The Sun.
London, England, 1849-10-22 00:00:00

22, 1849

cised with complete impunity. The lad was at the
time about 14 years of age, and extremely quick,
intelligent, and spirited, and having shown an eager
disposition to capacitate himself for educating others,
he was placed under the tuition of Mr. Ross, of the
Lancasterian School in Tottenham, where
his progress was considerable. Funds, however,
dropped down very low, and he was obliged
to leave the place, in which he was rapidly improving,
in order to provide for the necessaries of life for the
day that was passing over him. Mr. Brotherton, to
whom he had from the first generous interposition in
his favour ever looked as a parent, obtained for him a
berth on board an Indian ship, and he had since that
period made several voyages in attendance upon
gentlemen of high standing, travelling to and from
and in the East Indies. He understood seven lan-
guages, including the French and English, but as he
found himself deficient in the elements of an English
education, he had entreated his benefactor to introduce
him to the Lord Mayor, in order that, through his
Lordship's instrumentality, he might be afforded the
means of instruction at some one of the public
schools, his intention being to go abroad to commu-
nicate to his benighted countrymen the advantages of
education.

Alderman GIBBS said he had no doubt that an
application to the public school in the parish of St.
Martin, in which Mr. Brotherton resided, would be
attended to upon such an occasion. At all events
the notice of such a case by the press would be likely
to produce a satisfactory result.
MARYLEBOIVE.

Samuel Peppit, a man having the appearance of a
groom, and who resides at 27, Mitcham-street, Lisson.
grove, was charged before Mr. Long, on a warrant,
with having assaulted Anne Hungeman under cir-
cumstances of a somewhat singular nature.
Complainant deposed that on Wednesday night
la3t, at 12 o'clock, she, accompanied by her son
and a gentleman named Anthony, repaired to the
defendant's house, in consquence of information com-
municated to her that he (the defendant) was living
in adultery with her son's wife. She ascertained,
upon her entering the premises, that such was really
the case, and on the wife making her appearance with
nothing on her but her nightgown, she (complainant)
said to her, " Anna, dear Anna, are you not ashamed
of yourself to act in this way ? why don't you come
home to your husband ?" She had no sooner uttered the
words than the defendant rushed forward, almost
naked, and, after abusing her, gave her a violent
blow in the face ; he also made an attempt to strike
her a second time, but she fortunately avoided him,
and she then screamed out " Murder" as loud as she
posssibly could.

- William Stephenson, (the husband), a very respect-
able-looking man," said that he had not lived with his
wife for the last ten years, owing to the violence of
her temper and her general bad conduct, but that
during the whole of the period alluded to he had paid
to the parish officers of St. Pancras 58. per week for
her support. He had heard many reports respecting
her of late, but was unable to satisfy himself fully as
to where she was until Wednesday, upon which night
he went with his mother and a friend to defendant's
dwelling.
Mr. Anthony gave evidence to the effect that in
order to induce the wife of Stephenson to come down
stairs he sent up a message to her that her mother had
died suddenly, and that she had better lose no time in
going off in a cab. The ruse had the desired effect—
viz., that of proving that she was cohabiting with the
defendant, as she had evidently just got out of bed,
and was attired in nothing more than her nightgown
and cap. As soon as her husband saw her, he ex-
claimed, " Oh, Anna, I've caught you at last,":and
defendant then gave complainant a severe blow upon
the head. Defendant on being asked what he had to
say, replied that he merely attempted to part the
complainant and his wife, who were struggling with
each other in the passage ; he denied having inflicted
any blow.

He called witnesses, who swore that complainant in
the struggle which took place tore off the night-
gown and a great portion of the chemise from the
woman. They could not state positively that the de-
fendant had not committed the assault with which he
was charged.
The wife, a portly woman, got into the witness-
box, and said she wished to state to the bench that
she had not lived with defendant for a longer period
than from March last; her husband deserted her as
soon as he found out that he could not obtain from her
father any more money than that which he received
from him on the day of their marriage.
The MAGISTRATE fined defendant 20s. for the
assault, in default of payment fourteen days' impri-
sonment.