The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-12-24 00:00:00

THE LATE RIOT AT BIRKENHEAD

On Thursday, John Brown, shoemaker, of Birkenhead.
and Edward Smith, a man in his employ ; Michael
Griffin, John Feehan, William Haggerty, and another—
the four latter being navigators employed at the Birken-
head Docks—were again brought before the magistrates,
at Chester, forexamination.
At the commencement of the proceedings, Sir J.
Stephen, who appeared for the defence, protested, in the
name of his clients, against the hearing of the case before
the magistrates now sitting, whose names appeared tacked
on to the placard convening the meeting out of which
this charge now brought forward arose. The question,
said the learned counsel was whether they, as magistrates,
had really conducted themselves in such a manner on
this question as to entitle them to complain of any aggres-
sion such as that charged, or whether the public had not
a right to complain of the manner in which the police
had conducted themselves acting under the instructions
of the magistrates themselves. (Sensation.) He must
meet this case in its broadest form. Now here he found
—for he apprehended it would not be denied that the
copy of the placard which he had read was correct—that
on this question the magistrates had themselves already
prejudged the case—that they had committed themselves
—that they stood in the position of accusers in their own
case, and that therefore—he said it with all respect—they
had so far committed themselves that it was not compe-
tent for them in the eye of the law to become themselves
parties any further to this inquiry. That was his first
objection. But it was also his duty to state, that from
what he had heard since Monday last, there was another
reason why he was equally entitled, and compelled, on the
part of the prisoners, to object to the magistrates' pro-
ceeding. That objection was, that the magistrates were
themselves at this moment the subjects of official charges
before the Home Secretary ; that these charges, seven-
teen in number, had been put into an official form,
according to the desire of the Secretary of State. Now,
it would he monstrous for the magistrates at present on
the bench to hear the case under such circumstances, and
should they do so he was satisfied the public would feel
indignant, however much they might respect the high
office which the magistrates held. He was compelled,
on the grounds which he had stated, formally and most
solemnly to protest against any further inquiry on the
part of the magistrates present on the bench.
Mr. Conway, for the prosecution, stated that the pro-
test of Sir G. Stephen must fall to the ground with regard
to the question of the magistrates' competency, for they
were not there to trade upon the guilt or innocence of the
prisoners. This was an offence against every person in
the hundred, who would have a right to feel himself
aggrieved against the rioters; and consequently, if there
were anything in the objection, no magistrate of the dis-
trict would have a right to sit in judgment on the
offenders. In a matter of treason—treason being an
offence against every subject of the Queen—there could
not possibly be a conviction unless subjects of the Queen
were entitled to give evidence. With regard to the fact
of the conduct of the magistrates being the subject of
' judicial inquiry, Mr. Conway said he had reason to believe
that the conduct of the magistrates was not the subject of
inquiry. Although be had heard it stated that a certain
number of charges had been made against the magistrates
and sent to the Home Office, it would turn out that those
charges were entirely groundless. He asserted that the
magistrates had a perfect right to act.
Mr. Case said he believed he was only speaking the
sentiments of his brother magistrates when he said that
Sir G. Stephen must understand that all he had advanced
had been matter of consideration with the magistrates.
They might have interfered before, and some of his
brother magistrates had intimated to him that he ought
to have arrested Sir G. Stephen in his observations. He
was desirous on all occasions to allow the utmost possible
latitude in a court of justice. If they had been sitting to
try the parties then before them, it would have been a
different matter. They were, however, only sitting to
ascertain whether there was sufficient evidence to warrant
them in putting the men on their trial. God forbid that
any of the gentlemen around him should do anything
wrong ; but he did not think from an} thing which had
fallen from the learned gentleman, that they ought to
cease to go on with the inquiry. He had had the honour
of sitting on the bench for nearly 20 years, and ever since
lie had qualified he bad been called upon to act in such a
way as to obtain for himself the thanks and goodwill of
his neighbours. At the time that the railway between
Chester and Birkenhead was being made, a parcel of law-
less savages took possession of the country, and committed
serious breaches of the peace. On that occasion he (Mr.
Case) made a requisition for the assistance of the troops,
and the result was that 34 prisoners were taken, and the
examinations were taken by himself and other magistrates;
they were committed and convicted in heavy sentences.
He did not feel it necessary for them to retire from the
inquiry ; and in this opinion he was joined by his brother
magistrates, notwithstanding the observations of the
learned counsel. He should go on and endeavour to dis-
charge his duty. He should feel ashamed of himself if
he had the slightest ill-feeling towards any of the parties ;
but lie felt that the remarks' of the learned gentleman
were not courteous or called for. _ _

Sir George Stephen said he directed his reflections
against those persons who had caused the prisoners to be
conducted in chains through the streets of Birkenhead.
It was unnecessary and vindictive. The case of Mr. John
Brown should be taken first.

John Grimley, of the Liverpool police force, was the
first witness called. He was one of those who were almost
killed at the riot. His head was still bound up, and he
appeared in an exceedingly weak state. After speaking
to the facts connected with the riot, and to the manner in
Sc nay struck uu the head and in various parts of
the body, by several of the mob, who were armed with
crowbars and bludgeons, he said that when he was down
for the second time, a man came forward, and struck him
On the head with a bar of iron. He had seen that man
since in Birkenhead bridewell. It was one of the prisoners
at the bar. Whilst he was 'down the prisoner Brown
came, and struck him with a bludgeon over the shoulder;
when he (witness) said, " For God's sake do not kill me."
The witness further deposed to being struck by other of
the prisoners. He also described what took place before
the police interfered. A window in the Town-hall was
open at this time, and a person put his head out of the
window, and called to the crowd, " Now men, now is

your time."
Mr. Conway.—Who was that man ?
Witness.—That is the man (pointing to Mr. Brether-
ton, solicitor.)
Mr. Bretherton (evidently excited, and addressing the
bench.)—l appeal to you, gentlemen, whether I was not
in the Town-hall at the time.

Another policeman, named John Bowes, who received
severe injuries, was next examined. He also spoke to
having been struck by some of the prisoners.
Superintendent Ride, of the Liverpool force, who was
nlaced at the head of the body of police sent over from
Liverpool, was next examined. His evidence corrobo-
rated the official report which he had previously furnished
to the authorities.

The court then adjourned until next day
The examination was resumed on Friday

The first witness examined was Mr. Richard Brown, a
boot and shoe maker, residing opposite the Town-hall, in
Birkenhead. He was an eye-witness, from a room win-
dow over his shop, of the whole riot, and he described it
in detail. Between eight and nine o'clock in the morning
he saw a great number of persons in front of the Town-
hall. He put up his shutters about eleven o'clock, and
about twenty minutes after saw the police striking the
mob, some of whom retaliated. About forty or fifty men
passed his shop after the first row was over, and he heard
one of them say, "I'll go and get a stick, and knock their
bloody brains out." About twenty minutes to one he saw
a large number of men coming towards the Town.hall,
flourishing weapons in the air. One of them had a pole-
axe. After describing the general facts connected with
the riot, the witness deposed to seeing the prisoner Brown
standing by in an excited stat...t. This was after the riot.
Brown did not throw a stone, nor did he see him strike a
blow. He saw the prisoner Feehan holding a weapon and
menacing the police, During the time the riot was pro-
ceeding he saw police-officer Kelly lying opposite his door
apparently dead. in a few minutes Kelly got up, and
staggered towards the Town-hall. As Kelly was endea-
vouring to get into the Town-hall, witness saw a man
whom he knew strike him with a poker. Witness deposed
to seeing the windows of the Town-hall broken, after the
police had got inside the ball, and to seeing the Rev. Mr.
Browne and Mr. Bretherton address the mob several
times.

Cross-examined by Sir G. Stephen.—The Rev. Mr.
Browne addressed the mob first. Several respectably
dressed persons attempted to enter the Town-hall as well
as several of the mob. Saw Feehan before the riot com-
menced in a menacing attitude with a weapon. All the
blows inflicted by the mob on the police were at the back
of the head. As soon as one man struck he retired into
the crowd and another came forward. had often ex-
pressed himself, since the riot, as to the brutality exhibited
by the mob. Had said to Mr. Tyler I never saw any-
thing so fiendish in my life, and that 1 could never have
imagined that human beings would have displayed the
ferocity which I witnessed on the part of the mob.
Constable Kelly, 571, in the Liverpool force, one of
those who was so severely wounded in the riot, was the
next witness. He said that shortly after the mob was
first routed, he was standing with Superintendent Ride
opposite the Town-hall, when he saw an armed mob ad-
vancing. Ride said that the attention of the police must
at once be directed to the road. Whilst he was conversing
a shower of stones came and struck them both. They
turned their faces to avoid further blows, and whilst turn-
ing witness !received a blow across the shoulder, and
afterward another blow at the back of the head. Finding
that he was attacked on all sides, he made to the centre of
the road, when the prisoner Fitzsimon made a blow at
him with a long stick, but witness dropped his head and
missed the blow.SFitzsimon and another man then made
another attack upon him, but he defended himself with
his stick for some time, and kept them off. In a few mo-
ments after four other men joined Fitzsimon and kept
striking him until he fell, and he became insensible. The
witness identified the prisoners Feehan and Griffin as
taking an active part in the riot.
Police-officer Fellan, of the Birkenhead force, identified
the prisoners Haggerty, Feehan, and Griffin. Haggerty
attempted to go into the Town-hall, and witness endea-
voured to push him back, when Haggerty raised his hand
and struck him. Witness raised his hand to defend him-
self. That was about the commencement of the disturb-
ance, when the bricks and stones were thrown. Feehan
was in the first mob. The prisoners Griffin and Haggerty
were concerned in the second row. Had known Griffin
four years. He had a stick in his hand, and was fighting
No. 41 of the Birkenhead police. During the disturb-
ance Haggerty seized witness's stick, and in the attempt
to recover it the prisoner fell.
Mr. Conway said they had now gone so far into the
general case that it would be sufficient to" call police offi-
cers to prove the presence of the prisoners at the riot.
Thomas Hughes, a Birkenhead policeman, identified
Haggerty and Feehan.
Police-constable Coe identified Hikggerto as being the

man who had dragged a police-officer out of the police•
office lobby.—On cross-examination, the witness would
not swear whether there were four gentlemen or 40 with.
Mr. Browne and Mr. Bretherton. He did not see anr
person who appeared to act officially as a tnagistrate:.
During the interval between the first row and the riot he
did not see any of the Birkenhead police in the streets.
Sergeant Tomlinson, of the Liverpool police, identified
Haggerty, Smith, and Feehan. Smith had a stick in his
hand, and appeared to be heading the mob. The exclu-
sion of the people was not the commencement of the dis-
turbance.

All the prisoners having been identified, the Court ad-
journed till yesterday.