The Sun.
London, England, 1853-11-09 00:00:00

of 1,0001. was entirely consumed, together with two
horses, and all the harness, stable utensils, and propel:-
ties of the circus, which cost at least 5001.-1,5001.
Estimated depreciation in the value of fixtures, fittings,
&c., at the Rosemary Branch Tavern, estimated to have
cost me 3,0591., but which are not estimated to realise
' under the bankruptcy more than 1,0001."
Mr. Bagley, for the assignees, who were large credi-
tors, stated that they had' been very favourable to the
bankrupt all along, but from some circumstances which
had come to their knowledge within the last 48 hours
they were induced to ask that the consideration of the
certificate might be adjourned until inquiry should be
made into the new features of the case. It was repre-
sented to the assignees that property had been concealed,
and that a marriage settlement existed, of which the
bankrupt had given no account.
Mr. La wrance, for the bankrupt, said he should not
oppose the application for adjournment.
After a short examination of the bankrupt, the fur-
ther hearing of the case was adjourned for six weeks.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN RE ROBERT BRENNAND.

The bankrupt, of Addle-street, warehouseman, applies
for his certificate, owing to creditors 5,031/., besides
8471. of liabilities. The assets were returned at 461. in
good debts ; property, 4051. The profits had been 6481.;
law charges, 346/. ; trade expenses, 4681. ; losses, 2261.;
house and personal expenses, 2951.; by deficiency, 3,439/.
Mr. Linklater opposed, for the assignees, on the
ground that the bankrupt had concealed the true state
of his affairs, by neglecting to enter into the books cer-
tain consignments which he had received from Messrs.
Maunder. The debts were large, upwards of 5,0001.,
while the assets had realised little more than 5001.
The bankrupt bad consigned some goods to Corfu, on
which he stated there would be a large profit. The
case had been adjourned three months in consequence ;
and it now appeared that, instead of a profit, there would
be a loss.
Mr. Lawrance, for the bankrupt, contended that the
discrepancies complained of had been explained at the
examination meeting. Messrs. Maunder had been in
the habit of consigning to him to the amount of 4,0001.
a year. He had made a composition in March, 1852 ;
but, as occurred in nine cases out of ten, he was ,un-
able to carry it out, and was obliged to come to this
court. The law charges, which were apparently large,
had arisen out of the attempt at arrangement.
His Honour thought the omissions attributable ra-
ther to carelessness than to fraud. Considering that
'nine months had elapsed since the bankruptcy, the jus-
tice of the case would be met by a short suspension—
four months from that date ; the certificate, when
granted, to be of the second class, with protection in the
meantime.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT—Nov. 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Murphy.)
IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD BAYLEY-BREACH OF
TRUST.
This insolvent, a ship aind insurance agent in Tower-
street, appeared for judgment. Mr. Cooke opposed for
Messrs. Bailey, iron merchants of Liverpool.
The complaint in this case, which was originally beard
in September, was that the insolvent had contracted a
debt with Messrs. Bailey by means of a breach of trust.
Messrs. Bailey were in the habit of consigning goods to
him, and with them he received bills of lading. It ap-
peared that he wanted to raise money on a bill of ex-
change, and deposited a bill of lading of Messrs. Bai-
ley's goods as collateral security, and the point was
whether it was a pledging under the 5 and 6 Vict., cap.
39, by which it became a transportable offence. It was
denied that it was a pledging as contemplated by the act,
Mr. Commissioner Murphy was clearly of opinion that
the insolvent had committed a breach of trust in the
manner in which be had deposited the bill of lading, and
that the case came within the act of Parliament cited
to him. It was a question which affected the trading
community, Messrs. Bailey had to pay the debt for
which the bill of lading was deposited, and were now
creditors for 1341. There would be a serlous judgment.
The case stood over, and the learned Commissioner
now pronounced judgment for twelve calendar months,
at the suit of Messrs. Bailey, for a breach of trust,
whereby the debt had been fraudulently incurred.