The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-07-11 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANOiItD,

THE 3vIILLOWNERS AT THEIR DIRTY WORK

AGAIN

Lae devices by which our very

millocracy

seek to put into their own pockets the hard earned wages
of their poor operatives appear to be inexhaustible. One
of these, described by the Manchester Courier, is so bare-
faced as to be almost incredible. It appears from our
contemporary's statement that a firm in a manufacturing
town near Manchester—the Courier gives the names—
has recently posted a notice in their mill " that no odd
coppers (I) will be paid to their workpcople ;" and have
actually put the plan in operation, thus putting into their
own pockets all odd sums earned under sixpence. These
in a mill employing four or five hundred hands, each
working piece work, and the majority most probably
having " odd coppers" at the end of the sum of their
week's wages, will amount to no trifle. At another large
establishment the Courier informs us that—
"A person going to this mill to learn to weave, is, after learn-
ing put to a pair of looms, and for the space of s months 3d.
out of every Is. 4d. is stopped and goes into the master's
pocket. Should the master consider the weaver not sufficiently
perfect at the expiration of the eighteen months, he continues
to take the 3d. for six months longer. The same practice is
adopted with the dressers. In one or more mills at Staley-
bridge, every fresh spinner is compelled to work for twelve
months at a penny per 1000 less than the spinner whom be
supplants. At one mill in Ashton the •

_a the master is so nice with
the -fines, that he actually carries out a farthing fine."
Do these men really think that such practices are
' Or if they fail to stir up their outraged work-
.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YEsTEmitY
(Before Mr. Commissioner Perry)

IN RE 11. B. HIGGINSON.-IMPORTANT DECISION OF THE

COURT

Yesterday his Honour gave decision in'the above case,
on an application to annul the fiat. As it will be seen,
the whole case has arisen out of the affairs of Barton,
Irlam, and Higginson. His honour's decision excited
the greatest interest in court, which was much crowded
during the whole time the decision was being given.
His HONOUR, in giving judgment, said this was an
application made on behalf of Mr. Haynes Barrow Hig-
ginson, to annul the adjudication under a fiat sued out
against him by Mr. John Myers, one of the registered
public officers of the Royal Bank f Liverpool, for a debt
due to that bank. The grounds of objection to the adju-
dication, which were argued by Mr. Deane on behalf of
Mr. Higginson, were, that the act of bankruptcy was
insufficient, because founded on an affidavit of debt made
under the Ist and 2d Vic., c. 110, sec. 8, which section of
that statute has, as he contends, been repealed by reason
of its being inconsistent with the provisions of the sth
and 6th Vic., c. 122. Secondly, that the affidavit of debt
upon which the fiat issued was made by a public officer
of the bank, though the provisions of the Joint Stock
Banks Act do not warrant his taking such a proceeding,
which can only be taken by a creditor of the debtor.
Thirdly, that the debt sworn to in that affidavit
was £5O and upwards, whereas it should have been
£lOO and upwards, which is the lowest sum named
in the Bth section of the Ist and 2nd Victoria, c. 110.
Fourthly, that the petitioning creditor's debt was insuffi-
cient, being stated in Mr. Shand's affidavit to be £60,000
upon a promissory note, and £53,000 upon a guarantee,
and the conditions of that guarantee not having been, as
Mr. Deane contends, fully complied with by the bank, and
so the bank not being entitled to enforce it, the affidavit
_must be taken to have failed as to a part of the debt, and
could not therefort support the fiat. And, fifthly, that
the trading was insufficient, Mr. Higginson having ceased
to trade from the time of sending a deed of dissolution of
partnership in December, 1847, which dissolution was
carried out into full effect by advertisement in the Gazette
on the 17th of March in the present year. The case was
fully argued before me on Friday last, by Mr. Deane, on
behalf of Mr. Higginson, and by Mr. Lowndes, on the
part of the Royal Bank, and two witnesses were exam-
ined. After Mr. Deane had concluded his opening ad-
dress, he applied to me to adjourn the case, in order that
Sir Thomas Brancker's testimony, in a matter connected
with the wording of the guarantee might be obtained;
but Sir Thomas Brancker's summons not having been
applied for until about half an hour before the sit-
ting of the court, though the notice to dispute the ad-
judication was given three days' previously, and though
the party summoning him knew that Sir Thomas
Brancker was able to give evidence in the case, I
did not consider his absence from Liverpool, under the
circumstances, a ground for postponement. A further
application was made that the case might be stopped, in
order that the attendance of Mr. Chaffers, who had not
been summoned, but who had the power, as was alleged,
of supplying the evidence which might have been given
by Sir Thomas Brancker, might be procured, but declined
to issue a summons, and it was ascertained that Mr Chaf-
fers was unwilling to leave home, and it was stated in
court that he was unwell. Being subsequently again
pressed to sign a summons for Mr. Chaffers' attendance,
I did so, intimating, however, that the notice was so
short that it could not be followed by the issue of a war-
rant, even if Mr. Chaffers' indisposition had not been a
sufficient excuse for non-attendance. Mr. Deane then
made another application, that the registrar should be sent
to Mr. Chaffers' house to take his evidence, or that I should
myself attend there for that purpose. To this application I
declined to assent; for though in some cases I have attended
at "a bankrupt's residence, at his request, to take his
surrender, when confined to the house by illness. I know
no power which authorises a commissioner of this court,
or one of its officers, thus to enter, unsolicited by the
owner, the house of any person who may be summoned
as a witness. I have thought it right thus to notice these
several applications, and the result of them, before pro-
ceeding to examine the grounds of objection which were,
as I have stated, five in number. The first is founded
upon the argument that the provision of the statute under
which the affidavit was filed, being inconsistent with
those of the sth and 6th Victoria, c. 122, must be taken
to have been repealed by the latter statute. I have had
occasion to consider this objection long before the pre-
sent case was submitted to me for decision, and the con-
clusion at which I have arrived is, that there is not any
such inconsistency. The two acts may, as it appears to
me, both be considered in operation, and it is open to
the creditor, either to file an affidavit of debt under the
Ist and 2nd Vic., c. 110, s. 8. ; and on the 22nd day after
service of the affidavit to take steps for the issuing of a
fiat, on non-payment of the debt, or other non-compli-
ance on the part of a debtor, with the requisitions of the
statute ; or he may, under the later act, summon the debtor
to the court of bankruptcy, and on his failure to attend, or
other non- com pliance wi th the provisions of that act, proceed
to issue a fiat upon the acts of bankruptcy defined by the
13th, 14th, and 15th, sections of that act. Two cases
have occurred before the Vice-Chancellor, Knight Bruce,
one reported in Ist De Gex, 334. and the other very
recently, but in neither of them was any decision given
as to the constructive repeal of the Ist and 2d Viet., c.
110, sB. In the latter case the Vice-Chancellor is re-
ported to have declined to decide the point against the
party suing out the fiat. Lord Denman, however, in the
case of the Queen against Dunn. 16, Law Journal, s. 382,
has said the statute Ist and 2d Vic., c. 110, s. 8, is not
" repealed." The second objection, that the public officer
of, a bank cannot file the affidavit of debt, which can only
be filed by a crediter, is, I think, answered by the 9th
section of the 7th Geo. 4th, c. 46, which not only author-
ises the banking company, in the name of their public
officer, to commence, institute, or prosecute, all actions
and suits, and all other proceedings at law or in equity,
but also all petitions to found any commission of bank-
ruptcy, and this statute is extended to fiats in bankruptcy,
by the 16th section of the Ist and 2d Willm. 4th, c. 56.
Now by the law and practice of bankruptcy, the pe-
tition for a fiat must be supported by an affidavit
of debt, and it would be of little avail to provide that
such petition may be presented by the public officer
without giving him the power to make the petition avail-
able by supporting it with the necessary affidavit, which
power has, I think, been given by the word " prosecute."
The same act, moreover, in an earlier section, the 4th,
requires that the public officer shall be a member of the
co-partnership, and so he is himself a creditor of the
party against wnom he may proceed. The third objec-
tion, that the debt sworn to was £5O and upwards, where-
as it should have been £lOO and upwards, following the
words of the Ist and 2nd Vic., c. 110,,5. 8, appears to me
to fail, for this reason—that the necessity for depositing
to the larger sum is to be found only in the case of the
affidavit filed under that section. When the act of bank.
ruptcy is once completed under that section, any creditor
having a debt of £5O or upwards may sue out a fiat, even
though he may not have been a party to the filing of the
affidavit of debt under the Ist and 2nd Vic. ; and if any
creditor, a stranger to the last-named proceeding, may
obtain a fiat upon the smaller debt, I know no reason
why the creditor who has filed the affidavit of debt under
the Ist and 2nd Vic., for the purpose of making the act of
bankruptcy, is to be called upon to depose to the larger sum
in his affidavit for the fiat. The case of Mr. Higginson
as to the fourth objectio 1

_ n is made, the argument, to
depend upon the assumption that the Directors of the
Royal Bank have not complied with the conditions upon
which Mr. Higginson gave them the guarantee, but this
objection has been, as it seems to me, wholy disposed of
by the Lord Chancellor in his judgment, even should it
eventually turn, as contended before me, but not put in
evidence by reason of the absence of Sir Thos. Brancker,
that the initials to the alterations in the letter of the 13th
of March, 1846, were not in Mr. Higginson's hand writ-
ing ; though, as to this matter, it may be as well to notice
the fact, that arguments were addressed by Mr. Higgin-
son's counsel to the Lord Chanceller, to prove that a sig-
nature, by enitials, is not a sufficient signature, I now
come to the fifth and last objection, that Mr. Higginson
had ceased to be a trader on the 17th of December, 1847,
and that he had given notice of a dissolution of part-
nership to the Royal Bank on the 22nd of December; and
that, therefore, were not justified in treating him as a
trader on the 6th of May last, the date of Mr. Shand's
affidavit. This objection would be well founded if the
words of the eighth section of the Ist and 2d Victoria, c.
110, are to be construed according to the argument of Mr.
Dean, who interprets the words is such trade as afore-
said," as if they were, "is now engaged in business as a
trader." But it is obvious that the act has no such re-
stricted meaning. If the trader be " a trader within the
meaning of the laws now in force respecting bankrupts,"
the trading is sufficient to support a fiat, and it has long
since been a settled point in the law of bankruptcy that a
trader who becomes indebted, while such trader, may be
made a bankrupt by his creditor to whom he is so indebted,
upon an act of bankruptcy which shall have taken place

atter he has ceased to trade. Indeed, the case of Bailie
agaidst Grant, decided by the House of Lords, in 1832, has
gone further than this, for it was then held that a person,
not a trader, contracting a debt which he did not pay while
he continued to trade, might be made a bankrUpt upon
an act of bankruptcy committed after he had ceased to
trade. All the groundp of objection, therefore, having
failed according to ray view of the case, I must, notwith-
standing the hardship of the case, as it affects Mr. Haynes
Barrow Higginson, a surety merely for his brother, con-
firm the adjudication which I had previously made.

DEATH n DROWNING.—On Wednesday, as John
Thomas, shipkeeper of the Challenge, lying in the Bruns-
wick Dock, was going on board, he slipped into the dock.
He was taken out alive, but soon died.
THE WEATHER.—Since our last publication, we have
enjoyed a few fine sunny days, but the past week has,
upon the whole, been chequered by showers, and some-
times prolonged rains, which have rather militated against
the hay harvest. On Sunday. morning, a very heavy rain
fell for several hours successively, flooding the roads and
streets. The afternoon, however, was dry, with a fine
breeze, and yesterday was, on the whole, fine.
SUDDEN DEATH.—Yesterday, an inquest was held at
the boroueh coroner's office, on view of the body of John
Wilcock, aged 39. Deceased lived in Collingwood-street.
On Friday night last he went into Preston-street, and
there took lodgings with a woman with whom he coha-
bited. They went to bed, and
at 11 in the morning he
was found in a state of insensibility, in which he remained
until four in the afternoon, when he died. The cause of
death was disease of the heart and lunge.
THEFT OF LINEN FRONT A SHOP.—At the Police-court,
yesterday, four women, named Margaret Waters, Mary
Smith, Mary A. Lynch, and Sarah Bowman, (two of
them with infants in their arms,) were charged with hav-
ing gone in and about the shop of Mr. Lewis, draper,
Great George-street, and carried off a piece of linen con-
taining 39 yards, valued at Qd. a yard. The article was
at the door, tied by a strong cord, which was found to be
cut. The prisoners were observed by several parties to
make other attempts, and the piece was found upon one
of them. They were all committed for trial.