The Express.
London, England, 1852-01-19 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, JANUARY 19, 1852.

firm of Messrs. Coutta and Co. to MOM the rem of
2,5061. 175., which the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant
had improperly paid upon their account. The action was
tried before Mr. Baron Martin, when • eeri let wee foiled
fur the plaiutilti, damages 2,596. 17s. The cireuuedances
of the case were these. It appeared that the plaintiffs were
the trustees of the property of a deceased person, whose
name we understood to be Cragg, and that a Chancery suit
had been instituted for the purpose of settling his drain
An order was made by the Court of Chancery, directing
the plaintiffs to pay the sum of 2,5981. 17s. into the
hands of the Accounant•Cleneral of the Court of
Chancery. They accordingly drew a cheque upon Mean.
Coutts and Co. in favour of • Mr. Edward Bryant
Cleary, the solicitor to tho next of kin to the late Mr. Cragg.
The cheque stated that the money waste he paid on account
of general unpaid coon, and was crossed with the word"
Bank of England, for account of the Accountant-Omen's"
The Aceountant-Ueneral, it appeared, would not receive
cheques, and consequently Mr. Cleary struck out the en-
dorsement upon the cheque, and wrote the name of his
own hanl.ers, Messrs. Ousting and Co., across it. Messrs.
Coutta and Co. then paid the amount of the cheque to
Messrs. tioslin • and Co., who placed at to Mr. fleary's pri-
vate account. That person, however, instead of plying the
money to the Accountant-General, converted it to his own
use, for which offi nee he was tried, convicted, and sentenced
to transportation. The present action was then brought
ageing the defendant, the plaintiffs contending that as they
had crossed the cheque with the %orals Dank of England,
Messrs. Coutts and Co. ought only to have paid the amount
into the Bank of England, and not to Messrs. Gosling and
Sharpe.
In the course of last term Sir F. Thesiger obtained a rule
for a new trial.
The Attorney-General now showed cause against the rule,
and said that the effect of the finding of the jury
was that Messrs. Coutts and Co. ought to have paid the
cheque into the Dank of England, and that they had been
guilty of negligence in paying it in the manner they had
done. it was clear that the intention of the plaintiffs had
been frustrated by their own bankers, in consequence of
their having paid the cheque to Mr. Geary 's bankers. The
intention of the plaintiffs was to obey the order of the
Court of Chancery, and to pay the money to the Accountant
General, and not that it 'should' be put to the private ac-
count of Mr. Geary. Under ouch cireumstanees ought
Messrs. Coutts and Co. to have paid the cheque in the man-
ner they did ? Ho (the Attorney-General) submitted that
they ought not. The intention it the plaintiffs woo
fest upon the face of the cheque, but it was said that the
manner in which the cheque was drawn rendered it a nullity
If that were so, then it was the duty of Messrs. Coutts and
Co. to have communicated with the plaintiff.. and to
have told them that they had drawn a cheque in such a
form that it was not possible to honour it. lie (the At.
. torney-General) therefore submitted that the rule ought to
; be dicharged.
Mr. Knowles, Q.C., and Mr. Unthank followed on the

same aide. _
Mr. Serjeant ("barmen then addressed the court in sup-
port of the rule, and contended that it must me made abso-
lute. If in point of law Messrs. Coutta and Co. were jus-
tified in paying the cheque, then there could he no negli-
gence on their oart. Ile submitted that they were so
justified, and that the evidence in the case rebutted the
charge of negligence. The cheque wu an order,
by the custom of bankers, to pay Mr. Geary or bearer the
sum of 2.5961. I7s. They had paid Mr. Geary,
aad therefore he might be considered in the
light of the bearer of the cheque. The restriction as re-
garded the payment of the cheque, if any, arose from the
words " Bank of England" being endorsed upon it, but
those words carried no meaning with them, and were
merely written in compliance with a conventiond form,
which wu altogether inealid. It was impossible, by any
custom, to contravene a written instrument, and in the
present case Messrs. Coutta and Co. had only followed the
directions contained in a written instrument by paying the
money to Mr. Geary or bearer. Ile, therefore, contended
that the rule must be made absolute.
Sir John Bayley was also heard in supl ort of the rule.
The Lord Chic. B iron said the amount sought to be re-
cosi red was very large, and the case was one of great fin-
portanee. The court, therefore, did not feel theinsilvcs
justified in giving judgment until they had submitted the
matter to grave consideration.
Judgment deferred.

COURT OF BANKRUPTUY.-S.ATrRDAT.
_Barons 21. a. nansiesso7.9.. nas

IGt-irs;;W
The bankrupts, who were drapers, at Leeds, applied for
their certificates at a former sitting. ilia Honour now gave
judgment, recapitulating all the circumstances. The bank-
rupts, he said, had commenced busitiese at Leeds, in 1847 ;
but not satisfied with this, they had opened shops at Brad-
ford, Leeds, and Shelfiell, and there sold goods, but not in
the ordinary way of trade. The consequence waa that as
early as the 20th of February, 1830, they owed 2,7301., and
had assets only to the extent of 1,6301., leaving them in •
deficiency of 1,2001. At the same period of the following
year they they had again looked into their affairs, not in a
regular and systematic manner, but with sufficient accuracy
to enable them to state that they owed rather less than at
the previous period (2,2091.), while their wets had been
reduced from 1,3501. to about 1,0001., leaving them in
pretty nearly the same position. with a deficiency of 1,2001.
They became bankrupt in August last, when their debts had
increased to 3,300/., and their a•sets, instead of 1,0001., were
reduced to about 5001., leasing a deficiency of about 2,8001.
The mode in which they had carried on business sufficiently
explained how it was that they had gone on from had to
worse. Thomas Wallis, Jun., stated in his examination
that they had had sales at Halifax and other places. They
had no memorandum of the stock that went there, or of the
stock that came back, or of the money that they received.
They marked their goods to he sold at an avenge of 20 per
cent. above the cost price. The amountsgiven were merely
estimated. They sent young men round the country with
hawkers' licenses, but never entered the good• delivered to
them. This was • degree of recklessness which it was im-
possible to distinguish from fraud ; end, looking at the re-
sult, in the gradual iacrease of the debts anal the reduction
of the assets, he could not regard it as any other than •
fraudul ,nt proceeding. A few days before calling their
creditors toaether they had m a payment of 100 t. to -n
noel., to whom they owed 2001., but thG had been returned .
This, taken in connection with the other facts of the case,
was an evidence of something which, if not absolutely fraudu-
lent, was closely allied to it. There were certainly two
circumstances ■ little in their Savour. The personal ex-
penses appeared to have very small ; but when such masses
of money bad disappeared there was reasonable ground
for suspecting that tthhee personal expenditure was under-
valued. The other &montane, was that they had ,hewn
a readiness to meet their creditors, and had induced their
uncle to repay the 1001. Giving them credit for this, he
still felt bound to postpone their certificates for two years
from the date of the fiat, and he should not grant them
protection till they had undergone three mouths' imprison-
ment.
Mr. A. Jones represented the assignees in this case, and
Mr. Lawrence the bankrupts.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.-SATURDAY.
Ix NE JOHN MILLII.-BILL DISCOUNTING.-11INT TO

This insolvent, descs7b:cia;Us author, who applied under
the Protection Act, was opposed in person by two rialtos'
named Magniss and Thompson. Mr. Cooke supported.
The opposing creditors were holders of bills of exchange
given by the Insolvent, and the question was what reason-
able expectations the insolvent had for contracting his
debts. His wife was in expectation of money by the death
of a relative, and a friend expected a chancery sail to be
settled. He had made himself liable for debts, and had
sold for 1201. furniture which had cost him more than 3001.
Mr. Magniss had discounted bills for the insolvent, and
admitted that he had charged 30 per cent. as discount.
The insolvent said Mr. Magniss had charged him 60 per coat.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips said if the opposition stood
alone he should pay little attention to it, but he looked at
the schedule and saw the manner in which some of the debts
had been contracted. He should give no assistance to gen-
tlemen—and it should be made public—who took by their
own admission 30 per cent. They were their own insurers,
and need not complain.
Mr. Thompson, the other complainant, said he was inthe
Mme " boat" es the ether. He had charged 30 per eent.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips—Do not call it boat, call it
Kr.
(Laughter.)
Kr. Thompson said he had lost 1,0001 by the persons
!!am whom be took the bills of the insolvent.
Mt.

W me doubt bill dieeoonten
ran great vieke—di reenril=filede peelhoies. They were
their own 1021•1•18 mai yen oft mar the Peissaen' Act
eotiticd to and =lle 7/1I OM time Whir the Pre-
tection Act, opea the hoe el the NIA& It tree am
that tho insolvent bed imired delis IMMO imesible
expectations el mese& St had no weeherity
it tub
the
act i• WM • der alf the leaf order, and therefore it moat
be adieurnell mime die without protection.

THB POLICE COURTS.
WORSHIP-STREET.
_ _

John Fletcher, a young man of respectable appearance
and connexions, was charged with having stolen • F con-
taining 461., in notes and gold, the property of his em-
ployer, Mr. Peter Ludgate, an ostensive draper, in ChM.
well-street, Finsbury-square.
It appeared that the prisoner had filled the situation of
clerk in the prosecutor's service, at • liberal salary, since
the month of July last, and bad always been regarded as a I
of unimpeachable integrity until the 31st alt., when
person
left without notice, and never again made his
appearance. Shortly after be bad absconded, it was dis-
covered by Mr. George Ovary, another clerk in the esta-
blishment, that • canna bag, containing sovereigns and
hank notes, to the amount of W., end which he had depo-
sited in • desk in the warehouse the same morning, in the
presence of the prisoner, had also disappeared. A search
had ever since been made after him by the police, but the
prisoner succeeded in eluding apprehension, and nothing
more was seen of him until the preceding evening, when
he presented himself before Inspector Brannan at the
Featherstone-street station-house, and voluntarily sur-
rendered himself into custody.
The prisoner was fully committed for trial.
M AR LBORO U G H - ST RE ET .
Hem AA...a, pugilist, was charged with conspiring with
game net in est. Mahood Jackson, landlord
it Om King's Peett-iewa et 341. 10s. 04 Friday
wadi liilbedant went M eemplafitant, a Yorkshirentan,
end selkeit him it he hod • room for sparring, as h• knew •
Me.of torten" wbo wanted to take MOM imam
mid 10 *aught be eosli aessuundata the
cam we mot le have June seam islet
sf 4,0101, end wlee, elie taking hese^ wail Crelimiero
miler a belle et maw The next two days the gannet

and the gentleman came, and some sparring took place, and
on the second d ty the gentleman said he was going to !care
town, but, hefore cluing so, should wish to bring a friend
to have a sort of glove fight with the prisoner. On
Wednesday last the gentleman and two others came
and after sparring some time, prisoner told Mr. Jackson
that a bet of 51. was made for one of the gentlemen's friends
to fight him with the gloves on. A bet was made by one of
the friends of 301. to 101, and the bettor asked the prose-
cutor to put down 101. for him, to which he consented, and
the person took it up. The room being con►idered too
small for the glove fight, all parties went to a house in Cnns..
berland Market. The glove fight was begun, and during
its continuance, Mr. Jackson was induced to put down
211. 10s. more, making 311. 10$., not on his own account,
but on account of the bets made by the gentleman% friend.
Mr. Jackson, however, suspected something was wrong,
and demanded his money buck, when the prisoner and
others threatened to punch his head, and made their way
out of the house into a cab, in which he also got, and they
then got out, and went into a public-hours in Lambs Cou-
duit-street, hut were followed by Mr. Jackson, wko ulti-
mately gave the prisoner into custody.
Ile was remanded to Tuesday neat.