The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-14 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—(TMs Day.)

EQUITY COURTS.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Stuart.)
EMPEROR OF AUSTRIA v. DAY—KOSSUTH

NOTES.

Sir H. Cairns, who appeared for the plaintiff, said cer-
tain affidavits had been made by the defendants, and he
thought he ought to be furnished with copies of such docu-
ments previous to proceeding with the case.
The Vice-Chancellor said he thought the learned gentle-
man ought to have copies of the answers.
It was then arranged that copies I should be furnished,
and the cause was ordered to stand over to a future day.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.

TDB 82tOREDITCH DANK FAILUILE,--1N It} DA.VIES AND

TROUGIITON.

These bankrupts, described as of Shoreditch, bankers,
whose disastrous failure was so recently before the public,
came up to day upon their examination meeting.
The accounts have appeared upon a former occasion., but
it may be remembered that Messrs. Hart Brothers, and
Hayles, the eminent accountants, of Moorgate-street, had
been engaged on behalf of the creditors to investigate and
report thereon.

This morning at an early bcur the court was fairly filled
by parties interested in the estate, and the various legal
gentlemen appeared for their several clients.
Mr. Linklater, for the assignees, said the assignees
wished to make an alteration in the balance sheet. The
bankrupts had credited themselves with amounts upon
bills receivable, which would be materially reduced when
the assets were realised. He (Mr. Linklater) proposed to
examine both the bankrupts and if their answers were
satisfactory, the assignees would not oppose their passing.
Mr. Troughton (called by Mr. Linklater).—Before
January, 1859, I was a clerk in the employ of Davies since
August, 1855. My brother was in partnership with Davies
in 1857, and I went into partnership in August, 1859. Up
to that time I was managing clerk. I was tolerably ac-
quainted with the position Gl' the house when I joined it.
The banking house in 1859 was not, to my knowledge,
insolvent. Robert Cradock Davies said he had private
property, but I did not inquire what it was. Davies
told me what it was, but I did not ask' him.
Davies was in the habit of looking at the books
of the bank from time to time. The bookkeeper prepared
the monthly balance-sheets on paper. I presented those
balance-sheets to Mr. Davies. That gentleman did not
attend at the bank every day in the week. He was absent
one or two days. He was in the habit of looking at the
daily balance-book very often. I was in the public office.
Messrs. Evans Mothers are indebted to our firm in an
amount of £46,000. They were indebted to the bank when
I became a partner. Looking at the daily balance-sheet,
it would be manifest that Evans's account was overdrawn.
I arranged the advances with Evans Brothers, and told
Mr. Davies of it. He knew they had £2,900 in 1859.
Evans here represented that they could not pay their
wages unless the bank assisted them, and the bank did
assist them. Mr. Davies usually arrived at the bank
about eleven o'clock and remained till three or four.
He was in the habit of seeing customers who required
assistance. We remarked to each other that Evans's account
was largely overdrawn, and he objected to its going on. He
complained before July, 1859. Davies would notice the
overdraught from the daily balance-book. I had told him of
the overdraught. By the end of 1859, Evans owed £14,000.
I understood they had property, houses, and contracts. I
have kept some documents from the official assignees, be-
cause I did not think they were of any use.
In reference to questions of money advanced to Evans on
mortgage of some houses, an answer given by the witness
led to a most indignant cry of " oh! oh I"
Mr. Linklater considered such interruptions most im-
proper. They materially interfered with the equanimity
of the witness, and prevented the advocate from properly
doing his duty.
The case was not concluded when we went to press.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—( This Day).

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

ROBBERY OF BANK NOTES, &C.—Sarah Andrews, a
servant in the employ of Mr. John Sykes, corset maker, of
280, Regent-street, was charged before Mr. Tyrwhitt, with
stealing four £5 Bank of England notes, and also on suspi-
cion of stealing a quantity of jewellery--the bank notes
that of
being
Ethe
mp
ar eari
Haig,
so
ifs tMe r
nS.
lyakwe st, a o
tnhde theprojseewe lt loer—r y.
Mr. Sykes said, the prisoner had been in his employment
as servant since the 2d of March, having given as reference
a person at Trevor-square. Prisoner left last Tuesday, and
after she had gone he missed the notes from the cash-box,
where they were E. afa the previous day. Some jewellery
had been also missed.

Philip Steel, barman at the Queen's Head, Titchfield •
street, said—On Tuesday morning prisoner tendered a £5
note in payment of a bottle of whisky. She took it from
among some others. The number of 06880 was on it. He
told her he could not get change for it. He then saw her
go to a neighbour's, and on going there found she had at-
tempted to change it.
Prisoner said she knew nothing about it.
Edwin Chapple, 26 E, said that the jewellery the prisoner
was suspected of stealing was the property of Miss Haig,
the sister of Mrs. Sykes, and was of the value of about £3O.
He had ascertained that the prisoner had been carrying on
a systematic plan of robbery at different situations where
she had been employed. He wished for a remand.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said he should remand the prisoner for a
week.