The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-07 00:00:00

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

RESISTANCE TO THE PAYMENT OF ASSESSED TAXES.
THE KING V. FORD AND OTHERS.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL prayed that the defendants in
this case would be brought up for judgment.
The defendants having come into Court, several affidavits as
to character were put in and read ; there were no affidavits in
aggravation.
Mr. HUMPHREYS addressed the Court in mitigation of pu-
nishment. He had been most anxious that the humane pro-
position of the Lord Chief Justice for an arrangement of the
matter out of Court should have been carried into effect, but
that could not be accomplished. The defendants were all
tradesmen in humble circumstances, and had been already put
to very heavy expense by the removal of the trial from Clerken-
well to that Court by certiorari. They had been a consider-
able time in daily attendance to receive the judgment of their
Lordships, and were thereby prevented from attending to their
business and their families. He trusted that the contrition
which the defendants had expressed from the commencement
of the proceedings, and the great expense they had been put
to, would weigh with their Lordships in considering the pu-
nishment they should inflict upon them, and that justice would
be satisfied with their conviction.
Mr. DUNBAR then addressed the Court on behalf of four of
the defendants. The Learned Gentleman entered at some
length into the details of the case and pointed out what he
maintained were discrepancies in the evidence of the prose-
cutor, who, he asserted, had almost consented to give up pos-
session of the premises for a sum of money.
John Johnston, one of the defendants, then addressed the
Court on his own behalf.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was not by any means his
wish to press for severity of punishment, but at all times the
present must be considered a very serious offence. Ford, al-
though repeatedly applied to, refused to pay the King's taxes,
alleging that he was not liable ; a distress was legally put in,
and then he collected a mob around the house and entered into
a concert to disturb the public peace and commit violence upon
the person of the officer who was in charge of the distress.
Ford .was not present when the assault was committed, but the
jury found that it was by his procurement, thereby sheaving that
there was a concerted system to commit the assault and violate
the law. It was evident that great personal violence had been
done to the prosecutor, Scattergood, and the only mitigation
he had heard was from Mr. Dunbar, which was, that Scatter-
good, under duresse, had agreed to go away for a sum of money.
That appeared to him (the Attorney-General) rather an
aggravation of the offence, and it was now, therefore, his pain-
ful duty to call upon their Lordships to pronounce the sentence
of the law upon the defendants, for the offence of which they
had been convicted.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE pronounced the judgment of the
Court. They had been convicted before Lord Chief Justice
Denman of an assault upon John Scattergood, who had been
put in possession of a distress made for Assessed Taxes. The
language of Ford on that occasion was of a very violent na-
ture, and could not be justified, as he must have been aware
that his goods were liable to be seized for these taxes. The
Learned Judge here entered into the particulars of the case,
which have been already fully before the public. It appeared
to the Court, that Ford, Drabble, and Bolton, were more ac-
tively engaged in the assault than the others, and therefore
the Court would make some distinction as to the measure of
punishment. His Lordship then sentenced Ford, Drabble,
and Bolton, to six months' imprisonment in the Coldbath-fields
House of Correction, Johnston to four months imprisonment,
and Tanfield, Edgington, Neele, and Langley, to one month's
imprisonment each.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)