Star.
London, England, 1827-07-06 00:00:00

sees a young hare smoking ea the table, bnt he has no
love of the sport itself, unless, inclehtl, it be od an Easter.,
day. The plaintiff is desirous of keeping his propertk
to his own use, and does not wish to hate a mob of
people trespassing upon that portion of his ground
which be keeps in his own occupation. The defence
has tailed—there is no colour for it ; for thotigh the
warren- field and Stanmore-park are in the occupation
of Batetnan, the planation between them, consisting of
about ten acres, belongs to the plaintiff, and there the
trespass was committed. The plaintiff has, indeed,
allowed Bateman to have a way through this land ; he
might grant the same indulgence to any other person,
and might, whenever he pleased, withhuld it from Bate-
man, and from every one else. Jones swears that he
saw the defendant break open the gate. and he is not
contradicted by the evidence of the rattling young far-
mer /tf•chols, who has so soon forgot his debt of grati-
tude to the plaintiff; and who, if he could screw up his
courage to the sticking place, is disposed to give the
strongest evidence for the defendant. He says, indeed,
that Jones was abuiite: that he might poisibly have
been, he does not deny it; but is he contradicted in his
statement that the defendant dii break open the gate?
I call upon you to give the plaintiff such damages as a
ma, ought to be made to pay who, in snch-a season and
in rich a manner, trespasses after notice upon another
pefson's ground.
Lord TENTIRDIS said, a man may have a right of
way over land, but it did not therefore follow that such
land was in his possession. If the plaintiff is the oc-
eupi-r of the plantation, he has a right to maintain
this action.—Verdict for the plaintiff. Damages Is.
Lord Tantinteas—l do not think I ought to certify.
lElaCeinan was the occupier of the land on each side of
the plantation, and it does not appear that the de.
feadarst knew that the intervening space was not also

in his occupation.
THE RING V. isatutAst sairtsrt.
. This was an indictment for perjury. assigned to have
been committed by the defendant, in the statement
which he gave upon oath of his property, in the Coate
of King's Bench, where he came up to justify as bail for
a Mr. Charles Proby Bowles, who had been arrested.
Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS stated the case. Bowles
gave notice, that his two bail, the defendant end a man
of the name of Eastwood, would justify as his bail in •
, open Court on the Bth of November. The defendant
on th it day did endeavour to justify in two actions, one
at the suit of a Mr. Stoltz for 1811. and the other at the
-mit of a Mr. Myers for 781. The defendant swore he
. 5181. after payment of all his debts; and cia•
bean examined, stated that his property consisted of a
Mire in Sidney-street, Commercial-road, of which he
had a lease, of the furniture in that house,. of a gardeo
of which he had also a lease, and in which he swore
he had erected a coach-house, stable, and buildings,
which co,t him 8001. and were worth that sum.—
; The Court, however, would not permit -him to lalnify,
but granted time for the plaintiffs in two actions to
mite inquiries concerning this property. An inquiry
had accordingly been made, the result of Which was,
that the defendant did live in Sidney-street, bin had no
lease of the house; his furniture was very trifling, and
he had not erected either coach-house or stabling. Mr.
Stoltz felt it his duty, under these circumstances, to in-
stitute the prosecution. The Learned Sergeant called
several witnesses,' who substantiated his statement.
The Common SERGEANT, for the defendant, took an
objection to the indictment, which stated that the per-
jury was committed in the Court of King's Bench,
whereas the oath was administered in the Bail Court, I
where the defendant was examined, and gave the state-
merit of his property.
L rd TENTSRDIN over-ruled the objection. The
Court of King's Bench could at all times sit any where,
the act under which one Judge sat in the Bail Court to
take the justifications of bail, and to do other business,
gave the Court the power it did not possess 'before of
sitting in two places at one time. One Judge consti-
tuted a Court, and the Bail Court was therefore the
Court of King's Bench, and the defendant's answers
were properly stated in the indictment to have been
made in the Court of King's Bench.
Thejury found the defendant Guilty.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. limy 5.
WIGGINS V. CHAPMAN AND MISR&
'This was an action of assault and false imprisonment.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY stated the case. The plaintiff
was a very respectable person, residing in Tottenham-
eourt-road, carrying on the business of a builder, and
was now compelled to seek compensation at-!he hands
of i Jury for an injury he had sustained from the three
defendants, two of whom were officers of the Thames
Police, and the other a constable. On the 26th of April
last, Mr. Wiggins was going from his house in Totten-
ham-court-road to superintend the building of another
.house he was erecting near the Regent's Park, having
in his hand a rope, which it was customary for persons
in his line of business to use. When he had nearly ar-
rived at the Semmes Park, he was stopped by the de-
fendants, who insisted on his immediately going before
a Magistrate. The plaintiff was of course very much
surprised, and remonstrated with them, saying he was
guilty of no crime to be carried before a Magistrate.
The defendants, however, paid no attention to his re-
monstrances, saying, " You have got some rope about
you, and if you don't come directly, we will handcuff
you." The plaintiff then told them who he was, and
.. riquested that they would at least go back with him
~ to his house, where he could convince them of his
tespectability. Alter some time, the defendants con-
• tented to this, and they all went back to Totten-
ham-court-road, a great mob following them.—
When they got to the house, Mrs. Moore, one of the
lodgers, and several others, told the defendants who the
plaintiff was, but they still insisted on taking him to
. loa-street, which they accordingly did, leading the
-.plaintiff through the sueeu io the middle of the day, to
the gaze of all the rabble who were assembled about
them. When they an ived at Bow.street, however, no
Magistrate was there, and the' plaintiff was taken on
board the Thames Polite boat air the riser, where he
was detained for some time. ltuled, tbsiiiffaiialtoge-
-4,,e! occupied
...the whple day.; lints the evening the
I. ,pailltut els- Ithowtt 10 fp ' .
I,Pezt 09141a!t .lr6spaes ice, -hit was Info-tined
haft
J,i.illa; he might go g. 114 Aimee, tbete being no
0, , 4inst kilr. plebe trete die reqe, of the case,
t. 5.4 i: eined"Sergeznt.thOUilet they wine such as
. lay , rO vary 46i0a, dasn*es.
475
&vent maser were then cilied,Who estibtlitse•Aibe. charge
Nig— nu' two of the defendiati; Ink iof against tilipman.
' • Mr. Sergeant SPANK'S appeared kit Coapman, and
° PIT. Sergeant Winos for theothei two defendants.
• Mr.' Sergeant SPANKIS submitted that Chapman
naboukt be acquitted.
,erhe, it enlist Mem* inquired whether Mr. Seri•
seam Wilde Wended to call wiznesses ? and o . being