§ MR. PICKERSGILL (Bethnal Green, S.W.)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to a case heard at the Southwark Police Court on Monday, when a carman named Thomas Russell was convicted by Mr. Slade of assaulting Police Constable 326M; whether the evidence for the prosecution was that of four civilians, who swore 1236 that the prisoner did not assault the constable, and that the officer was drunk and struck the prisoner and several other persons; and whether the evidence for the defence was that of an inspector and a constable, who were not present when the alleged assault was committed, but swore that the prosecutor was sober when they saw him about that time; whether Mr. Slade is correctly reported to have said that—
After the evidence of the Inspector he could not believe in the serious charge of drunkenness made against the constable, and he had come to the conclusion that the evidence for the defence had been got up to screen the prisoner;and, whether he will inquire into the circumstances of the case?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS) (Birmingham, E.)I have obtained a Report from the magistrate on this case, from which it appears that four civilians gave the evidence quoted, for the defence and not for the prosecution. The Inspector who took the charge and two constables who were with 326M before and after the occurrence respectively swore that he was quite sober. The prisoner did not deny the charge at the station, and made no complaint against the constable. The magistrate, after careful hearing, deemed the defence set up to be utterly untrue, and the charge of drunkenness to be amply disproved. He gave the prisoner an opportunity of appealing; but this he refused to do, and paid the fine. I see no reason to interfere with the decision of the magistrate.