The Sun.
London, England, 1821-12-04 00:00:00

CHARGE OF ASSAULT AGAINST A SOLDIER.

William Blithe, a soldier in the second regiment of Foot
Guards, was tried upon an indictment charging him with hay-
ing assaulted Robert Longdale with a musketand bayonkt, and
with having used threats against the prosecutor's life.
Mr. COOPER, in stating,the case, said, that the question to
be decided was, whether the citizens of London had any right
to expect that they might walk upon the footpath in the
streets without fear of military violence, or were to be jostled
and kicked out of the way at the 'pleasure of any man with
a red coat on his back, and a formidable weapon in his band.
—lt was to be hoped that the verdict of the Jury would
teach the soldier to keep his arms for proper use, and not
in a time of peace to apply them to malevolent purposes.—
Soldiers were, as Mr. Pulteney had described them, mere
passive instruments, any one of whom, if ordered to drag his
lather out of the 'louse of Comtnons, must do it without hesi-
tation. The Commander was responsible, and Mr. Longdale,
who had himself been in the Army, applied to the person at the
head of the company, who, however, preferred assaulting him
to giving him the expected redress. If such things were per-
mitted to go on, it would, in the Learned Counsel's opinion,
be much better to get out of the country than to abide in it.
Mr. Longdale said, that on the 17th of September Last, as he
was passing down Ludgate-hill towards Heet-street, he was
pushed off the pavement, anti some one rudely said,—" Get

PRICE SEVENPENCE.

-out of the way." Witness, on turning round, saw some soldiers,
and said, What the devil do you mean by that ? i don,bt
whether you have any right to walk on the pavement at at."
The soldier to whom he spoke told him •to go and be d-
Witness then,spoke to the. defendant, who was corporal, upon'
the subject. '1 he corporal told him to do what the soldier ad-
vised him to do,, in the same language; upon hearing which,
witness asked his name and his regiment. The corporal re,.
plied, " your blood, • if you don't get out of any way,
I'll run you through with my bayonet"- The--corporal then
took his musket from his shoulder, and, lowered the paint.
Witness started back, or he really believed the defendant would
have xun him through. .
On his cross-examination by Mr. ADOLPHUS, he said that
he was, about six years ago, in the militia, and was now a spe-
c4hleader. He had not taken hold of the corporal's anm, but
miglithave touched him. • The bayonet was lowered, but not
so low as his body. , •
A.nran named Talbot confirmed the prosecutor's statement.
Mr. Ano tmius' in his defence of the corporal, ridiculed
what he called Mr. Pulteney's frothy declamation, and assured
the Jury that he had studied diligently the records of his coon-
.. try, and had ascertained that the estates of the realms were so
happily-blended by the Constitution as never to be capable of
acting but with one interest, design, and. object, and that it. was
impassible-.that one I.l'z could; Irons jealousy,. bring the sal-
diery to Act against another part of the community even to -
rieiste..„. The military had a right to pass through the streets as
they the „liilgit-of doing, and it, could not be
that they were tO be broken and driven about by the 'cariiages.
He had learned, that since the extinction of the feudal system,
it Wtas'never known that the civil powers had been put down by
the military, except when factious demagogues destroyed
stitutions,ottbe country: After some :further _observations, in
the course of which the Learned Counsel took occasion to east
imputations upon the prosecutor and his evidence, he called
nil'. soldiers, who were of the marching party, and all of
whom swore that the defendant went between the second man
and the corporal; and took hold of the arm of the corporal which
'supported the musket, and seized the musket with the other in
a manner which obliged the corporal to turn round, and prevent
his piece from falling. They also swore that the corporal hid
not used a word of abuse.

Mr. COOPER contrasted the evidence given upon both sides,
and observed upon the likelihood-that common men, who mess.:d
and lived together, would be unanimous upon any subject con-
aected with any one of them.

The Commox SERGEANT, in summing up, said that cer-
tainly soldiers had no right to shove the paopie off the pave-
ment. In the present.case, he considered the soldier had rot
acted with impropriety ; but if the assault had been proired,
the most severe punishment would be inflicted. Verdict..;_.
Not Guilty. •