The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-25 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.--July 24.

SOUTHWARK. Edward Colpoys, a well-
dressed man, was placed at the bar before Mr.
Burcham, charged with assaulting Albert Kreusler,
a waiter at the Bridge-house Hotel, Wellington-
street, London-bridge.
The prosecutor, a young German, said that the
defendant and a lady came to his employer's hotel
on the previous afternoon, and, at the request of
the gentleman, were shown to a private room.
They were supplied with refreshments by the wit-
ness. At the defendant's request the witness had
the bill made out, amounting to 7s. 6d., which he
handed to him. After looking at it, the prisoner
became much excited, and said that they were
a set of rogues, and that he should not pay it.
Witness showed him the list of prices, which
agreed with the bill, and told him the charges were
correct, when the defendant tried to leave the house.
The witness demanded payment before he left, when
the defendant deliberately struck him on the face.
The defendant here, in a very excited manner,
declared that what the witness had stated was un-
true. He considered that he had been treated
shamefully. The bill was exorbitant, and he offered
65., which be considered sufficient. The barmaid
refused to accept this sum, and then the complain-
ant rushed at him and called him a swindler. He
told him if he applied such a name to him he would
knock him down. The complainant repeated the
offensive ephithet, when he struck him on the cheek.
He would not put up with such an insult from any
one.

The complainant, recalled, said he did not say the
defendant was a swindler. He behaved in a cour-
teous manner to him, and only asked him to settle
his bill before he left.
The defendant again contended that he was ill-
used. His uncle was one of the directors of the
South-Eastern Railway, and he wanted to send to
the Board-room to prove that he was a gentleman
of property and position, well able to pay the bill,
but they refused and surrounded him.
Joseph Honor, 492 A, said he was called to the
hotel, and saw the defendant in a very excited state
outside. He was asked for his address, and told that
if h e gave it he might go. The defendant then
pointed to the complainant, and said, " This vaga-
bond has called me a swindler," and at the same
time he struck him on the face. The witness then
took him into custody.
In cross•examination the witness said that the
defendant was in a very excited state when he came
up, fighting about with everyikly. He not only
threatened to fight the witness, but said if he laid
hands on him he would blow his brains out with a
pistol. He had no weapon about him.
Mr. Sidney Spencer, proprietor of the Bridge-
house Hotel, said that a little after four on the
previous afternoon he was writing a letter
in his private room when he heard an
altercation in the passage. He went out
to see what was the matter, when he saw the
waiter showing the defendant the list of prices
at the bar. The defendant struck the waiter at
that time. The witness went up and said that he
was the proprietor of the hotel, and that such un-
gentlemanly conduct could not be allowed. The
defendant then exclaimed in a violent manner,
" You are a d- set of swindlers, and here's my
card." The witness had ascertained that he had
refused to pay his bill; consequently he told him he
might leave the hotel, provided he gave his address,
as the card had only a name on.
Mr. Burchair, told the prisoner that as far as the
evidence went he was of opinion that he had grossly
misconducted himself. Suppose the charges, had
been exorbitant, he did not act in the way a gen-
tleman should have done. He should with coolness
have seen the landlord, and pointed out to hits the
charges which he thought excessive. If they were
not reduced he should then have left the house never
to enter it again. No gentleman would have
attacked a waiter under such circumstances.
The defendant assured his worship that he Was
in great mental trouble through his wife's alarm..
ing illness, and he might have been over excited.
Mr. Burcham had no doubt from his manner that
be
was much excited. His conduct, however, had
been
disgraceful. He should convict him of the
assault
ou the, waiter and fine him 405., with the
alternative
of 14 days' imprisonment.

GREENWICH.—Robert Cooke, carrying on
business ae a butcher at Lee-green, Lewisham, was