The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-18 00:00:00

EVENING SUN

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
Paws TEM EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—" Sister, you can't be pretty—you had
better be odd"—said a beauty to her homely relative.
The Times would seem to have come to the
entice conviction that it can't write like a Christian
or a gentleman, and had better be as black-
guard as possible. Without dealing in mere com-
pliment, we must really congratulate our Con-
temporary on the complete success with which
he baslately realised his beau ideal of blackguardism.
One would have thought the approaching baptism
of the Prince of Wales was not an occasion which
the soi-disant " leading journal" of a Christian and
civilised country would exactly choose for extra out-
pourings of utterly unprovoked scurrility on. Christian
brethren, and civilised neighbours. Dzs alder visum.
The river-gods of the neighbouring Fleet ditch cer-
tainly spare some portion of the " deeper sable" where-
with they delight to " blot the silver flood of Thames
—as contributions to the late baptismal effusions from
Printing House-square. The Times has been run-
ning amuck at everybody, in Malay or Mohock style
—from the humble sect, which could nevertheless
boast such a member as Robert Hall, to the proud
State whose European rank was fixed by Frederick
the Great of Prussia. The Times has made itself rather
remarkable lately for its Puseyite tendencies, and its
recommendations of" aggressive policy" to the Govern-
ment on the side of the Church militant. We sup-
pose those recent articles are a sample of the sort
of aggressions which the Times thinks decent in High
Church politicians against all other Christians. His
Majesty of Prussia has fallen out of the Times'
good graces already, by his impertinence in presuming
to sibscribe for an Anglican Bishop in partibus. Lu-
theran aid was utterly inconsistent with Puseyite pre-
latical purity. We should not wonder if Lutheran
presence were a desecration of Church rites ! What
next ? It is satisfactory to find the constant assailants
of the late Government, for their alleged want of sin-
cerity in the cause of Protestantism " all over the
world," throwing off the mask in this extravagant
manner, on the eve of the arrival of the great re-
presentative of Continental Protestantism, to do
honour to a solemn and Royal ceremony of the An-
glican Protestant Church ! It is tolerably evident
what sort of Protestantism was that of the partisans
who who were hallooed on against Liberal administration
by the cry of " Down with O'Connell!" They were Pro-
testants only after the pattern of the ex-Grand Master
of Orangeism—Protestants only while Protestantism
found them some party to injure or insult. The Pro-
testantism of the King of Hanover was the sole form of
it congenial to these worthies. The Protestantism of
the King of Prussia is Anathema Maranatha—a hissing
and a curse.
COURlER.—Supposing the claim of the United
States in behalf of the legitimacy of such property
to be allowed, and that under the peculiar circum-
stances it is taken out of the special category of British
constitutional or common law, which decrees instant
liberty, and refuses the recognition of bondage, we
may next have to deal with the question in another
shape. The Virginian planter may voluntarily bring
his household slaves into our land, and claim in like
manner to have them identified in the light of property
sacred and intangible in this very capital of the empire;
so that should the unfortunate beings assert their free-
dom, and quit their master, the British Government, as
on the present occasion, might be held responsible for
their evasion and in like manner menacingly appealed
to for indemnification of the loss. In the case of a
vessel, with other destination, laden with goods pro-
hibited by law in the country on whose shores
driven by stress of weather, we know that the fact of
such distress and compulsory deviation from her course
would, as it ought, protect both vessel and cargo from
the fiscal penalties to which otherwise liable, and
to such extent the analogy of circumstances would seem
to plead in favour of the claims set up by the United
States. But in such a case there is, and there can be,
no international misunderstanding as to what should
constitute property. A cargo of tobacco er of cotton
cloths counts for property anywhere and everywhere by
common consent. But no such common consent can
be pleaded in regard of human beings. So far as the
British isles are concerned, the notion of property as
attaching to them has ever been utterly repudiated,
just the same when Great Britain had slave-holding
and slave-dealing colonies as now, when slavery is not a
word to be breathed, or a slave to be found within her
dominions. lad the Creole, with her 150 slaves, been
driven on the coasts of the British isles, it is quite
clear that the question, so far, would not have
admitted of a moment's hesitation or debate. The
slaves on kissing the soil would have started up free-
men, as the Titan of old was refreshed by tho touch
of mother earth, and no human power would have
been suffered to re-impose their fetters and carry them
eff to bondage.

PROGRESS OF DISTRESS.
(From the Tablet.)
The winter has now set in in earnest ; and the poor,
in addition to short work, or no work at all, and scanty
food, or positive starvation, have to encounter the mi-
sery of intense cold, and a still further diminution of em-
ployment consequent on the frost and snow, and short
days which now encompass them. We have again be-
fore us, in the same fashion as heretofore, long statis-
tical details of distress in various portions of the island
—chilly from Dundee and the surrounding districts,
and from Gloucester and the west of England. Wo
might fill our paper with tables, and figures,
and lists of suffering and misery, but we think
that %hat we have already printed in this way will
suffice. If our readers will be at the pains to select
any ono of the tables we have before presented to them
(the worse the better), and will substitute the name of
Dundee, or of Stroud, or of any of their neighbouring
towns and villages, the detail will be accurate enough.
It is, literally, a case of starvation to hundreds and
thousands, not merely in the county of cotton-mills—
the Budded growth of a time of factitious prosperity—
but in every corner of the land in which anything in the
shape of a manufacture has presumed to show its head.
Some are cut down because they are too now, some
because they are too old ; some because the process they
employ is too thrifty of labour, and too prodigal of art ;
some because they have not been sufficiently thrifty in en-
couraging the cost of production • some because they
have adhered too blindly to old modes and traditions of
manufacturing ; some because they have too greedily
adopted the new; but all are cut down, or are being
cut down, one after another, by an invisible hand,
against which neither enterprise' nor skill, nor capital,
nor prudence. uor human foresight, can struggle suc-
cessfully. The destroying angel smiting the first-born
of Egypt gave, perhaps, a sharper and more startling
31v:di, but hardly produced a deeper and more wasting
agony than this unseen devastator of cities is planting
in every portion of this island. And let not those who
are determined to shut up their bowels of compassion
hug themselves under the belief that these things are the
idle stories of bustling demagogues, or the dishonest
creations of the press. For our readers, at least, there
must be a deep significance in such a man as Lord Stour-
ton—a man removed from the pettiness of faction, if any
such there be—high-minded, cautious, experienced—
coming before his fellow countrymen in the beginning
of wiuter to tell them, that "this distress pervades
wide districts, and prevails in some with an intensity. I
have never, to my mind, seen equalled in this. kingdom,
covering our roads with artisans in search of employ-
ment, and exhibiting itself in our towns under appear-
ances the most calamitous and frightful." These are
not the words of a trading agitator, nor of a rash enthu-
siast, but of a man of sober and practical good sense,
who truly discerns the evils of our present state, and
grieves over them. Nay, the facts are becoming too
black and too certain, as well as too dangerous, to be
wholly denied or concealed by those who would run all
lengths to deny Or conceal them, if it were possible.
Briar whkt tlra Standard now. tells us of the condition
of Paisley— •

" We regret to learn that the distress at Paisley not
only continues, hut is actually upon the increase. We
have seen it letter written by a gentleman well
ac-
iluaintcd with that town, from which we quote the fol-
lowing appalling' extract ;—"The number of claimants
upon our funds is on the increase. The people are
actually dying of starvation—no beds to lie on, no
covering even ; the boards only to rest upon. These
are facts.'"
We wilt venture to lay before our readers an extract
from a private letter bearing on the same subject ; the
writer, whom we known intimately, is the wife of a gen-
tleman of property in Stockport,and the most perfect re-
fiance may be placed on her statement. We do note
give it as containing .4 More shocking statement than
other accounts which have already,been published, but
becalm we, as well as. everyone else, attribute a rather
higher importance to facts which we can ourselves verify,
than,to the more abstract statements which crowd in
upon us from other quarters.
" I must tell you a little of the Stockport `distress,
for it is awful ; no description can equal it. Last
Thursday was rent-day there, and T— did not re-
turn till late, when he told me one of the tenants,
named a draper, was late in coming to pay
his rent Tiro reason was, he was one of the, Relief
Cominittee employed to seareh into the distresses of
the poor, prior to their being relieved from the fund
of 2,000/, which has been collected for them. He
has been, out all day, and such were the sights of dis-
tress he had witnessed, and so unable were they to re-
lieve them, that it made him ill, and he could not
eat. He even felt inclined to give up business, and
leave a neighbourhood where charity could alleviate so
small a degree of misery. Such a tale induced my
husband to go on the following nsornisg and see for
himself, taking H— with him. I must tell you
what they saw, and don't tire 'of it, for we are sur-
rounded with it, and it ought to be known. Io one
house, three stories high, on the first floor, were
six people preparing to dine off one pennyworth of
potatoes. In the next story lived another family,
sand in , the third (one room) lived'. fourteen persons,
nut any appearance of a bed, or anything to
lie lop, le another room, which was not seven feet
,PAW slept seven people. A widow owned two cot-

tages ; in one she lived with her son ; be was out of
work ; she could not get any rent. Her furniture kept
going till nothing was left, and she slop' on pack
sheets. She had 31. of pawn-tickets ; and this woman,
the owner of two cottages, was grateful for a sixpence.
Parents and children huddled round the fire, with not
a mouthful of food in the house ; and they were gra-
dually pining
to death. One man was fretting sadly
over a child he had buried the day before. He had
bad no, solid food for five days. One youngish woman
stretched out her arm, which, from want of clothing,
was bare to the shoulder, and showed them how thin
it was for want of food. Little children, mind this,
were waiting for some oatmeal and water for breakfast,

which was nearly ready for them ; they had not tasted
food that morning, and it was near twelve. One man
had worn two pairs of shoes out in seeking work, and
found none. There are about eighteen cotton•mills stand-
ing in Stockport and the neighbourhood, and these are
the workpeople, with the addition of poor cobblers and
the like. My husband, you may be sure, did not pass
them by without attempting to relieve them ; but these
are people who want no charity, if they might only
have work."

I In all this, awful as it really is, there is nothing pecu-
liar, nothing which has not been said a hundred and a
thousand times. But the truth is, no description can
equal the reality of these things. All that can be told
of any given moment of time—" we have bad no food
to-day," " we have had no solid food for five days," and
the like—makes but a small item in the great account
which weighs the man down. He has had no solid
food for five days—shocking, truly; But how did he
live before the beginning of that five days ? The five
days of abstinence of which he tells you were but fol-
lowing up a long series of days of the same kind. He
began his forced experiment in fasting with a half-empty
stomach, an enfeebled constitution, a wasted frame, and
above all, with hopes blighted, and spirits sunk, at the
long period during which ill•luck has pressed her heavy
hand upon him and his. Of all this wearing and tor-
turing anguish, which hangs upon and haunts him every
moment of his life, he says not a word. He' speaks
only of the last five days, and few of his hearers take the
trouble to mount back to the fifty which preceded them.
Meantime, what is taking place here in London?
The Workhouse regulations seem to -be growing de-
cidedly unpopular, especially among that class who,
having no settlement, though they may have resided in
[ London for a quarter or half a century (perhaps been
born there), have nonlegal title to relief, and are offered
the delightful alternative of famine or a pass to their
own parish, which knows them not, and which they
know not. Accordingly, bands of these men are be-
ginning to parade about the street, and to knock tumul-
tuously at Workhouse doors. Some of them, in de-
spair of finding any yielding metal in the breast of a
relieving officer, march off in array to a baker's shop,
and send in a deputation to take loaves by the strong
hand, and thereby secure at least a breaking of bread
among the famished multitude. Arrest follows as
matter of course, and is not resisted ; for even in prison
a man who makes a profession of fasting is provided
with gruel and water, which are not always to be had
out of doors. _ . _

And while the poor are in this state, what are the
rich doing ? Above all, how is that aristocracy demean-
ing itself which steadfastly denies them food, and all
for the good of these starving wretches cripples trade,
makes corn dear, and employment scanty, with the
avowed objeet of keeping rents above their natural
pitch ? What is Lord Stanley about—that profound
statesman who sees the welfare of the country brought
about by an artificial encouragement given to grooms
and fancy gardeners, as a panacea for the general dis-
tress ? A recent number of the Liverpool Journal
will tell us. This Noble Lord and his associates having,
we suppose, as many grooms and gardeners as they can
well employ, are directing their philanthropic energies
to a cognate manufacture—that of gamekeepers and
poachers.
Then follow certain details of the distress now preva-
lent in Prescot and St. Helen's.

" It must be evident to every one that a community
so situated must, at any time, but particularly with
food at the present high price, be suffering the most
horrible distress, nor could the frequency of crimes
against property excite any great surprise. But to po-
verty, •as a source of demoralization, we must add
the game-laws, which tend directly to give
crime its most dangerous and sanguinary character.
For miles round these towns, once hives of industry, now
dens of despair, the land is one great preserve. Demesne
succeeds demesne, flanked by covers, and guarded by
keepers, lodges, and armed watchers. There is scarce
a thicket without a bare, or a coppice without a phea-
sant, and in the middle of them all men are starving by
thousands. A perfect mania for preserves has possessed
the gentry, to the exclusion of anything like fair old-
fashioned sporting. Lord Stanley, we have been told,
by laying the Knowsley and Latham estates together,
and influencing some smaller proprietors, can now tra-
vel 15 miles in a straight line, over a country on which
not a gun can be lawfully fired without his permission.
The consequence is, that the peasantry over the coun-
try are pretty generally becoming Poachers."
" Alas, where now are the Hengista and Merles of
our still glowing, still expanding Europe ; who, when
their home is growing too narrow, will enlist, and, like
fire-pillars, guide onward those superfluous masses of
indomitable living valour ; equipped, not now with the
ba►tle-axe and war-chariot, but with the steam-engine and
ploughshare ? Where are they ? Preserving their
Game !"—(Carlyle's " Chartism.")
In a little time, is a few weeks, these frightful symp-
toms must be encountered by some better remedy than
that of pheasant-breeding, by some better answer than
doubts as to whether John Nokea really died of star-
%ration, and references to the increase of Savings'
Banks, which increase may just as well be owing to
the increasing poverty of those private depositaries of
the poor man's savings, who enjoyed and merited his
confidence before the Government took this trust upou
itself. It will not do, then, to deny the want of food,
or to boast of the facility with which men from the
dregs of society can vault to the loftiest pinnacles
of honour. Yet a few weeks, and neither quackery,
nor trickery, nor sophistry, nor rhetoric, nor candour,
nor impudence, nor tactics, nor delay, will serve the
turn. These things have had their day. The party
game has been played out. The national game remains
to play ; and a stern and fearful game it is. It it is a
hard thing to reason with the master of ten legions, it is
sometimes not less difficult to reason with millions not a
unit of whom is, master of anything but an empty belly.
With haggard countenances, rough aspect, and peremp-
tory voice, these men—for they are men after all—will,
in effect, if not in form, thrust themselves into the sanc-
tuary of the constitution, stand face to face with the
Prime Minister, and ask him what remedy his wallet
contains as the fruit of the " comprehensive view" of
affairs which he has been taking for the last three or
four months. Woe to him if he has then nothing to
offer them but a bottle of patent quack medicine.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, Jun. 17.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)

TFIF. CORPORATION OF Fl/I,RTISIJITTH V. HOLESWORTH.

His HONOUR, in giving his judgment, said that the
ease for the plaintiffs went on the assertion that six of
the aldermen, at the meeting at which the bond was
'granted, had misled by false representations theremaining
two, thereby inducing them to sign the-deed. There was,
however, no evidence whatever to prove that each of the six
Aldermen had made these misrepresentations • and it
would not be enough to show that they had been made
by one or two of the parties, because those who brought
forward a charge of fraud, should be held to the strictest
proof of such charge. The allegations of the plaintiff
were not sustained, and he should therefore dismiss the
bill with costs.
(Before Vice-Chancellor BnucE.)
FANNING V. DEVEREUX._

In this cause, Which came before the Court on bill and
answer, the plaintiff, Richard Fanning, claimed as the
personal representative of the testator's next of kin.
The testator, James Fanning, was possessed of an
estate in France called La Roche Talbot, and of
considerable sums of money in the French Funds,
and other property in France, all of which was confis-
cated at the time of the French Revolutien, in consequence of
his being a British subject. In January, lev), he made his
will, and thereby, after giving a certain annuity, he be-
queathed to his kinsman, J. E. Devereux, of 'Carigrnendu, in
the county of Wexford, and to the Reverend Daniel
:11‘Cartity, whom he also appointed as his executors, all his
wordly substance, and directed that it, at the decease of the
annuitant, should go as the rest of his fortune to those execu-
tors. Another executor named Edward Christian, was also
nominated executor by the testator. In a subsequent will,
dated ItiO4, the testator, after expressing a confident hope that
he would be indemnified for the confiscated French estate,
and for the seizure, during the Revolution, of hit plate, linen,
household furniture, and other personal property, bequeathed
his iroperty in the following manner:—One-third part for cha-
ritable purposes, for the relief of the poor of Waterford
and other: places in Ireland ; one-third part to his relation,
J. E. Devereux; and the • remaining third to his cousin,
Jannuius Fanning, of the city of Naples. The whole of the
property thus devised was to be subject to an annuity of 601.,
to -be paid to the testator's niece, Catharine Al*Namara.
In a paper left-with Devereux the ' testator confirmed
this will in everything except the nomination of the
Reverend D. M.Macarthy as one of the- executors:
That nomination he revoked, and named the Reverend
Dr. Walsh, of the Irish College of Paris, and Mr. Devereux,
as his executors. Januarius Fanning died during the lifetime of
the testator, and 'the third portion of the property be-
queathed to him became lapsed, and vested in the
testator's next of kin, Catharine M'Namara. She died intes-
tate in lill7, and the plaintiff had taken out letters of adminis-
tration of her estate and effects, and now, as her personal repre-
sentative, brought forward his claim to the lapsed third por-
tion of the property bequeathed to James Fanning.
The cause had on a former occasion come before the then
Lord Chancellor, on a petition, which had been dismissed
with costs by his Lordship. .
His HONOUR thought. that he was bound by the weight of
the late t.ord Chancellor's authority, who intimated an opinion
adverse to the cause, to dismiss the bill, but not with costs,
and thus the question would be left open to appeal.
(Before Vice-Chancellor WlcaAlt.)
JONES U. HUGHES.

The arguments in this cause were brought to a hear-
ing. his Ho'.4;oVß commented upon several of the points
which had been raised at the bar, but deferted his judg-
ment till Wednesday.
THE EAST INDIA COMPANY v. THE COOPERS' COMPANY.
Mr. BuRGE opened this ease at great length for the
plaintiff;. The prayer of the bill was that the Coopers',
Company might be decreed to grant to the plaintiff* it

I formal license in writing in pursuance of the agreement
entered into between them and David Trinder in the bill
mentioned, and that it might be declared that the plain-
tiffs were entitled to demise, assign, or underiet, the pre-
inises in dispute. The Learned Counsel said that, by
the Act of the 4th Wil. IV. e. 85, the East India
Company were directed to close their commercial busi-
ness, and for that purpose to sell all their warehouses,
tenements, hereditaments, and other property, which
were not necessary for the government of the territories
in the East Indies. Part of this prop ty consisted of
certain premises at Ratcliffe, upon which were erected
the Saltpetre Works of the East India Company. They
held these premises for the residue of a term of 260
years, which had been granted to them by the Coopers'
Company, by an indenture of lease of the 30th of Octo-
ber, 1770. In and previous to the year 1770 a.person of
the name of David Trender had been in possession of the
premises, as the assignee of two indentures of lease,
bearing date the sth of February, 1760, and granted by
the Coopers' Company to a person of the name of Hatt.
In the year 1770 an agreement was entered into be-
tween the East India Company and Mr. Trinder, by which,
in consideration of the sum of 3,9201, Mr. Trinder
agreed to surrender the residue of the term to the East
India Company, and to procure a grant by the Coopers'
Company to the East India Company of this term of
260 years, at an entire rent of 1551. ; and the East India
Company, in consideration of this, were to grant to Mr.
Trinder the lease of a parcel of land adjoining the wharf,
being part of the premises to be included in the lease
from the Coopers' Company to the East India Company.
200 years were to be added to the term of the lease,
and Mr. Trinder agreed that he would deliver up to
the Coopers' Company the two indentures of lease, and
the Company agreed to grant him a portion of the land
comprised_ in that extended lease, at a yearly rent of
165 L, piyable quarterly. The bill stated that Mr. Trin-
der entered into the agreement with the East India Com-
pany with the privity and consent of the Coopers' Corn,
pany. The whole of the negotiation on the part of the
Coopers' Company and the East India Company was
carried on by Mr. Trinder, and the Coopers' Company
must be taken to have been fully acquainted with his au-
thority to act on the part of the East India Company.
On the 30th of Oct., 1770, the Coopers' Company exe-
cuted this indenture of lease to the East India Company
for the term of 260 years ; and that lease contained a
covenant that the East India Company should not part
with the said demised premises without the license and
consent of the said Coopers' Company first had and con-
tained in writing for that purpose. The plaintiffs en-
tered into possession of all the premises except that
portion which was demised to Mr. Trinder. The East
India Company had regularly paid to the Coopers' Com-
pany the reserved rent hr the whole of these premises.
In the beginning of the year 1836, the East India Com-
pany proceeded, in obedience to the directions of the Act
of Parliament, to sell this portion of their property.
The British Gas Company first proposed to become the
purchasers ; but, discovering in the lease this covenant
against leasing or assigning without the license of the
Coopers' Company, and not being aware of what had
passed between Mr. Trinder and the Coopers' Company,
making the latter parties to the agreement, they offered
500 L for a license ; and that offer being rejected, there
was au end of the negotiation. The Coopers' Company,
being aware of the situation in which the East India
Company was placed by the Act of Parliament, and
having it, as they supposed, in their power to prevent
that sale, by not granting a license, they being in the
possession of the only evidence of that license having
been originally granted to Mr. Trinder, it occurred to
them that they might make a bargain for themselves,
and they °tiered to become the purchasers of the premises
for the sum of 4,0001. They afterwards extended their
offer to 4,5001, but that sum was refused. It was quite
clear, from all the circumstances, that the Coopers' Com-
pany were seeking to avail themselves of the obligation
imposed upon the East India Company by Act
of Parliament, to compel the latter to sell. The
interposition of the Coopers' Company, and their
refusal to grant a license, originated entirely in
the passing of the Act, making it obligatory on the plain-
tiffs to sell; and it was to protect themselves against such
conduct that the:present.bill had been filed by the plain-
tiffs. The Learned Counsel insisted, at great length, on
the right of the plaintiffs to have a formal license granted.
The property had been sold to Mr. Ward for the sum of
5,5001.; but the Coopers' Company had refused to enable
the East India Company to complete the sale. He con-
tended, that upon all the evidence and correspondence in
the cause, the plaintitTh were entitled to what they asked
by the bill.
Mr. LLOYD followed on the same side.

The further hearing was postponed at the request of
the parties until Friday next.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR directed the attention of
Counsel to two points—first, to the manner in which it
was sought to be proved that there was an agreement to
' permit an assignment contemporaneous with the grant-
ing of the lease which expressly forbade it, which must
be a matter of great difficulty ; and, secondly, as to the
relief which could be given against the lessors, when it
did not appear that they had threatened to eject the
plaintiff, even supposing that there existed an agreement
to permit the lease to Trinder to be granted, it not be-
ing the rule of the Court to make any merely prospec-
tive declaration of the rights of the parties. The Act of
Parliament directed the East India Company to sell
their commercial property, but it was difficult to argue
that it gave the Company a right to come into a Court
of equity for help, in order to carry the Act into effect.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Jan. 17.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
IN RE WILLIAM HITCHCOCK.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
State the names of those houses you referred to Cook and
Ce. since that period ?—Messrs. Hollington and Warwick ;
Leaf, Smith, and M‘Dougal ; Messrs. Smith and Thompson;
Messrs. Lindsay and Patterson ; and I should think a great
number of others.

Mr. MAROON said he did net think it necessary to ask the
bankrupt any further questions, as he intended to examine the
parties referred to Messrs. Cook and Co. by the bankrupt.
Mr. HEIIFILEY asked if there was any other statement be-
fore he entered upon his cross-examination ?—No.
By Mr. BUTT—Was there a proposal of a loan of 7,000/. in
May, 1840, between you and Messrs. Cook and Co. ?—Yes,
about that time.

What terms were agreed upon between yon for that loan ?
—They offered to lend me 7,0004 for ten years.
Was that loan first proposed to be secured by a bond, and
your brother, George Hitchcock, proposed to be a security for
that amount ?—Yes, he was.

Was it arranged that you were to give your brother a bond
to indemnify him against loss ?—it was.
Was that proposed originally between you and Messrs. Cook
and Gladstone /—I am not sure.

In consequence of this arrangement did you cause a bond
to be prepared between you and your brother ?—I did.
Was that about the time of the arrangement ?—lt was.
Mr. Mardon, the solicitor, prepared the bond for you?—He did.
Have you got the draft or copy of the bond so prepared ?—I
have.

Produce it. This was not executed, can you state the rea-
son ?--Yes. When I gave instructions to my solicitor, Mr.
Mardon, to prepare that bond, I had not stated to any one in
the City that I had not given any such bond but on one occa-
sion. Subsequently, I inadvertently stated to a house, that
I had not given any bond to my .brother, nor to any
other person. On consideration, after making this statement,
I felt that I could not execute such bond. That was the cause
of its not being completed.
Does the word " subsequently" in your last answer refer to
the time of the agreement for the loan and the preparation of
the bond ?—No, but subsequently to the order which I had
given to Mr. Mardon for the preparation of the bond.
The bond was here read.

Mr. llumF !LEY again asked the bankrupt if there
was anything he wished to say before he cross-
examined him ?—Yes, I have. The bankrupt then made
an application to the Court, which he said was necessary
to place him before the public as an honest and upright man.
The application was, that as he had been examined as to the
parties he had referred to, Messrs. Cook and Gladstone should
be brought forward, in order that they might upon their oaths
say what the character was that Messrs. Cook and Gladstone
gave of him. It any gentleman should not be able to
attend, as he expected, he hoped the Court would allow a
letter frown that gentlemen to be put in, and which would be
sworn to. He was sure that his Honour must have noticed
that he was very much indisposed during his examination, and
therefore was incapacitated, from his exhaustion and excite-
ment, to give that attention which he had since done, and on
that account he wished to make an application to the Court
respecting an erroneous statement in the Times, which he
wished corrected.
The COMMISSIONER said the Court could not allow him to
refer to any report but that upon the files of the Court.
The Bankrupt then stated, that Mr. Ashurst, in his exami-
nation had involved various points in one question, and thereby
embarrassed him in his answers, by which he was easily led
into an error in his answers, and this was the reason he wished
to refer to the Times' report. At another opportunity he '
should address the Court respecting this.

. -
Now, referring you to your examination of December 13th,
where you were asked " Will you swear, to the best of your be-
lief, you had disclosed everything relative to your estate," was
that answer true?—l considered then it was true.

Had you pawned plate at that time which you had not dis-
closed to the assignees ?—I had pawned plate which
I had not disclosed to my assignees. The Sat was
opened in my estate about December 20. Shortly after and
about the period that I began to reveal my transactions with
Messrs. Cook and Gladstone to my assignees, I was subject
to a great many heavy expenses. In the first place I have a
wife and seven children to support, some of them in a very de-
hcate state. I had also been told that it was necessary for me
to employ an accountant in the preparation of my balance-sheet,
or I could not pass my examination. Relying on the information
that it was necessary for me to employ an accountant, and who
was recommended to me by the official assignee of this Court,
I slid employ one. Now, at this moment I had no funds where-
with to pay such an accountant, except the 5/. which you have
kindly allowed me for the support of my family.
Five pounds a week, you mean ?—Five pounds a week. This
I found to be insufficient to pay even the cost of my balance-
sheet, for I found that his charges were, for himself ss. per hour,
far his clerk, 2s. 6d. per hour. Even supposing that he
worked eight hours a-day at my balance sheet, that would
have entailed an expense upon use of 31. a-day : and, as I had
not been my own clerk, I found it quite impossible to under-
stand or explain my books, without engaging and paying him
his salary. There were also many other expenses incidental to
my then situation, and which expenses I was obliged to bear.
I felt myftseielnfisutnwiblluintg
stillat fends I must have in thatorder
moment to apply to any
of
to pass this Court. I therefore
did not hesitate,
e
knowing that I had some plate which belonged to my
children, and which was, therefore,
not the property of
the assignees, to pledge such plate. I did SO to the amount of
16/. lOs., and which money
was spent in expenses necessary
for my appearing here. I believe, also, that about this time
Mr. Cook, who was then one of my
assignees, objected to my
receiving any allowance for my maintenance. 1 will, how-
ever, say, that the other assignees were willing to allow me
the amount, and that Mr. Cook, finding himself thus placed,
made it a matter of grace to sanction it.
Now is that the only reason far swearing you had given up
the whole of your property when you. had not?—That was my
reason, and my determination was to bring any tickets at my
last examination, which I was told was usual.
Then, according to your own account, you said that you had
delivered up to your assignees all you had, and yet at the time
you had in your pocket duplicates which you had not disclosed.
Is that so Yes, and for the reasons 1 have before stated.
Now, you said yen had plate belonging to your children. • Will
you swear to having pawned none belonging to yourself ?—I
will not. The Court will remember that my wife and.
family were at the Isle of 'Wight. When they