The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--;This Day.

ROLLS COURT.
(Before Sir John Romilly.)
JUDGMENT.-,SIDNEY V. IVILMER-FITZOLARZNOD V. DO,

-WILMER V. HIINLOKE.

His Honour the Master of the Rolls, in delivering
judgment in this case, said that he had ♦ery little diffi.
culty about the construction of the will, but that con-
struction was unfavourable to the plaintiff. The will
was the will of the late Mr. Henry Wilmer, executed by
him on 4th July, 1845 ; and, besides the limitations of
the estate, he charged his estate with a term of 500
years. The plaintiff, by her bill and supplementary
bill, asked for a declaration that she was entitled to the
fee of the surplus rents of the estate after the division
of the provisions of the trust are performed. His
Honour was of opinion that this must be determined
entirely upon the construction of the will, and looking
to the terms of the provisions in the will, the plaintiff
was not entitled to the fee of the surplus rents of the
estate.

Then with regard to the trust for the term of 500
years—was the plaintiff entitled to take, in face of the
provisions and limitations contained in the will. There
was a provision for tenants in tail and contingent
remainders, and a limitation in favour of the children
of his sisters to be born within five and fifteen years.
His Honour was of opinion that although there were no
children at present, yet, until the expiration of that
time, of which five years had to run, the plaintiff had
no claim against the trust funds.

His Honour made a declaration to that effect, and
granted the usual administration decree.
Costs of the trustees of the trust fund as between
party and party.

Costa of the trustees under the will to come out of the
trust estate,

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulburn.)

IN RE G. SICHRL.

To-day was appointed for the further consideration
of the certificate of this bankrupt, who was described as
of Gresham House, New Broad-street.
Mr. Ashur-at appeared to oppose on the part of
Messrs. Morrison, Dillon, and Co., on the ground that
the bankrupt had (obtained a large quantity of goods of
the value of upwards of 1,6001. at a time when he
well knew that he was in a hopeless state of insolvency.
He (Mr. Ashurst) said that the Messrs. Morrison
and Dillon had felt it their duty to oppose the
bankrupt on the present occasion, but they were not
actuated by the slightest feeling of vindictiveness, and he
(Mr. Aehurst) regretted that the grounds on which the
suspension arose had not been explained. He then pro-
ceeded to state the allegations made rgainst the bank-
rupt.

His Honour said the better way would be for him to
read the affidavit of Mr. John Dillon and Mr. Slater, as
to the manner in which the goods were obtained. His
Honour then road the affidavit, and, according to the
e►idence of Mr. Slater, it appeared that Messrs.
Morrison and Dillon at firbt refused to give
credit for such a large amount, but it was
ultimately agreed that he should pay 630/.
in cash, and he stated that he had been a partner in
tho firm of Sichel and Co., of Manchester, and connected
with his brother at Melbourne, on whose account he made
the purchases. He also stated that he had ample means,
and was liquidating the matters of the Manchester
firm, and that he had the use of the money until the
liquidation was completed, but they (Messrs. Morrison
and Co.) had been informed that at the time of this tran.
eaction he was hopelessly insolvent.

Mr. Ashurst proceeded to remark on the ease, when
his Honour suggested that the case should be adjourned
for some period, say 6 mouths, with protection, to enable
the bankrupt to proceed to Constantinople, and to
endeavour to realise the estate. He (his Honour)
considered that such a course would be beneficial to the
interests of the creditors, and would also be, in all pro-
bability, advantageous to the bankrupt.
Mr. Lawrence, for the bankrupt, declined accepting
the suggestion, as there was an imputation of fraud on
the bankrupt, but which he should be able satisfactorily
to rebut. The proteotion of this court would be looked
upon as waste paper in a foreign country, and Mr. Sichel
was prepared at once to take the judgment of the court,
but whatever might be the decision of the court, even if
adverse to him, it would not in any way interfere
with his anxiety and determination to do the
utmost he could for his creditors, but he
could not allow himself to remain under an imputa-
tion of fraud. The learned gentleman then at great
length referred to the extensive business which the
bankrupt had been connected with, and said that as
junior partner of the firm he had undertaken to liquidate
the debts of the Manchester firm, and at the time he
purchased the goods of Messrs, Morrison and Co,, he
fully believed there would be a surplus of 40,0001. of
which he would be entitled to one-fifth. The learned
gentleman proceeded to answer in detail the voluminous
evidence already given, and the case was proceeding,
but his Honour intimated that he should take time to
consider his judgment.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.— (This Day.)

BOW-STREET.
ROBBIELY BY A SERYANT.—James Groves, a footman,
was placed at the bar charged with stealing forty
sovereigns and two five-pound Bank of England notes,
the property of Lady Henderson, of Torrington-square.
From the evidence of the prosecutrix,
it appeared that
on the 25th of January last she placed 150 sovereigns
and four five-pound Bank of England notes in her cash
box, which she kept in a drawer in one of her apartments
known to the prisoner. A few days ago,
finding a larger
sum of money missing than WAR expected, she made out
a list of expenses that had been discharged, and on
comparing the whole with the money remaining, she dis-
covered a deficiency of 501. The money stolen consisted
of 40 sovereigns and two of the five-pound notes. The
police were sent for, and on Inspector Fathers of the E
division arriving, she related the robbery to him, and
from certain circumstances he suspected the servants,
and the prisoner was given into custody. Immediate!),
afterwards he asked the inspector whether he would
allow him to see his mistress ; and on being taken into
her presence, he admitted taking the 40 sovereigns, but
denied all knowledge of the notes. The prisoner, in
answer to the questions of Lady Henderson, stated that,
knowing where the money was kept, he tried the keys
of the other apartments, and finding one to tit the lock
of the door of the private room, he thus got at the
money.

Another person was also placed at the bar, charged
with being concerned with the prisoner in the robbery.
Mr. Henry remanded Groves for a week,
but he
discharged the other prisoner on the undertanding that
she should enter into her own recognisances to attend
this day week.

ii THAMES.
AN INCORRIGIBLII CHINESE THIESI.—A Chinese cook,
who gave the name of George Marshall, who came to
England in a British ship two years ago, and has since
been alternately a thief and a vagrant, was brought
before Mr. Salle, charged with stealing a snit of clothe',
a cap, silk handkerchief, woollen comforter, and other
property from the ship John Collett, in the East
India Dock. It appeared that the prisoner waited en
Mr. Jas. Cunard, the steward of the vessel, while he was
getting dinner ready, on the previous day, and asked if
a ship's cook was wanting. The steward said he would
give him an answer in a minute or two, and left the
prisoner in the galley while he went to the cabin with
the dinner for the captain and officers of the vessel. On
been wearing
gone, and an
oh
lids returnoep
wt oi i ti
ch
he galley, atlhl eey , tphrei s
op
or iesro n er
had le a s
was upon deck. The prosecutor opened his
chest, and found all his clothes, linen, cap, mit-
tens, and the whole of his sea kit were missing.
captured i
An alarm was raised, a pursuit was made, and luckily
far
set ,haaebf endstueurt taking t f
ejuluesartgi circuitous fctruhoiemt opurtsihs roe on ue wasdtruec.i t at the principal
ascy he
l
The whole of the
stolen property was upon him over his own clothes, or
rather some rags and a white flannel shirt. The prisoner
Was wearing the prosecutor's cap, and had left his own in
the ship's galley. James S Ninglaud, a London Dock
tphreisoLueorndOans Dock, and oafnda when he
precisely
w constable,abrought
similar
offu saidu h
three waistcoats, three shirts, and three pairs of trousers
all on his person, all of which he had stolen from a
offence
neto t
in
thee police station he had three coats,
ship. He was sentenced to two months' imprisonment
and hard labour.

Police Sergeant Walker, in charge of the police van,
said the prisoner had passed through his hands four or
five times, and came out of prison on Thursday morning.
The prisoner, through an interpreter, said he never
stole anything.
Mr. Selfe—The case is clear, and I sentence him to
three months' imprisonment and hard labour.

RELEASE OF MR. BATES.—.A paragraph hag lately
appeared in the pubho journals erroneously stating that
Mr. Bates, the ex•b 4nker, has been released from Faison.
We are authorised to mention tbat Mr. Bates will not
be set at liberty until October next.— Civil Scaice
On;ettc.