The Express.
London, England, 1852-12-20 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-SATURDAY.

SITTIPOI AT tilsl PILIVI AT GCILDMALL. BI FOLIC Ttlt LORD Crll/7
....B•wom AND • Yner••

TIII GRT.At CZNTi/A -61;.•L:0;;U-11-i1111. • COMPANT O.

Z ALLI 3

This was an action to recover the sum of 2241. Pis. 5d.,
the bilance of an account due to the plaintiffs for gu sup-
plied to the defendant, a printer in the city. The real de-
tendants, however, were the Chartered and other gas com-
panies ; and the object of the action, on the port of the
defendant, was to prove the inferiority of the gas supplied
to him by the plaintiff., he having been previously supplied
by the Cluttered Gas Company.
The plaintills case only was concluded when the court
MSC.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—SATURDAY.
COIIIIIIOIoPIM F0N11.A1,11,11.
IN RE KEITH AND SHOMMIDOE.

The consitleratiouoFthe cCriiiicate•—•OFtiese bankrupts
was resumed, by adjournment, from Wednesday last. Oa
that day, the case azitinat the bankrupts was gone through
by Mr. Reed, and Mr. Lawrence was beard on behalf of the
banks apt Simahridge.
Mr. Linklater now addresatil the court on behalf of Keith.
Ile contended that in the charges made against the bank-
rupts jointly, his client was not more culpable than the
other bankrupt. Mr. Keith lid for some years carried on
• successful business as gauze manufacturer, before enter-
ing into partnership with Mr. Wilson; they were then
joined by Shoobridge ; and when Mr. Wilson retired in 1845,
the capital of the firm was found to be upwards of 8,001.
Of this capital 5,0001. belonged to Mr. Wilson; he chose to
settle this &meant on the children of Mr. Keith, in which
there was nothing extraordinary.
Mr. Reed said if this matter was to be gone into, he
should require the examinations relating to it to he read.
Ilia Honour said it was immaterial how this property
came into the bankrupt'slamily ; the only question was how
it was dealt with.

Mr. Link'ater said the result had been to place a large
sum to the benefit of the estate. Ile merely mentioned thi
circumstance to chow the successful nature of the business
that had been carried on up to that period. In June, 1847,
there appeared to be a small deficiency. This was known
to Mr. Bboobridge, as well as Mr. Keith ; so wu the state of
the firm in 1848. At the former relied, extended credit
being necessary to the amount of 20,0001. or 30.0001., they
hail tho assistance of their largest creditors to that extent.
But for that circumstance they might hare been induced to
stop then, or at all events in 1819. The loss of 3.0001. in
1818 arose on the purchase and sale of goods; but Mr. Keith
was not to be singled out as mainly responsible for that.
On the separation of the business Keith went into partner-
ship with Mr. Goode, who hod been most unjustly described
as a pauper, whereas he bad an independence hit him by
his father, and was now living on the rents of his freehold
and leasehold property. The bona fides of the partnership
between Keith and Goode were undou'ited ; there was a
regular deed of partnership; and it was stipulated that
Goode should bring in 2,0001.
The Commissioner.-11a agreed to bring in 2,0001.; but
what did he bring in ?
Mr. Linklater said it appeared from Keith's examina-
tion that Goode had actually brought in 2,0001. at first, and
afterwards capital to the amount of 5,0001. in all, but of
this 4,0001. was trust money, Goode being one of the trus-
tees for Keith's children.

Mr.lteedrefe;;;F; the balance-sheet to show that
Goode brought in no capital. The 1,0001. was merely an
accumulation of profits.
Mr. Linklater submitted that the establishment of the
separate business of Keith and Co. was evidence of steps
being taken by the bankrupts to relieve their own business,
on the Imes o(1848 becoming known to them. But the
new firm was not made a mere machine for the accommo-
dation of Keith and Shoobridge ; on the contrary, Mr.
Keith protested firmly against it. There was every pro-
sped of the desired relict being obtained; but in 1849, the
sales were still less productive (end this was the exclusive
department of Mr. Shonbridge), leading to • further loss of
3,000!. To meet this en arrangement was made, on the sug-
geation of Mr. Shoobridge, for having their goods printed in
Scotland, whereby they anticipated saving one-half the ex-
pense. Though it might now appear, on a review of the
whole of the transactions, that they ought then to have
stopped, it should be remembered that a single year's suc-
cessful trading might have brought them entirely round,
and some allowance should be made for the sanguine hopes
of traders themselves. Se far from seeking to defraud
their creditors, it was evident their sole anxiety was to be
able to meet all demands upon them. In 18.50 a large por-
tion of their stock being in the hands of the Scotch printers,
their regular annual stock taking could not be made. They
then anticipated great advantage to themselves and their
creditors from the results of their display at the Great Ex-
hibition, and considerable expense was incurred with a
view thereto. They obtained several prizes; they were
placed on the royal committee; and the fame of their firm
was considerably raised. During the Exhibition Mr. Shoo-
bridge was almost in daily attendance ; the result was that
the stock taking was again omitted. That this did not arise
from any fraudulent design towards their creditors was evi-
dent from the fact that every one of their transactions
were carefully recorded in their books. There had
not been the slightest attempt at misrepresentation or
concealment ; the only charge against them was that they
had gone on trading at a loss. During their trading they
had paid 133,0001. to one creditor alone—Means. Ilar-
greases; these gentlemen were naturally anxious that the
bankrupts should be enabled to continue their business;
they and other creditors had assisted them in doing so;
end the bankrupts ought not now to be condemned far that.
Between 1847 and 1852, the debt of Messrs. Hargreaves
had been reduced from 8,0140/. to between OW/. and
6,0001. Even so late as the beginning of the present
year, Messrs. Hargreaves had assisted them, by taking
their note of hand for a large amount-3.501. Unfortu-
nately, the sanguine hopes of the bankrupts from the Great
Exhibition were not realised. They were not singular in
this; for the tilts of that court were filled with records of
similar disappointments. In the firm of Keith and Co.,
Mr. Keith was the principal manager ; he bad conducted
that business carefally and successfully; the accounts bad
been kept with perfect accuracy ; bow then could he be
chug, das more guilty than Mr. Shoobridge ? There was
no evidence whatever to justify this conclusion. It had
been originally charged against Mr. Keith, even before his
accounts were filed, that the firm was insolvent in 80,
when Mr. Wilson retired from it. Mr. Keith bad no op-
portuaity then of refuting that charge ; he bad labuured
under it ince. Now it appear-d that the firm had, at
that time, an undoubted capital of 8,0001. This was suffi-
cient to account fur Isis apparnit estrangement from the
assignees.
The Commissioner—You cannot mean that he was justi-
fied, from souse fancied Ofence on the part of the assignees,
in not doing his duty to his creditors ?
Mr. Li dtl3lar was fir from c.m•ending that. On the
other hand, the bankrupt had done all in his power to
serve the estate i but he referred to this eireuni.dance in
'Soot of the feeling that had existed. On the question of
the general trading there was nu discoverable difference
between the bankrupts, except that Mr. Shoobridge had