The Express.
London, England, 1848-02-12 00:00:00

Mr. Inglis said he was a baker, and that he resided at
Little Russell-street. Had known the defendant since 1843.
The character that ho had borne was unblemished for

Two Two other witnesses were then called, but they merely
corroborated the evidence of the former witnesses as to the
charscter that the defendant had bora* inhisneighbourhood.
Mr. Chambers having replied, Mr. Justice Erie summed I
up, going very carefully through the 'victim:o, and leaving it
to the jury to say if they were saddled that the crime of per
fury was clearly established against the defendant —The
jury, after deliberating for a short time, returned verdict
of Gutity.—Bentence deferred.

COURT Or BANKRUPTCY.
Bel= /i/G.Mliedoßee Enos.
Tun ABINGDON BANll.—Tdis wan a mutin forte lest
exemination of Henry Knapp, banker, Abingdon. In
answer to questions from Mr. Hawkins, who appeared for
the assignees, the bankrupt deposed :—I carried on business
as a banker at Abingdon, and bad a branch at Wantage,
where Mr. Pemberton attended once a week. I commenced
business in 1816, as partner with my father, who died in
1825. I have *ince carried on the business alone, with the
eminence of three clerks. I doubt whether I was solvent in
1826. From that time I became more and more involved.
I attribute my diffieultie4to allowing interest on depoeita, and
having so returns. I also lost money in stock transactions,
having dealt largely in the bargain, in foreign and English
feeds, both before and after I commenced business in 1125.
I could not tell my losses within 10,0001. Property to the
amount of about 30,0001. kw come to me since 1825; about
20,0001. from my father, xnd the remainder from my aunt.
In August last I assigned some property to Mr. West, my
father-inlaw, to whom I bad applied for money. He said
he bad none, but could raise some on securities; he did so,
and let me hays it. I assigned to him an estate, some rail-
way shares, and a few houses at Abingdon Immediately
after the change took place, the bank refused dis-
counts, and hence our diffieelties. Mr. Weed advanced
me 9,0001. on thee. securities ; it was paid into Williams's
on my account. Afterwards Mc West and I entered into a
bond for 7,0001. to Messrs. Williams, Deacon, and Co., for
their advances; they also received some notes of hand,
which I held as securities for sums advanced to my customers.
In some cases I had not made advances to the full amount of
the note', but Williams and Co. were not aware of this. In
1845 1 gave a mortgage to Mr. Thomas Graham for en
edemas of 8,0001., of which 6,0001. had been advanced some
years before, by Mr. Wm. Graham. I had powers of
attorney from different customers to receive their dividends
half-yearly • them were to the extent of above 3,0001. Wil-
liams and 'Co. received them for me. I don't know the
balance owing to Mews. Williams. It would vary every
day. I have not yet been able to tile my balance-sheet; I
fear I shall not be able to produce a very accurate one. It
will require two months at least —Mr. Smythe who appeared
for Mr. Belcher, of Abingdon, a creditor, stated that there
bad been cross accounts between Mr. Belcher and the bank'
Mr. Belcher owed the bank 811., and there was this to him
Gem the bank 1931. • leaving a balance due to him of 1121.
Mr. Belcher was collector of a charity at Abingdon called
Christ's Hospital, in which capacity be k pt an account at
the bank, headed Wm. Belcher, hospital collector." On
this account the bank had been in advance to
Mr. Berber, 861. Sr. 3d. By a bond to the Rover.
non of the hospital, Mr. Belcher was bend to
account yearly, and to deliver over the balance
due to the hospital. Hence the hank was not the hanker of
the charity, but of Mr. Belcher, who ass thus placed in a
different position from a receiver in Chancery, or a bailee of
goods, being absolutely responsible for the safe custody of
the monies of the charity. The second account was that
which Mr. Belcher had kept as treasurer of the borough
fund ; and in respect to this his position was precisely the
same, a bond being given to the corporation, and Mr. Bel-
cher having full discretion as to the custody of the funds. On
this account there was a belence due to Mr. Belcher of 1931.
In crdinary cases, he would have been entitled to set off one
of these baiaseis against the other ; and there sae a dccii.ion
in Ex parte Pearce" (2 Montague and De Gee', p. 142),w hid%
brought this case clearly within the same rule.—Mr. 'taw-
kiss said the case was a novel one to him, and he hoped the
argument would be deferred till he had had time to look
into the authorities.—The Commissioner said there was no
doubt whatever as to the law of the ease. The proof must
be admitted as to the balance. Ultimately, the cue was ad-
journed nil khe 14th of April.