The Sun.
London, England, 1827-09-05 00:00:00

SUMMER ASSIZES.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.-GLOUCESTER, SEPT. 3.

BALL V. JONES, CLERK'.

This was an action to recover compensation in
damages for false imprisonment. The defendant is
a Clergyman, and a Magistrate for this county, and
pleaded—first, that he was not guilty ; and second-
ly, that he had tendered a sum of 101. which sum
was a full and adequate compensation for any damage
which might have been sustained.
-Mr..CAMPBELL stated the. ease, which was one,,
he said; that, ,looking to the station of the defend-
ant, he was sorry to be compelled. to lay before.
them. 'The plaintiff was a boy of the tender age of
14, years, and was in the service of a farmer, named
Bennett, by.whom, in company with another lad,
about four *years older 1:lin linnself, he was sent to
drive the rooks from off a newly-made wheat rick.
After performing this duty they wandered to about
Ibilf a mile distance, and happening to stumble upon
a hare which had been caught in a wire (laid by some
other persons), they took it, but had hardly so done
before they were pounced upon by two of the Duke
of Beaufort's gamekeepers, and taken to a public-
house, and there detained for the night, and the
next morning conveyed to the Reverend Mr.
Jones's house, at Wickuar. A charge of poach-
ing was then preferred against them both, and
without their being confronted with their ac-
cusers, or being allowed to hear the informations
made against them, they were convicted by this
Reverend defendant, and sentenced to undergo each
six months' imprisonment, in default of paying a
fine of 10/. each. After they had been in Horsley
gaol about a fortnight, their friends interfered in their
behalf, and a professional gentleman was employed,
who discovered that the commitment was informal,
and consequently illegal. A Habeas Corpus was
consequently moved for, and the boys having, after
suffering six weeks' imprisonment, been brought be-
fore Lord Chief Justice Abbott, were discharged,
on the ground that the offence, being a joint one,
the commitment ought only to have been for three
instead of six months. The imprisonment having
been thus declared illegal, by no less authority than
the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, an ac-
tion was commenced by his client for false imprison-
ment, and in stay of that action a tender of 101. had
been made; but, as he should be able to prove that
independently of the injury which the plaintiff had
sustained in his character and in his person by this

mprisonment, Itt had further incurred an expence,
n obtaining the Habeas,, of upwards of 20►1., he
trusted the Jury would, by their verdict, declare him
to be entitled to a far larger sum.

Mr. Winday, Governor of the Horsley Gaol, pro-
duced the warrant of commitment under which he
had received the plaintiff on the 11th of December,
and detained him till the 21st of January, when he
was moved by Habeas Corpus, and discharged by
the Lord Chief !ustice. The plaintiff was kept on
bread and water during the first month, and after-
wards was allowed oatmeal porridge for breakfast,
and a pound of potatoes for dinner. He was con-
fined in his cell from sun-set to sun-rise; the cells
are all solitary.

Cross-examined—The diet and confinement was '
not in consequence of any directions given by the
defendant ; he knows the Rev. Mr. Jones, and can
undertake to say that he is nearly 80 years old.
David Goodman was next called, for the purpose
of proving who the wires were set by, and that it
was not probable thelaintiff or the other boy had
any concern therein.'
Mr. Chivers—ls attorney in this action, and was
also the attorney by whom the Habeas Corpus was
sued out. The expences altogether, including his
charges, amounted to 441., of which one half was
charged by him against the plaintiff.
Cross-examined—He was himself once convicted
by the present defendant, and paid the penalty ; he
afterwards brought two actions, one he allowed to
drop, and on the other he recovered one shilling
damages; for the transaction with respect to these
boys, he has brought four actions, two against the
Rev. Mr. Jones, and two against the gamekeepers.
Mr. LOFTUS and Mr. BUXTON, both professional
Gentlemen, gave it as their opinion, that the charges
contained inNi:. Chi vers' bill were fair and reasonable.,
Mr. TAUNTON replied.
After consulting for about two minutes, the Jury
found for the plaintiff—Damages Twenty-eight
Pounds, being 181. for the expences of the Habeas,
and 10/. for the false imprisonment.
James Galavin stood indicted for the manslaughter
of James Butt, one of the constables of the parish of
Cheltenham.
On the 15th of August, the prisoner and another
man were seen in Cheltenham, and were insulting
and pushing about every person they passed. Several
constables, in consequence, were sent after them,
who, after watching them some time, took them into