The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, DECEMBER 20. 1841

That was in 1833 ?—lt was.
When you speak of extensive business, do you mean
with the Earl of Egremont, or after that time 2=Exten-
sive business for the Earl of Egremont, containing works
of the greatest value in the kingdom. My business with
the Earl of Egremont was one of the sources, and the prin-
cipal source, from which I derived my pecuniary means.
That is what I say, and I want to know if the 7001.
did not come from the Earl of Egremont ?—Not by any
means.

Then I understand you to say that you will not ven-
ture to say that 1,000/ was not paid to you by the Earl
of Egremont ?—I will not venture to say so, but there
is no evidence. •
I have not asked you about what evidence there is, the
Court will settle that. Will you tell the Court where
you got the 700/. from ?—Let the books be produced,
Be good enough to tell me of one source you got that
700/. from ?—I want to produce the accounts and pass-
books of the bankers, that will show the dates.
I ask you to point out the works?—lnsolvent, with
warmth—l do not wish to say anything of myself, but
you are obliging me to do so; but, Sir, I was a distin-
guished artist.
I do not doubt this, and I am sorry to see you in your
present position.
I am obliged to you, Sir; but, if the late Earl of Egre-
mont had been living, I should not have been here now.
Now, tell me where you got that 700/P—l cannot say.
You desired Messrs. Wigney to mark the items of those
cheques of the Earl of Egremont paid into their hands
for you ?—I did, that I might render the account to the bill
filed in Chancery.
Some items were received from Call and Co., and paid
into Masterman and Co.?—Yes, I paid some of them
myself into Masterman and Co.
Here are two cheques of the 16th May, 1835, for
600/. Did you receive that from Lord Egremont 7—Yes.
You have 500/. paid into your account at Wigney's.
Was it out of the amount of the cheque ?—Yes ; I
should suppose so from the date.
Here is a cheque of the 9th November, 1836, for 250/.
on Call and Company. Did you receive that also ?
I have no recollection how I received that amount.
Do you remember applying et that period to Lord
Egremont to prevent you from being arrested P-1 do
not recollect.
Do not you recollect paying a sum of 8001. to a Mr.
Stephens, and did not Lord Egremont give you the money
to meet your debt to Stephens ?—I cannot recollect; but
I remember I did owe a sum to Mr. Stephens in conse-
quence of an accommodation to a friend.
Did you not, at the period in question, make an appli-
cation to Lord Egremont while he was sick in bed to re-
lease you from the claim ?—I do not think I ever did.
I owed too much to Lord Egremont to make such an ap-
plication under such circumstances.
Did you ever make such an application ?—I never did,
to the best of my recollection ; but I will not pledge
myself.
Do you know Mrs. Greenfield ?—Yes ; she was the
nurse attending on Lord Egremont.
Do you remember his Lordship having been raised up
in his bed to sign a cheque for you 7—No ; I do not.
Do you ever recollect having gone to Lord Egremont
for assistance in tears ?—I remember his Lordship wrote
to me to come to visit him on his birth-day if I expected
to see him alive. That was, I believe, the 18th of Dec.
1836. Then perhaps I might have been in tears in con-
sequence of the state of his Lordship's health. But when
I went in I found him up and sitting in his chair.
I want to know whether you never appeared before
his Lordship in tears on a very different account. Did
you not appear before him on one occasion in tears,
stating that you were about to be arrested in consequence
of your having accommodated a friend?—l have no recol-
lection of such a fact.
Was he not propped up by a pillow on one occasion
when he wrote you a cheque, and when he added—
" Then when I am gone you will go to the dogs."—
Never ; I do not think Lord Egremont was capable of
saying such a thing.
I believe that when you brought the action, it was to
recover the sum of 33,007/. 18s. ld.—Yes.
In filing your bill did you give any credit for the re-
ceipt of any sum?—l believe I did.
In the bill filed against you we find you give credit for
the receipt of 421 in 1833 7—Yes.
And I find no more credited to Lord Egremont in
1833 in the bill.—Yes ; that is the only sum. I gave a
reply to the bill filed by the advice of Mr. Merryman.
I gave him every possible information ; but as Messrs.
Call and Co. had refused to let me see their books I
was unable to give such full information as I could have
desired. Messrs Call and Co. refused to show me the
cheques I had received without the permission of Colonel
Wyndham. I wrote to Colonel Wyndham on the sub-
ject, but Mr. Charles Murray, who was the agent for
Colonel Wyndham refused to give me access to the
papers ; and that is the reason, I apprehend, why the
421 formed the only sum for which I have given credit
in 1833.
I understand you had inspected certain cheques at
Mr. Murray's with your solicitor ?—Yes.
Look at this cheque of 1,0001, dated in 1833, and tell
me whether you had not seen that cheque before you filed
your bill ?—I will not venture to say I had or I had not.
It might have been one of the cheques shown to me ; but
I cannot swear.
How does it happen that, in the schedule you filed in
this Court, you give credit for 1,0001., which, in your an-
swer to the bill filed against you in Equity, you only
gave credit for 42/. ?—I found I had been mistaken on
the subject, by comparing the dates of the cheques with
the entries in Wigney's book.
Had you not Wigney's account at the time you filed
your answer ?—I had not looked over the account ; I
cannot answer for the legal proceedings taken in my name.
In your answer in the Equity
.Court, you admit the
receipt of 1,000/. only, while, in your answer to the
schedule filed in this Court, you admit the receipt of
2,260/. How do you account for that P—l found out the
additional sum by looking over Wigney's account.
Mr. COOKE here objected to the course of examination
pursued in inquiring into the correctness or incorrect-
ness of documents filed in Chancery, while the Court
had only to deal with the bill filed in that Court.
Mr. PLATT having contended that he had a perfect
right to show that the insolvent had already been guilty,
to say the least of it, of equivocation before another Court,
The COURT decided that they could not then deal with
the proceedings of the insolvent in another cause.
Examination continued by Mr. PLATT.—I find from
the pass-book that you had paid into your banker the
sum of 2,1591, while your schedule acknowledges only
1,5001 Where did the remainder of the 2,159/. come
from ?—I raised money by bills, and I received 8001.
from Mr. Dodd.
What did you do with the money you received from
Mr. Dodd ?—I find I paid in 7001. at Masterman's in
May, 1833, and that might have been part of the 8001 '
I received from Mr. Dodd.
Might not the 700/. have been part of 1,0001 you re-
ceived at the very time from Lord Egremont ?—lt might
have been. I cannot say from which source the
.700/.
came.
Did you pay off the SOOL, and, if so, how did you pay
it ?—I gave Mr. Dodd a mortgage on my house for the
debt, and Lord Egremont gave me the money to redeem
the mortgage. Lord Egremont wrote me a cheque for
1,800/. I was then about to leave the room, when his
Lordship said, " Have you that cheque safe 7—take
care of it." I then looked at the cheque, and finding it
was for 1,8001 instead of 8001, which I had asked for,
I told his Lordship so. He said that did not m atter, and '
asked me whether I was not satisfied. I said T wanted
8001. only for a specific purpose ; and he then threw the
cheque into the fire, and wrote me one for 800/.
Did you pay backl the money to Lord Egremont ?
No ; I never had an account with Lord Egremont. The
money I received from him was for my subsistence.
I observe you state in your schedule that you received
from Lord Egremont the sum of 2,260/. in 1834. How
did you make up that amount P-1 made it up from my
account with Wigney ; the cheques were produced to me
with a memorandum on the back of them. I have no
doubt my attorney will show the documents necessary to
establish the account. Besides Wignev's account there
were the cheques which have been shown me by Lord
Egremont's executors.

-Can you specify what are the documents which en-
abled you to fix upon that particular sum of 2,2601. ?—I
find here a cheque for 1,0001., and I have no doubt the
remaining 1,2601. will be accounted for by the various
documents now before the Court.

Specify the particular documents from which you
derived the information.—l derived the information
from the account with Wigney, and on compa-
rison of the dates of the cheques charged against
me in the trial at Lewes. On r.-ferring to th e dates
I found I could account for the sum of 2,2601.,
having been received by me in 1834, because they- were
endorsed " payable to Jobn Carew or bearer." I made
out the account from the copy of the bill and the aitiwer.
How did you pay the sum of 1,000/. to Mr. Ferne)• ?—.
I received 1,2001. from Lord Egremont, two of which
were 5001. notes, with which I paid Ferner 1,0001. for
ground to build on. That was a gift of Lord Egremont.
I might hare paid into my banker's the remaining 2001.
I received also in the year 1834 the sum of 5001. from
my profession. _

In
the year 1835 it appears from your schedule that
you received from Lord Egremont the sum of 1,3001.
and from your profession 500/. ; then there was in addi-
tion a mortgage of 1,000/., with 2001. received for
rent ; but it appears from your pass-book that you
paid into your banker's during the year the sum of 4,4251.,
leaving a sum of upwards of 1,400/. unaccounted for.
Where did that sum come from ? Was it not received
from Lord Egremont ?—I do not think it was. I gave
the best account I could of my receipts from Lord Egre-
mont.

Will you swear that you did not receive from Lord
Egremont, during the year 1835, upwards of 3,0001.7
I will not swear ; but I have given in my schedule the
fullest amount which I could.

Did you receive from LOrd Egremont, in 1836, as
stated in your schedule, the sum of 3,5001., amd 300/.
from your profession ?—I did.
And you received in addition 2001. for rent, making
iynooalhl
a4d,Opoaoi/d.
aßtou ty iota arpbpaeor
y
of 5,815[, leaving a balance of 1,815/. unaccounted fur.
lt-sersfrdomurinogutrhepaysesa-brotohke stuhmat
how do you answer for that ?—ln the yen. 1836, I had
received bills of exchange to a considerable amount from
Joseph Germaine which made up the sum. I hav a some
of those bills, I believe, now at home. I cannot, ho wever,
say what was the amount of the bills so discounted fit 1836.
Some letters were h^re read from the insolvent to the
Earl o
ef f Egremont, acknowledging the weeipt of certain
DE xo aymolun aktoi oonw continued.
alady
of
sums money, and the obligations under which his
Lordship's kindness had placed the receiver.
at Southampton ?-Islo ; but I have heard of her.
the name of O'Keefe, residing
Did you ever write a letter to her ?- -No, never, to
the best of my recollecaon.
A letter was here read from the insol 'vent to Miss
O'Keefe, requesting her to send him any letter she might
have from Lord Egrenont relating to an altar-piece to
be erected in the Roman Catholic Chape lof Brighton.