The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-28 00:00:00

TEIE STOURBRIDGE OBSETIVEIL

A LITTLE GIRL STABBED BY HER STEP-
FATHER.
At the Police Court, on Wednesday last, before
Colonel Fletcher and Mr. R. L. Freer, John Welch
was charged with unlawfully cutting and wound-
ing Helen Jane Hatton, his step-daughter, on the
16th instant, with intent to do her grievous bodily
harm.
Mr. Clulow was for the defence.
Complainant, a little girl nine years of age, said
she knew the defendant, who was the husband of
her mother. About:half-past eight on the morning
of the 16th inst she was running a string in her
pinafore, and she did not do it quite right. Priso-
ner picked up the fork off the table, and " stuck "
it into her. It remained in her shoulder. Priso-
ner had the fork in his hand when he struck her
with it. He then ran away, and left the fork
sticking in her. He did not say anything to her
at all.

Cross-examined by Mr. Clulow : I live at home
with my father. Ido not know how long I have
lived with him. He has not been kind to me, and
has frequently hit me. Ile cut my head open with
a rifle corps strap, a week before he " stuck " me.
(Mr. Freer here examined the child's head, and
said the cut must have been a very slight one, as
there was only a slight roughness visible.) Priso-
ner was sitting down having his breakfast when
the affair happened. I was standing by the table
putting a string in my pinafore. He did not scold
me before he struck me; neither did my mother
scold me for not putting the string into my pina-
fore rightly. She only asked me if I had done ray
pinafore, and I did not speak. 1 had been 3up
about an hour. When prisoner struck me with
the fork my mother carried me into Mrs. John-
son's. He struck use right through the blade
bone. My mother has not told me what to say.
lam quite sure of this. Ido net know a Mr.
Lees. (A man of that name who was in Court was
asked to stand up, and was pointed out to corn-
plainant).—Cross-examination continued: I never
told that man that my father threw the fork at
me. I cannot recollect when my mother told me
to say prisoner struck me with it. She only told
me to say that one word. When my father struck
me my mother took me into Mrs. Johnson's, and
she pulled the fork out. My mother told me the
fork had gone through my blade bone. My father
and mother quarrel sometimes, but not often. I
saw my father run over the stile as hard as he
could as soon as he could. My mother did not
tell me about him going over the stile, because I
do_ not think she saw me.

Mary Anne Johnson said she was married, and
her husband's name was Henry Johnson. The
last witness was brought into her house on the
16th inst. She examined her, and found the fork
sticking through her clothes and through her
shoulder blade. It was standing up in the blade
bone. (The fork was here produced with which
the injury was inflicted). Witness said she pulled
twice before she could get it out. The fork was
stuck in about half way up the prongs. When she
pulled it out it was followed by blood. She saw
the defendant run over the stile and go over the
fields opposite to their house.
Cross-examined by Mr. Clulow : I could see half
the prongs when the child came to me. It would
be through the clothes. The fork would have to
pass through her frock and chemise. I cannot
tell exactly how far the prongs penetrated into
the flesh; but her clothes fitted tight. When the
child was brought in the fork was sticking straight
out at right angles with her back. The handle of
the fork was not projecting upwards, but it was
straight out from her back The child did not say
anything about how it was done. I know the
prisoner. He was a neighbour of mine, but lam
not related in any way to his wife.
R. L. Bayley, surgeon, said the child was brought
to him on last Monday week. Her mother brought
her at about half-past nine or ten in the morning.
The child was not bleeding when she was brought
to him. There were three small punctures in the
lower part of the shoulder blade. It was below
Ihe spine near the scapula. As far as the position
of the orifices went they would correspond with
the prongs of a fork. 'The direction of the punc-
tures seemed to be downwards and inwards.
Cross-exarr ined by Mr. Clulow : Witness did not
probe the wounds so as to enable him to say posi-
tively whether the direction was downwards or
inwards. The wound was below the spine. There
were three small punctures, but he could not say
what their depth was without probing them. They
must have been caused by considerable force. The
child did not appear to be suffering when she was
brought to him. It would only take a few days for
the wound to heal. He did not see any blood upon
the child's clothes when she was brought to him.
Police-sergeant Jones said that about nine
o'clock on the morning of the above date the child
was brought to his house crying very much, and
appeared to be in very great pain. He examined
her back, and there he saw three distinct small
holes. He gave instructions to the mother to take
the child to a doctor. There was a little blood on
the child's chemise. He then received informa-
tion as to the person who had inflicted the wound.
He then went in search of him, and could not
succeed in apprehending him until Saturday night
last, about twelve o'clock. He then found priso-
ner at his father's house, in Angel-street. He
afterwards read the warrant to prisoner, and he
made no reply. The fork he now produced was
given to him by Mrs. Johnson, who said it was the
same that she had pulled out of the child's back.
Prisoner did not tell witness anything about what
he had been doing.
Prisoner was then committed to take his trial at
the ensuing Worcestershire Quarter Sessions, bail
being accepted—himself in one surety of £4O, and
two sureties of £2O each.

the two defendants. No one elsehad a right to go
into the stables. He next saw the horse at half-
past five in the morning. The tongee of the horse
was out three inches, and he could Le.,e, get it in.
On examining the horse he found the tongue cut
from the root, and he produced a portion. The
horse was worth £4O, being between 3 and 4 years
old. He saw the men get into the cage to go up
:the pit, and received the horse from them. Could
not say how many men were at work in the pit.
William Homer, a eager, said that he received the
horse from Colley, and begun to take off the gear.
The horse appeared all right then. Richard
Stevens, licensed victualer, said that about two
o'clock on Saturday week, Giles said he knew whab
had cut that horse's tongue. It was the
leading rein. Henry Francis, Inspector to the
Humane Society, said from information received
he saw the defendant, Thompson, who said it was
the check rein that had done it. Mr. Homer next
called all the men that were at work in the pit to
prove they did not damage the horse. The Bench
retired to consider the case. On returning into
Court, William Homer was re-called, after which
Mr. Waldron addressed the bench for the defence
contending there was no positive evidence against
the prisoners, and said he had preyed that Colley
was the boy who did it. Charles Littlewood said
that he saw Thomas Colley lay hold of the horse's
tongue, snatch it and pull it in two. Saw the
blood come out of the mouth. He told the mana-
ger about it two daye ago. The bench said there
was no direct evidence against the defendant, but
it was a case of grave suspicion, and they should
discharge them. Colonel Fletcher reminded them
that boys illtreating horses were liable to three
months hard labour.

John Cartwright was then charged with cruelly
illtreating a horse on the 13th by knocking his eye
out. Mr. Homer prosecuted. Richard Morrell
proved that he saw the defendant strike the horse
several times with aNN capon, he cautioned him
about it. It was proved that the horse had been
seriously injured, and defendant was sentenced to
one month's imprisonment.

of land belonging to Mr. Perry. He saw complainant go
into the field and say something to the men, when Mark
Bennett threw off his jacket and struck him. For the
defence, Thomas Williams, Thomas Deans, William
Brooks, George Merrick, and Edward Corns were called,
and they all said that the defendant (Mark Bennett) was
trying to part the fighters, when complainant came up
and struck at Bennett with a stick. Bennett caught the
blow on his arm, and then struck complainant back. The
Bench considered the case proved, and fined Mark Ben-
nett 20s and costs, in default three weeks for the assault,
and bound the other defendants over to keep the peace.
CII.'.RGE OF STEALING HAY. Matthew Silcock was
charged with stealing a quantity of hay, the property of
Benjamin Blewitt. Mr. Clulow defended. Complainant
said he had left a cock of hay in his field at night. and
the next morning it was gone. He found traces of hay
and oats leading in the direction of the defendant's
house, and saw some bay in the pigstye. He saw the
defendant's son in the field the night previous. Police-
constable ICeenan said he traced the bay from the field to
defendant's premises. When they got on the ground
defendant threatened complainant. Defendant said there
was nothing in the pigstye, and witness went in and found
the hay thcre. For the defence, Thomas Silcock, son of
defen lent was called, and be said there was no conceal-
ment in the case, and they did not have the hay from the
complainant's field. Charles Painter, a lad, said he took
the hay to defendant. He had it out of the gutter at the
side of the railroad. The Bench considered there was a
doubt as to defendant's stealing the hay, and they should
dismiss the case, but if complainant thought he could
prove a case against defendant of feloniously receiving
the hay he should do so.
SERIOUS CASE OF AssAri.r. Alfred and Thomas
Bellingham were charged with brutally assaulting an old
man named Emanuel Flavell.—Mr. Henry F. Hodson,
surgeon, of Cradley, said he was called to see the prose-
cutor the previous night, and found that he was very
badly bruised, and had five of his ribs broken. He was
afraid the man would not recover, as he was very old.—
When the prisoners were apprehended Alfred said to
Police-serge,tit Baldwin, " It was good enought for the
old —. I ought to have killed him."—Prisoners were
remanded for a week.

Ass IIiLT CASE.—At the Police Court, on Thursday,
before Messrs. L. Freer and N. Hingley, Levi Cole was
chargiid with assaulting William Cartl,tright, on the 21st
inst. The evidence went to show that complainant en-
gaged the defendant to work. He had neglected two
half-days. On Saturday, defeni.ant asked for his full
money which complainant refused, and defendant then
struck him a 1.)19w on the mouth, causing it to bleed.
The defence was, that complainant first struck him. Fined
20s and costs; in default 14 days.
_

WOMEN'S QUARRELS.—Harriet Scott was charged
with assaulting Eliza Woodward, on the 19th ult. Com-
plainant, who resides at Bromley, said she was going
home when she met the defendant, who struck her three
times. She did not strike again. After hearing further
evidence defendant was ordered to pay costs.
BROTHERLY LosE.—Joseph Lowe was charged with
assaulting Alfred Thomas Ostins, on the 19th ult. From
the evidence adduced, it appears that the parties are
ridated to each other, complainant having married de-
fendant's sister who was left in America with one child
by the complainant, and on meeting him on the above
date, defendant asked him why he had left his wife and
child again behiiid him in Arneric, when complainat
told him it was nothing to do with him,and he struck him
on the mouth. The Bench dismissed the case.