The Sun.
London, England, 1847-10-01 00:00:00

tAiIIatUPTCY.-(riflS bAY•)
(Before Mr. Commissioner SuErnErtn).

FONDS IN BANKRUPTCY.—In this case the defendant
had been summoned to show cause why he did not
pay a debt due to the plaintiff, and in default be de-
clared a bankrupt. The defendant denied that he
owed the deist, and was called on to give a bond to
try the case. The question now ,was, whether such a
bond required a stamp, it being under an Act in con-
nexion with bankruptcy, and the Act only required
it to be a bond, to- the satisfaCtion of the Commis-
sioner.
His HONOUR said that no bonds or document in
bankruptcy required a stamp, and the question of the
validity of the bond would be decided by the Court
in which the case was tried.
The plaintiff's solicitor submitted that this was not
get a proceeding in bankruptcy, and that a stamp was
req,uisite.
The defendant's solicitor said he considered that if
it could be held that any stamp was requisite, an or-
dinary 355. stamp would be sufficient.
The plaintiff's SOLICITOR contended that it would
be an ad valorem duty on the amount of the debt
claimed.
In reply it was urged that there was no condition
in the bond for the payment of the money, but merely
to render the body of the defendant.
His HONOUR said that the bond must be complete
to be of any use or satisfactory to him, and it could
not be complete without a stamp.
The defendant's attorney said that in one case
Mr. Commissioner Holroyd required a 355. stamp,
and the case went to the Court of Review, who held
it sufficient.
His HONOUR ultimately held that the bond would
be satisfactory to him with the ordinary stamp.

BOW-STREET.—(THIS DAY.)
George Hall was placed at the bar before Mr.
Jardine on a charge of assaulting Mr. Gisling, the
publisher of the Satirist newspaper.
Mr. Gisling stated that he was the tenant of the
Satirist office, and had been so since the paper was
first conducted by Mr. Carrol. At that time Mr.
Gregory refused to let the office to Mr. Carrol, but
4_...._.:llgzeed. to let it to him (Mr. Gisling) for Mr. Carrol.
• Since Mr. Carrol's bankruptcy he (Mr. Gisling) had
conducted the paper, and of course continued to rent
the office. Mr. Gregory had been in the habit of
advancing money to him to carry on the paper, but
had recently complained of the expenses of the illus-
trations (which witness had introduced), and had
refused to advance more money unless they were
abandoned. Witness had published the last number
of the paper at his own expense, and had registered
a new paper in his own name. Yesterday Mr.
Gregory put in a distress for a quarter's rent. The
broker was accompanied by a Mr. Tims, and assisted
by half a dozen of Irish labourers, they forcibly
took possession of the premises, and turned witness
and his brother out. Considering the distress
illegal, he and his brother returned with a
reinforcement, and having expelled the broker and his
allies, again took possession of the office. A charge
of felony was then made against witness's brother
and another, by Mr. Tims, and on the way to the
station the prisoner, whom he bad not seen before,
struck one of the bystanders. He was taken into
custody and brought to the station, where it was
found that the prisoner had made a mistake, having
intended the blow for witness. Afterwards, while
they were at the station, the prisoner suddenly struck
witness a violent blow in the face.
The prisoner said that he was one of the persons
employed by the broker to take possession of the
office and expel Mr. Gisling. He had been sent out
to get some beer, and on returning found the pre-
mises in possession of the other party, and was vio-
lently assaulted by Mr. Gisling and his brother. lie
admitted that he intended the blow which he gave to
one of his own friends for Mr. Gisling, and that he
afterwards struck the latter at the station.
Mr. Gisling said that some one had attempted to
force his way in (after the expulsion of Mr. Thus and
his party), and had been beaten in the manner
described by the prisoner, but he did not remember
whether it was the prisoner or not.
Mr. JARDINE said that the alleged provocation did
not justify the assault committed by the prisoner
nearly two hours afterwards. He would sentence
him to five day's imprisonment.
George Gisling, the brother of the complainant in
the above charge, and James Cody, were then charged
by Mr. Tims with stealing two reams of paper.
Mr. Tims represented that he was the registered
proprietor of the Satirist and tenant of the office, that
he had been so for the last three months, that the
distress was against him, and that the goods were
actually his property. The alleged felony was the
taking possession of the paper, together with other
property, after the brokers were expelled.
On the part of the prisoners an invoice consigning
the paper to Mr. Gisling was produced, and also a
number of receipts for rent at various dates, signed by
Mr. Gregory as landlord, for payments made by Mr.
Gisling.
Mr. JARDINE said it was evident the prisoners had
• taken possession of the paper on the part of Mr. Gis-
ling on a claim of right, and whether that claim ss as
a just one or not, such possession was not felonious.
The complainant had no right to give the prisoners in
custody, and they must now be discharged. They
must settle the dispute elsewhere.
The prisoners were liberated, and the parties left
the Court.

MARLBRO'-STREET—(THIS DAY)
Chards Trike, a respectable-looking man, was
placed at the bar before Mr. Hardwick, charged with
embezzling the sum of 801., the property of the mem-
bers of thelJpholsterers' Institute, Great Marlborough-
street.

Mr. Gordon, from the office of Mayhew, Son, and
Reynolds, appeared for the prosecution, and stated
that the society was established for the purpose of
affording assistance to its members when out of em-
ploy, and also for literary purposes. The prisoner is
a member of the society, and held the situation of se-
cretary, for which he was paid an annual salary, and
the utmost confidence was placed in him
till the period of his present defalcations being
discovered. It was the duty of the prisoner to re•
ceive the subscriptions from the members, and to pay
all current expenses for the week. The residue, if
any, was handed over to the trustees, and by them
securely deposited in a box, to which the prisoner had
access. In consequence of some suspicions the
stewards asked the prisoner for the residue, when he
replied that Bainbridge, one of the treasurers, had it.
On that person being applied to, he denied having
received any money from the prisoner. On being
questioned, the prisoner said he had made a mistake,
and had paid it to Mr. Jones, another of the trea-
surers, who also positively denied receiving any
money from the prisoner. The prisoner's de-
falcations being so extensive, the members,
with much reluctance, felt bound to prosecute
in the present case. He (Mr. Gordon) was quite
aware that as the society was not enrolled that there
would be a legal difficulty in bringing a case home to
the prisoner. He would call two witnesses forward
who would prove paying money to the prisoner, which
had not been accounted for by him.
Mr. James Mackie stated that he was one of the
stewards of the society. On the 10th of May lest
he gave the prisoner 11. 9s. 6d. to pay over to the
treasurer, which he neglected to do, but converted to
his own use.
Mr. John Bainbridge said he was one of the trea-
sures. The prisoner had not accounted to him for the
sum received from last witness. He had exaimined the
books, and found that the money had been paid, but not
accounted for by the prisoner. Several other vbit-
nesses proved paying to the prisoner various sums,
amounting in all to 80/.
Mr. HARDWICK said, that according to the evidence
he had no doubt whatever that the prisoner had em-
bezzled the money, and that he was guilty both mo-
rally and legally. Ile was afraid, from the defective
state of the law regarding unenrolled societies, that
the prisoner would not come within the reach of the
Act set down for the guidance and regulation of be-
nevolent societies.
Mr. Gordon contended, that according to the Act
of George the Fourth, the prisoner was amenable to
the law, and quoted the case of Rex v. Nettleton.
Mood.C.C. 259, which states that a member or secre •
tary of a society who fraudulently withheld money
received from a member to be paid to trustees, was
held to be guilty of embezzlement.
Mr. HARDWICK thought that the trustees were not
so, as there was no deed of trusteeship drawn up.
They were, therefore, no more than treasurers ap-
pointed by the members for the time being.
Mr. Gordon said, that although they were called
treasurers, they were trustees de facto, though
hethough not so
literally. With the permission of the Magistrate,
would go on with another case against the prisoner,
in which he had received a sum of 55., and fraudu-
lently converted it to his own purposes.
Mr. HARDWICK said that unless a case could be
clearly established against the prisoner he must dis-
charge him. He should recommend them to get
counsel's opinion on the subject. Mr. Hardwick then
discharged the prisoner, and told him that he Nvaa
liable to be taken into custody at any other time
should the prosecutors continue the case further.
The prisoner, who appeared to feel his disgraceful
position, then left the court in a very hurried manner.

Lord and Lady John Russell still continue at
Richmond Park, and will not, it is expected, make any
further tour this year. We regret to state that his
Lordship has lately been suffering from the effects of a
severe cold.
FOLIMONE.--The Bishop of 'London, with his
lady Ewa tamity, arrived here a few days since. It was
understood to be his Lordship's intention to proceed to
Boul_.ogne and Ostend, to confirm the children of the
Esittioh resident§ ihnee—KenliA Obrcrver.