The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-22 00:00:00

COMMON PLEAS.-MONDAY

SYMONS V. BROADWOOD.
This was an action against the defendant, who was
sheriff of Surrey, for an illegal arrest.
The plaintiff lodged in the house of a person of the
name of Parke, on Kennington-green. Two officers, of
the name of Rutland, father and son, with their fol-
lower, went to arrest Parke in December last, and having
got entrance to his house, went up stairs, and found the
plaintiff at breakfast with his wife and Mrs. Parke. They
immediately addressed him as Mr. Parke, which he de-
nied. They then went to get a person to identify him,
and while endeavouring to do so, another of his (Rut-
land's) sheriff's officers was passing by, and he entered
the house for that purpose. So strong was the likeness
between the plaintiff and Parke, that he at first (Rutland's)
brother) took him to be Parke, but when be spoke, be
then discovered his mistake, and withdrew his brother and
nephew, and their follower. The plaintiff immediately fol-
lowed the officer, abused them, and told them he would
bring his action. The constraint he complained of did
not exceed twenty minutes, for which Counsel at the
opening of the case offered to take an apology and costs,
which was declined.

The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.-Is. Damages
(TUESDAY.)
RYAN V. STACKPOOLE.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover a
quantum meruit for services rendered by him in the reco-
very of a large fortune in the well-known cause of Stack-
poole v. Stackpoole.
The plaintiff, in 1819, was sent by the defendant Stack-
poole to Paris to negotiate and arrange his claim with
Count Stackpoole. On that occasion the plaintiff procured
a letter of introduction from Lord Castlereagh, the then
Secretary for Foreign •Affairs, to Lord Stewart de Rothe-
sayi the Ambassador, to give any assistance to facilitate the
adjustment of this great cace. The plaintiff had frequent
interviews with Lord Stewart de Rothesay, and did every-
thing a zealous and efficient agent could do. For the want
of certain papers his stay was prolonged in Paris for a
considerable time, during which period he contracted debts
and was thrown into prison, where he remained for five
years. While in prison he was consulted by the defendant,
who, it was alleged, after getting all the information he
could out of him, placed his case in the hands of M. Dupin,
the celebrated French advocate. The claims of the de-
fendant being compromised with the opposing party, he
denied the right of the plaintiff to any claim for compen-
sation.

Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 1,5001.

INSOLVENTS' COURT.-TUESDAY.

IN THE MATTER OF GEORGE ALMAR.

An application was made on the part of Mr. Almar, the
actor, dramatic writer, and late lessee of Sadler's Wells,
for leave to file his petition, the 14 days from his commit-
ment having expired. The affidavit on which the motion
was grounde was made by Mr. Almar. It stated that he
had been arrested in Maich last, and committed to the
Fleet Prison in the following month, and had been since
detained at the suit of other creditors. That the only
property he possessed was some theatrical dresses, and the
reason he had not petitioned in the time allowed by the
Act of Parliament was, that he expected his friends would
have effected an arrangement with his creditors. He had,
however, been disappointed, and was now desirous of filing
his petition. The affidavit farther disclosed the money he
had received during his imprisonment, and its application.
Mr. Commissioner BOWEN granted him leave to file a
petition.
The Court rose t.;11 Thursday.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.