The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-14 00:00:00

WESTMINSTER.

Thomas Haynes, a well-known associate of bad cha-
racters, was charged with assaulting Thomas Plant, a
plumber, and wounding him with a knife.
The complainant stated that early that morning he
went with a couple of friends into the Bell public-house,
Bell-yard, York-street, and while taking some refresh-
ment a young woman came up to him and entreated him
to protect her, as a man wanted to rob her of a sovereign
which she had in her hand. Prosecutor replied that he
did not know about protecting her, but if she stood near
him he would see that nobody injured her. Immediately
after this the prisoner (the man alluded to) came up to
the prosecutor, and asked him what he had to do with
the young woman, and upon replying "nothing, but
that she had come to him for protection," the prisoner
struck him a violent blow in the face, which made his
nose bleed. Prosecutor returned the blow, and followed
it up with two or three others, when the prisoner finding
he was getting the worst of it gave him a desperate
kick in the lower part of the person, which caused
him to be in great agony for some time.
He then left the house, but subsequently
returned, and finding the prisoner still there, asked how
he could treat him in so inhuman a manner (in allusion
to the kick), when the accused attempted a repetition of
the same brutal treatment, but only injured his shin.
Prosecutor again struck him, and a few minutes after-
wards, when prosecutor considered that the affair was all
over, the prisoner came suddenly by his side and stabbed
him under the left eye. The blood gushed from his eye
immediately, and he was taken to the hospital and the
prisoner secured.
Two witnesses proved seeing the prisoner with a large
penknife in his hand when he inflicted the wound.
Mr. W. Dawsnap, house-surgeon at the Westminster
Hospital, proved that the prisoner had received a punc •
tured wound under the left eye, and was also suffering
from some contusion of the face. The wound spoken of
was such as would be produced by a knife; and had it
been a little higher would have been very dangerous.
The prisoner said the prosecutor had " pitched" into
him, and ho was hit and kicked about dreadfully. Pro-
secutor's eye must have come in contact with the side of
the bar or one of the seats.

Mr. BRODERIP committed him for trial for the stab-
bing, at the Central Criminal Court.
BITING A MAN'S NOSE OFF.—Charles Lovell,described
as a stonemason, was charged with biting a man's nose
off.

William Preston, the injured man, who follows nearly
the same occupation as the prisoner, wore a stout linen
bandage across his face. He stated that he went into
the Regent Arms, Regent-street, on the previous evening
about six o'clock, with a friend, and while having a pint
of beer in the tap-room he accused the defendant, who
was there, of having on a previous occasion played him
a dirty trick, and some angry words then ensued between
them. After about five minutes, during which time
some others in the room interfered to put a❑ ead to the
quarrel and separated them, defendant set down, and
complainant was standing up against die fireplace, when
the defendant rushed upon him and bit his nose off.
T. Sullivan proved that angry words occurred betwee❑
them, and defendant struck at the complainant. Wit-
ness went between them, and pulled Preston away.
Defendant suddenly jumped up, and in the next mo-
ment Preston exclaimed, "He has bitten my nose off."
Witness and others immediately ran to Preston, who
was upon the ground underneath defendant, and witness
had to thrust two of his fingers into defendant's mouth,
and with difficulty succeeded in opening it. When they
got Preston up, they found that a bit of his nose was
gone; they searched round the room but could not find
the missing part.
Mr. BRODERIP—What became of it? Witness—l
think he must have swallowed it, as it was not found.
Witness then stated that the injured man was conveyed
to a surgeon's, and tho accused to the police-station in
Rochester-row.

In reply to the charge, defendant said he had been sub-
ject to a disorder in his head for some time past, and if
anything disturbed him, ho did not know what he was
about. He had not the slightest remembrance of having
made any attack upon the complainant.
Mr. BRODERIP ordered him to find two sureties in 401.,
and enter into his own recognisances of 801., to answer
this serious charge at the sessions.
He was locked up in default of bail.