From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 21 January, 1870. Price 1d.

ASSAULT - CROSS SUMMONSES

Benjamin Edward Coleman was summoned for an assault upon Henry Charles Solly, on the 12th inst. There was a cross-summons in which Mr. Coleman charged Mr. Solly with committing an assault upon him.

Henry Charles Solly: I keep the "Stag Inn," in Adrian Street. Last Wednesday afternoon, I was in the house of Mr. Thomas, chemist, Cross-wall, having been to see a friend off by the half-past three train. No one was in the shop at the time I entered, and I was about to walk into Mr. Thomas's living-room. when Mr. Coleman rushed into the shop after me, and took me by the shoulder and asked me what I meant by "making faces" at him. He put his fist in my face, and said "You _____ I owe you 'one,' about the cigar business, and I will wring your nose out of your face." I said "You had better do so," and he thereupon gave me a blow on the nose with his fist. He was about to strike me a second time, when I put up my hand to ward off the blow. Mr. Thomas's daughter at that moment came out of the living-room, and seeing the door open I went in. Mr. Coleman followed me, and while I was remonstrating with him upon what he had done he said he would serve me worse than that. At the same time he threw me down and my head came in contact with the window-seat. The assault was witnessed by Miss Thomas and Mr. Hellesburg.

By the Bench: I had not made any faces at the complainant. As I was going into Mr. Thomas's the defendant was standing near the "Hotel de Paris." His reference to the "cigar-business" was owing to me having some time ago purchased of his foreman a hundred of smuggled cigars for 6s. 6d. He subsequently sent me a bill for 10s. 6d., which I declined to pay. Some time after Mr. Coleman's foreman was convicted of smuggling, and that, I suppose, is the reason the defendant "owed me one."

Mr. Louis Hellesberg said he was in Mr. Thomas's house on Wednesday last, and saw Solly enter the back room. He did not see what took place in the shop. Mr. Coleman followed him. Witness did not know whether Mr. Coleman struck him or pushed him; but Solly fell to the ground, and he fell in consequence of something Mr. Coleman did to him - not of his own accord. He did not see Solly strike Mr. Coleman again; but he seized the poker, and brandished it in his defence.

Charlotte Thomas, daughter of Mr. Thomas, chemist, Cross-wall, said that Mr. Solly came into her father's shop on the previous Wednesday afternoon. She first saw him when he opened the door leading from the passage into the shop. She heard Mr. Coleman threaten to wring Mr. Solly's nose. Mr. Solly said he had better do it. Mr. Solly then struck Mr. Coleman in the face. Mr. Coleman afterwards followed Mr. Solly into the back-room, and threw him down. Mr. Solly, on getting up, took hold of the poker, but Mr. Coleman took it away from him and put him down again in the corner of the room.

By the defendant: I am quite sure I saw Mr. Solly strike you in the face.

The cross-summons was then heard, Henry Charles Solly being charged with assaulting Mr. Coleman.

Benjamin Edward Coleman said that on Wednesday afternoon he was standing on the Crosswall when he saw defendant entering Mr. Thomas's shop. He was about going in when he made a grimace at witness.

Magistrates Clerk: What sort of a grimace?

Witness: I don't think I could put my face into such an ugly shape. (A laugh.)

Examination continued: I followed him into the shop, and told him he ought to have his nose pulled for making so ugly a face. He said "Will you do it?" I replied that I could do it if I chose. Miss Thomas at that moment came down stairs, and just as she got to the bottom she saw Solly strike me.

Magistrates Clerk: Did he strike you?

Witness: Yes.

Examination continued: I had not struck him first; but I admit following him into the back-room and tripping him up. He then seized the poker and threatened to smash my brains out. I took the poker away from him; and that was all that transpired.

The Magistrates considered the conduct on both sides as the result of a very foolish quarrel, and dismissed the summonses, directing each of the parties to pay his own costs.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 16 September, 1870. Price 1d.

THE ANNUAL LICENSING DAY

BEER HOUSES

The licence of Henry Solly, landlord of a beerhouse in Adrian Street, (“Stag”) was objected to, it appearing that he had been convicted on the 15th October last for harbouring prostitutes and of interfering in a very aggravated manner with the domiciliary visit of the Police.

It appeared from the statement of Sergeant Stevens that he went into the house and found in a downstairs room four men and a like number of abandoned women, drinking together. He did not speak to the landlord then; but visited the house some time afterwards when he found the same four women there, three being in the same room, and one in the bar. He then asked the landlord if he knew anything of the women and he replied in the negative. He told them they were prostitutes, and the landlord promised to turn them out immediately. He shortly afterwards again visited the house, and asked if they were gone. The landlord said “Yes;” but Stevens, having some reason to doubt the truth of this statement, said he would go upstairs and see. He was about ascending the stairs when the landlord took him by the coat-tails and pulled him down. He continued to obstruct him till Sergeant Bailey came to his assistance.

Mr. Lewis, on behalf of the owner of the house, made a similar application in this case to that made by Mr. Claris, in the earlier part of the proceedings, in reference to the “Gothic Inn,” viz., that the Magistrates would adjourn their decision till the Broadstairs meeting, in order that the owner of the house might obtain a more eligible tenant; but the appeal met with a similar fate, the licence being unconditionally refused.