The Shropshire Examiner and all round the Wrekin advertiser. — 1875-02-27 (Wenlock, Shropshire, England)

HORSLEY. Mr. Leslie Trotter, medical practitioner, of Coleford, stated that on the 9th inst. he made a post martens examination, under the direction of the Coroner, upon the body of the deceased man, Thomas Watson. Be,e-an with the brain, which he found healthy. Then exumined the chest. The walls of the 'heart were rather thin, the right side containing blood. Both lungs were congested, especially the left. The stomach contained about six ounces of fluid. It had patches of congestion on it in both orifices, more especially at the lower end. The mucuous membrane was softened. The upper part of the small intestine was congested in patches as well, but no ulceration. The liver was about the average size, and fatty; its actual weight was about 51bs., which is about lib. over the average. Deceased's body was immensely fat. The gall bladder was about two-thirds full. Left kidney congested. Noticed that all the organs were exceedingly much covered with fat. The appearance was such as he should expect to find from a man of drunken habits; it would not be at all surprising to find in the case of a man of such drunken habits as deceased the condition described, or that he would suddenly collapse altogether. He was of opinion also that deceased at the time of of his tfeath was suffering from diarifficea, so that he must have been in a very weak state. When at the water-closet he must have been in such a condition, and the probability was that he fainted at that time. He died of fatal syncope. The Coroner: Mr. Horsley says he died from exhaustion—syncope, owing to the absence of sufficient stamina to keep him alive. Mr. Trotter Just so: he died from exhaustion and Mal syncope. This concluded the evidence, when The Coroner proceeded briefly to address the jury, observing that he should not have to trouble them with many remarks, more particularly with regard to the cause of death, which I was very conclusively shown by the evidence of Mr. Trotter. He would here state that he believed it to be a very proper case for investigation. He should alwitys have a very painful recollection of this inquiry—a case in which a man had as nearly as possible committed suicide, but upon grounds in regard to which the jury need not inquire. Both himself and the jury, he  thought, were pretty well sistisfied in their own minds what it was that led the deceased to take the extraordinary course he did. He (the Coroner) never found a case in his experience in i which he had had greater difficulty in getting anything like the truth, and in which, ,on the j other hand, was adduced a greater amount of I untruth. In fact, he never heard so great an amount of falsehood in the course of his life. More disgraceful, or more disreputable evidence could scarcely be adduced, although, as he had said, it could have no important bearing on the verdict of the jury with regard to the death of deceased. He was perfectly well satisfied that the truth, and nothing but the truth, had been brought before them. Personally, he (lid not believe the evidence of Powell, and as to the witness Barnett, the manner in which he had perjured himself was of the most flagrant character. Mr. Shadrach Hughes then interrupted the Coroner, and said he wanted to ask one little little question. Would his honour, the Coroner. allow him one word? If he could do no good, he did not intend to do any harm. The Coroner: If you, as a Juryman, desire to ask a question you may do so. Mr. Hughes: I shall be glad to say that I think koor Watson was lost entirely for the want of Woking after. I have said this before—(a laugh). He's lost and I'll never go on for any other verdict. I don't agree with what the Coroner said just now, unless I misunderstood him. He's lost for the want of looking after, and it's a great pity that a good healthy man to be lost in that way. It is one of the worst things that ever was. The speaker, who appeared to.be slightly inebriated, proceeded to say that Watson wats a wood neighbour, when the Coroner interposed anti aided that it was useless to attempt to find a verdict which the evidence would not carry, or inconsist with the facts. The evidence was that the deceased suddenly became a man of very drunken habits, and as the Coroner had already reins-eked there were some grounds for his taking the unfortunate course which unhappily cost hint his life. He had the means of assistance if hie wife failed to do her duty. He could have sent for aid. There was no evidence of criminal neglect on the part of the wife, alt4ough her eonduet in not preventing her husband m killing himself by drink as he did, was most lamentable and disgraceful. The act of taking a budiet of cider was a terrible thing for any wottui do. She however did this, but it could not be said that by so doing there was any criminal neglect or crime, ',rendering her liable at criminal law. He, the Coroner, believed if the evidence was correct, in a most shameful and disgraceful manner, for instead of assisting her husband to take away his wife, she should have done all in her power to prevent him doing so, The facts were that she aided him in every possible way. After some further remarks, the Coroner suggested that the jury should accept the evidence of Dr. Trotter. The Jury, after shortly consulting together, found that the cause of death was syncope, brought on by excessive drinking, and they, the Jury, desired to express very strongly their disapproval of the unsatisfactory manner in which witnesses, Power and Barnett, gave their evidence.