The Express. — 1848-08-30 (London, England)

SHREWSBURY. --Ye,tenlay, its the Bankruptcy Court. at Birmingham, Mr. Commivioner Daniell delivered judgment on the application of Charles March Adams, one of the bankrupts in this firm, for his certifimte; Mr. Viarr n, the other partner, having received his certificate, unepponed, some weeks since. His honour commencid by observing that the be:Arai:it was oppowd on the ground of reckless extravagance. It appeared that in the year 1835 he became a partner in the bank at Shrewsbury, and that previous to that period he possessed property in homiest° the amount of 7,0001. at Brighton and Worthing. This yielded him a good income ; but about this time he wee solicited to join the bank at Shrewsbury, and to enable him to do this he raised 5,0001. It had been urged that this was a Mall cum for banking pur. pure, but it shrink be recollected that Mr. Beck, also one of the partners, who realised upwanls 410,0001 , advanced only when he entered the concern 2,5001. Shortly after the b inkrapt became a partner in the Shrewsbury Bank a person named Baton, oue of the firm, committed suicide, and the partnership of Warren with Adams then I ommrnced. Bo long as the bankrupt confined his expenditure within his income his creditors c said have no sight to coin plain of his conduct. His expenditure it would appear, from his first unnexion with the bank, was equal in amountan no tis to h income. He had never made any *relive It wso, however, with Mr. Beck, inasmuch as it slivered that in the year 1840, when he retired from the batik, he drew out upwards of 10,0001. Up to that period the concern bag been proeperous, and it had been contended that the bankrupt had a right to anticipate that such properity would continua ; co t during a period of seven years the profits of the bank tinued to &creme nor was this all, for it was evident that the bank hat lest during that time not leas than 12,0001. in bad debts. He (the commissioner) had, in fact, considerable iloub.s whether from the year 1840 the bank had yielded any profits at all. Notwithstandg this, however, the bankrupt had drawn out it the pockets of the creditors about 19,0001. for bin own use. It was quite clear from the evidence, that the bankrupt, had he exercised proper caution, would not have been boar in finding out whether the profits of the conctrn were falling off ; and unqitestionably it was bis duty to ascertain whether the hank was a profitable or a losing concern. By his own admission he had lived up to the amount of his income. He appeared to hue been regular in his attendance at the bank, but he never made out any periodical statement of account. Ilis honour then went into a lengthened review of the affairs of thy concert, and its management, adverting particularly to the fact of the bankrupt never having made himself tcquieted with the state of bis affairs ; and this, he said, led bin, to the conclusion that be was unwilling to ascertain has real position. He came to that conclusion reluctantly, but he was compelled to do so. The property at Brighton had become a loss indeed of • gain, and the property of the linnknipt's wife wu unequal to pay the interest of mortgages. It appeared that the bankrupt'sliabilities amounted to no less than 34,5001., being at the rate of 4,0001. whilst he carried on business at Shrewsbury, of which sum 19,0001. was obtained from the creditors of the bank. The balance was derived tram other persons, amongst whom was a sister of the bankrupt, who was a creditor for 6,0001. This sum the bankrupt had obtained by a sale of stock in his own name, as trustee, and it had been alleged that by so doing te bad been guilty of a breach of tryst ; and in his opinion it was a matter in which the assignees had a right to interfere. It showed. to say the least, a great want of caution on the part of the bankrupt, as well as being an act of cruelty to his sister. Moreover, that the bankrupt had been guilty of reckless extravagance was not denied, and all that his conned had urged in his behalf was merely in mitigation of the judgment which mightbe awarded; but to him (the commissioner) this appeared a case in which the severest censure of which the court was capable ought to be pas.ed. Ile felt strongly for the family of the bankrupt, an had no wish to add to his painful feelings. He should have recollected, however, the great principle of hone sty, and that he was not justified in drawing tiro@ the resowcea of others. In view, therefore, of all these circumstances, he lelt it to be his duty to refuse the bankrupt his certificate.