Star.
London, England, 1821-03-12 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

HERTFORD, MARCH 10.
Thomas Allen was indicted for a rape on the body
of Ann Joyce; at Rick mersworth, on the 23d of Sep-
tember last.—The prosecutrix (a young and hand-
some girl of eighteen), before she had stated anything
to criminate the prisoner, in the agitation of her feel-
ings, went into a fit, and fell on the back of her head
with great violence upon the floor. She was carried
senseless out of Court, and placed under theme of a
surgeon. After the lapse of two hours, the Learned
Judge sent for the surgeon to report the state of her
health and mind, when the latter gave it as his de-
cided opinion, that the unimppy young woman was
not in a state to give evidence, and would not be in a
condition for that purpose before two or three days.

The CHIEF BARON, under these circumstances,
charged the Jury to acquit the prisoner for want of
.evidence ; and the Jury accordingly found him Not
Guilty. However, his Lordship informed them, with
great satisfaction, that, had the case gone through,
they would probably have come to the same result.
CIVIL SIDE —HICKIN AND WIFE V. GOODYEAR.

'MS was an action of trespass. The first count
was for breaking and entering the plaintiffs' dwelling,.
house, and making a noise and disturbance therein
the second was for an assault and false imprisonment
of the husband alone; and the third was for an as-
sault upon the husband and wife.
It aPpeared in evidence that the plaintiff was a
bricklayer, and his wife a straw hat-maker, at Mar-
ket-street, in this County. The defendant was a baker,
in the same place, and his wife also was a straw hat-
maker. A wholesale straw hat-maker, named Gee,.
of Market-street, who had been robbed of a large,
quantity of straw-plat, having reason to suspect, from
information he had received, that his property was
concealed in the plaintiff's house, coirsulted the de-
Tendaut, who was Churchwarden of the Parish, and
with whom the plaintiff Was on terms of ill-will, and
upon his suggestion, ice applied to the Earl of B:idge-
water, as the neare,t Magistrate, for a warrant to
search the plaintiff's house. The Noble Lord granted
his warrant accordingly, which was directed to the
Constable of the Parish, and to the defendant espe-
cially, though not a Constable. The Parish Consta-
ble not happening to be in the way, the defendant,
accompanied by the Constable of the adjoining Pa-
rish, named Taylor, went to the plaintiff's house to
search it for the stolen "property. Search was accord-
ingly made in every part of the house, but without
effect. The defendant produce.] a pistol, which he
laid do, n on the table, and ordered the Constable
to handcuff the plaintiff; but the Constable remon-
strated, and said there was no occasion to proceed to
such extremities. The defendant, not finding the ob-
ject of his search, went away, but retuned twice
again, and repeated his search each. time, and exa-
mined every part of the house. On the last occasion
he sent the plaintiff away in custody of the Conga.
ble, and remained behindin the house.
It was sworn by a female, who had been to dri..k
tea with the plaintiff's wife, that the defendant then
produced a pistol, and swore that he would have an
improper intercourse with one or other of them, and
-actually proceeded to take indecent liberties with, and
offered some violence towards, the plaintiff's wife, but
not being able to effect his purpo.e, left the house.
A witness swore, that the defendant had used ex-
pressions of a malicious tendency towards the plain-
tiff, and said, before the warrant was executed, that
he owed him a grudge, and that he would now
" Ina him."

On the part of the
.defendant. Mr. Gee, a tailor,
:he Constable, and a Mr. Stocksiey, a butcher, were
examined, to prove that no violence was offeied to
die plaintiff; that he was not taken into custody ;
that there was reasonable and probable cause for the
suspicion entertained against the plaintiff; aid that
there was no noise nor riot committed in his house.

The case went to the Jury under the Learned
Judge's directions, and they found a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages £1.5.