The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-07-14 00:00:00

MI

■

r.~y

LAW INTSLLIGENCE.
COURT OF RING'S BENCH, JULY IS.

BICH JUDSON E. SIR TAISATIK, B SIT. AND ANOTHIR.
This was an action against the Sheriff of Essex, and
Ms slicer, for as assault and false imprisonment. The
defendant pleaded first the general issue, not guilty, and
second,* plaint justifying the alleged assault and false
itlieloonnnest, by virtue of a writ of topics ed eetieftei-
e es Wood against the plaintiff. Tb this the plaiotiff
replied de iajmria, and denied the existence of the sup-
posed writ—lssue thereon.
Mr. SCARLITT opened the plaintiff's case. He repre- ,
*ranted that the plaintiff was a Gentleman of fortune and
respectability, residing at Oak Hall, near Wanstead, in
Essex. (in the 30th of October, whilst travelling in a
poet chaise near to that plate, be was stopped by Sackett,
the defendaat, an officer of the Sheriff of Essex, who ar-
rested him for WI. by virtue of a writ which he pro-
duced. The plaintiff, conscious that he owed no mac,
200/. desired to see the writ, which the officer produced,l
anti it appeared to be sued out upon a warrant of attor-
ney given tp a Mr. Wills, sued out by a supposed at-
torney of the name of John Mills. It was directed
against William Richardson. The plaintiff immediately
said 's My name is William Jobe Richardson ; 1 am
unite ignorant of the persons whose names are men-
tioned in this writ; you are mistaken—l am not the
man." The ()Meer, however, persisted that he was
right, and took the plaintiff to a lock-up house, where he
wile detained for three days and three nights. The
plaintiff sent for his attorney, who made every exertion
to find out Mr. Mills, the attorney who had sued out the
writ, but in vain. The plaintiff was than set at liberty,
on his giving his word to appear when called upon.
lie was, in fact, never called upon, and it turned
out upon inquiry, that there had been no kik-
meat in any cause against the plaintiff, or in any cause
in which the writ was supposed to have issued. The
writ had been inclosed to the Sheriff's office in a note,
with a Mr. Mills's compliments, begging that it might
he executed immediately, and describing the plaintiff,
• *Mout naming his residence. Under these dram-
-wooers, the plaintiff sought rnmpensation in damages
torthe injury he had sustained.
Mt. (ivRYI.r, for the defendants, contended that the
Sheriff, being an executive o:.icer, he was hound to
esecute the process delivered to him, and therefore he
was exempt from liability if be arrested the person
.nanied in the writ. The writ bad been sent to the
Shevid's office in the manner already • stated. A
person ..f the name of William Richardson, had
teen in fart arrested, and though the plaintiff said
more was also John, yet that wade no differ-
ence as to the question of the Sheriff's liability.-
6o malice nor ladies could be imputed to the de•
fendinit, and in the execution of his Ministerial
duty, he was not bound to take the word of the
person arrested, as to any supposed mistake.
The Cuter JUSTICE charged the Jory, that if they
believed that the plaintiff was the person intended by
the writ, though all bis names were not set out, and
though the process was seed out by fraud, and from
motives of malice on the part of other persons, the She-
riff, se an executive officer, was not hound for the
consequence.. This however might be a matter for
Ctrtilier consideration, whichever way the verdict

went.
The Jury found their verdict fur the defendants
-.11.1..-

CONAIWTORY COURT. JrLY 13.

aunts° v. aMITN, FALSELY CALLS!) SLIDING.

This watt a ease of nullity of marriage, by reason of u n•
dye celebration, and was brought by the husband against
11:e wife. The facts were few and in themselves unimport•
ant ; het the question at issue involved the validity of
perhaps every marriage celebrated by the British Mi
timers of the established Protestant Church of Eng-
land, Chaplains to, or otherwise Connected with, Bri-
tish armies of occupation, quartered in any foreign
territories. since the passing of the Marriage Act up-
weds of sixty years ago.
tor. JIINNER opened the case. This was the case of
a marriage betweeu—ltuding, an Officer in the alloy
otitis Britannic Majesty, and Miss Jemima Clandia
smith, whirl) was solemnised at the Cape of Good
Hope (one year after its reduction in 11795), by a cler-
gyman in orders of the Church of England, under a
I:certe from the commanding officer on that station,
toad letween two persons, British subjects. The period,
obetrefore, between the celebration of the marriage and
•to institution of the suit was somewhat about twenty-
!' te year.. These facts were pleaded in the 9th arti•
o:f the libel given in. This was clearly a marriage,
svLich must be good and valid in all places where the
Neeriage Act hail no operation. Before the passing
of•that Act, there could be no doubt as to its validity.
ZIP he understood that it eras to be impeached on this
groinad. namely, that this marriage had been had and
celebrated in a Colony, conquered by his Majesty's
aru s. and under an express capitulation that the laws
if sack territory should remain in full force and should
be4aisteling en those who remained in the colony. The
Cktort would at once see that the derision of this ques-
t-on as to nbether a marriage of this description was
et was not to. be supported, was a question of the
gres.est import .nce, not only to these particular
parties, but to others who bad formed the like
ace flexion in other parts of the world, and was now to be
tried-in .der that they (if,' contrary to his (Dr. J.'s)
eapectatiun, the Court should hold that such marriages
wee iiealid) might be induced to adopt those measures,
which' 'haul(' have the effect of making them legal and
viand. When he said this, lie did not mean to dispute
atat general principle upon which the Court was accus-
tomed to rule (on the kr loci) that marriages, good
Ned regular in the place of their celebration, were good
mad: regttliw elsewhere. But what be meant to con-
mad was, that it did not follow as a necessary come-
timice that because marriages so sotemnired should
be held to be good In all parts of the world, therefore,
▪ *arrive solemnised according to the laws of the
country,•of which the contracting parties were natives,
hut not according to those of the territory in which
Vitt rites were performed, should be' invalid and of no
et. The laws of the Cape might have beep binding
sad penal apse two individuals, iobabitants of the
Laise, or subjects of Holland ; bit they must have
:stogy a very digs-cent operation on 4wo parties owing
otullegimace whatever to the Dutch Government, and
t.essguistag no Dutch law whatever before the period
Cif the capitulation, : a ibetioli they could be under
no such obligati*n after the capioalation, when the
I *ay became essentially British. The tuarriage act
toid amtaread to places beyond the roar seas I and
itereisre, as it could am afoot this marriage, that
lie just as gad as if bed.besa celebrate/ in
The ;Amami Caamal,.in the
of a most elaborate argument, emustuleil that it

terefi
arimad
. sr y
64 arse