The Sun.
London, England, 1867-10-17 00:00:00

ME SUN. LONDON. ITLURSDAY EVENEYG, OCTOBER 17, 1i67.

'MEN'

190
100
100
100
100
100

102 f I

103 f
llut I I i

1071 1 f

14 16

1031

1031

T SECURITIES.

101 103;
1,9 lull
99 Ivl
138 9i
t 7 • f 9
103 1( 5
107 10!
It 7 1('
1( 6 107

f 4 ?6
10t IC4
1111 112 j
1(3 105
IGI 100
105 107
104 1(6
102 104
1(1 1(.3

97 09
r 4 95

91 96

1021 2

911

100 I

LAW INTELLIGENCE.---This Day.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Winslow.)
IN RE F. D. B. ST. JOIIN-ANOTHER 'VICTIM TO

OVEREND, GURNEY, AND CO.

This bankrupt was described as a banker's clerk,
of St. Faith, Norfolk, and to-day was appointed for
the last examination and order of discharge.
The bankrupt attributed his failure to being con-
stantly harassed for calls as a contributory to
Overend, Gurney, and Co., he being a shareholder.
His total liabilities are £3,397, of which £1,877 are
due to unsecured creditors, and the deficiency is
£2,202. He owes £1,400 in respect of calls due
to the estate of Overend, Gamey, and Co.
Mr. Airidge, for the assignees, referred shortly to
the figures in the case, and to the fact that the
bankrupt had bought shares in Overend, Gurney,
and Co.

Bankrupt—l paid for the shares, and did not an-
ticipate any calls. A great many of the Norwich
people took shares.

Mr. Lawrence, for the bankrupt, said there was
no opposition, and his Honour granted an imme-
diate order of discharge.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. F. Gibbons.)
FORDIIAM V. RANDALL AND EDWARDS

(Trading as the London and Provincial Assurance,
24, Cornhill).
This was an action to recover £3 upon a policy
of assurance for certain glass windows and damages
for breach of contract.

Mr. Buchanan appeared for the plaintiff, who is
proprietor of the Gladstone, St. Leonards-row,
Bomley, and who proved that he had insured his
property in the company. Some panes of glass had
been broken, but defendants had not replaced them,
and in consequence of this neglect plaintiff had
suffered damage.
His Honour—Have you the policy here ?

Mr. B uchanan —Certainly.
The policy was then handed up to his Honour,
who found by one of the clauses that no in-
dividual director was to be held liable for the debts
of the company.

His Honour—lt is clear that plaintiff cannot sue
the defendants, who have made a special bargain of
protecting themselves.
Plaintiff—They early on the company.
His Honour—You have made a foolish bargain,
and mast be bound by it.
Mr. Buchanan—Cannot your Honour strike out
the names of the defendants, and leave tho
"London and Provincial Assurance Company ?"
His Honour—Oh! no ; you have sued the de-
fendants. You must sue the company.

Plaintiff was then non-suited.
No ono appeared for either the defendants or
he company.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

MANSION-HOUSE.

CHARGE OF CONSPIRACY.—JuIius Hugo Leven-
stein, a commission agent, carrying on business in
Lombard-street, in the City, was charged with
having conspired with another person, named
Mecklenburgh, not at present in custody, for the
purpose of obtaining goods to the amount of
£366 4s. 11d. under false pretences, from Messrs.
Crawford and Lindsay, linen manufacturers at
Bambridge, in Ireland, who also had a warehouse
in Milk-street, Cheapside.
It appeared from the opening statement of Mr.
Straight (instructed by Mr. W. Collings), who ap-
peared for the prosecution, that the complainants
were extensive linen manufacturers, at Bambridge,
in Ireland, and had a branch establishment in Milk-
street, Cheapside. The prisoner was a person who,
in conj unction with a man named Mecklenburgh, re-
presented himself to be one of the agents of the house
of Levenstein Brothers, merchants at Berlin, and had
even gone so far as to state that he was a partner in
that house. Some few months ago, the 27th June,
it appeared that Mr. Mecklenburgh had called upon'
Mr. Martin, the London manager of Messrs. Craw-
ford and Lindsay's firm, and stated that he wanted
some goods for Messrs. Levenstein Brothers, of
Berlin. Mr. Levenstein subsequently called, and
goods were supplied to the amount of £366 4s. 11d.
They gave a bill for £ll9 lls. 61, which ho (Mr.
Straight) should ultimately be able to prove was a
forgery, but at present he would confine himself to
tendering such an amount of evidence as would
justify a remand. It was only just to the prisoner
to state that some of the evidence would have
to come from a very doubtful source, but
still it would be corroborated by disinterested
and respectable testimony. One witness, whose
evidence would be important, was at present waiting
to take his trial at the Old Bailey for obtaining
goods under false pretences, and this witness had
been the managing clerk to Levenstein. On the
next occasion he should endeavour to get rid of
such evidence.

Mr. Martin, the manager of Messrs. Crawford
and Lindsay, said that he remembered Mr. Meck-
lenburgh coming to the warehouse and ordering the
goods. After the preliminary inquiries were made
they were supplied, not all at once, but by instal-
ments. The largest amount was when, in July, they
came together and ordered about £lOO worth of
goods. Levenstein called by himself in September.

He came to match a pattern of linen, and witness
said that it matched their own pattern-book.
They sent for him afterwards to Lombard-
street. The prisoner then stated that 'he and
one of the Levenstein Brothers had married
two sisters, and that they were cousins. He called
about two days after. He then obtained an order
from Mr. Levenstein. Shortly afterwards, sus-
picion being aroused, application was made to
Messrs. Levenstein (Brothers), and they repudiated
the order as emanating from them. The prisoner
was then taken into custody.
This evidence, and some of a similar description,
justified a remand.