The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-13 00:00:00

IN RE AN ATTORNEY AND ANOTHER.

It will be remembered that some time since Mr.
Watson, Q.C., obtained a rule nisi, calling on an at-
torney to show cause why he should not be struck off
the rolls:, for allowing an unqualified person to prac-
tise in his natne. ; and why such person should nut be
committed to the Queen's prison.
Mr. M..Cualurmas, .Q.C., and Mr. WILLS showed
cause, and relied principally on the fact that the person
alkged to have been unqualified was the managing
clerk of the attorney, and that he did not receive any
portion of the profits. The afiiclavit in support of the
rule stated that the deponent was informed, and verily
b;-dieved, that this unqualifid person was the articled
cirri; of the attorney, bat was in fact serving with his
own father, a solicitor, and was carrying on the busi-
ness of a bill discounter.

The LORD CurEr BLnoN—Though it is dangerous
to lay down a general rule, I think it may be said that
whenever a &ponent swears that " he i 3 informed and
vn-ily believes" frets in a case Ilk!? this, he should
state the ram e of his infermilrit, and his precise state-
ments.
?d r. Wilms—The affidavit went:on to sly, " that
from circumstances within his own knowledge he was
informed and verily beiitived." Thi3 was c;early in-
sufficient : he should state the circumstances them-
selves from which he got his information. In other
ways .ho the Hli.lavits wore insufficient.

LORD CHIEF BARON—S'riking out ail that is given
upon information and belief, what is there left ?
Mr. WILLS —Nothing material. All that is left our
affidavits answer.

Mr. WATioN replied in support of the rule. •Ho
contended that there was amply sufficient disclosed to
warrant the Court in making this rule absolute. There
was a bill handed to a Mr. Brown by his supposed
managing clerk, which, however, was not indorsed by
him, ;:o great, apparently, was the estimation this
Brown held him in. Then there was a letter de-
manding payment in the supposed clerk's hand-
writing, but written in the attorney's name. Then
there was a request by the defendant's attorney to the

plaintiff's attorney, requiring plaintiff's address, but

no answer was returned. go-other parson was ever
seen in the office but the assumed clerk ; all the letters
were in his writing ; and there was not one single al-
legation in the affidavits that the attorney himself ever
saw a client or gained a shilling within those chambers
he assumed to be his. He says he was much in county
courts and in the insolvent Debtors Court; but it must
be borne in mind that he has to account for a period since
1843, and that the county courts have only existed
since 1846. He ought to have stated that this person
was his managing clerk, saw his clients, made out bills
of costs, received the money, and handed it over to
him ; but this he has not done. The Learned Counsel
animadverted on the opposite affidavits, and asked the
Court to protect the public.
Baron PLATT—We must also protect the pro-
fession.
After a short deliberation the Learned Judges de-
cided on discharging the rule with costs.
EX PARTE THE DUKJS OF BRUNSWICK IN RE CLEMENTS

AND ANOTHER.
Mr. Udall and Mr. Gray were heardin support of
the application, and Mr. Knowles opposed it.
It was a motion to issue a scire facies on the recog-
nizances entered into by the sureties of Ghislin, the
printer cf the Satirist newspaper. The affidavit of
the Duke's attorney stated that judgment had been re-
covered against Ghislin for libel, and damages had
been recovered fur 1,5001. and costs taxed at 2601. The
Duke N 4 as therefore 2601. out of pocket. Soon after the
verdict Ghiilin left the country, and the Duke was
therefore unable to recover either damages or costs out
of pocket. His only course was to proceed against the
ureties of Ghislin on their recognizances. By the
GO Geo. bonds and recegnizuices were required
to be entered into by all newspaper proprietors, in
case find should be imposed upon them in cases of
conviction ; but this statute applies only to indict-
ments and informations, and not to actions. The
subsequent statute, 1 Wm; IV., requires recogni-
z inces to be entered into by the sureties (the amount
of the recogninnce to he 4001.) if an action for da-
mages be recovered, and the some remain unpaid.
All persons libelled in a newspaper have therefore a
remedy for the amount cf their verdict, to the extent
of 406/,, not only against the publishers but also
against the sureties. The statute of Wm. IV. gives
a summary remedy on these recognizauces where the
action has been successfully brought against " editors,
conductors, or proprietors."
In support of the motion, it was contended that as
no action had been brought against the editor,
conductor, or proprietor, but only against the
printer, the summary remedy could not be had re-
course to, and the scire facias only could effect the
desired object.
The COURT took time to consider their judgment.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, June 12.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONELANQUE.)
IN RE SHEWARD.
The bankrupt was a pawnbroker at Norwich.
This was the certificate meeting. Mr. Lawrence
supported ; Mr. Lucas opposed.
The grief ground of opposition was that the bank-
rupt had put Mrs. Fulcher, an elderly lady, to great
expense by representing that she had made him a gift
of a sum of 1,8501., instead of lent him the money.
His HoNous, in giving judgment, said that it ap-
peared from the evidence that Mrs. Fulcher could
neither read nor write. A pass-book of her account
between herself and the bankrupt had been impro-
perly headed by the bankrupt, and afterwards it was
alleged to have been lost by his wife in the course of
a walk of five miles through the snow to the old lady's
residence. Mrs. Sheward was said to have fallen down
twice on the way, and she supposed that she must
have thus lost the book. It did not appear, however,
that she had taken the slightest trouble to recover it.
Now, it had been remarked that it was a singular
circumstance that she should have lost the book when
her pockets were so deep that they had contained not
only the book but also an ox's tail—(A laugh)—and
he (the Commissioner) thought it was. The bank-
rupt's own evidence was inconsistent with his repre-
sentation that the money was a gift. Looking at all
the circumstances of the case, he could arrive at no
other conclusion than that from the first the bankrupt
had made up his mind that if Mrs. Fulcher did not
leave him the money, her executors should not be in
possession of evidence that would enable them to
recover it. That was a serious offence, and so deeply
imbued with fraud as to call for the longest suspen-
sion of the certificate that he ever adjudged. The
certificate would be suspended three years, and pro-
tection withheld unless the bankrupt should have been
in prison six months.

IN RE CROFTS.
The bankrupt was the landlord of the Marquis of
Waterford Arms, Haymarket. Tne certificate was
unopposed, and the Court granted one of the first
Class.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT,June 12.
(Before Mr. Commissioner LAW.)

IN RE JAMES FREDERICK MUNCKS.
This insolvent again came before the Court. It
will be recollected that the insolvent, a German jour-
neyman tailor, had seduced a young Welshwoman,
named Sarah James, a servant, and had contrived to
obtain from her 601. in money, on promise of mar-
riage. The case stood over for the insolvent to pro-
duce the young woman's watch, and for other pur-
poses.

Mr. STURGEON again opposed for Sarah James, and
produced a copy of her savings bank book to show
that she had made advances trom her earnings as a
servant to the insolvent. Her watch was produced
by the insolvent, but not a gold seal which she had
given him, which he now stated he had, with other
articles, pledged, and dispoaed of the duplicate.
Mr. Commissioner LAW directed the watch to be
handed to the young woman, which was accordingly
done ; and his Honour expressed himself of opinion
that the insolvent had cruelly used her ; he bad got
her money on the pretence that he was goirur to
marry her. It was for him to see what; amends he
could make, and wsth that view the case had better
stand over for six weeks.

The insolvent handed in a paper, which he wishfd
to be read. It had been written by a fellow prisoner.
The paper, which was read, exprsed hi 3 regret fi r
the ijury he Ekd (h S wh•y.,
he a:linitted he hall promised to n-nirry. She had
been ill, and having become acquainted with his pre--
sent wife, and she bang pregnant by him, he had
married her.