The Sun.
London, England, 1860-11-09 00:00:00

WE ROAD CHILD MURDER.

1••••-,,,e
•
"1

ROAD, Nov. 8.
7:lne adjourned inquiry, conducted by Mr. T. B.
Sal thi:Lers, was resumed this afternoon at the Tem-
per &Dee-hall, Road. At the commencement of the
bus mess only two gentlemen besides the reporters
wer e present ; but a small knot of villagers collected
outs ide the hall and gazed with idle curiosity on
the ecene being enacted within. In the course of
the E .fternoon the audience increased in number, and
befL ); 7e the adjournment took place the hall was
ratl it more than half filled.
Saunders said he should be much obliged if
a put lie intimation could be given to the writers
Who lad addressed him on the subject of the in-
quiry , but it was utterly out of his power to answer
each . and every of them. He had received 10 letters
since he came to that place that morning, and the
best I ,art of half-a-dozen before he came away from
Bradt Ord, and nine after he left yesterday. Some
of ttLese letters contained hints and suggestions
whit h appeared to him to be of great importance,
and 'schen the proper time came he would take care
tnat :all those hints and suggestions were attended
to. kt present, however, it seemed to him desira-
ble ne t to say anything in reference to the contents
of the se letters. As a, general rule anonymous
letter s were consigned by him to the fire, but in a
case c 4* this sort he thought it right to read whatever
was a ddressed to him, as it was possible that valua-
ble information might be communicated anony-
mould, y.
The re being na one present who volunteered any
statement Mr. Saunders proceeded to read through
the letters which had been received by him at Road
that morning, some of which were anonymous, and
in others the writers gave their names. Such parts
of the communications as were read by Mr.
Saunders contained hints most of which have been
already anticipated, and others really seemed
unimportant. After leaving Road yesterday Mr.
E>aunders said he had received letters from two pro-
fessional gentlemen, offering to come at their own
:private 'expense to assist him in the legal conduct
;of this inquiry. The testimonials of one of those
I;entlenten were signed by a Queen's counsel who
1 iad been engaged in some most important prose-
cutions, and who was well known at the common
L bar.
Mrs. Ann Hall, keeper of the turnpike-gate at
outhwick, between Road and Trowbridge, stated
t k kat on the morning of the 30th of June she let a
gantleman pass through the gate ; he asked her
v7liere the policeman lived. Witness continued—
I knew the gentleman. I showed him as near as
I could where the policeman lived. The gentle-
man said he had had a child stolen.
Mr. Saunders The statement you are now
m aking may hereafter become what is called evi-
dence. You have never before been examined in
public, I believe ?
Witness—No. I was examined by Mr. Slack.
3EIe (the gentleman) said his child had been car-
ried off in a blanket. I asked when he lost the
c land. He said that morning, and told me if I saw
tiny one coming along I was to stop them. He I
Ilea went on towards Trowbridge. This happened
-about eight o'clock. Mr. Peacock was the next
gentleman who came by. 1 said, " This is a sad
affair at Road." He said, " Yes, but the child is
found." I said, " Where ?" and he said "In the
garden." Mr. Peacock went on towards Trow-
i bridge. When Mr. Kent came back I said to him,
Then the child is found?" and he said, " Yes, and
aurdered." He then went on in his carriage as
tat as ho could, and Mr. Peacock came after him.
'r here was no one with Mr. Kent in the carriage.
r. can't remember speaking to Mr. Peacock as he
p tssed back. I did not notice how Mr. Kent was
dr, essed, or whether the apron of his carriage was
.
&nn Heritage, wife of Inspector Heritage—l re-
met nber the morning of the 30th Juno last, and
pert Laps ever shall. I saw a gentleman call at the
gate of my house. I immediately went out. The
gentaleman was Mr. Kent. He gave a boy a half-
penury to show him where my house was. Mr.
Kent asked me if my husband was at home. I re-
plied "‘ He is in bed, sir." He said, " You must call
hira i'ntmediately. I have had a child stolen out of
my house te-night, or rather we missed him about
5 o'clock this morning. It was a little boy, aged 3
years arid 10 months, and was supposed to be taken
out of the drawing-room window." I said, " Have
they taken any clothes, sir ?" He said, " No, he
was wrapped up in a blanket." He said," Tell your
husband to get np and make every inquiry • I am
going to Trowbridge to give information to Foley."
I said, " Your name and residence, if you please,
sir ?" and he said, " Kent, Road-hill-house." I saw
Mr. Kent going back, and I saw Mr. Peacock. I
think Mr. Kent had an overcoat on, but I did not
particularly notice his dress. It was a dry morning.
That is all I know about the matter. I have not
been questioned in public before on this subject, but
was spoken to by Mr. Slack about it.
Emma Freeman, wife of Edward Freeman, stated
that she did not think the lamp over the hall door
at Road-hill-house was lighted except on occasions
_ r_ e.,54;n0,-1 aoveral
times that the lamp was not lighted. Could not
say whether or not a lamp had been lighted at
Road-hill-house since the 30th of June.
Police-constable Heritage—l have been stationed
.a t Road for about two years. I have noticed a
Limp generally burning over the hall door of Road-
hill-house on the nights when I have been on duty.
I was not present on the morning of the 30th of
Jane, when the child was found. I got to Road-
hill-house about 10 o'clock in the morning. I as-
sisted in searching round the premises. I examined
the garden tools. I went into the house almost as
soon as I came, and saw the child. I was there a
few minutes before Mr. Foley, and went in with
him. I did not go down the front stairs into the
I went into the kitchen and the room where
the child was lying. In the evening I went into
t.he house about 11 o'clock, under orders from Mr.
}'oley, to stay there for the night ; Mr. Foley said
Mr.r. Kent wanted Urch (another constable) and
ray self. We were to go quietly because Mr. Kent
did not want the servants to know that we were
the/. e. We were to put ourselves under Mr. Kent's
directions.. ; There was no other police-officer
present, I believe, at that time besides Urch and
myself. There were no officers present in undress
to my knowledge. Mr. Kest was not present or
within hearing when Mr. Foley gave these orders.
I ler.ow Sergeant Watts, of the Somerset constabu-
lary ; I can't say that he was there. I dial not
notice him. The order was given to Urch and
myself by 'Mr. Foley after nine o'clock, I believe.
U.rch, the constable who accompanied the last
witness, corroborated the statement made by him.
Sergeant Watts, of the From° division, was at
Road-hill house on the afternoon of the 30th of
June. He did not say anything to •ree about
stepping there. I. was present when Sergeant
Watts found certain things.
Mr. Saunders --What were those certain things?
Witness—A woman's nightshift. It was such a
shift as is worn at all times, night and day. It was
about five os six o'clock when Watts found the
shift. It was found in the boilerhole in the front
kitchen,. It was puet in as if to light the fire. It
was dry, but very dirty, as if it had been worn a
long time.
Mr. Saunders—What was that dirt ?
Witness—Well, S;ir, it had some blood upon it at
several places; the marks of blood were on the tail
part. They did not extend over nearly the whole
of the loaves part of the article of dress. The
blood was dry. I ca'n't say how long it had been
there. I don't know whether there were any
initials upon the shift I found. I should think
it belonged to one of the servants. It was not a
very large
one. We all remarked that it was a
srnallone, Sergeant Watts and Dallimore, I believe
were present besides myself. Mr. Foley was not
shifte
thre
tot the time, but I believe Watts gave the
the
afterwards. I did not notice any cinders
under the lace of the boiler. It did not strike
me as beir,
did. We tlioruvithrtt strange finding this shift as we
it was not of any use when we
came to look
it' that it was not anything
leading to the order of of the child.
Mr. Saunders
f3o'onu. think that bloody shift
had anything to
child? folio the murder of the
we did not think that the person
Witnss—NO,
who wore ithad anything to do
with it.
Mr. Saunders—To whom did
You think that shift
belonged ?
'‘Vitness—l can't tell; we thought that tlee stains
g to
With the
shift had nothing of blood on the
murder.
Sauniers—Now, let me ask you whether
nearly the whole of the lower part of that shift was
not saturated with blood and stiff ?
Witness—.No, it was in different places, but
not
all over the lower part. I don't know what was
done afterwards with the shift that day. 1 believe
I saw it again on the next dayafter it was brought
hack and put in under the boiler-hole again. I
think this was done by Dalliniore. I was present
when it was done. I think there was another con-
stable there. The owner of the house was not pre-
sent at the time. I don't recollect seeing Mr. Foley
at, the time the shift was put back.
Mr. Saunders—Did the owe er of Road-hill-house
ever speak to you or to any single human being in
your presence about that shift ?
Witness—So. I cannot say whether it was
on' the following Tuesday the shift was brought
back. I believe Dallimore brought the shift
back and said that Mr. Foley had the shift ex-
amined, and that it was of no use. I have
not stated anything in reference to this shift
in public before this day. Nothing was said to
51 t 4 the effect that the house had been searched
INQUithi Uu Tuesday Mr. Kent asked me if we

had sent to the washerwoman ; he did not ask me
if we had searched by the waterside. I saw
Police-constable Dallimore at last Road fair. I
don't recollect having conversation with him about
this shift. I don't recollect anything more about
it beyond what I have told. I don't recollect ever
seeing the owner of Road-hill house near the
boiler-hole. I have seen him in the large kitchen.
Police-constable Dallimore confirmed the state-
ment of the last witness as to the finding of the
shift, adding :—As the shift was being taken out
to the stable Mr. Kent was passing by. He asked
what we had there. I told him nothing particu-
lar. On examining the shift I found it to be a
very old one, and that the appearances presented
were produced by natural causes. We showed the
shift to Mr. Foley, and proposed to put it back
again ; but he directed me to keep it in my posses-
sion, and I did so, and brought it back on the Mon-
day or Tuesday. Mr. Stapleton, surgeon, of Trow-
bridge, examined the shift at the request of Mr.
Foley, and stated that the stains proceeded from
natural causes, and during the day I put it back
in the boiler-hole. Sergeant Watts was present
at the time, I believe ; I did not see or hear Mr.
Kent about there, 'or any person belonging to the
house. If you have been told that some one was
near at the time 1 put it back that is not correct.
I put it back rather hastily, that I might not be
observed by any of the servants. We searched the
water near the house more than once. Mr. Kent
never suggested to me from first to last that the
house had been searched enough.
Mr. Happerfield and Mr. Superintendent Foley
made statements showing that the matter with re-
ference to the shift had been thoroughly investi-
gated at the time, and that it was found to have
nothing to do with the murder.
Mr. Superintendent Foley also produced a letter
received from Sergeant Summers, late of the
Somersetshire constabulary, denying that he had
ever stated to Mr. Groser that there were marks of
blood on the front door of Road-hill house. What
he said was that there were marks of blood on the
watercloset door, which were seen by other police-
officers as well as himself.

The inquiry was then adjourned to the following
dayA.
mong the persons present to-day the reporter
recognised Mr. J. Pollaky, superintendent of the
foreign department of Mr. Field's Private Inquiry
office, Devereux-court, Temple, but the nature of
his mission did not transpire.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS—Nov. 8.

(Before the Assistant-Judge.)

Ambrose Wallis, 45, was indicted for feloniously
receiving a pair of boots, the property of Gilbert
Deroy, of Cranbourne-street, Leicester-square. The
thief was an assistant in the employment of the
prosecutor, and he sold the articles he purloined to
the prisoner, who lived in Short's•gardens, Drury-
lane, and who gave him for them about one-fifth of
the wholesale value, and in some instances much
less. The assistant was a witness, and he admitted
that this had been going on for the last eight
months, and stated that for ladies' boots, of which
he had stolen a great number, the prisoner gave him
what price he thought proper, generally about 3s.
a pair.
The Jury found the prisoner guilty, and the
Assistant-Judge sentenced him to 18 months' hard
labour.

Mr. Best was counsel for the prosecution ; Mr.
Sleigh was for the prisoner.
Mary Williams, 34, and Ida Jameson, 23, two of
the most expert thieves in London, were indicted
for stealing four half-crowns and other moneys,
from the person of Susannah Hutchinson, in one of
the London General Company's omnibuses, running
from Paddington to London-bridge.
Mr. Tindal Atkinson and Mr. Best were for the
prosecution (instructed by Mr. Beard); Mr. Met-
calfe and Mr. Rowden defended the prisoners.
The evidence clearly proved the offence against
the prisoners, and they were found guilty. Former
convictions were proved against Williams.
Inspector Williams, of the Great Northern Rail-
way, put in a conviction against her, which took
place in Lincolnshire in 1853, when she was sen-
tenced to twelve months' hard labour.

Inspector Foulger, of the City police, proved
a conviction at the Old Bailey, when she was
sentenced to nine months. She was recently tried
at this court in the name of Nash, but acquitted, for
a robbery in the Hampstead-road. She pretended
to be taken ill, and some good-natured person con-
ducted her across the roadway, when two of her
companions (men) robbed him.
The Assistant-Judge sentenced Jamieson to 18
months' hard labour, and Williams to three years
penal servitude. His lordship said this was a pro-
secution by the London Omnibus Company, and it
was not only a proper, hut a most creditable one on
their part. It showed their desire to protect the
property and persons of their customers. There
were certain cases in which the Court had power to
order rewards, but he regretted that this did not
come within the category, or he certainly should
have marked his sense of the praiseworthy conduct,
tact, and intelligence of the conductor of the omni-
bus in the detention of these prisoners, but he
thought the company themselves ought, and he had
no doubt would show their appreciation of his be-
haviour, which had been very meritorious. The
conductor's name was Thomas Rainsbury, badge
1,595.

Mr. Atkinson said his lordship's remarks, he
would take care, should be forwarded to the proper
quarter.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Nov. 8.

MANSION-HOUSE.—A young man, named
Edward Sowerby, who presented all the external
indications of a person of unsound mind, appeared
before Mr. Alderman Lawrence upon a summons
which charged him with indecent and disorderly
behaviour in a place of public worship, namely, a
meeting house of the Society of Friends, commonly
called Quakers, in "White Hart-court, Bishopsgate-
street.
The defendant, who wore a moustache, and who
professes to be a Quaker, walked into the court
with a wide-aw.:ke hat on with an extra broad
brim. He was requested by Partridge, the gaoler,
to uncover his head, but he said that with him it
was a point of Conscience not to take off his hat.
Partridge very civilly told him that he was in a
court of justice, and that he must take off his hat,
and if he would not he must do so for him, and he
quietly suited the action to the word, amid a good
deal of laughter. The defendant has made himself
very notorious for his indecent proceedings at the
meetings of the Society of Friends, and he has lam
repeatedly fined in consequence.
Mr. Humphreys, of Newgate-street, who ap-
peared in support of the complaint, said that
the gentlemen who were the complainants had
felt it to be their duty to institute the pre-
sent proceedings against the defendant, as
unless some steps were taken to put a stop to such
conduct as that which was now complained of, it
would be impossible for them to attend their places
of worship with any peace or security. He then
went on to state that on the day named in the sum-
mons, the 31st October, while divine worship was
going on at the meeting-house belonging to the
Society of Friends in -White Hart-court, the defen-
dant got up and made use of the most offensive
expressions, and his conduct was so violent and
extraordinary that a great many of the female por-
tion of the audience got up and left, and the ser-
vice was abruptly closed. The defendant had been
repeatedly guilty of similar misconduct, and had
been fined for the offence, and he hoped that some
other method would be taken, in conformity with
the act of Parliament which gave a magistrate the
power to imprison any person guilty of such an
offence without the option of paying a fine, to put a
stop to such iJ ffen sive and illegal proceedings.
Ebenezer Leadbeter Simmons was then examined
upon hi;„ affirmation. He first produced the ecrii-
&ate of the registration of the meeting-house in
question as a place to be used for divine worship in
conformity with the act of Parliament.
Mr. Goodwin, the chief clerk, told the defendant
that as he had no legal adviser, he thought it right
to inform him that by the statute this certificate
was made evidence of its contents.

The defendant bawled out that this act of Parlia-
ment was never intended for " Friends." It was
only intended to apply to lying priests and false
persons. (A laugh.) . • '
Mr. Simmons then proceeded to state that he was
one of the overseers of the Society of Friends
which held its meetings at the meeting-house
in White Hart-court, Bishopsgate, and he wes
present at a meeting of the society for the pur-
. .was
!Tse. of divine . worship according to the rules
of their society on the 31st October. The defen-
dantsuddenly present, and he took a seat near the
jumped u,
UllalSter, and while the service was going on he
and exclaimed in a loud voice, " Your m • misters, elders, and overseers are deceivers
and hypocrites; theyZyre only eager for money, and
their god, is their bel
He also said that they
were liars, and he turn.e"d
:round
portion of the audience ancitldthem not to pay
to the younger
any attention to what their.mln t
is
told them, for they were only l€, a
edr and overseers
mischief. The defendant did notfira at them into
t address
any one in particular, but, he shortly afterwards
turned towards Joseph Brown and Edward Marsh,ds
both of whom were overseers of the society, and he
made use of very offensive expressions towards them.
Witness went to the defendant and requested hint
to be silent or to leave the building, but it had ria
effect. The defendant continued talking in a loud

and excited manner, and the consequence was that
a good many of the female members left the meet-
ing-house. 'Witness tried to induce the defendant
to be quiet, but to everything he said the only
reply was that he was a liar, and eventually the
confusion was so great that it was considered ad-
visable to abruptly close the meeting,
Alderman Lawrence asked the defendant whether
he wished to ask Mr. Simmonds any questions.

_
Defendant (to the witness)—Thou sayest I called
thee a liar. Compare thy conduct and that of those
belonging to thy sect with that of the first Quaker,
and I ask thee whether thou art not a liar. (A
laugh.) Thou wearest a broad-brimmed hat and a
cut-away coat, but thou art no real Quaker.
(Laughter.)
Alderman Lawrence told the defendant that he
was only permitted to put questions relating to the
facts, and he could not be allowed to persevere in
such a course of examination.

Defendant—l say that Quakers hale no right to
swear.

Alderman Lawrence—The witness has not been
sworn. He has merely affirmed the truth of his
evidence.

Defendant—He has made a solemn affirmation,
which is tantamount to an oath. Quakers should
only say " Yea, yea—nay, nay." (Laughter.)
John Rawlings, another overseer of the society,
said he was present on the day in question, and he
bore testimony to the violent and outrageous con-
duct of the defendant. He called them all hypo-
crites, children of the devil, and every other ex-
pression in the way of abuse that could be imagined.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Humphreys (to the wituess)—l believe you
are rather hard of hearing, Mr. Rawlings?
Mr. Rawlings said he was, but the defendant
spoke so loud that he heard perfectly well what he
said.

Edward Marsh, another of the elders of the so-
ciety, gave similar evidence as to the conduct ofthe
defendant to that deposed to by the other witnesses.
Alderman Lawrence then asked the defendant
what answer he had to make to the charge.
The defendant said that he believed he was
charged with disturbing the congregation at this
meeting-house. He denied that he had disturbed
them. All he did was to tell them that they did
not walk in the ways of God, and they did not like
it. (A laugh.) Instead of his disturbing them,
they disturbed themselves. (Laughter.)
Alderman Lawrence told the defendant that the
had no right to disturb the congregation, and the
law would not permit him to do so.
The defendant—l contend that as a Quaker I had
a perfect right to speak when I did. (Laughter.)
It is part of our religion to sit still until God moves
us to speak. They sit for hours till God moves
them. (A roar of laughter.) I sat still till God
moved me, and when he moved me I spake. (The
tone in which the defendant said this caused a burst
of laughter in the court.)
Alderman Lawrence said that the pretence that
God had moved him to do what he did was no excuse
or answer to the complaint, which he considered
bad been fully established. He had the power to
send him to prison for two months without the in-
fliction of any fine, but he should not go to that ex-
tent on the present occasion. The defendant, how-
ever must understand that if he repeated such
conduct he would certainly be sent to prison. He
should now order him to pay a fine of 405., and in
default he would be imprisoned for one month.
Mr. Goodman, the chief clerk, then asked the de-
fendant whether he intended to pay the fine.
The defendant replied—Certainly not.
Mr. Goodman then asked him whether he had
any goods upon which distraint could be made to
levy the amoait.

The defendant said the only goods he had were the
clothes he was wearing, and he did not know
whether they worth 40s. (A laugh).
Mr. Goodman told the defendant he had given
a very foolish answer. He knew perfectly well that
his clothes would not be taken off.

The defendant said he had nothing else, and he
should not pay the fine.
Alderman Lawrence —Very well, then you will
go to prison for a month.
The defendant, upon hearing this, picked up his
"wide-awake" and clapped it on his head, but Par-
tridge again pulled it off, and he was then removed
from the court.

GUILDHALL—David Evans, a bill-sticker in
the employ of Mr. Scott, a bill-poster, of Burleigh-
street, was brought up for final examination, charged
with stealing a quantity of posting-bills belonging
to the London and Brighton Railway Company.
This case has been several times before the court,
and the facts adduced in evidence went to show
that Messrs. Waterlow, of London -wall, printers
and stationers to the railway company, contracted
with Mr. Scott to post the large bills at a stipu-
lated sum per thousand, and the bills received
for that purpose by Mr. Scott were distributed
by him to several bill-stickers in his employ, to be
affixed upon the various advertising sites throughout
the metropolis. Upon the opening of the Victoria
station of the London and Brighton Railway at
Westminster, large posters were issued announcing
the fact, some of which, with others, were entrusted
to the prisoner to stick up, and shortly afterwards
it was discovered a large quantity of those and
similar bills had been sold to a person of the name
of Soames, of Harper's-mews, Theobald'a-road. In-
quiries were accordingly instituted by Messrs. Wa-
terlow on behalf of the railway company, and it was
then ascertained that Soames had bought several
cwts. of such bills of the prisoner at the rate of 7s.
per cwt., the full value even as waste paper being
estimated at 15s. per cwt. Alderman Humphery
commented upon the conduct of Soames in buying
such property of a bill-sticker at less than half its
value, and that individual appeared yesterday with
his attorney, who complained of Ald. Humphery's
remarks, and of their appearing in the newspapers.
Alderman Finuis said he would hear anything
in explanation at the termination of the case.
Several witnesses were then called, from whose
evidence it appeared that one lot of large bills,
which Soames admitted he bought of the prisoner
at 7s. per cwt,, were afterwards sold at 15s. per
cwt. to Mr. Ongley, a blacking manufacturer, 163,
Union-street, Borough, who, upon opening the par-
cels and discovering that the bills were new, and
not out of date, as had been alleged, gave immediate
information to the railway company.
Alderman Finnis complimented this witness in
very high terms for his conduct in these transac-
tions, and intimated that if all tradesmen would act
upon the same principle there would not be quite
so many facilities for robbery.
The solicitor for Soames said, Aid. Humphery
had stated that any one could see the bills were not
out of date upon the very face of them, whereas
there was only one parcel that was not out of date;.
He had several gentlemen present to negative Al-
derman Humphery's assertion about the goods being
purchased at half their value, as 7s. per cwt. was a
very good market value.

Alderman }lnnis said ho thought the solicitor
was not doing his client any good. He perfectly
concurred in all the remarks of Alderman
Humphery. That there had been great looseness
in the ru4nner in which Soames's business had been
conducted must be apparent to all, and it was
equally clear that bills which Soames bought at 7s.
bad been sold again at 1.55., and ultimately proved
to have been stolen. These facts were quite suffi-
cient to satisfy him that Soames had acted very
imprudently in buying these bills under the circum-
stances which had transpired. Soames had brought
these remarks upon himself, and he must take the
consequences of his own acts.
The prisoner was then fully committed for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—AN ALLEGED
VOLUNTEER ASSAULT.—Mr. Louis Robert Hazle-
wood, of the Parthenon Club, Regent-street, ap-
peared before Mr. Tyrwhitt on a summons charg-
ing him with an assault on Mr. Frederick Kent, on
the Ist inst.

The complainant appeared in Court as a member
of the London Scottish Volunteer Corps, in full
grey uniform, with his kilt and bare legs.
The defendant, who it was said was also a volun-
teer in a different corps, was represented by Mr.
Edward Lewis, of Marlborough .street.
The complainant said he was walking along the
Haymarket, in full uniform, after 12 on the night
in question, in the direction of Pall-mall. Near
the corner of Jermyn-street the defendant, who was
behind him, and had two other gentlemen with him,
called out, " There's a young Scotchman."
He took no notice, and proceeded on his way, and
when at the corner of the Opera-colonnade, the
defendant assailed him again with the same expres-
sion. He stopped an instant, intending to turn
away, when defendant ran against him, and struck
him in the mouth, Holding up his hand to guard
off a second blow, defendant's hat fell off, and he
(complainant) caught him by the collar, and held
him until a constable came up, who, refusing to
take the charge because no marks of violence were
visible, required him to give his card, and recom-
mended a summons.

Cross-examined—Complainant said he had two
young girls with him. They were prostitutes, but
he knew them before they became so. None but
defendant and his friends were following them.
Had been three times before in the Haymarket of a
night in his uniform. Defendant made use of the
bad language more than twice. Did not knock
his hat off. Did not run away, but kept his stand.
Had been at drill up to half-past nine.
Police-constable 138 C, said he saw a number of
people, and heard quarrelling, when he came up,
but nothing more.
Mr. Lewis said his client, himself a volunteer,
would scorn to be guilty of ouch want to another