The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-07-08 00:00:00

WOK?* V. IMAM

Mr. PARK, for tile Plaintiff, stated, that this
*is an action of rather a singular nature, it bee%
brought against the Sheriff of Middlesex, Sir Jo-
usthaa Miles, to recover damages for not arresting
• permin of the name or Bromley, au attesmey, who,
during the last Middlesex election, west acting as
an Uuder-Sheriff: Mr. North, the Plaintiff, was
geatlernen residiug at Mialdea-upou-Thames, in
the county of Surrey, to whom Mr. Broinley hap-
pencil to become a neighbour. Mr. North, not
M:. Bromley so well as others did, ad-
vanced vim, in 1801, tOOl. upon his bond; and,
spun tilt: 15th of January, 1803, another 300 f.
upon li. promissory -note. Tae circumstance of
Mr. Brnnlsy being nn attorney induced the
Plaintiff to ?lace greater reliance on the securities
be had oldained ; but he was grievously distill,
pointed in his expectations, fur Mr. Bromley failed
sn all his promises of repayment, and placed hies
rehance upois the Act which exempted attorneys
of this Court from arrest; By a very 'whole-
some act, however, even attorneys, wisea they
acted 04 Under-Sheriftei were deprived of thit
privilege, and :were Haile to be arrested. Ac-
cordingly • she Plaintiff took the opportunity of
the •dast Middlesex eloclicin, when this Brom-
leg was acting hi that capacity, and employrel
a Mr. Lee to proenni a ssernint egeinst him.—
This writ 'au issued od the itth of Alley, aid
was letlittllohla tilMa 119th of that_ month, tt
beiag notorious tlaist3lr. broasley waives be every
day at the heating* at Breutionl. This writ was
delivered to a Mr. Leach, a bailie; to Iterate •
but he neglected to do so, and, upon be-
ing reprimanded for gross negligence, stated,
as an excuse, that this Under-Sheriff . had
threatened .to suspend- any bailiff who would
dare to angst him, and said he meld not do so,
unless the other Sherif, Sir James Brausemiih,
would indemnify him. In this ease them was there-
fore a total loss, as Bromley had new ceased to be
Under-166144.M was %ling as as attorney, 111.
though nobody knew Where he was to be found.
Mr. Smith, who acted as agent to Mr. Bromley
daring his Under-Sinievalty. an May,. 1807, Prov-
ed his hand-writiug, and his embarrassments at
that period. lie seldom saw him at the electiou,
but frequently had occasisii go call upon him, at
his house in Suiehmespeou-street, duluora,where be
war frequently denied. During pert of that mouth
too hlr. Brantley was in Dtroiashire.
Mr. Richard Lock, clerk .to Mr. Lees the Plaint-
iffs sent, flowed Ow dire7tions •,;:.vilin to Mr.
Lse-chi, the Aire-, o

Mr. Kattr, at' tic .-hr, ;I b Office, proved that
the warrant eou!d n• be found iu the (Alice, al-
though strict had been made for' it
statolgst the nitt se. tited warrants.
Mr. Leach, the She.:ll-s Officer, said, he had
not sent' tae warrant tor these eight months. He
believed it most date been returned amongst the
et -executed Avarraate. lie certainly dill recollect
of Is Icing 'anti. a warrant against Tdr. Bromley, and
le went to Middlesex Election upon the 21st.- awl
two or ttirec following days, in search of him, and
alms to I,:s howl*, but he could not be found. He
was the bailiff employed by a Mr. Smith, whom
he understood to be agent for the Plaintiff.
He bad serer (Jane any hilirlesl for Mr. Lee. He
met Mr. Lee one day, and told thin he could not
inert with Bromley, although he had done his het.t
upon which Mr. Lee ohwerred to lilt.. " I'll renew
the writ." lie did nit rattolleet Laving to the
witness, Lock, that hedtifid not exec ute the writ,
ow ate-mut r.f having been thrtateeet by Brom:, y
with suspension. It was not. therefore, from al y
iippreheeston of the miter that he had not et;r-
cuter! it, but merely from not being able to find

Mr. lister idd^d, that he ha I been et the ele r-
Curt every day. b.it could only swear as to Mr.
Bromley having been prevent upon one ocannon. I.v-
-tweet) the Teth and ..,7th of May. Sir Jonathan
Miles end Sir James Brauseoinb were prevent upon
norm eocaaioue.

Mr. ',tick was again called, mid saran as to the
r•aureration he h 4,1 s ith Leitch, in which the res..
I'M assigned for the null-execution of the warrant
1,141 the threat held out by Brantley u to the •us-
pwwian of as, 'lndia that trotdd dare to execute
a writ against him.

Mr. Alexander smitb deposed, that he had acted
IN L 1..! friend of Mr. Norih—fiat recommended
to Mr. Lee as sin Agent, and had also
t. eamnieniled Leach as the ofli r:r to be ein-
lito ed. He had had * conversation with Leach.
sit.iia the subject of :Ms arrest, and iieghed h.lll to
ieee eery eadeavoiir to arrest Brom!ey, as liuth Mr.
North and Mr. Lee were trusting to him. He was
inclined to think that this officer :Wilted to
Li:a the threat that had been held out by Bromley,
Nor.'. 0(1114:no.

Mr. Sbepher,l, another officer who had attended
violdlesex ti.inoosteil, that be had hot seeu
tr. revntley there,slsove mice or twice. lie heti also
a o ri: against Bromley, which halo rain eadearour-
et; to enecnte atoint.t luta.
The kerolisxv-G,NERAL then addressed the
Jl•occ. en the hart of the Defendant. Sir Jotiailiao
Liles. lie sai I thin tens nothing tat• a schetae of
4.4.1.1 e., to Make the Sliernfot .tiohlitsex

ble for a cleat .of which he (told 4nat atlanglion.
have receiveitt a farthing. He and 'his again
had laid the sehewie pretty deep, by. setxrag •
the opportunity of Mr. Bromley acting as limier-.
Sheriff, kaowitig his insolvency, and at the smile
tune employing Mr.elestch us t)te officer, a person
never employ,...i ',rm.,. Lee u;tun any former ye- -
asioit. Tbi, eowe was different from those which
might occur 111 places where there were tome but
bound bailiffs. He wished to call toe attention of
the Jury to the 'Osmium of the Sheriff' by such it
proceerimg—the Plaintiftselects. his own officer,
surf yet endeavoured, by the uegligence of that of-
ficer, to render the Sietilf liable for the debt.--.-
This appeared to him to he extremely ittird upon
the Sheriff; as it less buying him opeia.to actions of
this sort, and rendering him answerable for every
claim of debt that might, under Nuiriar 'cirturn-
stithces, be laid against an insolvent debtor, with-
out affording hint the possibility of redeem. The •
Officer was a person who had been appointed some-
what against the will of the Agent for the Plaintiff;.
but, at any rate, the uther Officer, Shepherd. bee-
t.% other writs against Bronorly,sod not being able
to get scent of him, renderd it probable that Lear'.
could not have succeeded, even although co oe-
glect could be imputed t him. It had been prov-
ed that Bromley cuaW. neither be found at thi
.election, nor at hi. home at cms-street.
Besides this, it had been proved that Mr.• Lee had
expressed himself perfectly satisfied with Mr.
Leach's conduct up to the return of Om writ, as he
said the only altentative, war to get the. writ re-
newed. —it was perloatly • incrediLle that any
threat of suspension had been held out to this offi-
cer, so as to preveitv biro front doing his duty or
that he could have communicated any such thing
to Mr. Lees clerk, fur theta Mr. Lee must have
known it, audatiowing it, he could not have been
doing his duty-to his client, nor acting bueoumbly
towards the Sheriff', ,in not communicating the cir-
.custistauce to them. The erstc2, however, could not
depend upon what , Leech had said, but upon what
he fuel time. or what lie had omitted to do. The
Plaintiff war just where he was before, as he could
not hare recovered any tidal; from his debtor,
who was ibsolveut. Supposing that this U oder-
tae; itf; Broudey, had held out the alleged threat,
was it to be supposed that he . had the power to
carry it into execution? or that the Sheriffs them-
selves would have sanctioned such proeeeslitig
Upon who' he believed that if the Jury could
be inil.wed to find damages, they would be only
hominid.

Lord Exutnaottottett, in addressing the Jury.
observed, it was certainly the duty of the Sheriff of
.7didellesex to employ men as bsdiffs whom -he
de med worthy of midi ience,and he wad responsible
for them. In this case, ,here a writ bed been
issued upon the stnol. promissory note, a person
had been employid, in whom the Sheriff sensed
to ,lace peculiar i:onfldence, by hewing appointed
h s to set as an Under-Sheriff. The question
i I erefore entirely turned upon the degree of dili-
gence which they were of opinion this bailiff had
used in executing this writ. If they thought be
mid had noopportnnity of arrestiug this Mr. Break.
ley either at the hustings or at his house, thall
46:1 Sheriff ovoid ust be rendered liable the 4.-
snaps sustained. If -otherwise, then the question
was, what «mount of damages should be given
These were to depend upon the actual degree of
loss sustained br the Plaintiff, and the degve.: of
kombettility of his yet having an opportunity of re-
eoveripg the amount of his debt from the original
debtor.