The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-15 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Dec. 14.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FORBLANQUE
IN RE NATINE.
The case of this bankrupt, a stockbroker, of Copt-
hall-court, has been frequently before the public,
under the head of Guildhall Police Court, upon the
charge of non-surrender and embezzlement. Ile
to day came before the Court in the custody of
Forrester, the officer, upon the question of surrender.
Mr. LAWIMANCE, for the bankrupt, cited several cases
to show that his (the bankrupt's) surrender might be
taken as a matter of course, upon his presenting
himself, the spirit of the bankrupt law always being

to afford a locus penitentim.
Mr. HILLEART, for the assignees and creditors insti-
tuting these'proceedings, urged that no good reason
had been shown why the bankrupt's surrender was
not taken on the day first named, and that it could
not now be taken. The 28th of September was the
day originally named, and the excuse for his non-
attendance was, being detained abroad through
iliness, he being, as alleged, at that time in constant
communication with his clerk, with the view of
getting rid of his estate. The alleged cause for not
returning to England was the seeing certain reports
in the newspapers that legal proceedings had been
instituted against him. ;
Mr. LAWRANCE objected to any letter being put in,
written by the bankrupt subsequently to the 28th of
September.
1l is Hortoust would put out of consideration every-
thing subsequent to that date.
George Ingall, a clerk,' formerly in the employ of
the bankrupt, proved going to Boulogne on the 29th
of July; afterwards saw him there, and took him a
release to execute.. II id` had frequent ccminu-
nieations with him, and believed his liabilities to be
about 30,0001.
Mr. LAWRANCE said the bahltrupt was in court, and
• e.
might be examined.
His HoNouse—Not till 'after the question of sur-
render is decided.
Mr. HILLEARY said there was not even a medical
certificate of 2i surgeon at 'Boulogne, which might
have been easily obtained, to show the bankrupt's in-
ability to surrender. There was no ground for sup.
posing thatelie was now willing to make a full dis-
closure of his estate and effects, and his past conduct
had been fall of design and fraud. The expenses o
the crecliters prosecuting ,at Guildhall were already
701, Forrester s fee,alone'being 451. ; and the present
was a pOceseling for the purpose of cutting the ground
from under the prosecuticn. The case was now just
on the eve of trial, and to accept his surrender under
such eitcunistences would be a dangerous precedent.
The hankrnpt only sought this mode to extricate
himself from a fix. Toe creditors would sooner have
this man exposed and punished, as a-warning to other
stockbrokers, than receive any paltry dividend the
estate might pay.
Mr. LAWRANCX said that the new Act had supplied
an important deficiency in the old Act, by giving
the Csinmissioner. a discretion of accepting the bank-
rupt's surrender at any time. There could be no
doubt tht the present opposition was more with a view
to the pending indictment than any bmefit to the
esta!e'. Ile declared that the French authorities had
bsesi ineruced to give this man up, in consequence of
tithe rep're?.entations.. The bankrupt, if allowed to
surretfrier, was ready. to be examined at once.
The COMMISSIONER, in an elaborate judgment,
during which he reviewed the decisions of the Court
of Chancery upon this ve..}tion, and the spirit, po-
licy, and enactments' of the numerous bankruptcy
sta:utee, expressed a cl6cided opinion that the bank-
rupt was nos entitled to a concession of the prayer of
his petition, having, in the opinion of the Court,
wilfully absconded, and wilfully avoided surrender-
ing to his Hat. No medical certificate of ill-health
had been produced ; the voyage from Boulogne to
England was a short and an easy one—one which
even an invalid might undertake. Some time ago
a bankrupt, who had absconded to the Cape of
Good Hops and was outlawed, obtained an order
from the Court of Review to surrender, but he
(the Commissioner) reluaed Wet upon that criler,
considering that the bankrupt had in absconding
necessarily contemplated the consequences of his
conduct, and had thereby committed an act
of bankruptcy. It was essential' that that
portion of the bankruptcy law. Which related to non-
surrender, awl which had been greatly mitigated
(frem the punishment of death to transportation for
seven years) should be strictly maintained. The act
of bankruptcy in this case was the absconding to
Boulogne, and that act was, in the opinion of the
Court, wilful. The surrender was not voluntary, nor
was there a tittle of evidence to support the plea of
illness. Another reason for not acceding to the
prayer of the petition was that a prosecution before
another Court had been 'instituted, and it'ltat the
custom that one Court should do nothing which could
bias the proceedings of another Court one way or the
other.
Mr. LAWEANCR quoted the opinion of an eminent
judge from a note in " Rose's Bankruptcy Cases," in
which a prosecution was prevented and the fiat super-
seded, because it was shown that the non-surrender of
the bankrupt arose from ignorance or accident.
The COMMISSIONER, after some further observations,
decided upon dismissing the petition.
The petition was dismissed, but notice was given
that the bankrupt would appeal from his Honour's
decision.