The Sun.
London, England, 1850-11-12 00:00:00

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Mr. John Goldsmid, of Mecklenburgh-square, was
summoned before Mr. Bingham for an alleged assault
on George Trenamen, a revenue officer.

The complainant stated he had occasion, in the dis-
charge of his duty, to serve a notice paper on the
landlord of the Blue Posts Tavern, Haymarket. He
went there for that purpose on Friday evening last,
and when he got into the house he observed several
persons, male and female, before the bar, amongst
whom was the defendant. As he was giving in the
notice paper the defendant came forward and looked
over his shoulder, remarking that he would pay the
b— lot for the landlord. The defendant then
asked him to have something to drink, and he de-
clined. The defendant asked him to shake hands,
and to this he said he had no objection. He held out
his hand, upon which the defendant laid hold of him
by the waistcoat and shirt and forced him back
rudely towards the stairs. The defendant repeated
this rudeness with greater violence, and complainant
then declared he would give the defendant into
custody for the assault. He requested the landlord
to give him the defendant's name—the landlord made
light of the affair, and said he lived by such persons as
the defendant. Complainant persisted in his determi-
nation to call a constable. The landlord said if he did
he would gat himself into trouble, as the defendant
was one of the " great City men." Complainant was
obliged to leave the place without the address of the
defendant, but by the exercise of some perseverance
he managed to find out who the defendant was, and
he got a summons against him immediately.
Mr. BINGHAM asked the defendant what answer he
had to make to the complaint.
The defendant said his answer was, the complainant
had made a complete mistake. He was at Brighton
at the time of the alleged assault, and that he could
prove, if necessary, by the evidence of members of his
family and his servants.
Mr. BINGHAM asked the complainant if he might
not be mistaken in the identity of the person he
accused.

The complainant had no doubt whatever that the
defendant wai the gentleman who used him as he had
described. He could not be mistaken, and there was
the landlord and the head-waiter who could also
identify the defendant.
The defendant said next Wednesday week his
family would be in town for the winter. If the case
were put off until that day he would be able to bring
ample evidence that he was at Brighton, and not in
London, at the time the complainant said he was
assaulted.

Mr. BINGHAM remarked the assault was of no very
serious character—it was more in the nature of an in-
sult; therefore, if the defendant had committed an act
of forgetfulness about his not being in town at the
time, he should advise him to arrange with the com-
plainant, which might be done without much diffi-
culty.
The defendant adhered to his statement.
Mr. BINGHAM said, as the defence was one of mis-
taken identity, the defendant had a right to be beard
in support of his plea. Could the defendant attend
the next day ? The defendant said it was settling
day in the City, and he could not leave business with-
out great inconvenience.
Mr. BINGHAM said he would spare the defendant
the expense of bringing witnesses from Brighton by
adjourning the case until next Monday, in order to
procure the attendance of the landlord and the waiter.
The complainant said the landlord had thrown