The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-12-11 00:00:00

THE STOURBRIDGE OBSERVER.

A CONVICTION AFFIRMED.

: ;1 • ; ,! rcf fl, Crown
Oases Reserved (before Lord Coleridg._,
Field, Mr. Justice Lopes Mr. Justice Stephens, and
Mr. Justice Watkin Williams), the cause of "The
Queen o. Salmon and Others" has been heard. It was
a case reserved by Lord Coleridge on the trial before
him at the last Summer Assizes at Wells of three men
named George Salmon, John Salmon, and Arthur
Hancock for manslaughter in accidentally causing the
death of a little boy while firing guns.—We take the
following report of the case from The Times :

The case was thus stated by Lord Coleridge.—The
three prisoners were tried before me on the 27th of
July, 1880, for the manslaughter of William Wells, a
little boy of ten years old, under the following circum-
stances :

George Salmon is a member of the Frome Selwood
Rifle Corps. On the 29th of May he attended the rifle
practice. He took his rifle from the armoury, had 14
ball cartridges served out to him, and fired them all
away. After the practice was over he took away
with him his rifle, which it was his duty to return to
the armoury. He did not take it back, and the drill
instructor missed six cartridges from the magazine
when he went there about half-an-hour after the prac-
tice was over. About seven o'clock—that is, shortly
after the practice was over—the three prisoners came
together to the house of a witness (Newport), who was
called and whose evidence, so far as it is material to the
point to be determined was as follows :—" The three
prisoners came to my father's house somewhere about
seven in the evening on the 29th of May. George
Salmon had a rifle with him and some ball cartridges.
All three wanted to fire off one or two shots, and
they asked me for something to fire at. I gave them
a board from our fowlhouse. I went with them into
a field close by, and the prisoner Hancock climbed
into a tree. George Salmon handed up the board
to him. Hancock fixed it in the tree about
eight feet from the ground. They all went about
one hundred yards up the field, and all lay down in the
grass. I heard two shots. I cannot tell which of them
fired the shots, for I was looking at the board. lam
not sure whether the first shot struck the target; the
second shot did strike it. I do not know which of
them fired it. Two more shots were fired afterwards,
when Wells and Knizht came running up and told us
what haa nappened." The place where the shot was
fired and all the surrounding houses and roads are
correctly delineated in a plan which was proved
before me and marked by me at the time. To that
plan I beg leave to refer the Court, as conveying a
clearer view of the place and its surroundings than
any statement of mine could convey. What had hap-
pened, to use the words of the witness Newport, was
this:— . . . .

The deceased William Wells was with his young
sister in his father's garden, and her evidence was as
follows :—" I remember the evening of the 29th of
May. There is a low apple tree in my.father's garden
with a rose tree in it. My brother got up into the
apple tree to water the rose. While my brother was
in the tree I heard a shot; it passed through the tree,
for some of the leaves fell down from the tree. I called
to my brother, but he answered me and said he was safe.
Then there was another shot, and ray brother fell out of
the tree dead on to the ground. There were four or five
shots fired altogether. I think the second shot killed him."
It was proved that the distance from the spot where
the shot was fired to the tree in which the boy was
killed was 393 yards but the rifle was sighted for 950
yards, and would probably be deadly at a mile. The
evidence of conversations after the death had been
caused as to the person who fired the shot was as
follows :—Joseph Wells, the father of the little boy,
the first person who came to the prisoners after the
shot, said, "When I first came up I saw Hancock
and Newport and John Salmon. I told them what
had been done, and that they had killed my boy.
They seemed very sorry and wished they had not
done it. I asked them were the rifle was. They said
it was flung down in tlie field; but we could not find
it. I left Hancock and John Salmon in charge of
Knight."—Jonathan Knight said, "I saw the three
prisoners with Newport in the field. I called to them
to stop firing. I came on Hancock and Newport and
John Salmon. I saw George Salmon at first, but he
was not there when I came up. I told them they had
killed a boy, and I said 'Where is the gun?' They
went back to find it, and could not, and said that
George must have taken it away."—William Parsons
said, " I went to Newport's house. There I saw
Hancock and John Salmon. I went with them
to the field, and they showed me the tree in which
was the target. The bottom of the target was
about 10ft, from the ground. I took John Salmon
and Hancock to the police-station. Then I went to
George Salmon's. He said when I took him into cus-
tody, Don't blame my brother for it; it was I that
did it.' I took him to the station. When the three
were together there George Salmon said, 'I fired the
shot.' Hancock said, Yes we all three fired one
each.' George said, I fired the first shot. and it
must have been I that killed the poor boy." The rifle
was afterwards found in George Salmon's honse, and
it and two cartridges found in the field were identi
fled by the drill-instructor' the rifle as being the rifle
George Salmon ought to have returned to the
armoury on the evening of the 29th of May, the
cartridges as cartridges similar in all resperts to those
six which he had missed from the armoury on that
evening. The jury found all the prisoners guilty of
manslaughter, but I allowed them to go out on bail
till I could take the opinion of the Court of Criminal
Appeal on the case. I am to request the opinion of
the Court whether these was any evidence upon which
either or all of the prisoners could be convicted of
manslaughter.
Mr. Norris appeared for the prosecution; no
counsel appeared for the prisoners.
The counsel for the prosecution said the substance
of the case was that the three prisoners went out to
shoot in a field, and employed a boy to put up a target,
which was placed in a tree 100 yards from the firing
point, and
,behind, in a straight line, was the tree in
which the boy was. Several shots were fired, and
there was nothing (except the statement of George
Salmon) to show that the first shot killed the boy,
and the evidence showed that it was not the first, but
a subsequent shot, probably the second. If it was
possible to identify the person who firel the second
shot, he would clearly have been guilty of man.
slaughter.
Mr. Justice Field: Is that clear?

Mr. Norris submitted that it was, as there had been
culpable negligence. Surely there was culpable neg-
ligence in firing at a target only 100 yards from the
firing point.
%Ir. Justice Lopes: Culpable negligence would be
sufficient to sustain the conviction.
Mr. Justice Stephen: It is a question of degree for
the jury.
Mr. Justice Field: The difficulty is that the boy
was in a tree in a position which could not be antici-
pated. Suppose a person fired in the air, and hit a
person in a balloon he did not see?
Lord Coleridge: Suppose he fires a gun 'lnto the air
in llyde-park and the shot falls and kills some one?
Mr. Justice Field: Was there a duty towards the
boy who was in a tree?
Mr. Norris: There was a duty to all the world to
exercise reasonable care.
Mr. Justice Field: There is bf ten Volunteer prac-
tising.
Mr. Norris: With proper precautions.
Lord Coleridge: And here the practising had
already taken place.
Mr. Justice Stephen: Wherever a person does an
act likely to kill some one or which may kill some one,
he is bound to take reasonable precautions.
Mr. Norris: And here the prionners fired over three
or four roads.
Mr. Justice Stephen: In a place where people
might naturally be expected to be.
The Judges conferred together, and then
Lord Coleridge said they affirmed the conviction, on
the ground that if a person did a dangerous act with-
cut proper precaution and so killed any one he was
guilty of manslaughter. That would make it clearly
manslaughter against the one who fired the fatal shot,
and as all three fired shots, and so were guilty of cul-
pable negligence, and among them they caused the
death, they were all guilty of manslaughter.
Mr. Justice Field concuried, observing that he had
at first doubted, but was now satisfied, as it was cer-
tainly the duty of any one who used dangerous and
deadly weapons to take proper precautions.
Mr. Justice Lopes also said he thought the convic-.
tion right.
Mr. Justice Stephen also concurred, as did Mr.
Justice Williams, and so the conviction was affirmed.

EMIGRATION FROM LIVERPOOL.

The emigration ststisties show that the number of
i
n November was 85, with
8,843 emigrants, of whom 7,918 were for the United
States, 455 for British North America, 26 for
Australia, 109 for South America, 244 East Indies,
29 West Indies, 10 China, and 52 Africa. Of the
total number, 3,591 were English and 3,846 foreigners,
only 919 being Irish.
The emigration of the month exhibits a decline of
5,852 on that of October and of 1,298 as compared
with November last year.