The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-06-11 00:00:00

A CONVICTION AFFIRMED.

In the Court of Criminal Appeal the cause of The Queen
V. Hadfield" has been hoard:—

The prisoner was tried and convicted at the quarter
seseiona for the county uf Chester, for obstructing the
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway by
&hexing the signals at the Dukinfield Station. I; ap-
peared that the clerk at the station, having arranged
the signals for the night, and cleared the station,
shortly afterwards retired to rest on the premises. A
few unnutes aLer be heard a knocking at the station.
door, and immediately a man, who turned out to be
the prisoner, got over a door a the station wall on to
the platform, and walked al mg the platform to the
semaphore signal. On looking out ef the window,
the clerk SAW that the semaphore danger and csution
signals had been put on, and the red or danger signals
on the distant liiffits. The cleik pursued the iiri-
saner, and apprehended him, when he was found
not to be sober. About the same time the driver
of a goods train that should have passed through the
station, shut elf the steam in consequence of seeing
the danger signals, and brought the train very near to
a stand, and conld have come to a stand at any ma.
meat; but seeing no one at the !Station, lie passed on
cautiously. The mail train going in the same direction,
and on the same rails an the goods train, was due at
Dnkinlield Station in about half an hour after the
goods train. On the conclusion of the Clts!., it was
objected on the part of the prisoner that this was not
an obstruction within the meaning of the act. The
deputy chairman, who tried the case, refused to with.
draw the case from the jury, but reserved the question
for the opinion of this Court. The prisoner was found
Roil y, but admitted to bail to come up to receive
jiniernent when called upon. The question was
whether the prisoner was properly convicted.
Mr. Horatio Lloyd Appeared in 'support of the con•
vie ion.

Mr. Baron Martin did not considtr it a felony under
the 36th section of the act. It was a consequential h.
strurtion, and not a real one as contemplated by the
act. Thiel was a straining of the words.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, Mr. Juatice Mellor, Mr.
Justice M. Smith, and the Lord Chief Baron were of a
contrary opinion.
Mr. Baron Martin withdrew his dissent. His opinion
s/as not strung enough to induce him to trouble the 18
jinlgts upon the point.
Conviction affirmed.

ONE WAY OF RAISING THE NEEDFUL!
"A Victim and hi Friend "Writes to The Times

I trust my wish to warn my fellow.travellers against Im-
position may he considered a sufficient apology for trespassing
on your valuabla apace.
The town council of Wiesbaden have thought tit to impose
a'aix on all visitors who may remain one week tu their town, on
the pretence that they have to incur great expense in keeping
up the promenades, bands, Sic , for their recreation.
It happens, h .wever, that thme.are already provided, free
of expanse, not only to tile visit re, but to the natives them-
selves, by the Kura.] Company, who are also the chief sup-
porters id the theatre and ol ail the charitable institutions of
Wiesbaden. . . .

It m pears, therefore, that this is simply an attempt to
obtain money. It has also bs en pronounced by au eminent
lawter to be illegal. Opinion annexed. Still the levy of this
t ix is proceeded with, in hopes of inducing visitors, especially
ladies, to pay IL
Some pay to rid themselves of the incivility of the col.
lectora. The travelling public, however, have this remedy,
either by avoiding Wiesbaden or, if obliged to visit it by
the state of their health, by confining their exp ntiture to
the mete necessaries of board and medical attendance, the
course puraued by
Wleshadeo, May 29.