The Express.
London, England, 1861-01-21 00:00:00

RYDER r. RYDER.- CUSTODY (W CHILDREN.

This pert-beard case was an appeal brought by the Hon.
Mrs. Ryder against en interim order made by the Judge
Ordinary for the custody of the children of the marriage.
Of these there artten, and three being above the age of 16,
Sir C. Cromwell gave no directions respecting them. The
eldest., a daughter, who will be 21 in June next, is living
with an uncle, where the father has access to her, but the
mother has not. Another is a boy in the navy, and is at
present in China; and the third, likewise a boy, is in a
merchant's office in the City, but on Sundays he sees one
of his uncle.. There am cross petitions, and the charges
involved in the case are of a moat painful character.
Mr. serjeant Pigott and Mr. M 'queen, for Mrv. Ryder,
contended at great length lust the court had jurisdiction
over the custody of children during the whole period of
their minority, and that the Judge Ordinary ought there-
fore to have made an order respecting the whole of the
children, instead of confining his directions to those that
were uuder sixteen. The learned counsel also maintained
that they had • right to read a number of affidavits which
had been tiled in the cause, and which went into the merits
of hie client'. petition.
The court refused, however, to permit the affidavits to
be looked at for any purpose except to show the present cir-
cumstances of the family, for it would obviously be im-
proper at this stage to try the cake b anticipation.
Dr. Twiss,AC., rose to address the court contri, led be
was interru in the course of his observations by
Mr. Justice Willem, who mid be was satisfied that they
had no jurisdiction over the three eldest children. The
power vested in the court was given it by the statute of the
20th and 21st of the present reign, cap. 8.5, sec. 35, in which
it wan muted that the court might make such ad interim
orders, and might make such provision in its Baal decree, as
it might deem just and proper with respect to the custody,
maintenance, and education of the children of litigant per
tie -
; sad might also direct proper proceedings to be u
for the porpoise of placing such children under the protec-
tion of the Court of Chancery. Prior to the passing of
this act there were two jurisdictions in force with regard to
the custody of children—namely, that of the Court of
Chancery, and that of the common law courts in respect of
proceedings upon habeas corpus. It might be mid that the
jurisdiction of the 'out of Chancery extended beyond
uses in which property was involved ; but it wail cot the
practice of that court to interfere unless there was pro-
perty concerned. In a case reported in 2 De ilex and Smile,
p. 417, Lord Justice Knight Bruce, then a Vice-Chancellor,
carefully abstained from saying that the court hail
not jurisilictioa when there was no property ;
bat it was nevertheless clear that the foun-
dation of the jurisdiction in equity and at coin-
mou law was not the same ; for the writ of habeas
corpus dealt only with what was usually termed the "liberty
of the subject." In this case, however, it was not necessary
to go minutely into the question, because the circumstances
were wholly different from what they would have been if
the matter had been moved either in Chancery or at common I
law. The infants themselves were not before the court, nor
did he know how, except as amici curia, they could offer
any suggestioa as to the order which the court should make.
Taking the ease of the young lady, for instance, she was not
represented at all, and the court had no right to interfere
with her liberty any further than the parties who were
there had a right to control it. But it was mid that the
statute gave the court a discretion to deal with her
beyond the power which either parent, or both, possessed,
but he apprehended that that would be a great miaeoooep
lion of the duty which the ant imposed up oo the court. No
court would interfere to to ter that to be done, the doing of
which it had no power to Warm ; and what power would
it have to compel a person of 19 to live with anyone with
whom she did not choose? Under the circumstances of the
case he thought the Judge Ordinary had acted correctly in
refusing to make any order for the custody of the children
who were above 16. He did not, however, say that the
court had no power to make provision for the maintenance
of patens between the age of 16 sod that of 21.
Mr. Baron Channel concurred.
The Judge Ordinary said he had been a good deal ember-
tweed in administering the law under the clause in ques-
tion, the jurisdiction thus conferred upon him being quit*
new, and there being no practice to guide his decisions. The
legislature could nut, however, have intended to confer on
him the power of depriving en infant of any liberty which
be by law enjoyed. The age at which an infant was consi-
dered of sufficient discretion to say with whom he would
live bad never been strictly defined. Lord Chancellor
King had mice called on a girl of 13 to state in open court
where she would go, and had bidden her Logo there. In "The
Queen v. Howe," the age had been extended, under the
peculiar circumstances of the case, to 16. But it wan mine-
cessary to say more upon the subject; for, whether the
proper age was 14 or lei, it was clear the court had in this
case no right to interfere with the three eldest children.
He was glad theappeal had been brought,for he had now the
decision of his leaned brethren to guide him in future.
Appeal dismissed.

COURT OF BARKRUPTCY.—JA3t. 19.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goolbws.)
RE WAN/Xt.—PM AID BAIIMPTCY.

The bankrupt, Mark Wane, WWI a draper, carryiag on
lesions in Shoreditch and Whitechapel. This was aa
nineties meeting.
Mr. Lawrence again opposed for the assignees ; and Yr.
MISS (Allen, Niool, and Allen) supported the bankniorkiii
It may be remembered, from the report of the
assignee. that the bankrupt had disposed of his shop is
Shoreditch to one Elizabeth Critebell under circumstance,
which called fur inquiry. A fire took place on the bankrupt's
at Whitechapel on the 28th December, 1859, sad
ret:lrged he sustained aloes of 900/.., although he had coup
promised the matter with the Mamas Pare-office, in which
e was insured, for Ski. There we. an amount of 68!. re-
turned as due from a person named Polack, of Mount-street,
Whit/chapel, who denied being indebted to the bankrupt.
There was a loss of 701. by • robbery of lace and pieces of
pnnt taken from the door.
A witness was called, who deposed to having captured
the thief, but he was surrounded by his confederates, and
the man escaped.
Mr. Lawrence-86We kind friends attempted to assist
you the wrong way. (A laugh.)
Witasee—They attempted to carry me off as well as the
goods. (Laughter.)
Mr. Lawrence said these robberies in Shoreditch were of
frequent occurrence.
The bankrupt's wife swore to the robberies and also totter
amount due from Polack.
After hearing the evidence the Commissioner said the
question was whether accounts of a better character could
be rendered.

Mr. Lawrence said the assignees did not believe the stock
was on the premises which constituted the claim on the ere-
office for 9001. insurance °Sees frequently permitted them-
selves to be plundered. becalm if they bad the moral
cwo:mie to dispute the claims the character of the office
be damaged, and it would become • subject of
general oonvereatn. The only excuse OM by the bank-
rupt for accepting onethird of his illal/ellee we that he
was being premed by his creditors. Bankrupt had not
kept proper accounts, and had made over large quantities of
goods to Polack.
Mr. AUen complained that the aesignees bad premed
hardly oo the bankrupt. Bankrupt could not have con-
' templated fraud in accepting a smaller stun than wu doe
from the firs... Aim. The bankrupt was the victim of name
suspicion, and if the baakrupt was guilty of negligent book-
keeping, he could be pisaished oa his applieetfon for his
certificate. The bankrupt did not appear to be a man of
business, or indeed of vast intelligence, but he had been
pursued with an animus by the assignees.
The Commissioner reserved judgment until lloodey (this
day).

RI RO% LAND. - TM! BVU.D:S.;
Asaigneee wen. chosen undler the bankruptcy of Edward
Rovised, et Coleman-ate...et. New North-road, builder.