i i tb: Tais Court on the [6th March 1915 made an order, pursnant to the Trading with the Fneny r hot I9T4 Sec 8, appointing Horace Bately Allard Control : Sof the firm of Alexander and Compeny, such con- -trol to continue "until the ond of the present state of war or until fur- ther order of the Court", By the same order &t was provided that the powers to be exercised by: the Controller should be subject to oertein sonditions which included the following: that the moneys of the firm be deposited in @ bank to the jofat oredit of the Controller and Bernhardt Hesslein so far ae the moneys were in Sydney, A 4, bovis Fronksc, fara the wonsuesarain Sudnex, and inthe names of the Controller and Louis Frank so far.as the moneys were in Melbourne, and that #11 securities of the firm be in the joint control of the Controller and such one of Pernhardt Heaslein and Louis Frank as should be resident in the Place where the security existed. The order #lso provided that certain : moneys Witnarewn from the firm and paid or invested, ez the benefit? of the wife and daughter of Louie Frank, and securities for the time being =p Tepresenting the same,should be placed in the same control as the moneye and securities of the firm. The firm of Alexander and Company consisted of three partners: Edouard Alexander, who resided in Germany 'gna was « German national; Louis Fianld fat thirty years and married.en Auatrelian subject of the King, mang iasanby Chactlnar, And Nines: Keno? etna sine Aloe the family home in Australiag tea Bernhardt Hesalein, + third partner, wns wee born in Germany but had resided in Australia for some twenty eight years, We algo had married an Austrelian eubject of the Frese (never King and the family home wan weaphedped in Australia, Hesslein however had " | i Frank, who was also a German national, but had resided in Australia for Bi ' t obtained a Gertificate of Haturalisation under the Naturelisation, Act 190}. Ka thlean Prantl Louis Frank died in Melbourne in 1920, leaving a widow en sev eral children, My hie will he ed the National Truatees Exeoutors and Agency Company of Australeeia Ltd, his executor , and thw Company duly proved the will, The outbreak of war betwee Ingland and Germeny dissolved the partnerghip pf Alexander avd Company end apparently Pernhsrdt Heeelein led to wind up the business. Put, ey] with the congent of Boule Frenk; ote - indlowted, an a Lisation wads mi to this Court as under the Tree ding with the Enemy Act T9I4 fer the arpointment of a Controller of the firm of Alpxander an. Co., with the result thet it wade the order of the r that order, considerable sums of money, securities, und luvestuents came inte the or control of the Controller jointly with Dernhardt lesslein or Louis Frank. The coutrol was imposed only "until the end of the present stete of war or until further order of the Court". "The present state of war", according to the Trading with the | Enemy Act IST4 Sec 2, wes the period from the 4th Auguet I9T4 until such time as the Goweror General should isoue « proclamation to the effect that the war between Nis Majesty the King and the German Ewperor wud be~ tween His Wajeety the King and the Faperor of austria "King of Hungery, had | cvased . Proclamations have been issued declaring thet the I0th January 1920 shall be deeméd the date of the terminution of the war with Cermeny, end the 16th July 1920 the date of the termination of the war with Austria (ee the Commonwealth Gazette 8h for the Sth March 1920 and the 26th August 1920), The control imposed under the order of the I6th March I9I5 I has therefore ceased, but the Controller and others require some oredr offs. this Court, for their protection before handing ower the moneys securities and investments come to their hends possession or custody under the order of the Iéth Haroh 1915. Consequently the Controller moved the Opurt, on notice to the parties interested, for the following ordera and directioni and the determinetion of the following questions: I, That the businesa of the said firm be ordered to be wound up. 2. That a1] sums and other property assets of the said business and now under the control of the seid Centred be distributed by the said Controller. . 3. Thet porsons entitled to the eaid sume and other property and the respective amounts ard shares payable to such persone j such distribution be ascertained and determined by this Court. in the event of any share of the said suns and ined and determined to be payatle to ror to the Public Trustee, the following other property being g0 ether preperty a _Alexand her Zathleon Frenk i¢ entitled to be paid for } last nentionsdshure unt of £109 referred to in Paregrarh I8 of Affidavit of dorace rately Allard to be filed herein, and if so whether ry without interest oc with st, simple or compound, and at whet rate igoyrhained and determined to be payable to the in the event of ony share of the guid wus ad '| G ting from th Tealisation of assets of the seid business or otherwide representiy oes | | legal personal repra tatives of Gouis Frank decessed, the following questions be determined, vizi= . (a) Whether Kathleen, Frank widow of the said Lois Trank deceased, ig entitled to be paid from the said share the two reapective amounts of £1000 and £250 referred to in Paragraph I9 of the Affidavit of Horace Bately Allard to be filed herein, end if w #0, whetber without interest or with interest, simple or cowpound., and at what rate, . (>) Whether the said Kathleen Frank ie enti- tled to be paid from the eaid we the amounte of £300 and £350 referred to in Paragraph 20 of the Affidavit of Horace Butely Allard to te filed herein, and if so whether without interest or with interest, simple or + vate. (co) whether Freida Fenn (née Frank) daughter of the said Cathleen Trank ani of ths esid Louie Frank deceaged is ensitd entitled to be paid from the guid share the amount cf £600 referred to in Paragraph 22 of the Affidavit of Horace PBately Allard to he filed herein, and if 80 whether without interest or with interest, simple or compound, and at what rate. compound, and at a fi 6. That the said Horece Hately Allard may be discharged from the position occupied by him of Controller of the said Firm and veeted with generel gowers of 2 receiver of the said firm. 7. That the said Horace Pately Allard may be authorised to retain out of the aid sums and other property tne costs and expenses properly incurred by him in the course of the winding up of the. Conpens said Firm. 8, That the costs of this application after? texation by the proper officer of the Court may be retained by tre said Horace Bately Allard out of the said sums and other property. In my opinagn the motion is misconesived. Jurisdiction is not conferred on this Court to wind up the busineee of the firm or to distribute ate assets. Nor is Jurisdiction conferred upon it to de termine the rights of the partners inter ee to the assets of the firm ghter of Lovis Frank aa against the or the rights of the wife and dau, Frenk to the moneys and securities partners or the executer¢ of Loui paid to or invested for their benefit and brought under the Gontrol 6rder, The provisione of Seo 9h ana MP of the Trading with the Eneny Act IOT4-I916 are inapplicable to the present case, and Seo & does "not . enable the Court to determines any question arising in the carrying out of the control order, e¢ does Sec SH in respect of an order nede by the Vine ister for Trade and Customa requiring # business to be wounc up. Hit the Court, I think, has inherent power to give directions to persons who an oréer of the have the pose¢ssion custody or control of property vi Court, for the return of that property now that t facks it Geems to me that obtained. em of Ale 25th June T9195 the Minister. for Trade and Customs, purperting to act unad.r Sec $ (©) of thy Trading with the Pnemy Aot ToT4— I$I6, vested in the Purlio Trustee all property reul and pereonal (inclu- ding 811 rights whether Jecnl or gquitable in, or arising out of, property F real of personal) belon ne to of held or managed for and on behalf of Fam- erd Alexander, being an cneny subject, and likewise the right to transfer } such property. And Sec GN of the Act direqts the Public Trustee to hold d the property vested in him under the Act until the permination of the war, | anc to thereafter des] with the awe in euch manner ae the Governor Genvral | directa, Dolibtlees the share of She Edevard Alexander in the partnership assets would be dealt with in acccrdanee with the Economic Clauses of the Treaty of Peace (See Treaty of Peace Act 1919 and the © Res wilations made them under 1920 Ne 25). The share of Kouie Frank in the partnez iship assets has not however been vested in the Public Trustee#, and & the 7th October 19. the Governor General, acting pursuant to Regulation 20 of the Treaty of Peace Regulations, released the share of Louis Frank in the assets of shed parinerehip buginess from the charge created on that property under the Treaty of Pegce, the Treaty of Peace Aot I9I9, and the Reguletions of Toeks Both the Public Trustee aud Frank's executors have no doubt & right as x H against the other partner Reaglein to have the share of Edouard Alexendew and the deceased Frank ascertained @d paid, but I apprehend that Mees) the would, until a Court intervenes, have the right and duty to wind up patrtnership affaire, In the events waich have happened, it sesame to me that ersons in poesesssi' per direction would be that the Controller and other of the property of the and Co pursuant to the contre | : orders, should pey and deliver it over to the only living partner now rs aysees the juriediction, namely Pernherdt Hesshein, and leave #e the Public and Prank's executor} to enforce 'their rights to their respective shart in the partnership assete by the ordinary legal processes. But Resalgr OeRCUTORS~ very Feusonably consenta to an order that the partnership i j Ld be peid and Gelavered over to him and the Public Trusbe | jointly, j property shoi A question has avigen whether this order shoulda be wad» wah hie accounts, Al] the parties Ww out requiring the Controller to pas rently consent to this course, but I aw not ETRE Suc gi it mt require, im my opinion, that there snovld % collection, administration, investment and diepogal of assets under the order of the Court, Koreover, it ie not unimportant thet Maouard Alexander should heve an cpportuntty, if he evet eo desires, of ascertaining t his shage in the partnership amotinted to end how far-it has deen dealt with, Thig may be cf moment to ' possibly ih connection with claims for dndemnity ageinet his om ee Of challenging the right of the Put- Covermaent, or , again, for the purs Yuatee to receivy share. The moneys paid to or, invested for the benefit of the widow and duughter of Lowis Frank which came to the possession or custody of ths Con- troller and. Louie Frank under the control order must be restored to the possession froin which they came, namely that of Mre Kathleen Frank and-of "eg Freida Feon. It is neeessary to direct the National Trustees Executors and Agency Cowoany of Australasia td, the executor of Frank, to join in the restoration. Some of the moneye were deposited or eome of the invest- Controller and Frank under the control mente made in the joint names of 4% order. COnsequently, if the Court is to restore the parties, eo far as possible, to the position in which they were before that order was made, the executor§ of Frank mist coneur in acte necessary to effect that reetor ation. It must ve. vaderstood that the Court gives no judgnent ae to the rights of the parties 'in thsse moneys and eecufities. The righte of Some Cor fh ehawt™ the partners mist be worked out if neceesary before monsoons tr ita nel end in other proceedings.And if Frank's estate is entitled to the none ete ordered to be paid and delivered over to Mra Frank and Mre Fenn, then ~ the executor must establish ite xr hte by tue ordinary prefoa-6e process of law, A declaration is added to the order which will, I hope, make the position other trivunale from any euberrasement in dicating upon the rights of and seourities dealt with in thegorder. with me by letter. I could not act upon thie letter, and have not done so. I direct it to be placed with the file of pepers in the registry, and to be shew to such of the ps parties as may inspect 1¢. It may possibly be useful to the' on executor of Louis Frank. One other matter T think 1t right to mention. Louis Frenk Gied during the year 1920, The control order ceased to operate after y 1926. Int thougl Frank wid his wife were apperently entitled to con- Kanteen ore Mito. Tf, the property was never Meedisod, a reble property to thet ord & Gy eub pPee rah a and Mre Frenk and he hiliven have, it secme, since her husband's death, deen near point of starvation, Neceseary as was the control from the public point of view, #4111 the hardshipdeuf fered by Mrs Frank and her family were ghite unnecessary. The leck of consideration for their inter- este refleots but little credit «mon those responsible for the administra- tion of the control ordsr. I have provided in the present order that the Contfoller pass his accounts within one month or such further time ae the District Regis— trar allowa, But I recowsiend to the District-Registrar that he inslets upon expedition if the passing of these accounts, and I direct him to Te- port ta me if any unneceseary dulay takes place. Further, I trust that Hesslein and the Public Trustee will Te- 'lease the shares of Heaslein and Frenk respectively in the partnerehip eees assets and aleo the moneys ete payable to Mra Trang and Ure Fenn, at the @ ore Ley earliest possible moment. And WAgparuat some arrangement ban be made smonget the parties which will soon release some ino¢me for Mre Frenk and her children.