Dowling A.C.J., 28 June 1837

Blackburn v. Galliott. - This was an action brought to recover compensation in damages for an assault and battery committed by the defendant on the plaintiff and his wife, on the 10th October last.  The damages were laid at £200.  Plea, the general issue, not guilty.  The circumstances of the case, as proved in evidence, were these.  On the evening of the day laid in the declaration, the plaintiff, a woolsorter, accompanied by his wife and a few friends, were enjoying themselves over a social glass at the Currency Lass, public-house, situate in Castlereagh-street south, of which the defendant was landlord.  After the party had been there some short time, an assigned servant of one Castles came into the bar and asked for a glass of malt liquor, with which he was served by the defendant.  Having drank the liquor, he requested another glass of it, which the defendant refused to serve until he had paid for the former one, and without waiting sufficient time for the man to comply with his demand, sprang over the counter, seized him by the collar, and roughly handled him.  He was turned out of the house, and after he had gone the plaintiff expostulated with the defendant about the matter, telling him he had done very wrong in ill-using the man as he had done, and that he did not give the man time enough to pay him.  Upon this the defendant again leaped over his counter and knocked the plaintiff down with his hand, and falling on him, the parties scuffled together from the bar to the centre of the adjoining tap-room, where the bystanders interfered and separated the combatants.  The defendant then went again behind the counter, and the plaintiff coming into the bar shortly after him, the former immediately seized a stick of about three feet in length, and varying in its circumference from half to one inch, with which he struck the latter a violent blow above the right temple, inflicting a severe lacerated and contused wound , which felled him to the ground.  The plaitiff's [sic] wife seeing the blood flowing from her husband's head profusely, immediately said to the defendant ``for God's sake don't kill  my husband," upon which the defendant struck her also over the forehead with the stick, knocking her senseless, and inflicting on her a similar wound to her husband's.  One of the bystanders upon this disarmed the defendant, in doing which he met with violent resistance from him.  Mr. John Neilson, a surgeon, attended Mr. and Mrs. Blackburn until their wounds were healed, which occupied about three weeks in doing, and for which he charged five guineas.  Mr. Neilson deposed also that he considered the plaintiff was hindered from pursuing his usual avocations for about a month in consequence of the wounds; and his wife was also debarred from following her domestic occupations for a similar period from the same cause.  Mr. Felix Wilson of the firm of Wilson and Son proved that the plaintiff had occasionally worked for him - that he was a good workman - and could earn on an average about three pounds per week.   This action was tried last term, and the defendant having failed to plead, judgment was given against him by default, and damages were assessed for £25 on the foregoing evidence.   The defendant subsequently moved the Court in banco for a new trial, on affidavits setting forth that he had good grounds of defence, and this was granted on his paying the costs of the former action.  Mr. Sydney Stephen now addressed the Jury on behalf of the defendant, and engaged to prove the whole case to be nothing more than a mere drunken public-house squabble, in which the plaintiff had been the aggressor by improperly interfering with the defendant's business; but the witnesses he produced to support this, instead of doing so, only supported the plaintiff's case, and made it still stronger.  The learned Judge charged the Jury, and put the case to them as one of unprovoked and aggravated assault, to which no legitimate defence had been offered; and the Jury concurring in that view, after a few minutes consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff - damages £80.  Mr. Windeyer for the plaintiff, Mr. Sydney Stephen for the defendant.