Maidstone Telegraph, Saturday 12 November 1870.

Alleged assault by constables at Wrotham.

Police sergeant George Harman and police constable Edward Dalby were summoned for assaulting Joseph Dutnall at Wrotham, on the 15th October.

Mr. Palmer, of Tonbridge, appeared for the defendant's.

Prosecuted deposed that he kept the beer house at Wrotham. On the night of the 15th of October, he closed his house at 11 o'clock and went down to the "George and Dragon Inn." He returned from there between 12 and 1 o'clock. He had then been in conversation with two men named Edward Taylor and Robert Smith when the constable Dalby came up and order him home. He refused to go, when police constable Dalby took hold of him by the arm, and called upon police sergeant Harman to assist him. They then both took hold of him and dragged him to his house.

Cross examined by Mr. Palmer:- I was not drunk, I had a little liquor. I did ask the landlord of the "George and Dragon" for a quart of brandy, but only for a lark, I had no intention of drinking it. He did not refuse me the brandy because I was drunk. My mother does live close by. I don't know that she asked Dalby to look after me. I don't know that she went to the next morning to Dalby to ask him to look over it. I was not singing or making a noise. Two men named Taylor and Bennett did endeavour to persuade me to go home. Dalby did not persuade me quietly. I "squatted" down when the constables took hold of me. Dalby told me on the following morning that the sergeant Harman was going to summon me for being disorderly. I took out the summons on Monday against both defendants. That was after what Dalby had said. I had solicited both Mr. Norton and Mr. Young, solicitors, to appear for me. They are neither here as they did not think it was necessary.

Robert Smith was called by defendant and stated that the constables asked complainant to go home, but he refused and sat down on the ground. The constables then took hold of him. He (witness) asked defendant to go in doors. He thought that was the best place for him. Complainant was neither making a noise nor a disturbance, nor was he drunk but very quiet. Complainant ought to have known whether he went to his house head first or legs first.

Mr. Palmer then addressed the bench for the defendants and alleged that complaint was making a great noise in the street and all the constables did was to take him home quietly. They behaved in the kindest manner to complainant by taking him home instead of locking him up. It was a mere trick of complainant when he took out his summons, because he knew he was to be summoned for being drunk and disorderly. He could call witnesses, which complainant refused to call, to prove that the policeman did their duty to the man in the kindest possible manner.

The Bench thought one witness would be sufficient.

William Bennett then entered the witness box, and said that he was with complainant at the time of the occurrence. Complainant was not drunk, but sensible. The witness Smith asked complainant to go home. Taylor told complainant to go home as the police were coming, when complaining replied that he did not care for any ______ police constable.. Dutnal refused to go home and sat down, when both of constables took hold of him and "skidded" him along. He never saw any other violence. The constables did not ask him (witness) to go home. He could not tell the reason they did not ask him.

The Bench thereupon discharged the constables as the only did their duty, and made an order for complainant to pay £1 1s. for the attorney's fee, and all the costs of three witnesses.

In reply to Mr. Palmer, the Bench said that there was not the slightest stain against the character of the constables.