The Sun.
London, England, 1839-04-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Araa 5.
The sittings of the Court were resumed to-day. Mr.
Commissioner LAW presided.
RELIGIOUS SCRUPLES.—Isaac Illedec, a Jew, applied
to be liberated on bail. In this case a somewhat singular
objection was raised on a former day. One of the pro-
posed sureties, who was possessed of property, had com-
pounded and had been a bankrupt. The objection was
that the party could hold no property until he had paid
15s. in the pound under his estate. The objection was
allowed, and the bail rejected. Other persons now ap-
peared ; they were both Jews, and after an opposition were
accepted, and required to sign a recognizance.
Mr. Leir, one of the bail, said he could not, from his
religious scruples, sign his name until after seven o'clock to-
morrow evening. lie would allow an officer of the Court
to sign his name, and he would acknowledge It.
Mr. Commissioner LAW held that the discharge could
not issue until after the recognizance had been signed.
Mr. WOODROFFE hoped the scruples would be removed ;
it was an act of charity, and works of that nature on the
Sabbath-day were allowed..

Mr. Leir declared that he would not sign his name for
50/. It was much against his will he attended to-day.
Mr. Commissioner LAW said the bail must come on
Monday, and sign the document. He could not discharge
the insolvent until that was done.

The insolvent was remanded to prison where he will re.
main three days from the conscientious scruples of the
bail. The objection was taken, the present period being
the " feast of the Passover."

John Fowler, Jun., was opposed on the part of Messrs.
Addington, drapers, and Mr. Butcher,la tailor. He was a
landing waiter in the Customs, at a salary of 1541. a-year.
He was a married man. He was discharged, and 80/.
a-year set aside for the creditors.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.

Yesterday Frederick Helm, a herald chaser, of Long-
acre, preferred a complaint against Mr. Casely, a Soli-
citor of Guildford-street, Russell-square, for passing him a
receipt without being duly stampted.
Mr. CLARKSON appeared for the defendant, and Mr.
TILSIT of the Stamp-office attended to watch the pro-
ceedings.
The complainant stated that he waited on the defendant
at his house, on the 4th of March, to pay the balance
of an account, amounting to 291. los. 6d. as law expenses,
and being at dinner he called in an hour after, when he
got the receipt produced, which the defendant wrote and
signed in his presence. Witness never lost possession of
the receipt, until he brought it to the Stamp-office, and
there was no stamp upon it when he got it out of the de-
fendant's hands.
In answer to Mr. CLARKSON the witness said
he did not mention the circumstance to the defendant,
although he expected to have got a stamped
receipt on paying the money, and the defendant had been
suing him for money. He had been told by his solicitor
that the defendant wanted to get him into his clutches, by
putting him to 41. additional expense if the money were
due another day. Witness had been concerned in a law-
suit, and judgment had been signed as in case of a nonsuit,
and the person to whom he was opposed subsequently be-
come insolvent. The defendant was witness's solicitor in
the case, for which he was furnished with a bill of costs in

February last, amounting to 33/., but as credit was given
for a part, there remained a balance of 291. 17s. 6d. ; but
as he was informed by Mr. Grain, whom he afterwards
employed, the defendant promised to take 251. if paid
immediately, which he could not swear to. Witness
could not say how often he had been applied to
for the payment ; and it was about seven o'clock
in the evening, when he got the receipt, which he showed
to no person, until he went next morning to the Stamp
office. He could positively swear that the paper produced
had not the stamp on it when he received it.
Mr. CLARKSON said he was prepared with the evidence of
several creditable witnesses to show that a more deliberate
attempt to injure the character of a respectable professional
gentleman, by the grossest and most barefaced perjury,
never came before the Bench. The Learned Counsel then
went into the details of the circumstances connected with
the action, between a man named Isilder and the com-
plainant, which had been conducted by Mr. Casely on the
part of the latter, upon payment of the costs, of which the
receipt in question was given, and having concluded, he
cal_d tl-Ae following witnesses.

David Wilkinson, clerk to the defendant, proved that on
the 11th of February he purchased a stamp from Mrs. Pitt,
of Lamb's Conduit-street, which on bringtng to the
office he placed in the inkstand drawer. He subsequently
saw the stamp on the same day on which it was used, and
it was in every respect the same as that produced with the
exception of the stamp.
By Sir F. ROE—He brought no more than one stamp
on that day, nor was there any other stamp of the same
kind in the drawer.

By Mr. CLArixsoN—lt was a custom with the defendaut
not to write on the stamp on giving receipts.
Mrs. Hannah Pitt identified her private mark on the
paper produced which, had a stamp upon it when pur-
chased from her, but she could not say when that was.
She always procured her paper from the stationers of the
Stamp-office, and it was the size of a stamped paper.
Mr. Henry Berry, 4, Trafalgar-square, proved that hay-
met with with an accident, he requested the defendant to
write some receipts for him, which he did without touching
the stamps.
Other witnesses gave testimony to the same effect.
Mr. TILSEY said he was obliged to receive the informa-
tion on such subjects from any person, but hearing that the
defendant had some explanation to give, he thought it bet-
ter to lay the case before the Magistrates, than take it into
the Court of Exchequer, as it would be a saving of expense.
Sir F. ROE said that the weight of evidence was in fa.
your of the defendant, who had satisfactorily accounted for
the stamp, and as it was his conviction that the stamp was
on the paper when he gave the receipt, the case should be
dismissed.

The receipt was then ordered to be impounded for the
purpose of producing it on another occasion and the parties
left the office.

Countess Batthyany, accompanied by her family,
arrived at Mivart's Hotel last evening from Brighton, where
she has been passing the winter months. Count Batthyany
is shortly expected in Leicestershire from town.