APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 2G0 



He f.!so proved that he had not 

 fled the country after the murder, 

 but remained at home as usual ; 

 and produced his parish priest, 

 wlio gave him a good character, 

 and the witness, John Maginnis, 

 a bad one. 



After a full recapitulation of 

 the evidence by the learned Judge 

 (Baron M'Clelland), the Jury 

 retired, and in a short time 

 brought in their verdict. Guilty. 



ESSEX ASSIZES, CHELMSFORD, 

 MARCH 13. 



Extents in Aid. 



Philpot V. Mortlock and another. 

 — This was the most important 

 case that was tried at these assizes. 

 It was an action against the defen- 

 dants, who are bankers at Cam- 

 bridge, for maliciously suing out 

 an extent in aid against the 

 plaintiff", by which the whole of 

 his property was seized, and 

 business thereby entirely ruined. 



Mr. Gurnej', as counsel for the 

 plaintiff, stated, that this case was 

 entitled to their most serious 

 consideration, not only as it was 

 of vital importance to the plaintiff, 

 who was entirely ruined by the 

 misconduct of the defendants, 

 but as it was of equal importance 

 to the public at large, to protect 

 from the wantonly suing out that 

 most formidable process, an ex- 

 tent in aid. The defendants were 

 eminent bankers at Cambridge, 

 the receivers of the excise-duties, 

 and very wealthy men. The 

 plaintiff was a respectable farmer 

 and maltster at Thaxted, in this 

 county, where he had lived for 

 many years in the greatest credit, 

 without the least imputation upon 

 his solvency. He had for many 

 years kept account with the 

 defendants as his bankers, and it 



happened that in the year 1815 

 the balance due to them was 

 something above 600/. For this 

 they asked security, for which, 

 the learned counsel said, he did 

 not quarrel with them, for they 

 had a right so to do. The plain- 

 tiff, although he had abundant 

 property, had not at that time 

 ready money to discharge the 

 balance, and therefoi'e, it was 

 agreed that he should give them 

 a mortgage on his freehold pro- 

 perty, and his bond, and in the 

 mean time until those securities 

 were prepared, a joint note of 

 hand of himself and his father 

 for 660/. The meeting at which 

 this agreement took place was in 

 the month of March, 1815, and 

 the agreement was prepared by a ^ 

 Mr. Bush, an attorney, by which 

 a mortgage was to be executed 

 for payment of the money on the 

 1st of May, 1816. It appeared, 

 however, that the time of pay- 

 ment was enlarged by the deeds 

 executed, until the last day of 

 July, 1816. The joint note was 

 accordingly as a temporary secu- 

 rity. In pursuance of this agree- 

 ment the bond and mortgage, 

 and warrant of attorney, were 

 prepared by Mr. Howard, another 

 attorney, for the defendants,-and 

 duly executed, by which securities 

 the' balance due to the defendants 

 was to be paid in Aug. 1816, and 

 the note of hand ought then to 

 have been given up, as it was only 

 a temporary security, until the 

 higher securities were prepared ; 

 and accordingly, the plaintiff 

 having executed the mortgage 

 deeds, asked for his note. Mr. 

 Howard, the defendants' attorney, 

 said he had not the note with him, 

 but he would get it and deliver 

 it up in the course of a week or 



ten 



