The Daily Telegraph WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1882.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3560, 6 December 1882, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1882.

Avery interesting judgment was given in the Court of Appeal yesterday in the case ot Cooper v. Coleman, to quash the bankruptcy of the petitioner. Mr Cooper —so well known on this coast as Oily Cooper—it appears had taken legal proceedings against the late Captain Read's trustees in connection with transactions respecting a former bankruptcy. At the time Mr Cooper owed a sum of money to Mr McDonald. This debt, it seems, was purchased by Read's trustees, and Cooper, being unable to pay, wn adjudicated a bankrupt. Mr Justice Johnston, in giving judgment, said : —The question that arises on this statement of facts is whether a person in Cooper's position ought to be adjudicated a bankrupt under such circumstances on a petition founded on a debt assigoed to the petioners for an express purpose. In the case of ex parte Grieffen, in re Adams, it was decided that the Court will refuse to adjudicate a man a bankrupt when a debt has been bought for an inequitable purpose — as, for instance, to compel the debtor to abandon legal proceedings, or when a debt has been purchased in order to take proceedings in bankruptcy. There is no doubt that the facts of that case show a more clear and determined fraud than can be said to exist in the present case, but tbe ground taken in the judgment of Lord Justice Cotton was that the proceedings were not taken to obtain a judgment, but that the debt was purchased in order to take proceedings in bankruptcy, which is precisely applicable to the present case. Lord Justice James added, " I think that after wbatLord Justice Cotton has said, in which I entirely agree, people will probably think twice before they buy debts for the purpose of taking bankruptcy proceedings." In the case of ex parte Harper in re Rooley the case of ex parte Grieffen was approved and acted on. It is true that the case was one of very gross fraud, but Lord Justice Holker used language in his judgment which can very well be applied to this present case. He said : "It appears to me that it is a gross abuse of the bankruptcy law for persons to buy debts which are due by other people for no other purpose than that of enabling them to carry the choice of a trustee in bankruptcy or to place anybody in a position of control with reference to the bankrupt's affairs." His Lordship farther .tated that he thought it desirable that the decision in ex parte Grieffen should be more generally known than it is. Having arrived at the conclusion that the adjudication in this case was a fraud on the bankruptcy law I need not consider the other questions which were raised. The appeal will be allowed and the petition for adjudication dismissed with costs.