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

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.—WiIat 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.
Was 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 ?—I should if I had not lent it to Johnson.
But why did you not pay your own brother fist; 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 ?—I
still wanted money to speculate in timber.
By the CommissioNm.---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. He-
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 titnber?—Yes.
When you lent the £350;t0 Johnson, what grounds had

, • .
itill to suppose he would ever be able to tepay it ?—ithought
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 ?—H is 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 you 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 souse gambling
debts.

The COMMISSIONE R.—And for that purpose you borrowed
it ?—I did.

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 four 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 bg 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—l 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 1-1 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 be wanted the loan of £350,
when you could have known him only a few weeks?—He
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 dayg afterwards he came
again to borrow money ; and yo❑ 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 bu;iness then as a merchant exactly 21
days ?—Yes.

by the CLERK.—Did Johnson go to Mr. Troughton with
you to borrow the first £3501—1 believe he did.
Have you not been an execution creditor of Johnson's ?
Yes.
His stock was sold ?—Yes.

What money did you receive under that execution ?—I
should think about £2OQ.
The COMMISSIONER.—How much is Johnson in his debt
now ?
Mr. BARDSWEI,L.—X99O.

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 £2 a week ?—Yes.

Do 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 average-1:10 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 kind ?
No.
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 Johnson's execution ?—I paid most of it
back again to Johnson's creditors.
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 ?-1:990 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 I—About £300:
May it not have been £400; 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 ?—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 ?-
it was before.
It was after he told you that, that you lent him the money?
Yes.
Who is Mr. Johnson?
Mr. BAanswELL.—lle is a farmer.

—I believe

the COMMISSIONER.—A farmer losing £lOO, and £5OO at
one throw—l should like to see him if he is forthcoming.
Mr. BARDSWELL.-1 am afraid there is little chalice of
seeing him here ; for I hold an execution against him for
£l5O.
The COMMISSIONER
chance of seeing him

-Yes, I am afraid there is little

The BANKRITPT.—He was represented to me as a person
of property.
The COMMISSIONER.—How could any human being sup-
pose any man to be solvent 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 bad 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 COMMISSIONER.—What did the sale realize?
Mr. FOLLETT.—About £l2O.

Examination continued.—Considered the bill which be
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 £l,OOO 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
done.not
sweaAiir l. i
Ellis knew he did nut ;
Wheeler;
buti
tw as possible he might have
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. Iliad not taken the slightest trouble
of inquiring whether he had the means of meeting a single
shilling 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
hills. 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 bad
been two or three months in business. The date of the bill
paid to Mr. Ellis was October 15. Was to receive £509
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. 3d., in December, from Mr. Hawks, of St.
Helen's, and £B7 from Mr. Hill, of Manchester, which were
paid for in these bills. 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 bills 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, Vie 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 creditors 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. BAnnswELL.—You will not adjourn the examina-
tion ?

The CoNtmissloNEß 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 ap-
plied for his certificate; but, now, he had certainly made a
full discovery and disclosure of his estate and effects. True,
there might be some information wanting as respected the
disposal of his property, and the manner of contracting
debts ; but that would come on hereafter.
The CommissioNEtt 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 doubtful 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

He had not, howe*rer, inter

of what had passed toida).
feted in the course of the examination.
The COMMISSIONER agreed that Mr. Bardswell had In
interfered in the course of the examination ; but he threw
out for consideration that there was ap.)

• ••• vaays, •Irca* Kt UCiIL W oe 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, but

not nov

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

Mr. BARDSWELI
allowance of the certificate.—Some conversation
place
_upon the time ; 'and eventually the application was

aid he c

!e when I%'

have spent his vacation

A .FEW OBSERVATIONS ON THE PROBABLI

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 inceudaries, and requires very conclusive evi-
dence to induce us to believe so, particularly us there are
various other clauses from which combustion might ariee

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