The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-07-27 00:00:00

RESUMED INQUEST ON THOMAS GUY.

Yesterday evening, at five o'clock, the Inquest was resumed at
the Turf tap. before 'Air. limos, Coroner, nn the above young
man, whn died from the dreadful kicks given him by a brick-maker
named William Tutlow, dins Tattoo. As on the previous sitting
of the Jury the same interest was excited.
Mary Rankin. of the Royal liospital.row. Chelsea, deposed
that she knew nidew by sight. Oa Sunday she saw bleu a
short distance from her house, and on the pavement a young woman.
who was called " Scntchey," was lying beastly drunk. Tutlow
wife had been fighting her, and was seconded by him. The tie.
ceased came up, and advised the woman to go away. Tutlow struck
his wife on one side, and then knocked the deceased down, and, as
he was getting up, kicked him down again. The deceased wire a
dreadful groan and rolled over. Tutlow kicked him a third time
In the side. The deceased, on being raised, put his hands to the
lower part of his body, and seemed double; the blood streamed
from Ids fare and mouth. The witness's husband asked him Übe
was much hurt, but lie made no answer. The witness called out
that the deceased wets much hurt, but no person would take up the
quarrel; they were all afraid of Tutlow, who is a desperate lighting
character.

Coroner—lt that hie charaeter:and demeanour in the neighbour-
hood ?
___

Witness--Ves, Sir, it is. People are afraid to open their mouths
for him. Ile has been confined in'the Penitentiary.
Coroner—Was there any other affray ?
NVitness—Yes. Sir, some time after.
Coroner—Was there any man kicked in that affray?
Witnevi—None that I heard of.

Richard Painter, of No. 12, Grosvenor-street, Grosvenor.square,
bricklayer, gave a totally different account of the transaction. Ile
saw Tutlow and his wife walking along Jew's-row; the woman wan
jealous of some intimacy which had existed between Tutlow and a
Scotch girl whom she met, and they had a fight ; at the time a
man came up and said " Take your wife home r.nd give her a
good thrashing, because if you dont I will." Tutlow told him to
go about his business, upon which the deceased took him by the
arm and turned hint round. Tutlow then snuck him and he fell
because he was drunk. He got up and said " Oh, lam not hurt"
and walked away. Tutlow or nobody else never kicked him or
struck him ; Tutlow was sober, he is a civil man if left alone, and
is not it fighting man.
Juror—Do your mean to give your address in Grosvenor-street ?
Witness—l live in a house we are at work in; its an old unin.
habited house.

Juror—Did he walk away quickly and steadily ?
Witness—Yes, Sir, as well as a drunken man could.
Coroner—Do you know where he is ?
Witness—Not 1. indeed.
Juror—When did you see Tullow last ?
Witness—t lo Monday morning, going to his work.
Juror—Did you see any of his family ?
Witness—Yes, his father.
Juror—What did he say concerning this?
Witness—Why, he asked me to conic as 1 saw it all, and I have
come. I did not know the man was dead until Monday night.
Juror—Did not the deceased walk away bent double?
Witness—()h no, not all. I dont know what you mean.
Juror—Why I mean this, that we have the evidence of several
persons which completely proves you are swearing falsely.
The Beadle here said a crowd of persons were without who were
brought by Tittlow's father to give evidence for him.
The Coroner observed it was useless to receive so many contra-
dictory statements, the evidence already taken was almost conclu-
sive.
The Foreman of the Jury thought the object of the contradictory
evidence was quite manifest.
Rachuel Neville, a woman of the town, gave the same account,
only varying in this point very positively, that the deceased was
very sober in ; whereas the lust witness said he was quite
drunk.
Sangwell, who hail been in custody from the first sitting of the
Inquest, also said the deceased was perfectly sober, but he main-
tained positively that Tutlow did not kick hint.
lie was discharged from custody.
The Coroner read beer the depositions, and observed that sup-
posing the evidence correct, which Painter had givea, that demised
had threatened Tutlow, it could not justify such brutality ; but the
evidence of the other witnesses completely disproved all he had said.
lie thought the case sufficiently proved for the decision of the Jury,
and as a part of his duty was to explain the law in such uses,
they would understand that it was necessary. for the result of a
verdict attaching the party with 'Wilful Murder, to prove the
malice before the commission of the act. It could not be con-
stituted murder without that, as in this ease, malice was not im-
plied, but on the contrary, fully expressed by the set, according to
the terms of law, as it was clearly proved that he had first knocked
him down, and then, while down, kicked him in such a horrible
manner, that his death was rroduced.
A Juror thought this did not fulls constitute malice.
The Coroner stated to him and the Jury generally, at peat
lent„nh, the opinion and distinctions of the great law writers
upon the subject of murder, manslaughter, homicide, and eLance
medley.
The Jurors thanked the Coroner, and observed, they had no
doubt upon the case upon his explanation, but were only appre-
hensive he wealth escape punishment, by any other verdict than
that of wilful murder. •
The Coroner said, that it by to means followed, because the
Jury at the Sessions, in the event of his bring indicted for murder,
could return a verdict of manslaughter.
After same conversation, a verdict of—." Minder,"
against William 'rutlew was returned.