Newspaper Transcripts
Some Selected Reports from The Windsor and Eton Express
13th January 1827
Royal General Dispensary, Windsor
The Annual General Meeting of this Institution will be held at the Town Hall, Windsor, on Wednesday, the 24th of January, at Twelve o'clock precisely, when all Benefactors to this Charity are earnestly requested to attend.
W.B.Holderness, House Surgeon and Secretary; Dispensary, Church-street, Windsor, Jan 13.
National Schools
of
Windsor and its Neighbourhood
The Subscribers and the Public are respectfully informed, that the Annual General Meeting of the Friends of this Institution , to receive the Report of the Committee, will be held in the Town Hall, Windsor, at One o'clock, on Wednesday, January 28, 1827.
C.Knight, Treasurer
Windsor Market
In consequence of the Funeral of his late Royal Highness the Duke of York having been appointed to take place on Saturday, the 20th inst.
Notice is Hereby Given
That this Market will be held Friday, the 19th instant, instead of the following day.
John Voules, Mayor.
Windsor , Jan 12, 1827.
Windsor and Eton
Her Royal Highness the Princess Augusta, we are happy to say, is so much recovered from her late fall as to be able to ride out, on Thursday, for the first time these three weeks past. Her Royal Highness left Frogmore about eleven o'clock, and preceeded in her carriage and four, as far as the King's Palace, Kensington, where her Royal Highness arrived about one o'clock, on a visit of condolence to the Princess Sophia and the Duchess of Kent, on the demise of their beloved brother. The meeting of the Royal relatives continued about an hour, when the Princess returned to Frogmore.
We are enabled to state, by authority, that the funeral of his late Royal Highness the Duke of York will take place at Windsor, on Saturday evening, the 20th inst.
The splendid suite of state rooms at St.James's palace are appropriated for the lying in of state of his Royal Highness's remains, which are to be removed thither from Arlington-street on Wednesday next for that purpose, and on Thursday and Friday the public are to be admitted.
The room where the coffin is to be placed is the large new room at the eastern end of the palace. This spacious apartment (we believe between 60 and 70 feet in length by nearly 35 feet in breadth,) will be fitted up as a vaulted chamber, composed of sweeping black draperies, springing from a magnificent pendant formed in the centre of the ceiling around the chain of the grand lustre. This pendant of cloth and feathers will have the striking effect that is produced by the like forms in the beautiful ceilings of Henry VI th's chapel , Westminster, and King's College Cambridge: whence we presume the hint has been taken, and than which nothing could be more appropriate. The draperies will fall from this down the sides of the apartment to the floor; and around will be placed the armorial bearings immediately belonging to his Royal Highness as Duke of York and Commander-in-chief of the British army. At the east end of the room, on a raised platform of two steps, and under a canopy of state, the coffin will be placed, surmounted by heraldic and military banners. At the head will be seated an officer of state, and on each side two gentlemen ushers. On the ground behind the latter will be long silver candlesticks bearing tapers, and the chamber further illuminated by other lights and by large silver sconces about the walls. A railing will complete this division of the room, occupying the space to the centre door, through which the public will retire, having been admitted at the further or western extremity, and walking up to the melancholy dais. The visitors to this silent farewell of a beloved prince will be admitted through the hall, on court occasions appropriated to those who have the privilege of the entree, (the Ambassadors court.) Proceeding through the chapel gallery and the new gallery, both hung, as well as the staircase, with black drapery in mantle and banner forms, they will enter by the centre door already mentioned, through the presence chamber and the guard chamber, both draped in a suitable manner. The draperies in the latter chamber are so arranged as to display the armour and arms always exposed on the walls, and now so appropriate to a spectacle in which the principal object is the latest commemoration of one so dear to British soldiers.
The ceremony over, early on Saturday morning (as early as may be to eight o'clock) the funeral procession will move from this Palace to St.George's chapel, Windsor. It is arranged to proceed up St.James-street, Piccadilly, and along the high road by Knightsbridge, Kensington, &c., resting at Cranford Bridge. It will probably reach Windsor about nine o'clock. It will be a grand military march, attended by all the troops which the circumstances of the times admit to being brought together. The first portion will be entirely military; then mourning coaches containing the civil officers, &c., of his Majesty, the domestics of H.R.H., and the executors (Sir Herbert Taylor and Colonel Stevenson, as we are informed). Immediately preceding the hearse will be the carriage of the deceased, bearing his coronet on a cushion. The hearse itself will, for the first time, be drawn by eight of the King's black Hanoverian horses.
The ceremonies at Windsor will be distinguished by all the magnificence due to the rank of the illustrious deceased. The streets will be lined with troops bearing torches, and minute guns will be fired by a train of the Royal Artillery in the Long Walk. The choir, of St.George's Chapel will be hung with black cloth; - and the coffin will be lowered into the entrance of the Royal Vault, by that machinery which produced so solemn an effect at the interment of the late revered King. While the service is performing, his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, as chief mourner, will be seated at the head of the coffin; the Dukes of Wellington, Rutland, Dorset, Newcastle, and the other noblemen who are pall bearers, on either side.
We have made every arrangement for giving the most complete account of this national tribute to the memory of one of the most amiable and truly English members of the illustrious House of Brunswick. In consequence of the interment taking place so late on Saturday night, those papers which we usually despatch by post will not be forwarded till the following morning.
Amongst the memorials which many persons will be anxious to possess of his late lamented Royal Highness the Duke of York, we know of none more satisfactory than the portraits published by Mr.Sams. The chalk engravings from a drawing by Wivell, and the mezzotinto print after Jackson, are both excellent in their respective styles, the heads of each are fine and characteristic, conveying an adequate impression of the manly and generous character of the departed prince.
It will be seen by an advertisement in this paper, that in consequence of the funeral of his late Royal Highness the Duke of York taking place on Saturday next, Windsor market will be held on the day previous.
On New Year's day a distribution of blankets was made to the poor of Windsor, by J.Voules, Esq. Mayor, and J.Clode, Esq., Justice, of this borough. These gentlemen were engaged nearly the whole of the day in this praiseworthy task, which was performed with great impartiality. There were 111 pair of blankets given, by which relief was afforded to nearly 200 poor families. The fund from which this charity was effected, was the donation of �50 presented by his Majesty to the necessitous poor of Windsor.
In our market on Saturday last, some most disgusting meat, consisting of pork, beef, and salt tongues, was exhibited at a stall kept by a man named Willoughby, from Shepperton, who was selling it at 2d and 3d a pound. It smell and appearance was of so offensive a nature, as to excite general indignation , and the vendor was summoned before the Mayor. The whole of the meat, amounting to upwards of a cwt, was condemned:- and ordered to be publicly burnt in the Acre, which was accordingly performed at twelve o'clock.
The Quarter Sessions for the Borough of New Windsor were held on Friday, at the Town Hall, before Sir Giffin Wilson, Recorder, John Voules, Esq., Mayor, and John Clode, Esq., Justice.
The Recorder, in his charge to the grand jury, regretted that at the present distressing period, when every mind was clouded with reflections of the lamentable decease of H.R.H the Duke of York, he should be placed in the painful situation to acquaint them of the unusual number of offences which they would have to take into their consideration. He trusted, however, that a good sound judgement would pervade all their decisions; and if any difficulty should arise in their progress, he should be most happy to aid them.
The following trials were then proceeded with:-
James Money who was indicted for stealing four half crowns, from the pocket of William Valentine, at the King's Arms public house, on the 25th ult. The prosecutor was so much intoxicated at the time of giving his evidence, and that was so contradictory a nature, that the Recorder, before its conclusion , appealed to the jury if they felt satisfied that a verdict of acquittal must necessarily be passed. The jury accorded to this sentiment, and Money was Acquitted - The Recorder said it was a lamentable thing that a case like the present should ever occur in a court of justice. He had little doubt, and he thought the jury must be of the same opinion, that certain facts would have been elicited had the prosecutor been in his clear senses; and he strongly advised the prosecutor to be careful in his future dealings.
Sarah Salmon was indicted for stealing, on the 28th of November, a piece of white satin riband, the property of Mr.Hildyard, linen-draper, Windsor. - Alfred Barton, shopman, stated that on the evening of the 28th of November, the prisoner entered the shop, and purchased articles to the amount of 7s. Witness was cutting some black riband, when he observed the prisoner secrete a piece of white riband under her shawl, and afterwards put it into her pocket. There were two lamps in the shop, and he could distinctly observe her motions. She talked to him for five minutes, and having paid for her articles, was about to leave the shop, when he accused her of having stolen the riband, which she denied. At this time, Charles Saunders, another shopman, came in. Prisoner said, if witness would leave the shop, she would give up the riband to Saunders; he left accordingly; and on his return to the shop, he saw the riband in the prisoner's hand, which, after a short time, she returned to Saunders. Mr.Hildyard, on being made acquainted with the case, told witness to procure a constable, but instead of going he remained in the shop. Mr.Hildyard came down stairs, and desired witness and Saunders to detain the prisoner, whilst he consulted with some one what steps should be taken. In the intermediate time, they allowed the prisoner to depart. This was done under the impression that they could take her again. A promise was extended to prisoner that if she gave up the riband no mention should be made of the affair. - Charles Saunders corroborated the above testimony. The prisoner in her defence said she took the riband entirely by mistake. - The Recorder in summing up, said there could be no doubt as to the taking of the riband. He could not find any symptom, he confessed , by which any mistake could be inferred; nor could he, for an instant, entertain a shadow of a doubt as to the veracity of the witnesses. It would be necessary for them to weigh up every thing very impartially in their minds, and return such a verdict as would satisfy their consciences. The jury returned a verdict , of Guilty. - Sentenced to six months imprisonment, which was afterwards commuted to three.
Charles Henry Green, late in the employ of Messrs.Ramsbottom and Legh, was indicted for an assault on James Miller, of Thames-street, Windsor.
The plaintiff stated that he was managing clerk at Messrs.Ramsbottom and Legh's. On the 7th September, defendant went into the brewery, where he entered into conversation with the men; witness went up to him and said, "Mr.Green, it is Mr.Ramsbottom's request that, having no business here, you will not come upon the premises." Defendant said, he should not attend to any orders which he gave. Witness was going away, when defendant pushed him several times; but not returning the provocation, he struck him a violent blow on the head; in putting himself in an attitude of defence witness slipped down, and whilst on the ground defendant struck him several times on his cheek bone, by which he grazed off the skin from his own knuckles. Witness now considered his life in danger, and called loudly for help. After he got upon his legs, the defendant said, "That's the way they do in Bristol;" adding, that witness struck the blow first. He had recourse to medical assistance to reduce the swelling some time after. In cross examination, made by Mr.Rickett, a solicitor of Odiham, an attempt was made to prove that at the time of the assault defendant was in the employ of Messrs. Ramsbottom and Legh, but the fact was positively denied by the plaintiff, who said that the salary was paid to the 3d of September, and this affair happened on the 7th. - William Pitt, in the employ of Messrs.Ramsbottom and Legh, stated, that on the 7th of November, he saw Green at the brewery. Witness was in the blacking-house, and heard some one cry for help. He found Mr.Miller on his back; while in the act of assisting him, Green struck Mr.Miller on the cheek bone. - Cross examined. Is quite positive that defendant struck Mr.Miller; his face was very bloody; Mr.Miller had given witness orders not to clean the defendants boots. This was the plaintiff's case. To disprove the statement of the last witness, defendant called a person employed in the brewery, who, however, could give no evidence to that effect. - The Recorder, in summing up, observed, that the question for the jury was a very simple one, whether or not an assault had been committed on the plaintiff. He should leave it entirely to their own judgement to say if such was the fact. - The jury returned a verdict of Guilty. - The Recorder advised the parties to retire to settle the affair. After a considerable time, the attorney for the defendant stated that he could not agree for his client to accept the terms proposed by Mr.Miller. The Court then sentenced the defendant to pay a fine of �10, and bound him over to keep the peace, himself and two sureties, for twelve months.
Richard Morton and Henry Bowman, porters in the employ of Messrs Thumwood and Co., were indicted for obtaining money under false pretences, from Mrs.Boddy, wife of a gardener, living in Goswell-court, Windsor. It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutrix, that she was standing opposite the Tally Ho coach office, in High street, and was accosted by the accused parties, who asked her if she was going to London ? She said her daughter and a young woman were, and that two places were booked for them at the Tally Ho office. Morton then said all was right, and that if she would give her money to Bowman, they would see them safe in London. Supposing the porters belonged to the Tally Ho coach, she went to the Union public house, and paid 3s to Bowman as her daughter's fare. She afterwards learnt that the porters belonged to the Union coach office; but as their places had been booked at the Tally Ho office, the parties went by that coach. She applied to Morton to return her the money, who said that it had been paid at the Union office; but at that office she could not recover it.
The Recorder defined to the Jury the law relative to this case. A fraud could not be substantiated, as there was no proof that the money in question was appropriated to the purposes of the prisoners; and a conveyance was provided for the parties, by which a return would have been made for the money. Under all the circumstances a verdict of acquittal must be given. The prisoners were accordingly discharged, with a recommendation, from the Recorder to avoid so near an approach to the law's power in future.
At this period, as there were several other trials to be heard, the Court adjourned to this day.
At eleven o'clock the Court again sat, when the following prisoners took their trial:
Francis Hearn was indicted for refusing to assist Thomas Keate, in the execution of his duty, as constable of this borough, on the 24th of October; to which he pleaded Guilty, and was fined 40s.
David Young, was indicted for assaulting Samuel Smith, a watchman of this borough, on the 26th of December, at the Spread Eagle, George-street. The evidence of the prosecutor was contradicted by two credible witnesses, and the prisoner was Acquitted.
Thomas Buby, a stonemason, was indicted for assaulting Samuel Smith, the prosecutor in the former case, on the 23d December, at the Spread Eagle. The prosecutor was called in by Mr.Day, the landlord, to quell a very serious riot, between some of the privates of the Royal Horse Guards and some of the privates of the 67th; on his entering the room a number of these persons fell upon him, with a cry of "murder the watchman." Mr.Day, in consequence of the increasing uproar, sent for a guard of soldiers. At this time the prosecutor was beaten senseless, and he recollected nothing more of the affray; he therefore called Mr.Thomas Day as a further evidence of the outrage committed on him. This witness corroborated Smith's testimony, and added that he saw prisoner strike Smith, and remonstrated with him on the impropriety of his conduct. The prisoner excused himself by saying that he had been struck by some one, which he had returned in self defence. In his defence the prisoner called two witnesses, who stated that the prisoner did not strike the watchman. Their evidence not being credited, the jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sentenced to one month's imprisonment.
Aylesbury
The Bucks Epiphany Session commenced on Tuesday, and the whole of the business, which was unusually heavy, was disposed of by Thursday afternoon. This dispatch was owing to a plan agreed upon by the Magistrates, during their absence from Court on Tuesday, to try in both Courts. Sir John Dashwood King, who was in the chair at the opening of the Court, by desire of the other gentlemen in the commission of the peace, agreed to preside in the inner hall, and to try the appeals. The nomination of another Chairman, to preside at the trials of the prisoners then became a subject of consideration. The Marquis of Chandos, in a neat speech, proposed Sir Thomas Freemantle as a gentleman well qualified to fill that important situation. Col.Browne seconded the nomination, which was carried unanimously. Sir Thomas Freemantle accordingly took the chair. The manner in which he, for the first time, performed the duties of Chairman, must have met the approbation of every one; he evinced moderation, quickness of comprehension, and knowledge of the law. We do not think that in the whole circle of the Magistrates of the county, among whom are many gentlemen highly talented, a more efficient Chairman could not have been selected.
The officers and men of the 2d Regiment of Bucks Yeomanry have received notice to hold themselves in readiness to pay a last tribute of respect to the late Commander in Chief; it being probable that the remains of his Royal Highness the Duke of York will pass through some part of the county, on their way to the place of interment, it is expected that the Regiment will be required to assemble and join the cavalcade.
A poor woman of Aylesbury, named Glenister, who gains her livelihood by charing, accidentally fell from a step at the door of Mr.Thorpe, butcher, on Wednesday evening and broke her leg.
Yesterday a notorious rogue, of the name of Edward Mooring, was brought to Aylesbury gaol, having been committed for trial for stealing a loaf from a baker's shop. This is the fifth time he has been an inmate of the gaol. He was last discharged about a fortnight ago, having undergone an imprisonment for poaching by the name of Wm.Church. As the constables were bringing him to Aylesbury, he expressed his sore regret that the Magistrates had taken half a pound of bread from the prisoners daily allowance.
As the waggoner of Mr.Charles Grantham, of Chetwode, was on his way to Buckingham with his master's team, on Monday last, being intoxicated and riding on the shafts, he unfortunately fell under one of the wheels, which, passing over his body, killed him on the spot.
Bucks Epiphany Session, Tuesday, Jan 9.
The Chairman addressed the Grand Jurors after they were sworn, as follows:- Gentlemen of the Grand Jury - It is with great concern I observe that the number of prisoners for trial at the present Session is greater than on any previous occasion. Large, however, as it is, it is not so extended as some other counties, and there is no case out of the ordinary description, or any one that requires me to recommend it to your particular consideration. I wish to say a few words respecting an erroneous idea which has gone abroad, that the luxuries of the gaol induce those who have been once confined there to return. This as is consistent with their situation , but nothing more; no such indulgence is shown to them as to render the gaol a desirable place of residence. There is one other subject on which I shall make some observations. I had hoped to be able to congratulate you on the decrease of the county rates, but I regret to say that there are likely to be great demands upon the county during the present year; the money required , however, is not on account of the gaol, which has been so much enlarged an improved as to render a further outlay at present unnecessary , but on account of the bridges of the county, no less than five of which now require repair; three of them have been indicted, and the expense of repairing one alone will be equal to nearly the whole annual amount of the county rate. I wish you therefore, to take into consideration whether it will not be advisable to collect tolls, at least at one of them, with a view to lessen the county expenditure. I have now, gentlemen, made all the observations I think necessary , and you will retire to the performance of your duties.
During their absence from Court the Magistrates, in consequence of the very heavy business of the Session, agreed to transact business in both the outer and inner hall. The trials of prisoners was proceeded with in the outer hall; the appeals in the inner.
Trials of Prisoners
Sir.T.F.Freemantle took the chair, and was supported by the Marquis of Chandos, Lord Nugent, Sir Wm.Clayton, Bart., G.Carrington, Esq., T.T.Bernard, Esq., Rev.D.Jenks, Rev.E.Owen, Rev.-Drake, Rev.T.Archer, Rev.W.B.Wroth[?], Rev.W.Bradford.
Corbey Roads, an elderly man, and Richard Roads and Wm.Roads, his two sons, were arraigned on an indictment charging them with stealing at Wotton Underwood, on the 16th of December last, a quantity of hay and straw, the property of his Grace the Duke of Buckingham. They all pleaded Guilty, and notwithstanding they were cautioned by the Chairman that this plea would not operate to mitigate their punishment, they persisted in repeating the avowal of their guilt. Their plea was consequently recorded. The Chairman observed, in passing sentence on them, that there were in the case of the elder Roads two points of great aggravation. The first was, that he had effected this robbery in conjunction with his two sons, to whom it was his duty to have set a different example, and whom he ought to have instructed in principles of honesty and virtue instead of teaching them to steal; and the other was, that he was in the service of the Duke of Buckingham at the time he committed the robbery. In consideration of these circumstances, he should inflict on him a heavy punishment, though not so heavy as his crime deserved, and he hoped that both he and his sons would derive a beneficial lesson from the punishment they would receive. He then sentenced Corbey Roads to Eight months hard labour; and the other prisoners to Four months hard labour.
John Ives and Thomas Pearce were arraigned on an indictment, charging them with stealing on the 19th of October, one hempen sack, containing about four bushels of wheat, value �1, the property of Henry Davies, of Iver - Ives having pleaded Guilty, Pearce was arraigned alone, when Mr.Wallington, counsel for the prosecution, declined to offer any evidence against him, and he was in consequence Acquitted. Ives was sentenced to Eight months hard labour.
Wm.Penn was put on his trial, charged with stealing, on the 14th of September, a piece of walnut timber, value 5s, the property of Thomas Carter, of Iver - Mr.Best stated the case for the prosecution.- It appeared that Mr.Carter, who is a carpenter at Iver, was at the Swan public-house in that town, on Sunday, the 14th of October, and was asked by a boy there if he had lost any timber. He replied that he did not know that he had, but he should soon miss it if it were gone. He went home and examined his premises, and discovered that a piece of walnut tree, about three feet six inches in length, had been taken away. In consequence of suspicions he entertained he went with Thos.Ashley, the constable of Iver, to the prisoner's house, and found the piece of timber lost from his premises in his bedroom, covered over with a piece of sacking.[The timber was produced, and positively sworn to by the prosecutor.] - In addition to the above testimony, a witness named John Godalming , swore that he saw the prisoner on th night of the 14th of September, carrying a piece of timber from the ground of the prosecutor - The prisoner said that could not be, for he found it in a ditch, and when he took it up he saw no one near the place. When called upon for his defence, he said he had no other defence to make. He was found Guilty - In reply to the question from the Chairman, how many times the prisoner had been in custody, Mr.Sherriff (the gaoler) said that he had found from his books he had been there during the period he had managed the gaol twelve different times, and as far as he could learn four more times before, making altogether 16 periods of confinement. The Chairman in addressing the prisoner, observed that imprisonment having been often tried to reclaim him, but in vain, for he invariably returned to those pursuits for which he had been confined, he should now pass a sentence upon him that would prevent him from pursuing for some time those acts of pillage which were habitual to him, and sentenced him to Seven Years Transportation.
Benjamin Puddephatt was put to the bar, on a charge of having feloniously stolen six bushels of wheat, value 20s, the property of Robert Lewis, of Iver. - Mr.Wallender, counsel for the prosecution, moved for his re-commitment on account of the illness of Mr.Lewis, who was the principal and a necessary witness against him.[A certificate of his illness signed by a medical man, was put in and read.] Mr.Bethel objected to this evidence, and said the evidence of illness ought to be the best possible to be given, which was oral - The Chairman said that it was invariable practice of the Court to receive written testimony of illness, from which he saw no reason in the present instance to depart.- Mr.Bethel the moved the prisoner might be admitted to bail; but this also was overruled by the Court, and he was finally re-committed for trial at the Assizes.
Wm.Hawkins, aged 17, was indicted for stealing, at Aylesbury, on the 18th of November, six fowls, the property of John Deverell, and John Britnell, aged 15 [?] , was indicted for receiving the same fowls, knowing them to be stolen. - We so recently gave the circumstances of this , that it is unnecessary to repeat them. The prisoners were both found Guilty, but the Jury and prosecutor joined in recommending them to mercy on account of their youth. They had already been in gaol seven weeks, and were sentenced to One month's hard labour.
Wednesday
Benjamin Denny and Robert Hutchins were placed at the bar on a charge of stealing 8 cwt of coal, the property of Thomas Roberts, of Preston Bissett.
Wm.Massey was indicted for stealing in the parish of Wooburn, on the 9th of September last, a rope and bucket, value 1s 6d, the goods of James Rance. - Guilty - One month's hard labour.
John Weston, an elderly man, and Henry Weston, his son, were indicted for stealing 12 bushels of barley, value �2 11s and four bushels of peas, value �1 10s, the property of Henry Hobbs - Henry Weston pleaded Guilty. Twelve months hard labour in the House of Correction.
William Matthews was indicted for stealing fourteen shillings, the property of John Baxter, on the 11th of November, in the parish of Little Missenden.- Baxter, it appeared, being in a state of intoxication, went to lay down on some straw in the stable of the Nag's Head public-house, Little Missenden, and while laying there asleep, fourteen shillings were abstracted from his pocket. The circumstance which caused the prisoner to be suspected of the robbery were, that he was seen in the stable while Baxter was sleeping there, and on the following day he showed several shillings to Mary James, an inmate of the poor-house of Little Missenden, which, with his narrow stipend of eight pence a day, it was not probable he could have saved.- Guilty - Three months hard labour.
John Collins, a man in advanced years, and John Clarke, his son-in-law, were indicted for having stolen four bushels of wheat and a hempen sack, the property of John Soames - The facts of this case nearly resemble those of the one already given. Mr.Soames, it appears, is a farmer now living at Ivinghoe, but who dwelt not long ago at Little Brickhill. His barn being broken open on the night of the 11th of December, and a sack of wheat taken away, he sent samples of corn similar to that which had been stolen to the neighbouring millers. On the 29th of December he was apprized that some wheat resembling his sample had been taken to the mill of Mr.Lane by Collins. He in consequence procurred a search warrant and went to Clarke's house, where he found two bushels and a half of wheat similar to that he had lost; he knew it again by its being mow-burnt; some other wheat was boiling in a pot; and these parcels with that at the mill made up altogether nearly the quantity he had lost. The wheat was produced, and Mr.Soames and a labourer in his employ both swore to its identity. There was little evidence against Collins, except that he carried the wheat to the mill to be ground, and this he accounted for by saying it had been given to him for that purpose by a little boy six years old, the son of Clarke, and that he did not know it was stolen. In his defence Clarke put in a written defence stating that the wheat found at his house was the produce of half an acre of land he rented, part of which was sown with rye and part with wheat. The Jury intimated their disbelief of his statement by finding against him a verdict of Guilty, but they Acquitted Collins.- Clarke was sentenced to Twelve months hard labour.
Robert Holmes was indicted for stealing at Lavendon, a hempen sack, the property of Edward Bithrey.- Robert Heath committed with the prisoner, was liberated to be King's evidence on another trial.- In this case it appeared Mr.Bithrey, having lost a sack and some wheat, obtained a warrant to search the prisoner's house, which was executed by Mr.Heath, his brother-in-law, and a constable; they found in Holme's house a sack with wheat in it. [This sack was produced in Court and identified by Mr.Bithrey and a labourer in his employment as his property.] - The prisoner in his defence, said the sack produced was left at his house by Robert Heath, who wore it round his shoulders on a wet day. By the desire of the prisoner, Heath was questioned on this point, and stated that he did leave a sack like that produced at the prisoner's house.- The Chairman, in charging the Jury, told them that if they believed the prisoner's defence and the evidence of Heath, they must acquit the prisoner, for though he might be found guilty under another indictment of receiving the sack, knowing it to be stolen, he was not, if they credited the evidence of Heath, guilty under the present indictment.- The Jury having conferred, gave their verdict, Guilty of having the sack in his possession - The Chairman told them he could not receive their verdict in such a shape, and they then gave a verdict of Guilty - One months hard labour.
Margaret Holt was indicted for having stolen at Newport Pagnall, on the 21st of October, a cotton shawl an several other articles, the property of Wm.Bailey Pratt, - The prisoner, a young woman about 23 years of age, who bore the appearance of a respectable servant, which in fact she had been until the present charge was brought against her, seemed deeply affected with her situation, and was in tears during the whole time of the trial. From the facts stated in evidence, it transpired that the prosecutor is a linen-draper, at Newport Pagnall; the prisoner, a servant of Mr.Provis[?], the county surveyor of Bucks, was in the habit of coming to his shop to make purchases; Mr.Pratt, however suspected from having missed several articles immediately after her visits, that she took away with her more of his goods than she bought. Impressed with this idea he determined to watch her narrowly the next time she entered his shop. On the 21st of October the prisoner came and purchased a pair of stockings. Mr.Pratt who was serving other customers while she purchased the stockings, observed her take a shawl from the counter and put it into a basket she carried. He made no attempt to stop her, but allowed her to go out of the shop, and then sent for a constable, who followed her and took her into custody. The prisoner voluntarily gave up the key of a box containing her clothes when she was apprehended, and consented that it should be searched. Mr.Pratt and the constable went to the house of her master to examine her box, and found in it several articles which Mr.Pratt identified . These together with the cotton shawl stolen on the 21st, were produced in Court, and sworn to; they consisted of a black silk shawl, a piece of printed cotton, a piece of white riband, and a cotton shawl - There were some other articles which Mr.Pratt believed had been taken from his shop, but which he would not swear to. - The prisoner said nothing in her defence, but called Mr.Provis, her late master, to speak to her character. He said she had lived in his service for four years. Her conduct during that time was strictly honest, and so satisfied was he with the propriety of her behaviour, that if she were discharged he would again take her into his service. - She was found Guilty - The prosecutor recommended her to mercy. - In passing sentence, the Chairman said that the offence of the prisoner was of a nature that would a few years ago have rendered her liable to transportation. There were, however some circumstances which operated strongly in her favour. The good character which her master had given her, the contrition she had shown in Court, and the recommendation by the prosecutor to mercy, proved that she was not a practised or hardened offender, and induced him to hope that a lenient punishment would be sufficient to reclaim her. He should sentence her to Six months imprisonment, and he hoped when she was discharged that she would endeavour to redeem good the character she had lost.
Robert Hinton was indicted for having stolen at Whitchurch, on the 20th of December, two white willow boards, the property of Mrs.Mary Carruthers. - The prisoner, it appeared, had been in the service of Mrs.Carruthers, and had access to a barn where some willow boards, belonging to her, were placed. It chanced that a rabbit-hutch was observed on the premises where the prisoner lived, made of willow boards, and on examination the hutch proved to have been made of boards taken from Mrs.Carruthers barn. - Guilty - Three months hard labour.
Thursday
Samuel Fairy and Thomas Fairy (father and son,) were put on their trial, charged with having stolen a quantity of wheat at Lavendon, the property of Edward Bithrey. - The case against the prisoners was very clear. Some wheat in the chaff was stolen from the barn of Mr.Bithrey. Soon after the robbery, Samuel Fairy, the eldest prisoner, sent some wheat to Lavendon mill to be ground, a sample of which was taken out and compared with the wheat in Mr.Bithrey's barn, with which it corresponded. - In addition to testimony to the above effect, was a confession of the robbery by Thos.Fairy, the younger prisoner, and the evidence of Robert Heath, an accomplice. Heath, who is brother-in-law to Mr.Bithrey, stated that he lives in his house as servant, and that on the night the wheat was stolen, he himself took the wheat out of the barn and gave it to Thomas and Samuel Fairy, who were waiting outside for it, and that they took it away with him. - In his defence, Samuel Fairy said he bought the wheat of Heath, the accomplice. - The Jury found both prisoners Guilty - The Chairman observed that the offence with which the prisoner was charged was one that seemed to be gaining ground in the county. This was the fourth trial that had taken place in the present Session for wheat stealing, and in three of them sons had been indicted with their fathers. It must therefore be checked by severe punishment. Guilty as they were, it appeared they were not so culpable as Heath, who had been admitted King's evidence, for he was living with the relation whom he had assisted them to plunder. There was a difference too in the degree of criminality of the prisoners; the father had instructed his son to steal, instead of bringing him up in ways of honesty, and he should make a distinction in their punishment. Samuel Fairy would be Imprisoned to hard labour for eight calendar months, and Thomas Fairy for Four calendar months.
Before Sir J.D.King
Samuel Worley and James Hele, were indicted for having, on the night of Saturday, the 18th of December, entered into an inclosed wood, called Pitlands Wood, in the parish of Chalfont St.Peter, the property of James Du Pre, Esq., with intent illegally to destroy game or rabbits, and then and there being armed with a gun, contrary to the statute. - Guilty - Twelve months hard labour.