The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-04-29 00:00:00

THE SPRING.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE. NORTHERN TIMES.
Sir,--H-While winter prevails in the hill country,
and the ewes are dropping their lambs among the
Snow in Perthshire, though unusually cold, we
have in this early distriei flocks of swallows, and,
this morning I heard both the cuckoo and landrail.
Can any naturalist prove that swallows all
Pligratc? My own observations lead me to the
impress ion that some species, if not all the young
birds of last year, hybernate with us, and are called
o
ut as pioneers by the warmth of spring.--Yours,
T. R. A.
Burnside Cottage, Seaforth,
April 27, 1857.

THE GALLOWS OR LIBERTY.—The wretched man Mansell,
*who has been many weeks under sentence of death, but
nose life hangs on a legal quibble, is to be placed at the
bar of the Court cf Queen's Bench next Saturday morn •
b, while learned counsel argue before leaned Jt.dges
ether or not the jury by whom he was tried was properly
Lord Chief Justice and the judges of the Court of Queen's
13etch nearly the whole day. the legal quibble happens
to go in opposition to the mode in which the jury was
electc.d, _Mansell will be then and there set free—for it
aPPeats that he cannot be again tried for the same ffenee;
tat if the technical points relied upon by the counsel for
the Crown are affirmed by the judges, he will be taken
back to Maidstone, there, after weeks of anxious doubt,
i° hanged by the
neck till he is dead.

MANCHESTER COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.

(BEFORE MR. COMMISSIONER JEMMETT.)

. In re jOSEPII Waione.—On Mond sy Mr: J. Nunns, Cotton
broker, of Liverpool,. was examined-by Mr. Atkinson, on
behalf of the assignees of this bankrupt, as follows, with
respect to his transactions with • the bankrupt.—
Mr. F. Robinson appeared for Mr. Nunus, and
Mr. R. B. B. Cobbett for the bankrupt. Refer to
the invoice book of Messrs Samuel Lees and Co, now
produced, and state whether, on the sth of January, 1855,
you sold to the bankrupt, or purchased on his account, the
cotton comprised in the invoice of that date, amounting
to £935 14i? I neither sold that cotton for the bankrupt,
nor did I purchase it on his account. Had you in your
possession at that time, on the bankrupt'st account, the
cotton specified in such invoice? lam not aware that I
had; I am almost certain I had. not ; but I will refer to
my contract book. Refer to the farther invoices
in the before mentioned invoice book, numbered
respectively froth No. 2 to 37, both inclusive, and
state whether, on the respective dates of those invoices,
you sold to the bankrupt, or purchased on his account
cotton comprised in those invoices respectively ?—Af.er
examining the invoices, I am able to state that none of
such cotton was either sold by me to -the bankrupt, to.• pur.;
chased by me on his account. Then does the explanation
given by you before this court on the 11th of Match last,
is reply to questions, apply to those 37 invoices? The
answer
_was : "At the request of the bankrupt these
invoices were prepared, as in the case of a purchase, and
forwarded to Samuel Lees and Co. When the purchase
was first commenced, I did not know- what it meant ?"
This Answer, and other explanations which I gave at that
time do. The bankrupt received' the whole, or nearly the
whole of the money, direct from Samuel Lees and Co. for at
least the three months preceeding his bankruptcy,
in consequence of The invoices that were sent during
that period. Which are the six invoices referred to
in your answer to question 70 in your previous examina-
tion? The answer was that there ware six of such
invoices sent to Samuel Lees and Co. subsequent
to Ist of April, 1856? —Yes, those invoices are dated
respectively, 10th of April, 30th of April, 6th of May, 2nd
of June, 7th of June, and 23rd of June.. Did you on
any occasion make a sale of your own cotton to the bank-
rupt? I have sold him false-packed cotton and samples
for consumption. Da any of the invoices to which your
attention has been directed this morning refer to such
sales ? No. Do you produce any other letters received
by you from the bankrupt on the subject of these invoices ?
My letters are in court which I produce, bat not being
aware that the production of them would be required, I
have not selected such as relate to these invoices in par-
ticular. I did not receive written instructions in every
case. Can you state on which occasions the bankrupt's
instructions were verbal ? I could by reference to my
letters. State, as nearly as you can, the nature and effect
of the instructions with respect to these invoices
on the occasions of their being verbal. They.avould
be very similar to the passages contained in the
letters copied in my previous examination : for in-
stance, " Send an invoice to Samuel Lees and Co., men-
tioning the date and amount, and whether for Stockport or
Caton." Have you read the bankrupt's examination taken
before this court on the 201 of the present month ?—I
have. Is it a fact that cotton comprised in some of the
before-mentioned invoices was sent to him for consump-
tion ?—lt is not a fact, for there was no such cotton in
existence. I find a letter from the bankrupt, dated the
11th of January, 1856, is which the following passage
occurs :—" In the meantime, I wish you would have an
invoice of cotton made out for Samuel Lees and Co., about
£965, dated the 4th of January, I shall want it with me to
Manchester, on Monday. Don't forget this." In conse-
quence of the receipt of that letter, did you make out and
send Samuel Lees and Co. the invoice now produced, dated
the 4th of January?—.Yes, I made out such invoice, but
whelei I sent it direct to Samuel Lees and Co., or handed
it to the bankrupt to take to them, I -cannot at present
s ate ; but most probably I sent -it to them.
Did you receive letters 'from the bankrupt, dated the 6th
December, 1855, and 20th December, 1856, in which occur
the following. passages :—" I wish you would -send an
invoice to Samuel Lees and Co., about the usual amount,
say „e 960, for Stockport, dated the 3rd December. Batter
send it to-morrow." " Send an invoice to Samuel Lees
and Co., for Stockport, about £950 or £960, date-the 17th
December, last Monday. Don't fail ?"—Yes. Did you,
in pursuance of thotte letters, prepare and send invoices of
those dates respectively, and are -the invoices now pro-
duced such invoices ?—Yes • I either sent or gave them.
I did prepare them, and probably I should send them to
8. Lees and Co. You have stated, on your examination
before this court, on the 12th March last, that the invoice
of the sth of January, 1855, was prepared at the request
of the bankrupt, to save any loss on . the buying of the
cotton and the re sale. Can you state more particularly
when and how the request was made ?—I cannot state
further particulars as regards that particular invoice, but
all these invoices were sent at the bankrupt's request :
and, in addition to the letters produced, and many others
of a similar kind. I had frequent conversations, when the
system first commenced, on the subject of these invoicse,
with the bankrupt. The bankrupt obseived that it waul I
save the buying and immediate re-sale for cash, as he did
not want the cotton for consumption. Were such invoices
prepared and sent to S. Lees and Co. for the purpose of
procuring money from them? I sent the invoices at the
bankrupt's request, and I believe S. Lees and Co. eid
advance him money upon them. Was not that the object
for which these invoices were sent ? I do not know that
that was the object; .my opinion is that it was. Do you
not know that money was advanced by them to the bankrupt
in consequence of these invoiceseand was not such money
frequently sent by them direct to you, in consequence of
one of such invoices being sent? I know nothing from
Samuel Lees and Co.; all I know I heard from the bank-
rupt. Will you swear that you do not know that
the bankrupt's object in sending those invoices was to
procute money from Samuel I ees and Co. ? I
concluded that it was to procure money. With
reference to your transactions with Joseph Leach and
Co., and to your explanations thereof, given on the 11th
and 12th of March last, can, you state whether, on every
occasion of your procuring money for 'the bankrupt by the
disposal of cotton previously purchased on his account by
you, you did so by an advance upon such cotton ; or
whether, on any occasion, - there was an actual absolute
sale of the bankrupt's cotton for cash ? All the'transac-
tisns with Joseph Leach and Co. were absolute sales by
me to them, on the bankrupt's account., for cash. On a
-few occasions, 'I have sold to other parties cotton on the
bankrupt's account. Were such sales made to Joseph
Leach and Co , and others, for the purpose of raising
money on the bankrupt'e account? Yes. Mr. Robinson,
i addressing the commissioner, said that Mr. Nunns had
attended that day, and submitted to an examination by
Mr. Atkinson; and he had desired him to state publicly
that, in consequence of something which had fallen
from his Honour at the last meeting, as to the:
'reason that he did not appear again in support
,of his proof, that an arrangement had been come
to, not with the bankrupt, by which Mr. Nunns-would
receive more money than he would have received
seri.,posing he had established his proof, in the way of
dividend from Wright's estate it and- that being so, he had
no object in pushing his proof further. • That was the sole
reason why he did not attend the court on the last occa-
sion. Mr. Atkinson said, if any arrangement had been
come to by which the bankrupt had bought Mr. Nunns
off, he did not )s.now of it. Mr. Cobbett said, Mr. Nunns
had been just examined and given furious evidence against
the bankrupt, and they were to be told that the bankrupt
had bought him off. Mr. Robinson said, his client had
nothing to do with either the assignees or the bankrupt.
Mr. Cobbett said, ho had his Own opinion as to whether
Mr. Nunns had been bought off or not. Mr. Atkinson
said, that if the bankrupt or any of his friends had been
concerned in buying Mr. Nunns off, that would leave the
inference that the money was owing still. The Commissioner
said, he understood the other day that Mr. Nuniss had fore-
gone his claim, and his remark went t o ascer rain whether i t was
intended that all the evidence given against the bankrupt
by Mr. Nuuns should be repudiated. Mr. Atkinson :
Does Mr. Robinson say so ? Mr. Robinson : How can I
repudiate what Mr. Ninins has stated on oath? The
Commissioner said that Mr. Nunns had brought forward
a certain statement, and asserted on oath that the bank,
rupt owed him £30,000, and the next day he came
forward and said he withdrew the claim. He had taken
an opportunity since the last meeting of going through all
the examinations and the accounts of the bankrupt., and he
was clearly of opinion that no good could arise to the credi-
tors from any further adjournment. He thought so far as
this day's meeting was concerned, the bankrupt should
be allowed to pass his examination, and whatever
observations had to be made on the conduct of the
bankrupt ahould be reserved to the certificate meet-
ing. Mr. Atkinson said that was the conclusion the
assignees had arrived at, lent neither the learned com-
miesioner our anybody else could say his accounts were
satisfactory, The Commissioner ; No ; I don't say they
arc. The bankrupt was consequeutly alloyed to pass his
examination. Mr. Cobbet applied for an allowance' for
the accountant who had been employed by the bankrupt
to furnish information to the assignees. He said his bill
would come to about £lOO. Mr. Atkinson (instructed
by Mr. W. Parker, one of the assignees present) objected
to the allowance, and said they bed given the accountant
notice of this at first. However, they should not object
to £2O or £3O. His Honour made an order for VO, to
which Mr Atkinson assented. Mr. Cobbet then applied
for an allowance for the bankrupt. which Mr. Atkinson
Opposed, and the commissioner refused to make any.
The certificate meeting was fixed for the Bth of Jane,