Former Bermuda Fire director William Cox yesterday told the Supreme Court that his 1993 deposition attesting to the solvency of Bermuda Fire was accompanied by contentious financial statements which suggested otherwise.

Mr. Cox told Puisne Judge Vincent Meerabux that he'd had "good, strong, compelling reasons for doing so'' -- apparently against the vocal wishes of the draft statement's authors, accountants Cooper & Lines.

Afternoon sessions began with Mr. Cox's continued questioning by Cooper & Lines lawyer Ian Croxford QC, during which the evidence turned to the draft financial report from Cooper & Lines exhibited alongside an affadvait signed by Mr. Cox on November 2, 1993 -- a document in which, Mr. Croxford put it, "you were deposing to the position that you had reviewed the draft financial statements, which showed the company had a positive net worth.'' The court heard, however, that these statements and an accompanying letter from Cooper & Lines employee Peter Mitchell suggested that the accountancy firm was "not able to form a view of the accuracy of its financial statements''.

"What Mr. Mitchell said was you might think it is inappropriate at the time you're trying to say the company is solvent -- you might not want to use this,'' Mr. Croxford said.

However, it had been Mr. Cox's insistence that the statements be kept to exhibit his affadavit.

At the meeting in which they were produced, Mr. Cox said, he was told that Peter Mitchell and David Lines of Cooper & Lines wanted the letter withdrawn.

"I understood that to mean they wanted to distance themselves from this account,'' Mr. Cox said.

Mr. Croxford asked, "Did you speak to Mr. David Lines?'' "I got a call from Peter Mitchell which was somewhat threatening,'' Mr. Cox recalled. "He said, `You don't have any right to insist this letter be included.' "Within minutes of this conversation being terminated the phone rang and David Lines told me, `My colleague says you're being silly and stubborn'.

"I said I wouldn't sign the affadavit unless their letter was attached to it.

"The expletives became more frequent and loud and the conversation was terminated.'' "You ultimately had your own way, to exhibit what you wanted to exhibit,'' Mr. Croxford said.

Mr. Cox answered that to do otherwise would have been "distorting the truth.'' "Despite the express views of the people who produced the draft report,'' Mr.

Croxford added. Mr. Cox agreed.

And, in a subsequent questioning by defending lawyer Richard Millett -- representing in this instance the shareholders of BF&M -- Mr. Cox stridently denied allegations that as a director of Bermuda Fire his decisions had been motivated by personal gain.

The case continues today.