The Express.
London, England, 1850-08-21 00:00:00

AQUATIC&

ROYAL YACHT SQUADRON REGATTA.

Cows., MONDAT.—ilde regime wee Weight Ma Ural-
matins oa fleturday, with a ett,terst fog a cup Moen be her
Majesty, to be sailed f3r by en.ters of the Royal Teeht
fiquedr en, Iron 30 tons and under 100 tons ; Quvea's Cup
course ; three to start or no race. The conditions of the
sketch wale somewhat different from them in the programme
originally trued, in coesequenee, it is understood, of t►e
comer el the Frisk, Mr. R. Franklin, declining to call his
yacht '1 he entries were fi tally settled as follows :
Fusee Toes Owners.
Aurora ... 47 ....... Mr. Lo Mne►eot Mona%
lloAquito
Freak
87 .. Mr. W. IL Woodhouse.

"deed....

Anew
Os the wail signal baiag givea, at 20 minutes to 11, they
all got under weigh, rampt the Gondola. Tae wind was
blenring tusk from W.15.W and the matt we. effected la
wry good style, the Anew leading, with the Aaron lying at
Mar stem. The Mosquito, to the surprise of most people, did
sot get her topsail set for some tine after the start. Off
Newtown the Arrow increased tier lead. and went round the
boat off Yarmouth a considerable i.ttnee ahead ; the time
at this point star ding Moos : Arrow, 12.47 ; Ammo, 1.1.60;
Mosquito, 1 2.60; Freak, 112. The Arrow this led the
wsy doom to Cowes-reeds, one ;weed the Squadrosohouse
with a lead of 20 miasma. When be }nab rushed this
point she gave in. The bests? shortly alter ',wired, bat
this caused no alterations in the p •4ion of the leading
yacht ; she retained her foremost place, and rounded the
Nab Light Ana, and bad the lead when the yachts were
made out off Old Castle-point. Toe gun g d her arrivsl
at 6 65.46, and the Aurora and Mostaito cams in nearly
together, about Whoa-hour latch Mr. Cbstaberlayne, the
owner oe the Arrow, bee thus had the good fortune. to wla
two of the Mar cups given daring the week, and with the
same good aid vessel, the Arrow having won the most
roved Um Wend on Thareday.
The regatta ie considered superior to some, but lii ballad
away that ars atiU huh is the remembrance of tba
guilt sea.

biIrfItOPOLITAN BtitAYIT BOCISTIFA ASYLUM.—
tht[outlay the aanivorsary of the sinning of the sapient at
Dalea-pood. I. since, wss colebrated in the grounds of the
lastitutisa by • fitr champ', re. A splendid m-tcoos was
netted on *slows ander which the inmates of the stylus,
SI r assbee, wen shitustielly r•galtd. A misty of
to owls lollowa, la which the visitors Poised.

nab) fatelligence.
BRISTOL DISTRICT COURT OF BANK-
RUPTCY.
_Suess Ma. 11111~IT eismer. .

Ba Joszro Ftsstas, 11011OVINI1, OP CL11112.-..5001,11.
/MI OP fiIIISTIFICATI 101 711111 TIMM
ml, •••• has suited mob Mimosa Inn w tonossibl.
Ht y of Oa) ram, sad tram th• 'pestles. wlits a milato• ba.
somas • 'prism's sr soo, Wag tavolesii. Tb Imhoosslort
dam! tram Jas. 1. 1847, sad ottsodlog to Dia 11, 1849,
wins tie Oasktort Lel bit; pstitioo, was as NUM:
Da.

...___
£9 443 6 6
Various credits
WNW. utaillous
Po
3,337 14 Ads
Demo 36 19 9

£25,819 0 4
La
Wilms L3BB 2 4
Proving
Mcetresa PAWS,
Trade wpm. 2,607 16 4
Plink(' expesses 1.649 0 0
Lew.
Dalleiessy ea Jan. 1, 1847 2.109 2 8
8.000 0 0

£26,819 0 4
By ea amended account the deldeasp saes reduced be
shoat 1,6001.
The lest examination having been end &wee 12th Feb.
sad entreed by adjournments Ist ins beginsing of thie
moth, and the arguments being wenelned, Mr. Beene*
Stephen delivered the rollowiag judgment, which embargo
the material ford the case.
Hie Roam said—The applied/ea for • MOON 1111
ease is opposed, not by the assignees, bat by a
creditor, Mr. Togs', wholes proved is rigba el hr 1:0 eller
a sum of moan la whisk she has • knead Wend alder
the will of Thomas Yibbeil, dressed, sad while she is
entitled to have psi& est st the estates( the beistoot ; and
Mr. Tesese's Arse pesead Oepposition is that the dream-
stances out et wbki tide eldm eras., hooked • no if
fraudalest misciesdest ea the part of the bankrupt. It is
admitted that Mitchell died is 1818, heavies W. Origin
and B. Cook, elsesten and hasten ander his will, sad that
the will directed the trustees to place certain males (the
mosey claimed) le government or other good assurity ; and
at the death of kb mother end his wife to pay Men Teague
(then unmarried) the income for her life sad separate as..
It is farther Mended that both the orator peeved and
the bankrupt was employed by Edward Cook as le solicitor
in telling and getting in the not manias, sad piscine it in
redoes securities ; that Edward Ceek died on the 281 i of
April, 1428, leaded a will, of whisk the bankrupt, John
Cook, and the Bev. Josh Nash wen enestore, sad that
they sll to
Farther, that William Oriels earvived
Edward Cook, sad died on the Nth of July, 1830, having
appointed Bawer& Holder sad another his itheenteer
Holder proved, sad died in December, led. With
regard to fraud, I shall state • few fasts to
testify my judgment. Mr. Teague hes sworn that
in Jolter', 1830, after Edward Cook's death,
and soon after Mrs. Teague became entitled according to
Mitchell's will, ke had an interview with the bankrupt, to
ascertain how the income was to be paid, and to Is the time
of payment, and received from the bankrupt orris state-
ments se to the diepodtios of tie property, which, it is now
insisted, were of a false and hencinent character ; bat sa
then is reason to doubt the accuracy of Mr. Togo's me-
mory of what passed at that isterview, and its precise date
(thrash that data is materiel), and as the memorandum
produced is not quite safe to rely upon, I form my opiaion is
so degree on what Is said to have passed there, except as
regards the fact which I. established, that prior to the deli-
very of the account to be presently mentioned,
Mn. Teague had made inquiry of the bankrupt ia what
manner Mrs. Tosgas's income was to be paid. The
account I refer to is in the handwriting of the bankrupt, and
headed " Anount of Mrs. Mitchell's money estate, and
where vested at the period of Mr. Cook's decease."
This sec tint was ferohbed by Mr. Terme (as ap-
pears frcm the bankrupt's books), on the 23rd March,
1830, to (sable ben is ascertain what arrears of in-
terest were due to the estate of the wife of the testator, Mrs.
Mitchell, who had • life interest ender his will in the pro-
perty is question, and whose executor Mr. Teague Opposed
to be. It is enough to say lam Whiled that it was Owned
to be, and in fact was, understood by Mr. Teague as an an
count of the manner in which those moneys were vested,
sot only at Mr. Cook's douse, but also at the
period when the account was furnished, vis., 23rd
Mirth, 1830. Now it it be looked upon in that
light it was deceptive, for it represented • sum of 9501. as
nerd with Mr. Baker on mortgage, and 1601. with Mr.
Sparrow, bat without sayiag is what smear. also 801 with
a Mr. White; when it appears from the beakrupt's books
that though seek Isms bad is B Cook's lifetime been ad-
vanced to those partial, viz , to Sparrow on bond, and White
and Baker as mortgage, they had all been paid off since his
death, and before the account was furnished. viz., Sp error's
1501 on 29th Aug., 1829; Baker's 9501. ea 34th Oct., 1829 ;
and White's 801. on 18th March, 1830; and when I consider
the whole evinces before me I feel no doubt that then
Orepreentations wen intentional on the part of the
bachelor, and fraudulently designed by him to convey a
false imperil MI, that the monies wen still vested with these
several parties. With rap-et to this accowit it is further to
be observed that, besides the son 6 I hare mentioned, her.
an other same pat down sealed the suns of different
parties as parties wok whom they were respectively vested,
and that they ernapne an snoods of 2,90 W., of which
4001 is put down to Mr. Teague (an advance t, that amount
out of Mitchell's estate having been is rat made to him on
mortgage), leaving • residue of 2,501.; and that out of this
2,501 , three literal ISM of 1501., 7461., and 201, are put
dews to the bankrupt himself, sod in such loaner as to re-
provost bits as chargeable with interest on the two sums
first mar toned, those+ he is not mentioned as having given
any security for tbith And though it is no doubt
pees ibis that the agxregate of these three sums,
viz., 9161. may have been the whole amount
at the time in his hands, yet another document shows that
about two years and a half aherw irde at least he was is
pessaries of a still larger portion of Mitchell's estate, vie.,
1,6151., and also shows that be was retaining it in his bands,
under so authority from Mitchell's representatives, or other
lewfal authority whatever, bat by • mere act of unlawful
apprepriation ; for I Sad mated beads to have beta drawn
sp between the bankrupt, John Cook, acid Noah, that of the
bankrupt bearing date to 13th of October, 1632, end reciting
that Edward Cook, at the time of his death, bad 2,5001. in
his hands, part of the trust monies ander the will of Thomas
Mitt bell. and that the bankrupt, John Cook, and Nash, had
possessed themselves of this sum in the followthe propor-
tions: 1,6161. in the hands of the bankrupt, 6691. in the
hods of John Co k, 1501. in the hands of Noah, and 1841.
is the hands of the bankrupts, John Cook sad Nash, as eve
esters of B. Cook ; and these mutual bonds were accord-
ingly executed by each of those parties, and the others of
them cooditioned for payment of these several sums, and
the interest thereon, tram time to time, secording to the
Meets declared in the will of Mitchell. With respect to
Meek, it appears that this condition was performed, and that
be did, in tact, ultimately repay to Mitchell's estate the sum
0(1601. (nor does any unfavourable inference neoesaarily
ado on of the transaction, too far as Nash is concerned, for
be probably acted under false impressions, derived from the
beaknipt as the professional co-executor) ; but John Cook
was, be an arrangement between the bankrupt sad himself,
allowed to bold his 6501., and the 1,6161. mentioned in
the bankrupt's bead remained, at the time of his beck-
/spry, wholly unpaid and unsecured. And, as regards the
bankrupt, at lost, the transaction (which woe entirely
unknown at the time to Mr. Teague, and, as it would
seem, to all but the parties themselves) mat be considered
'se as unprincipled appropriation of the 1,6161. to which
his bend »fin ; for the bankrupt, as a solicitor,
must have been well aware that it ought to have
bees amounted for to the representative for the time being of
Thomas Mitchell, in order that it might be disposed of by
him aceordiog to the trusts of Mitchell's will; or if any
difficulty opposed itself to that cone, that it should, seismic,
have been invested by the bankrupt and his fent:noon on
inch good and sufficient security as Mitchell's will directs.
Above all, the bankrupt was bound, in common honesty, to
have apprised Mr. Teague of the unsecured position of this
sum, and, indeed, of the whole 2,5001 ; instead of which,
Yr. Teague is allowed to remain in utter ignorance of ih
position, and led to suppose that it continually remained in
the position falsely represented by the account of 23rd March,
1830, an impression confirmed, even down to a late period, by
payments of interest thereon,regularly made by the bankrupt, '
end by letters nerved from the bankrupt, particularly •
letter wider date of 11th of August, 1845, in which be sap
stenteredly, in answer to application for a loan of part of
2,601.," There is not any of the Ethan you speak of de
angered, or likely to be so, at present ; and, as the pass
ties who have it are tolerably passed with the into ed.
we would not willingly. loconveniesse them by callingit
in." And under this =pre miss Mr. Toro esedased
receive the ornate of interest bdwe messtiosei Par the
bankrupt (supposicg him to be the saute, of the Mewl
from himself and the several parties meadow& it the
account) until the year 1847, when he at length disesemmed
bo'h the heed that had been practised upon him and the
utter inability of the bankrupt to refund the money.
The bankrupt's solicitor, Mr. Abbot, could have no rea-
sonable hope of combating with mere, upon the merits, a
case of fraudulent misconduct so clearly made out ; and was
reduced, therefore, to insist chiefly on the labeled point that
it was not misconduct committed as • "trader ;" and that,
by the provision of the bankrupt laws no misconduct that is
committed In that earthy h a legitimate ground of opposi-
tion to the cortiffeate. That such ls the state

of the law I take to be a settled
_point. It
u an decided Is this mart In "Es Matthias,"
and that decision wee eccdirined by his Honour, Bir Knight
Bruce, on appeal, and though that a die arose at • time when
a different act of parliament was In force, ft was admitted by 1
Mr. Bipg, solicitor for the opposing creditor, that so far as
this point was concerted, the provisioi.s of the two acts
were not distinguishable. By • clues examination of the
beakrupt's books, Mr. Abbot certainly succeeded in satisfy-
* me that net ewe of the several sums of 9501, 1501., and
801 mentioned la the amount bad else to the hands of the
bankrupt r • trader; for the only trade engirt to be
serried ea hy the bankrupt (who wee by pawl to ri soli-
altar) was that of scrivener ; and it I. clearly established by
the cease of " Malkin v. Adama" (3 Camp. 28), and " Lott'
v. Melville" (3 Boett's New Reports), that to constitute
Maio .14 • man must be estrus* by his eimployess to
keep their mosey is his poeseasion until he shall be enabled
to proems as ismatemst for It. and it appeared by the bask-
rtipt's book, that it was ant the ease with any of the
three sums before-seutiosted but that they muse into
his profits/km strictly as a • .licitta. Bat se regard. the
three ewes of 1601, 1761., awl 301, whlek i• the MIN
accusal the bankrupt himeelf is chuged with aa part of
Mitchell's estate, themes stands very differently; as to them
then r so eeideses has the Wain's% boas settee what