The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-19 00:00:00

IN RE A. DANIELLS.

This bankrupt was described rs-I:Merchant having for-
merly been in business as a perfumer, receiving about 1,0001.
a year, and living like a gentleman, which he disposed of
for about 1,500/., and then entered very largely into rail-
way speculation, being at one period worth about 12,000/.,
but in the end his speculation resulted in a very heavy loss.
This case was before the Court a short time since upon ap-
plication for certificate, and it was adjourned till this day,
for the purpose of investigation, and more particularly re-
specting the proof of Mr. More for 644,0004 being a balance
of account, resulting out of railway speculation. The bank-
rupt's debts and liabilities amount to about 10,0004, running
over a period of three years, and the assets appear on the
balance-sheet to be, property 162/. 9s. Bd. He commenced
with a capital of 3,189/. 14s. 11d., and the losses and ex-
penses amount to about 10,000/., the profits being stated at
2851.65. 6d.

Mr. Bagley appeared for Mr. More, to oppose, and Mr.
Lawrarce for the bankrupt.
It appeared that Mr. More had been in business in Liver-
pool, and in 1839 became bankrupt, but owing to some negli-
gence on his own part, he did not obtain his certificate until
July. 1845, at which period he entered the Liverpool market
as a sharebroker ; and he did not know what was the amount
of his debts, or the dividend, if any, paid under that bank-
ruptcy. He was not a sworn broker. He had not offered to
withdraw his opposition on payment of 3001.
Mr. LAWRANCE stated that the last item in the account
between the bankrupt and Mr. More, upon which the
proof of 644,0001. was now sought to be made, bore date the
11th of August. The certificate was dated the 25th of July,
and 21 days were required for the certificate to remain at the
Court of Review; therefore the whole of these transactions
upon which the proof was made took place at a time when
Mr. More was an uncertificated bankrupt; under these cir-
cumstances, he (Mr. Lawrance) must submit that Mr. More
was not entitled to prove.
After some further discussion the proof was admitted for
the full amount claimed.

Mr. Shultz, a stockbroker, was then called and examined
by Mr. BAGLEY, in the course of which it was stated by the
witness that he had had transactions to the extent of thousands
of pounds with various persons, and that the bankrupt was
the most punctual of all.
Upon the part of Mr. Ripley, a stockbroker. an adjourn-
ment of the case was prayed for under these circumstances:
Mr. Ripley was a creditor for 5,0001., being the result of a
loss upon Birmingham and Oxford shares, occasioned, as
was alleged, by Emanuel Daniell, who, it was stated, had
represented his scrip buyer to be a man of fortune, but had
always refused to disclose his name. Upon going, however,
to the office of the official assignee (Mr. Edwards) a bond of
Lord Ventry's for 7,0001. being mentioned in the bankrupt's
proceedings, and the same having been shown to Mr. Ripley,
it was concluded that the bankrupt, being the brother of
Emanuel Daniell, was his employer, and hence the trial to
prove against the estate.
The bankrupt then denied having employed his brother in
any such transaction.
Mr. LAWRANCE objected to an adjournment under such
circumstances, and the Court concurred.
Mr. BAGLEY and Mr. LAWRANCE having been heard pro
and con,
His HoNourt said that he did not consider that More
stood in the position of a creditor entitled to much favour.
The bankrupt had stated on a former occasion, that More
would be unable to prove himself a creditor against this
estate, but it appeared to him (the Commissioner) that he
was a creditor. Upon the last occasion. also, the bankrupt
stated that he had nothing to do with West Riding shares,
but it appeared that he had, and he now sought to excuse
himself, by stating that he was merely agent. But for the
speculation in cotton, his Honour could not perceive how
the bankrupt could have come here at all. This Court would
be slow to tempt traders from legitimate speculation, if they
did not go too far, and in the present case, the objection ap •
peared to be, that the bankrupt had been trading out of his
avocation as a trader, and it also appeared that he had been
speculating in that which a trader ought not. In order to
show traders that they were not to enter into illegitimate
speculation, incurring losses, and then enter into one or two
legitimate speculations for the purpose of coming into this
Court, and being made free of all the debts, the judgment
of the Court was, that the certificate be suspended for twelve
months, with protection from month to month.