The Express.
London, England, 1853-12-16 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, , DECEMBER 16, 1853.

!balance-sheet and accounts were very fully published in the
Daily News, at the (lamination meeting.
Mr. Linklater, for the assignees, asked Le an adjournment
of Fit months in order that it might be seen how the ;met,
were real'-ed. The present statement was that the sale-
cured creditor- amounted to 5;2721, and the gond debtors to
6,2821., but tio re l.ad hi en hitherto ri.ceivcd by the official
assignee only about 2501., from the sale of furniture. A
debt of 2,6001. was stated to be due from the Delta of
Buckingham, which had been admitted by his grace
in • letter to be .due; but the prospect of ruining
anything from that source was rather remota. There were
other good debts, which had not been realised ; and an
adjournment would be of advantage to the bankrupt. A
suit against Mr. Ledger, the bankrupt's late partner in the
Era newspaper, was also pending.
Mr. Lawrence, for the bankrupt, said he was exceedingly
anxious to have the judgment of the court on the case as it
stood; hue, inasmuch as the realisation of the assets would
throw light on the character of the trading, he bad diffi-
culty in resisting the application. The estimate of the
bankrupt had not been made loosely, but wet in the main
correct; and if the certificate wcre adjourned tillall the debts
were disposed of, it might be put off for an indefinite period.
One debt was due from a company which was beiog wound
up under the winding-up Act. The debt from the Duke
of Buckingham was unquestionably due; there was no
du ibt as to the :lability, whatever doubt there might be as to
the time of payment. Under such circumstances, an adjourn
ment would impose upon the bankrupt all the consequences
of a suspension. In Castelli's case, the Lords Justices had
held, overruling the decision of that court, that the certifi-
cate should be adjudicated on without delay. The ve-
racity of the bankrupt's statement of debts and capital,
with which alone the court had to deal, was sufficiently
borne out. The debt from the Duke of Buckingham was
secured by a mortgage for 3,100!.
The COUlolllsioner—Has sufficient time elapsed for the
assignees to say whether the debts returned at 6,0091. are
good or bad ? Of all these debts only 11. 7s. Id. has yet
been received ; the rest is from the sale of the furniture.
Should all these debts turn out bad, instead of good, it will
make a great difference to the certificate.
Mr. Lawrence could not say that a *Oldest time had
elapsed for this purpose. His client was only mini to be
relieved from any imputation which an adjourning... Wit
carry with it.
His Honour said there was no imputation either we way
or the other.
Mr. liana, who appeared for Mr. Beefy, a amine pin
ditor, did not oppose, but asked that porridge AWN be
given Mr. Keeley of the house at Putney, of whieti he MK
the mortgage.
Mr. Lawrence, on the part of the bankrupt, consented to
We, and the certificate meeting was adjourned for dues
nonfat.
Mr. 13agley, who appeared to oppose for Messrs. Lairs,
builders, said he wished to sak the bankrupt a few questions
reepectior the money he bad receiv,d from Mr. Keeley.
The bankrupt stated that he had received 1,3001. in one
sea from Mr. Keeley, on the 29th of August, 1851. He
spoke to this from memory, having no entry of it. He after
wards received 5001. The 1,3001. was received in this way ;
608/. from a party named Church; a cheque of 5001. odd
from Mr. Keeley ; and afterwards 6651. from him. He had
rendined a written statement of these advances. Having
since seen Mr. Keeley's account, he found his own was in-
correct, and would render another in a week.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.—YarrEiDAT
moss XI. ocoolissiocza rumors.
II( 7Ra 11117T1R OF ABRAHAM COMMIT.
This insolvent, who we. a boot and shoe dealer in Adam
row, Bau,pstead.road, applied to be discharged from prison.
Mr. Cooke opposed for two creditors, named Fawcett and
Bingham. Mr. Dowse also opposed for creditors. Mr.
&good supported.
This cue, which occupied several hours in the investiga-
tion, exhibited some peculiar features. The insolvent had
dealt with Mr. Fawcett for some time, and now owed him
upwards of 2001. A complaint was aside uto the manner
in which the debt we. incurred, and after spending a good
deal of time on the subject, another point was opened, as to
the disposition of property under that matter; the evidence
was of a remarkable character. It was alleged that the
interest of the insolvent's wife under her uncle's will had
been parted with for 50!. to a persoa named Weston, of

5.1181.11.1.,,51VER•
Weston, on examination, produced a cheque dated on the '
10th October for 601., which was the alleged purchase-
money of the interest under the uncle's will.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked the witness when the
cheque was written?
Weston said last night.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips thought so, although it was
dated in October laic.
It was then elicited from Weston that although he had
agreed to purchase the property,. no money passed; and last
night he gave a cheque to the insolvent's wife, who gave
it to her sister, Sarah Willis, and she gave it ack to him
for the property.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips believed that the cheque was
produced to deceive the court.
Weston said it was not; and he had told what had oc-
curred, because he would not tell a lie.
Weston was strictly examined on the point, and also as
to the sale of some stock to Sarah Wallis.
Mr. t3argood hoped the court would not hold the insol-
vent responsible for the evidence given by the witness.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips made some strong and pointed
observation on the conduct of the witness.
After a long discussion the case was adjourned to Mon- I
day, for the production of further evidence.
TV we IMMIIIf 01\401111. wove!. Torn T.
In this case an application was made for the official as
eignee to join in the transfer of some property which was of
no value to the creditor. The application of the insolvent
in this court was heard under the Protection Act.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips said that he had received a
commusication front the official 8111iitnile, that he could not
join in any conveyance under the Protection Act. The
applicant could file a claim in the Court of Chancery.
Mr. Reed wished to argue the motion, as it was very hard
that his client should be driven into the Court of Chancery.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked the bar if they had ever
heard of such an application under the Protection Act ?
Mr. Nichols answered in the negative.
Mr. Reed was further heard on his motion.
His Honour refused the application, on the ground that
he had no power.
IN RE THOMAS BENNETT.
Mr. Macrae applied for an extension of time to sell the
real estate in this case. A question arose, as the term was
for 1,000 years, whether it was a real estate. It had, how-
ever, been held to be real property.
The 000 rt extended the period for the sale.