The Sun. — 1865-08-14 (London, England)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.  EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT OF POLICE CONSTABLES.— William Watson, a respectable looking young man, described as a clerk residing in Stamford-street, was charged before Mr. Knox with assaulting Police-constable Charles Bluett, 170 C. The constable said that about 10 minutes past one on Sunday morning ho was in the Haymarket when he heard a great disturbance through some foreigners shouting a song. The defendant, who was with about half a dozen other men, was pushed, when he fell over his (witness's) foot and fell. On getting up he accused him of having knocked him down, and said he would given him (witness) a straight one, and then gave him a blow in the breast. The defendant said, with some companions he was going in the direction of Coventry-street when they met a friend, and had not stopped more than a minute when the constable (Bluett) came up and said " Move on, " at the same time giving him (the defendant) a push which made him fall, twisted his arm, and then, without any resistance on his part, took him into custody. He was told at the station that it was too late tO call witnesses, and he had to get bail as well as he could. He was perfectly sober at time, and having been suffering from cholera for the past few days, thought ho would have died in the cell, as he could scarcely breathe, and had to put his face to the grating to do so. The defendant called a witness, who said the constable pushed the defendant down and afterwards against a lamp-post. He asked the constable to let him go in and see the inspector, when the door was slammed in his face, and ho was not allowed to go in, although he wished to be a witness for the defendant.  Mr. Knox asked Inspector Walker if that was the case, and whether it was the practice not to allow witnesses into the station on behalf of a person who was locked up? Inspector Walker said ho understood it was the case on Saturday night, but it was not the practice. Mr. Scott, of 6, Hatfield-street, Stamford-street, who was also called by the defendant, said he was with the dofendant and the last witness, and were just shaking hands with a friend when the constable (Bluett) came up and said " Move on," and before they had time to do so the constable seized hold of the defendant and throw him down, trod on his heels, and forced him against a lamp-post. Another constable (322 A) then came up and also seized hold of the defendant and nearly choked him. lie went with his other friends to the station to see the inspector, and theconstable at the door, in a jeering way, said, "Now what do you think of that ?" and shut the door in our faces, and would not let us in.  In answer to the constable the witness said he had been in the Haymarket before, but had never caused the slightest disturbance.  Mr. Walker said ho wished the witness to be asked whether he did not see the inspector (Draper). The witness said lie did after some trouble, but then the charge was taken. It was too late for them to be heard, and the defendant was in the cell. The inspector said he could then do nothing in the matter, and that he was not a magistrate.  In answer to Mr. Knox, the defendant said that bail was taken as soon as it could be procured, but he believed that had his witnesses been admitted to the station the inspector could never have taken the charge at all. He had no particular complaint to make against the inspector, but he had of the way in which ho was treated by the constable. He had several other witnesses he could have called. Mr. Knox said there had been a scandalous abuse of duty on the part of the police-constable (Bluett), who, if what the witnesses stated was true, was no longer fit to be retained in the force. Ile would advise the defendant to take out a summons against the constable who had mishandled him in the way described, and the defendant could then produce all his witnesses and the constable his. As for what took place at the station, he thought witnesses for a person taken into custody should instantly be admitted to the station. He thought it probable that the men outside excluded the witnesses without the inspector's knowlodge at all. He should discharge the defendant, and advise him to take steps against the constable.  The Dreadful Murders by Southey.