Star.
London, England, 1827-10-13 00:00:00

SQUIRES O. LA ROB.

. This was an action to recover damages for a mali-
cious arrest.
Mr. Sergeant WILDZ stated, that both the plaintiff
and defendant were tradesmen, one a co ict maker, and

,the other a livery stable keeper. Trarsacri6iis had oc•
curved between them which led to accounts, and the
plainuffcoonplained that the defendant biougln an ac-
tion in the Palace Court, he 'being well aware that no'
debt was due that could warrant 'him in making an
arrest. Ti .e defendant had thought fit, from a feeling
bf hostility, to arrest the-plaintiff, and on the trial ache
c 4ure at the Palace Court, the Joryleund a verdict
against him. It appeared manifest from the record of,
the proceedings in this action that the defendant, Large,
had no debt which wuuld authorise him to arrest the
plaintiff.
The affidavit of debt and the writ were then put
in .and read.
Mr. PLATT objected to an informality in the records.
The officers of the Palace Court were directed to take
the body of fiqui, es, and him safely keep :but, instead of
keep, it was " ksek." I-le contended that it could not
be legal to take a man and keek or kick him—(A laugh).

The L RD CHIEF Just mt.-11a man was to lose his
cause, becaihe the rezords in another action is nonsen•
sisal, very tew causes could be gained.
The objection was overruled.
Evidence then proved that the plaintiff was arrested
for a debt of 111. when it appeared by deductions made
by the defendant in pencil marks, upon the face of his
own account, that he was only entitled to a balance I
of 81. 12s.
The plaintiff's daughter, who kept his accounts, said
she believed when allowance was made for over-charges,,
that nothing was due to the defendant.
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE was of opinion that no
malicious m,tive had beerviceeed, and that the action
could not be sustained. He said, however, he would
Ii
not nonsait the plaintiff if theJuty wished to hear more
of the case.

The Jury hating expressed a desite to hear more
upon the subject.— . .
Sergeant TADDY addressed them, and contended, on
the part of the defendant, that his client bad acted as a
fair tradesman would act to another.

Sergeant WILDE then called for the defendant's evi-
denie, which was givens It appeared that a request
was made for payment of 111. due to the defendant, and
the plaintiff said he would send 101.
Several respectable tradesmen proved that the defend-
ant's charges in 114 account were fair and reasonable.
The LORD CHIC/ JUSTICE, with some a•perity, made
remarks upon the vehemence with which the Learned
King's Sergeant had pressed his reply upon the Jury, end
called their attention to the facts of the case. Unless they
believed:the defendant had been guilty of perjury from a
malicious desire to arrest the plaintiff, the action could
not be sustained. An action for a malicious arrest,
founded upon no better evidence than that they had
heard in this case, be had never known in the course of
his long practice.—The Jury found fur the defendant.

COURT OF REQUESTS, CAsTLs-sass!
A TRADESMAN V. A MARRIED WOMAN.

A tradesman, who had supplied a fence covert with
goods, brought his action, against her for the re•
covery of the amount; and she, pleaded her covertnre.
The Commissioners said, that such a plea might per-
haps prevail in a Court of Law ; but io their Court,
which was a Court of Equity, it could not be received.

Deff ndant.—No Court of Equity in this country bas
ever decided that a married woman is liable to her
debts. If a married woman, living apart from her hus-
band, who has a separate allowance made to her for
her maintenance, were in debt, a Ccurt of Equity will
apply that allowance to the liquidation of her debts,
but that is all it will di. It mill not deprive her of her
liberty, nor will it meddle with al y separate property
she may have. _ _ _

Cominissiorers—But how bad this tradesman know•
ledge of yoor condition ? Perhaps he dealt with you as
a feme sok?
Defendant—l am ready to put the case upon the issue
of his word in that particular.
The plaintiff admitted that when be gave the credit
he knew the defendant to be a married woman, but said
that she told him she would pay him herself.
Defendant—Such a promise could not be binding on
me, as I am incapable in law to make any promise.
Commissioners—Then what becomes of moral justice?

Defendant— Abstract moral justice can have nothing
whatever to do in the case. Before you can make it
apply in a case like tL•e present, you must remove from
married ss omen those disabilities under which the law
places them. If a person get into the debt of a married
woman, where is her remedy ? She can bring no suit;
she can maintain no action of herself. What has she
to confide in then, but the honour of those she trusts?
And will it be said that she is not equally euti'led to the
benefit of this moral justice? She will be told, forsooth,
that she had no right to trust in her case, knowing that
she could have no remedy. May not a tradesman be
sent about his business with the same answer ? he knew
he was giving his goods to a person whom he could nor.
recover the value or, or at least ought to know, as igno-
rance of the law is not to be presumed. I can call abun-
dance of legal authorities in support of my argument.
The Commissioners did not want authorities. They
had ascertained that the debt was due, and ought to
be paid.

- Defendant—Gon forbid that I should say otherwise
—1 have as fastidious a sense of tight and wrong as any
of you, but my husband, mud not me, is the person who
ouglit to be compelled to pay it.
The Commissioners—You keep a house? Yes—And
have your same on a plate on the door? Yes-014.thist
is enough for us.

Defendant—lf I were able to appeal from your judg-
ment, you must well know your decree would be an-
nulled. But, if I had means, nothing or this kind would
have occurred, as the plaintiff well knows.

The plaintiff did not deny this, and acknowledged
having e d her for three years. He was retiring from
business, however, and wanted his balance, which, with
costs, was ordered to be paid to him in two months.
Defendant—All I wanted was time: and if this pro-
ceeding had never been, I would have paid all the debt
within the time I am now allowed, although I again
repeat I am not legally bound to do so.

Thursday the River, above bridge, presented a very
unusual appearance.--gat two o'clock the tide being lower
than was perhaps ever remembered. The bank of mud
on the South side of Waterloo Bridge was quite dry as
far, mut as the fourth arch, and at the beacon of the
Lambeth Water Works above the Bridge, the tide had
so drair.ed out, that persons might walk completely
round it ; and most of the mooring chains of the vari•
ous roads were to be seen, and the barges affixed there-
to aground ; and such was the state of the River at
this time. that it was impossible for a loaded barge to
pass downwards between Westminster and Waterloo
Bu id:get. The cause of this was partly owing to the
S W. gale of the previous night, and partly to the open-
ing of the two new arches at Loudon Bridge, ever since
which the tide has fallen considerably above-bridge. •

4)OIACt

..y
I ~.RY:

lIANSLoN-11013*P. •

A Man was brought before the:Lown Maros,by Mr. flanwead,
one of the principal coal meters, under tile folloaing clrcurmt suers—.
Ile stated that the man was stationed at Boy and Austin's wharf;
Wippiug, on the sth of Octolserinit. to rtirastire the coils fbit west'
tram that whaif : that of stz rhaldivitts.sold to • boost In the cky,
on the sth, and sent from the wheef en the following anCenhig.
Sacks were meawired at the purebasees house sad found tote short
fous.bushels. The other part of the coals was shot Into, cellar,,
from which it was impossible to have it taken to be remeasored.— :
Ilse man had been suspended by the principal totters, and he was
now brought before tits Lordship, for bhi disposal of him.
The man said the fact was, that it was late It, the sight en which
the coals were leaded, and he having had something aloe to do, kft
them to be loaded without being measured at all.
The Loan Maroc considered this no elect* whatever; it was
Inipossible, in justice to the public, that- • Magistnite-shouki pawl
over such a fraud. The public bad protection, if such conduct
on the part of a meter could be allowed. Wherever a meter was
found to connive in any way whatever in such a fraud he ought not
to be suffered to mete another bushel, and tbraefore his Lordship
dismissed him from his simatiun.