The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-23 00:00:00

to suffer much. Between seven and eight o'clock he saw
147 A push a young man rudely along. The youth
irked " Why h., did 0..." Tie p,licedlan
again:, and on t: r'uth aia renmstrating, tho nolioc-
Loan gave him di viulent bow on tii' iJ sine of 'll.lle,:i
and face, which he repeated, and the blood flowed. A
respectably-dressed woman came up and told the
policeman that he ought to be ashamed of him-
self. He then left the boy, who was on the
ground and struck at the woman, knocking off her
bonnet. He after that struck the youth a third time.
Witness, with others, went over to ascertain who the
boy was, when a body of police came up and ordered
them off, or they would serve them the same. He saw
one small stone strike a policeman's hat. The boy was
struck after that. The stone came in a different direc-
tion to that where the boy stood.
Cross-examined by Mr. Ellice—He thought he should
know 147 A. He believed the people congregated in
Hyde Park on account of the Sunday Trading Bill.
Mr. Henry Seers, grocer, 6, Prospect-place, Kings-
land, corroborated the last witness.
Mr. Lewis Franklin, compositor, 7, Furnival's-inn-
place, Holborn, was in the Park with his wife on the
afternoon in question. When in Park-street, his direct
way home from the Park, he found another assemblage
of persons near Lord Robert Grosvenor's. They were
in conversation on the Sunday bill. He saw a body of
police, four or six abreast, pass up the street, and
'at a given signal they struck away right and
left at the people. The !people around him
cried " Shame,' in which he joined, and was im-
mediately seized from behind by Inspector Webb. He
was passed over to two policemen, a third bringing up
the rear, and when a short distance off, without any
resistance on his part, one of the policemen drew his
staff and struck him on the left side of the head, causing
it to bleed. Inspector Webb gave orders for his wife to
be taken, but the men not understanding who he meant
did not take her. At Vine-street Station Inspector
Webb asked where the woman was, and a policeman
went outside to see if she had followed to the station,
but could not find her. Inspector Webb made the
charge against him for "inciting the mob and riotous
conduct, and his wife for inciting the mob to effect his
"
rescue.

The charge sheet was produced and read by Mr.
Ellice, but it contained no entry with reference to the
wife.

Witness explained that as Inspector Webb gave the
charge before he knew whether or not witness's wife was
in custody, that when it was ascertained she was not
there the charge was entered as read. He described
the state of the cell at Vine-street in similar terms to the
witnesses already examined. His wound, which was an
inch and a half long, was not attended to during the time
he was in custody. It was so suffocating in the cell
that he was afraid at one time there would
have been a death struggle to get at the
small] aperture for fresh air. He heard the police-
men in conversation, one said "he had brought five pri-
soners, and if he had had conveyances he could have
brought 50." He was discharged on the Tuesday, no
charge being preferred against him.
Mr. James W. Howell, law student, Middle Temple,'
said he was managing director of the Metropolitan Insti-
tution for the Protection of Trade. He had left S!i6o
where he was canvassing in anticipation of a dissolution
of Parliament—(laughter)—on ,purpose to give evidence
on this occasion. He was in the Park and heard cries
of "Go to Church," and " have you paid for that
bor:e ?" He saw one man seized and dragged away
by the police by the direction of one of the
superintendents. He lifted an elderly gentleman from
the ground who bad received a severe blow on the
temple. He saw a bill in a man's hand, headed "Arise,
oh England," having reference to a Socialist publication.
The people on this occasion were good humoured.
Mr. Mitchell—A mob is generally in a jocular mood,
is it not ?

Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—The gentleman
will probably know that on his return from Sligo.
(Laughter.) .

Mi.Thoinas Sutherland, 28, Gloucester-terrace, Hyde-
park, gave it as his opinion that the conduct of the
police was reprehensible.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley suggested that as
the general conduct of the police had been spoken to
over and over again it would be better to confine the
evidence to specific charges.
Mr. Robert Ward, plasterer, 3, Marsham-street, West-
minster, saw three females thrown down and trampled
upon. 113 A struck a gentleman across the face, and
on witness going forward to take his number another
policeman told hint "he had better mind his business or
he would, be locked up." Noticing the misconduct of
another policement in striking a boy he went forward
to take his number, which was either 392 A or 393 A,
when he threatened to knock him over the head with
' his staff. He could identify that man. He was able
to identify 58 A beating every one he came near.
John James White, waiter, 1, Chair-court, Temple-
bar, was in the park, and apprehended by 398 A. The
people interfered, and the policeman struck him on the
head with his truncheon. His face and clothes down to
his boots were covered with blood. The blow rendered
him insensible. He was confined in a cell with others
at Vine-street. He was there an hour before he could
get any water to wash his face. At Marlborough-street
they were placed in the garden adjoining the court pre-
vious to their cases being heard ; and whilst there, a
man—he believed the usher of the court—came and
called the cases, and told the police "to knock our
heads off" if they did not keep quiet. When the magi-
strate told this man to feel witness's head he put his
hand an inch from the place, and said "it was a wound
apparently from a stone." Witness was charged with
throwing stones at the police, but discharged. He de-
nied having thrown stones at the police. The usher or
gaoler at Marlborough-street told them he wished he
had a "mine underneath to blow them all up."
Mr. Mitchell said he had a number of other witnesses
to call ; but as their evidence was much the same as that
already given, he thought it would not be advantageous
to go further with the case.

Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said that Mr.
Mitchell had conducted the inquiry with great pro-
priety, and had done great justice to the parties who had
entrusted their cases to him. The Committee were of
opinion the time had arrived when it was necessary they
should be informed of the nature of the regulations issued
to the police, and which regulated their conduct.
The Court then adjourned until 11 o'clock to-morrow,
when the police will be heard in reply.