The Sun.
London, England, 1869-12-23 00:00:00

COSTLY MARRIAGES IN INDIA.

The Bombay Ga:ette has a strong article on the absurd
system which prevails in India of spending enormous
amounts on marriage festivals. An Indian marriage cere-
mony is a most costly and formidable affair, and such is the
inexorable rigour of custom that men will pinch themselves
all the year round in order to spend one or two thousand
pounds at their children's wedding. Debts are incurred which
burden the debtor for years, and the money which, laid
out in cultivating the ground, would have enriched the
spender for life, serves only to make a temporary
display of fireworks, jewellery, horses, and other useless
accessories to the marriage feasts. Every man feels it to
be incumbent on him to spend as much money on his son's
wedding as was spent on his, and were he not to do so, he
and his family would feel disgraced. Recourse is, there-
fore, had to the native money-lender, and the whole
mischievous system is perpetuated. The _Bombay Gazette
suggests that as the reform must begin from above, some
effort should be made by the cultivated classes to put a
stop to so futile and even disastrous a practice.,

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S CHARGE ON
THE OVEREND AND GURNEY CASE.
LONDON, 'WEDNESDAY.
The Lord Chief Justice delivered his charge to the jury
in the Overend, Gurney, and Co. case at Guildhall to-day.
The court was crowded. His lordship, after some prefa-
tory remarks, in which he said that little as was the assis-
tance which gentlemen acquainted with mercantile affairs
like the jury needed in comprehending a case of this kind,
it was still his duty to bring the matter before them in a
clear form, proceeded to call attention to the counts
of the indictment. With regard to the first
six, which charged a misdemeanour under the 24th and
23th Vic., c. 96, he said one of the defendants, Mr. Barclay,

would not be affected by them, for he appeared to have
had nothing to do with the publication of the-prospectus,
having left London before it was agreed upon; and he
should have directed the charge against Mr. Barclay to be
withdrawn when Mr. Mellish made the application, had
it not been for the general counts of conspiracy. But as
whatever was done by any of the parties in a conspiracy
was the act of all, if the jury thought the defendants had
entered into the fraudulent conspiracy represented, then Mr.
Barclay like the others would be implicated. Besides the
counts of conspiring to defraud the general public there were
s )me which charged the defendants with issuing the prospec-
tus with intent to elefraudDr. Thom by inducing him to take
shares. With the exception of one or two, he thought the
latter counts could not be maintained.. Where there was a
general conspiracy against the world at large, and particularly-
when persons were defrauded, it might be said that the con-
s2iracy was against them individually; but with regard
to Dr. Thom and certain ether parties, they were not-
brought into ecntact with the defendants, for they took
their shares over from other persons. Still there was
undoubtedly ono person who would be included in
those counts, and who bought immediately of the
defendants ; he meant Mr. Peate. There were
other counts, but the substance of the charge was this :
That the firm of Overend, Gurney, and Co. being hope-
lessly insolvent, the defendants knowing the fact, con
spired to induce other persons to take shares in a new corn.
pany, to which their business would be transferred, with
the view of defrauding and cheating the persons who should
pay for them. And if the jury believed that the business
was worthless, and that the defendants, knowing this,
' conspired to defraud the public, there could be no
doubt of their guilt of the offence laid to their charge.
But in order to convict, the jury must be satisfied that
there was a deliberate intention to defraud, and he prayed
their special attention to that point. For in a case of this
k'nd they were on the confines of criminal and civil law,
and must take care not to step over the border
line. In a civil action, a contract would be
found to be void because of a misrepre-
sentation, though honestly made, in the belief
that it was correct; but in a criminal prosecution it must
be found that the misrepresentation alleged to be made
was known to the defendants, and that, acting upon that
knowledge, they set about deliberately to do that which
was charged as the statute able offence in the case. Coming
lack to the actual charge in this case, he must point out
that it involved four questions :—What was the state of
the business ? Was it the worthless, hopeless, insolvent
business which on the part of the prosecution it was alleged
to have been ? If so, was its condition known to the
defendants ? If it was, slid they misrepresent the state and
condition it was in? .-if they did, what was their inten-
tion—waa it to defraud persons who might take shares?
In order to answer the first question, it was necessary to
go back to the history of the firm. His lordship referred
to the evidence on this point, and the figures sheaving the
vast business transacted, the large profits for many years,
and the heavy losses which resulted from what he termed
insane speculation. There appeared to have been in 1865
a deficit of three millions. A business, conducted like
that of a banker, with other people's money, should, the
moment it was known there is a large deficit, be at once
brought to a close. The man who took the money of
others under such circumstances would be guilty of fraud,
and, therefore, the defendants were perfectly right in
declining, in 1865, to continue the business under the old
conditions. What then were they to do ? They might, as Dr.
Kenealey suggested they ought to have done, have
realised their assets, and paid what they could in the
pound. But he could not help thinking that some allow-
ance was to be made for men with such a business and
such a name as the defendants had at the time if,
while they had another opening, they did not adopt
the remedy named. What could a man do with a
good business when lie found that, by unlooked for circum-
stances, he could not conduct it solvently without new
capital'? He might sell it, but he wns hardly likely to
take that course ; or he might endeavour to obtain
new partners to join him who would bring in the
capital necessary to cover the existing debts. Such
a course was perfectly legitimate, provided always that
the man who has the business made known to the other
all the circumstances necessary to enable the one who was
coming in to aepreciate all its merits, what liabilities he
undertook, and what was the prospective profits. On the other
hand, if the person who found himself in the position indi-
cated, knowine, that his business was hopelessly gone, mis-
represented it,° in order to prevent the other party from
knowing its true position, he was guilty of fraud, and if a
body of men combined to carry out such an iniquitous pro-
ceeding, they were guilty of conspiracy to defraud.
He must ask the jury to take pains to form their own
judgment as to which of these two courses the defendants
pursued. They. made up their 'minds to dispose of the
business to a joint-stock company, but at the same time to
retain an interest in it, by taking shares themselves. Ac-
cording to the evidence on their behalf they made it known
that there was upon an account of 15 millions a deficit of
4 millions, which would become eventually 3 millions.
This aniountrthey proposed to reduce to 2 millions, by
striking out of the liability side of the account that
which stood in the private ledger, and to guarantee the
property of the members of the old firm to meet that
deficit of two millions, while the property of the pro-
prietors, being reduced by this guarantee, there would
still remain a deficit of one million. Now,
supposing that to be the true result of the
figures, and that this deficit of a million would
certainly fall sooner or • later upon the new com-
pany, was this business worth purchasing by the
public? The proposal was made palatable by the state-
ment that the directors would only call up £500,000, and
that they would not ask for a farthing in cash. At the
same time the borrowing power of the firm,
to the extent of £190,000 a year, was said
to be undiminished, and it was represented that
the introduction of a million of capital would cover the
deficit. The decision of the jury on this point would
depend on their view of the reliability of the
figures adduced by the prosecution or defence.
In considering .otht r points, his lordship observed
that he could not impugn the motives of the
prosecution in this matter. Ho gave them credit
for beleg actuated by,public motives and a sense of public
duty. They believed, no doubt, that a gigantic fraud
had been practised upon them and other shareholders,
and they had entered into this proceeding
with the feeling that those who had defrauded them
ought to be made responsible at the bar of a criminal court
of justice. Giving.them credit for these motives, ho could
not concur in any of the observat.i.ons which had been made
in their disparagerant. But ho must say that ho thought
c4,s9____tho new

directors should-111We been mixed up in zne same prosecu-
tion as the old. He knew of no case which had produced
on his mind such a deep impression in regard to one •
matter which had long been growing up as his firm
conviction, and it was that our present sys-
tem of prosecution was based upon a false
principle, and that a public prosecutor was a neces-
sity in the due administration of justice. (A movement of
applause was quickly checked.) If there had been a public
prosecutor in this case, he would Undertake to say that he
would not have put the new directors into the one charge,
and at all events he would have allowed to those who
were put on their defence an opportunity of calling before
the jury those of their colleagues wbo could have thrown
so much light on this most important transaction. His
lordship went on to inquire whether it was probable that
men so well acquainted with business would have
joined in this undertaking, and embarked in it large
sums of money if they bad not examined its condition, or
if they doubted its success, and failed to draw attention to
the terms of the prospectus, with a view of seeing whether
its representations had not been fully explained.
Speaking of the deeds, he observed that the
first sufficiently indicated that there was some
farther arrangement, and any commercial man must have
seen that it did not provide for fully crrrying out the
object it contemplated. Then the fact that the Stock
EKchangc had not exerted its powers and inquired about
the other deed should be a warning to the public not
to trust too much to the exercise of that power
and to make full inquiry for themselves. Certainly he
doubted svhether, even if the second deed had been
more explicilly indicated, the shareholdtrs would be
teoubled to look at it, and believed that if the position
hsd been more c7carly stated, the public, knowing
h jNY large was the property of the Gurneys,
would have hesitated to invest; but still it would be for
the jury to say whether this arrangement of the deeds was
part of a fraudulent scheme.
After a short adjournment,
His lordship went on to cen . ides the other points of the
case, insisting that in this case the intentien of the
defendants was everything, and, putting before the jury
with greater care the arguments on both sides, the
jury had been told that their verdict would have great in-
fluence on the commercial world, and that the commercial
world of the present clay required purification. Indepen-
dently of their verdict, however, it might be hoped that
this melancholy matter—the downfall of this com-
pany, the presence at the bar of a criminal
court of justice, of men who once stood so
high in the commercial world—would have a powerful
effect. They were told that the commercial world was no
longer animated by those lofty and safe principles of con-
duct which formerly distinguished British merchants and
ma le them respected throughout the world, and that for
this had been substituted a spirit of reckless speculation and
commercial gambling which had lowered this country in the
eyes of the nations. In this case, they found the members of a
firm doing an enormous business, and universally known
as men of vast wealth and high position, fallen from their
high estate, induced by delusive expectations into
embarking the capital which ought to have been
devoted to their own particular business, in
wild speculations and rash projects ; and now
they saw them fallen into absolute ruin, their
commercial position destroyed, their vast fortunes lost,
their reputations threatened, and themselves placed at the
bar, charged as criminals with conspiracy to defraud. He
hoped that if such a lesson was necessary to the com-
mercial world, it would be lasting in its effect,
But no one could look upon society around him and fail
to see that a sprit of speculation and gambling had taken
possession of the minds of large classes of time people of
this country. Men who were wont to be satisfied with
moderate means, seemed now to be led away by a spirit
of greed of gain, sunder the influence of which they were
willing to risk their fortunes, however hardly earned, in
the often vain expectation of realising something t.y pre-
mouns on shares, or in other ways. It was well that they
learn the danger of following such ignus falai, and that it
was unsafe to trust in enterprises the scope of which they
cnild not comprehend, and in the management and superin-
tendence of which it was impossible they could take any part.
Jr the result of this trial was to check this spirit of specula-
tion, he should rejoice. In conclusion his Lordship, who
had been speaking for over three hours, complimented the
jury on the assiduous attention which they had paid to
the case. An attempt to applaud was suppressed.
The jury retired to consider their verdict at two o'clock,
acid retuinel in a quarter of an hour with a verdict of Not
Guilty. On its announcement tumultuous applause broke
forth in all parts of the court, and numbers of the assembly
indulged in extravagant demonstrations of joy, waving
their hats, stamping on the seats, and shaking hands with
those around them. When at length comparative silence
was obtained,
Dr. Keneaiy applied for costs under the 24th and 25th
Vic. chap. PG. section 121.
The Lord Chief Justice said if only the original partners
had been included in the indictment he should, although
he fully concurred in the verdicts have allowed costs.
because he thought an inquiry was necessary. But as it
was he should not be justified in granting the application.
This decision called forth another burst of applause, and
She defendants then left the court amidst the congratula-
tions of their friends, while sonic hisses and other expres-
sions of disapprobation were directed against the prose-
cutor.