The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-13 00:00:00

Mr. Mills—This is a ca.e of great hardship upon me.
I have earned my daily bread ; and here are the savings
of many years.
Mr. Bagley—Nobody can help feeling for you and
persons in your position.
Mr. Kennedy—Perhaps your Honour will put upon
this examination, " without prejudice."
The Commissioner—lt cannot prejudice him in any
way • he has said nothing to prejudice himseff.
The next case taken was that of Mr. Adolphus Scher.
mann, of George-street, Minories. This was the share-
holder who first petitioned the Court of Chancery for a
winding-up order.
Mr. Solomon appeared on behalf of Mr. Schermann,
who was examined as follows by Mr. Bagley :
Are you a shareholder in the Royal British Bank ?
I am, unfortunately, what is called a shareholder, but I
consider that the money which was ipaid on the new
shares has been obtained by fraud. I consider that those
shares are not shares at all ; that the money has been
obtained from the shareholders by fraud. lam a share-
holder in respect of 10 shares issued on the 6th January,
1855.

Those shares were granted you upon that application
(handing a paper to the witness) Is that your signa-
ture ?—Yes. I inquired of the manager, and I had his
advice personally to recommend these shares. He
promised that they would pay 6 per cent. interest.
You say you took those shares on the recommendation
of the manager ?—Yes, Mr. Cameron ; and Mr. Craw•
ford was likewise there at the same time.
But whose recommendation had you ?—That of Mr.
Crawford.
Was he one of the managers ?—He was the secretary,
I believe, at that time. I happened to have a deposit
of money there.
What did Mr. Crawford say ?—.He said that the bank
was in a thriving state, and wound pay a good dividend.
On thof-• representations I was induced to take the
shares ?
Did you receive any dividends on those shares ?—I
twice received dividends. I call it only interest ; I
don't call it a dividend. It was my profit at the bank.
It was paying me my own money back again.
Did you sign those warrants, dated Feb. 18 and Aug.
15, 1856 ?—Yes.
Did you receive the amounts specified in those war-
rants ?--E did.
Mr. Salomon—What were you told that those war-
rant.; were fur ? —As interest.
Mr. Bagley—By whom were you told that ?—From
Mr. Crawford.
That was on the money you paid for the shares ?
Yes.

Are you aware that the directors made a call of 501.
per share ?—I am a.eare of it.
Had you notice Of it I—l had.
Mr. Solomon—Do you know when you had that
notice ?—About a fortnight after the baiik stopped pay-
me m.
By Mr. Bagley—Did you pay that call, or any part
of it ?—I did not. Tfiero were likewise two ether calls
made, one by the C ,urt of Coancery, and the other by
the Court if Bankrupty after that.
Did you ever offer to pay any part of that call ?—I
did not.
Did you make an offer of 100/.l—l made an offer of
1001. t 3 Mr. Linklater after I received the notice of
call. I said I would find a friend to pay that if they
would give me a release altogether.
You offered to pay 1001. if they would give you a
release altogether ?—Yes.
Mr. Solomon—Oh, yes, I offered that.
Mr. Bagiey—Did you add that if the 1001. was not
acceptA it would do to take you through the court, or
words to that effect ?—I said something to that effect. I
said at the time that I was not liable, because I consi-
dered that the bank would not issue new shares then.
Did you say that at the same time ?—I did. I con-
sidvred that the bank was at that time dissolved,

Have yuu since then transferred or made away with
any of your property ?
Mr. Solomon—l do not think you need answer that
question. You are summoned here to show came why
you do not pay the debt or admit it. Ido not think you
can inquire into his private affairs.
Mr. Schermann—l did threaten.
The Conimi,si mer—l don't ink it is material fur the
present inquiry.
Mr. Solumon—Tho wording of the summons confines
the mquiry to the debt he owes.
Mr. Bagley—Ara you ready now to pay this 501. call,
or any part of it ?—I am not.
Why n )t ?—l❑ the first place, I am not in a position ;
and secur.dly, I object because there have been different
calls.

The whole or any part of the debt ?—The whole or
any part of the debt.
jg Are you a creditor of the bank ; do they owe you any
money ?—I drew a cheque the day before the stoppage,
and paid it to a party for 701. odd. If this cheque was
honoured it would exhaust my balance within a few
shillings.
Are you a creditor or are you not I—That cheque was
not presented until the next day, when the bank stopped ;
so I don't know whether I am or not.
How much was it for ?-701. odd.
If that was paid there would be no further balance due
to you !-- —There would not, except some few shillings.
If that was not paid you would consider yourself a
creditor of the bank for that amount ?—Yes.
This concluded Mr. Schermailft; case.
Mr. Blunt said he appeared on behalf of Mr. James
Mackay, of Richmond, who was one of the unfortunate
shareholders of the. class B. He was a teacher of lan-
guages; and, though be_bad nothing but hie furniture, he

I port of the summonses. Some of the shareholders were
represented by professional men, but the majority of
them appeared without advisers.
The first case taken was that of Mr. T. C. Mills, of
Camden-town.
Mr. Kennedy said he appeared for Mr. Mills, who
was a shareholder and also a creditor of the bank. A
call of 50/. per share bad been made upon him by the
official assignee, and also one of 751. per share by the
official manager. He denied that the call was a good
one, but if it were decided to be good, would not give
any trouble' but was content to pay it. All he said
was he did not admit the call to be a debt. The
question was whether the assignees were entitled to
examine Mr. Mills at all under these circumstances. The
claim could hardly be said to be a debt.
The Commissioner—That is the question that is to be
determined. Nothing that is taken down will at all pre-
judice yGur client. You can take the examination under
a sort of protest as to the validity of the claim.
Mr. Kennedy —But we have really a bona fide answer
t,) this claim. They owe us 4501. on a drawing account,
but I am told we cannot set that off here; and I under-
stand the official manager has objected to allow those
who have paid this call to set it off against the call of
751.

The Commissioner—All that we require now is merely
to get the facts. This gentleman may now state, if he
chooses, that he disputes the validity of the call. He
merely admits that he holds so many shares, on which,
if the call be good, he will have to pay so much money.
He can further state that he is a creditor of the bank
fur so much money.
Mr. Kennedy I would suggest that the examination
should stand over till the question of the validity of the
call is disposed of. We have no desire to litigate.
The Commissioner—Simply getting the facts will do
nobody ai,y harm.
Mr. Bagley—That is all we propose to do.
Mr. Mills was then examined and deposed as follows:
—I am a clerk in the London and North-Western
Railway. I hold six shares in the Royal British Bank.
They are all transfer shares, and I produce them. I
received seven dividends, I believe on the above shares,
the last being for the half-year ending June 39, 1856.
I paid the amount of that dividend to the credit of my
drawing account with the bank. The dividend warrants,
dated 18th of February and 15th of August last, are
r-spectively signed by me and were paid into the Royal
British Bank to the credit of my drawing account.
Mr. Bagley—Did you have notice of the call made by
the directors of the company for 501. per share.
Mr. Mills—l had notice that they had passed a reso-
lution to make a call.
Mr. Bagley—That was before they became bankrupt ?
Mr. Mills—lt was after they had stopped.
Mr. Bagley—Can you state the date when you received
that notice I
Mr. Mills—No, I could not. It was some days after
they had stopped. I think the bank stopped on the sth
and this was about the 17th of September.
Mr. Bagley—You have never paid that call, I sup-
pose. ?
Mr. Mills—l have not.
Mr. Bagley—Nor any part of it ?
Mr. Mills—Nor any part.
Mr. Bagley—Are you prepared to pay it now, or any
part ?

- Mr. Mills—l have been prepared to pay it to the par-
ties who may be decided to be the proper and legal
parties to receive it ; but I have been confounded and
c•nfused with the accounts that I have received of two
courts applying for the same. All I want to know is
who are the proper parties to make the call.
The Commissioner—You mean to say, you are ad-
vised that the call is not a valid call !
Mr. Mills—Yes. My impression is that it was not a
call, but only a resolution to make ons, but they did
not make it.
The Commissioner—And you had better say, subject
to the set-off.
Mr. Bagley—ls that so ? Are you a creditor to the
bank
Mr. Mils—l am.
Mr. Bagley—To the amount of how much ?
Mr. Mills-4291. 19s. 3d.
Mr. Begley—ls that the balance of your drawing
account ?
Mr. Mills—lt is. It is a little more than the actual
balance ; something, I suppose, has been added for inte-
rest. The balance in my pass-book is 4901. 16s. 7d.,
but my debt has been admitted by the official manager
to be 4921. 19s. 3.1.
The Commissioner—Yon have no claim against the
British Bank, but upon a drawing account
Mr. Mills—No.
Mr. Bagley—Do you desire to set off the claim that
you have against the call?
Mr. Kennedy—l object to that question. He has
already stated that you have a claim, and he is ready
to settle it.
Mr. Mills—l should be quite ready to settle from the
balance that I hold as a creditor ofthe bank provided I am
shown who are the proper parties to receive the amount.
I don't want to give any trouble. I have very little to
pay with. I have paid 3001. for my shares.
Mr Bagley—The set-off is a matter of discretion with
the parties, whether they choose to set off their claims
or not.
The Commissioner—But the act of parliament directs
that, if the debtorb to a bankrupt estate have a set-off,
the court shall go into the account.
Mr. Bagley --Just so, it the party comes to prove a
debt.