The Sun.
London, England, 1824-09-10 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

LANCASTER, SEPT. 7.
Beftre Mr. Baron HuLLocic and a Common Jury,
MILLER v. DODSON.

The ATTORKEY-GENERAL stated the nature of this action
on the part of the plaintiff, which was of a novel nature, and
brought to recover of the defendant the sum of 401. being so
much money paid to him under the following singular circum-
stancest—The plaintiff; it appeared, was the agent for a Mr.
Cocks, a land surveyor, then in the Vest Indies, and acted as
his agent in the collecting of his rents, &c. during his absence.
Among his tenants Dobson was one,who had paid to Miller the
SUM of 301. which sum it appeared the present plaintiffhad paid
into the bank of Messrs. Dilworth and Co. of this County, to
the credit of himself, and not to the credit of Mr. Cocks, as It
was contended ought to have been done, as so much money
paid by the defendant Dobson as tenant to Cocks, and which
sum he had applied to his own use, and afterwards offered the
defendant 1001. to compromise. The Learned Gentleman then
called—.
Thomas Barber—lle is a clerk in the house of Messrs. Dil-
worth and Co. of this place. John Miller did not keep an ac-
count at their house that he remembers ; he recollects there was
triee(eAnbtlbleerp)lapianifiatnint
ttohetdheefiernit,laannkt
a dispute
his private account; he examined the books, and found
on
such a sum had bean paid; the plaintiff and defendant came
together to their bank ; the money appeared by the cash books
e paatytnht their
rt
hoof'. '3Boe /!7
been repaid to him again on the llith October 1822 ;
attoislehtroeavtwielas a receipt given and 'brought in by John Miller ; the
entry would be that the plaintiff had credit for that sum; the
mistake was cleared up to the satisfaction of both parties. Wit.
nestshad detected the error, and the defendant had offered him
ss. for it ; it was an error of the
'plaintiff's ; the plaintiff had
received the money on Mr. Cocks account, and had not (riven
credit to Mr. Dobson for it as such ; he had heard this by
report.
Mr. Serjeant Cross, for the defendant, objected to mere
report.
Examination cantinued—Don't remember that Dobson paid
money into their bank on his own account, but only for the rent
which he had credit for, he had paid out before on Mr. Cocks'
account. Dobson presented a cheque for GO/. when Miller
you
stfirriittililaittwhdat:was dievasnce on; costhi
enhthe I3ank,
are.,
asaid, " this was a bad job for him." Miller was with him, and
said they
cdaleyerrs4kt
041 in the
I Lawson,
e
don'ttws Lpi
a cheque of my brother for COL for my error. An appeal was
afterwards made to Mr. Bitkett, a partner in the firm, he hav-
ing heard of the circumstances of the case, who refused to pay
the cheque ; and said to the defendant, in the presence of a
person of the name of Morson, that this was a barefaced and
scandalous transaction ; that it was a mistake on the part of the
.plaintiff, and a. gross injustice to take any money from hint
on that account. Dobson said you have nothing to do with that,
he has agreed to pay me the money. Mr. Eirkett said that he
would not pay the checque, and requested Dobson, as an honest
man, to give it up, and return the dOl. he had received, which
he refused to do. Mr. Birkett said to both (defendant and
Mason) whoever advised you to act in this way deserves to be
prosecuted. Dobson said that lie had been advised to act in
the way he had done. Mr. Birkett asked by whom ; he said
he was not prepared to say, and if he was that he was not going
to tell that ; he said the chance was worth more than that ; that
it was worth 2001.

. .
Mr. Serjeant CROSS to witness--DOn't.set up, Sir, here for
an interpreter !
Witness—lie said that he would put it in an attorney's
hands 11 the cheque was not paid.—(Receipt put in and
read—" Received of Richard cocks, Esq. 301. per Thomas
Dobson)

Cross:examined by Mr. Sergeant Caoss—He gave ,Dobson
the receipt for 30/. ; he can't say if they turned poor Dobson
out of their banking-house ;' he had called at hislouse, and
offered him &s. if he would look and find the entry for3ol.
Miller was not very strenuous; he does not rementter that
Miller denied the receipt.
Bir the JUDGE—The inonerwas paid to Miller and carried
to Dobsou's account. I suppose it was your ettrelessness that
it was not found. He came two or three hours afterwards;
Millet Is a land surveyor.
Ite..examined by the ATTORNEY.GENERAL—That is the
receipt ; believes Dobson had paid it to Miller on . Cocks' ac-
count fur rent.

By the Juno E—When the receipt was brought the money
was paid to Miller.
Tim Juvou--This case, I think, far the credit of both
parties, ought to be settled elsewhere.
Mr. Sergeant Cnoss—l Will take a verdict for 401. and costs.
The Jur of—.:The cause had better proceed.
Robert .Birkett examined—flu is a partner in the firm of
Dilworth and Co. of this place. Mr. Cocks was in the 'West
Indies. He remembers the mistake in question ;' it was dim.
covered in.the present year ; he saw both parties at the Bank
before the mistake was discovered ; Dobson charged witness
with 'receiving it; it was discovered by a memoranduni
told -Dobson that it was a rascally act to extort money front
Mr. Miller. ale said ho had been advised to take certon
sures, and advertise him. He brought the receipt, and said

•
that it would not be paid until he had seen Miller. He asked
him who had avised him, and he said that was nothing to hins•
By the JUDGE—Credit was not carried to Cocks' account
3lr. Serjeant CROSS replied, and said that his Learned Friend
had a muddy case to wade through. His client was a poor far-
mer, and had paid to Miller the sum of 301. supposing that he
• was the authorized agent of Mr. Cocks, and if the plaintiff bad
thought fit to compromise the affair with the defendanOhe
plaintiff had now he thought no reason to complain of what
rose out of his own wilful act. Had the accounts of the bank-
ing house of Messrs. Dilworth and Co. been as accurately kept
as at the counting houses in Lombard-street, this action bad
probably never been brought into this Court.
The Learned JUDGE charged the Jury, and Said that this,
action being brought to recover the sum of 401. paid by w 6
plaintiff to the defendant under particular circumstances, it
would be for the Jury to say what right the defendant bad to
hold out a threat against the plaintiff of a criminal nature, end
to threaten him with tr• prosecution unless he paid him 1001. to
compromise his error. It was evidently a mistake on the peg
of the plaintiff, and the bankers who had the care-of the public
money acted wisely in not paying it out of their hands under
such circumstances as this, and which had come to their know-
ledge. It was an improper and an illegal act of the defendant
to obtain money by a threat of this kind. It would be therefore
for the Jury to say whether the plaintiff had not a right to
cover back from the defendant the sum mentioned in the item.
The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 40/. Costs 40s.
HEWITT V. FINLOW AND OTHERS•
OE
nart-
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated the Case on the pan
plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeant Coosa on the part of the de-
fendants.
It appeared that this was an action against the defendants;
arising out of an execution levied against a certain number In,:
horses belonging to the plaintiff; who had taken the benefit
a recent Act of Parliament for relief of Insolvent Debtelro_,C"„e
who had subsequently to that discharge become poosem`u
them by their being turned over to him by another persontlb,,,g.
important point Wass, h
far the defendants were bawe'.".
damages on this execution, in not having applied in the brain!
stance to the Insolvent Debtors' Court for a Rule Nisi• It Ise
proved by the examination of witnesses that the PlaintiVi the
not apprised the defendants that he had taken the benefit 0'
Act, and which the Learned. Judge ruled he
he
to have.
done, to have produced his schedule ; and if he had it not In
his possession lie ought to have sent for it, in order to have ll'
tisfied the parties.
The case went to the Jury, who found for all the defendalls!
his Lordship reserving a point of law arising out of the easel;
future consideration • and giving the plaintiff Is. she
should his Lordship 'have taken an erroneous View of we
BARKEIt V. GREEN. ~ Retied
The ATTORNEY n at. stated that this was foe
brought by a professional gentleman against the defelurLast
the escape of a prisoner of the name of Winterbottomi
whom a ea*: ad satieaciendum had been issued att.°. the
stance. The defendant had been suffered to escape 'it 04
negligence of the High Sheriff's officer. iVinterbottoni,...,% •
peared, was afterwards discharged by the Insolvent Dem;
Act, who previously stood indebted to the plaintiff in thegif
signed
ivir.
pa and delivered.l, of r
of 501. for law charges, a bill of which had been regular
cx
hard and an oppressive case on the part of the plaintiff "6-1).
the defendant. The plaintiff; according to: the mode pres,,critm
the defendant, submitted tluft..ibtivillill:
ed by law, might have ruled the Sheriff to have retor,_Aue" e.
writ, and also brought up the body, both which he wile.
glected to do ;. and he now turned round upon the Po"
tiff's officer for a claim due to him from another
person. •
The JUDGE charged the Jury, and said it was their pro'
vince to consider what compensation of damages the plrn,
was entitled to recover in consequence of the escape of 11114;
bottom ; and if they believed that it had been through Ott':
gligence of Madder (the Sheriff officer's assistant), then then
insist find a 'verdict for the plaintiff. With 'respect to the
amount of the bill claimed by Dlr. Barker against WiPterb°t'
tom, that find nothing to do with the question, or the quantAill
of damages the plaintiff had sustained, and which only liPPri d-
to the escape of Winterbottom, if they believed an, escape P.
occurred before the return of the writ.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, One
Farthing.
31r. ecir.Locx--itly Lord, I hope you will certify.
t.; DGE —I will consider of this, Mr. Pollock.
On the Crown Side nothing of interest occurred; and Mr*
Justice BAY LEY, having got through the Calendar, wok same
undefended cases on the Civil Side. To-morrow both the
Judges will sit at Nisi Prius.
The Assizes are expected to last until the latter end of nag
week, from the number of causes for trial.

BRISTOL, SEPT. 8. .
THE ICING v. BRYANT AND TWO OTHERS.
This was an indictment against the defendants for conininill
to defraud a Mr. Ilaythorn, %merchant of Bristol, of the e..„'";
of 160/. under these circumstances :—The defendant BrP,".„; ••
had committed an assault on Air. Ilaythorn in 1822, f0r.0:5;. .
he proceeded by action, and recovered damages, 1001 -nd
defendant was possessed of some cottages near Bristolia be
other property, on which execution on the judgment Wu by
levied ; but before the period arrived when execution eoa4",A.
sued out, the defendant, with a man named Wilcox
several others, conspired to fabricate a deed of mortgage' of
suing the property to Sims, who was the brother be
Bryant. Bryant, after the transaction, caused himself t7.cie
arrested on a sham debt, and finally obtained the benefit or Le
Insolvent Debtors' Act. The persons who were to prove
h
case were themselves parties to the fraud.
give the testimony of Mrs. Hari°
There was nothin important or curious in the evidence;
carol:
shall therefore merely ,
Cox, who deposed as tbllows:-111r. Cox, Tny husband, ti ea
torney. Was confined with the gout in April, 1622, and I n,
to his office, which is in Bristol, to take uphis letters. 1 relt3rio
her Bryant calling at the office about that time. AVatkins
called there. I told the latter that Bryant had called and 1",,a
letter for my husband. I asked hint if he knew Bryant. Hest,
he did, and that he understood he was .n Injured math e 4„,,
believed he had not committed the assault; that he thought 1 75,1
thorn was a man with plenty of money, and could et
to swear what he thought proper. Ile said he had-asked Ilet
ant if he was not afraid of an execution, and that Bryant saved
was afraid ; and Watkins said to hint, if he would be eav
llta..
by him he would bring hint through it without paying e
ling, provided there were a dozen executions against hiel•bi
He then said he advised hint to make over his proPertior
mortgage to some one who would hold it in trust, and co,
ant said lie would make it over to his brother-in-law if lid con,
sented. Watkins then said, that his brother-in-law had if
sented, and thit the deed was prepared. I asked Wlfanar
Mr. Walker hail prepared the deed. He said no. Ltioiri
knew nothing of the matter ; that it was prepared bY,rociet•
who was not an attorney, but knew more than halt te'do ta
neys in practice. . Watkins said they were to go to lion COAL.
stay a few days, and that he saw Bryant on the top of ti! tot,
for London ; that some hours after Bryant had left g
regretted that he had not consulted with hint remPeStl;,saa
house and furniture; that his father went to Bryant a_ nods te
consulted with her on the propriety of removing ilSrifim aerY,
some lodgings; that she approved a the plan ; Assistance °,t.
he had taken in the Hotwell-row. At the begiatgiirefol
night, about 12 o'clock, 'Watkins said, with the the
his son, he bad removed the whole of the g00d0t..%-f the c°"-
sensation, Watkins said that Bryant was janAilliOse told. ;
rascal, and it was after that that he repeatea “'"heard the e"
Mr. Serjeant YELL stated that after having that the de-
dente of the last witness, he was instructed to is,,,rded ag4
fendants consented to have a verdict of guilty
rec."-
them. •
little

1004
Yesterda y afternoon
, abort ir6 sat
the end of Fleet-market, Ludgate. street, tot:Tee:l gocse
vehicles, called " Vans," either through its own nowiel..l(ll:l;ptse
the negligence of the driver, was forced against I„,lt,PlPoesoflt
Fhalse, which it crushed to pieces in a moment. 01'
ins the chaise were, fortunately, by the promptness 1' Criieso
the spot, extricated from their very perilous situation• to for
was heavily loaded with goods, and the passengerl, w et safe'
numerous, may think theiuselves very fortunate if they g ,
to " Rath or Ettistoi.,,

MARRIED. 0;44 to
Yesterday, at Camberwell, AIL Theophilus Ugh
Miss Ann Loscombe. W.
eigl Alt/ r
Charles Deudney, Esq. of Oensingaod,
On Tuesday last, at St. John!a Church, LiamPst ' hot 0
Smith, mercer and draper, to Charlotte, youngest daug
near Hastioe'cop-
On Thursday at Putney Church, by the Rev. Thoin:eli, to
man, Mr. WUliam Mackintosh Hutton, of Camber
Elisabetb, daughter of James Clue man, Esq. of Putner„iate, 0
On Tuesday, the 7th hist:, D. iVilliams. of Berra rwr
lateJ. '
Phillips, Esq., M.P., of e ywinywilly, 01.111)arthetobirg_____:,,,...-'
to Miss E. L. 51. Phillips youngest daughter of the

iiiaosAos.inirtritJhaeiTethh: at the Lancashire,
illittpslesa,l:eldE2oD. Her' d ' the
tyll
°l.'
former onr fNiCti°`
'K
OW.
Ring,
Wednesday morning last, at Cranbrook, in —44
4-I,llg, wife of Mr.
,E;ing, hanker, at that place. ivormanJY,
Lllt°hensedk iitniri:eaniei:'sdat
.t3.EI a ri7Py ,i 11-11ttlisIwVii ifei 1,
atinlielliaartt:lit Oillitteb°o-i the
Miss 111
the 29th of August, at Koue!t, infthire.
I 111 r a Leatoorgeort, formerly of Bath, Selzer"—
...........
- _..------''
71
PrintodrainltE ll,mb No.l iahii Strand,edigforthy J. i
aP:o P it tf ca
ioxnss.
o:‘,0t1: 5.5°