The Sun.
London, England, 1827-10-20 00:00:00

:NINA-, OCTOBER 20, 1827

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

WITT OF KING'S BENCH, OCT. 19

FROMONT 27. REILLY. .`
•
This cause was called, on, and none of the Special
Jurymen appeared.
Lord TENTERDEN sent for the summoning Officer,
and citamined.him upon his oath as to the service of
the summons, when it appeared that several of, the
jurymen were out of town, four were dead,- five
could not he found, and some had removed out ,of
the city, so that there were only two who had been
personally served. The Lord. Chief Justice directed
these "two gentlemen to be fined 101. each. Upon
further inquiry, it appeared that the hooks from
which the list 'had • been taken were made out
So long ago as three years; at which his LOrdship
expressed his diSapprobation. His Lordship 'then
took common jury causes.
HLACKLOW, ONE, &C,AGAINSTFAREBROTHER AND OTHRRS.

This was an action for false imprisonment, brought
against the late Sheriff of Middlesex, . and against
Messrs. Shapcott and Joseph, two sheriff's officers,
for arresting the plaintiff, whom they erroneously
supposed to be a Mr. Benjamin Pearson, against
whom the officers had a writ.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the action was
for a very gross outrage, committed under the most
unjustifiable circumstances. His client was a re-
spectable attorney, ' whose object in bringing the
action was not damages, but to punish the two offi-
cers for their misconduct. The plaintiff had been
arrested through mistake, and, had he been treated
with that decency which every man -was entitled to,
he would never have thought of instituting proceed-
ings, but he wished to make an example of the
officers for their unnecessary grossness. On the 7th
of last April the plaintiff had occasion to go to
Highgate, and when returning home in the evening,
he was assailed, near the Archway, by the two de-
fendants, Shapcott and Joseph, who, it appeared,
had a writ against a Mr. Benjamin Pearson. Shap-
cott, after asking him a few questions, told him he
had a writ against him, and laid hold of him. The
plaintiff said he was mistaken ; .but they insisted
that they were not, and dragged him along in the
most violent manner to the Highgate Archway
Tavern : and when he expressed a wish to see the
landlord, and desired for that purpose to go into the
bar, they would not let him do so, and refused to
hear any explanation, but, forced him into a room
up stairs. Shortly afterwards, the landlord was sent
for, and on entering the room he saw the plaintiff
showing his pocket-book to the officers, and endea-
vouring to convince them who he was. Indeed he
warned them repeatedly, but they for a ,Jong time
refused to receive his explanation. They at last,
hoWever, did receive his card, and beginning to sus-
pect that they were wrong,, they told-him that he
was at liberty, after which they made apologies as
abject as their conduct had been outrageous :• these
apologies, the plaintiff felt it his duty to reject.
Evidence having been given of the assault::

• Mr. BROUGHAM, fOr the defendants, contended
that the plaintiff was arrested throngh his own fault ;
he chose to be arrested•by personating another man;
he went about decoying the sheriff's officers to ar-.
rest him,in order that he might teach them a lesson
of good manners. There was .a writ at the suit of
Mr. Catherwood against a Mr. Benjamin- Pearson,
which had been a lono. time in the hands of the de-
fendants, ivhO(had :with neat difficulty traded Pear-
son to the Highgate Archway, where they under-.
ptood he was to get. into one of the Manchester
/caches. As'they did not personally, cnost).lPearson,
they naturally thought, that if they saw a man looking
out for, a coach, that-man Would probably .be the
person, and seeing the plaintiff making a long crane.
neck, as if looking for the coach, they accosted. him
as Mr. BenjarnitiPearson. ' Had he then told them
li he was Mr. Blacllow an attorney, the -would as
soon have touched a snake as have laid .r,._, . s .upon
him ; but the jury would hear that he was over and
over again accosted by the.name of Pearson, and
that 'he suffered himself to be so addressed, without
taking any pains to undeceive the officers until he
got a copy of the warrant, when he told them his
name, and abused them, and threatened, them with
proceedings. A man who answers to the name
of the person 'in search of whoin Sheriff's officers
are going,must thank himself for the inconvenience
he is put to.

William Pearson—Witness kneW Mr. Cather-
wood, and.that he had issued a writ against -Benja-
min Pearson, and being of the same name, it was
suggested to witness that he might trace him. Wit-
ness went with the two defendants to The Archway.
Whilst sitting there, they saw the plaintiff coming
as. if from the house of Mr.-Neville, a relation of
Benjamin Pearson. The defendants went out, and
'itness followed. Joseph accosted him, and said,
" Mr.Benjamin.Pearson, of Utrecht." The plain-
tiff looked confused, and coloured, but said, U What's
your pleasure ?" Mr. John Cather Wood then came
up, took off his hat, and said, " Mr. Benjamin Pear-
son." The plaintiff said, " What is your pleasure,
what do you want ?" Joseph then said, •" I have
a writ against you, at the suit of Mr.. Catherwood."
The plaintiff answered, " -You can't take me ; you
shan't take me." The officers said they would, and
went one on each Side of him, and took him to the
public-house, he continually saying, " You can't
take me," but never telling his name. The plaintiff
wished to go into' the bar, but Shapcett said, " No :
a private room." When we. got in; the warrant
was shown, and the plaintiff copied ii Witness
went to Mr. Neville's house? to- get the plaintiff's
luggage, thinking he was certainly Benjamin Pear.;
son ; but when he got there he SAW the real Mr.
Benjamin Pearson, who made his escape. Witness
returned, and the plaintiff was liberated.
Cross-examined—After the plaintiff gave his name,
he behaved in the. most outrageous manner ; he said
" knock any of you down, me.if Ido not,"
and swore very much at them all.
Verdict for the two defendants, the late ,Sheriffs,
Not Guilty; and for the two other defendants, the
officers, Guilty; with 101. damages.

- THE TREAD MILL.--At Lewes, each 'pri-
soner walks at the rate of 0,600 feet in ascent per day; at
Ipswich, 7,450 ; at St. Alban's, 8,000 ; at Bury, 8,950 ;
at Cambridge, 10,175 ; at Durham, 12,000 ; at Brixton,
Guildford, and Reading, the summer rate exceeds 13,000 ;
while at,Warwick, the summer rate will be '17,000 feet' in
ten hours. • ,
THE' COFFEE TREE.—As it is not every one
that has seen this singularly useful tree, a short deicription
of it may be worth giving. It sometimes attains the
height of twelve feet, - with a trunk of fifteen inches in cir-
cumference,
and very much resembles , an apple tree of
eight or ten years standing. The branches, which stretch
all around like an umbrella, are extremely pliable i the bark
is of a whitish colour, and rather rough ; • and the leaves,
in shape not unlike, those of the citron-tree, are of a
berry
the leaven.
reda smallasit ripens, green
of
appears
inglossy dark green. The blossoms, white as the jessamin
flower, and of a delicate fragrance, shoot out at the stem
Whenits theplace,w
biblossomeii,
growingdrop s,
like a cherry, contrasts beautifully with the green fruit.
and numerous fresh blossoms, which appear upon the tree
all at the same time. In the window of a
coffee-ware-
house in Old Bond-street, the reader may see
of this tree ;,- but it is small, has no blossoms, andspecimen the few
s e.
'berries,which hang upon the branch are withered and.
brown.-London Weekly Review.

CHEAP LIVING.--.The wages of some of the
native servants in India are not more than two rupees a
month. Though they provide their own food and cloth:.
ing, they frequently confine :their whole expenditure to
one-half of this trifling allowance, which is at the rate of
about 30s. per annum ! What would 'Jahn Bull say to
such an extravagant mode of living