Thus far is partly from the evidence for the prosecution. For the defence, it was contended that it was excessively ungentlemanly to deprive any gentleman of the seat such gentleman might have occupied at the commencement of the performance; and furthermore, that the little round man was so roughly handled, that it was absolutely necessary for him to _kick_ in his own defence; for, having once lost his perpendicular position, his _rotundity_ of form made it extremely probable that he would roll over the front of the boxes into the pit! Indeed it was asserted that his enemies endeavoured to bring about that shocking catastrophe, and that, had not a gentleman in the adjoining box held him back by the coat, they certainly would have accomplished it. The magistrate said there were faults on both sides. In the first place, the defendant should not have quitted his seat without saying to his neighbour that he intended to return; secondly, common courtesy ought to have induced the complainant to have relinquished it when demanded; and, thirdly, that the defendant should have demanded it civilly. Upon the whole, it was a very silly piece of business, and he would recommend them to retire, and make an end of it by mutual explanation, or apology. This pacific advice, however, was rejected by both parties, and so the little round man was held to bail. A SPOILED QUADRILLE. One _Solomon Dobbs_, an operative tailor, "all fudge and fooster," like a superannuated goose, was charged by a very spruce young gentleman with raising a false alarm against him, whereby he, the young gentleman, was in imminent danger of being treated as a pickpocket, or something of that sort.