The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-22 00:00:00

aw 3intellteence.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT—YEsTERDAT.

tarout Mt.

l'n.u.:rs.,

. _
IN TIM Wining ay Fanomat Tows FOWLER.
This ose, wide& was before the court on Saturday, and
reported, was tureen heard. It had created some interest
f the oletemstoseee that the Bishop of London was re•
gained to afloat His lordship sent an intimation that he
model sot Mend dee court before one o'clock. lie arrived
at the use. appointed, accompanied b. his secretary, and
was seeenearedood with a scat by the commissioners. Mr.
gargand appeared, ron the preceding occasion, for Mr.
Frances T. Gell, so attorney. The insolvent was his own
advocate. . _ _ . .

The Insolvent inquired of the learned commissioner when
it would be for him weal evidence to rebut the two charges
—fraud and contracting a debt without reasonable expecta-
tions of payment—made against him by the opposite side.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips told him that his time would
be when the evidence on t►e other side was concluded.

The Bishop of London was sworn. Mr. Commissioner
Phillips expressed his regret that his lordship should have
had to attend, on which the right reverend prelate said he
wan glad he had the opportunity. In answer to Mr. Sar-
good, the Bishop stated that he remembered being applied
to by the insolvent to take copies of his charge. The ap-
plication was made two or three days before it was deli-
vered. It was delivered on a Monday (his lordship was
reminded by his secretary that it was on Saturday, the 2nd
of November) lie had a personal interview with the in-
solvent, when he said that he made the application on the
part of the public press. He said he was employed by
the public press His lordship said he would refer
to a cop of a letter he sent to Mr. Fowler on November la.
His lordship read to the edit that the insolvent had told
him that he was employed by the principal London pa-
pers, and that the Times would have a copy
of the charge, and that it was in type when it was de-
livered. Ile (the bishop) understood Mr. Fowler to say
that he came specially from the public press, or he would
not have allowed him a copy of his charge. It would be but
Air that he (the bishop) should refer to another letter in
which he told the insolvent that he had told him that he
was employed by the principal journals, and that the Times
I would have a copy sent. In answer to further questions
put by Mr. Sergood, the Bishop stated that ho only men-
tioned the Times in answer to a question whether that
raper would base a copy. The application was to make
copies, and he (the bishop) stipulated that they should all
be left in his hands until the charge was delivered.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked his lordship whether
the leaving of the copies io his bands came from his lord-
ship or the insolvent. On Saturday the insolvent had stated
that it was hi. own suggestion.
The Bishop said he would not say.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips inquired whether the sugges-
tion might not have come from the insolvent ?
The Bishop replied that his impression was that it did
come from him (the insolvent). His lordship, in continua-
tion of his examination by Mr. Sargood, said the insolvent
had reminded him in a letter that he was the individual
who bad before applied to him about one of his charges.
Ile had no knowledge of the circumstance, but it was yen,
likely the same party. It was some years before. He
would not have granted permission to copy the charge is
question had he known that the insolvent had no definite
authority from the morning papers. He expected the
papers would have remunerated the insolvent. Ile (the
bishop) did not want any money himself. (A laugh.) After
' Fowler had taken copies the regular reporters of the
journals applied to him for copies.
The insolvent proceeded to put some questions to the
bishop, handing him a number of letters addressed to him
fruit several of the bench of bishops. His lordship recog-
nised the signatures of the Primate, and the Bishops or,
Winchester, Oxford, St. Asaph, and others. Ile (the in-
solvent) would refer to the letters when he came to the ques-
tion whether he was an accredited reporter or not. The
insolvent reminded his lordship that he had a letter from
him as early as March in reference to his charge. He also
wished his lordship to refer to the last paragraph in the
letter his lordship had sent him, and which he had read.
His lordship referred to the part, and there acknowledged
that Mr. Fowler had said that he was employed by the
press generally, and not particularly for the limes. His lord-
ship added in his evidence that six copies would show it.
Ho was not aware that a seventh copy was made. The iu-
solvent said he admitted he took the seventh copy away.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips—Did Mr. Fowler by words
. _

give your lordship to undeistrml that lus had ()tali taken
the us copies? •

Bishop Of London—Certainly.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips—By words, my lord ?
Bishop of London—Oh, certainly. It was by words.
His lordship was asked two or more questions on the
same point, which he answered to the same effect, and then
retired.
Mr. Edward Woods and Mr. Henry Potter were called
by the insolvent. They were reporters, and had shared the
proceeds with the insolvent. Mr. Woods said his share was
about 101. Both stated that Mr. Hell was made acquainted
with the seventh copy taken by Fowler when he was em-
ployed to bring the action aping the Daily News. What
the insolvent complained of in the article was, that he was
described as not an accredited reporter, and that he was
levying black mail.
Mr. Commit,ioner Phillips referred to the article in
question, and sad, the fact of the seventh copy taken must
have been iu discussion. It was the very sting of the thing,
as the word showed.
The insolvent handed in a parcel of letters from the
managers of the different newspapers, which, ho said,
would show his connexion with the press. One from Mr.
Morris, of the Times, was read. Mr. Sargood then raised
an objection, that the (utters were not evidence. The letters
were withdrawn, the learned Commissioner observing that
there was no doubt that the insolvent was connected with
the press. That point, however, in his opinion, was not
the one he had to answer. It was stated in the course of
the ease that Mr. (fell was out of town.
Mr. Sargood addressed the court. He contended that
the debt was contracted by fraud. That the insolvent had
concealed the fact of the seventh copy from Mr. (Jell—that
he was a mere liner, and not employed by the morning
papers—tint he had practised a gross fraud on the bishop,
and bad incurred a debt fraudulently with Mr. Geld in
concealing the circumstance of the seventh copy, and there-
fore was not a person to have •day named for the final order.
The insolvent, in reply, urged, in answer to the charge
that he had contracted a debtwithout probable or reasonable
expectations of payment, that he could show from his schedule
that he had made about 2001. a year, and therefore he had
the means to pay the costs out of pocket to bring
an action. Ile referred to the draft declaration,
in which he had struck out the words "six co-
pies," and returned it to Mr. Gell, so that he must
have been well aware of the fact of the seventh. He ad-

mu ted that he had taken the seventh, and that the Bishop
of London was not aware of it • but his lordship had not
been injured, as there was no publication uutil after the
charge was delivered. He denied that he was the miserable
penny-a-liner depicted by the learned counsel—he was paid
as he was paid when he got a brief—for he did not suppose
that he had, any more than himself, a standing salary. He
thanked his Iluuour fur the kindness and fair treatment he
had received &Lillis Lands. . . .

The pleadings in the action brought by the insolvent
against the Daily Nam and the declaration were required
to be handed up to the court.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips gave judgment. He said the
case had taken a considerable time, and a good deal of
matter had been introduced which had nothing to do with
it. The question was, what fraud had been practised on
Mr. Gen, the opposing creditor, by means of which the debt
had been contracted with bins There was one portion of
the case which bad to do with the insolvent's conduct to-
wards the Bishop of London. He was sorry that the right
rea prelate had to attend, but it was necessary that he
should attend in the case. It appeared to him (Mr. Com-
missioner Phillips), from the evidence of the bishop, that the
insolvent had been guilty towards him of very gross and se-
rious misconduct. The insolvent waited on the bishop with two
friends, reporters, to obtain from him authentic copies of his
charge, to be furnished to the newspapers. 'fhe bishop was
anxious, and well he might, in times like these, that no mis-
representation should be made in the report of his charge
then about to be delivered, and which might have arisen
from disjointing a sentence, or omitting a word, in a point of
doctrine which might create schism, and be of manifest
importance. Under such circumstances the bishop was
anxious, and ho (Mr. Commissioner Phillips) did not won-
der at it, that his charge should be anntratelv given, and he
therefore yielded a ready ear to the applicaiion which was
made to him to take copies of the NNW His lordship
was attended fur that purpose by Ow= equady
respectable—gentlemen of talent =I edaeetlaa, The
bishop had stated somytbies r ommaboontli= of the
insolvent, except OM• •ehavoismea died the irelooat
had mentioned a eireematimee whist} 1e boblimoVmsd
was in his favour. It was whether he had not
gested that the six copies taken so he supposed shade bel%
with him. The iishopaaweeld set wear that imed be
made lie whet did that prove la his
opiates it si;sielire the ewe the wares for the bweigat,
for it showed t exercise of a perverse ingenue', be eider
to deceive and mislead ea beseurable ma*. What was lie
lordship to think, bet that be had the mesas is his
=a to prevent the eimieelrea being gubilsbedbaiea it
was delivered Bat the area who hid .bewailed Idembol•
sash a Marisa hater that be hell wweepthiesrly ebtaiseis
ow tibia bekweeded SI IN% MEd as pet imeepipetallare
tha ahem was wade. If any of the poem hail hacks frith
with him as Ms had bra= faith with the bieheplawealdisaws
rendered that reverted prelate =objected syrers if ash
of Mande before this =dd. ti pebble*, his eiseqw beim
it was delivered. lingpeo irq al the gres:7ll4l
charge is print had the it ea the dews IBM
he hod dose towards the Wimp. ISM Veda tuft his
lordship a laughieg.steek of On whey •1•81 i ike reel,
Teat said his lordship bad owl amillwodi bet mom bi het
required to maker olliamlism. mild he ate hive bellsead
that he mild have ins so he bed she espies ia WI
own possession. The bishop lied art asilliael. No *seam
to the insolvent that be had set *ANL The papers had
not broken faith within's, as holiwidemmillb tile osonspiore
his lordship would have sawed oessahtlpt Air la wee n'
document of such value, that the mere -a
second and third edition to Vibe ettome, ratrete-
, lion had been retarding the •1111111111•• 84 • auditor
—had he so appeared against imoivant—had he de-
wired soul defrauded him as • oreditor then, beyond all
ques.ine, Mr. Fowler would have suffer:el for his conduct.
His Honour reviewed the lessise is to Mr. Bell's debt
being frauduleatly roatrestadv Be acquitted that gentle-
man of all intentional twheepresentatioa. There was the
evidence of the insolvent MINI his two frisado—rsalre
demon, he must say, of roupattatility
of Mr. Grill, with rospent to the dsot of rawitimanws of
the seventh copy being known to that geatiessea. Be-
sides, there was to him what was very *wag etw-
rebeestic•—the draft declaration, In width the L.