The King against Tregarthen
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1833 |
| Date | 01 January 1833 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 110 E.R. 941
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
S. C. 2 N. & M. 379.
the king against tkegarthen. 1833. A party gave information on oath before a magistrate, that from certain language used towards him he was in bodily fear from another; and the magistrate, upon hearing the complaint, required the latter to enter into recognisances to keep the peace. On motion to discharge the recognisances, on the ground that the language was used in a metaphorical sense only, the Court refused to interfere, because it was for the magistrate to judge in what sense the language was used. [S. C. 2 N. & M. 379.] The defendant and one William Matthews, being rival sail-makers at Penzance in Cornwall,, and meeting there on the 30th of October 1833, the defend-[679]-ant, addressing Matthews, said,-" The rod (alluding to an expression said to have been used by Matthews towards the defendant) you have in pickle for me, you must prepare yourself to receive such a castigation with as you deserve; and I am determined you shall have it." Some altercation then passed between the parties; and, on the same day, the defendant sent a letter to Matthews, containing the following expressions:-" The rod you have had so long in pickle for me is now so well saturated, that it is, in every respect, complete and fit for use; and, instead of applying it to my shoulders, you must now prepare yourself to receive such a eastiga-tion as your dastardly cowardice and intriguing designs most justly merit. I will no longer scruple to expose your infamous conduct." The letter then proceeded to give several instances in which the writer alleged Matthews to have been guilty of fraud in the trade of a sail-maker, and challenged Matthews to meet those charges. On the following morning the defendant was summoned to attend before the Mayor of Penzance, to be bound over to keep the peace on the application of Matthews, founded on the above conversation and letter: he accordingly attended at the office of the town clerk, when, the conversation and letter having been sworn to by Matthews, he was asked by the town clerk whether, from the language, threats, and letters of the defendant, he was not in bodily fear from the defendant; and Matthews having answered in the affirmative, the defendant was compelled to enter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gregory v Judge Windle
...1889; vide "Judgments of the Superior Courts in Ireland" (H.M.S.O., Dublin, 1903) page 343). In re Tregarthen (1833) 5 B. & Ad. 678; 110 E.R. 941; 2 Nev. & M.K.B. 379; 1 Nev. & M.C.C. 431. Re Willock (1829) 2 Law Rec. 422. Plenary summons. The facts are summarised in the headnote and are fu......
-
The King (Boylan) v The Justices of Londonderry
... ... An order could be made even by word of mouth: Dalton, Justice of the Peace, pp. 270, 271. No warrant was necessary if the party against whom the surety was sought was present before the Justice: Ib. , p. 271. Orders for sureties for the peace and good behaviour are essentially ... In R. v. Tregarthen ( 7 ), where the defendant gave security in a case inter partes , there was evidence; and Parke, J., expressly makes sufficient information on oath ... ...
-
Nixon v Rodgers
...v. The Bailiffs of ShrewsburyENR 2 Leon. 34. Rex v. BrightENR 4 C. & P. 387. Broughton v. Jackson 18 Q. B. 378. The King v. TregarthenENR 5 B. & Ad. 678. Duke of Marlborough's Case 5 Q. B. 955. Haylock v. SparkeENR 1 E. & B. 482. Derecourt v. CorbishleyENR 5 E. & B. 188. Pleading Indecent b......
-
The Queen against Mallinson
...[Lord Campbell C.J. If we hold that sureties ought to have been given, we decide that the refusal was wrong.] In Bex v. Tregarthen (5 B. & Ad. 678), where a magistrate had taken sureties of the peace, this Court refused to interfere. [Coleridge J. In Regina v. Dunn (12 A. & E. 599), [375] w......