Star.
London, England, 1827-08-15 00:00:00

CHt&WAS R. SMART.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE, be ore he left Stafford,
certified in this case, to prevent the plaintiff's claiming
costs. AUGUST l
ANDERSON O. wA111.14.
This was an action to recover compensation in da-
mages, fur an alleged malicious arrest.
Mr. CURWOOD stated the case. The pla;ntiff being
anxious to procure the sum of 2001. on the security of
some freehold property, which he hal in this neigh-
bourhood, applied to the defendant,:.who is an attor-
ney, and who undertook to obtain fur hint the required
sum.;fhe defendant did as be bad privatised, and a mort-
gage deed being executed, the money•was handed over
to the plaintiff. Some short tiane.subsequently, the
latter wanted a further sum of 30(1 and ag.iin applied
to the defendant, who advanced hint #O/. and undertook
to procure the remainder ; hut instead of so doing, after
repeatedly promising to have e money ready by a
certain day, and failing of his promise, lie suddenly,
and without any previous demand being made for the
money, caused the plaintiff to be arrested for two di&
lerent sums. The one arrest being for the 301. he had
himself advanced, and the other lor the 2001. of Which
he had procured the loan from Mrs. Rowla..d. Against
the first arrest, he could make no legal Mrjection, but
he should be able to prove, as regarded the second one,
that it was most unwarrantable, and that it had been
made wholly without the knowledge and concintence
of Mrs. Rowland, although the writ purported to be at
her instance. Having proved these facts, he should be
entitled to their verdict, arid he trusted they would give
such ample damages as the case required.
Mr. Henry Scott produced the affidavit of debt on
which the writ was issued.
Mr. Wm. Parker proved that the signature, Charles
Harper, was the handwriting of a person of that name,
who was I ving as clerk to the defendant.
The affidavit was then read. It set forth, on the oath
of Charles Harper, that the present plaintiff was in•
debted to Mrs. Ann Rowland, in the sum of 2001. It
was attested by the defendant, as having been sworn
before him.
Henry Jones proved having arrested the plaintiff on
two writs, which he received from the defendant. One
of there was for the sum of '2OOl. and at the suitof Mrs.
Rowland. The plaintiff was in his custody for two
drys. The defendant called on the plaintiff a• the re-
quest of the latter. The plaintiff demanded why the
defendant had used him so? and the latter replied, " I
have not half done with you yet: I will use you still
worse before I have done."
Cross-examined—The defendant charged the plain.
tiff with intending to defraud him out of hit moi,er,
and with having made a conveyance of the property w
his wife, previous to executing the mortgage deed. The
plaintiff admitted having made the conveyance. He
wished the defendant to release him, and not to let the
affair come to the ears of his wife.
Mr. Henley w•as one of the plaintiff's bail, and after-
wards called on Mrs. Rowland to pay the debt and
costs; but Mrs. Rowland refused at first to take the
money, and declared that she knew nothing of the ar-
rest, and had given no directions for it.
Mr. Lawrence deposed to the same effect.
Cross-examined—Besides Mrs. Rowland's mortgage,
there was another one for 200/.
Mr. Stanley proved that Me property was worth front
7001. to 80C1.
Mrs, Rowland deposed that she had given no mac-

1

I!t.

H.

11!

'1