The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1871-08-12 00:00:00

CHARGE of ASSAULT AGAINST a VICAR.

At a r.pech! bitting of the Enfield inardsttates, the Rev. G.
H. Hudson, Vicar of Enfield, appeared to a summons which
rharecd him with unlawfully aaeaulting Alfred Carter, on
Suuday, the Wth of July.

Mr. Jessopp, of Waltham Abbey, who appeared
for the prosecution, said the complainant was a boy
of fifteen, and on Sunday, the 30th ult., attended
the parish Sunday•school. The defendant taught his
class. One boy had read from the Bible, and the vicar
called upon complainant to go on next; but he had
lost his place by looking off his book. Defendant
then told the boy to stand up. It might be very
wrom; not to obey the vicar, but the boy did not
stand up when he was told to di. so. Defendant
then pulled him up. The boy asked for his cap
that he might leave. The request was refused, and
when the boy repeated it the vicar slapped his face,
then got him between his knees, and struck him several
Unita with great violence; in fact, his eyes and face,

as they were even then, would show the magistrates
that much violence must have been used ; and this on
A lituulaf—Cif all days in the week. The complainant
might have been impudent, but if so Mr. Hodson haul
no right to take the law into his own halltiti and beat
him as he had done. In correcting complainant, de-
fendant did wit correct {din properly, but havino
bruised his eyes and face, as the justices must see hail
been done, he (Mr. Jessopp) contended that defendant
hail been guilty of a brutal assault.
The complainant corroborated the statement by his
evidence, declaring that the vicar boxed his ears, got
him down on the floor, with his heal between his
knees, and then stilt* him in the eye with his right
hand, and causol the lirnises which were then visible.
. .

Mr. .Bevan (one I t the justiens) Was not your eye
bloodsh4 before this?

Complainant It was not. I cannot say how many
times Ile struck me, hut a good loony. I said,
"Perhapo you will have to pay for this," and left the
school._ a_ _

In the cross-examination complainant admitted that
he had been expello I the schisl- once for misconduct,
but said he did not tell the boys to sing badly; it was
done on the previous Sunday, but not at his sugges-
tion. _ _

--Mr. Baker. surgeon, deposed that the boy was
brought to him Iql Monday, his mother stating that
she had been to Mr. Moyer. a magistrate, who could
not see any bruise, but be (the sumeon) saw a bruise
very distinctly, and was surprised that any one could
miss seeing it. The eyes, too, were bloodshot from
the pupils to the angles.
Mr. Bevan : Could not that arise from a cold?

Witness : Certainly not. There were bruises both
on the eyes and behind the ear. The face was also
swollen. The blow must have been very severe to
have fweasioned such injuries.
Frank Greenwood, twelve years of age, and -Henry
Bonitwowl, thirteen' -onfirmeduomplainant's evidence.
Mr. Bevan asked Mr. Jessopp if he contended that
the master of a Sunday-school had no right under any
eirelllll4tallCOS to box a boy's ears.
Mr. Jewsepp : In law the master has no right to in-
flict chastisement at all, lot I is not onnplain of
proper chastisement, but .4 this oust improper usage.
Mr. Itignall (for the defendant) I contend that a
schoolmaster has the same right as a parent to chastise
a boy.
Mr. Ford (one .4 the justiees) : Awl does the law
recognise boxing ears as a legitimate mode of punish-
ment ?

Jessopp : Looking at that boy's face, I should
1,,' ashamed not ~nly as it elogyman of the Church of
England, but AN a gentleman—to allow it to be seen in
court. (Applause, which was immediately repressed.)
Mr. Rignall, on the part ~f the vicar, reliudiated any
suggestion of undue violence. For some time past
there has been a coalition amongst the boys to upset
the discipline of the school, and that had been traced
in some degree to the complainant and three others.
Carter had already been expelled for bad behaviour,
but at the instance of his father he was re-admitted,
the father requesting that if he did not behave
himself he should be corrected. Before the school
commenced on Sunday last the complainant told
the other boys to sing out of time. He had
already been remonstrated with by Mr. Randall, the
superintendent of the school, but immediately Mr.
Randall's back was turned the noise was re-com-
menced by Carter and his accomplicea. When the
time came for reading Carter was inattentive and
defiant. The vicar then, feeling it necessary that some
example should lie made if discipline was to be main-
tained, ordered the boy to stand up, but the reply was,
" J am not going to stand up for you," and the boy
tried to get his hat. The vicar told him be would get
his ears boxed if lie did not behave himself, but he
would not, and then his ears were boxed. There was
a struggle in which the boy got his head between the
vicar's knees, and the vicar kept It there to prevent
him kicking. If the boy received any injury to the
eye, it must have been through bringing his face
into contact with something during the struggle.
vicar only struck lain on the ears with his open
hand.
I Joseph Randall, 11 years old, a witness for the de-
I fence, said Carter told the boys to sing out of time.
The vicar hit Carter about ten times, some blows being
inflicted while his head was between the vicar's knees.
Some other evidence having been given, the court
was cleared, and on the re-admission of the public,
Mr. Ford said the magistrates had given the case
their best attention, and they quite considered that if
a school was t., be carried on, the authority of th.efe
who had the management must be maintained. Of
course that must be done by legal means and proj,er
punishment, and there scented to. be sante doubts as to
what was proper punishment. If boxing the cars was
not proper and legal, then the devision must be against
the vicar; :und it was for Mr. .1 essopp, fa, behalf 44
the complainant, to r .nsider whether it was worth
while to, take 3 ease tO the superior courts iq ion CAI.
point. The magistrates would be happy to grant a
Mr. Jessopp said if it were his own ease be should
carry it to a superior court, lout complainant's parents
were very poor.
Mr. Ford : We cannot help that. If boxing the ears
is right, it reffolved itself into a question at' to, whether
unnecessary violenee was used ; but if it is unlawful,
the defendant is clearly to blame.
Mr. Bevan : We express no opinion as to the extent
of punishment.
Mr. Jessop : That is the only point on which the
bench are called on to adjudicate. My clients are too
poor to appeal to a higher court.
Mr. Twelis (one of the justices) proceeded to speak
of the bad conduct of the boy, when he was loudly
his.ssl from the is sly of the court. The court was at
onc. cleared, after which the Chairman said, "The
I case is dismissed."