The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-03 00:00:00

LA W INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.-DEC. 2.
YIP B~ JOHNSON.--CASE Or AN UNDERWRITER.

This was the last examination meeting in the matter
of Thomas Johnson, merchant and underwriter, of
Broad-street-buildings, who had traded in partnership
With two others, under the firm of Johnson, Peel, and
Co. His accounts, prepared by Mr. Turquand, com-
menced on the 30th June, 1850, with a deficiency of
3,9601. He now owes to unsecured creditors 3531. ;
ditto on underwriters' account, 4281. ; secured creditors,
1,933/. ;to Johnson, Peel, and Co., 5,7361. The assets
were stated as follows :----Good debtors, 281. ; ditto on
underwriting account, 2,854/. ; property held by credi-
tors, 7071. The receipts on the underwriting account
had been 3,0078. ; losses, 1,1871. ; household expenses,
1,3391. ; personal ditto. 1,8451.
Mr. Cotterill, for the assignees, opposed, and wished
for further accounts to be rendered. The bankruptcy
was on the 20th of 'August, but the firm had stopped
payment two months earlier ; but the accounts ought to
be brought down to the later period. It was observable
that three years ago the bankrupt was in a deficiency of
about 4,0001., that he had subsequently expended a very
large sum of money, and now owed to his firm upwards
of 5,700/. The assets were stated at 2,800/. on the un-
derwriting account ; but it was necessary to have the
accounts to a later period, as in the interval heavy losses
might have accrued, and a very searching investigation
was necessary.
Mr. Lawrance, for the bankrupt, said the main ques-
tion was oue between Mr. Johnson and his partners.
The books had been accurately kept, and every part of
the accounts were vouched. A question had been raised
as to a great part of the assets, whethea they were joint
or separate estate • but that was not now before the
court. It might be,uncertain whether the whole of the
2,854/. would be realised ; but the amount of assets
would be taken into consideration by the court at the
certificate meeting.
Cotterill said that a great many of the proofs had
been made in respect of claims arising since the period
to which the accounts extended.
Mr. Gardiner (representing Mr. Whitmore, the offi-
cial assignee), said that the books were well kept, and
the balance-sheet was fully borne out by them. The
only question with Mr. Whitmore was, whether the
bankrupt should take credit for so much on the under-
writing accounts, also whether he ought not to furnish
an account of liabilities an the policies outstanding.
Mr. Cotterill said that if he had gone to Lloyds on
the 20th of August, and asked what were the claims
then against him, he would have got the amount in a
couple of hours.
His Honour did not see that any benefit would arise
to the creditors from an adjournment. Let the bank-
rupt pass his examination, but let it be thoroughly un-
derstood that he was as much bound hereafter as previ-
ously to give every information to his assignees. The
accounts were such as in their nature must be varying.
Where it was a mere question of buying and selling, a
man must exhaust a means of stating what he had
bought and sold : but where he was wagering on events
that might pass in distant parts of the globe, the court
could not refuse to pass his last examination until every
ship he had underwritten should either come home or
be lost.

The bankrupt passed accordingly, and a day was
named for the certificate meeting.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.—DEC. 2.
(Before Chief Commissioner Law.)
IN THE MATTER OF JOSEPH STAMMERS.
This insolvent, the originator of the Wednesday Con-
certs at Exeter Hall, appeared before the court and ap-
plied for an adjournment for a fortnight, to enable him
to settle with his creditors.
The Chief Commissioner remarked that he had already
adjourned the case for a month for the same purpose.
The insolvent replied that he had negotiated with his
creditors and some had agreed to arrange, and he only
wanted a short adjournment to complete the arrange-
ment with all of them.
The Chief Commissioner wanted to know why be pre-
ferred staying in prison to being discharged ?
The insolvent answered that he was not in prison, but
out on bail. He had succeeded in his application to
nearly all his creditors.
His Honour declared that he could not see why his
bail should be rendered liable from time to time for his
attendance. The best thing he could do was to dis-
charge him.
The insolvent intimated that he only required an ad-
journment to settle with his creditors.
The Chief Commissioner said he should not adjourn
the case, but should discharge him. That was the best
thing be could do.
The insolvent was sworn to his schedule, and ordered
to be discharged.
IN RE JAMES VICKERS WEDGWOOD.
In this case Mr. Macrae opposed for Messrs. Dean,
of Lamb's Conduit-street, lithographers.
The insolvent, a young man, had been placed in
business as a lithographer by his father, and an exami-
nation took place as to some costs he had incurred on a
bill of exchange.
Mr. Macrae intimated that it was not a case for pro-
tection.
The Chief Commissioner appointed a day for a trial
order, and suggested a settlement.