Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-11-19 00:00:00

LONDON COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—Nov. 6

In Re LEOPOLD BEDPATIL—A proof was tendered
against this estate by Mr. Lawrence, on behalf of the Great
I' orthern Railway Company, for a sum exceeding £200,000,
under the following circumstances :—The bankrupt had
forged the company's stock or shares to the amount of
£221,070, and its dividend warrants to the further amount
of £15,000. Parliamt nt had made-the forged stock valid,
and the bankrupt's estate was indebted to the company in
the sum of £236,070. The company, desirous that the
bankrupt's other creditors should not suffer by a clerk in
their employ having obtained credit by means of appear-
ances which his forgeries had enabled him to assume,had
satisfied all the claims against the bankrupt's estate. With
very few exceptions, the creditors had been paid 20s. in
the pound, and in these instances or exceptions 155., or
upwards of )ss. in the pound had been paid. Every other
creditor havir g been thus satisfied, the company preferred
the proof in order to obtain the sum which Redpath's estate
had realized (about 1,30,000), as now in the him& of the
official assignee His Honour said he would carefully
examine the Act passed on the 16 h of August, 1857, to
see whether it had turned the loss of the company, by these
forgeries, into a debt. In this case the proof wou'd be
admitted. Otherwise there was a difficulty in the case.
His present impression was, that the Act had not quite
turned the claim into a dab., although he thought it had
intended to do so. Proof deferred accordingly.
In Re G. H. SELLERS.—The bankrupt is cescribed as a
merchant, of Weetbourne.park-road, late of Liverpool.
This was a sitting on the question of certificate. Mr.
Lawrence appeared in sup; ort. There was no opposition.
It appeared that this sour: havirg refused to pass the
bankrupt's examination, the Lord Justices on appeal had
made en order that in their opinion "the bankrupt ought
to pass." In a somewhat similar case (the case of one
"Tilly") Mr. Commissioner Evans considered the order
"ought to pass" as equivalent to passing the bankrupt's
examination, and he did not require another sitting in his
Court for that purpose. 9Nie Bankruptcy Consolidation
Act requires the Commissioner to certify, on passing a
bankrupt's examination, that he has " made a full and
true disclosure and discovery of his estate and effects,"
and that " so far as the Court could judge there did not
appear any reason to doubt his statements." Mr.
Commissienar Evans got over the difficulty in respect
to violating his conscience by omitting the above words in
the form cf order passing the bankrupt's examination. His
Honour (Goulborn) now said he did not think he could
make an order which contained an omission of the words in
the Act. The cues were not, however, so far parallellas to
subject him to a violation of conscience. The assignees,
when the case was before the Lords Justices, had withdrawn
all objections to the accounts, and the Lords Justices, it
would appear, were influenced by that course. He should
pay due respect to the opinions of the Lords Justices, that
The bankrupt ought to pass," but there must be an
examination meeting before he could do so, or enter on
the question of certificate. This would subject the bank-
rupt to the expense of two further meetings, but there was
no remedy. He could not consider the words " ought to
pass" as equivalent to passing the bankrupt.