The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-08 00:00:00

- • Etilkes
LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Anus, 7.
( Before Sir C. F. \Yuma )
JOHN DAVID I.ODER'S BANKRUPTCY.
This was the. day named to take the choice of assignees
against the estate of this bankrupt, who is described as a
• musical publisher, and musical instrument maker, of Bath,
but is better known as a leader, &c., in the musical circles;
and he appeared before the Court and ascribed his insolvency
to the great falling off in his professional income. The debts
proved were small in amount, the total at this sitting only
amounting to 2,300/.
Mr. T.Tomkinson, of Dean-street, Soho, Middlesex, piano-
forte manufacturer, and Mr. William Collard, of Cheapside,
musical instrument maker, were chosen the assignees at the
conclusion of the proceedings.
(Before Mr. Commissioner EVA NS. )
THOMAS HAMLET'S BANKRUPTCY.
This was also the choice of assignees against the bankrupt
estate of Hamlet, the jeweller arid goldsmith, of Prince's-
street, Leicester-square, and the Court was exceedingly
crowded with creditors. This failure created a good deal of
astonishment in the money circles, he being considered a very
wealthy individual. A very great number of the proofs ten-
dered were on hills of exchange, the acceptances of the bank-
rupt, which were in many instances negotiated at an enor-
mous rate of discount.
A proof was tendered on a balance of discount and other
transactions with the bankrupt, by Mr. Holditch, of Long-
acre, for the sum of upwards of 6,0004, which was sought to
be impugned by Mr. Twells, who appeared for the petitioning
creditor, as an usurious transaction ; the Learned Counsel en-
deavouring to extract from one of the claimant's clerks in
the course of examination, and from the bankrupt, that an
understanding existed between the parties, that when the hills
became due they should be renewed, 40 per cent. being taken
as the rate of discount.
The bankrupt said, 40 per cent. was the rate of discount on
which the business was done, and if he found he could not pay
them when they fell due, they were to be renewed. It was not
understood that when they fell due they would be as a matter
of course renewed.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS said the proof under the law must
be admitted. It could not he resisted.
It then appeared that there was a contested choice, and
Mr. Twells said he had to imply to the Court for an ad-
journment of the choice of assAiees, founded upon what had
transpired with respect to Mr. Holditch's proof. That gentle-
man was named in the opposition list with two others, as as-
signees to this estate, and he was instructed that many sig-
natures had been obtained in favour of that list before these
circumstances came out (the obtaining of 40 per cent. dis-
count on moneys advanced, and 40 per cent. upon the renewal
of the bills given as security for those advanced) which had
they been known would have been withheld. There were
160,0001. debts, and to-day not more than 30,000/. was
proved, and he thought the Court would, under the circum-
stances, adjourn the choice to give the bona
„fide creditors the
opportunity of influencing the choice.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS had never heard such a ground
assigned for an adjournment. It was all legal.
Mr. Twells—lt is also legal to adjourn the choice for the in-
terest of the creditors.
Air. Commissioner EVANS—They have now equally the
same interest to look after the affairs of the estate, and get the
most they can. I cannot adjourn the choice.
The assignees chosen were Mr. Chaffers, silversmith, of
Queen-street, Cheapside : Mr. John Houlditch, of Long-acre,
coach-builder ; and Ms. J. Howard, of Leicester-square
builder.

It was stated in the course of the day that the theatre cost
between 40,000/. and 50,0001., and that it was the immediate
although far from being the sole, cause of Mr. Hamlet's
fa: lure.
• Mr. Holditch begged to state in explanation of the observa-
tions of the Learned Counsel, that in the first instance the rate
of discount was only 5 per cent., and afterwards increased to
40 per cent.
Mr. Commissioner EVA NS said he. had understood the bank-
rupt to say it was 40 per cent. He could be asked the ques-
tion. (To the bankrupt. )--How was it ?
The bankrupt corrected himself. At first it was 5 per cent.
and afterwards it was increased to 40 per cent.
Amongst the claims admitted were Mr. Howard (who built
the bankrupt's theatre in Oxford-street), 6,5641. ; Grace and
Co,, decorators, 2,300/. ; Mr. R. Clarke, (about) 3,0001. ;
Mr. Chaffers, 2,7401. ; Mr. Miller, 2,000/. ; Mr. Jacobson,
1,130/. ; Mrs. Green ( Henrietta-street), 1,450/. ; Mr. Sa-
muels, Bury-street, 1,150/. ; the agent of the Duke of Port-
land (for rent for the theatre), 3001.; and Mr. George Robins
(balance of account), 1,630/.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, AnaL 6.
(Before Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS.)
IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD COOKE.
The insolvent in this case applied to be discharged
under the benefit of the Act. He resided at No. 1, Bath-
street, City-road, where lac carried on business as an apo-
thecary and druggist.
It appeared that, in the year 1832, he borrowed from
his mother, Mrs. Mary Cooke, the sum of 2001., to secure
the repayment of which a warrant of attorney was exe-
cuted to her. With this money be commenced business in
the above premises., and continued until 1837, when,
meeting with some difficulties, he borrowed various sums
of money, among which was 1401. front a person named
Pursden, who got the lease of the house as security. In
March, 1840, becoming still further embarrassed, Mrs.
Cooke caused the power of attorney to be put in force
against hit property, and the lease, good-will, and fixtures
being sold for 300/., she received 1601. in part payment of
her demand, end the balance was given to Mr. Pursden,
who then handed the lease over to the new purchaser.
The insolvent being opposed by the detaining creditor
in person, Mrs. Cooke was called, and subjected to a very
strict cross-examination by the Commissioner, to establish
the validity, or otherwise, of the warrant of attorney.
She stated that she was seventy-three years of age, and
having advanced all she possessed in the world to set her
son up in business, if other creditors took precedence of
her, she would have no resource left but to seek refuge in
a workhouse.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS—How many persons did
the insolvent's family consist of ? Witness—A lady
named Cannon and her two children lodged in the house
with us.
COMMISSIONER—Who is Mrs. Cannon ? Witness (after
some hesitation)—l don't know; she is at present in York-
i shire ; she used to pay 12e. a-week for her lodgings.
COMMISSIONER—I don't see this sum entered in the
schedule.
Mr. WO3DRUFFE said he was instructed to state that
insolvent.
the cohabited with the female alluded to, but
being in practice as a medical man it was necessary that
appearances should be kept up ; their intimacy was there-
fore kept a secret from even Mrs. Cooke, and Mrs. Can-
non lived in the house as a lodger, the insolvent giving
her 12s. every week to pay to the old lady as rent, that
she might not be aware of her real character. The
Learned Gentleman then contended at length that the
document under which the insoivent's property was seized
was bone fide, and not for the purpose of excluding the
other numerous creditors.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS commented on the facts
of the case, and ordered the insolvent to be remanded fJr
six months.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

NEW COURT.
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)
John Porter, 23, who was described as a labourer, but
who, it aeoeared, was a reporter and book-keeper to
Mr. John Roberts, the proprietor of one of the Chester-
field newspapers (the name did not transpire), was in-
dicted for having feloniously stole:a six printed books,
two pocket books, three paper knives, and thirty-six
pencils,having been stolen out of the shop of the prosecutor.
Mr. PHILLIPS conducted the case for the presecutior,
the prisoner defended himself.
Mr. Roberts, the first witness called, staled that he was
a bookseller and stationer, and lived in Chesterfield. The
prisoner carte into his service in September, 1839. He
gave him notice to leave him on the Gth of February,
1641. The notice was a month's notice, bat before that
time had expired, the prisoner left his house suddenly
and without his knowledge The witness missed him
on the 24th of February ; ho did not come as usual.
A few days afterwards the witness received a letter by
post in the hand writing of the prisoner is the following
effect :—" Sir, by the time you receive this I shall have
put an end to my existence, begun in misery and ended
in sorrow. No effort will discover me. Your account
I have lent to my brother, who will discharge it with
ct'sers." He witness, from information he received, pro-
ceeded to London on the Ist of Hard, and on the 21
went to Gray's Inn Coffee-house. While he was there
the prisoner came into the coffee-room with a companion,
and the witness directly gave him into custody. The witness,
the officer, and the prisoner proceeded to the lodgings
of the prisoner, where he recognised his property. All
the books had a private mark on them. From further in-
formation the witness proceeded to Pickforcl's wharf, and
there found a box waiting for the prisoner. h was opened,
and several books, &c., the property of the witness, were
discovered. This box was taken to the station-house, and
the witness there further searched it, and discovered three
dozen black-lead pencils, his property. Two of the books
were out of the circulating library belonging to the wit-
rest. None of the books or other articles were ever sold
by the witness to the prisoner.
Cross-examined by the prisoner—What was my general
charact_r? IVitness-1 can't say particularly. If I an-
swer that question it may not tend to your advantage.
What was my general character up to the Ist January ?
—I had some suspicion, but I was averse to entertain the
opinion in consequence of your station.
Why were your verse to entertain that opinion ?—I have
just told you.
Why did you entertain the opinion?—Because I thought
you had embezzled s me money.
What situation did I hold ?—You were a preacher
amongst the NVesleyans, and from that circumstance I was
averse to entertain a bad opinion of you.
Now, Sir, I ask you what character I bore up to the Ist
of January, 1641 ?
The COURT-- You had better not press this question—
it will only tend to your disadvantage.
Prisoner (with energy)—l will, my Lord ; I have no-
thing to fear from it.
The prisoner then went on to cross-examine the witness
at some length on a sutject not bearing sm the case, and
on being informed by the Court that it would benefit him
nothing, he desisted, and returned to the facts.
Prisoner—Will you undertake to screar that you did not
sell me these books? Witness—l will.
The witness here produced a list which it seemed had
been taken from the day bock of the witness, and con-
tained articles, which the prisoner bad entered on his own
account in the day book, and the prisoner requested that