The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-07-12 00:00:00

CORONER'S INQUESTS.

• An inquest was held on Wednesday last, before P. F.
, Curry, Esq., touching the death of James Atherton, which
took place a few days ago. More than ordinary interest was
attached to this case, as it had been reported that the de-
• ceased had met his death by the ill-treatment of some of the
police-force. The first witness examined was
Christopher Smith, who said,—l am porter at the South
Dispensary. On Saturday the 22d of June, I saw a great
crowd in Bolton-street, Toxteth-park, amongst whom were
two policemen and another man struggling together; the
man was on the ground. They proceeded as far as Bedford-
street, and here he again began to resist the police-officers,
and twice attempted to kick one of them. A third officer
then came up, and put out his staff with his right arm to
ward off a kick. Could not swear whether the policeman
struck the deceased with his staff or not ; did not see him
strike at all ; I was about a yard from him, and there did
not appear to be any unnecessary violence. I knew the offi-
cer who held out his staff ; his number is 4) . The deceased
again got up, and began a renewed struggle with the officers,
but handcuffs were procured, and he was taken to Brick-
street Bridewell. When he arrived there he complained of
his leg. Deceased was in drink at the time.
Martha Atherton deposed,--I am a daughter of the de-
ceased. On the evening of Saturday fortnight I went into
our house. I saw my father standing with his back to the
fire, and holding my mother by the shoulders. I begged of
him to sit down and be quiet, and he aimed a blow at me. I
went to a neighbour's house. My mother came out after-
wards, and stood at the bottom of the entry ; and I saw him
aim a blow at her. I then saw two police-officers coming
down the street. They got hold of him, without any charge
being made that I heard. Neither my mother nor I gave
any charge to the officers. The officers, after they got hold
of him, trailed him away up the street. They are now pre-
sent, and their numbers are 297 and 260. When they had
got the deceased near to the top of the street, and when he
was lying on his hack, one of the officers knelt upon him,
grasped his throat with his hand, and nearly choked him.
I screamed out for the officers to let the deceased get up,
for they were choking him. When I told them, they struck
me on the neck. The deceased afterwards got up, and ap-
peared to be in a great passion. They then took him to the
top of the street, where two more officers joined them. I
then saw one of the first two officers (260) strike him on the
leg with his staff. I cannot tell which leg : it was across the
legs. There was such a crowd I could not see if deceased
was in the act of striking. I saw the officer lift up his staff
to strike him. I did not see the deceased fall from the blow,
but I saw him afterwards lying on the ground.
By Mr. Maine and others.--I say him on his back in Par-
liament-street. The officers saw him strike my mother. I
saw him struck on the leg through the crowd. They dragged
him up the street by his hands. I saw the policeman stoop and
strike my father.
By the Coroner.—When the officers were taking deceased
to bridewell, and were proceeding along Bedford-street, de-
ceased pulled up his trowsers and showed me his leg. I heard
him say that his leg was broken, and he requested that a
doctor might be sent for. I don't know how the officers car-
ried him from Bedford-street to Parliament-street ; but in
the latter street I saw him on his back, and heard the de-
ceased ask my sister to go for a doctor, for his leg was broke.
I did not take particular notice how they afterwards carried
him to bridewell.

By Mr. Maine and Jones.—l cannot say whether my fa-
ther's leg was uplifted at the time the policeman struck him.
I did not see the deceased kick at the officers ; but he made
great resistance. I did not see him make any blow. I heard
my mother request them not to ill use him.
Catherine and Sarah Atherton gave somewhat similar tes-
timony to the last witnesses.
Robert Bradshaw, a youth sworn.—l am an apprentice to
Smith, in Bolton-street. On the night in question, I was
coming up Bolton-street, and saw two officers dragging the
deceased up that street. The last police-officer who had
come, and who is not one of the three now present, there
struck the deceased a blow with his staff across the leg, and
he fell immediately, and I heard him exclaim, " Oh ! my
leg's broke." Just before the last blow was given, the
police-officer said, " Damn him, let us take him off!"—and
he fell. They took the deceased away. I saw him twice
struck by two officers.
By a Juror.—He was struck by a police-man, before he
made a kick at a police-officer. Police-officer 297, put the
staff to the deceased's mouth, and threatened to put it down
his throat.

Thomas Boothby, the keeper of Brick-street Bridewell,
being sworn said, on Saturday fortnight last, the deceased
was brought to Bridewell, and appeared to be drunk. He
was carried up stairs by four officers, when discovered that
his left leg was broken. I sent up to the Dispensary for a
doctor. Mr. M`Lellan, the surgeon, came; and recom-
mended that deceased should he taken to the Infirmary.
He was taken there about half an hour afterwards.
Mr. Andrew M`Lellan sworn.—l am surgeon at the
South Dispensary. I was sent for on Saturday fortnight to
see the deceased in Brick-street Bridewell. I found he had
received a fracture on the left leg, about the middle of the'
tibia, or large bone. Just over the fracture there was a
small round wound. There was opposite the fracture a
depression on the soft side of the leg, so that it would take
no injury by the removal.
John Nottingham, being sworn, said—l am house surgeon
of the infirmary. The deceased was brought there on Satur-
day the 22d of June. He had a bad fracture on the left leg.
On the following Saturday, he was attacked with erisypalis.
He died on the Bth inst. The immediate cause of his death
was the erisypalis, which was consequent upon the fracture.
The deceased, after his being brought to the infirmary, on
my inquiry how the things had happened, said the police was
determined to take him to bridewell, and that he was deter-
mined not to go there that night, and resisted them as much
as he could. He afterwards expressed great regret at the
way he had behaved. I did not consider his life in danger at
the time he said this.

All the witnesses present having now being examined, the
coroner said that he considered it desirable in order to arrive
at a satisfactory result, that the inquest should be adjourned
to the following day, as there were several points on which
information was yet required to complete the case. It was
desirable that the jury should, if possible, have some further
evidence as to the particular blow spoken of by the young
man, as having broken the leg of the deceased. It was
equally desirable that they should have distinct evidence that
the officers were justified in the capture, which had not yet
been shown. The police, it would be generally admitted
were a fine body of men, but the case involved a serious
charge against one or more of them, which, for the ends of
justice, it was proper to investigate more fully before coming
to a conclusion. The wife of the deceased, too, had not yet
been examined ; and he considered that her testimony, as the
case now stood, might be available. The youth and the
daughter last examined, should also be again called, as well
as any other witnesses who could be procured in the interim,
whose testimony might serve to complete the chain of evi-
dence. Search was also to be made for the parties who re-
ported to officer 297 that the :deceased was maltreating his
wife.

The jury concurred with the coroner, and it was finally
agreed that the inquest should stand adjourned until ten
o clock, the following morning,

ADJOURNED INQUEST.

Yesterday, at ten o'clock, the inquest was resumed.
Robert Bradshaw, the youth, being sworn, saw the police-
officer now present, and whose number appears to be 250, is
the man whom I saw strike the deceased across the legs, and
exclaiming, at the same time—" D—n him, let us take him
of!" Deceased, immediately after he fell from that blow,
exclaimed—" Oh my leg is broken ?" lam quite sure No.
250 is the man,

Henry Parkinson, Police-officer 297, sworn.—l was at
Bolton-street. I went to the court, and heard a great alarm
in a house there. I went away immediately for further as-
sistance, and returned with police-officer 260. I saw a crowd
of women, who said that `• this drunken villain (pointing to
the deceased) was murdering his wife." I saw deceased
making a blow at his wife with all his vengeance, when I and
a police-officer interposed to prevent any injury. I secured
deceased. The wife of the deceased then said, " I have
often made complaints to you; you see how he is using me;
take him away. Upon that we took him away. Deceased
resisted when we got him a short way; we proceeded a little
further, and he again resisted, and made a kick at 260. I
held him as forcibly as 1 could to prevent the kick. We
proceeded a little further he again made a kick at police-
officer 260, and we were all three down together ; we then
became exhausted, and each took hold of a shoulder and
dragged him a few yards. His daughters then came up,
when he became outrageous. Police-officer 41 came up after
a little while, and the deceased fell, but I could not tell from
what cause. Police-officer 250 then came up, and I can
swear that Police-officer 250 did not strike, for he had no
staff. I did not see any of the officers strike the deceased
across the legs. We took deceased to Bridewell. I never
heard deceased complain of his leg being broken until in
Bridewell.

The Coroner here said, that he entertained some doubt,
whether it would be proper to examine the police-officers,
one of whom was accused of having struck the blow, and
the other three as having been aware that the leg of the
deceased was broken; and he had, consequently, consulted
with Mr. Rushton, and also some legal authorities, and that
Mr. Rushton was of opinion, that the evidence of police-
officer 260 might be properly taken, and the jury might judge
of it.

Mr. Whitty said, that there was evidently a mistake in the
identity of the officer, on the part of the boy Bradshaw.
It was then agreed to hear the evidence of the officer, who
was then called.

Police-officer, No. 260, Robert Bowerbank. On the 22d
June, the last witness, police-officer 297, came and informed
me that there was a man killing his wife in Bolton-street. I
accompanied him there. When we got there, there was a
great crowd of people, chiefly women. I saw a woman stand-
ing at the foot of an entry there, whom I afterwards ascer-
tained to be the deceased's wife. I saw the deceased come
down the entry and make a blow at her, with apparently great
violence. Parkinson and I then laid hold of him, just as he
was in the act of striking the blow. (Parkinson's evidence
was then read to witness.) The wife of the deceased in-
sisted that we should take him to Bridewell. I remarked to
her again, that it would be better for him to go home • but
she said no, and again insisted on me taking him to iride-
well. We proceeded to do so. He resisted, and used all
the violence he possibly could. We held the deceased down,
until police-officer 41, came up. Police-officer 41 took hold
of the deceased, who was then standing up. The deceased
swung himself round, and kicked me in the belly with some
force, and was in the act of repeating the kick, when police-
officer 41, with his staff, struck the deceased a back-handed
blow on the leg that was up-lifted to kick me. The deceased
immediately fell, and exclaimed, almost directly, that his leg
was broken. Police-officer 250, came up a minute or so
afterwards. He had only a cane in his hand, with which he
kept the crowd off. I told the other officers that I feared
the deceased's leg was broken, as when he fell, I saw it turn
round. We carried him about 100 yards, and then put him
in a cart. The deceased was hand-cuffed after he fell, but
he was quiet enough then. When we arrived at Bridewell,
we ascertained that his leg was broken. I did not observe
police-officer 41, many seconds before the blow was struck.
I am positive no one but officer 41, struck the deceased a
blow at the time he fell. A man named Smith, brought
hand-cuffs, and put them on the deceased.
Mr. Whitty said there was no further eivdence, unless that
of Police-officer 41 were taken, who was ready to admit that
he had struck the blow which caused the fracture of the leg
of the deceased. This constable's evidence was not, however,
taken.

John Griffin Davies, inspector, was sworn, and said that
he had struck the deceased with his staff, and broken his
leg.
The Coroner then read the whole of the evidence, and af-
terwards charged the jury, pointing out in a lucid and per-
spicuous manner the principal points of the evidence by which
they were to be governed. The jury, he said, had a painful
and arduous duty to perform, not only from the gravity of
the case, but from the circumstance that the evidence was to
a considerable extent contradictory. It became his duty to
inform them that police-officers were under the peculiar pro-
tection of the law. If a police-officer were killed in the dis-
charge of his duty, the offence amounted in law to murder ;
while in a similar affray as regarded another individual, it
would be adjudged to be be only manslaughter. On the other
hand, police-officers were not to exceed their powers in ap-
prehending any individual. There was a limit which they
could not legally overstep, and they were not to be justified
in using unnecessary violence. The jury had first, on the
present occasion, to inquire into the death of the deceased,
and next, who the parties were who caused it. They could
entertain no doubt, after the evidence heard, but that the de-
ceased died from the blow which broke his leg. The point
was by whom that blow was inflicted. He had advised the
adjournment of the inquest, in order to obtain the fullest in-
formation, and the jury would doubtless be satisfied that he
had done so. Had they contented themselves with the evidence
of yesterday, they world have doubtless come to the conclu.

sion that police-officer 260 was the man who had given the
fatal blow to the deceased. To-day they had heard evidence
which went entirely to exculpate that officer; and that evi-
dence he had taken under the advice of Mr. Rushton. The
boy Bradshaw, though he gave his evidence very clearly, was
evidently mistaken as to the identity of the constable who
struck the blow. The police-officer, who had been examined,
stated that he saw the blow given by No. 41. The party
being thus identified, the next question was—was he justified
in striking it at all. To arrive at a proper conclusion on this
point, they must first consider whether the caption of the
deceased was legal or otherwise. He was clearly of opinion
that the caption was strictly legal. The wife of the deceased
herself said, that a blow was struck at her, which one of the
officers prevented from taking effect, and that on being asked
a second time if she would give the deceased in charge, she
said that he must be taken if he would not behave himself.
He was decidedly of opinion that in taking him the officers
had done their duty. The next question was, since they had
a right to apprehend him, whether they had used any unne-
cessary degree of violence. There had, it appeared, been a
good deal of rough and tumble work in the street, while the
deceased was being taken along. It appeared, too, that one
of the officers had knelt upon his breast ; but this might have
been necessary under the circumstances owing to his violence
and resistance. It was sworn to that he swung round and
kicked police-officer 260 with considerable violence ; that he
afterwards attempted to kick him again, and that, while in
the act of doing so, he was struck a back-handed blow (in-
tended to prevent the kick) by another police-officer, who
came up to his assistance. Now, the police-officers had no
right to use their staves violently, except in self-defence ;
and this defence, in their case, comprehended the defence
or protection of their fellow officers. If an officer were
over-powered he should call for assistance, and not pro-
ceed to violence until the last extremity. If the jury were
of opinion that there was no occasion for the violence
used ; or in other words that a greater degree of violence
was used than was necessary—then it would be their duty to
bring in a verdict of manslaughter. If on the other hand
they, considering that the deceased was a strong powerful
man, and exceedingly violent in his conduct, and did not
think that more force was used than the occasion required,
they would bring in a verdict of justifiable homicide. He
thought police-officer 250 should be acquitted : but if they
thought he, too, had also struck the deceased unjustifiably
they would include him in the verdict. He trusted they would
dismiss from their minds every thing they might have heard
but the evidence before them. The police, he need scarcely
remind them, had their enemies. They were obnoxious,
particularly to parties whose evil propensities they were ap-
pointed to restrain. As a body, he never saw a finer set of
men, and he had visited most of the large towns throughout
England. It might happen however, that amongst so large a
body, some few might not, on occasions, conduct themselves
as they ought to do. The caption was legal : the degree of
violence was alone to be considered, and he did think that if
too much violence were used by the officer it was from his
zeal in the discharge of his duty.
The jury then retired, and after an absence of about fifteen
minutes returned with a verdict of " Manslaughter against
police-officer, No. 41, William Edwards."

The Coroner' addressing the officer, said it was his painful
duty to commit him; but he trusted that the judge, on his
trial would take the same view of the case which he did,—
that he had inflicted the blow from over zeal. The witnesses
were told to appear this day (Friday), to be bound over to
prosecute.

The accused, can, we understand be bailed out on applica-
tion to the chief judge of the Court of Queen's Bench, who
is virtute officii, the head Coroner of England.

ACCIDENTAL DEATH FROM BEING RUN OVER.
_ _ _

On Tuesday last an inquest was held on view of the body
of Catherine Matthews, a girl of sixteen years of age. It
appeared in evidence that the deceased, who lived with her
parents in Roberts-place, Stewart-street, so far back as the
18th of April last, was walking along Oldhall-street with a
child in her arms, when a shandry, with four persons in it,
drawn by one horse, came up, at the corner of Rigby-street,
making a sudden turn, by which the wheel struck her, knocked
her down, and passed over her right leg, which was thereby
fractured. The deceased was taken to the Northern Hos-
pital, and every attention was paid to her, but she lingered
until the ith instant, when she expired. It appeared, from
the testimony of several medical gentlemen, that had the
friends of the deceased agreed to the advice given, that am-
putation should be resorted to, her life would, in all proba-
bility, have been saved. Verdict, " Accidental death.''

DEATH FROM STARVATION.
On Tuesday, an inquest was held on view of the body of
Maria Davies. The deceased lived in St. Andrew-street,
with her husband. They did not live on good terms. On
Sunday evening last, she went into the public-house kept by
Mrs. Dodd, in Crabtree-lane, in company with two young
men and a boy. The latter called for a quart of ale, and
said, " mother pay,"—meaning the deceased, and she paid.
The deceased was afterwards deserted by the young men, who
said she was not their mother—and she appeared to be stu-
pefied and intoxicated. She was taken into the back yard,
and placed with her back against a bench. It was afterwards
discovered that she was in a dying state. A surgeon, Mr.
Fell, was sent for, but she had expired before his arrival.
Mr. Fell said he found the deceased dead, and had since
made a post mortem examination. " I found (he stated) the
inner membrane of the stomach and bowels inflamed, which
had caused a severe diarrhma, which, coupled with the actual
want of the necessaries of life, was the cause of death. I
am quite satisfied the deceased died from the want of the
common necessaries of life. The stomach and bowels were
empty. The viscera were all healthy except the liver,
which was slightly inflamed. The daughter of the deceased
said her father was a cooper, and that the deceased had
plenty to eat if she chose to take it. She added that her
mother had lost a little money about a fornight ago, and had
not since been right in her head. Her father, she said, had
been confined to bed for twelve weeks, and was in a dying
state.—Verdict, " Died from want of the common neces-
saries of life."