The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-05 00:00:00

IN RE FENN.

This bankrupt was an innkeeper at Norwich, and this
was a meeting for last examination and discharge.
Mr. Brough appeared for the assignees, and did not op-
pose. The bankrupt had been in business many years, and
now failed for £3,000, and assets to about half that amount.

His Honour granted the discharge.
THE ANGLO-FRENCH AGRICULTURAL TRADING COMPANY.

A meeting was held for a call in the case of this com-
pany, and it was fixed at £2 per share.

IN RE HOLMES.

A dividend meeting was held in the case of this bank
rupt, a shipowner, in Swan-alley, City, and a dividend of
Is, in the pound was ordered. A previous dividend was
declared of 3s, 6d. in the pound. The debts were above
£2,300.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.--This Day.

(Before the Assistant-Judge.)

A respectably dressed person named Hicks surrendered
to his bail on a charge of assaulting the police and creating
a disturbance in Cremorne Gardens.

From the evidence of the p lice•constable it appeared
that on the occasion of the Licensed Victuallers' fete on the
Ist of July the defendant and a friend were present at
Cremorne Gardens, and about half-past 12 o'clock a dis-
turbance occurred, when the police interfered.
There were some other persons engaged in the
quarrel, and by direction of Inpector Drake two constables
named Ayres and Manley, were sent to restore order, it
possible. The two constables alleged that the defendant
refused all persuasion, and to prevent further annoy-
ance steps were taken to eject him and his friend from
the gardens. In effecting this they said they received
many violent kicks about their legs and shins from the
defendant, and the result of the disturbance was that the
prisoner was charged with assault, and the magistrate
sent the case to be disposed of at the session.
For the defence it was contended that the police had alto-
gether acted under a mistake in taking Mr. Hicks into cus-
tody, as instead of being the aggressor, he was in fact trying
to procure the ejectment of another who had been making
himself objectionable to some of the visitors of the gardens.
The police constables having given their evidence.
The Assistant Judge said he did not think any very
violent assault had been proved.
Mr. Sleigh, counsel for the defendant, said, although
that was so, it was of the utmost importance to defendant
that he should take steps to remove the stigma of having
been in the custody of the police without the slightest
reason. His client was a respectable licensed victualler, and
if the evidence of the police was true, then most certainly
an assault had been committed ; but he coatended that they
had taken the wrong man into custody. It was of the utmost
importance to the defendant that the evidence of the police
shoul'i be thoroughly sifted, because from the beginning the
utmost prejudice had been imported into the case. He felt;
that the witnesses he should call would prove to the satis-
faction of the jury that the police had altogether been mis-
taken in taking Mr. Hicks into custody.
Mr. Cannon, an auctioneer, carrying on business in
Bloomsbury, said he was at Cremorne Gardens on the Ist
of July, and about half-past 12 he invited a number of his
friends to the refreshment bar, when a little man, in con-
sequence of his reaching over his shoulder to get a glass off
the bar, felt himself offended. He challenged witness to
fight, but he refused, and a disturbance was the result,
The next he saw was the defendant in the custody of
the police. He remonstrated with the constable,
and told them they had made a mistake, and that they
ought to have taken the little man. The police did not
treat Mr. Hicks very tenderly.
In answer to a question from the Assistannt- Judge; the
witness said he was ordered to leave the gardens, but he
did not consider he was ejected from them.

George Webb said he was in the gartiens and saw the
disturbance. He did not think the defendant was the ag-

gressor.
In crass-examination the witness said ho did not know
the defendant personally, but he had been pointed out to
him as a fighting man in Jim Mace's circus.
George Parkes also said he was at Cremorne-gardens on
the evening in question. He thought, as far as ho could
form an opinion, that the police were to blame.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of assaulting the
polite in the execution of their duty.
The Assistant-Judge said he never saw a case more
clearly prov-d, and he could not but think that it had been
aggravated in consequence of there being a determination
in some quarters to offer every opposition to the police, and
by the bad advice the prisoner had chosen t) adopt. He
should not, under the circumstances, send him to prison,
but he should inflict on him a fine of 120, and also call
upon him to find two respectable sureties to keep the peace
for 12 months.
The fine having been paid, and bail accepted, the de-
fendant was discharged. _ _ _

John Price, who was yesterday found guilty of stealing
a pair of diamond earrings, value £lOO., the property of
Harry Emmanuel, of Hanover-square, was to• day sentenced
to four years' penal servitude.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

WESTMINSTER.

DISGRACEFUL AND 'UNPROVOKED ASSAULT.—Mary
Ann Baker, a woman of the lowest class, was brought be-
fore Mr. Arnold, charged with assulting Ann Courts, an
elderly respectable-looking woman.
Complainant had evidently received so severe a blow that
her whole face was contused and swollen. She stated that
at 12 o'clock yesterday she was proceeding through York-
street, Westminster, in company with a friend, when the
defendant suddenly struck her a violent blow on the nose,
from the effects of which her face now presented its present
appearance.
Mr. Arnold—Do you know anything of the defendant?
Complainant—Not the least, she is a perfect stranger to
me.
Mr. Arnold—Had you given her any provocation ?
Complainant—None whatever. I never spoke to her nor
did anything to her. She suddenly came up and struck me
before I was aware of her intention, and without any cause.
A respectable young woman, who was passing at the
time the outrage was committed, and who described herself
as a stranger to both parties, said that the attack was per-
fectly unprovoked in any way by the complainant, who was
quietly pursuing her way when it happened-
Mr. Arnold (to defendant)—What have you to say ?
Defendant—l am very sorry. I was drunk, as the police-
man knows.

Mr. Arnold—lf ycu pleasc to get drunk it is no reason
why unolfending persons should suffer for your want of
reason. This is a most wanton and unjustifiable act. The
complainant is walking peaceably through the streets, when
You suddenly attack her, without anything which can bear
the colour of an excuse. This sort of thing cannot be per-
mitted, and toe sentence upon you is that you be committed
for one month to hard lab.ur in the House of Correction.