The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-26 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE•

HOME CIRCUIT.--.LEWRS, .31412 CH 23.
FAWCETT V. HAULTAIT.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff for an
assault committed by the defendant upon him.
Messrs. C. Jones and James conducted the plain-
tiff's case, and Mr. Platt the defence.
Mr. 'F. ROBERTS, the attorney to the plaintiff, stated
that he resides in Red-lion square. On the evening of
the 30th of January he and the plaintiff, with both
their wives, were returning on foot from Greenwich to
London. The latter walked together first with the
largest umbrella, it being a wet night. Witness had oe,
casion to be in the rear of his friend for a short time, and
when he overtook him he found him conversing with the
defendant, to whom he said, " Do you want anything of
those ladies you jest met ?" " Ladies," replied the de-
fendant," I met no ladies, I met two women a little time
ago." " Weinen," said the plaintiff, " I'd have you to
kow, sir, they are two wives."—(Laughter.) Mr.
Fawcett accused him of rudeness to them, when the
defendant gave him " the lie," and Mr. F. said, " if
either of us lie it's you." The defendant then struck
him a blow with his walking stick, and was about to re-
peat it when witness interposed, and received a blow on
his own arm. In order to prevent any further
attack witness then took hold of the defendant by
the collar, and a struggle ensued, and they both fell.
By Mr. PLATT.--1 am attorney in this case. I;
jointly with my wife, am plaintiff in the next, against
the same defendant, and arising out of the same cause.
I did not bluster on the night of the assault, and say,
" I'm an attorney, Sir', and you shall see what an at-
torney can do." I did not hear the plaintiff give the
lie first. I never saw him strike the defendant with an
umbrella, but he said it was broken, as he supposed, by
parrying off the blows aimed by the defendant. I re-
ceived one blow on my head, but I do not know on
which side. He also tore some of my hair off my head,
Mr. Pr. ATT.-Really--you don't say so !—(The
peculiar manner in which the Learned Gentleman ut-
tered these words set the Court in a roar of laughter,
in which his Lordship joined.) Witness (in continua-
tion)—The defendant was requested to give his ad-
dress, but he obstinately refuse;', until a policeman
came up and interfered. His wife is not here to-day ;
he never takes her on business.
Joseph Bailey, police constable R 127, stated that it
was not till he threatened that he would take Mr.
Haultain to the station, that he could be prevailed
upon to give his address. lie gave it to me, and said
he was not bound to give it to every blackguard he met
in the road. The parties then separated. Did not
hear either of the females complain that they had been
molested.
Mr. Roberts recalled by Mr. Platt—l have since
found that the defendant was nine years in the Secon-
daries Office as Bail Clerk, but I believe that he does
not hold that situation now.
Mr. PLATT addressed the Jury for the defence in a
very facetious strain, and submitted that there was not
the shadoW of a proof that the " ladies" were insulted,
and that, therefore, there was no cause for remonstrance.
The plaintiff and his attorney appeared to be offended,
because their wives ware called " women ;" if they were
not such what in the name of wonder could they he ?
(Laughter.) The real fact was, that the parties had
trumped up two actions, in order to put money into the
pocket of one of them (Mr. Roberts) in the shape of
costs.
Lord ABINGER,._iP summing up, said that, supposing
an assault had been committed, it was of a trivial nature,
therefore it was a case that did not call for heavy
damages, as no great personal injury had been sus-
tained. The Learned Counsel had remarked upon the
fact of two actions having been brought arising out of
the same cause. This reminded him (Lord Abinger)
of a case where a lawyer's clerk, when serving a copy
of a writ, got assaulted in some way, and he brought
home with him two more actions for his employer.
The Jury without hesitation found for the plaintiff,
damages One Farthing.
Mr. JONES withdrew the record in the case of Ro-
berts and wife v. the same defendant.
Some time after the case was over, the Foreman of
the Jury complained to his Lordship that Mr. Roberts,
who had three actions that day, had departed the Court
without leaving their fee, and the Judge's Clerk said
he had served
,him in the same way,
Lord ABINGER—He likes to do business cheap ; to
prevent this it would be well if the fees were deposited
when the records are filed. Gentlemen, I have no
power to assist you, and I wish I had.