The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-08-21 00:00:00

STOrRBAIDGE OPBEIRVFII.

evident the lad had no idea of the value of an
oath, he was not sworn; but he made a sta,tement
to the following effect. On Saturday last, witness,
deceased, deceased's brother, and some other lads
went down to the canal together. They had with
them a line and fishing rod. After they had been
there some time, one of the boys gave deceased
the line, and told him to fish, and the rest com-
menced to play with a boat. That was the last he
savi of deceased alive. .He did not see him fall
into the water. He missed him, and saw his cap
floating on the surface of the water, and ran and
asked a man to get him out, and the latter did
80.

Edward Perry, said he lived at King-street,
Wollaston. On Saturday last, about twelve
o'clock, he was passing by the canal side, at the
back of Foster's Forge. He was returning home
from work. A little lad came up to him when be
was near the bridge, and said to him "Come, and
get a little lad out of the water, who is drowning."
There was another man with witness at the time.
Witness was within 15 yards of the bridge, and
he immediately ran to the spot indicated by the
witness Lavender. Redid not see anything in the
water. He, however, undressed himself, and got
into the water, and felt something with his feet
which proved to be the body of deceased, and he
got it out. Deceased was taken into a carpenter's
shop and placed upon a bench,: and every means
used for restoring his life; but they were of no
avail. A doctor was sent for, and Mr. Bayley
came in about twenty minutes from the time he
was sent for. Deceased was not undressed when
witness got him out of the water. One of the
lads had got deceased's fishing rod out of the
water before witness came up.
Thomas Rowlands, brother of deceased, who
said he was seven years old, having been tested as
to his knowledge of the nature of an oath, was
sworn. He said on Saturday last he went to the
canal, with his brother Felix. He took a fishing
rod and a line with him. They were accompanied
by some other boys. They had only one rod be-
tween them. One of the boys named Luther
Davis gave deceased the fishing rod, for him to
go and fish with it, and he went to fish and fell
into the water. Witness did not see him slip into
the water; but he saw his cap and line floating on
the surface, and by that he knew deceased was in
the water. Luther Davis was nearer to deceased
than witness was at the time of the occurrence.
Witness did not hear his brother fall into the
water, or see him go to fish. He (witness) and two
other boys were pushing a boat which was near at
the time. When he saw the cap and fishing rod
on the water, he went and told his father of what
hat' happened.
Mr. R. L. Bayley said he was a surgeon, prac-
tising in Stourbridge. He was riding down Lower
High-street, about a quarter past one on the above
date when a man came up to him, and asked him
to go and look at deceased, and he did so. The
deceased was dead when witness saw him. There
were no marks of violence on the body, with the
exception of a very slight abrasion of the skin
over the right ear. There were all the appear-
ances usual in cases where death has resulted from
drowning. The water flowed in acontinuous stream
from the nostrils, as if there had been an attempt
at artificial respiration.
The Jury returned a verdict to the efiect that
"Deceased, Felix Rowlands, was accidentally
drowned."

ELECTION OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE
BURIAL BOARD.
A meeting for the election of three members of
the Burial Board, in the place of thcse who retire
by rotation, was held in the Corn Exchange, yes-
terday morning. The was. al. good number of rate-
payers present.
Mr. Prescott proposed that Mr. Henry Hughes
take the chair, but Mr. Hughes declined, and the
propesition was not seconded.
Mr. Haskew then proposed that the Rev. H.
Sherrard take the chair.
This was seconded by Mr. Stringer.
Mr. Haskew then put his proposition to the meet-
ing and it was carried unanin-ously.
Mr. Prescott said he did not know what right
Mr. Haskew had to put that question to the meet-
ing. Any ratepayer had a right to move a reso-
lution, but he did not think Mr. Haskew had a
right to act in the way he had.
The Rev. H. Sherrard then took the chair, and
said the object of calling that meeting was to give
the ratepaym an opportunity of electing three
members of the Burial Board to fill up the vacan-
cies caused by those who had gone out by rotation
under the provisions of the Act, which stated that
at the end of the first year three membess of the
Board should retire. The three gentlemen who
had retired were ',Messrs. J. B. Shepherd, Frank
Evers, and Henry Billingham. They were, how-
ever, eligible for re-election. He would call upon
Mr. Maginnis to make a few remarks, as he be-
lieved he had a proposition to move.
Mr. Prescott said he had a few words to say be-
fore Mr. Maginnis. He wished to know what
right Charles King had to convene a meeting in
' the township of Stourbridge; and also what right
he had to convene that meeting without giving
seven days' notice. The Act provided that seven
, clear days notice should be given before a meeting
'of that kind was called. He should prove first
that seven clear days' notice had not been given,
and secondly that King had not power to callthat
meeting, and thirdly that that meeting was illegal.
He quoted a section of the Act to show that seven
days' notice should have been given. The gentle-
man who had called that meeting for eleven o'clock
that day had not acted fairly by the ratepayers.
They had brought their friends there, and of
course, could do as they liked. (Here W. H.
Penny made a remark, wnich was not audible.)
Mr. Prescott went on to say that no tradesman
and certainly no honest man could agree with
that meeting being called at eleven o'clock in the
morning, when the majority of the ratepayers
could not possibly attend. There was not a single
man who could call that a honest proceeding.
(The Chairman here asked him to confine himself
to the point). Mr. Pres cott went on to say that
Mr. Shepherd had taken the same objections when
the Burial Board was being formed that he (Mr.
Prescott) now took, and that meeting was put
back to have the 7 days' notice accordingly.
The Rev. D. Maginnis then said he rose with
pleasure to.ruove "That Messrs J. B. Shepherd,
Frank Evers, and Henry Billingham be, and hereby
are, appointed members of the Bnrial Board of the
parishes of Stourbridge and Upper Swinford, Counay,
of Worcester." These gentlemen had performed
their work in the best possible way. Mr. Shepherd
was a man whom they all knew, as being very self ,
sacrificing, and willing to do the best he could for
the township, and in the direction of the affairs of
the Burial Board his legal knowledge was of great
value. The other two gentlemen had been very
attentive to their duties, and had carried out their
duties in a very able manner. He (Mr. Maginnis)
was very desirousthat they should have all those
gentlemen, because after the first year's apprentice.
shipsithey had got thoroughly into the way of ear-
ring on the business. They had fixed upon a site
for the cemetry, and he trusted that before the next
annual meeting took place the cemetrylwould be in a.
working condition. In speaking as he had he be-
lieved he was expressing the sentiments of the ma-
jority of the ratepayers—(hear, hear)—.-and he felt
extremely obliged to those gentlemen for the ability
and care displayed by those gentlemen With° time
past.—(cheers).
Mr. Perry seconded the motion.
Mr. Woolley said before the question was put to
the meeting he should like to say a few words.
He did not wish to throw any obstacles in the way
of those who wished to bring that meeting to a
peaceful issue; but there were one or two ques-
tions which he should like to have answered for
his own satisfaction. He thought the churchwar-
den (Mr. King) had acted in a very courageous
way in calling that meeting when his colleague
had objected to do it. In the name of the inhab-
itants of the town he asked if that was a legal
meeting. This meeting had been called by a per-
son who represented the parish of Oldswinford.
He thought they (the inhabitants of Stourbridge)
should have some voice in calling that meeting,
whereas it was the churchwarden for Oldswinford
who had called that meeting. He'wished to know
if the township of Stourbridge should not have
been represented in some way.
• The Chairman then read a portion of the no-
tice calling that meeting, which stated that the
meeting was "A meeting in the nature of a vestry
of payers of poor rates in respect of real property
situate within the parishes or townships of Upper
Swinford and Stourbridge, in the County of Wor-
cester, the inhabitants of which said paishes or
townships have and heretofore have had the joint
use of the Churchyard or Burial Ground attached
to the Parish Church of Oldswinford, in the same
County, to be held at the Corn Exchange, Stour-
bridge, aforesaid, on Friday, the 20th day of Au-
gust, 1875, at eleven of the clock in the forenoon,
for the purpose of filling up the vacancies in the
Burial Board for the above-mentioned parishes or
townships of Stourbridge and Upper Swinford,
occasioned by three members thereof, namely,
Messrs. John Bullen Shepherd, Frank Evers and
Henry Billinghanf, having gone out of office in
accordance with the statutory provisions for such
purpose." He (the chairman) understood that
the churchwardens represented not only Upper
Swinford, but Stourbridge also.
Mr. Woolley said supposing Mr. King had ob-
jected to calling the meeting, he wished to know
who, in that case, would have the power of calling
the meeting.
Mr. Shepherd explained the law as to the calling
of vestry meetings, and said the churchwardens
had the right of calling vestry meetings for those
who had a common right in the burial ground at
0 ldewinford.
The Chairman then read over Mr. Maginnis's
proposition, preparatory to putting it to the meet-
ing.
Mr. Prescott said the notice over the doors was
not a legal one, and he had issued A counter no-
tice apprising them of that fact. He wished to
know if they roused to take any notice of it.
The Chairman said that meeting had been
called under legal advice, and they were prepared
to carry out their purpose under that advice. If
the meeting was ultimately proved to be illegal
they would have to bear the consequences.
Mr. Allsop said it had been objected that one
churchwarden should not have called that meeting
but if the other churchwarden had not been there
he would have had to call it.
The Chairman then put the proposition to the
meeting and it was carried, Mr. Prescott being
the only dissentient.

that defendant had rendered himself liable to a penalty of
I £2O for each animal. Defendant said he was not awiNe
of it. Fined 20s and costs.
A FAMILY Bow AT BELBROLGHTOII.—Levi Waldron,
Ambrose Waldron, Benjamin Waldron, and John Wal
, dron, were charged with assaulting Joshua Waldron on
the 14th inst. Mr. Perry appeared for complainant.
From the evidence it appears that the four defendants
are brothers and thecomplainant is a cousin. Some die-
putelarose about the club, at the Swan, Fairfield, and on
' the night in question, Levi knocked him down stairs,
and when down, the other defendants kicked and struck
him se_veral times. They were all turned out of the
house by the landlord, and when out they all set about
him again, and he had to fight to protect himself. A
number of witnesses where called to prove the case.
Witnesses were called for the defence. Defendants were
fined 2s 6d each and costs, and bound them all over to
keep the peace, the sureties in .£5 and themselves in £lO
Some cross summonses were taken out and dii•missed.—
A charge of committing a breath of the peace by fighting
was preferred against Joshua and Ambrose, and proved,
, and defendants were bound over to keep the peace.
CHARGE OF STEALING A Sam BAG —William Jones,
an elderly man, was charged with stealing a sack bag, the
property of George Davis. Mr. Homer appeared to
piosecute, and Mr. Perry defended. Prosecutor, who
is landlord of the Swan Inn, Oldswinford, said that on
Saturday night he nut a bag by the brewhouse window.
He saw it last about twelve o'clock at night. It was
worth from 6d to 91 in its present state. William Henry
Perry said that about six o'clock on Sunday morning he
saw the prisoner in the Back Lane. about four or five
yards from prosecutor's window. George Wheelwright,
labourer, said that about a quarter past six o'clock he
saw a man put his arm through the broken pane of the
window, and pull out something like a brewer's apron or
bag. He did not see the man's face but he was about
the same size as:prisoner. The man walked up to a field
and witness sawittim shake a bag or apron. He saw
Charles Yardley there and spoke to him. He would not
swear that prisoner was the man. Charles Yardley,
labourer, said that he saw the prisoner in a field. He had
a bag or hurden apron with him. Police-constable Wood.
hell proved searching prisoner, but he did not find the
bag. Mr. Perry addressed the Bench for prisoner, and
the Magistrates remarked that they did not think a jury
would convict on the evidence. There was a doubt on
the case and they should give the prisoner the benefit of
it and discharge him.