The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-25 00:00:00

,PV!Vtre'r..P.`n
s•-•
SUMMEir.itSSIZES.
OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Woreegier,fuly 23.
etrft-Starl.--(Berory 116., Serape ntATcrignixr.)
(Attire siting:of-1W thle-'indriltig, the triel,
forpe_wgyi-ponmenced.
pain, end gr. 4reayes *ere rtainecl on the
counsel. ttre deterrht was -unrepresented by

As Mr, GE,EAyEs.roselo 0141the.proceeslingg, he was -Ink
teirtfiltrilgiLthe 'defendant iVlip Claimed his -right to have the'
;indictment read albudio.iliejurly.s., • := -•-• • -
The Learned JUDGE left the Court fuLtliepurnOse -df con-
sulting the Lord Chief Justice oaths subject, and,
,on his re-
) Wen.; obSeried4-Aq iny Lefinied Brother, whe
kriforll44Pit That henevek in. his+ lif* heard kif such a proceed'-a
ing, but if the defendantthinks that any good is to be got by
it, let it be read?' , -
N4*ton::-Theri, ujt. LOH; -I say, let It be read. ,
Tlie ~Learned 4tuia.E-k1 have alrea4ilikl so, Sir:
heofficor of the Court then monunenced:reatling the: docn.
Mentin-qhestion; 'which 'was Said- to be nearly ten =feet in
Jiength; the perusal occupied fifty -"
cV AlfiP9.9s(Pr, ease for :tlie'prosecution, said
toa.t a most painful duty devolved upon him,.entaiting as it
-equally-painful-en the jury. arid. on file -teamed
o.4dgeibe?Pre whom:he-had the .honour-to- appear; and pre-
,rnisieg : his observitions ,with ,B9MG,,furthOr :rot:darks, the
'learned 'counsel stated,that the-, facts of the case were few and
agi ;weak', appear froth the Subjoined statement,
-The .4efouclaza, AliguStusiNewton;•ilehcc resided at, lit; Paul's
COttage, Chelterthain,happened. spate time since tobe sited by
amine 'merchant: of 'the name of Healey, for the sum of
,12/.)145. ; tb thisaction- he-madeno defence',' and jiidgment,
t3ras taken for the full amount by his Own: consent, on_ the 2d.
-of May, 1843. On the. 28th of June, the, defendant being at
-the time -at the iGlonceSter sessions, Was -arrests 1" hy the.'
aheriffisofficer for the above: dehti.wherenpon ilie:Cluitried his .
privilege of freedom from, liability ~.to ,arrest, which was at :
length conceded by the -Learned Serleant Ludlow, who pie-
, _sided. Laded. on condition. that the' defendant *mild net take the
,benefit,Osuch dischargei. order, however, topreventany,
.misunderstanding, it was suggested that the terms -of the
undertaking Should be put -into Writine;' whereupon the fol-
',leWirrg document was diawn.up - *- •
.. . • " IMALEY V. NEWTON. . . '
" I hereby undertake not to bring an/ Aqion in respect
of :any. arrest-in the said. action made this trioniing against
any perso.n, or pelsouss.; ;and ;hereby undertake that the
Plaintiff in the said action shall be. at _liberty to execute, or
cause to 'be executed; the said- writ, in the' same imunter as
,if no such_ arrest bad taken place ;Land' that the 'case shall,
in all respects, lie„ponsidered as if in: point of fact no such
'arrest had taken place as aforesaid:
-" 28th June, 1843. "AgGITSTIIS NEWTON."
affidavit was afterwards made, ..as,was alleged, on tile-
part of the prosecution, for the purpose of ,doing away with
this undertaking,. the law not permitting two arrests for the
same debt, unlestrthe' party arrested have consented to take:
it out of the general rule ; it became, therefore, in some de-:
gred necessary that the defendantahould give some such docu-
ment as the bile.above `set out being discharged; he duly
-attended the sessions,iand afterwards retired to-his cottage at
St. Paul's, Cheltenham, . Acting, pn the undertaking which
had been already given,'the officer proceeded to make a second
..arrest. , The cottage .was • surrounded -by its own grounds,
having in front a. lawn. The sheriff'si officer rang' the bell
'at' the front, door; inquired for the defendant, and was
answered in the, negative; the door being slanimed in his
face. Thereupon, the officer climbed over the wall at the
back; and being aware that a large dogwas kept upon the
premises, took with him 'a loaded pistol, as a necessary pre-
caution_ against the animal ; - nor did this-appear to be a
needless step ; for no, sooner did the servant girl observe him
Making an. entrance in 'the way described than she loosed
the dog in question; which Was only taken alray under a
threat of shooting . hint Ina short -time- considerable ex-
citement preVailed in:the neighbourhood, and a large body
of the populace colleeted'armind the hank. The officers -then
made their way to - the rear, when' Mrs. NeWton inqUired of
them. their business. ; The warrant. Wad shown to and' was
read by her through a window, consequently it could not be
supposed but that the defendant was well aware of the errand
on which the officers hadicome.. The. house was stated to
have, been as well-pretected as the liberal use of bars, bolts,
barritedes, &c.; Would admit ; and from half-past eleven till
one o'cloek the -offieers 'remained hovering around it, the
crowd in the immediate neighbourhood gradually increas-
big, in the interim. 'The, officers, consequently, concealed
'themselves near the back door, under the shade of some pop-
lar-trees then in leaf; watchingiattentively the only mode of
egress in the rear. -Their patience was finally rewarded, by
seeing it at length gently opened. They waited no longer ;
but rushing- forward, pushed it fully open against the wall
'behind. On forcing the door thus, they met Mrs. Newtonin
thepassage,. saw one of the defendant's sons near her, and
Newton himself, whom they instantly arrested, at the foot
of the staint The defendant -did not- hesitate to charge the
officer with breaking into. his house, reiterating repeatedly-
his complaint, which was over and again denied, though the
'charge would Seem,at length, 'te 'have been admitted. The
defepdant, upon his arrest, was -taken to,Gloncester. On the
Bth of July he made an affidavit for the purpose of procuring
a writ 'of habeas 6otpas, which he obtained: On the 14th of
July he was brOnght from Gloucester gaol before Mr. JuStice
Malik., and thereupon alleged two reasons for his immediate
diseharge : the first Of these:was, that the plaintiff having con-
- vented to his liberation upon a previous occasion, was stopped
, ftom again' taking_hint for the same debt, the second arrest
being illegal; the second allegation was, that he ought to be
discharged from prison, because he had been' arrested by
'means:of a forcible entry into his honse. It was upon these.
twe•grounds that the defendant was charged with perjury;
no mention was made of the undertaking. already adverted
to. • When before Mr. Justice Mettle, the defendant asserting
that two arrests, had been made for the same debt, was about
to be released from custody, when the_ undertaking was pro-
duced, and the Learned Judge, considering that the second
arrest was not illegal, ordered him back to custody, on which
occasion he was transferred to-the Queen's Bench-Prison. It
may be as well to mention here, that an action of trespass was
brought by- the defendantegainst four of the individuals who
were to be witnesses against him to-day, 'for:the forcible en-
try into his house detailed above, a verdict passing against
them for the. sum of -50/.1 they, howeVer,- being all made
parties to the record in that instance, were of course incapa-
cited from aiding each other by their-evidence.
The above • is a condensed,' statement- of the whole of the
facts connected with this . somewhat extraordinary case, as
they 'were' detailed in the opening speech of counsel ; the
Proceedings, as will be seen shortly,. were brought suddenly
to a close, in consequence of a deficiency iu the evidence ; it
is, therefore, out of our power to draw an intelligible account
from the imperfect testimony adduced on the trial.
William George Stratford, clerk in the rule department of
the Court of Exchequer, produced. the affidavit of. the de-
fendant made on the Bth of July, and also two writs.
Charles Thomas Lewis, officer-of the Queen's Prison, pro-
duced a writ of habeas corpus, from the office of the Queen's
Bench Prison.

Robert • George Whatley, attorney ,at Cheltenham, and
Commissioner for taking. affidavits,- proved the swearing of
the 'affidavit in question, his own signature and . that of the
defendant; and added that he attended for the 'purpose of
taking the.affidavit at the .defendant's request.
James • Boodle, solicitor at Cheltenham, was attorney in
the cause of Healey r'. Newton. Was present at Gloucester
in Court when the defendant was discharged, by an order of
Mr. Sergeant Ludlow, on the *2Bth of June, 1843. It is not
true that Augustus Newton was discharged out of custody
by any order; direction, -or consent of mine, but I told the
sheriff's officer that I would not bring any action against the
sheriff if he would let the defendant Than was after lie
had. signed an undertaking in my presence. He was there-
upon discharged., I stated what have already mentioned,
in an,under tone, to the officer. The defendant claimed his
privilege as a barrister attending sessions, and.tho Learned
Sergeant Ludlow (the Recarder of Gloucester) said he would
make na order, bat that the: privilege should, be allowed.
Mr. Sergeant Arcugnutv-rpo you think, Mr. Godsoii,
that that amounts to perjury? , . •
Mr. GOosoX—l submit that it doei, My Lord. -
Boodle's examination continued—Mr. Justice Maule stated
that a discharge for, privilege would have been right, arid
would not have prevented a second arrest. The application
for defendant's discharge on the ground of a second' arrest
has failed. -This. undertaking answers that ground.
Cross-exaMined by the defendant—James Bennett arrested
the' defendant in the Shire Hall, at Gloucester, and took him
before the Court. Sergeant Ludlow said that .the defendant
should be protected during the sessions, on each party under-
taking to bring' no action. After the undertaking was signed,
Boodle told me no action should be brought against the she-
rift'. I let him go at liberty in consequence of that. I should
not have done so otherwise. • .
Mr:Sergeant-ATcnertr.kr,---The queftiOn is, whether per-
jury canhe assigned •or not on these facts. Chief Justice
Tindal agrees with. me that as the offieer, would not have dis-
charged the defendant but for what passed between Boodle
and the officer, though there is a suppression of truth in the
affidavit, yet an indictment for perjury cannot be maintained.
G. Wilson, constable and prosecutor, gave evidence rela-
tive tO the mode of making the arrest; •
.The cross-examination of.the witness by the defendant was
continued at great length, relative to irrelevant matters, when
it was interrupted by
Mr. Sergeant Axer-rEaLigv,- who inquire& " What on earth
ha.g,this to do with the subject-bolt:ire us ?"
Defendant—lt goes against the credit of this witness.
Mr. Sergeant Arairmu.nv-'--Do• you wish to discredit a
witness favourable to yourself ? • • -
The, soreraau 9f.the Jury--7We are: atreid, my .Lord, that
the defendant will do hii case an injury.
Defendant to the' witness-=Did yon ask Mrs. Newton if I
were at. home.? . Witness...-Yesi she said ihatLyou were not,
but that she• had pistols, And would shoot me. • •
Re,examlnedl 'am 'the prosecutor in this ease: I said to
the defendant, " I :clid riot break open the dem', and you
know it." The door was opened from the inside purposely.
After some further conversation, the Learned JUDGE, ad-
dressing the jury, told them thathe thought the evidence in-
. sufficient to support theindictment, at.the same time he con-
sidered the case one very proper to be inquired into.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict ofNot Guilty
NORFOLK Jiilq 23.
TheComrnisslon fbr' the county of Suffalk Was opened' his
;afternoon, and it is said thakthe Courtswill be opened for the
dispatch of business at .an early hour. to,:inerrow.. The ea-
lender if a very heavy ana indeed. It contains the names of
fifty; prisoners, the majority of vilicen- are charged with the
frightful crime of arson....This.:documeht is now before us,
and in order to give some insight into the State of this county,
we think wei'cannet de better thari shovt"the names and ages
of the respectiveparties r
.CASES 4ND ?IpcoNEEs,
rteniy'Sergeitat,lailiodr2l; read and write ireperibco.
'Eliza (his wife); aged 22', read'and write.well..
4alXloll:l4licliand, aged 53; read and write imperfectly: _
Robert Roper, aged 15, neither, . ~,);.
• James Snuth; ageil la, neither: " '
Jirinesiriend, aged 27, read and write', imperfeetly.
. Wm. Cattermole, aged 18, read and writeilsnOrfeCtlY.
Tiorley,' aged 18, read and write imperfectly. This
prisoner was acquitted on a similar 'Charge last circlet..
John, Williams;aged 29:,.read and write imperfectly.
„ J.. Durrant, aged 17; read and writeiipperfectly.
DavidJackson,aged 14;"read,Aird*Tite imperfectly.
John WoOds; agedifilifieithet. • •• •
Samuel Jawb,:aged 28, neither.. . •
Aifu INiannitig, aged 32 read and write
James Thurlow, aged W.
Ed-Botwright&aged 22, read and writtimperfectly.
John Spilling; aged neither.,
David Clow Cad 40, neither.
All-thoie noes tab frarn the western 4lvision of the County,
Those; yhioh,(l4llv. Fe:famished
tiY the -eastern : , •
"Itabert Grim*kle, aged 38, read and writ© well.
(TWO threkiehifelklfterg.)-- •
William fraies,'agod'2o, neither,
JasclikX3arnott, aged 21,'
• - 04-iref aged 11, neither:'
LA:Nisiiiißandrill, agediikieltd.ff- •11:Loq
,Iwrep aged 214.u,either:_ !:: (7:: ',:f,•
arymend aged 45, read and.write
gged 33; neither,'
: C Davy, Aged 13,
Robert 440 • . •
0.0 IWickki4e ,e 0 14ed
.14trid aged;aLankaster;-read: "
Tbis is, indeedi.a tierefolied state it-not, how,
eYe4o4§jr.te7esil the
,vl,ll4han tti devi..s9*e remedy. ?, •
•
• DispatclnS weave 'soht 'off' frbm :pan
t.tc .ofirer cirs cfeibrilOr'tugl
y.ri4 CJ

7 ba

iV3