defendants, then being such-high bailiff and assistant bailiff respectively as aforesaid, to be executed in due form of law: And that, by virtue of the said warrant, the now pleading defendants, while the said warrant was in force, and before the expiration of the said seven days from the date thereof, to wit, at the said time when &c. in the declaration mentioned, in the said building in which the said court was so holden as aforesaid, took the plaintiff by his body, within the said district of the said Westminster countycourt of Middlesex, and compelled him to go, by a reasonable and public way in that behalf, to the said house of correction in the said direction of the said warrant mentioned as aforesaid, and at the said house of correction delivered the plaintiff and the said warrant to the said governor of the said house of correction in the direction of the said warrant mentioned, being the prison to which the said judge had power to commit offenders under the said act, and also being the gaol and house of correction in the declaration mentioned, and, in so doing, did, at the said time when &c. in the declaration mentioned, necessarily a little assault the plaintiff, and seize and lay hold of the plaintiff, and pull and drag the plaintiff about, and pull and drag the plaintiff from and out of the said building in the declaration mentioned, in which the said court was so holden, into the said public street, and force and oblige the plaintiff to go in and along the said public street in the declaration mentioned, to the said house of correction in the declaration mentioned, being the public gaol and house of correction in the declaration mentioned, as they lawfully might for the cause aforesaid, using no unnecessary violence, and doing no unnecessary damage to the plaintiff on the occasion aforesaid; which were the said supposed trespasses to which that plea was pleaded, and whereof the plaintiff had in the declaration above complained, -verification. The defendant Tracy, as governor of the house of correction, in a similar manner justified the reception and detention of the plaintiff under the warrant. (a) To each of these pleas the plaintiff demurred specially, assigning for causes,-that the plea was uncertain and bad, in this, that the warrant therein mentioned, as therein set out, was void and altogether bad on the face thereof;-that the warrant, as set out in the said plea, appeared to be bad, in this, that it did not shew in what manner the plaintiff insulted the said D. C. Moylan, whether by words, or gestures, or acts, or in what other manner; that the warrant, as set out in the plea, contained no commitment of the plaintiff to any such prison as in the plea is mentioned;-that the warrant, as set out in the plea, was void and bad, in this, that it did not appear therefrom that there was any adjudication or order of the court in the said warrant and in the plea mentioned, for the commitment or imprisonment of the plaintiff for the time in the said warrant mentioned, the order in the said warrant mentioned being merely for an imprisonment until the rising of the court; whereas, the warrant required that the plaintiff should be imprisoned for seven days, &c. To the third plea of the defendant Moylan, the plaintiff new assigned, that he commenced the said action. against the defendant, not only for the several trespasses in his said third plea mentioned, and therein attempted to be justified, but also for that the defendant D.C. Moylan, at the time in the said declaration mentioned, by a certain warrant in writing by him the said D. C. Moylan signed, did cause, procure, and order the other defendants Smedley, Flack, and Tracy, to assault and imprison the plaintiff, in manner as in the declara (a) See Hayes v. Keene, post, E. T. 1852. 1850. LEVY .. MOYLAN. 1850. LEVY V. MOYLAN. tion, and which warrant or writing is as follows, that is - by reason of which said warrant or writing, the plaintiff was, on the day mentioned in the said declaration, assaulted, seized, and laid hold of by the defendants, and by them imprisoned, and kept and detained in prison, for the time and in the manner in the declaration mentioned, without any reasonable or probable cause whatsoever, and against the will of the plaintiff; which said assault and imprisonment above newly assigned, was another and different assault and imprisonment than the said assault and imprisonment in the last plea mentioned, and thereby attempted to be justified: and this the plaintiff was ready to verify, wherefore, inasmuch as the defendant Dennis Creagh Moylan had not answered the said trespasses above newly assigned, he the plaintiff prayed judgment and his damages by him sustained on occasion of the committing thereof to be adjudged to him, &c. The defendant Moylan pleaded to the new-assignment, — thirdly, that the said trespasses above newly assigned were, and each of them was, committed after the passing and coming into force of the act of parliament in the second plea of the defendant Moylan to the declaration mentioned; that, before and at the said times when the alleged trespasses, and every of them, were committed, he, Moylan, was the judge of the countycourt in the said second plea also mentioned, being a court theretofore, and then, and thence continually, duly constituted, appointed, and holden according to the said statute, and which then and still was the court in the warrant in the new-assignment of the plaintiff mentioned; that, just before the committing of the said newly assigned trespasses, to wit, on the day and year in the declaration first mentioned, the said county-court was holden, and a sitting thereof took place, to wit, at a certain building appointed in that behalf within the jurisdiction of the said court, according to the form of the said statute, to wit, at the building in the declaration mentioned, and the defendant Moylan was then and there sitting in the said court as the judge thereof; that the plaintiff then, and before the committing of the said trespasses, or any of them, and within the said jurisdiction, and at and in the said court, wilfully insulted the defendant Moylan during his said sitting in the said court as such judge as aforesaid, and whilst he was so sitting as such judge thereof as aforesaid; whereupon the defendant Moylan then and there, during the said sitting, and before the rising of the 1850. LEVY v. MOYLAN. 1850. LEVY ย. MOYLAN. said court, and at and in the said court, and within the jurisdiction thereof, did, according to the form of the said statute, order that the plaintiff should, for his said offence, be taken into custody and detained until the rising of the said court, and that he should be committed for seven days then next to the house of correction in the declaration and new-assignment mentioned, which then and always was a prison within the jurisdiction of the said county-court, to which the defendant Moylan, as such judge as aforesaid, then and always had power to commit offenders under the said act of parliament: that the plaintiff was then and there, and at and in the said court, and within the jurisdiction, and during the said sitting thereof, accordingly taken into custody and detained until the defendant Moylan afterwards, on the same day, and within and at a reasonable time in that behalf, and during the said sitting of the said court, and before the rising thereof, and at and in the said court, and within the jurisdiction thereof, did, according to the said statute, in order to commit the plaintiff for seven days to the said house of correction in the declaration and in the new-assignment mentioned, according to law, make his warrant in the new-assignment mentioned, signed by him the defendant Moylan, and sealed with the seal of the said county-court, and did thereby then command as therein is commanded, which said warrant was then and there, and at and in the said court, and during the said sitting, and before the rising thereof, delivered to the said Francis Smedley, who then was the high-bailiff of the said court, to be executed in due form of law: that the said Francis Smedley, as such high-bailiff as aforesaid, and the said William Flack, who then was, and thence continually had been one of the bailiffs of the said court in the said warrant mentioned, in aid of the said Francis Smedley, |