The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1884-10-25 00:00:00

THE AT.T.TIGED STARVATION OF A

WIFE AT GRIMSBY.
Charles Frederick Joseph Beaumont Ihiggs and
Elizabeth Briggs, his mother, who are charged with
wilful murder by starvation of the male prisoner's
wife, were again brought before the Grimsby county
magistrates on Monday. Mr. Tweed, of Lincoln, pro-
secuted on behalf of the Treasury; and Mr. Mason,
of Grimsby, defended. Mrs. Sheer, who had resided
next door to the Briggs' family for six weeks, deposed
to having frequently given food to Mrs. Briggs
because she complained of not getting enough to
eat at home. She had noticed 'deceased getting
weaker lately, and she visited her. When Mrs.
Briggs became confined to her bed, a few
days before she died, witness advised Briggs
to send for a doctor, but he said there
was no need. She afterwards offered to sit up at
night with the invalid, but Br;ggs said he had
walked hospitals, had seen worse cases than that, and
could wait upon her himself.—Jane Drape; servant
to the last witness, stated she was called into Briggs
house on Sunday morning, the 28th September, by
the deceased's little daughter, and on each occasion
she found Mrs. Briggs lying on the floor, where she
had apparently fallen down exhausted. In the even-
ing witness went in again, and found Mrs. Briggs
lying on the sofa, quite helpless in her limbs, but she
could speak. Briggs gave his wife some white fluid,
which she took after having at first refused it.—
Fanny Willoughby, a schoolmistress, produced a letter
from Mrs. Briggs, in which she said her husband and
her mother-in-law wanted to make a Harriet Staunton
of her. Charlotte Donmall, Whinfield House,
Chislehurst, said she lived next door to Briggs
when he resided at Chislehurst. She frequently
heard the female prisoner use bad language
to the deceased and call her the foulest names. Once
after hearing the crash of glass in Briggs's house she
was told that old Mrs. Briggs had knocked her son's
wife through a window; and another time the de-
ceased was knocked down by her mother-in-law with
a cradle. Witness frequently gave deceased food
under the impression that she dil not get proper
nourishment. William John Cooper, draper, Chisle-
hurst, said he was at the prisoner's house one day
when the wife said, "Here, old lady, pleme go
away." Afterwards he heard a Beetling upstairs,
and saw the elder Mrs. Briggs apparently trying to
shove the other downstairs. The deceased was fre-
quently supplied with food by him. Other witnesses
corroborated these statements. Dr. Jenkinson gave
medical evidence showing that death was induced by
starvation. The prisoners were remanded.

On Tuesday the magisterial investigation was
resumed and concluded. Dr. Jenkinson, continuing
his evidence, said the red and spongy state of the
deceased's gums observed in the post mortem exami-
nation was due to starvation, and not to the effects of
mercury contained in the pills which had been
administered by the male prisoner. Dr. Anningson,
who was called in to consult with Dr. Jenkinson the
day before the deceased died, and who assisted at the
post mortem examination, stated that though the
prisoners said the invalid had had similar attacks both
there and at Chislehurst, he was unable to get any
satisfactory description of them. It appeared, how-
ever, they were neither epileptic nor hysterical. He
found the deceased in a state of complete debility.
The whole body was very thin and emaciated, and
the ribs were very prominent. In the post
mortem examination nearly all the organs of the
body appeared healthy, but the stomach and bowels
showed an entire absence of food. The immediate
cause of death was apoplexy, induced by poorness of
the blood. There was no trace in the body of any
wasting di-ease, and there was certainly nothing to
account for the deceased's emaciated condition but
lack of food. In fact, all the symptoms observed in
life and the appearance after death were those of
chronic staivation. Alfred Pywell, managing clerk
for Messrs. Latham and New, solicitors, Melton
Mowbray, proved that the late kfrs. Briggs received
£lO7O on the death of her father, Mr. Rowland, and
about eight months before her marriage she received
£6OO under the will of her maternal grandfather,
Thomas Henton. She had also a house at Melton,
worth £BOO. After her marriage this house was
secured by deed to whichever should survive, and
afterwards to her eldest child. After other evidence
of minor importance, the prisoners pleaded not
guilty, reserving their defence, and were committed
to the assizes.

THE CHARGE OF ASSAULT AGAINST
LORD MARCUS BERESFORD.
In London, on Tuesday afternoon, at the Bow-
street Pulice-court, Lord Marcus Beresford was
charged on a summons before Mr. Vaughan with
unlawfully assaulting and beating Mr. Thomas Gib-
son Bowles, the proprietor of Vanity Fair.
The assault in question is understood to
have arisen out of an article and a letter
which appeared in that journal with reference to the
case of Mrs. Trevelyan, who, within the past few
months, has been several times charged before various
police magistrates of the metropolis, and for whom
Lord Marcus Beresford is trustee, under a. deed. of
settlement executed by her husband.
The court was filled, much interest being shown in
the case, while several ladies and gentlemen were
accommodated on the bench.

Mr. Montagu Williams, upon the magistrate taking
his seat after the midday adjournment, said: Would
you allow me to make an application in regard to a
summons granted by Mr. Flowers on Friday, upon
the application of Mr. George Lewis, on behalf of
Mr. Bowles, the proprietor of Vanity Fair, against
Lord M. Beresford, for an assault? The summor,s
was seived as late as Saturday afternoon, when Lord
Macrus Beresford and Mr. Brandon were at
Worthing. Under these circurptitsnces it is really
impossible that he could meet the charge to-day. I
myself was in the country, but I communicated with
Mr. George Lewis, and it appears that the letter did
not reach him till Monday evening. On my return
I sent round to Mr. Lewis to tell him that I had
written, and that if he did not consent to an adjourn-
ment I would make a formal application to the court.
Lord Marcus Beresford had an important engage-
ment for to-day, but he is present. I am not aware
of any circumstance which takes this case out of the
usual course, which is that when summonses are
applied for they should be made returnable that day
week. I am in this position. Here is my brief
(holding up a single sheet of paper), and my solicitor
is sitting as arbitrator in relation to the Salvation
Army riots at Worthing. I, therefore, am not pre-
pared to go on now, and ask that the summons may
be adjourned.
Mr. George Lewis said: I appear for Mr. Bowles.
I am not going into the circumstances in connection
with the matter at this stage, and until you have de-
cided whether you Will grant an adjournment I am
instructed by Mr. Bowles to oppose any adjournment.
Of course, if you think is right to do so, I will at once
yield; but an assault was committed on ThurNday
on the following day my client made an application
for a summons, and he has come here to-day with his
witnesses to support the charge. I really fail
to see any sort of reason—any practical reason
—why Mr. Bowles should not be heard to-day,
except that the solicitor instructed by Lord
Marcus Beresford is unable to be present. He wrote
to me that he would be absent, but, under the instruc-
tions of Mr. Bowles, I did not think it right to yield
to any adjournment. I know no circumstances why
it should not proceed. If there were any witnesses
for Lord Marcus Beresford not present it would be
different; but his counsel is here, and it was a very
unprovoked assault.
the Magistrate: What are the circumstances that
render it inconvenient, or rather impossible, with a
view to justice being done, that the case should not
be beard this afternoon?

Mr. M. Williams: Simply that Lord Marcus Beres-
ford's solicitor is not here, and has not had any time
to prepare his defence. I can, if you like, tell you
my reasons, but my brief is a single sheet of paper.
The Magistrate: Do you mean to say that justice
will not be done if the case is gone into at once?
Mr. M. Williams: I do, sir, most decidedly.
The Magistrate: That being so, Mr. Lewis, I shall
adjourn the summons.
After some conversation, the summons was ad-
journed until Wednesday, the 29th inst.