The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-01 00:00:00

Mr. Justice lisle smd the rule mwt be made absolute.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—YESTERDAT.
!Immo DI Boa.—Beroas na emu lamer, Ma. PhaTICI
MarLs, Ma. James exesawsu, LND Ma. Jamas WILLIAM..
iimuts O. Rms.—ALLEGED Itzscus op Uuovs ritual
THE _

In this can • ru'e had been obtained calling on Joseph
Chuck end George Flintoff to show cause why an attach.
mesat for contempt should not issue egainst them lot illegally
rescuing and taking away certain goods and chattel, out of
the custody of tee sheriff of Middlesex, the same being in
his possession under a writ of Geri facia, issued at the nit of
the plaintiff ; and alto for assaulting Smith and Luckett,
bailiffs of the sheriff, whilst charged with the execution of
the writ. It appeared that a judgment sad been signed in
au action of Banks and others against Rice, and a writ of
H. fa. issued for 54/. The landlord of the defendant claimed
301. odd for a year's rent, and put in a distress on the de-
hadant's premises after Stamen had levied, employing for
that purpose a broker called Joseph Chuck. Chuck sad his
men removed t e goods, sod they were sold to Flintoff.
Mr. &eine' Bytes now showed cause on behalf of FlM-
teff, and produced affidavits setting up an alibi, and alleging
that the party who had been served with the notice was not
the person called Flint-if who was the purchaser of the
goo&
Mr. Jamey, Q.C., appeared on behalf of Chuck, and took
aft objection to the rule, on the ground that the sheriff's
men were not acting under a proper warrant. Stumm, the
sheriff's officer, in his affidavit, stated that he anted under •
warrant delivered to him on the 23d of August last, signed
by BobertWalter Carden and George Edmund lingkinson,
sheriffs of L Judos and Middlesex, whereas he (Mr. James)
had an affidavit stating that those gentlemen were not
appointed sheriffs until the 211th of Sep.. abet, Alderman
Lawrence and Mr. Nicoil being the sheriffs on the 231 of
August, when the writ was issued. It was only • squabble
between five or six sheriffs' men on one side, and broken'
men on the other; arid, mentor*, he teltjunified in taking
this objection.
Mr. Bramwell, in support of the rule, submitted that the
court would assume that the sheriffs' men were acting under
authority.
The Cunt Justice—lf be had not a legal warrant he Is not
only a wroag doer, but he has no connexion with the court,
and cannot claim our protection. You are asking us for
criminal remedy, and you must come properly armed.
Mr. Justice Mauls—We held yesterday that we could not,
for the pupae of providing for a gentleman's family, put a
few more clauses in his will— (a laugh)—and we cannot
swum a legal warrant for your purpose to-day.
Buie discharged with costs.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—YESTMAL
tonnes se Baum.
Joins e. JOHNBON.—Coerce.
This was an action of replevin' brought to try the validity
of • borough rate for the city of Lichfield, and of a warrant
issued by the defendants, as justices of that city, to enforce
the payment of the rate by the plaintiff, as overseer of !
one of tie parishes. By consent a special verdict was framed
and recently argued in this coon, ,ben judgment was given
in favour of the defendants generally.
Mr. Whitmore cow moved for a rule to review the tan,
don of costs on the ground that under the Municipal Cor-
poration Act (5 and 6 Wm. IV, cap. 76), the defendants
were entitled to recover costs as between attorney and client,
instead of the ordinary costs between party and party. That
act provided for the protection of all person* aides it be
execution, that all actions for anything done in of
it should be local and should be commenced within six
months. That nodes of such actions should be given, sad
that In any such action. the defendants might plead the
general imam sad that if • verdict and judgment should he
given *plan the pl.intiff the defendant should recover hie
lull outs as between attorney and client. The question wen
whether this action, beicg one of replevin, fell within the
section. It was submitted for the defendant that it 44
though some of the clauses in the section did not apply W
actions of replevin. Poe example, that relating to notice—
s form which n could have been required in such a
proceeding.
Mr. Gray appeared to show cause Mich. first Instance, and
segued that the section was altogether inapplicable to actions
of this sort.
Mr. Whitmore was stopped in his reply by
, The Court, who were of opinion that the defendants were
entitled to the protection of the 133rd section in this as well
as in all other forme of actions brought against them for acts
done is pursuance of the statute. As public officers dia.
charging a public daty It was evidently intended
that the justices iambi have the most complete
indemnity from eons in the event of their
and the question was whether that object could be caroled