The Express.
London, England, 1852-01-24 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JANUARY 24, 1852.

bankrupt had unfortunately become connected with young after Sir P. Thesiger concluded, to Mrs. Cumming, and
collegians and the money-lenders who assisted them in their remained with her tor a considerable time.
difficulties. The father was the largest creditor ; and all
the creditors but two had consented to accept a composition
of 10s. is the pound.
His Elegem said it was the duty of the bankrupt's father
to hare rousetained that his son wee indebted to the amount
of sinsseissi TOOL Wen he starts* Ma is besissst. Thus
had salroprody, howssur. bum as postassmes, sad the
baskrupt sight naive s sortilists et the third class.

THE VERDICT.-THIS DAY.

The Learned Commissioner commenced summing up the
evidence tl.is morniug. Ile did not read over the evidenee,the
jury, who took extremely ample notes during the ease, ex-
pressing an opinion that it was not necessary to de so. He
accordingly left it briefly to the jury to say is what state of
mind they thought Mrs. Cumming was now; whether they
believed her to be of sound mind, and capable of taking can
of her property ; or whether they believed her to be of un-
bound mind ; and, if so, to fix on some day on which her
insanity eommenced.
The jury retired at 11 o'clock ; and, after an ahossos of
abou: 25 mirtites, returned with the following uswelosea
verdict:—" That C. Cumming is of unsound mind, and Or
caple of taking earn of her property, and that she has Wee
so since the let of May, 1846."

INSOLVENT DESTOR.S. COURT.—VESTERo.►T

Dumas Ma. Colonsuonta Pswass.

111 it ALTIRD BATLIIT.—BazAcunt OY TiVeT IT •
Brucaestonsti.
This insolvent, of Lothbsrv, stockbroker aid railway
share dealer, applied to Ili discharged from prison. Mr.
Dowse opposed for Mr. Corbin Robert Corbin, a farmer at
Christchurch, Hampshire; and Mr. Parnell for a Mr.
Freer. A female named Susan Piper appeared in person.
Mr. Cooke supported.
The complaint, on the part of the opposing creditors,
was that the insolvent had committed brosekei of treat
against them. It appeared that he eras • bankrupt in
1842, and obtained his certificate. He now owed 4631., and
had .5071. owing to him, which were all bad debts on
railway specalatious. In 1838 be was employed as stock-
broker to invest between 3001. and 4001. for Mr. Corbin,
and had a power of attorney to receive the dividends, as he
resided in the country, and he was requested to invest the I
dividends with the principal. He now admitted that from
1812 to 1851 he received the dividends and did not invest
them, but applied them to his own uses. Ile had received
according to his own showing 921. be. ad. in dividends,
which he had uut invested. Lest year, Mr. Corbin gave in-
structions that the principal and amainulation should be
sold out, and it was then discovered that for nine years the
dividends had set been invested. Mr. Corbin sued the in-
solvent, and Ise was now is prison at his suit. It wu
stated that Mr. Corbin was not in court to give evidence.
Mr. Freer gave the insolvent, in 1814, 241. to invest for him
in the funds. He discovered when he went to the Bank
fur his dividends that the money had not been invested. Ile
complained to the insolvent, and he bad paid to him at dif-
ferent times W. off the original sum.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips said there was a clear breach
of trust with respect to Freer, but the quest'on was whether
the subsequent payments had not condoned the offence.
Mr. Cooke having been beard for the insolvent,
Mr, Commissioner Phillips gave judgment. He observed
that the insolvent was opposed by three different parties,
on grounds eavoerisg of fraud, all of which had been clearly
and abundantly proved ; but in two of the eases, from pecu-
liar circumstances, the legal grounds were not established,
and therefore the court would only give a judgment, as far
as they were coat-creed, under the discretionary clause. Per-
haps such a circumstance would be of little adv aitage to him,
as the other case of Mr. Corbin was so clearly made out,
possessing no mitigation, that the court was bound to give
an adequate judgment for the breach of trust committed.
The nature of the offence was the cruelest to be imagined
—that of a brash of trust. Although he wu saved from
the penalty in two instances, no one could doubt that the ,
ease of the poor woman who had Bayed her hard earnings
was a cruel one. Breaches of trust were flagrant cases,
whether committed by • person who was required by a
dying man to act as a friend to his children, or by a person
in his station, who had deluded the parties by • receipt
having the appearaace of a document from the back. His
Honour concluded an impressive address to the insolvent
by adjudging hint to an imprisonment under the discre-
tionary clause of six months, and for twelve calendar
month' at the soit of Mr. Corbin, for contracting his debt
by means of a breach of trust.