The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 21, 1859.

Caunt had never thrown any beer at the plaintiff,
nor herself turned him out ; the truth being that
the waiter at the establishment had quietly walked
the plaintiff out -without any violence at all, and
how he got. his hurt nobody knew. If it were true
that Mrs. Caunt had thrown the beer, how did it
happen that the soldiers who were present were
not called to prove the fact ?
Mrs. Caunt—l have known the plaintiff 14 years.
He has been in the habit of doing anything there
was to do about the house. Any time he wanted
a shilling I gave him one. He has no regular
wages. I very seldom sat down to my dinner with-
out sending his, for I knew he wanted it. I danot
know that, anything was due to him on the 16th of
September ; he had only been scrubbing the kit-
chen. I saw him about midnight on the 16th of
September. He was very drunk, and used very
bad language to me. He wanted some money. I
said, " Jack, you're drunk ; if you come to-morrow
morning I will give you some." He was noisy and
used very bad language. \ I leant over the bar and
said, "Will you go, Jack ?grid touched him. The
bar was between us. I neve7 left the bar. He went
to the door and fell down, and went away. He
came back. It was four yards from where I was
standing to the door. I rang for -William, the
waiter, and told him to put him out. I did nothing
after that ; the waiter put him out. William said,
" Come along, you are drunk ;" and the plaintiff
said, " I will take your advice, I know I am." Wil-
liam then took him by the arm, and he went out.
Between the time when he fell down and when the
waiter put him out, two hours had elapsed. I
never threw any beer at him.
Cross • examined—Benjamin was seated on a barrel
in front of the bar at the time. (A laugh.) Ile was
smoking.
(At this stage of the case the witness Carroll was
taken with a fit, and was carried out of Court.)
Witness continued—When the plaintiff fell,
his head was out of the door and his legs in-
side. Ido not know how much of his body re-
mained in the establishment. I did not measure
it. (A laugh.) I did not owe him a halfpenny.
He did ask me for money, and I said I would
give him some next day. I kept him for 14 years.
There are always soldiers at our house ; we could
not live -without them.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—You have been charged
with assaults several times.

Witness—l have been assaulted first, I suppose.
(A laugh.)
Air. Sergeant Ballantine—How many times ?
Witness—You had better tell me, you know.
They say open confession is good for the soul.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—Then set to work at it.
(A laugh.)
Witness—l have no doubt you know, and it is
very improper to ask these questions.
Re-examined—l have only been charged with
one assault, and that was 13 years ago. I cannot
tell his name—was it Ballantine? (Loud laughter.)
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—l had nothing to do
with it. (Laughter.)
Witness—The magistrate's name was Ballantino,
I think, and he dismissed the case.

Mr. Benjamin Caunt said—l am not now the
champion. _ _

Mr. Justice Byles—We don't want to know that;
conduct the case regularly.
Mr. Sergeant Parry—l only wished to know the
fact.

Mr. Justice Byles—Then take another opportu-
nity of inquiring. (Laughter.)
Witness—l have known the plaintiff 25 years,
and have frequently given him clothes and victuals.
He had bad legs. [Mr. Caunt then detailed the
filthy and disgusting language addressed by the
plaintiff to Mrs. Caunt.] He did not fall down
from the push by Mrs. Caunt. He came back in an
hour or so and made a great noise. Mrs. Caunt
rang the bell for the waiter, who took hold of the
plaintiff's arm, helped him down the step and bid
him good night. Mrs. Caunt never came from
behind the bar. She pushed him over the bar door.
No beer was thrown.

Cross-examined—She put her hand on his
shoulder, but she did not push him very much.
L. Keys—l was waiter at the Coach and Horses,
but am not now. I was called William. The plain-
tiff was tipsy. I asked him to go, and he said he
would take my advice and go. I handed him down
the step and bid him good night, and shut the door.
This was between one and two. I had shut up the
house at one. I saw nothing the matter with him
beyond being drunk.
Mary Ann Carter said she assisted in the bar at
the Coach and Horses, and was present on the occa-
sion in question. She confirmed the evidence of the
other witnesses. •

Frederick Enns—l am a stonemason, and am
sometimes called "Josh." Two or three weeks after
the accident, I met the plaintiff, and asked him
what was the matter with him. His arm was in a
sling. He said it had happened round the corner,
but he did not know how, for he was drunk at the
time. I said, " I understand you have brought an
action against Mr. Caunt about it," and he replied,
"Yes. Berry Hutchinson (the attorney) has sweated
him before, and he will sweat him again."
Cross-examined—l advised him to go round and
apologise to Mr. Caunt, for I thought he was wrong.
He said he would set a lawyer on him : Baron
Nicholson, I think. (Laughter.) No ; it was Baron
Hutchinson. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Justice Byles, in summing up, lamented that
so much of the time of the Court should be employed
in trying a case like this during the sittings in term,
which were intended to be devoted to the purpose
of trying actions for the recovery of debts and other
short causes only. After commenting upon the evi-
dence he left it to the jury to say whether the plea
that the plaintiff was committing a disturbance in
the house, and that for that reason he had been put
out, was true. If so, as the record was framed, their
verdict must be for the defendant, for there• was no
new assignment that unnecessary violence was used.
The jury, at one o'clock, retired to their private
room, where they remained until five o'clock, when
they were sent for, and came into court in custody
of the officer.

Mr. Jones, the Deputy Associate, inquired if there
was any chance of their agreeing to a verdict.
Several jurors—Not the slightest chance.
Mr. Jones—Then I am directed by his lordship
to discharge you withoht a verdict. _

The jury were accordingly discharged.
The officer who had them in charge had been
sworn in the usual terms to keep them "without
meat, drink, or firing, candlelight excepted," and he
did his best to perform his oath, for he locked them
up in the jury room, put the key in his pocket, and
himself remained outside the door. Several of them,
however, availed themselves of a window opening
on to the street, and which was out of the sigh ,t of
the officer, to send a message to a neighbouring
tavern, which soon produced a boy with a large can
of beer and a pint pot. Several pints of the beve-
rage had been handed into the jury room when
some one connected with the Court discovered, by
accident, what was going on, and it was immedi-
ately put a stop to. The boy seemed quite uncon-
scious that he had done anything wrong, and when
sternly told the heinousness of his offence in serv-
ing beer to a jury who were locked up, innocently
inquired why they were locked up, and who was
to pay for the beer—but to neither inquiry did he
get any satisfactory answer.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE, Jim. 20.

MARYLEB ONE.—SUMMONS AGAINST A LI-
CENSED VICTUALLER.—Mr. Joseph Potter, land.
lord of the Sun, Upper Lisson-street, was summoned
by the police for suffering gaming on his premises.
Mr. Herring attended for defendant.
Police-sergeant, 3 D, stated that on Monday
evening, 10th inst., he went to defendant's house,
with another constable, at half-past nine o'clock,
and in the parlour he saw 35 persons, men, women,
and children ; dice were being thrown.
By Mr. Long—l saw no money pass, and neither
did I hear anything mentioned about money. I
spoke to the landlord, and he said he believed that
what was going on was for a Christmass tree, and
he hoped he would look over it.

Mr. Herring said that the facts of the case were
that a neighbour of defendant had a Christmas tree
which he wanted to dispose of by its being drawn
for, and that the throwing with dice was without
his (defendant's) sanction.
The summons was dismissed.

BOW-STREET.—Mr. Harry Boleno, the clown
at Drury•lane Theatre, appeared to a summons
charging him with having assaulted J. Mackintosh,
a supernumerary, during the performance of the
'pantomime.

The complainant stated that he was one of the
mimic mob, and had to share in the sham kicks and
cuffs of the numerous street brawls, at ls. per night.
Although occasionally a" super" might get a harder
knock than was intended, still the row was gene-
rally conducted with good temper, and the best
feeling prevailed at Drury-lane among all parties,
from the High Sheriff of Nottingham downwards.
From some cause, however, he (complainant) had
given offence to Mr. Boleno, who, on the night in
question, after accusing him unjustly of igniting the
tail of the comet before the proper time, rushed upon
him with unprofessional ferocity, knocked him
down with an umbrella, and kicked him "in ear-
nest," after he was down threatening in strong
language to "do for him," or for any one else who
took his part. The assault took place off one of the
wings, and was not wholly witnessed by the public
who, not knowing the nature of the attack, sided,
as usual, with the clown.
Mr. Henry observing a broad grin on complainant's

face, said, " You do not appear yourself to treat it
as a very serious assault."

Complainant said he was struck by the ferule of
the umbrella, and hurt a good deal at the time ; and
he called several other " supers " to confirm his
statement. They differed, however, in their state-
ments—one swearing that it was the handle and
not the fertile of the umbrella, and another declar-
ing that he saw a bump on complainant's forehead,
a circumstance which had not been mentioned by
him nor either of his previous witnesses.
Mr Henry (addressing one of the witnesses) asked
if it was not part of the duty for which they were
engaged to receive the knocks of clown, harlequin,
and pantaloon ?
Witness—Yes, but they don't hurt generally.
Mr. Henry—Are you not often knocked down ?
Witness—Apparently, but not really. We drop
down.

Mr. Henry—But is not the man, for example,
who plays the policeman, often knocked down ?

Witness—Yes, but we never hurt him. It's all
sham.

Complainant—Boleno is very rough. I've heard
he broke a woman's leg three years ago.
Mr. Boleno indignantly denied this statement,
and thought it would be obvious to his worship that
the whole thing had been got up by a little clique
to annoy him (defendant) for having interfered to
prevent some of their pranks on the stage. The
fact was, these gentlemen constituted the necessary
evils of a pantomime. For the first night or two
they were content to play for the amusement of the
public, but afterwards they began to play for their
own—indulging in a series of practical jokes
and a sort of " skylarking," which greatly embar-
rassed the clowns, and often destroyed the action
and effect of a "scene." They refused to do
what was set down for them, and persisted in a
variety of antics of their own invention. The
defendant was one of the most refractory of
these. One night he pulled a string and
started the comet, although he had no busi-
ness to touch it ; and another time he jumped
on his (defendant's) back without any autho-
rity, when he (the clown) was riding a don-
key, and' when, from the fatigue of the scene,
he was nearly exhausted. He certainly did give
him a smart rap, instead of the donkey on that
occasion, and was glad to see him wincing under it.
On the night in question, however, he only rapped
him with the umbrella, for the complainank, after
hitting in return, literally bolted, and declined to
receive the drubbing which Ina (defendant) might
have given him.
The harlequin (M. St. Maine) confirmed Bolen o's
statement, and said they had enough of peril to
encounter in the scenes of the pantomime, without
being exposed to further risk from the insubordi-
nation of the " supers."
Mr. Henry, believing the charge to be perfectly
frivolous, dismissed the summons.

SOUTHWARK.—ALLEGED ROBBERY OF PA-
TENT CAPSULES.--Mr. Samuel Israel, a rag-
merchant, carrying on an extensive business
in White-street, Southwark, surrendered to his
bail, charged with having in his possession a quan-
tity of patent capsules, alleged to have been stolen
from Messrs. Hill and Ledger, export pickle mer-
chants, Cannon-street, City, and Half-moon-yard,
Borough.
Mr. Sleigh for the prosecution, and Mr. Solomon
for the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence that about six
weeks ago some person called on Mr. Capern, a
pickle merchant of Whitechapel, and asked him if
he would purchase some capsules, with Messrs. Hill
and Ledger's stamp on them, as he could dispose of
them to those gentlemen, being in the same trade.
In consequence of that, he communicated with Ser-
geant Smith, 4 M, and went with him to the pri-
soner's house, where he found 125 perfect capsules,
quite new, belonging to the prosecutors. The
defendant first said he had them from the country,
and afterwards that they were brought to him by
Myers, his collector, who had purchased them of
Mrs. Fowler, a marine store-dealer, of Little Bush-
lane, Upper Thames-street, and he was then given
into custody, Mr. Ledger swearing that they were
their property, and must have been stolen from
their premises. Mrs. Fowler was examined, when
she admitted selling Myers a few broken up
capsules, but never such as those produced. The
defendant was eventually remanded, to give the
prosecutor an opportunity of making further
inquiries.
Mr. Sleigh now informed his Worship that the
evidence was of such a nature that it would be use-
less to go before a jury for the felony, but he
thought the possession was so unsatisfactory as to
require further investigation.
Mr. Capern said that Mrs. Fowler had told him
she frequently purchased such capsules as those
produced, and disposed of them to the defendant,
and now she denied that: In fact, he was satisfied
that she had them.

The magistrate said he could not rely on Mrs.
Fowler's tstimony, and as all depended on her
he must discharge the defendant.

ATTEMPTED MURDER OF A POLICE CONSTABLE.
—Jas. Beale, a bricklayer, residing at No. 1, Nel-
son-square, Blackfriar's-road, was brought before
Mr. Combe for final examination, charged with
attempting to murder Joseph Birch, police-con-
stable 239 M, while in the execution of his duty.
The offence was committed on Friday evening, and
for two days the constable was in a precarious
state, and he was unable to attend until yesterday.
He was still in such a weak state that he was
allowed a seat at the table.

Mr. Edwin appeared for the accused.
The constable, who exhibited a contused wound
on the left temple, and another under the left ear,
said that about six o'clock on Saturday evening he
was on duty in Great Charlotte-street, Blackfriars-
road, when he heard the cries of murder proceed
from Nelson-square. It was a female voice. Wit-
ness immediately went there, and saw the beadle
of the square on the steps 'of No. 1, the door of
which was open, and he told witness that he be-
lieved murder had been committed there, as a
female had just rushed out, calling out " Murder."
They both went up stairs, and in a room on the
second floor he saw the prisoner, and before he had
an opportunity of saying a word, he suddenly
rushed at witness and knocked him down. While
on the ground the prisoner kicked him two or
three times severely, and he took out his staff
to protect himself, but the prisoner wrenched
it from him, and on the beadle coming to
his assistance, they all fell. In attempting to
get up, the prisoner struck him two or three
blows—one under the left ear rendered him insen-
sible, and he must have been then severely knocked
about. He had no recollection of anything after the
third blow, until he found himself at a surgeon's.
Mr. Combe asked where the beadle was when he
struck him the third blow ?

Witness replied that he had gone out for a light,
as the candle had been upset. As soon as he left the
room the prisoner rushed at him with the staff, and
struck him upon the head, saying " Now you I'll
do for you." He then became insensible.
Mr. Combo asked him whether he had struck the
prisoner prior to that ?
The constable replied that he had not.
Mr. Combe inquired if he saw any female in dis-
tress prior to his entering the house ?
He said that he did, and he understood it was the
prisoner's wife. She had marks of violence about
her face and neck, and had called out murder.
In cross-examination by Mr. Edwin—Witness
said he never tried to pull out his staff until he had
been thrown down twice and kicked with great
violence. In wrenching the staff from him, prisoner
said he would not be taken by them, and that he
would murders him.
Frederick East, the beadle of Nelson-squiire, said
that he saw the prisoner's wife rush out of their
house, No. 1, with her hands to her face, calling out
" Murder." He asked her what the matter was,
and she said her husband had ill-used her, and she
advised him not to go upstairs without a constable
or he would murder him. A minute or so afterwards
the officer, 237 M, came up, and they entered the
house. The female followed them as far as the second
floor landing, where she remained. As soon as they
entered, prisoner threw off his coat and waistcoat,
and rushed at the constable, knocking him down,
and on going to the assistance of the latter he was
pulled down, and they all rolled over. When he got
up he saw the prisoner wrench the staff from the
prosecutor's hand, and strike him over the head
with it. The light was upset, and witness left the
room for a minute to get another, and on his re-
turn he saw the officer leaning against the wall
bleeding from the head, and the prisoner was break-
ing the things in the room with his staff. Witness
took the constable to Dr. Hutchinson, who dressed
his wounds and ordered his instant removal to the
police station.
Mr. Edwin asked whether the prisoner was not
mad drunk when they entered the room ?
Witness said he was not drunk, but he was un-
der the influence of liquor. The constable never
touched him or even spoke to him before the prisoner
rushed at him and knocked him down.

-Mr. Combe asked what was the present state of
the officer ? _ _

Sergeant Raymondthe acting inspector, said that
he was still very ill, and it was the opinion of Dr.
Evans, the divisional surgeon, that it would be a
long time before he would be able to return to his
duty.

Mr. Edwin hoped his worship would deal with
the case summarily; his client was under the influ-
ence of drink, and much excited at seeing two con-
stables enter his house. He contended that ho had
not assaulted his wife, and that the police had no
right to force their way into his house.
Mr. Combo said that, according to the evidence,

the officer was justified is doing what he had, and
under all the circumstances he should commit him
for trial..

At the request of Mr. Edwin, his Worship con-
sented to take bail; and substantial securities being
accepted, the prisoner was liberated.

GREENWICH.—CAuTION TO APPRENTICES.—G.
E. Pattie, a youth, about 16 years of age, apprentice
to Mr. George England, of the Hatcham Ironworks,
New-cross, was charged, before Mr. Train, with
unlawfully absenting himself from his master's
service.

Mr. England stated that, in consequence of
an extensive order for fireboxes, amounting in
value to £5OO, havinc, to be shipped for Swit-
zerland on the Friday after Christmas, orders
were given that none of the persons employed in
the establishment were to absent themselves from
work on the Boxing-day without permission. The
defendant was one of the hands engaged in prepar-
ing the rivets for the fireboxes in question, and
stayed away on the Boxing-day, and had not re-
turned until the preceding day, having been absent
for a period of three weeks. The consequence of
this was that the then engaged on the work made
an excuse of defendant staying away, and left and
went on the drink for two or three days, and the
order was not completed until the following week.
He had received a letter from the father of de-
fendant, dated the 28th Dec., stating that his son
(the defendant) was ill ; but as he had ascertained
that he had visited one of the London theatres on
the Boxing-night he had brought him before his
worship to prove such illness, or to be punished.
A young man, named Phillips, having corrobo-
rated Mr. England's statement as to the cause of
the delay in not completing the work,
Mr. Foggo, solicitor, who appeared for defendant,
produced a certificate from St. Bartholomew's Hos -
pital, showing that defendant had been admitted an
out-patient on the 27th Dec., and continued so up
to the present time. •
Mr. Traill looked at the certificate, but it con-
tained no specific statement as to the ailment under
which defendant was labouring.
Defendant, in reply to the magistrate, admitted
going to the theatre, but said he had been too ill
to attend to his work.
Mr. Foggo said he was anxious the defendant's
father should be examined, who then stated that
his son had continued to be supplied with medicine
from St. Bartholomew's Hospital, and that he be-
lieved his illness arose from a severe rupture, which
rendered him unfit to work at the trade. He (the
father) had summoned Mr. England in September
last for striking his son, on which occasion Mr.
Seeker, the magistrate, inflicted a fine of ss. and
costs, and to this circumstance alone he attributed
the present proceedings. He wished to question
Mr. England as to a threat made by him at the
time of being fined by Mr. Seeker, but
Mr. Traill said that had nothing to do with the
case. A certificate had been produced, which was no
evidence, as it stated nothing as to what defendant's
illness was. It was not to be presumed that because a
person might be taking medicine he would be unfit
to work, and the cause of the case being adjourned
was that such evidence should be produced. This
had not been done, and he (Mr. Traill) was bound
to believe, from the fact of defendant's attending at
a theatre, that he was capable of having attended
to his work. In dealin with cases of apprentices
he always considered what good was to be effected
in sending apprentices to the House of Correction.
Generally speaking, he considered very little good
resulted from such commitments, but where there
was an evident determination to neglect work, he
thought some good might result, because the ap-
prentice would have to choose between the treat-
ment received in a prison and that if he followed
his employment. The present was a case in which,
he should sentence the defendant to 21 days' im-
prisonment in the House of Correction, and the
attention of the surgeon of the gaol would be di-
rected to him to ascertain whether the defendant's
disability was such that it would be improper to
subject him to the ordinary labours of the gaol.
The defendant was then removed to await the
prison van.

WAND STU ORTH.—THE CHARGE OF ASSAULT.
—ln the case of Mr. Harding, of Battersea, who
was reported to have been committed for one month
for assaulting the police, it appears that. although
Mr. Ingham positively refused to alter his decision
in the first instance, he was subsequently induced,
upon the application of Mr. Wilson, solicitor, of
Wandsworth, to fine the prisoner instead of com-
mitting him to prison. The sentence was altered
to a penalty of £lO, being £5 for each assault. The
money was paid, and the prisoner was consequently
liberated.

HAMMERSMITH.—STEALING PEWTER MEA-
SURES.--Joseph Francis, who had the appearance
of a workman, was charged with stealing two pint
measures belonging to Mr. Alfred Shelly, the land-
lord of the Earl of Zetland public-house, William-
street, Notting-hill.

The prosecutor met the prisoner coming out of his
house shortly after one o'clock yesterday afternoon
carrying a basket, and suspecting wrong from his
manner, he went into the taproom and missed two
knives. He ran after the prisoner, and instead of
finding the knives in the basket as he had expected,
he discovered two of his pint pots. The knives
were afterwards taken from his pockets.
The prisoner said. he was very sorry, and would
not do so again.,
Mr. Dayman committed him for two months,
with hard labour.