The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-26 00:00:00

BOW-STREET.

Richard Beer, a shoemaker, lodging in Cursitor-
street, Chancery-lane, surrendered upon a warrant
(issued by Mr. Hall), charging him with a violent
assault upon police-constable Lewis Harris, 69 F,
while the latter was on duty within the Liberty of
the Rolls.
The complainant, who appeared to have sustained
considerable injury in some way, stated that he was
walking alone in Cursitor-street, between one and two
o'clock in the morning of the 11th inst., when a man,
_ _

whom he had since ascertained to be the defendant,
came up to him and struck him a violent blow on the
nose with his clenched fist, by which he was knocked
down and stunned. When he became conscious he
found himself in King's College Hospital, and, from
the injuries received, he had been since unable to
attend to his duties.

Cross -examined by Mr. Ablett (who appeared for
the defendent)—He had been three years in the
police force. Was perfectly sober at the time in ques-
tion. He had been assisting at a fire at the corner of
Castle-street, Holborn, and, in the course of the even-
ing had only drunk half a pint of porter, a small glass
of whisky, and a small glass of rum, the latter having
been given him by a Mr. May, in Holborn-bars, as
he was wet through. He did not fall till he was
knocked down, and was not taken home drunk.

Thomas Duncan, a bootmaker, living in Chiches

ter-rents, said that he was standing at the corner of
Cursitor-street, when the defendant, who was the
worse for liquor, came up and said, " I have got a
b-- policeman down here, in a passage, and I am
determined to murder the —. Come and see me
do it." Witness accompanied the defendant, after
some hesitation, and found the complainant lying upon
the ground, in a passage. The defendant struck and
kicked him several times, and then witness went out
and fetched a policeman.
Cross-examined—He went with the defendant out
of curiosity, and not as a witness. The complainant
seemed stupified, but not drunk. Mrs. Saunders,
the landlady of the house, came down stairs, and wit-
ness heard her say, " Go and fetch a policeman."
Mrs. Saunders, the wife of a leathercutter, who oc-
cupied No. 10, Cursitor-street, stated that the de-
fendant lodged in her house. Between one and two
o'clock on the morning in question the family were
disturbed by his knocking at the door and calling
for a light, He said he had found a policeman lying
in the road, and, when a light was procured, they
saw the complainant lying in the passage, apparently
insensible, but able to speak. The defendant asked
him " How he got into such a mess," and he replied
that "He had been to the fire." Witness rebuked
the defendant for bringing in a man in such a con-
dition, and, seeing the witness Duncan there, she
desired him to go and fetch a policeman. The com-
plainant was bleeding from his nose and forehead,
which were washed. On the arrival of a constable
he inquired who had been ill-treating him, upon
which the complainant replied, " The young man,"
meaning the defendant, who had then gone upstairs.
Several policemen arrived shortly afterwards, and
witness heard them say that they could not tell how
he got so tipsy. Eventually they took him away on
a stretcher.
Cross-examined—The defendant had asked wit-
ness's husband to allow the complainant to remain in
the passage until the sergeant had passed by, or he
would be sure to get into trouble. He appeared to be
treating the complainant with great kindness. He had
lodged with witness's husband for seven years, and
had always borne a good character. The witness
Duncan made no complaint to the policemen respect-
ing the defendant.
Mr. E. Davis, the house-surgeon at King's College
Hospital, deposed to having been called up by the
night porter, at two o'clock in the morning, to attend
the complainant, who was brought in upon a stretcher
by some other policemen. The complainant was
covered with blood, and witness dressed his wounds.
He appeared stunned, as witness supposed, by the
blows he received. Witness did not ask him if he had
been drinking. He did not consider the injuries of
a serious nature, and would not undertake to say that
they were not occasioned by a fall instead of blows.
Witness saw the defendant three days afterwards, and
signed a certificate to the effect that he was not in-
toxicated when first brought to the hospital.
Mr. JARDINE—Do you believe he was sober at the
time ? Witness could not say positively. He con-
sidered the man's insensibility might have been caused
by the injuries he had received, but he could not un-
dertake to say that he was not intoxicated.
Mr. JARDINE—And yet you actually signed this
certificate, declaring that he was sober. It was a
most improper thing to do. Here was a man whose
duty it was to preserve order in the streets, and
whose actual condition it was of the utmost import-
ance to ascertain, and you would screen him from the
probable effects of an inquiry, by certifying to a fact
which you are wholly unable to support in evidence.
Such conduct should be represented to the hospital
authorities.

Witness—My impression was that he was stunned.
Mr. JARDINE—We had better say nothing more
about it.

Saunders, the tenant of the house in Cursitor-street,
corroborated his wife's testimony, and stated posi-
tively that the complainant was drunk. The witness
made no complaint of the defendant to the policemen
on their arrival.

Mr. JARDINE said the whole case as against the