The Express.
London, England, 1856-03-25 00:00:00

•/BAULT UPON ♦ POLICE OC:

William Bow/afield, 44, a man of . &twines appearance,
was indicted for wounding Thomas Abel Wilmot, with in-
tent to him some grievous bodily hula.
Mr Ecailand prosecuted, and Mr. Cooks defended.
It appeared that Wilmot, who was at that time one
of the superintendents of the county polies, was at Wenkok
I rues, is July. 1849, with some of the men of the force, and
among the company were Bradfield and hie aompaaioas,
who Wed to get spgamblisg. They were prevented by Wil-
mot. About 7in the evening a BAIA took place la a drinking
booth, to quell which Bewley, a roltuntan, went in.
Broadfield, however, threw bum across a tat la, and beat
him well. At this juncture, Wilmot came in, and Broad.
field ran away. He war stopped, sad Wilmot apprehended
him. A violent struggle then d, in which Wilmot'a
staff wss torn out of his band, and lased about hie be►d moat
unineresifsUy by Broadfield, who managed to etc pa,
although several hundreds of people were assembled. W
amines rendered insensible, and bled profniely. la cows-
guano of this, Wilmot has bola psrman.aUy &gabled, red
leas beta obliged to leave the polies force. His hearing is
also rendered very &fictive. The prisoner was not again
seen in that part of the country from 1849 antil October
list year, when he visited Bridgeorth, and was apprehended
after a desperate struggle, at a publiwkosse there, by gaper-
inteadeat Beater, who had ascended Wilmot I. the
pollee.
The jary found the prisoner
Tbe priseser, ft appeared, had bees previously trays-
ported, sad also hens twice imprisoned for bang tones.
The learned Judge said that bat for a recent act the
prisoner would have been transported for tea years; and the
'gateau of the court upon him sow would be that of ala
years' penal servitude.
Their lordehips left sally to open the temasaltioa at Hert-
ford.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—WARWICK, ?deice 24.

INERT V. PL_
Mr. W. IL Adams opened the pleadings. The dealer %-
ties stated that the plaintiff bad been bit and injured by a
mischievous, savage, and ferooions dog kept by the defend-
ant, for which the plaintiff claimed damsel to the amount
of 1001.
Mr. Bittlisten thought that this WM II 011ie is which the
jury would think that the plaintiff had sustained math little
hardship. He was a lahoering gatellener and somewhere
about the 16th of March, 1856, was returning from his work,
and primly through Aston, when the wife of the defendant
(who was the view of the parish) ease by, accompanied by
two doge. The animals, be believed, were cared Pepper'
and "Mustard," and hos their labile he th night the jury
would amides %bey well deserved their names.
Lord Campbell—An they of the Dandle Dinnsont breed ?
Mr. Bittleston believed they were. When the dogs saw
ruttistiff they immediately flew at him, in r guar dog
attacking his le front and rear, sod biting him on
Or kip The plaintiff treated the wound himself for mir
dm% ewi his improper mode of treating it increased the
VIM& MEN was gives to the d•foadant of what his
tlsr bed AIM, bat nothing in the @hope of remuneration
baread half-a-mown had been sent him. The plaintiff,
info re now sought something like substantial
coaapema-
del is. the injury received. By the law of the load, he was
boa m& Se prow' the dogs wen of bad disposition, sad accus-
tomed to bite people.
Lord Campbell—That is the law of England, but it is not
the law of Bcollthd. By the law of that country, rho owner
1 a dog is liana frr all its misdeeds without the relents.
Mr. Bittleetth obeetved that,in th.t respect tte law of

BITING MN.