The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-04-24 00:00:00

I owed be Maevotout r The object could not he mistaken by the
..I my. In oonclusiont the beamed Counsel sa,e., that the eelence
Ives An aggravation ut the tyranny and oppression of which he had
'hero,* tw p guilty ; and that altogether the July were bound to give
soy most ev. mpia y vlamages. Mr. Ravenga had all the way
tomcat. oppoav•v, the deuentures. even when %ea we. the Minister;
and hccauv. he did tow violate his judgment and his duty he was
.torn heat to a prison Inc the sum of R0,01.11d. As &foreigner, Mr.
Ravenna was ehtitleil to every consideration, and. for the honour
of their country, the fury should whew that if the law is 'bused
I airway severe t'nuugn against the debtor), there is a power and a
will w siva an amiss reparation in damages to the iniurt4l party.
Thel.oato Chute JUST IC V. recapitulated the principal pins of
the ',Aimee. and lett the question entirely to the Jury.
The 'oar! retired at sir o'clock to consider of their verdict, and
retsmist, a. seven with a verdict for the plaintitt: Damages, 250 L

I"Nf'I,I'ENT DEBTOR...' COURT, Mein 21
11'44 Heaven*, who was before the Court on the 2.1 instant,
when his ease wee referred to the Provisio.ial Assignee, came up
t v li ..1 h.wrona and jinigment.
Mr. Pott.rty a appeared to oppose the insolvent for Messrs.
ano Co. and Mmes.. Barclay and to., brewers; and Mr.
Trewnba, a pulslican, opposed in person.
rennet of .Mr. Dance, the Provisional Assignee, having
i...• res.., the insolvent was examined. He stated that he lately
I ent a pebl...-hoese called the Hat and Plough, of which Messrs.
and Co. were the landlords. To enable him to take the
..i.blic-heuse, be borrowed 2001. of ri Mrs. Locock, and 1001. of
' .5 fa• her, swirled to which he possessed a small cep.tal of his own.
‘• hen he enrolled to negotiate for the house, he concealed the fact
t At he har! borrowed the money; hence they supposing it to be
his advanced him 1001. more. Snare time after he bat been
in tvisr-e.., I.nroek expressed her dissatialiction, end got
lire it-Reiter prerure a warrant of attorney which was obtained,
and the/mei which she eventually recovered her money. The in-
s..l.rees diaeswerl of the goodwill of the helm Inc log, and re.
I eierd 11.0trether MOI. from the incoming tenant, 401. of which he
t,arnirvect. to his tether, in liquialwion of his debt. The insolvent
•tated teat Mrs. Lneock was a angle person, and the money ad-
vertent be her to him were her savings through life. His father
caw and had long keen a confidential servant to Mr. Contest. (A
PT...dilly, and had saved money in that capacity ; be was now a
5 to Ms schedule.
:1". POLLOCK contendeel, on the part of his clients, the inset-
• w. had wilfully and fraudulently concealed the real state of his
▪ iiVra sad moreover, he had been guilty of an undue preference
raweor tr." his father and 3lrt.
Mr. Toombs; deposed, that he agreed with the insolvent for the
7-Wlr-house in question, for the good-will of which he was to pay
:W. sad he pair! 201. deposit and executed; it turned out, how-
eve.. that thebouse was let to another person, and the insolvent
rcver returned the 90L This was the ground of his complaint.
insolvent, in explanation, said, the reason why he did net
ratite the agreement with ale. Toombs was, because Messrs. Reid
:.c.' Cc would not sweet him as a tenant.
iv-. remmistiorer liaßttla said, that was no reason why he
nil not hare returned the 21'l.
1r Heatru, for the insolvent, contended, that so far as Mn..
1 "ea was concerned, the insolvent had not Inzn guilty of a frau.
51..1e0t reference, but admitted that the insolvent did not stand in
V". flentirable a position in ireard to the money he paid over to his
-1 re. Ile was etmfident that the eminent brewers who appeared
e oppose would not lay great stress on the payment of 40i. to his
1 ,thee, eapeeially as in most eases those gentlemen took great care
t • seem themrelves.
Tbe COURT observed that it was quite clear that the insolvent had
et wee every thing in his power to contravene the 17th section of the
• et. A clearer case of undue preference, and fraudulent transfer
I f property, never came before the Court, and it was well the
I mount was not large. His conduct also, In the detention of the
from Mr. Toombs. was highly dishonest, but that pert of the
• IS: the Court had nothing to do with. They then ordered the
insolvent to be remanded for eight calendar months, and to be con-
flied within the walls of the pruon, for making away with his pro.
ttrty with a view to diminish thn. dividend.
Jeremiah Jai. Reading came up on his petition to be discharged,

which application no creditor appeared to oppose.
1. appeared that the insolvent had been discharged by the Court
i^ the month of July last, at which time he did not insert the debts
• .1, in his schedule, for which he assigned the following reason.
In tote latter tart of 11t22 he purchased a quantity of watches and
jowellery for a person who was about to send them out to Sir Thos.
Maitland, who was resident abroad. The deliveries were to a very
considerable amount, and the party to whom they were consi;,meri
by the insolvent abscond d, and firs not since been heard of. The
insolvent was apprehended by the vendor, and indicted for the fe-
lony, and tried at the January Sessions of last year, when he was
acquitted ; and it was in consequence of this circumstance that he
,'id not put the debts in his last schedule, and in doing this he foi-
-1 awed the advice of his attorney. He admitted that the watches
s v.: delivered to him, but denied that be received any part of the
nixed%
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS informed the insolent, that before
coe.d obtain his discharge be must get the consent of three.
fourths of his creditors.
llsolven.--Then I shall be confined all the days of my life.
Mr. Commissioner liannts—You count procure this consent,
and then the Court will pronounce you discharged ; at all events,
5 Oar eohfinement will only extend to five years.
Jr.solvent--I shall not live half that time; I am now 72 years old.
COURT—You have heard our order, and must comply with it or
eelSer the consequences.
The insolvent was .hen remanded to his former custody, for the
reason previously assigned.
Mem. Thistleton applied for his discharge, which was opposed
by Messrs. Lucas and Thompson, the late Jhuiffs of London and
iddlescs.
The Clerk from the attomey's office stated, that the insolvent
teaanie !nide to the late SheriE., by becoming bail to them for a
person of the name of Ford. The defendant in the action &b-
-us:tided, and a writ was served on the insolvent, who caused con-
hi aerobic expense to the pursuers, by setting ups vexatious defence.
The insolvent said that he was a police-officer belonging to the
Hatton-garden office, and Ford, the defendant in the original
action, was formerly the chief clerk therein, at a salary of 2601. a-
gar, besides perquisites, which were considerable. When Ford
was arrested he became bail at his request, and never knew but the
actin was settled until be was served with a writ, when he went
to Ford, who assured him that he should sustain no injury. lie
was quite ignorant of the vexatious defence, as he never employed
an attorney. Ford had since absconded.
Mr. HEATH submitted to the Conn, that the insolvent's case
Vas one which deserved their humane consideration.

Mr. Commissioner HARRIS—DO the Sheri ft of London pray
jtidgment in this case?
Mr. Poi.Loci—Yes.
The Con £7 then mnandid the insolvent for ten weeks from the
ds e of his petition, which only entails on him ten days further
itup•tsonmenL