The Sun.
London, England, 1857-09-12 00:00:00

IN RE J. F. GOODERED.

The bankrupt was a wine merchant, of the Pic-
:. ; •
cactiily Saloon.' This was an examination meeting.
Mr. Lucas appeared.,for the petitioning creditor,
Mr. Murrough- for. the Assignees, ,and Mr.lLaw-
ranee for the bankrupt. The, accounts have al-
ready appeared in. TheStt. ;
The bankrupt examined, said--Onthe 23d March
.he .gave .a bill of-sale over the whole of his effects at
the. Saloon to Messrs. Seale and Ca. Tha consi-
deration. was a sum of 862/., and he gave a receipt
for that; amount. He. only, 150/, the
iiifferenee_b,eing money that he awed before, ,Se ale
and Co. did not take possession undepthe bill of
sale, but, under a warrant of attorney which. he bad
given them orrthe same day that he gave the bill of
sale. 'The power of attorney was for the whole
.8621:
The Coramissioner---Who are Seale and Co. ?

Mr. Lucas—The proprietors or.. a loan and'.dis-
count office who have since -oallei ,theselves
banke,themselves

Examination continued—He wasin prison at the
time of the sale, and the Sheriff got his carent, to
sell.: It was six orseven weeks aft-r having given
the bill of sale that Seale and Co.• took possession.
The bill of sale was not given to protect the pro-
perty. . He hari resided at Westmorland-vdla,
Kensington, with a lady. The furniture. there
did not. belong to him, but to the lady. • The
furniture had been deposited with ;Mr. Tingdy for
200/..,and he ,had signed a memorandum, upon
permission of the lady, that the, property wag his.
The : furniture included a table which,hei had
made a present of to the lady on her ;birthday.
He bad kept books showing his profi's at the
E•aloon, and•he was new attend;ng at the saloon for
his brother. Messrs. Seale and Co. had let the
premises to his brother, and. he was acting as his
servant. Persons were admitted, to, the saloon by
.refreshment tickets of In. -6J.' each.
The. Commissioner—Are visitors bound to take
refreshments

The.bankrupt explained that they were required
to take the Aicket only a,s a cleAirabla .ragulation.
He had. kept bettitig-rooms at Doncaster as-admi-
nistrator of his father. ; . 12

, Mr. Lucas—Do you mako bets in the ,chafacter
of administrator , .

Mr. Lawrance subraitted that the learned coun-
sel rh,litld not make sport of bis client.; and
The Commissioner .decided that the question
need not be answered. •

• Examination of bankrupt continued—The rooms
at-Doncaster were carried on by himself and a Mr.
Atkins. Had never kept books showing the profits
of the rooms. The receipts of. the last races were
ordy 575/., not 8001.—it was a bad year.
Mr.- Lucas—Have you not taken as much as
113,000/. ? . = _ _ _

'rho bankrupt—No ; ,he had nob kept books of
the receipts, neither had ,Atkins that he was
aware of. .
• Mr: Lucas called the, attention of the Court to
the circumstance that,; although the bankrupt had
carried on an extensive trade be now appeared with
accounts showing only two debtors to his estate.
The bankrupt—lt was a ready-money house.
( Laugh t er. ) . . .
The bankrupt, ,examinedby Mr. Lawrence, said,
•he succeeded his father, who had carried on the

business for a great many years. He had charged
himself with profits 3,000/. during the last two
years. The Doncaster 'betting rooms were sup-
ported 'by subitribers' who paid it. ls. back He
ha•l kept a list of the members. It was not neces-
sary to keep any books beyond this list. Every-
thing was vouched except the Doncaster business.
Mr. Lucas remarked upon the manner in which
the• bankrupt's property hid passed to Messrs.
Seale awl Co.

Mr. Murrough said, it was but just to the bank-
rupt to state that the a.signe es were of opinion that
he had, correctly stated, the position of affairs be-
tween himself and Messrs. Seale.

Mr. Lucas submittal that the property obtained
by Messrs. Seale and Co. was recoverable for the
creditors generally. The bill of sale given to them
wag an act of bankruptcy itself. It had been de
cided in the case of Graharn and Chapman, that a
bill of sale, part of the consideration for which was
a' by-gone debt, was an 'act of bankruptcy. The
trade assignee was the bankrupt's own surgeon on
a debt part of which was nearly ten years old.
The' Commissioner—What is his name ?
Mr. Lucas--Robins. The creditor for whom I
appear wishes to be allowed to inves'tigate the bank-
rupt's affairs and to bring an action against Seale.
A meeting is a,.ked at which -Messrs.•Saye and Sale
may be examined.
The Commissioner--Who did you call them—
Sayo and Sole ? -
- Mr. Lucas—l was thinking at the moment of
Lord Soya and Sale.' I meanfto say Seale and Co.
Thera are no ass •ts -wherewith to defray the ex-
penses -of the meeting or by wlich Mr.,Nathan
can be reimbursed: It is the wish of Mr.-Nathan,
however, to examine Messrs. Sayc and Sole. I beg
your honour's pardon. (Laught-r.) •
Mr.-- Lawrance—You ought rather to • ask his
Lordship's pardon. • •
• Mr. Lucas proceeded .to •urge. that Mr. Robins
had overtopped Mr. Nathan in the choice of assig-
nees, and elected himself to that office.
Mr. La,wrance—lt was, unquestionably, a vary
fierce contest. Mr. Natba•n tried his strength, and
Mr. Robins.beat him. I do not object, at all to
your bringing an action on giving an indemnity
against costs. Mr. Lawrance proceeded to urge
that the application was foreign to the business of
-
the day • that all the credit Ors who had furnished
the bankrupt with either money or goods were per-
fectly aware of the nature of his business, and that
the bankrupt should be allowed to pass his last
examination.

Mr. Lticas—Seale has get" all the London pro-
perty ; a person named Wood has got 'all the Don-
.caster property. The balnkrupt ought, not to be
allowed to pass until there has been further inves-
tigation.
Mr. Murrough isaid-the assignees were satisfied
that the bankrupt's transactions with Messrs. Seale
and Co. were bona fide.' Mr. Seale would attend
With great pleasure to be examined. It was not
right that 'the assignees should be accused of laxity.
They thought that the property could not ba re-
covered. They had no objection, howeier, to Mr.
Nathan prosecuting an action in the names of the
official assignee and the trade assignees—whose
names must necessarily be used in any action—on:
receiving an indemnity. • -
Mr. Cannan (the official assignee) said he had the
strongest objection .to his name being used in any
such action: It was his opinion that nearly the
entire value of the property held was in the forni
of the goodwill of an infamous trade, and that any
action must fail

Mr. Lucm—The goodwill is' said to' 'be worth
I,BCOY. a-year.
Mr. Lawranco .contended that tho case of
" Graham.and Chapman" was not analogous to the
one before the Court. •
The Commi,sioner—,Mr. Canaan objects to the
use of his name in the .matter. • •
-Mr.. Lucas urge l that, although t hat' was natural
enOugh," an official assign6e- Was bound to allow an
action in hiS name on redeiving an indemnity. His
chent was desiretis by e,'ety ]means in his p jwer to
r-c )ver the koperty.
Lawrance--44 frien I 4r. Lticfo,9 is really
misinsttucted, Messrp, bale and, Co. soil -under
the warrant a attorney, not. Under the bill of sale.
•Tharasefrof " Graham and Chapman" cannot apply.
The Commissioner thought that whether the pro-
perty :had been taken nuclei. 'the bill of sale or
under the warrant of attorney was foreign to the
,point: The question was whether the property had
b,een diverted from its proper course.' ;He siw
no, objection.. to' Mr. Nathan having a meeting
at, his own expense fur the examination of Mr.
Sqale, and he might employ, li Own solicitor to
prosecute the; inquiry. , -, •
,Lucas—ln. the .xn,eaAtime :the baukrupt's
examination..wilb i
he, adjourned. There s not a
farthing for the creditor.
After some Author discus3iou Elm adjournment