The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-11-27 00:00:00

THE CHARGE AGAINST A TRUSTEE.

At the Mansion House In Loudon, on Monday, Robert
Haswell, flit) -tiur years of age, described as a laud agent.
WAS brought before the Lord Mayor, on remand, charged,
under the Fraudulent Trustee Act, with having sold out in
Ms capacity of a trustee, and converted to his own use, a
Limo aim of money invested in the Three per Cent. Con-
solidated ASSIIIitiSS, with hitt tit to defraud.
The prosecution had been instituted with the sanction of
Sir Robert Collier, the Attorney-General, who had issued his
fiat with that view in accordance with a provision of tile
Act. Sir. Straight, barrister, conducted the prosecution ;
the prisoner was defended by Mr. Serjeant Sleigh, instructed
by Sir. Beard, solicitor.
The prisoner was first before the Court on Monday
week, and the circumstances as then elicited in evi-
dence against hi o were fully reported. It will be re-
membered that the prisoner and a Mrs. Louisa Baker
were, in October, 181i2, appointed trustees of a sum of
.£14,000 invested in the Three per Cent. Consolidated
Annuities for the sole support of Mrs. Sarah Mark-
wick during her life, and afterwards to be divided in
equal proportions among her eight children on their
attaining the age of 21. The prisoner had lived with
Mrs. Markwick, but, it was alleged, had treated her
with cruelty. She left hiin a few months since,
and married a Mr. Thomas, and she died on the 2nd
inst. Before her death she stated that the prisoner had
sold out stock of which he was a trustee, that she
feared her children would be deprived of it, and that
he had appropriated it to settle a private lawsuit
arising out of a Chancery proceeding. The prisoner,
in whose presence these remarks were made, admitted
that the stock had been sold out, but said that it
should all be returned, and that he had sufficient
money to meet all demands upon him. After Mrs.
Markwick's death the prisoner was given into custody
by Mr. John Macdonald, the husband of one ot her
daughters, who had been deprived by the prisoner
of one-eighth of the sum, as had also the re-
mainder of the family. The prisoner, when arrested,
was armed with a loaded revolver, which, it was stated,
he invariahly carried about with him. On evidence
of which this is an outline the prisouer had been re-
manded, and on Monday Mr. S•rjeant Sleigh applied
to the C, urt, on behalf of the defence, for a further
adjournment. The very essence and gist, he said, of
such a charge as that now preferred against the pri-
soner were that the acts alle.esl to have been done
wero committed with an intention to defraud.
tie hart had a conversation write so-
prosecution, and he believed he had satisfied him
that before the next hearing some tangible proof
would be given that the prisoner, in his transactions
with the trust fund, had not acted in the least degree
mula fidc. In reference to that fund he might state
that a bond had been entered into between the lady
beneficially interested in it and the prisoner, in pur-
suance of which the latter had noted as he bad done,
but without the slightest intention to defraud. The
prisoner was making arrangements to replace all the
trust money, and by the next examination it would
have been either wholly reinstated or such good security
given as to leave its repayment not a matter of the
smallest doubt. He believed the prosecution had been
instituted under an erroneous supposition, and be had
no doubt that if that was shown to be the case the Lord
Mayor would have pleasure in allowing the charge to
be withdrawn.
Mr. Straight said the prosecutor, Mr. Macdonald,
had instituted the proceedings solely to learn his true
position with regard to the trust fund, and he could
consent to the application made on behalf of the prisoner
only on the condition that everything which should
occur in the interval of the remand should be made
public, and should receive the concurrence of the
Court.
The Lord Mayor remanded the prisoner until Tues-
day the 30th inst.
THE PRIVILEGES OF PEERS.

Judgment was given on Saturday, In Chancery, in the
point raised in the Duke of Newcastle's bankruptcy, whether,
being a peer, he was liable to arrest for debt. It was an
appeal from the decision of Commissioner Winslow, refusing
to deal with the estate of the bankrupt on the gr,mnd that
he was protected by Privilege from legal proceedings in that
court.
Lord Justice Gifford said the only question was
whether the defendant was exempt from the operation
of the bankruptcy laws, and he went through the dif-
ferent authorities and cases cited in the course of the
argument Up tithe time of George the Tnird there
was no doubt that members of Parliament were
excluded by privilege from the operation of the
Insolvency Court. or other legal proceedings, except
in the case of misdemeanour. He was of °Onion
that the question should be decided by the Acts of 1849
and 1861, which altered the relation between members
of Parliament and their creditors, except so far as per-
sonal freedom was concerned. By the first Act mem-
bers of Parliament, both of Lords and Commons, who
wire traders, were held to be liable to proceedings in
bankruptcy, and if the defendant in this case had been
a trader there would have been no question about the
matter. In support of the appeal it was urged that
there was nospecitic mention of members of Parliament ;
it was not intended by legislation that they should be
placed in the came position in this respect to creditors
as non-traders were by the Act of 1849. In the ,
Act of 1861 occurred the words :—" All persons whether
traders sir not." Ile considered that the olject of the
Act of 1861 was to extend the powers of the Act of
1849, and that the words in question did include all
members of Parliament, whether traders or non-
traders, and that omission of not including them
uppeirtlly uro,e from inadvertence and not from the in-
tention of the legislature. The case must be remitted
to the Bankruptcy Court, and if the defendant were
proved to be indebted ti the plaintiff the coat of this
appeal must come out of his estate.