The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1876-03-25 00:00:00

MANSLAUGHTER BY A BOY.

At the Lincoln Assizes, William Gilbert Harrod, aged 11,
has been charged with the wilful murder of William Henry
Hebblewhite, at Fishtoft, en the 19th of February last.
Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Lumley appeared for the prosecu-
tion; Mr. Buszard defended the prisoner.

Mr. Lawrence, in opening the case, observed that
the prisoner was not yet twelve years of age, and that
the law presumed that a child under the age of thirteen
had not what the law calls a "mischievous discretion," ...es
and, therefore, the jury would have to say not only tea/
whether the prisoner committed the act, but whether .Vie
he was actuated by a malicious and mischievous •-ei.
intention. The facts were that the boy was sent
to his grandmother with some clean clothes on the -
afternoon of Saturday, February 19, and that he
left his grmdmother on his return home just as it was
getting dusk. The prisoner was heard to ask the
deceased, a boy of nine or ten years of age, to walk •
with him, and they were seen walking together. The 'l'4
deceased boy not returning to his home, inquiries were
made of the prisoner among others, and the prisoner
denied having seen the deceased. On the following
mvrning the attention of a shepherd was called by a
basket lying by a pond and one of a number of faggots,
which had been put up to prevent sheep getting
into the pond, being removed. In this pond the
body of the deceased was found with a wound on his
head and other marks of violence, and there were
a number of footmarks, evidently of two boys of
different sizes, by the side of the pond, and the impres-
sion of the knee of a boy wearing corduroy trousers, as
if the deceased had tried to get out of the pond. It
was found that the prisoner's boots corresponded with
some of the footmarks, and blood and mud were found
upon his clothes. The pond was about five feet deep,
and the banks were steep all round. While the prisoner
was in custody, and before the hearing of the magis-
trates, he wrote a long letter to his mother containing
the following passage :
" I must tell you that me and William Hebblewhite (the
deceased) was coming on the road together from the corner
of the ro.td to come home together, and he asked me to go
and look at Mr. Simonds' lambs, and I went with him, and
they was against the pit, and when we got the, e he asked me
it I would have a fight, and I told him 'No,' and he said he
wotild, and then he drew a stake out of some kids and struck
me twice with it across the Itis as hard as ever he coma,
and then I puird another out and struck him four times
across the heat) and twice act 'as the face; then he swore at
me. then I shoved him in the pit, and I saw that he was in
the middle; and then Iran home across the churchyard, and
now I have told you the solid truth."

In the course of the evidence it was proved that the
deceased boy Was under ten years of age and a smaller
boy than the prisoner, and that they were neighbours
and schoolfellows and had always appeared to be good
friends. On the evening of the 19th February, and
after the deceased had been missed, the prisoner denied
that he had been out that day, or seen the deceased, and
on the following day, in conversation with the inspector
of police, he at first denied having seen the deceased,
but almost immediately corrected himself, and said
that he had seen him, but had not spoken to him. He
aocouated for blood and mud being on his trousers by
saying that he had cut his finger some time previously,
and had slipped into a ditch on his way home on the
previous night, but he could not point out the place
in the ditch, nor was ther any mark of a cut upon his
head.

Dr. Lowe, a physician practising at Lincoln, proved
that there were about two ounces of blood upon the •
prisoner's trousers, a quantity of mud, and a small
pieoe of duck weed.
James Edward Tuxford, a surgeon practising at
Boston, exarained the body of the deceased on Sun-
day, the 20th of February, and found the hands
clinched and full of mud. There were no wounds or
marks anywhere but on his head. His hair was full
of dark mud, mouth slightly open, and tongue nipped
between his teeth. There was a cut across the right
eyelid and the bridge of the nose, a severe bruise over
the left eyebrow, and a cut across the top of his head,
—a clean cut down to the bone 2,n. long. On the
following day witness made a post-mortem examination,
and fund that death was caused by drowning. The
wounds were such as might have been caused by the
stakes, which had sharp edges, and were of such a
nature as probably to stun the deceased, but not to
cause death. _ _

In crostsezamination by Mr. Buszard, the witness
said that the wounds on the eye and nose were pro-
bably caused by one blow, and the wound on the head
was caused by one blow. The wounds altogether
showed that there had been four blows on the head
and face. There was no doubt as to death having been
caused by drowning.
Mr. Lumley having summed up the evidence for the
prosecution,
Mr. Buszard addressed the jury on behalf of the pri-
soner, and contended that, having regard to his age, -1
the jury could not come to the conclusion that he in.
tended to commit musder. The letter written by the
prisoner probably contained a true account of the .•
transaction—namely, ths.t the deceased had attacked
the prisoner, and had fallen into the water in the
course of the struggle which ensued.
Mr. tiUete
summing up, said there were
two
ciuestiin
se LinintdiheeYfret iestancei:first, did the de-
ceased come by his death at the hands of the prisoner,
and, if he did, was it under circumstances which, in
the case of an adult, would be murder or manslaughter?
After the evidence which had been given, it was
absurd to suppose that death was the result of acci-
dent ; it was clear that there had been foul plaw.
There was no footpath near the pond; therefore,
how was it that the boys got there and got
through the kids or faggots, which were put
there to keep the sheep away? Apart from any
statements by the prisoner, the footmarks would
tend strongly to show that the prisoner was by the
pond with the deceased, and that there had been a
scuffle between them. There appeared to have been
no mark of violence upon the prisoner, and the first
statement made by him, at about half past six the
same evening, was that he had not been from home or
seen the deceased boy that day. That was clearly
proved to be false. On the following day he ad-
mitted having seen the deceased, but denied having
spoken to him. His Lordship then referred to the
conversation with the Inspector of Police and
the letter written by the prisoner. The d, ceased
was a younger sad smaller boy than tile prisoner,
and there appeared to have been no quarrel;
therefore the jury muet judge of the probabilities
of the statements in the letter. Was there a
fight or not? And if there was, was it provoked
by the prisoner or the decea4ed? If by the former
it would be murder, and if by the latter,
slaughter, unless the violence was out of all pro-
port by
the circumstances. The last queetioq in t.,tee
wad the nauat difficult of ali, becaese althergh a
, et rum over fourteen years of
•••.pable of committing eetni•-, der tn.lt age
he
d a jury must be
-'-e presumption is in Li, favour,
ert was t. wickedness
age isispresuwed to oe
t. fi•-d by the evidence that
fl
showing
lie
was
In the absence
censcions tha'..- he was doing
mind or mischievous
wrong.cto 't the •
f such evidence they were botm e pry.
0 s slaughter. To ascertain
r both of murder and man
disig,ltio
'thenestat..; of the prisoner's mind the jury must look at
I all the circumstances of the case, aid in considering
:
their verdict must not be
for which they were not responsible. consequences, 11: m any way influenced by the
The jury retired to consider their verdict at a qusrter
to four o'clock, and on their return, after a short
absence, found the prisoner Guilty of manslaughter.
His Lordship deferred passing sentence.
The prisoner was further charged with the wilful
murder of a boy named Arthur Hockley, who also met
his death by drowning on the 2nd Ootober, 1875,
Mr. Lumley, for the prosecution, with the assent of
the learned Judge. declined to offer any evidence upon
this charge,