The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-22 00:00:00

BETTING AT MANCHESTER-THURSDAY.

Dundee was nit firm for the Derby to-day, 9 to 2 being
freely offered against him. Rouge Dragon was in much
request for this event, and all the 25's to 1 that, could be
obtained were taken about him. Matador, about whom a
bet of 300 to 100 was booked for the "blue ribbon," was
supported for the Two Thousand Guineas Stakes at 100 to
9. 10 to 1 was offered on the field for the City and
Suburban Handicap, and Chance Shot was rather freely
supported for the same event, but 22 to 1 was the lowest
price that we saw taken. Butterfly and Sweet Hawthorn
were in much request for the Chester Cup, but no one
seemed disposed to make any offer against Chere Arnie.
100 to 8 was offered on the field for the Northamptonshire
Stakes. For the Great Metropolitan Stakes Betts would
have been supported, but 8 to 1 was the only bet we saw
taken, and that merely to a small sum, from which circum-
stance we are inclined to believe that there are but few
books opened on the last-named event. Closing prices :

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE STAKES.
12 to lon the field (offered)
CITY AND SUBURBAN.
10 to lon the field (offered)
100 to 8 agst First Lord (offered)
100 to 6 agst Industrious (offered)
22 to 1 agst Chance Shot.(taken)
25 to 1 agst Dover (taken)
100 .o 3 agst Pancake (taken)
100 to 3 agst Sawcutter (taken)
100 to 3 agst Apollyon (taken?
METROPOLITAN HANDICAP.
Sto 1 agst. Betts (taken)
CHESTER CUP.
100 to 6 agst Butterfly (offered, take 20 to 1)
20 to 1 agst Wild Rose (taken)
25 to 1 agst Sweet Hawthorn (taken)
TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS.
6to lon the field (offered)
11 to 1 agst Matador (taken)
DERBY.
9to 2 agst Dundee (offered)
22 to 1 agst Dictator (otered)
25 to 1 agst Rouge Dragon (taken freely)
30 to '1 agst Matadorftaken)
33 to 1 agst Kildonan (taken)

THE NE Jr BANKRUPTCY BILL.

The Bankruptcy Bill is receiving its last exami-
nation in detail by the Commons previous to being
sent forth from that house as an exposition of what
a law of debtor and creditor should be. It would be
premature to say that the measure as it now stands
is to be our law for the future. It has to undergo
yet another ordeal, through which it will probably-
not pass altogether unscathed. The Lords, how-
ever, are not likely to interfere with those parts of
the bill which are looked upon as most important
by the commercial classes ; nor is it probable that
any difference of opinion can arise between the
two houses which will be sufficient to prevent Sir
Richard Bethell's second bankruptcy attempt from
becoming law. Fragmentary and imperfect as it
is, it is still a very considerable achievement for a
House of Commons at this early period of the ses-
sion, and, so far as we can judge of it with its pre-
sent rather unreadable manuscript corrections and
interpolations, it promises to satisfy all the imme-
diate exigencies of the commercial body.
It is undoubtedly a disadvantage, as Mr. Henley
last night complained, that this bill has not been
reprinted since it passed through committee. It
is scaroely possible as it now stands for any one to
retain a clear idea of the whole scope of the
amendments which have been made or to calcu-
late their action upon the working of the scheme
as originally proposed. We speak, therefore,
with a reservation when we say that the principal
objects for which it was prepared seem to be
attained by the measure as it came out of Com-
mittee and as it now appears. It simplifies the whole
of the proceedings in the collection and distribution
of an insolvent estate. It defines with what at
present appears to be sufficient precision the circum-
stances which shall justify a man's creditors in
taking his property out of his hands and dividing
it to satisfy his debts. It separates the questions
of law which may arise as to the debtor's liabilities

from the mere administrative functions of collec-
tion and distribution. It creates a Judge who shall
be the supreme authority as to the law, and it
allows to the creditors the control of the funds. It
makes wholesome provision for keeping down the
expense, and it relieves the estate from the unne-
cessary charges accumulated by the court func-
tionaries. These are in themselves very great
improvements upon the old system. But it also
provides machinery by which the small estate of a
bankrupt who has not soared into the higher, and,
as it seems to be considered, the more respectable,
atmosphere of debt, can be distributed without
being entirely consumed as fuel for the great steam-
engine which used to be set at work. Moreover,
it does all this without demanding any unreason-
able sacrifice from the public resources, and with-
out injustice to any one, except, perhaps, the County
Court Judges—those patient camels who are always
kneeling to take up more burdens, and who are
always being fed with promises which fail on their
way to performance.
All this is discernible in the Bill as it stands.
We hope to coo it more clearly when its clauses
have fallen into rank, and have been duly drilled by
the Attorney-General and his adjutant, the Queen's
printer. Up to this point the Bill only undertakes
the humble but most useful office of making reco-
very by Bankruptcy as cheap and efficient as the
circumstances of the debtor's estate will admit. Up
to this also the House of Commons have placed
themselves with a simple faith under the guidance
of the Attorney-General. So, when Sir Richard
Bethell swept away the whole absurdity of classed
certificates, and the medieval contrivance of punish-
ing an imprudent or fraudulent trader by an en-
forced condition of idleness, the House was still
ductile. When, moreover, for the first time, fraudu-
lent trading was made a criminal offence, no one
objected ; although some perhaps may have won-
dered why so noxious a crime should be touched so
tenderly, and why the power of the Judge to sen-
tence should be so very limited. All these divisions
of the Bill, however, passed with an unanimity and
good-will which we cannot too much commend, and
which we hope will be rewarded by the proof here-
after that the care of the draughtsman was equal
to the confidence reposed in him by the Legislature.
No serious fight took place until Sir Richard Bethell
passed out of the old domain of Bankruptcy, and un-
dertook to search all the kingdom through and bring
every one within its purview. This is the weak point
of the measure. We were the first to point out the
consequences which must arise from subjecting two
classes of different habits and necessities in relation
to their money arrangements to similar rules
in respect of their obligations ; and the mistake Sir
R. Bothell made in this matter caused the miscar-
riage of his former bill. Sir Hugh Cairns and Sir
George Bowyer have worked this subject in the
present session, and last night the Attorney-General,
under the pressure of their opposition, agreed that
a non-trader shall when abroad not be made a
bankrupt until some serious attempt has been made
to serve him with a notice that this contingency is
impending over him. The concession is not unrea-
sonable. It is no more than the Common Law
Procedure Act already enacts as a preliminary to
getting a judgment against a man who is absent
from the country. It is, however, some protection
against experimental lawyers of a certain caste,
and some safeguard against the easy gratification of

malevolence. Whether it is sufficient we shall be
better able to judge when we see the provision in
print. In another foray into regions beyond the
necessary scope of a Bankruptcy Bill the Attorney-
General was less prudent and less fortunate. Per-
haps with some classical recollections of the practice
of the Egyptians, he proposed to make dead men
bankrupt. Clause 237 had during the discussions
acquired the short title of " the dead man's clause."
The determination of the Attorney-General to re-
tain this excrescence upon his bill led him into a
defeat ; and, if we non-traders must live in some
terror of this universal possibility of bankruptcy,
we may at any rate die without fear of the Gazette.
A discussion raised by Mr. Ayrton upon the
clause of the bill which provides that persqns im-
prisoned under the County Court Acts shall not be
released lets in the whole question of a distinction,
between the rich and poor in the law of debtor
and creditor. We are quite sure that it would
astonish the, public if the County Court Judges,
,were to describe the operation of the imprisonment
clauses of the County Court Acts —with what
cruelty they often work, and what protection they
afford to the " tally-men," who press the families
of artisans to take on credit unnecessary goods at
exorbitant prices. These, however, are only
matters which cause a little friction in the passage
of the measure. In no case do they go to the vital
parts of the bill. Even the fusion of bankruptcy
and insolvency is admitted to be most convenient
in itself; and if the Attorney-General will only
satisfy the non-trading portion of the community
that he does not insist upon rendering it a pre-
sumption of law that they keep a shop or a count-
in-house, and are always at home ready at any
hour to pay any bill that may be presented to
them at a moment's notice, the division against
Sir H. Cairn's attempt to alter the interpretation
clause makes it evident that the House of Commons
has no to his fusion principle, and has every
desire to pass his bill.--Tines.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—March 21.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
PEAKE V. PEAKE.-INCEST.
In July, 1850, the respondent, a pocket-book
manufacturer in London, married the petitioner,
and resided with her about six years. In 1856,
Elizabeth Divine, his wife's sister, went to live with
them in Union:street, Edgware-road, where it was
alleged that an incestuous intimacy sprung up
between her and the respondent. The landlady
told the petitioner what she had observed between
them, and a separation ensued. Peake then co-
habited with his sister-in-law.
The court made a decree nisi.
BRAMALL V. BRAMALL.-BIGAMY.

The respondent, a druggist in the West country,
married Rebecca Coath, at Stoke Damerel, in 1839 ;
but after a short time he deserted her. In 1842, he
married Elizabeth Tinley at Barnstaple, under the
n -me of Henry Bennett. He repeated this offence
of bigamy several times ; and in 1848 he was con-
victed at the Old Bailey on two indictments; for
which he was sentenced to 14 years' transportation.
Dr. Spinks appeared for the petitioner.
The court dissolved the marriage.
FOWLER V. FOWLER.

The petitioner, a mariner, married the respon-
dent in Cumberbind, on the 26th of April, 1836,
and had by her eight children, of whom four sur-
vived. The respondent unfortunately took to
drinking. In 1859, while her husband was absent
from the country, she was delivered of a child in
Whitehaven workhouse, under circumstances which
left no doubt as to her adultery.
Dr. Spinks appeared for the husband.
The court dissolved the marriage.
TOWNSON V. TOWNSON AND MURRAY.

Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., and Dr. Spinks appeared
for the petitioner ; Dr. Swabey for the respondent.
The parties were married at Lancaster in 1853,
and had had two children, of whom one survived.
The husband was a publican at Liverpool, and
in 1856 his wife contracted very disgusting habits
of intoxication. On one occasion her husband took
steps to summon her before the magistrates for
assaulting him, and on another she was actually
brought up at the police court for having been found
drunk, and incapable in the streets. There were
several separations, but the cohabitation was not
finally severed till April, 1860, when she went home
late one night and drunk. An altercation ensued of
a character which compelled the petitioner to turn
her out into the street, and to shut up his house.
At first the police took her away, but she succeeded
in getting from them, and coming back made a noise
at the door. The petitioner still refused to admit
her; and at a later period she committed the act of
adultery complained of with a butcher.
Dr. Swabey made an attempt to show that her
fault was owing to the husband's ill treatment; but
The Court granted a rule nisi.
Dr. Swabey asked whether the Court did not
think it a case in which some provision ought to be
made for the wife?

Sir C. Cresswell certainly did not. She had had
many chances of reforming, but she had chosen to
pursue the same filthy course.
The next three cases on the list were abated by
the death of one or other of the parties.