The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-03 00:00:00

My question is whether you believe it was or not ?
My belief is that it.was presented, and another bill was
obtained.
To whom ?—I suppose both to the bankrupt and his
brother.
By whom ?—I can't tell.
What reason have you for supposing it was presented
for payment, seeing that you cannot tell by whom it was
presented ?—Because another bill was obtained.
By whom was that other bill obtained ? I don't know.
Have you not heard from one of your clerks that, he
presented the note to the bankrupt for payment ?—I
have no recollection of it.
Was any part of the 7,000/. paid off in June, 1841,
when you obtained, as you say, another note ?—No ;
because the bankrupt was then applying to us for the
renewal of other bills.
Did you see the second note ?—Yes.
Then did it not occur to you to inquire why the sum
of 1,000/. was not paid off, as agreed to be done annually ?
—I knew the reason. The bankrupt, had then applied
for the renewal of other bills.
Did you grant any, and what, renewals at the time
when the second note was given, as you have stated ?
No ; it appears the moneys are still unpaid.
What moneys do you allude to as still unpaid, being
the subject of renewal in June 1841 ?—The bill falling
due the 4th June, of 1,0001. one 4th July, 9991. It is
right to observe the bankrupt obtained the moneys from
us at these times to pay the bills becoming due.
Was there any other bill than that for 1,000/. renewed
in June 1841 ?—There does not seem to be any renewal
of bills, for we lent him money to take up the bills.
Was it not agreed between you, the bankrupt and
Mr. G. Hitchcock, that the note of 1,000/. should not be
negotiated ?—I have no recollection of it ; but we do not
negotiate such large sums.
Did you keep it in your cash-book from June 1840 to
June 1841 ?—Yes.
When did you give it to your clerks, or any other
person for presentation ?—Doubtless when it became due.
Will you swear that you did give it to any person to
present for payment to the bankrupt or Mr. George
Hitchcock ?—I do not recollect that I gave it to any
person, but have no doubt it was presented in the usual
way.
Did you not write a letter on or about the Ist of June
to the bankrupt, stating that that bill would not be pre-
sented for payment, and that another would be present-
ed for renewal ?—I think not, but I have no recollection
of it.
Will you swear that you wrote him no letter on June
the Ist, in which another bill was inclosed for his signa-
ture?—l do not remember.
Will you swear that you did not do so?—I will not
swear that I did not do so, but I have no recollection. If
it were so, it would have been a very natural course.
Did you, or your clerk by your direction, present such
a note to the bankrupt for his signature ?—I am not
aware of it.
Have you seen the second note referred to?—Yes.
Of whom did you obtain that?—l have seen it in our
bill-box.
From whom did you obtain that note?—lt was doubt-
less obtained from Mr. Geo. Hitchcock. lam not aware
that I obtained it.
Have you any doubt upon it—was it obtained by your
knowledge ?—I have no doubt upon it, by my knowledge.
What do you mean by my knowledge?—l have stated
from the commencement that I do not know distinctly
how it was obtained, or words to that effect.
Have you the first or original bill for 7,000/.?---No.
What has become of it ?—I suppose it was given up
when the other was obtained.
Have you the second note now in Court?
Mr. HUMFREY'--I believe not, but you can have it in
five minutes.
Mr. MARDON—I should like to see it.
Mr. IcIINFREY—It shall be sent for.
Mr. MARDON continued—What rate of interest in
June, 1840, was agreed to be given upon the loan of
7,0001.?—I am not aware of any agreement being made at
the time, but about 7 per cent. was afterwards given.
When afterwards was that 7i given?—About twelve
months afterwards.
What rate of interest did the note purport to carry?—
There was no rate of interest specified.
Was the sum of 5251. 12s. 6d. accepted for by the bank-
rupt on the 29th day of February, 1841, at four months?
It is very unlikely : there is no such day. The bill was
received by us on February 22d, and due June let.
Was that sum paid when the bill became due?—Yes.
But I here wish to observe that that payment, as well as
one or two others in the month of May we held security
for.

Then do you mean that the 5251. 12s. 6d. falling due
June Ist, 1841, was not solely for interest for that loan
of 7,000/. ?—lt was for interest.
Did any, and what arrangement, take place between
you and the bankrupt as to the rate of interest of 7i per
cent. to be paid on the 7,000/., and if so, when?—l am
not aware of any arrangement, but 71 per cent. was paid.
Seeing that the note was drawn on the Ist of June,
1840, for twelve - months, can you explain why it was
that in February 1841, you charged him 7 per cent., and
for which he gave you his acceptance ?—I cannot ex-
plain it, but I know 7* per cent. was paid. •
Did you give directions to'Mr. Parkinson in February
1841, to obtain 71 per cent. upon the 7,000/.?-7-I have no
remembrance of it.
Do you know the hand-writing of this, Exhibit V ?
Yes, it is Mr. Parkinson's.
Read it.—One year's interest on 7,0001., at 73. per
cent., 5251.; stamp, 12s. 6d.
1-Lavin„ seen that memorandum, are you now certain
that you have no recollection of giving any directions to
Mr. Parkinson to obtain the bankrupt's acceptance for
the amount ?—I have no recollection of giving Mr. Par-
kinson any directions, but it is quite possible I might.
Do you superintend that department of your house
which relates to the cash and bill department?—Not ex-
clusively.
Do you at all interfere in the matter, so as to give you
knowledge. of what bills are drawn on your customers ?—I
do interfere, but many bills are drawn without my know-
ledge.
. _

geeing that this bill was drawn in February, 1841, in-
cluding interest, at the rate of 7 per cent. upon 7,0001., is
that such a bill as one of your clerks would obtain with-
out the directions of yourself or Mr. Cooke ? No, it would
be by direction.
Do you mean by your direction or that of Mr. Cook ?
—Yes.

I want to know is it probable that you or Mr. Cooke
knew that that bill was obtained, and with interest at
the rate aforesaid?—Yes.

Can you explain why, if' there was no arrangement in
June, 1840, nor afterwards, that you took the bankrupt's
acceptance in February for interest on the 7,0001. at the
rate of 71 per cent. ?—I cannot explain why, but it
must have been agreed either then or before. It is
right to observe that this is the only instance on which
71 per cent. was taken, and that the average of all our
transactions from the commencement of 1839 up to
June, 1840, do not exceed 6} per cent., and the Bank
rate of interest during part of that time was 6 per cent.
Was not the bankrupt discounting with Mr. Glaister
in 1839?-4 do not know.
You have stated in your examination of the 26th of
January last, that .as the bankrupt had shown by his
stock taking of January that he had a balance in his
favour of between 3,0001. and 4,0004, this, with the
amount you meant to write off would enable him, with
prudence, to carry on the business well. Now look at
that stock taking, and state whether or mot it appears
that the debts are taken on the credit side at 2,700/. ;
premises, fixtures, &c., 6,000/. ; alterations, 1,0001. ;
house at Torrington, 400/., whether or not it does so
appear, making a total of 10,1001. does.
Now do you really believe that by writing him off
2,500/ he could, with prudence, be able to manage his
trade well, seeing that those assets were unavailable for
the purpose of paying his engagements?—Certainly, be-
cause we also told hint that we would continue to lend
him the 7,000/.
Had you not previously agreed to lend that sum for
seven years or a longer period?—Certainly not.
Are the premises anti fixtures mentioned in the Ex-
hibit A, the same premises that you offered to sell for
1,5001. ?—Part of the premises we offered to sell for
1,500/., but the bankrupt told us on the 13th ofJtity that
the portion we held was of little or no value without his
brother's, and to which the fixtures and plated glass of
all the others are added. We held two leases out of the
three, but without plate glass and fixtures.
Had not the alterations and the additions of plate-
glass alluded to been made since January, 1841 2—l be-
lieve the alteration commenced some months previous to
that time, and was completed about that time.
Are you not aware that your firm soil to the bankrupt
a large parcel of goods- for the opening of the premises
in March, 1841 ?—Upon the strength of this account
(A)'l have now got before me, and the confidence his
brother had in his affairs, having given us a promissory
note for 7,0001., after satisfying himself upon the affairs
of the bankrupt.
Yen have stated that you would receive back a par-
cel of linens from the bankrupt, to be re-finished on the
17th of .July. Are these linens entered in your book ?
—They are.
Will you produce the book 7—They are, to his credit.
Under what date ?-14th of September, amounting to
647/. Os. 3d.

By whom was that entry made ?—The clerk who
kept the books. It is right to explain why they do not
appear till the 14th of September. The linen had been
packed and sent to Ireland for the purpose of being re-
finished, and was afterwards sold there at a reduction,
and after the sale, when we ascertained that reduction,
the goods were credited.
Is it the habit of your house to sell goods first and
the habit
Nve cannot
ourno t
house, except
aifntesr:vicarh deass?e—s last
becausethisesen,ot

When were those goods sold, and to whom 2—They
were sold from about the middle of August up to about
the date they are entered.
Can you mention any one person by name 2—Holman
and Harris of Cranbrook, but I cannot call others to mind.

Have you any entries in your books of such sale ?
Certainly. They are all entered iu the books.
Refer to your books and point out the dates.—lt can-
not be done v. ithout great inconvenience.
Mr. HumFREY said he did not think it important. If
it were worth it Messrs. Cook and Gladstone should pro-
duce them, but it would be a great trouble as there were
no less than eight journals.
After a short conversation between Messrs. MA.RDON
and HUMFREY the subject was dropped.
Can you explain why those goods which you received
for the purpose of being refinished were not sent away
for that purpose ?—I can ; certain expenses would have
been incurred forfreight, and I told a salesman that if we
could ret certain prices for the goods they might sell
them, if not we would send them to be refinished.
When did you give 3,our,salesman those directions ?
I think, about the middle of August.
Would the expenses of freight and refinishing amount
to 1501., or thereabouts' ?--No ;many of them were de-
tvreciated in value.
Have you stated at any tune that you gave the bank-