The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-07 00:00:00

NEWTON V. RIE.

In this action for libel, of which the particulars have
been frequently before the public, the plaintiff, a bar-
rister, applied for a rule nisi to enter a verdict in his
favour, upon the counts which the jury had found for
the defendant.—Rule nisi granted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 6.
(Sittings in Banco.)
RINNERSLEY, AN OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE, V. CROUCH

Mr. CROWDER moved for a rule to show cause why
the verdict returned for the plaintiff in this case should
not be set aside, and a non-suit entered, or the damages
reduced to such a sine as the Court should direct, by
leave of the Learned Judge who tried the case.
This action was tried before Mr. Justice Matteson at
the last Bristol Assizes, when a verdict was returned fir
the plaintiff for 153 L 13s. It was an action for money
had and received on account of a bankrupt named Brown,
who had carried on the business of a currier in Bristol.
The defendant was Brown's foreman. On the 28th
of October Brown left his shop for the pur-
pose, as he alleged, of going to Cheltenham, but
he never returned to his Shop. It appeared that be
went to Cheltenham, As he stated, but that he ultimately
left this countay. A fiat of bankruptcy was issued
against him on the 9th of November following. Crouch
conducted the business of the bankrupt from the time of
his leaving it till the issuing of the fiat. The action was
for money received by Crouch, on account of the de-
fendant, during that time. An account was produced at
the trial, in which the defendant debited himself to the
amount of 153/. 135., and for various other sums, on
account of the business of the bankrupt, and to the work-
men employed in it. The Learned Counsel had cou•
tended at the trial that the defendant acted in the caps-
eity of a servant, and that he did not come under
the cognisance of certain sections of the Bankruptcy
Act, and could not be answerable for money which he
had received and paid on account of his employers. lie
now reiterated these arguments, and instanced the case
as one of considerable importance to the mercantile
world. Was a servint to be liable for moneys so paid,
and for the acts of a bankrupt, of whose actions and
intentions he was wholly ignorant ? The decision of the
jury seemed to imply that the defendant was placed in
the position of the bankrupt.
After considerable discussion, the rule was granted.

COURT OF REVIEW, Nov. 6.
His Honour Sir J. K. BRUCE was engaged during the
day in disposing of bankruptcy cases, none of which pos-
sessed any public interest.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nov. 6.
(Before Mr. Commmission GOULBErRN.)

THE DRAPERY TRADE.-IN THE MATTER OF ROBERT BAN.
NISTER, OF PORTSEA.
_ _

The bankrupt, whose capture in the island of Madeira,
and examination at this Court, had excited such interest
in the commercial world, was again this day brought up
for re-examination. •
Mr. EDWIN JAMES, before proceeding with his exami-
nation, briefly recountered the facts of the case to the
Court. The bankrupt, he stated, had delivered a balance-
sheet which was perfectly untrue, and it bore internal
evidence of its fictitious character. The bankrupt had
been in business with his brother, and, upon dissolving
partnership, he withdrew 722/. as his share of the proceeds.
He then commenced trade again in Portsea in the
month of April, 1844, and the fiat of bankruptcy was
issued on the following July. He had in those four
months got goods to the value of 17,690/. 9s. 4d., and
had disposed of them again for 11,3211., thus alleging a
loss of 4,879/., or 43 per cent. Among other sales effected
by him in this period was one to Moses and Son, of Aid-
gate, of goods valued at 1,0401., but which they pur-
chased for 269/. 3s. 3d. Another sale to Hodge and
Lowman, of Regent-street, of goods invoiced at 200/.,
and sold for 100 L The purchase was how ever
denied by that firm. A third sale to a person
named Williams, of goods valued at 2454 was effected
for 1401. The bankrupt's expenses, during the period
he was in trade, amounted to the enormous sum of
1,9001., being an average of 2001. per week. He (Mr.
James) was happy to state that a sum of 3,5001. had
been rescued from the bankrupt, his wife, and a person
named Quin, who was a sort of general vouchee, in
cases of sales and purchases. He (Mr. James) woted
not enter into details of matters which would be ren-
dered sufficiently clear by the bankrupt's own examina-
tion, and he would therefore at once proceed to question
him upon the subject of his schedule.
Mr. JAMES—What amount of goods did you sell to
Moses and Son, of Aldg,ate ?—The amount stated by me
already, 1,040/.
Mr. JAMES—What amount de you mean to say you
received from them ?—For one lot 2001. and for ano-
ther 180/.
Mr. JAMES—WiII you swear that you received more,
from them than 269/. 3s. 3d. Will you swear after look-
isig at these invoices thatyou receivedmore ?—I thought
there was more, but unless there are other receipts this
must be the amount.
-Mr:-Jastes—Do you mean to represent that the goods
you sold to Moses and Son for 2691.'3g. 3d. cost you
1,040/. ?—I should say not, decidedly not.' They cost
abut two-thirds more than they were sold at.
Mr. JAMES—What do you believe they cost you then?
—About 750/.
Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN—What induced you to
put down a different sum then?—l have given up every
farthing, and made the best statement I could.
Mr. JAMES—Answer his Honour's question.—Those
amounts were correct to the best of my memory. -
Mr. JAMES—What made you fix on 1,040/. for Moses
and Son ? What was your particular reason for so
doing ?—I believe to the best of my memory I thought
it correct.
Mr. JAMES—You have put down to Hodge and Low-
man goods costing 200/. at 100/. When did you make
that sale ?—Either in May or June. The goods were
not invoiced in my name, and they have therefore denied
the purchase. I sold them in the name of Williams,
which is a fictitious name.
Mr. JAMES—Did you take the goods there ?—Yes, in
a cab, which I took only to Oxford-street, and the goods
I took into their place in separate parcels.
Mr. JAMES—Do you mean to swear, then, that these
goods cost you 2001, and that you sold them 50 per cent.
under cost ?—Yes, I should think there was a loss of
50 per cent.
Mr. JAMES—You have charged in balance sheet sales
to a person named Williams of goods which you say cost
you 245/. Who is Williams ?—I believe he was in the
drapery trade, but I cannot say where he is now.
Mr. JAMES—When did you sell him these goods ?
In June of this year.
Mr. JAMES—Where did he live then ?—I do not know.
I met him in Cheapside. I had met him before. He
had lived in Birmingham some years before.
Mr. JAMES—Where did you effect the sale ?—When
I met him I said, I've got a lot of goods for sale ; and we
went in a cab to the wharf, got the goods, and went to a
public-house in Oxford-street. I left the goods, and
met him at three o'clock, by appointment. He told me
that a hawker had given him an offer for them. I ac-
cepted the offer, met him again, and he paid me the
money.
Mr.JamEs —Where did you meet him again ?—At the
house in Oxford-street, where the goods were sold. I
do not know the house, but it was on the right hand
side going westward, between Tottenham. court road and
Regent circus.
Mr. JAMES—How much did he pay you?—To the best
of my knowledge, 1051 I gave him no receipt.
Mr. JAMES—How was the money paid ?—ln Bank of
England notes and gold.
Mr. JAMES—In what part of the house were the goods
sold ?—ln a private room.
Mr.J.t sliss—What did you do with the money ?—Took
it to Portsea.
Mr. JAMES—How long previously did you meet Wil-
liams before this transaction ?—About nine or twelve
months before.
Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN—What was this Wil-
liams, and where did you meet him ?—ln the Johnson's
Head, Fleet-street ; and I believe he was assistant to a
draper, but where I do not know.
Mr. James—When did you get the goods that you al-
lege had been sold to Williams ?—They were lying at
Whitcroft's wharf.

Mr. JA Es--What kind of goods were they f—They
were shawls and silk handkerchiefs. The shawls were
Bannermann's, of Manchester, and Alfred Thomas's.
Mr. JAMES—Now attend to this question. Did not
you state to Mrs. Quilter—now she is here, so be careful
—that you and the man Quin took these goods from the
wharf, and that Quin sold them ?—No ; that conversa-
tion referred to another lot.

Mr. JAmEs—What goods then did Quin assist you to
take from Whitcroft's ?—I was rather confused, and
might have said that Quin went with me.
Mr. JAMES—Look at the invoices now produced, and
point out the goods sold by the man Williams. But
first, were these goods taken from the public-house before
you had tho money ?—They were so taken away. I see
Bannermann here for 180/, and Thomas for 77L I is. 101
Mr. JAMES—WeII, any other ?—Yes, some others ;
but I can't point them out now.
Mr. Commissioner GouutunN wished to know if Mr.
James had any other case of a similar character to that
of Williams ?

Mr. JAMES—None, perhaps, that would come under
the same category. Before he would proceed, however,
to the cash account, he should ask the bankrupt one cr
two general questions.
To the bankrupt—Was the man Williams ever men-
tioned to any person before the balance sheet was filed ?
—No.

Mr. JAMES—Have you any more to add, for his
Honour's information, about the disposal of these goods
to Williams ?—I have no more to add.

His Honour retired for a time, when, in reference to
a remark from Mr. James, the bankrupt passionately ex-
claimed, " So help me God, I have not a guinea left in
the world, nor a person on whom I can come for a shil-
ling. I know you think that.l have a lot cf goods tind
money, and all that sort of thing, but it's all false."
Mr. JA. Es—Now turn to your balance-sheet. What
money had you altogether, from the time of your
commencing business in Portsea to the date of the fiat ?
—To the best of my knowledge 6,921/ 45., but it is im-
possible to say the exact amount.
Mr. JAMES—Nov, have you not put down a sum,
amounting to 1,9001., for expenses during that period ?
Do you now adhere to that statement ?—No. The items
amount to 1,239/ only from the time rleft Nottingham.
Mr. JAMES—Explain the 210/ charged in the balance-
sheet at page 3 ?—There is a 251. for clothes, 31. 10s.
for boots and shoes, 311. 10s. for a watch, and a good
deal was spent in theatres and saloons, and such like.
Mr. JAMES—Why, the gold watch, ring, &c., is al-
readyo charged at page 1 of your account. Can you men-
tin any one place where you ever spent 20/. at once?—
No. I cannot.
Mr.
j"r4-I.°llr 11°11014r will And that these sutras

are included in a sum of 3101. charged for private ex-
penses. Your explanation then is, that the money was
spent in theatres and saloons ?—Yes, I was rather gay,
and spent a good deal of money that way.
Mr. JAMES—Now I observe a sum unaccounted for of
2421. 4s. Can you give any account of that money ?
No, not the slightest. I only know that I haven't a
farthing, and have no claim on any one.
Mr. JAMES—You have put down that you have ex-
pended 441. Bs. in Manchester, Lichfield, Derby, and
London. In what time was that spent ?—Twelve days
to a fortnight.
Mr. JAMES —Have you any vouchers for any of those
expenses ?—No.
Mr. Commissioner GoLLßußN—These expenses ex-
tend over a mass of nine pages, and comprise small
amounts, exceeding in the aggregate 7,1901. Follow that
up, Mr. James, if you please.
Mr. JAMES—You have heard what his Honour said.
Have you vouchers for the sum of 16,440/. 4s. 3d., which
remains after deducting the amounts t 3 your credit ?
I have no vouchers but what you have seen.
_ _

Mr. JAMES—How then did you come at those very
minute sums ? What materials had you to enable you to
furnish your accountant with these items ? Here is one,
for instance, spent in London, 101. 10s. 6d. ; expenses in
London, 16/. iios.
Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN—Waiter in Vauxhall
Hotel 51.; and London, in July, spent 1/. 103. 1(1.
Bankrupt—l did the best I could to furnish a correct
account from memory.
Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN—I think, Mr. James,
you have carried this far enough to warrant the ad-
journment; I cannot think of passing the bankrupt on
this examination.

Mr. JAMES—Have you any other explanation to offer
on the subject of your cash account before this part of
the subject is concluded ?—None whatever. I've done
the best I could.

Mr. JAMES then proceeded to press for a com-
mitment, on the ground that the bankrupt had
not furnished satisfactory accounts, but
His HONOUR, after explaining to the bankrupt the ob-
ject of the Learned Counsel's application, asked whether
he would wish to consult some professional adviser in
the matter ?

The bankrupt would feel grateful if an opportunity
were given him of engaging counsel to defend him i❑ the
maitae.

HIS HONOUR said that he was sure Mr. James would
be the very last to press the law too severely, especially
when the bankrupt was undefended.
Mr. JAMES asked whether it would not be expedient
to commit him into the custody of the messenger of the
Court ?

His lloNoun said that he could not decide upon the
matter beforehand, and he would therefore adjourn the
examination till to-morrow at one o'clock.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

(Before the ASSISTANT-JUDGE and a full Bench of
Magistrates.)
John Smith, dressed as a mechanic, and John Stevenson,
a most respectable looking young man, were indicted for
stealing an umbrella, the property of Hugh Garden.
The evidence went to prove that both the prisoners
were observed to go into the house of the prosecutor,
about night-fall, and Stevenson take the umbrella, which
he threw away upon being pursued.
The jury acquitted the prisoner Smith; and, having
found Stevenson guilty,
The Learned JUDGE expressed his regret at seeing a
person of the prisoner's acquirements and previous
respectability in such a degraded and melancholy posi-
tion ; however, the law should take its course. The
sentence of the Court was—that he be imprisoned, and
kept- to hard labour, in the House of Correction, for
three months.

John Perry, aged 13 years, who was found guilty of
felony at the last sessions, and judgment deferred for
inquiry, was brought up this morning, and sentenced to
be transported for seven years.
Henry Smith was found guilty of stealing a coat from
Mr. J. Wells, into whose house he was admitted fur
charity, he being at the time in the utmost state of des-
titution.

The COURT sentenced him to be transported for seven
years. _ _ _

- A very old and respectable-looking man, named John
W allows, was indicted for attempting to break into the
house of Frederick Barry.
The prisoner pleaded guilty to the charge, and stated
that he must have been out of his senses at the time he
made the attempt, for he could make no other excuse for
his conduct.

The COURT said, in consideration of the prisoner's age
and previous character, it would inflict but a light
penalty. The sentence of the Court was that he be im-
prisoned for two months, with hard labour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

Two well-dressed women of the town, named
Bridget 117 Warns and Mary Easton, were brought
before Alderman Wilson, under the following cir-
cuit-is tances
About eight or nine weeks ago a gentleman was
met, at a late hour of the night, in -Thames-street, by
a female, who contrived to rob him of a small bag,
containing 4.5/. He subsequently appeared at the.
Mansion- house, and charged Mary Euston with the
robbery. As, however, he could not positively swear
to her identity, and it appeared on being searched at
the station-house the woman was found to have no
property about her, the case was, after a strict inves-
tigation before the Lord Mayor, which was adjourned
'from day to day, discharged, in consequence of a
fatal deficiency in the evidence. Mary Euston, as
might be expected, solemnly protested her innocence,
but she, at the same time, intimated to his Lordship
that she knew the woman who had committed the rob-
bery, although she could not tell her name or ad-
dress. It is proper to state that it is a general prac-
tice with women who combine the two characters of
prostitute and thief, to contrive, with the assistance of
some ruffian of the male sex, to lighten the pockets of
gentlemen who stay out rather late at dinners, not-
withstanding the activity of the City police.
On Tuesday night, as a policeman was in King
William-street, he heard a violent shrieking, and
upon going to the spot from whence it came, he saw
the Mary Euston, who had been previously charged,
quarrelling with Bridget Williams, the other pri.
soner. The former, in her rage, said she would let
out all she knew, and then accused her adversary of
having stolen the money about which she had suffered
so much. They were both taken to the station-house,
where Mary Euston said that Bridget Williams had
promised to give her money to fee counsel to get her
out of trouble if she would not split; but that in-
stead of assisting her, the latter went out of the way
until all the cash was spent, and therefore the whole
business must come to light for the punishment of
such ingratitude.
The policeman said that Mary Euston distinctly
accused Bridget Williams in the station-house, not
only of having committed the robbery, but of having
basely broken the promise to send her a sovereign
for not " splitting.' That Bridget Williams did not
deny the fact charged, but, on the contrary, stated
the number of 101. and 51. notes contained in the
bag, and admitted that she had spent the whole of the
money.
Alderman WILSON (to Bridget Williams)—So you
robbed the gentleman between you, and when you
went off with the money you determined to keep it
all yourself ? Bridget Williams—Oh, upon my word,
my Lord, I never had a shilling of anybody's money.
She came to me quite sudden and tore my clothes.
Mary Euston—l never saw her since she refused
to help me out of trouble till last night, and as she be-
haved so treacherously, I resolved to split. I know
she robbed the gentleman.

Alderman WILSON—How did you know anything
about the robbery, except you were both together
when it was effected ? Mary Euston--I heard it.
Alderman WILSON--And why did you not give
information of it before? Mary Euston—l did not
know it so exactly as I do now. She told me, if it
went to trial, she would pay the expenses.
Alderman WILSON—WeII, I hope you have both
money enough to fee counsel now, for I think you
will want counsel's assistance.

One of the officers stated that there were three or
four of the " swell-mob," who were known to be the
associates of the prisoners, prowling about the Man-
sion-house. When, however, the Alderman directed
some of the police to take any persons of the descrip-
tion into custody, and place them at the bar, he was
informed that they had vanished.
The Alderman then remanded the prisoners.
An old Frenchman, named Jonas Legrand, was
brought up, charged with having picked a lady's
pocket of eighteen-pence. There is an odd circum-
stance connected with the history of the prisoner.
A City policeman stated that between three and
four o'clock on Friday, as he was doing duty at the
west entrance of the Royal Exchange, he saw the
prisoner, who was covered with a cloak, busy at work
in trying the pockets of females in the crowd. The
prisoner afterwards left the crowd, but having taken
off his cloak and hung it over his arm, soon returned
And got into the midst of the multitude. Witness,
who suspected the prisoner's intention from the com-
mencement, continued to watch him, and soon saw
him lift up a lady's gown, and evidently pull away his
hand. Witness seized him by the wrist, and he im-
mediately dropped a shilling and a sixpence on the
ground. The lady, upon being told that she bad been
robbed, put her hand in her pocket and said she had
lost eighteen-pence.

The lady confirmed the greatest part of the police-
man's evidence, and

Alderman WILSON having been informed that the
prisoner was an old offender, committed him for trial
at the Central Criminal Court.

Gooch, the principal turnkey at the Compter, sub-
sequently mentioned that, on a former. occasion, when
the old Frenchman was in prison for picking pockets,
he used to amuse himself in giving lest;ons to the boys
in that art, and advanced them so considerably in the
mystery, that one of them so adroitly whipped the
handkerchief out of the pocket of their instructor as
wholly to escape his • observation. Legrand, who
despised the principle " ante perire sua," or falling a
victim to his own cleverness, made an avzful disturb-
ance in the prison upon missing his property, and his
pupil, who proved to be really worthy of such a
master, could not be prevailed upon tca restore the