The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-01-04 00:00:00

MONDAY NEXT, THE_trx (IT

Doe, on (lenllse of
Cohen, • Jacobs
Be•or • Ellison
The King • John
Revett
Heeley • Graham
Char • Norris.
Doe, on demise of
Sharp and others,
• Barrett
A.mis • WhWar

Ifooman • Winks
II ngbes • Breedes
Deering • Bailey
Cockerton • Richard-
son
Woodrow • Jones,
Esq.
Roberts • Busted
Leman .• Brown
Bye • Scott
Tomk ins • Basket.

I"hompson v Ted-
denhain
Chard r Freida
Boxer r 11141)ourrall

villa
Smith v Simpson
\l•Laughlin'Vowler
Harris v Rawlins

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Turstur, Lts

Joseph Banks. late of Battersea. size.manufaetorer and shol,*
keeper, came up on his petition to be discharged, end was opposed
by Pfr. Coo' e, on behalf of a person named Johnson, and stye.
ral other creditors. • _ . .

The insolvent, on his direct examination, admitted that he hea
disposed of his stock in trade, together with the • Kitures of hirert
house, and part of his furniture, to his brother-in-law. Mr. Jorephi
II aliier, for 391. I3s. A few weeks before this transfer he had ob.
tained goods to a considerable amount on credit. In the premised
in which he carried on the manufacture of size. the insolvent had
erected a furnace, and made various improvements. which coat him
several !tundra pounds, yet he disposed of his interest In those
• premises, together with a horse and cart, originally purchased for.
461. to .another brother-in-law, named IVoding, for 111. Under
those ercumatances Mr. Cooke, for the opposing &editors, con.
tended that the insolvent was guilty of a fraudulent dispnaal of hi*
property, and that he had fraudulently contracted debts without
any Intention of paying the amount.
The insolvent denied the intention to defraud, and alleged that
he was possessed of a chymicat secret, so valuable, that If he had
not been molested by his creditors, he should have teen enabled to
discharge all his debts.
The CHIEF COMMI33IOIIER said it was not Matter of
ir-
ference, but a clear and obvious fact that the insolvent had fraudu.
lently contracted debts with the opposing creditors. The Court,
taking into consideration that he had been some time in prison.
only adjudged that the insolvent should be remanded for eigh:
calendar months.

Wm. NVarmington. of Bradford, iViitshire, linen-draper, tame
up for the hearing of his petition. which no credittw inpeered to
oppose. The Court, however, used its discretion in subjecting the
insolvent to a rigid examination, from which it appeared that he
had been arrested some months ago, when two persona became
his bail, and took a bill of sale as indemnifieationi upon which
they acted, and had made some very enormous charges.
The Cult,- CnMMSssIONER said the case exposed the grossest
instance of collusion between the insolvent, his bail, and his attor-
ney. that ever came before the Court. Considering It in this light.
although the insolvent was not opposed, the Court thought It r.
public service to exercise tht discretion reposed in it, by ordering
the insolvent to be remanded for a period of six months.
George Chapman was opposed by Mr. HEAT'S, on the part of
Messrs. Curry and Co. distillers.

It appeared that in November 1824, the insolieni receired 1527/

arising out of an Exchequer suit decided in his favour. His debts,
at this period were under 4001., and soon after he became the pro.
prietor of the Roebuck tnn, at Chigwcll, on the border of Epping
Forest. This speculation not proting satisfactory to the Insolvent..
he disposed of his interest to a Mr. Reeve*, which, with the stock,
&c. was valued at between 5001. and 6001. A large part of this
sum, it was alleged, was taken by Mr. Cullum, the brewer, who
had lent 2001. on the lease, and supplied the house with beer. Tho
Insolvent stated that only 701. came into his hands, Mt of settieN
he had paid to save his mother, who had formerly advanced hirt
0001., from arrest. The Insolvent denied that he ever possessed a
hunter; the nag he sometimes rode upon was the property of his
mother. Insolvent had a watch, which he_sold t 6 his brother Inc
3!.. but denied that he had ever represented it as worth 00/. or 701.
The opposing creditors' solicitor prodttced the record of an action
brought by Curry and Co. against the insolvent, which the latter
met by a writ of error, thus putting the plaintiffs to an expense et'
upwards of 301.; but it appeared that the insolvenfhad no deferca
to go into Court, as he voluntarily surrendered himself at the h..
ginning of Michaelmas Tenn, It further appeared that the Irani.
vent had proposed a compromise to Messrs. Carry, and when they
hesitated upon his proposal, he took from his pocket a watch, whicia
he said was worth all he owed Messrs. Curry.
The insolvent was finally remanded for eight months, fur having
instituted vexatious proceedings against his creditors.