The Sun.
London, England, 1827-04-09 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, MARcit 7.
MESSRS. CHAMBERS' BANKRUPTCY.

EX-PARTE CHAMBERS IN THE MATTER OF CHAMBERS.
This was the petition of Abraham Henry Chambers,
the elder, and Abraham Henry Chambers, the younger,
who formerly carried on the business of bankers, in New
Bond-street, praying that the Commission of Bankruptcy
sued out against them might be superseded, end that, the
costs of this application be paid by Wm. A'Beckett, the
petitioning creditor, by the Committee of Management
under a deed executed in November, 18'24, by the assignees
under the Commission, and by Messrs. Mayhew and Ha-
zlewood, Solicitors. The bankrupts prayed for the issuing
of the writ of supersedeas, and all the consequential di-
rections, on the following grounds ;—That Wm. A'Beckett
had no debt at law ; that if there existed such a debt, it
was concluded by the deed of arrangement which he had
signed, and was fraudulently and vexatiously used by him,
in such a manner as could not, in a Court of Equity, be
made a ground for a commission of bankruptcy; that the
Messrs. Chambers had never, in fact, committed any act
of bankruptcy; and finally, that they had not been traders
within the true intent and meaning of the 6th Geo. IV.
cap. 16, since that Act came into operation in September,
1825. They admitted having been traders previously to that
time, and before the deed of arrangement ; but that trading,
they contended, was a trading under the expired Bank-
ruptcy Laws, which had been repealed by the present Act.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opened the petition, which
set forth that the affairs of the Messrs. Chambers having
become embarrassed in November, 1824, they were urged
by their solicitors, Messrs. Mayhew and Hazlewood, to tall
a meeting of their creditors. These latter gentlemen had,
as trustees for certain other persons, a mortgage affecting
the estate of the petitioners ; and it was now alleged against
them, that they having, from their confidential connexion
with the banking concern, an intimate acquaintance with
its pecuniary embarrassments, recommended the arrange-
ment with the creditors, lest a Commission of Bankruptcy
should issue, and perhaps interfere with their own claims
on the estate. Mayhew, it was said, exerted himself for
this purpose to prevent a docket from being struck. A
meeting of creditors accordingly took place, when a state-
ment was laid before them of the debts and claims against
the estate of the firm, and of the available assets which
they had to meet these demands. It appeared, that the
total debts amounted to 269,363/. 15s. I ld. ; and that the
available assets were estimated at 270,7721. 15s. 4d. The
creditors, at the same time, came to certain resolutions,
which were afterwards embodied in a deed of arrangement
executed on the 10th December, 1824. The deed, after
reciting that, in the opinion of the Creditors present at
the Meeting, the estate of the firm, if judiciously admi-
nistered, was sufficient to liquidate all the debts, vested
all the property, of every description, belonging to the
Messrs. Chambers, in the hands of a Committee of Ma-
nagement, who were to have full power to sell or otherwise
dispose of the same, for the general benefit of the cre-
ditors. The Messrs. Chambers were to give the Commit-
tee every assistance in carrying the provisions of the deed
into effect, and were in return to have a letter of license.
The deed also contained a provision to the effect, that if any
of those creditors, parties to it, should, whilst the letter of
licence was in force, sue, arrest, or otherwise molest either
of the Messrs. Chambers, on account of the particular
debt provided for by the deed, such a proceeding on the
part of that creditor should amount to an absolute release
of his debt, and might he pleaded in bar of any action
brought for the recovery of it. There was also a provi-
sion of this nature, that the Committee of Management,
which consisted of Messrs. Calcraft, Stowe, and several
other gentlemen, might be at liberty to revoke the letter of
license, and annul the deed, if a number of creditors suf-
ficient for carrying the arrangement into effect should not
have signed the deed within two months after its execution.
Matters went on in this manner for eleven months. The
Committee proceeded to sell several of the estates of the
Messrs. Chambers, and do all the other things which seem-
ed to them likely to forward the objects of the trust. Three
or four days before the bankruptcy, and only one before the
revocation of this letter of licence, on the part of the Com-
mittee, the Messrs. Chambers, who had no notice of the
intention to revoke, executed, at the instance, and by the
advice of the Committee, a lease of the Opera-house to
Mr. Ebers. This establishment formed a large item in the
property of the petitioners, and in the schedule of assets an-
nexed to the management was estimated at 100,0001.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL argued, at considerable
length, that A'Beckett, the petitioning creditor, a solicitor,
residing in Broad-street, Golden-square, was excluded by
the 'deed of management from striking a docket ; that
within the practice of the Court in Bankruptcy, he could
not he justified in setting up that debt in order to procure
the issuing of a commission; that he was bound by the
acts of the committee who had allowed the deed to remain
in force for eleven months, and could not therefore annul
it at their discretion, being limited to the two months next
after its execution. And even suppose the committee could
annul the deed after the expiration of the two months, it
was contended on the part of the petitioners, that such a
power belonged only to the particular members who form-
ed the committee within the term limited by the deed, and
not to the members subsequently introduced. It now also
argued on the part of the petitioners, that their trading had
ceased upon the execution of the deed, and that any busi-
ness done by them since that period was performed in their
capacity of agents to the Committee.—lt appeared that the
deed of arrangement was signed by creditors, to the amount
of 160,0001. The remaining creditors, among whom was
the Bank of England, were either mortgagers of the bank-
rupt's estate, or were so circumstanced, that though they
did not sign the deed, their refusal ought not to be consi-
dered as a dissent from the arrangement. The Attorney-
General went on to state, that every exertion had been
made by the Committee and their Solicitor, Mr. Joshua
Mayhew, to force the Messrs. Chambers to commit acts
of bankruptcy ; and it was diatinetly chat ged against May-
hew, that he went to several of the creditors of the Messrs.
Chambers, and urged them to issue writs for their respec-
tive demands, promising at the same time that the Com-
mittee would indemnify them front any loss incurred iu
consequence of such proceeding. Mayhew succeeded, and
the younger Mr. Chambers was arrested at the suit of a
Mr. Barehill, whilst attending a meeting of the Committee
at the Opera-house. The Attorney-General, under these
circumstances, contended that A'Becket was hut the mere
instrument of the Committee and of Mayhew, and that the
commission thus concerted between them, ought to be
superseded.
Mr. MONTAGUE followed on the same side, and read the
evidence as it bore on each particular point—first, with re-
spect to the trading since September, 1825, there was an
affidavit on the part of the assignees, that the Messrs.
Chambers were engaged in a co partnership with a Mr.
White, in the manufacture of a particular description of
cement, used in building, and that this co-partnership
existed up to the present day; the Committee of Manage-
ment also put in affidavits, stating that the petitioners were
still traders, although their business of Bankers, so far as
regarded the recovery of deposits, was not conducted since
the deed had been executed. The Bankrupts, in reply to
this part of the case, said that they had given up their in-
terest in the cement manufactory to the Committee, and
Then,in aa
sr respect etchte
act o tradedf Bankruptcy,ols thei their o-
this e
their share in that concern was estimated and scheduled
among their other available assets ; and they denied dis-
tinctly
a creditor; and, there-
fore,
tie',
submitted, an incompetent
wc
witness
a ac-
count
proved
rg ot
thevhn;
eac
ntebldl
syre
b2ny t
,hadao
an Irish
Gentleman
t servant to the Messrs. Chambers,
who gave his evidence under the impression that he was
serving his masters, and who now most anxiously sought to
explain what he had then sworn. The Messrs. Chambers
denied their haying committed any act of bankruptcy,
and declared that their constant care was to avoid doing
any thing which could' be construed into one ; and
when absent from town, it was not with the view
of escaping from their creditors. They were al-
most constantly to be seen publicly in town ; and when
the elder Mr. Chambers left London, it was for the purpose
of visiting his friend, Mr. Denhew, who was one of the
Committee, but dissented from its proceedings against the
petitioners. [The evidence of several of the creditors was
produced, for the purpose of proving the concert between
Mayhew and the Committee.] The Learned Gentleman
stated, that the Committee withdrew the letter of licence,
because, as they alleged, -the Messrs. Chambers had mis-
-thhnerreow in n
private use, Bond-street,
w
conducted themselves, in threatening to confess judgment
to some of their creditors ; in abstracting certain papers
relative to their affairs, and in having attempted to remove
a
offr bankingoznytleiretingitto
o
in contravention of the deed of arrangement. The Messrs.
Chambers, on their oaths, positively denied any such mean-
ing, and stated, that as the Banking-house was considered
by them to he an insecure place for keeping the wine, they
ith
applied to a Mr. Brown, a wine-merchant, to value it, and
quantity
i t y intention of
wine
remove it to some safe place. Whilst Brown uses in the
act of so taking it off, he was prevented by Mr. John Cal-
craft, one of the Committee, who hai.aways distinguished
himself by his hostile opposition to the petitioners. The
Learned Gentleman, after going through., the greater part
of the evidence, subMitted that there were no grounds for
'sustaining the nomaiiisioliSYsce,
The further hearing of the toe lititlldB OYU until 11.10Aday.