The Express.
London, England, 1851-11-15 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-YESTUIDAT.

-
PUMP. AT $l.l PROM 11 lllenl. saa...,t.rnaa MIL JUOTICK
CIPeIrIAL. MOD a 071.1101. JURY.
'WANES, Or TIM COURT.
The Court sat this morning for the purpose of disposing
of the cases appointed to be heard at the second sitting in
Middlesex. The c4nse li.t contained 12 cast', hut seven of
them were withdrawn, and oat was tried no undefended.

•
TARRANT V. Usl4l/1--PALSI IMPRISONMENT.
This was an action to recover damages for an alleged false
impfteonsnent, and the only plea upon the record WON not
gadty.
The plaintiff was a coach-trimmer, and the defendant
was • coach-lace manufacturer, in Cong.lane, Smithfield.
The plaintiff was formerly in the employment of
Mr. Nash, and had been with him once, to the
defendant's shop, to purchase goods. Afterwards he
requested the defendant to let hiss have some goods' on
his own account, and the defendant agreed to trust him for
a fortnight, if Nash would recommend him. On a subse-
quent occasion he produced • paper purporting to be signed
by Mr. Nash, recominendinef him as a person fit to be
trusted, and he obtained credit to the extent of 3/. 15s. ed.,
and gave the defendant his card. The goods,Towever, were
not paid for, and at the end of a month or nix weeks the
defendant called at the address given, and was informed
that the plaintiff did not then live there, nor could he as-
certain his residence. Inquiries were consequently mane
of Mr. Nash, and he denied that be hid ever signed the re-
commendation. After this the defendant mat the plaintiff
accidentally, and told him what Mr. Nash said, hut the
plaintiff stated that the signature was that gentleman's.
Nash was again applied to, and repeated his former state-
ment. The defendant ascertained ou the 28th of
June that the plaintiff was working for Mr. Mor-
ley, and he at once sent an officer to arrest him.
The plaintiff was consequently taken to the station-house at
six o'zloek in the afternoon and the defendant was sent for,
but he hesitated to make the charge, until a person who
was there reminded him that Mr. Nash said he had not
signed the paper, and then the defendant charged the plain-
tiff with obtaining goods by means of a forged instru-
ment." The police inspector, Cahill, however, directed the
constable to see Nash and ascertain if he had signed the
paper, and it was arranged that if he had done so the con-
stable wee to return and the defendant was to be sent for so
that the plaintiff might be liberated. But if the paper was
nut signed by Nash the constable was n to return, and as
he, in fact, did not come hack the plaintiff remained in
custody until Monday morning, when he was taken before
an alderman at Guildhall and discharged The ground of
discharge was doubtfule one &mess saying it was because
the defendant expressed his belies that the signature was
Nash's, while another witnees stated that the alderman
thought that it was a debt, and that the case could not be
carried further. After the discharge the whole of the
' parties went to a public house, and the defendant agreed
to take the debt at les. a month, fur which the plaintiff
expressed his thankfuluese. This arrangement was not
acted upon, but shortly afterwards the whale amount was
paid and the present action brought. How this came about
did not appear, but it was suggested by the deleudiuit's
counsel that the money was paid with a view to the action
' being brought.
The jury found a verdict fur the plaintiff—Damages, one
farthing.
Mr. Justice Creswell (turning to thejury)--Perhape, gen-
' tkinen, if you think anybody purchased the privilege of
bringing this action by paying 31. 131., he is rightly *treed.