Star.
London, England, 1827-11-17 00:00:00

to serve the 'Opens art' house, sad
*th
although he might be f e time, yet, if he
did not appear within doe tie* an attachment issued
alai" him. It was an anomalous proctedingin a Court
of Law, but somewhat analogous to the proceedings of
a Court of Equity. The subpoena, it seemed, had been
served on the 7th of November, and on the 13th the
defendant, had been arrested by an officer of the Sheriff
of Middlesex, upon an attachment issued for the pur-
pose of compelling his appearance.
Mr. GARROW was sure a very large portion of the
public would be indebted to the Learned Counsel (Mr:
Jervis) for bringing this question before the Court for
its decision.
Mr. Serjeant Joists, on the other side, was prepared
to show cause at once against the rule applied for by
.his friend, Mr. Jervis. This peculiar process, by sub-
poena and attachment, had been recognized as the
practice of the Court of Exchequer so far back as the
reign of Edward VI. and its legality bad never been
disputed down to the present moment. It was not a
process which issued for the payment of money, but
to compel the party's appearance before the Court : and
if the defendant entered an appearance, and gave bail
to the amount of 401. whatever Might be the amount
of the debt, the writ was satisfied.
Mr. Baron Hou.ocit observed, that if he could not
give bail, he must go to gaol.
Mr. Sergeant Jotsas proceeded to argue that the
words " subpe n a" and " attachment" had been inserted
in the Act lipmistake he was prepared to shew by the
context of .119.. Act, that it was only intended to be a
renewal of fIW fawner Acts of the kith of George I. and
51st and 53d of eorge HI. The spirit and tenour of
those Acts went to shew, that by the process of at ach-
aunt there spoken of, was only meant attachment
against goods. They give the remedy of entering an
appearance on a vemire and distriagas ; this Act carried
the remedy a degree farther, by giving it upon process
of subpana and attachment, which only meant attach-
ment against goods.
Mr. Baton HEMLOCK asked If the word snbpena must
not mean, ex vi termini, an arrest of the petson?
Mr. Sergeant Jones contended that the process onit
applied to goods. The late statute, he argued, was an
enabling statute; although it gave a new remedy by;
entering a common appearance, it did not take away
the old one of attachment against the person. H the'
Legislature contemplated taking away a process which
had existed for so many years, they ought, and would
have introduced an express provision into the Act for
that purpose.
The Loan CHIEF BARON thought it evident that the
Legislature bad acted in ignorance of the practise of
this Court.

Mr. Baron VAUGHAN was of opinion that the statute'
did not apply to the process of this Coast.
Mr. Baron HoLzoct said, that the intent and meaning
of the statute was, that no person should be taken to gaol
upon mesne process for a less sum than 201.
Mr. Baron GARROW observed, that the words of the
clause were, that no man should be held to bail on any
process, kc. issuing out of any Court, kc. Now,unless
the Court of Exchequer was held to be no Coombe did
not see how it could be said that the statute did not
apply to this Court.
Mr. Sergeant Jonas argued that it was impossible to
render the application of the statute so extensive as that;
for if so, it would apply to subpoenas issuing of Chan-
cery. The words of the clause artist be taken with re-
ference to other clauses of the Act.
Mr. Baron Hotrod observed,. that there was this
difference between a subpsna from the Court of Chan-
cery and a subposia from this Court—the former was
for a contempt, the latter for debt..
Mr. flerjeant Jones said this process had issued, not
for payment of a debt, but for a contempt. .
The CHIE/ BARON said it was for an luminary eon-
tempt, but practically to enforce the payment of a
debt.
Mr. Barron GARROW said, that the meaning of the
act was, that a man should not be abridged of his li-
berty by any short hand process.
Mr. PARKE argued on the same side with Mr. Ser.
geant Jones, and said, that the hardship of this case
was only imaginary, for the defendant had only to pay
13s. 4d. and enter an appearance.
Mr. Baron Hor.r.ocx.-11 be did not find bail, he
must go to gaol.
Mr. Baron GARROW said, that a man arrested undo:
an attachment, had often to pay more costs before he
got out, than the amount of the original debt.
Mr. PARKE proceeded to argue against the construc-
tion of the statute which would extend it to this process.
Mr. JERVIS, in his reply, contended that the Legisla-
ture must be taken to be aware of the decisions on the
51st and 53d of Geo. 111. which did not extend the
meaning of these acts to the case of a diaringai. This
statute, therefore, provided for a cases oarissur. The
words in question must be taken to have the meaning
which they bear upon the face of them, and, to give
them any force, they must apply to the process in the
present case.
The Court took time to consider the question.
COURT OF CON-DELEGATES, Novogsgs 16.
Nothing of importance occurred in this Court. A
case was mentioned, in which the inconvenience arising
from the conflicting rules of the English and Scotch
Courts is exemplified. Elizabeth Forest was appellant
in a testamentary suit respecting the estate of her sister
deceased. She died, and left the suit to be inherited
by her son. Before its termination he also died, leaving
a sr idow and children, and the suit devolved to his re-
presentatives. The children were cited to appeal in the
High Court of Delegates, and failing appearance, were
cited in pcenavr. Tile case went before the whole com-
mission,when it appeared that all the preceedings on pain
had been wrong ; that, according to the English law, the
widow, not the children, should have been cited ; though
by the Scotch law the children were the true represen-
tatives, notwithstanding they had not administered to
'their father's estate. In amending the proceedings, it
was found that the widow was a pauper resident in
Scotland ; she was willing to appear in forma ?aspens
but not being able to anwer in person on oath, sbe
could not be admitted, unless a commission were issued
to take her answers. To cure the error in another way,
by the widow waving her right to distribute her bus-
' -band's effects (which she was willing to do), it was
necessary for the children to administer,_ and for the
whole ground to be gone over again. The property
was about 8001.
Their Lordships left the knotty question for next
court day..

A few evenings since as Mr. Gainer, landlord of
the Devonshire Arms, in Devonshire Place, Mary la
Bonne, was returning to town in his gig, when about
four miles on the other side of St. Alban's some fellows
desired him to stop, but their appearance 'smiling sus.'
picion, he galloped on as fast as possible. The villains
immediately fired, and a ball perforated the centre of
the back of the gig, the wadding, posidentially stop.
ped the ball, which on Mr. Garrets arrival at home,
was found in the gig.