Did a dog fire the gun? - conclusion of inquest

first Inquest report here

From Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 23 August, 1929

Snowdon Shooting Mystery

Protest as to suggested drunkenness at Snowdon Institute

The inquest on the body of Reginald William Clark, 23, of Nonington, who was shot in a tent in the early hours of Saturday morning, August 10th, was resumed at Ackholt farm, Nonington, last Saturday morning by the East Kent coroner, Mr. W. Rutley Mowell.

The coroner: I should like to ask the brother of the deceased one or two additional questions.

When you found what had happened was the dog still tethered to the tent pole? - Yes.

Did you notice the position of the cord which held the dog? - I did not notice where it was.

You told me the dog was on the bed?-Was the cord entangled around the gun? - no: the gun was lying on the ground but there was no rope round it.

The gun was quite free from the cord?-yes.

Mr. Campbell (one of the jury): I should like to ask him a question on his evidence which appeared in the local press. His remarks about drunken miners coming from the institute cast an aspersion on the Institute. Has he got any reasons?

The coroner: I do not object to you asking him that. What I have got about that is this, “On Monday night we heard another dog barking outside the door…….”

Mr. Campbell: Were they coming from the institute?-They were coming from that direction.

Mr. Campbell: They might have been coming from Barham, Nonington and Woolage.

The coroner:”We will enter it this way.” With regard to my evidence about people coming from the club, I cannot be sure they came from the club. I mean they came from the direction of the club”.

P.C. Ralph Chalmers, K.C.C.., stationed at Nonington, said : At about 8.10am(note: this time not clear in my copy-brambled), on Saturday August 10th , Mr. Clark informed me that his son Reginald was lying in a tent at Ackholt farm with a gunshot wound in his chest. I went with Mr. Clark to the tent, where I saw the deceased lying in a bed with the lower portion of his body covered with the bed- clothes. There was a gun lying on the ground with the muzzle pointing towards the deceased. There was also an Alsatian dog made fast by a cord secured to the centre pole of the tent. The dog was sitting at the front of the deceased’s bed and it barked when I got there. Mr. Clark had to take it outside before I could enter the tent.

The Coroner: The presence of the dog, to my mind controverts the possibility that anybody else could have entered the tent.

Replying, to the Coroner, P.C. Charman said he did not think the deceased could have been out of bed from the position of the clothes. By a juryman: It looked as through the deceased had sat up in bed and the clothes had fallen from his body.

The Coroner: What was the deceased wearing?-A cotton singlet and a pyjama suit.
Was the shot through the vest through the vest and pyjamas?-It had penetrated the vest. The.pyjama jacket had evidently opened because where the jacket had joined the shot had taken part of it away.

Was there any trace of any part of the shot in the bedclothes?-No.

He must have had the bedclothes down just below the point where the shot entered his body ?- I should think so.

The foreman of the Jury (Mr. JF Harlow) said they had seen the tent and found it to be in the same condition that the brother had stated- They had come to the conclusion that the gun was fired by the dog through the animal becoming in some way entangled with the gun and they returned a verdict of “accidental Death”. The jury expressed their sympathy with the deceased’s family.

Mr. Clark thanked them and said he wanted to thank the police and the coroner for the way in which he had conducted the enquiry.

For scan of this newpaper report click here