The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-12-06 00:00:00

VERDICT OF MANSLAUGHTER.
At M diatoms mita, Thomas Atkins, aged 27, a labourer,
was Indicted for the wilful murder ol Israel 114 y, at &rang,
on the 24th of Auguat.

The prisoner had, for some time previi wi to the 23rd
of Auguat, been employed at the Cement Works, near
Snotlland, and lodged at the house of a man named
l'arker, at Blrham. At about eight o'clock in the
evening of Saturday, the 23rd of Auguet, the priffloner
left him lodgings stating that he ahould return at eleven
o'clock. At that time he was wearing a Inookey-
jacket and corduroy suit, a flat cap upan kis head,
and, according to Factor'. evidence, he never returned
Labia house after thattime. At a quarter toele yen o'clock
nth. niaht of the 23rd of August, he was seen out-
aide the "Bull" publichomie at lln Po drunk
that he 'could not stand by himself, and had to be
propped up against the wall of the house. At thin time,
the deceased man, Israel May, who was the district
police oonatable, came up and tried to induce the
prilioner to go home, which he repented and need foal
and threatening language to the officer, who was called
away almost immediately to a diatuibance elsewhere.
The primner and two men left the publichotve eh irtly
afterwards and walked along the road leading to Ham-
hill; and when about 100 yards from the Turnpike-gate
the prisoner fell down by the roadidde so helplessly drunk
that the others could not rouse him. The demand man

came by at about half-past eleven, tried to roam the
prisoner, but without success. and then pared on towards
Ham-hill on his beat. He was spok.en to at Ram-hill
by a witness named Upton at half-past ese in the morn.
Mg, asks returned in the &seeks whore the prisoner
had bees liter, midis, was never seen again alive. At six
o'clock the following (Sunday) morning the deed body
of the policeman was found lying in • field about de
yard* from the met where the prisoner had been left
the evening before, his heed so smashed that his
features were hardly distinguishable. There were
marks of a struggle along the road and in the field where
the body was discovered and near the body were found
„p_ brace and a cep as well as the polioeman's helmet.
The prisoner was not apprehended till the 30th,
enhen he was found at Kingadown. Upon being appre-
nded tbe made • statement to Superintendent Hui.*
the effectthatthe demisted man Game up to him and
ake him, aid upon his getting notruck him • violent
blow en the bead (the mark of which he pointed ) ;
ghat thereupon a struggle ensued between them; that
they fell over the hedge into the field, and he coo-
ceded in getting the staff from the policeman, and
then struck him five or six times on the head. He
expressed regret at the result, and stated that Ise hid
no idea at the time that he had hided the man. The
ferrymen at Seedless' was called for the prosecution,
and proved that on the Saturday previous he had fer-
ried the prisoner over the river, and that on that
occasion the prisoner expressed his Intention of making
a mark upon the deceased, but that at the time of
making this threat the prisoner was much the worse
drink.
For the defence it was *Omitted to the jury that the
threats were those of • drunken man; that the wound.
were inflicted by the constable's own staff and not by
any weapon previously prepared, and that the whole
of the evidence pointed to the truth of the prieoner's
statement, which was consistent with manslaughter,
biet did not upport • charge of wilful murder, it was
suggested that the wound on the prisoner's head pointed
to the fact that the constable had struck the prisoner,
as he stated, and that instead cf the deed having been
premeditated, the-prisoner's drunkenness on the night
in question precluded any such theory.
His Lordship, In summing up the case to the jury,
told them this, they would by their verdict have to de-
cide whether the prisoner had, on the facts proved, •
delibsrate intent to take the life of the deceased man.
In re mpittilating the evidence, his Lordship remarked
that the only occasions on which previous malice was
shown by the prisoner against the deceased man, were
when, according to the evidence for the prosecution, be
was the worse for drink—namell, at the ferry, on the
Saturday previous, end on the night ef the 23rd
of August, Then the offence was committed.
Words uttered by • man when excited by thick
must be taken with some modification. The nature
of an act of violence must not be judged by a like
modification. The evidence in his Lordship's j adg-
en wt, did not oonfliot with the two statements made
by the prisoner, and it might fairly be taken that there
was on the occasion when the deceased man met his
death • very onosidemble struggle between the
constable and the prisoner. The weapon which was
used on such an occasion is of importance when
considering the question of malice; and if, as in
the osee before the jury, the weapon is one not
only not provided beforehand, but is one wrested
from the decease d in the course of • struggle, the
presumption would nether be against thank' favour of
any premeditation. The jury most take into their
consideration, finally, the question whether they be-
lieved the prisoner's statenient that the cone table
struck him first with his staff or not. If they believed
that the prisoner was so struck, that would undoubtedly
be an unlawful act on the part of the constable, and,
in his lordship's opinion, would be material when the
. jury came to consider whether their verdict should be
one of murder or manslaughter.

The jury retired, and after delibeestimg for twenty
minutes, returned into smut with • verdict of Guilty
of maruilatig hter.

„.
His Lordship, In passing sentence upon the prisoner,
expressed his strong disapprobation of any resistance
1 to an officer under any circumstances, even though
that officer may be exceeding his duty. Addressing
the prisoner, his Lordship said that the jury had be-
lieved his statements that the deceased had first struck
him with his staff. That was an unlawful act which
mitigated in some degree the mien:men of the offence
which he had committed, yet he could not but believe that
he had continued his blows upon the constable's head
long after he must have known that be was seriously,
if not mortally, wounding the man, and, therefore, his
VIM an aggravated case of manslaughter, and the
sentence upon him was that he be kept in penal servi-
tude for the term of 20 years.