The Sun.
London, England, 1852-01-21 00:00:00

WHITEHALL, JAN. 20.

The Queen has been pleased to present the Rev. Thomas
Leishman to the church and parish of Collace, in the
presbytery and county of Perth, vacant by the death of
the Rev. John Rogers, late minister thereof.
PRINCE OF WALES' COUNCIL CHAMBERS,

lace manufacturers (so far as regards J. Stevens)—J.
Reddish and P. Bramley, Manchester, wholesale drug-
gists—J. Hobson and A. Oakley, Derby, ropemakers—
J. J. Flitch and J. Close, Leeds, morocco leather ma-
nufacturers—R. and R. D. Williams, Carnarvon, braziers
—T. Pearson, J. Pearson, and J. Rowlands, Liverpool,
millwrights (so far as regards T. Pearson)—W. Cramer
and H. G. Dance, Brighton, musicsellers—J. Nayler and
T. Roberts, Hunslet, Leeds, glass bottle manufac-
turers—J. Thompson, E. Thompson, R. Daglish, sen.,
and R. Daglish, jun., St. Helens, Lancashire, ironfoun-
ders—H. Bates and H. Williamson, Warley, Yorkshire,
brewers—A. Louislonx and P. Deprez, Church-street,
Soho, ormolu and bronzists—J. Green, G. Sergeant, and
E. Pepper, Shelton, Staffordshire, brickmakes (so far as
regards G. Sergeant)—A. R. Bird and G. Rushton,
Poppin's-court, Fleet-street, sugar refiners—C. Vicars,
T. Trueman, and W. Greavcs, Leeds, commission agents
—H. Woodhouse and C. J. Luckman, Wood-street, City,
furriers—G. J. Humphreys and J. Moule, Crown-court,
Old City, insurance brokers—W. Kirk,
W. B. i
Ripley, Leeds, cloth finishers (so
fa
r des Broad-street,
j,p
ley_
as H. E. Emberlin and T.
Claridge, Leicester, grocers—F. and T. Simpson, High-
street, Southwark, cutlers—H. Hildyard and J. Clegg,
Rio de Janeiro, Brazils.
INSOLVENT PETITIONERS.
Joseph Pullin, Newark-upon-Trent, grocer.
Joseph Freeman Morcott. Rutlandshire, farmer.
George Liddall, Boxmoor, Hertfordshire, grocer.
W. Garrett, East Redford, Nottinghamshire, hatter.
John Walker, Sheffield, slater.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
A. Anderson, Macduff, shoemaker, to meet Jan. 24
and Feb. 14, at twelve, within Gillander's Hotel, Banff.
G 1919:
sagtorW hair-manufacturer, to meet
twelve, within the Glasgow Stock
Exchange, Glasgow.
JanW..23ManudreFhet.

LAW INTELLIGENCE;
COatt/NRiTsi
pOriusF
EXCHEQUER, Jan. 20.
(Sittings
, before Mr. Baron MARTIN and a
Common Jury.)
TOY V. LAMENAUDE.
This was an action of debt, to recover the sum of 95/.
for a number of brass letters used to be fixed on glass,
supplied during the last year to the defendant, who car-
ried on the business of selling such letters.
Mr. Lush appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Hurnfrey,and
Mr. Pigott for the defendant.
It appeared that the defendant ordered of plaintiff
about 35,355 of these letters, in anticipation of their
having a large sale at the Great Exhibition building
and elsewhere during the Exhibition year. Ile After-
wards, however, informed the plaintiff that he did not
want so many, but the! plaintiff said that as he had
gone to great expense in having
tools made for the ma-
nufacture of the letters the defendant must take them,
but if it would be any accommodation to the defendant,
he would not deliver them for a month. Defendant did
not assent to this, but plaintiff did send the letters from
Birmingham, where he carried on his business, to de-
fendant, and he paid for the carriage. He did not re-
turn the goods, but after the action had been brought ho
required the plaintiff to take them back again.
Mr. HUMFREY contended that these facts did not
enable the plaintiff to recover as for goods sold and
delivered. The defendant had repudiated the sending
of the letters, and had not accepted them. The plaintiff
ought to have sued him specially for not accepting.
Mr. Lusu asked his Lordship to amend by inserting a
count for goods bargained and sold.
After some discussion it was arranged that the plain-
tiff should be nonsuited, with leave to move to enter a
verdict for the amount claimed, if the Court should be
of opinion that the Learned Judge ought to have allowed
the proposed amendment, and that the plaintiff would
have been entitled to recover under it or without it.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Jan. 20.
(Before Mr. Commissioner EvANs.)

IN RE JOUN LOUIS BA.TTYE BUCKLAND.-JUDGMENT.
His HONOUR said this was an application by the bank-
ruptvie.t folro,
a6ceratnifidcaatels,owthhicaht
be was guilty of reckless was opposed on the ground
that the case came within the 201st section, 13 and 14
trading. In support of the first objection it was
admitted by
the bankrupt that he had lost
within a year before his bankruptcy more than 2001 in
contracts for the purchase of Peruvian Bonds, and also
more than 2001. in the purchase of railway shares, and
that such contracts were not to bo performed within one
week after the contract, and that the stock and shares
were actually transferred or delivered in pursuance of
such contract. It was contended on behalf of the bank-
rupt, that the Peruvian Bonds being foreign stock were
not within the word stock in the clause referred to, and
many cases were cited, proving that under the 7 George
11. it was not held to include foreign stock. I have
looked at those cases, and they establish that point. I
had considerable doubt as to whether the 201st section
could be considered similar to the 7 George 11., sec-
tion 8, but I find the opinion of the majority of the
Commissioners is in favour of such construction, and
as this clause is highly penal I think I ought to de-
cide in favour of the bankrupt on this point. I under-
stand that shares are not considered as stock on the
Stock Exchange, and consequently they do not come
within the 201st section. But although I decide
that the case does not come within the 201st section, I
am of opinion that the bankrupt has been guilty of
reckless trading, that be has traded to the extent of
thousands when he had no capital to meet losses. To
trade when a man's creditors must necessarily bear the
loss and he keep the gains, is most unjust. The fre-
quency of such conduct is no excuse, but proves the ne-
cessity of visiting it with severity when proved. I
therefore shall suspend the bankrupt's certificate for one
year, then to be of the second class. The following
eases were cited by Mr. Lawrence for the bankrupt:—
" Wells v Porter," Scott, 141; " Oakley v. Rigby," id.,
194; " Elsoworth v. Cole," 2 Meeson and Welsby;
" Robson v. Fcllowes," 2 Bingham, N. C. 332; " Hen-
derson v. Bise," 3 Starkie, 158; " Hewett v. Price," 4
Manning and Granger, 355; " Morgan v. Pelisa," 3
Bingham, N. C. 454.
IN RE AUGUSTUS R. DAVIS.
The examination of this bankrupt, a wine-merchant,
of New-court, Bow-lane, was adjourned sine die.