The Sun. — 1852-02-06 (London, England)

BURCHELL.) EXTRAORDINARY ASSAULT.—BULL V. ROLT.  This was an action to recover damages for trespass and assault. The defendant suffered judgment to go by default.  The plaintiff is a widow lady, keeping a house in Albion-street, Hyde-park-square, and the defendant is the son of a gentleman residing in Hyde-park-gardens. In May last the defendant went to plaintiff, and stated (hat he had been secretly married, and wished to take apartments in her house, and he and a lady took up their abode; the lady conducted herself with the greatest propriety, and if it had not been for the statement of the defendant, plaintiff would not have known but it was Mrs. Rolt. On the 13th of November a dispute arose between the defendant and Mrs. Rolt, and the latter went down into the kitchen in a state of great excitement, and claimed plaintiff's protection, or she would be murdered. Defendant afterwards went down stairs and (-ndeavoured to force Mrs. Rolt up. Plaintiff insisted on his leaving the place, instead of which he became very violent, and on a female, having a child in her arms, begging Mrs. Rolt to go up stairs, defendant asked her why she interfered, and attempted to strike her, when plaintiff interfered, and detendant struck her and injured her arm, which was bad for three weeks. Plaintiff's daughter then interfered, and defendant threw her down. The disturbance was so great that, on the servant-girl opening the door, the mob rushed into the house.  Mrs. Bull, who is the wife of Major Bull, deposed to the above facts, and Mr. Challis, a neighbour, proved the general disturbance in the street. Mr. O'BRIEN addressed the jury for the defendant, and commented on the fact that plaintiff's daughter and other witnesses were present. He urged that the defendant, from a feeling of delicacy towards the young female who was under his protection, offered to make thy reasonable compensation, which, however, was refused. Emma Sims was called for the defendant, and denied ,hat on the day in question she went down to claim the protection of Mrs. Bull, but went down to speak to her. Defendant sent to her to go up stairs, when Mrs. and Hiss Bull said, "Do not go—do not be a fool." Witness did not go up immediately, and Mr. bolt went down and offered her his arm. Witness got up off her chair, but Miss Bull pulled her down on her knees, and held her. Mr. Rolt said," Let her go," and plaintiff went over to hold witness, and plaintiff laid hold of ,Ir. Molt. She denied that defendant had used any threat to her on that evening, nor did she see any blow struck in the kitchen.  Mr. SHAW, plaintiff's attorney, cross-examined the witness, but did not shake her testimony. The defendant was called, and stated that previously to the last witness going he had gone down to see the plaintiff, who had charged the defendant's valet with getting fish, &c., from the fishmonger without his knowledge. This, however, was not true. Whe❑ Mrs. Rolt went down, he (defendant) sent for her, and as she did not come up he went down. He denied that he struck any blow. Mrs. Rolt was willing to come up, but plaintiff and her daughter held her down, and a scuffit, took place, but he did not strike a blow. Plaintiff ran out in ,he area, and called " Murder." Elizabeth Morgan, the plaintiff's servant, corroborated the evidence. She also proved plantitf had sent ner to the defendant to say that if he would give her 201. she would not proceed, but he was not at home. Plaintiff said she hoped witness would be on her side. Witness said if sha had to go up to court she must tell the truth, and plaintiff replied, " Oh, you are conniving with them." Plaintiff asked witness to say plaintiff was knocked down. Witness fetched a policeman because Hrs. Bull was knocking Mr. Rolt about.  Coss-examined--While Mr. and Mrs. Bull were holding Mrs. Rolt down, defendant said, " Emma, come out of this den of infamy." Defendant had never offered her 201. to give evidence in his favour. Robert Hales, defendant's valet, was called, but he was ❑ot present at the time of the alleged assault. Mr. SHAW, for the plaintiff, challenged the defendant to show that there had been one bona tide offer of compensation. Mr. Martin, clerk to the defendant's attorney, proved that an offer had been made of 501. by Mr. Ballantine, delendaut's attorney; that was, however, entirely to previ-nt the case getting to the knowledge of defendant's friends.  The