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

IN RE J. F. GOODERED.

The bankrupt was a wine merchant, of the Pic-
cadilly Saloon. This was an examination meeting.
Mr. Lucas appeared for the petitioning creditor,
Mr. Murrough for the assignees, and Mr. Law-
ranee for the bankrupt. The accounts have al-
ready appeared in The Sun.
The bankrupt examined, said—On the 23d March
he gave a bill of sale over the whole of his effects at
the Saloon to Messrs. Seale and Co. The consi-
deration was a sum of 8621., and he gave a receipt
for that amount. He only received 1501., the
difference being money that he owed before. Seale
and Co. did not take possession under the bill of
sale, but under a warrant of attorney which he had
given them on the same day that he gave the bill of
sale. The power of attorney was for the whole
8621.

The Commissioner—Who are Seale and Co. ?

Mr. Lucas—The proprietors of a loan aid dis-
count office who have since milel themselves
bankers.

Examination continued—He was in prison at the
time of the sale, and the Sheriff got his consent to
sell. It was six or seven 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 bad resided at Westmorland-villa,
Kensington with a lady. The furniture there
did not belong to him, but to the lady. The
furniture had been deposited with Mr. Tingey for
2001.. and he had signed a memorandum, upon
permission of the lady, that the property was his.
The furniture , included a table which he had
made a present of to the lady on her birthday.
He had kept books showing his profits at the
saloon, and he was now attending at the saloon fur
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 ls. 61. each.
The Commissioner—Are visitors bound to take
refreshments 1

The bankrupt explained that they were required
to take the ticket only as a desirable regulation.
He had kept betting-rooms at Doncaster as admi-
❑istrat A. of his father.

Mr. Lucas—Do you make bets in the character
of administrator ?

Mr. Lowrance submitted that the learned coun-
sel should not make sport of his client ; and
The Commissioner decided that the question
need not be auswt-red.

Examination of bankrupt continued—The rooms
at Donca4ter 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
only 5751., not 800/.—it was a bad year.
Mr. Lucas—Have you not taken as much as
10,000/. ?

The bankrupt—No ; he had not 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 he now appeared with
accounts showing only two debtors to his estate.
The bankrupt—It was a ready-money house.
(Laughter. )
The bankrupt, examined by Mr. Lowrance, said,
he succeeded his father, who had carried on the
business for a great many years. Ho hal charged
him.,elf with profits 3,C00/. during the last two
years. The Doncaster betting rooms were sup-
ported by sub etibers who paid 17. ls. each. He
hal 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 had passed to Messrs.
Seale awl Co.

Mr. Murrough said, it was but just to the bank-
rupt t• state that the a=signees 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
was an act of bankruptcy itself. It had been de-
cided in the case of Graham 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 investigate the bank-
rupt's affairs and to bring an action against Seale.
A meeting is asked at which Messrs. Saye and Sele
may be examined.
The Commissioner—Who did yon call them—
Saye and Sele ? .

Mr. Lucas—l was thinking at the moment of
Lord Saye and Sele. I meant to say Seale and Co.
There are no ass Sts wherewith to defray the ex-
penses Mr. Nathan
o a Ia
breimbursed. of h e
meatinlgt isorthbeywwishiliPoilf Mr.
however, howver, to examine Messrs. Says and Sele. I beg
your honour's pardon. (Laughter.)
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. Lawrance—lt was, unquestionably, a very
fierce contest. Mr. Nathan 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 creditors 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.. Lucas—Seale h►s got all the London pro-
perty ; a person named Wood has got all the Don-
caster property. The bankrupt ought not to be
allowed to pass until there has been further inves-
tigation,

Mr. Murrough said the assignees were satisfied
that the bankrupt's transactions with Messrs. Seale
and Co. were bona fide. Mr. Sea'e 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 be re-
covered. They had no objection, however, to Mr.
Natlian prosecutiilg an action in the names of the
official assignee and the trade assignees—whose
names must necessarily be used in ay 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 form
of the good sill of an infamous trade, and that any
action must fail.

Mr. Luca;--The goodwill is said to be worth
1,8 o'. a-year.
Mr. Lawrance contended that the case of
" Graham and Chapman" was nut analogous to the
one before the Court.
The Comtnisioner—Mr. Cannan objects to the
usa of his name in the matter.
Mr. Lucas urged that, although that was natural
enough, an official 'assignee was bound to allow an
action in his name on receiving an indemnity. His
client was desirous by every means in his power to
rtc )ver the property.
Mr. Lawrance--My friend Mr. Lucas is really
miainsttucted. Messrs. Seale and Co. sold under
the warrant of attorney, not under the bill of sale.
The cane of " Graham and Chapman" cannot ki)ply.
- The Comtnisionor thought that whether the pro-
perty had been taken under the bill of sale or
under the warrant of attorney was foreign to the
point. The question was whether the property had
been diverted from its proper course. He eily
no objection to Mr. Nathan having a meeting
at his own expen,,e for the examination of Mr.
Seale, and he might employ his
own solicitor to
prosecute the inquiry.
Mr. Lucas—ln the meantime the bankrupt's
examination will be adjourned. There is not a
'farthing for the creditors.
After some further discussion an adjournment