The Express.
London, England, 1847-09-06 00:00:00

tats inttUtgenct.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Commisloner Fenn
lie RE H. F. Hoots.—A HINT TO BANYRuTTE.—This
bankrupt, who was unopposed, was a grocer in High street,
Southwark, and applied, upon his own petition, forhia certifi-
cate, having no assets.—His Honour, upon looking over the
proceedings, said that this case was an illustration of the great
abuse of • benevolent act of parliament, viz., 'Bowleg a man
to make himself a bankrupt, in order that his estate might
be equally divided amongst his creditors. He (the commis-
sioner) had laid it down as a principle, never to punish a
man-for struggling on honestly and fairly in business, unless
under such circumstances as those pursued by the present
bankrupt, which were, that, having been sued by no
less than six creditors, and judgments having been ob-
tained against him prior to the 23rd of March
last, he made an assignment: to • firm to whom he was
indebted in the sum of 407/., having informed no person
of hie position, and then be came to this court upon the 20th
of April, upon his own petition, with nothing for the
general body of creditors, allowing a few to have 201. in the
pound. The court must ask, could it unction the course
pursued by 'hie bankrupt, in consequence of whose mis-
conduct no less than 1,2001. worth of property had been
wastefully saerifioed ? Under such circumstances, the bank.
rapt must do the best he could.—Mr. Cooke, on behalf of
the bankrupt, said that he commenced business through
the assistance of his father, who was now • creditor to the
extent of 1,3001. Respecting the executions, be was entirely
ignorant of the law, and allowed judgment by default, but
the coats incurred were very trivial. He bad not courage to
make these facts known until it was too late, and all that
could be now urged for him was honesty, youth, went of
moral courage, and inexperience. No creditor appeared to
oppose, and the remarks of hie Honour, independent of the
name bankrupt, were a sufficient punistment for so young •
man as the one who now applied for his certificate. The
learned counsel concluded by stating that he entirely' con-
curred with the doctrine stated by his Honour.—His Honour
said that the court did not charge the bankrupt with any
dishonesty, but, upon a matter of principle, its disapproba-
tion with the reckless trading of the bankrupt must be made
known by the suspension of the certificate for 12 months.—
Protection applied for and refused

POLICE—SATURDAY.
CITY POLICE COMMITTEB.--,Conviertoxe rots
SUNDAY TRADINO.—Four licensed victuallers were fined
for having their shii open on Sunday morning ; and a fifth,
in which case the offence was proved by a policeman having
gone to the house in private clothes, by the direMion of his
superior officer, and obtained beer on Sunday morning,
was dismissed by Alderman Farebrother, who objected to the
police being sent out in disguise to entrap tradesmen into
committing offences.
MANSION-HOUSE. CHARGE or CONSPIRACY TO
DEFRAUD.— Gardiner and Holliday, carrying on busi-
ness together as merchants in Pancras-lane, were charged
with attempting to defraud. Mr. Hillery, solicitor, stated that
his client, Mr. Gray, was a ropemeker, and that a short time
Ingo Holliday applied to Mr. Gray, and said lie wanted about
2001. worth of rope, that two gentlemen on the continent were
his principals, and that the article must be sent to a wharf to
be shipped immediately. Mr. Gray sent about 1791. worth of
rope to the wharf, and was to receive cash immediately. He,
however, was not paid, and ascertained that the goods, in-
stead of being chipped, were sent away toe party who pur-
chased them at 10s. a hundredweight less than the price at
which they had been sold by him to the poisoners. Amongst
the papers found upon the two merchants were about forty
pawnbrokers' duphcates, although Holliday had represented
Gardiner as a man of extensive property. Subsequently,
Holliday declared that Mr. Gardiner was the rogue,
and that he wed himself the unfortunate dupe.—
W. 11. Trinsley Gray, of No. 2, Mercer-place, Commercial-
road, said that about two months ago Holiday called at his
house, and said be was a partner of Wm. Gardiner, of 4,
Pancras-lane. City, and he saw Holiday and Gardiner to-
gether, and they gave him art order to ship several coils of
rope at London-bridge-wharf. They said they were ship-
ping fora house at Hamburg, and that the packages wore
to be sent in their names. Witness made up 1791. worth of
cordarr, which was delivered at the wbarf. After it was de-
liven he learnt that the cordage was sent away by a town
cart instead of being shipped. He saw the wharfinger,
who told him that the goods had been taken to a house in
East Smithfield. When he saw Holliday, he denied that
there was any truth in the statement that they had not been
'hipped, and he handed in a bill for 2201., which hrls said he
thought Mr. Barber, of a firm in St. Paul's Churchyard,
would discount, and that if he could not get that done, the
money should be paid. Mr. Barber soon dimovered that
witness was defrauded of his property.—Mr. Barber, of the
firm of Barber, Howse, and Meade, said that when Mr.
Gray called upon him with the bill alluded to, ho at once
perceived that his friend was done, and told him so. He