The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-16 00:00:00

THE SON, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING,

The Atrocious Outrage with Vitriol.

BOW-STREET-THIS DAY.

John Wainwright, described as a surgeon, residing in
Old Quebec-street, was placed at the bar, charged with
feloniously throwing a burning fluid over the person of
Mrs. Peacock, the wife of Mr. Peacock, the manager of a
fruterer's establishment in New Oxford-street.

It will be recollected that early in the month of
January the prisoner was arrested on a charge of throwing
corrosive sublimate on a lady in Museum-street, and
that such was the injury the lady had sustained,
that she was totally incapable of appearing in court
to give evidence against the prisoner. On the first exami-
nation Mr. Lewis, of Great Marlborough-street, who
appeared for the prisoner, applied that bail might be
accepted, but this the magistrate refused, and the prisoner
has been under remand and in custody ever since.
Mrs. Peacock was this morning, however, so far re-
covered as to undergo examination, and accordingly she
was brought to the police court, but hor appearance
excited the greatest sympathy. She is a lady of
about 30 years of ego, and has sustained irre-
parable injury. The sight of ono eye has altogether been
destroyed, and it has only been been by the greatest skill
and care that the partial sight of the other has been pre-
served.

The evidence of the surgeon, it will be recollected, stated
that the liquid which had produced the injury was sulphu-
ric acid.

Martha Sarah Peacock said—l am the wife of Beckett
Peacock, of 477, Oxford-street. About half-past 10 on the
night of the 2d January last I was going up Museum- street,
waiting for my laundress, who had gone to the oil shop. I
then saw a man cross the road wearing a cap and a cape.
Ile stood sideways to me, and I then recognised it was the
prisoner. I was just going to speak to him when he pulled
his cape on one side, and then I saw something white in his
hand, which looked like a basin, which ho threw at me. It
came over me like a basin of cold water I held my head
down and it streamed over me. I screamed and stood still.
I could not open my eyes. I don't recollect anything more
but being taken into the shop and from thence to the hos-
pital.

Mr. Vaughan—How far from the Museum was this ?
Witness—The corner of Brewer-street, near Mr. Peek's
shop. I have suffered excruciating pain from the liquid.
My face is burnt. _ _

Mr. Vaughan—Have you any doubt that the prisoner
was the man who threw the liquid over you ?
Witness—None whatever.
Mr. Vaughan—Have you the power of vision so that
you can say the prisoner at the bar is the same man ?
Witness—Yes.

[The bandage was then for a moment removed from the
witness. eye, and she said, pointing to the prisoner,
" That is the man who threw the liquid over me."l

By Mr. Lewis—My dross was all burnt in holes.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lewis, of Great Marlborough-
street—l have known the prisoner for twelve months. My
husband and myself have been on very friendly terms with
the prisoner. We knew him at Sheffield. I and my hus-
band have visited him frequently at his house in Quebec-
street. We wore all on very friendly terms. A quarrel
arose between the prisoner and my husband in consequence
of a paper being posted on our door. This took place the
Thursday before Christmas day. It was placed just under-
neath the bell. From that time my husband declined to
visit him or to receive his visits.

The witness here became very much agitated, and for a
short time her examination had to be suspended.

On recovering herself the witness proceeded—My sister-
in-law used to visit the prisoner with us. After the paper
was posted on our door my husband requested me not to
visit the prisoner. I never visited the prisoner after the
prohibition before the day of the accident. I am quite
sure about that. The last time I saw the prisoner I was
in company with my uncle, we shook hands at parting,
and were all very friendly. The day of the accident I and
my uncle took tea with the prisoner, and I returned home
about 9 o'clock in the evening. I had occasion after that
to go out to my laundress, this was about 10, and then
it was that the injury was inflicted on me. I told the
person who first came up to me that the man who had
thrown the liquid over me was a man about the middle
height with a thin face. I don't remember exactly what I
said to my husband, I was in such pain. I recollect I did
tell my husband I did not know who it was that had
thrown the liquid over me, but this was because I did not
wish him to know I had been to the prisoner's house. I
told him the person had a cap on. My husband did not
say in my hearing, " Oh, then, it must be Wainright."
I told my sister-in-law that ho thought that that was the
man who had done it.

Re-examined —I went to the prisoner's house on the day
I did in consequence of receiving a letter which I
thought he had sent. I told my uncle about it. He said
he was going up that way, and that he would go with me.
I went to Wainwright's, and he thou went on his knees
and told me it was not him that sent the letter. This was
on the Saturday night of the accident. On Sunday morning
I told my sister that Wainwright was the person who threw
the stuff at me. His name was never suggested to me by
any one, as to prisoner doing mo the injury.

Mr. Vaughan—Why did you say in the baker's shop
you did not know-who it was?
Witness—Because I was afraid of my husband.
Mr. Vaughan—When you left the prisoner on the even-
ing of the accident, did you tell him where you would be
at another part of the evening ?
Witness—No.

Mr. Vaughan—Did you tell him you would be in
Museum-street about half-past ton ?
Witness—No.

Mr. Vaughan—Did you expect to see him at Museum-
street ?

Witness—No.

Mr. Vaughan—Have you seen tho prisoner wear a cap
at his own house ?
Witness—Yee.

Mr. Vaughan—Was the cap that the prisoner wore on
tho eTening of the outrage the same sort as you had seen
him wear at his own house ?
•
Witness —Yes.

Mr. Vaughan—Was the statement that you made to the
constable that the man wore a cap true ?
Witness Yes.

Mr. Vaughan—How far was the place where the accident
occurred from your own house.

Witness—About half a minute's walk.
The prisoner was then fully committed for trial.

Liverpocl Cotton Market. —Ms Day.

The Market continues steady. Sales probably
25,000 bales or more.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

MARLBOROUGH STREET.

OBSTRUCTING A POLICE INSPECTOR.—JuIia Cal-
laghan was charged before Mr. Knox with being
drunk and disorderly in the Haymarket; and Mr.
James Thompson, of No. 16, Colville-road, Bays-
water, wine merchant, was charged with being
drunk and obstructing Inspector Bowles in the exe-
cution of his duty.
Pole-constable Fisher, 831 A, said that hearing a
disturbance in the Haymarket that morning about
2 o'clock he went up to ascertain the cause, and
found the prisoners having a dispute with a cab-
man and making a great disturbance. He per-
suaded her to go away, and she did so, but after-
wards returned and smacked his face, and said " You
rogue and vagabond, give me my purse." She then
tried to strike him again, but he prevented her, and
with assistance took her into custody.
Inspector Bowles said that while on the way to
the station Callaghan's skirt came off, through some
of the crowd treading on it, and Thompson then
came up while he was following with the skirt on
his arm, and pushed him into the road, saying at
the same :time, " What the - have you to do
with it." He told Thompson he was an inspector,
but notwithstanding that he pushed him twice more
into the road. He then took Thompson, who was
drunk, into custody.
Peskett, 143 C, having corroborated the inspector,
Thompson said no doubt he had taken a little too
much to drink, and he was sorry for what he had
done.

Mr. Knox said Thompson had made the best
defence he could, bnt he must not interfere with the
police. The defendants would have to pay a fine
of 20s. each.

WIFE BEATING.—Michael Hurley, a rough-look-
ing man, was charged before Mr. Knox with as-
saulting his wife.
The complainant, on the chargebeingfirst brought
before the Court, stated that her husband was in
the constant habit of ill-using her, and at the same
time she exhibited her arm, which was much dis-
coloured. She also described other conduct on the
part of her husband of a disgraceful nature, and
said he was a lazy, drunken fellow.
The prisoner said his wife was a drunken, aggra-
vating woman, and that she had struck him on the
head with a poker.
The complainant said she was a charwcman at
the Reform Club, and could call witnesses to speak
to her character. She had not struck her husband
with a poker, but her son struck him in taking the
poker from him and protecting her.
The son was called and bore out the complain-
ant's statement.

Mr. Knox ordered Paice, the warrant officer,
to make inquiries respecting the parties, and the
officer now stated that he had ascertained that they
were both in the habit of drinking, and that there
was very little difference between them.
A waiter from the Reform Club was called by the
complainant, and he gave her a good character, and
two witnesses were called by the prisoner, and they
stated that the complainant was a woman of a most
aggravating nature, and said that her voice could
be heard in the street hours after she came home of
an evening, and they believed she wanted to get rid
of her husband. She was also in the habit of drink-
ing
M.
r. Knox said he had no doubt what the officer
had represented was the truth of the matter, and
that sometimes one drank and sometimes the other,
and that there was not a pin to choose between
them. The prisoner was a strong man, and had
assaulted his wife, and he must be taught to keep
his hands off his wife. He would not send him for
the full term, as at first he intended to do, but
would commit him for two months with hard labour.