Court Of Chancery, Thursd...
LAW REPORT. v-7> -- Pplauu, uji oetmalu or tae DSDKrUP;s, tor tlis bOrastlip's certificate, that the commission issued against them had been super. seded with the consent of their creditors, The commissioners had made a report, in which thev stated that all the creditors who had either proved or claimed debtsagainst the bankrapts, hadgiven their consent to the snipersedear: but they went on to report (and upon this arose tbe point which had created some doubt in his Lnrdship's mind), that a Air. White, the executor of a person deceased, had come beforQtfhem at one of their meetings, and had represented that a: debt of 24,000. was dae to the estate which he represented. The commissioners upon making further inquiry, found that the alleged debt was alreaAy in a course of investigation in this court, and as they thought it would be more properly discussed there than else- wherc, they declined to receive lMfr. White's proof of the debt, and he did not request that any claim might be entered. Nothing had been done by that gentleman since Juiy last, in prosecution of the claim be had set up. The learned counsel therefore submitted, that as the consent to superseding the commission had been concurred is by all the creditors who had proved, and as Mr. White couid not be considered to fall within the de?cription of a creditor at all, his con. sent was not necessary, and ought to be no bar to his Lordship's cer- tificate. The LORI CHTAVCET.LOR said, that he had hesitated, and still did hesitate, to allow this xupersedcas. The order requiring the consent of all the creditors had been framed for the purpose ef' giv- ing everr one an opportunity of knowing exactlv the state ofa bank- rupt's aifairs, and of choosing whether they would or would not al- low him to re-establish his credit. In the case before him, the debt claimed by M1r. M,'hite formed a very important item in the accounts of the bankrupts. The commissioners thought2 anld perhaps tlie were tht, that its validity would be best tried in the Alasters or- ice, hey said that hlr. White did not tender a claira ; but it ap- peared that they had not recollected to apprise him that he might make such claim if lie chose. No notice had been given to Air. White of the former application to the Court, nor of the present. Without such notice, his Lordship would not entertain the question, nor ha2ard the possibllity of granting asupersedeas to a commission, In the absence of one who tuight perhaps be the largest creditor un- der that cor,mmission. Mr. ROSE proposed to give no:ice to Mr. White, and to mention the mateer again at some other opportunity. NATUSCH V. IRVING A.D OTHERS. The SOUCITOR.GENERAt. said, this was a case in which his Lordship had granted an injunction nisi in the vacation, and had written notes of the reasons which had induced him to do so. Upon looking over those notes, it had appeared to the counsel for the defendants that it would be lmpossibl to answer them, and they were theretore content to abide by his Lordship's decision. The LORDa CHANCELtOa. said, he had given considerable at- tention to this case. The parties litigant were members of the " AUiance Life Insurance Company." It was proposed by all the partners, with the exception of the plaintiff, to extend the business of the concern to Marine Insurances. Air. Natusch objected, and filed his bill to restrain his partners from investing the joint capital in the new concern. Ilis Lordship thought the point of the c2se w.as a very simple one. If A, B, and C are partners, and B and C choose to embark in a ne.w trade, were they to have the power of compeUing A to join his share of the capital with them, or of driving him out of the old concern by offerin to return hini his capital ? His ljordship had no hesitation it deciding that they could not. The notes which had been alluded to were drawn up with some haste, and were not intended exactly as the teasons of his decisions; but as the parties had a right to know the exact grounds upon vrhich a jadge's opinion was formed, if the notes were returned to him, he would put them into a more correct shape. TItE ATTOnNEYTGE:MERAL EX ItBEL. ADAM,S V. TIIE RtEV. ALEXANDER FLETCHER AND OTHlERS. The SOLICITOR.GzxERAL ro3e to move for an injunction that one of the defendants should be restrained fromn preaching in a cer- tain chapel at Moorgate, and that the other defendants, trustees in a deed, should be Testrained from paying over or in any way disposing of the collectioss and the pew.rents arising from the same chapel. The appjication was made on the relation of one of the trustees. h'r. lioRxE objected to this motion being now made, on the roand that the defendant Fletcher, for whom he appeared, had not nad sufflient time to answer the affidavits filed. The LoRD CHANCELLOR directed the Solicitor-General to pro- ceed, and state the nature of his motion. The SOLICITOR.G3ENERAL then went on. The Rev. A. Fletcher was the preacherin a chapel at Moor-gate, the property of which chapel had been vested by a valid deed in certain persons upon the trusts therein mentioned. AMr. Fletcher's conduct havingbeen made the subject of an investigation by the Presbytery of that religious sect of which he was a meinber, he had been sentenced to be sus- pended from his functions as a minister. The Synod of the same church afterwaris confirmed the sentence of the Presbytery. By the provisions of the trust-deed, Air. Fletcher, as minister of the chapel, was bound to submit, in all things relative te his clerical ca- pacity, to the authority oftlie Presbytery and Synod. By these tri- bunals he had been suspended from his offlce of minister, and for. bidden to -peach In the chapel fTom the last Sunday in September to the 18th of Mlay next. He was, therefore, no longer the minister of the chapel for any practical purposes. It was the cutom of the Presbyterian Church- MUr. HORNE here repeated his oheetion that the motion should proceed further, because he said the Solicitor-General's statement would go forth to the public, and have the effect of creating a preju. dice unJfavourableto his client. rlir. 'Ltcher. 'z'a T.---. vnAXCULLOIL-You have notiimijg to rear on that score. I 'have heard niothing yet, and I dare s~ay Mir. Solizitor, General has nothing to tell me, that I have not already seen in all thle newspapers the matter as bten made quite public enough in al its details. The SOLsIsCrTu GENERtAL said lie should state nothing thpt his a nstrdction and the affidavits of the party (lid not justify, le then went on to say, that the Synod, in piursuance of their usual prac- tic On such occslons, made out a rota, containing the names of s,i or seven persons, who were directed to preach in t hhe capel during sheP priod o Mr. letcher's suspenaion. Mr.Fletcher haddeclined to obey the decisi dn is refusal hrad been fsupporte byome wo the tees Ovn tone ochecasion a gentleman mxentioned in ttis rota presend hel he urpose of doing tlso duties ofe the chapel an thefdayatnhice h f been appointed, but he was prevented frodoing ob r ltcher and certain trustees, who refitsed to permit hffl toi eter the chapel. It was to prevent a re. petition of this cireumstance tha the learned gentleman was n,ow in. structed to press his motion. life ecdcesiastical authority of the Pdareadyti anee efSetoltteproduvahridenr theschapcl and SYnod was apart of the cometltution ofEnglasd, and Wsa as mwdch withia its May ad limit&--as much entitled to icts pto tection, As the rchof England itself. That Presbytry arid Syfro hNADWdEcLaredthAt Alr. Fletcher was not fit to be a mnldseer, at lastdurng cetain period. The reverendI gentlem-an choes to8dispute the athority by which lie had been suspended, andT in he ver teethof the church whicha had aprointed hin- in the teeth,too,onf the prvisions of that trustel eed by which tIrechael ad eenfoundled, he refused to give up his pulpit ; and sad openy, tha n~~hiabrmtthe interference of tile civil powershoud inuce hm wd so.In pursuance of this resolu. tio,h a once e cue h iitr appointe by the Synod, and -the probability was ththewud iote same thiing on the ensuing Sunday. Under th circunistarnces he had now stateid, be saibmilted that be had a right to mnove tor the injunction er..parte ; and as the notice which hied been given to the other siide was ani extension of courtesy to the defendants, they had zio right now to come and com- plain oft'the Shortness of thait notice, or of the lateniess of the Detiod at wvhich the nffidlavits were filed. Th'is wyanprecisely one of th-ose cases in whichb, to use the techinical expression of theo Court, " irre- paabie mischief" must be done if' it did not interfere. Mlr. Fletcher had already once 'refused to let thie person duly autheirized enter the chapel, and he would do so again ; the maichief of these refu- sals would be wholly irreparable, and thie only way, to prevent them in ftur wold sp o gantthc rayr o ths peset aplication. Mr. HADELLrepied itwastha th trstsof the deed The LOtS, CHWCRLLO~..... Whatare those truists ?I - Air. ~*IDWZLL...On thepart ofthg tustes they arc. that they shall applSyall such collectons as may be made in the chapel, and all the pew*rcnts, in the manner direCted by the deed. 'Fho LORD CIIANCELLOR.-ls any property vested in the trustees by the deed ? MIr. SI4ADWIELL.-Yes; t1e le:ise fsthe chnpel is conveyed to themn. Lr. SOLaCt r on.GFxER T..-And they are to cnforce the provi. sions of the deedl, one oE which is, that the minister shall obey the .3ecrees of the Presbytery nnd Synod. The LOaD CrAAScrj.Ton.-ThiR matter seems to he of sornC importance, and It is quite intpossible that it can be decitled before Saturdlay. AIr. HoRNE.-I am quilte aware of that, nmy Loid, but my oh. jection to its proceeding in the present shape is, that the statement on one side only will be mate public. The LoaD CssANCELLOR.-What harm can be done by its being made public? Every body knows already that this Synod, as they call themselves, havc suspended Mlr. Fletcher from his office as one of their ministers and every body knows, too, that Air. Pletcher does na choose to submit to the sentence they have passed upoII his.ll MIr. HoitnE.-The question inyolves a ver important point re- specting your l ordship's jurisdiction. *e have been unable to prepare the answer which we shall be ready to give to the affieavits filed on Tuesday laif; and we only ask time to do so. MUr. Sl{ADwELr.L._AIl that we are immediately anxious about is, that these trustees-shaU be r,estrained from paying over, or in any way disposing of, the amount of the collection which it is intended to make in the chapel oa Sundiy next, after a sermon to be preached by M11r. Fletcher.: The IXOmB CAANCELLdtt.- should think that after niotice of this application, the trustees will -hardly be so rash as to part with ant of the money that may comne to their hands under the deed. If they do so, they will do wrong. With respect to the other points of the case, some of them appear to be of great importance. Alr. 14ORYE.-They are so. And vour Lordshiis should be in. fbrmed tbat this Presbyteryand Synod is not belonging to the church of Scotland, but is a secession from that church. The LoTD (JIANcLTa.onR.-I think it fair that you should have a reasonable time to answer the allegations against you. In the mean time, as the bill is on the files of the court, no harm can be done on the other side. Mr. Ho1stE.-I appear, my Lord, for the Rev. Air. Fletcher, who in no tnrutee, and wlho has nothinlg to do with disposing of any money that may arise from the chapel. The LORD CAscELt.oR-Let it.stadd over fol the present, and bring it on again on Wednesday or Thursday next. CO(URT OF CHANCERY, THURSDAY, NOV. 4. IN RE BAYLIS A'NDl TH0OMSON, fANI;RUPTS.