The Sun.
London, England, 1809-09-21 00:00:00

CLEITA!-EAIVELL SESSIONS, SEPT. 20.

THE KING V. SHAW AND OTHERS. ,
This was an iiidament against a Sheriff's officer, •
employed in levying an execution, the broker em-
ployed in selling the goods, and the other Defend-
ants, who were employed therein as their servants.
The indiiiment charged -thetas with riotously and,
unlawfully assembling, and tearing and otherwise
injuring the carpets, and other furniture, the pro-
perty, and in the dwelling-house of Joseph Oliviere,
and with assaulting Margaret, the wife of the said
-Joseph.
Mrs. Oliviere, in support tof this indiament,
stated, that her husband is an artist, living in NII-
- and herself employed in executing fancy ar-
ticles and dresses, for Ladies of the first fashion.
Oa the 23d of December last, having been from
hotue, on her return between seven and eight in
the-evening, she found an execution had been
lodged in her husband's house, and a person in
possession ; on the next day, being Saturday, she
went out between three .and four in the afternoon,
for the-purpose of trying to have the matter settled,
'and returned home about nine ; she then found a
number of men, from twelve to sixteen, of whom
the Defendants (eight in number) were a part, in the
house. Thei,vvere busied in all partS of the house,
in colleaing the furniture, tearing 'up the carpets,
openi6g her drawers, and taking out her clothes.
She requested them to stop, as she expeeed a Gen-
tleman would come within an hour, for the purpose
of settling the business. They, however, proceed-
ed in their work of preparing the things for re
moval, when she declared she would not safe!: the

•-
goof's to be removed nut cf whAOnt-first
having an inventory taken of thetn. They persisted
in their preparaii-Jn to remove the goods ; andtpon
herstill opposing them, they sent for a constable,
to whom they gave•her in charge; but lie refused
to take her into custody, as it did not apl.ear she had
keen guilty of any offence. About twelve o'clock,
she retired to the house of her next-door neighbour;
from whence she returned to her boUse between
three and four of the Sunday morning. She then
saw a cart at the door—,-her shop was *entirely str pt.
of all the goods it contained; the cart was filled
with them; and some were lying on the pavement
before the door. The party went away before three
o'closk her furniture was all removed even to her
beds, there not being• one, out of sis, left for her
Children to sleep upon. \She could- not state the
value of the articles, taken, as her stock consisted
in articles chiefly in the fancy line; including a va-
riety of fancy'w arks', the-property of her .Majesty,
her Royal highness the Duchess of YOrk, _Lady
Mary Erskine; and a number of other fernales of
the first rank and fashion, which she was honoured
with the execution of ; including alsci her husband's.
paintings and property, as 311 artist. In the course'
of the night„ some of the defendants, she could 'not
state which, had torn her pelisse • off her. She- was
very ill afterwards.—Upon her cross-exaMination,
she denied having behaved with any vii ence in
opposing the removal of the things, or that., she
had producedkoife, or threatened to stab any
person who should remove them, or had said she
would wade up to her knees in blood, before
'she would suffer them to be removed, Or any
words to that effea. She acknowledged she_ had
locked the street door; declaring she 'would not suf.
fer the goods to be relnoved without, first, having
an inventory ; that no pet-Son came for the purpose
of settling the business as she had promised; and
that though she had part of the amount of the
execution in her pocket (b 61.) she had net ten.:
dered it to any of them, though she wanted Them
to stay the removal of the goods till the- Monday

. .
ger daughter, a child of twelve years of age, and
two young women in her erniluy, ga.v.e testiwony to
the material circurnsiances of her evidence. .

Pethering; the ,Constable who was sent
for to take her into custodr, stated; he revised to
do so, as he thought he would-not be justihed in so
doing--,- as he conceived she had a right to what she
demanded, an inventory of the goods Wrote they
were removed. He' described' tholaking' of them
Out of the house, as like' a removal iti the case. of
are.

To this charge the defence was, that they were
lawfully-employed in executing the King's writ;
that with resped to the removing the goods at so
late an hour on the Saturday ni*glit, it was owing to
an indulgence, in order to allow the matter to, be
settled; but that not being the case, they were
forced to proceed, as, had they delayed till the Mon-
day' following, the landlord's rent becoMing due on
the Sunday' (the.2bib); he would have levied a dis-
tress, and by thus ousting them of the fiuits of their
execution, the Sheriff, that is, his Ortieer, would
have become liable to the amount of the execution
Which he should have delayed to levy. With re-
spect to the alleged, assault, it was contended, that
was exactly the reverse, as Mrs, Oliviere had behav-
ed in the most-outrageous manner, in opposing the
removal of the goods. ,

To prove this case, the writ to the Sheriff, and his
warrant to his Officer, were put in and proved. It
was 'also sworn by two of the persons employed in
removing the goods, that Mrs.Oliviere behaved with
great violence, that she drew a knife, End threatened
to stick it into any man who should attempt to re-
move an article, and that ther4;itre the constable was
sent for, It was further sworn, that her pelisse
was torn in her attempt to stop cue wan in carrying
a bed down the stairs.

The Learned Chairman (Mr. MAnAwAattic), in
summing up the evidence to the Jury, observed; the
question they had to decide was, whether an act, le-
gal in itself, was illegally performed The carry-
ing away the goods under the execution was certain-
ly lawful, but as certainly they were bound to do so
with as little damage as possible, as the Defendant
in the execution was entitled to any surplds aftej
paying the amount of the execution. An inventory
was certainly held by some not to be absolutely ne-
cessary- in law; but still it was usual, both fur • the
safety and benefit of both parties. AnOther thing,
was, officers were bound to execute their warrants
at a seasonable hour, which, in his judgment, was
not the case here.

The Jury found all the Priioners guilty except
two,- who were not identified ; and the Court zienv
tenced the Sheriff's Officer and his followers to be
confined one week, and. thp Broker, who appeared
most active, to he confined a fortnight.