The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-03-16 00:00:00

r.

, 1

• ?'

BHERIere
ileum b. tatratttak wtrAiratit.
'Whit wit a writ of enquiry to, assess damages, Id
an actiow hroi*ht by the Plaint* This kept th eta.
dem, at libeinieramitl4 against the Defendant, art
Attoeney4 Of Canker:Street, bbineeiy.hine; for
putting hi to illegal Alteration Slid diltraidt upon tbi
Plaintiff's Oreille., the Defendiee basing suffered
judgment to pby debielt: The *marl were laid
at 80001.
The Under Bherii having ittlety iiiililsed ep; th 4
jury tetired for 'boot test arfuetei;l4 lee (vet tgo
tent messed the floatage' it bock .
. . ,
tilkilisevaa, Notice 18.
?ITEM IN AID.
I;eit.tot b. mattock A*o aftoTdiff.
This was the most important Ca* that i 044
tried at these Assizes. It boil an action spins the
Defendants, who are hinted at •Cantbriditei for ma-
liciously suing not an Estent in Aid idlest the Main,
tiff, by Which the whole of hie property ski seiged4
and business thereby Oellrely
Mr. autteit, is Couhbel for thd Plaintiff; stead(
Chet this case was retitled to their least Wipes cowl
sideration, not only as it *ls of Anil iniporteece ttS
the Plaintiff, 'win was entirely reined by the mid`'
conduct of the Defendant% but a* it was ef.eqeet
importaece to the Public it large to protect faired DS
wantonly suing not that mutt formidabli peat:44loft
Extent in Aid. The Defendants deeeeminent barikerir -
at Cambridge, the rebeivers of the Racist Duties, and
very wealthy men. The Plaintiff was a respectable
farmer and maltatee at Thilated4 id this roomy, where
be had livid for many ries in tee greatest credit,
erithoet the least imputation upon his solvency. 110
bad for many years kept account with the Defendants
as hit hankers, and It happened that in the year 1813
She balance doe to them Was seniethitig shove &Vt.
For this they asked scarify, for whith, the learned
Counsel said, he did not quarrel dish tberti, for they:
'bad a right so to do. The Plaintiff, although he hod
abundant property, bad not at that time reedy.
'money to discharge the balance, Inch thetefore,
it as Weed that he shoisld else theth a aloft.
gage on big freehold property. and his bond,
and in the mean time until those securities werel
prepared; a joint note of hand of himself and hit 184.
ther for 6601. The meeting at which this %grimmest
took place, was in the month of March, 1818, end
the agreement was prepared by a Mr. Bosh, as mu
torney, by *Akira mortgage was to be tweeted for.
payment of the money on the Ist of May 4 1810. Ib
appeared, however, that the time of payment Was veal
Leveed by the deeds esecoted, until the last day of.
July, 1816. The joint note was accordingly as a.
temporary security. In pursuance of ibis aromas,
the bond and mortgage, and warrant of attorney;
were prepared by Mr. Howard, another attorney, five
the Defendants, and duly 'seemed, by which wed-
ties the balance doe to the Defendants was to be paid
in Aug. 1816, and the note of hind ought then td
base been given up, as it was only a temporary secu-
rity, sued the highs securities were persisted ; end
accordingly, the Plaintiff having executed the snort-
gage deeds, s.k.'d for his note. Mr. Howard, that
Defendants' attorney, said lie had not the onto with
him, but he would get it, and deliver it up in the
course of a week or ten days. These Defendants
now had got toe scarify fot their money for
which they stipulated. They bad got a mortgage
amply sufficient to cater their demand—obey had
got a bond and warrant of attorney, ell secure
log payment of the money in the month of As.
gust; 1810, and before that time they could not
legally demand it. It, however, In happened, for
what reason he could not tell, that in the moeth of
Mord; four months before the money beciso
due, they had the hardihood to go into the Court et
Exchequer, to take oat an extent its aid against the
Plaintiff's property, and to enable them to do it,
they swore that the Plaintiff was Indebted to them
in the sum of MI., by virtue of this very note of
hand which was merged in the higher scorning end
which they bed promised by their agent, and ought
to have delivered up to the Plaintiff. An extent is
aid is moo procured. It isseed of coarse upon this
affidavits and the whole property of the Plaintiff was
seized into the hands of the Crown, and e total stop
put to the whole of his business. He, however,
contested their right to issue it, and the cause was
tried in the Exchequer, and the Jury found there
was no debt due. The cause was tried early in July,.
bat the Plaintiff could not get his judgment until
November, 1816; and, therefore, though the per.
dirt west against them, they persisted in holding pose
session of the property, although any security was
offered them to let the poor man into possession of
his property, which they must then know they wrong-
fully withheld.. But mask what tbeiv trick was—by
keeping possession ender the extents they prevented
his reisistg 'toasty to plty them in August, when their
debt really became dee; and on the oth of August,
they entered op their judgment on the warrant of
attorney; they then on that day abandoned the ex-
tent, and the very nett, cams in with their common
law ezecetion, lad is four days after sold all his et.
fectss and literally turned his wife and children with.
rout a bed into the street% and they were received end
protected in the house of the Vicar of 'the Parish,
to whom the honesty and good eonduct of the Plain'
tiff eras well knower Tide Was the injury for which
thealeintiff that day sought a recompence, ending
was sine the dory weeld give a liberal one.
The'prneeedings in She Court of Etchequet were
then ;swim, by shish it @mimed, that, by the fade
ing of the Joryghthe Went was set asides ,on the
greon4llmt ww•-ddlyt was dee fess the Plaintiff to
Drfrudassf at the amoral ..g eel this extent.
Theism's.' securities tresimiweet called for, which
the Defendant's Counsel cohjetted to produce, until
ea idewee was elven etecetiors.TTlse subscribing
witnets was called, tab premed the execution of the
deeds, at Duntunw, when they Were produced by Mr.
Howard, as Defendant/at, Attertsey. Being asked,
whether Mr. Howard did prodhise to glee -up the
oot'? it was objected by Mr. Serjeant °snow, that
Howard himself ought to-be called, and that en wyte
deuce could be given of his derlaradens.
Meurer GIIIINZT and Ctrawooo, en the other side,
argurdithat Howard being proved to he the agent for
taking the conveyance% all his acts and deaufaiitios

A-

it

~1~

~r~~:-:._...

.a~::