The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-08 00:00:00

HER MAJESTY.

OSBORNE, Jan. 7.
The Queen, attended by Lady Churchill, drove
out yesterday afternoon.
Her ➢Majesty walked and drove in the grounds
this morning, accompanied by Princess Beatrice.
Prince Leopold also went out.

The Archbishop of Canterbury did homage yes-
terday, and afterwards resigned his appointment as
Dean of the Chapel Royal.
The Archbishop cf Canterbury 'and Mrs. Tait,
the Right Hon. Henry Bruce, and the Dean of
Westminster, had the honour of dining with the
Queen an I the Royal Faintly yester

THE PROSECUTION OF 7HE DIRECTORS
OF 0 I'EREND, GURNEY, AND COMA NY
(LIIIII LD).

THIS DAY.

The further hea►ing of this extraordinary case
was resumed this morning More the Lord Mayor
and Alderman Gabriel, in the Court of Queen's
Bench, Guildhall.
Mr. Howell, the accountant, was further exa-
mined with a view to show that after the transfer of
the business to the limited company all monies paid
into the bank by defendants were drawn out
on the day following, or nearly so, with the
exception of a sum of £150,000 on the
part of the Norwich Bank. The witness gave
a variety of entries in the nine months of the
existence of the limited company, each of which
were for monies received from the Messrs. Gurney,
and on the other side of the book were repayments
in very large sums to persons on account of the
indebtedness of the old firm. One item will serve
as an illustration. On the 27th of February H.
Gurney had in £lO,OOO, H. E. Gurney £20,000,
and on the 26th £50,000 was paid to the Bank of
London, which was the amount of a guarantee
by the old firm. On the Ist of March S.
Gurney paid in £6,000, D. Gurney £lO,OOO, and
H. Birkbeck £4,000, making exactly the £50,000.
There was also a payment to the Agra Bank some
time afterwards for £50,000, but that also was a
guarantee of the old firm.

Mr. Lewis—And had nothing to do with the
liabilities of the limited company ?
'Witness—No ; not as appears by the books.
Mr. Lewis—lt was, in fact, Messrs. Overend,
Gurney, and Co. paying their own liabilities.
Mr. Giffard objected to such observations being
made whilst the witness was under examination.

Mr. Sergeant Sleigh said some of the items that
had been referred to by the witness had been paid
as calls on shares.
Mr. Lewis said that was so, but he should like
to know where were the shares.

Mr. Sergeant Sleigh replied that would appear
presently.
The witness having gone through the whole of
the transactions of the old firm after the transfer
until the stoppage, Mr. Lewis asked what was
the amount that the new company had benefited
by the subscription of the old firm, to which
he replied £85,000. The liabilities of the limited
company after the transfer amounted to £15,000,000,
but there were other liabilities of Overend, Gurney,
and Co., for bills re-discounted to the amount of
£9,841,440. The entries in the " bills or hand
book" gave the particulars of that total. On the
30th of July, 1865, the total amount of bills in,
out and in hand, as appeared by the book
kept for such entries, was £19,100,680. The
total amount of bills lodged as security,
as appeared by the books of the limited
company, amounted to £8,507,000, deducting that
and the bills in hand, which amount to £1,345,135 ;
the total amount of bills rediscounted and payable
amounted to £9,348,494 ; but there were other
entries which had to be deducted, which made the
total liabilities for bills discounted amount to
£7,177,280.

Mr. Lewis—Does it appear in any book in any
form that that liability of £7,177,280 was taken
over by the limited company?

IVitness—lt does not.

Mr. Lewis—Was there any assets except the
£126,000 cash taken over to meet that liability ?
Witness—lt does not so appear.

Mr. Lewis—What was the pecuniary interest
the old firm held in the new company after the
transfer?

Witness—l can find none, unless it is their over-
drawn account of £2,970,000.

Mr. Lewis—Had their account been overdrawn
to that amount at the time of the stoppage ?

Witness —Yes.

Mr. Lewis—By the prospectus of the new com-
pany it was set out that the old firm would retain
a large pecuniary interest in the new company.
Can you say what that pecuniary interest was ?
Witness—No, without it was their over-drawn
account (Laughter.)
Mr. Lewis—What is the total amount of liabili-
ties of the old firm on account of guarantee at the
date of the transfer?

Witness—l can't exactly say, because they are
not all entered in the book before me. I have
found references to other guarantees in the letter
books.

Mr. Lewis--Is there any leaves torn out of that
book ?

Witness—No, not from this.

Mr. Lewis—From any other then ?
Witness—Yes ; there are other books from which
a great many leaves have been torn out.
The witness then proceeded to read various
entries in the book before him relative to the
guarantees, which amounted in the gross
to about £1,000,000, which did not in way
appear in the £15,000,000 of liabilities
transferred to the limited company. In a book
marked " private" witness said he found particulars
relative to a guarantee of £150,000 on page 206, and
then pages 207 to 235 were wanting.

Mr. Lewis then asked the witness if he could tell
the amount of deposit each of the defendants held
at the time of the stoppage of the limited company
on the 10th of May, 1866.
Witness—Mr. J. H. Gurney drew out on the 2d
of April £33,026, which balanced his account, so
he had nothing. Mr. H. S. Emery had £69.
There was a joint account of H. E. Emery and J.
G. Besely for £29. Mr. R. Birkbeck had nothing,
but Mrs. R. Birkbeck, on the 12th March, drew out
£Bl2, and Mr. H. Bardy had £lO 4s. 4d.

Mr. Lewis—What was the liabilities of the old
firm at the date of the stoppage?
Witness—Over £2,000,000, giving them credit
for everything.
Mr. Lewis—Does the books show whether the
old firm ever paid a farthing on the shares in the
new company allotted them ?
Witness—No ; they do not.
At the end of Mr. Howell's examinatien the court
adjourned.

MARICE 7 S-7 MS DAY.