Beverley and East Riding Telegraph. — 1896-12-26 (Beverley, Humberside, England)

ALLEGED MANSLAUGHTER NEAR DRIFFIELD. ACQUITTAL OF RILiLEY.  THE  The trial of John Ridley, a wold ranger, of Arnotherly, near Malton, for the manslaughter of Thomas White, of Deighton, near York, at Kirkby Grindalythe, on November 26th, attracted only a few people to the Court-house, Driffield, on Monday. The magistrates present were Colonel Brooksbank (chairman), Mr J. Elgey, and Dr. ' Wood. Mr F. J. Brigham prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury, and Ridley, who had been liberated on bail, was defended by Mr Estill, solicitor, of Mahon.  Prisoner pleaded not guilty to the charge. Mr Brigham, after reviewing the circumstances of the case at some length, surmised that the defence would be justifiable homicide, but to prove this it must be shown that before the fatal blow was struck prisoner had declined any further combat.  The evidence of witnesses was then taken, and with little addition was a repetition of what was given at the inquest on the body of deceased. William Simpson, a man employed on the same farm (Mr Abrams), said he saw the deceased soon after the alleged assault. His face was covered ! with blood. He saw the man after death; he was the same whom he had known as "Punch " and I "Johnson." .  William Dobson deposed to seeing deceased in a loose box on Mr Abram's fakom on November 26th, wrapped in bags. He had lost a great quantity of blood, and appeared to be sinking. He observed the wound on his forehead, and put some sticking plaster on it. He knew him as •• Shackes Punch. He was a tramp thresher or wold ranger, and was in the habit of sleeping in loose boxes. Cross-examined by Mr Estill: He never knew deceased drink.  Thomas Newton Hugall said he resided at Weaverthorpe, and was assistant to Dr Norris, of Sherburn. Deceased came to his surgery on December 26th, and gave his name as Sam Johnson. He noticed a cut over the right eye, and there was a good deal of swelling round it. It was about three-quarters of an inch in length. It could not be called a severe cut, being a sort of broken wound, apparently caused by a blunt instrument. He saw deceased again on the 27th and gave him some dressing to apply himself. The wound was than going on well. On the 30th he met him again at Weaverthorpe, when the wound was rather inflamed, and he advised him to go away somewhere to have it properly dressed. Cross-examinecl by Mr Brigham: He had had many worse wounds on the head himself while playing football. 9i3KO Mr Sumner, workhouse master at Driffield, gave evidence as to deceased entering that institution, and his ultimate death. John Robert Keith, M.D., said he was assistant to Dr Brand, medical officer to the Driffield  He saw deceased at the Workhouse on the 30th of November, and found the right side of the cheek very much swollen, the eye being completely closed, and he could only open his mouth a little. The day following lock jaw set in, and deceased died on Friday of tetanus, which was not the usual result of such injury as lie had received. Cross-examined by Mr Estill: In the majority of eases deceased's wound would not have been fatal.. It was fatal because tetanus followed. The tetanus bacillis would cause death. Its especial habitation was earth, although it could be found in wood, and it might have been transmitted from some soil on the net stake, or front the wood itself.—By Mr Brigham: In the majority of cases such a wound would not have been fatal if caused by any instrument, but was more likely to be fatal if caused by a wooden one. Tetanus must be introduced from the outside. It was a disease only found out during the last Leg years. Supt. Cooper, of Driffie:l, produced two coats and a cap which had belonged to deceased, which were marked with blood. In summing up, Mr Estill said the evidence proved that had it not been for tetanus supervening the injury to deceas,:a from the net stake would have been very small and insignificant. Before a charge of manslaughter could be brought home to a man it most be proved up to the hilt, and no evidence had been brought to prove that Ridley had committed unlawful homicide. After retiring for a few minutes, Co!. Brooks. batik said the Bench were quite satisfied that the evidence was not sufficiently strong to send the case to the Assizes, and therefore they dismissed ' the charge. ' The verdict was received with general approba• tion in court.