The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-27 00:00:00

POLICE lATELLIGENCE.—March 2G.

WORSHIP-STREET.—THE "NINE HOURS"
MOVEMENT.— Charles Huggins, 23, describing him-
self as a porter, and Joseph Chisnel, 30, a chair-
maker, were charged before Mr. Leigh with
violently assaulting James Dunn, a carpenter.
Mr. Vann, who attended for the complainant,
stated the facts. Dunn was in full employment,
and bad, while so engaged, been taunted by the
defendants with respect to- the nine hours' move-
ment, and a threat to tell " Potter" of how he was
engaged. In this instance there apparently had not
been any direct act that would bring the defendants
under the powers of the statute relative to the in-
timidation of workmen, and therefore they had only
been charged with the assault, but it was one of a
very aggravated character, and he (Mr. Vann)
trusted that the magistrate would mark his sense of
the same by his judgment on the perpetrators of it.
Complainant, whose eyes were blackened and
shirt collar and waistcoat soaked with blood,
then said, upon oath, " I work for Mears, a
builder in the Hackney-road. About three o'clock
this morning I was on a job near there, when
the defendants, whom I do nct know, came up
and said, You are a nice nine hours' man. An-
other man was with them. One of them said,
I'll tell Mr. Potter about you.' I made no reply.
I dont't know Potter, and don't wish to see him.
He is secretary, I believe, to the Trades' Union
strike. I was sawing floor boards at the time this
occurred. Defendants did not call me any name,
but all three set on me. I was struck with some
of the boards. I do not know who hit me. It
caused the injuries you see, and I bled profusely.
I am likely to lose my work.
Defendants—We did not touch him and know
nothing about the strike. We are of different
trades to his.

Mr. Hurlston—This is a misdemeanour, and in
law all implicated aro equally guilty.
Mr. Leigh—Was there any threat ?
Complainant—Not any, sir.
Robnet,lo3 N—l heard a great disturbance at
Nicoll•square, and on reaching there saw defend-
ants standing as though waiting for some one to
come out of a house—they appeared as waiting to
strike. Complainant on seeing me came from a
house; his features were quite covered with blood
—they were really not distinguishable. He gave
the defendants into custody.
Mr. Leigh (to eomplainant)—At the time this
occurred were you impressed with the belief that
they were angry with you for working ?
Complainant—l thought it was from what they
had read in the newspapers. It was on my mind
so, and I think so now.
Huggins—You struck me on the head with a
mallet.
Complainant-4 do not deny it, but it was not
until you attacked me.
0140.0—You flung a piece of wood at me first.
Ti).-ctt's how the bother began.
Complainant—Nothing of the kind.
Mr. Leigh—This man (complainant) has been
considerably injured, and I am bound to tell you,
that if the solicitor had proceeded against you for
the intimidation, I should have dealt with the case
under the powers of the 6th of George IV., whereby
an imprisonment of three months would have been
the result, accompanied by Lard labour. I now
order you to pay the penalty attached to the com-
mission of violent assaults, viz., £5 each, or in
default two months' imprisonment.