The Sun.
London, England, 1856-11-24 00:00:00

THE ROYAL BRITISH BANK.

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.
LEE V. AITCHESON.

This morning Vice-Chancellor Kindersley gave
judgment in this important case, which was in effect to
decide the question in whom the right to distribute the
funds was vested amongst the creditors and depositors.
In his opening observations, his Honour alluded to the
circum3tances that had led to the present proceedings,
and also to the different motions that bad been made in
the cause. The present proceedings involved a new legal
point, and on a late occasion he bad noticed the fact,
but it was not the wish of either party that it should
be settled by an action at law, and he, therefore, had
undertaken to settle the point as far as it was possible for
him to do so. His Honour then at great length alluded to
the intention and effect of the Winding-up Act with respect
to proceedings like the present, and said the first question
he was called upon to decide was, in whom was vested
the legal title to the effects and estates of the Royal
British Bank ? and in viewing the whole of the circum-
stances connected with this case, he could come to no
other conclusion than that the legal right was vested in
the official assignee under the bankruptcy. The second
question he had to decide was, whether there was any
grounds upon which this Court was called upon to in-
terfere with the legal right of the official assignee in the
distribution of the funds. He did not see that there was
any equitable right for such interference with respect to
the property of the bank. Snob, therefore, would be
the decision of the Court. This being his judgment the
nex‘, thing that bad to be considered was the books and
papers at present in the hands of the official manager.
Now having decided that the proceedings are to be gone
on with in bankruptcy, he thought the whole of the
books, papers, &c., at present in the hands of Mr.
Harding ought to be given up, and he should make an
order to that effect, because if he did not do so, he did
not see that any proceeding that might be instituted
for their recovery could be successfully resisted, and,
having arrived at the decision he had done, and which
he bad already mentioned, he thought he was bound to
render every assistance in his power to effect a
speedy settlement of the affairs of the bank. In
making this order be should direct the expenses
incurred by the official manager, Mr. Harding,
to be ascertained, and deducted from the funds already
in hand. The injunction that had been obtained by the
learned counsel for the keeping the proceedings of the
bank in state quo until the decision of the Court was
given with respect to the authority of the official
assignee and the official manager was decided, and
would therefore now be dissolved. Then there remained
the question whether any contempt had been committed
by Mr. Lee and Mr. Johnstone. There could be no
doubt that whenever a receiver had been appointed by
this Court, and that receiver was interfered with by cer-
tain persons, those persons would be guilty of contempt,
and this Court would always punish that contempt and
vindicate its authority. Mr. Lee and Mr. John
after h
stone
hade
haddi been sturbedMr.
Harding in his possession,
appointed
by
this Court,
and therefore they had committed a contempt.
The proper course for those persons to have pursued
would have been to have applied to this court to ascer-
tain whether their authority was sufficient, and had it
been so, they would have been justified in acting as they
had done. But they had acted otherwise, and there
could be no doubt but that both Mr. Lee and Mr.
Johnson had been guilty of contempt, but he thought
that contempt was committed more through not being suffi-
ciently informed than any other circumstance -
, and, tak-
ing into consideration that all steps against Mr. Harding
in the Bankruptcy Court had been withdrawn, that jus-
tice would be satisfied by the Court in this instance
passing over the proceedings. The payment of the costs
of the rule nisi would be paid out of the estate.
In reply to an observation of Mr. Rolt,
His Honour said he should not make an order for the
immediate banding over of the funds in hand by Mr.
Harding. The expenses properly incurred in the col-
lecting and realising the assets would have to be ascer-
tained, and atter that had been done then would be the
proper time to make the order.

A discussion here took place relative to the payment
of certain other expenses, in which his Honour observed
that the struggle in the present case was not so
much as to the speedy distribution of the funds,
but as to who should receive the percentage. He

should therefore make no immediate order for

handing over the money, as the legal expenses of Mr.
Harding must be ascertained and paid before the money

passed from the authority •f this court.
Sir F. Kelly addressed a few remarks to the court
relative to an appeal before the Lords Justices, but no
permission being necessary it was not noticed by his
Honour.

The appeal is to be made to the Lords Justices imme•
diately, but his Honour refused to make any order bind-

ing the court not to part with the money of the bank
until that appeal was disposed of,

During the delivery of the judgment by the Vice-
Chancellor the court was densely crowded, and the
greatest excitement prevailed during the whole of the
proceedings.