The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-22 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, NOVEVI BE 22, 1861.

NR. LAY A.RD AND HIS CONSTITUENTS.

Last night Mr. Layard met his constituents in
Taylor's Depository, St. George's-road, Southwark.
The meeting was very crowded, a large portion of
the audience consisting of working men. Mr. New-
man occupied the chair, and was surrounded on the
platform by a considerable number of the more in-
fluential electors of the borough.
l‘lr. LAYARD said—l believe the present is the
first political meeting at which I have met my con-
stituents since I accepted office under the Crown. I
trust, however, that although I have not been in
your sight I have not been altogether out of your
minds. (Hear, hear.) Allow me to say at the outset
that in taking office I have not done anything which
should not meet with the approval of my constitu-
ents. (Hear.) I do not believe you will think that

I have done ill in accepting office under a Govern-
ment in whose general principles I concur. (Cheers.)
It is frequently the case in England, especially with
the Liberal party, that people are denounced for
merely taking office. Either, however, public mora-
lity has very much improved during the last 50
years, or the press is much more vigilant than it
used to be, for no man can now be suspected of tak-
ing office for the mere paltry gains of place. Such
a thing is unknown in the present day. All those
snug sinecures and profitable jobs which were for-
merly regarded as the sweets of office are, happily
for us, no longer in existence. Indeed, instead of a
man making money by taking office, the probabi-
lity is that he will leave office poorer than when he
entered it. (Hear, hear.) I think therefore that the

Liberal party has not done wisely in denouncing
those who have accepted office. Soon after I joined
the Government I received an interesting letter
from a valued friend in York. The writer, Mr. John
Brown, a small bookseller in York, gave me when
I contested that city a most disinterested and noble
support. He told me in his letter that 20 years ago,
when he was known as a Chartist, he should
have been unable to find words sufficiently strong
to express his indignation at a Liberal taking
office, but he said his opinion upon that
point had undergone a change, and he now
thought it was a foolish thing for the Liberal party
not to wish those who represented the people to
take office. How were they, he asked, to carry
out their views, unless they had men to represent
them in the Government ? (Hear.) What he said
was perfectly right. If a man can accept office

without abandoning his political convictions, with.

out breaking his political pledges, he is justified in
doing so. (Hear.) On the other hand, if in taking
office he renounces his political opinions, throws his
pledges to the winds, he does a base thing which
no words can sufficiently condemn. (Cheers.) I be-
lieve that in accepting office I have done neither
the one nor the other. It is true, perhaps, that the
present Government; have not done all we could
Lave wished them to have done in matters of do-
mestic policy. In matters of foreign policy, on the
other hand, they deserve the hearty support of the
country, and you will recollect that when I made
my appeal to you at the election it referred almost
exclusively to questions of foreign policy. There
are times when questions of foreign policy are so
important that questions of domestic policy give
way to them. I think the Government should have
done more in matters of domestic policy—but look
at the circumstances in which they were placed, for
instance, at the commencement of last session.
They had to do one of two things—either to intro-
duce a Reform Bill into Parliament which, through
the machination of parties—and parties, I am
sorry to say, not composed exclusively of Conserva-
tives—would have been thrown out, or to wait until
public opinion out of doors was sufficiently strong
to enable them to carry a good measure. The latter
was the course they took. You will recollect that
Mr. White, the member for Brighton, moved an
amendment upon the address in the interest of
Reform. I voted with him, but lam sorry to say
we found ourselves in an illustrious minority of 48.
(A laugh.) Immediately afterwards we had a
meeting in this very building. I believe that was
the first meeting held in this country after that
division on the subject of Reform. The people of
Southwark nobly expressed their opinion upon that
question, and all I will say is, that if every great
constituency in England had followed your example
we should have had a Reform Bill at this moment.
(Cheers.) What, however, are the facts ? It is
impossible to deny that from various circumstances
there was not that excitement in the country which
Reformers had a right to expect. Perhaps a different
state of things might sooner or later arise, but the
fact was as I have stated it. (Hear.) The House
of Commons had been accused of lukewarmness. It
is all very well to accuse the House of Commons,
but let me tell you that the fault lies, not with the
Rouse of Commons, but with the people themselves.
(Cheers.) I may be told that the case is not so,
because the people are not represented in Parlia-
ment, and cannot therefore have their voice heard.
That may be perfectly true, bat whose fault is it
that the people are not represented in Parliament?
It is their own fault. (Hear.) Who carried the
Reform Bill of 1832 ? Was it the members for the
rotten boroughs, or the few members who repre-
sented popular opinion in the house—men whom
you could have counted upon your 10 fingers. No,
the Reform Bill was carried by an unmistakeable
expression of public opinion out of doors. Who
carried free trade ? Not certainly the Protectionist
members of the House of Commons. Free trade
was carried by the people themselves, and until
we have a similar expression of public opinion on
the subject of reform there will be no Reform Bill.
(Hear.) The question therefore remains with you,
and no Government can do anything with it until
they have the support of the people. (Cheers.)
Under these circumstances, the reform question hav-
ing been withdrawn from consideration, it appeared
to me that as I agreed entirely with the Government
on matters of foreign policy—as I admired their
policy in Italy and saw its great results, as I believed
they had made the name of England honoured
abroad, and as I coincided with their Eastern policy
—I should have been a political coward if I had
refused to accept office when I had an opportunity
of carrying out my own opinions. (Cheers.) Before
going to public matters let me say a few words on
what are called local interests. When elected your
representative I was particularly pledged to attend
to your local interests. Have I neglected those in-
terests in any way ? (Cries of " No, no," and cheers.)
Last session Mr. Locke and myself succeeded in de-
feating two measures which if passed would have
seriously affected your local interests—the Do4er
Road Bill and the Rock Loan Bill. There is another
local question which I regard as one of the greatest
importance, and which is engaging a good deal of
public attention at the present moment. I refer, of
course, to the Thames embankment. (Hear, hear.)
You all know that in, consequence of the projected
embankment on the north side of the Thames the
river will be considerably raised, and that, flooded
as you have been hitherto, you will be flooded ten
times more if that embankment is carried out with-
out a corresponding embankment on the south
side.
(Hear, hear.) I accompanied a deputation to the
Prime Minister yesterday on that very subject.
Lord Palmerston, who received us most graciously,
promised that the matter should be carefully consi-
dered. I have since seen Mr. Cowper, the. Chief
Commissioner of Works, and he, too, promised that,
the subject should be brought before Parliament, at
the same time expressing his hope that the southern
embankment of the Thames would be speedily ar-
ranged. (Cheers.) Let me now proceed to public
matters. Of the light literature which one reads
during the recess, a great part consists of the
speeches of members who are out of work. I
have read a good many of those speeches recently,
and it appears to me that they may be characterised
generally as apologies for the donothingness of the
House of Commons. I shall not apply to the
makers of those speeches an old French proverb
which says that he who excuses himself accuses
himself, but still I believe that they are chiefly to
blame each individually for the fact, if it be one,that,
little was done last session. lam not here to apo-
logise for the House of Commons, but I think that
last session, although not a very brilliant one, was
certainly a very useful one. You will not expect
me to enumerate all the measures of domestic in-
'Wrest which -wave Passed in the course of the ses-
sion. Mr. Locke has
done so in a masterly

speech. He has given you an admirable description
of the bill for the reform of the Bankruptcy Court,
of the Post-office Savings-banks Bill—a most useful
measure, and one highly advantageous to the poorer
classes—and of the bill for the consolid I. ion of the
criminal code. But there was one me IL ure passed
last session upon which I wish to say one or two
words, because it materially affects the interests of
my constituents—l mean the bill introduced by Mr
Villiers with respect to a larger area for parochial
rating. That bill I regard as the first step towards
that which we all desire— equalisation of poor-rates.
(Hear.) It is only the first step, and it may be called
a little step, but it is, to use a common phrase, the
small end of the wedge, and I trust the day is not
far distant when the same principle will be extend-
ed to the whole of the metropolis, if not further.
(Cheers.) I have always been favourable to the
equalisation of the poor-rates, and I need hardly
say that I shall continue to give it my hearty sup-
port. (Hear.) There were three bills passed last
session to which I must make more than a passing
allusion, because they involve most important inte-
rests and obtained my cordial support. I allude to
the bills introduced by Sir C. Wood for the better
government of India. One related to the reform of
the civil service, one to the reform of the Legisla-
tive Council, and one to the establishment of judi-
cial tribunals in India. The first will have a
very important effect in opening the civil ser-
vice to the natives of India. Nothing struck
me more during a journey which I made in that
country at the time of the mutiny than the manner
in which we treated the natives. It is only too
true that whenever the Anglo-Saxon race comes
into contact with the natives of other countries in-
ferior to itself it is prone to treat them with haugh-
tiness, if not sometimes with cruelty. I have al-
ways wished to see a better feeling between the
natives of India and the people of this country.
Hitherto the former have been unable to make them-
selves heard in Parliament, but now the people of
this country, by uniting the empire of India to the
Crown of England, have taken upon themselves a
great responsibility. It is now their duty to watch
over the rights of the natives of India. (Hear.) The
second bill I have mentioned is one for abolishing
the old cumbrous machinery of a Legislative Coun-
cil assembling in Calcutta, which has worked ex-
ceedingly ill, and substituting in its stead a Legisla-
tive Council in each of the presidencies. But the
important consideration connected with that bill is
that for the first time the natives of India are
admitted to seats in the local Councils. Hitherto
the natives have been excluded from all
share in the administration of their own affairs. We
never consulted them, nor had we any means of
ascertaining their opinions and feelings. Now,
however, they will take their seats with Europeans
at the Council Boards. By teaching them to re-
spect themselves we shall teach them to be worthy
of our respect, and by thus throwing open the local
Councils we shall obtain this further advantage,
that through them we shall ascertain the feelings
and opinions of the natives. What an immense
advantage would such Councils have been only a few
years ago! How much bloodshed would we have
been spared in India! Perhaps those mutinies which
we still deplore might have been avoided if we had
known the opinions of the natives with respect to
our rule. (Hear.) The present bill, it is true, gives
the natives only a small share in the administration
of their own affairs, but it is a good beginning, and
I hope it will lead eventually to a full measure
of justice. The third bill—that relating to judi-
cial tribunals—has the same tendency. I think
Sir Charles Woad and the Government deserve
infinite credit for bringing forward and passing
three such measures. If you knew the opposition
which our countrymen in India give to Bills of this
nature you would be able to appreciate the difficul-
ties in the way of such legislation. The natives of
India have few friends in this country. Only a
very few men is the House of Commons, such as
Mr. Kinnaird and Colonel Sykes, have stood for-
ward in their behalf. On the other hand, the Eu-
ropean residents are generally wealthy men ; they
have plenty of friends, and they can make them-
selves heard in Parliament. Sir Charles Wood,
then, is entitled to great praise for what he has
done. He has passed three Bills which will have the
effect of raising the people of India in their own es-
timation and in ours. (Hear, hear.) Current
events are sufficient to show how deeply the inte-
rests of this country may be affected by India. We
are told by what is taking place on the other side
of the Atlantic how dangerous it is to be depen-
dent upon any one nation for the supply of an
article essential to the welfare and prosperity of
this country. India may furnish us with material
for our manufacturing districts; but, on the other
hand, let us remember that the people of India have
rights as well as ourselves; that we never can com-
pel any race to work against its will; and that we
must make a fair and just return for whatever we
get from India. (Hear, hear.) Englishmen go to
llndia with the notion that they have a right to
claim allotments of land from the Government, for-
getting that the soil of India belongs to the natives,
who have been in possession of it from time imme-
morial, and that we have no more right to interfere
with it than the hatives of India have to interfere
with the land of this country. (Cheers.) I trust
that the bills passed last Session will introduce a
better state of things. I believe them to be of the
utmost importance, as securing to the natives of
India some share in the administration of their own
affairs, and I have no doubt they will prove effective
and beneficial. (Hear, hear.) Reverting to the
question of Reform, I have merely to add to
what I have already said that if gatherings
similar to that which has just taken place at
Leeds are held throughout the country you
will soon have a Reform Bill. Do you think
that men like Lord Russell, Mr. Villiers, and Mr.
Milner Gibson are opposed to Reform? They have
been Reformers all their lives. (A cry of " Very
slow ones," and cheers.) But how are they Re-
formers ? They are Reformers as long as they re-
present the feelings of the people, but if they can-
not speak in your name and with your voice they
can do nothing in the House of Commons. (Hear,
hear.) I need scarcely remind you that even a very
small measure of Reform was defeated last session
—I mean the proposal to give members to Kensing-
ton and Chelsea. The Government brought in a bill,
but was it carried as they proposed it ? No. Whose
fault was that ? lam afraid it was the fault of the
Liberal members of the house. They might have
carried that bill, but as long as we have differences
of opinion and of interests among Liberal members
we shall never carry a measure of Reform, how-
ever small, in the House of Commons. The ques-
tion now rests with the constituencies. It is for
them to say whether they will have Reform or not.
There is, no doubt, an improved feeling in the
country. We have little of that agitation
or of those extreme opinions which prevailed a few
years ago. The prediction of Mr. Cobden has been
realised. He said that when the people got cheap
bread they would begin to forget their political
rights. I trust they will not go so far, but un-
doubtedly public opinion has undergone a great
change. Those who used to be called Chartists and
Radicals have modified their views ; they are much
more rational than formerly, They know what to
aim at; they have adopted the policy of O'Connell,
and are willing to proceed step by step. (Hear,
hear.) ,I have heard it said that the change in
Public opinion has been caused a good deal by
what we have seen on the other side of the
iotlwan i Atlantic. We have been told of the breaking
c democratic institutions. Now, in the first
plue, I do not believe that what has occurred in
the United States is a proof of the breaking down
of democratic institutions. (Hear.) You might
as well say that what we have seen in France—the
restoration of Imperialism—is a proof of the utter
valuelessness of constitutional monarchy. Wherever
error exists in the institutions of a State, evil will
result. If you do not reform in time, mischief will
be the end. There was a great error in the institu-
tions of the United States, and that error has led to
the present deplorable state tlhingsig.
might
tf ith ahvaedhbeeeenn
reformed in time, this e ,„,e re
acovutt; principle
dot it Reform
fo r
m holds
shakingg good d
our in
intshtiis,
a7-adeinsastmeae
tutioJA it will, if judiciously made,dea
strengthenl Reform,and
preserve them. (Hear, heal.) If you
then you have a chance of Looking down our hag-

tutioEs. England happily possesses an elastic 'Con-
stitution. Changes are gradually made—concessions
are granted when demanded by the people. I hope
that will continue to be the case. If the people

want Reform they will have it, but they will not get
it if they do not demand it. (Hear, hear.) Permit
me now to say a few words on foreign questions.
Here I must naturally speak with some reserve,
but at least I may fearlessly say that the foreign
policy pursued by the present Government has been
in accordance with the opinions and wishes of
the people of England. (Cheers.) So far, at any
rate, as its foreign policy is concerned, the Govern•

ment has the support of the country. I shall in a
few words tell you why. We have at the head of
the Government Lord Palmerston. Whatever his

views may be on matters of domestic policy, Lord
Palmerston has made the name of En gland respected
and honoured throughout the whole civilised world.
(Cheers.) He is undoubtedly the greatest Foreign

Minister this country over had. He is the only man
whose name is connected abroad with a system of

English foreign politics. During a long and bril-
liant career he has maintained the honour and dig-
nity of England. Ho has preserved her rights,
has raised her, as far as her foreign relations are

. _
concerned, to the highest pinnacle of fame. (Cheers.)

At the head of the Foreign Office at this moment

you have Lord Russell. He has always represented
the Liberal party. His opinions upon politics are

well known. He is essentially a Liberal among

Liberals, and his opinions, which have been dis-
played in reforming our institutions, are now
applied in carrying out our policy abroad. That
policy, it appears to me, is founded upon two very
distinct principles—first, non-intervention in the
affairs of other countries, allowing every people to
do what it chooses with its own ; and, secondly,

giving the moral support and sympathy of England
to those nations which are endeavouring to estab-
lish their liberties by means of institutions in con-

formity with our own. (Hear, hear.) A foreign
policy based upon those two principles will always
deserve and receive the support of the people of

England. Has the present Government observed
these principles in its foreign policy ? I venture to
say it has. Let me turn to Italy. See what that
country has done within the last few years—l may
almost say within the last few months. Within
two years Italy, so long a down-trodden country,
despairing, without hope, without a future,
has become a great and united kingdom. It
has become a kingdom which, ere long,
may place itself among the great Powers of the
world. It is wonderful to see what has been
done within the last few months,—railways
opened and in progress all over the Peninsula ;
a mercantile fleet as well as a navy in a state of
rapid development ; freedom of speech almost from
the Alps to the Adriatic, freedom of worship about to
be established. (Cheers.) It is true that something
is wanting to complete the picture, and make Italy
perfectlyhappy and prosperous, but that something
will be obtained hereafter, if the statesmen of Italy
only persevere in the wise, prudent, and moderate
course they have hitherto pursued. I do not believe
that it is possible that any nation can be kept for
long out of rights which are incontestably its own.
But at the same time we do not interfere. We say
to Italy, "You have oursympathy ; free institutions
will always have our moral support, but anything
mare we cannot and will not give. We think you
are unwise in asking it, for no nation deserves
liberty which has not conquered liberty for itself."
(Cheers.) I believe the moral support we have given
to Italy has donemore than armies could have done.
It has encouraged her and enabled her to place
herself in her present proud position, and she
will be grateful for it hereafter. (Cheers.) We
have done all this, too, without adding
millions to our debt, or bringing misery to a single
English home. (Hear, hear.) I say the Govern-
ment which has done that deserves the gratitude of
the people. (Cheers.) The same policy has been
pursued with respect to the American question. It
is sad to think that our brethren on the other side
of the Atlantic have not appreciated our policy.
They have mistaken us altogether ; they have
thought that we have shown a want of sympathy
with them. I do not believe it. What has been
the conduct of the House of Commons ? Last ses-
sion there was certainly no lack of sympathy for
America. Nobody ventured to bring the subject
before the House. When Mr. Gregory, the mem-
ber for Galway, impelled by a sense of public duty,
wished to bring it on, he was implored by a mem-
ber of the Opposition not to do so. Everybody
felt as if it were a domestic calamity, and people
spoke of it with bated breath. It is to be regretted
that the thoughtless words of a thoughtless young
man, uttered in the heat of debate, should have led
the American people to believe that we do not sym-
pathise with them. England does sympathise with
them, and why ? Because we know that slavery is
at the bottom of the struggle, and has led to it.
(Hear, hear.) I think we err when we judge the
American people by the fact that abolition has not
been proclaimed. To proclaim abolition at once
would have been impossible. You could not at once
liberate 4,000,000 of slaves, and if you did it might
lead to domestic catastrophes too horrible to be con-
templated. But what was the ground upon which
the separation took place ? It was the wish of the
North to prohibit the introduction of slavery into
what are called the Territories, with the view of lead-
ing to its gradual extinction in the Southern States.
That was the question upon which the great con-
test for the Presidentship took place, upon which
Mr. Lincoln was elected, and which has led to the
present lamentable war. lam not here to discuss whe-
ther North or South be right. We have said we will
not interfere. To say that because we have recog-
nised the Southern States as belligerents therefore
we have recognised them as an independent State
is absurd. We could not help recognising them as
belligerents. How could wo be prepared to treat
12,000,000 of people as pirates ? Even the North
has found it impossible to do so, and has been
obliged from the very nature of things to do as we
have done. (Hear, hear.) Let the Americans settle
their own quarrels. All we can hope is that when
this terrible contest has an end, whatever that end
may be, the liberty, happiness, and freedom of these
magnificent States may not be impaired. ( dear.)
We know that the interruption of communication
with the Southern States may lead to deplorable
results in this country. Thousands—nay, millions
—of our people are anticipating great misery and
distress; and yet, with all that suffering in pro-
spect, not a single petition has been addressed to
any member of the Government in favour of break-
ing the blockade or doing an illegal act. (Cheers.)
I:say, then, that the conduct both of the people of
England and the House of Commons has been noble
conduct, and the time will come when the wise and
good men of America—and there are many such in
the States—will acknowledge that in confining our-
selves to expressions of sympathy we have adopted
the policy best calculated to assist them in their
terrible struggle. (Hear.) But I wish you to under-
stand that, while we proclaim the principle of non-
intervention, we are resolved to make the rights of
Englishmen respected throughout the :world, and
to resent outrages committed on the persons of
English subjects. It is upon such grounds that we
have recently entered into a :convention for taking
possession of the ports of Mexico. Words cannot
describe the atrocities which have been committed
in Mexico upon the persons of English subjects. A
respectable gentleman named Beale was recently
murdered in cold blood, not with the view of get-
ting hold of his property, but out of pure hatred to
foreigners. In the same way a beautiful young
woman was put to death. No redress could be got
from the Government. You have all heard, per-
haps, how the agents of the Government broke
into the British Legation, and carried away a large
sum of money, the property of English subjects.
Are we to tolerate these things ? What would be
thought of the English Government if they were to
aalel7
ro Pinsgeleisthhastubsjoemctes
members
to e
mbe b
eorustroafg
have been endeavouring to make
political
the
ei nt h a t m
Opposition a
capitaln-
out of this Mexican e
the other day that the PEe dition.
e r on fmt
ohne
tm saidwere
e r e
GOovae
going to send a force to Mexico to collect the bad
debts of English subjects. That, of
course, is an utter
absurdity. We are not going to collect bad debts;
English traders must take their own risks; but we
are going to obtain redress for outrages .committed

on English subjects and English property. (Cheir-s.)
We disclaim all wish to interfere in the government
of the country; we repudiate all selfish objects;
what we hope is that the Mexican people may find
means to establish a Government sufficiently strong
to maintain order and fulfil its engagements with
foreign powers. (Hear.) A few words more and I
have done. I have heard it said there has been a
Tory reaction in this country. I very much doubt
whether that is so. There may have been a reac-
tion against certain extreme opinions, but that is
not a Tory reaction. At the same time it is not im-
possible that a Tory Government may sometimes be
a good thing for us It may show us, for example,
the great advantage of a Liberal Government. An
alderman should eat mutton broth once or twice a
week if for no other purpose than to increase his
relish for turtle and punch. So let us have a little
Tory mutton now and then to enhance our appre-
ciation of Liberal soup. (A laugh.) Some people
may think that a little experience of that union of
Church and State which has recently been so ear-
nestly advocated by a distinguished defender of the
faith might be useful in persuading us to continue
our efforts for the freedom of religion. (A laugh.)
But I do not believe that a reactionary Govern-
ment is possible for any length of time. (Hear,
hear.) The people are now on the road of pro-
gress. They will not suffer anything to cheek the
wheel ; they must go on ; they must obtain a
share in the administration of our own affairs. I
believe they will soon obtain it. The Government
have been liberal in their foreign and in their colo-
nial policy ; it is not possible, when the proper time
comes, that they will not pursue a liberal policy in
domestic affairs. With that conviction I have ac-
cepted office, and in doing so I believe I have
neither renounced my opinions, broken my pledges,
nor neglected your interests. I have always endea-
voured to secure your approbation, and I hope I
shall continue to deserve it. (Loud cheers.)
Several questions were then put to the hon. gen-
tleman, in reply to which he stated that he had no
doubt the Government would apply the principle of
non-intervention to the affairs of Hungary and Po-
land, though they would everywhere give sym-
pathy and moral support to oppressed peoples
struggling for their freedom. He also stated that
he was favourable to economy in the public expen-
diture, but thought that, considering the present
aspect of affairs, we could not safely revert to the
estimates of 1846.
A vote of confidence in Mr. Layard was moved
by Dr. Rendle, seconded by Mr. Harris, and carried
with acclamation. The meeting then separated.

him. He ate of it *artily, but did notrexchange a
word with any person.
Mrs., Molloy and her sister are in Jervis-street
Hospital, where the body of the child remains.
Policemen are in charge of the body of William at
the lodgings of the prisoner in South Cumberland-
street.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—Nov. 21.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Evans.)

THE BANK OP DEPOSIT, OR NATIONAL ASSURANCE AND

INVESTMENT ASSOCIITION.
A trader summons having been issued against the
above company, to-day was appointed for the hear-
ing. The summons was taken out under the Bank-
ruptcy Law Consolidation Act of 1849, and it was
directed to the company and to Mr Peter Morrison,
the managing director.
Mr. Roxburgh opposed for Mr. R. P. Harding,
the interim manager under the winding-up order
granted by the Master of the Rolls a few days ago;
Mr. Lawrence opposed on behalf of the association ;
and Mr. Turner appeared for the creditor on whose
) behalf the summons has been issued,

Mr. Turner, in support of the summons, stated
hat it was issued under the 78th clause of the act ;

and the 276th, which was the definition clause, de-
fined the steps which were to be taken.
Mr. Roxburgh—That clause is repealed by the
new act. It is not law now.

The Commissioner—Are you going to show cause
against the summons ?
Mr. Roxburgh—l shall have no difficulty in doing
that. Under the 12th and 13th Vic. members of an
incorporated company are not liable to the Bank-
rupt Act. The company did not come within the
definition of traders, and therefore did not come
within the definition of the act in that case pro-
vided. This company was styled the National As-
surance and Investment Association. The company
had been recognised by a private act of Parliament
which they had obtained. They were established
in 1844, for receiving monies which were invested
in life assurance. The company did not even come
under the 7th and Bth Vic., and where the issue had
been tried of trader-debtor summonses against com-
panies they had invariably failed. This was an
experiment of that description.
Mr. Lawrence, for the company, followed on the
same side, and contended that by chap. 110 of the
Joint-Stock Companies Act this case could not be
considered to apply. He then referred to the fol-
lowing section, in which he said three modes were
open for persons making themselves bankrupts.
Firstly, it provided that the company might be made
bankrupt ; secondly, a course was pointed out by
which such company might be made bankrupt.
Here it was sought to make Mr. Peter Morrison,
the managing director, liable. If Mr. Peter Morri-
son was so in his capacity of manager, then he was
so liable as a bankrupt, and he was liable under the
second section ; and the third section provides that
the company might make itself bankrupt. There
was a simple remedy open. If a judgment had
been obtained, why did they not serve a de-
mand on the company, as had been done in
the case of the European and Steam Shipping Com-
pany ? There was a course which could be pursued
as shown by that which was popularly known as
" the Royal British Bank section. Creditors always
had remedies. When an adjudication was made
against the Royal British Bank, it was annulled;
but a service of demand having been made, and, after
the expiration of thirty days, it remaining unsatis-
fied, adjudication took place. How could the whole
of the company appear to answer a trader-debtor
summons?
Mr. Turner, in reply, quoted several sections of
the act, and said it clearly was an association.
Mr. Lawrance—l never saw such a summons in
my life. It is addressed to the National Assurance
and Investment Association and Mr. Peter Morri-
son. It is not a banking association but a company.
We say the parties who you appear for are partners,
but I shall say no more about that at present, because
it remains to be decided hereafter.
Mr. Turner—Now Messrs. Lubbock carry on busi-
ness as bankers next door. Suppose they were to
suspend payment, should I not be justified in serving
them with a summons as a banking association ?
Mr. Lawrance They are not a company.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Turner—The private act provides that in all
cases of default, &c., Mr. Peter Morrison may sue
as managing director, and therefore I contend that
the summons is in proper form. I urge that all
banking companies ought to be brought within the
operation of the act I have cited.
The Commissioner—l do not understand this sum-
mons at all. If you have a trader-debtor summons,
why not have it against Mr. Peter Morrison, who
will then have an opportunity of appearing and
answering it ?
Mr. Turner said that under the special act Mr.
Morrison was to do all the " necessary acts of the
company," and it was therefore supposed that he
was the proper party to be sued.
The Commissioner said that the present summons
he could not understand. He could understand Mr.
Morrison being summoned, with the view of his
being a trader ; but he could not understand this
summons. What could the Court be supposed to
know of the National Assurance Association ?
Mr. Lawrance—Your honour never issued a sum-
mons against a company in your life, or against
anybody else.
The Commissioner—l can take no notice of this
proceeding.
Mr. Turner—But the special act.
The Commissioner—Oh, that is nothing.
Mr. Turner—When the summons was taken out
they got an adjournment by consent, and in the
meantime took advantage of that adjournment to
obtain a winding-up order in Chancery.
Mr. Roxburgh—l may mention that the matter
is now being wound up in Chancery.
The Commissioner—Never mind. I dismiss the
summons, but will say nothing about costs.
The following was the form of summons :—" I,
James Rawlings Monday, of No. 3, Moore-place,
Kennington-road, Surrey, surgeon, make oath and
say, that the banking company known or called by
the name of the National Assurance and Investment
Association, of No. 3, Pall-mall East, in Middlesex,
and who have from time to time advertised their
said place of business by the name of the Bank of
Deposit, 3, Pall-mall East, and of which banking
company or association Peter Morrison is the
managing director, are truly and justly indebted to
me in the sum of £lOO for cash paid and deposited
by me with the said banking company or associa-
tion, at their said place of business, situate at No.
3, Pall-mall East, on the 18th April, 1861: tliat
Mr. Peter Morrison was served with a notice, Bze."
7,' I