Star.
London, England, 1821-11-20 00:00:00

to escape- from a mob of smugglers.. The defendant
wat stationed at the door of the Hall, with orders
from the Mayor of the town to let no person-in. Mr.
Dickenson, who wore his uniform, was pelted by a
mob with stones and mud. He was on his way to,
the Magistrates, and was obliged to draw his sword
in his defence. He endeavoured to pass the defen•
dant, who assaulted him. and declared he would lose
his life rather than let him pass into the Court House.
The Jury, at the trial, were directed to take into con-
sideration, whether the defendant was acting from
the orders of a superior, or beyond his duty?—They
found him Guilty.
The defendant put in an affidavit, stating that he
had been a soldier in the cavalry, and had served
with the Duke of York in Holland. He considered
' he was dohig his duty in keeping the Officer out.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY, in passing judgment, ob-
served, that the defendant must have known the Of-
ficer was endeavouring to avoid the attack of the
mob; and it was his duty, as a peace officer, to as•
sist, rather than keeo him out of a place where he
expected to find protection.
The defendant was sentenced to be imprisoned two
months in. Canterbury jail, and find sureties for his
good behaviour for two years—himself in £lOO, and
two others in £2O each.

VT. H. S.

KNIGHT V. KENT.
This was an action of trespass in the case, for as-
sault and battery. The declaration alleged a violent
attack upon the plaintiff's person by the defendant,
but the latter pleaded, first, the general issue ;, and
secondly, that he was justified in assaulting the plain-
tiff, as the latter had obstructed him on the King's
highway. 1.14r0n these pleas issue was joined.
Mr. GURNEY stated the case to the Jury. The
plaintiff was a driver of one of the Paddington stages,
the defendant was an auctioneer, residing at Pad-
dington. On the 31 of February last, Mr. Kent, the
defendant, took a place in the plaintiff's coach from
the Bank for Paddington. He wished to be an out-
side passenger, but was prevailed upon by the plain-
tiff to take an inside place. The coach drove on to
its place of destination, and a boy, who attended the
coach for the purpose, and whoshould be called as a
witness, alighted to let the defendant out. He de-
manded the fare, but Mr. Kent refused to pay it.—
The plaintiff then came down from the box, and the
boy was sent to the horses' heads. On the plaintiff's
repeating the same demand for his fare which the
I boy had made, Mr. Kent positively refused to pay it,
unless he was driven to his place of residence, which
was out of the way, and not on the high road. The
coachman represented that it was contrary to their
custom to drive a four-horse coach out of the way;)
but to no purpose, defendant refused to pay the fare,
and was walking away. The coachman, as was 'his
duty, was still demanding his fare, as would be
shewn, in the gentlest terms, when the defendant.
knocked him down, giving him a blow on the eye,
which was dreadfully bruised. He at the same time
refused to give his name or address, though repeat-
edly asked for both. The coachman suffered so
much, that he was unable to drive for four or five
days, and there was a weakness inthis eye ever since.
Mr. uarcav submitted, that under these circum-
stances the plaintiff was entitled to considerable da-
mages. He supposed the defendant had knocked down
the plaintiff because he was an auctioneer, and it was
in the way of his business. The Jury would, hosv
over, perceive that if coachmen were to be thus
knocked down by auctioneers with impunity, the cause I
of law and good order would be soon knocked up.—Hat I
then called his witnesses.
Charles Jewell said, he knew the plaintiff. He
drives the Paddington coach. Witness was with the
defendant in the coach. Defendant was a passenger.
He got out at the corner of the Harrow Road. He
had been taken up at the Bank. Witness was present
when he got out. Witness said, " You must pay the
fare; but defendant said, " I shall not." He pushed
witness away, and the coachman got down. Knight
said, " You must pay your fare," but Kent raised up
his fist and knocked bim down. Knight told 'witness
to stand by the horses' heads. Saw nothing more.—
He was bleeding a little.
Cross-examined.—ls not an apprentice to Knight.
Is not a coachman, but is learning.
Joseph Dale lives at Paddington. On the evening
of the sth of February was near the spot where the
coach stopped. It is a four-horse coach. Saw plain-
tiff and defendant quarrel. Witness was standing
near his own house, when hearing a noise he went to
see what was the matter. The noise was loud talking.
On going out he saw Knight and Kent. Cannot re-
collect that there were any marks on Knight's face.
Kent was going to strike Knight, and witness stepped
in between them. Knight said to witness, " You see
how lam served." Witness did not know Mr. Kent
previously. Believes Kent was asked his name, but
be did not give it until he got to Mr.Windall's shop.
It was then given for him. Knight's face was almost
covered with blood. Next day he wore a cloth about
his face. He seemed to have been much bruised.
Joseph Conden gave evidence to the same effect.
Mr. Robert Taylor said, he was proprietor of this
coach. It is not usual to set down people at their
own doors. This was a four-horse coach. The plain-
tiff did not drive the coach for three or four days
after the assault. His eye was much hurt.
Mr. Doughty, a surgeon, at Paddington, said, that
he saw the plaintiff about nine o'clock in the evening.'
His coat was covered with blood, and his eye very
much swelled.
This was the evidence for the plaintiff; and Mr.
Scanutrr, for the defendant, opened a case to shew
that it was the plaintiff who committed the first as-
sault. The defendant was not an auctioneer, he
was an architect, and Overseer of the Parish. It
was not true that he had refused to give his address.
He then called
John Askew, who said he lodged, in February last,
at Mr. Wiadalis, cheesemonger, at Paddington. His
lodgings were on the second floor. Witness recol-
lected something of this affair. Hearing a noise in
the street, he went to the window, and saw the coach-
man walking backwards, and some words passed
which he could not hear. The Gentleman tried to
get by ; the coachman prevented him, and struck
him. He saw Mr. Kent go up to Ashford's door,
but it was shut.
Crosperawined.—Witness said he was a tailor. Did
not know Mr. Kent; did not know that it was Mr.
Kent that was there, until he was told his name four
or five months afterwards by Mr. Windall.
GeorgeWitadall said, he was a cheetemonger, in the