The Sun.
London, England, 1852-10-23 00:00:00

IN RE BREWER.

This was the last examination meeting in the case of
H. N. Brewer, mast and block maker of Deptford, and
tobacconist, of the South-Eastern Arcade, London- bricfge.
The accounts extended over ten months prior to ?lae
failure in August last, and showed a deficiency in Oct.,
1851, of 1,8201. The bankrupt now owed to unsecured
creditors 1,9441.; for cash, rent, and interest, 1,0711.; to
creditors holding security, 1,6711. ; liabilities, 1,7001.
The assets were considerable, being estimated at 2,5271.
in good debts and property; property held by creditors,
5681. The profits had been 515/ ; cash received, 2,027/.;
trade expenses, 1,0701.; interest, 811.; domestic expenses,
3891; losses, 7651.
Mr. Lawrence, for the bankrupt, asked for an adjourn-
ment, in o. der that further accounts might be furnished.
Mr. Beetholme, for the assignees, consenting, the meet-
ing was adjourned accordingly.
FEES OF COUNSEL.
Mr Sturgeon applied to the Court under the following
circumstances:—ln a trader debtor summons heard by
his Honour a few days ego, he appeared as counsel for
the defendant. The plaintiff had unlawfully obtained
from his client a bill of exchange, and was served with
notice by the defendant to produce certain papers, which
it was alleged would show that his claim was not a just
one. The plaintiff did not appear on tho day of hearing,
and the summons was dismissed with costs. Amongst the
cots were the fees of counsel, which the taxing master
had refused to allow. Under the,o circumstances he
asked the Court to make an order for the allowance of
such fees.
His Honour said it was unusual to allow counsel's fees
in such cases, unless special circumstances were shown
to justify it. The facts stated should be embodied in an
affidavit, and the Court would then consider whether it
was a fit case for the allowance of counsel's fees.
IN RE NEYER.-INOTHER CASE OP ABSCONDING.
This was the last examination meeting in the case of
Anthony Meyer, merchant, of Throgmorton-street. He
was made bankrupt by the assignees of J. S. Lacey, of
Great St. Helen's ; and Mr. Pennell, as the official
assignee of that estate, was appointed trade assignee
under Meyer's bankruptcy. The bankrupt has not
surrendered, and of course has filed no balance-sheet;
but a preliminary statement of his affairs shows the
following results :—To creditors, 3,0891. ; liabilities on
bills payable, 5,657/. ; liabilities on bills receivable,
2,1581.; other liabilities, 352/. Assets, in good debts,
1061. ; doubtful debts (estimated at) 2001. ; property,
3091. ; consignments, at cost price, 1,045/.
Mr. Reed, for the assignees, stated that the bankrupt
had left the coanty, and asked that the usual course
should be followed.
The bankrupt was ordered to be proclaimed in th©
usual form.

(Before Mr. Commissioner Fonblanque.)
IN RE BLARE.
This was as adjourned last examination meeting in
the matter of J. Blake, innkeeper, of Attleburge, in
Suffolk. He owed 1,2171. to unsecured creditors, and
6201. to thoso holding security. His assets consisted
only of 51. 9s 2d in good debts, and a trifling amount
entered as doubtful; the whole of his property had been
seized and sold by Sir W. B. Smyth, under a bill of sale,
given about a twelvemonth before the bankruptcy, and
had produced 3001. The profits had been 1201.; trade
expenses, 6221.; domestic do., 2821.; losses, 3091. There
was an admitted deficiency at the commencement of the
accounts of 3071.
Mr. Linklater, in support of the bankrupt, stated that
amendments had been made in the accounts, and asked
that the bankrupt should now pass, as there had been
repeated adjournments at the instance of the assignees.
Mr. Lucas, for the assignees, opposed the bankrupt's
passing, principally on the ground that certain furni-
ture, in the possession of his daughter, in a house near
Euston•aquare, was in reality the property of the bank-
rupt.
His Honour said he should allow the bankrupt to pass,
giving the assignees leave to commence an action for the
recovery of the furniture. A distant day must be fixed
for the certificate,'as the court, in judging of the bank-
rupt's conduct, would have regard to the result of the
action.