Star.
London, England, 1830-09-29 00:00:00

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Tuesday, Sept. 28.

Thomas Tovey, late of Cheltenham, Glocestershire, collector of the
paving and watch-rates, was opposed by Mr. Coozx on behalf of the
Commissioners of Cheltenham, by Edmund Lambert Newman, clerk
to the Commissioners, appointed under the Aets of the let and itd of
George IV.
Mr.WOOD/OrTE supported the insolvent.
From the examination of the insolvent by the learned gentleman
(Mr. Cooke,) it appeared that he had been collector of the rates
since 1821, during which period he bad become deficient in his accounts
to the amount of 7001. and not being in a condition to pay the ba-
lance, they /the commissioners) had soused a detainer to be lodged
against him for 5001 previous to which, on the 27th of June last, he
rendered in discharge of his bail, in an action upon which he had
been originally arrested. The commissioners, it seems, are required
by the above recited acts to audit their accounts periodically, whereby
they are the better enabledi to check the collector of rates ; but in the
case of this insolvent, notwithstanding the powers given them, they had
suffered the insolvent, from time to time, to collect monies, and apply
the old rates in liquidation of the new. The last audit made by the
insolvent was in 1830, when it was discovered that he was a defaulter
to that amount. It also appeared that he had entered in his collecting
book the names of several persons as defaulter', whom a person of the
name of Russell proved by the insolvent's rate-book and receips in
the handwriting of himself, his son, and a person of the name of Malley,
had discharged all claims upon them.
Mr. WOODROFtE, on the part of his client, said that the Commis-
sioners had proceeded against one of the insolvent's bondsmen (Tanner)
for 5001. and that he had returned 5001. debts on his schedule which
were due to him from the persons for whom he had become liable to the
Commissioners, who if they had done their duty would not have suf-
fered the insolvent from year to year to have made default in the way he
bad dope.

Mr. Coosa, in a short address to the Court, contended.. that the in.
solvent had been guilty of a direct fraud, and that he had made out a
ease of embezzlement against him.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS, in pronouncing the judgment of the
Court, said, that there was no doubt but that the insolvent had been
guilty of a gross breech of trust. The Court, however, could not shut its
eyes against the manner in which the Commiedoners bad suffered
the insolvent's accounts for so long • period to go in wear : and
the ease might be of some consequence to the Commissioners of Chel-
tenham hereafter, not only in auditing their accounts regularly, but
in taking better security in future, as it 'appeared that one of the
bondsmen had become bankrupt, and the other (Mr. Tanner,)
whom an action had been brought, had not paid the penalty. ariati:st
false that the insolvent had 5001. due to Mtn from persons liable to the
payment of the rates, for he perceived upon looking over the insol-
vag's schedule, that no less than 3701. had no connection whatever
with that sum. He would not, however, go the full length of the penal
clause of the Act oftarliament, but he considered the insolvent merited
a severe lent and adjudged him to 12 months' imprisonment from
the time of filing his petition, at the suit of the clerk of the commis-
sioners under the Act of Parliament.