Stockton Herald, South Durham and Cleveland Advertiser. — 1890-03-22 (Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, England)

HOTEL.  John Feemen, a ice:internee botcher. was charged at South Stockton Police Court on Monday afternoon with (1) being drunk and disorderly; (i) being drunk at Sedler's Hotel and refusing to quit ; 0) assaulting Wilson Furness, the landlord of the hotel; (4) doing malicious damage to property; and (5) assaulting Frederick Bell, a plumber who was working at the hotel.—Mr Bunton prosecuted; Mr E. J. Thomas defended.—The Cilee of being drunk and disorderly was proved by Sergeant Newstead, who had been called upon to eject the defendant from the hotel, and defendant was fined 7s 6cl and fe costs, or fourteen days.— The charges of being drunk at the hotel, and refusing to quit, and of assaulting Bell, were admitted, the others were denied.—Mr Bunton staled that on the 10th inst., in the afternoon, the defendant became very quarrelsome at the hotel, and assaulted Bell. Mr Furness was called, and ordered defendant, out. The b....rman tried to eject him, but defendant broke away, rushed at Mr Furness behind the counter, and hit him on the head. Ultimately he was got out but returned in about an hour in a most excited and dangerous condition, produced a butcher's knife, and began sharpening it on a steel, and threatened to use it on Mr Furness—to " rip him open," and 'cut his throat "—at the same time using very bad language. Mr Furness was behind the counter talking to Mr Fenniek, a Newcastle commercial traveller. Defendant tried to get at him, but could not, so he took up a metal measure weighing about 41b., and flung it at Mr Furness. The measure struck Mr Fumeas on the back of the head, cutting the skin, and glanced from his head against a , glass whisky keg, which it broke, the contents being entirely wasted. The breakage of the keg constituted the malicious damage to property, the damage amounting to 25e.—Mr Furness corroborated this statement, and said the defendant's behaviour was so violent and alarming that the customers and servants fled, and he (witness) ultimately sent for hie revolver, but it was not brought down. Defendant behaved like a madman.--Cro,s-examined, he admitted that before the measure was thrown at him he threw two or three small glasses at the defendant. It was when defendant struck , him over the counter, and pulled out his imile.' He hoped to frighten him away by throwing the glasses.—Re-examined: The glasses did not hit the defendant. —Mr Fenniek and the barmaniCharles Snowden) also corroborated, the latter stating that the defendant did not obtain at the hotel the drink which made him drunk—Sergeant Newstead deposed to hearigg defendant threaten to murder Mr Furness-1n defence, Mr Thomas admitted that the defendant was mad drunk, but he contended that the conduct of Mr Furness in throwing the glasses at the defendant was not such as to allay his excitement. On the contrary, it was calculated to unnecessarily exasperate him.—The Bench dierniesed the case of malicious damage, the element of wilfulness being wanting; fined defendant £2 and £1 2s costs for the assault on Mr Frtrness; ordered him to pay 95 costs in the case of the assault on Bell, and 9s costs in the case of being drunk and refusing to quit, in default two months' imprisonment. This was exclusive of the penalty in the police case.