Newspaper Transcripts
Some Selected Reports from The Windsor and Eton Express
Saturday, January 1, 1831.
WINDSOR & ETON.
In Residence, at Windsor, the Rev. W. CANNING.
In Residence, at Eton, the Rev. J.S. GROVER.
REPORT OF THE ROYAL DISPENSARY AT WINDSOR.
Registered the Month of Dec., 175 - Lying-In, 4 - Vaccinated 14 - Total Registered, 193 - Discharged Cured, 188 - Relieved 10 - Non-attendance, 14 - Dead, 4 - Total Discharged, 216 - Under Cure, 323.
An account of the baptisms, marriages, and burials of the parish of New Windsor, for the year 1830 :- Baptisms, 211; Marriages, 32; Burials, 137.
The Hon. Linsey Burrell, of Laleham, Middlesex, gave to two hundred and fifty-four poor persons a Christmas dinner, consisting of beef, potatoes, and bread, likewise one bushel of coals to each family.
On Christmas Eve a bountiful distribution of beef and bread was given by their Royal Highness's the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, to all the poor of Bagshot and its neighbourhood according to the number of individuals in each family - to the amount of 1200 persons, with some comfortable clothing, and good great coats to the labourers on his Royal Highness's farm.
The first subscription ball and supper at our Town Hall this season, took place last night; about 120 persons were present, and the company did not separate till half-past five o'clock this morning.
Wm. Slaughter and Daniel B.rns complained before the Magistrates at the Town Hall last week, against Wm. Brown, of the Crown, in Peascod street, for nonperformance of his agreement with them. It appeared on the evidence of the complainants, that about the 7th Oct. last, Brown employed them to dig gravel for him in Clewer Gravel Pits, and agreed to give them 4d. a yard. They continued their work for upwards of five weeks under his direction, during which time they had dug 524 yards, and completed their job. In the progress of their work, Brown paid them money on account. On settling accounts, Brown denied that he had agreed to pay them by the yard, but at half-a-crown a day each, and refused to come to any other settlement. Brown, it appears, measured the work, but declined telling them the admeasurement. All parties then agreed that Edward Atkins of Clewer should measure it, who made 524 yards. Atkins gave his admeasurement to Brown, who paid him a shilling for his trouble. Brown, in his defence, stated, that he agreed to pay them by the day, and not as stated by them; but he produced no witness. The Magistrates, therefore, seeing no reason to doubt the evidence of the complainants, corroborated as it was by Atkin's and Brown's own conduct, adjudged him (Brown) to pay the balance of �2. 10s. 2d. which appeared to be due to the complainants.
ACCIDENTS AT OLD WINDSOR.
A person, whose name we do not know, was thrown from his horse about six o'clock this evening, near the Nelson, Old Windsor, and bruised in a most dreadful manner.
About half-past six o'clock, a second accident happened near the same place, as Mr. Burton of Egham, accompanied by a friend in returning from Windsor to Egham, in a chaise, they by some accident came in contact with a brewer's dray, and the concussion threw both gentlemen to the ground, whereby Mr.B. was killed on the spot, but his friend escaped with only a few slight bruises.
UXBRIDGE - A shocking accident occurred at Harefield a short time back. A girl of about fourteen years of age, meeting a little boy of her acquaintance, who had been sent a short distance by his mother with a flask of gunpowder, persuaded him to let her have "just one flash," as she termed it. The boy had no sooner agreed to this request that the girl ran of for a piece of lighted wood, while he was engaged in filling up the charger of the flask to the top. The portion of powder thus measured out was then ignited, and, strange to say, went off without communicating to the contents of the flask. The children were so pleased with the result of this experiment that they determined to try a second, when unfortunately the whole exploded, shattering the boy's hand in a dreadful manner, and actually carrying away one side of the poor girl's face ! As the terrific nature of the wound was aggravated by pieces of the copper flask having lodged in the flesh for two or three days, life was at first despaired of, although we since learn that the foreign substance has been removed and that the patient is rapidly recovering.
A Coroner's Inquest was held at the Chequers Inn, Uxbridge, yesterday afternoon, before W. Stirling, Esq, coroner for Middlesex, on the body of Elizabeth Hobbs, a child three months old, who was put to bed on Monday night, some time previous to its parents, who did not retire until between two and three o'clock on Tuesday morning, and when they awoke at 7 o'clock the infant was dead, the Jury after hearing the desposition of the mother, returned a verdict of "Died by the visitation of God."
T. Polhill, Esq. M.P. for Bedford, gave 3lb of beef and a quarten loaf to every poor married man without a family, 2lb of beef and ditto to every widow and single person, 4lb and ditton to every man having a wife and two children, and to those having a larger family an extra pound of meat and half peck loaf; to the poor of Renhold, where Mr. Polhill resides, equal portions, with 100 bushels of coals.
IVER - ADDITIONAL BURYING GROUND.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE WINDSOR EXPRESS.
SIR, - I forbear to make any remark on the tone and spirit of the two paragraphs, that have lately appeared in your journal, dated IVER, and referring to the purchase of an additional Burying Ground for the use of that parish. I wish only to put your readers in possession of a correct version of the whole transaction, that they may form their own judgement, whether it justifies the construction attempted to be put upon it.
In the spring of the year 1828, the meadow adjoining the present church yard, and measuring an acre, was offered for sale by the proprietor; and in consequence of his not meeting with a purchaser at the price he at that time demanded, he proceeded to build cottages upon it, and actually laid the foundations of several.
The old church yard being deemed too small for the present, and still more so, for the growing population of the parish, and this being the only contiguous piece of land, which in all human probability could ever be available to enlarge it, the Minister, the Churchwardens, and a large proportion of the resident proprietors and occupiers, felt the extreme importance of securing it an additional burying ground : as well as the expediency of preventing the erection of cottages, which would not merely disfigure the precincts of the church, but in all probability, entail an encreased burden on the poor-rates of the parish.
Accordingly, on the 23rd of April, 1828, at a general vestry, held "to appoint a parish surgeon," which was more numerously attended than any vestry for very many years, and at which all the Churchwardens and Overseers, were present, as well as twenty one other inhabitants, the purchase of the field in question was brought before the meeting, and it was unanimously resolved that under the peculiar circumstances of the case, the sum of �400 should be offered to the proprietor for it. He at that time demanded six hundred, but at length consented to take five. One hundred was in consequence raised by subscriptions, of which the Minister paid put of his own pocket more than one half, and �400 was advanced by him to the parish, to effect the purchase.
In the meanwhile, the subject was again submitted to another general vestry held on the 21st May 1828, to "examine the parish accounts," at which all the parish officers and 21 other inhabitants were present, when the purchase of the field was a second time approved.
As however, a specific notice of the purchase of the field had not been given previously to the two former vestries, it was deemed advisable to call a third general vestry, pursuant to public notice, for the exclusive consideration of the subject, when one Churchwarden, one Overseer, and twenty other inhabitants were present, and for the third time the measure had the approbation and sanction of the meeting.
There was however, some informality in the wording of the notice for this last vestry, it not having been drawn up by a professional man, and it is upon this technical inaccuracy that the late exception has been taken, and the repayment of the money attempted to be resisted.
Mr Campbell, the eminent Barrister of that name, to whom the case in its most circumstantial details has been submitted, has given it as his opinion, "that the validity of the security is not affected by the informality of the notice; that the arrangement appears to have been made in the most perfect good faith, and that the parish is both bound by law, and by justice to abide by it."
Another professional gentlemen who was made acquainted with all the same particulars, pronounced the exception to the notice to be a quibbling on words.
On thing must be palpably evident to all - that so far from taking the parish by surprise, the utmost publicity was given to the measure, and the sense of three general vestries - all unusually numerous - was taken upon it, and that all concurred is its approval.
It is quite true, that the repayment of the loan ought by this time to have been far advanced, but it was entirely through an indulgent spirit to the farmers, who complained of two indifferent harvests, and solicited delay, that it was deferred. Had the payment been enforced, as it became due, no objection, it is presumed, would have been alleged; for neither the legality of the contract, nor the expediency of the purchase, has ever been brought into question, till within the last few months.
Two other points remain to be noticed. One is, that the Vicarage House is not opposite to the field in question, as has been assented, and the other, that not more than one stranger in every two years, at most, has been buried here, while it is reasonable to suppose as many may have been removed from hence to be interred elsewhere.
That the old church-yard is inconveniently crowded must be obvious to every one who inspects it, and the fact is, no new grave can be dug without prematurely disturbing an old one. Its limits also are of late years further contracted by the official order of the archdeacon, than no bodies are in future to be interred within six feet of the church.
That the population is increasing may be inferred from the number of houses and cottages that have been built within the last ten years, amounting to upwards of fifty, while not more than six or seven have been pulled down. The same inference may be drawn from the parish registers, which record within the same period the excess of births above burials to be one hundred and forty-eight.
I am, Sir, your's W.
Iver, Dec. 22, 1830.
BIRTHS.
December 19th, the lady of the Rev. Henry Palmer, of Addlestone, Chertsey, of a son.
MARRIED.
December 23, at Westbury, Bucks, by the Rev. William Gurden, Lieutenant Alexander Shillingford, R.N., to Miss Gurden, of the former place.
December 27, at St.George's Church, Hanover Square, by the Rev. G.P. Sandilands, Lieut. Benjamin Leggett, of H.M.R.N. to Ann, only daughter of Mr. Thomas Moore, of Uxbridge.
DIED.
December 28, Mr. Burtt, of Cove, Hants, in his 73d year.
December 27, at his house in Datchet, William Wentworth Deschamps, Esq.
BERKS SPECIAL COMMISSION.
READING - MONDAY.
The proceedings under the special commission, issued for the trial of prisoners in the county of Berks, commenced yesterday at Reading. The High Sheriff, attended by a numerous cavalcade of the gentry of the county, met the Judges at Sonning lane, and escorted them to the Town-hall shortly before 12 o'clock, when the commission was opened, and the Court immediately adjourned in order that the Commissioners might attend Divine Service. The Judges are, Sir James Allen Park, Sir William Bolland, and Sir John Patteson. The other Commissioners are, the Earl of Abingdon and Mr. Charles Dundas.
The Commissioners returned from church at two o'clock, when business was proceeded with. In addition to the two lay-Commissioners, the Marquis of Downshire, C.F. Palmer, Esq. Member for Reading, R. Palmer, Esq., Member for the county, and a great number of the Magistracy were present.
Twenty-three of the 26 Grand Jurors whose names were first called over having answered, the following Grand Jury was sworn :-
|
|
| Sir J.B. Walsh, Bart. | W. Hallett, Esq. |
| Sir J. Sewell | T. Earle, Esq. |
| Sir M. Ximenes | G.H. Crutchley, Esq. |
| R. Palmer, Esq. | J. Wheble, Esq. |
| C.F. Palmer, Esq. | J. Blagrave, Esq. |
| H. Clive, Esq. | E. Goulding, Esq. |
| J. Ramsbottom, Esq. | R. Harris, Esq. |
| J.B. Monck, Esq. | E.B. Bunney, Esq. |
| H. Russell, Esq. | M. Const, Esq. |
| Major General H.W. Rooke | P. Green, Esq. |
| W. Congreve, Esq. | P. Brown, Esq. |
| G. Mitford, Esq. | |
The usual proclamation against vice, profaneness, and immorality, having been read.
Mr. Justice PARK proceeded to charge the Grand Jury. As soon as the Learned Judge had concluded, the Grand Jury retired, and returned in a few minutes with a true bill, against Charles Symonds, for rape. The prisoner was brought into Court in a state of the most fearful and outrageous madness. He was put upon his trial pro forma; a Jury was hastily sworn, who, without hesitation, returned a verdict of "insanity," and the unhappy prisoner was conveyed out of Court as speedily as possible.
Mr Justice PARK then dismissed the Petty Jurymen, observing that he should try no case that day, but requiring their attendance punctually at nine o'clock on the morrow.
The calendar contains the names of 138 prisoners, the majority of whom are charged with riotously assembling and destroying thrashing machines and other species of property. In several cases these outrages, which appear to have been committed principally in the course of the week between the 18th and 24th of November, were accompanied by robberies of money, and in a fewer number of instances provisions were forcibly demanded and obtained. There is only one commitment for arson, and one for sending a threatening letter. It is worthy of observation, that of the total number of prisoners, only 25 (less than 1 in 5) can read and write, 37 (about 1 in 4) can read only; the remainder, who can neither read nor write, being 76. There are but 18 of the 138 prisoners, whose ages amount to or exceed 40; the rest are generally from 17 to 35 years old.
Mr. GURNEY, who has come down specially to conduct the prosecution, was in Court during the day. Mr. CAMPBELL is also specially retained on the part of the Crown, but was not present.
ROBBERY - TUESDAY, DEC. 28.
William Oakley, William Smith, alias Winterborne, Daniel Bates, and Edmund Steel, were placed at the bar, and indicted for robbing John Willes, Esq, of five sovereigns, on the 22nd of November, at Hungerford, in this county.
The prisoner Oakley, a young man of about 25, is an iron-founder or wheelwright, and was somewhat better dressed than is usual among the members of the class of working tradesmen. He is a pale sinister-looking person, as is Winterborne, who was also an artisan of some description. The age of the latter prisoner is stated at 33, but he appears older. Bates (a wheelwright) is a young man of florid complexion, and with an extremely mild, good-natured expression of countenance. The fourth prisoner, Steel, is a short determined-looking man, about 40, and was, like the rest, a tradesman. All the prisoners can read and write, with the exception of Winterborne, who is entirely uneducated.
There are several other charges against the prisoners (none of whom it will be observed, are agricultural labourers), for riot, robbery, and the destruction of machinery.
Mr. GURNEY (with whom were Mr. Campbell, Mr. Shepherd, Mr. Blackburn, and Mr. Talfourd), for the prosecution, stated the case to the Jury.
Mr. John Hill, examined by Mr. CAMPBELL. - I live at Standon house, Hungerford. On the 22nd of Nov. I was with Mr. Willes, a Magistrate, and 11 or 12 others, near Hungerford. We went for the purpose of preventing a mob from going to Mr. Cherry's. We found the mob on the Bath road near Dentford [?] farm, proceeding towards Mr. Cherry's house. It was known by the name of the Kintbury mob, and consisted of 200 or 300, some had large stakes in their hands. They proceeded to Hungerford. At the entrance to the town they broke Mr. Anning's windows, they stopped at Mr. Gibbon's foundry, and broke into it. Mr. Willes, the prosecutor, a Magistrate, endeavoured to prevent the mob from breaking Mr. Anning's windows, but without success. Mr. Willes, Mr. Pearse, M.P. for Devizes, and others, went to the town hall. Five deputies came thither from the Hungerford mob (which had collected in the town), and five from the Kintbury mob. The four-prisoners were four of the five deputies from Kintbury, and were present during a conversation with the Hungerford deputies, who demanded 12s. a week wages, the destruction of machines, and a reduction of house rent. Mr. Pearse promised that "wages should be raised; as to house-rent he could say nothing : they must arrange with their landlords respecting that." The Hungerford deputation having retired from the table satisfied, the Kintbury deputies came forward. Oakley, in allusion to the Hungerford men, said, "You have had a parcel of flats to deal with, but we are not to be so easily caught." He afterwards said, "We will have �5." There was some demur among the gentlemen, and Bates, who had a sledge-hammer, flourished it and struck it on the ground saying, "We will be d---d if we don't have the �5 or blood." There was a great deal of confusion afterwards, and the men left the room, but I did not see them receive any money.
Mr. Joseph Atherton deposed, that he was at the Town hall on the 22nd. He estimated the mobs at about 500; and stated that many of the men were armed with bludgeons, sledge hammers, and iron bars. Mr. Willes requested that deputations of five should be sent from the Hungerford and Kintbury mobs. This was complied with. Prisoner Oakley called out the names of the Kintbury deputation. Prisoners are all carpenters or other tradesmen; none of them are agricultural labourers. Witness having described what passed between the Hungerford deputation and the gentlemen present, proceeded to relate the conversation with the Kintbury deputation. Oakley said, "You have not such d---d flats to deal with now, as you had before; we will have two shillings a-day till Ladyday, and half-a-crown afterwards for labourers, and 3s. 6d. for tradesmen; and, as we are here, we will have �5 before we will leave this place, or we will smash it." Oakley then, addressing himself to Mr. Pearse, said, "You, gentlemen, have been living long enough on the good things; now is our time, and we will have them. You, gentlemen, would not speak to us now, only you are afraid and intimidated." A person in the room, of the name of Osborne, put his hand on Winterborne's shoulder to speak to him, when the prisoner turned round and said "If any man puts his hand upon me, I will knock him down or split his skull." He had an iron bar, three or four feet long, in his hand (it looked like the spindle of a machine); Oakley had an iron bar, Bates a sledge hammer, and Steel a stick, or something else. Winterborne said to Bates, "Brother, we have lived together, and we will die together." Bates raised his sledge-hammer, and striking it hard on the floor, said, "Yes, we will have it, or we will have blood, and down with the b---y place." Mr. Willes talked to Bates, and Bates flourished his hammer over Mr. Willes's head, who said, "If you kill me, you only shorten the days of an old man." "Hearing this, I" said witness, "turned round, and thinking all our lives in danger, and having a brace of pistols in my pocket, I laid my hand on one of them (not, however, exhibiting it), and got it ready. Afterwards Mr. Willes did give five sovereigns to prisoners (to which of them I cannot say), who all went away, and I saw no more of them."
Cross-examined by Mr. Rigby - Did not hear all that passed in the Town hall. Heard nothing about paying prisoners for safe conduct. Has stated all he heard. When Mr. Willes gave the money to the prisoners, he said, "Spend it in town;" but witness immediately said, "No : if you get drinking with the Hungerford mob, you will fall out and quarrel. Take the money home."
Cross-examined by Mr. Stone for prisoner Steel,- Did not hear Steel say a word, and could not say certainly whether he had anything in his hand or not.
Zebulon Wicks, a coachman, living in Hungerford, examined by Mr. Shepherd, stated that he was present in the Town-hall on the occasion in question, and gave a similar account of the transaction to that give by the preceding witnesses. Oakley said, "You have had it your way long enough, and now we will have ours." He also said, "Old Fowler (the vicar) of Kintbury, has �2 for every man he commits to Reading gaol, and that has kept him out of the workhouse." Something further having passed, Oakley said, "they should not have come there if they had not been asked to come : but as Mr. Willes had brought them there, they would have �5 before they left the place." Bates said, "�5 we want, and �5 we will have." On the demand of �5 being made, Mr. Pearse said he would do no such thing; and Bates struck the ground with his hammer, and went across, as if about to strike the window, when someone having tapped him on the shoulder, saying, "Young man, don't be hasty," he turned round and flourished his hammer over Mr. Willes's head. After this Mr. Willes took his purse, and gave the money. Prisoners went down stairs into the market-place, where Bates (I believe) holding up his hand, said to a person in the crowd named Lemon, "We have got �5 out of old Willes; if we havn't I'm d----
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - Mr. Willes said to Oakley, "Will you do me the favour to leave those bludgeons outside ?" Oakley said, - "No, I'll be d----d if I do." Mr. Willes, after consulting with Mr. Pearse, said, he would give them (the Kintbury men) �5 if they would go away quietly.
Mr. Stephen Major examined by Mr. BLACKBURN - Described the scene in the Town-hall, and stated, that on Mr. Willes requesting the prisoners to leave their weapons outside the door, Oakley said, "I'll see you d--d first." Mr. Willes made them .... and crossed the room towards the table, followed by the five Kintbury deputies. Oakley, after an observation already given, said, putting his hands in his pockets, "Here are only five of us, but we can soon clear this room." Oakley is an iron-founder, Bates a carpenter.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - Oakley has an iron concern at Kintbury; does not know that it was destroyed by the mob.
Mr. John Willes examined by Mr. GURNEY - I am a magistrate of this county, and was at Hungerford on the morning of the 22d of November. In consequence of something I heard, I mounted [?] my horse, and left Hungerford in company with about twelve persons, and met a mob going towards Mr. Cherry's house. I requested them not to go, because Mrs. Cherry was near her confinement, and the consequences might be dangerous, appealing to their good feelings, and they d....d. A little after, I said if they would follow me to the Town-hall, I would hear their grievances, and if reasonable, they would be attended to. They agreed, and I proceeded to Hungerford in the middle of the mob. The mob broke the windows at Mr. Anning's house. I saw them attack Mr. Gibbon's manufactory, and requested them to desist, but without success. I requested five of each party to come up to the Town hall. I remember Winterborne, Bates, and Steele. They were of the Kintbury deputation. Witness described his having requested prisoners to put their weapons down, and the refusal which he met with, but from which of the prisoners he could not say. They said, "they never would have come there but for me, who enticed them, and they would never leave the hall without having money - �5." There was a great deal of confusion and cries of "we will have blood for blood." Many other threatening expressions were used. One of the prisoners having swung a sledge hammer twice over my head, I said "I am an old man; you can only shorten my days a few years, and of what advantage will that be to you ?" After some consultation, I gave 5 sovereigns I think, to the man in the white jacket (Bates) I remarked on the white dress at the time.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - The mob treated me kindly and led my horse by the bridle. Observing Steel with a hatchet in his hand, I said, "My friend, that is a deadly weapon you have, it would split a man's skull;" to which he replied, "Depend upon it, Sir, it shall never injure yours." [Steel appeared affected by this, and there was a manifestations of applause among the spectators in the body of the court, but it was instantly repressed by Mr. Justice Park, who declared he should commit any person indulging in expressions of approbation or disapprobation.] The money did not come exclusively from me, though I provided it at the time. Mr. Pearse said to me, "You, and I, and General Popham will pay it all, don't take anything from other persons." I have since been repaid. The Hungerford people also received �5. Never saw Steel before the 22d. He behaved well, as I have described, and made no use of the hatchet he carried. The �5 was a voluntary gift to the Hungerford people after the Kintbury deputies obtained the money. I said, "Now that the ruffians have extracted �5 it is too hard that the Hungerford people who behaved quietly, should get nothing."
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. RIGBY submitted that the evidence adduced was not sufficient to support the indictment, which was for a simple robbery. To constitute a robbery, there must have been an actual extortion of money from the party through fear or violence, and he argued that neither of these ingredients in the crime existed in the present instance. The prosecutor, after consulting Mr. Pearse, and other gentlemen present, agreed to give the ... a sum of money raised by contribution. He contended that this could only be considered a donation - a construction of the circumstance rendered more probable by directions having been given by the prosecutor as to the mode of expending the money.
The COURT having consulted, overruled the objection without calling upon Counsel for the Crown to reply : Mr. Justice PARK observing that there was sufficient evidence of intimidation to [ �..] an indictment for robbery.
The Court not being of opinion that there was evidence to go to the Jury against Steel, he was put aside, and a verdict of acquittal recorded in his case.
The prisoners being severally called upon for their defence, Oakley said he should not have gone to Hungerford if Mr. Willes had not asked him to go with him, for the purpose of [..ing] him from the mob.
Bates said he should not have gone into the Town hall if he had not been invited.
Winterborne said nothing.
The Rev Mr. Fowle, vicar of Kintbury; Mr. C. Johnson, a gentleman of the same place; Mr. S.Field, silk-thrower; and several farmers, resident in the same place gave the prisoner [Bates] an excellent character from his infancy up to the period of the of the riot[?]. It was [...] that the prisoner was remarkable for [...], industry, and sobriety., - that he was the youngest [...] his family, and had been principally instrumental in [...] his mother, who had been many years a widow [...] of the witnesses by whom the prisoner had been employed expressed their readiness to employ him again if released [....]
Bated repeatedly shed tears during the examination of witnesses [..] his character.
No witnesses appeared for Oakely or Winterborne.
The Jury after a few minutes consideration, found all the prisoners Guilty, but recommended Bates to mercy.
Francis Norris was indicted for feloniously assaulting the Rev [?]. John Thomas, and taking from his person, against his [�], two sovereigns and other monies.
Mr. GURNEY, with whom were Mr. CAMPBELL, and Mr. TALFOURD stated the case for the prosecution.
The Rev. G.J. Thomas examined by Mr. CAMPBELL - I am vicar [?] of Inkpen. On the 23d Nov. I was crossing a common [�]. I saw about 300 persons on the common. I went into the middle of the mob, I did so because a boy came from the mob and demanded money of me. The boy had an iron bar in his hands. I went into the mob, and said, "It is too bad to be stopped in this way; where is your leader ?" Some of the mob then went away, and returned with Norris. Norris is a bricklayer. He came forward as leader of the mob. He and they had been to Mr. Butler's, and that Mr. Butler had given them �5. I said, "Norris, what do you want with me ?" He said, "our demand is �2." I said, "for what ?" He said, "for these men's time and expenses." I remonstrated on the [...] manner in which the boy had stopped me, and he said "we will murder him for that, " I said "for God's sake do not." The mob said, "at all events we will punish him." I had nothing but notes about me, and not thinking it prudent to take them out, I went to an ale-house and borrowed two sovereigns of the landlord. Norris followed me. I gave him the money. The crowd was so dense at that time that I could not see if they had any weapons. After giving the money I went away.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - The boys conduct was very [much ?] blamed by the mob and by the prisoner at the bar. They could have injured the boy who assaulted me if I had not remarked [?], I told them that since I had given them the money they were not to come to me any more. They did not ask the money out of compassion; they demanded it, Esther Norris, or some one near him, told me they were going to Lord Craven's. After giving the money, Norris made a way for me through the crowd.
Mr. Justice BOLLAND here interfered, and said he thought the evidence would not bear out the case upon the record.
The Jury, under the direction of the Court, immediately acquitted the prisoner.
MACHINE BREAKING.
Francis Norris, the same person, was then put upon his trial for having on the 21st Nov. unlawfully and maliciously damaged with intent to destroy and render useless, and with having destroyed, a certain thrashing machine.
Mr. GURNEY, with whom were Mr. CAMPBELL and Mr. TALFOURD, stated the case, and said he was happy to state this offence was not a capital one.
Richard Goddard, examined by Mr. CAMPBELL - I live at [�.], I am the son of a farmer, I was at home on the 21st of November. Between 12 and 1 o'clock at night, when we were in bed, we where disturbed by a hallooing and blowing horns [?]. I got up an saw a great number of people assembled; [...] to break, the machine; I then came downstairs, and went out to them. Francis Norris, the prisoner, demanded a lantern [?] to break the machine. I said there was not one in the house, but that I would got to the carter's and get one. When I returned, I found they had broken the windows and the outer door. Norris had something in his hand I think it was part of a machine. There was present a person named William Winterborne. Norris said, "this is a hand job," and Winterborne said, "never mind Frank, when you are tired I am ready to take your place." They broke the machine, they broke both. Then Winterborne demanded a sovereign, which I gave him. They went away bellowing and making a great noise,. Both machines were my fathers.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - I knew the prisoner before that night. They demanded a light. They said they would have a light. They asked me where the machine was, and I refused to tell. The went to the barn, pulled down some boards [?] and got in. The machine was in a perfect operative state. The machine was broke to pieces.
The prisoner being asked what he had to say in his defence, denied the whole evidence. He said he had no bar in his hand, and that he never asked for a light. He said he had a witness to speak in his character.
C� Johnson, Esq., called for this purpose, and examined by Mr. RIGBY, said, I have known the prisoner 7 or 8 years. He is a bricklayer. I have seen him amongst the rioters during the late troubles. He always behaved very civilly to me. Generally speaking, I should say he was not a peaceable man.
Mr. Justice PATTESON charged the Jury, and observed that the only witness to character had given the prisoner anything but a good character, saying he was not a peaceable man.
The Jury without hesitation found the prisoner Guilty.
William Page, labourer, was indicted for a similar offence.
The following evidence was called for the prosecution :-
John Kidgell examined by Mr. CAMPBELL - I live at Bradfield, Berks, I am a farmer. About eight o'clock in the morning of the 18th of Nov about 230 people came to my farm. William Page was one of them. I saw him break the machine with a large sledge hammer.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - I should rather think the prisoner was intimidated in joining the mob, for he bore a good character before. The prisoner I suppose is about 18 years old. With the exception of his previous good character I have no reason to believe that the prisoner was intimidated into joining the mob. I saw nothing which could lead me to suppose that the prisoner was acting under compulsion.
Re-examined by Mr. Campbell - They were about five minutes about this job. Many of the men had hammers, but they were not heavy enough to break the machine. It was the prisoner's sledge hammer that broke it.
The prisoner being called on for his defence, said, "My Lords, I was pressed about 100 yards from my house, by two men, who obliged me to go with the mob."
Two respectable persons gave the prisoner a good character, and said they had always considered him a sober, industrious, and honest youth.
Mr. Justice PARK charged the Jury, who immediately returned a verdict of Guilty, but recommended the prisoner to mercy.
The prisoner was a stupid looking boy, and cried bitterly during the trial.
RIOTOUSLY ASSEMBLING AND DESTROYING PROPERTY.
David Hawkins, William Chitter, Israel Pullen, William Haynes, David Yarlick, George Rosier, John Field, John Cope, Charles Smith, Jeremiah Dobson, William Oakley, William Winterborne, James Watts, Timothy May, Joseph Tuck, Edmund Steel, and Daniel Bates, were placed upon their trial for having, in the town of Hungerford, together with others, to the number of 100, or more, riotously assembled and destroyed certain machinery employed in the manufacture of cast-iron goods, and belonging to Richard Gibbons. All the prisoners were described in the indictment as labourers, with the exception of Pullen, who was called a cordwainer.
Richard Gibbons, examined by Mr. CAMPBELL - I live at Hungerford. I had a manufactory there. It was an ironfoundry. I carried on business there in November last. I had machinery for carrying on my business. The machinery consisted of wheels for blowing the bellows, an iron furnace, a crane made of wood and iron - these were fixed to the building. I had also iron flasks. They are what we make our moulds in. They were moveable. On the 22d of November about 400 people came to my house at near eleven o'clock in the forenoon. They had sledge hammers, bludgeons, hand hammers, sticks, and so forth. They came to the buildings, I was standing at a little distance from the yard door. Mr. Viner was with me. The mob came up : Mr. Viner said, "this man never made any machine of any sort, and he has no thrashing machine on his premises." One of the mob put his hand on two others, and said "go forward," and they rushed into the factory. About 200 followed into the factory. They broke everything they found. They broke the articles I have enumerated, and also many machinery wheels which I had there. In fact they broke everything they put their hands on. They then got two sovereigns from Mr. Viner. The damage they did has been valued at �260. The mob then went to the Town Hall. They got the two sovereigns from Mr. Viner, not from me. I cannot identify any of the prisoners as forming part of the mob.
Thomas Viner examined by Mr. SHEPPARD - I am a wine-merchant at Hungerford, I live next door but one to Mr. Gibbons. On the morning of November 22d there was a very large number of persons at Hungerford. I saw them come up to the manufactory. I heard some say "let us go into the iron manufactory and break the machinery." They pushed me on one side and went. (Witness here corroborated the evidence of the last witness, respecting the conversation with the mob about there being no machines made on the premises.) The foremost of the mob seemed inclined to go away when I told him this about the machinery, but some man in the crowd called out and demanded five sovereigns. I instantly replied, "I'll give you five sovereigns if you leave this place unmolested." Immediately a man called out, "hark [?] forward; go at it; beat the iron to pieces." When the man said this he pushed many of the mob forward into the gateway. Of the prisoners at the bar I can identify Rosier and Yarlick as two which went into the factory; also Bates and Steel, who were the two principal of the mob - I never saw them before, but I can swear to them. Bates and Steel demanded two sovs. I said, if you will get the men away you shall have the two sovs. I did give them the money. Rosier, to the best of my belief, was armed with a sledge hammer. (Witness corroborated the evidence of the last witness, with regard to the damage effected.) Steel took the money from me, but both Bates and Steel demanded it. Charles Smith certainly was not present, I will swear to that.
Charles Kent, examined by Mr. BLACKBURN - I am foreman to Mr. Gibbons. I saw the mob coming up the town. I saw Mr. Viner and my master try to keep them back. They would not be kept back. I can identify Israel Pullen, Wm. Haynes, David Yarlick, Geo. Rosier, John Field, John Cope, and Wm. Winterborne, as part of the mob. These came into the factory, and joined in doing the mischief. They were in the factory all the time. They were all armed either with mallets, hammers, or pick-axes, bludgeons, or other weapons. I cannot tell what portion of the mischief each of these did. I saw them all beating the goods to pieces, except William Haynes, who had no weapon, and who did not go into the factory, but stopped in the yard. Haynes seemed as if he was only looking on. I went over the factory after the mob left, and found every thing in it broken to pieces. I will swear to all the prisoners I have mentioned.
The Counsel for the other prisoners cross-examined the witness, but elicited no new fact.
Thomas Clements, examined by Mr. TALFOURD - I worked for Mr. Gibbons, of Hungerford, in November. I saw the mob come on that day. I can speak to David Hawkins, William Chitter, Jeremiah Dobson, and Timothy May, James Watts, and Joseph Tuck. They were part of the mob. They had sticks and iron bars. They took a part in breaking the goods. I will swear positively to all of the prisoners I have mentioned. (Witness pointed out each of the prisoners he had identified.)
Here the case for the prosecution closed.
The prisoners having been severally called upon for their defence, they merely denied their guilt.
Thomas Winkwell, called by the prisoner Hawkins, and examined. I am a farmer, and live near Hungerford. I have known Hawkins five years. He is a married man, and has a family. I always found him an honest man. If this trouble were over I should have no objection to employ him again.
Joseph Cadman, called by prisoner Pullen, and examined. I am a tailor. I know Pullen. I saw people round his house on the 22d of November; they were about 50 in number. It was about five or six o'clock in the morning. I heard them threaten to pull his house about his ears if he did not come out. These 50 went away, and soon after returned with about 50 more, and made the same threats. I cannot say whether he did go out.
The Rev. William Cookson, clergyman of the parish of Hungerford, examined. I have known Israel Pullen for ten years. He always bore a very good character. Witness also gave the prisoner Haynes a good character.
Thomas Winkwell had employed the prisoner Yarlick, and always found him civil and sober.
Thomas Major, a surgeon, at Hungerford, examined - Had known John Cope several years, and never heard anything bad of him.
The Rev. William Cookson also gave the prisoner Cope a good character for honesty and sobriety.
Henry Cundell - Had known the prisoner John Field from a boy, and had never heard anything against him. Field had always borne a good character. Witness also gave the prisoner Yarlick a good character.
Thomas Owen - Had known the prisoner Steel for many years. Steel was always honest and industrious.
Mr. JUSTICE PARK read his note of the evidence which had been given in a former case, with regard to the character of Bates.
Mr. Baron BOLLAND summed up the evidence, and told the jury that the only question for their consideration was, whether any, and if any, how many of the prisoners were present at the work of destruction which was committed upon the premises of the prosecutor. They might, however, put the prisoner, Charles Smith, out of their consideration, as there was no evidence to implicate him.
The jury asked permission to retire to consider their verdict. After an absence of about ten minutes they returned with a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners, with the exception of Haynes and Smith, who they acquitted.
The Court, which met at one o'clock this morning, adjourned at half-past six till nine on Wednesday.
MACHINE BREAKING - WEDNESDAY.
Thomas Hicks, Edward Harris, William Hawkins, Daniel Hancock, John Naylor, James Hutchins, George Arlett, John Nash, George Williams, Thomas Browne, Luke Browne, John Cooke, Charles Vince, Stephen Williams, James Fuller, Joseph Quarterman, and James Burgess, labourers, were indicted for breaking and destroying a thrashing machine belonging to William Mount, Esq, at Waring, in the county of Berks, on Friday, the 19th of November last.
Mr. GURNEY, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. SHEPPARD, Mr. BLACKBURNE, and Mr. TALFOURD, were engaged for the Crown. Mr. RIGBY appeared for the prisoners Hicks and Hutchins; Mr. STONE for Luke Browne, Stephen Williams, and Hawkins; Mr. COOPER for Fuller; and Mr. SALMON for Harris. The other prisoners were undefended.
Mr. GURNEY stated that the 17 prisoners at the bar, with others who were not in custody, formed part of a large mob who had on several nights recently disturbed the peace of the county, and had on one particular occasion - namely, on the 17th of November last, which formed the ground for the present prosecution, destroyed a thrashing machine belonging to Mr. Mount, at Waring. That offence was selected from a number of outrages committed, and the proceeding founded upon it was adopted as the mildest course which could be pursued under the circumstances. He should prove that all the prisoners were present at the outrage, and that some of them took an active and a leading part in it. The Jury would be aware that persons who by their presence aided or encouraged crimes of this nature, rendered themselves liable to the penalties equally with the actual perpetrators.
William Adnam, examined - I was at Mr. Mount's farm on the 19th of November last. A large assemblage of people came to the yard on that day, armed with sledge-hammers and sticks. They asked me where the thrashing machine was. I pointed it out. The men entered the barn, and completely destroyed the machine. They were about half an hour engaged in it, and conducted themselves very riotously. Thomas Hicks, Edward Harris, William Hawkins, and Daniel Hancock, are all of the prisoners whom I can recognize as having been in the barn. I asked Hicks whether the party he was then with would stand by him better than the party he had been with at Thatcham a few days previously. He said if they would not he would not give one farthing for them. After some blows had been struck on the machine, one of the party said, "Where is the money ?" Hicks, in reply, said "That was taken down at the other house" (meaning the house of my father, who is Mr. Mount's steward). Hicks was very active in breaking the machine. He was not exactly the leader, but was a principal. Harris was also very active; but I cannot say that I saw Hawkins do any act. He and Hancock, however, were in the barn.
In his cross-examination, by Mr. RIGBY, the witness said he could not swear whether the machine had been a perfect or a damaged one before the attack; but it was perfectly broken up. He had known Thomas Hicks for years before.
Thomas Leven [?], a farmer - I saw Mr. Mount's thrashing machine broken to pieces. I saw George Williams, John Nash, Geo. Arlett, John Naylor, Luke Browne, Edw. Harris, Thos. Hicks, and Thos. Browne, amongst the mob on the occasion. Hicks had a sledge-hammer in his hand. John Naylor had an iron ball with a stick to it. The others were armed with sticks, or weapons of some sort. Hicks was particularly busy. After they had left the barn, Naylor told me his name was Mr. Day, of Bucklebury. He asked for some money, which I refused to give him. He then pulled off his hat, and begged. He was a little in liquor. Those whom I have named were in the barn and the premises on the occasion.
To Mr. STONE - Luke Browne had been with the mob the whole morning. I saw them before they went to Mr. Mount's.
To Mr. Justice PARKE (at the suggestion of Mr. Gurney) - The witness said he say Fuller running across Mr. Mount's farm with a sledge hammer in his hand. He was going in the direction as if he might have been at the barn.
John Paice - I saw the mob at Mr. Mount's on the 19th Nov. I saw Hicks breaking the machine. I saw the prisoner Harris, Hawkins, George Arlett, John Nash, and another of the prisoners , who went by the name of Staffordshire Jack, amongst the mob. The last mentioned prisoner gave his name as George Williams. Hicks had a sledge hammer, and all had something in their hands. Hawkins was not taking an active part in breaking the machine when I saw him.
James Joplin, a plumber, at Aldermaston.- I followed the mob to Mr. Mount's barn, nearly three-quarters of a mile. I saw the machine broken. I saw Thomas Hicks with a sledge-hammer, breaking the machine. I saw Edward Harris with the mob the whole morning. He also had a sledge hammer. I saw Hancock with the mob in the barn. I do not recollect whether he had anything in his hand. John Navier was also amongst the mob. He had a stick with an iron ball at the end of it. I saw George Arlett with the mob at Aldermaston, and at Mount's barn. He had a common stick in his hand. John Nash was also one of the mob, and. I believe, was armed with a stick. John Williams was with the mob, and had a stick. Thomas and Luke Browne, James Hutchins, and Stephen Williams were present with the mob at Aldermaston, and at the breaking of the machine.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - I went to the barn to watch the mob. I saw Hutchins strike the machine either with a stick or a sledge-hammer. Hicks struck it with a hammer.
By Mr. Stone. - The mob came at half-past ten, and stayed till two. I saw Hicks, Harris, the two Williams, Naylor, and Nash, actually engaged in breaking the machine.
Mr. RIGBY here called the attention of the Court to the circumstance, that the Grand Jury had not returned a true bill against James Hutchins. On referring to the indictment it was found, that on the enumeration of the prisoners against whom the bill was found, the name of Hutchins was omitted. The Court, therefore, directed that this prisoners should withdraw for the present.
Mr. Adnam was recalled, at the request of Mr. RIGBY, and said that he had endeavoured to dissuade the mob from going to Mr. Mount's dwelling-house, to frighten Mrs. Mount and the children. Hicks said, "Well, we won't:" but added, "if they will, I can't help it," - Some other of the mob said, "He can't prevent it, I'll be d---d if we don't go, and have a sovereign and plenty of bread and cheese and beer." I believe Hicks stopped the mob, and I gave him 5s out of my own pocket; but I never said that they might break the thrashing machine, but I hoped they would do no further mischief. I endeavoured to dissuade the mob from destroying the property of a gentleman who, as I told them, was a great friend to the poor; and I told them, that I myself last year, paid a hundred pounds of my own money towards the support of the poor, and that there were those amongst the mob who could testify to what I had done on my own farm.
Luke Middleton, a participator in the transaction, said - I am a labourer residing at Midgam, near Waring. I joined the mob on Thursday night, and remained with them until they went to Mr. Mount's on Friday. None of us had gone to bed on the Thursday night. In the course of Friday morning we went to Aldermaston Park. We were counted there by William Morgan, who had joined, about two o'clock on the Friday morning. About 113 were counted, and there were a great many more who were not counted. Several joined us there, and amongst them the prisoners Arlett, Nash, Fuller, and Hicks. We had some victuals and drink after we had been at Aldermaston Park. Edward Harris paid for the whole. There were 11 gallons of beer, for which Mr. Adams, of the Hind's Head, charged 24s and 17s for bread.
Mr. Justice PARKE inquired whether such a body of men had been harboured at any public-house, as he wished such house to be made known to the Magistrates. It turned out, however, that the mob had been on foot all night.
The witness, in continuation said - I saw Thomas Hicks, Edward Harris, Wm. Hawkins, Daniel Hancock, John Naylor, George Arlett, John Nash, George Williams (who went by the name of Staffordshire Jack), Thomas and Luke Brown, John Cooks, Charles Vince, Stephen Williams, James Fuller, Joseph Quarterman, and James Burgess, at Mr. Mount's barn. Some of them had been at several places with us. I saw Thomas Hicks help to break Mr. Mount's thrashing machine, as well as Edward Harris (who had a sledge-hammer about 14lbs weight), Luke Browne, and Fuller. After leaving Mr. Mount's we went to Brimton, where the mob was met by some Magistrates, and the Riot Act was read by Mr. Cove. Some of the mob were seized. I escaped. There was a regular fight, and finally the mob were dispersed. I was taken into custody last Thursday night, and examined before a Magistrate, and my recognizances taken to appear and give evidence.
Cross-examined by Mr. RIGBY - I was the person who accosted Hicks, and insisted on his joining the mob. I was not the ring leader. Edward Harris first said, "Won't you join us, Hicks ? We are going to the Hind's Head to have some beer - you stand and see that every man has some." I did not take Hicks by the collar, and compel him to join the mob. He came voluntarily. I did not go to Mrs. Bunbury's, of Bucklebury, on the 18th, nor do I know that any of the mob did. We went to Mr. Welsh's, and got 5s. Hicks was not with us. We went to Mr. Cox's and Mr. Hazell's; but I never struck any machine. We went to Mr. Richsod's [?], on Bucklebury common, and some of the mob pressed the men to join them, saying they would beat the walls down about their ears if they did not come. I saw the carters pressed from the plough; but it was not I who did so. I did not say that I would be ringleader, and would not leave the company as long as there was another man along with me. I never said not heard any one say, that a man might have his arms cut off if he did not go, I swear that I did not direct the mob to Mr. Mount's barn, where the thrashing machine was. I did not put the sledge-hammer into Hick's hand, and insist upon his breaking the machine, that he might be as bad as any of us.
Cross-examined by Mr. STONE. - I have not done any regular work for some months. I have been in ill health, under the doctor's hands, and supported by the overseers of the parish. I know Staffordshire Jack very well. He was the man who stopped me when I was coming from my work.
The Learned Counsel was preceeding to ask some further questions relative to the prisoners, when
Mr. Justice PARKE reminded him that he was not his client, adding, "Don�t hang my client - hang your own if you like."
Cross-examined by Mr. COOPER - Mr. Mount and Mr. Congreve told me that they did not think there was anything against me, as my character was excellent good, but do not recollect that any promise was made to me that I should be forgiven if I came forward against the prisoners. I was bound over to appear, but I do not recollect that any promise in particular was made me."
Cross examined by Mr. SALMON - I do not know that Fuller was compelled to join the mob with whom I was. Staffordshire Jack gave Edward Harris the money with which he paid for the refreshments. The mob collected money at several places.
Kenrick Hickman, a farmer - Saw the mob break Mr. Mount's machine. Thomas Hicks and John Cooke were active in striking it. Witness saw Joseph Quarterman also. He was blowing a horn, as if to call the mob together.
Thomas Reynolds, a baker - I met Hicks on the 13th November, and said, "Hulloa ! Tom, where are you going ? I suppose you are going to join those rioters." He said, "Yes," and asked whether they were at Aldermaston. I said, "If you will take my advice, you will go back. They are looking out for you." He said he did not think so, and he went on the road to Aldermaston.
James Butler, a labourer, identified the prisoner Fuller, as having assisted in breaking Mr. Mount's machine. He had also seen Hicks, Harris, and Hawkins, George Williams, Thomas and Luke Browne, Charles Vince, and Stephen Williams, amongst the mob.
Cross-examined - I was with the mob myself. I first saw Hicks about nine o'clock on Friday, at Mr. Mount's. I did not hear Luke Middleton give any orders to the mob, or say that he would be the ringleader, and would not leave them as long as there was another man with him.
Re examined - I was pressed to join the mob. Staffordshire Jack held a stick over me; and said if I did not follow him, he'd be d--d but he'd beat my head off. I was going to run away from them at Mr. Congreave's park, but one of the mob flung a stick at me, which struck my head, and forced the blood from my ears and nose. They took me and washed away the blood, and afterwards put me into a pig trough at Mr. Mount's.
The Rev. Edward Cove - I am the Vicar of Brimton, and a Magistrate for this county. On hearing what had taken place at Aldermaston; the tanners and inhabitants of Brimton assembled to meet the mob who came to Brimton. They appeared to advance in some order, three abreast. Hicks, who had a sledge hammer, seemed to act as the leader. I read the Riot Act, and called upon the mob to disperse. They did not do so, but immediately made an attack upon the farmers party. Eleven of the mob were made prisoners. Hicks, Luke Browne, Thos. Browne, and Stephen Williams, were among the number.
Cross-examined - I know Luke Middleton. I did not see him amongst the mob. I saw Mr. Tull and Mr. Goddard. I did not see either of them, or anyone else, present a pistol at Hicks, not hear him exclaim, "If you like to shoot, shoot." I did not see him knocked down, but I saw him fighting with a Mr. Arundel. I believe Luke Browne and Stephen Williams have been in full employ. I know that every labourer in the parish of Midgam is in request, as the population is small.
Re-examined - When I saw Hicks he was trying to strike Mr. Arundel with a sledge hammer.
The Rev.Mr. Cove, jun. identified Hicks, Thomas, and Luke Brown, Stephen Williams, Naylor, and Hancock, as having been among the mob at Brimton, at the time spoken of by his father, the last witness. Hicks offered great resistance when he was taken into custody.
This evidence completed the case for the prosecution.
The prisoners had nothing to say in their defence.
Mr. Thomas Matthews said he had known Harris from his infancy, and had never heard the least thing amiss about him until the present unfortunate business. He also knew the prisoner Cooke, and had never heard anything amiss of him.
Two other witnesses, who had employed Cooke, gave him the character of a hard-working man, of whom they had not known anything amiss.
Mr. Henry Hall said that Luke Browne and Hawkins had been in his employment, and conducted themselves well there. The father was one of the best labourers in the neighbourhood.
Daniel Wheeler, a wheelwright, spoke in favour of Naylor, who had worked for him from his boyhood, until within the last five years.
No evidence was produced in favour of the other prisoners.
Mr. Justice PARKE, in leaving the case to the Jury said he was happy to inform them, that the present prosecution, although one of infinate importance to the country at large, as well as to the prisoners at the bar, did not however involve the extreme penalty of human life. The indictment was founded upon a recent statute, which provided expressly for the security of property of this description by not leaving it under the general definition of goods and chattels, but providing a specific penalty for any injury done to it. As to the law there could be no difficulty in the case, and the Jury had not only to consider, in the first place, whether a machine belonging to Mr. Mount was destroyed; and, secondly, whether the prisoners, or any and which of them, were concerned in it. He would here observe that the evidence in this case went directly and positively to contradict the statements so industriously and mischievously promulgated throughout the country by newspapers, and the other channels, and which tended to excite and irritate the people by leading them to believe that those above them were doing all they could to oppose them, and were regardless of their sufferings, and totally indifferent to their condition. The Jury had heard that the gentleman whose property had been attacked and destroyed in this case had been a great benefactor to the poor, and had in the preceding year expended a considerable portion of his funds in relieving the distresses of the poor in his neighbourhood. He was glad to point out this praiseworthy contradiction of the statements which were propagated with so much zeal, and which, as he had already said, tended much to extend and perpetuate the mischief which had occurred. It also appeared from the evidence that many of the persons engaged in the outrage so far from being in great distress, were actually in full employment, and that their labour was in great demand : so that although distress did undoubtedly prevail to an extent which must be lamented, yet on this point too the representations that were made were in many cases exaggerated, and in some wholly unfounded. The Learned Judge then proceeded to recapitulate the evidence, and to direct the attention of the Jury to such parts of it as bore upon the cases of the several prisoners.
The Jury, after about a quarter of an hour's deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners, except James Burgess, against whom they did not consider the evidence sufficient. They recommended for mercy those prisoners who had received good characters.
Seventeen prisoners were then placed at the bar, charged with having committed a similar outrage upon a thrashing machine, belonging to Kenrick Hickman, on the same day, the 19th of November. All the prisoners in the above case were included in the present, with the exception of Hicks, Hancock, and Naylor; and indictment comprised, in addition, John Coventry, Alex. Barrett, and Charles Williams.
Mr. GURNEY, in stating the case, took occasion to remark that, wherever a proper resistance was made to the demands of these lawless assemblages, their riotous proceedings were quickly put down; and he wished to impress upon the public the words of Chief Justice Eyre, at Warwick, on the occasion of tumults of a still more seditious description than those which had recently prevailed. The Learned Judge said that when wicked men combined to disturb the public peace and commit outrage, it was the bounden duty of honest men to unite and suppress their violence, and not to lie down and die because they had not a regiment of soldiers at their backs. The civil power, if properly exercised, was sufficient to correct the evil. He would only observe, in addition, that this was the third county in which it had been his painful duty to prosecute men for these offences, and in no instance did it appear that the parties had been driven to commit outrage by want of employment.
Kenrick Hickman proved that his thrashing machine had been destroyed by a tumultuous mob, amongst whom the prisoners Harris, Arlett, and Nash were very active. Harris demanded and received 5s of witness. George Williams and Thomas Browne were also amongst the number.
Mr. Paice identified John Coventry as having been amongst the mob.
James Butler identified William Hawkins, Thomas Browne, Chas. Vince, and Stephen and Charles Williams.
Luke Middleton identified Joseph Quarterman, Alex. Barrett, James Hutchins, John Cooke, and James Burgess, as having been amongst the mob.
Mr. RIGBY asked whether some farmers has not broken their machines themselves, or requested the mob to break them ?
The witness replied that, in all the cases of which he knew the farmers were very much against their machinery being broken.
Witnesses spoke favourably of the characters of Edward Harris, --- Cooke, Luke Brown, Hawkins, Barrett, Burgess, Fuller, and Hutchins.
Mr. Baron BOLLAND summed up the evidence, and the Jury found a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners.
Charles Gilham, William Hamblin, Stephen Denton, James Waith, and William Beckett were indicted for breaking and destroying a thrashing machine belonging to Jethro Laly, on the 18th of November last.
Jethro Laly, the prosecutor, and another witness, deposed to the destruction of his machine by the mob. The prisoners were amongst them, and Stephen Denton (a boy apparently of 16 or 17) was the most active in breaking the machine with an iron bar.
The prisoners were found Guilty.
The Court did not rise until near eight o'clock in the evening.
READING, THURSDAY.
DESTRUCTION OF THRASHING MACHINES.
Edward Harris, George Arlett, John Nash, John Coventry, George Williams, Joseph Quarterman, William Hawkins, Thomas Browne, Luke Browne, Alexander Barret, Charles Vince, James Hutchins, Stephen Williams, John Cooke, James Burgess, Charles Williams, and James Fuller (all of whom had been convicted of breaking thrashing machines), were placed at the bar, under an indictment for assaulting Kenrick Hickman, and forcibly taking from his person two half crowns, his property.
Mr. GURNEY stated to the Jury that the Crown, in presenting these cases for their deliberation, had endeavoured to combine mercy with justice. Against all the prisoners at the bar there were indictments for breaking thrashing machines, and for robbery. The latter, as the Jury were aware, was a capital offence; but he former was visited with a less extreme punishment. The milder course had been adopted, and it was determined to offer no evidence in support of the present indictment. In the absence of such evidence, therefore, it would be the pleasing duty of the Jury to acquit the prisoners.
Mr. Justice PARKE commended the judicious and lenient course adopted by the gentlemen who were engaged for the Crown, and the prisoners were then acquitted of the charge of robbery.
James Burgess was indicted for having on the 18th of November last, broken and destroyed three thrashing machines belonging to Wm. Perrin Brakenbrow.
Mr. GURNEY detailed to the Jury the progress and proceedings of the mob of which the prisoner formed one, and produced evidence to prove his participation in the offence charged in this indictment.
The prisoner was found Guilty.
John Hutchins was indicted for having, on the 18th of November, broken and destroyed a thrashing machine belonging to William Laly.
The evidence clearly implicated the prisoner as having assisted in breaking the prosecutor's machine; but it appeared that the arms and part of the tackle had been taken off and laid aside, for the purpose of discontinuing the use of the machine (although it could be put together again without difficulty), and upon this Mr. Cooper, for the prisoner, submitted that the imperfect article, which was broken, could not be considered as a thrashing machine, and that the prisoner was entitled to an acquittal.
Mr Baron BOLLAND said that he and his Learned Brothers, foreseeing that such a point as this would probably arise in the course of the prosecutions, had turned their attention to it before hand, and the result if their conversations was, that the objection was untenable. Some of these machines were made portable, and it would be a great hardship if a man could not disjoint his machine, for the purpose of transferring it from one part of his farm to another, or for other necessary purposes. The parts were in a state ready to be put together again, and he had no hesitation in saying, that such a machine was to all intents a perfect one.
Mr. Justice PARKE and Mr. Justice PATTESON concurred in this view, and the prisoner was found Guilty.
Thomas Bunce, Wm. Bunce, and Thomas Britton (the latter a publican), were indicted for breaking machines belonging to Sarah Larkham on the 18th of November.
Joseph Larkham, the son of the prosecutrix, proved that the prisoners Bunce and Hamblin were amongst a mob who broke his mother's machine.
The witness, in his cross-examination, admitted that, when the mob approached, he said, "Come, my lads, I have been waiting for you for some time." They said they were going to break his machine, and asked him for 5s. He went with them to where the machine was, but did not lead them to it. He did not open the barn door for them - it was already open - nor tell them to break the machine. After they had commenced breaking it, he said, "Now, that you have begun, do it in a workmanlike manner." They had already declared their determination to destroy it. He was in no situation to resist a mob of 150 persons.
Bunce said, in his defence, that Mr. Larkham said to the mob, "Come on, my lads; I have been waiting for you;" and when they reached the place where the machine was, some of the mob asked for money, and he said, "On to work, and do your work like men; I'll pay you when you get to Bucklebury." They said they would break the other machine, and Mr. Larkham said, "There is a mill there; don't break that."
Hamblin said that Mr. Larkham desired them to break the machine a little smaller, as it was so large they could not get it into the cart.
The case against Britton was abandoned, for want of evidence.
Mr. Justice PATTESON left it to the Jury to say whether the machine had been broken against the will of the prosecutrix, and whether what had been said by Joseph Larkham should be taken as an authority or encouragement to the mob, or had been exorted from him by terror.
The prisoners having received good characters.
Mr. GURNEY consented to a verdict of Not Guilty.
James Grant and Elijah Baker were indicted for breaking a thrashing machine belonging to Joseph Cuncle, on the 23d of November. They were proved to be amongst the mob who broke the machine, and that one was armed with an axe and the other with a sledge hammer.
The prisoners said they had been impressed, and Grant received a good character from the prosecutor. It was also represented that Grant had a wife and family - The prisoners were found Guilty - They were acquitted on a second indictment, in which no evidence was offered.
Solomon Allen, Charles Horton, John Horton, James Simons, William Simons, and John Wheeler, were indicted for breaking a thrashing machine belonging to Martha Davis, on the 20th of November.
Mr. GURNEY observed that the present case was attended with circumstances of greater atrocity than those which had hitherto occupied the attention of the Jury, and it was entirely owing to forbearance that the prisoners were not placed at the bar under a capital charge. He then stated some of the facts, and called the witnesses.
Martha Davis, an old and infirm woman, said that on Saturday, the 28th of November, she and her son's wife, who had been lately put to bed, the husband of the latter, who was attending her, a nurse, and a little girl, were in the house. About ten or eleven at night she was alarmed by the strokes of a sledge hammer on the kitchen window. She went to the bedroom window to she what was the matter. She saw six men, and immediately afterwards they had broken in the back door. She asked what they wanted, and they said there were 40 sworn men come out of Kent, an they were going to drive the country before them. They demanded victuals and drink, and asked her whether she would rather have her ricks and buildings set on fire about her ears, or her threshing machine broken. She desired them to break the machine in 500 pieces if they liked, but, for God's sake, not to burn the staff of life. One had a sledge hammer, and another a sword or cutlass, which he flourished about. They had victuals and drink out of the window, but they still kept thumping at the door, and finally broke it. She saw Allen and Charles Hotton amongst the number. The men asked for a candle and lantern to break the machine, and afterwards Allen and some others came back, and asked for some more beer and a hammer to mend their sledge hammer, which they had broken. When they had mended their hammer and had as much beer as they liked they went away.
George Lukar identified all the prisoners as having been of the party who broke the machine. Wheeler had a sledge hammer; James Simons had a sword. The witness corroborated the foregoing evidence as to the behaviour of the prisoners.
There were no Counsel or witnesses for the prisoners, nor did they say anything in their defence.- They were all found Guilty.
The same men, with the exception of Wm. Simons and John Wheeler, were indicted for breaking a machine belonging to Glasspool, on Sunday, the 21st of Nov.
The case was proved, and the prisoners were found Guilty.
SENTENCES.
Solomon Allen, Charles Horton, John Horton, James Simons, Wm. Simons, and John Wheeler, were then placed at the bar to receive sentence.
Mr. Justice PARKE said that the offence with which the prisoners were charged, had been brought home to them all by the most conclusive evidence, and there could be no question of the propriety and necessity of their conviction. Equally unquestionable was it from the evidence that four of the prisoners had been guilty of a repetition of their crime. Had it not been for the remarkably lenient course pursued by those who conducted the prosecutions, the prisoners would all have stood at that bar under indictments, which, if proved, would have subjected them to the forfeiture of their lives; and if that had been the case, the Court would have felt it a duty to let the law take its extreme course. William Simons and John Wheeler had been convicted but once, and the sentence of the Court was, that they should be transported for seven years. The sentence of the Court upon Solomon Allen, Charles Horton, John Horton, and James Simons was, that they should be transported for seven years for their first offence, and for an additional term of seven years for their second.- The prisoners were then removed.
David Hawkins and John Jennoway were indicted for breaking a thrashing machine belonging to Charles Spanswick.
The prosecutor proved that a mob, amongst whom the two prisoners took an active part, came to his house at night, and with threats of violence compelled him to light them to his machine, which they destroyed. They also demanded two sovereigns, which, after endeavouring to evade it, he was finally compelled to give them. Hawkins received the money.
The prisoners were found Guilty.
Hawkins had been capitally convicted on a former trial on Tuesday, and there were other cases against him and Jennoway, in which no evidence being offered, they were acquitted.
Alfred Darling, Daniel Bates, William Pearson, Richard Nutley, George Liddiard, and John Gater [?], were indicted for breaking a thrashing machine belonging to Wm. Webb, on the 23rd of November. They were found Guilty, but were recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of their having used no violence. The Counsel for the Crown joined in this recommendation in favour of Nutley.
Isaac Burton, James Greenaway, Giles Fidler, James Turton, William Waring, George Alick, and James Deacon, were indicted for destroying a thrashing machine belonging to John Hawkins, on the 23d of November.
The prisoners were all found Guilty.
There was an indictment against the same men for assaulting Mr Hawkins, and robbing him of two sovereigns; but no evidence was offered.
John Aldridge and George Whiting were indicted for having on the 22nd of November, broken and destroyed a thrashing machine belonging to Thomas Winkworth.
The evidence was similar to that given in most of the other cases, and the prisoners were found Guilty.
HANTS SPECIAL COMMISSION.
SENTENCES.
The Court having on Wednesday evening intimated its intention to pass sentence on such prisoners as had been convicted during the Special Commission, the three Judges took their seats on the Bench (Thursday morning). The Duke of Wellington and the Hon. W. Sturges Bourne, M.P. sitting to the right and left of their Lordships.
DEATH - James Thomas Cooper, aged 33, Henry Eldridge, 23, and John Gilmour, 25, were put in front of the dock, convicted of destroying several machines at Fordingbridge, and on being asked why sentence of death should not be passed on them, remained silent. The three Judges then put on their black caps, and Mr Baron Vaughan, addressed the prisoners in a most solemn and impressive manner, which had a powerful effect upon a most crowded Court. He told them it was the most painful duty of a Judge to select those, by way of example, for the ends of public justice, who had been most desperate and prominent in the commission of outrage. The law delighted not in punishment - but the object of the law was the prevention rather than the punishment of crime. The Learned Baron then alluded to the violence which had characterised the outrageous proceedings of the prisoners at the bar, and concluded by saying their lives were forfeited to the law, their days were numbered, the gates of mercy on this side the grave were closed against them for ever. It now remained only for me to pass the dreadful sentence of the law; and that is, that you, James Thomas Cooper, that you, Henry Eldridge, and that you, John Gilmour be severally taken to the place whence you came, and thence to a place of execution, and that you there be severally hanged by the neck till you are dead; and may Almighty God have mercy on your guilty souls !" - The prisoners, who some time before the conclusion of the sentence had shown marks of considerable feeling, towards the latter part of it became very much agitated, and were removed from the dock in a state of the greatest distress, particularly Eldridge and Cooper. Many of the other prisoners shed tears.
Sentence of Death was also passed in the same impressive and solemn manner, on Robert Hollaway 38, for destroying the poor-house at Headly; James Annells 19, for robbing W. Courtsey at Barton Stacy, and Henry Cooke, 19, for robbing T. Dowden, Every one in Court appeared much affected by the solemnity of the address. The heavy sigh, the suppressed sob, were distinctly heard, and the quivering lip of the prisoners was visibly perceptible. Altogether, a more dreadful sight was never witnessed; for it must be remembered that the prisoners tried during this Commission have not been persons usually met with a the Assizes - hardened thieves - but men who have been deluded into the commission of these outrages, and who had before, most of them, been men of good character, and respectable in their class of life.
Death was then recorded against a great number of other prisoners, with an intimation from the Judge that most of them must expect to leave the society, the benefits of which they had forfeited; hoping, that the leniency of the sentence would be properly appreciated, but at the same time teach others that these riotous assemblies would not be endured. He would add, that it was his firm opinion, with respect to many of the rioters, that they were acting under delusion; and he would state publicly, that since the opening of the Commission the Court had found but very few instances where hardships - where extreme distress - where pinching want and the pinching spirit of necessity, had instigated any of the parties to the committal of these breaches of the law.