Mexborough & Swinton Times – Friday 03 June 1892
Hewitt Before the Bench.
Case Adjourned for a Fortnight.
On Monday at the Rotherham West Riding Police Court before Mr. G. W. Chambers. (chairman). Mr. N. Camm, and the Rev. H. G. Jobb, George Hewitt, newsagent, of Kilnhurst, was charged with unlawfully and maliciously wounding Florence Annie Flavell, the daughter of a newsagent at Kilnhurst on May 21st.
The case was one which had excited considerable interest in the district. At Kilnhurst a defence committee had been formed to assist Hewitt, who has been a member of the church choir, and held a respectable position. The Rev. P. Houghton sat behind Mr. Hickmott, who defended, and occasionally as the hearing progressed gave him information. There was a large attendance of local residents at the court.
Mr Gichard, who had been instructed by the police to prosecute, said Hewitt was charged with unlawfully and maliciously wounding Florence Annie Flavell, at Kilnhurst, on the night of 21 May. He did not think it was necessary for him to go into any of the facts. He simply proposed to give sufficient evidence to justify a remand.
Mr Chambers:Did not this case come before the bench on Monday last ?
Mr Gichard: No, sir.
Major Hammond (superintendent of police) said Hewitt was only arrested on Tuesday night, and the following day be was admitted to bail.
Mr. Chambers: By Mr. Jobb?
Major Hammond : Yes, sir.
Mr Gichard said the injured woman was at present unable to attend. He held a certificate from the doctor was attending her. That certificate was written out in the presence of a police officer. He proposed to put it in, and then he understood his friend will raise no objection to a remand for a fortnight, bail being granted in the same sureties as before.
Police sergeant Lyttle, stationed at Swinton, stated that he had seen the injured woman on several occasions.
Mr Gichard: Where you present when the doctor was there? – Witness: On one or two occasions.
Did the doctor write out the certificate in your present? – Yes.
The certificate was handed in. It read as follows: “This is to certify that Florence and its level, of Kilnhurst, is unable to attend the court on Monday, May 30, 1892, in consequence of injuries received. Charles F Burton, surgeon, May 28, 1892.”
Mr Gichard: Is the woman at present unable to appear? – Witness: She is.
Mr Gichard: there is no objection.
Mr Hickmott said that was not sufficient evidence to justify a remand. The mere fact that a person is injured and was unable to appear would not do.
Mr Gichard understood that his friend raised no objection.
Mr Hickmott: I want sufficient evidence. We say it is an entire mistake, and that this man Hewitt is accused wrongly.
Mr Chambers: We cannot judge of that at the present stage.
Mr Hickmott complained that he had had no notice of intention to apply for an adjournment. The defence had not had the slightest intimation. He had brought to the court 15 or 16 witnesses to give evidence on behalf of the prisoner, had done so at considerable expense.
Mr Gichard said the defence could not be prejudiced by the facts not being further gone into that day. At present his friend Mr Hickmott did not know what the case for the prosecution was, and the only object of his friend in asking for the facts to be gone into was in order that he might gather what the case might be.
The Chairman said he saw Miss Hickmott had a perfect right to do that.
Mr Hickmott said he apprehended the bench must have some evidence to justify remand in the prisoner. Unless this was produced each should object to the prisoner been remanded.
Mr Gichard said the facts he proposed to put before the court were to the effect that on the night in question the prosecutrix, who was in business, or looked after the business of her father at Swinton, was returning to Kilnhurst shortly after 11 o’clock on Saturday night, the 21st inst The defendant Hewitt was also returning at the same time. He (Mr Gichard) would call witnesses who would prove to the bench that the only person they met for a distance of 600 yards were the prosecutrix and the defendant. The assault took place near a point called Meadow View, which was some little distance out of Kilnhurst, and the witnesses would speak as to about 300 yards on each side of the place; after the time, their evidence be sufficient show that he Hewitt must have been near the place when the assault was committed. He (Mr Gichard) would put a witness into the box who would prove that at the time he went to see Hewitt about the occurrence he denied he had seen this level on the road. The prosecutrix could not be put into the box.
Mr Chambers: We do not try the case today.
Mr Hickmott said he only has, under the circumstances of this particular case, that the prosecution should bring such witnesses as would connect the prisoner with the matter, and justify is been remanded. It mentioned the bench already set up 15 or 16 witnesses in court, but if notice had been given to him he will not brought any witnesses at all.
Mr Gichard said the only two persons on that road, and who could under ordinary circumstances have been connected with the offence, was the prisoner and the woman (prosecutrix). If he pulled this statement he apprehended that would be sufficient evidence to justify the bench in granting a remand.
Thomas John Gray was the first witness examined.
Mr Gichard: do you remember Saturday, 21 May? – Witness: Yes.
What time did you leave Kilnhurst? – 11 o’clock.
Did you meet anyone on the road? – I met George Hewitt.
Where were you going to? – I was going to High Thorn.
Would you have passed Meadow View? – Yes.
And when about did you meet? – Against the church.
How far will that be away from Meadow View? – About 280 yards.
After you had passed him did you meet anyone else? – No.
Did you see anyone else on the road. Do you know a man named Goldspink? – Yes.
Did you see him? – Yes, he was supporting Florence Annie Flavell.
In what condition was she? – She was in a reclining state.
Was she conscious or unconscious? – She was unconscious.
From the time of leaving Hewitt to the time of seeing Goldspink supporting mislabelled did you meet anyone? – No, sir.
I believe you are assisted to take Miss Flavell home? – Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr Hickmott: Charles Gray (see below), Baguley Cobb, and other young men were with him. The point where they met this man (Hewitt) 280 yards and were he saw the girl Flavell. He did not speak to Hewitt, nor was he aware that any of his friend said “Good night.” He was positive you notice you are, though he forgot the incident afterwards. There was nothing particular about Hewitt to make him remember him. When they got to the place of the poor goals like they found a man named Goldspink besides her.
Did he say he had just got there? – I don’t remember.
May he have said so? – I don’t know.
Mr Chambers: did he say anything? – He said, “Oh Jack there’s somebody done something here,” or words to that effect.
Mr Hickmott: Would it have been possible for some of your companions just spoken to Goldspink, and for Goldspink to have said “I have only just got here,” without you hearing? – I did not hear anything.
Is there a footpath across a field where the woman was found? – Yes.
Anyone who attacked this woman might have gone across that footpath? – They might. We should not have seen him.
Already might have gone across to the other side of the road are you could not have seen him? – No.
Or if they had gone back to Swinton by the canal side, you would not have seen them? – No.
Do you think it was the usual habit for this man (Hewitt) to go on this road on Saturday nights? – I do not know.
Have you heard of a man been seen at Meadow View ran away? – I have not.
Witness said he had heard of a man been seen on the doorstep at Meadow View, but not of one running away.
By Mr Gichard: He knew Hewitt well.
Mr Chambers suggested that before the next hearing a plan of the place and the adjoining ground should be made.
Mr Gichard said that would be done.
Samuel Goldspink, miner, living at Kilnhurst, said he was passing between High Thorn and Kilnhurst, between 20 minutes and our past 11 o’clock on the night of Saturday, the 21st inst. As he was nearing Meadow View, he heard some screams. He was coming down the hill towards Meadow View and towards Kilnhurst. He would then be 240 or 250 yards from Meadow View, and the distance from Meadow View to the spot where he found the girl was 40 yards. She was on the opposite side of Meadow View. When he found her she was leaning up against the wall as if she had staggered against it. She was unconscious. There was a slight bank of earth against the wall. The wall part of the road and the railway embankment. On the other side there was a somewhat steep embankment down to the railway. He did not see any marks as the night was dark. He afterwards noticed she was covered with blood all over her face. She appeared to have been assaulted. He supported her and carried her across the road to footpath side. He stood with her there and someone came up – Charlie and John Gray and several others.
In reply to the Chairman, witness said it would be about 40 yards from the cottage when he found Miss Flavell. He had stepped the distance.
Mr Hickmott said he had a plan, and the exact measurement was 32 yards.
Witness, in reply to Mr Gichard, further said it was on the Kilnhurst side of Meadow View that he heard the screams, and in going down the hill he met no one.
By Mr Hickmott: Until he met the girl he saw no one.
Did you see a man named Smith? – No.
Did you hear him speak? – Yes. It was near High Thorn.
Mr Chambers: Howe far was it from where you heard him speak to this place? – Several hundred yards.
Mr Hickmott: Did you hear Smith speak before or after you were the screams? – Before, sir.
How long? – About three or four minutes.
There is a hill between High Thorne and Meadow View? – Yes.
Did you ran up that ill? – I ran up a few minutes after I left my friend.
How long did you ran up before you heard the Screams? Was It 10 Minutes? – No; It would be about seven minutes.
Witness Said He Had Just Left the Public House, and after Conversing with James Whitehead Ran A Few Yards up High Thorn Hill.
And You See Miss Flavell Pass That Night? – No.
Had you seen her before? – No.
Did you see before you found her against the wall? – No.
Mr Chambers: Did she pass the public house? – I suppose she did.
Mr Hickmott: It would have been the ordinary road for her to travel on the road you were following? – Yes:
How long had you been there when Gray came up? – I tried to recognise her after I carried her across the road. It would only be a few seconds.
How did you carry her? – With my arms around her waist.
Were her legs dragging on the ground? – They might possibly.
Did you examine the place next morning? – Yes, Sir.
The road was dry? – Yes.
Did you see any marks across the road where the girl had been dragged? – I could see where she had been dragged to the place where i found her.
You say there were marks where she had been dragged from the Meadow View Side to the place where you found her? – Yes.
Were there any marks where you dragged her back? – No Sir.
Was there any blood on the Meadow View Side, where you carried her back? – No Sir.
Mr Chambers: Did you see any blood on the footpath? – I did not look for any next morning. I went to the spot where I found her.
Replying to further questions by Mr Hickmott, witness said there was blood against the wall, but he did not see any on the Meadow View side. He did not look for any blood next morning. He actually went to examine the road and saw where she had been dragged, but did not look for blood on the footpath. He did not go on the footpath, but only went to the spot where he had found her and returned again. There was a patch of blood, and her face was covered with blood.
Mr Hickmott: at the place where you found her did you find marks on the wall of the person having got over Eschenbach – I cannot say I did.
Where they marks pointed out to you where a person would wall nail boots I got over recently? – No, sir.
Did you look for them? – I looked at the wall. Will you swear that there were no marks? – There were no nail marks. I saw some marks of blood.
The person who did this outrage might have gone down the footpath without being seen by you? – Yes, he might have done so. It is 40 yards away to the footpath across the railway level.
Mr Chambers: What is there on the other side of the wall? – The railway cutting.
Mr Hickmott said there was a deep cutting on the line at Kilnhurst, but it was at the end of the cutting on the level where the crossing existed.
Witness said the road was not level with the road, the latter sloped down to the railway.
Mr Hickmott remarked that the row was level with the road at Meadow View.
Witness said it was not level when he found Miss Flavell.
Mr Hickmott, continuing, said at any rate there was a footpath within 40 yards, and any person might have gone down there that been seen by witness.
Witness confirmed that this was so, and added that the footpath across the railway, and led to Kilnhurst. He was about 25 yards away when near the screen. He could not say that Miss Flavell was a slim girl. He could not say what her weight was; he was not a judge of weights. (Laughter.)
Mr Hickmott: You got your clothes saturated with blood? – No, sir.
Did you get any blood on your clothes carrying her home? – I did not carry her home after I met Gray and these other men. I went home with her.
Mr Chambers: Had you known before? – Yes, sir
Mr Hickmott: how long? – About four years.
Mr Chambers: Was she accustomed to go home that way? – I don’t know; but I think she does because I have met her.
Mr Hickmott: You know that she attends her father’s branch shop at Swinton, and on Saturday night takes on the takings? – I know nothing about that.
Answering further questions, witness said when he went to the place next morning, he did not see a man named Whitfield there. He examined the road, and found a 2 ½ d stamp. He put it down again, and left it. He did not consider that strange. The reason was that the stamp had been used. He did not think it was worthwhile to go and tell the police about it. He could not swear whether the stamp had being used or not. He put it down close to where Miss Flavell was found.
Mr Hickmott said the stamp and not being used.
Witness, continuing, said he left the stamp there. It did not strike him it might be material as to whether the stamp had been taken from the girls pocket. He could not say how the police had got hold of it. He was sober that night. He went to the public house about 8 o’clock. He was about the middle of the I Thornhill when he heard the screams, and running at the time. It would be about 240 yards from where Miss Flavell was found.
Mr Hickmott asked him if he would be surprised to hear that it was about 500 yards from the middle of High Thorn Hill?
Witness said the place where he was could easily be ascertained, as there was a gas lamp on the opposite side of the footpath. It would not be 500 yards.
Mr Hickmott said supporting it had been measured, would he contradict the statement?
Mr Gichard said he did not wish to enter up, but he also measured distance, and it was not 500 yards. He asked witness when he was alone at the time he found the postage stamp?
Witness said he was not, and therefore he was not the only person who failed in discretion in leaving the postage stamp there.
The Chairman asked the name of the person who was with him.
Witness said it was Tait. He also stated that at the place where Miss Lovell was found his footsteps will be heard “pit-a-pat” as he was running down the hill.
The Chairman remarked that the postage stamp might have come from the pocket as a Miss Flavell or her assailant stop
Mr Gichard said that remain to be seen when Miss Flavell came into the witness box.
This was all the evidence offered.
Mr Hickmott said the case was a very unusual one. He submitted with the greatest possible respect there was not tittle of evidence to connect prisoner with the offence. He strongly urge that before the Court to adjourn the hearing, some evidence should be shown that nature.
Mr Chambers said the accused was seen near the spot, and it would be far better to investigate the matter thoroughly, as it would be a fortnight hence. In the meantime the queues will be released on sureties.
Mr Hickmott produced the Reverend P Houghton, Vicar of Kilnhurst, and Mr Bowman healed sureties, neither at sector, the adjourned hearing to take place on 13 June.
Mr Chambers: Of course if prosecutrix is unable to appear in a fortnight, notice must be given to Hewitt’s solicitor.
Major Hammond: But the girl will then be able to attend.