The Express.
London, England, 1868-07-08 00:00:00

THE

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DIY.)

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVOROE.
(Beton the Judge Ordinary.)
611 AV, P. ORIVTIN ANT twat/am
The hearing of this suit, which related to the will bf
John Shaw, fellmongsr at Nottingham, was resumed ;
and additional evidence was given on behalf of the
plaintiff, who set up • casq of donna/. The trial
jikely W 90euPY the whole EdfSe del):

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Commissioner floiroyd.)
cis wa PNTERS AND WAMMIIIMI.
The bankrupt. ,:verts ribbon
.manufacturers, dealers in
trimmings. and agenfis carrying on business at 149,
atuttp.tda; and also at Coventry. The case has been
before the court since Be!teraber last. The amounts
jointly prepared by Moors. Thsbois and Newstead, and
tiled in March had, show art aggregate liability of
123,1281., including 16,8921. upon accommodation
end 21,743/. due to unsecured credits'''. Of those liabili-
ties, about 60,0001. arise on bill tralseaction.s between
the bankrupts and Mr. Chappell, of Covsesti7 oslso bank-
rupt). The assets in good debts and property are stated
at 7,1321. ; property held as security, 13,4004; do., held by
holders of balls discounted, 10,536/. This was the sitting
for examination and discharge.
Mr. Dubois and Mr. Leach, of Derby, appeared for the
assignees, and asked for another adjournment. The so-
counts were voluminous, and showed that the bankrupts'
transactions had been prin4lli with Mr. Chappell, who
was bankrupt in the Birm' court, but the proceedings
bad been transferred to the on court, by order made
on the 27th ult. During eight months of last year the
transactions between the two firms had exceeded 400,0001.,
of which not above 6,0001. or 7,0001. was in re-
spect of goods. The assignees in both caws
were the same ; and though one of them
had devoted his whole time to the examination of
the accounts, he could nut unravel the nature of
the transactions between the bankrupts and Chappell.
They had discounted each other's bills, and the result had
been to involve Lloyd's Banking Company of Birming-
ham ; Masers. Carr and Co., of Leek ; Messrs. Eaton, silk
merchants, and other creditors in very serious loss.
Mr. Lawrauce, for the bankrupt Peters, asked that the
case should be dealt with in the ordinary way. Though
the application to remove Chappell's proceedings had been
delayed by the assignees until quite recently, that was no
reason why the present bankrupts should be thrown over
the long vacation. Their accounts had been filed in March ;
requisitions had been snarls and answered by the bankrupts
on the lUth of June. All the information had been given
that the es required. The transactions with Chap-
pell were o cashtransactions—thebankrupts having
discounted their bills. The reverses in the Co-
ventry trade had led to the failure of Chappell
and many other traders in that district Up to
that time the bankrupts bad always bad money in hand
to meet Mr. Chappell's bills. The accountants
by the court had reported, so far back as A last, on
the general accuracy of the accounts. Chap s accounts
had also been Sled since March last, and the assignees
bad bad abundant opportunity for comparing the two
sets of accounts, and thoroughly investigating both.
Mr. Treherne, on behalf of the bankrupt Warburton,
also opposed any further delay.
His Honour did not think there was any ground for
adjourning the last examination of the bankrupts. The
last sitting was on the 30th of April, upwards of two
mouths ago; prior to that special accounts had been
filed of their dealings with Chappell, extending over 24
sheets of paper ; and it was too late now for the assignees
to say that they wanted further time to examine the ac-
counts. The bankrupts would pass ; but they must stand
or fall by the accounts they were now swearing to.
Mr. Lawrence staked that the applicants should have
their orders of discharge ; but this being strongly opposed
on behalf of the assignees, the sitting for discharge was
adjourned.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
(THIS DAY.)

(Before Lord Chief Justice Born!.}
LORD BIIILITESBITNT AND an erpnraaa.

Robert Short Waters surrendered to his recognisances to
take his trial on several indictments which charged him
with umbel:ling various sums of money while acting as
steward to the Earl of Shaftesbury.
Mr. Bardinge Giffard, Q.C., and Mr. Greene appeared
for the prosecutor, and Mr. F. H. Lewis for de-
fendant.

Mr. Giffard stated that he did not intend to offer any
evidence in this case, which involved the disentanglement
of many intricate accounts. He might state that the case
bad been postponed on many occasion., invariably at the
ruined of the defendant, and proceedings had been insti-
tuted both in the Chancery and Bankruptcy Courta. He
also added that Lord Portman had called on the prosecutor
on the part of the prisoner, and represented that ha
was in very. bed health and an utterly ruined
man, and inasmuch as the account. involved
matters of dispute, the prosecutor felt justified in with-
drawing from the case. At the same time he (Mr. Gif-
ford) was bound to state that there was nothing in the
nature of a compromise of a criminal offence.
Mr. F. H. Lewis said he appeared for Mr. Waters, and
begged to say that he was entirely innocent of the charge
of embes.lement ; and if the case had been gone into, he
would have been prepared to meet it. He held in his
hand a paper containing the terms of an arrangement be-
tween the prosecutor and the prisoner.
Yr. Giffard said he objected to such a statement There
was no arrangement
..

11;.1Lnriii 'askedthe learned counsel to look at the
/4 12.
Hr. Oiliard having done so, said the paper was exactly
as he had stated. Lord Shaftesbury received no conside-
ration for withdrawing from the case.
The paper was then handed to his lordship, and it was
afterwards read by the clerk of the court. It was signed
by Lord Portman in behalf of the prisoner, and by Mr.
Stephens, (.C., in behalf of Lord Shaftesbury, and stated
that Lord Portman, having submitted to Lord Shaftes-
bury that Mr. Waters was in bad health, and was entirely
in want of funds, had solicited the noble earl not to pro-
secute him, and that Lord Shaftesbury had agreed thereto.
It also stated that all legal proceedings on either side
should terminate, and that there should be an end of all
transactions between them.
The Lord Chief Justice said there was no application
made to him, but an intimation was made that no evi-
dimes was to be offered, and the grounds for so acting
were stated in the paper which had been read, from which
it appeared that there had been proceedings in Chancery
for -the investigation of certain accounts -between Lord
Shaftesbury and the defendant, and it also a Roared that
the accounts were of a very intricate character. In
these circumstances it was very difficult for the
'ourt to pronounce an opinion as to the right course to
pursue, and without knowing much more of the case than
be did, it wan impossible for him to do so. He must ac-
cept the statement that had been agreed upon, and which
wee signed by gentlemen in a high position, who had, no
doubt, made themselves acquainted with all the facts.
His duty was not to pronounce an opinion one way or
another, and he had not the means of doing so.
Under these circumstance* he could not say
whether the prosecution was right or wrong; he
would net say, so far as the papers appeared to
him, that Lord Shaftesbury ought to pursue the prosecu-
tion with reference to the accounts. So far as he (the
learned judge) knew, the defendant might be guilty or
innocent, but the prosecution must take their own course.
Mr. Oiffard then informed the jury that no evident*
was offered, and a verdict of Not Guilty having been re-
turned, the defendant was discharged.