Star.
London, England, 1808-07-07 00:00:00

Loa IV INTELLIGENCE.

• SUMMEIL :ASSIZSS:
/KWH colour.
Lord Et.s.ansoaoooti siukObicf,Bacall MACDONALD
it A—Mon , at' Hertford. •
Essex—'Wednesday, Aug. 3, at.Cheinisibsd. •
ISitT—Monday, Aug. 8$ at Maidstone..
SiissXx —Saturday, 'Aug. 11, at Levies. •
Scalise—Th.oMay, Aug. in, atGuiJdford.
wonsox.a. ctrttlgtc,„, • •
Sir lAMIS MAN MELD and Mr. Justice
lieiestitisitsstintat—Mtituhi, Aug. 1, aillaehiagfilini.
Bsato}tuetas--Thuraday,.*kg.saaalaatoot.'
HONTINGDONSHIIIt—SaturdayA Awg.6i atestifziti
essis*Yeassaik e-.-MoridayeAavli, at • •• •
• 52fLe/ia-....--earsdaYs -Aug- 314:11RWree_•111410woaso
oioarota—awooday, Aug... 15, at tha =y of Norwich.
O'er diNtikwiest-•--Stfatie day, at tbiGundhall, said city.
.:: • .
_ COURT OF kING's BENCIi, JULY 6.
swat CLEApING.
Bite-rm. v. Mansnox.-o-This was an action upon
a Bill of Fizhange, and to 'which the Defendant had
pleaded, two Sham Pleas : first, a lodgment reco-
vered,in the Court eif,,Exchequer in Scot Lind ; next,
a judgment
recovered in the Court of Vied Pondre, in
the falr of Si. BarthOtinieiv, at the last fair held there.
Mr. PARK had obtained a rule calling on the De-
fendant to chew cause why judgment should not be
signed against him, notwithstanding the above pleas;
on the gronad that the :last" of them was. a niqcitery4l
and anlinuilt to the Coln the Court of Pied Ponds*
being now no longer in existenee, and only' quoted
as Matter of ridicule. The Defendant had been seri.
ed with& Role to abide bylsiiplea. or plead instanter.
Tho Arroallor-Goonitaz. now chewed cause
against the rule, aayiag--4, I am very sorry that this
case is brought beitireffie Court, because this is not a
subject on Wakhvie ought to exercise our ingenuity; at
therame tittle one is too apt to cast blame upon the
Attorney in such a case as this. I think, considering
all things, it would be very hard. • I very much disc
approve of the practice o
,puging on the Court die
troublesome consideratitm of different sort of pleasi
whikli•hive iiithem no merit Whatever. I know very
welt; iseitover,- that withmit_sbeise aid of this descrip-
tion, under certain circumstances, great hardghip
maa.fall-swa Defeadans,..which he may in some de-,
gree by means.ela Sham:Pleis But the pre-
sent does riot appear al4senfirhidli the Court;
is calliki upon to decide a ditficitlt law, as in
sornelostances is the east bylneshisof-ia Sham Plea:
Buts -boiveter ludicrous this sea 0 Judgment
vend in the Court.of lied-Potadre may.appear, yet
I do„not..soeliow to distingdishlt its principle from
that OT..apteit judgMent the'eClurt of Common
Pleag`.o4+hen--thie Vele falsil and therefore the
question keteseaily is, whetherthe Court shall hence-
iiitTridAdafernaa affidavit :IfOrifE a dilatory plea,
ask. 4s ig the.cale of ',plea in abatement ? If not,
I submit that lONIA wfft'unt interfere in this cue.
I shall Spialereallesiith 44feet tO the future conduct
botli d the „it Attorniess- I think that if
your liOrdshiPribSuld'suffer this rule to be enlarged,
I donot mean. by to take advantage by the time
that wonkl. 51ssmoky, be gi_ven, (of no time can be
gaioed by this • Plea in is case. do not like to
argue on such a Subject AIMS; but whatevep pleas
hae been pleaded hi thilfteasi; Vierohas been a ma-
Wen for the Defendant to-abide:by-his plea, or plead
another by witialtAtit-loill *ilk, and he has abided
by. it ; so that K0.q.10443ip Vie, that although, this
patty sisch gett as can be callecl seriods, yet the
patty is not placed hi-it :in a' situation diferent from
that in which irealtl• have been it he had pleaded
a judgment recovered in the Court of Common Pleas,
at in arty ogler well-known Court or place.
.)dr. Justice BAILEY—" Is opt this an action upon
aTM of E.Yce • " "
• s_?.'AtiaittW-Chtbeastat,-0 Yes." •
e. luttibar;Barcat,-is. Then the Plaintiff might
have had judgment of this Teem if this plea bad not
heel,' pleaded, hy-referriim it to the Master to tom-
pute principal andinterest upMi 'the Bill of Exchange."
Mr. Justice Gram--"' is arrises from our prac-
tieetiot being like dials( the Ctiotmodlieas." •
• Mr. kitOßNETZlplaut,-44 The Rule would not
apply to this caserltetause this is a single plea."
Can' Jusricr," I cannot help, thinking that there
is a great difference between the Court's not inquir-
ing very nicelY'intei the truth of a plea of judgment
reiovered; iibr *weld it perhapi betoo severe on the
patty who availed himself of that mode of pleading
to gain time. The Court would not inquire minutely
intd ihe facts ; but when a suitor ot the Court so bur,
Pudendy puts on the face of his plea, totally without
foundation, a falsehood, which ought, instead of
being called “ a plea in this behalf," it should be,
04 if we encourage this practice, I suppose will
be htyled, a Sham Pim- in his behalf, which would
be disgraceful to the Court, that should be resented
by the Court. But the party who shews a respect for
the Court, and conduCts himself with decorum, will
not he regarded in the same measure. I know, in
point of: Eta, that these pleas of judgment recovered
are *tad,. wash* Court has been sometimes put
tfititoth inconvenience in deciding minute points thus
food& befdrt it by special pleas ; and the Court is.
not fraremely nice in marking what is done amiss.—
But the Coast Ana not be made the vehicle of inde-
cent-jab s • amidst -Gault has frequently been put to
Math•-nistible-oif account of; the *Sham Pleas, as to
the ;twiner Of dispotiog of them, for they now and
their inttodtste'the,llet itest nicety in pleading."
'The Arronstomitt. i
..—" No such nconveni-
eine. ugh 'alike how for rfo boy who has been in an
offict for 'half a- l' would have any difficulty in
krioktioglioiv to reply to this plea."
CatortijoOrtcd.---d, But these Sham Pleas are mul-
tiplied, upon as f and I do net see why we should in-
dulge questitnii of direly Which-Mint occupy a
Landon
of that time of which we have not too much.
idr. Itistice La Bwitto,..--o Too much ingenuity
oust not-be indulged.in the framing of a plea."
MT, ATFORNEV.GENETIAL...--" The applieotion
whicho is made -on thelpelefthe Plaintiff is, that he
.it be at fiberty toagesiedgenent as for want of a
*at ..
-- Li • -
Jterrxe.og Yes ; Ishink that the only way
ETntri(a -Wag the party to a sense of the difference between
she pment and a decent mode of pleading, is to
itakke this O pass- far nothing."
MA Justiotti4z•lltaooso—'4 14 is high time to coo-
tea this ,practice: ". Ir,
Mr. Justice Cohma.--" All this is intended to ren-
der it tliffienli totePif-T
Cut& .lierrias-;/4 Those things give a great deal

rT