The Express.
London, England, 1847-06-03 00:00:00

COURT OF REVIEW.

Ex PARTE FLOWER, RE FLOWER..—INJUNLTION TO £l-
- PROCERDINOS IN COUNTY COURT.-111.ii Wu the
petition of the aidbankru to restrain a creditor who had
proved, under the fiat, ebt of 151. 175., from primal's;
upon the same demand in the Middlesex County Court. It
appeared that the creditor had opposed the bankrupt's cer-
tificate, which had been suspended for six months. No di-
vidend bad been declared. The fact of the creditor having
come in under the fiat was stated at the bearing in the
County Court; but the judge considered that the cases decided
at law precluded him from attending to this cWenmatance,
and that it must be made the subject of an application to
the Court of Review. Mr. Macnaghten appeared in sap-
port of the petition, and Mr. Bwanston for the respondent.
The Chief Judge said that the proof amounted to an elec-
tion not to proceed at law, especially aa the creditor had
availed himself of the proof for the purpose of opposing the
certificate. The injunction must be granted, and the re-
spondent must pay the costs of this application.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. CommitelooerOoolbore.
Tfte ADILAIDE HOTEL.—This bankrupt, Joseph &Alm,
who was the proprietor of the Adelaide hotel and Bridge
House hotel, Southwark, came up to pass his last
examination. The following items appeared by the re.
port of the official assignee : To creditors unsecured,
6,6041. ; creditors holding security, to the extent of 4,0001.
odd. The assets were: good debts, 2371.; and property,
3461. (3001. already realised). The balance-sheet ran over a
period of about 8 years; the profits at the Bridge House
hotel were 18,1871., and at the Adelaide 5,9201; capital 20/. ,•
therefore leaving the large sum of 30,0001. to be accounted
for, which was done: by trade expenses at the Bridge House
I hotel, 15,7821., and at the Adelaide hotel. 5,4621. ; and lases,
7,6111. The general trading of the bankrupt appeared to
hive been profitable, and the books famished sufficient
information to raise the figures in the balance-sheet, but the
great loss appeared to arise out of the great sacrifice made to
the proprietor of the Bridge House hotel, and the decrease
of the value of property mortgaged.—No opposition was
offered, and the bankrupt passed.

WESTMINSTER COUNTY COURT.
Before D. C. Moyhub, E.., Judge.
FULLER V. FLownn..—Are ltl.P. s BlLL.—This was an
action to recover the sum of 3/. 10s. retained by the
defendant. In the month of Much last, the plaintiff
was in possemion of • bill of 211. Ss. accepted by
Mr. Peter Borthwick, M.P., and being anxious to get
tune money, gave the bill to the defendant to sell for him,
telling him that the lowest price be would take for it was 10
guineas. Ina short time after, he gave him two more hills
to sell for him, and told him that when ha bad got them
cashed, he would give him two guineas for his trouble. The
defendant in March sent him word that he had sold the bill
for tan guineas, and enclosed the money in a letter; but in •
abort time after, plaintiff found that he had sold the bill to a
Ms. Mary Anne Browne for 141., keeping 31. 10$. for him-
self. He (plaintiff) not being able to get that money or the
other bills returned, applied to Bow-street for • warrant, but
was referred to that court—The defendant Bald that he was
directed by the plaintiff to sell the bill for ten guineas, andl
was entitled to all above that sum for the trouble he had had,
even if he had got 201. for it.
The Judge held that in the capacity of agent he had no
right to retain any portion of it, as Mr. Fuller had given him
the bill to do the beet be could with it, and made an order
for the payment of the balance in a week.