The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-21 00:00:00

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

ASSAULTS AT A COFFEE-ROUSE.—Salnuel Gillis, de-
scribed as an artist, but said to be a pugilist, was charged
before Mr. Knox with assaulting Joseph Herring, the
waiter at a coffee-house at 17, Bear-street, Leicester-square,
and Andrew Carlisle, a chairmaker, of 2, Archer-street,
Haymarket.
Joseph Herring said he was waiter at a coffee-house at
17, Bear-street, Leicester-square, and between two and
three that morning the prisoner came in, and said in a loud
voice, " Where's my uncle ?" Witness told him that he
did not know his uncle, when he exclaimed, " 'Why, he's a
man with a big white hat," and then made use of very vile
language and struck him two or three severe blows on the
head with his fist, which had the effect of rendering him
nearly senseless. He knew nothing of the prisoner, only
that he was a pugilist, and talked about his connection
with the " P.R."

Mr. Knox asked the witness whether the prisoner was
drunk, and the witness said he thought not.
Andrew Carlisle, a chairmaker, of Archer-street, Hay-
market, said he was in the coffee-shop when prisoner came
in and said, " Where's my unele Have you seen my
uncle 1) He's.a man with a big white hat." And on being
told that his uncle was not known he set to abusing every-
body, and then struck the waiter. On witness remarking
V., the landlady that the prisoner wa a brutal fellow, the
prisoner came up to him and gave him a violent blow in
the eye. (The witness had a bad black eye.)
Joseph Kettlewell, 70 C, said he was called to the coffee-
house, and saw the prisoner assault the two witnesses.
The prisoner was not quite sober, but knew what he was
about. _ _ _

The prisoner denied using the bad languago, and said ho
only struck the witnesses when they struck him.
Herring said that even when outside the prisoner at-
tacked him in a violent manner, and knocked him against
the shutters with great violence.
Mr. Knox asked the constable whether he saw the wit-
ness assaulted outside the house as he had just stated, and
the constable replied in the affirmative.

Mr. Knox said that persons were not to be exposed to
ruffianly attacks as these, and committed the prisoner for a
month without the option of paying a fine,

WESTMINSTER, THIS DAY.

UNFOUNDED CHARGE OF STABBING.—Mary Tayley, a
young woman, was charged before Mr. Arnold with stab-
bing Catherine M'Carthey, under the following circum •
stances.
Mr. Smith attended for the prisoner.
The evidence of the complainant—who had three incised
wounds on her—one on her arm, another on her breast, and
a third on her side—stated that on the previous afternoon,
she was suddenly
which she took from
wo
shs
ei lue l et e
dh
bwya st
hien
par
ssohnoepr naPh yae
knife,r e e
the counter. She had given the prisoner no provocation.
She took the knife from her, and was afterwards taken to
Westminster Hospital.
In answer to Mr. Smyth,

Complainant stated that she did not follow the prisoner
into the shop. She had no knife in her hand.
Mrs. Honeybrook, occupier of the shop, stated that she
was present during the whole time the complainant said
prisoner was in the shop. The complainant was much th•
worse for liquor. She first struck the prisoner on the lips,
which bled. She never saw a knife used by the prisoner.
Complainant fell on a scale, which was on the counter, and
cut her cheek, as also her arm.
By Mr. Arnold—She had a brick in her hand.
It further appeared that when complainant first entered
the shop she had no brick in her hand, and that after her
quarrel in tho shop she went out and returned with a brick.
Mr. Arnold said that he could place no reliance upon the
statement of the complainant in reference to the alleged
assault upon her by the prisoner.
They were held to bail severally to keep the peace for six
months towards each other.