STARTLING DI-CLOSURES.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1069, 20 October 1882, Page 3

STARTLING DI-CLOSURES.

The adjourned inquest on the man Black - hum, who died in a paddock over against Uhe White Hart Hotel, Christchurch, &as continued on Monday, October 16, One of the witnesses said he had re. ceived a letter telling him to keep his month shut A large amount of evidence was brought forward, hut nothing to show that actual violence had been used, hut the man had been earned out of the hotel, and first of all shoved down in a right-of-way in the full glare of the sun, and then carried into the paddock and propped up against the fence There he was left to die. The general tenor of the evidence, however, showed that no one thought he was in a moribund state, hut he was treated as though merely drunk. After a retirement of about half an-hour, the jury returned the following verdict : “The deceased John Edward Bradburn died from congestive apoplexy, accelerated by the use of intoxicating liquors and the inhuman treatment received in connection with his removal from the White Hart Hotel. The jury desire to add a strong vote of censure on the authorities of the White Hart Hotel. And that the Coroner he requested to bring the matter under the notice of the Christchurch East Licensing Committee ” The Coroner said he could not accept the clause as to death having been accelerated by inhuman treatment. This virtually amounted to a charge of manslaughter without specifying any culprit. He would of course send on their rider as requested.— The Foreman said that the verdict had been agreed to unanimously.—The Coroner said that he did not see that the evidence had proved inhuman treatment. —One of the Jurors replied that it was the unanimous opinion of the jury that such had been proved.—Another Jnrer objected that he did not see that the evidence had proved inhuman treatment. A Juror said that the verdict was the opinion of fourteen men, and asked if the Coroner could over-ride it.—The Coroner replied that he could refuse to take a verdial, that was not legal.—The Juror did not consider their verdict an illegal one, and the Coroner answered he would take the verdict with the omission of the clause he had referred to.—The Foreman asked if the jury might retire for the purpose of amending their verdict, and the Coroner replied that they certainly could.—The jury retired, and after a brief deliberation returned with a verdict amended by the omission of the word “inhuman,” so as to read “accelerated by the treatment received in connection with his removal from the White Hart Hole l .”—The Coroner said he would accept the verdict, which was accordingly signed in the usual way.