The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-03-21 00:00:00

SATURDAY, MAR. 21, 1874.

' with being drank and disorderly. on the 3rd inst. Police'
constable Smith proved the eaae. Pleaded guilty. Pined
Is and cote.

DRUNK AND RIUTSINtir I o 4171 T. -- Joseph Bateman
was brought up on a warrsnt charged with being druot
and refusing to quit Bra house of Heary Bestbridge, the
Bri•ish Oak, Bomsley, on the 18th November, 1873. Da.
fendant was further charged with assaulting David Haden
on the same date. Both cases were proved. In the first
case defendant was fined 5s and costa, in the secoad, 2s
rid and costs.

_
CHARGE ENDER THE FA(' 'WV: ACI. Joseph Wogton
was sunnnontd by William Brewer, Inspector of Fait°.
net, for neglecting to send his son to school, according
to Act of Parliament. Prosecutor said that the defend-
ant was employed at James Grove's Factory, nag wh,
not at work refused to attend school. Defendant pleaded
guilty, and said she would In future see that the bey
went to school. Ordered to pay costs. Similar chargm
were made against Thomas Hawkswood and Willi.,
Guest. Mr. Brewer said he did not wish to press the
case against them; but he had cautioned them, and as
they neglected to send their chiidren to school be MO
obliged to take the present proceedings. Ordered to pay
costs--James Grove was also charged with neglecting to
send his son to school. Defendant said that his toe bed
been regularly to school, he having only missed once
since Christmas. Mr. Brewer said that had the dnpli•
cates from the schoolmistress to prove that the defend.
ant's son had not attended school, as required. Ibis east
was adjourned for the attendance of the octioolmistress.
THE LATE ELECTION RIOTS AT
HALESUWEN.

At the lielesowett Petty B.Bn-in's, on Tuesday last,
before Major Smith, Messrs. F. W. G. Itarrs and IT
Howard, the following persons, on remand, appeared in
answer to eiunmonees issued at the instance of the Su.
perintendent of Police, charging them with riotous con.
duet at Heti a .wen, on the day of East IVoreastenhins
election :—lieber Rudge, Thomas nudge, Abel Moore,
Witham Hackett, Joseph Denakeu, Edward Jones, mud
Mary Chao.
. .
" " .

Stokes, of Dudley. appeared in support of the
summonses, and Mr. Austie (Oxford circuit), inatrueird
by Mr. W. Morgan, of Birmingham, wstelied the ease on
behalf of the defendants, in the absence of Mr. Busctril.
who was detained at Lincoln.

It will be remembered that on the 3rd inst. charge. ccf
rioting were perferred against 10 persona but after hear.
mg the evidence in support of the ellegetioue three of
the accused were discharged, there being no testimony
to show that they had beim, even in the slightest degree,
guilty of any offence. An regered the other defendants,
Mr. Bassani submitted that there was no evideuee ef
riotous conduct. To constitute • riot he argued the%
there must be an assembly of persons such as to cause
rbeoadailyinftehaer caLgneinnegr.albeterardo.r.ittna'hetnhatthe ltondiouutbA, etthiwz
had assumed • riotous aspect, but not a single wituess
had spoken to having seen any of the defendants at the
time. Sem° of the defendants, the learned counsel
said, might have been guilty of assault or obetructien,
for which he thought the infliction of a tine would meet
tit. offence. Mr. Stokes, in opening the mar, said the
defendatets were charged with rioting, and that the 1,1-
deuce of their guilt would be an ebundantly proved, that
it wcald be the duty of the beech to commit them for
for trial. Heals° submitted that" if it were aliment that
all the deli nctauts were in a crowd, and that if one ccf
them committed an assault, one and all were liable for
tee cc neequencen, notwithstanding that they might bare
; taken no uetual pert in it.- Ile had no liesitatien in say•
ing tie t alhi the law " with regard to all of them,
I whether they were proved to have demolished any build•
ing or not." The !awned counsel replied that the accused
were not charged with demolishing building It fact,
the only damage which the village was shown to have
sustained was the breaking of three window panes. But
the evidence did not even hint that any of the defendants
fiat d molished building," i e., broken • pass, ele the
; part of the police it was sought to show that the deiced,
: who were Liberals, prevented many Conservatives from
voting. The chief witness sent so far ea to say that
defendaht, Heber Budge," objected" to all persons
voting eh° not decked with the Liberal colour (bine).
Moreover, he said 100 or 500 pewees " besiege " the
polling station. In croes-examination by the learned
counsel, this witness, however, admitted that there Irma
nothing enamel at the large number of people in the
stet eta for an election day; that none af the defendants
had anything in their heeds during the day ; that he
could not name a single person who was prevented voting;
but had beet told by • men named Hollie that • man
named Powell had been prevented, and that Hollis
himself was afraid to record his vote. Upon this state•
ment being made, several of the defendants expreseed •
wish that the informant should be fetched, Upon which
the wittiest; remarked that lie had heard that Hollis was
a friend to one of the defendants on the day of the
election. The evidence of the other wittiest, as regarded
the riotous conduct°, the defendants, was almost as
strong as that of the chief witness, and though several
of them stated that many persona had been preveated
voting, strange to say tot e single elector Was forth.
coming to corroborate the statement that h• hind not
allowed to exercise his rights. A Pollee • conetable
stated that he saw the defeudant Hackett holding Mr.
E. (Sem &galled the wall, and threaten not to let ehe
I vote, but that gentleman in his evidence state,. that he
had no recollection of the occurrence. Ile was struck
with a stone, and the crowd tried to prevent him getting
to thepolling station; but he could not swear that any
of the defendants took part in the affair.- At the con-
clusion of the evidence for the prosecution, Mr. Barra
said he thought the case was one for a jary.—Mr.
Bummed replied that he intended calling 20 witneneee
for the defence, who would put an entirely different
aspect on the case, and after a ahott discussion the case
waf edjoarned for a fortnight.
In opening the proceeding, Mr. Stokes said lie
thought it would be unnecessary to call witeensee
Since the had sitting of the magistrates, he had carefully
considered the evidence affecting the whole of the def•
endants, and the Chief of Police, for whom he appeared,
had left with him an entire discretion as to bow the Bench
should be ask to deal with the case. That officer bad
no feeling either one way or the other; was no perusal' ;
did not care to koow whether defendant. were Liberal or
Conservative; and in conducting tl“t prosecution had
been only actuated by a een.c of public duty. As the
Bench knew, defendants were charged with being e 011•
corned in a riot, and with committing assault, and in
considering what course lie should ask them to take he
had very miuntely examined the evidence, and at the
scene time borne in mind the only ecbjeet the proteention
had, viz., that of protecting the peciple and their pre.
perty. Ii that object could be effected Icy taking •
lenient °muse, the Chief of Police had instructed him to
do so. He had, then, to ask the Beech not to deal with
the charge of rioting. He was li•iuuct to admit that the
evidence did not prove the charge of rioting, and if be
did not at once state this, he should he wanting in his
duty, and in hoeesty,toward, the gentlenieu he addressed.
With respect to the assault they had dierreticinery power
an dealing with defeudauta, led the officers only wi heel
for them to be tamed that into•fering or elcdructieg
voters at election times Was all 4,11.. m, against the law.
Not only did Ile desire it to he Weevil that it era, illegal
to gather round pcilliug atetion., an I there resort to
' vicilence, but lie alas wished the mindn of defendants
, and others tii he dembueed of the ab.urd notion that
: there wits no law 011 is elect day. He had now only
to ask the magistrates tied each defendant be bccuud over
in suet' surety to keep the place.
Mr. Anstev said lie had very little to add to the rens
w.
able observation,' of Mr. Stokes, It Was utterly int-
. mpossilile that • jury would convict defendent, of rect •
ing. He would Yot say, however, that the magistrates
were not quite:justified:in seeding for the indite. y if •
riot was auticipated. No one would for an instant
dream that it was anything but right and proper to arm
themselves lig dust expected claimer. There Was no
evidence, however, spun which 11 jury could find that
there bed been • riot at Halesowen. As lci the cpiestion
of assault, there the ease differed, and there might be
sufficient evidence to justify a conviction ; but it was
scarcely worth while to go farther into the case after
course taken by the prosecution, and than, perhaps, stir
up ill blood, and rake up matters which it was desirable
should be buried in oblivion. He accepted most readily
the proposal thrown out, and, of course, felt with Mr.
stokes that defendants should be made to understand
1i,,. rediculons and absurd was the notion which seemed
to have prevailed that when her Majesty's subjects were
met together to elect representatives to pass laws, that
upon that day alone law was to be &lashed, and the
whole country allowed to become a scene of riot. On
behalf of the defendants he expresaed regret at what
hod occurred. He aseured the Bench of their sorrow
that they had taken part in any proceedings which bad
given occasion for their, appearance in a Police Court,
and he had to express a sincere determination on their
part that that sort of thing should be pot a stop to.
One remark he might make in their favour—that they
did not destroy property or retort to that sioleuee which
characterised the rioting in other towns.
After the magistrates had consulted, Major Smith
said they held the some opinion as at the last meeting,
that it was a case of rioting, and in this they were more
especially confirmed since hearing the charge of the
Lord Chief Justice to the Grand Jury at Worcester.
Mr. Stokes' however, had withdrawn the charge of riot-
ing, and therefore there only remained the asaault fccr
the Bench to deal with, but they hoped this would he a
warning for the future to those who had been engaged
in the allele. and that they would bear in mind the long
terms of imprieoement to which the Dudley end Lye
rioters had been sentenced. One surety would not inert
the cane, and defendants would ellen be hound ever in
eV, and be called upon to find two sureties in Ile to
keep the peace for six months.

_
THE LILLE MARRILAOI3. Itr.JUICINGS.
7'o (At Editor of the "Oboorror."

you kindly insert the following letter la
JOIST next issue. lii your report of my openitig remarks
as chairman, at the dinner at the Wine Hotel, on the sc.
casion of the marring° of W. H. Foster, Bey., several
inaccuracies occurred with regard to dates and place..
My statements were., follow,,: The name of the firm,
Bredley and Co., in an familiar as household word. to
all parts of the civilised world where iron has been
brought into nee. I feel much pleasure in saying that I
have been in their employ for the peat 56 years, and iPA
years ago I had occasion to go through some warehouse.
in London, belonging to some French merchants. I in.
gaited 'from where do you get your beat iron' ' From
Broiler and Co., Stourbridge Iron Works, was the
reply. After this I had to cross the Atlantic in charge
of a 'cue auger mills and engines from the said works, for
the Islam% of Cuba, in the Went Indies. When I list
been there @sine time, I bad to look 4nit .iime iron in the
warehouses to take up to the Plantations, and I made
the same inquiry, From where do you get your best
iron' ' The answer was the mime, ' From J. Bradley
and Coo Iron Worts. England.' It is no wonder that
we all feel souse pride to lie connected with one of the
oluest and most honourable firma in the iron world.'
Thanking you for the insertion.
I remain, Mr. Editor,

Your, truly.
WM. MILL WARD.
Wollaaton, March 1811, 1M74.
The report referred tones furnished by a gentleman abo
a. there. Doubtleapt, the alight in.curactes lon
mention crept in accidentally.— r ED. S. 0.:
Printed and Pm.foaled by the Dole Proprletor,9ll2loZ
FIKI.D. at ht o °Moos. 92, Righ.atraet, St0.11(1.10, Ii
he County u• aorosater : to wnien place MI 144144.
40211101Vion+ nt.Dtt • tnisiql..
ilareh 21, 1874.

I

iigl=iii

No.

=l2galli

HAG:

Tb
Sale it El
OA

CIENTE]

ATESIre"
itt th
D JUL
very
receotl
_

table, Cosc
ettuate at lii
The HMI
with a Farni
For WWI
Shepherd,
Perreus, Inc

°ATE!
are :
EN., to 10
MIME, ST(
Range of
tikte.EN ar
aod entente,
Portable dc
Flower Ste
placa au
Catalogue