South Eastern Gazette, 15 May, 1860.

CITY PETTY SESSIONS.

Tuesday. (Before the Mayor, E. R. Coles, F. Furrell, H. Everest, and G. Lowrey, Esqrs.)

Dismissal of One of the City Police.

James Hewitson, linen-draper, Chatham intra, was charged, on remand, with being drunk and assaulting Police-constable Boakes. The court was filled during the examination of the accused, the proceedings attracting much interest.

The police-constable said he was on duty in Strood on Friday night, and saw the defendant at the railway refreshment room about eleven o’clock. He drank with the defendant, and also with the three witnesses to be called for the defence. The lady serving them wished witness to get defendant away. Witness persuaded him to leave, and they both went to the "Water-mill" public-house, where complainant again drank at the bar, the defendant at the time "dancing about" in a state of intoxication. Complainant did not pay for what he had. He left the "Water-mill" at twenty minutes after eleven, leaving the defendant there. About half-past twelve complainant saw the defendant again at the foot of Rochester-bridge. He was then insulting every one that passed, and as he refused to go home, witness put his hand on him to "shove" him along, when defendant turned round and struck him in the eye with his fist. He then closed with him and they struggled for some minutes, both falling more than once. As he was down defendant kicked him three or four times in the back. A baker named Grewcock assisted witness to take defendant to the station-house, defendant kicking Grewcock several times.

Cross-examined by the defendant:— They were at the "Cobham" public-house together drinking; witness had some ginger-beer.

Mr. Everest told complainant there was a discrepancy in his evidence, as he said he did not see defendant after he left him at the Water-mill till he saw him on the bridge, and now he admitted he saw him at the "Cobham." Which statement was correct?

Complainant:— Both; I was persuading him to go away.

Mr. Coles:— Then what you stated just now is not true?

Complainant:— No, Sir.

Complainant said he had no witness to call, as Grewcock had evidently been put out of the way.

The son of the landlord of the "Cobham" was called for the complainant, but the magistrates said his evidence was unnecessary.

The defendant stated that on the day in question he had been out in the country, and came home rather late. On going into the railway station to leave a parcel he met the constable, when they several glasses of ale together and left in company, a woman meeting them, with whom complainant advised him to go home. They then went to the "Water-mill" public-house together, where they saw Grewcock, and remained drinking, defendant paying for what the police-constable had. After leaving the "Water-mill" complainant induced him to go to the "Cobham," and on his leaving that house, the police-constable wanted to lock him up. Defendant then struck him, on which the police-constable threw him down, but he succeeded in getting up, and the police-constable then fell down. He had been very ill-used by the police-constable and Grewcock.

John Swinton, railway porter, and John Wallis, switchman at Strood junction, were called for the defence, both stating that the constable was in liquor; Wallis saying that he tried to put on the handcuffs; but was too drunk to do so.

Defendant said he had another witness to call who would prove that he saw the police-constable that evening asleep in a railway carriage, that he treated him to a cup of coffee, and that Boakes told him he should go home and "sham Abraham."

The Mayor thought there was no necessity for any additional witness, and the charge would be dismissed.

Mr. Coles said, as Boakes had been before suspended, more than once, he should call the attention of the Watch Committee to the matter. His own opinion was that Boakes was quite unfit to be a police-constable of that city.

Boakes said, seeing the course the case had taken, he thought he should be only studying his own interest and that of the city, by at once resigning.

The Mayor, addressing Mr. Hewitson, told him he hoped it would be a warning to him.

From the Southeastern Gazette, 19 June 1866.

TO BE LET.

FREE PUBLIC-HOUSE, called the “Watermill,” eligibly situated on the Canal-road, Strood, Kent, and close to the Stations of the South Eastern, and London, Chatham, and Dover Railways. Immediate possession can be given.

For particulars apply to Messrs. Hills and Winch, Solicitors, Chatham.