The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulburn.)
IN RE POPE-JUDGMENT.

This bankrupt was described as of Wandsworth, colour
manufacturer, and he was formerlysecretary to the Saloon
Omnibus Company. He applied a few days since for his
order of discharge, when he was opposed on behalf of Mr
Harrison, of the Windsor _Herald, on the ground that he
had vexatiously defended an action for money lent, and
put the opposing creditor to an expense of £lO. The de-
fence sat up was, that the money had been advanced in an-
ticipation of a partnership, but the evidence went to show
that it had been lent out of friendship.

His Honour said he was clearly of the same opinion as
the learurd judge who tried the else, that there was no pre
te.nce for the defence. It was a great hardship upon a cce
ditor to be put to such heavy expenses vexatiously, and
the discharge would be suspended for six months without
protection, except the first, to enable the bankru. t to appeal
if he thought fit,

A SINGULAR APPLICATION IN INSOLVENCY-TN RE WOOD

Mr Baz;ey applied in this ease for proof to be admitted
against the estate of an insolvent, the insolvency having
taken place so far back as 1810. The proof was founded on
a judgment recovered in one of the superior courts, but the
bill itself had been los% The claimants were the sur-
viving executors of a Mr King, a bill discounter, and he
died in 1847. Wood was discharged from custody as
being of unsound mind, and so continues, and no schedule
has been filed, the insolvent having been released on the
application of the keeper of the prison. It now appears
that a sum has come to hand which will pay 10s. in the
pound, and it therefore became an object to prove.
His Honour considered that, after ,uch a lapse of time,
the abi.ence of the bill, the death of the drawer and other
patties, he ought not to admit the proof.

LORD MAYOR'S COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant and a Jury.)

THE " LONDON GAZETTE" AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT,-

SINGULAR POINT -HARLAND V. SKINNER.

This was an action to recover the balance of an account
for board and lodging supplied to defendant's son, and for
money paid to his account.

Mr Talfourd Salter (instructed by Mr Reed) appearing
for the plaintiff, and Mr Phillips (instructed by Mr Samler)
representing defendant.

Plaintiff said he had boarded and lodged defendanes son
from April, 1859, to December, 1861, and he had received
£35 on account. In addition to this he had paid £ll Is 4d
for the son.

In cross-examination, plaintiff admitted that he had been
bankrupt in 1861, and that he was embarrassed in the latter
end of the same year.

Mr. Phillips put in the London Gazette to prove the facts
in question.

Mr, Salter objected, and would ask the court if ,the Lon•
don Gazette could be called evidence,

His Lordship—Oh, yes ; it is an official public document.
Mr. Salter—Of course, the London Gazettc itself may be
evidence, but the question is, if every printed copy is.
Mr. Phillips then said that defendant's son had been ap-
prenticed to plaintiff, and called for the deed. When put
in it was found to be insufficiently stamped, and plaintiff
was non-suited.

DETAINING WORKMEN'S TOOLS,- MASTER AND SERVANT

JONES V. GARNER

This was an action to recover damages for the detention
of certain carpenter's tools.

Mr. Salter (instructed by Mr. Olive), appearing for
plaintiff; Mr Kempt (instructed by Mr Allen, of, 64, Chan-
cery-lane), representing defendant, who had paid £2 into
court.

It appeared that the plaintiff had been in the service of
the defendant for three years, and that a quarrel ensued.
His Lordship suggested that the defendant should with-
draw a plea; and Mr Kemp said he would if the record
were also withdrawn, but Mr Laxton said he would no do
that.

Mr Kemp—The tools were very old, and not worth 10s.

Mr I...Axton—And you pay £2 into court ?
The plaintiff was called, but Mr Kemp said, acting under
the authority of Mr. Allen, after what had fallen from the
Court, he would agree to give up the tools and pay the costs.
His Lordship—Oh, yes, plaintiff was an old servant.
Verdict by consent.