The Birkenhead News and Wirral General Advertiser. — 1882-08-26 (Birkenhead, Merseyside, England)

THE MURDER AT BIRKENHEAD. THE BEERHOUSE KEEPER AT the Borough Police-mart on tistnirdaYs before Mr. Preston James Himmel' Liwson licensee of a beerhouse at 21, avenue, was summoned for allow. Namina• in his licensed premises on the 12th -day at August bat. Mr. Moore prosecuted and Mr. Thompeoit defended. Mr. Thompson, on the ease being called in said that, having heard;the whole of the evidence given in the case that came before big worship a few days since, he had advised hig client to throw himself upon the merciful eon. sideration of the court. He felt sure that the unfortunate occurrence which led to that enquiry could not either directly or indirectly be attributable to the faot the men had been playing cards in Mr. Lawson's house, because he believed from what he remembered of the evidence that from a quarter of an hour to twenty minutes had elapsed between the time of their leaving off playing off cards and the time that the quarrel took place. Further, he might say that none of the persons who were in the house at the time, either theman who had been committed or the deceased, were under the influence of drink in the slightest  degree. Mr. Preston: Well, I don't know about that. Mr. Thompson continued that in any ease that was immaterial to the present imam. He was sure that in this, as in all cases that came before him, his worship would give wine consideration to the character of the person who was charged with the offenee. With regard to Mr. Lawson, he had been the occupier of the beerhonse he was at present in for about II years, and for a period of 27 years he had held licenses in Birkenhead, during the whole of which time there had never been the slightest complaint against him. Farther, he had been an inhabitant of Birkenhead for the last 42 years, and had always conducted himself in such a way as to gain the respect of everybody with whom he had been brought into contact. Mr. Lawson not only carried on the business of a beerhouse-keeper but had also a most respectable , business as a collector, auctioneer, and houseagent. When this case w e shorn of all the circumstances placed around it at the enquiry, he thought his worship would be of opinion that Mr. Lawson had not been guilty of a very serious offence after all. It, but for the circumstance that happened afterwards, would have been treated as a very ordinary case. He submitted that a nominal fine would meet the case. Mr. Moore, on the Tart of the prosecutor, left the matter entirely in his Worship's hands. Mr. Preston said that, as far as he recollected the case, it did not seem to have been a solitary instance of gambling, but that the men were accustomed to go to this house for the purpose of playing at cards. In looking at the evidence of Thomas Threllfall, he saw it stated in his cross-examination that Mr. Lawson's was a card-playing house, and, if a dozen men were there, four were selected to play for the company, each of the company paying a penny towards the game. He was sorry that Mr. Lawson, who bore so good a character, and who had for a great number of years conducted his house so well, should have fallen under the imputation of having a gambling-house. It seemed to him so impor. tent that beerhowes should not have gambling going on in them that he could not look on this as a very trivial offence. He should have treated the matter very differently, but that it was a place where people habitually played; but, under the circumstances, he felt that a mere nominal fine would not meet the ease. Giving Mr Lawson every advantage of his previous gdod character, he felt bound to inflict a tine of £5 and costs, the license to be endorsed. Mr. Thompson asked his worship to reconsider his decision as to the endorsement, but Mr. Preston said that, in his opinion,lit was a most proper case in which to endorse the license. MR. LITTLEDALE AND THE