The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-03 00:00:00

LIABILITY OF PETITIONING CREDITORS UNDER FIATS

IN BANKRUPTCY-HAMBER V. ROBERTS.
The plaintiff in this action is one of the messengers
of the Court of Bankruptcy, and sought to recover of
the defendant, as the petitioning creditor, for a fiat
against a person named Salmon the sum of 19/. 14s. 10d.
for a bill of costs, up to the choice of assignees, there
being no available assets under the bankrupt's estate.
Mr. Wrensted, a clerk in the Court of Bankruptcy,
proved that the fiat was duly issued, and possession
taken under it. He said that the messenger was enti-
tled to payment of his bill up to the choice of assignees,
in priority of all other charges.
The defendant's attorney contended that the mes-
senger could only look to the assets, and not to the
petitioning creditor.
The Learned SECONDARY said he was clearly of
opinion that the petitioning creditor was individually
liable where no assets were realised.

The jury thereupon gave ; verdict for the amount
claimed.
THE TRUSTEES OF THE EQUITABLE PROVIDENT ASSO-

CIATION AND SAVINGS' FUND V. NEEDHAM.

The plaintiffs in thi;—t:ctiOn,ihe trustees of the
Equitable Provident Association and Savings' Fund,
sought to recover the sum of 6541. 4s. 10d., the arrears
of subscriptions, redemption fees, and fines due from
the defendant.

Mr. LOCKWOOD, the manager of the association,
proved the amount to be due.

Defendant allowed judgment to go by default and a
verdict was given for the plaintiff for the amount
claimed.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
THE ROYAL BELGRATE LYING-IN INSTITUTION.--
James Locke, sen., and his three sons, Edwin, James,
and George Curtis, were brought up for further exami-
nation, charged with having conspired together with in-
tent to defraud certain parties of sums of money by
falsely pretending to apply the money towards the
support of a charitable institution for affording medical
assistance to married females at the period of their
confinement.

Mr. Shea, 10, Hyde Park-square, barrister, was the
first witness examined. Recollected some persons called
at his house, about two months ago, soliciting subscrip-
tions for the Belgrave Lying.in Institution. Two PaPc",
one a prospectus of the alleged institution, were given at
the time. Witness did not see the pomons who called;
but, from the particulars in the prospectus, thinking the
institution was good in its objects, he signed the sub-
scription-book, and sent a guinea by his footman to the
parties who called. Had parted with his money on the
faith that the Royal Be!grave Lying-in Institution was a
boisa fide institution, and that he would be at liberty to
refer a married woman to the institution for relief. Wit-
ness also believed the representations in the prospectus
that the institution was under the immediate patronage
of the Duchess of Kent and other distinguished persona
whose names were set forth in the prospectus.
Several other witnesses were called to prove that they
had paid money to the prisoners for the benefit of the
institution, and under the same impression as that enter-
tained by Mr. Shea.

Inspector Leslie said the house was very meanly fur-
nished. In the room used as an office there was a table
and half a dozen chairs. There were no surgical in-
struments or appliances. There was nothing to indicate
that a lying-in institution was held there. Witness found
a book containing subscriptions to the " linen fund,"
with her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent to it as
a subscribe. Witness also found a letter from her
Royal Highness's secretary, Mr. Cowper, com-
manding her Royal Highness's name to be withdrawn
from the prospectus of the Royal Belgrave Lying-in In-
stitution. The letter was dated 1843. Witness had ob-
tained proof that the prospectuses had been printed
within the last two months, all of which bore her Royal
Highness's name as patroness.
Mr. HanDwrcx asked the elder Locke if he wished
to say anything in answer to the charge? The prisoner
-Locke, sen., said he had not seen his solicitor since Satur-
day. last, and then he had been advised to reserve his de-
fence. Since then he had been informed by his daughter
that she had received a letter from the Earl of Car-
lisle, stating that he had given full permission for his
name to be used as a patron of the institution.
With
respect to the charge that there was no institution in ex-
istence, there were ten midwives present who would
prove that they had attended thousands of cases, and had
received hundreds of pounds from the institute. Some
cases had been attended to within the last fortnight.
Then, as to the deficiency of funds, the midwives de-
clared that that was to be attributed to the stir made by
Mr. Ryder in 1844. Mr. Ryder called them together
under the plea of ascertaining if any debts were owing
to them, in order that he might see them paid. Mr.
Ryder's proceedings had exasperated all the midwives,
as he had prevented subscriptions from coming to the in-
stitution. Many subscribers had withdrawn their
names, and others had not taken the trouble to make in-
quiries. Then, with reference to the blinds having on them
the name of her Royal Highness the Duchess of
Kent, as patroness, which blinds it was alleged were
carried about and exhibited in various localities, that
was not correct, as the blinds had been broken for some
time. With reference to the use made of the Duchess of
Kent's name, her Royal Highness had been a liberal sup-
porter of the institution for manyyears, and had the privi-
lege of recommending 30 women to the institution. Her
Royal Highness did give 101. towards the linen fund,
and the midwives would prove that boxes of linen were
provided for the women when confined. Having paid
this 101., her Royal Highness became a life subscriber,
and being entitled to six letters, her Royal Highness's
name was kept on the subscribers' list. He (prisoner)
considered this a very hard case. He had devoted 17
years of his time and energies to the institution without
proper remuneration. A salary had been proposed by
the committee, and he had received an allowance of
1001. a year, which did not compensate him for the ser-
vices he rendered to the institution.
Mr. HARDWICK said he would remind the prisoner
that a letter had been put in to show that after her Royal
Highness had withdrawn her name, he had used her
name to collect subscriptions.
The prisoner said at the time the letter was received
from her Royal Highness it was delivered to the com-
mittee, who submitted it to legal persons. The result
was, that the committee found they could not undo what
they had done.

Mr. HARDwicx. said he should further remand the
case to Wednesday next, and the❑ he would decide
whether he would convict summarily or send the case to
a jury.

‘..A -person here produced 7$ letters from midwives who
had not been paid.
Another midwife produced 12 letters, for which she
could get no payment.

The prisoners were then remanded. A gentleman
connected with the Pimlico Lying-in Institution wished
it to be known that the charity ho represented had no
knowledge of the Belgrave Lying-in Institution. He
believed that the prisoners had got subscriptions from
parties who believed they were subscribing to the Pim •
lico Institution.

MOLNE, THE Scur,rrox.—This artist, who had
attainedl considerable distinction in his profession, has
committed suicide. Pressed by numerous creditors for
deb's ineurrd by the oeenpation, and
having passed some days without food, or the means of
obtaining any, in a fit of delirium he put 'an end to his
exiotence.—Art Journal.