The Sun.
London, England, 1829-01-28 00:00:00

had-, in the affidavits which he had filed, given an
e?cplanation. of the circumstances. Mi. Eveley; it
!retire/I; bad Comi4 into tho neighbrMrhod: ea
auout tour years ago, and had devoted more
of his time to the killing of partridges, pheasants,
and hares, than to the performance of his spiritual
functions. He had acquired the title of the " Sport-
ing Parson," so persevering had he been in his
pursuit of game, When Mr; Cmnp!iell sa4.l; hitti In
th'e ratie-tied, he was not in the dress of a clergy-
man, but in a shooting jacket, and Mr. Campbell
did not at first recognize him, and that wap the
re4son why he had demanded 'tte his certitr:t4e.
Mr. Campbell denis...td that ae had raised his horse-
Or put himself...in an attitude to strike Mr.
Eveley, and he swore positively that he had no in-
tention of assaulting him, or provoking him to a
breach of the peace.
Lord TENTERDEN said, that as Mr. Campbell had
sworn that he did not intend to tomtti't a bread'
tbe peat; Conti thought that the justice of ths:
r,:lse would be satisfied if the rule was discharged,
Mr. Campbell paying the costs.—Rule discharged
accordingly,

br COMMON PLEAS, JAN. 27.
LIUNT V. BLAQUIERE.

This was an action brought by an upholsterer at
Brighton, against Lieutenant-General De Blaquiere,
to recover 489/. for furniture supplied to Lady
II ►rrict De Blaquiere, the defendant's wife. The
trial took place before the Lord Chief Justice in the
sittings after las-t Michaelmas term, when the Jury
found a verdict for the plaintiff,
Mr. Sergeant SPANkiti Dow moved fora rule to
show cause why the verdict should not be set aside
and a non-suit entered, on the ground that the wife
having been divorced from her husband, and decreed
a sufficient allowance by way of alimony, she was no
longer capable of Contracting debts on the credit of
ht's husband.

The COURT, after hearing the arguments of the
Learned Counsel in support of his motion, granted
a rule to show cause.

The Learned Ser►geant further applied, in the
event of the point of law being decided against him,
for a rule for a new trial, on the ground that a
servant-maid had falsely sworn on the trial that the
defendant had struck her mistress the day before
their separation, which he (the defendant) now most
solemnly denied upon his oath; and also that it had
been sworn, that only a small portion of Lady
Harriet's alimony had been paid, whereas the whole
of it had been paid up, except a sum of about 801.,
and for the non-payment of that sum he was ready
to account, to the satisfaction of the Court. This
part of the application, however, was refused.—
Rule nisi for a non-suit.

LANE V. WICKET AND OTHERS.

This wag an action brought by the secre►ary of the
Imperial Distillery Compaay, against the defendants
a members of that company, to recover the amount
of three quarters of a year's salary. The Jury hav-
ing found for the plaintiff,
Messrs. Sergeants TADDY and ADAMS now ap-
plied for a rule to show cause why the verdict should
not be set aside.—Granted.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION HOUSE.

Yesterday Mr. Harmer waited upon the LORD '
MAYOR, in consequence of a complaint which had ,
been made against an attorney, and an informer, who
have been
_put ring their heads together, with a view
to extort sums of money from time publicans in the
metropolis and its environs. The newspapers con
tained an account of the mode of proceeding adopted
by those worthies against the publicans, which was
by action in the Court of King's Bench, for enor-
mous penalties, by which processes they had already
succeeded in terrifying their victims into the pay-
ment of certain compromises. Some of the defend-
ants in these cases had applied to him fur advice, and
he had thought it the more prudent course to recom-
mend an arrangement than to run the hazard of
greater expellees in a Court of Law. The plan was
as follows :—The informer went about- from place to
place, and if he happened to hear a pianoforte in or
near any house of public entertainment, he marked
it down, hied off to the attorney, who wrote a polite
note, informing the defendant that he had incurred
heavy penalties by allowing music in his house, but
insinuating that it was possible to prevent destruc-
tion. He (Mr. Harmer) found the attorney capable
of listening to reason. In the cases submitted to his
(Mr. Harmer's) care, he generally succeeded in in-
ducing• the legal gentleman to take 4/. and costs,
amounting to between 6/. and 71., but he was aware
that much heavier sums had been required and paid.
This practice, he rejoiced to hear, the Lord Mayor
had strongly deprecated.
The LoeD MAYOR said that the collusion between
the attorney and the informer was most abominable,
and he trusted that the publicans would act upon
his advice, and compel those who had extorted their
money to disgorge every farthing. He was convinced
that Mr. Peel would pay immediate attention to
their complaint. his- Lordship wished to know
whether the two actors in these cases could not he
punished for conspiracy.
Mr. Harmer said that an indictment could be sus-
tained if it could be proved that the attorney had
compromised without the leave of the Court. The
indictment would he for compromising a penal enact-
ment. The pillory used to be one of the puni.ll-
- annexed to the offence, but now imprison-
ment and fine were substituted.
The LORD 'MAYOR said it was surely worth the
experiment to prosecute in one of the strongest
cases. His Lordship knew nobody so well qualified
as Mr. Harmer was to undertake a prosecution of the
kind.

Mr. Harmer was at present engaged in prose-
cuting an attorney and two informers fur having con-
spired to extort money from a pawnbroker. They
effected their object in this manner—the informers
went to the pawnbroker with a quantity of plate,
and asked for the loan of 301. upon it. The pawn-
broker stated that the Act prevented him from giv-
ing more than 101. upon a bundle of plate, where-
upon it was suggested that he should make the plate
into three bundles and lend 101. upon each lot. A
. .