The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-03 00:00:00

BATEMAN V. DUNN.

Mr. Sergeant Wane moved in this case to set aside an or-
der of Mr. Justice Coltman, cancelling the bail bond in this
case, and entering an exoneratur. The Learned Sergeant
said that there arose in this case a point of general importance
in reference to the construction of the new Act of Parliament
respecting imprisonment for debt. The defendant had been
arrested and put in bail before this Bill came' into operation.
He was arrested on the 13th of September, and on the 27th
he gave notice that on that day he had put in special bail. The
Bill came into operation on the Ist of October, and on the 3d
there was an application to Mr. Justice Bosanquet, which was
refused; but on the 16th of October, after some consultation
had taken place, amongst the Judges, the order in question
was granted by Mr. Justice Coltman. He supposed that that
order had been granted upon the 6th section of the Act, which
provided that it might be lawful for any person arrested to
apply for an order calling on the plaintiff to show cause
why he should not be " discharged out of custody," and thi:t
in case of his failing to do so that order might be made abso-
lute. But now this was the case of a gentleman generally re-
siding in Ireland, who had been arrested in England upon an
affidavit that he was expected shortly to leave this part of the
kingdom, and who had put in bail. There was no immediate
pressure on his liberty, which was the case contemplated by
the Act ; he was not " in custody" at the time, nor was there
any probability that his bail would render him. The Court
granted a rule nisi.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 2.
RICHARDSON V. CLARIDGE, KNIGHT, AND OTHERS.

This was an action brought against the defendants as provi-
sional Directors of the London and Brighton Railway Com-
pany, to recover the balance of an account, arm)unting to
upwards of 130/. It was tried lef,re Mr. Baron Gurney, at
the sittings in list Term, wh n the verdict was for the
plaintiff. Mr. PLATT now moved fo: a rule nisi for a new
trial on the ground of misdirectio❑. The Court granted a
rule nisi.

U. NEWSMAN.

Mr. DiEssioEu moved f r a rule to show cause why the
verdict for the defendarrt in this case sh,ruld not be set aside,
and a verdict entered for the plaintiff for 1001. It was an
a,tion tried at the Maidstone Assizes, and was brought to re-
cover a penalty of 1001., alleged to have been incurred by the
def ndant, by his officiating as assistant Treasurer for the
Gravesend Pier, while at the same time he held the situation of
clerk to the pier-works, which was expressly forbidden in the
Gravesend Pier Act, 3 and 4 William IV., c. 101, sec. 19,
under the penalty sought to be recovered.—Rule granted.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nor. 2.
MARSH, STRACEY, GRAHAM, AND CO'S BANKRUPTCY.
A meeting of the creditors under the commission issued
many years since against the partners of this firm, who were
extensive bankers in Bernard-street, and the failure of which
was occasioned by the delinquencies of the late Mr. F.lunt-
leroy, was held to day for the proof of debts. and the declara-
tion of a dividend upon the separate estate of, Mr. Marsh. A
small dividend was directed to be paid to those creditors who
have proved since the former dividend was ordered to be paid,
with the view of placing all the creditors upon the same
footing. It is not expected that a further dividend will be
paid upon the joint estate of the banking firm for some time
to come.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nor. 2.
BAIL.—Two applications on the part of insolvents to be
discharged out of custody until their final bearing were heard
to-day, and granted. There were four cases heard yesterday,
making fifteen applications under the 38th section, Ist and 2d
Victoria, within a short time. The clause will be productive
of great benefit, and will frequently be put into requisition.
Nearly all the applications were granted, and the several in-
solvents restored to their business or profession until the days
appointed for their hearing.