The Press.
London, England, 1856-11-29 00:00:00

,'al:e ant Value.

A GA3IBLING CASE of some interest, and consider-
able profit to the " general reader," was heard on
Wednesday last at the Court of Queen's Bench.
The action, that of Culverwell v. Sidebottom," wa.,
brought to recover 2,0001. on a promissory note drawn
by a Mr. Atkins (the keeper of the Barkley belt, at the
corner of Albemarle-street, known by the name of
the "Stick Shop "), accepted by Mr. Sidebctom,
the son of a wealthy Manchester cotton manu-
facturer, and held by Mr. Culverwell, a retired
tailor. The defence was that the bill was given for
money lost in gambling. Mr. Sidebottom, in 1817,
came up to town, saw life, and visited Atkins' hell.
He played at hazard, and the first night lost 8,000/.
From that year to 1853, whenever he came up to
town, he spent a little time and much money at this
hell. He thus detailed his experiences :

When I have been there I have always seen Atkins. HI
sat at the table, and seemel to be the moneylender. Then
were two bankers. They were called croupiers. Atkins
was one of them. He sat at a small table at one side of
the room. He seemed to take the general management of
the place. The persons almost always play with counters.
They are given out by the croupiers. Money is paid for
them. When the parties have no money the croupiers ask
Mr. Atkins whether they shall give them counters. When
he gives his consent the croupiers hand the counters to
the parties, who give bills, and sometimes do not. I have
often obtained money in that way. I gave 1 0 U's and
cheques for them. Having obtained the counters, I went
back to the table, and played at the game. I continued to
go there until 1832 or 1853.
Mr. Sidebottom then proceeded to give the modest
history of his play and his losses. On the first night
he lost 8,0001.:—
From 1847 to 1852, or 1853, I went about twelve times.
I cannot say positively what I lost altogether, bat I think
it was between 25,0001. and 26,0001. I think I paid of that
sum about 15.0001. or 16,0001. When I lost my largest
sums I was playing against the bank alone. I played all
night and until the next morning. There were refresh.
ments in the house, champagne and other things. They
were supplied by the people of the house. The waiter
went round and asked who wanted refreshments.

This was the gentleman's story. He had lost his
money at what he thought fair play. A little of the
inner life of the Stick Shop," was yet to be detailed
by a Newington publican, one Davis. He had known
Atkins for thirty years :
When I first knew him he was doorkeeper, or porter, at
160, Piccadilly, which was a gambling•house. I took him
in partnership at a gaming-house at the corner of Albe•
merle-street. It was called the Stick Shop. ( Laughter.)
The person who kept it sold sticks and umbrellas. The
next gaming-house we kept was in St. James's-street, over
Dodd's, the tailor's.

So much for Mr. Atkins. Now for Mr. Culverwell,
who, according to this witness, was upon the most
intimate terms with Atkins :
I know Culverwell, the plaintiff. When I first knew
him be was a tailor. He has retired from business, and
lives in North street. Clapham. I have seen him on
several occasions at these gaming-houses with Atkins. I
have heard Atkins apply to him for money—that is where
his money came from. I have known Atkins lend him
money. Atkins would say to Culverwell, " The bank
broke last night, and we want some money." He has ad-
vanced money, and he has asked me whether I thought he
would be safe in so doing.

But Cnlverwell was something better than a monci-
lender :

Cnlverwell used to be the " bonnet "—that is a by word
for a person who pretends to play when any stranger conies
in, but always wins. (Laughter.) Saw him act as a
" bonnet " at Atkins's table and mine. Charles Pitcher
was also a bonnet." Atkins knew him well. We three
were concerned together at HO, Piccadilly. Pitcher was
the "bonnet " there.

At last we get a view of the tables and dice, and the
fools and rogues who occa,ionally use them.
Lord CAMPBELL: Supposing the bonnet wins?
Witness: Well. he generally do. (Laughter.) I have
heard applications made to Culverwell to lend money upon
bills. I know what loaded dice are. ,Some dice were
handed to witness.) 1 think these are loaded. There are
other dice, which are called " dispatchers."

Lord CAIIPBELL : I never heard of " dispatchers "
before.

Witness : This dice (holding it np) is loaded to make a
particular number turn up. The dispatch dice have
doable fives and double sixes. They are in favour of
the table, I should say, fifty to one—in tact, ail the world
against one. They are changed for other dice; some-

1137

times by the " bonnet," and sometimes by the room•
porter— " rung in," as it is termed. I have seen them used
at Atkins's table, but I have always tried to get them away
as soon as possible. I am speaking both of loaded dice
and " dispatchers."
_ _

Crosaexamined by Mr. Sergeant Sitaz : I have been
engaged with Atkins about ten years altogether. During
that time we sometimes used loaded dice and "dispatchers."
1 used to get them away as soon as possible, because I
did not like to take the responsibility of employing them.
1 never returned the money which we won with them
from young men—they never applied for it. We, how.
ever, did use the " dispatchers," but I hope I am a better
man now. 1 have never been a " bonnet."

Re-exanained by Mr. E. JAMES: Culverwell made
clothes for the " bonnets." (Laughter.) I have seen
" bonnets " iu military costume, and in all shapes and
forms. (Laughter.)

This closed the case for the defendant. On the
other hand, Culverwell ddnied that he was ever in a
gambling-house. He discounted bills, and, among
other persons, for Atkins, but he never acted as a
" bonnet," nor had he ever gambled. He had
discounted this bill brought to him by Atkins, and
had given for it two cheques, one for BSOI., another
for 675/., but be knew nothing of its origin. The
bill was drawn by Atkins upon Mr. Sidebottom, who
accepted it, payable at four years, and that was all
he knew about it. Lord Campbell summed up
briefly on the evidence, and the jury immediately re.
turned a verdict for the defendant.

THY QUESTION OF AN ADJUDICATION IN BANK-
RUPTCY, in the case of the Royal British Bank, which
for some weeks past has given rise to a conflict
between the Courts of Chancery and Bankruptcy,
was partially decided by the Vice Chancellor on
Monday. Notice of appeal was immediately given,
and the case will come at an early day under the
notice of the Lords Justices, from whom it may
possibly be further referred to the House of Lords.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR, in delivering judgment,
observed that the practical question to be decided
was, whether the property of the Royal British Bank
was to be distributed among the creditors by the
official assignee under the bankruptcy or by the
official manager under the Winding-up Act. He then
went through the material facts and dates of the
ca-,e. On the 3rd of September, 1856, the bank
stepped payment. On the Bth, Elliot, a creditor,
filed an affidavit of debt in the Court of Com-
mon Pleas. On the 9th of October, when a
caleidar month had expired from the service of
Ellict's writ of summons, another creditor named
Burke presented a petition for adjudication to the
Court of Bankruptcy, and oa the same day the com•
pany was adjudged bankrupt under 7th anal 8:h Vic.,
cap. 1-1, and Mr. Lee was appointed official assignee.
On the 13th of October Mr. Harding was appointed
official msnager :
Upon these facts, the first question to be determined is
this—who has the legal tide to the property of the com•
pan; ? hit vested in the official assignee or in the official
manager? If in the latter, no ground has been suggested
why that edit should not prevail. If in the official assignee ,
the next grtstion is, are there any grounds upon which
this court cagbt to interfere with the assertion or exercise
of his legal t' tle ?

The solntiot of those questions depended principally
upon the cozatruction and comparison of two acts of
Parliament-7th and Bth Vic., c. ill, and 11th and
12th Vic., c. 45. His Honour then entered into a
luminous exposition of the state of the law with
respect to the vinding up of joint-stock companies ,
from which it appeared that, while the Court of Bank-
ruptcy under th4th and 8:h Vic., c.lll, is empowered
to declare a con.?any bankrupt, and to proceed to a
certain extent in vinding up its affairs, it pussesses
no power for eiforcing contributions among the
debtors, which end is only to be attained by the aid
of the Court of Chancery. Upon the point whether
the double litigatict_ could be carried on together,
his Honour observet

certainly feel that same inconvenience may possibly
arise from the simuitalions prosecution of proceedings in
bankruptcy and procetlin,,..,,s under the Winding-up Act
against the same compaiy, but I cannot admit its impossi-
bility. All that can be done in any case by the assignee
under the orders of the !nun of Bankruptcy, is to divide
among the creditors the (listing estate and effects of the
bankrupt company ; to go beyond this and make the
shareholders contribute vast is needed to supp:4 gee
deficiency of those assets fir full satisfaction of the debts
is not the function of the Court of Bankruptcy, but oflt his
court, so that if the procesawas carried on simultaneously
in both courts, the effect timid be that the assignee in
bankruptcy would collect aid realise, and divide among
the creditors the existing estae and effects, and the official
manager would proceed to Bette the list of contributories,
and ascertain bow mach each eight to contribute, in order
to effect lull satisfaction of the tebts.

With respect to the proceeditgs in the present case,
it was clear that all was don, thatjwas necessary in
conformity with the 7th and Bth die., c. 111, and
that on the 6th of October at al e►ents the company
had committed an act of bankinptcy, and
adjudication and appointment of the official
Mr. Lee, on the 0,1 of October, Tested all

estate in the °Masi assignee, niter the 1

that the
assignee,
the legal
33rd sec-

1138

tion of the Bankruptcy Consolidation Act. His
Honour having at great length gone through the
various sections of the statutes referred to, and the
arguments of counsel, said he did not see there was
any pretence for saying that there was any legal
estate in the official manager, all that had been done
on his part at the time of the adjudication in
bankruptcy was the appointment of Mr. Harding as
au interim manager, and registering that appoint.
ment previous to the adjudication and appointment
of the official assignee. The official manager was a
mere receiver appointed by that court, and had no
legal estate vested in him, and there was nothing
analogous with such an appointment and that of an
assignee in bankruptcy. Looking at the whole case,
he was of opinion that the legal estate in the Royal
Bitish Bank vested in the official assignee, and that
all the assets in the hands of Mr. Harding, atter
deducting all disbursements, costs, and charges of
collection, should be handed over by Mr. Harding to
the official assignee. With respect to the grounds
urged by the plaintiffs, that the court ought to inter-
fere on the ground of equity, he did not, after care-
fully reviewing it, think that ought to prevail, and
Mr. Harding being a mere receiver, ought not to
have been made a plaintiff at all. Under all cir-
cumstances, he should order that all the assets be
handed over as before stated, all expenses of collec-
tion to be retained by Mr. Harding, who would go
on with the contributories, and as soon as there was
that fund lie would deal with the question of his re-
muneration—the injunction to be dissolved, the
costs to be costs in the cause. His Honour then
pronounced the order to the effect stated.
Notice ot appeal was immediately given, upon
which the VICE-CIUNCELLOR remarked that of course
an appeal against his judgment would hare been
made in either ease :
The practical struggle is, who shall have the benefit of
the per-centage upon this large sum—the official assignee
or the official manager. (Laughter.)
Mr. Roux: I protest on behalf of my clients that suet
is not exclusively their object.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR: Ido not say exclusively. (Re-
newed laughter.)
Sir F. KELLY said that he had intended to make a rro-
don to extend the injunction against the official assio:e.
That motion would be made on entirely new grounds, tnu
it would be decisive of the whole question between the
parties. As it was intended to appeal at once to the Lords
Justices against the judgment just delivered, he hoped
that the learned counsel on the other side would coasent
to an arrangement which would permit that motion to
come on with the appeal as if it had been made in the first
instance to his Honour.
Mr. Hour assented.
A compromise will, however, most likely be effected,
Mr. Linklater baying stated on Thursday in the
Court of Bankruptcy that the appeal in all proba-
bility would be withdrawn, and au arrangement
entered into between the official manager and the
official assignee to the mutual benefit of shareholders
and creditors. The petition then before the court to
annul the bankruptcy, in older that the proceedings
might be transferred to the winding-up judge, was
ordered to stand over accordingly.

A CASE, curiously illustrative of tle morals of
Shoreditch, was heard by Mr. D'Eprourt, at the
Worship-street Police-office, on Thurt,itty. William
Neale, an intelligent boy about twelvt, was charged
with robbing his father of ten shilling,. Mr. D'Eyn-
court asked the father if be really rere desirous of
prosecuting his son—he said "Yes." Mr. D'En-
court then asked for the boy's nother : a woman
about thirty-five stepped into the witness box, and
was sworn :

Mr. D'EyNcot-tyr: And are you, tx, desirous this boy
should be prosecuted?

Woman Yes, air. •
Mr. D'ErNcot-nr : And ars you ha mother?
Woman : I am his mother•in•law sir.
Mr. D'ErNcouar : Oh; then ha► long has his mother
been dead ?

Wontau: About five years, sir He has been out of
prison but five weeks; he has en.ugh to eat, and is well
eluthed, but he prefers guing outwithout his boots.

" Going out without his boot" was conclusive, and
going into gaol seemed the natural consequence,
when suddenly the boy best into tear?, and cried
out :

Oh, sir, my mother is not teed ; she is living now.
Mr. D'EyscousT : Let th father stand up again. (To
the father )—ls this so?
Father : It is, sir, but sh left me, and I have not heard
o' her for five years.
Mr. D'Erscotrar : Let nat woman stand up. ( She did
so.) You said you wer the boy's mother-in-law, which
means his father's wife, aid that the boy's own mother had
beau dead five years.
Woman : Well, sir, 'am not married, but I am going
to be; the bans are pit up. lam living with the boy's
father as his wife, but know the mother is not dead.

It was quite clear now that the father and this
woman wished to let rid of the boy. Mr. D'Eyn-
court sent for th. mother. When she arrived, the
boy, on seeing hismother, burst into tears again. In
e ply to Mr. D'Epeourt, she said:—

THE PRESS.

I am the mother of this boy, and his father is my
husband. I was married to him fifteen years ago at
Stepney Church, but have been separated from him now
for five yearsand a half. I left him in consequence of his
ill-usage, and he has not since contributed anything to
support me.

Nothing but pity for this poor woman was felt; but
Mr. D'Eyncourt put the awkward question, " Thep,
how do you live "f

Wife: Why, to speak the truth, lam living with another
person, but I supported myself fur ten mouths before I
did so, and he is a very hard-working man.
And then this interesting little episode in domestic
life closed as follows :

Mr. D'Etrwcottar (to the father) : Are you still desirous
to prosecute your son?
Father: I am, sir, both for his benefit and mine; be
I,as disgraced me and destroyed my character. I certainly
illuse my wife, I know it; but it was in consequence
of her dissolute character.

Mr. D'Eyxcouar : I cannot sufficiently express my
indignation and disgust at your conduct. Now, look what
Sou have done. You are cohabiting with another woman,
your wife, that child's mother, being still alive, and she
herself is living with another man. These are facts that
have been proved, and yet you can talk to me of the boy
having disgraced you and destrovel your character! This
poor boy, it is obvious, is the victim of an unhappy,
writehed home, and you are tenfold more guilty than he.
I mill not send him to prison at the desire of such a father
at you are; he is an object 0 pity; he shall be placed in
a" reformatory," and—

Father: Think you, sir, I am very much obliged to yon.
Mr. D'Evxcoutur : Yes, of comae you are, but I will
take very good care that you are made to contribute to his
oupport, for by a recent act of Parliament I can fortunately
do that I repent, I never beard a case that more disgusted
me, and I have little doubt, if a mob had heard the whole
of these facts, that they would havo wreaked summary
vengeance upon you.
Father: I dare say they would, sir, if they lived in the
neighbourhood I do.

Mr. D'ErNcornr : That is my determination, and the
boy shall be taken care of until he can be provided for in
that way.

A VERY CURIOUS CASE, affecting the relations be..
tween counsel and client, has this week been heard
at the Common Pleas. The story is not a long one.
Mrs. Swynfen, under her father-in-law's will, was the
devisee of estates worth 65,0001. Captain Swynfen,
the heir-at-law, contested the will, on the ground
that the testator was fatuous. The case went down
to Stafford for trial, Sir Frederic Thesiger being
specially retained as leading counsel for Mrs. Swyn-
feu, and Sir Alexander Cockburn, then Attorney-
General, and now Chief Justice, for the heir-at-law.
The investigation threatened to be long and compli-
cated. One whole day had been consumed without
getting through the evidence for the plaintiff, and
public curiosity was at the highest pitch on the
opening of the court on the second morning, when
suddenly it was announced that the great Swynfen
case had been amicably settled. The terms of the
arrangement were, that Mrs. Swynfen, in return for
giving up the estates, was to receive an annuity of
1,0001. a year for her life, while a sum of 1,250/. was
to be paid down for the costs of the cause. The
whole matter had just been concluded when Mrs.
Swynfen drove up to the Court-house. Her disgust
was extreme. She declared that she never autho-
rised such a compromise, or indeed any compromise
at all, and protested that she would never be bound
by it. She kept resolutely to her ground, and refused
altogether to quit possession of the estates, or to give
up one iota of the devised property. Captain Swynfen
now applied for a writ of attachment, commanding Mrs.
Swynfen to carry out the arrangement agreed upon
between Sir Frederic Thesiger and Sir Alexander
Cockburn, under penalty of commitment to prison
for contempt of court, and the rule nisi was granted.
On Monday last, through Mr. Kennedy, her counsel,
Mrs. Swynfen was called upon to show cause why
this rule should not be made absolute. The affida-
vits principally relied on were those of herself, her
attorney, and Sir Henry Durrant. The substance of
her's is, that after the first day's trial Mrs. Swynfen
was summoned with Sir H. Durrant to Sir. F. Thesi-
ger's rooms, that Sir Frederic intimated the case was
going against her and advised a compromise, that
nothing definitive was agreed upon, Mrs. Swynfen
positively declaring for the will, the whole will, and
nothing but the will. The next morning she de
spatched a telegraphic message to Sir Frederic at
Stafford, in these words, " The offer is refused."
This message Sir Frederic received before going into
court. Mr. Simpson, the attorney, deposed that be,
for his part, entirely declined assenting to any terms
of compromise, and threw the whole responsibility of
doing so on the leading counsel. The affidavit of
Sir Frederic Thesiger denied Mr. Simpson's state-
ment., and, after relating the interview on the evening
of the first day's trial, states that the parties left him
"on the understanding that they would consider the
matter, but he supposed that counsel would be at
liberty to negotiate for an arrangement." He admits
the receipt of the telegraphic message the next morn-
ing, to the effect that the offer was refused," but
declares that, in his opinion, and that of Mr. Whit,-

SATURDAY,

more, that message "did not meet the question, as
no offer had been made," but they were all convinced
that the arrangement was abandoned, and they must
prepare for trial the next day :
On his coming into deponent's room Mr. Simpson told
deponent that circumstances had come to his knowledge
which made it extremely desirable that the case should be
arranged. Having previously entertained that opinion,
he was strongly confirmed in that view, and deponent said
that he would instantly go to the Attorney-General, and
offer to take 1,0001. a year, which he believed he would give.
He had no recollection of any written paper, and did not
think any was produced. When he reached the court, it
wanted a few minutes of the time of the court's sitting ; but
he had a brief communication with the Attorney General,
who assented to the proposal that the plaintiff should receive
1,0001. a year. it was not true that deponent had told Mrs.
Swynfen that the Attorney-General had offered to give her
an annuity of 1,0001. ; nor did he say, as stated in her affi-
davit, that he had had an intimation from high quarters,
which he was not at liberty to name, that the ease was
likely to go against her. The plaintiff did not say she
would not accept 1,0001. per annum, or any other offer ;
but, on the contrary, there was considerable discussion as
to the terms of compromise, and it was understood that she
and Sir Henry Durrant would take the whole matter into
consideration and send their decision on the following day.
It was nut true that deponent stated that the Attorney-
General had offered to give 1,0001. a yea' and costs if she
would relinquish the estate. Deponent had already stated
the mode in which the arrangement as to the 1,0001. a year
was entered into, and that statement was correct.

Mr. Alexander, Q.C., Mr. Whitmore, and Mr. Gray,
the other counsel, made affidavits supporting the
statements of Sir Frederic Thesiger.

GIVING A FALSE CHARACTER to a servant was a
charge brought before Mr. Jardine, at Bow-street,
this week, against a lady, Mrs. Smithson, of 48,
Gower-place, Euston-square, who in recommending
a young girl, one Anne Leonard, to a new mistress,
a Mrs. Shute, of Hanway-street, gave her a high cha-
racter, and stated that the girl had been two years in
her employ. Anne Leonard was upon this engaged by
Mrs. Shute, and two days afterwards robbed her of
41. 10s., and absconded. Subsequently Mrs. Smithson
called and inquired what was the amount of the rob-
bery. Mr. Shute told her, and she offered to reimburse
him, " as her husban 1 was a gentleman, and would
not mind the money if the exposure was avoided." She
admitted that Leonard had never been in her service,
but said that she had been for two years servant in
the same house in which she (defendant) lived in
Newman-street. " She had done very wrong, and
her husband was exceedingly angry with her." Mr.
Shute refused to accede to any compromise, for Leo-
nard was proved to be a confirmed thief. Mr. Jardine
said it was a clear case of personation of an em-
ployer, and fined Mrs. Smithson 10/., or three
months' imprisonment.

THE ADJOURNED INQUEST upon the body of
Worrell, the carpenter charged with the late murder
at Erith of George Carter, and who poisoned him-
self in the police-cell at Greenwich last week, was
concluded on Wednesday, when a verdict of " Felo-
de-se " was returned. The evidence obtained in-
contestably fixes the murder of Carter upon Worrell,
and, with regard to the manner in which the latter
managed to secret the two phials of prussic acid from
the police searcher, it is now satisfactorily ascertained
that they were hidden in his long hair behind
his ears.

A MURDEROUS ASSAULT was last week committed
at Croydon. A man named Bright, lodging in the
house of a Mrs. Belton, in the Wbite Horse road,
for some cause or other, on coming home last Thurs-
day week, attacked her with a wood chopper, beat in
her skull, and left her insensible on the floor. Some
neighbours, attracted by her screams, when Bright
first attacked her, soon arrived on the spot. Bright
fled, and has not since been found by the police. The
woman lies at the point. of death.
THE STATION-MASTER AT BADWELL, near Barnsley,
Yorkshire, on Monday night, while fastening up the
doors previous to leaving the office, was suddenly
attacked by two men, knocked down, and beaten till
he became insensible. The office was then ran-
sacked, the cash-box broken open and robbed, and
the villains decamped.
THE Two GAROTTERS, HUNTER AND MUSTY, who
on the 29th of October last garotted and robbed Mr.
Mason at Clapham, were tried at the Old Bailey
on Wednesday before Mr. Baron Watson, and sen-
tenced to be " transported for life."
ARCHDEACON DENISON'S APPEAL against the sen-
tence of deprivation passed in October last, under
the Church Discipline Act, on the ground that the
archdeacon's diocesan had not sat in person and
heard the cause, was heard on Thursday at the
Arches Court before Sir John Dodson. The learned
judge said he would deliver judgment on the next
court day.
MR. COOPER, the attorney who at a recent trial at
the Cheshire Quarter Sessions tore off an important
portion of a document used in evidence, and en-
deavoured to secrete it from the notice of the court
was on Monday, by judgment of Lord Campbell,
. . _ .
suspended fror

••••• 1 ...,. .....1 7 m 'ICI .... ..,,,, . 111,,LUCE-111•111W , V11111:11
--....r.,......a,, GsucailllCW LUC winne responsunnty of arcnaeacon's ulocesan nan not sat in person and
means his fathers wife, iod that the boy's own mother had doing so on the leading counsel. The affidavit of heard the cause, was heard on Thursday at the
be.ol dead five years. Sir Frederic Thesiger denied Mr. Simpson's state- Arches Court before Sir John Dodson. The learned
Woman : Well, sir, 'am not roamed, but lam going went, and, after relating the interview on the evening judge said he would deliver judgment on the next
to be; the bans are pit up. lam living with the boy's of the first day's trial, states that the parties left him court day.
father as his wife, but know the mother is not dead. "on the understanding that they would consider the MR. COOPER, the attorney who at a recent trial at
It was quite clear now that the father and this matter, but he supposed that counsel would be at the Cheshire Quarter Sessions tore off an important
woman wished to let rid of the boy. Mr. D'Eyn- liberty to negotiate for an arrangement." He admits portion of a document used in evidence, and en-
court sent for th. mother. When she arrived, the the receipt of the telegraphic message the next morn- deavoured to secrete it from the notice of the court
boy, on seeing hismother, burst into tears again. In ing, to the effect that " the offer was refused," but was on Monday, by judgment of Lord Campbell,
e ply to Mr. Dtpcourt, she said:— declares that, in his opinion, and that of Mr. Whit,. suspended from practising for six months.
_ ._