The Sun.
London, England, 1837-10-12 00:00:00

LAW" INTELLIGENCE.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Oct.
Thomas CmLon wes opposed by Mr. I.Voodrefre, on the
pert •of Mr. Robert Wyatt Grange, Mr. Saunders, Mr.
Clarke, lqr, Weeks, Mr. Gething, and LI creditor named
Saunderson;
Tilt! ;t4oH6et hd been disehfgld Bti a tOrnier tictiagintif
and had been a bankrupt Pe iinmeroiTs Creditors.
It appeared that he had been a grocer, and in
line t" be had also been a builder. He had obtained g,oocig
from the opposing Creditor§ on representing that he was
possesstd of considerable property—that he was building
houses at Chelseai and oratited to invest money for his
daughter. Prom Mr. Orange, briekitta6,,r4 at "Uxbridge,
he obtained a quantity of bricks, on represcfitiog that he
'could Pay for them on delivery ; and on Mr. Grange at-
tempting to get thettig t.)-0 of his men. were charged with
felony.
The insolvent was adjudged to an imprisoeuh of six-
teen calendar ttitintits, for fraudulently contracting the debtS
with the opposing creditorit.
" SAM WELLER."—An insolvent., in the cciii7o .5c a case
tieafd to-day; %till asked whether a pt.rson named
with whom he bad had sonie transarmions, was in attendance.
lie answered in the negative.
The Learned CHIEF COMMISSIONER (smiline.), said the
insolvent had better look round and see if 'Mr. Weller
was in Court.
Mr. Cooke—What is his Christian name ?
The insolvent said his name was " Samuel Weller."—
(A laugh.)
Mr. Cooke—What, Sam Weller ! Well, then, is Sam
Weller here ?—( Loud laughter.)
Samivel did not answer.

The Pickwickian joke was much relishel in the Court.
The Learned CHIEF CoMMISMIoNEIt decreed that Sarni-
vel must appear to be examined in the cane in question,
which bore no resemblance to that of "Bardell v. Pickwick,"
in which his "original." gave important testimony.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.

Yesterday Charles 'Vlllimn Lachlan, a clerk at Messrs.
Lurk and Co.'s, Manchester warehousemen, Bread-street,
was brought up for examination, charged with embezzling
5491.

Mr. Flower, for the prosecution, stated the nature of the
charge against the prisoner, who has been in custody since
the 18th of September, but was confined to his room by
severe illness.

Mr. Bowers, a draper-at Chipstead, stated that he knew
the prisoner as a clerk at Messrs. Luck and Co.'s, and on
the 23d of August he called at the warehouse, and paid him
661. 155., taking his receipt net on a stamp, but as a memo-
randum at the foot of the bill.

Sir JOHN KET asked if the prisoner had employed any
solicitor ? Mr. Flower said he had not.

Sir JOHN KEY then told the prisoner he might ask the
witness any questions he pleased. The prisoner declined
doing so.

Robert Horne, in the service of the prosecutors, deposed
that on the 4th of August the prisoner sent him to a cus-
tomer named Capper for an account, and he received in
payment a check on Masterman's for 131. 18s. 6d., which
he gave to the prisoner.
William Shaw, in the service of the prosecutors, stated
that on the 4th of August the prisoner sent him to receive
an account from a customer, and he brought the check pro-
duced for 701. ss.' which he either gave to the prisoner, or
placed on his desk.
Charles Fox, in the service of the prosecutors, was sent by
the prisoner to receive of Mr. Tindall, in Cornhill, the sum
of 51. 17s. 6d., on the 28th of August. He paid it to the
prisoner.
Wm. Bough, a partner in the firm of Lack and Co., said
the prisoner had been in their service about eighteen months,
but he had lived with the firm they succeeded for eight or
nine years. On the 14th of September they accidentally
discovered a sum entered in the ledger as paid which they
knew had been entered in neither of the cash books, and the
partners, having consulted together, called the prisoner to
explain the circumstance. Upon being questioned whether
this was the only sum he had received and not accounted
for, he admitted he had embezzled 1501. He was then
told to sit down mid go through the ledger, and he then
made out a list of sums to the amount of 549/. Only one
small sum had been since discovered that did not appear in
the list. The prisoner had not accounted for any of the
sums spoken of by the witnesses, and they were items in the
prisoner's enumeration of deficiencies. _

Sir JOHN KEY asked ir any promise of forgiveness was
held out to the prisoner to induce him to confess ? Mr.
Bouch replied, None.
Sir JOHN KEY asked the prisoner if he wished to say
anything upon the charge ? The prisoner, who seemed
much affected by his situation, shook his head, but handed
in a letter requesting that the money found on him (about
Si.), and some private letters and papers, might be given up
to him.

Mr. Bouch said lie had no objection to it. He had seen
the papers. They did not relate to the charge.
Sir JoIIN KEY committed the prisoner for trial, and or-
dered the property to be given up to him.