The Birkenhead News and Wirral General Advertiser. — 1904-08-20 (Birkenhead, Merseyside, England)

VIM  ALFRED DOCK FATALITY.  THE JURY RETURN AN OPEN VERDICT  At the Abbotsford Hotel, Seacombe, on Thursday morning, the deputy-coroner (Mr. F. re Moo Dutton) investigated the death of I Alfred Parsons, aged 21, a labourer, of Birkenhead, whose body was found in the Alfred Doak, Seaccanbe, on Tuesday afternoon. Catherine Emma Persona, of 1, Greenfieldstreet, Birkenhead, the widow of John Par, sone, pensioner, stated that deceased, who wa.s employed at Lairds', was her son. She Met saw him alive on the Wth inst., at 1.40, when he appeared to be somewhat depressed. Two years ago he met with an accident at Lairds', by which he received concussion of the brain, and since then he had at times been low spirited. He had never threatened to take his life, and witness did not know of anything that would lead him to do so.  _ John J4).1163, 103, Claughtou,noad, BirksnI head, a watchman employed by Affairs. , Laird, stated that he had been very well acquainted with deceased. Ho last saw him on the 10th inst., about a quarter to fore in , Chunchetreet, walking in the direction of' the ferry. Deceased was always very quiet.l and the men in the yard at times said he was ! "religious." He was in no trouble in the yard that witnees was aware of. Patrick McNulty, 50, Deemondetreet, , Liverpool, also a labourer at Lairds', said that he was working with tho deceased mast on the 10th inst., and missed him about a quarter pain three. He had not seen deceased since. On the Saturday preceding Anguish Bank Holiday deceased remarked to,yritnes that something serious would happen 'during the 'aulidays. Witnese iagnired the reseal of such a statement, and deceased would not reply, but indicated some rubbish lying in the yard. Witness could not understand the affair, but did not think that Parsecs; intended committing suicide. Deceased was a steady man and very regular at his work. Witness had aeon him looking at a took seine times but he did not appear to be in any way affected by religion. During the I seven months witness had worked with de-1 ceased he had not detected any signs of insanity about him. Albert James Rubery, 5, Whitford-roadr, Higher Tranmere, manager of Laird's works, described deceased as a quiet eteady man. lie seemed intellectually weak, and on Luis account was given work which would not endanger 166 safety, .uing in tios condition he was. He simply had to p•ck rubbish. This was a task usually allotted to old and feeble men. Deceased met with an accident in December of 1202, falling from a staging while engaged in swasoing up rubbish on a ship. He thus euetained injury to the back of his heed. Even riefoie the accident re seemed of weak intellect since he was taken from employment in the fitting department as the foreman considered it unsafe for him to be amongst machinery. George Mock, head gateman at the Alfred Dock, and residing at 15, Jubilee-gro4e, Seacomb., stated that at 1.20 on Timm* afternoon his attention was called to a body floating in the south-west corner of the dock. The body was removed from the water with the asaistance of the police. He noticed that the deceased's face was grazed. It was very probable that the body had been in the mud since deceased's otothes were thickly smeared with that salistance. It was possible that the injury to the fees might have been occasioned by a fall, or from owning in contact with the dookgate or a flat. Be was of opinion that the body came in from the river and had settled in the mud in the corner of the dock.  The Deputy-coroner addressing the jury. said that a poet-mortem examination wooM no doubt supply them with the information as to whether the mark on deceased's face had been caused before or after death. If they required this point to be decided, the inquest could be adjourned for medical evidence. Be remarked that if there had been a fall it wee improbable that such a wound which was more of the nature of a graze, would have been caused. If they accepted the fact that there had been no foul play they would have to decade from the evidence whether deceased had committed suicide. The only evidence in support of this was the remark made by deceased to the witness McNulty. If they were not satisfied that deceased had not taken his life, the only counee wae to find an open verdict, . .  The inn y returned asiapen verdret, stating that there was no evidence to show how deceased got into the water.