The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-09 00:00:00

MURDER AT LIVERPOOL

Owen Kehoe, 27, was plaeed at the bar, charged with the
wilful murder of Ann Kehoe, his wife, at Liverpool.
Mr. HARDING, who was concerned for the. prosecntion,
stated that he understood the prisoner was insane, and had
been so since his committal, so as to be incapacitated from
taking his trial. A jury was thereupon impannelled to try
the fact.

Thomas Chalmers. the surgeon of the gaol at Kirkdale,
was examined by Mr. MURPHY, and stated that he had been
in attendance upon the prisoner since his committal, and
was of opinion that he was decidedly insane. He had en-
tirely lost his reasoning faculties, and, in fact, was mad.
The prisoner rambled a great deal in his talk in court, and
the jury. without hesitation, found that he was insane.

MURDER AT ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE

Joseph ijoila;il729,wasindicted for the wilful murder of
Thomas Garland.
Mr. BRANDT and Mr. HALTON were for the prosecution.
Mr WiLiciNs and Mr. OVEREND for the prisoner.
Mr. BRANDT stated the case for the prosecution. He
said that the deceased, on the 31st of October, was leaving
the town of Ashton-under-Lyne, in order to go to Manches-
ter, with four or five companions. When they had gone
about a ,cinarter of a mile on the Ashton and Manchester
road, they were assailed by a party of fifteen or sixteen per-
sons, and so violently beaten, that the deceased afterwards
died of the bruises which he received. The learned counsel
added, that in order that the jury might thoroughly under-
stand the case, it would be necessary for him to give them a
short account of the state of Ashton at the time of the affray.
In the month of October last, there was a dispute amongst
the sawyers in that town. The masters would not agree to
the prices demanded by the men, and there was a turn-out
of all that belonged to the union. The masters were for
some time left without workpeople, but at length they got
men to accept of their terms from a distance. Those in the
union were dissatisfied with this arrangement, and resorted
first to solicitation, and afterwards to deeds of violence, to
disturb it. There was a meeting of the club, and it was
agreed that a party should go out to meet and assault the
workmen. They chose a night on which the people usually
returned home ; some of them living at a distance.
Several of these had a warning not to go home on that
night ; but others who had not been warned did go. A party,
considing of five or six, were proceeding on the Ashton road
to Manchester, when they were met by fifteen or sixteen of
the turn-outs, and the whole of them were set upon, and
knocked down with sticks, clubs, bars of iron, and other
weapons. There was just light enough to enable them to see

the countenance; of their assailant 4, and the prisoner would
be proved to be one of them.. It would also be shown that
.he had taken from a part of his dress a piece of iron, and
struck the deceased to the ground. The men who were at-
tacked made the best of their way to Manchester, and the
deceased was taken to the infirmary. The scalp of his head
was found to be much injured, and the forefinger of the right
hand was broken. The surgeon who examined his wounds
recommended that the finger should be amputated; but he
was very anxious to keep it, and so strong were his remon-
strances, that the surgeon consented merely to dress it. He
came there to have it attended to, from day to day, until the
16th of November, when he was found to have lock-jaw. He.
was admitted an in-patient, and died on the following day.
The learned counsel observed, that it might be urged on be-
half of the prisoner, that if the deceased had consented to
have his finger amputated, he would not have died. Now
this operation might have been advisable, but it would be for
the jury to say if the lockjaw was produced by the bruises,
and if the wounds had been inflicted by the prisoner. -After
the affray it appeared that the prisoner was not to be found
for spine days, when .he met a man named John Arrandalei
and told him be wished to get away from the police on ac-
count of that affair, and that he should go, by way of New-
castle, Liverpool, and Bristol, to Dublin. 'The constable
traded him to these places, and he was apprehended in com-
pany with some sawyers at Dublin.. This would be the evi-
dence which he should have to lay before the jury, and it
would be for them to say, under the direction of his lordship,
whether there was sufficient to convict the prisoner, and whe-
ther he was guilty of murder or manslaughter.
Patrick Kehoe—l am a sawyer. On the 31st of October
last, I worked for Mr. Stones, at Ashton-under-Lyne. I
had been with him three weeks. I was not in the union. I
lodged at Church-street, Ashton, for two nights. My family
was in Ashton. On Saturday nights I went to Manchester.
Before I went to Ashton, I was working in Manchester. My
son James worked for Mr. Stones. Thomas Garland worked
for Mr. Gouldthorpe, next door. John Harney worked for
Mr. Stones. He went there at the same time as I and my
son. The prisoner is a sawyer. About half-past four on the
evening of the 31st of October, I went to Manchester. I had
previously seen him about three o'clock in the afternoon,
speaking to my comrade, Thomas Grimes, in the yard. They
were together about an hour. My son, myself, my brother
James, John Harney, and Thomas Garland, the deceased,
went to Manchester together. Myself, my son, and brother,
and Garland. were first on the road. Harney was behind.
About a quarter of a mile from Ashton new church, we met
from twelve to fifteen men, seemingly coming from Manches-
ter. Thomas Roberts, one of the party, knocked me down
with his fist. Before that I saw the prisoner amongst the
party. I was beaten on the ground, and the blood poured
from me till I could see no more. When I got up I saw the
party who had assailed us run towards Ashton. I only knew
Thomas Roberts and the prisoner. I tried to go towards
Manchester, and then returned. My son was crying " Mur-
der." His arm was much hurt. Garland was standing
against a. wall. He was covered with blood, and said, " Pat-
rick, Patrick, I'm killed." All our party were beaten. We
went to Manchester, and took Garland to the infirmary. We
got there between eight and nine o'clock. Our wounds were
dressed and we went away. I did not see him until he was
dead in the infirmary.

Cross-examined—The first time I saw the prisoner was in
the Town-hall, at Manchester, about three weeks ago. I had
mentioned him to Mr. Alcock and Mr. Green about three
weeks ogo. I bad previously been before the magistrates.
The only man I mentioned there was Tinker. Garland, when
he went home, had the instrument called " the pricker." He
carried it in a bag. I have never said it was five o'clock when
we left Ashton.

Re-examined--Mr. Alcock and Mr. Green, I believe, are
peace-officers. They , came to Ashton to inquire into this
matter. I spoke of this murder before the magistrates.
James Kehoe.—l am. the son of the last witness. In Oc-
tober last I worked for Mr. Stone, at Ashton. I was one of
the new hands that supplied the place of the turn-outs. I
was going home with the party mentioned by my father,
when we were about a quarter of a mile from Ashton new
church, we met a party of fourteen or fifteen. Thomas
Roberts, Grimes, and Joseph Holland, were amongst
them. Saw Roberts strike a blow at my father with his
naked hand, and then pull out a stick and strike him. My
uncle was near to him and tried to catch him, but was obliged
to fly for his own safety. I was knocked down and beaten,
and saw no more. Two of my ribs were broken, and I was
very much mangled—more bruised than wounded. When I
zof up I saw some of the party who attacked us running to •
wards Ashton. I assisted in taking Garland to the infir-
mary. He was very much backed and cut up. He had a
desperate wound all down his forehead, and his fing3r was
nearly hanging off.
Cross-examined.—l saw the prisoner the first time on the
29th October, at the widow Wood's. It was about a quarter
to five o'clock when this happened.
By the JUDGE.—The men said nothing. Some of them
had pieces of stick, and two of them had bars of iron.

Jan Harvey.—l was struck and fell on my hands and
knees from the blow. The man who struck me was behind.
I saw the prisoner was among the men. I had often before
seen him in Ashton. Four of the men passed us before the
attack begun. I knew the prisoner ten or twelve yards dis-
tant. I saw him strike Garland with a piece of iron ten or
twenty inches long, which he drew from his breast under his
coat. He made an attempt to strike Garland on his head,
and the latter putting up his hands, the blow fell on them.
Garland cried out " Murder !" I was then knocked down.
(An iron instrument, about a yard in length, and the thick-
ness of a poker, with sharp pointed ends, was produced.)
This instrument is a " pricker." The bar with which be
was struck was about the same thickness, but not so !ong.
When I got up I saw three men beating Garland. I ran to-
wards Ashton, and two of the men followed me. I did not
go to Manchester with Kehoe and his son and the deceased,
nor until some time afterwardq.
Cross-examined.—l have known the prisoner three or four
years. Garland did not strike with his fist when he put his
hands up, nor had he done so before. He had not time. It
was not a minute after I saw the men, that Garland was
struck. We had with us iron instruments called " does,"
that we use in our trade. We had been told in the course of
the day there would be a disturbance, and armed ourselves
accordingly.

Re-examined.—l had no time to pull out my weapon, but
saw some of our party use theirs. Garland had two prickers
in a bag.

Thomas Redmond.—l am an out-door worker. On the
evening of the 31st October I was going home towards Ashton,
and, about a quarter of a mile from the new church, heard a
cry of " murder." I saw a man on hishands arid knees, and
three men beating him. I could not see what the weapons
were, I was too far distant. There was acart and two horses
on the road. The man who was beaten was very near the
first horse. - I saw ten or twelve persons on the road. Two
men were running towards Ashton., and turned into the foot-
path in the fields. I found the pricker produced on the road,
and a bag and another piece of iron near where I saw the
man down. The carter took the last mentioned piece of iron

away.
Cross-examined.—lt was light. There were a great many
people on the road going backward and forward. My im-
pression at the time was, that there Were about ten men alto-
gether. There was a great noise. I heard one voice crying
" Murder," and two-or three others saying " Oh! oh !" 1
do not know who the man was that Isaw down.
Re-examined.—The men ran past me. They were the men
who had seemingly been beating the others. The three I
saw beating the one were amongst them.
Peter Kehoe.—l saw one of the men strike my brother on
the naked eye. I tried to save him, but left him for my own
safety. One man passed me, and struck me several times
with something like the leg of a table. I rushed towards
him, and he retreated to his party. They were beating my
friend with bludgeons. Thomas Garland was amongst tem.
I ran away, and in two or three minutes, the men having left
them, I returned, and found Garland in a very bad state.
His head was very much cut, and his finger hanging off. He
complained very much, and I took him to the Infirmary at
Manchester.
Francis Butterfield.—On the 31st October I was working
as a sawyer, at Manchester. I was applied to the night be-
fore to go to Ashton. I got two days' wages, and went to
Queen's Head, in Ashton, which was called " The Sawyers'
Club-house." I was ordered to go there. I went to Mr.
Gouldthorpe's, to see the men who had gone to work there
from Manchester, and asked them the reason why they went
there, when they knew there was a dispute between the mas-
ters and the men. I went to tha Swan at half-past twelve,
and met the Kehoes and other persons. I afterwards went
to Gouldthorpe's again. and returned to the club-house. I
saw Boyd, Sutton, and Williams there. I did not see the
prisoner there.
John Arrandale.—l am a hatter, at Hooley-hill, near Ash-
ton. On the morning of the 26th January, about half-past
five o'clock, I met the prisoner on the road. He asked me
how he should get by the police-station, at Denton, as he was
afraid be should be taken for that Openshaw-road job.
Cross examined.—Had been intimate with the prisoner,
and the first time he had told the story was about a fortnight
ago.
Re-examined.—He mentioned it first in conversation at a
beer-house, to a man who told the police.
Richard Green, police-officer, in Manchester, said, he went
in pursuit of the prisoner into many parts of the kingdom,
and at length, on the 11th March, apprehended him in Dub-
lin, as he was in company with a number of sawyers.
Robert Newton, constable of Ashton, identified the prisoner
as a resident at Ashton, and described the road where he had
seen him.
Mr. Furnival, house-surgeon to the Manchester Infirmary,
said, the deceased was brought in there on the night of the
31st October. He had several lacerations and contusions on
the head. There was also a compound fracture of the nose.
The bones of the first finger of the right hand were broken
and laid bare. Witness strongly urged him to have the finger
amputated, and warned him of the consequences, but he re-
fused. He was an out patient till the 15th November, when
he was brought in labouring under lock-jaw. Part of the
finger had sloughed off from mortification, and.witness am-
putated the remainder. The lock-jaw proceeded, and he died
the next morning. His death was caused by lock-jaw, which
was-produced by the injuries he had received. The wound
on the finger might have been produced by the instrument
produced.
Cross-examined.—lf his finger had been amputated when,
witness recommended it was probable he might have re-
covered.
By the JUDGE.—Lock-jaw was not certain from the injury
to the finger, but there was no hope of recovering the use of
the finger.
Mr. Wimurqs said he would take the opinion of the Court
whether, as the deceased had resisted the advice of the sur-
geon, the indictment for murder could be sustained.
Mr. OVEREND followed, arguing that the death of the
deceased was his own act, as he bad a reasonable chance of
escape, if he had adopted the advice tendered him.
The JUDGE overruled the objection. It certainly was not
the law that if a party died from not having followed the
most cautious advice of the surgeon, the party who inflicted
the wound was not to be responsible for it.
Mr. WILKINS then addressed the jury for the prisoner.
The fact of the death was irresistible ; there was no doubt
on the night in question there was a conflict in which the
prisoner was engaged, but he should convince the jury that
the capital charge could not be sustained. The party going
to Manchester had about them deadly weapons, and no man
could believe but that they had used them. The facts as
proved for the prosecution proved that the deceased himself
had two instruments which were afterwards found in the
road, and the bag empty. The origin of the transaction was
left in so muph doubt, that it was quite impossible to tell
which side had began, and if the jury should be of that opi-
nion they would be justified in bringing in a verdict of man-
slaughter only.
The lesrned JUDGE then summed up, and intimated that
he could see nothing in the evidence which could reduce the
case to one of manslaughter.
The jury, after a consultation, found the prisoner guilty of
WILFUL MURDER.
The learned JUDGE then put on the black cap, and after
recapitulating the circumstances, told the prisoner he had
been guilty of one of the most atrocious crimes which could
be committed, and that there was not the slightest hopes of
mercy for him in this world. He could not hold out to him
the slightest expectation of the extreme penalty not being
carried into effect. Indeed there were no circumstances in
the case that' would justify him in doing so. The learned
Judge then passed sentence of death in the usual form.
The prisoner, who beard the decision of the court with
apparent unconcern, was then removed.
MANSLAUGHTER.
Christopher Eastwood, 35. John Shepherd. 23, and Ben-
jamin Bentley, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging them
with manslaught6r, at Spotland, in having killed Jacob Town-
end. They were sentenced to one month's imprisonment,
and ordered to find sureties.
THE ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE UNIONISTS.
Henry Hardwick, 35, Samuel Hardwick, 40, John Wil-
liams, 30, Thomas Hassall, 29, Peter Thompson, William
Shaw, Robert Kenworth, Joseph Marshall, William Jarvis,

John Buckley, Hugh Boyd, Patrick Tobis, and Robert
Sutton, who were indicted for a conspiracy to raise the rate
of wages at Ashton-under-Lune, and having, in pursuance
thereof, assaulted Patrick Kehoe. William Irving, John
Paxton, James Rowbottom, Joseph Norcross, Thos. Wild,
and John Lomax, who were • charged with the conspiracy
without the assault, severally pleaded guilty.
• Dr. BROWN, for Wild; Mr. MURPHY, for Norcross; and
Mr. WILKINS, for the other prisoners, observed that they
were sure the court would believe the men whom they repre-
sented, when, through them, they avowed their deep contri-
tion, and their determination, in future, to have nothing to
do with such combinations. In truth, the jeopardy in which
two of them had been placed the other day, and the awful
example made of another this morning, was amply sufficient
to produce contrition.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that after what he had
heard, he would consent, on.his own responsibility, that, with
the exception of Williams, whom be must leave to be dealt
with as the court might deem fit, all -the prisoners might be
discharged on their own recognizances, and two sureties, in
£25 each, that they would appear when required, and conti-
nue to keep the peace.
The Learned JUDGE; addressing Williams, said that this
was an extremely serious offence. There was a grave cha-
racter in all such cases; but in his, from the evidence which
had been given on other trials, in 'which he and others had
been concerned, that this was a conspiracy of a dangerotis
and deadly description. The conviction would not subject
him to penal infliction, which, if the indictment had been laid
in another form, he would have suffered. He would not be
liable to transportation, but only to imprisonment. The
term might be much shorter than his guilt would seem to
demand ; but the court hoped that he had shown some evi-
dence of contrition by pleading guilty.. lie would also have
to find sureties; but that perhaps might be for his own be-
nefit, for some persons were so infatuated with these societies
that they lost sight of all the duties of men. The sentence
of the court was, that he.should be imprisoned and kept to
hard labour for eighteen calendar months, and at the expira-
tion of that time enter into his own recognizances in £2OO,
and two sureties of £5O each, or four of £25 each, to keep
the peace for two years, and to be further imprisoned until
such sureties shall be found.

SUPERSTITION.-AN UNNATURAL STEP-MOTHER

Martha Kniveton, 15, was indicted for having killed and
slain Joseph Kniveton. Mr. Brandt was for the prosecution.
The prisoner was the second wife of a person employed on
the Manchester railway. They lived in Salford, and had four
children, the issue of the husband's former marriage, and se-
veral of the woman's. The prisoner had taken some dislike
to the deceased, (which was an infant of about two years old,)
and in consequence of her neglect, it became so emaciated
and diseased that it died. She told one of her neighbourt!
that " she could not touch it; for it was no natural child, but.
a little old man come again." The child appeared to he very
much afraid of her, and was in a starving and most filthy
conditiorywhen discovered. Great anxiety and suffering were
depicted on its countenance. When bread was brought into
the house it held out its hands and made the most piteous
cries ; and if anything was given to the child it was greedily
devoured. One of the witnesses stated that she ha given
the mother a penny to buy the child some black cherry wine,
as it was in a sinking state, and her remark was, that she
was " without tobacco." The woman made a long rambling
defence to the effect that she was in good circumstances when
she married her second husband, but he made away with all
her furniture, ran into debt, spent all his wages in drunken-
ness, ill-used her, and left her without money to buy food
for the child,—that the infant had always been sickly and li-
able to convulsive fits—that it was not dirty and neglected,
and that the neighbours who had given evidence against her
had misrepresented her because they had taken edislike to
her.

The prosecution was instituted under the direction of the
parochial authorities.
The jury acquitted the prisoner, and she was immediately
discharged.

MANSLAUGHTER AT WIGAN

Robert Jump wasindicted for killing and slaying his wife,
Jane Jump, at Wigan. Mr. Brandt, for the prosecution,
said there were some circumstances ofstrong suspicion against
the prisoner, which rested chiefly on statements said to have
been made by the deceased; but as those statements were
not made in articulo mortis, they could not be relied upon.
No evidence could therefore be offered against the prisoner,
and he must be acquitted. Acquitted accordingly.

MANSLAUGHTER. AT MANCHESTER..
Samuel Widson, 27, was indicted for killing and slaying,
Thomas Brown, at Manchester.

Mr. Brandt appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Wilkins
for the defence.

Mr. BRANDT stated that a drunken quarrel out of a sup-
posed insult offered to some women at the Volunteer public-
house, in beansgate Manchester, on the night of the sth of
September last. The parties went into the street to fight ; a
fight of a confused nature followed. The deceased had been
engaged in it, but was standing on one side in the crowd,
when the prisoner came up and struck him a blow in the
throat, putting his leg before him and shrowing him down ;
and he died before he could be taken to the surgeon's, of a
concussion in the brain. &number of witnesses were exami-
ned on both sides.

The defence was, that the deceased died of apoplexy, or of
injuries sustained by falling from a push given to him by a
female.

The learned JUDGE summed up, and directed the jury to
give the prisoner the benefit of any doubt they might enter-
tain on the evidence.

The jury, without a moment's hesitation, returned a ver-
dict of acquittal.

ARSON AT CROMPTON

Joseph Greaves, 28, was indicted for having feloniously
set fire to the warehouse and goods of Jonathan and Joseph
Thompson, at Crompton.
Dr. Brown appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner,
who was in an exceedingly bad state of health, was unde-
fended.

Dr. BROWN stated that in the course of the night of the
18th October, Mr. Beaver, the manager, who lives on the
premises, was awoke by a strong smell of fire, and on going
into the warehouse discovered that some strips of cotton
in various places had been set fire to by some persons who
had broken into the warehouse and counting-house, and sto-
len some cotton caps and committed this serious offence in
the expectation of concealing the other. They left some shoe
marks behind which exactly corresponded with those made
by the prisoner's shoes. An attempt was made on the same
night to break into another house, and a stick was thrust
through a pane of glass, which a person inside laid hold of ;
and the father of the- prisoner proved that his son had left
home with that stick in his possession that night, and did not
return. He was apprehended with the shoes on his feet the
following Monday, at a house of ill fame in Rochdale.
The prisoner cross-examined the witnesses to show that
others may have had shoes of a similar description.
The jury acquitted the prisoner.
There was another indictment against the prisoner for
stealing 1001bs weight of cotton caps, the property of the
said Jonathan and Joseph Thompson.
No evidence was offered in this case, and the prisoner was
acquitted and discharged.
The court rose at half-past 6 o'clock.