The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-19 00:00:00

GREENWICH POLICE.

Yesterday Michael Murphy, the young man who was
committed a short time ago by Mr. Grove, on a charge
of assaulting and attempting to stab Sergeant Lovell,
applied to Mr. Jeremy for a warrant against that officer.
The applicant was accompanied to the Court by Mr.
Drury.
Mr. JEREMY, who evidently was not aware that
Murphy was the individual whose case had created such
attention, requested him to state the nature of his appli-
cation. Murphy replied, that a month ago last Satur-
day he was at home at night, when a lodger was brought
in quite drunk by Lovell, who then went away. After
he had gone the lodger said something to the appli-
cant which Lovell overheard, and he immediately broke
open the door and rushed in, saying to the lodger,
" You rascal,:is that your thanks for bringing you here?"
The applicant told him it was not intended for him,
when he (Lovell) said," I want none of your sauce," and
seized him by the hair, adding, " I'll pull the top of your
skull off," and dragged him out of his father's house to the
station-house, where ho was charged with creating a
disturbance, and attempting to stab Lovell. Ile (the
applicant) was taking his supper when Lovell broke open
the door ; but ho put the knife clown, and never in the
least offered or intended doing any injury with it.
Mr. JEREMY said in such a case notice should be given
to the superintendent, who would order the policeman to
attend before him, for the case to be investigated without
granting a summons. He wished to know why the ap-
plicant had not applied before?
The applicant replied that ho had been committed for
one month by Mr. Grove.
Mr. JEREMY, after looking over the deputation taken
on that occasion, said he did not think he could, again
hear a case that had been disposed of by his brother
Magistrate.
Mr. Drury here rose and said, ho much regretted that
the case had not been brought before Mr. Jeremy, whose
honest and honourable conduct on the bench assured
him that the case would have been treated with impar-
tial justice. • _ _ -

Mr. JEREMY said ho could not allow such an opinion
to be expressed.
Mr. Drury repeated with great energy, that he was
convinced that if Mr. Jeremy had examined the wit-
nesses instead of Mr. Grove, the case would have ter-
minated differently, adding, that it was not his
opinion only, but the opinion of the public. If po-
licemen were to be allowed to forcibly enter houses,
and drag persons out by the hair of the head, without
such conduct being inquired into, then no more " Jus-
tice for Ireland" in England. What can be expected
when the Irish are told they will swear anything ? " I
repeat," added Mr. Drury, ,4 that the case was not heard
with equal justice. The first witness placed in the box,
on the applicant's behalf, was threatened by Mr. Grove
to be committed for perjury. Another had told him,
after the case, that he was so frightened by Mr. Grove
that lie could not speak. I regret that the applicant had
not the benefit of your adjudication."
Mr. JEREMY—I cannot consent to be complimented
at the expense of nay colleague. By your statement you
do not give your countrymen much credit for courage
when before the. Court. I suppose you were not fright-
ened ? -
Mr. Drury—Not in the least, your Worship, although
Mr. Grove threatened-to commit me: Had he treated
me outside this Court as he did in it, little as I am, he
should have answered for his conduct.
- : Mr. JEREMY, who smiled at the warmth with which