A meeting of the creditors of Messrs. John Wm. Nurrish, deceased, and Alfred Flawn, trading as Nurrish and Flawn, boot manufacturers, Rushden, was held at the Northampton offices of Messrs. A.C. Palmer and Co. on Friday.

  Mr. A. C. Palmer, who was voted to the chair, submitted a statement of affairs showing liabilities to unsecured trade creditors £586/8/9; to unsecured cash creditors, £40; to creditors fully secured £22, holding securities valued at £50, leaving a surplus to contra of £28, and making total unsecured liabilities £626/8/9.  The assets consisted of stock (at cost) £190/16/7, estimated at £159/17/6;  book debts, £14/8/6, estimated to produce £13/10/0; cash in hand, £14/3/8; Machinery and plant, £50; fixtures and fittings, £10; and surplus from securities in the hands of creditors fully secured, £28.  Deducting £18/14/0 for preferential claims, the net assets totalled £256/17/2, showing a deficiency of £369/11/7.

  Mr. Palmer went on to say that with regard to the claim (£198) of the Union Bank that so far as the estate was concerned they had no security.  They held, however, a collateral “cover” from Mrs. Nurrish, the widow of the deceased, who, having some property, deposited the deeds thereof.  Messrs. Sturgess, Wells, and Co. were the only firm who had issued process.  He had written to them, but had not yet received a reply.  As to the cash creditors, Miss Nurrish, daughter of the deceased, had been employed in the business.  She had formerly been employed by Messrs. Nurrish, Nurrish, and Pallett, and had saved up a little money.  When Messrs. Nurrish and Flawn were “hard up” for wages she advanced it.  It was all in the books, and there could be no question about this nor about Mrs. Nurrish’s claim.  Probably many of them would know or have heard, said Mr. Palmer, that they had been instructed to prepare figures in this matter.  Messrs. Nurrish and Flawn came over on the 26^th ult. – before the death of the former – and said they found themselves in financial trouble, and asked them to come over and investigate.  As a matter of fact, Mr. Franklin was there when the sad occurrence happened – Mr. Nurrish meeting with an accident and dying the same night.  Had this not happened the meeting would have been called before, but they postponed it and took no further steps until after the funeral.  He (Mr. Palmer) had been able to get out a trading account.  The deceased and Mr. Flawn were formerly with Messrs. Nurrish, Nurrish, and Pallett, the former as a partner and Mr. Flawn as an employee.  On the reconstruction of that firm they left.  Mrs. Nurrish gave her husband £50 and Flawn had saved £50, and with this £100 – the first entry in their pass book – they started in business in March, 1907.  Their purchases since had been £3,328 and wages £1,637, against sales £4,999 and present stock (at cost) £190, showing they had made a gross profit of £314.  This was nothing like sufficient, however, to cover the expenses, for when these were taken into account there was a loss on trading of £144.  The deficiency was accounted for within £4.  Debtors’ drawings were moderate, being only 30/- a week each.  As to their separate estates, Flawn was a single man; with regard to Nurrish, his wife helped to keep the house going, and the daughter had 15/- a week, which also went to the keeping of the house.  Their whole position in the matter was fair so far as the estate was concerned.  The deceased had a policy for £50 in the Britannia – formerly British Workman’s Insurance Society.  Mrs. Nurrish had paid the premiums for twenty-three years, and nothing had come out of the business for it.  He thought, in equity, this belonged to the wife, and that the small amount which would accrue should go to her, since she had made a more serious loss than any other creditor.  This was subsequently voted to Mrs. Nurrish.

  Mr. Flawn made no offer.  The only money he had, £50, had gone, and he would have to seek a situation.  Mr. Palmer concluded by suggesting that the only way to deal with the matter would be by winding up the estate under a deed of assignment.  There was nothing reprehensible about the case; it was simply unfortunate.  He was originally afraid they had made no gross profit at all, but they had made a little.  Unfortunately their turnover was insufficient and the expenses too heavy, and they made a net loss.  Their deficiency, however, was not so much due to loss on trading as to the deductions which now had to be made.

  It was resolved that the estate should be realised as early as possible under an assignment to Mr. A. C. Palmer (to be executed by the surviving partner, Mr. Flawn).