Star.
London, England, 1821-10-13 00:00:00

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.'

In this Court, yesterday, a Half-pay Officer of
the Marines, was opposed by Messrs. Brock. Henry
Moss, and Strudwick, on the ground of contracting
debts which he had no visible means of discharging.
It appeared on the examination of the insolvent (an
elderly gentlemanly-looking man), that he had been
in the receipt of his half-pay of ss. per day since
1797 ; that he was possessed of some property at
Granada, in the West Indies (being heir to a debt of
£4,000), but his receipts from thence had stopped
seven or eight years ago. He had now contracted
debts to the amount of £1,200, thus spending £lOO
a-year more than his income. He had now living a
wife and eight children, the eldest of whom was
only fourteen years of age.
Mr. Moss, a tailor, residing in Westminster, op•
posed the discharge of the insolvent in person.—
Having been sworn, he stated that his debt amounted
to £l2 12s. The insolvent, some time prior to his
imprisonment, called upon him and asked him to
make a suit of boy's clothes. To this he consented,
after learning the insolvent's place of residence. The
insolvent stated, that he was a Lieutenant-Colonel in
the Army, that he had plenty of estates in Suffolk,
and that he was in the half-yearly receipt of money
from Granada, in the West Indies. Witness looked
in the Army List, and perceived that the insolvent
was a Major in the Marines, and this was for the
present satisfactory to him. The boy's suit was made
and sent home. Some time afterwards, the insolvent
asked for some Ladies' cloth, to make a pelisse for his
wife and little girl, and witness produced a piece of
eight yards, at 18s. a yard. The insolvent then pro-
duced a bill for Cl 4. 15s. which he said he had ob-
tained from Messrs. Hawes, his agents for the West
India property. The insolvent added, that he had
two other bills, and he shewed them, one for £l5,
and the other or £l7, and that he (witness) might
take his choice of them. The bill for £l4. 1.55. was
taken, and it was agreed that witness should take
£l2. 12s, the amount of his debt, out of it, and return
the change when he sent the cloth home. The cloth
was sent home, and one of the insolvent's little boys
called next day upon the tailor and asked him why
he had not sent the change? Witness answered, that
he had it not at present in the house. In the mean-
time witness made inquiries about Messrs. Hawes, the
drawers of the bill, and found that all was not quite
right. He went to Messrs. Hawes, and saw a person
who called himself a clerk, in a large warehouse with
nothing in it. He was advised by the neighbours to
have nothing to de with the business. Witness after-
wards called upon Mr. Strudwick, the landlord of
the insolvent, who told him that inquiries of a similar
nature had before been made. All this induced him
to give no change for the bill he had received from
the insolvent, and when it became due it was disho-
noured. All the parties had decamped. After this
he saw the insolvent, who declared positively to him
that the money should be paid in three days: witness
said he could not wait, and gave an order for his
arrest. The insolvent added, that he (witness) might
think himself d—d well off to get the money in
three months, for that most tailors gave two years'
credit. Before the bill became due the insolvent told
witness to be careful what he said about Messrs.
Hawes, the drawers of the bill, for that an action
might be brought against him. He (witness) had
been induced to trust the insolvent upon his re-
presentation that he had money coming from the
West Indies, and upon finding that he was a Major
in the Army.
The insolvent was so extremely leaf, that ht heard
not a syllable of what Mr. Moss had sworn against
him, and the Commissioner read to him the notes he
had taken of the evidence. The insolvent then most
solemnly declared that every word of it was false.—
Being interrogated by the Court, the insolvent said
that he knew nothing of Messrs. Hawes, the drawers
of the bill in question, and never once stated that they
were his agents. The, manner in which that bill had
come into his possession was this—a Mr. C. had
given it him for a bill which he (the insolvent) had
drawn, and had paid long ago. It was a mere matter
of accommodation between himself and Mr. C.

That Gentleman went with him to the tailor's house,
and told Mr. Moss this to his face. Mr. Moss then
said, that he never suspected him (the insolvent) of
any dishonest practices. He had been induced to take
the pelisse cloth from Mr. Moss's pressing persuasions,
and this bill had been given in payment. He never
produced a £l5 bill, or a £l7 bill. He had not
got them to produce. Mr. C. he believed, now
lived at Croydon. He was a friend of his, but did
not know precisely what business he was in. He was
a merchant, or something of that kind.
Mr. Strudwick, another detaining creditor, also
opposed the insolvent on the same grounds. He had
let the insolvent a ready furnished house for £lOO,
and according to his (the insolvents) own statement
to-day, be was worth no more than 1101 a-year, with
which he was to support a large and helpless family.
The case was ultimately ordered to stand over till
Monday, in order that Mr. C. might be produced
as a witness.

Thomas Donaldson was opposed by Mr. Grainger,
a detaining creditor, for a breach of trust, and a mis-
appropriauon of monies. The facts of the case, as
shewn by the insolvent's examination, were these:—
Money was given to the insolvent by Mr. Grainger,
to the amount of £5O, to take up a bill that was due.
The bill was never taken up; but the insolvent lost
£9 of the money in a public-house, and was's() much
ashamed to return home•without it, that he set off to
Paris, and spent the remainder of the £5O there. In
Ithe Rue St. Honore he opened a house, and Mr.
O'Shaughnessy, the boot-maker, was his lodger for
some time. By him he was now owed £2.5. Since
the insolvent had been in prison, he confessed he had
received a debt of £4O. This he had never inserted
in his schedule.

Mr. HEATH, on the part of the opposing creditor,
thought that a sufficiently strong case had been made
out. He thought Mr. Grainger had done the insol-
vent a great favour in taking so mild a course, for
he had committed an offence which was perhaps de-
serving of a very different punishment.
The Coon; in deciding the case, observed, that
the insolvent, to speak in the mildest terms, had been
guilty of a most flagrant act of injustice. It was quite
ridiculous to suppose that shame had induced him to
travel to Paris, and to purloin all the rest of the
money. He hal as much stolen the money as any
man *ho had• been convicted of picking a pocket,

The judgment of the Court Was. that he should be
imprisoned at the suit of Mr. Grainger! for twelve
months from the signing of his petition.
Mary Ann Ingram was opposed by sir different
creditors, for obtaining money under false colour and
pretence. It seemed that Mrs. Ingram kent a school,
and in 1809 had thirteen girls and some apprentices
in her school. This she had carried on in the name
of a Mrs. Deely. A gentleman of the name of Mills
had sent a Miss *Donnell to her school as an ap-
prentice, and had paid £5O with her. He did not
know that Mrs. Ingram held the school in trust for
Mrs. Deely. Before he paid the money he had heard
that there were some embarrassments in the establish-
?pent, and he questioned the insolvent about it. Mrs.
Ingram then said—a Do you think I could be so base
minded a woman as to take people's money unless I
was able to go on with my school?" The insolvent
was about the same time paid £7B avith another
young lady who was sent to her school. Soon after
the establishment broke up, and the children were
sent home.

Ultimately the case was postponed to some future
day, for the production of a book in the insolvent's
possession. The decision of the Court was therefore
at present withheld.

PALACE COURT, OCTOBER'S.