The Sun.
London, England, 1852-01-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Jan. 2.
, (Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.)
IN RE WALL AND WALL.
The bankrupts, John Wall and Thomas Young
Wall, were brewers at Chatham. Their accounts
show debts to unsecured creditors, 1,430/. ; mortgage,
creditor, 6021. ; and assets about 10500/., in the event
of the mortgaged property realizing 8001. This was
the certificate meeting.
Mr. Duncan appeared for the bankrupts, and Mr.
Cranch for the assignees.
The chief ground of opposition was that the bank-
rupts had passed through the Insolvent Debtors'
Court without disclosing the possession of certain
property.
HIS HONOUR held that the conduct of the bank-
rupts when before the Insolvent Debtors' Court was a
matter of which he could not take cognizance. The
bankrupt John Wall would receive an immediate
certificate of the third class, and Thomas Young Wall
one of the second class.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONBLANQUE.)
IN RE WOOLF AND LYONS.
The bankrupts were umbrella manufacturers in
Cripplegate-buildings. This was an examination
meeting. The bankrupts' accounts show debts, 6,4961.;
assets about 2,8001.
Mr. Parker appeared for the assignees ; Mr. L -
dance for the bankrupts.
Mr. LAWRANCE said, that in justice to the mercan-
tile community he should hereafter advert to the
manner in which certain wholesale houses had pur-
chased from the bankrupt Lyons goods at a ruinous
sacrifice. As there must, however, be an adjournment
of the present meeting, he would not now refer more
fully to the subject.
The COMMISSIONER said he had seen enough, while
sitting in this court, to satisfy himself of the truth of
the adage, " that if there were no receivers of stolen
goods there would be no thieves."
The examination of the bankrupts was then ordered
to stand adjourned. On their way, however, from the
court they were arrested oh the charge of having il-
legally pledged goods.
(Before Mr. Commissioner EVANS.)
IN RE STANTON.
The bankrupt was a jeweller, &c., at Buckingham.
His case had been several times before the Lords
Justices and this Court on the question of discharge
from prison.
Mr. Kennedy was now heard for the bankrupt ;
Mr. Goddard for the assignees in opposition.
His HONOUR ordered the bankrupt to be discharged.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT,
(Before Mr. Commissioner LAW.)
IN THE MATTER OF HENRY COLLINS MANDERS.
In this case an important judgment was given, on
an application by Mr. Sargood, to annul a vesting
order on a creditor's petition. A short time back the
Court of Queen's Bench decided that a vesting order
became null and void on the discharge of the party
without taking the benefit of the Act. This deci-
sion has excited a good deal of interest, and titles
made to property in numerous cases may be ques-
tioned.
Mr. Commissioner LAW delivered a very long and
elaborate judgment. He dissented from the Court of
Queen's Bench, and felt it to be his duty, from the
rank and weight of the Learned Judges, to enter into
the question. His Honour went through several
clauses of the Act on the subject, and the alteration
of the Act 7 Geo. IV. to the present Act of 1 and 2
Viet. He was of opinion that the Legislature had
empowered the Court to entertain applications for
annulling vesting orders in cases where there was
no adjudication, and that every discharge from cus-
tody without taking the benefit of the Act, did not
render null and void a vesting order. His Honour,
therefore, in this case, ordered the vesting order to
be annulled.
IN RB FREDERICK WILLIAM WILSON.
This insolvent, a young man, who had been clerk
to a house-agent, was opposed lay Mr. Nichols, for a
gentleman named Woodhouse.
The insolvent had taken a house of the agent of the
opposing creditor, and had not paid the rent. He had
previously rented a house in Exeter-street, belonging
to the Marquis of Exeter, and owed 951. for the rent
of the same. He had cleared upwards of 11. a week,
by letting the house in lodgings, but had not paid the
rent.

ran. 2.

Mr. Commissioner LAw thought the individual was
liable to a judgment under the discretionary clause.
He had increased his income by the house Le had
taken, without paying the rent, and on the complaint
of Mr. Woodhouse was not entitled to his discharge.
Ilia Honour adjudged him to an imprisonment of four
calendar months on the vesting order, and added, that
had he bee❑ opposed on the part of the other landlord,
to whom he owed rent, the judgment would have been
to a longer period.
The insolvent was accordingly adjudged to four
months' imprisonment.
IN THE MATTER OF HENRY SMITH.
The case of Mr. Smith, the vocalist, who was op-
posed on the part of Henry Russell, again crime
before the Court, and,was concluded.. The facts having
been before reported.
Mr. Commissioner LAW granted a protecting order
under one petition, and a discharge under the second,
filed under the Prisoners' Act. The insolvent had
been in prison since May last.