The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-28 00:00:00

HAYMARKET THEATRE.

A new, one-act farce, entitled The Miseries of Human
Life, was produced here last evening. The hero, or
victim—meine chose—is a certain Mr. Ally Croaker (ad-
mirably personated by Webster). He is a housekeeper
and a single man, possessed of an invaluable servant in
Margaret (Mrs. Humby), a worthy friend, Mr. Mildmay
(Tilbury), and a good property. But Mr. Ally Croaker
is not content ; he wishes to purchase certain houses in
Texas-terrace to round his property, and also to take
unto himself a wife in the person of a widow, Mrs.
Courtney (Mrs. L. S. Buckingham). He wishes for a
new coat, in which to appear before the widow. and be
orders it accordingly ; and he wishes to comfort his
inner man by devouring a roast partridge for breakfast,
which partridge is duly prepared by Margaret. Now
Mr. Croaker hateth flattery, and accordingly, having
roundly rated Margaret for being eloquent in his
praises, she, to please her master, describes him as an
avaricious, violent brute, to Mrs. Courtney, and sends ber
away disgusted. Proud of what she thinks her triumph.
ju
st
come relates what she has done to her master, who has
come in wet through, and splashed up to his eyes, for
the rain is falling in torrents. He calls for his new coat—
it has been taken off by Mr. Mildmay, and he has nothing
but a monkey jacket in which to make his appearance
before the lady. Hungry and tired, he calls for break-
fast—it is not ready; in a towering rage he discharges
Margaret, and quits the house. Mr. Mildmay, wbo has
been asked to breakfast, arrives true to his time, hhving
previously purchased the houses in Texas-terrace. Find-
ing Margaret in tears, he inquires the cause, and imme-
diately engages her as his own housekeeper, while i
he s devouring the partridge; and when Croaker returns
he finds himself minus houses, breakfast, and servant.
Mrs. Courtney arrives, and has an interview with him.
She drops her handkerchief ; in stooping to pick it up
Croaker bursts a brace-button, and stands a figure of
awkwardness until, by a hitch in a buckle, he is enabled
to remedy the mischief. He unwittingly offends her by
abusing her kith and kin ; and he, in an agony.
sits down on her bonnet, and upsets a table full
of china. Mildmay now enters, and being left alone
with the lady, offers and is accepted, and Croaker,
deprived of coat, breakfast, houses, and wife, by his evil
genius, Mildmay, orders them all to quit the house,
determining to shut himself up alone, and brood over his
miseries. But his cup is not yet full. He is arrested
by a policeman for an assault on a cabman, who, having
been desired to drive him to the Stock Exchange, sets
him down at Bedlam. Thus far all went well. The dia-
logue, which is written with great piquancy.
went trippingly off, and the incidents followed
each other with such a rapidity, that the
house was kept in a continual roar. But the piece
ends with a dangerous tag. Margaret whispers some.
thing to Croaker, who, therefore, comes forward, and,
addressing the audience, says that he has learned that
certain friends who promised to support him are absent,
but that he trusts the audience will do what they pro-
mised to do, and that thus they may enjoy, for many even-
ings to come, a hearty laugh at The Miseries of Human
Life. This tag was received with unequivocal symptoms
of disapprobation ; the opposition were, however, out-
voted, and when Webster, after the fall of the curtain,
announced that, favoured by the approbation of his
friends, the piece would be repeated, there can be no
doubt that the ayes had it. The house was crowded in
every part. _

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 27.

KENNEY V. WILSON.
This was an action for an assault, to which the defendant
bad pleaded that he was not guilty.
Mr. Martin and Mr. Prance appeared for the plaintiff, and
Mr. M. Chambers for the defendant. _ _

The plaintiff was a pianoforte maker, in the employ of a
person of the same name, who carries on the business of a
pianoforte maker in the Hackney-road, and the defendant was
a publican in the same neighbourhood. On the 31st of July
last, between the hours of twelve and one in the morning, the
plaintiff happened to be at the Green-gate public•house, in
the Hackney-road, when a knock came to the door, and Mr.
Gander, the landlord, asked the plaintiff to goand see who
was there. He did so, but had no sooner opened the door
than the defendant rushed in, knocked him down, and beat
him most violently. The result was, that he was laid up, and
unable to attend to his business for a week ; and he brought
the present action to recover compensation for the injury he
had received.
Evidence having been given in support of this statement,
Mr. M. CHAMBERS urged that it would have been much
better had the matter been made the subject of a complaint
before a magistrate, rather than the cause of a civil action.
He affirmed that the assault was occasioned by the miscon-
duct of the plaintiff, who slammed Mr. Gander's door in the
face of the defendants and it was this act which gave rise to
the assault.
Evidence having been adduced to prove that the plaintiff
gave the first provocation, by rudely pushing the door in
the defendant's face after he had been invited to enter the
house by the landlord,
The Learned LORD CHIEF BARON summed up, and the
jury afterwards returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages 151.

BANKRUPTCY COURT, Nov. 27.
(Before Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN.)
BRAY AND REAY'S BANKRUPTCY.—THE WINE TRADE.
IES HONOUR gave judgment in this case this morning, and
the Court was crowded with creditors and numbers of the
wine trade on the occasion. He said he had looked into the
whole of the proceedings, and the bankrupt must be satis-
fied that in the prosecution of this inquiry every possible
advantage had been afforded him. He had stated his own
case as he thought, and he had given his statements
under the sanction of an oath, and had been assisted by
his counsel with zeal and ability. The charges preferred
against the bankrupt by the assignees were, the absence
of the proper balances of the books, the purchases of goods.
and pledging them, the "overdrawing" on customers, and
generally reckless conduct in trade. His Honour then, at
some length, referred to the condition of the bankrupt's
estate, tracing it through its various stages, from the period
of his solvency down to the date of the fiat. In the course
of the narrative he recapitulated the leading facts which
were brought out in discussion yesterday, and which have
already been reported. Hia Honour was understood dis-
tinctly to say that the bankrupt appeared to have been
solvent in 1841. It was a distressing thing to see the bank-
rupt, a man who had occupied so high a position in the
mercantile world, before the Court under the present condi-
tion of circumstances. After having for a series of years con-
ducted his business with credit to himself, it seemed that
all of a sudden he had altered his course, and, by the reck-
less line he had pursued, involved his crditors. It was said,
on his behalf, that the punishment of this position was very
great, and he (the Commissioner) could well believe that it
was a bitter and deeply humiliating position for the bankrupt
to be in; and as he (the Commissioner) thought the bank-
rupt felt it deeply, he should take that punishment into con-
sideration in the Judgment he was about to give. Generally,
it was said, there were mitigating circumstances in this case.
To see how this stood it was necessary to follow the bank-
rupt into the details of some of his transactions. With re-
gard to Wright, his conduct ought not properly to be made
a matter of censure. The transaction with that person ap-
peared to be the result of many years' dealings, and Wright
having got into his confidence, left him largely in debt. Be-
sides, the affair was wound up, and what loss was made was
made when he was solvent, so that the creditors could not
interfere with that—for bad as the bargain was, if he
had then been called to account he could have paid
every farthing he owed. He (the Commissioner)
wished lie could say the same of the debts of
Blumenthal and Jarvis. He must say that he
thought the conduct of the bankrupt with respect to Blu-
menthal amounted almost tc insanity. Blumenthal had been
a bankrupt, and so he told Reay. Reay admitted that in his
examination before the Court. It was much to the bank-
rupt's credit to say, that since his bankruptcy he had be-
haved in the most candid manner, and had afforded every
assistance for the realisation of the assets of his estate. It
was extraordinary how the bankrupt, without reason, could
allow Blumenthal so much confidence as to trust him nearly
to the extent of 50,0001. It was scarcely to be credited, and
yet there was no excuse offered. If the bankrupt were ab-
solved from the penalty of such conduct in the case of
Wright, because he was then above the complaints of
creditore, it was different with respect to Blumenthal.
At the date he trusted that man his affairs were in a
very different position, and the proper' balance of his
books ia 1843 could not have deceived him. In 1842 it
might be a question whether he was entitled so to deal
with Blumenthal; but in 1843 no person could have been
ignorant of the condition of his affairs, such as the bank-
rupt's were, without wilfully closing his eyes. The bank-
rupt, as he himself ought to have known, was then in a
hopeless condition, or, at least, fast going down the road to
insolvency. He (the Commissioner), therefore, did consider
that the charge of reckless trading was made out against
the bankrupt, with little or no excuse for his conduct. The
case of the credit to Jarvis was more extraordinary. Jarvis,
according to Reay's own account, was known to him as being
a clerk in a respectable house. With respect to this point of
the case a curious argument had been used for the bankrupt.
Reay, since his bankruptcy, being a large creditor against
Jarvis, had been afforded an opportunity, under the process
of bankruptcy, of inspecting Jarvis's books. What was the
result? Why, that he had supplied himself with informa-
tion of the dealings of Jarvis with other parties in the trade,
and it was now said for him, that if he did trust Jarvis, it
was no more than other parties had done who were in the
same line of business. The names of several firms were
mentioned, and the amounts named; but they were small
sums compared to the credit allowed by the bankrupt.
Reay said that he had made investigation of the position of
Jarvis at his banker's, but no name was given. If he did
inquire, he would have found that the person to whom
lie gave so large a credit never dealt further than to
the extent of 1001. or 1501. Reay trusted him as others
did. That was the excuse; but he (the Commissioner)
would beg to remind Mr. Reay, that if he turned to the first
item of all in Jarvis's books, he would there find his own
name entered for large credit, and especially during the first
part of Jarvis's trade, was his name entered for a very con-
siderable amount. Was it, therefore, surprising that when
the world saw (for, no doubt, Jarvis advised the other houses
of the fact) that Reay was giving support to this new firm,
that others followestthe example to a limited extent? Cer-
tainly not ; and if Reay chose to give false credit in this
manner, and thereby induce others to do likewise, he must
take the responsibility. It was through the credit given by
Reay to Jarvis, that that person (who described himself as a
porter, and Reay as a clerk) in the course of eleven months
obtained 36,0001. worth of wines, all of which had gone to the
winds. If the bankrupt's conduct was to be blamed in the
case of Blumenthal, it deserved much greater censure in the
case of Jarvis, for the last credits were ail given in the year
1844, when, as a faithful stewardof the property of his credi-
tors, he ought to have stayed his hand from further transac-
tions of the kind. It was, however, evident that so long
as be could obtain the discount of paper, so long was he de-
termined to pursue this inconsiderate course of dealing. The
allegation that the bankrupt had engaged in accommodation
bills was most strenuously denied. He (the Commissioner)
had closely investigated the case on that point, and was per-
fectly satisfied that a system of accommodation transactions
had been indulged in between the bankrupt and several of
his insolvent customers. It was said the course the parties
bad adopted in this respect was a. custom of trade. If it were,
it ought to be most strongly reprobated. There was no
doubt, from the books, and the discovery made since the
bankruptcy, that bill dealings had been engaged in by the
bankrupt for the purpose of keeping these parties "going,"
and supporting a fictitious appearance of credit. If it were
not so, how was it that several thousand pounds' worth of
bills %sere found in the bankrupts' drawers after the
bankruptcy ? They were there reedy, of couree, to be
pushed into the market to keep credit alive, and delude
the public into the belief that they were dealing with
men of substance. It was only when the bankers and
bill-brokers refused to discount further that the ruin to
the par'ies engaged was made apparent by the fiat.
Could any one say this was proper conduct? No one, not
even the bankrupt himself, whom he (the Commissioner) be-
lieved, if lie calmly reflected for a moment, must admit the
impropriety of his career. It. was necessary to state so,
that the creditors. might not be deceived, that the assets
under the joint estate would not realise more than 2s. 6d.
in the pound, and this one-eighth of the gross amount of his
debts and liabilities was all that this merchant, who once oc-
cupied a proud position in his trade, could offer to his cre-
ditors in satisfaction of their claims. It now became his (the
Commissioner's) duty to say what amount of punishment
was to be awarded for this want of proper conduct on the part
of the bankrupt. If the Court wholly refused the certificate,
it would be inflicting on the bankrnpt a punishment amount-
ing to a commercial outlawry. That he was not desirous of
doing, considering some of the features the case presented.
He thought there were mitigating circumstances to be taken
into consideration ; one of which was the very good conduct
of the bankrupt since his bankruptcy—an ingredient allowed
by the terms of the Act to have weight in the judgment of
the Court. He hoped he did not permit the sympathy which
he felt for the bankrupt's position to interfere with the course
of justice; but he did consider that that circumstance ought
to weigh in favour of the bankrupt. He could not but hope
that inquiries like these would be of essential service to trade ;
because, by the power the Court now possessed in granting
or refusing certificates,all persons must undergo the ordeal in
public instead of private, as heretofore.' Traders would now
Mel that the moment would come when whatever might have
been clone in the closet or the counting house would be ex-
posed on the house-top. The present case ought, therefore, to
be an example to them of truly and fairly looking their
affairs in the face, and if on a tree balance of books they found
themselves wrong, to give uis the property they possessed for
full and equal distribution. Looking at all the facts of this
bankruptcy, his Honour said, in conclusion, that it appeared
to him the justice of the case would be met by the suspension
of the certificate for two years.—Certificate suspended accord-
_ -

CENTRAT4CRIMINAL COURT.
°Lb COUR7'.
Charles Gibbs, 19, and Charles Phillips, 31, were indicted
for housebreaking, and stealing two coats, two waistcoats, and
other articles, the property of Mr. George South.
Mr. Parry conduced the prosecution ; and Mr. Baldwin
defended the prisone.
The prosecutor in this case is the landlord of the Duchess
of Kent public-house en the Dover-road, and the robbery in
question was committed on the evening of the Ist of No-
vember. The case was clearly made out as far as r
regardedthe
the prisoner Gibbs, and the only question was,wheth e
evidence was sufficient to justify the conviction of the other
prisoner. the principal testimony against him being that of a
little girl, who swore positively thac about the time the rob-
bery must have been committed she saw him leave the house,
Carrying a bundle.
bit% Bal.pwiN addressed the jury, and called several wit-
nesses, who gave the prisoner Phillips a good character, and
some evidence was also adduced with a view to establish an
alibi, but it was not of a satisfactory description.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE having summed up, and left the
case to the jury, they proceeded to deliberate upon their
verdict.
The prisoner Gibbs requested leave to address the Court,
and he then asserted that his fellow-prisoner knew nothing
whatever of the robbery, and was perfectly innocent of any
participation in it. He insinuated that the little girl had
been tampered with.
The jury, after a short deliberat:on, returned a Verdict of
Guilty against both prisoners.
The prosecutor got into the witness-box, and begged to be
allowed to state that he had not had any communication
with the girl until after she had been examined by the ma-
gistrate and had given her evidence.
The LORD CIIIEF JUSTICE said that there was not the
slightest. imputation upon the character or conduct of the
prosecutor.
The prosecutor said, that as he believed the prison

Phillips had formerly borne a good character, he begged to
recommend him to the merciful consideration of the Court.
A previous conviction for felony was then proved against
the prisoner Gibbs.
The LORD CIIIEF JusiicE sentenced Gibbs to be trans-
ported for twelve years, and the other prisoner was ordered
to be kept to hard labour for twelve months.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

Yesterday- a very remarkable case was brought before Sir
J. Pixie, after the Lord Mayor had finished the routine busi-
ness of the day in the justice-room.
A seaman of very intelligent appearance, named John
Potter, who stated his age to be about 30 years, presented
himself at the bar in the custody of Bradley, one of the prin-
cipal officers of the Mansion-house, a voluntary prisoner.
The following evidence was given on the occasion :
Ames Bradley said, this day the prisoner voluntarily de-
livered himself into my custody as an escaped convict. He
stated to me that he escaped in December, 1839, from Syd-
ney, since which time he had been at sea—that he was tried
and convicted at Shrewsbury in the month of August, 1832
was transported for life—had received no pardon for his
offence—and was actuated by a sense of duty to his God in
thus giving himself up to justice. I have procured from John
Bellamy, Esq., the clerk of assize of the Oxford Circuit, the
certificate of his conviction at the assizes holden at Shrews-
bury, in and for the county of Salop, on the Ist day of August,
in the third year of the reign of his late Majesty King
Willian the Fourth, by the name of John Potter, and the
prisoner confessed to me that he is the person referred to as
John Potter in the certificate I produce, and which I saw
signed by Mr. Bellamy.
Sir J. PIRIE—What have you to say to this statement
made by the officer, prisoner? The prisoner—l admit that
his evidence is in every respect correct.
Sir J. Pfmn—l am aware of the particulars of your history
from yourself, and I have every reason to give credit to all
your assertions. I think it necessary, however, as a magis-
trate, to hear you make a public statement.
The prisoner then said he had escaped from Sydney about
four years ago that he there witnessed the miserably im-
moral condition of his fellow-convicts, whom, as he was now
a reformed man himself, he should earnestly wish to assist as
much as lay in his small power in reforming. That he had
been earning an honest living as a sailor, first in an American
vessel, and afterwards he was employed in the Hudson's
Bay Company's service, and sent to Africa. He said that
after a laborious service in foreign ports, he became a sea-
man on board the ship John Gray, trading from Greenock to
Bombay, and on the outward voyage he was induced by a
special Providence to turn over the pages of the Holy Bible,
which wrought such changes in his mind, affecting the good
of his fellow-creatures, that he was at once seized with the
desire to do something for their advantage ; and he certainly
considered himself able, from the experience he had had of a
convict's pains and penalties, to read them a strong lesson
upon the nature and effects f their crimes and errors. There
was one thing, however, to be got over before he could think
of making the attempt upon which his mind and heart were
fixed. He had been guilty of a further violation of the laws
of his country by making his escape from his place of punish-
ment, and he could not satisfy his conscience without deliver-
ing himself up to justice. lie had, therefore, come to the
determination to confess his escape, notwithstanding the
horror inseparable from the idea of a convict's life, and the
great probability that he never should be discovered in the
character which he had performed so long without having
excited the least suspicion. After looking over the subject
with the seriousness which belonged to it, he applied, through
the recommendation of a clergyman at Calcutta, to whom he
had mentioned the cause of his uneasiness, to Sir John Pink,
who attended to him with the most benevolent interest, and
declared the utmost willingness to give him employment by
which he could earn a respectable livelihood, but considered,
as a magistrate of the City of London, that an effort to shield
him could not be consistently made without the sanction of
the Secretary of State.
Sir J. PIRIE said the case having all the evidences of truth
about it, and the prisoner having abandoned the vicious
courses which led to his conviction, an application was made
to the Serretary of State for the Home Department to take
the circumstances into consideration. The crime, however,
for which the sentence of transportation was passed having
been a heavy one, and the effect of example co-operating,
Sir James Graham could not recommend the grant of a par-
don, but intimated that the convict must resign himself to
trial by the laws of his country unconditionally.
. . .

The prisoner said the accusation against him at the
Shrewsbury Assizes went much farther than it ought in jus-
tice to have gone ; for, although it stated that he had com-
mitted a burglary and stolen several articles, the real fact
was that he entered the premises without the least violence,
and he carried off but two articles, and they were of very
little value indeed.

Bradley produced the certificate of the prisoner's convic
tion, of which the following is a copy, divested of its tech.
nicalities

"These are to certify that at the assize and general de-
livery of the gaol of the late King William IV., holden
at Shrewbury on Wednesday, the 10th of August, in
the third year of his Majesty's reign, before certain
justices assigned to deliver the gaol of the pri-
soners therein being, John Potter, labourer, was tried
and convicted on a certain indictment against him for that
he, on the sth of June, 1832, with force and arms, the
dwelling-house of William Evans feloniously did break and
enter, and two keys of the value of sixpence, one pair of
braces of the value of sixpence, one coat of the value of ten
shillings, two waistcoats of the value of five shillings, two
pair of breeches of the value of ten shillings, one hat of the
value of five shillings, and one pair of stockings of the value
of one shilling, did feloniously steal and carry away, against
the peace, &c., and thereupon judgment of death was re-
coreed against him for the offence, and afterwards his late
Majesty was graciously pleased to extend the royal mercy to
him on condition of his being transported beyond the seas
for the term of his natural life, and such extension of mercy
having been signified by Viscount Melbourne, the Court al-
lowed to the said offender the benefit of a conditional pardon,
and it was thereupon ordered that John Potter be imme-
diately transported for the term of his natural life."
The prisoner was committed to Newgate for the escape,
and a true bill was yesterday evening, about an hour after
his committal for trial, found against him by the grand jury.
Some years ago a similar case occurred in London. -A
man, who was sentenced to be transported, made his escape
from Sydney, came to London, and lived in respectability as
a tradesman for some years, but was one day met by the
very officer on whose evidence he had been convicted. He
was committed for trial for the escape, and immediately
after his confession and conviction was, upon the strong re-
commendation of the jury, mercifully recommended to the
Sovereign, who granted a free pardon.
It appears that Potter is anxious to return to Sydney, in
which he had witnessed boundless depravity, for the purpose
of reforming his fellow-convicts.
DESPERATE ASSAULT.—A woman, named Mary Fowler,
was charged with having struck the daughter of John Good-
child, a labouring man, in the forehead with a cleaver.
The prosecutrix said, her father and the prisoner lived in
the same house, and some words having been exchanged, the
prisoner inflicted a murderous blow upon the young woman's
forehead, and the cleaver would have descended with another
blow, which would probably have dispatched the prosecutrix,
had not her father interposed the strength of his arm, and
turned aside the blow.

The prisoner declared that she bad used the cleaver in de-
fence of her life, which the family of the prosecutrix seemed
determined to take from her.

The LORD MAYOR said, the case was one of such a serious
nature, that he was resolved to send it to the Central Criminal
Court for trial.

The prisoner was then committed.
The LORD MAYOR requested that the press would honour-
ably acknowledge his receipt of the following sums for the
poor-box at the Mansion House:-11. ls., by Subpoena;
No. 11-0 30,269; 11., Mr. Blacket.