The Sun.
London, England, 1866-12-15 00:00:00

PAN Y.

This was an action by William Henry Witherington to
recover compensation in damages for injuries sustained
through the alleged neglect of the company's servants.
The defendant pleadod that the plaintiff was not a passen-
ger, and that they wore not liable.
From the statement of counsel and the evidence for the
plaintiff, it appeared that lie had been for many years a
driver of stage coaches as well as a part proprietor in the
country. In December, 1862, ho was appointed a driver of an
omnibus in London, and on the day in question he went to
Scotland-yard to get a license. On his return he took an
omnibus of the defendants' from Charing-cross to the City,
and got up on the box. When he reached the corner of
Wood-street, Cheapside, he desired the driver to stop, and
as ho was alighting the strap broke, and the door slam-
ming the horses went on. The consequence was that he
fell between the wheel and another part of the omnibus,
which continued to go on. Ho was taken to St. Bartholo-
mew's Hospital, when it was found that his left knee
joint was so injured that he was kept in the hospital until
the following September. His case was a very singular one
and a cast was taken of his leg, and when he left the hos-
pital he was permanently injured. He wrote to the de-
fendants stating the extent of his injury and asking for
compensation. They made an answer similar to the pleas
placed on the record, and having no means at the time he
was unable to enforce his claim, and ho accepted employ-
ment in the defendant's service for a short time. In De-
cember, 1865, through the death of a relative he came
possessed of a legacy, and his application for compensation
being again refused he commenced the present proceed-
ings. The medical evidence fully corroborated the state-
ment of the plaintiff as to the extent and permanency of
the injury.

The evidence was very conflicting., and the jury found
a verdict for the defendant.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.---This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

A SOLICITOR CHARGED WITH DISORDERLY CONDUCT.—
Mr. Alfred Guppy, solicitor, was charged before Mr.
Knox with being drunk, and behaving in a disorderly
manner.

Police-constable John Fraser, 322 A, said that about 12
o'clock last night ho saw the defendant at the top of the
Haymarket, surrounded by a crowd of persons. The de-
fendant, who was drunk, had taken his luggage to the
White Bear Tavern, Piccadilly, but he had been turned
out of the house. The defendant had been about the place
for five hours, and had seized hold of two respectable
females and accused them of robbing him, but although
they were both hurt they refused to charge him.
The defendant addressed the magistrate at considerable
length, stating that he had abstained from drink for six
months, but was yesterday overcome a little through some
friends who had been to the Agricultural Hall. He was a
solicitor, and the member of a good and respectable family.
He would admit being overcome, but did not consider
that he had been guilty of any disorderly conduct. His
luggage was still at the White Bear.
Mr. Knox told the defendant that if he had disgraced
himself as the defendant had done, he would not have
dared to open his lips in court. The defendant said he was
a member of a respectable family and a solicitor, and that
being the case ho ought to show an example to the poor
creatures who were so often placed in a similar position.
He would ask the defendant whether he considered his
conduct fitting a decent and respectable man. The de-
fendant had not only disgraced himself but the profession
to which he belonged. Had the defendant been one of the
miserable creatures he was in the habit of having brought
before him he would have imposed a light fine, but with a
person in the defendant's position the matter was very
different, and the defendant vrould have to pay 40s. or a
month.