The Express.
London, England, 1864-07-04 00:00:00

Li.W INTELLIGENCE.

(TEM DAY.)

EQUITY COURT.
(More ViorObsoodlor Wood.)

DANIEL W. ARIIVILIOBT.-40DCanNT.
The object cl this snit was to rectify ea once in
sea appointment et share under a act
this or it
this could not be done, to rectify a subsidiary settlement cif
another appointed share, so far as it iseluded Icor'
acquired property. It was the wish of all parties that L:leee
errors should be set right in order to carry out a family
arrangement ; but there was a difficulty which could only
be got over by • decree of the court, arising from the fact
that infants were interested in the property included in the
subsidiary eattleeneet. The case was one of considerable
professional interest, as an attempt to rectify an appoint-
ment is a novelty in the proceedings of the court.
Mr. Bolt, Mr. Batten, Mr. Sump, Mr. C. Russell, Mr.
G. L. Bissell, Mr. 3. Howard, Mr. A. South, Mr. Giffard,
and Mr. Kekewich were in the case.
The Vice Chancellor, after remarking upon the difficulty
of the cam, said that it was One of those unfortunate
complications which ocoasionally arose from slips made bY
professional advisers. The abject of the appointer himself.
as was apparent from his Instructions, and even from the
recitals in the deed itself, had, through the blonder of his
advisers, not been carried into effect. Under such circum-
stances a court of equity moat meuredly ought to endeavour
to interpose its aid and prevent the injustice which must
the
decree would sowise ensue. Hneaccorangiace.thoutiyt,7 therefore,tthoabet he.dwssej.ustiand-
thoothe ie directing rfied

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Oommimakeer Oon!burn.)
LY U LOUIS LZICZBUCL—JUDGIIXIIT.
Thu bankrupt was a cornice pole manufacturer of Oxford-
street. The case had bees frequently before the court.
The bankrupt sought to pass on accounts showing a large
descieooy, which he had very imperfectly amounted for.
The debts are about 4.0001.

..
His Honour now gun lodgment. H. said the case was •
singular one, and one which raised some difficulty a to the
proper tonne to be pursued by the court. It was • cos
where the bankrupt himself almost admitted that the so-
wants rendered by him were unsatisfactory and wrong ; and
be sought to explain the errors and deficiencies by alleging
that he bad placed implicit confidence in one Smith, his
clerk, to whom he bad delegated the power of drawing
cheques and accepting bills, not only during hie
own absence from the business through illness, bat gene-
rally. Smith absconded before the bankruptcy, and it had
nom tented oat that he had been convicted of embezzle.
meet, and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. Hie
real wine was not Smith, but Choppin, and he had gone by
two or three names. This was the man whom the bank.
rapt, a shrewd and intelligent man enough. had re-
ceived into his employment, and placed implicit
emifidence in. It did not appear that he had
had anything like a character or recommendation with him.
No jury could accept than is a sufficient explanation of the
defective accounts. Under the present law it was not very
clear what the court ought to do with such a man ; pro-
bably in the amendments that were contemplated thin
point would not be lost sight of. The examination
would be again adjourned sine die, with protection
for two months, to enable the bankrupt to obtain the
opinion of the appellate juriedictioo, and bus Hower
hoped that the Lord Chancellor would lay down sours
definite rule for the guidance of the court in those ewe.