THOMSON TO STANLEY. 577 property under the circumstances stated in the letter of Mr. 1343, Kennedy, nor was it known to the Judges, until communicated to 2 March. them through Your Lordship's Despatch. Mr. Manning's interfer- ence with the property, therefore, was unauthorised and unofficial; f*S°Tt hy and, although he was a Crown Officer at the time," it cannot truly defalcations of be said (as by Mr. Neil Kennedy it has been said) that he, " under J. E. Manning the authority of the Crown, took charge of the goods," etc. He had, in fact, no authority from the Crown, or from the Court, for what he did; and we can give no other explanation than that afforded by Mr. Manning himself, in his letter above referred to. Fourth. As -to the representation of Mr. Geo. Johnson, " In the in estate of Estate of John Thomas Campbell." An order of Court was made J- T- Campbell; so long since as the 16th January, 1830, for John Edye Manning, Esquire, Registrar of the Supreme Court, and Robert Robinson, Cap­ tain in the New South Wales Royal Veteran Company, to collect the Estate of John Thomas Campbell, Esquire, who died on the 7th of January, 1830. This Order was superseded on the 28th of November, 1833, by administration being granted of the goods of John Thomas Campbell, with the Will and Codicil annexed, to Mr. Manning; his son, Edye Manning, Esquire, and Thomas Bodenham, Esquire, being his sureties. In order to obtain these letters of administration, Mr. Manning was appointed by the next of kin (who appears to have been Dr. Charles Campbell of Newry, in Ireland) his Agent. It was the duty of any one, claiming a debt to be due to him from the Intestate, to bring forward and substantiate his claim by a demand upon the administrator or next of kin, legally prosecuted. But Mr. Johnson does not appear to have done more than make enquiry of the late Registrar, through his friend, Cap­ tain Armstrong, in 1834; and this does not appear to be in any way pursued until in 1842, eight years afterwards, he applies to the Secretary of State on the subject. Meanwhile, Mr. Manning had in 1836 (according to his statement, see letter annexed) settled with the next of kin thro' his lawfully constituted Agent, for the money received by him. Under such circumstances, Mr. Johnson can only blame his own remissness for not having more promptly brought forward his claim ih a legal way, between 1830 and 1836, and his only remedy (if any) is to apply to the next of kin of Mr. John Thomas Campbell, as Mr. Manning suggests. Fifth. As to the petition of James Morgan. Mr. Manning's inter- and re property ference with the property referred to by the Petitioner was wholly of J. Morgan. unknown to and unauthorised by the Judges. Real Property does not, indeed, fall within their Jurisdiction to commit to the charge of the Registrar; the property, so liable, being personal property only of intestate persons, which is subject to waste. It appears by the petitioner's statement and that of Mr. Manning that, on the application of Mr. Manning the late Registrar, the petitioner was induced to execute to Mr. Manning and to his son William Montague Manning, Esquire, Barrister at Law, a Conveyance of the property in question in Trust (as we gather from Mr. Manning's explana­ tion) to sell for the benefit of the petitioner. Mr. Manning's ex­ planatioSEE.n I.(a sVOL containe. XXII—d2 0in his letter above referred to) is the only one we are enabled to communicate to Your Lordship of this matter, and of his conduct in regard to it. He admits having actually re­ ceived on James Morgan's behalf, in all, a sum of £2,900, on which, he says, " James Morgan will be entitled to a dividend " and that he " holds ' in trust' securities to the amount of about £1,500 more of unsold, and as yet, unproductive land." 578 HISTORICAL RECORDS OF AUSTRALIA. 1843. Under such circumstances, Your Lordship will share in the feeling 2 March. of indignation which we ourselves entertained, on a perusal of Mr. Manning's explanation. We have not the power, however, of relieving the petitioner. He has, unfortunately, by his own act, as it appears, legally invested the Messieurs Manning with a Trust, for the execution of which he must look to them in that character. We have, &c, JAMES DOWLING, CJ. W. W. BURTON. • ALFRED STEPHEN. [Sub-enclosure.] Statement by MR. J. E. MANNING TO MR. A. ELYARD. J. E. Manning Sir, Vermont, 29 Deer., 1842. Your letter of the 17th inst., addressed to me by their Honors' direction and enclosing copy of correspondence in the several estates of Were, Lillyman, some deceased person unnamed at Port Phillip, John Thomas Campbell, and Mary Morgan, re estate of I did not receive till the 23rd from the Camden post, and reply to it as early as I W. Were; have been able, not having papers by me to refresh my memory on the various Subjects. First. In the estate of W. Were, deceased, intestate. I believe Mr. Thomas Were's representation to Captain Pechell, in May last, to be substantially correct. I deeply regret my not having paid into the Savings Bank the balance of £139, ascertained by the Judges' audit to have been in my hands at the latter end of the last year and forming part of Intestate balance. The vouchers of this account are in the office of the Supreme Court. The second sum, mentioned by Mr. Were, Senr., of £160, had never been realized by me. It is in the form of a promissory note at two years' date given by the friend of the deceased gentleman to him before his death, and did not fall due till the beginning of the present year, long before -which period the maker of the note had returned to England. It was handed over by me re estate of to Mr. Macpherson on my quitting office. I could get no clue to the residence or R. Lillyman ; connections of the maker. All the papers herein will be found in a bundle endorsed " Were," left by me in the top right hand drawer of my office desk, among the vouchers of audited Estates. Second, In the Estate of Richard Lillyman; A sum under £300 was received by me through my Agent Mr. Cooper of New Zealand the Colonial Treasurer there, some twelve months before I left Office. It was not brought by me before the Court from the circumstance, as well as I recollect, of the Island having ceased to be within its jurisdiction. I, however, satisfied the claim of Mr. Lillyman's family, who were represented (in one of the latter months of last year) iby Mr. Augustus Gore of Spring Street, by assigning to him my share of the wool of 4,400 Sheep, and re which I had in charge of Messrs. Pitts, Bollivant, and Adams near Moreton Bay, complaint of of whom Messrs. Thomas Gore and Co. of Sydney, and later Mr. A. Gore, were the N. Kennedy. agents. A reference to my Balance sheet or schedule of personal effects, filed in the Court, will show that the then forthcoming fleece of these flocks were excepted. I calculated that my half of this wool would, 'as near as possible, cover the amount of Lillyman's claim, and of which I have never since heard. Third. Estate of a party who died by Suicide at Melbourne. Mr. Neil Kennedy's letter of 3rd July last to Lord Stanley does not give the name of the party, who is said to have died in his debt for the value of some consignments tnade in his lifetime. I have endeavoured, in vain, to tax my memory for the name, but I per­ fectly remember the business. This is no Intestate Estate, but a probate of his will was granted by the Supreme Court in Sydney in favor of the two Executors, who were, I think, Mr. Simpson the Police Magistrate at Melbourne, and some Merchant there. These gentlemen became alarmed at the p'robable consequence of their under­ taking the management of this Estate, consisting, I believe of some gross £300 in value, and they entreated my agent, Mr. James Smith of Melbourne, to take the conduct of the business in my name. I consented to his doing so under the circum­ stances, in which no will ought in fact to have been proved, as it was hastily made with the poison in his Stomach by which he destroyed himself. Mr. Smith sold the effects found in the small Store of the deceased, paid £100 for rent due, for which the Executors had undertaken, paid funeral expences, wages, etc., and ulti­ mately sent me the balance in hand, the whole of whieh I disbursed in Sydney in satisfying the specific claims of consignors who proved by invoices, of which dupli­ cates were sent me from Melbourne, that their property had been sold as the effects of deceased. The bundle of papers must be some where in the office, either in the large Press among balanced estates papers, or in the second drawer on the right hand Iiofn consequencmthiy s desparticulak amone ofr gmestate ybundle bein, igfs Ivero frecollec yestate latet scalle rightnotd mad,upo I eoverpain thtoe pa subjecdy somanothete seveofr anspecifin yo r Coureighc claitt Orderspoundm at as. THOMSON TO STANLEY.