DOVER KENT ARCHIVES
PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Barry Smith and Paul Skelton

Earliest 1834-

Royal George

Latest 1859

(Name to)

7a Priory Street

 

On the same side of the street, but four doors away from the "Golden Lion".

 

It seemed always one to be on the wrong side of the law. Earliest date, so far known being 1834 when the licensee was convicted for 6 months, and fined £10 for something that even the Dover Telegraph wouldn't publish.

The renewal was refused in 1842 and although subsequently allowed, was refused again in 1854. Misconduct brought about its closure again in 1859 and although it did manage to open again probably in 1860 under Baker, it was always known after that as "Anglesey Arms".

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 2 August, 1834. Price 7d.

John Page was indicted for keeping a disorderly house, "The Royal George," in Priory Street, in the parish of St. Mary the Virgin. Mr. Brett in opening the proceedings for the prosecution, moved that all females and young persons should be excluded from the court, and the evidence, which subsequently transpired, proved of too gross a nature to be submitted to our readers. After a lengthened investigation, the defendant was found guilty, and sentenced to be imprisoned six months'; also to pay a fine of £10. to the King, and further, to be imprisoned until such fine should be paid. The learned Recorder, in passing the sentence of the court, expressed his regret that the prisoner's wife had not been indicted also; her conduct, it appeared, fully demanded that she should share the punishment with him.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 17 June, 1837.

POLICE REPORT

Judith Ann Gadis was committed on Monday, charged with stealing nine dozen of stay and shoe-laces, from Richard Bowen, at the "Royal George," in Priory Street. The articles were found by police officer Chandler, at the prisoner's lodgings; and in defence, she said she had purchased them.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 8 July, 1837.

Richard Bayley was fined ten shillings on Tuesday for an assault on Elizabeth Page, of the "Royal George," in Priory Street, and in default was committed to gaol for one calendar month.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 4 November, 1837.

DOVER POLICE COURT

John Wilson and Robert King, two sturdy vagabonds in seamen's garb, were charged by Mrs. Page, of the "George," in Priory Street, with violent conduct, and creating a riot in that house, where they had engaged to sleep on the preceding night. They were also charged with assaulting the officer, called to take them into custody. Wilson, who described himself as a seaman, and named different ships of war in which he had served abroad, was committed to the house of correction for a fortnight. King, who had received a similar accommodation on a former visit to the town, but which he at first denied, was sentenced to a months' confinement and hard labour.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 10 February, 1838.

M. White appeared on recognizance, to answer a charge of having assaulted police constable Harman, in the execution of his duty. The officer, it appeared, was called on Saturday night, to stop a fight at the "George," Priory-street. The parties in the room strove to prevent his interference; and the defendant collared him, saying he would blow his head off. The latter expressed contrition, and pleaded intoxication in excuse of such conduct, of which otherwise he would not have been guilty. The officer not wishing to press the charge further, it was withdrawn. The mayor expressed his hope that the parties in the defendant's situation, would rather see the propriety of assisting, than interrupting the officer in the execution of their duty.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 3 January, 1846.

DOVER POLICE COURT

Ann Roberts, upholsterer, aged 26, charged with stealing two silver table spoons, and a silver fork, the property of Mrs. Catherine Gale. Mr. Addison appeared for the prosecution.

John Carter deposed- I am servant to Mrs. Gale, who resides at No. 1, Marine Parade, Walmer. On the 22nd of December, I missed the plate in question from the dining room. I recollect, a few days previously, seeing the prisoner come to the back door begging, but I cannot say on what day.

Hayter Scrivener deposed- I am assistant to Mr. J. Long, pawnbroker. On the 23rd of Dec., about half-past eight o'clock in the morning, prisoner offered me the plate in pledge for 10s. Thinking it had been stolen, I detained it, and gave her in charge of the police.

Police-constable Hogben deposed- After I took the prisoner in custody, I searched her basket at the "Royal George," in which I found a steel carving fork, which the first witness identified as the property of his mistress.

The prisoner then addressed the jury at great length, and in a style that might vie with many an Old Bailey practitioner, but her eloquence had no effect, and they, without hesitation, returned a verdict of Guilty, and she was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment and hard labour.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 24 January, 1846.

DOVER POLICE REPORT

Thursday.- Mary Roy, widow, was committed for trial, charged with stealing a shawl, value 5s., and an apron, value 2d. the property of Mary Smith. The articles were stolen from the "Royal George" public-house, on Tuesday last; and the prisoner being the suspected thief, she was traced to Ashford, and the stolen property found on her person.- Prisoner, in her defence, stated that the shawl and apron were given to her by a man on the road from this place to Ashford.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday, 26 June, 1847. Price 5d.

DOVER PETTY SESSIONS

Fanny White, 25, cap maker, was charged with stealing, at Dover, from the person of Richard Young, eight shillings, his monies; and Mary Ann Robinson, 19, cap maker, was charged with receiving 6s. 6d. of the same, knowing it to have been stolen. The prisoners were defended by Mr. Horne; and the case for the prosecution was conducted by Mr. Barrow, who called Richard Young, who deposed: On Saturday, the 8th of may last, I was in Priory Street, where I was accosted by the prisoner White. Ten minutes previously I had my purse out in Mr. Richardson's shop to pay for goods, and then I put it into my left-hand pocket. On missing my purse I returned to Richardson's, to see if it had been left there; but it had not. I then went to the “Royal George,” and had as glass of beer at the bar, where I saw both prisoners; and I said to White, “You are the girl I want,” upon which she passed something like money to Robinson, and ran out. I followed, and overtook her, when she said, “Don't call the Police, and you shall have your money.” There was 6s. 6d. lying on the table, which was placed there by Robinson.

Cross-examined by Mr. Horne: I am a labourer at Farthinglow, and never saw prisoner before. White put her arm round my waist, and then walked off. I had nothing to drink till the evening.

John Goddard deposed: I was at the “George” on the day in question, when Young came in. he said to White, “You have robbed me.” Robinson wished him not to call the Police saying, “Here is the money;” which she gave to me, and I put it on the table.

Richard Millehard, waiter at the “George,” corroborated foregoing, and stated that Robinson endeavoured to put 2s. into his hand.

Not guilty.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 5 August, 1848. Price 5d.

DOVER PETTY SESSIONS

Edward Perfect, George Brown, and William Harris, three persons lodging at the "Royal George," were placed at the bar on suspicion of stealing a gold chain and other jewellery, at the late fire, belonging to Mr. E. Robinson. After a lengthened examination, they were remanded till Monday.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 26 August, 1848. Price 5d.

George Brown, one of the parties lately charged with stealing jewellery, &c., from the house of Mr. Robinson, during the late fire, was now charged with hawking bath bricks without a license. The offence was clearly proved, but defendant was discharged on his promising to leave the town forthwith.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports Advertiser, 12 May, 1849.

A CASE OF FELONY AT THE DOVER CASTLE BARRACKS

Robert Alexander Roberts and Robert Heitman, privates of the 50th Regiment, now stationed at Dover, were brought up, charged with stealing certain monies, the property of Capt. Carmen from the officers quarters at the barracks at Dover Castle. From statements made at the early part of the investigation, Heitman became exonerated from a guilty participation in the theft, and was admitted as a witness in the case, which was proceeded with in reference to Roberts only, and the following evidence elicited:-

John E. Leverson Gower, a Captain in the 50th Regiment - On Monday evening, at about half-past 11 o'clock. I went to my quarters at the Castle, when I found that a desk lying on a table in my room had been broken open, and I believe between £19 and £20, but I am not certain as to the correct amount, stolen therefrom. The money consisted of £5 notes from the Dover Branch of the National provincial Bank, sovereigns, half-sovereigns, and some silver. The prisoner was my servant, and had been so since January last: he had charge of my room in which the desk was placed, as well as of the key of the desk during my absence. In my room there was a cupboard, of which the prisoner had charge also, and in which I found a screw driver that, on examination corresponded with the mark on the desk when forced open, and I have no doubt it was the instrument used by the prisoner for that purpose. I saw the money safe in the desk on the morning of Monday.

Robert Heitman, a private of the 50th - On Monday afternoon last I met the prisoner at a public-house in the town, when he treated me with a glass or two of beer, and told me that he had received a remittance from his sister in London. I thought this statement was true, as a short time since, when in London attending the funeral of my father, I called on Robert's friends, and found them in very respectable circumstances. After being treated with the beer by prisoner, we played a game or two of bagatelle, had a drop more beer, and ultimately agreed to join Roberts in the evening in having a "spree," for which, from the beer I had taken, I was quite fit. We then returned to the Castle - myself to the barracks, and Roberts to his master's kitchen, where I saw him. At about half-past 8 o'clock we started from the Castle, but instead of going out at the gate, which we should not have been allowed to do, we got over the wall. We then went to the "Sailor's Arms," where the prisoner changed his dress; but the landlady would not allow us to stay there, upon which we proceeded to the railway station, intending to take a trip, but were too late. Our next movement was to the "Royal George," in Priory Street, where we stopped for the night. In the morning breakfast was ordered, when, Roberts having no cash to pay for it, I offered to get one of his notes changed, and he handed a £5 note to me, and I went down stairs to apply to the landlord for change; he, however, could not supply me with it, and went out to procure it. The change, with the exception of 10s, was in gold. I took it to the prisoner who returned me some silver, from which I paid the landlord 3s. for breakfast. At about 9 o'clock a fly, which had been ordered the previous night, came up to the door of the "Royal George," in which we shortly after drove off for Canterbury, but had not arrived at that place more than a quarter of an hour before we were apprehended by two of the police now present. The prisoner had since told him that he broke open his master's desk, and took therefrom £11. While at the public house I saw 2 £5 notes and some silver in his possession. Prior to his admission of the theft I was entirely ignorant of the fact, and perfectly innocent of any participation in it - This witness also stated, in reference to himself, that for some time past he had been given to drinking; that at a former period he was a sergeant in the 31st Regiment, in India; and on return of that corps to Europe witness wishing (for the benefit of his wife and child) to extend his service to India, had volunteered into the 50th Regiment, by which he lost his rank; and while the latter Regt. was stationed at Loodianah, in 1846, they were visited (May 20th) with a terrible hurricane, which blew down the whole range of barracks, and among the number killed by the fall of the buildings were his wife and child; and that, to drown his sorrow for the sudden loss of his family, he had taken to drinking, for which fault alone, excepting the present occasion, had he ever been called to account while in the Army.

William Millyard, landlord of the "Royal George," deposed from receiving from the last witness a £5, which he got changed for him at Mr. Kennett's, baker, Priory Street.

Richard Kennett, baker - I received a £5 note from Mr. Millyard on Tuesday morning, which I changed for him, and endorsed it with his name, and in his presence. The note now produced, No. 66 National provincial Bank, is the same.

Superintendent Laker stated that he received information of the robbery late on Monday night, and immediately ordered Sergeant Back and Police-constable Pine to start in pursuit of the parties suspected; and, as it was hinted that Folkestone contained the fugitives, the police officers were soon on their way thither by the mail-train.

Police-sergeant Back - In accordance with instructions from our Superintendent, myself and police Constable Pine left Dover for Folkestone by the mail-train on Monday night, in search of the soldiers who had committed the felony at the Castle barracks. Finding on our arrival at Folkestone, that no soldiers had passed, we instituted a minute enquiry in the town, but without success; and then returned to the station, to await the arrival from Dover of the six o'clock up train. The parties not arriving by that train, we started for Dover by the turnpike road, and just as we were entering the town by the "Red Cow" we saw a fly standing at the door of the "Royal George," in which some soldiers were seated, one of them answering the description given of one of the suspected felons. Before we could reach the "Royal George" the fly had driven away in the direction of Charlton; but had the landlord given us correct information when we questioned him we should have stopped the vehicle before it had reached Charlton gate. To my enquiries - as to who the parties were in the fly - he replied that it was a wedding affair. I then asked if the soldiers had been seen with more money than it was common for privates generally to have in their possession. He said, "No; they only changed half a sovereign." I then asked him when they came to his house, and he said between six and seven that morning. We then left and had proceeded but a short distance when Millyard called Pine back and told him that the soldiers came to his house on Monday night, between 10 and 11 o'clock, and slept there that night, and had changed a £5 note. Upon this information being communicated to Pine by me, I went to the "Salutation," and engaged a horse and cart for Canterbury, and while it was being got ready, Pine and myself went home and changed our clothes; and as quickly as possible started from the "Salutation" to Canterbury. We did not overtake the fly, but reached Canterbury within a few minutes of its arrival at that city, and proceeded to the "Eagle," in White-Horse Lane, we found the parties there, and apprehended them on two charges - one for felony, and the other for desertion, for being found at such a distance from head-quarters. I removed them from to the police station at Canterbury, and on searching them; found nothing on Heitman, and £9 0s. 2d. on Roberts, consisting of a £5 note, a sovereign, four half-sovereigns, 19s. 10d in silver, and 4d in copper. They were detained at the station till we were ready to return to Dover; and on our return home Roberts, without any inducement or persuasion, two or three several times admitted that he had broken open his master's desk, and stolen £11 from it. He further said that he did it with a view of getting rid of soldiering altogether, as he was tired of it.

The prisoner, being called on for his defence, admitted the robbery, but said he had only taken £11.

With the usual formalities, he was then fully committed to take his trial at the ensuing Dover Midsummer Sessions; and the several witnesses were bound over to attend thereat.

Sergeant Back wished to know if the charge for desertion would be proceeded with.

Mr. Wilkins observed that that matter rested with the commanding officer; upon which a sergeant stepped forward and said that the charge would not be entertained.

Mr. Elsted, who had entered during the examination of the above case, agreed with Mr. Wilkins, in requesting that the sergeant would communicate to the commanding officer of the Regiment that, from the straightforward manner in which Heitman had given his evidence, the magistrate hoped no military punishment would be inflicted on him in connection with what had now transpired.

William Millyard, the landlord of the "Royal George", was then brought forward, upon an information fully sustained by the witness herein, on a charge of keeping an improper house, and fined £5 6s,. costs included; and, in default, to be detained in custody till the fine was forthcoming.

Both of the magistrates present severely reprimanded Millyard in reference to the character of the house he kept, and the violations of even public decency repeatedly observed by passers by - also observing that the prostitutes by whom the prisoner Roberts associated at his house could not live without means were not at his disposal of private soldiers, the consequence was that they were induced to rob their masters, and in all probability was the case in the present instant.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 25 March, 1854. Price 5d.

BOROUGH PETTY SESSIONS

William Maynard, landlord of the "Royal George," Priory Street, was fined £5, and costs, for permitting bad characters at his house, which, the Bench observed, was notoriously known as a common brothel. The Magistrates were determined to put down such houses, and the police were instructed to visit them regularly, and especially defendant's whose offence on this occasion was proved by Sergeant Scutt and the police-constable Irons.

 

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, Saturday 25 September, 1858.

FATAL AFFRAY AT DOVER

On Sunday last the town of Dover was thrown into a ferment of excitement from the fact of an affray between a soldier of the 4th battalion of the 60th Rifles, which are at present quartered in this garrison, and powerfully-built man named Joseph Blackwell, the landlord of a public house in Priory Street called the "Royal George Tavern," resulting fatally to the former. From what can be gathered at appears that the soldier, Richard Walsh, who had recently joined the regiment, and who, although but twenty two years of age, had previously seen service in the Crimea, while generally a well-behaved man, is inclined to be quarrelsome when under the influence of drink, and that he had on previous occasion visited the "Royal George" when intoxicated and created some little disturbance there. On the other hand, Blackwell, the unfortunate man accused of the murder, is a most powerful and muscular man, At one time employed as a ganger upon the railway works, and has of late years been a sort of sub-contractor, which business he has carried on in conjunction with that of a licensed victualler, his house, the "Royal George," being much frequented by the military. He is said to be a well-disposed man under ordinary circumstances, but the victim of an ungovernable temper, which at time urges him on to such lengths as to render him, possessed as he is of the physical advantages already noticed, a most formidable and dangerous antagonist. He is not, however, a quarrelsome man; and during the time he has been located in Dover he is said to have amassed some little property by his steady, hardworking, and diligent habits.

The facts of this tragical occurrence appear to be as nearly as possible the following:- It would seem that on Sunday evening, about seven o'clock, Walsh went into the "Royal George Tavern," in state of intoxication and called for some beer. The man employed at the house as waiter, seeing his condition, refused to attend to his order, which seemed to irritate the deceased, who repeated his demand to a girl also connected with the house, who soon afterwards passed the table at which she had seated herself. She, however, refused to bring him any beer unless he first gave her the money. This he did not feel disposed to do; and he then, with an oath, threatened to "clear the room" if beer was not given him. Two men of the regiment to which the deceased belonged were present, and as they had finished what they had been drinking they arose and left the house, and induced the deceased to follow them. Blackwell, who had been till that time sitting in the taproom, got up at the same moment and also left the room by the same door for the purpose of closing the shutters on the outside of the window, which overlooked a house at the side of the house leading out of Priory Street, and into which the door by which the soldiers left the house opened. It appears that on getting into the passage the comrades of the deceased could not prevail upon him to return to the barracks in company with them; but after exchanging a few words with them just outside the house he made for the door again, declining that he would have some beer before he left. Blackwell, who at this juncture was fastening the windows, caught hold of Walsh's arm as he was returning to the house, and said that he should not go back again to annoy his customers, whereupon the deceased turned round and sharply upon the landlord and a scuffle ensued. This, it transpires, was sufficiently violent to induce Blackwell to call out for succour, and the soldier was ultimately removed from him. Instead of carrying out his intention of returning to the house Walsh now made off in the direction of Biggin Street; and Blackwell, who appeared very much overcome and excited by the effects of the scuffle, returned to the tap room, where he called for a poker. Not finding such an instrument there, however, he must have gone to the kitchen and obtained the poker from the grate in that room, as he was next seen by a man named Joseph McCordell with a poker in his hand at the kitchen door and advancing towards the front door leading into Priory Street. McCordell, with a praiseworthy anxiety to prevent a disturbance, ran round from the side door already mentioned, and intercepted Blackwell just as he had reached the front door of his house, and there entreated him to abandon his intentions of pursuing the soldier. But Blackwell, as it turned out would not be prevailed upon; nor would he allow McCordell to take the poker away from him, but started with it in his possession, yet concealed under his arm, in pursuit of Walsh. It appears that he was also expostulated with by a second person, a neighbour named Sayers, a wheelwright, who was passing at the moment, but without effect. Indeed, the answer he gave to the latter indicated that he was still labouring under very strong excitement. In the meantime the soldier had gone in the direction of St. Mary's church, in Biggin Street, nearly opposite which he had rested, and was leaning against the closed shop-window of one of the houses there when Blackwell overtook him, stating that he wanted to give him in charge of the police. The soldier was then seen to advance in a quiet manner to Blackwell, whereupon the latter raised the poker and gave him a severe blow with it upon the left side of the neck. The unfortunate man placed his hand to the other side of his neck and made some remark to the bystanders as to the nature of the blow, and then staggered and fell to the ground. A piquet was soon on the spot, and he was promptly conveyed to the guard house; but there is every reason to believe that he died upon the road, and his cries and struggles gradually became more and more feeble until they ceased altogether within a hundred yards of the guardhouse.

It will be seen by the evidence of the medical witnesses that there could be but one opinion as to the cause of the deceased's death, although the Coroner's Jury differed from the Magistrate's in their view of the impulse by which the accused had been actuated.

Throughout the week the greatest interest has been manifested throughout the town by the horrible occurrence.

 

EXAMINATION OF THE PRISONER

Considerable excitement attended the examination of the prisoner, which took place in the magistrates room, at the Maison Dieu Hall, at eleven o'clock on Monday morning. A very large crowd surrounded the doors of the building, and betrayed great anxiety to catch a glimpse of Blackwell as he was taken into the court. By the excellent arrangements of the police authorities, public inconvenience was in a great measure obviated, and the room in which the magistrates held their meeting was not so densely packed as it has previously been on similar occasions. We are sorry to have to make a single complaint as to the arrangements the authorities in their wisdom see fit to make for the public accommodation; but the inconvenience experienced by the representatives of the press on Monday was so intolerable that we cannot refrain from drawing attention to it, in the hope that some better accommodation may be in future provided. The position assigned to the reporters in the magistrates' room is in every sense, the worst that can be imagined, as they can neither hear the evidence of the various witnesses with any certainty, nor obtain sufficient light to take a reliable note of what transpires; added to which they are made to experience many minor inconveniences which tend further to impede them in the discharge of their duties. In no other court, indeed, have we ever seen the necessities, not to speak of the comfort or convenience of the representatives of the press, so contemptuously disregarded.

The magistrates upon the bench were the Mayor; Capt. Noble; and L. Stride, S. M. Latham, and E. Sabbit, Esqrs.

Mr. E. Knocker appeared for the prisoner, who was charged with having assaulted Richard Walsh, a private of the 4th battalion 60th Rifles, with an iron poker, on the preceding evening, in Biggin Street, and with having beaten him over the head with it, in consequence of which assault he had since died.

The first witness examined was Henry Smith, landlord of the "Priory Tavern," Folkestone Road, who said:- I saw the prisoner in Biggin Street about half-past seven o'clock last evening; he was running down the street. I did not know why he was running. When I got near to the house of Mr. Bushell, fruitier, I saw standing there a man belonging to the 60th Rifles; he was leaning against the shutters of Bushell's house. The prisoner, as he was running along the street, said "I want to give that man in charge." I asked him what the man had been doing. I was walking down the street at the time, and the prisoner passed me. In answer to my question as to what the man had been doing the prisoner said, "He has been kicking up a noise in my house, and it is not the first time he has done so. I want to give him in charge." Upon that the soldier made away from where he was standing against the shutters, and stepped into the road. He uttered some words, but I did not hear what they were. The prisoner then struck the soldier a blow over his head with a poker he had in his hand. I saw the poker for the first time when the blow was given.

The Mayor:- Did you see the blow struck? Where did it strike him?

Witness:- Apparently on the side of the head.

The Mayor:- Was the soldier standing with his back or his side towards the prisoner?

Witness:- The soldier was facing him. I believe he was struck on the left side of the head.

Examination resumed.- Some persons had gathered round by this time, and the soldier pointed to his head, exclaimed to them "Look here!"

The Mayor:- Was hat all he said?

Witness:- Yes; he might have said it three or four times, but that was all he said, and he then fell to the ground. The prisoner walked away in about half a minute or a minute after he struck the blow, and just after the soldier fell to the ground. Immediately after he had fallen some of his comrades came along and picked him up, and just as they had done so, a piquet came along and took him away. He was very resolute, and refused to walk. When they commenced doing so his face was turned upwards. Four or five men were employed to carry him, one holding his head, and one taking hold of each of his arms and his legs. They found they could not very well carry him with his face turned upwards, so the sergeant of the piquet desired them to turn him over. They did so, he resisted all the time. I heard him ask several times to have his stock taken off. I could not, however, see whether he had a stock on. The word he mad use of were "Loosen my stock, take my stock off," which he repeated several times. I did not see the piquet take his stock off; I did not follow them. The last I saw of them was at St. Mary's Church, and they were then going towards Market Place.

By the Mayor:- I cannot say the sergeant in charge of the piquet was told that the man had been knocked down with a poker. I did not hear anyone mention it to him. An officer's servant, dressed in plain clothes, was standing by. I believe he as one of the deceased comrades. He might have stated that the deceased had been knocked down with a poker. When I last saw the piquet they were carrying the deceased with his face downwards - the way I have described. That is all I know.

Cross-examined by Mr. E. Knocker:- I did not know the soldier personally. When the prisoner came up to him I was as close to the former as I am now (about a yard). The soldier moved a few yards from the spot I first saw him at. He was standing on the kerbstone of the pavement. When the soldier came towards the prisoner I was about half-a-dozen yards from them. I scarcely heard what the soldier said to the prisoner. and I did not hear the prisoner say anything but what I have stated. I did not hear the prisoner say to the soldier, "If you come forward I will strike you with the weapon I have in my hand." He might have said it without my hearing him. It was light enough for me to discern objects clearly. The prisoner appeared to be sober, but was excited. I believe there was a little blood about his mouth. I did not see whether his hands were smeared with blood. The prisoner said that the soldier had been tearing to pieces his shirt, and that he had a row with him. I did not notice that the soldier had his arm up as if about to strike the prisoner when the latter came up to him. The soldier's comrades came up just after the blow was struck. I did not see them on the spot at the time the blow was given. They came up about half a minute afterwards. There were three or four of them, or there might have been more. When the piquet picked him up I did not hear him say anything to them. The servant I mentioned was one of the soldier's comrades. Several persons were passing at the time, and some stood still. I did not go forward to pick up the man when he fell, because his comrades had come up so soon afterwards. He appeared to be very drunk, and he might have fallen from that cause. I looked at the man's face to see the result of the blow, but I did not see where he had been struck. I heard the officer's servant say to the prisoner "Remember you have knocked him down with a poker; I will be in the orderly room in the morning." I did not hear him accuse anyone else of knocking prisoner down. I might know the servant again if I saw him, he was a short man. I did not see whether deceased was wearing his belt or side-arms. There was another man coming down the street at the time the prisoner was coming down, but he was not exactly with him; prisoner was in the road, and the other man was on the pavement. I did not hear the prisoner send for a policeman, but prisoner said he had done so.

The Mayor:- You said just now you saw the prisoner with a poker. Where did he get it from?

Witness:- I believe from under his shirt sleeve. I did not see him produce it, bit I noticed that he put it there after the blow had been struck. I did not see the poker in his hands while he was running down the street.

The poker, a small iron one, was then produced and identified by the witness.

Charles Sayers, wheelwright, of Priory Street:- I reside at 17, Church Street, but I occupy a yard in Priory Street which extends behind the prisoner's house and is communicated with by means of a passage at the side of prisoner's house. I also occupy a workshop in Priory Street which is rather nearer to Biggin Street than the passage in question. Yesterday evening I first went to my workshop, and after staying there a few minutes I went to the yard, where I remained four or five minutes. I then returned to Priory Street through the passage, and as I passed I saw a soldier in dark green dress, talking to a young woman. They were conversing very quietly together, and the prisoner was within a few yards of them at the time, but was not talking to them. I brought a dog with me from the yard to the shop and tied it up there, and put on the light, and as I came out of the shop again a soldier in dark green ran by. Whether he was the same soldier I had seen standing in the passage, or not, I could not say, but I noticed he came from the passage leading from the yard. A side door of the prisoner's house opens into the passage. After the soldier had disappeared in the direction of Biggin Street, I saw the prisoner leave his house or the passage as if in pursuit of the soldier, and heard him say he would give him into custody. I endeavoured to persuade him to return to his house again, but his only reply to my advise was "D_____ your eyes; mind your own business." At the same time I noticed the prisoner held a poker in his left hand; he carried it under his shirt-sleeve, which was tucked up, and held the handle of the poker in the hollow of his hand. I did not observe anything else remarkable in his appearance. The soldier had at the time gone quite out of sight. The prisoner spoke to me sharply, and appeared to be a little angry; he went round the corner of Priory Street, into Biggin Street, in the direction of Market Place. I did not follow him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knocker:- I was not in my shop more than four or five minutes. I merely tied my dog up and extinguished the light.

Mr. Stride:- I am rather anxious to know why you took any pains to recommend the prisoner to go back to his house.

The witness:- Because he said he meant to give the man into custody, and I thought it as well that that should not be done.

Cross-examined resumed:- I did not take particular notice of his face. I did not observe anything about it. Nothing else passed between us but the words I have mentioned.

Charles West, colour-sergeant of the 4th battalion 60th Rifles, said that he was in the piquet of his regiment on the preceding night. They were under the command of Lieut. Hamilton, and as they were proceeding up Snargate Street they made for Biggin Street, in consequence of someone saying that a row was going on there.

The witness Sayers here stated that he wished to add something to the evidence he had previously given; and on being placed in the witness-box he said - I am anxious to add that I heard the prisoner say, after he came out of his house, D____ his eyes; I will give him something." That was before I recommended him to return to his house again. I am quite sure he used those words.

Lieutenant Frederick Hamilton, of the 4th battalion 60th Rifles, said:- I was in command of the piquet of my regiment last night about half-past seven or eight o'clock. In consequence of what I heard I ordered the piquet to go to Biggin Street. On getting there I saw a crowd, and heard a disturbance. I went into the midst of the crowd, and there I saw the deceased; he appeared to be in a vary excited state. I immediately ordered the piquet to take charge of him, and he was taken accordingly -  saw that he was drunk. He was very violent for a short time after he was taken. The men of the piquet were obliged to carry him, and the at first took him with his face turned upwards; but they found that this method would now answer, and the deceased position was then reversed, and his face turned downwards. He was conveyed in this manner to the guard-room at the Grand Shaft, whither I accompanied the piquet. At the entrance of the yard leading to the guard-room I gave the deceased over to the charge of the corporal of the piquet, and told him to give deceased into the hands of the sergeant of the guard. The deceased was so drunk as not to be able to walk; he might have managed to stand a short time, but I think he must soon have fallen. He was very intoxicated. I saw him afterwards, when he was dead. That was, I suppose, in about five minutes or a little more from the time of depositing him in the guard-room. After I have given the deceased over to the corporal, to be delivered to the sergeant of the guard, I got the men of the piquet to fall in and march back again into Snargate Street, and they got a little past the "Apollonian Hall" when I was told by one of our men - a bugler - that the man was dead. I at once returned to the guard-room and found it was so.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knocker:- The men carried the deceased scarcely any distance with his face upwards - not more than four or five yards. I heard deceased calling out something about his stock, and I believe it was taken off. I did not see it taken off, but some of the men told me it was.

It having been decided by the enquiry should be adjourned for a post mortem examination of the unfortunate deceased.

Mr. G. T. Thompson, the borough coroner, who was present throughout the proceedings, suggested at this stage of the examination, that a civilian surgeon should be associated with the military doctor in that investigation, with which the magistrates fully concured.

Henry Chapman, a private of the 4th battalion 60th Rifles:- I was one of the piquet last night. I saw the deceased in Biggin Street, and was one of the men who were ordered by Lieut. Hamilton to take charge of him. On lifting him up we tried to carry him with his face upwards, but we saw that that would not do, and we turned his face downwards. I held the deceased's head, and there was man at each of his arms and each of his legs. We carried him in that posture all the way to the Shaft. I held his head all the time. I heard him say "Take my stock off" two or three times, but on looking to se if that was necessary, I found he had none on. That was when he had got about twenty yards from the spot at which we found him. I helped to carry him into the guard-room. I did not stop there till he died. He was laid on the floor, and we left the sergeant to guard with him. I did not see him stir after he was laid there.

Cross examined by Mr. Knocker:- When we were about to take him he knocked about, and refused to go. He knocked about also when he was being carried, but not quite all the way. When we got about 100 yards from the spot where we found him he ceased to move, and I did not hear him say anything more. My hand was supporting his forehead. He never stirred after we reached the guard-room. We laid him down, with his stomach downwards, on the guard-room floor. I did not notice whether he had his belt on.

This was the last witness it was thought necessary to call at this examination, and the prisoner was then remanded until the following Wednesday.

 

INQUEST UPON THE BODY

The borough coroner, G. T. Thompson, Esq., opened his enquiry upon the body of the deceased on Monday afternoon. With a view to the convenience of the witness, who was required to be in attendance at the magisterial examination, the investigation was conducted in the grand jury room at the Maison Dieu Hall. A most respectful and intelligent jury were enpannelled, the foreman being Mr. George Flashman.

Mr. E. Knocker was in attendance to watch proceedings on the part of Blackwell.

The jury having been sworn.

The Coroner said that he proposed on that occasion taking only such evidence in the melancholy case before them as would justify an adjournment for the purpose of a post mortem examination, as the nature and extent of their future enquiry would very much depend upon the report of the medical witness. He had thought it right to recommend the Magistrates to direct that a private medical practitioner should be associated with the military surgeon making this examination, and their worships had assented to this recommendation. Mr. Walter had therefore been requested to give his assistance for the purpose; and the result of the medical investigations would be made known to the jury on their reassembling on Wednesday morning, to which time he should propose adjourning them after taking just such evidence as was necessary.

The gentleman of the jury having been to view the body, which was lying at the military hospital, Western Heights, and returned to the jury room, the witnesses Smith and Chapman were examined. Their evidence is mainly a repetition of that given before the Magistrates, but some additional facts were brought out in the course of the examination, and these were append.

The Coroner, in the course of Smith's examination enquired if the blow was given to the deceased by Blackwell was a violent one, to which the witness replied that it appeared to be a heavy blow from the manner in which Blackwell struck. After striking the blow Blackwell turned away and went towards his home.

Mr. Knocker:- Did he turn away before the deceased's comrades picked him up?

Witness:- I can hardly say, but I think he did.

Mr. Knocker:- What do you mean when you state that the piquet found that they could not carry the deceased with his face upwards?

Witness:- He was too violent. They could scarcely hold him, much less carry him.

Mr. Knocker:- When you first saw Blackwell did you hear him warn the soldier of the peril of being struck with the weapon in his hand?

Witness:- I did not.

Mr. Knocker:- Might he have said so without you hearing?

Witness:- Yes, he might have said so, but I did not notice that he did.

Mr. Knocker:- You state that the soldier was drunk. Now there are different stages of drunkenness; was he very drunk?

Witness:- I should say he was; he could scarcely stand still when he was leaning against the house.

Mr. Knocker:- Did Blackwell say what the soldiers had been doing?

Witness:- He said he had been tearing him to pieces and assaulting him.

The Coroner:- Was that before or after he struck the blow?

Witness:- After, I believe.

Mr. Knocker:- Did the soldier when he advanced to Blackwell raise his arm in a threatening manner?

Witness:- I did not observe him do so.

Mr. Knocker:- Might he have done so without you seeing?

Witness:- Yes.

By the Coroner:- I did not go forward to pick the deceased up because some of his comrades came to his assistance immediately.

Mr. Knocker:- Does not the circumstance enable you to say that Blackwell did not go away until the deceased's comrades had come up?

Witness:- I should think he must have gone away about the same time; but everything was done so quickly that it is difficult to remember. I believe he was gone when the deceased was picked up.

Mr. Knocker:- Do you think it probably the deceased fell from his intoxicated state?

Witness:- I think it quite possible.

The Foreman:- Do you think he was so drunk that he would have fallen if he had not been struck?

Witness:- I cannot say; it is possible.

The Coroner:- Then you mean to say that you do not know whether deceased fell from the effects of the blow or drunkenness?

Witness:- I do.

Mr. Knocker:- Did you hear Blackwell say he had sent for a policemen?

Witness:- I asked him if he had done so, and he said that he had.

Mr. Knocker:- Was that before was struck or afterwards?

Witness:- Before.

A juror:- Did the soldier give any reason for wishing his stock taken off?

Witness:- No; all I heard him say was, "Loosen my stock; take it off!" which he repeated several times.

The witness Chapman was then placed under examination. He said:- When the piquet were going to take hold of him, the deceased put his hand up to the side of his neck and said - "He hit me here." Walsh was very violent while the piquet were carrying him through the town, until he got within about one hundred yards of the shaft. He then became very quiet, and made no further movement.

The Coroner:- During the time you were carrying the deceased did you notice whether he breathed heavily?

Witness:- I could not tell; I did not take notice.

By Mr. Knocker:- The deceased was carried by five men, one at his head, two at his arms, and two at his legs, so that his arms were extended. I carried his head, which I was careful to keep in the same position all the time I held it.

The Foreman:- Was that not a very extraordinary way to carry a drunken man?

Witness:- We were obliged to carry him some way, and that was the best.

The Foreman:- The best way to quiet him?

Witness:- Yes.

Mr. Knocker:- Are you sure the deceased was alive when you laid him on the floor of the guard-room?

Witness:- I did not notice. We laid him down and left him.

Mr. Knocker:- Did he move at all after you laid him on the floor?

Witness:- No sir; he never stirred, but just laid as we put him down.

The Coroner:- Did he complain of the mode in which you were carrying him?

Witness:- After we had carried him about two hundred yards, he said he would walk; but Lieut. Hamilton would not let him, and told the piquet to continue carrying him.

By the Coroner:- Walsh was at the roll-call at three o'clock yesterday.

At this stage the proceedings were adjourned till Wednesday.

 

ADJOURNED CORONERS ENQUIRY

The jury reassembled at the Maison Dieu Hall on Wednesday morning, the enquiry on this occasion being conducted in the magistrates' room. Mr. E. Knocker again appeared on behalf of Blackwell.

Samuel James Jackson sergeant of the Donegal Militia, was the first witness examined. He said on Sunday night last I was the sergeant in command of the main-shaft guard. I recollect Walsh being brought in, about eight o'clock, by the piquet of the regiment to which he belonged. They laid him upon the floor, face downwards, and left him in charge of the guard as a prisoner. The piquet then left, and I turned the deceased over with the assistance of the corporal of the guard (Corporal Finch), thinking the position in which the piquet had left him was not a proper one for a drunken man to remain in. Having raised him up we placed him on the guard-room bench and unfastened his clothing; but on feeling his pulse we discovered no sign of animation, and soon found that he was dead. The body was warm, but life was extinct.

The Coroner:- Had he is stock on?

Witness:- No, sir; his stock was fastened around his leg.

Examination resumed:- The Surgeon of the Donegal Militia, and also that of the Bedford Militia and the 60th Rifles shortly afterwards came, and all pronounced him dead.

By Mr. Knocker:- Deceased did not make any movement whatever after he was brought in and placed upon the guard-room floor.

Police-sergeant George Gedds, of the Dover force, examined:- I produce a poker I obtained on Sunday evening last, about nine o'clock, at the house of the prisoner, "The Royal George," Priory Street. I found it in the kitchen under the grate. I had taken the prisoner into custody, at his own house, about half-an-hour previously. On telling him he must come to the station-house with me, he asked if the man was dead. I replied "I do not know," on which he said "I did not mean to kill him; I hit him with the poker, as I thought, about the shoulders." After I had obtained the poker I showed it to Blackwell, at the station-house. I said to him "Do you know anything about this?" He replied, "Hold it higher up," and on my doing so he added, "That is the poker I struck the man with." He then repeated, "I thought I struck him on the shoulder." He knew Walsh was dead as soon as he was brought to the station-house.

By the Foreman:- This was the only poker I could find in the house. I was not told to look for it in the kitchen. The kitchen, to the best of my belief, is not generally used by soldiers.

By Mr. Knocker:- I had been informed that Blackwell had struck the deceased with a poker; and he did not attempt to deny it on being brought to the station-house.

Mr. Knocker:- Did Blackwell tell you where to find the poker?

Witness:- No he did not.

The witness added - I had learnt Blackwell had struck the soldier with a poker previously to taking him into custody. I did not make any enquiry for the poker at the time of taking the prisoner into custody, because there was a very excited mob outside the house, and I was afraid to leave the prisoner. Blackwell said there had been a quarrel in the house, that deceased had been knocking him about, and that he (Blackwell) took the poker in his own defence. The distance from the "Royal George Tavern" to the place at which the deceased was struck is about 230 yards. I have measured the distance by pacing it.

Henry Smith, on being recalled, said the poker produced was similar to that with which Blackwell had struck the deceased.

Mr. J. Walter, surgeon, examined:- Yesterday, in company with Dr. Howell, staff surgeon of the garrison, I made a post mortem examination of the deceased. Externally there was a mark of a blow on the left side of the neck, below the ear.

The Coroner:- What was the character of the blow?

Witness:- As if occasioned by a stick, poker, or other blunt instrument.

Examination resumed:- It was the mark of a heavy blow. On the right side of the face there were some slight scratches, as if caused by nails. On the inside of the lower lip there were two slight abrasions, which might have been occasioned by a blow upon the chin, or by deceased biting his lip himself. There were the only external appearances. I saw no marks upon the deceased hands as if he had been fighting. The internal appearances of violence indicated a blow on the upper part of the right parietal bone, and these must have been produced by a heavy blow or fall. Under the part marked by the blow externally the muscle was considerably bruised. There were no other marks of violence or disease beyond what I have already stated. The lungs were in a congested state.

The Coroner:- Was the congestion very severe?

Witness:- No, not very severe.

The Coroner:- Now, have you formed a conclusion as to the cause of the deceased's death?

Witness:- Yes, I consider the death of the deceased to have arisen from a shock caused to the nervous system by the blow the trace of which I discovered on the neck.

The Foreman:- Do you consider the manner in which the deceased was carried by the piquet would accelerate death, seeing he was intoxicated?

Witness:- No, I should think not, supposing his head was held up properly.

A Juror:- We have it in evidence that deceased was very violent when taken by the piquet. Do you think that might have been the result of the blow?

Witness:- No, I think not.

By the Foreman:- I am of the opinion that the rough treatment deceased experienced at the hands of the piquet had no influence upon the shock the nervous system had received.

Mr. Knocker:- Might not the effect of such a blow as you have spoken to be different in the case of a man sober from that produced on one intoxicated?

Witness:- It might. In the case of a man intoxicated the effect would be more serious, as he would have less power of rallying.

Mr. Knocker:- Is it your opinion that such a blow would necessarily lead to the death of a person when sober and calm?

Witness:- It is very difficult to answer that question. I am not prepared to say that it would, necessarily.

Cross-examination resumed - If the outer skin were broken by the blow it must have been very slightly so. There was very little ecchymose.

Mr. Knocker:- Supposing the deceased to have been highly intoxicated, would the circumstance of his being carried with his face downwards be as advantageous to his recovery from a blow such as you have described as if he had been carried the reverse way?

Witness:- I think it would make no difference whatsoever.

Cross-examination resumed - Congestion of the longs might have arisen from the position in which the body was placed after death or from the circulation suddenly ceasing upon death, taking place. The lungs were more congested than usual after death, but I account for this by the suddenness of the death. The position in which the deceased was carried out could not have had any influence upon the appearance of the lungs after death. In my own experience I do not know of death resulting from a blow of this kind. There are cases on record, but they are very rare. There was no appearance, beyond a slight congestion of the outer covering of the brain, from which I should infer that deceased died whilst in a state of intoxication. There was considerable adhesion of the right lung of the deceased to the cavity of the chest - the effect of an old disease - and this, I think, might have lessened his power of rallying.

Dr. Thomas Howell, staff surgeon of the Dover garrison, and attached to the 60th Rifles:- I saw the deceased on Sunday evening shortly after he was brought into the guard-room at the Grand Shaft. He was then to all appearances dead. I attempted to restore animation for upwards of an hour, but without success. I then examined the body externally. I did not know that he had been struck, but on afterward ascertaining that he had been I examined him more carefully. I found a long mark on the left side of his neck, as if caused by the smut from a poker, but I could not then detect any mark of injury, the skin not having even been broken. I made a post mortem examination, in conjunction with Mr. Walter, yesterday. When the scalp was raised there appeared an ecchymosed spot about the size of a crown piece on the right side of the head, as if occasioned from a blow or fall, probably from the latter. There was no apparent internal injury resulting from that appearance. On examining the neck an ecchymosed spot about two inches in length was found, externally, about midway between the lower part of the left side of the neck and the ear, and as would be occasioned by a blow from a blunt instrument. The parts were then carefully dissected out, and the bruise was found to be continuing down to the vertebrae. Immediately above the vertebrae there existed a most important network of nerves which effect the motion of the heart and lungs; and in the case of their being paralysed the heart and lungs become effected, and ultimately cease their functions. This network of nerves was involved in the bruise of which I have spoken, which extended about half an inch below it. The ligaments which keep this network in position were also effected by the bruise. The chest was then examined. The lungs, with the exception of the right lung adhering to the chest, which is not uncommonly found in men who are knocking about, were perfectly healthy. The portions near the back were completely gorged with blood, probably from the position in which the body was deposited, after death, but there were no other appearances about the lungs with which death could be connected. The heart was perfectly healthy, and entirely void of blood, which would not have been the case, I conclude, had the deceased had died from apoplexy or suffocation. The stomach was perfectly healthy and its contents free from all smell of beer or spirits, and it presented the appearance consequent upon healthy digestion during life. I examined the trachea and larynx, which were also congested.

The Coroner:- What conclusions do you draw, Dr. Howell, as to the cause of death?

Witness:- I have no doubt in my own mind that death was occasioned by the shock the nervous system of the deceased had received through the blow he had sustained on the neck.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knocker:- I observed no more congestion of the brain than is usual in the case of persons dying in a state of intoxication. It was more a veinous congestion than congestion of the brain. I should not say from this appearance that the deceased must have necessarily died in a state of intoxication, because the same appearance is often found when persons are quite sober at the time of death. The network of nerves of which I have spoken was in the deceased about an inch beneath the spot on which the blow descended. I consider the effect of such a blow as the deceased sustained would not be changed by the deceased having been drunk or sober. Its first effect, if not immediate death, would be loss of power, and, reaction taking place, would admit of considerable exertion, which would again decrease as death approached. The manner of which the deceased was carried by the piquet would not have had any effect in influencing death, provided his head was supported, not would the way in which he was deposited upon the floor of the guard-room.

John Bishop, private of the 4th Battalion 60th Rifles, examined:- On the evening of Sunday, about half-past seven o'clock, as I was walking up Biggin Street near to St. Mary's Church, I saw Blackwell, the man now in custody, standing in the middle of the road, and a private of the regiment to which I belong leaning against the shutters. Two or three other persons were standing on the pavement. Just as I was passing Blackwell, he said - "I'll be _____ if I don't have him taken." The soldier then advanced towards Blackwell, and said to him, "Look here, I'll tell you what," then Blackwell said, "Stand off!" and then immediately struck him a blow with a poker, which up to that time he had concealed under his right arm. The blow fell upon the left side of the deceased's neck, just below the ear. I went up to the deceased and took him by the arm. He put his hand up to the left side of his neck, and said to me. "There! Did you see that?" I said "Yes, I did." Blackwell was standing near at the time. The deceased then staggered back about three paces, when he fell to the ground. The blow from the poker was a very heavy one. Deceased fell upon his right side. I then knelt down and unhooked his collar, when I found that he had no stock on. An officer's servant, who was standing by, then said to Blackwell, "Mind, I saw you strike the blow, and I shall be in the orderly-room to-morrow morning." Blackwell made some reply, but I could not hear what. He remained on the spot about two minutes after the blow was struck, and then went away. After delivering the blow Blackwell returned the poker under his arm. I and the officer's servant then picked up the deceased, and as soon as we had done so the piquet came up and took him away. Deceased did not extend his arm in a threatening manner when he advanced towards Blackwell; he went up to him very quietly, his hands hanging at his sides. He staggered when he advanced, as if he was drunk.

John Haniford, a private in the 60th, and officer's servant, examined:- On Sunday evening about half-past seven, as I was walking along Biggin Street, I saw the deceased turn the corner of Priory Street. He was staggering along as if very much intoxicated. I was on one side of the way and he the other, and I continued to walk apposite him down the street. I noticed that his stock was buckled around his leg. After he had gone some distance down the street the deceased stopped and leant against the window shutters of one of the houses. After remaining for a second or two in this position he went a few yards further, when I heard the sound of some one running down the street, at the same time exclaiming - "Oh, here he is." That was the man now in custody. On coming up to where deceased was, he said to him, "I insist on giving you in charge of the police." The soldier said something in reply, but I could not tell what it was, and thereupon advanced towards Blackwell. He did not come forward in a threatening manner. I heard no words pass between them; but I saw Blackwell directly strike the deceased, but what with I am unable to say. I never heard a voice exclaim, "Do you see that, now"! I see deceased stagger a short distance and fall to the ground. He was then picked up by myself and others, and shortly afterwards removed by the piquet.

The witness, Charles Sayers, was then examined, but his evidence did not furnish anything beyond what had already been transpired when he was before the Magistrates.

Joseph Staples McCordell, labourer, residing at 8, Albany Place:- On Sunday evening I was at the "Royal George Tavern." I went in about seven o'clock, and entered the tap room. At that time a soldier was in the room, sitting at a table with his head resting upon his arms. I have seen the deceased and recognised his body as that of the same man. Other soldiers were present; some were of the 60th Rifles, others were of the Bedfordshire Militia. In about a quarter of an hour after I had entered, everything having been peaceable up to that time, the deceased followed Blackwell out of the room into the passage at the side of the house. When deceased went out Blackwell was closing the shutters. Directly he had gone I heard a scuffle in the passage and Blackwell called out "Murder!" whereupon I with two of the Bedford Militia and two of the 60th Rifles ran out into the passage, when I saw that the deceased had got Blackwell against the wall. I assisted to take deceased off Blackwell, and deceased them immediately went away. He went down Priory Street. On Blackwell's return to the tap-room, I saw that his shirt-sleeve was torn. There was a spot of blood on the right breast of his shirt, and also a little, but nothing to speak of, at the corner of his mouth. Blackwell made a noise as if he were crying, and shouted out for a poker. No one came to him, and he ran into an adjoining room and appeared with a poker in his hand. I immediately ran out to the front door of the house to interrupt him. I had just reached the front door when he came out with a small poker in his hand. I said to him, "Joe, go and carry that back - don't make a Deal job of it - or give it to me, and I will carry it back." He refused to do so, and I then tried to take it from him but he broke away from me, and ran towards Biggin Street. A man who lodges in the prisoner's house was in his company. I do not know his name; he is a stranger to me. I then returned to the tap-room again. Four or five minutes elapsed from the time I took the soldier off Blackwell till the latter started away from the front door of his house with the poker in his hand. After Blackwell's return from the yard, I believe he went into a kitchen and rinsed his face before calling for the poker. Blackwell was quite sober but I believe the deceased was in liquor. I meant by the words "Deal job" to refer to a death which occurred in Deal in consequence of a man striking an officer with a poker. Beyond calling for a poker I heard Blackwell say, with an oath, that he would give the soldier a blow for kicking him in the mouth. I do not recollect the exact words he used, nor do I remember him saying anything else. I waited in the tap-room till Blackwell returned, which he did in about seven or either minutes. I do not then believe he had the poker in his hand, but before coming into the tap-room he went into the bar. I asked him whether he had caught the man and he said "Yes, and I've given him one." He then went into the bar, and having called me to him he asked me at what time the commanding officer held his parade, as he wanted to report the deceased. I said, "Joe, it's of no use for you to report him, man, for you have taken the matter into your own hands." He still said he should report him before the commanding officer on the following day. While he was saying this so the piquets of several corps surrounded the house, and I then left.

By a juror:- No one "chaffed" the prisoner upon his return to the tap-room, about his being pinned to the wall by a smaller man than himself. No allusions was made to the subject.

 James Cayford, general dealer, 31 Albion Place, examined:- On account of some information I had received, I went to the "Royal George" in company with the sergeant of the piquet of the 60th Rifles (Sergeant Jessop), after the disturbance on Sunday evening. The sergeant on entering the house asked for the landlord, when Blackwell, who was in the bar, said, "I am he." The sergeant then said, "I believe you have had a row with some of our men." Blackwell answered, "Yes I have." The sergeant enquired the cause of it, when Blackwell replied, "He has been knocking my things about and kicking me about." The sergeant said, "If you show me what is broken I will make a report to my colonel, and it shall be replaced." Blackwell, however, showed nothing. The sergeant then said he had understood Blackwell had struck the soldier with an unlawful weapon, to which Blackwell answered, "Yes, I struck him with a poker." The sergeant then said, "Where did you strike him?" and Blackwell pointed to his left shoulder, on the left side of his neck. The sergeant said, "You are not justified in doing that; I might as well draw my sword and strike you. I shall report it to my colonel to-morrow morning." Blackwell rejoined, "I don't care about your reporting it; if I had knocked his _____ head off I should not have regretted it." The sergeant, having desired me to remember the conversation and to come to the orderly-room on the following morning, then left the house.

Thomas Jarvis, an umbrella maker by trade, but employed by Blackwell:-  I have lodged at the "Royal George" for the past six months, and still live there. On Sunday night I was employed as waiter in the tap-room of the "Royal George."  I recollect a soldier of the 60th Rifles, now stated to be dead, coming into the tap-room a little after seven o'clock and calling for a pot of beer. I refused to fetch it to him, as I saw he was drunk. He then sat down and leaned his head upon his arms, which he placed upon the table. Other soldiers of different corps were present, and I said to them, "Mind your jugs and glasses, his shacko will fall off." A young woman employed in the house passed at the moment, and the deceased, rousing himself, asked her to bring him a pot of beer. She answered, "I will if you will give me the money." He made no reply to that, but demanded some beer of the other soldiers, declaring that if they did not give him some he would "clear the _____ tap-room." Two of his own corps were sitting near him told him they had none, and they were just going. They got up and went into the yard, whither he followed them. Blackwell then went out to close the shutters, and I heard (the door being open) Blackwell say, "Now, young man, don't make a noise here on a Sunday night. We do not want any disturbance here." The man then appeared desirous of returning to the tap-room again, but Blackwell said to him, "you shall not go in; I don't want you to disturb my company." I then saw the soldier strike Blackwell with his fist, and take him by the collar and force him against the wall. Blackwell called out for help, when several persons left the room; and one of the Bedford Militia took hold of the deceased and removed him off Blackwell, who then desired me to go for the police. I left the house for the purpose of doing so, and proceeded to the station-house. No one was there except the man in charge of the station-house who told me that a constable was on duty somewhere in the neighbourhood. On returning through Biggin Street to the "Royal George," I passed a piquet who had the deceased in charge. I left the deceased in the passage adjoining the house when I went for the police. I did not accompany Blackwell in pursuit of the soldier. A young man who was then lodging in the house, but who has since left Dover, went with him.

Alexander Ewens, adjutant of the 4th Battalion 60th Rifles:- The deceased, whose name is Richard Walsh, was aged twenty-two years and four months.

William Robey, a private of the 4th Battalion 60th Rifles, examined:- I was in the "Royal George" on Sunday night, in company with a comrade named Franklin. While we were there the deceased came into the room. He sat down and rested his head on his hand, at the table, for some time. He then asked myself and Franklin whether we intended to stand a pot of beer. We answered that we were going, and we thereupon both left the tap-room and went into the passage at the side of the house. The deceased followed us, and so did Blackwell. The deceased asked me and my comrade who we were. We told him, and then offered to assist him home, but he refused our aid and then turned and made way for the house again. Blackwell prevented his going in, saying that he should not disturb his company as he had done before. A scuffle then ensued between Blackwell and the deceased, but who began it I do not know. A civilian, with others, then came into the yard, and the two were separated. Blackwell said he would give the deceased in charge to the police, but directly afterwards he said to me and Franklin, "Go away, perhaps the man ( meaning the deceased) may follow you." I and Franklin then went into the street, and the deceased came after us. While in the street I saw Blackwell enter his house again, by which time deceased had passed myself and Franklin, and had got half way down the street. Shortly afterwards, in about a minute, as I think, Blackwell came to the front door of his house with something in his hand which shone. On passing us, he said, "I am going to give him I charge of the police." he very quickly turned the corner of Biggin Street, and we lost sight of him.

This concluded the evidence, and the Coroner then briefly summed up, pointing out to the jury the distinction made by the law between the crime of murder and that of manslaughter, and leaving them to form their judgment upon the facts which had been brought out in the course of the patient investigation they had just terminated. He alluded particularly to the amount of time which elapsed between Blackwell's struggle with the deceased in the passage and his pursuit of him with the fatal instrument; his remarks during the interval with the soldiers Robey and Franklin previous to returning to the house ; and then, after rinsing his face, as deposed by McCordell, his conversation with that witness and subsequently with the witness Sayers, which all tended to show that sufficient time was afforded for reason to resume her sway in the mind of Blackwell before his pursuit of the deceased.

The room was then cleared, and after about an hour's deliberation, upon the readmission of the public.

The Foreman said that the majority of the Jury found a verdict of "Manslaughter." We have since been given to understand that out of fifteen jurors, twelve were in favour of the verdict returned, and three inclined to a verdict of "Wilful Murder."

 

RE-EXAMINATION OF THE PRISONER

The prisoner Jeseph Blackwell was again brought up before the Magistrates on Wednesday morning. Although the examination took place in the Sessions House, very insufficient room was found for the accommodation of the number of persons who flocked to hear the proceedings. The prisoner was placed in the dock, where he was accommodated with a seat. He appeared not a little effected by the serious position in which he was placed, and although playing strict attention to what transpired, as was evidenced by his frequent communication with his solicitor during the day, he rarely raised his eyes to look round the Court.

The Magistrates on the Bench were the Mayor, Capt. Noble, S. M. Latham, Esq., L. Stride, Esq., E. Sibbit, Esq., and J. Worsfold, Esq.

The evidence in chief of the witness examined will be found in our report of the adjourned Coroner's enquiry; but comparing the statements made by them before the Magistrates with those delivered before the Coroner, and finding that many new facts were elicited, we give such additional points in their testimony as seen to be important.

George Geddes, police-sergeant of the Dover police force:- On the way to the station-house, after I had taken the prisoner into custody, he said, "The man has been knocking me about; I meant to give him in charge; and I only took the poker in my own defence." Having been cautioned by the superintendent at the station-house, the prisoner repeated that he did not intend to kill the man, and he thought he struck him on the shoulder.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knocker:- I fetched a doctor to the prisoner after he had been lodged in the station-house. The surgeon I fetched was Mr. Walter. prisoner seemed very much excited, and complained on the way to the station-house that he was unwell through being knocked about.

Mr. Walter then stated the result of the post mortem examination of the deceased. In addition to his statement before the Coroner, he said - The mark upon the left side of the deceased's neck was such as might have been caused by a blow from the poker produced by the witness Geddes. I believe the skin of the neck where the mark of the blow was not broken. The blow must have been given very shortly before the man died. There was no appearance on the brain as if deceased had died from apoplexy. Had the deceased died from apoplexy or from suffocation, the brain would not have been in the state I found it in.

Br Mr. Knocker:- In consequence of a message I received, I went to the police-station a little after ten o'clock on Sunday night. I there saw the prisoner, who complained to me that he had been knocked about and that he was ill. He was ill. On examining him I found his face a little swelled, but I discovered no other marks of violence. Prisoner also complained of diarrhoea, from which he said he had been suffering very much all day. I prescribed for him. I did not observe any marks of blood either upon his person or his clothes.

By the Court:- I did not at the time think that the swelling on the prisoner's face had been caused by a blow.

Dr. Howell was next examined:- He deposed to his examination of the body of the deceased at the guard-house on Sunday night shortly after the affray: and he then said - I got an order from the colonel for the removal of the body to the dead house at the Western Heights, where it was taken. I saw it placed there. I also went to the dead house about two hours afterwards, and saw that it was properly secured. I than again examined the side of the neck, but no bruise had even then made itself apparent. About nine o'clock I the following morning I again went to see the body, and then at the place on the neck where I had previously seen the dirt mark there was a deep red mark of a bruise. This mark as exactly where the dirt had been, and a mark could not have been caused in any way after death. There was no post mortem mark on the body at all. Describing the internal appearance of the deceased body, he said - The heart was in a very healthy condition. It was completely empty that if it had been washed out it could not have been cleaner. In cases of death by apoplexy, the heart is always found full of blood. All the organs of the body were healthy. In my judgement the cause of death was the shock to the nervous system from the blow on the neck. It must have been a very violent blow to have occasioned the appearance I saw. The parts are completely broken down for an inch or an inch and a half; and it was such a blow as might have been occasioned by the poker produced by Sergeant Gedds. I have known three instances of death caused by a blow in the same place. One by a kick from a man, another by a blow given by one boy to another, and the other by a fall on a spike; and I have heard of several other similar cases. Death must have been caused by the shock, as the injuries to the part alone would not have been sufficient to cause death. The appearance of the lungs, the heart, and of the brain were not by any means such as would have been the case if death had been caused by suffocation. I have heard the position in which deceased was carried described, and if I had been present I should have ordered him to be carried in the same way. In my opinion it was the best position he could have been carried in; indeed we placed him in the same position when I endeavoured to restore animation. In one of the cases I have mentioned - the case of the man who was kicked - I was present at the post mortem examination, and there was in that case no apparent bruise, and there was no other appearance in the body which could account for death.

Mr. Knocker:- Speaking of the ecchymosed spot on the parietal bone (see Dr. Howell's evidence before the coroner) I think you said you have known death arise from a blow on that spot without any mark external or internal?

Witness:- Yes, I have, from concussion.

Mr. Knocker:- I think you said that blow might have been caused by a fall against a wall?

Witness:- It might.

Mr. Knocker:- So that a drunken man falling against a wall might get a blow of that kind?

Witness:- Yes.

Mr. Knocker:- Is it not possible that in this case, then, death might have resulted from a fall?

Witness:- A good deal would depend upon the force; but that part of the head is such a perfect arch that the force of the blow struck on this spot must be almost sufficient to cause a fracture to produce concussion; and I should say that the blow must be very violent to do so.

Mr. Knocker:- And yet you have known a blow on that spot of sufficient violence to cause concussion without leaving any mark?

Witness:- Certainly.

Mr. Knocker:- Then there being an ecchymosed spot in this instance the blow might have been very violent?

Witness:- It might.

Mr. Knocker:- You will no undertake to say that death did not arise from that ecchymosed spot?

Witness:- I will not undertake to say so, but I should doubt it. We generally find, when death is caused by concussion from a blow on this spot, that the brain on the opposite side is broken down and bruised, and there was no such appearance in this case.

Mr. Knocker:- Do you, as an experienced medical man, say that when death is occasioned by concussion of the brain it is distinguishable in the brain after death?

Witness:- I have always heard that it is; I have never seen a case of the kind.

Mr. Knocker:- Have you ever made a post mortem examination of the brain in a case where death has resulted from concussion of the brain?

Witness:- Yes, frequently. In all cases there has been effusion more or less.

Mr. Knocker:- In your judgement if death arose from concussion of the brain in this instance might it have so happened that there would be nothing in the brain to betoken it?

Witness:- It is possible.

Mr. Knocker:- Do you find persons in a state of intoxication more liable to casualties of this kind than sober ones?

Witness:- No.

Mr. Knocker:- If the head of the deceased had not been held properly when he was being carried by the piquet would he have been liable to suffocation?

Witness:- Most probably he would have been suffocated.

By the Court:- If the man had fallen on his head and had received concussion of the brain there would have been the usual stentorious breathing and he would have been in a state of complete insensibility, coma, or stupor; and it is very seldom that in cases of concussion of the brain death ensures so speedily as in this instance. I never knew death to arise so speedily from concussion. Sudden deaths from injuries to the brain generally arise from some leisure or fracture.

Mr. Knocker:- Are there no cases of instant death from concussion of the brain without some fracture?

Witness:- Not to my own experience. I have heard of cases, but I have always had doubts about them.

By the Court:- Piquets have particular orders when carrying men to support the head properly, and to take off their stocks. The first thing you see an old soldier do to an intoxicated man is to take off his stock and unbutton his jacket.

The witness McCordell was then examined:- He said - It was about a minute from the time prisoner returned into the taproom that I met him at the front door with a poker in his hand. I said to prisoner, "Joe, let me take that poker in doors, or take it in yourself." He said, I'll follow him, and if there's a policemen I'll give him in charge." I said, "I hope you will, mate, but don't take that thing with you. Leave that behind; don't make a Deal job of it."

By Mr. Knocker:- I did not see the prisoner obtain the poker. I heard him ask for one. I might have been talking to him at the door about a minute or half a minute, or two minutes, I could not say. He did not stay longer than was necessary to hear what I had to say. I tried to get the poker away from him, but he "slewed" away from me.

The witness Jarvis, in cross-examination by Mr. Knocker, said - he had seen the deceased in the "Royal George" previous Sunday last; it was about a fortnight ago, and he behaved very badly. He threatened the mistress's life because she would not give him half a gallon of beer. The mistress refused to supply him because he was drunk.

Mr. Knocker:- Did he draw a knife and threaten to stab her?

Witness:- Yes; the knife I now produce.

Mr. Knocker:- Did anyone interfere then?

Witness:- A young woman took it out of her hand, and I went up to the Heights for a piquet to take him away. When the piquet came the man had gone. Prisoner was not then at home. I did not observe whether the soldier had his belt on on Sunday.

Assistant-surgeon McCormack, of the Donegal Militia, examined:- On Sunday evening last I went down to the guard-room at the foot of the main shaft, about eight o'clock, and I there saw Richard Walsh, the deceased. He was laying on the settle. I examined his heart and his pulse. He was pulse less. There was some warmth about the region of his heart; the rest of his body was not quite cold. Dr. Howell came down a quarter of an hour afterwards. Immediately I came down I tried to resuscitate the deceased. I did not know the man; he was in the uniform of the 60th Rifles.

David Jarvis, called at the request of Mr. Knocker, said - I am a pioneer of the Bedford Militia. I was at the "Royal George" on Sunday evening last. I saw there a man of the 60th Rifles, who, I have since been told, was named Walsh. He behaved himself very well, except that he was rather drunk. I heard a scuffle in the yard and looked out of the window. I did not see Walsh strike the prisoner, but I saw him with his hand on the prisoner's throat. I took the man's hand off the prisoner. The soldier had his belt on. He had his stock on when he went out of the door.

The other witness examined before the Coroner were called, but their examinations resulted in the deposition of no new facts, and it is not therefore necessary to reproduce their statements.

The Magistrates having retired for a short time, and returned again into Court.

The clerk to the Magistrates cautioned the prisoner in the usual way, and asked him if he had anything to say.

The prisoner shook his head.

The Mayor:- Then it only remains, prisoner, to commit you to take your trial on a charge of Wilful Murder.

The prisoner appeared much overcome by the decision of the Magistrates, and considerable sensation was manifested in the Court at the concluding words of the Chief Magistrate in his committal of the prisoner.

The Sessions House remained densely crowded throughout the examination, which occupied more than eight hours.

 

While the examination of the prisoner was proceeded on Wednesday, the remains of the murdered man were conveyed to the cemetery at Copt Hill. The body was of course interred with military honours, and as the cortège passed the Mason Dieu Hall the wail of the trumpets as they played a mournful funeral dirge had a peculiarly solemn and desolating effect. The prisoner, it was observed, betrayed much agitation as the sound floated across the yard of the prison into the windows of the Court.

 

Superintendent Coram, who was bound over to prosecute, conveyed the prisoner to the county gaol, at Maidstone, on the following day. The trial of the prisoner will come in at the next Assizes; but it appears doubtful whether this will happen until March, it being uncertain whether there will be any Winter Assize.

 

The Daily News (London, England,) Saturday, December 11, 1858; Issue 3924.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIRCUIT.

MAIDSTONE, Dec. 10.(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)

THE MURDER AT DOVER. (as previously reported)

Joseph Blackwell, 38, now described as a greengrocer, Landlord of "Royal George," Dover, when the crime took place.

Verdict: "the Jury", after a short deliberation, said they acquitted the prisoner of the crime of wilful murder, but found him guilty of Manslaughter.

The learned Judge, in passing sentence, said it appeared to him that the jury could not have returned any other verdict than the one they had; for although he had undoubtedly received a good deal of provocation, still his conduct in arming himself with a poker, and following the deceased when he was trying to get away and the matter was at an end, and then inflicting deadly injury upon him, was quite unjustifiable, and he had been very properly convicted of the crime of manslaughter. His lordship then observed upon some of the other facts in the case, and concluded by sentencing the prisoner to be kept to hard labour for twelve months.

 

Incidentally, I have traced reference to the "Deal Job" to the murder of Edward McCarroll by Samuel Baker, landlord of the "Ship" inn, Deal the previous year.

 

LICENSEE LIST

PAGE John 1834

PAGE Elizabeth 1837

PAGE John 1841+ (age 60 in 1841Census)

MILLYARD William 1847-54 Bagshaw's Directory 1847

BLACKWELL Joseph 1857-58+ Melville's 1858

 

Bagshaw's Directory 1847From Bagshaw Directory 1847

Melville's 1858From Melville's Directory 1858

 

If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-

TOP Valid CSS Valid XTHML