INQUEST.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXII, Issue 33, 22 January 1912, Page 6

INQUEST.

H. S. PRIESTLEY’S DEATH

An inquest touching the death of Mr Henry S. Priestley was held on Saturday afternoon in the Courthouse before Mr John Leydon, acting-Coro-ner.

The following jury was empanelled: —Messrs J. Masters (foreman), A. W. Reid, F. Copestake, W. P. Brown, Charles Milner, and Alan Cuthbertson.

John Robert Haggle, the first witness called, said he had occasion to go to Mr Priestley’s house. He noticed that for the last two days the shop, had been closed, and the lights at the back were burning. On Saturday morning ho tried the shop door and received no answer. He went round to the back, and found the door there unlocked. Ho opened it, and shouted out “hullo there,” but received no answer. He went in and saw him bn the door in front of the door. He was lying on his right side, still retaining his scat in the chair. He was then dead. He immediately informed the police. To a juryman: He thought ho must have been dead two days, seeing no one about the sljop. Sergeant McNeely callod May Dunham, wife of Sergeant Major Dunham, who resides immediately at the back of deceased’s shop. Witness stated that she saw the late Mr

Priestley on Friday, 19th inst., between 12 and 1 p.m. She was standing at her back door, and saw him come out of his back door and put something on the clothes lino. She was quite certain that it was Mr Priestley. On Thursday she had seen him walking in Regan Street, where ho had spoken to two little boys.

Dr Steven gave evidence to the effect that lie found the body of deceased lying in the back premises; of the shop! It had been evidently lying in the chair on the right side, as described by a previous witness. There was a contusion of the left eye, and a slight abrasion on the back of the right hand. No other signs of injury were about the body. He performed a post-mortem examination of the body on Saturday afternoon, and found an extensive haemorrhage in the base of the brain on tho left side. This was sufficient to cause instant death.

To Sergeant McNeely: He was quite satisfied that this was the cause of death. The haemorrhage would not have been caused by a blow. Tho mark on tho loft eye would have been caused by coming into contact witn the table. There was extensive disease in tho right lung, but that was not the cause of death. All other organs were sound and healthy. Ho did not think deceased had been dead twenty-four hours.

The jury did not retire, lint returned a verdict in accordance with the medical evidence.