Brighouse & Rastrick Gazette. — 1892-09-03 (Brighouse, West Yorkshire, England)

EARLY IN THE MORNING.— Allan Bottomley, farmer, Hi pperbol me, was summoned at the instance of Win. Batch, quarrytnao, Hipperholme, for an assault on the 18:11 Aagust. Mr. Willans (Storey, Bedford and Wiliam) prosecuted, and Mr. Boooook defended.—Mr. Willans stated that a little unpleasantness had taken place between the parties, and on the day in question defendant went and stood opposite the complainant's house at about seven o'clock in the morning, and challenged him out to fight. Complainant came out and had no sooner recognised defendant than the latter rushed at him, knocked him down, and assaulted him. There had been no provocation whatever for the assault.— Complainant, in his evidence, said be was in the kitchen about seven o'clock on the morning of the 18 h, when he heard a man making a row lo the street. The man stood opposite his gate and shouted Come out, and I will murder you.' Complainant went out and defendant rushed at him, and °etching him by the throat, nearly throttled him. A young man of the name of Samuel Stephens came out of a house adjoining, armed with a poker, and assisted witness to get out of his assailant's clutohes.—Mr. Boooook : A very nice weapon to protect oneself witb, isn't it ?—Witness: Yes, I think so.—And you assaulted him with it? No, I didn't.—The evening previous to this affair, did not you use some uncivil language to defendant'a wife? I called her.—Let me have a sample of it. I have forgotten 11.—On, no, you haven't. Now, out with it. She insulted me, and I told her I would spoil her face for her if she did not desist. (Laughter.)—You call that civility, do you? Yes. (Laughter.)—Defendant asked you the following morning why you had used such disgusting language to his wife, didn't he? He never mentioned a word about it.—l think you doubled your fist up and told defendant you were ready to fight? No, I didn't.—l understood that you closed with him, and you unfortunately got to the bottom? (Laughter.) Yes.—Either you or your protector seized the poker and dealt defendant several blows wish it'? No.—Tell the truth, now. Doesn't the origin of this disturbance rest with the feet that your wife is in the habit of shaking her carpets precisely when defendant's wife has hung her clean clothes out Yes, I think so.—Hasn't your wife done it at least a dozen times? No, she hasn't; I believe she has more sense. (Laughter.)—Mary Waters and Sam. Stephens gave evidence in support of the charge, the latter stating that when he interfered defendant was throttling the life out of complainant,—Mr. Boocook And what were you doing with the poker? (No answer.) Had you a poker? Yes.—And defendant felt it? (Laughter.) No.— Didn't your uncle when freed from the weight of his adversary pull his coat off and say he was ready for another round 2—( Laughter.) I didn't hear him. —Ambrose Welford, coachman, said he lived at Luddendem Hearing a row while in the stable he ()limbed the wall and saw the defendant throttling the complainant.—Mr. Boooook . Didn't you say the same day that you had risen half-au-hour earlier to see the fun? Witness: Yes.—You thought there was going to be a do? Yea.—Well. how did you rt to know? Because defendant had told me that he intended to have it out with complainant in the morning.—Mr. tioooook argued that the case was a trumpery one—nothing but one of those neighbours' quarrels with which the court was so familiar. Defendant's wife had been insulted by the complainant, and what the latter had received from defendant in the form of punishment he richly deserved. He (Mr. B00000k) had witnesses to call, if the bench thought it necessary.—The Chairman : The bench are unanimous that the case must be dismissed.