The CASE of EDWARD STRODE Gent. in an Action of the Case, for scandalous Words, and pretended false Imprisonment, brought against him, Thomas Pemberton Gent. and Henry Manning Defendants, by George Rodny Plaintiff.
ONE Mrs. Joyce Buckeridg having set up several forged Deeds to strip one Richard Anderson Esq; of his Inheritance; Case. and after several Trials at Bar, and a Decree in Chancery, the said Deeds being detected, and Mrs. Buckeridg convict for the forgery of one of them; pending these Suits, Mrs. Buckeridg sent down the Plaintiff, Rodny her Brother, to hold the possession of the Rectory of Bury Pomeroy near Totness in the County of Devon', and to receive the Rents and Profits thereof; the Tythes of which Rectory, together with the mean Profits, were adjudged to the said Mr. Anderson: who thereupon sent down several Writs against the said Rodney for the mean Profits and Rents received by him, but could not get him arrested thereon.
Whereupon, about the latter end of July 1685, Mr. Anderson desired the Defendants, Strode and Pemberton, to go down thither, and to get the Plaintiff Rodney arrested, and to that purpose sent a Writ by Pemberton, (against Mr. Rodny, at the Suit of Mr. Curteis Trustee for Mr. Anderson) who took a VVarrant on the said VVrit, and repaired to Bury Pomeroy aforesaid, where the Plaintiff Rodny was taken by virtue thereof, by the Defendants: who fearing Rodny might be rescued, for preventing thereof, gave out to the Rabble, that they had taken him as a Rebel, for being one of those that were with the late Duke of Monmouth in the late Rebellion. But on the first Arrest,See Rodny's own Affidav', one sworn 3 months, the other 6 months after the Arrest. Rodny swears he was taken on the Writ, at the Suit of Curteis, and mentions not one word of being scised as a Rebel: and the Goaler Good swears, he received him a Prisoner at the Suit of Curteis only. they acquainted Mr. Rodny himself, that they took him on the VVarrant at the Suit of Curteis, and so carried him to an Alehouse in the same Parish where he was taken; where Mr. Rodny sent for an Attorny, who read the VVarrant; and the Defendants offered to discharge him, if he would give but 200 l. Bail to the Action: which Rodny refused, and so was carried to Prison by virtue of the said VVarrant, and for no other Cause whatsoever, and was in Prison charged with nothing else, as appears by two of Mr. Rodny's own Affidavits, and by the Affidavits of Mr. Pemberton and Mr. Good the Goaler.
Notwithstanding which Mr. Rodny brought this Action against the Defendants, for charging him to be a Rebel, and to have been with the late D. of Monmouth in the late Rebellion. To which Action Strode and Pemberton jointly pleaded, Not Guilty: and Manning suffered Judgment by Default; and upon Trial, in March 1685, one and the same Jury found the Defendants, Strode and Pemberton, both equally Guilty, de premissis, yet assess Damages against Strode to 1000 l. against Pemberton to 50 l.And on the Inquiry against Manning assess Damages against him to 50 l.The Plaintiff Rodny, before Judgment, entred two Noli prosequie's as to Pemberton and Manning, and took Judgment against Strode for the 1000 l. and 75 l.Costs. VVhich Judgment hath been affirmed in the Exchequer Chamber in Trinity Term last; and on the Defendant's paying Mr. Rodny 120 l.in last Michaelmass Term, for a Cessat Executio to save his Bail, till he could bring his VVrit of Error in Parliament: which VVrit he hath now brought, and it is now come here by VVrit of Error.
And the only Questions are, VVhether the Verdict was at first Vicious? and if it were, then whether a Noli prosequi, as to the Defendants Pemberton and Manning, will make the Verdict against Strode good?
The Plaintiff Rodny, Note. on the Trial, never proved he was damnified one Peny. And if the Judgment be reversed upon this Writ of Error, the Plantiff Rodny hath another Action of the Case now depending against the Defendant Strode, for the very same words as were given in Evidence against Strode on the first Trial, and for which the Jury gave the Plaintiff Rodny 1000 l. Damages as aforesaid.
It is strange a Person should receive 1000 l. Damages for being charged to be a Rebel, when he himself swears he was taken up and arrested at the Suit of Curteis, and not mentioning his being taken as a Rebel.