The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1871-07-22 00:00:00

CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER AT BUCK

POOL.

William Dues, a carter, of Buck Pool, was charged
with the manelaughter of William Henry Haguell, rive
and a-half years of age, at Buck Pool, on Saturday, the
15th inst.

Mr. Addison appeared to prosecute
William Bagnall said he was an engineer, and lived at
Buck Pool. He went to his dinner as usual at one
o'clock on the above date, and his son William Henry
Haguell, live and years old dined with him. He
went back to work, and teens information received, re•
turned home about half.past two. When he d
home be saw his son lying on a bench in a dying state.
He saw prisoner, who had had something to drink.
James Hill said he was a boatman, and lived at Buck
Pool. On the above date be was standing at the ccruer
of John Rock's garden. Whilst he was standing there
he saw the prisoner in charge of a horse and cart; the
latter was !Jaded with iron. As the prisoner was coming
towards him the bead of the horse caught his shoulder
and made bins stagger, after which he took hold of the
bridle and led the horse across the road ;towards the
witness. The prisoner was drunk, and stumbled several
times. On the opposite side of the road to where wit-
ness stood was another wall, against which the deceased
was standing, but there were no other children there at
the time. The prisoner, on getting up to the child, was
before the horse, and immediately afterwards the horse
drew the cart close to the wall and crushed ltie child %Wit
one of the wheels. The prisoner WWI on his right side
of the road. The witness, upon seeing the accident,
called out to the prisoner, but he was stopped by some
one else. After the child was taken home, the prisoner
also followed with another man, but he did not inquire
whether the child was injured or not. He was told that
he would not be allowed to go away until a policeman
arrived, when he said he should go, but he was prevem
ted. He was in a very drunken condition

in cruss•exaruinatioii- by the prisoner, witness denied
that the horse was stopped by the prisoner himself, nei-
ther did he look behind when situess shunted at him.
Wit Leda was quite sure that he was drunk, because he
staggered several times near to the canal bridge.
In reply to the Bench, witness said the road was nearly
ten yards wide, and there was plenty of room for the pri-
soner to go without going near to the child.
Police.constable Cottenll said he was stationed at
Brucktuoor. On Saturday last between three and four
o'clock from information he received he apprehended
prisoner, and charged him with unlawfully causing the
death of a little Loy named liagnall. Witness cautioned
him, and he said he was avoiding running over some
other children, and ran against this child. He was
drank. He then took him to the Police Station. His
(witness's) attention was called to some blood on the
wall, and opposite to the blood he saw the wheel mark
of the cart. The wheel mark was 61 inches from the
wall, and the road is between nine and ten yards wide at
that spot. As prisoner was being takeu to Brierley Hill
Police Station he staggered and nearly fell down several
times.

Police-constable Breton said he was at the station
when prisoner was brought in by last witness. He was
quite drunk.
Prisoner was committed to take his trial at the ensuing
Stafford Assizes.

THANSFERS.—At the Wordsley Police Court, on Mon-
day, the following licenses were transferred :—The Vine
Inn, Delpu, from Charles Attwood to Thomas Attwood;
the Waterloo lon, Brierley Hill, from James Wardall to
damael Haywood; the Reindeer Inn, Pensuett, from
Rhoda Mills to John Richard Mile; the Nelson Inn,
drierley Hill, from William Dawes to John Aston; the
Crown Inn, Brierley Hill, from Richard Phillips to Levi

OBSTRUCTING THE FOOTPATH.—Four youths, named
John Bate, William Lees, thorge Crump, and Charles
Crump, were charged with obstructing the footpath at
dolloway End, on the 6th inst. Police-constable Josepn
e'reeman, in proving the charge, stated that he had re-
ceived numerous complaints by pedestrians of the ob-
struction of the footpaths by youths, some of whom
were very insolent when spoken to about it. The de-
lendants were lined 2s 61 each and costs, or in default of
payment seven days imprisonment.