The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-06-23 00:00:00

COURT OF BANititUPTCYt.A-MownAT, Juult 19,

(Before Charles Phillips, Esq., Commissioner.)

IN RE SOTHERN.—This bankrupt, who carried on business
at St. Helen's, came up this day to pass his last examination.
He was supported by Mr. Bardswell, (of the firm of Messrs.
Littledale and Bardswell ;) and Mr. James, the barrister,
appeared on the part of the assignees. The bankrupt had
put in an amended balance sheet; and
The COMMISSIONER said he had enquired of the official
assignee, Mr. Follett, whether there was anything in the
amended balance sheet which would render necessary a post-
ponement of the examination. Mr. Follett bad informed
that there was not ; and as there was nothing in it requiring
amendment, it was the duty of the court to proceed with the
examination. It was possible, however, that something
might occur in the course of the examination which might
render an amendment necessary.
Mr. FOLLETT said the bankrupt had furnished no books in
which the credit accounts could in any way be traced.
The COMMISSIONER observed that was not, at present, a
question for the court. It would be a question when the
bankrupt applied for his certfiicate whether he had furnished
proper documents and books. It would then be an ingre-
dient in the case.
_

Mr. JAMES submitted that it was not merely when a party
applied for his certificate, but that it was a very important
ingredient in passing his last examination, because, unless
he had furnished all books, papers, and documents, he could
not pass.

Tile COMMISSIONER thought they were anticipating a
little. Was it not an enquiry for the decision of the court
when the bankrupt asked to pass, after the whole was closed?
Then would be the proper time to take the objection.
Mr. BARDSWELL said, if the balance sheet contained false
items there might be something in the objection, but it stated
facts, and' surely no difficulty was to be raised now.
The COMMISSIONER observed. that instances bed occurred
to him, strange to say, in which the bankrupt had kept no
books.

Mr. JAMES mentioned that he had not•seen the balance
sheet till that moment.

Mr. BARDSWELL replied that it bad been filed ten days.
Mr. JAMES then said that on the former meeting the
examination of the bankrupt was adjourned for the purpose of
laying before the court an account of his debts, but he had
given in no account of debts whatever. All that he (Mr.
James) had found in the balance sheet was " debts due to the
bankrupt from the Ist of July, 1842, to the 12th of March,
1843," which was just as before.
Mr. BARDSWELL.—No, no.
Mr. JAMES, in continuation, said the bankrupt com-
menced business on the Ist of July, 1842, and the balance
sheet professed to be an account of all his estate in trade;
consequently all the matters mentioned in it must have oc-
curred between the Ist of July, 1842, and the 12th of March,
1843, the date of the bankruptcy. The sum of :CBOO was, in the
last balance sheet, placed against the name of Henry John-

son ; now it was increased-to £990. Was it not important
that there should appear upon the sheet some explanation
whereby this statement might be verified or otherwise ?
There was an utter absence of any account of the time when
this debt accrued to the bankrupt : it might have been on
the Ist of July or the 11th of March, the day before the
bankruptcy. On the very day before the bankruptcy John-
son might, for aught that appeared to the contrary, have
received this £990 which belonged to the creditors. The
only entry relating to it was, that it was secured by a trans-
fer of Johnson's interest in some property, and a warrant of
attorney for £l,OOO, upon which judgment had been entered.
He submitted that, with the balance sheet in this state, the
bankrupt ought to be sent back.
The COMMISSIONER said, he could not compel a bankrupt
to put in a better unless he chose, but the circumstance would
be matter for consideration by and bye.
Mr. JAMES contended that if omissions like this were
allowed to pass without comment a great loophole would be
opened for fraud not only upon creditors but upon the court.
A bankrupt was required to file his balance-sheet for the
purpose of giving the creditors every information, to enable
them to ascertain whether the accounts were correct or other-
wise. It was monstrous to suppose that this bankrupt, a
young man with all his faculties about him, and in the full
vigour of life, should not be able to arrive at some more
accurate statement of his affairs, seeing that he had been in
business for only nine months. The sum of £990 had passed
from him to another person,—yet how or when was not
stated. •

The COMMISSIONER said, the bankrupt might be examined
to see whether he had materials for furnishing a better ac-
count ; and if he had, the court would certainly send him
back without scruple, but if he had not, the sending of him
back would be like asking him to do an impossibility. There
was a good deal in what the learned counsel said ; it was,
indeed, surprising, at first sight, that, having been so re-
cently in business, and only from July to March, he should
not be able to explain it.
Mr. BARDSWFLL thought if the accounts were gone into,
the items should be entered into also.

The COMMISSIONER thought so too • but at the same time
it was very odd, that with such a considerable sum of money
involved there should be no books.

The bankrupt was then sworn, and examined by Mr.
JAAtEs.—He said, in answer to the questions proposed to
him, Mr. Henry Johnson, who appears as a debtor to my
estate, is a farmer, who resided at Bold, and the amount of
his debt is £990. It is for lent money. I lent him £350 on
the 11th of July, 1842, and £3OO upon the 21st of July. I
have also lent him several small sums, of which Mr. Follett
has the dates, but in how many different sums I cannot say.
The entries in the sixth page of the book, marked A (a
memorandum book) of these two sums having been lent were
made perhaps three months ago, and perhaps one month ago,
I cannot say exactly. Upon my oath they were made before
my first appearance before the Commissioner; it was before
I filed my balance-sheet. When I made more entries I was
aware that I had lent Johnson more money than is contained
in them. I thought at that time I had lent him about £3OO
more.

The examination then proceeded :
Will you then say how it happened, with the materials be-
fore you, that in your former balance-sheet you entered only
£BOO, when you now say it was £3OO more ?—I could not
prove I had ever lent him more money.
When you lent the first sum of £350, did you make any
memorandum in any book, or on any paper ?—No.

Was any one present when the money was lent ? fes.
Who ?—My foreman, William Garbut.

Was he the only person present?—At the £350 he was.

Did Johnson giVeyou any acknowledgement of the receipt
of that money ?—Yes. _ _

What species of acknowledgement?—An I 0 U
Where was the money lent ?—ln my house at St. Helen's.
What is become of the I 0 U so given?—lt was de-
stroyed when he gave me a bill for £l,OOO.

When was that?—About the 22d of July ; I am not cer-
tain as to the date.

Was it before or after the £5OO were lent ?—After.

Who was present when the £5OO were lent ?—Mr. Pickard,
Mr. Slater, and William Garbut, my foreman.
Who is Mr. Pickard?—He used to be a timber merchant
in Liverpool.
What is become of him ?—He is in Liverpool at present.
In business?—No.

Where is he to be met with?—At Mrs. Stalker's, in a
street leading out of Pitt-street.
Who is Mr. Slater ?—I believe his father keeps a saw-mill
in Liverpool; he is a friend of Mr. Pickard.
Do you know where is he to be met with ?—No.
Where was the 1:500 lent ?—At my house in St. Helen's
Did he ;iv.: you any acknowledgement for the £5OO ?
An I 0 U.
What became of that ?—Mr. Follett has it.

At the time that the bill for the £l,OOO was given, had you
lent to Johnson the whole of the money for which he is now
a debtor ?—Yes.

How came the I 0 U for the sum of £5OO not to be given
up ?—I could not find it at the time.
Where was the bill for £l,OOO given?—lt was given at an,
attorney's office in Dale-street, whose name I don't renaern-
ber.

Where is the bill for £l,OOO ?—Mr. Troughton, an attorney
in Liverpool, destroyed it in his own office at the time I got
a warrant of attorney.
When was that 17—It will appear in the book marked A.

Did you make the entry at the time the warrant of attor-
ney was given ?—No.
When did you make it ?—About two months ago.
Did you make the entry from any written document ?
Yes.

Where is that ?—I don't know.
Why was the sum of £l,OOO fixed upon as the amou
the bill ?—I had won the remainder of the money from him.
By the COMMISSIONER.—How did you win it from him
—At cards.

I warn you I shall expect distinct answers to the question.
I am about to put; take as much time as you choose, but bp
careful how you answer them. How long is it since you
won that money ?—Somewhere about July.
Last July ?—July, 1842.
What time in July ? About the beginning, I should
think.

Had you been in the habit of playing with Johnson?—
No, sir.
Was it won at one sitting, then ?—About three times.
Did you always win from him, or was the luck alternate—
did he sometimes win from you ?—No.
He never won from you ?—No.

What was the game I—At Put.
Have you been in the habit of playing that game I—Yes.
Frequently ?—Yes.
Were you in the habit of playing for large sums ?—No.
What do you call large sums?—(No answer.)
Have you ever lost as much as £lOO a week at any game
or species of play ?—Never.

Nor £50.-Never.
Where did you play at put with him ?—Once at my own
house and once at his.

Are there any houses kept for play in Liverpool ?—I don't
know.

Have you ever been in any ?—No, sir. I never was in any
gambling-house in Liverpool.
Have you played much within the last twelve months?—
Yes.
At Clubs ?—No, sir. _
__

Always in private houses ?—Yes.
I ask you upon your oath, how much have you ever won
in a day ?—About £lOO.

At cards ?—At cards.

Have you ever played at dice or hazard ?—Yes.
Any game at dice ?—Yes. _ . .

Ho-woften in the course of the last twelve months?—
Perhaps fifteen times.

You have stated your winnings in the course of one day to
be £lOO, more or less ; now, be good enough to tell me what
was the most you have ever lost in any twenty-four hours,
and take your own time to answer the question, but be
equally accurate about your losings as you were about your
winnings?—About £2.
_

In one day ?—Yes ; on the very outside.
Are you sure of that ?—Yes; certain.
___

Tell us who you won the £lOO from?—A friend of mine.
Who was it?—William Brown, of St. Helen's.
Do you, then, mean to swear that you have never lost to
him more than £2 a-day I—Never.
Or to any body else I—Never, sir.
Is that your deliberate answer?—Yes, sir.
How soon after you lent the £5OO was the bill given ?
A few days after.
How long did you keep that bill before the warrant of
attorney was given I—Under a week, believe.

Bow does it happen you never made any entry of the £5OO
hill in this book (A) as the warrant of attorney is entered ?
I cannot say.

By Mr. J AMES.—Where did you first become acquainted
with Mr. Johnson ?—At Charles Orton's public-house, in
St. Helen's.

By the COMMISSIONER.—What is Mr. Brown, from
whom you were lucky enough to win the £lool—He is dead.
Did you ever win as much money from any living person
in the course of a day ?—Not as much.
Then how much ?—Fifty pounds.
Did you keep a gaming-book, sir?—Never, sir.
Did you never keep any hook in which you entered any
sums you won or lost at play I—Never.
Now tell us if you please, the name of any living person
from whom you ever won £5O in one day I—Livingston, sir.
What is he ?—He is a travelling Seotchtnan.

That is a very comprehensive kind of character you know ;
tell us what you mean 14 that ?—I believe be takes samples
of goods out.
He is then, what in ordinary phrase is called a commercial
traveller ?-1 believe he is.
Can you tell us where he is to be found ?—I cannot.
Have you played often with him ?--Twice, I believe.
You are not sure?—No, I am not certain.
Did you win on both occasions ?—I did.
Fifty pounds upon one : pray, how much did you upon the
other ?—Perhaps thirty pounds.
These things you must know, unless you are in the habit

of winning or losing, large sums are things ealealated to
make an impression upon a man. Now could you state it
was not £4O ?—No.
Why men who get their living by industry in trade, would
be likely to remember the sum ; are you prepared to state
you did not win from him £4o?—Yes.
Then how much do you say you won upon the second oc-
casion ?—Perhaps £3O.
Have you been in the habit of gaming with any other per-
sons, who are eit her not travelling about the country, or who
are not dead?—Yes.
Have you ever won from any one who is alive, to whom
we can have access ?—Yes.
Who is that?--Charles Orton.
And do you mean to swear that £3O is the utmost you
ever won from that gentleman at a sitting ?—No, sir.
Give us what you have won from him ?—Perhaps £2O.
Will you swear it was not £3O?-1 cannot, sir.
Will you swear you have not won £4o.—Yes.
You fix the sum then at about £3O ?—I cannot tell what I
did without calculating.
Am Ito understand then, that you have won at a sitting
£2O, £3O, £5O, and £lOO at a sitting, and you have never
yourself lost £2O in any 24 hours ?—Yes.
Have you money at all in the stocks or funds?—l have
not.

In the year 1842, did you, in all that time, lose money to
the amount of £2oo?—Never Sir.
You have been very fortunate, I must say, but at the same
time it is just possible : but thank God I know very little
about it—
By Mr. JAMES.—How much have you won since the Ist
of July 1842
The COMMISSIONER.—That will, of course, take him
some time to calculate: but tell me whether the £lOO you
won from Mr. Brown was since that period ?—I think it was.
How much have you won since then ?—Nearly £2OO, I
should think.
By Mr. JAMEs.—Have you not won considerably more
than £200?-1 believe not.
When did you become acquainted with Mr. Johnson ?
The latter end of May or the beginning of June, 1842.
Were you at that time in business ?-1:o.
How many times had you gambled with him before you
lent the first sum of £3so?—Once, I believe.
Now, I ask you upon oath whether the two I. 0. U.'s
had not some connection with ganibling transactions ?—They
had not.
How did you get the date in the book A of the 11th of
July, 1842?—From Mr. Richardson.
Who is Mr. Richardson ?—My father's out-door clerk or
foreman.
How came you to apply to him for that date ?-1-Ie lent me
the money.
When did he lend it you ?—I believe it was on the 9th of
July, 1842.
Did he lend it you in Liverpool?—He did.
Did you tell him for what purpose you wanted it—to lend
to Mr. Johnson ?—I did.
Where did you get the £5OO you lent to Johnson ?—I got
£4OO from my brother John ; £lOO I had myself.
Did you tell your brother John you wanted it to lend Mr.
Johnson ?—No.

Did you tell him what you wanted it for?—l did not.
Had you ever borrowed any money from your brother
John before?—Yes ; I used to get £3O or £4O whenever
I wanted it; I had only to ask him for it at any time.
Did you ever borrow from him before as much as £lOO at
one time ?—Yes, but I cannot state the date.
How often ?—Perhaps twice.
The Mr. Slater you have before spoken of, is he not now
in the employ of Messrs. Chaloner and Fleming ?—I can't
say.
. _

At how many different times did you borrow the sum of
£4OO from your brother ?—I could not tell without referring
to my book.
Did you enter them i❑ the book ?—I did not.
Then how will the book tell you ? Now, upon your oath,
without reference to the book, did you ever borrow £4OO at
all from your brother ?—I did.
When ?—I believe it was from May to June. It is in the
book.
Can you give no better account of the times of receiving
the £4OO from your brother John than that which you have
given ?—Not without referring to that book. [The bankrupt
here referred to the book A.]
Have you not been applied to by the family of Johnson to
know where he is ?-1 have.
Do you know where he is ?—I do not.
By the COMMISSIONER,—Did you know he was going
away ?--Yes.
Where was he going ?—To Carlisle.
Have you had a letter from him ?—Yes.
When I—Three days ago.
By Mr. JAMES.—CouId you not have given information to
his mother, when she applied to you about him ?—I might
have done.
Can you then give no better account of the times of receiv-
ing the £4OO from your brother ?—I can. May the 10th,
1842. £100; June Ist, £150; June 22d, £I00; July 10th,
£5O.

When did you make the entries in book A, from which the
foregoing account is taken ?—This morning.
Where ?—ln Castle-street.
Do you mean in the open street?—ln thelopen street.
From what did you take the entries ?—M y brother gave
me the dates.
By the COMMISSIONER.—Do I understand you state you
borrowed the £350 from Mr. Richardson to lend to John-
son ?—Yes.
Did you tell your brother that the £4OO you got from him
was to lend to Johnson ?-1 did not.
Am I to understand you borrowed £lOO from him to lend
to Johnson I—Yes.
Where did you get the £5OO which you lent to Johnson in
one sum ?-1 got £4OO from my brother, and £lOO I had of
my own.
By Mr. JAIZES.—Was the whole £5OO lent to Johnson at
one and the same time ?—lt was.
Had you it in the house at the time you lent it ?—I had.
How long had you had it by you ?—I can't say.
Had you any more money than that by you at the time ?
Yes.

How much ?—I cannot say.
About how much ?-1 really cannot say: perhaps £5O.
Had you had the £5OO in your possession as much as a
week before you lent it ?—I think I had.
How long ?—lt is impossible to say ; it may be a week ; it
may be three or four days, or a fortnight.
Did Johnson apply to you for the purpose of borrowing
the £3so?—He did.
When did he apply to you ?—About the 7th or Bth July.
Had you any money by you then ?—Yes, perhaps £4O.
You borrowed it from Mr. Richardson upon the 9th
Yes.
In Liverpool ?—Yes.
Did you come to Liverpool for the purpose of borrowing
the £350 ?-1 did.
Did you see your brother upon that occasion ?—I knew
that Mr. Richardson had the money by him.
Can you tell me any one person from whom you received
as much as £lOO, between the 9th of July and the 21st ?
No.

Did you receive as much as £lOO from any one person
during that time ?---I can't say •, I might have received £2OO
or £3OO from my father, veryllikely.
Did von make no entries in any way of the moneys you re-
ceived ?—lf I had received it in business it would have been
in my cash book.
How much beside what you received in the way of business
did you receive in that interval ?—I can't say ; I can give no
account.
From the Ist July, 1842, down to your bankruptcy, how
much did you receive besides what you received In the way of
business ?-1 cannot tell.
By the COMMISSIONER.—What other source had you of
receiving, money besides from your business ?—None that I
know of,' except from winnings.
Mr. BARDSWELL.—There, is borrowed money.
The COMMISSIONER.-1 do not know what he should
borrow money for, except to lend it to strangers. That is
the strangest part of the case. Did you borrow any money
between the first of July and your bankruptcy ?—Yes, from
my brother.
How much altogether—putting the £350 out of your
mind—did you receive except in business 1-1 cannot say.
Mr. JAMES.—How much did you borrow—putting Mr.
Richardson out of the question I—Perhaps a couple of hun-
dred pounds.
The COMMISSIONER.—Pray how much did you -win in
that time altogether, from July to March, at every species
of game you played at 1— Perhaps a couple of hundred
pounds.
Do you mean to fix it at that ?—I won, but I never got
paid.

• How much did you win, sir? I think it is highly probable
you were cheated, for if respectable men, merchants, will
venture into public.houses to gamble, they must expect to be
cheated ; and now, sir, tell me how much you won, whether
you got it or not ?—.±:700 or £BOO.
And you think you have received of that about £2OO ?
Yes.

You swear you have not received more than £2OO ; will
you swear you have not received £3OO ?—Yes, sir.
By Mr. JAMES.—How long before you lent the £5OO to
Johnson was it that- he applied to you for the loan ?—Three
or four days.
The COMMISSIONER.—May I ask you, Mr. Sothern, what
bond of connection there was between this wan of a month's
acquaintance that could give him a claim upon you to borrow
£350 in one sum, and a few days afterwards, another sum of
£500? I want to know how he, almost a stranger, should
think of asking you for a loan of £B5O ?—He said he could
give security.
Did you tell him, when he asked you, " Sir, I have hardly
known you four or five weeks, how can you ask me for such
a thing ?"—I did ask him.
What explanation did he give ?—He said he had asked two
or three people in the town, a❑d he could not get it from
them; and ha said he would give me security.
Well, sir ; I have been looking at this balance-sheet, and
I see what at that time was due to your creditors.—(No
answer.)
By Mr. JAMES.—Now when he applied to you for the
£350 loan, had you the money by you ?—I believe I had.
Then how came you not to lend it him there and then ?
I came down to Liverpool, and a day or two afterwards I got
a bill drawn out, and I lent it him.
That is not an answer: how came you not to lend it bins
there and then ?—I forget now.
By the COMMISSIONER.—You stated you bad the money
just now ?—I wished to inquire whether the security was
good.
By Mr. JAMES.—WiII you explain the meaning of the
words, " I had £lOO of my own ?"—That was not borrowed.
money.
How did you separate that particular £lOO which was your
own from the rest which had been borrowed and passed
backwards and forwards ?—I might have won it.
By the COMMISSIONER.—What means of living had you
before the Ist of July ?—I was allowed £2 a-week by my
family.
Were those your only means of living?—Yes.
Why was it from that May 18th to July' the 22d you
borrowed £3OO, you having only £2 a-week to live upon ?
I forget.
What did you, in the course of five weeks, borrow £350
for—was it to pay gambling debts?—lt was not.
\Vas there any earthly reason, then, that you borrowed it?
—I intended to purchase timber at that time.
Was that the reason you borrowed the money ?—I wanted
to buy some timber, but I did not buy it after all.
'What did you do with the money ?—lt was what I lent to
Mr. Johnson.
In the place of lending the money to Johnson, with whom
you had such a short acquaintance, why did you not repay
your brother 1-1 should if I had not lent it to Johnson.
But why did you not pay your own brother first; was
not the debt due to him more stringent upon you than the
lending of it to Johnson ?—I thought I was safe, sir.
By Mr. JAMES.—Why did you not lend the £350 to John-
son out of the money you had in your hands, instead of
applying for it to Mr. Richardson, your father's clerk ?-1
still wanted money to speculate in timber.
By the CommissioNEu.—Were you not, Mr. Sothern,
from day to day in public-houses, gambling at that time?—
No.

Upon your oath were you not continually playing at cards?
—No, I was not.
Frequently, then ?—Sometimes I have played.
[At this stage of the case Mr. JAMES, who had another
engagement, left the court, and an application was made on
behalf of the creditors to adjourn the examination. Mr.
Bardswell objected ; and after some discussion the court di.
rected the examination to proceed. It was conducted by the
Managing Clerk to Messrs. Barnes and Barrow, of St. lie.
lens, solicitors to the creditors.]
By the CLERK.—What description of timber did you think
of speculating in?—English oak.
Did you know the qualities of English oak timber?—yea,
When you lent the £350;t0 Johnson, what grounds had

you to suppose he would ever be able to repay it ?—I thought
the deeds he gave me were worth the money.
Did he give you old deeds ?—Yes.
Where are those deeds now ?—I gave them up to the fa-
mily.
By the COMMISSIONER.—To Johnson's family ?—Yes.
What security have you ?—A deed transferring his interest.
By the CLERK.—Upon whose application did you give
those deeds up to the family?—His mother's the first.
You employed Mr. Troughton about this matter : did he
tell you that Johnson could give a good security ?—He
thought the deeds were good.
Did not Mr. Troughton tell von that Johnson did not take
a vested interest in this property ?—He told me I might
safely lend him £l,OOO upon them.
Did Johnson tell you for what purpose he borrowed it ?
I believe he said part of it was to pay off some gambling
debts.
The COMMISSIONER.—And for that purpose you borrowed
it ?—I
Did you understand what the amount of the gambling
debts were ?-1 did not ?
Had you the curiosity to ask ?—I had not; I never thought
of asking about it.
Was your brother from whom you borrowed the money
accessible at the time; could you have seen him any day you
liked ?—By coming to Liverpool'
Did it ever enter into your head to tell your brother that
the money you borrowed to speculate with was to be given
over to pay the gambling debts of a mere stranger—did it
ever strike you to ask your brother whether he would con-
sent to that, you yourself subsisting upon £2 a week from
your respectable family ?—I did do it.
You went to your brother ?—I did.
Did you tell him how Johnson owed this money?—Not a
word.
Or how long he had owed it?—Not a syllable.
Did you tell your brother that you and he were then in the
habit of gambling at public-houses in St. Helens?—No.
Then you asked your brother's advice about lending the
money, but kept him in pure ignorance of all the purposes of
the loan ?-1 did.
By the CLERK.—When you advanced the money upon
these deeds did you understand they were Johnson's- own
deeds ?—I did.

Did you ask Mr. Troughton any questions as to whose they
were ?—Johnson stated to Mr. Troughton that the deeds
belonged to him, and he had lent £l2OO upon them.
By the COMMISSIONER.—For what purpose did you un-
derstand from Mr. Johnson that he wanted the loan of £350,
when you could have known him only a few weeks ?—l-le
said he was short of money to go on with his farm, as he had
lost £5OO at one throw at hazard, to some captain in Man-
chester.

Can it be possible, then, that for a man of this description,
who had just lost £5OO at one throw of hazard, you went to
your father's clerk to borrow the money ?—I thought the se-
curity was good.' I believed it was to pay off gambling debts.
Then in the course of four or five days afterwards he came
again to borrow money ; and you having been told that the
£350 you borrowed from Richardson was to pay off gambling
debts, lent him £5OO, although you knew he had lost £5OO
in one throw of the dice-box with captain somebody ?—Yes.
You had been in business then as a merchant exactly 21
days ?-7-Yes.

by the CLERK.—Did Johnson go to Mr. Troughton with
you to borrow the first £350?-1 believe he did.
Have you not been an execution creditor of Johnson's ?
Yes.

_
Ills stock was sold ?—Yes.
\\That money did you receive under that execution
should think about £2OO.
The COMMISSION ER.—How much is Johnson in his debt
now ?
Mr. BARDSWELL.-1;990.
The COMMISSIONER.—Pray, Mr. Sothern, did you keep
a house ?—Yes.

What was the rent ?—£3o a year.
What establishment had you ?—A. maid servant, and a
horse and livery, at 12s. a week.

Out of X 2 a week ?—Yes.

Da you mean to tell me you had no other means of keep-
ing your house than the £2 a week from your family ?—Yes.
Did you not sustain it by gambling?—No.
Did yon not make more than £2 a week by gambling ?—I
did, sir.

Did you not make more than £2O a week by gambling ?
I have won more than £2O a week.

The avera:e—Xlo a week ?—Very likely I have.
You have told me already you have never lost more than
£2 ?—Yes.

Did you keep any carriage or car, or thing of that kindl—

Do you mean to swear you did not ?—Yes.
Your manner of answering induces me to ask you the
question again ?-1 used sometimes to borrow one and pay
for the loan of it.

By the CLERK.—Where have you given credit for the £2OO
you received under Johrjon's execution ?—I paid most of it
back again to Jolinson's'itreditors.

By the COMMISSIONER.—Why did you sell the man's
goods at all, if you were going to give the proceeds of a forced
sale to his creditors ?-1 thought afterwards I had no right
to have done it. .
Mr. BARDSWELL.—It was under a threat.

By the COMMISSIONER.—HOW much do you consider
Johnson in your debt now?—X99o lent money, and about
£3OO I have won off him.

You gambled with him to a great extent; now how much
was the amount you ever won off him ?—About £3OO.
May it not have been LlOO ; or between £3OO and £4OO ?
Yes.

How much did Johnson lose at a sitting to you—you that
lent the money of your brother and of your father's clerk to
him ?—About £lOO.

At one sitting ?—Yes.

And you were receiving £2 a week from your family, and
were borrowing this money from your father and your fa-
ther's clerk ?—Yes.

Were you in business at that time ?7,Upon the Ist of July
I was.
Were you in business when you won the £lOO from him
at one sitting ?—I am sure I do not know the date.
You did not carry it in your head?—No.
Was it after he had lost the £5OO by one throw ?—I believe
it was before.
_ _

It was after he told you that, that you lent him the money ?
Yes.
Who is Mr. Johnson ?
Mr. BARDSWELL.—He is a farmer.
the COMMISSIONER.—A farmer losing £lOO, and £5OO at
one throw—l should like to see him if he is forthcoming.
Mr. BARDSWELL.—I am afraid there is little chance of
seeing him here ; for I hold an execution against him for
£l5O. _

The COMMISSIONER.—Yes, I am afraid there is little
chance of seeing him.
The BAN KRUPT.—He was represented to me as a person
of property.
The COMMISSIONER.—How could any human being sup-
pose any man to be jolvent who lost £5OO at one throw ? If
he had the wealth of Crresus he could not be solvent by so
acting.
The examinrtion was continued at great length ; and in re-
ply to the questions put to him, the bankrupt said he had no
capital when he entered into business at St. Helens. In
November 1842, he ordered furniture from Mr. Ellis to the
amount of £226, for which he gave him a bill, which bill had
been dishonoured. This was after he had borrowed the money
from his brother and Mr. Richardson. Owed Mr. Ellis the
amount now. The furniture was lett in the house with the
exception of six chairs, a book-case, and a sofa.
The COMM ISSIONER .—What did the sale realize?
Mr. FOLLETT.—About £l2O.

Examination continued.—Considered the bill which he
gave to Mr. Ellis a good one. It was accepted by Richard
Wheeler, Inspector of the Fish Market, Liverpool, who had
given him an order to build a boat. From the month of
May to the failure, the amount of about £1,500 or £1,600 in
bills passed between him and W heeler ; is not sure it was not
£2,000, and would not swear it did not extend to £3,000.
Does not know what property Wheeler has ;. but he was lia-
ble to the amount of £9OO about. Wheeler had not paid a
single bill; and bankrupt continued drawing and Wheeler
accepting. Did not inquire, before the acceptances were sent
out, about his solvency. Might have told Mr. Ellis that
Wheeler was a respectable solvent man ; cannot say. Will
not swear he did not ; but it waa possible he might have
done. Mr. Ellis knew Wheeler; and he did not ask about
him. Did not tell Mr. Ellis he knew, from his own know-
ledge, that Wheeler was a solvent man; but only that he
was building a boat for him. Told Mr. Ellis that Wheeler
would meet the bill. Had not taken the slightest trouble
of inquiring whether he had the means of meeting a single
shillin., of it. Thought Wheeler would meet it, as he (bank-
rupt) should have the boat. Thought he (bankrupt) should
have had money to meet the remainder of the £9OO worth of
bills. Should not have built Wheeler the boat if he had
known him to be a man of straw. Paid all the acceptances
of Wheeler to different tradesmen, and got value for part.
Mr. David Mottram held to the amount of £7OO, and bank-
rupt was owing him only £3OO. First began to put out
Wheeler's acceptances when he commenced building the boat,
but cannot say when that was; perhaps it was after he had
been two or three months in business. The date of the bill
paid to Mr. Ellis was October 15. Was to receive £5OO
for the boat. Believes that Wheeler lives in Brownlow_hill,
and the bill was payable in London, at Mastermans and Co.
Kept the boat; and Wheeler had no value for the bills. The
name of Allen was to other acceptances : believes he repre-
sented Allen as a solvent man. Allen is a fishmonger in the
Fish Market, Great Charlotte-street. Cannot say to what
amount he (Allen) accepted bills; but thinks it was about
£1,200. Will not swear it was not £1,500, but it was not
£2,000. Arrives at that conclusion by recollecting what bills
there were. All the bills were put in the balance sheet. Al-
len had paid none of them. Did not think he (Allen) could
pay £1,200. Built a fishing-smack for him. (The learned
commissioner here enumerated the bills from the balance
sheet accepted by Allen, and the bankrupt admitted that they
were accommodation bills, for which Allen did not get a
single farthing value. Bankrupt put them off; and repre-
sented to the parties to whom he paid them that Allen was a
solvent man, and that the acceptances were safe.) The
bankrupt was then examined as to two other large quantities
of furniture which he had ordered and received, to the value
of £122 12s. 5d., in December, from Mr. Hawks, of St.
Helen's, and £B7 from Mr. Hill, of Manchester, which were
paid for in these hills. The furniture was received in De-
cember, and in the January and February following it was
sold at a great sacrifice, with the exception of what had been
sold by the court, to raise money to pay wages with. He
was next examined as to some extravagant hills for tailoring,
and a quantity of timber, some of which he had treated in the
same day as the furniture.

The examination being concluded, it was submitted on the
part of the creditors that the bankrupt had not given a proper
account of his estate and effects, and that the examination
ought, therefore, to be adjourned.
The COMMISSIONER said he did not see how, if the bank-
rupt were to be adjourned for a hundred times, the balance
sheet could be amended. There was a serious question be-
hind that, Which he (the commissioner) was exceedingly
sorry should come before him ; but it was not his duty to
give a premature opinion, seeing that the bankrupt was in
the hands of a very able solicitor, who had heard the an-
swers which he had given. The bankrupt, indeed, could not
possibly be in better hands—a circumstance at which the
court was glad ; but, at the same time, he could not conceal
the fact, for it would only be deluding the bankrupt, and
keeping the creditor,: in suspense, that there was a great
deal for him to answer. He should therefore adjourn the
case to any time which might be asked.
Mr. 13ARnswEm..—You will not adjourn the examina-
tion ?
The CommissloNEß. said he was obliged to ask himself
this question before he passed the last examination : had the
answers of this gentleman been satisfactory ? Could he (the
Commissioner) conscientiously say that ?
Mr. BARDSWELL said the bankrupt, in his examination,
had made every disclosure respecting his estate and effects.
He did not see, therfore, how the estate would be benefitted
by an adjournment of the examination. If there was any
reason to think the bankrupt had not given a proper account,
the question might come on in a different form when he
ger as respected the
ap-
plied for his certificate; but, now, be had certainly made a
full discovery and disclosure of his estate and effects. True,
mightdtliiseproesalof
be
hisspormopeeritnyframnadtiotthiewmanatniini
of contracting
debts; but that would come on hereafter.
The COMMISSIONER was unwilling to put the creditors to
one farthing expense, and therefore he should allow this last
examination to pass ; but at the same time he could not help
throwing it out for consideration, whether matter had not
been disclosed upon testimony which ought to be unexcep-
tionable as far as the bankrupt was concerned, to render it
much more than dciubtful whether in a future state of the
business he obtained his certificate.
Mr. BARDSWELL believed that when he applied for the
certificate he should be in a situation to explain a great deal

of what had passed to-day. He had not, however, inter-
fered in the course of the examination.

The COMMISSIONER. agreed that Mr. Bardswell had not
interfered in the course of the examination ; but he threw it
out for consideration that there was a great deal to be ex-
plained if the bankrupt was to be believed—and much, too,
that was impossible to be explained if he believed the bank-
rupt. There was the gambling transactions and the insol-
vency—

Mr. BARDSWELL was quite prepared to go into them, hut
not now.

The COMMISSIONER expected if any application should be
made for the certificate the assignees would have the differ-
ent tradesmen in attendance, who had received the dis-
honoured acceptances in payment for their goods.
Mr. BARDS WELL said he certainly should apply for the
allowance of the certificate.—Sohie conversation then took
place upon the time; and eventually the application was
agreed to be made when Mr. Commissioner Philips shall
have spent his vacation.

A FEW OBSERVATIONS ON THE PROBABLE
CAUSES OF THE LATE FIRES.

The extensive and destructive fires that have recently oc-
curred in Liverpool demand attention, and require investiga-
tion in their cause, as to whether they have arisen from
incendiarism, or are the result of ignorance and carelessness
on the part of those employed in cotton warehouses. It is
painful to suppose even for a moment, that they have been
the work of incendaries, and requires very conclusive evi-
dence to induce us to believe so, particularly as there are
various other causes from which combustion might arise
I am inclined to suspect, that spontaneous combustion has
been a more fruitful source of fires in cotton warehouses
than hitherto we have been aware of. I recollect that, in the
year 1810 or 11, the Blantyre Cotton Mills, belonging to
Messrs. Henry Monteath and Co., were destroyed by fire.
A young man (a worker) was strongly suspected of being the
wilful cause, and, in consequence of that suspicion, was
thrown into gaol, where he lay for several months. Whe._
tht court met, his trial was postponed until next sessions,
and he was recommitted. Bqt, fortunately for him, a few
weeks previous to his trial coming on the mill again took
fire. Then it was discovered that both fires had originated
in a corner of one of the rooms, where the workers had,
had, without suspicion of any danger, been accustomed to
throw aside the pieces of cotton with which they cleaned off
the old oil from the machinery previous to oiling it anew.
The origin of both fires was now satisfactorily accounted for,
being the result of spontaneous combustion.
It is a well-known chemical fact, that cotton, flax, hemp,
and various other vegetable substances, whose parts or fibres
are in a state of minute division, when brought into contact
with any of the oils, are, under certain circumstances, ex-
tremely liable to spontoneons combustion. In some cases,
ignition ensues with great rapidity, especially if tile oil is of
a drying quality, and more slowly, but not less sure, with the
other oils.
I have seen cotton cloth, which had been brushed over
with linseed oil, when folded and laid carefully by, burst out
into actual combustion in the course of three hours. Shortly
after the chemical action commences, there is a quantity of
caloric or hest given out, which partially decomposes the ve-
getable matter, and gives to it a brown colour. As the ac-
tion progresses, the vegetable matter is converted into car-
bon (charcoal), the intensity of action now becomes so great
that the charcoal is in a state of actual ignition, which is
readily communicated to the surrounding bodies.
There is an important fact connected with spontaneous
combustion, arising from oil and vegetable matter. It is not
generally known, but deserves particular attention, as it
points out in the most decisive manner the danger to be ap-
prehended from small quantities of oil coming in contact
with cotton. If we take a quantity of cotton wool, and im-
merse it into a cask of oil, the wool will become gradually
decomposed, but no combustion will arise from it. If we
take another equal quantity, and mix it with an ounce of oil,
subject it to a slight pressure and partial exclusion of the
air, and combustion will then assuredly take place. The
spontaneous combustion of bay and straw is governed by the
same principle. If either of these be immersed in water,
they will in process of time rot and be decomposed, but
without ignition ; but put them into a barn in a stamp state,
and combustion will ensue from the decomposition of the
water and the vegetable juices.
From a consideration of the. above facts, I am induced to
suspect, that the jigger-lofts of warehouses have long been
.unknowingly a fertile source of spontaneous combustion.
My reasons for so thinking arise from the fact that nearly
two-thirds of the tires in cotton warehouses have commenced
on the top floor. The jigger-loft forms a part of that floor,
and I understand, that it is the universal practice to use oil for
the machinery of the jigger; a practice which I consider in-
judicious and dangerous in the hands of ignorant porters ;
men who, if they heard of combustion from cotton and oil,
would more readily associate the idea of danger with a cask
or two of oil than with an ounce. And hence there is no
great stretch of probability in supposing the following to hap-
pen : They accidentally overturn the vessel containing the oil ;
part of it runs down through the floor on the cotton below ;
they wipe up the rest ; and, as in the case of the mill, they
throw the oiled cotton aside. They oil the machinery too pro-
fusely, and it runs down off it. They clean the old oil off the
machinery and throw the cotton aside. Allow me to state that
old oil from machinery is still more dangerous than pure oil.
All these are highly probable causes of fires originating in
the top floors of cotton warehouses, and point out the pro-
priety of substituting tallow or lard in place of oil. Either
of these would equally answer the purpose, and at the same
time lessen the danger a hundred fold.
I would suggest that the following directions be given to
every foreman of cotton warehouses ; and that he should be
held responsible for their due observance, under pain of im-
mediate dismissal : That he shall employ no porter who is
known to smoke tobacco at any time or place, with the ex-
ception of his own house. That, in the discharge of cotton
at the docks, the place of landing be carefully examined and
cleaned of any oil which may have lately been landed there.
That every lorry or cart be carefully examined and cleaned,
if recently employed in carrying oil. That no oil be used in
any part of the warehouse where tallow or lard can be sub-
stituted. CHARLES CAMERON, Chymist.

NEWTON RACES.

WEDNESDAY.

The TRIAL STAKES, of 10 sovs each, with 25 added. One
mile and a quarter. 4 subs.
Mr F R Price's oh c Colin Clink. 3 yrs 1
Sir John Gerard's ch f Meal, 4 yrs
2 to 1 on Colin Clink, who took the lead, made his own
running, and won very easy by a length.
The LYME PARK STAKES, of 50 sovs each, 30 ft, for three
year olds. One mile and a quarter. 6 subs.
Mr Mostvn's br c Earl of Richmond
Mr F R Price's br f Gwenderline 2
Mr Meiklam's b f Margery . 3
Even on Earl of Richmond, who was never headed, and
won without an effort.
A GOLD CUP, value 100 sovs, the gift of the Lord of the
Manor, added to a Handicap Sweepstakes of 15 soya each,
10 ft. Two miles and a distance.
Mr Meiklam's b c Aristotle, 4 yrs, 7st 131 b • •
Mr Wormald's ch h Millipede, 5 yrs, Bst Glb
Ermengardis, Pickpocket, and Valentina also started
Even on Millipede, 3 to 1 agst Aristotle, and 5 to 1 agst
Ermengardis. A quick race ; the struggle made by Milli-
pede to reach Aristotle, on coming into the straight running,
was very severe, but ineffectual, and Aristotle finished a
clever winner by nearly a length.
A PLATE of 50 sovs, for horses that never won that sum.
Heats, one mile and a half.
. . _ _

Mr Fowler's b c Yardley, 3 yrs . 0 1 1
Mr W 0 Powlett's b g Bobadil, aged..
THURSDAY.

The ST LEGER STAKES, of 20 sous each, with 30 added

One mile and a half. 4 subs.
Mr White's b c Judex
Mr Meiklam's ch c Philip
Mr F R Price's b f The Li1y......
The GOLBORNE STAKES, of 20 sous each, for two year olds.

Go'borne Course. 8 subs.
Mr Mostyn's b c Milton, by The Saddler—Quadroon.... 1
Mr Walker's br c The Best-of-the-Three
A SWEEPSTAKES of 15 sovs each, 10 ft, for three year old
fillies. One mile and a quarter. 3 subs.
Mr Whitworth's br Gipsey Queen
A PLATE of .£5O. Heats, one mile and a half.

Mr Fowler's b c Yardley, 3 yrs..
Mr 'Worthington's b c Hooton, 3 yrs
Mr Thompson's br gby Shrighley, 4 yrs..

LIVERPOOL REGISTRY OF SHIPPING.

The annaal meeting of the .subscribers to the Liverpool
Society for the Registry of British and Foreign Shipping,
was heldin the Board-room, on Tuesday, the 20th instant,
Henry Cleaver Chapman, Esq., in the chair.
The Chairman opened the proceedings by stating that the
meeting was held as required by the rules of the society, for
the purpose of electing six members to serve on the commit-
tee, in lieu of six who go out by rotation, and to receive the
annual statement of the operations of the Society, together
with the receipts and expenditure for the past year, and pre-
sent state of its funds. He then proceeded. "As time is
valuable, I wilt bot enter into any lengthened exposition of
our past labours, or anticipate the future, beyond congratu-
lating the merchants, shipowners, and underwriters, on the
success of the society, which, notwithstanding the great and
continued depression of the shipping interest since its es-
tablishment, has been able to surmount all opposing difficul-
ties. But although much has been locally accomplished by
the committee, a gre it deal yet remains to be done, especially
by the shipbuilders themselves, whose study it ought to be to
suggest improvements in the construction of our merchant
ships, and more particularly to guard against the manufac-
ture of iron ships of too light materials and inferior work-
manship, it being the anxious desire of the committee to pro-
mote the true interest of the shipbuilders, as well as of our
mercantile marine, by establishing a higher scale of scantling
in both wood arid iron ships, more particularly in the length
and thickness of the planking, combined with the proper
treenailing and caulking of wood ships, and the plating and
rivetting of those of iron.
" With these brief remarks, I will now with your permis-
sion call on the secretary to read the report, and leave you to
draw your own conclusions from the facts and figures to be
submitted to you, and which I trust will fully bear out my
statements."

The. secretary then read the report, which was received
and adopted. Several members expressed their gratifica-
tion at the successful progress of the society, the want of
which, under a local committee, had been so long felt in this
port.
The thanks of the meeting were then voted to the chair-
man and the committee, for their impartial and judicious
management of the affairs of the society, which fully entitled
them to the confidence and support of the public.

SCOTCH SN 11 F. BOXES.—Commock, a village in the heart
of Ayrshire, on the Lugar-water, is celebrated for the manu-
facture of those beautiful wooden snuff-boxes now so common,
a species of trade carried on nowhere else in Scotland, except
at Laurencekirk and Montrose. It is little more than 20
years since some ingenious indivduals commenced the making
of these curious little cabinets. There are now upw;iids of
100 persons, men, women, and children, employed in the
trade, all of whom get more considerable wages by their
labour than most other artisans. Planetree is the wood used
in the manufacture, and great ingenuity is evinced in adorn-
ing the lids with devices. The very nice manner in which
the hinges are constructed, so as to be almost invisible, is
deserving of the highest credit. It is calculated that a piece
of rough wood, costing only 255., will make £3OOO worth of
snuff-boxes.—chambers' Edinburgh Journal.

PRUSSIAN STATISTICS.—BERLIN, JUNE 14. —The annual
tables of the births and deaths in the whole Prussian mo-
narchy are now published for the year 1812:—
At the close of 1840 the total population was 14,928,501
1841, excess of births
1842, ditto 188,521

Total at the end of 1842
The births in the last 27 years were 14,039,277 ; of that there
were 982,868 illegitimate, about 7 per cent. ; but it was not
to be inferred that-7 out of 100 living individuals are illegiti-
mate, for the number of still-horn illegitimate children, as
well as of those who die before they attain the age of one
year, is much larger in proportion than that of legitimate
children. Thus, for instance, in 1842, of 578,437 legitimate
births, 21,559 were still-born children, and the number of
deaths of children under one year old was 100,026; whereas
of 45,566 illegitimate children, 2,501 were still-born, and
12,110 children under a year old died in the same year.—
Prussian Slate Gazette, June 16.