The Warwickshire Herald. — 1887-12-01 (Birmingham, West Midlands, England)

EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT OF A SIGNALMAN.  Edward Allem surrendered to his recognisances at the Central Criminal Court before Mr. Justice Smith, to answer an indictment charging him with maliciously administering to William Racher a certain poison, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm at B.lrnet on the Great Northern Railway.—Mr. Horace Avery prosecuted, and Mr. Overend defended.—Mr. Avory, in opening the case, said that the prisoner was charged under section 23 of the Act of Parliament ielating to offences against the person, which made it an offence to administer or cause to be taken by another, any noxious thing so as to endanger life or to cause grievous bodily harm, and under another section it was competent for the jury to find that it was administered to injure, grieve, or annoy, and that would reduce the offence to a misdemeanour. It appeared that the prisoner and the prosecutor were both signalmen in the service of the Great Northern Railway, and were engaged at a signal box between Barnet and Potter's Bar, a very lonely spot between two tunnels. For some time past quer els had been going on between them with regard to a very trivial matter, viz., as to who could grow the best vegetables or plants in their small gardens. The prosecutor took some prizes, and there appeared to have been reprisals going on between them, one putting salt and water on some plants, and the other retaliating by putting paraffin oil on others. The prosecutor went on duty at six o'clock on the morning of Oct. 17. There was a filter in the box, and when he mixed his cocoa he found something very distasteful which burnt his throat. He then tried a little more and found it very nasty. He next tried the water from the filter, and found that it had evidently been tampered with. There was no dispute now on the part of the prisoner that he put into the filter some hydrochloric acid which was used in the electric batteries for working the signals. If the prosecutor had drunk a sufficient quantity it would probably have totally incapacitated him from duty, and he was in charge of a signalbox where there were 125 passenger trains passing in a day. The more serious charge would be abandoned, and the indictment they would have to consider was for causing to be taken a noxious thing to injure, grieve or annoy, and when arrested prisoner said he only put the stuff in to annoy the prosecutor. —Win. Racher was called, and gave evidence to the same effect as the opening statement of counsel, adding that he suffered from violent purging. In crossexamination by Mr. Overend, witness said he was on duty 1l hours after he tasted the cocoa, and signalled 105 trains.—Henry Lawford, a platelayer, stated that prisoner gave him some of the water from the filter to taste, and when it got down it fluttered and fluttered about as if he had swallowed some salts (laughter). Mr. Allen, station master at Hadley-wood Station, said that the water from the filter had an unpleasant and strong metallic taste.—ln cross-examination, witness said the prisoner had been in the employ of the company for 18 years.—A detective in the employ of the company proved finding upon prisoner a letter, addressed to the deputy-superintendent, complaining that prosecutor had taken two or three lodgers, and suggesting that he should be removed.—Detective-Sergeant Fox said that when he arrested prisoner, he at first suggested that Racher had himself tampered with the water, but afterwards admitted that he put a little drop in the filter, but not to do him any injury, and only to make it slightly distasteful.—Mr. A. N. Gow, analytical chemist, stated that the water in the filter contained 134 grains of chloride of zinc and a little free hydrochloric acid. The cocoa also contained the same poisons. —His Lordship: I suppose that if a man had taken what was in the filter we should not have seen any more of him, should we :o—Witness : No.—ln reply to Mr. Overend, witness said that directly a man tasted it he would have a nauseous taste in his mouth, and no one would continue to take it unless he wished to commit suicide.—Mr. Overend contended that it was simply a foolish and unreasonable act, for which the prisoner had had sufficient punishment. —Mr. Avory having replied, and his lordship summed up, the jury found the prisoner guilty of misdemeanour. Mr. Overend said that in consequence of this occurrence prisoner had been dismissed from the service of the Great Northern Railway Company, that he had been the support of an aged father, and had accumulated some savings which had been absorbed by his defence. He, therefore, submitted that, under all circumstances, it was not a case which called for severe punishment. —His Lordship said he felt that the prosecution ought to have been instituted, because such tricks ought not to be allowed, looking to the safety of the public. Prisoner had an excellent character, had lost his employment, and had to pay the costs of defending himself, and he would therefore be bound over in his own recognisance of £5O to come up for judgment if called upon.