Somewhat disreputable and unfortunate long-ago me

From "Cases in Bankruptcy," Volume I (1820) by John William Buck, a rather shaming appearance or reappearance I made before the Bankruptcy Commission in Guildhall, 1815, "for not answering to their satisfaction the questions put to him," as the record states.  I was apparently supposed to bring to the Commission my records and business papers, but did not produce them, giving instead a long and hard-to-follow story about having given them to somebody named Hamilton for safekeeping, who (I claimed) refused to give them to my messenger.  This Hamilton is reported to have said "He knew what was wanted, but all these proceedings are illegal, and there's an end of it."   

The Commission then questioned me:

"Have you any accounts now to produce to the commissioners, or any further reason to give why you do not produce them? Answer: I have no accounts to produce. I have no further reason to give why I do not produce them except that I have two petitions before the Chancellor to supersede this commission, the first upon grounds of a commission being now in force against me bearing date in 1 808, and the second of no act of bankruptcy to this commission, but still I am ready to render every account possible in my power to the commissioners; which answer of the said John Crowley being not satisfactory to us, the said commissioners, these are therefore to will and require and authorise you immediately upon receipt hereof to take unto your custody the body of the said John Crowley and him safely convey to his Majesty's prison of the King's Bench and him there to deliver to the marshal keeper or warden of the said prison, who is hereby required and authorised, by virtue of the commission and statute aforesaid, to receive the said John Crowley into his custody, and him safely keep and detain without bail or mainprise, until such time as he shall submit himself to us the said commissioners, or the major part of the commissioners, by the said commission named and authorised, and full answer make to our or their satisfaction to the question so put to him as aforesaid, and for your so doing this shall be your sufficient warrant."

I then later (1818)  got a writ of habeas corpus and was brought before the Lord Chancellor, who noted that the writ was written wrongly, but it was allowed anyway on appeal from my solicitor, Samuel Romilly.  And I got off! The Lord Chancellor convinced I couldn't be held for not producing a deposition.  

Well!  This Samuel Romilly, a very famous barrister, friend of Mirabeau, legal reformer, etc., etc, was, in the very year I was imprisoned, acting as negotiator between Lord Byron and his wife in their separation .  Byron thought there was something wrong with this, as Romilly was under contract to him as well as to the Noel family (his wife's).    Romilly was so devastated by the sudden death of his wife later in 1818 that he committed suicide -- slit his throat.  Byron was not sorry.  If I can find it online, I'll quote his notice of Romilly's death in his diary.

What a lovely sort-of coincidence.