Star.
London, England, 1825-12-21 00:00:00

BANKRUPTS.

Mr. GLYNN said, in consequence of his Lordship's
judgment being suspended in thematter, it might be
necessary to have an order now, that the public meet-
ings of ;he creditors should be postponed. Thursday
was the first day, and Friday the second for meetings,
and if there was a probability, or even a trance of tl.e
present commission being superseded, the expense of
those meetings might be considered as Fe, reedy un-
necessary. He would only farther say, that since the
matter was discussed here a few days agn, additional
affidavits had been filed, from which it appeared, that
Vie statement of the amount of the extent on the part of
the Cio.vn had been very much exaggerated, because'
at first it had been said, that it amounted to 50,0001.
whereas it now appeared not to exceed 1,5001.
Mr. HORNE, on the same side, said, there was ano-
ther fact that the Court ought to be apprised of, which
was, that the creditors of the bankrupts mere ex•
ceedingly numerous, and dispersed over the whole of
the country.
Mr. GLYNN, under these circumstances, did not'
know whether Mr. Montagu, who, on the former oc-1
casion, opposed the superseding of the commission, st.ll
thought it his duty to persist in that opposition.
Mr. MONTAGU said, from the statement of the re-
duction in the amount of the extent, from the considera-
tion of the vast number of creditors that the bank had
—from the consideration of their being so widely dis-
persed—from his conviction of their not agreeing to
any settlement among themselves were they to meet,
and from his personal feeling being such, as to the
badness of the present commission, he could not con-
scientiously advise his client to attempt to support ; he
would submit to its being superseded.
His LORDSHIP observed, that taking the amount of
the extent to be 1,5001. if that claim were resisted, the
expenses might soon amount to as much more, and if
the commission at last failed, it might rather be a
benefit than an injury to the body of creditors that the
commission should now be superseded. All Counsel
were of the same opinion.
His LORDSHIP then said, as the matter had taken this
turn it was not necessary for him to say more on the
point of law, than simply, that his present opinion was,
that the commission could not stand ; therefore, it
would, undoubtedly, be (or the benefit of tie general
body of creditors. that the commission should be
superseded, and that the same creditor should be at
liberty immediately to take out another, and which was
accordingly ordered.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH, WESTMINSTER, Dic.l9.

WILCOX V. MARSHALL.
This action was brought on a policy of insurance,
founded upon a bottomry bond executed at Dartmouth,
between the plaintiff aad defendant. The insurance
was on a vessel from Havre to St. Sebastian, with a
cargo of tobacco. The plaintiff alleged that the ship
was lost by the perils of the sea.
The question was whether the ship proceeded on her
voyage to St. Sebastian ; or whether the object was to
remain on the English coast for the purpose of landing
tobacco?

It appeared that the ship, which was turned the
Heider, was at Havre de Grace in the -month of June,
1824. She sailed and put into Dartmouth in July.
She left that harbour, and was obliged to return again,
when she struck on a rock, and was in a dangerous
state. Waving received repairs, the vessel sailed once
more, and springing a leak in the Channel, went down
soon after the crew 1-ft her. It was contended that the,
circumstances under which the ship remained so long
upon the coast of England were suspicious, and that
the underwriters ere justified in withholding the
amount of the policy until the question came before a
Jury—The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 1001.