The Sun.
London, England, 1826-08-04 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT—CARLISLE, Auousr S.
(axexisrin THIS MORNING.)
CIVIL SIDE-SLANDER AGAINST AN ATTORNEY.
ARMSTRONG T. JORDAN.
Mr. Jones opened the pleadings.
Mr. Brougham stated the plaintiff's case. Mr. Arm-
strong, the plaintiff, was an attorney, who had formerly
lived, and indeed was a native of Carlisle, but had removed
to Liverpool, where he had a good practice. The defend-
ant was a grocer in this town, and it would appear had a
somewhat slanderous tongue; and said at the King's Arms
Inn, to a person named Irving, with whom he was in con-
versation, that "Armstrong (the plaintiff) was a villainous
scoundrel, and a blood-sucking, petty-fogging attorney; and
had robbed Edward Beaumont of 71.'
The Learned Counsel called
Mr. Joseph Irving, who stated that he was acquainted
with both the plaintiff and the defendant. On the 4th of
April last, at ten o'clock in the morning, he was sitting in
the bar of the King's Arms Inn, with Mr. Donald, the
landlord, and the defendant. In the course of conversa-
tion the defendant asked about Mr. Armstrong, and how
he was getting on ? Witness answered that he was set-
tled at Liverpool, and doing well. The defendant seemed
to doubt it, and dropped the conversation for some time;
but something arising about an action, in which the plain-
tiff was employed, the defendant exclaimed " He is a pet-
tifogging attorney, and a blood-sucking designing scoun-
drel—he has robbed Edward Beaumont, of the Pine
Apple, of 71. or 8/." That was all that passed ; witness
communicated what he had heard to Armstrong, on his
return to Liverpool.
Cross-examined by Mr. Ficautxrr.
I don't believe that the defendant used the words in any other
sense, than merely applying them to the particular action or trans-
action arising out of it. I did not write the words down, but I
informed my family, and then told the plaintiff shortly after my
return. lam convinced the words were only applied to the action
of Beaumont's. I saw the words written down shortly after I
told the plaintiff, indeed, I wrote them down, and he copied them,
and by his direction I signed the copy.
Mr. SetaLrrr.—Why, just now you told me that you did not
write down the words.

Witness.—..l did write them down certainly.
Witness.-.. 1 do not live with the plaintiff---I am certainly inti-
mate with him... 4 came with him—we had a pleasant journey.
The plaintiff amused himself with a man who was carrying a let-
ter, by throwing his hat over a hedge—we were in very good
spirits, I assure you.—(A laugh.)
Mr. SCARLITT addressed the Jury for the defendant, and ob-
served this ruse an instance of what could be produced by a mit-
chievow, man, carrying we, to and fro. There was a point for
their consideration, which almost proved that the plaintiff was a
iis own
attorney
bloodsucker (and he hoped that he would not bring an action
hisiii bt h one),,
and he well knew that he could namely, that the plaintiff was
r ili
cianl
ntlliishnaen o action,
lose nothing, hut, if he succeeded, could suck out of the defendant's
pocket bill MU costs.
Mr. Baron Huttacx, in summing up, observed, that taking
the words into consideration, he was of °Pinion, that the only
part of them which was actionable, were the words, 41 petty-
fogging attorney." The plaintiff was entitled to a verdict, and
he believed the smallest damaged would meet the justice of the
COL

—The Jury consulted fora few minute*, and returned a verdict
for the plaintiff... Damages One Shilling.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY—(Tmis DAY.)
HABEAS CORPUS.
IN THE MATTER. OF JAMES BOWES SMITHSON.

Mr. Hart was under the necessity of making applica-
tion, though he felt bound to confess he did not know
what it meant. The petition was the petition of a per-
son of the name of James Bowes Smithson, and prayed
that the Court would order a writ of Habeas Corpus
to issue, directed to the Wardell of the Fleet, to bring
up the body of the prisoner, from day to day, before
this Honourable Court, or the prisoner's Counsel, that he
might be enabled to produce those documents, books, &c.,
and give all necessary instructions respecting the pro-
ceedings in his cause. This was what Mr. Hart was
instructed to state. It was the case of a prisoner, and,
therefore, it was his duty to submit it to the Court ; but
he really did not know for what useful purpose the habeas
was applied for.
His Lordship observed, if there was any fault in this
Gentleman's committal, he would have a right to a Habeas
Corpus, to bring him up to be discharged; hut the Court
had no power whatever to grant an Habeas Corpus to the
Warden of the Fleet to bring the prisoner up from day to
day.
Mr. Hart said, the person who had left the papers he
held in his hand at his chambers, was a person in the cha-
racter of a messenger at the prison. Mr. Hunter had had
no notice of this application, but Mr. Hart would endea-
vour to communicate to him the Court's desire to see him.

Ilis Lordship said, if this person were in prison for con-
tempt, it might be of some use, if any thing could be of
use in these times, to state, that the prisoner's being con-
fined for contempt, was neither an act of the Court's, nor
at its desire ; it was an act of one party, to compel another
party to do the justice the law of the land required. There
had been a great deal said by the Public about the hard-
ship of imprisonment for costs; now he himself had
taken care to have got inserted into every Insol-
vent Act a provision, entitling persons to the bene-
fit of those Acts, who were confined for non-pay-
ment of costs, just as if, for any other debt, not-
withstanding there were publications sent forth to the
world every day stating, that persons confined for costs
could not be discharged under the Insolvent Debtors'
Act ! His Lordship, from his own personal knowledge,
could declare, that there were persons in prison who would
not come out; and he would only further add, that when-
ever persons were committed, to the very utmost extent
to which this Court could interpose on their behalf, every
branch of it was most anxious to do so.

COMMITMENT.
DVAADIN V. BAMFORD.

Mr. HEALD moved before the Court rose yesterday, for an or-
der to commit the defendant for a breach of an injunction granted
on the Bth of November, 1820.

Mr. Srxwcit appeared to-day, on behalf of the defendant, to
oppose the application. The plaintiff was the owner of the lord-
ship of lands in the Manor of Rochdale, which were the lands in
question, some of which were freehol.d, and smite of them
copyhold. Mr. Bamford had a .grant from his father,
of mines under freehold lands, situate within the township ; and
he had sworn, that at the time he began to work the coal lying
under the Hayes, in a close called the Pasture, an injunction
was granted to restrain him from working the coals under the
copyhold. An order was also made subsequently by the Court
below, to commit him for a breach of the injunction. The
order of conunital was never signed by his Lordship. An issue
was directed to try whether the defendant had encroached on the
mines under the copyhold, and the result.was, that the plaintiff
was satisfied with a payment of 50W. for the coals that had been
wrongfully worked out. The injunction was continued, and the
present application was founded on a statement that coals had
subsequently been continued to be worked out and taken away.
Mr. HIALD considered he had made out his case.

Mr. Srzweit thought, so far from the breach of the injunction
having been demonstrated, the motion was, if not altogether,
almost ridiculous.

Ilis Loansittr asked, when Mr. Spence sat down, if there was
any body to reply?

It wt;s stated that Mr. Heald, who opened the motion, was not
tin Court.

His LORDSHIP, without uttering another word, said,'" dismiss
the motion with costs," which was accordingly done.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT—.(THIS DAT.)
Edwin Brown was brought up on his petition, and it
having appeared that he had made over his property on
two persons, the Commissioners required them to be exa-
mined.

. Mr. Webber stated, that the insolvent had made over
to him some property, on the I7th of May last, by war-
rant of attorney.
The Chief Commissioner said, that this was only two
days before the arrest of the insolvent ; and the Act de-
clared, that any assignment of property made by an in-
solvent to a creditor, within three months previous to his
committal to prison, shall be deemed fraudulent and void.
Mr. Stapleton (the other cxeditor to whom the insol-
vent had assigned some property) stated, that the insol-
vent was indebted to him in the sum of 1051., for which
he obtained a bill of sale, and took possession of his pro-
perty on the 10th of May last. The reason why he did
this was because he wanted his money, and threatened to
sue the insolvent for it.

The Chief Commissioner asked if there was any person
present who wished to be appointed assignee.
Mr. Doyle, a glass-manufacturer, said, that he would
willingly accept the appointment. lie had some time
before received a warrant of attorney on a part of the in-
solvent's property, but could not avail himself of it, as an
execution had been previously put in on the bill of sale,
The Chief Commissioner.—These securities were evi-
dently given in order to exclude your claim. I would
advise you to consult your attorney respecting it, as I
think that these assignments are illegal, and that the pro-
perty can be recovered for the benefit of the creditors in
general.
John Daniel Clark was brought up for judgment.
The Chief Commissioner said that it having appeared that while
the Insolvent was in prison, he wrote notes to his tailor, repre-
senting himself at large, and thereby had fraudulently succeeded in
getting some clothes on credit. As the amount of this debt was
not large, the sentence of the court would not be so heavy as it
otherwise should be. The judgment of the Court was, that the
Insolvent be imprisoned for a period not exceeding five calendar
months from the date of the petition.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOI.V-STREET..(Tans DAY.)

A tradesman was charged with an assault on a person describing
himself a solicitor, and residing in Norfolk-street. It appeared
that some time since the complainant borrowed a gun of the
other, and had sent it into the country, and on every application
for it replied, that is a short time it should be forthcoming. This,
however, not being the case, the owner went to the complainant'•
house and refused to leave without it ; a sort of row took place,
and the tradesman was brought to this office, but on Sir Richard
Birnie hearing the case, he dismissed it ; and to-day, the same
parties re-appeared, the owner of the gun complaining that he
could not recover it.
Sir R. Broom remonstrated with the solicitor on his conduct,
who replied, " I borrowed the gun, and shall return it when I
can, and you, Sir, have no power to restore it to him."
Sir R. Boom—This is throwing off the mask, indeed,"as I
now see your intentions, Sir, I shall advise this man how to act,
but not in your presence; therefore, I beg you will leave the
Office.
The Solicitor walked out, and Sir R. Timers advised the man
to bring an action.

MARLBOROUOH-STFtEHT.—(Tnis DAy.)
A queer fellow in a little blue coat, wits brought in for begging
in Regent-street. His appearance denoted him a vagabond " of
the first water," and he told the Magistrate that he was greatly
distressed, and could prove himselftth
ea
teas
ns
eo4fpaaib)li(ltietyf.illuTnog thisthe
statement he pledged his honour, and produced several certificates
rop
to
etraibelteer'sitanandtioonneosftattligthat
sub-constable. The Magistrate ordered
him to he searched, when a sovereign and a half sovereign were
found stitched in his inexpressibles. This contradiction of his
statement of poverty did not discompose him ; but on the Magi-
strata ordering him to be sent to prison for a month, and the
money found on hits to be paid for his maintenance, he fell on
his kneel,but was quickly removed by the ever active Marsden.