The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-10 00:00:00

EVENING,

NOVEMBER 10, 1851.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, .Nov. 8.
eq;/),,i ;11 .1
ri,-et, before Lord CAmer3FLL and
A 6
j:l2tiCeS PATTESON and Cor.rx.rno
THE QUEEN 1% GASKE'LL AND
The appellants in this case represented the subscri-
bers to the Manchester Library and News-room, who
occupied a building called the Portico, and appealed
against a rate which had been assessed upon them by
the overseers of Manchester in respect of their occu-
pation. There were 400 subscribers to the Library
and News-room, in which there were as many as
15,000 volumes, besides periodicals arid journals. The
affairs of the institution were governed by a committee.
The question now raised was whether the building
was exempt from rates within the provision of the
Exemption Act, as being a building occupied for the
purposes of literature, science, or the fine arts exclu-
sively.

Arr. PASHLEY, Q.C., on the part of the parish,
contended that there was no ground for the exemp-
tion. The rule had been laid down in the case of the
Concert-hall at Manchester (" The Queen v. Brandt"),
where it had been held that that institution was liable
to be rated. The building was used for the benefit
and convenience of the members, and not for the pro-
motion of literature, science, or the fine arts. Besides,
a news-room could not be regarded as occupied for
any of the purposes mentioned in the Act.
Mr. T. JONES, on behalf of the institution, con-
tended that this case did not resemble that of the
Concert-hall at Manchester, but rather that of the
Birmingham Library, which was held to be exempt;
and that the cultivation of the fine arts, &c., was
materially promoted •by Newspapers.
Lord CAMPBELL said it was quite clear that this
institution was not within the exemption, and he
should have been surprised if the Legislature had
passed an Act granting exemption to such places.
'The statute exempted those places only which were
established for the promotion of literature, science,
and the fine arts exclusively, and did not extend the
exemption to cases where the members derived a par-
ticular benefit to themselves. If this exemption
were allowed, there was hardly a club in London
which might not claim exemption. This was a pri-
vate society, established for the convenience and ad-
vantage of its members. There could be no doubt
that newspapers contained much valuable literature,
but they also contained matters relating to business,
to questions of profit and loss, and advertised all
sorts of commodities for purchase and sale. They
could not be said to he exclusively devoted to litera-
ture, science, or the fine arts. Under these circum-
stpnces, chiefly because the institution was formed
for the benefit of its 400 members, whose comfort
and convenience were its mai❑ object, the rate must
be affirmed.—Rate affirmed.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nov. 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner GouLnußN.)
IN RE DEARIE.

The bankrupt, R. Dearie, victualler, Charles-street,
applied for his certificate. The balance-sheet, from the
3d of April, 1848, to the 4th of May, 1849, shows the
following :—Creditors, 1,487/. ; ditto, holding secu-
rity, 513/. ; profits, 341/. ; debtors considered bad,
1541.; property held as security, 5131.; losses, 457/. ;
trade expenses, 425/. ; personal Expenses, 342/. ;
pairs, 250/. ; deficiency on the 3d of April, 1848, 1971.
Mr. Licklater supported the bankrupt, and Mr.
Innes appeared for the assignee, who offered no oppo-
sition.

Mr. LINKLATEIL trusted his Honour in this case
would grant a certificate of the scond class, as the
bankrupt had conducted himself with great propriety,
and •the official assignee's report was not unfavour-
able.

His HONOUR said there was an absence of a cash-
book. He should grant a certificate of the third
class.

IN RE BEDFORD.

This bankrupt, W. Bedford, farmer, Pen Drayton,
came up to pass his last examination. His accounts
showed that he had on the Ist of January, 1848, a
capital of 3531. He owed to creditors 371/. ; other
creditors for rent of land on which crops were grow-
ing, and not growing, 2561.; profits on farming and
sale of beer, 1,0991. liabilities, 1001.; he had good
debtors, 411.; property, 1831.; cash, 89/. ; growing
crops subject to 144/. ; rent of land, per con , 170/. ;
expenses, 1,1831.; domestic, 1531.; losses, 157/. ; re-
pairs, 89/.
Mr. COLE, for the assignees, said they were not sa-
tisfied with the accounts, but had no objection to the
bankrupt passing, reserving all question as to conduct
for the certificate meeting.—The bankrupt passed.
IN RE ISEMONGER AND ISEMONGER.
The bankrupts, R. Isemonger and P. Isemonger,
merchants, Little Hampton, came up to pass their
last examination. The balance-sheet, from January
1, 1849, to September, 18.51, shows the following :
Creditors, 3,049/. ; ditto, holding security, 1,799/. ;
profits, 5,2321.; debtors, 611/. ; property, 211/. ; pro-
perty held as security, 2,5591.; losses, 6961.; trade
expenses, 4,293/. ; house and personal expenses, 4121. ;
law costs, 116/. ; amount drawn out by R. Isemon-
ger, 82/. ; ditto by P. Isemonger, 110/. ; deficiency
on January 1, 1849, 891/.
Mr. Linklater supported the bankrupts.
Mr. LUCAS appeared for the assignees, who said
they did not oppose, but merely wished to have it set
right whether certain vessels were joint or separate
property.
P. Isemonger, upon being examined by Mr. LUCAS,
said the ships were purchased partly out of joint pro-
perty, and the rest was borrowed. He, for his father,
borrowed the money. A legal security was given in
his father's name. The ships had always been re-
gistered in his father's name alone, and mortgaged in
his father's name alone.

Mr. LUCAS had no objection to the bankrupts
piFsing, and he said the assignees considered that
there would be a surplus from the joint estate.—The
oankrupts passed.

IN RE FRENCH AND SANDS.
The bankrupts were coal factors, Coal• Exchange.
This was a last examination meeting, which was ad-
journed, as no accounts were filed. The debts and
'iabilities are said to be about 36,000/. ; assets consist
of stock-in-trade, furniture, &c., 1,3001. ; debts due to
the London house, 11,000/.; ditto, Chatham house,
6,1001.; of these about one-fourth are said to be
good, the residue doubtful and bad debts.
Mr. Lawrance supported the bankrupts.
IN RE SAMUEL.

The bankrupt, Lyon Samuel, was described as a
jeweller, of Bury-street, St. Mary-axe. This was
the last examination meeting.
Mr. Pennell, the official assignee, reported that the
bankrupt was a bankrupt in 1847, and had obtained
his certificate in 1848, at which date the present ba-
lance-sheet commenced, of course without any capital.
lie now owed to unsecured creditors 1,7811 ; ditto,
holding security, 4561. ; less estimated value of secu •
rity, 1201. ; besides which he was liable, as the drawer
of bills, to the amount of 1,6601. The net profits
were 881. The assets consisted of a bond debt, due
by a Mr. Davies, which was secured by a judgment
against his property in Wales ; but it was impossible
to say whether it would realise 1,0001. The domestic
expenses were 732/. ; law costs, 1331. There was a
banker's book and a few vouchers. His trading had
been in jewels, railway shares, and in discounting
bills of exchange. The details were not recorded in
any books, as the bankrupt was not able to keep them.
Mr. LEWIS, for the assignees, opposed the bank-
rupt's passing.

.
The COMMISSIONER said it was hie duty to ascer-
tain whether the accounts furnished were a full and
true disclosure of the bankrupt's estate and effects.
lie considered it impossible to pass the accounts as
such; were he to do so it would hold out a most mis-
chievous precedent. This man bad been bankrupt in
1847, and he must have been well acquainted with all
that was required by the bankrupt law. He obtained
his certificate in 1848, and had embarked again in
trade. None of the items in the expenditure were
vouched; in excuse he alleged he could neither read
nor write, and he made this a means of parrying the
inquiries of his creditors. The only available asset
was a debt of 1,0001., alleged to be due from a Mr.
Davies, of Carmarthen or Holy well ; but there was no
proof of the existence of such a person except by, a
letter dated from Bromley, in Kent, three days ago.
The onus lay on the bankrupt to produce this per.
son. The examination must be adjourned without
a day, with leave to the bankrupt to come up again
when prepared to substantiate the allegations in the
accounts. Protection would he granted for a month.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS.)
IN RE THOMAS DOPPING BUCHANNAN D'ARCT.
This insolvent, who described himself as " a gentle-
, man " filed a petition under the Protection Act on the
14'h of August last, and this was the day appointed
for his final examination.
On the case being called on,
Mr.Dowsx said the insolvent did not intend to
appear, and he was instructed on his behalf to apply
for the dismissal of the petition, as the description was
incorrect.

Mr. Nxertor.s said he appeared to oppose for 18
creditors ; and Mr. SARGOOD was also instructed for
two creditors.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS said the insolvent had
more opposing creditors than he had names, and he
had plenty of them.
Mr. LEWIS (of the firm of Lewis and Lewis) said
that one of his clients had come up from Scotland to
oppose the insolvent at very great inconvenience.
Mr. DOWSE said he was instructed to ask for the
dismissal of the petition.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS would do nothing of
the kind. The petition should remain upon the files
of the Court in scecula seculorem, until the insolvent
had settled with his creditors. In his opinion it was
taking a most scandalous advantage of the Act of
Parliament for a man to present a petition and obtain
protection till the day of hearing and then not to
to the trouble,
appear, putting upwards of 20 creditors

expense, and inconvenience of coming to this Court
to appear without any result. By such conduct both the
Court nd the creditors se:: at doflauce, and there-
fore. be (the Le recd Cemalissioner) would keep the
strictest tirld over :he icsolveot In his power. It was
a scandalous Act, but the law allowed it, and there
was no remedy.
The insolvent's attorney said he had been endea-
vouring to procure a letter of license for 12 months,
and some of the creditors had signed, and it was
hoped that the others would do so likewise. If that
did net occur, the insolvent would place himself at the
dispo4al t liti oreilioT.4. The insAvent hail disc)v@reil
that the deFcription was incorrect, he believing that
the petition would be dismissed, and knowing there
were writs out against had thought it best not to
appear.
The case was then struck out of the list.

CENTRAL CRI ViIN AL COURT
SENTENCES.

Transportation—Life—William Eaton.
Fifteen Years—Christopher Brooks.
Ten Years—James Dorrara, Edward Henry Poyntz,
Michael Ryan.

Seven Years—John Hayes, George Senior, Henry,
Everett, John Williams, Thomas Wilson, Thomas Will-
cox, John William Jones, John Head, Henry Howard,
William Kingsbury, Law Griffiths, William Dubois,
Thomas Agar alias James Williams, John Nelhams,
Edward Evans, Robert Sergeant, Robert Caswell,
George Bennett, William Jones, Richard Mackhay,
Richard Horton, John M'Kay.
Imprisonment—Eighteen Months—James Coope,
James Robinson.

Twelve Months—George Smith, David Cole, Thomas
Stephens, William Ryan, John Pearson, and three
months in addition, at the expiration of the first term,
Dennis Bourke, Phcebe Boyce, Frierherr von Forster,
David Powell alias Doland, Henry Franklin, James
Harberry, Robert Hemmings, William Cherry, Charles
Appleby, Sarah Pomeroy, Martin Connelly, James
Thompson, John Goodenough, Richard Morgan, MrAr-
garet Buckley, John Whitelock, Francis Ignatius Coyle,
John Burke, Spencer Ansel!, George Crooks, Edward
Clancey, William Bungin.
Nine Months—Samuel Collier.

Eight Months—Mary Ann Jenkins.
Six Months—Mary Connor, Anne Skeane, James
Bay-man, Henry Wood, John Edwards, Rachel Simmons,
William Hamilton, Catherine Paton, George Cousins,
Mary Paton, Alfred Asbury, Edward Pittard, James
Moss, Edwin Lowe, Edwin James, Sarah Bethel, Han-
nah Wilkinson, James Murray, Francis Williams, Gar-
rotty Connor, Thomas Smith, John Griffiths, Thomas
Richens, Charles Johnson, William George Stewart,
Elizabeth Roberts, Joseph Palmer, John Goodav, Anne
Jones, John Murphy, Martha Murphy, James Williams,
William Gillings, Thomas Chudlow, William James,
Anne Lawrenson, Jonathan Wild, Frederick Fisher,
Froderick Cole, Coractius Sheehan, Tunes Scott, George
Burrows, William Wilmshurst.

Four Months—Johu Crookbane, John Foster, John
Brown, William Aifri d Shelton, John Connell, Ellen
Sayers, Margaret Collins, Ann Flynn, John Owen,
Catherine Dal,-y, Julia Kelly, Mary Brown, liteplacn
Reeves, William Chalkling, Johanna Aiki❑aon, Mary
Ann Wright. _ _ _

Three Months—Alfred Morgan, Benjamin Morley,
Charles Samain, Rac'nel Menzies, Cornelius Seymour,
Willirtm Henry Pearce, James Thomas Palmer, John
Shayler, Ann Smith.
Two Months—James Willmott.
Six Week3—Jam,,s Clark.

one Month and Under—Joseph Dillnutt, Ann Jones,
Richard William Moore, Charles Edwards, John
Batten, William Scadden, Thomas Cox.
Acquittu.k—Joseph Jones alias Jonas, Marie Ann
Graveur, Mary Brown, Ellen Prosser, Josiah Westley,
Charlolte Hafer, Charles Cadaerall, Michael Raley,
Luigi Grsziani, Davide Bardniett, James Rdey, Thomas
Collier, Edward Ha skins, Jane Smith, John Johnson,
James Pallison, Alexander Gordon Bishop, Francis
Srarbrook, Samuel Jeaves, Valeri Sularkowski, Charles
Cullingworth, Tboms John Edward Pomeroy, James
Parker, James Robert Ellis, James Frost, Thomas
Glover, John Bartholomew, George Taylor, John
Saxby, Charles Willson.
_

Bills not Found—Charles Kempton, Charlotte Smith,
William Meadows, Thomas Raven, Sarah Oliver.

Judgment Respited—Naomi Clark, Alexander Good,
Mary Ann Pantoll, James Banbury.
Remanded until Next Sessions—George Price, James
Douglas, John Simpson, Thomas Allen.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

George William Warman, a letter carrier, was
placed at the bar before Mr. Henry, charged with
stealing a letter, containing cash, the property of the
Postmaster- General.
The prisoner assisted, on Friday last, in collecting
letters in the north-eastern division, for the purpose
of taking them to the carrier's office, and in conse-
quence of the frequent robberies in the same depart-
ment, Mr. Sculthorpe, a president, made up a letter
addressed to a lady at Kingsland-crescent, Kingsland-
road, enclosing a marked sovereign and a shilling,
which was posted, with other letters, by the inspector,
but upon being subsequently sought for it could not
be found. When the prisoner returned from his de-
livery in Cheapside, ho was conducted into the pre-
sident's room, and questioned respecting the loss, but
he denied all knowledge of it ; and being searched by
Peake, the constable, he found a portion of the con-
tents in his pockets. The letter was also found in
the water-closet by the plumber attached to the estab-
lishment.
The prisoner said he took the shilling in change,
and knew nothing of the letter.
Mr. Peacock said that other property had been
found at the prisoner's lodgings, and applied for a
remand.

The prisoner was fully committed for trial, and or
dered to be brought up again in a week.
SOUTH A 1?K.

Hannah Shehan, a showily-dressed young woman,
who is well known as one of the most expert thieves
in London, and who has been tried at the sessions no
less than a dozen tim.s, and by extraordinary good
luck escaped conviction, chiefly by the reluctance of
prosecutors to give evidence against her, was brought
before Mr. Combs, charged with committing a daring
attack on Michael Topper, a master mariner, and
robbing him of his purse, containing a 51. Bank of
Englan note and two sovereigns, besides about ten
shillings in silver.

Prosecutor stated that he was master and part-
owner of the Alarm schooner lying off Fresh-wharf,
near London-bridge, and on the previous night he had
been transacting some business at Westminster.
About one o'clock that morning he was proceeding
towards London-bridge, and when at the corner of
Union-street, in the Borough, he was accosted by
the prisoner in a very familiar manner. He was
quite sober at the time, and told her to go away, as he
wanted to have nothing to say to her. She, however,
persisted in annoying him, and in his attempt to
shake her off she suddenly pounced upon him, and
endeavoured to knock him down. While struggling
with her she put her hand into his pocket, and
purloined his purse. He, however, succeeded in
catching hold of her, and, perceiving a police-con-
stable approach she threw the purse over her left
shoulder and tried to get away, but he held her so
firmly that she could not, and, on the constable com-
ing up, he gave her into his custody. There was
another woman near her when she first accosted him,
and while he was struggling with her she held her
hand out to her, and that one then ran away.
Police-constable George Neal, 128 M, said he took
the prisoner into custody for stealing the purse con-
taining the money mentioned from the prosecutor.
The latter picked up his purse near the spot and de-
livered it to witness, when he axamined it and found
it to contain a 5/.-note and two sovereigns. Oa their
way to the police-station they met three women near
St. George's Church, when the prisoner turned round
to speak with them and held out her hand towards
them. Witness seized hold of her hand, and found it
to contain 10s., which she said was her own property.
Mr. COMBE —What is known of the prisoner?
Downes, the gaoler, replied that she had been in
custody nearly 50 times for street robberies, and had
been several times sent to the sessions, but had
hitherto escaped conviction owing to the prosecutors
being inebriated at the time they were robbed or un-
willing to give their evidence.
Mr. Commis said he should commit her for trial.

Ely MARKETS.
good demand for flour to-day,
)3, holders not meeting it.
so d. s. Q.
Do.3leal,perlo6lo 15 ' 0 to 16 0
Barley, English, pr