The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-08-27 00:00:00

wr7rdoiuffared him to escape t in consequence, the sheriff had
rendered himself liable for the amount of the judgment. It
would appear from the evidence, thaton the Bth of July last,
a writ was sued out against Walton, at the suit of the plain.
tiffs, and that the following day it was delivered to the sheriff,
at his office in Preston. At the same time there happened
to have been a writ out against Walton, at the suit of a Mr.
John Scott, which writ was delivered to a man named Kirby,
the sheriff's officer, who arrested Walton in Liverpool, on
the lOth of July. The action between Scott and Walton
was then settled, whereupon Kirby, without searching the
sheriff's office, at Preston, to ascertain, if there were any
other writs against him, suffered him to go at large, whereby
the plaintiffs had lost the benefit of his arrest. In point of
law, when the sheriff receives several writs against an indi-
vidual, and that individual was arrested on one of them,
he was virtually in custody on every one of the actions. For
instance, if there were six writs out against a man. and he
was arrested on one of them, he was virtually arrested on
all the others, because it would be absurd on the part of the
sheriff to arrest him on each separately; and therefore when
Walton had been arrested at the suit of IScott, he was virtu-
ally arrested at the suit of the plaintiffs ; because, when he
had been arrested at the suit of Scutt, the writ of the plain-
tiffs was issued : under those circumstances, the sheriff was
liable for his default.

Several witnesses were then examined to prove the case;
after which,

Mr. CRESWELL addressed the jury on the part of the
defendant. He said that the two writs had come down si-
multaneously, in order that Walton might be arrested on
mesne process and let out, and that the sheriff should then
be fixed in the costs of the present action. Both the writs
came down on the same day, the 9th July : one of them was
sent to an officer of the name of Kirby, and the second to an
officer of the name of Ogle. Walton was then arrested by
Kirby, and when the action at the suit of Scott had been
settled, he kept him for a day or two after in custody, and
then liberated him, not knowing that there was another writ
against him at the suit of the plaintiffs, and the officer Ogle
knowing nothing of Walton's arrest. He (the learned coun-
sel) was not quite sure that Walton had not been a party to
the transaction, and that he had not been instrumental in the
getting up of the farce, which might well be called " anew
way to pay old debts ", by making the sheriff of the county
liable for the demand of the plaintiffs instead of himself.
There appeared to have been an arrangement between the
parties that Walton should be arrested and put in jail ; that
the second writ should be got down at the same time with
the plaintiff's suit ; that Walton should be liberated upon
Scott's writ, and that the sheriff should be made to pay the
amount of the second execution. For this purpose W alton's
arrest on Scott's writ had been kept a profound secret lest it
should come to the ears of the officer, Ogle, and lest mea-
sures would be accordingly taken to keep him in custody. If
the jury should be of opinion, under these circumstances,

_ .
that there had been a conspiracy between the parties, and a
piece of hocus pocus in the bringing down of the two writs

;t one and the same time, they would release the sheriff from
liability.