Sarah
Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper
Articles
The Western Daily Press, Bristol, Wednesday Press 26 Nov 1919
Page 6 Column 2
“TO PREVENT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE”
UNUSUAL CASE AT BRISTOL ASSIZE
At the Bristol Assize, yesterday, Ernest Albert OATEN pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with attempting to prevent the course of justice by being a party to a payment of the sum of £30 to Wm. George REED as an inducement to the latter to leave Bristol, and not to surrender to his bail. REED being at the time charged with stealing forage belonging to the Government to the value of £188, and OATEN with receiving the goods.
Mr Croome JOHNSTONE outlined the story, which has already been told in the police court and at the Quarter Session. Counsel referred to conversations between REED and OATEN which he said culminated in an arrangement by which the latter paid or caused to be paid the former £30 to clear out of the way and not appear at the police court. The bargain was not carried out, but apparently a more successful arrangement was made later, for which called upon to take his trial at the Quarter Session REED did not surrender, although he did so on the last day of the session.
William George REED, who is now undergoing sentence for the theft of forage, attended in charge of a warder and gave evidence. The witness spoke first of the conversations with CATEN <sic>, in which he endeavoured to arrange as to what they should say about the prices in forage transactions. He referred also to a remark made by OATEN to the effect that it would be worth £100 to him (OATEN) if he cleared off. REED said that he replied £30 would be sufficient for him. On another occasion OATEN said his brother should give him the money; then it could not be said that he (OATEN) gave it. Subsequently witness went with OATEN to the house, and received a bundle of notes from a man, and on the way back OATEN said. “There must be no nonsense about this; you will have to go away.” At that time, witness said, he meant to go away. On the day of the Quarter Session he went away to Gloucester, prisoner having promised to look after his wife. On the following day, witness said, he bought a Bristol paper and read an account of the trail. He was so horrified at the way prisoner and the others put all the blame on him that he came back to Bristol at once and surrendered.
Cross-examined by Mr INSKIP, witness maintained that others who had given evidence – the lorrymen – were his accomplices in the theft. Other men had shared in the money received – the £188?. Witness had about half or one-third of the money. He was in poor circumstances in May, but did not owe money to betting men. He did not ask OATEN for a loan. His idea in accepting the £30 was to go away for ever.
In re-examination, witness said he received unemployment pay while he was awaiting trial.
The Judge: They do not pay you unemployment pay when you are actually in prison?
Witness: No.
Mrs REED, wife of the last witness, repeated the evidence given at the police court. He husband, she said, brought home £30 in one pound notes. The next day OATEN called and asked why her husband had not gone away. Her husband said he was going in the morning, whereupon OATEN said. “You are leaving it rather late.” Mr and Mrs OATEN called at night, and finding her husband had not gone, Mrs OATEN said “It's a dirty trick; you might as well have thrown your money in the street; he never meant to go.”
Further evidence was given by a number of other witnesses, and the Court adjourned until 10.30 this morning.
<NOTES: Ernest Albert OATEN son of Frederick OATEN and Clara HORWOOD, married Emma Jessie CLEMENTS>