The Northern Daily Times. — 1856-01-31 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

THE RUGELEY MYSTERIES. • BIRMINGHAM COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, J. 23.  (Before Mr. Commissioner Balguy.)  This morning the appeal against the adjudication. of a fiat of bankruptcy against William Palmer, the surgeon of Rugeley, came on for hearing in the private! room of the commissioner, it being usual (as it wa.s stated) to take all such preliminary proceedings out of the public court. The learned commissioner, as well ae Mr_ Smith, the solicitor against the adjudication. consented to the admission of the press ; but this was opposed by Mr. James, the solicitor for the petitioning creditor; and his Honour, under such circumstances,  could not deviate from the usual practice of the cc The preliminary circumstances of the case are  follows:—Mr. John Spittle, coal master, West Brom wich, presented his petition on the 9th of January  instant, against Palmer, of Rugeley, surgeon-apoth,  dealer and Chapman. On the same day Mr. Sl.  proved his debt, which was to the amount of £l,O upon a bill of exchange, dated 19th September, 18  drawn by William Palmer upon and accepted by S  Palmer, payable to the order of William Palmer, three months after date, and by G. Palmer endorsed to Spittle. The petitioning creditor also proved the trading of an. apothecary by the mixing and dispensing of drugs and medicines by Palmer, and vending the same. The act of bankruptcy relied upon was then proved by Henry Gillard, of Stafford, sheriff's officcr, who stated that he arrested Palmer under a copies ad satisfaciencluna at the suit of Mr. Henry Padwick, on the ,13th day of December last ; and on the 17th day of the same month Palmer was removed under the same writ, anki also on a coroner's warrant, on a charge of murder, to the county jail of Stafford. Upon these facts Mr. Charles Waterfietal, the Registrar of the Court of Bankruptcy .acting for Mr. Commissioner Balguy during his absence, adjudicated Palmer a bankrupt. The notice of adjudk•ation was duly served, when Mr. Smith gave notice that L'e should this day dispute such adjudication. After some arguments had been gone into Mr. Smith stated that he was to dispute the trading, and the act of bankruptcy itself—the trading on the ground that Mr. Palmer had not been in business for more than two years ; the. act of bankruptcy on the authority of "Ex parte Bowes,' 4 Vesey, and " Regina v. Page," 1 Broderick andi Bingham, where it had been clearly held that a person must be in custody upon civil process only; and although, the 69th section of the Bankruptcy Law Consolidation. Act used the words, " having been arrested or committed, to prison for any other cause," yet such cause should be sui generis, and have reference to the law relating to bankrupts, which was not the fact in this case. The first petition in bankruptcy, of which notice had been given to dispute, was then annulled. Mr. James then left the room for the purpose of presenting another petition, and in the interim Mr. Smith intimated that he should not go into another petition now, and suggested that the case should be taken next Thursday. At a later period of the day Mr. James presented another petition from creditors, which the court refused to open.