Court Of King's Bench, We...
The Times, 1824-05-21T00:00:00

L4W REPORT. The defendant in this case was one of a party who ia the year 1821 created a riotous assembly at the town of Deal, and tarred and feathered two persons who had been witnesses on the trial of infor- mations for a breach of the laws of Excise, and carried them in a cart through the streets for two hours. Other parties concerned in the affair were tried soon after its occurrence ;- but the present de. fendant, having kept out of the way,was not tried till the last assizes, when he was found guilty. llr. GURNEY now moved for the judgmeent of the CourL Ur. Justice BAYLEY, after adverting to the aggravated circum. stances of the case, pronounced the sentence of the Coart to be, that the defendant should be imprisoned for a year, and be kept to hard labour, in 3Maidstone gaol; and that at the. expiration of that period he should give security for good behaviour during five years, huisself in IOOL, and two sureties in201. each. THE KING V. JAM1ES DILLON. Mlr. GASELEE moved for the judgmnent of thc Court on the ae- fendant, who was convicted at the last assizes for Somersetshire of assaulting and obstructing officers of excise in the execution of their duty. The COURT sentenced him to be imprisoned, and kept to hard la- bour for three mRonths, in Ilchester gaol. TIIE KING V. JANE EVANS AND OTHIERS. Mr. SCARLETT prayed for the judgment of the Court on Jane Evans and three other women, all of respectable appearance, who had been convicted at the last assizes for Lancashire, of violently obstructing an officer of excise in attempting to apprehend a man named Robert Evans, in his house. AMr. Justice HOLRO YD read the report, from wvhich it appeared that the defendants had conducted themselves with considerable vio- lenre. Alr. BtOUGHtAM addressed the Court in mitigation of punish- ment, urging that the principal offBenders were seven or eight .ailors, who lod6ed in the house of. Evans, and who had not been brought to trial. 3Ir. SCARLETT replied. The Judges consulted for a considerable time, after which M1r. Justice BAYLEY passed sentence-that 31ary Innis ihould be imprisoned six months, Mary Evans four months and the other two defendants three months, in L.nca:ster Castle. 6ne of the wo. men burst into loud lanientations on hearing her sentence. THE KING V. POOLEYS This was a rule obtained by Mr. Chitty, calling on Alr. Pooley and others to show cause whi a criminal inft'rthation should not be exhibited against them, for burning 3Ir. Pybuv,. an overseer pf the poor at Alaidstone, in effigy. It was now atimitted on the part of the prosecution, that the rule could not be saustaned against Ar. Poolev, and no aubstantial answer was given on behalf of thd other defendants. The rule was accordinglv dischatged as akafiif 2Ati. i'6oley, but without costs, and was made absolute against the other defendants. THE KING V. YUNT. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE proposed that this case should be appointed tor Tuesday; but 31r. ADOLPHUS stated, that according to an arrangement be- tween MNIr. Scarlett and himself, it stood for Friday (this day week), and accordingly it was fixed for that day. THE EIYG V. JAMES STAMP SUTTON COOKE. MvIr. TAUNTOR meved for the judgment of the Cidurt on this defendant, who watsc,.nvicted at the late Glocester assizes of , con- spiracy to disturb Sir Gecorge Jerningbam in the possession of his estates, and to molest and defraud his tenants. The LOaD CHeiEP JUSTICE intimated that, as he was obliged soon to retire, it would be inconvenient to enter on a case of somuch length. M1r. CAMPBELL, on the part of the defendant, suggested that the Court should postpone passirg sentence upon him until after tho trial of a ce.defendant, Ricliard Stafford Cooke,, wlho had pleaded in abatement, and whose plea now stood for argumrenr Mlr. TAUNTON said, that he was well assured that the Court, after hearing the facts of the case, wouldnot make such a rule com- pulsory on the prosecutor;* and if they forbore to do so, he did not think Sir George Jerningham could assent to it, consistently with hsis duty to himself and to public justice, The LSORD CIIIEF JUST ICE then left the Court to attend his MAIajesty's drawing-room. The other Judges sat afterwards to tike motions, but nothing occurred of the least interest. I COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WESTMINSTER, AIAY 20. THE KINXG V. JOHNI SUTTON.