The Sun.
London, England, 1824-11-06 00:00:00

LAW PROCEEDINGS.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 5.
IN RE LATII‘iSf, A BANICRUPT. •
Mr. SHADWELI, was heard in reply on this case. He con-,
tended that 3lr. de Tastet's refusal to sign the certificate of the
bankrupt was founded upon no rational grounds, and that, it ap.e
peared from Mr. de Tastet's examinations before the Com Mis...
sinners, that the violent prejudice which he had conceived
against thehankrupt was wholly capricious. The transactions-
between the lirni of Latham and Parry and Mr. de Ttetet had
been entirely conducted by Parry; the frauds by which Mr. de
Tastet had suffered so great a loss were committed by Parry,
not only without die • co-operation, 'but without the knowledge'
of Latham, whom Mr. de Tastet never saw until after the frauds
had been discovered, and Parry had abseonded. This fact Mr.
de Tastet stated himself. He said, in his examination, that he
never saw Latham until after his loss; and he added, " If I
had seen him, I should never have lost sixpence; there is disc=ie
mulation in his very face' and if I had once looked upon him, T
would nut have trusted him. His complexion is enclave/we,
and be bas the countenance of a conspirator. Ile eift'telseriLs
gave an occotint of the transactions between Latham and Parry
and himself, Ina manner whimsical enough, but in which the
motives he attributed to Latham were supported by nothing
but his own fancy. He said, " I am not. very fond of bills in
Chancery, bet I like good bills of exchange when they are ac-
cepted by responsible persona. Parry discovered this predilec-
tion of mine, and brought me bills of exchange to discount,
whiCh I always received from him with an agreeable smile. Upon
this a scheme was laid, of which I believe that Latham was the
contriver and the perpetrator." Upon being asked why he ac-
cused Mr. Latham of participating in this scheme, he replied,
" I believe that he assisted Parry as Hunt assisted John
Thertell." Mr. de Tastet went on to say, he believed that
Mr. Latham, having gained his confidence, and his favours
by proeurine. him those bills to discount., of which he was so
fond, invented the plan by which Parry and Latham had gained,
and • he .had lost, so much money. " This being done, said
Mr. de .Tastet, " Latham set to work his industrious and ac-
tive Mercury; who showed himself on this occasion no unworthy
representative of the old god of thieving."
The Loan CISANCELI.OR asked, whether these were really
Mr. de Tweet's answers, or the effusions of his attorney's
poetical fancy.
Mr. S/TADWELL said they were the Impromptu replies given
by Mr: de Tastet to the questions put to him at a private meet-
ing before the Consnaissionere. The Learned Gentleman went
on to argue, that all these imputations which were cast so un-
justly by Mr. de Tastet upon Alr. Latham were merely violent
prejudice&S which he' had adopted, for which there was not any
reasonable ground, but which it seemed impossible to tradicato
front his mind.
The Lonsi CHANCELLOR' said, that although they displayed
considerable irritation, it was such as would naturally enough
be created in the mind of a man who had sustained such exten-
sive losses by the frauds which had been practised upon him.
Mr. S'FIADWELL resumed his argument, and insisted upon
the hardship which Mr. Latham had already endured. He had
been ee- 12 years ei bankrupt, prevented front again embarking
in trade, deprived of the whole of his property by the same
frauds under which Mr. de Tastet had suffered, and in which
there was no particle of evidence that he had shared. All that
could be alleged against him at the moat was, that he had been
negligent ; and when it was considered how necessary it mast
always be for persons engaged in mercantile concerns to repose
the fullest tonlidence in their partners, he trusted this would
form a sufficient excuse for that negligence. The anxiety and
privations which he had endured for so many years, made him
the fittest object for the exercise of that wise and merciful
power which the Legislature had thought fit, now for the first
time, to vest in the Lord Chancellor, and the Learned Counsel
confidently hoped that his client's certificate would be granted,
and that he would have the benefit of the laws under the opera-
tion of which he had so long suffered.
The Loan CIIANEELLOR.—Before I can come to any de-
cision on this case, I must read again the examinations which
have been so often alluded to in the course of this discussion.
The painful and important duty which under the new Act of
Parliament, I am called upon to exercise requires on my part
the utmost caution and deliberation. Before file passing that
Act, the conduct of bankrupts had often been such as to call for
the animadversion of every person who had an opportunity of
observing it; and, to give too much reason for the complaints
made by creditors against the state of tke law which permitted
such bankrupts to go free. These complaints were often made
personally to me., by individuals who did not know that I had
then no means of remedying an evil, the existence of which I
regretted at least as much as any other person. The greatest
scoundrel in the world upon becoming bankrupt, if lie could
succeed in prevailing upon a certain proportion of the persons
who claimed debts against him, to sign his certificate, and if he
duly submitted himself to the operations of the bankrupt laws,
Was sure to procure release from his engagements of every kind.
The Chancellor had no power to withhold his certificate, and it
haS been ruled from this chair, over and over again, that the'
person who filled it had no right to look at the past conduct of
the bankrupt, however dishonest and atrocious it might have
been. I have known many men become bankrupt whose con-
duct has been as immoral, and who have as fully merited the '
heaviest penalty of the law, as thosecriminals upon whom in its
just severity the law has inflicted the punishment of death. Fre-
quently,
instances of the following kind have come before tne
Petsons reposing full confidence in the integrity of agents,
ecailiv in whom
wm
havehn
have confided to their hands large sums of money, for the pur-
pose of having them invested in the funds. These agents have
represented to the persons so trusting them that they have
obeyed their directions. They have punctually
this
: subject;psi at
nh
d even
e
divi-
dends on the days when theyanbxe
happeningietcany te
o
ifneltthtebeemvesicalvoc csf e r° a
l
anyfree froni all anxiety on this subject; and even
'in the eventof any
misfortunethe persons
irisaprinn
they had confided, they have congratulated themselves that
from
they had escaped the shipwreck in which the affidra of their
agent might happen to be involved. Then, however, comes the
disclosures that the monies have never been invested—that
the agent has dissipated them, no matter how,'—spill the un-
fortunate people find themselves suddenly stripped naked of
all their means of support, perhaps of existence. The indi.
vidual to whom the supreme administration of the bankrupt
laws was intrusted, was ton frequently obliged to, see and to
know this, without the power of preventing the fraudulent
agent from going back into the world freed front all the
weight of lus debts, from the responsibility of accounting
to the' persons he had ruined, and with increased power to
repeat the dishonesty of which he had shnwn himself ca.
pable, By the Act which has lately passed, this difficulty has
been removed. It is well known with what facility bankrupts
in general obtain their certificates ; the feelings of humanity
winch English creditors are always ready to exercise toward,
Englishmen, render them sometimes too ready to release them
front their bankruptcies. This Act of Parliament has in some
degree limited the power of the creditors, anti has given's re-
medy to that small minority of them who, upon good reasons,
shall object to the passing of -a bankrupt's certificate. It has
said that this remedy shall be just what the Lord Chancellor of
England, upon reviewing all the circumstances of the case,
shall think ht. I repeat, that in exercising this power for the
first time, I feel the necessity for a very cautious inquiry into
all the facts by which my decision must ultimately be re.
gulated. One obiervation I must make on the case, and it
is this—it has been stated,, that Mr., de Tastet's refusal
' to sign Mr. Lath:Mee certificate has been founded open
the advice of his solicitor, Mr. Lowe, who has told him
that by doing so he would let in the bankrupt's evidence
probably to the prejudice of his own debt. If Mr. Lowe
has done so, be has done wrong; Juni it is only necessary for
me to say here, that this Court would not be at a loss to know
how to deal with die debt of a creditor who refused to admit into
the investigation of it the evidence of a bankrupt. The only
View which take of my ditty under the Act is this—l must
ascertain, before I finally refuse to allow a certificate, that
the non-mascot of an individual creditor is founded upon
tational motives, arising out of some misconduct on the part
of the bankrupt. The difficulty of accurately ascertaining this
must strike every one. These motives must be entirely of a
moral nature, and it is nearly, if, not quite, impossible, that
a person, neither in the situation of debtor or creditor, shall
be able to say in every case what are and what are not sufli..
dent motives. I think it highly probable that for this reason
some vcey considerable alterations may be made in this Ass
before the month Of May next (the period et which all the
provisions' of the Act are to be in full operation), and that the
Legislature shall lay down some general rule which shall go.

vrn all possible cases, instead of leaving them to the decisiori
of any indiVidutd. Upon a principle which I always endea.
your to act upon that of saying nothing which may prejudice
the cause of any:persons whom, upon further consideration, I
shouhl i egret very iptich to have prejudiced. I decline to mato
even what is the inclination of my opinion on the present case,
If I did otherwise, that statement would go forth to the pub.:
lic; and from what is going, on •in, the world, I. have no heal.
tation In saying, that publication does much more evil than
publication can 'ever repair. I shall therefiire address myself to
the perusal of .the examinations;' feeling that I have not at pre-
sent information sufficiently accurate to gnahlo me to discharge
that great duty with which I .have been invested. "would
have the world, however, to know, that the necessity of con.
forming to the bankrupt statutes hail hitherto prevented me
from taking a view of tile precedent conduct of bankrupts, anti
that incS 1 find this restraint taken off, I will exercise my ,
power in this respect ass fully and as extensively as the case
may seem to require.

-VICE.CI-lANCELLOR COURT, Nov. 5.
The Art6,..CHANckt.t.ott was occupied this day in hearing
tition , and motions of course, which were of no public in-
.crest. •

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Now, 0„
cifosin- v. MOGRE.
This Wain question of obligation tin the part of the plaintiff
to act upon an agreement, in which he had concurred when a
minor. Benjamin Moore had left his property to his wife and
four children; subject of course to the payment of his debts.
A fainily of the name of Moore claimed 8001. An agreement
was entered into to take 4001. .The plaintiff was a minor at
the time of this agreement, and consented. But after he came
of age he'braught his action for 901., his share of the Money
'sr.:Tendered by the compromise. The ease was tried at the
Lincoln Assizes'
.before Baton Bullock., and a verdict
found for the plaintiff. Mr. Sergeant Vaughan obtained a
rule to shoW cause why a new trial should not be granted.
Messrs. CLARKE and READER this morning showed cause..
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN, for the rule, contended that the
plaintiff ought to be understood to have ratified the agreement
as soon as he became of age, hecause he did not then die--
claim it.
The COuuT thought be could not be required to difielaint
what had never legally existed.—Rule discharged.

PREROGATIVE COURT, Nov. A.
A great deal of business
,was done in this Court to-day, but
none of particular interest. ' Oneor two long depending cases
were advanced It:Stage of two: -
. MINTER V. 111.111NX.
In this case an executorship had devolved through several re-
presentatives; and Mr. Borne, the survivor of. those represen,.
tatives, was some time since called on to bring in an inventory
and account of the estate and effects of a Mr.. Elizabeth Ar.
bouin deceased; particularly as to a portion of the estate of that
lady's husband, which she, conjointly with her co-executor, had
administered, before making her own testament, of which Mr.
Borne was nominated the executor.
Dr. d. ADDAMS; on behalfof Mrs. Hunter, the daughter of
Mrs. Arbouin, objected to the declaration produced in Court in
the way of inventory, and prayed the Court to direct it to be
reformed,
• Dr. Donsow, for Mr. Borne, observed that Mr. Arbouin,
the original testator, in regard to a portion of whose property
the present question arose, died in 1303, in which year lite
widow and her co-executor took probate of his will, Now, as
this event happened so long ago, and as Mrs. Arbouin had
herself died so far back as 1800, and as the execution of the
trusta created by her will, on the part of Mr. Burne and his co.
executor (now &Ceased), had never 1)0h-re-been' objected to by
any of the other numerous kindred and legatees of Mrs. Ar-
bourn, the Learned Counsel contended it was too much to call
on his client for any greater specification of the first estate
(Mr. Arbouin's) than he had rendered many years ago, to the
satisfaction of all parties except the applicant. It might also
' be fairly contended that this Court had no jurisdiction, or but
a very feeble one, to refuse or reject an inventory furnished in
compliance with its assignation. in a case reported in 6th
Maule and Selwyn, p. 406, entitled " Henderson v. French,"
it was held by the common Law Court, that a prohibition would
lie to the Consistory Court of London, compelling it to receive
1 an Inventory ' • for the office of that Court was merely ministerial.
The Learned Counsel, under all the circumstances, prayed that
this party might be dismissed.
Sir iOLIN NICHOLL said, the dictum which had just been
referred to, applied only to a case for which an Act, of Perlis-
I ment had already provided, and wherein the original suit was
' brought by a creditor. The Court proceeded to state the facts
out of which the present question arose; observing, that Mr.
Burne had positively sworn in his affidavit, " that no other of
the goods, chattels, credits, or effects of the first deceased's
estate (Mr. Arbouin) had come to his knowledge or into his
possession, save and except such as he had already accounted
1 for and paid over at. the times and to the parties mentioned in
1 certain accounts therein referred to." Now, unless the other
party could show some reasonable ground of belief that this
solemn averment was untrue, the Court could not fairly call on
I Mr. Borne, at this great distance of • time, for any more de.
1 tailed specification of the effects of the first estate than was'
contained in his present declaration. The Court, having no
1 such grounds; before it, dismissed Mr. Borne from all further
'l observance of justice in the suit, &c.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, LINCOLN'S-INN.

FIELDS, Nov. 6.

This being the clay to which the Court adjourned its sittings,
it was to have resumed them to-day at the new Court in Por-
tugal-street ; but that building not being quite finished, and
the smell from the paint strongly offensive, Mr. Commissioner
HARRIS selected the large room .belonging to the office of the
Court, at No. 33, Lincoln's-inn-fields, and held the Court
there, where he will also hold it to-morrow ; but as this place
not sufficiently commodious, he directed public notice to be
given that the,Court will sit on Monday next at the Old Miley.
!lent!/ Kolbe was opposed by Messrs. Por.t.oc x and Cooxt,
for several creditors, A preliminary objection, involving or
point of somkimportance, was raised against the petition, un.
der the new Act, which, amongst other things, enacts that.
every prisoner petitioning this Court shall be in actual custody
within the walls of the prison at the time of presenting, sue
petition, and during all the proceedings thereon, and not within
any rules or liberties thereof. This Act came into operation
on the lit of September.' It appeared by the affidavit of the
solicitor of one of the opposing creditors, that he met the instil.
vent on the 23th of September, after he had filed his petition,
in the Borough-road, when he told him that •he bad receive
leave of the officer of the prison (King's Bench) to go to pro-
cure particular medical advice relative to a cone Taint under
which he was labouring at the time. The insolvent, being
examined on this subjecrtated that he merely went to the
doctor's house direct, anack again to the prison, that he had
been in custody within the walls from the time of his arrest,
and had never stopped one night out of it during that period.
Air. lit:ATl', for the insolvent, argued that there had bete
no breach here of the condition required by the Act; the object
of which was to disentitle persons who were not in actual ens.
tody, but living perfectly at their ease in some of the streets
within the rules, to receive any benefit from it. The Insolvent
had not been enjoying the rules of the prison; he had been in
close confinement, and bad not been outside the walls except en
this one occasion, when he went, with leave of the officer (for
without it he could not have got out), to procure necessary me-
dical advice.
- Mr. ,l'or.Locit contended, that the insolvent had violated
the condition imposed by the Act, of remaining in actual
custody.
Mr•Voolr. argued still further, tht if the insolvent had
even. gone out on a day rate in term tinilf, lie • would hot have
cOmplied with the condition of the Act.
The CouitT was not disposed to go that length with the
Learned Counsel.
Mr. it n havine. replied,
rt. _ _

Mr. Commissioner liAltßlti (being the only Commissioner
present) said, as the point was an important one, he should
direct the case to be adjourned, until it could be argued beton,
the full Court.

Mr. II EAT u said, that as it was possible the pohit might ul-
timately
.he decided against him, and his client have to begin,
over again by applying for leave to tile a new petition, it would
only be subjecting him to a couple of months' additional im-
prisonment. lie would therefore pray the judgment of the
Court at once.
Vommissioner ll.aania said, that since lie must decide
according to his present impression he must order the petition
to be dismissed. even' though the insolvent had the pokes
leave for going out, that did not prevent it, since he went vo.
luatarily, from being a breach of legal cuatody.—Petition
missed.