The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-18 00:00:00

A BANKRUPT•

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment in this matter,
which was argued on Saturday last. John Jacks.tiard-
well had bee❑ summoned before one of the Commissioners
of Bankrupts to give an account of the way in which be
became possessed of some goods removed from the house
of the bankrupt. He was then fully examined, and the
examination was resumed and continued on the 11th of
January before the same Commissioner, and the answers
of the witness appearing to him unsatisfactory, the
Learned Commissioner committed him to the custody of
a Messenger until he should be brought before a subdivi-
sion Court. Being afterwards brought before a subdi-
vision Court, he was asked whether be could give any
further explanation of the transaction, or whether he
would abide by his former examination ; and he said he
had nothing further to add, but would abide by his an-
swers as already given by him. The subdivision Court
then committed him, and he was brought up here on his
petition praying to be discharged from that commitment.
The warrant of the subdivision Court, after reciting that
the prisoner was examined as to a colourable purchase and
removal of goods belonging to the bankrupt, set forth
the whole of the questions and answers—and it appeared
that the witness was told of the charges touching which
he was examined, anti the language used to him was not
detrimental but useful, as giving him a knowledge of the
charges. There was nothing, therefore, in the objection
to the commitment on that ground. After some further
remarks his Lordship thought the witness must be dis-
charged, and that the costs should be paid (suvequent to
the making out of the commitment) out of the estate.
The COURT rose at four o'clock.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEB. 17.

LAWRIE V. DARBY.

.. •
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL appeared for the phintiff;
and Mr. F. Poi.Locx for the defendant. . .

--
This was an action of trover to recover some trinkets
alleged to be the property of the plaintiff, and unlawfully
retained by the defendant. The plaintiff had been the
second husband of the defendant's mother. There were
no children by this second marriage, and the defendant
was the only offspring of the first marriage. At his mo-
ther's death, she gave the trinkets in quest'on to the de-
fendant's wife; hot there was no proof that she did so
with the assent of her husband. A demand and refusal
were proved, so as to entitle plaintiff, in point of form,
to maintain the anion ; and :t was shown that the parties
had been before a judge, on a summons taken out by the
plaintiff, to stay proceedings on the delivering up of some
i.f the articles demanded. For the defence, it was urged,
that the plaintiff had affirinkd the gift of his wife,
'Although, in the first instance, it.had not been made with
his assent.

Tile LORD CHIEF JUSTICE suggested that there really
was no legal d.-fem'e to the action, and, at his recommenda-
tion, terms offered by the Solicitor-General were accepted.
A verdict was taken fur the plaintiff—Damages, 201. to
be reduced to l s. on the trinkets being given up.

This case was enlivened by the following incident ;
An old Scotch woman in the gallery, in the course of the
Solicitor• General's reply, either recognising with delight
the voice of her countryman, or being interested for one
of the parties (the plaintiff it may be presumed ftom the
❑ame), exclaimed aloud, " Tue Scotchtnan's right—l'll
stand up for the &veil!" She was desired to be silent ;
but her national fervour could not be repressed, It broke
out in repeated exclamations of the same kind. The
Court was in some confusion. Every one rote from his
seat.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, and several gentlemen in
the front, uttered the question, " What is the tcatter ?"
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, leaning from the B-mela
towards the Learned Solicitor-General, answered, " Oh,
it is only a junior of yours in this cause."
The officers were then ordered to take the old woman
out of Court, unless she woulif promise to be quiet. She
refused to promise, and was removed from the Court.