The Express.
London, England, 1851-09-25 00:00:00

satoo *nteitteence.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT,-Vmmumir.

Baran, ma Cuss cowassinVOXllS use Coatussiorau Law Aso
Pllll.lllll
IN Tall MATTER or 111:Gli SWAN.—JVDOXZXT.
A full court was formed to hear an application by the in-
solvent under peculiar circumstances.
Mr. Cooke appeared for several wholesale houses in the
city of London.
The insolvent, who bad been a linendraprr at Camden
Town and other places, was heard in this court in Novem-
ber last, having been refused his certificate in bankruptcy,
and the adjudication made was to the effect that he should
be discharged when he had been in custody for two years
from the 25th of March, being the date of his vesting order
at the suit of the general body of his creditors, and for
twelve months from the date aforesaid at the suit of Messrs.
Abbott and Nottingham, he having contracted a debt with
them without reasonable or probable expectations of pay-
ment. The twelve months adjudication hail expired, and
Messrs. Abbott and Nottingham were the may detaining
creditors when the judgment was pronounced. The war-
rant to the gaoler, on which be MN now detained, specified
I the judgment to be for two years at the suit of Abbott and
Nottingham' which warrant the insolvent contended was
erroneous. He had applied to a judge at chambers, and
was referred to this court. In an affidavit he had made he
had alleged that the judgment was twelve months, at the
suit of the general body of the creditors.
Mr. Cooke opposed the application. The warrant was
correct, as it specified two years, and the creditors at whose
suit he was adjudged to twelve months imprisonment for
a specific offence, were of the general body of the creditors,
right
and had a to detain the insolvent for the period men-
tioned. Besides, the warrant could be amended, if ne-
cessary.
The Chief Commissioner was of opinion that there was
no ground for the present application. The question was
whether the two persons were of the general hoily and had
a right of detention after the judgment at their Individual
suit had expired. lie was of opinion that they were of the
general body, and therefore they: were not to be put in
a worse position than the other creditors, because they had
an individual ease against the insolvent.
Mr. Commissioner Law delivered his opinion. He thought
the warrant was correct on the adjudication, although the
latter stated the term of 12 months after the adjudication
for two years. His Honour said that it was erroneous to
state that a person was " remanded " by the court. In
every ease of adjudication it was a discharge when a cer-
tala had expired.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips said he had troubled his
learned colleagues to attend, not from any doubt in his own
mind. He had pronounced the adjudication, and it was a
wicked act of the insolvent to allege in his affidavit that the
judgment was only one year at, the suit of the general body
of his creditors. It was well that he and others should know
that by a recent act this court, as well as the Court of
Bankruptcy, could order an indictment for perjury. He
concurred with Mr. Commissioner Law in his criticism on

the term " remand " generally used to the proceedings of
this court.
_ . .

The insolvent, therefore, took nothing by his motion, and
was taken beck to the Queen's Prison until March next,
when his term will expire.
IN as MART ANN bATIB.-NOTRL AND IMPORTANT

ruINT.

Mr. Lewis (Lewis and Lewis) mentioned to the full court
a point of some importance and of a novel character under
the Protection Act. The insolvent had obtained her final
order, and was afterwards summoned to a County Court
for a larger sum than was inserted in her schedule. The
judge was of opinion that she was bound to pay it or to
apply to this court to be allowed to increase the debt. The
question was whether the court would allow an amend-
ment after the final order. _ .

Mr. Macrae said the act was talent under the 30th section
when the amendment wee to be made.

The Comonssioners considered the point of importance,
and if a case was argued, would give it their best attention.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.-YESTERDAY.

Doors Mc SzaJIMPT MOUTAXT JONI., AT Till OnLOILLL
Mitsnoregrrrc IT Atuovarrurr raoli

• - ♦T TOLIMGiO;f.

WWiaiw i-eai;:ifiuii;;ltie;ira;;ii,;;;;l;dicied for
haring awaited and unlawfully inflicted grievous bodily
harm upon John Farrel, a child of the age ot six years.
After opening the CUM Mr. Parry who said he appeared
for the truateesot St. nary, Islington, called the following
witneases,_ _ _

Jeans Ilinchley—l am a cab proprietor, and have sta-
bles in Duncan-mews. 1 know the school connected with

the chapel in Duncan-terrace. My premises are near that
school, and I can distinctly hear cries coming therefrom.
On Monday afternoon, the 21st of July, I heard shrieks
from a child from the school. My attention had been
called to the school before. Hearing the screaming, I and
two other persons ran and got as near as we could, and
called to those inside to desist. When we got to the door
the child had been turned out of the school, and he was
in a crouching position. I heard the door shut. I picked
up the child and examined him. He was scarified from
the uncle to the thigh, and his posteriors had the appear-
ante of raw beef. Ile was exhausted as if front beating,
and from the ante to the calf of the leg there were wales
las thick as • little finger. I then kicked at the school-
room door. I saw discolouration of the skin of the boy
where he had been flogged. I did not examine him suffi-
ciently to notice whether he was bleeding or not ; but the
marks were blue, red, and ycUow. When I kicked at the
door the defendant came out in his gown, robes, and
beads. I asked him why he used • child like
that. He asked what business it was of mine,
and I said I would let hint know. The Rev. Mr. Leighton
was at my elbow, and said if he beard try more he should
bring it before a magistrate. I said I should do so now,
and sent two of my men for • policeman. The defendant
said he had chastised the child for not coming to cate-
chism; then, that it was for lying; then, that it was for
stealing a paint brush. I said if he had stolen a brush
he was old enough to know that ho was to give him in
charge. A policeman came up and he was given into cus-
tody. lie asked permission to go and change his robes.
The policeman objected, but I said let the man change his
robes, and he went into the school. Ho escaped through
the chapel somehow, and was taken in Chalton-crescent.
He was taken before a magistrate and bound over to
answer some charge. (The child was here produced.) At
the time the child bad but petticoats on.
Cross-examined—The school had been opened eight or
nine years, and the defendant had been there eight or nine
months. 1 was before the magistrate but did nut give evi-
dence. Don't know that the officer went with defendant
to change his robes. The officer followed him and took
him into custody.
Re-examined—l have certainly seen the defendant eight
or nine *tenths. I must have seen him as long as that.
Charles Davis, who was at work in ainchley's yard on
the day in question, corroborated the evidence of Mr.
Hinchley, and added that upon hearing the screams of the
child from the school, he Galled out as loud as he could
to the person to leave off beating the child. When ho saw
the child there weft marks of Severe violence all over its
body and legs, as though inflicted by the whip produced
(one made of gotta perch*, and about two feet long).
There was blood about the right thigh. He did not see the
whip until they were at the police court. The defendant
produced it there.
The Rev. F. W. Leighton stated that he was a clergy-
man of the established church, and resided at River House,
Duncan-terrace, Islington. He was aroused on the 21st of
July by screams coming from the school. lie had often
heard screams as though from children in the school who
were being dogged, but in the case of this child the cries
and screams .were horrible. When the defendant came
forward, he remonstrated with him for being out of temper,
but he denied that it was so. He saw the child, who was
covered with bruises, the effect of dogging.
J. I'. Huddlestone, • surgeon—l examined the child on
the 29th of July, eight days after the occurrence. On exa-
mining his person 1 found his posteriors perfectly black ;
his thighs and legs on the right hand side particularly exhi-
bited cuts, long, deep, and broad, some of them side by
side and interlacing each other. The skin was broken in
seven places. I believe the wounds would be made by such
an instrument as that whip.
(lass.examined—l do not know that the boy had been
examined by other medical men, I was not sent to examine
him professionally, but I went to inquire into the truth of
reports which were in circulation in the neighbourhood.
The marks indicated great violence. I saw the child In
lieut of his father's house. _

John Holland, a police officer, stated that be was on duty
in Duncan-terrace on the occasion in question; and he de-
scribed the marks which he found on the child's person.
He asked the defendant why he had treated the boy in that
manner, when he answered that he had been telling lies
shout having stolen a brush. He told him he must go
along with him to the station-horse. When the matter was
before Mr. Combs he issued a summons for the father's ap-
pearance at the police court. When he came on the follow-
ing Tuesday the father would not give any satiblactory
answer as to whether he would prosecutethe defendant.
Craw-examined—The only witnesses examined by the
magistrate were the child and two other boys, who were
called by the defendant.
Reexamined—The other persons were not examined,
because Mr. Combs declined to go into the matter more
fully, on account of the child's lather and mother being
unwilling to prosecute, and no other person coming for-
ward to do so.

Xr. Clarkson addressed the jury for the defendant.
The lazy bred the defendant Guilty of a comma assault,
bat usitrMagairevated circumstances.
Mr. Petri end the cries of the children Ind ben tre.•
wady Mend hen the same school dm thle eemenee ;
and it was me we defendant was a penis mat to be ia
the panda et a sehaelmaster.
The inesed leap hoped the superien el the school
Inlaid emir mita es = of the kind as teheyhot there
Nita pedastly with the omelet or_ OSwoe,tury,
sod be woe net at all disposed to think that Ile loloodLoat's
eeedeet hut bees Influenced by arey males motive ;
sit Ye Mime wee one that the end Mt le •'so&
*b seeeeby. wielemed sabty that ha
sokdr spines of the
banh. the isetokist severallowed to
IM the ensiles etsilteeimw, foe wee quite a
clear that
MINA we imetely ee einuel one lie •yeetioos in his treat-
!is woo tea ennensai to three menthe lap
Platirirlial he we Leos °Lamle* to e:pres the sebum-
the eutbeellee glom We prosecution was
, to Mr. Ilhaekley, it his exertions in this mat-
ted, and without which the lielbedeat would never have
ben botoght to j make.
Tan

OF Ho LT weeresrazir.—Cese or
Irroom.s.
William Dyes's, 62, NW iodide:l for unlawfully
_pea
sluing sad keying la his powerion for tar purls of se