The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-14 00:00:00

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Mr. Curtis Pinkus— appeared before Mr. Maltby, to answer
a charge of violent assault last Sunday evening, in the Qua..
drant, preferred against him by Mr. James Clark Pray.
Some rather curious disclosures were expected, as it was
generally known that an actress of some reputation was inti-
mately mixed up with the affair. It was, however, mutu-
ally agreed between ?he parties to confine the proceedings as
closely as possible to the charge of assault.
Mr. Bagley appeared for the complainant; and Mr. Pren-
dergast Cur the defendant.
Mr. James Clark Pray examined.—Had known Mr. Curtis
Pinkus, the defendant, for about two years. On Sunday
last was at an hotel in St. Martin's-street, where Mr.
Pinkus also was. Mr. Pinkus walked past complainant
once or twice, but did not say anything. Complainant left
the hotel in a phaeton, and the defendant also quitted at the
acme time in a cab. When in the Quadrant an accident
ocqprred to the complainantS vehicle, and he stopped to
100 into the matter. The defendant, who bad at that time
nailing, in his hand. went into the house No. 70, Quadrant,
and came out armed with a club or heavy walking-stick.
The defendant came up to a friend who was in complainant's
company, and asked him for his card. The party thus ac-
costed, replied jocularly, and the defendant then came to-
wards hinc(complainant), and almost immediately after-
wards complainant felt a blow on his back. Complainant
took the whip to defend himself, but he was unable to do so
eftectuall► in consequence of the severity of the blows in-
flicted by the defendant with his stick. One of the blows
fell nu his head, cut it severely, and rendered him nearly
insensible. In cons nuence of the injuries received from
the defendant, complainant was unable to attend to make a
complaint on the following day. Complainant's head had
been dressed by a surgeon. The injury was severe; it was
inflicted on the crown of the head. One reason why com-
plainant could not defend himself against the defendant was,
because he had been thrown out of a gig a few days pre-
viously, and had injured his hand. Mr. Pinkus had threat-
ened complainant: on a former occasion. Complainant
would swear that he had nothing in his hand when he re-
ceived the the first blow.

Cross-eximined by Mr. Prendergast—Was an author.
The anther of iwo or perhaps three hundred octavo volumes.
Had written in `favour of the atmospheric railway. The- de-
fendant considered he had some claim del Messrs. Clegg and
S:nnuda, but complainant did not think 'those claims well
founded, though that was a question for a jury to decide.
Complainant refused to call certain parties swindlers and
scoundrels, and in consequence of this refusal a quarrel en
sued, and complainant would not write a word in favour of
the atmospheric system afterward. His reason for believing
that the defendant's claim on Messrs. Clegg and Samuda was
not well founded was partly because he did not think Mr.
Pinkus was a scientific man. He conceived that a scientific
man ought to know something of logarithms, the rule of
three, and other of the higher branches of mathematics.
Mr, Prendergast—Now about these two or three hundred
Bvo. volumes. Do you still live on them? Complainant—l
ne,ver ate an Bvo. volume in my life.
Mr. Prendergast—You know what I mean; people in this
town live in a variety of ways. Pray how do you get your
li*g? Compiainant—l write for my bread. I write for
the lipoksAers. I write for the principal magazines. I have
edited ik e Monthly Review; I have written article for Black-
wood, MN on one occasion my article was the, only article
corgplimented by the editor. On Sunday last I went to the
hotTl in St. Martin's-street to dine, and I did dine there.
There was a lady in the cab belonging to Mr. Pinkus. The
ladftlid not tell me to quit the room, and not to insult her.
The lady only told me not to interfere. When I left the
hotel, I was not certain that the defendant lived is the Qua-
drant, though I knew that he did live at one time in the
Quadrant. _ _ _ _ . .

Alr. Prendergast--Have yon a wife and children living at
Amherst in America? Complainant—l have no wife or
children. in America. I have heard of a report to the effect
that I ha 4 a wife in America, but I intend to have the matter
sifted. II is immaterial to me whether the matter is sifted
here or elsewhere.

Mr. Prendergast—Be careful what you say on that head.
Mr. Bagley—Have you been married more than once?
Complainant—l have been advised to say that I have not
been married more than once.

David Taylor said he was secretary to a gentleman. He
was present during the affair in the Quadrant. Saw the de-
ffm(l.ipt strike the complainant with a stick, and afterwards
SAW the blows repeated.
On cross-examination, this witness said he went to the
er,mplainant's 141ging,s to assist him in writing. In addition
to this, was advertising agent to a newspaper. Did not fol-
low the cab in which Mr. Pinkus and the lady were when
he left the hotel in the phaeton with the complainant. The
lady in question went by the name of Pray. Witness had
seen the lady in question in the character of the complainant's
wife.

Sutcliffe, one of the constables doing duty in the Quadrant,
said he saw the defendant striking the complainant over the
Lead with a stick. lie went forward and interfered to keep

the peace.

Mr. Prendergast then addreesing the Bench, said it
would be obvious there was something in the case which both
patties were desirous, and perhops discreetly so, of keeping
There was a lady in the case, whose name it wascon-
sidered advisable to keep from the public, and the wiole
truth way, that the conduct of the complainant towards this
lady eventually led to the assault. The lady was interfered
wish by the complainant. The defendant left in a cab with
this lady, and the complainant and his witness followed in a
phaeton for the purpose of further annoyance. An assault had
oeeerredln consequence of this proceeding on the part of the
ownplainant, andalthough blows were given by the defendant
wit Ii his stick, they were repaid by the complainant with a
wldp. He should be in a condition also to prove by evidence
that the complainant committed the first assault, and that he ,1
ha. on more than one occasion resorted to the use of threats
er.Chst the defendant.
Inight, cabdriver, said he was a stranger to all
(parties. Arf he knew was, that he drove the defendant and a
lowly to \o. 70, Quadrant When witness set down his fare,
the gentleman made a remark to the effect that some persons ,
were following and annoying him. The defendant went up
to the phaeton and after saying a few words was struck re-
peatt dly by the complainant with a whip. The defendant
1,./h ell he got out. of the cab had a stick with him.
Mr. Bagley said, he was sorry to cast doubt on the truth
of the tie ence set up, but he was bound to do so in order to
make his instructions consistent with the case presented be-
fore the Court. lie could not help saying that the evidence
had shown that an unprovoked, severe, and, he was sorry to
all, dastardly, assault had been committed on the com-
plainant. The defence set up, that the phaeton had followed
the cab, was disproved by the witnesses. From their evi-
deuce, instead of the complainant having purposely followed
the defendant to annoy him, it was clear that the stoppage
in else Quadrant arose out of the accident referred to, and that_
the complainant, instead of having sought to annoy the de-
feedafff, had been himself attacked without previous provoca-
tism. He also begged, in conclusion, to say, that the charge
wale against the complainant, that he had previously
n«ved the defendant, was wholly unfounded and unsupported.
Mr. Macree decided on holding the defendant. to bail to
meet rimy charge that might be preferred against him at the
tgeri,ins.