TWO CLAIMANTS FOR A WIFE.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3173, 30 August 1881, Page 4

TWO CLAIMANTS FOR A WIFE.

At Westminster Police Court on June 3 , Albert Bailey, 27, a corporal in the drum and fife band of the 3rd Uatallion Grenadier Guard-*, stationed at Wellington Barracks, was charged before Mr Flowers with assaulting Charles ' ightingale, by striking him over the head with a 3tick. '1 he pr isecutor, a young man, whose head was enveloped in a surgical bandage, stated that late ai- night lie w_s parsing along the Buckingham Paluce road, when he saw the prisoner v.ilkmg along with a young woman whom he (witness) recogni-ed as his wife. He s.roke to the soldier, who struck him over the head with a stick. He bled very much, and gave the soldier in charge. Tho prisoner said the young woman was his wife, and not tho prosecutor's. (Laughter.) Prosecu'or and a low woman in his company insulted them, ma ing use of very disgusting language. Prosecutor followed him across the road, and then fell on being pushed, his head coming into contract with the kerb. Mr Flowers (to the prosecutor) .- Do you say '.his' wife is ' your ' wife ? (Laughter.) Prosecutor: Most decidedly I do. I should think I ought to know. (Renewed laughter.) Sho was married to me ut St. Matthew's Church, Westminster. Mr Tlowers : If that is tho case, she can give evidence for the prisoner. A young woman who gave her name as Ann Elizabeth Bailey, stated that Bhe was coming along Buckingham Palace-road with her husband. Mr Flowers : Do you mean the prisoner or the prosecutor P (Laughter.) Witness: I mean the prisoner, sir. Mr Flowers : Then tho other one is not your husband ? Witness : No, sir, I don't know him. Prosecutor : ■ Why, your Worship, she was married to me at St. Matthew's Church, and she burnt her certificate. I can easily prove I was married j to her, and get a copy' of the certificate. Mr Flowers : Really I don't know what to ! do in the matter. (Loud laugher.) The j witness went on to say that the soldier did all he could to avoid a conflict with the prosecutor, who was never struck with the stick, as he had described. After other evidence, which showed thsi.t the prosecutor's account of the commencement of the disturbance could not be correct, a sergeant of the prisoner's regiment gave him an excellent character, and stated that he was in possession of two good-conduct badges. Mr Flowers said the evidence was in favour of the soldier's version of what occurred, and therefore he should discharge him. Prosecutor could, however, take civil proceedings if he thought proper,