The Express.
London, England, 1860-12-07 00:00:00

r FRI IYA V t

Witsess said under his bas kruptcy he got a secood.claas
certificate.
By Yr. Lawriace—llia trade was prosperous in 1855 and
18.5 ii. Ilia business was presperom up to ties panie of 1857.
He had possibly exceeded hie badmen' by spectating is row
hides. The stock he held in hoed was of the value el
150,0001. If he had attempted to immediately realign then
would have been a loss of oue-half. He tided over the
psalm sod ilbsagiet it better to go on. In the following year
thaw vas a rise m the market. Ultimately hia trading ro-
adbed's a large loss. Hie personal expenses were about
SOUL a year. Some of the borer were kept for the purpose
al Wainer. There were times of the year when a tenser
bad nothing to do. (Lesigliter.)
Kr. Schroder (recalled) said—Mr. Lefoue drew en tho
Liverpool house when he required money to meet his bills.
2zalas drew on him for goods, and the account was

Linkkiter—There were two seta of hills representing
the maw tranmetico.
Witness said at their suspension acceptances of Lela's° to
their drafts were running to the amount of 15,0001. perhaps
actually of his. He may have had acceptances of theirs
(81mathild, Laurence, and Co.) to the amount of 10,5001.
Mr. Lawrence—There were goals to the amount of
8,5741. held.
Witness said they always had a running account. There
were bills accepted to the amount of 7,2501. by Lefone, and
10,0001. by the Liverl house. Emery was Labia to them
for 7,0381., against which they held goods within 3001. and
• audit balance of 1711. He toned on reference the goods
I. head as the time of the suspension wee about UM He
drew at Simaisilli and Co. There was a bill for 1,0001.
twin at the dais of the superman, and with the Liver-
pool hems 21001. They provided him with the money to
mist his bins when he wanted it.
Yr. Therms, the book-beeper, was re-exerninid, and add
in the ledger Were him heeded
?D64.7.6 and C 0.," which was seamed, and it was headed
" Smith and Co." That was to keep Draper's failure
"quiet." It was not known until some little time after
that Draper had failed. Some hides were afterwards sent.
By Mr. lawranse—Drapers bad very few creditors. He
heard it was agreed the creditors should receive 15s. in the
pound, and the small creditors would receive 20s. in the
pound. It was the arrangement to pay 20s. in the pound
to the smaller creditors by the principal creditors, sad they
wished the failure should not be generally known. That
was the reason the account was opened in the name of
Smith and Co. They were not going to supply goods with-
out a guarantee, and that was the reason they opened a
distinct account. The hide buyer sent a parcel of goods by'
I mistake.

The ass was then adjourned to the 19th of this month,
with the understanding that it would be proceeded with on
the following day.
Mr. Linkkter mid adjourning to so near Christmas
would non mist the digestion of the plum-pudding.
Mme•)
Adjourned seecedingly.

INSOLVENT DRECTORS COURT.—DEC. 6.
(Brion Mr. Ocandsiossr:hal.)
DI RR W. JERI WD.

This insolvent, whose ceasbas berm before reported, ap•
peered far farther examinstion. Mr. Dowse appeared to
cwt., former occasion it appeared that the insolvent had
bets miaister of Bedford , and a transfer
was ordered to be made to-theiterßl7YriVatson. It also
Viliathat the insolvent bad an action pending against
ir:hop of Exeter, in refenace to • living to whieh he
had been presented in Ocrawall.
Oa the part of the insolvent an application was made far
sat adjournment to serve a creditor, and the case stood over
to the 9th January.

IN RE JOHN DELLITHIELT.
This insolvent, whose case wag heard on& former occasion,
appeared for j lawudgment on • oomplaant of • Yr. Webster, in
111 C Ofke SOON
ened Oom= pronounced • judgment of
these months at the slut d Mr. Webster, under the dis-
cretionary clause.

DI II AiaaaAN calrnoi.

This ineolvent, the at the South Free Yoe
il=ti was appointed to be to-day. Mr. Henniker
to oppose for a Mr. TyrrelL Mr. &mood eup
The opposition stood over until the final order day,
posted
rd

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME cmcurE—Mminvolts, Dae. 6.
(Bdan Nr.!sliaßyles.)

Al.frM Cullen, a respeslohliviooldng young man, eurres•
dared to take his trial upon the charge of uttering a certain
forged paper with intent to defiancL in a second count he
wee charged with the like act, with intent to deceive and
injure Captain Buxton, the chief constable of the Kent
constabulary.
Yr. F. Russell conducted the prosecution. The defendant
had no counsel. .

ThecirJunsiances under which this charge was pre.
(erred were somewhat peculiar. It appeared that the de-
feadant waa desirous to obtaia an appotetment in the
wa=cad he applied to the superintendent of the
&Met to !sew what steps were necessary to
be talon to wiry out his object. Be was informed that it
would be required that be should in the lint instance pro.
dues a eirdlicate of good character signed by respectable
M6itand also the signature of his last employer, and
ia application could not be submitted to Captain
Buxton until this bad been done. The defendant shortly
produced a certificate of the nature referred to,
I=IIZ the itale of several respectable parties,
sad drafts& the defendant as a man of good character,
sal opal: so appointment in the police. Among
those was that of Mr. John Salter, a tradesman
living Gravemead, and it turned out that this was cot
• genuine aipature. It appeared, however, that the pri-
soner naft was • man of good character, aid Yr. Baiter,
who was asWd to prove that the signature to the certifi-
cate was not genuine, stated at the name time that if the
prisoner had applied to him to sign such a document be
should readily have done so.
The defendant, in answer to the charge, said he was not
aware that he had done any harm in putting Mr. Salter's
MAIO to the eertilleste. He wee sure he would have signed
It for hies If be had sated him. . _ .

It. diodes Bytes, in summing up, explained the law
with raped to the offence of forgery at common law, and
said Muth generally speaking, it was necessary to show that
the nit wee committed with an intention to defraud. In
the preeent case there appeared certainly to be no such in-
tention, and he thought the jury woof do well to direct
their attention to the count in the indictment which charged
an intention to injure and deceive the chief constable,
The jury at once returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The learned judge maid that this was probably the right
verdict under the circumstances, but, at the some time, it
should be known that any one who placed the name of an-
other to a document without his consent, under any circum-
stances, put himself in a position of great peril.