The Sun.
London, England, 1854-01-30 00:00:00

THE QUEEN V. SHARMAN.

In this case the prisoner was indicted at the Central
Criminal Court for forging a certain writing, being a
testimonial purporting to be written by the Rev. R. H.
Johnston, rector of a parish in Leicester, recommending
the prisoner and his wife to another clergyman in York-
shire as fit and proper persons to ►tndertake the charge
of a school. In another count he was charged with the
uttering only. The jury acquitted the prisoner of the
Charge of forgery, but found him guilty of uttering the
docturfent for the purpose of deceiving and of receiving
the emoluments of the office. The question was whe-
ther the uttering of such a document was an offence at
common law.
Mr. Clarkson appeared for the prosecution. The pri-
soner was not represented.
The Court having hoard the case, were of opinion
that the conviction was right.
Conviction affirmed.
BUSINESS OF THE COURT.

-------- -
The Chief Justice at the sitting of the court an•
nounced that their lordships could not agree in their
judgments in the cases in the "Queen v. Watts," and
the " Queen v. Beaumont " argued last Saturday.
The Court Would, therefore, sit on next Saturday, in
order that the cases might be re-argued before the fif-
teen judges.

JUDGES' CHAMBERS
(Before Mr. Justice Crompton.)
THIS THISQUEEN v. PETER ASHCROFT. Tu
FAT AI. COLLISION
ON THE EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY
This was an application to admit to bail. Mr, peter
the
permanent the resident engineer or superintendeni
oftle
permanent way of the Eastern Counties Railway, b
y,against
whom a double verdict .of manslaughterer
had been re-
turned in the case of the recent collision on this line
between the Thetford and Harlinm ° stations.
It may be remembered that the late heavy fall of
snow greatly obstructed the line. An up train, in which
was the defendant, Latham, one of his inspectors, and
some fifty labourers, proceeded on the up line, where the
obstruction was said to be, for the purpose of clearing
it away, when a collision took place with a down train.
and Fir-lives wore lost. It was contended that the de-
fendant ought not to have gone up on the up-line, but
On the down-line, as he had been directed. The defen-
dant, in his affidavit, said that he had not received any
.s such directions. That he was travelling on the up and
11 proper line for the purpose of clearing away the
snow, and that the train with which he came in collision
was en the wrong line, and that it had disobeyed the
171st rule of the compatifo regulations. That rule was

not observed, and if it had been, the collision would not
have occurred.
His lordship, on perusing the affidavit, decided on ad-
mitting the defendant to bail, himself in 1001., and two
sureties of 201. each, to appear at the Norwich Assizes
to take his trial.
THE QUEEN V. LATHAM.

Mr. Palmer applied to the court to admit John
Latham, who was on the engine attached to Mr. Ash-
croft's train to bail.
His Lordship fixed the bail at the same amount as
in the former case.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fane.)
IN RE GEORGE HENNETT.-JUDGMENT.

In the case of this bankrupt, the extensive railway
contractor, &c., which came before the court on last
Saturday, and was reported in our journal on Monday,
his Honour to-day gave judgment.
His Honour said—l have carefully considered Mr.
Hennett's case, and have great satisfaction in complying
with the wish expressed the other day by his assignees
that I should give him a first-class certificate. His ac-
counts show very large debts and very large credits.
He owes to secured creditors about 79,0001., against
which they hold about 87,0001. worth of property, and
he owes to unsecured creditors about 340,0001., against
which he produces general assets amounting to about
146',0001. ; so that the dividend will be consider.
able. His transactions were enormous. He was a
railway contractor, lime burner, coal-merchant, and
ship owner, and he had places of business in London,
Bristol, Bridgewater, Teignmouth, and Plymouth.
His books, so far as related to his trade transactions,
were kept with perfect regularity, and his businesses
were conducted with great ability. Why, then, it may
be asked, was he forced into bankruptcy ? Why might
he not have made a statement of his affairs and satisfied
his creditors out of doors ? He had, it is true, sustained
a great loss latterly by the sale of railway shares at a
heavy discount, which he had taken in part payment of
a claim he had on a railway company—another by the
failure of a large country bank, and many by the inabi-
lity of his other debtors to pay him, but these losses
would never have brought him into his present position.
His present position is owing to his having placed him-
self in the hands of those money-lending knaves, who
are the pest of society, who induce unwary people, when
in distress, to trust them with acceptances, and then pass
them into the hands of persons as great knaves as them-
selves, whom the law (one would almost think in mock-
ery), calls innocent holders, and who are thus enabled
to rob. It is to this unfortunate weakness that Mr.
Hennett owes his present position. Had he called his
creditors together at an earlier period, instead of con-
tinuing the struggle too long, it would have been far
better for himself and for his creditors also. At last,
he was obliged to do what he should have done at first,
and then, even those who most sympathised with him
felt that bankruptcy was the only process by which
transactions which had lately taken place could be
investigated, and bankruptcy ensued. Under the bank-
ruptcy much useful investigation has been made, and re-
sults to a certain extent satisfactory have followed, for
many unjust claims have been most materially reduced.
By the able and constant assistance of Mr. Hennett, and
the unceasing activity of Mr. Cannan, the official assig-
nee, contracts have been completed, and a profit of from
8,0001. to 10,0001. has been realised to the estate. Under
these circumstances I award him a first class certificate
with pleasure, and I hope that he will be shortly able to
resume business with the kind assistance of his creditors,
and that his known ability, industry, and integrity, will
again enable him to support himself and family in com-
fort. •