The Liverpool Standard, and General Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-09-05 00:00:00

a addition to imlied

1,44

essenger, leav-

us men in front of the premises, went away _
The officer tharght it advisable to consu►
Hassan, the clerk to the Wallasey Commissioners,
had attended this court previously to the adjudication in
bankruptcy against Eawiu Maw, as the attorney for Maw,
and who is said to have given, in his official capacity of
solicitor for the trustees under the deed of trust for the
creditors, some verbal authority for the admission of the
messenger in the event of a threat by that officer to break
open the doors. The officer Scambler delivered that mes-
sage to Lucas and Margetts, the latter the party now
before the cond. It was found, on the return of the
party to the premises, that any attempt to force the doors
and gates would be altogether nugatory, from the manner
hich the gates were secured, a belief confirmed when
,essenger ultimately got in ; for he found they were

in search

aded by large piecei of timber, railway waggons,
s, stones, and other heavy materials, placed in such
a way that it was impossible, in his opinion, to force the
doors. The entrance of the messenger was 'ultimately
effecteny his opening with his stick, 'and afterwards, by
the aid of one of his men, making his way Through, a
small ,window, in a different part of the premises. It ap-
peva, notwithstanding the verbal authority given by Mr.
Eassall, the solicitor, it was thought necessary to obtain
an authority on this side of the Mersey for-admitting the
messenger. The gentleman whose perniission it was
thought essential to obtain, previously to-snlimitting to the
authority of this court, was Mr. Banner, 'who appears to
`have been employed as accountant and agent to the trus-
tees for the creditors of Edwin !faw. The defence which
has been urged by Mr. Bardswell, attorney for Thomas
Margetts, connected as it is with these 'trustees and their
acts, obliges me now to enter upon a hiAory of the previous
part of this case. Mr. Edwin Maw, the bankrupt, had,
for months previously to any proceedings in this coart,
been in considerable difficulties as *regards money matters.
Meetings of creditors are stated to have been held, and to
have resulted in the execution Of two deeds in the month
of June last. The deeds had not‘been produced in court,
but other deeds had been mentioned, and the nature of
them, namely, that they were trust-deeds for creditors, as
has been stated. The date of the latter of these deeds is
admitted to have been the l'e:th of last June, and the
files of the London Gazette, open to all-the world, show
that it was not executed by the trustees until the 28th of
June. On the 24th of June, four days previously, it
having, I assume, been discovered that the deed could not
Maw_from his creditors, a petition for an

protect Mr

arrangement, under the :control of this court, was pre-
sented by Mr. Maw, in mihich it was stated that his in-
ability to meet his engagements with his creditors

Laving inve
31 building
of Chester.

;eci a considerable sum of money
and machinery, at Seacombe,ir
and in the island of Porto Rico,

apital was

sa.ge consignments of goods to places
which returns bad not been received;

and from 1

sses in trade and bad debts." The petition;
was accompanied bribe usual affidavit, which the Legis-
lature did not intend for use as a form merely, but as a
matter of substance, and as capable of being borne out by
facts to be afterwavtis proved, an affidavit that the peti-
tioner had assets ready to be produced to the court to the
amount of £2OO. Mr. Hassan, as I have before Observed,
for the petitioner, and also solicitor for the

was attor

trustees. An application was made to my colleague (Mr.
Stevenson), to whom this case properly belongs, for pro-
tection ; and I feel sure that had he been so fully aware
mstauces of the case as it has been my misfor-
I must call it so,) he would not have

,f the cir

to be, (for

granted the protettion sought ; and it is probable in that
case that the estate of Mr. Maw would have by this time
distribution by this court, under the

been in a train for
protection of

sSignees who might long since have been
appointed under ,its authority by the creditors. In the
absence of that full information, upon some representation,
made with respect to the assets abroad, protection for two

months was g;.a.ted upon the faith that the petitioner
would proceed inidue course to file an account of .deks and
credits, and give—the requisite notices through the mes-
senger of the court to his creditors, that they might attend
here, to assent to or dissent from his proposal, ancbstate any
grounds of objection on the score of conduct of hishusiness
which they might think proper to urge. Nothing of this
kind was done. 14. private sitting was held on Saturday
week, the 26th of August, the day on which Mr. Maw's
protection expired. At that sitting the deed was produced,
under which the trustees, one of whom has been examined
on this occasion, claimed to derive the authority which
has caused the disagreeable proceedings brought under
the notice of this ennrf

“rte=• Lite present apigication
ended by Mr. Has,sall, then acting a:
etitioner ; by Mr. Harmood Walcott
n• the trustees • and by this petitioner

tarcuiinfiarleeB 1 IeLL SZILLSIIeu
journment into the public court, there t
wninds, ample evidence of the:;

less excitabl
the accounts, the

Mr. BIRDWELL submitted that it was necessary to
show upon what authority,the summons, calling upon Mr.
Banner to produce certain books and papers, had been
issued. It must be shown, he maintained, that ,the sum-
mons was issued on an application of a creditor. Mr.
Banner vas present, and ready to be examined but he
I had a right to know at whose instance he was called upon
bentiou to carry an arrangemen 'e to appear.
Y t Mr. E'
ntrol of the court- - •

Tys observed that, if his friend would be a little
and read the wording of the petition and
should understand each better. rintil
assignees were appointed by creditors, the official assignees
had power to inquire into the -date and condition of the
bankrupt's affairs.
Mr. BAREEWELL contended the examination could not
legally proceed until an application had been macletby a
creditor.
The COURT—Then your arguraent is that there is rno
adjudication of ',bankruptcy.
Mr. BARDSWELL—If your honour will overrule my
objection, we will go on.
The COMUSSICN/4R did overrule the objection.
After some further delay, caased'hy technical objections,
owing to the summons served upon Mr. Banner not having
been signed, but Which Mr. Bardswell did not press,
Mr. Banner was examined by Mr. EVANS, and made the
following statements :—I have, in compliance with the
summons, delivered vp the books and papers in the pos-
session of myself or my partner to the official assignee, or
4-o the messenger : part of them on Friday, and the re-
mainder this morning. I believe they are now all in the
possession of the messenger or official assignee.
Mr. EVANS—Have you ever refused access to them to
'Mr. Maw, while they were in your possession ?
BARDSWELL objected to the question as irrelevant
011ie inquiry before the court.
M.. BANNER—It is a question I shall not answer. whe-
ther •or not. It is absurd.
Mr. EVANS thought it was relevant, because the bank.
rupt himself had been examined as to this very fact.
Thegounx—When a party is bere by summons, it is
quite competent that he should ke so examined, tVat every
information may be obtained as to the affairs, and trans-
actions, and dealings of the bankrupt; and pot only as to
the bankrupt's transactions, but far the elucidation of any
information relative to the estate.
Mr. BAX‘liiiWELL.—Just so ; I am aware.
The COURT.—Is not this a matter relating to the affairs
of the bankrupt ?
Mr. BARDSWELL still maintained that the question was
not a proper one to be answered, Mr. Evans might, no
doubt, ask as •te what had taken place slate the hank-
ruptcy.
The COURT.—That is what he desires to do.
Mr. BARDSWELL.—He asked whether he "ever" refused.
Mr. EVANS had no objection to limit the question to
"since the bankruptcy ;" and in that form it was then put
to the witness.
Mr. BANNER.—I deeline to answer the question.
The COI:W.—You are bound to answer.
Mr. BANNER.—I don't know whether I ever refused or
not Mr. Maw access to 'the books and documents.
_ Mr. BARDSWELL wished to know the object of this in.

quirt'
Mr. EVANS.—I shall not state the object.
Mr. BARDSWELL.—If the object be to contrast the
evidence of Mr. Banner with the evidence of Mr. Maw,
that is not for the recovery of property for the enlarge-
menrof the estate.
The COURT considered the evidence material towards a
full disclosure of the dealings and transactions of the
bankrupt.
Mr. Rourrn.—l don't think Mr. Maw made any appli-
cation to me since the bankruptcy for the.books and papers.
Mr. EvAlis.—Do you produce a list of debts due to and
from the bankrupt ?—I have a list of creditors, but I
don't produce it.
The COURT (to Mr. Bardswell).—Do you enforce the
same objection in reference to the above
Mr. BA.RDSLEY.—Oh, certainly, I shall maintain it.
The Couur--That is one of the papers.
Mr. BARDSWELL—Let us have no misunderstanding on
the question. The list Mr. Banner says he has is not a
list made from the books at all ; it is a list of.names,
which Mr. Banner has procured through the medium of
the creditors themselves.
Mr. EVANS—I had rather take that from Mr. Banner -
lihnself. • . .
Examination continued.—ls (at list made from the
Moss, and PAM and writiugs, which You h> i>3 Paw