The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1818-01-26 00:00:00

~~

S►TVIDAY, JAW. 14.

snot and expense of being absent from his family
letttribuisble to himself."
The Arcoansv.GeNzaat.—,, So I believe;
and I believe that every other gentleman who entered
into recognisance* under similar earcuatstauces re-
ceived a like cna►rnuuicatiou."
Mr.JouNSTON E—" Ida oot mean to deny that."
Lord EL I. EN soitoven" Tbeu there is an end
to this business."
Mr. JOHNIITONS" But I wish to state the na•
tare of the notice which I received."
Lord Er.v.strsoitoviat "..0 4 Really the time tilthe
Court. winch belongs to other suito►s. cannot be
thus trifled oath. We have your motion. and have
given you the only answer of which it is suicepti-
tile."
Mr. J on gyros e-44 Theo, I supposeil mutt sub- •

suit to the cousequences."
Two other persons, named Sohn Roberts tied
`amuel• Drummond, made similar motions, which
were rejected. Other peaces were prepared to per.
sue the same course, but the Court would sot hear
them.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COUNT.

jowl' ,
CONCEALMENT OF 'PROPERTY.
Vition litena was opposed by Messrs. A DOL•
PINS and HISATII, for several creditors, and ou se-
veral grounds.
Mr. MATH said that the Insolvent described
himself itt his schedule as Tyson Keene, late •of
l'ursus Cross, mar Fulham, coal-dealer, and hereto.
Yore rimmed victualler in that parish. NOV. the
taiiistrol Counsel said, he meant to contend that
tho'lissolvent was at the protest moment as Much
•a liosessed victualler as be ever was, and as cum•
pletely in the possession of the property which he
yet said belonged to Sarah Keene, the widow of his
brother. There was, however, another deception,
which he apprehended would go, its limbos, to pre.
vent the tioolvesit's case being further heard, and
that was this:—lsis deists were set down at 1,304/.
and his assets at 4691.; but he had thought proper
to include anon.% the latter a sum of 1741. due to
him by a Mr. Morvey, of Turks-row, Chelsea. Now
it could be proved that this debt way in fact due to
the lipaitreist's father, and paid to him by a com-
position some time ego—the insertion of it now
was, therefore, a gross deception on the Court and
his creditors.
Mr. David Shatter was called to prove this fact.
Ile said he was a solicitor, and had been employed
by Mr. Morvey, of Chelsea, who had been dead
same time. He had also I:eeti employed by the
widow in the settlement of her busbandie alfeirs.
He lied paid the liusolvent's father, at the public-
house at Porous Cruse, at one time a divideud of
3s. in the immid. out of this debt of 1741. and a
further dividend of 31. Ail. had, since the death of
the father, been paid to the lintolvent himself, as a
settlement of ii,is debt. Morvey was dead about
three years and a hall.
Saral. Keene was nest called. She appeared to
be what is commonly called " a bouncing" lady,
whose toddy couutenance was tree front the fur-
roughs of scowl:
Mr. ADOLPHIIIa--.14 Who are you, Madam ?"
Witisess—" A woman."
Q. " 0 ! I see that; but which are yon, maid,
wife, or widow ?"—A. " Widow."
The lady then proceeded to state, that she hod
been married to the Insolvent's brother, William
Keene, who died us, the ttetli May, 1812. His
father died soon after. She now resided at the
Wheiibilieuf public-house, or inn, at Pursue Cross,
near Fulham. The lusolvent's father kept it till
his death. Wittiest+ kept it now, and nobody else.
After the death *of old Keene, his widow kept it,
but witness could out say how long. She is still
olive. The prevent Insolvent kept the house after
Iris mother, by her consent, he being better (ra-
tified to manage the business than she was. fhe
license was transferred to him for that purpose. In
his own right lie had 110 claim whatever to the
house. His mother always appeared there as
mistress. IVitsiess herself never lived there as
mistress at that time, but resided at her own house
in the toots of Fulham. About twelve months
ago, or it might be something more, witness went
into possersion of the house, and did not know
where the lissolveet lived at the time. Ttueusan
and Hatibury were the original owners of the
house ; and she riohev thought they gave her a
lease, but she hod Tot brought it with her.
'f he Cover—" Who paid for this lease ?"
Witistsa—" I did, with money 1 got from my
friends."
She then mentioned the name of the attorney
who drew this lease. She paid for it to Richard
Keene. another brother. The Insolvent never had
any thing to do with the matter, though he liver'
there with his mother and brother ; he never paid
or received any money there as men of the house.
Mr. ADOLPUUS" What is the age of your
last child ?"—A. I have a child thirteen years
old."
Q. " I don't mean your eldest, but your youngest
*laughter, Mary."—A. " I wolf auswer that ques.
bon."
Q. " Well, where was it horn ; you can have no
ohjection to tell that ?"—A. " In the parish of
Fulham."
Q. " Iss the public-house ?"—A. " No, at my
own house in the town."
Q. " Is it true that you lived in the public-
house with the liisolveut as units and wife?"—
A. " Never." •
She then mid that the lease of the public house
was in the hands of her grandfather, Mr. A Idio, of
North End, merely for safe custody ; he bad no claim
whatever upon it; *he was appraised into the house
at 3004 She never talked about selling it to one
Thus. Sumter. It was rebuilt, but not since she
hail it ; the Insolvent had nothing to do with the re-
building, and could have paid none of the hills.
Q. " Now tell us when it was rebuilt ; war it
since the birth of your youngest child ? You know
wiliness always date by such matters."
Mr. l'ov.Luce—'• I thought it was by the eldest
they generally counted."
Witness admitted that her youngest child was
about rotor years old ; it might be inure. Her bus.
band died its May, li4i2.
Its tlllsverr to questions from the Court, she said that
the license for the public-house had been granted or
transferred to her less than two years ago. She

knew the Insolvent, but he never had the house.
The spirits were had from Mr. Baker ; she never
dealt with Seeley and Evans for spirits, nor with
Godin or Blake. of Parson's Green (creditors
named in the schedule). The Insolvent never dealt
with them to her knowledge. She did not know
the Insolvent's business, or that he ever occupied
Any other public-house.
In her crom-examination by Mr. Por.Loce, she
'repeated that the Insolvent had 'HAWN; to du with
the house at Pursue Cross. All the family, in-
cluding the Insolvent, quitted it when she got pos-
session. The Insolvent had no part in the contract
'she made, when the house was given to her. He
merely acted there in the time of the father and
loather.
The COURT—" Admitting that he. acted as such,
'hoer have these debts, amounting to 1,3001., many
of them for ale, spirits, and beer, been contract-
ed by the Insolvent ? the evidence of this woman
be it true or false, makes alike against him."
Mr. Poi.Locs replied, that he would shortly re-
move this impression from the mind of the Court.
The wiliness, in 'her further examination, admitted
that the Insolvent entered the house much about
the time that she took possession of it.
Q.—" Are you married to him ?"—A. " Yes."
Mr. PoLLoost, as she was uttering this mono-
eyllable, objected to her answering the question.—
He observed. that she had slimly said she was the
widow of William Keene, the Insolvent's late bro-
ther—amid could not, therefore, he called upon to
answer a question which 'nigh; expose her to pe-
nalittihrs in the Ereldieisatiriel rntart.
COURT—" Certainly she ought not. It is
also ate 'offence at common law."
Mr. ADOLPHUS dissented from this opinion of
the Court, and said, that neither in the Levitical
Table, uor in the Statute of Henry, relative to the
ties of consanguinity, was there any legal penalty
for the admission sought for front this witness. The
"reason why a witness could not be called upon to
answer certain questions was, that he should not by
so answering subject himself to some criminal pe-
nalty. But since the trial of Lord Melville, and
the Statute made iu consequence of it, it has been
held that nothing except that which would expose
the party to a statutable or continuo law prosecu-
tion can warrant a refusel to answer certain ques-
tions. The Act of the 531 of the King, put on
end to the penalty alluded to by the Court, and
ecclesiastical censure could uo longer have active
operation whist au individual. Marriage was now
a civil contract, and not a sacramental act as it
had been in former Catholic times, and the uuly
jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Court (which was
most happily cut dorm and circumscribed in mo-
dern times) merely extended to a nullity of the
marriage, and not to a personal punishment of the
parties. The woman was, of course, subject to ec-
clesiastical censure, and a nullity of the contract
for marrying within the prohibited degrees; but this
censure now-a-days was very properly described sa
being nothing more than a broom felmien. It ex-
posed nobody to a legal prosecution. amid, there-
fore, afforded no reason for refusing to answer a
question.
, Mr. PoLLocx, in reply, said. that he well re-
membered the present LOrd Erskine, when at the
Bar, earnestly pressing to put a question of this
sort before Justice Lewrence, at Guildhall ; but
the Judge would not allow hint to do so, and
quoted Chief Justice Treby, in support of his de-
cision. The same had since been held in the Court
of King's Bench, where it was ruled that a wit-
ness was not bound to answer any question which
would have the effect of discrediting or disgracing
himself. This had been also held in the House of
Lords. _

The COURT was quite of °Militia that the ques-
tion could not be put.
Mr. ADOLPHUS said, that he would put his
question (which by the way had already been an-
swered) in *wither way. The witness then, in an-
swer to his questiNt, said, that she had never been
church and married, since her former marriage
with the Insolvent's brother.
The Court then examined her as to any know-
ledge of Morvey's debt, whets she said, that she
knew nothing about it except having hoard it said
iu the family. Richard Keene was the executor
with the mother, wider the rither's will. TyKiii
had nothing to do with the property.
John Beech was called to speak to some conver-
sation he had with the last witness, but—
Mr. POLLOCK objected to the rippia.ite Counsel,
being allowed to adduce evidence to cuutrsdict their
own witnesses. _ .

The Court overruled the objection.
John Beech stated in his examination that Sarah
Keene and the Insolvent lived together as man and
wife Since the death of old Keene, about two years
ago, and the Insolvent admitted to wituessi, in the
presence of Mr. Tebbe. the Proctor, at Doctor.'
Commies, that he was married to her. They both
lived as master and mistress at the public-house at
Pursue Cross.
In his cross-examination by Mr. ANDREWS, he
said that the way he Itite.v dila was by ocessiostally
calling at the house for money. Sarah Keene was
in witness's debt, stud the admiiitiots of the marriage
was to give the responsibility to the Insolvent. In
the house at Fulham, where Sarah Keesie first lived,
and where the Involvetit now, in Ins schedule, re-
presented himself to live also. the name over the
door was, 41 Keene, coal-dealer."
Henry Partridge was next called. This gentle-
man proved that while standing near the lusolvent
in Court, when the question was pill to Sarah
Keene, whether she was now married to Tyson
Keene, he distinctly overheard the latter desire her
to answer " No."
Thomas Souster, a publican, proved, that he had
gone to the King's Bench to treat with the fowl-
vent fur the purchase of this house at Pursue Cross,
and that Sarah Keene was present when be asked
800/. for it.
The COURT—" What a horrid case this is; there
is no necessity to pursue it further."
Mr. ADOLPHUS—" Mr. Pollock, have you got
enough of this case ? you are quite a glutton to-
day."
After some immaterial discussion between the
Counsel in the case,
The COURT remanded Prisoner for a conceal-
ment of property. void svas proceeding to make the
remand still stronger, on the ground of ptetnedi-
tated fraud in the mattcr of the 1744 put in as a

debt due by Money to the insolvent, who knew it
to have been already settled, when
Mr. Poi. Lock interposed. and said that the book
debts were left by the father to the Insolvent, whu
seeing it unsettled in the list of debts. thought it
right to insert it in his schedule.
the Insolvent,
Mr. ADOLPH Us observed, that the debts due by
though he said !w bad nothing to do
with the public house, were all fur the beer engine
put up iii it,
and the spirits. ale, and beer sold in
it. if he came up sgaiu they would have hint re-
manded for fraud.
Mr. HEATII mid, that the opposition would he
withilniwn, if the Insolvent surrendered the lease.
The remand was then recorded for concealment
of property.

A DISCHARGE REVOKED.
Mr. Hearts applied to the Court to have a rule
'he had already obtained made absolute, that the
discharge granted Wan Insolvent, named Richard
Swayne, last August, should be revoked, on an af-
fidat. setting forth, that he had concealed from his
creditors the property he held in a farm at Chert-
sey, in the county of Surrey, where lie now con-
tinued to reside. The affidavit also stated, that
the Insolvent kept a riding-horse, which lie had
not inierted in his schedule, and on which he was
iii the habit of riding down to Chertsey, while he
was a prisoner, by means of procuring day-rules;
and that oil one of these occasions he had dined at
a tavern at Egham at a subscription feast given by
the corps of cavalry to which lie belonged ; and
further, that since his discharge he had paid 31. 10s.
r— opt t isg givt.soc, sWalso Kept sporting dogs
for his amusement.

Mr. Anot.enus, at considerable length, opposed
the rule, and answered the several points set forth
in the affidavit; he read the Insolvent's affi-
davit, from which it appeared that the farm
in question, and all its chattels, utensils, stock,
&c. had been disposed of by him by mortgage,
dated Nov. 2, 1809, and fur a consideration of
WM/. (wanting a fraction) to a relative named
Mary Edmeads, who hail since married Thomas
Sprootots. A warrant of attorney was given at the
time, and judgment immediately entered upon it.
Sprotsou took possession of the farm in February
1816, and though the Insolvent remained on it (it
appeared others were also put in possession), he
merely did so in the character of manager for
.Sprotson, to whom he regularly accounted for that
produce. The horse alluded to was merely kept for
husbandry purpooes ; the license was given him by
a friend ; undue to the dinner-party, it was at a pri-
vate house, where he had been invited by his fel-
low members of the corps, at no expense. The
affidavit further stated, that so far from this trans-
fer being made to cheat his creditors, it had ac-
tually taken place years before their debts had
existence.

Mr. HEATH, in reply, contended that the fact of
no possession being taken front 1809 to 1816,
skewed that the transfer was merely collusive.
The Court revoked the discharge, being clearly
of opinion that wine further inquiry was necessary
into this property.
The Court then adjourned until the 9th of Fe-
bruary.

CORONAWS INQUEST.