Sarah
Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper
Articles
The
Taunton Courier. Bristol and Exeter Journal, and Western Advertiser
Wednesday 20 Feb 1907
Page 2
TAUNTON BOROUGH POLICE.
WEDNESDAY. - Before the ex-Mayor (Alderman J. G. VILE), Alderman H. J. SPILLER, Alderman W. POTTER, Councillor H. J. Van TRUMP, Mr. J. E. W. WAKEFIELD, Mr. C. J. GOODLAND, and Mr. W. LOCK.
DISAPPOINTED PASSIVE RESISTERS.
“There's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip” is a saying often quoted, and it certainly applied to the passive resisters of Taunton, who last year were confidently expectant that their appearance before the Bench were at end. Between them and their hopes appeared a nemesis in the shape of the Peers, who at the last moment rejected the measure which would have brought the movement to an end. On this occasion passive resisters, numbering nearly fifty, came up on the usual summons of non-payment of a portion of the poor-rate. Among them was the Mayor (Alderman J. P. SIBLEY) and Mr. T. S. PENNY. These two gentlemen, as magistrates, did not of course occupy their usual positions on the Bench.
Mr. A. D. CROSSMAN asked and obtained permission to speak on behalf of his fellow-resisters. He said that they regretted very much to have to appear again, as they had hoped that the previous occasion would have been the last time they would have had to have come there. As citizens of that town they felt obliged to come before the magistrates rather than conscientiously pay that portion of the rate used for religious education in the schools of this country. They had tried Constitutional means to get the Act altered, but had failed through the action of “another place.” It was very unpleasant for them to have to come to the Court again.
Some of the resisters expressed their determination never to pay the rates, and the Rev. R. SQUIRE wanted to have a say on the subject of his having no goods to distrain on, but was not allowed to speak.
The following were the names of those summoned: - The Mayor, the Rev. H. J. KNIGHT, the Rev. J. H. COX, the Rev. R. SQUIRE, the Rev. J. P. TETLEY, Messrs. T. S. PENNY, J. H. BALE, J. S. WINSOR, LAWRENCE and THOMPSON (each two summonses), T. S. BICKEL, F. ADAMS, W. H. WESTLAKE, & Son, W. H. WESTLAKE, F. C. SANDERSON, S. LAWRENCE, S. A. LAWRENCE, J. Y. COLES, F. C. SANDERSON, A. J. WATTS, F. J. VENNING, C. SILVESTER, W. L. MOUNTER, G. CHAPMAN, A. E. BANFIELD, A. C. BULL, W. T. GILL, A. A. CHAPMAN, S. A. CHAPMAM, J. BAILEY, T. DODD, H. RELPH, J. W. COOMBES, A. CASLEY, C. W. CASLEY, P. J. THORNE, J. E. LAMBERT, and C. PRICE, Mrs. PALMER, Mrs. GUBBIN, the Misses BRIGHT, Miss J. M. SMITH, and the Misses F. and K. CASLEY. - All the defendants admitted the rate, and the usual orders were made.
Mr. CROSSMAN asked that the usual favour that had been given in previous years might be again extended to them, namely, to issue one warrant to cover the whole of the summonses.
The Chairman said the question was that there were two or three of the persons who had been summoned who had nothing to be distrained upon. Would Mr. CROSSMAN be responsible for their amounts?
Mr. CROSSMAN: We cannot do that.
The CHAIRMAN: In that case we must re-consider the position we have taken up before.
The magistrates then retired for a short time, and on returning,
The Chairman said he would address himself to Mr. CROSSMAN on behalf of the persons summoned. Would he retract what he said with regard to being responsible for the payment of those that had nothing to distrain upon? If not they would have to issue a separate warrant in each individual case.
Mr. CROSSMAN said that the law had to take its course, and the goods were sold to meet the claim.
The Chairman asked him again whether he would be responsible for those who could not be distrained upon, and Mr. CROSSMAN replied in the negative. - Then, said the Chairman, one warrant must be issued for each person.
Mr. CROSSMAN: We would rather have that than surrender our principles.
TEMPORARY TRANSFER.
Mr. C. P. CLARKE applied for the temporary transfer of the license of the Coach and Horses, East-street, from William CHICK to George Henry PEACH. - Mr. CHICK was called, and said that he had kept the house six years, and was leaving on account of his wife's illness. - Mr. PEACH said that he had kept a licensed house in Bristol for several years. He was willing to take over the Coach and Horses at a valuation. - The police having no objection, and a satisfactory character with regard to the in-going tenant haveing been produced, the transfer was granted.
THE TWO D's.
Edward MACDONALD, of 11 Court, High-street, pleaded guilty to being drunk and disorderly on February 8th. - P.C. LOVELL stated the facts, and defendant was fined 5s and costs.
THE NEW BY-LAW FOR LIGHTING UP.
Recently a new by-law was introduced into the borough by which all vehicles were required to carry a light after lighting up time. The first prosecution under this new law came up now, when Frederick CULVERWELL, landlord of the Royal Mail Hotel, pleaded guilty to driving a horse and cart without a light on February 8th. - P.C. GOULD stated that he saw defendant driving a horse and cart without a light in Priorswood-road just after seven o'clock on the date in question. - Mr. CULVERWELL, in explanation, pleaded ignorance of the new by-law that lights had to be carried in the borough, and the Bench decided as this was the first prosecution under it, a fine of 6d only should be imposed.
VACCINATION FINE.
Frederick SIMMONS, of Richmond-road, did not appear to a summons for not having his child vaccinated. - Mr. S. R. CHAPMAN, vaccination officer, said that the child was born in March last, and defendant had been served with notice; but the child had not been vaccinated, as he had received no certificate of vaccination or of exemption. - Fined £1 and costs.
THE EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM.
James HURLEY, of George-street, Rowbarton, and Thomas TALBOT, of Laburnum-street, were both summoned for disobedience of an order to send children regularly to school. - Each case was adjourned for two months, as improvement was promised. - Harry SHARP, of King-street, was similarly summoned, but did not appear. - He was fined 5s and costs.
THURSDAY. - Before the ex-Mayor (Alderman J. G. VILE) and Mr. J. E. W. WAKEFIELD.
BUTCHER IN TROUBLE.
GIVEN ANOTHER CHANCE.
A sad story of a young man's temptation and downfall was unfolded in the case where William POTTER, 18, of Creech St. Michael, was charged with feloniously embezzling and stealing the sum of £1 15s 6d received by him on behalf of his employers, Messrs. W. & J. BAKER, butchers, of Upper High-street.
The prosecutor gave evidence that the defendant delivered meat and received money for the same when customers chose to pay on delivery. They had had occasion to make some inquiries respecting the account of a customer, namely, Mr. COUSINS, of Sherford, and found that certain tickets had been receipted by the defendant, but the money had never been handed in by him. The dates when money was paid according to the tickets were January 5th, 12th, 19th, 24th, 26th, and February 2nd.
Jane BAKER, who carries on business in partnership with her brother, said defendant came into their employ about Christmas last, and delivered in the course of his duties meat to Mr. COUSINS at Sherford. She asked him on more than one occasion whether he had received any money from Mr. COUSINS, and he had replied in the negative. She knew that the receipts on the tickets (produced) were in the defendant's writing, these having bee attached to the meat delivered. Defendant had authority for her and her brother to take any money offered to him by customers and given receipts in return, but only as a rule when customers had books. Mr. COUSINS was an exception to the rule, he generally paying on delivery. She believed that defendant received other money during January from customers holding books. In the case of Mr. COUSINS defendant had authority to received money and give receipts.
Miss COUSINS, living at Sherford, gave evidence to receiving meat on the dates mentioned on the tickets from the defendant. She paid for the meat on each occasion on delivery, and defendant gave her a receipt on the ticket, and handed them back to her. Last Tuesday Miss BAKER sent up for the tickets. It was her general rule to pay on delivery if the price was on the ticket.
Defendant, who elected to be dealt with summarily, pleaded guilty, and said that he had been very much pressed for money lately. He had to pay 4s out of 6s for lodging.
Mr. BAKER explained that that sum included board and lodging, but defendant chose to sleep out at his mother's house.
P.C. BOURNE said that defendant had lodged out till about three weeks ago, and P.S. GILSON stated there was nothing known against defendant.
Mr. BAKER asked that the case might not be pressed.
The Chairman, addressing the defendant, said it was very distressing to see him in that position, and bound him over under the First Offender's Act for twelve months to come up for judgment if called upon.