generally known to the public, observed that two
charges, on public grounds, had been made against the
bankrupt; recklessly extravagant expenditure, and
undue preference given by him on the eve of bankruptcy.
As to the first it appeared that Mr. Delafield's personal
expenditure from November 1845 to July 1849, the time
of the bankruptcy, was less than £5000 a year; now
that was not reckless expenditure in a person of £7000
a year. In regard to the second charge, some allowance
ought to be made for the bankrupt's extreme youth; some
for the circumstance that he could hardly be deemed a
trader; some for the deception of which he had been
the victim, and some for the greatness of the ruin which
had befallen him, and which was itself a punishment.
The circumstances afforded no ground for withholding a
certificate, or for attaching to it (as had been demanded)
a condition that he should pay 10s. in the pound out of
future assets. I confess (said the commissioner) I have
no inclination to attach such a condition to a certificate
in any case. I refused to do so in Jullien's. The world
of industry in which we live is one in which every man
not living on accommodation is struggling for a subsistence.
In that struggling it is difficult enough for any
one to win his way, even with character clear and
something to begin with. What, then, may be expected to
be the fate of one who not only begins with nothing,
but is weighed down by the stain of bankruptcy, and by
an unpaid debt of 10s. in the pound on £33,000? I see
nothing for a person so burdened but to lie down in
hopeless despair, and abandon all future exertion. Were
the faults of this bankrupt far greater than they are, I
would not condemn him to such a fate. It may be said
that this bankrupt has rich relations. Perhaps he has;
but if it were true, this argument is one which will
never weigh with me. I will never be a party to the
establishing of any such doctrine that rich relations are
under any obligation to pay the debts of extravagant
connections. A contrary doctrine is a far more wholesome
one. It is better to lay it down that a creditor
shall not have means of pressure, direct or indirect, upon
rich relations, and thus check the giving credit to the
young and foolish. On the whole, he concluded,
I think, upon full consideration of all the circumstances,
that I shall best discharge my public duty by
granting the bankrupt a common certificate, without
attaching any condition. I hope that the terrible lesson
he has received may be of use to him in after life. An
unconditional certificate was granted accordingly.

On the same day the application of William Pownall, a
silk manufacturer at Macclesfield, for a certificate, was
opposed on the ground of fraudulent Concealment of
Property; and the bankrupt admitted on examination
that he had concealed several quantities of silk, with
the object of enabling himself to offer a composition of
8s. in the pound. The bankrupt's certificate was
suspended for two years, without protection, till he should
have been six months in prison.

Two boys, named Hill and Kempton, said in the
calender to be fifteen, but looking much younger, were
convicted on the 12th, at the central Criminal Court,
of Stealing a bowl with a quantity of Silver from the
bar of a publican at Greenwich. The charge was proved
by the publican's daughter, an intelligent child, who
had detected the theft and given the alarm. It appeared
that this was Hill's sixth conviction for robbing tills,
and he had just come out of Maidstone Gaol. The other
boy also belonged to an organised gang. Hill was
sentenced to transportation for seven years, with a view
to his being admitted into Parkhurst prison, and
Kempton was ordered to be imprisoned for three months
and once whipped.

Charles Thorogood, a lad of about fourteen, and
William Applelby, a respectable master-bootmaker,
were tried at the central Criminal Court on the 13th;
the former for Stealing Two Heads of Broccoli, valued at
threepence, and the latter for receiving the same. The
boy, who is in the employment of a market-gardener at
Enfield, had sold from his master's cart the two heads
of broccoli to Mr. Appleby, who bought and paid for
them at his own door, without any concealment;
nevertheless both parties were committed for trial by the
Enfield bench of magistrates. The jury acquitted both
the prisoners, and the Recorder said he should not allow
the expenses, as the county ought not to be at the
expense of such a prosecution.

Colonel Craigie, a retired officer of the Bengal army.
Committed Suicide on the 14th at his house in Exeter.
Not appearing in the morning to breakfast, and not
answering when called by Mrs. Craigie, his bedroom
door was forced open, and he was found lying on the
floor in a pool of blood, his throat cut, and with frightful
wounds in his belly and both his legs. He was breathing
when found, but died in less than an hour. No cause
is assigned for this dreadful deed.

William Anderson, a hairdresser, pleaded guilty, at
the central Criminal Court, on the 18th, of stealing
thirty sovereigns, twenty half-sovereigns, and a £10
note. He was sentenced to Eighteen Months Imprisonment.
Unable to believe his ears, at an announcement
so unexpectedly agreeable, he exclaimed, "Eighteen
years, my lord?" "No; eighteen months," was the
common serjeant's reply. The prisoner made a bow,
and got out of the dock with great expedition.

Ashby's Divorce Bill was disposed of on the 18th, by
the House of Lords. The Rev. Edward Queenby Ashby
was married in 1842 to Elizabeth Sophia Palmer, then
under age. They lived on affectionate terms at Mr.
Ashby's living, in Buckinghamshire, till 1848, when
they went to Madeira, in consequence of Mrs. Ashby's
delicate state of health. Their fellow-passenger was
Mr. Scudamore Stanhope, between whom, and the lady,
a criminal intimacy took place. Though Mrs. Ashby's
conduct had been the topic of conversation at Madeira,
her husband did not ascertain the extent of her guilt
till they were on their homeward voyage, still
accompanied by Mr. Stanhope, when Mr. Ashby accidentally
picked up a letter, which his wife had dropped, addressed
to Mr. Stanhope. It commenced,—"My own, own, own,
for ever doated on, idolised, treasured treasure, treasured
Henry;" and contained expressions which left no room
for doubt. This discovery having taken place, Mrs.
Ashby left the vessel at Cadiz, and Mr. Ashby proceeded
to England. In a few weeks Mrs. Ashby arrived at
Southampton, from whence she eloped with her paramour.
—Sir George Cockburn, examined in addition to the
evidence taken on previous occasions, deposed that before
Mr. and Mrs. Ashby left Madeira, he had advised Mr.
Ashby not to return in the same vessel with Mr Stanhope;
but that his advice had proceeded from rumours
he had heard and not from his own knowledge of Mrs.
Ashby's criminality; and the Dean of Ely, who was
residing in the island at the time, stated that he was in
habit of meeting Mr. and Mrs. Ashby, who lived upon
affectionate terms, and that he was quite unaware that
any improper intimacy existed between Mrs. Ashby
and Mr. Stanhope.—Lord Brougham said, that though
there was reason to suppose that Mr. Ashby's conduct
had been too lenient, yet it had been shown that he had
great affection for his wife, and was unwilling to drive
her by any harsh means into the arms of her lover. On
his lordship's motion, the bill was read a second time.

The gang of swindlers who have of late committed so
many depredations by means of Mock Agency Offices,
were tried at the central Criminal Court on the 18th.
Their names are Sydney Robert Sparks, Charles Stanley,
Edward Wright, and James Campbell, all young
men, of the appearance called shabby-genteel. They
commenced their joint operations about Christmas last,
by opening an office in Upper Wellington Street, under
the firm of "Wright & Co., Loan Office, General
Registry and Investment Company, Auctioneers, &c.,"
and successively opened other places of the same kind,
under different names, in Exeter Arcade, Brownlow
Street, Adam Street, Great Queen Street, Kingsgate
Street, and Cavendish Square. At these various places
they were found acting in concert, and by means of
advertisements, got many young men to place in their
hands sums varying from five pounds to fifty. They
then employed their dupes for a short time, by sending
them long distances to inquire after houses, &c. to let;
and the end was that the victim could neither get any
salary nor recover his money. Several of these victims
were examined, and each had the same melancholy
story to tell. They were found guilty. Edward Wright,
the father of the prisoner in the previous case, was then
put to the bar, along with one James, on a similar charge