The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-04 00:00:00

CROYDON.

At the weekly meeting of this bench, Mr. James
Haynes, a gentleman of fortune, residing at Mitcham,
attended before Messrs. Adams, Simeon, and Capt.
Kemmis, the presiding magistrates, to prefer a charge
against a poor labouring man, named James Pincham, of
having, according to the terms of the summons under
which he appeared, violently assaulted and beaten hint.
From the statement of the complainant, it appeared
that Pincham had been one of his tenants, and on the
thy mentioned in the summons, he met him in the field
and asked him for a quarter's rent which he owed him.
The defendant, however, refused to pay him, and was
very abusive and eventually struck him, and this was
the complaint, denied alto-
gethertt
true
lueT eai sees adhhueaaflvedt
nnhodgecaccenuootp,mmii
occupied
aiatani
tnsecledvodetatrona
tf
0.
assault.cottage
belonging
Haynes,
nweass,
but he always paid the rent, and had given him notice
to quit, and had given up possession, and Mr. Haynes
now endeavoured to get a quarter's rent for a period
during which he was not in possession of the house. He
was a poor man, and had to work very hard to get the
relt while he had occupied the cottage, and he would
not pay it atter he gave up possession.
Mr. Haynes, with an air of triumph, handed a piece
of paper to the Chairman, and said that the defendant
had certainly given him a notice to quite, but it was not
a " legal" notice.
The CHAIRMAN having looked at the notice, said that
in strictness it was not legal. The defendant had given
a notice, but being ignorant of the technicality of the
law, which required that a notice should expire at the
period when possession was taken of the house, it was
one which the landlord was intitled to refuse to take
notice of.

Mr. Haynes said the notice was illegal, and he was
entitled to another quarter's rent.
Mr. ADAMS remarked that, legally, perhaps, he was;
but he could not help saying that, in his opinion, in a
case where a poor man who appeared to have always
paid his rent regularly had, through ignorance, sent a
notice to his landlord of his intention to quit which was
not strictly legal, it would by much more becoming in a
person of education, and in the position of the complainant,
to have told a poor man so situated that his notice was
not legal, than to take advantage of the fact, and compel
him to pay another quarter's rent.
The complainant intimated that he should stand upon
his legal rights.
Mr. ADAMS told him he might do so, of course, if he
pleased. He was intitled to " his bond" and his "pound
of flesh" if he chose to exact it. The Bench merely
expressed their opinion what the conduct of a gentleman
in his position ought to have been towards a poor man,
who appeared always to have paid his rent regularly,
and that to a considerable amount, up to the time in ques-
tion, under such circumstances.
The complainant said, the man had been very inso-
lent to him, and he was determined to have his money.
He should bring an action against him if he did not
pay him.
The BENCH then consulted together for a short time,
when the Chairman said that the magistrates considered
an assault had been proved, but under the circumstances
they should only inflict a fine of one shilling and the
costs.

A DEEP TRICK —A few days ago a young woman,
apparently about twenty-five years of age, of short stature,
and innocent looking, went into a haberdasher's shop in New-
town-row, and asked for a pair of black stockings, which
were ticketed in the window at ls. 6d. The stockings were
handed to her, and after a careful examination she tendered
a half-sovereign in payment. The half-sovereign was
weighed, pronounced to be good, and the change, amongst
which were two half-crown pieces, duly handed to the pur-
chaser. The woman counted the change over and over, and
at length said she was sixpence short, and on the shopkeeper
endeavouring to explain, she said she thought the ticket only
said one shilling, and pretending to be offended at what she
termed an imposit►on on poor people who worked hard for
their money, she then put down the change, and insisted
upon having her half-sovereign back. The shopkeeper,
somewhat nettled in her turn, returned her the money, with
an observation that she had little to thank her for, which
indeed was the case, for, on looking over the change previous
to replacing it in the drawer, she found that her artful and
unprofitable customer, who had quitted the sh, p, had sub-
stituted a bad half-crown for a good one, with which she had
got clear away. The poor haberdasher had taken her first
lesson in what is called " ringing the changes,"—Nottingham
Journal.