Newspaper Abstracts

FALSE POLICE EVIDENCE
In a case at Worship street Police Court yesterday in which two men and a woman were charged with assaulting the police, the magistrate, Mr. Cluer, made some strong remarks concerning the police evidence. It was alleged that when constables ordered Margaret Stewart, who was creating a disturbance in Playhouse yard, St. Luke's, to go indoors, they were assaulted by her husband, William Stewart, a Reservist, and by John Ahearn, a tailor. Ahearn swore, however, that Constable 43G pursued him upstairs, broke in a door, and knocked him down with his truncheon. Mr. Cluer accepted this story and discharged the man, remarking that the policeman's evidence was untrue. His Worship also decided that William Stewart was wrongly arrested, but ordered him a day's imprisonment for kicking the constable. The testimony of Constable 434G [sic] that Margaret Stewart struck him with a jug and that he was knocked through a doorway the magistrate altogether discredited, and discharged the woman. "Have you ever been to Donnybrook Fair?" Mr. Plowden at Marylebone Police Court yesterday asked a constable, who admitted that in endeavouring to arrest a man during a street fight he "hit out anywhere" with his truncheon, and that it "happened to hit the prisoner twice." The prisoner, who had four scalp wounds, and said that he was bludgeoned till he was unconscious, was released. The magistrate cautioned the constable that his truncheon was intended only for self-defence.

FALSE POLICE EVIDENCE

   In a case at Worship street Police Court yesterday in which two men and a woman were charged with assaulting the police, the magistrate, Mr. Cluer, made some strong remarks concerning the police evidence.
   It was alleged that when constables ordered Margaret Stewart, who was creating a disturbance in Playhouse yard, St. Luke's, to go indoors, they were assaulted by her husband, William Stewart, a Reservist, and by John Ahearn, a tailor.
   Ahearn swore, however, that Constable 43G pursued him upstairs, broke in a door, and knocked him down with his truncheon.
   Mr. Cluer accepted this story and discharged the man, remarking that the policeman's evidence was untrue. His Worship also decided that William Stewart was wrongly arrested, but ordered him a day's imprisonment for kicking the constable. The testimony of Constable 434G [sic] that Margaret Stewart struck him with a jug and that he was knocked through a doorway the magistrate altogether discredited, and discharged the woman.
   "Have you ever been to Donnybrook Fair?" Mr. Plowden at Marylebone Police Court yesterday asked a constable, who admitted that in endeavouring to arrest a man during a street fight he "hit out anywhere" with his truncheon, and that it "happened to hit the prisoner twice."
   The prisoner, who had four scalp wounds, and said that he was bludgeoned till he was unconscious, was released. The magistrate cautioned the constable that his truncheon was intended only for self-defence.

THE POLICE AND THE PUBLIC REMARKABLE CASE AT ST. LUKE'S.
At the Worship Street Police Court, on Monday, a case of a very involved character imputing high-handed action on the part of certain police-constables occupied the attention of the Court for nearly two hours, three persons being charged with assault. The cases were heard separately. The facts may, however, be stated in their sequence against the three accused — John Ahearn, 30, a tailor, Wm. Stewart, 30, army reserve man, and Margaret Stewart, his wife. The three persons live in Playhouse Yard, Whitecross Street, St. Luke's—a very rough neighbourhood— and it appeared that about half an hour after midnight on Saturday, Constable 43 G was attracted to a disturbance there alleged to be caused by Margaret Stewart. The constable stated that on ordering her indoors he was, without any remark, struck on the nose by Ahearn. He seized him, and William Stewart and others assisted Ahearn to resist and release himself from custody. The constable pursued Ahearn into the passage of a house, where he said he was further resisted and assaulted, Ahearn again escaping and rushing upstairs. On the landing of the first staircase, however, he said he caught him again and assistance having arrived, got, him into the street and to the station. Meanwhile Mrs. Stewart had become engaged with Police- constable 43 G, who alleged that she struck him in the face with a jug, and Police-constable 87 G who, by direction of 43 G, had taken William Stewart into custody for assisting in the resistance of Ahearn, had been struck in the face and kicked in the stomach. The men went into the witness-box and gave evidence for their defence. Ahearn had two wounds caused, he said, by the truncheon of the constable 43 G. The latter admitted using his staff, but suggested that Ahearn's injuries which were on the head and forehead were the results of a fall against a doorjamb. The defence of Ahearn and Stewart was that they were both in a room on the first floor of the house to which Stewart, after trying to get his wife indoors, had retired, when the police broke in after him. It was said that 43 G burst in the door and rushed in with drawn staff, striking Ahearn twice on the head and knocking him down. Two other constables followed 43 G, alleging that in the struggle he was knocked through a door into a room. The father of Ahearn, a sister, and a nephew also gave evidence as to the action of the police, Stewart on his part alleging that after he escaped from the room he was bleeding from the head, and going downstairs when he was arrested. He admitted in cross-examination that he had been twice convicted of assaulting police constables. Mr. Cluer ordered Ahearn to be discharged, remarking that he did not believe he had assaulted the Constable 43 G, and that the latter's evidence was untrue. He had no doubt the prisoner had received his injuries in the manner he described, and was of opinion the constable had no right to go up to the room and break in as he had. With respect to Stewart, he had been wrongly arrested, but even then had no right to have kicked the constable. Stewart's, sentence would be one day's imprisonment on1y. In determining the case of Mrs. Stewart, against whom Police constable 43 G deposed that the woman struck him with a jug, and that he was afterwards, knocked through a doorway, the magistrate said he had been forced, to disbelieve that part of the officer's evidence. How then could he believe the other part which alleged he had been assaulted with a jug? He was bound to discredit the constable's testimony altogether and he ordered the woman's discharge.

THE POLICE AND THE PUBLIC
REMARKABLE CASE AT ST. LUKE'S.

At the Worship Street Police Court, on Monday, a case of a very involved character imputing high-handed action on the part of certain police-constables occupied the attention of the Court for nearly two hours, three persons being charged with assault. The cases were heard separately. The facts may, however, be stated in their sequence against the three accused — John Ahearn, 30, a tailor, Wm. Stewart, 30, army reserve man, and Margaret Stewart, his wife. The three persons live in Playhouse Yard, Whitecross Street, St. Luke's—a very rough neighbourhood— and it appeared that about half an hour after midnight on Saturday, Constable 43 G was attracted to a disturbance there alleged to be caused by Margaret Stewart. The constable stated that on ordering her indoors he was, without any remark, struck on the nose by Ahearn. He seized him, and William Stewart and others assisted Ahearn to resist and release himself from custody. The constable pursued Ahearn into the passage of a house, where he said he was further resisted and assaulted, Ahearn again escaping and rushing upstairs. On the landing of the first staircase, however, he said he caught him again and assistance having arrived, got, him into the street and to the station.

Meanwhile Mrs. Stewart had become engaged with Police- constable 43 G, who alleged that she struck him in the face with a jug, and Police-constable 87 G who, by direction of 43 G, had taken William Stewart into custody for assisting in the resistance of Ahearn, had been struck in the face and kicked in the stomach.

The men went into the witness-box and gave evidence for their defence. Ahearn had two wounds caused, he said, by the truncheon of the constable 43 G. The latter admitted using his staff, but suggested that Ahearn's injuries which were on the head and forehead were the results of a fall against a doorjamb.

The defence of Ahearn and Stewart was that they were both in a room on the first floor of the house to which Stewart, after trying to get his wife indoors, had retired, when the police broke in after him. It was said that 43 G burst in the door and rushed in with drawn staff, striking Ahearn twice on the head and knocking him down. Two other constables followed 43 G, alleging that in the struggle he was knocked through a door into a room. The father of Ahearn, a sister, and a nephew also gave evidence as to the action of the police, Stewart on his part alleging that after he escaped from the room he was bleeding from the head, and going downstairs when he was arrested. He admitted in cross-examination that he had been twice convicted of assaulting police constables.

Mr. Cluer ordered Ahearn to be discharged, remarking that he did not believe he had assaulted the Constable 43 G, and that the latter's evidence was untrue. He had no doubt the prisoner had received his injuries in the manner he described, and was of opinion the constable had no right to go up to the room and break in as he had. With respect to Stewart, he had been wrongly arrested, but even then had no right to have kicked the constable. Stewart's, sentence would be one day's imprisonment on1y. In determining the case of Mrs. Stewart, against whom Police constable 43 G deposed that the woman struck him with a jug, and that he was afterwards, knocked through a doorway, the magistrate said he had been forced, to disbelieve that part of the officer's evidence. How then could he believe the other part which alleged he had been assaulted with a jug? He was bound to discredit the constable's testimony altogether and he ordered the woman's discharge.

Ottumwa Daily Courier
Ottumwa, Wapello, Iowa
July 16, 1903

Mrs. James King, 93 Years of Age Passes Away in South Ottumwa
Was One of the Earliest Settlers of Wapello County- Old Resident of Ottumwa- Funeral Friday Morning at St. Patrick's Catholic Church.

Mrs. Mary King, wife of James King, died at 5 o'clock last evening at the family residence, 311 South Ward street. The funeral services will be held at 9 o'clock Friday morning at St. Patrick's Catholic church at solemn requiem mass. The services will be conducted by Rev. Father John O'Farrell. The interment will take place in Calvary cemetery.

Was 93 Years of Age.
Mrs. King was 93 years of age and was one of the earliest settlers of Wapello county and oldest residents of Ottumwa. She was born in County Clare, Ireland, September 29, 1810. In 1834 she was married to James King and in 1848 the young couple moved to this country and to Wapello county, where they lived for many years on a farm in Green township. A few years ago they left the farm and moved to Ottumwa to the family residence in South Ottumwa where Mrs. King's death occurred.

Her Death Unexpected.
About six weeks ago Mrs. King fell on the sidewalk and injured her left hip. At her advanced age the shock was a serious one and she never fully recovered. Her death last evening came very suddenly and was wholly unexpected.
Mrs. King was widely known and she leaves a large circle of friends. She is survived by her husband, Jas. King, and three children, Joseph King of Omaha, Mrs. Andrew Smith, 309 West Second street, and Miss Mary King, who resides at the family residence.

Ottumwa Daily Courier
Ottumwa, Wapello, Iowa
July 23, 1903

JAMES KING PASSES AWAY AT FAMILY RESIDENCE IN SOUTH OTTUMWA
Was 91 Years of Age- Funeral to be Held at St. Patrick's Catholic Church Tomorrow Morning at 9 o'clock at Solemn Requiem Mass.

    James King, aged 91 years died at his residence 311 South Ward street this morning at 1:40 o'clock. The funeral services will occur tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock at the St. Patrick's Catholic church, Rev. Father John O'Farrell will celebrate solemn requiem mass. The interment will take place in Calvary cemetery.
     Mr. King was born in County Clare, Ireland, in 1812. He was married to Miss Mary Daily in 1834 and the young couple came to America in 1840. They moved to Wapello county in 1848 and resided on a farm near Mt. Zion. Five years ago they moved to Ottumwa and have since continued to reside at 311 South Ward street. The wife, Mrs. James King, died on July 15, and since her demise the death of her husband has been constantly expected.
    Mr. King is survived by three children, Joseph King of South Omaha, Mrs. Andrew Smith, 309 West Second street and Miss Mary King who resides at the family residence.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: All rights to the pages found within this site are retained by the original submitter of the information. Pages may be printed or copied for personal use only. They may NOT be reproduced in any form in whole or in part by any individual or organization for profit.