The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-27 00:00:00

.:SOUTHIII ARK.

Yesterday, William Griffiths, a young man of re-
spectable appearance, clerk in the employ of Messrs.
Brown and Co., stoma-merchants, of Bankside, was
placed at the bar before Mr. A'BecluAt, charged with
rude cently assaulting Maria Palmer, in a railway
carriage.

The complainant, a respectable-looking young
woman, stated that she is a servant, and that on the
preceding afternoon she came up to town from Graves-
end by the twenty minutes past five o'clock train,
in one of the third-class carriages. The defendant,
accompanied by another young man, was a passenger
by the train, and sat nearly opposite to her in the same
c mpartment of the carriage. Before the train arrived
at the aackheath tunnel the defendant pushed
his feet against hers, and also put his hand upon her
knee, and she changed her position in consequence, but
still sat nearly opposite to him, and she was confident
that it was not accidentally done. When the train en-
tered the tunnel the defendant thrust one of his hands
up her clothes, but she pushed it away, and a second
time he repeated the ect, and she screamed out, and
when the carriages got out of the tunnel a soldier who
sat with his hack to her in the adjoining compartment
of the same carriage, seeing her crying, asked her what
was the matter with her, and when she told him how
she had been treated while the train was passing through
the tunnel, and pointed out her assailant, he (the sol-
dier) said that he ought to be ashamed of himself for
taking advantage of a female undar such circumstances,
She did not hear the defendant make any reply, hut
when the train arrived at the London-bridge terminus,
she mentioned the manner in which she had been in-
sulted on the journey to one of the railway officers, and
having pointed out the'defendant as the man, she gave
him into custody.

In reply to Mr. ATECKETT, the clmplainant said that
she had no conversation with the defendant previously to
his having acted in the manner she described. That she
did scream out loud, but the noise of the carriages pass-
ing through the tunnel might have prevented the other
pao,sengers from hearing her. That there were five per-
sons, including the defendant, sitting i❑ the same com-
partment of toe carriage with her, but still she was con-
vinced he was the man who insulted her, although she
could ❑ot distinguish him in the darkness that prevailed
in passing through the tunnel. That when they got out
of the tunnel she addressed the defendant, saying that
he was not fit to come thera if he could not behave him-
self, but he made no reply to what she said on the subject.
Mr. Binns cross-examined the complainant with a view
to show that she might have been mistaken in the iden-
tity of the defendant, and that, although exposed to the
indecent conduct she described, yet that he was not the
perpetrator of it, there being other men in the same
compartment of the carriage at the time. The com-
plainant, however, adhered to the accuracy of her state-
ment, and added that she was confident the defendant
and no other person was the man by whom she was as-
saulted.

Richard Cheer, a private in the Fusilior Guards,
stated that he sat in the next compartment of the car-
riage, and observing, when the train got out of the
Blackheath tunnel, that the complainant was crying, he
asked her what was the matter, and she described the
manner in which she had been tremed, and pointed out
the defendant as her assailant; that he (witness) said
the defendant deserved to be given into custody for such
scandalous conduct towards a decent young woman. He
(witness) did not hear the complainant scream out, but
this might be accounted for owing to the great noise of
the engine and long train of carriages passing through
the tunnel. He added that when he made the remark
about the defendant's conduct, the latter made no reply.
Henry Dives, ticket-collector at the London-bridge.
terminus, stated that when the Gravesend train arrived,
at half-past six o'clock the previous evening, he observed
the oomplainant crying very much, and, on inquiring
into the cause, was then informed that she bad been
grossly insulted on the journey to town. The defendant
was pointed out to him as her assailant, and witness
then asked her if she would give him in charge, and she
havieg expressed a desire to do so, he took him into
custody. The witness added that when the charge was
preferred against the defendant he gave no answer to it.
Mr. Binns said, although the complainant spoke so
positively to the defendant, yet, if his ins ructions were
correct, she was quite mistaken as to his being the per-
son by whom she was assaulted. That the defendant
was a young man of highly respectable family, had been
four years in the situation ho now filled, and that the
firm by whom he was employed had so high an opinion
of his moral conduct, and were so confident that he
would not have acted in the way imputed to him, that
they not only became his bail to appear at that court,
but were also prepared to give security for his appear-
ance before any other tribunal if the magistrate thought
fit to send him there. That a witness was in attendance
who was present in the carriage, and who would prove
that the defendant was not the man who had perpetrated
the assault. He then called
Robert Denny, who stated that he is a tradesman at
Chatham, and that on the previous evening he came up
in the same carriage from Woolwich with the defendant,
whom ho had known since he was a child. That they
both sat nearly opposite the complainant in the same
compartment, and that he had not observed his friend
take improper liberties with her, nor did be hear her
appeal for protectio❑ to any person, or hear her scream
out at the time she alleged the defendant thrust his hand
up her clothes.
By Mr. ATECKETT—Believed ho must have seen the
defendant if he put his hand on complainant's knee be-
fore the train entered the tunnel. Admitted, however,
that if the complainant screamed out when in the tunnel,
he might not have heard her, owing to the noise pro-
duced by the train.
Mr. ATM/LETT remarked that the charge was one of
so serious a nature against the defendant, namely, that
of grossly assaulting a female passenger, and taking ad-
vantage of the darkness that prevailed when the train
was passing through the tunnel to effect his purpose,
that he should not dispose of the case himself, but should
send it before another tribunal. He (the magistrate)
should, therefore, adjudge the defendant to find two
sureties of 501. each to appear to answer the charge at
the next sessions.

It was intimated that the complainant's father, being in
very indigent circumstances, was not in a condition to
bear the expenses of a prosecution, upon which
Mr. A'I3ECXETT said that if the railway company did
not do so, he should apply to the Home-office on the
subject, so that the law should not be defeated in a case
which concerned the public at large.