Insolvent Debtors' Court,...
JaMels Spittle was opposed b Mlr. POLLOCK for Sir John Lubbock and Co., and Messrs. Fry and Chapman; and by lMfr. COOKE for a creditor named Page. The case stood over from the month of hlarch last, in consequence of the insolvent having de. scribed himself in his petition by one name only, whereas it appeared that he had passed at different places by the various names ef Browne, WVhite, Greeni, ASnth, Young, and Williams ; and the I act requires a petitioner to describe himself by every name bv which I he was called or known. Thie Court, therefore, ordered that he shouldl insert a full description of himself in the Gazette, which having done, he was now brouglht up for final hearing. The insolvent, who had been formerly a soap-manufacturer in John-street, Clerkenwell, stated that he owed the house of Lubbock and Co. ,1001. fer billsl, w,hich they dscounted for him during and subsequent to the year 1819. Himself was the drawer of these bills, rnd they wereaccepted by variouspersons,sometorgoods sold,andsome forhis accommodation. Several of them wereaccepted by a mean of the name of Langdon, who was an oIlman in the Commercial-road. Lang- don had been a private in thel3th Liglht Dragcons, and purchased his discharge at his suggestion. WVhen these bills were discounted, he was not in solvent circumstanices. On his examination ih explana- tion, he said that he opened an account with Alessrs. Fry at their solicitation, and they agreed to discount any bills he might take. Upon opening the account, he lodged bills to the amount of 1,9001. with them, and they never, except in one instance, inquired about tle acceptors, but took the bills on his own responsibility. His transactions with them were very considerable, and those with Lub- bock and Co. exceeded 10,001. The opposition of Mr. Page was founded upon the insolvent's having taken defenwe to an action upon a bill for 501. but it did not appear to have beeii a vexatious defence. ThIe CouRT having heard counsel om each side, observed, that there wasno evidlence before them to show that the Insolvent had ever represented that the bills lhad been given to him for bonea ide consideration, or to contradict him when he stated that his oppos- ing creditors offered to discount wrtatever bills he might take, and did so on his own responsibility. This statement, if un. true, easily admitted of proof to the contrary; and in the absence of suchi proof, the Comrt were bound to believe him, and therefore de- clared him entitled to his discharge. James Innis was opposed by Mrs. Gibson, in person, for a debt of 591., principal and interest, due for lodging. It appeared lirom the testimony of lMrs. Gibson and her daughter, that theinsolvent who is a Scotchnan, represented himselfto be the nephew of Mtr. fnnis, of Broad.street.buillings, who, he said, would pay all his expenses, and from whom he was; In the habit of repeiving 20L without ever being asked what he did with it * but it tudned out that he was not at all related to AIr. innin's family. In the month of Mlarch last, the insolvent was arrested for 201., and upon his assuring Mfrs. (Gibson, that his uncle would enable him to repay her the same evening, she borrowed the money for him; and was afterwards sued for it and but for the kindness of Mr. Innis, who paid it, her furniture would have been sold for the debt and co0tS The insolvent admitted these facts except his having represented himselfto be the nephew of Mir. Innis, which lie denied ; but said he had experienced the greatest kindness fromn him. He had4 he said, the promise of a situation in Jamaica but aUl his prospects in life were blasted by the conduct of' ints. Gibson and her friends, who having first led him Into extravagance, then put him in prison, and went to all his friends, to whoan they calumniated his cha- racter. The COtRT observed,that the insolvent would have done himself more credit if lie had acknowledged with some degree of shame the misrepresentation of which there was not the slightest doubt he had been guilty, instead of atteFnpting to cast ussersions upon those who had treated him with a degree of kindness ot which he had shown himself to be undeserving. Tnder all the circtmstancets of his case, the Court thought they were passing too lenient a judgment upon him, wlteis they ordered him to be remanded within the walls for eight calendar months. I INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. FRIDAY. JULY 9.