The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-10-16 00:00:00

..... .
, .., . . .
ii... -
.. •
' .
. ,
• J •.•
A
. •
_1: "
. . %Evs'a Wwr bk tdits,‘COUßT, ocr. 15.
1 .
. . ,
The Court this,day die
- -
pAesi. t. tA,,,a f "ilil It
.10Ftr•Ofe: OP I
err?, arid turverallkolvb_, ! . .• ,
... 1. , ,;-..i, 1.. 4 I :adsk ' • •
The,..apelication ,of 4Mc. ..Inpli rfirumn mi. op-
posed sty Mr. Ilatttle on :the oilkwi,ng grgunfirkrr,
'i'ae Learned Cowrie' slated., that 91P I.IIOWISMt kri,
t.n far. hark as the time of. the,leho Mr, ?ofijeent•
Palmer, applied for the benefit of,tilse Act, iso
~tigen 1
i ,emanded by the Court. The fectwes,,he then end'
nnw stood committed for a contempt .ro(,,On' order
if the IliKh Crisp of Ch,AIICOCV, by vels ibe w sae.
441 'l
quired to pay into the Office of the Accfrptant.Goe,
tient a fug) of 011. ISt. 3d. in the 3,Pee Cents..--H
oat having complied with that order 40411 remain.
ad irecuatody for the contempt, fanfi his case was
clearly. not of the jurisdiction of
,this Clod. „, . .
•
Mr. Pow.ocx, on the part pf the Insoleesat,enne
!nested that his case WAS strictly within the inriarlice
tion of this Court, unless it could he supposed that
I)
) the Learned Serjeant who presided would one day
t contradict the course he bad deliberately taken on
the preceding% It was no later than yesterday that
the brother of this Insolvent was discharged from
this Court, although he stood committed with his,
by an order of the Court of Chancery, for the sage
.. . /contempt. How could he then have
.been discharg-
ed if Nis case was not within the Learned Serjeant's
juriadiclion ? The ,contempt consisted in a refusal
to transfer .16.11. in the 3 per Cents.; the Insolvent
and his brother were conjointly .involved in and
committed for this .refusal, but the brother was yes-
terday discharged by consent of. the Plaintiff's At-
torney, on his paying a sum of 701. The original
contempt had been, therefore, compromised by the
Plaintiff for a pecuniary consideration, and the pre..
I sent insolvent,merely stood as a debtor for his share
of the transaction. The case being thus reduced
to a, mere question of money by the Plaintiff, and
.. It.„ the contempt severed and commuted, the Insolvent
was, he contended, strictly within the jurisdiction
of the Court.
The Count.--t` The contempt arises out of ar
order from the Court of Chancery, desiring the In.
, solvent to transfer stock to a certain amount into tin
• bands of the, Acenmptant-Generali that the Court
8 , might have a controul over that property."
Mr. Anobentia followed on the same side wit)
. . Mr. Pollock. He said, ,that the Insolvent and hi
brother, were joint trustees for some property in thi
ii 3 per Cents. This property Was vested in them fo
a person of the name of Willienrs and his wife, will
.charged the trustees with hieing sold it opt. Thi
late Mr. Serjeant Palmer remanded the Insolvent
because he stood committed for a contempt of the
Court of Chancery, in hot purchasing an amount 0
.
I stock similar to that he was alleged to have sold
god ply* it in the name of the Accomptant-Gene
iii. Thos the contempt originally stood against tit
•Ins.ulveet .and his brother conjointly, as they wer
the co-trustees. But what hod been done since?—
The Attorney for the Plaintiff accepts a pecuniar
compensation from one of the cn-parties, and con
.sents to his discharge yesterday ; the contempt, thert
fore, was purged by this compromise, and melte
down into a mere pecuniary question between th
parties, which was clearly within the jurisdiction c
1. this Court. - If this were not the inevitable effect r
the compromise, let the Court only see the inanifei
injustice it would be the means of inflicting on tt
Insolvent. Instead of standing in the original sift
, . allot' as a participator in the operation of the cot
tempt with his brother, he would now stand as hoe
;,k ing it solely upon his own shoulders, with the ere,
additional disadsautege of having to contend wit
• his brother for the amount of money. psiii by il
. •latter out of their common partnership fund, to r
himself of his share of the contempt. The Cou
had clearly a full. jurisdiction where the content
in: the higher Court bad been merged ineo e me
eirestion of minty, as between the Plaintiff and c
trusty's, . . . .. . .. .
Mr. licAtn, ir reply, maintained that:the oriftin
contempt stood lio.full.forco In .one as both trusts
"lOW' ,19 concur in the
,transfer (fur without 1
cortcorrenctr of both it could not he made), succor
tog to the order of the Court. Ile contended t
1 .
i contempt had •netter been removed in the high
Court, ,and that this Court could not touch the co
of She Insolvent as the qoestion now stood, a
while the original cause of the contempt remain
still onesplained and unremosed.
The COuni lamented that it should be called tip
to pronounce its edjurlitatino upon an erifortina
person who had been mote than four years in c
il , tody. It appeared that, among other causes of A
t tention, he was committed by the Court of Chanel
s for a contempt of the ordet of that high Court,
quiring him to make a transfer of certain proper
of which he was a cu-trustee, in a breech of the pi
.lic funds. This contempt remained clearly ties&
f .
fled, and this Court could not exercise any jurist
%
lion over it upon the facts now disclosed. The c
tempt had never beenesregr:sle.i""i'ha:ehrieghPe'rcuCne
, i.
question, in the strict
imeroty tatted for the tentroul Oiff, not the act
a; disposal of, certaiwro pperty in the 3 per Cents.
• that controul so demanded bad never been sort
dered as required. Bat' It was contended the
trustee had compromised with the Plaintiff,
/ ..
therefore reduced the contempt to a 'mere quesi
of money. This Court could not look at the ma
in such a light, and whatever arrangement had_,
made, be it what may, alone remained for a CI
of Equity to consider and decide upon, it was
as the case now stood, within the province of
Court. The decision was, that the Insolvent be
charged from all other grounds of detention et
the contempt of the Court of Chancery.
i Wm. Twysden, Esq. formerly of Woolter, in
1 county of Northumberland, afterwards of Kuck
I house, near Edinburgh, and late of George-sti
I; Portman-square, Middlesex, was brought up to
1 -
' the benefit of the Insolvent Act.
Owing to a formal objection taken by Mr. BA
on the part of Mr. Samuel Kettle, of 50, Chit
cross, this case was stopped in lirntne, and the m
of it were not investigated. In Mr. Treysden's
i titian, and alsoin his schedule, he was stated t
a prisoner in the Fleet, where he was actually
t I'
e , fined ; bat in the order and the notice served on
Kettle, he was described es being in She K
' Beech. Upon its appearing that Mr. Twyst
former petition had been dismissed and not,adjout
i the. Court considered the oN.ctiou fatal, and Lis
I,