Paris, Tex, which leaves
a balance of s15s5, unaccounted for.
In the case of Ripon Knitting
Works VS.. Schreiber, 1O1 Fed. Rep,
p s14, par. 5, the court says: lone
of the principal grounds of defense
upon which respondent relies, is
contained in his answer denying
that he had any money. His ans
wer is not conclusive but the rules in
such cases requires that the denial
be overcome by evidence, proving
beyond a reasonable doubt that the
bankrupt has the actual present
possession or control of money, or
that any alleged transfer, or other
disposition of it, is a mere subter-
fuge which does not prevent him
from producing it. The decision OF
the court that the bankrupt had at
least $4,000 in his possession, or un-
der his control, is based upon con-
vincing evidence to the effect that a
large amount of money actually
came into his possession within a
few months before the adjudication.
OF the money so received, more than
$1,000 remains entirely unaccounted
for, after giving full credit for all
expenses, shown by the respondents
books of account, and after allowing
in full the extravagant amount
which he claims to have used for his
personal expenses and dissolute prac-
tices, and losses in gambling. AS to
so much money, this is not case of
failure to give a satisfactory account
or to show in a satisfactory way how
it has been disposed of, but it is case
of total failure to account in any
whatever, or to give any explana-
ton"
So in this case, the bankrupt fails
to give any explanation as to what
became of this said sum of S15s5.
Applying the law as 1 find it to
the facts in this case, the conclusion
is irresistible that the bankrupt has
failed to account for the sum of
S15s5, which has been traced to his
possession, and 80 find,
l have arrived at these conclus-
ions after giving the matter much
thought and considerable investiga-
tion. Resp't submitted,
j. P. WOOD,
Special Master.
|