The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-05-04 00:00:00

EXTENSIVE ROBBERY OF WATCHES AND

JE WE LLKRY.

On Saturday morning last, one of the most ex-
tensive robberies that have occurred in Liverpool
for some years past was discovered to have
been perpetrated during the previous night in the
shop of Messrs. Luff and Nephew, (late Norris and
Campbell) chronometer makers, South Castle street. The
robbery was effected in the most ingenious manner, and
shows that the perpetrators of it were no mean adepts in
the science of house-breaking. It appears that over the
',Lop is a number of office., one of which some psrties got
pogsosion of after the hours of business last night. The
shop be:ng closed, and all the occupants having left, the
thieves went to work in real earnest, and, with toe aid of
• a centre bit," succeeded in boring a number of holes in
the floor of
,the upper room sufficiently large to enable
a them with sexual saw to cut a hole in the ceding large
enough fol. a man to get through. Having successfully
accomplisted that objec., they descended into the shop,
by the aid of a rope-ladder, which they subsequently left
on the premises, and then packed up chronometers,
watches, and other valuable articles, to a great
amount —itis said, upwards of £l,OOO worth. With all
this property they ascended the ladder, and got clear off.
The robbery not having beer, discovered until the shop was
opened on. Saturday morning, of course information was
given to t pott,
~ who, no doubt, will ende 'your to trace
the partied ladder •and other articles used by
house-breakers, are in the possession of the police, and
may lead to the discovery of the adroit offenders.

DARING BURGLARY IN THE STRAND.—Daring the night
of NAT (1,,,s lay last th.i shop occupied by Mr. Charles
Dear. tiie carver and gilder and dealer in miscellaneous
goods. was entered, and a large quantity of valuable pro.
petty carried away, consisting of pictures, guns, pistols,
silver mounted walking sticks, cocks, 80. The shop is a
part of Mr. Charles Grossniith's premises, at the corcer of
Welliagtnn street, Strand, and was entered at the street
door, immediately opposite which is a night cab stand. It
would appEcir, therefor', imsossible that thy robbery could
have been committed without the collusion of the cabmen.
A Novar, ENTRRTAINMEST —Madame Bistori, in her last
appearance but ore on the Vienna stage, astonished her
audience by acting in an amusing scene, which, though it
frequently occurs in Italy, is seldom if ever witnessed north
of the Alps. The little comedy was entitled " Cio the
piace ails prima attrice," (that which is most agreeable to
the principal actress). In this piece a lively and witty
conversation was carried on by Madame Ristori from the
stage with_tdifferent friends scattered through the pit, who
in their ttqn. conversed with other Met ds placed in the
boxes, who again addressed the actress on the wage.
Madame Ristori talked easily, declaimed from the "Maid
of Orleans," told anecdotes of her youth and of her early
artistical career, and after half-an-hour of the most com-
pllte and natural acting. and the brightest and most
brilliant conversations, dosed the piece by saying that ere?
power of keeping the attention of the public changed so
long was " the place ails prima Wake.',

LIVERPOOL BAN7.7T.T !-'TC Y C DURT.-SATURDAY.

BErnRE MR. com FTPX EV !lON

In re JOHN LAD —His ,)el v,..ed ju4gm^ lr OTI
the certiicate on -stu Thy b ILicr Fti. ,rried on the
hu.iness of a builder and contractor in Liverpool His
case was argued y few days since, when he was opposed
by Mr. Stfmt on behalf of the as-ignees, and supported by
Mr. Pemberton. His Honour said :—This bankrupt's
certificate is opoos'd, on the part of the assignees, on two
grounds. First, reckless trading, in having continued to
trade and contracting debts whilst in a state of insolvency,
and without probablti means of payment; and, secondly,
wilful evasion of et tries in books relating to the loans
by two of his creditors, alleged to be an offence falling
within the second and ninth divisions of the 256 h
seltion of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act. The
circumstances under which these objections arise are
shortly these :—ln the month of August, 1854, the bank-
rupt's estate was placed under the control of inspectors
on behalf of his creditors, and under their inspection.
He continued to carry on business until about the be-
ginning of 1856, but it was not until about the Ist May,
1856, that Mr. Roberts, one of the inspectors, gave up
the entire control of the business to the bankrupts. At
the commencement of this inspectorship, the bankrupt
considered himself worth about .£lOOO, after payment
of his debts, On the let of May, 1856, the bankrupt's
unsecured debts amounted to about £1,967, and his then
available assets consisted of good debts amounting to
£409 lOs ; cash in hand, £23 104 ; furniture valued at
£137 Os ; stock-in-trade valued £865 9s ; making alto.
gether about £1,436. Bat he had further assets, consisting

of houses and other property, valued altogether at £4,189
13s, subject to a mortgage, on which £3,126 1.5 s was then
due, leaving a surp'us of £1,062 18s. From which figure.]
it appears that the bankrupt was, on the Ist of
May, 18.56, possessed of a capital of £530 193, as referred
to in his supplementary balance sheet. At this period
the bankrupt had entered into several contracts for
the erection of various buildings and other purposes,
which were then considered valuable contracts, though
(with one material exception) these resulted in losses
which, as I understand, proceeded from unavoidable
causes. No contracts of any consequence were entered
into by the bankrupt after May, 1856. The payments to
the bankrupt under these contracts were generally made
to him monthly. It appears that from the early part of
the year 1856 down to the time of his bankruptcy. the
bankrupt bad numerous actions brought against him,
some for portions of the debts owing by him in May,
1856, and some for works afterwards done by him under
his contracts, and whilst he was proceeding in the execu-
tion of them. Some of these actions he settled imme-
diately, and to some of them he pleaded to gain time,
and others he defended, having, as he considered, good
grenade of defence, but no defence seems to have been
carried on to any length, but the actions were, very
shortly after they were commenced, settled by payment
of the debts and cots, with the exception of one action,
to which the bankrupt considered he had grounds of
defence, and which was expected to come one for trial in
the County Court a few days before the bankruptcy.
The costs incurred and paid under all these scions, it is
alleged by the bankrepr, and not contradicted, did not
altogether exceed £6O. In order to enable him to carry
on his contracts, as well as to pay off several debts, the
bankrupt from time to time borrowed money of Mr. Tilley
and Mr. Bigham, for which he paid interest, at abut the
rate of five per cent per month, and which money he gene-
rally repaid out of his monthly receipts out of his contracts,
and Mr. Tilley is now returned a creditor for only about
£4OO, and Mr. Bigham for about £ll6. These circum-
stances, it is urged on the part of the assignees, show such
a state of insolvency in the bankrupt as well on the let of
May, 1856, as subsequently, as to have rendered it
unwarrantable in him to continue to carry on his
business at that period, or at any time subsequently.
Now, in May. 1856, it is to be observed that the several
contracts which since then he had been engaged in carry-
ing out, had already been entered into, and were then
co sidered very desirable to he carried out, and supposing
that his stock and other available assets, exclusive of his
house and other p-operty, ought only to be taken into con-
sideration, (but which, however, I do not think a fair way
of regarding his position,) still recollecting that this period
was not the commer cement of a business, bat the con -
tinuanee of one, and that the contracts were then
expected to be remunerative, I think even in that view
it would be going too fa• to say that he was then
bound to give up his business, and relinquish all such
expected benefit, especially when, by the terms of the
contracts, usual in all such building contracts, a failure
in carrying them out, either through bankruptcy or
otherwise, would most certainly have been attended with
considerable loss to his estate. But, on the contrary,
with the fair expectation of being remunerated under
these contracts, and taking into consideration the house
and other property of which he was then possessed, and
the value of it beyond the mortgage, and which I think
ought not to be left out of consideration, and by which
I altogether, he is shown to have had then a capital of
about £.530. It appears to me that the bankrupt was
fairly entitled to continue his business at this period, and
4.. 41.. .0 I.Z•
then, there were, I think, equally fair grounds to warrant
him in not giving up the expected benefit of these con-
tracts. It is true that he is shown to have been much
hampered for want of capital, and to have been subject to
numerous actions and other proceedings in consequence,
but, whilst he could obtain assistance to enable him to
struggle through his difficulties, and by which assist-
ance he did not incur more expense than each
occasion seemed to warrant, and whilst he had any
fair hope of overcoming these difficulties, it does not, I
think, follow that he was bound to stop his business.
In the case of exparte Johnson, 4, De Gex and Sm. 27,
to which I have had frequent occasions to refer, Sir
J. Knight Bruce, then Vice-Chancellor, observed, "that
the first question was whether Mr. Johnson (the bank-
rupt in that case) improperly continued his trade when
his circumstances ware insolvent, and he had no reason-
able hope of recovering himself or trading for any useful
purpose ; and that it could not be contended that a man
must leave off trade because he is in difficulties. They
might be surmounted. Nor could he (the Vice-Chan-
cellor) upon the materials before him, pronounce that at
any moment of tim- before this bankrupt placed himself in
the hands of his creditors he conducted himself recklessly,
nor could he assert that at any moment before' this time
it was his duty to stop his trade, wind up his affairs,
and give up his property." Now, these remarks appear
to me to he quite appropriate to the present case. It has
been urged that the bankrupt was not justified in incurring
the several costs in the actions brought against him ;
no objection, it is to be observed, is or can be made in
respect to these casts as an offence within the 7th division
of the 256th section, all such costs having been paid,
and there being no creditor opposing or who could oprse
on such grounds ; but the incurring of them is contended
to le an unju tifiable waste of the bankrupt's assets.
But sty nrevieus remarks as to the bankrupt's fair ex-
pectation of overcoming his difficulties equally, I think,
afford an answer to this objec ion. And as to the ob-
jection raised to the bankrupt having borrowed money at
so large a rate of in,erest, it is to be observed that these
loans were made but for short periods, and not to a great
extent, and the interest paid upon them do not appear
in amount to exceed the advantages derived from such
temporary loans; and although it has been very properly
considered that a trader is not justified in continuing his
bus 'less by resorting to usurious loans, yet in cases like
the pre stir, where the loans were but temporary, and not
to great extent, and where, also, assistance gained from
them may he considered advantageous, I am not prepared
to say that the ohiaining of such loans affords any jos,
grounds of objection. In prof of the fair grounds which
the bankrupt hal for continuing his business under
ail +hese difficulties, it is to be observed that, notwiih-
standing the loss in which the execution of same of the
contracts has resulted, and which has been, as I under-
s and, through unavoidable and uefereseen courses, the
bankrupt's present estate will, I understand from the
official assignee, realise nearly 7s in the pound after the
payment of all the expenses under the bankruptcy, and
not merely 2s 6d or 3s in the pound after payment of the
supposed expenses which would attend a bankruptcy,
as appears to have been only calculived upon by the
committee, appointed at a meeting of the creditors of the
bankrupt, to examine int r his affairs. Upon the whole,
therefere, I trust the first objection raised to this car-
tifieate—as to reckless trading is not substantiated.
With respect to the second objection raised to this cer.i-
fi ste, this arises from the circumstances of there having
been no entry in the bankrupt's books of the different
leans made to him by Mr. Tilley and Mr. Bigham, nor
any entry made of the debts now due to them, until after
the bankruptcy. And these omissions, it is contended,
f rm an offence under the 2nd and 9 h divisions of the
250th section of the Bankruptcy Act. To bring this
objection within the operation of either of these divisions,
it must be shown that the bankrupt withheld these
entries wilfully, and with the intent to conceal the true
state of his affairs. Now the bankrupt, in answer to this
objection, states that as these loans were but temporary,
he did not think it necessary to enter them in
his books, and that they were all known to his bookkeeper
who equally considered them unnecessary to b 3 entered ;
and although the debts ultimately owing to Mr. Tilley and
Mr. Bigham were not entered in his books until after
his bankruptcy, yet at the time of the meeting of his
creditors, shortly previous to his bankruptcy, they
were mentioned to the creditors; and, indeed, these
'debts were inserted in the statement laid before
the auditors at this meeting, and the bankrupt also
states that he proposed to the committee, who