The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-30 00:00:00

utility, and which seems to have no object beyond that of
increasing the Post•ofce revenue.

SUN.—It was said in the City this afternoon that
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would probat.ily make
known in the House this evening his intentions with
regard to meeting the expenditure of the country, i7ed
this acted unfavourably on the Stock Market. The
quotations of Consols for immediate transfer were 80:1-
to 89t, and for the account 8n- to 89k. Exchequer
Bills continued at 4s. to 6s. premium ; and India
Bonds at 10s. to ss. discount. Bank Stock was sent
down from 168 and 169 to 1671 and 166, but whether
this arises from any expectation of the financial arrapg-
ments of Mr. Baring affecting the posi•ion of the : -
rectors, we are unable to state. India Stock ryas dull
at 2•iB ; the New Three-and-a-Halt per Cents realised
SK to 974 ; and the Three per Cents. 90i to t-2,*
When Foreign States, which have often deceivtd ns
before, begin to make a show of doing justice to us in
regard to our claims on them for money lent, we Begin
to suspect some coming project for a new loan ; and as
the busy emissaries of Spain are trumpeting forth the
good intentions of M. Gamboa (which we ourselves do
not pretend to dispute) we conceive that the pnbl. c
should be cautious in dealing in Spanish Stock at pre-
sent, and bide their time. No doubt thoir suspense
will only be of limited duration.
'lo-day Active Spanish Bonds were at 25 to 24a ;
the New Portuguese Five per Cents. at 021 to 21'.
being a slight decline ; and the Three per Cents. at 21'i
to 20 ; Danish at 7S ; Chilian at 60 ; end Dutch,
Two-and-a-Half per Cents. at 50-1 to A.
Shares were in more demand to-day. Great Western
were 29 to 27.:1, the New at 131, the Fifths 6 to 6!,
the London and Birmingham 89, the Quarter '25, the
Thirds 28, and the York and North Midland 22 preen.
Brighton were 6to 6i, Greenwich New 3 to 274,
Eastern Counties 144, and North Midland 23 dis-
count. Australian Bank New Shares were 11 prem.
This afternoon the Foreign Exchanges were
fl it again, and three months paper was generally
quoted at a further slight reduction on each of the fol-
lowing cities :—Hamburgh 13 611 to 7 ; Frankfort
14 8 ; Amsterdam 12 2to 4 ; Trieste 10 to 10 1,
and Paris 25 50 to 5,5.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.

(Before Mr. Commissioner llnnoYn.)
IN TIII: BANKRUPTCY or WRIGHT A 11)
Friday being the day fixed for the final examination of the
13inkruFts, several additional claims were admitted, when
A s.dicitor, who said he attended for several credjlors, appliallon
G:11 Bair plum]: a

the Learned Commissioner to reeover vacs; rn um
for the sum of 1 161 16s. on different bankers, which had been
Maid in alter the determination by the bankrupts to stop par.
went, but which, nevertheless, were paid in, being pres'ented t.t
the different bankers on whom they were drawn on Hie morning

of the Monday on which they (the bankrupt actually stoppvl
payment. These checks had been handed over to the ussignow,
. . . . . .

and the applicant DOW prayed that his clients might be doolavtd en.

titled to receive the amount of those cheoks.
Mr. Commissioner floutovn assented.

O►Eit.uor: B:►NKERS' Ciireas.—A gentlemau, at t!:e lust titling

under this bankruptcy, made an application respecting crcr-due

bankers' checks, which was not finally disposed of, add upon which
the Learned Commissioner now proceeded to deliver his judgment

as follows

:—The question to which I allude was respecting the

right and form of proofs against the estate of the bankrupts for a

sum of money which, at the time of the bankruptcy, formed pact
of a larger sum than standing in the bankers' book to the credit of
a customer, and for which the customer had some days previously

to the bankruptcy, given a check to a third party, in payment of a
debt due by the customer to such party ; the cheek not haring been
presented for payment, thereby operated as a satisfactitn and dis-
charge of the debt for which it was given in payment, proritiod
it was drawn in conformity with the provision is the Stamp

Act mating to drafts to banlyrs. I should here mention
that all unstampcd checks, drafts, or orders for Vibe payment
. „ . .

of money to the bearer on demand, drawn in Great Britain on n
banker residing within fifteen miles of the place where they arc
issued—and the drafts or orders must specify the place where

they are issued, and bear date on or before the day on which
they are issued--no ladies by the holder will make a cheek not
drawn in conformity with the above provision amount to payment
of a prioi debt, even though the check, but for such !aches, would
have been paid. In the present case there appears to be no obje
tion to the form of the cheek. In order, then, to come to a-rigsl

conclusion upon the question before me, it will be proper to con.
rider the legal and equitable rights of the respective parties at the
time of the bankruptcy. First, then, what is the operation of
banking in regard to what are usually called deposits, or money
kept by customers at a banker's e It is this : sums of money
which are paid to credit of the customers with a 'milker
are both, in fact and in contemplation of law, loans by the
customer to the banker, who becomes their debtor, and is bound to
repay the money on demand, or to pay checks drawn by the *us-
tomers for any portion of such money. See " Car v. Car,"
I Merivale Rep. 541 (note) ; " Leverage v. Noble," 1 Merivale,
56S ; " Sims r. Barrow," 5 Harnewall and Alderson, 393 ; and
"Ex parte Swan," I Deacon, 7:15. A person receiving a check
drawn upon a banker must present it with due diligence, and,
by the law eof merchant, the general rule is that checks re-
ceived in the course of one day may be presented at any time
during banking hours of the next day. See " Rickford v.
Ridge," 2 Carlyle 537 ; " Robinson V. Bennet," 3 Taint, 3Se.
If the holder of a check fail to present it with reasonable
diligence, the debt in respect of which the check was
given is discharged by his lashes,—it amounts to a satis.
faction of such debt. In the present case, a Mr. Correa
having a large sum to les credit witk Messrs. Wright,
On the 13th of November strew a check in favour se( Mr.
Doxey for 25/. This check might have been presenled betore the
bankruptcy, and had it been present; d it would Have bean paid.
The holder, however, kept the check, and omitted to present it or
give notice to the bankers that he held it. The holder, therefore,
has no remedy at law against the bankers, who were .the debtors of
the customer (Mr. Corvan), and at law they would continue to be
so until they, by the desire of the customer, entered into some
binding engagement with a third party to pay the money to him.
Sec " Williams v. Everett," 14 East, 581 ; " Barrow v. leusband,"
4 Burn and Adol, (114 ; and " Fairlie v. Denton," S Barn. and
Cress•-
, 400. What right then in equity has the holder of the cheek
I
in question ? 1 think that in equity, es against the person drawing
the check. The check itself would operate as an assignment of so
much of the debt owing by the bankers to the customer. SI he awgen-
ment of a debt does not require for its validity in equity a contratet
with the debtors. When au order is given,by a person to pay pelt
of his money to another, for a foregone valuable consideration, in
equity the owner fixes the money the moment it is shown to the
party on whom it is drawn. " Yeatcs r. Groves," I Vee., in.,
Oa2 ; "Ex parte Alderson," Mad. 53 ;.," Ex parte Sootier 3
Swanst., 393 ; " Lett v. Simmons" 4 Simons. It * true tlsatup
this case no notice was given to Wright and Co. (the
,Baukare ) of
this check. Notice to the bankers is certainly necessary to perfect
the title—" to give a complete right in rem., and not merely a right
as against him who conveys his interest." Had the customer who
gave the cheek become bankrupt, the amount of that cheel: would
have passed to his Assignees; because, to make an ((tactual ansiese-
ilaanisios,,iit.ggirty:siii,oitii'hee.a:i:dhosa,:ftn;i„iiii,dsnfelil,lii.l,eci,ebesortcynsia,oneifun,
sttoif,atl,iee
everything bankruptcy
eqo ft
iti 1:
ae
1,,,a assignor, gt rai or; Tee
.
t7l:eLel re
cars' rtiltliee se Zuel admits
yo)f, —a
n7lni.rho tat es el an
the debtor of the assignment. Nor is the en-inciple confined to
vases in bankruptcy. In " Levesedge te Cooper," 3 Russell's Rep.
58, Lord Elston, speaking of the case of " Ityall v. Rowley," rays,
" The grounds of judgment are of general application." Lord
Chief Baron Parker says, " That on the assignment of a bond
debt, the bond should be delivered, and notice given to the
debtor," and he adds, " that with respect to simple eoneract
debts, for which no securities are holden—such as book debts
fur instance—notice of the assignment should be given to the
debtor, in order to take away from the debtor the right of
making payment to the assignor, and to take away from the
a,signor the power and disposition over the thing assigned."
But notice is not necessary in such caves to give effect to an equit a-
-1 hate assignment of a debt between the parties, though it is so for the
perpa c of preventing the title of those persons attaeliing, in order
that they may not be deceived by apparent possession and owner.
ship remaining in a person, who, its fact, is not the oNII,. See
"Duke of Newcastle v. Ilall," and" levesedge v. Cooper," 3 /les.
scll's Rep. ; and " Parke rine Hunt, v. Mortimer," 10 Barn. stda
Cress. 47. I think, therefore, for the reason which I have g.veti,
that in this ease the cheek will operate as an equitable astignment,
and that proofs should be made fur the amount by Mr. Corvan and
Mr. Doxsley jointly, in the ordinary form, for the assignor mid as•
signet s I the debt.
aIaiSeeFFOILD said tliat, after what now transpired relative to the
payment in of the checks after herr o'clock on November 21,11 e had to
state to the Court that the parties whom he represented were in a
similar situation, but had been led into error by proving for the
entire, upon deeositions prepared for the choice of assignees tinder
he first ha'.
Mr. Commissioner 1101.1101"D—lf the fa9ts be as they are stated,
then there can be no doubt of the right of the claimants to be paid
in full the amount et their checks.
Mr. 11.1,11i.T0N said that several creditors sought to prove for
" Companies," which so stood in the bankrupts' books, but these
Companies had no charters, neither were they in co-operation by
As tbf Parliament. He knew the parties, and had no objection to
the proof, if the Court was satisfied.
Mr. Commissioner Iloenoen. did not think persons so situated
could prove, particularly- under tee provisions of the Dankitig Act.
Mr. BacoN (the Barrister) said that he attended to claim upon
the part of a gentleman named lkirton, of the county of Salop,
against the separate estate of Mr. Geo. Anthony Wright 13idduaili,
for the sum of 20,000/. Mr. Burtim claimed as sole surviving ex-
ecutor (out of four) of a gentleman named Plewden. The Lather of
Mr. RW(11111,11 was also'..ttti(df the four, and the " executors' ac-
count" wee kept under that head in the books of Wright and Co..
and else in a separate ledger. NN hen Mr. Wright Bidatripli became a
partner in the batik, this sum, in which he had a life interest, w. s
transferred. An arrangement was m ate in Ala- ce, 1820, that Mr.
Wright Iltddulph should eurchase those slimes in the bankTiVti.nieli
were thee recently he'd by h a deceased father Mr.
T'
as
consideration forv'as our:
'put- rtsilhieaste"-:;fxtelcieuste7l,:efa:flicrns lilicidstea. t
(1)::1:::
which was produced by the transfer of that rill
again to Thomas
(stunt to that of Mr. liiddulPht and 017te ;se shares. That woo
Wright, the younger, and the vendor
t.
deal with the capital of
however, quite an unauthoris.d act 0
sainted with the mat ire of the
the trust fund, and being
Yitati"iuheni became pera gelly !Sable.
tlrterisstsn,ottli
ie,,iartnrtti etsoscoi:lictahl ien
Eilgivillitest insinuation upon Mr Biddulph,
: lg.
it :iit:ier ta,:ai
,gl;egi.trii
st:iri
leo, t:reaciisra2ecl tt, iho;tn,
,at ,
tutuia,si
ot,,11.:1
ale, Lid
money
was e sui. pose t be quite _ ,
~,.
den and
or thatt! he meant
dulph executed a b
I,ll,l,t,t(ott,t,,rtai,sd
sate surviving
lttirton,t
ep,Tteot:t,eilia,ili,o,,a,,adte,tiuow appear SI 1 before
;Ir. Ifseurreros said he had net heard a weed of this case untie
yesterday crewing.
elr. BACON continued—Upi.n the grounds lie had just Castel Le
thought there wools' not be the slightest available ree:eo' ion otnreet
thettreus tproof.n,tot
:fe y
account%
1,• 1 which i(; : l
would
he
keptl,
~,,l,i iil,
a tendered;t:ihdeubpatnotkite,lere,sbcobololtd:r)ktWaS still ill exist-
ence;aul;o:auardastuotthiri,yentaleiare,itt)ti:raetagiisriat,i:fileii,:s;aittiottiafigt.tntaiid:ce'fllhOpani:tl:lll.ontrfehty,laeest'h,ol;:airll:t.:
beenetr.iel‘,Siartms.nll,l,::';:iitetxiilionlit,N;lii:(iee(c,ili,esiesrtila)bt,,,n'aaoerdterissli.clsathi,:iaa(ri
the bonds referred to, he thought they would be effectually harrt%
by the Statute of Limitations,.
Mr. BeuoN —We seek to prove, because of the breach of trust,
si Inch we have clearly established ; and, in such a cave, that s'a
lute is•ne har to us.
A fatalist discussion ensued, and
Mr. Commissioner Hoersoen (erected the aftdavit of proof to be
new made and entered, and it it should be found that any fur.
they itivestigation into the matter would be necesseary, (rhea such
an investigation should be at the expense of the estate.
Mr. Becos saal he I ad three similar applications to make in be.
half of creditors, but he would be satisfied to let them abide the
issue of the joint proof.
Mr. Ilemieroe said that the bankrupts were not reedy with
their accounts, and he was rrquestee to mike application to the
Court to allow some funds for the payment of accounts to assist in
making them up. It would require at least a fortnight longer
to get them ready. Mr. Iliddulph was unable from 111-health to
attend to them, and Mr. John Weight's private aceounts were so
extensive, that assistance was absolutely necessary to get through
them.
The Learned Com MISSIONER seas understood to concur.
Mr. France said he represented creditors whose stock had beak
scia w Mr. Wright to the amount of 530,0001. i but in the ac.