The Herald of Wales. — 1887-10-15 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

THE MITCHELSTOWN RIOTS. CONTINUATION OF THE INQUEST.  The inquest on the bodies of the men killed at 1 Mitaelstown was resumed 3n Wednesday morning. Mr Harrington asked whether a body of , policemen, including men he had endeavoured Ito incriminate, had been removed from the town that morning. Inspector Irwin paid he had a body of police on leave. Inspector Wansborough said the whole detachment had left. The coroner said it was a very Improper proceeding; it was in keeping with the w hole action of the Crown. Mr Harrington proceeded to address the jury. He said it must have struck at Englistmau as as extraordinary contention, that the people of Miteheletown had no right to assemble in their sqqare. The police had the same right as other citizens to be present at that meeting, but he deftest any constitutional lawyer to show that a po'i,:eman had a right to seize anybody to make vri-- ,or hime .If. Mr Morphy had gone further and s /id it was a seditious meeting, but the Govert ment had denied that they wished to break up that meeting. Mr. Merphy had asked where were the people who received injuries. The reply was that if any person Clime forward he would be prosecuted for riot crested by the police, and for which he. Wall Freud to say they had to take the consequences of their misconduct, aud fly for refuge to their barracks. Mr Harrington addressed the juryon the law relating to homicide, manslaughter, and murder. If the people had no other means of saving their lives except by firing they would be perfectly justified iu bringing in a verdict of justifiable homicide He then went on to say that in order that the ends of justice might not be defeated by any it formality in the verdicthe would say afterwards as to how verdict should be brought in. Mr Harrington entered into an elaborate statement on this subject. Captain Segrave was in charge of the peace of the town, a gentleman of whom it was staid in the papers that he told the police at an eviction to "Clear away the dogs." Captain Segrave Ind denied this in court, and be accepted his denial, but he probably had not denied it to Captain Plunkett, at s. hose special request he was sent. The next in command was the most ill-tempered, hasty, and hot headed man In the constabulary, and his contention was that the county insp.:deed malign purpose was to cause a row or to make the people run from his police. Mr. Harrington said there were three points he wished to put before the jury: First, as to the manner of approaching the meeting wild the Government reporter; next, the second attempt to enter the crowd; sod, thirdly, as to whether the police were in danger in the barrack. Ile would quote the evidence of a Scotch gentlemen who came to Ireland—a Unionist—who said that when he saw the body of police he thought their object was to break up the meeting. Mr Dillon said be had never Iseen an attempt to force a Government reporter through a meeting in progress. Inspectorßrowning;saul he had never beell such an attempt. With 1 loh regard to the second attempt, the Government reporter had left the escort when it was made, and had gone among the crowd, and it was i shown that the police battoued the horse before the fight' took place. He bad never heard from sportsmen an account of the game killed with more levity than the manner in which Doran spoke of his firing. The coroner then summed up, ard directed the jury that the question for ^m was whether justificetion for the firing existed. After deliberating for two hours the jury found ita verdict of "Wilful Murder" against County Inspector Brownrigg, Sergeants Ryder, Bretman, and Kerwan, and Constables Doran and Gaveu.