cornwall england newspaper
1839 NEWS ARTICLE
APRIL
5 APRIL 1839, Friday
CORNWALL LENT ASSIZES - Thursday, March 28
William TREGENZA, 14, was charged with stealing a watch out of the house of Jane COCK, at Budock. The prosecutrix stated that on the 6th of March, on going out of her house, she left a watch on the kitchen table, and on her return found it missing. She suspected the prisoner, and sent for the constable, ROGERS, who after two beers brought him back. He lived near her, and had been about the premises for several days. Witness accused Tregears of taking the watch; and he said "there is your watch on the table." Witness was, however, sure the watch was not there before he was brought back by the constable, for she had just before washed down the table. George ROGERS, constable of Budock, corroborated the last witness, and produced the watch, which was identified by Mrs. Cock.
The prisoner made rather an ingenious defence, stating that a man working in the field, asked him to go into this house, and see what o'clock it was, when he took out the watch to show the man, and carried it back again. GUILTY. A certificate of a former conviction was put in, and the prisoner was identified by Mr. Everest. Transportation for 10 years.
The Judge, after passing sentence, told the jury he would take care the prisoner should be sent to the Isle of Wight, where the government had an establishment for the reformation of young offenders.
Richard CREASE [Creaese?], 23, charged with stealing at Redruth, part of a neck of mutton, the property of Kitty ROWE of Reduth. The prosecutrix stated that she kept Redruth market, and what meat she did not sell, she was in the habit of putting in Mr. REYNOLD's killing-house. She was at the market on the 8th of March, and the day after, she went to prisoner's house, where she found a piece of neck of mutton belonging to her.
John HOWELL, Mr. Reynold's servant, stated that on the evening of the 8th of March, he saw the prisoner at the killing house, which witness locked about 10 o'clock. The next morning he found the door had been opened, and a piece of mutton, belonging to Kitty ROWE, was gone.
Elizabeth DARKE, with whom prisoner lodged, stated that he had a shelf on which he kept his own meat. Prisoner came home about 11 o'clcok on the night of the 8th of March. The next morning, Kitty Rowe came, and found a piece of mutton on prisoner's shelf. There had been no meat there the night before.
Mr. G. D. JOHN, clerk to the magistrates, proved the examination in which the prisoner stated that he had bought the meat at eight o'clock, in the market, and went to bed by half-past eight. GUILTY. Two months' hard labour.
William RABEY, 40, was charged with stealing some straw, the property of William SOUTHEY. The prosecutor was a carrier, having a small farm near Padstow. James HARRIS, who worked for Southey, watched in a shed, and saw prisoner carry off about half a bundle of straw, of the value of twopence. Prisoner said he only took a little for his pigs; and that Mr. Southey would have given it to him, if he had been there. � In the prisoner's defence it was contended that he took the straw without any felonious intention, and Mr. D. OBORNE[as written] was called to speak to his character. Witness managed all parish matters of Padstow. He had known Rabey for many years, and had employed him on the road for fourteen years, sometimes as a superintendent. He had also employed him to collect poor-rates, and had trusted him with hundreds of pounds. He was still (being on bail) employed by the parish, notwithstanding this charge. NOT GUILTY.
Edward ROWE, 27, charged with having stolen two heifers, the property of Walter JEFFERY of Wendron. The prosecutor was a mine-agent and farmer. In February, he had two heifers in a croft. Saw them about seven or eight o'clock in the morning of the 26th. The following day they were missing. They were brought back to him on the 28th.
Richard GIDDY on the 27th February was going to Truro, when he saw prisoner with two little heifers. Witness asked the price. Prisoner said, six guineas a piece, and asked witness for some refreshment; when witness said "Such as I have I give to thee - some barley bread and butter." �Prisoner said he must sell the heifers, as he wanted to pay his rent. Witness said he would give GBP 9 and no more, for the two. Prisoner sold them for this sum. Witness, when they got to Truro, asked prisoner if any body would say it was all right about the heifers. � Prisoner said his wife was coming. They did not, however, see any woman. They then turned into the field where the heifers were; when the prisoner offered to give back the money; and witness said to himself "well, the man must be right, and I wrong." The men then returned to Truro, and witness went to his business; but he still felt something not pleasant within (smiting his breast) and he said to his son "follow that y! oung man." After that, in consequence of what he heard from his son, witness looked for the owner of the heifers. He turned them out, and let them go where they would, thus he found out where their home was, for they took him to Mr. Jeffery's. Mr. Jeffery recalled, swore to the heifers so restored being his property. GUILTY. Fifteen years' transportation.
The Judge said to Mr. Giddy "I think the public is very much indebted to you. You conducted yourself very well, both as an honest and sensible man."
Samuel Alford PIPER, 24, charged with stealing 40 lbs. of iron, the property of James DUNSTAN, of Kea. The evidence did not make out the case; and the Judge directed a verdict of acquittal.
Elizabeth RUNDLE, 17, charged with stealing a pair of boots, the property of Peter BARON, of Mevagissey.
Mary BARON, wife of prosecutor, kept a boot and shoe shop. Prisoner came to buy a pair of shoes; and after she had left, witness missed a pair of boots, the only pair of the kind she had. She sent for the prisoner, who confessed, and brought them back. This evidence was corroborated by another witness. GUILTY. Three months' hard labour, and solitary confinement.
John MONTGOMERY, 31, charged with stealing at Saint Agnes, twenty pair of leather shoes and ten pair of stuff shoes, the property of George WILLS. The prosecutor was a shoemaker of Truro, and attended St. Agnes market. The prisoner also attended that market, and sold tapes, luers, &c, &c, on a standing beside the witness's. The prisoner used to assist witness in packing up his goods, and returned to Truro by the same van. � Witness had repeatedly missed shoes. The last time was on the 24th of January, when he missed five pair. He saw them afterwards in the hands of the constable.
Sally WILLS, wife of last witness, attended Redruth market with shoes. Always assisted her husband in packing and unpacking. She never missed any shoes at Redruth market; but she saw some of her husband's shoes there, on Mr. Nicholls's standing.
Arthur NICHOLLS lived at Redruth, and sold ready-made shoes. Has bought shoes of the prisoner at different times. The last time was in January.
Mr. TREVORRA, constable, produced 31 pair of shoes, wish had been delivered to him on the 1st of March, by Mrs.Wills. � Mr. Wills recalled, identified the shoes. He knew them by his work. Mrs. Wills also identified them by her marks of prices.
William ROWE, constable of Truro, searched the house of Mr. Nicholls, and found a pair of shoes there, which witness produced.
Mr. Nicholls recalled. Did not know of what calling prisoner was. He told witness that he had made an exchange of goods, or bought them of a man in Perran.
Mr. and Mrs. Wills both identified one pair of the shoes, and Wills stated that the prisoner sold only list shoes, not leather.
Arthur Nicholls had known the prisoner six or seven years, and he had always borne a good character.
Mr. Cockburn addressed the jury in defense; dwelling principally on the difficulty of proving the identity of the shoes; and the possibility of prisoners's having bought them elsewhere. GUILTY.
The prisoner was again indicted for stealing 15 pair of leather shoes, the property of James HARRY, of Truro. The prosecutor in this case also was a shoemaker of Truro, attending St. Agnes market, and in the habit of returning in Wills's van, bringing back his shoes in boxes. The prisoner returned in the same van; and being lame, he did not get out when the others walked up the hills. Witness missed seven pair of shoes on the 7th of February, and afterwards saw some on Arthur Nicholls's standing in Redruth. Witness called the constable Trevorra, and delivered 10 or 12 pair to him.
Arthur Nicholls gave evidence, as in the last case, of his purchasing these shoes of Montgomery. Mr. Trevorra, constable, produced the shoes, which the prosecutor identified. GUILTY. The prisoner was sentenced to seven years' transportation for the first offense, and to seven years, in addition, for the second. � There were four other indictments against him not proceeded in.
Robert HAMPTON, 15, John JEFFERY, 33, and John WILLIAMS, 17, charged with breaking into a stable and stealing three fowls. Richard PAUL lived at Pool. Had a stable where he kept fowls. On the 5th of February, he locked them up about six o'clock in the evening. The next morning, he found three wanting. Afterwards Williams brought one, and said he was sorry for what he had done. Found the tracks of one shoe and one patten, like the track of one person walking. Saw the prisoners afterwards in custody at Redruth. Hampton said he went to the door first, and then Williams went down. � Hampton said he was very sorry for what he had done. Jeffery told him he carried away the fowls with the rest. John ORCHARD, on the night in question, saw the prisoner at his father's beer shop. � They left together about eleven o'clock. Hampton had a patten on, and said he wore it because he had a bad boot. John P. MAGER, Esq., the committing Magistrate, proved the confession. Williams described the mode of breaking into the stable, and Jeffery corroborated it. Mr. Richard PAUL and Mr. James gave Jeffery a good character. Verdict, All GUILTY. Jeffery, six months' hard labour, and solitary confinement. Hampton and Williams, three months' hard labour, and solitary confinement, and each to be privately whipped.
Johanna SALMON,17, charged with stealing four half-crowns, three shillings, and two sixpences, the property of John KNIGHT, the younger. John KNIGHT, jun., is a butcher at Truro. On Wednesday, the 13th instant, he put into his box six half-crowns, three shillings, and two sixpences. He marked this money, and the next day he missed it. Prisoner lived as a servant in the house where witness lodged. Witness with a constable, searched the house, and found the marked money. Prisoner was present, and said if witness would forgive her, she would give it up; and that the devil must have been in her at the time.
Cross-examined: This was in the presence of the constable and Mrs. Millett. Witness lodged with Mr. Collins. There were two servants besides the prisoner. They had access to his bed-room, where his box was kept. William ROWE, constable, apprehended the prisoner. He said he must see what money she had in her pocket. She said she had a crown-piece. Mrs. Collins and her sister searched her, in another room. Elizabeth MILLETT, sister to Mrs. Collins, searched the prisoner. Found nothing on her but a crown-piece. Afterwards searched her box, and found three half-crowns, three shillings, and two sixpence. The box was kept for all the servants. Prisoner said the money was hers; but afterwards, made a great outcry, saying, "only forgive me, and you shall have all."
Thomas COLLINS was present when the prosecutor marked the money. When it was found, the prisoner said "I must have been bewitched in this house, to have been condemned in this cause."
Cross-examined: Prisoner lived with him fourteen months. She was always a very honest girl, to his knowledge. Mr. ROWE here produced the money, which was identified by Knight. Evidence was given of the good character of prisoner. GUILTY. Nine months' hard labour.
SMASHING - William George GERRISH, 22, and Elizabeth BROOM, 23, were charged with having tendered a counterfeit half-crown, knowing the same to be such. The case was opened by Mr. Damon, and Mr. Moody briefly stated the facts. It appeared that on the 15th of February last, the two prisoners went into a beer shop at St. Columb, kept by Mrs. Mary CRAPP, and there they bought some rags and had some beer, for which the female prisoner tendered half a crown, and received 2s. in exchange. The son of the prosecutor examined the half-crown shortly after, and it proved to be a bad one. The prisoners were then pursued, and found in another public house in the town, where they were searched. On the person of the female prisoner was found two good shillings, while in a bag on the other prisoner were found nine counterfeit half-crowns, but no good money. The prisoners were then taken to the lock-up house, near which was afterwards found a quantity of counterfeit sixpence. GUILTY. The male ! prisoner twelve months' hard labour, and the woman, six months.
Richard MATTHEWS, 29, was charged with having stolen a chisel, the property of Joseph HENNESSEY, a workman employed in the Redruth Union Workhouse, in January last. The evidence was slight, and the Jury found a verdict of NOT GUILTY. The prisoner was again indicted for stealing 50 lbs weight of steel; the property of Richard ISABEL, and the Jury found a verdict of GUILTY. Six months' hard labour.
William ST. JOHN, 22, was charged with having stolen a quantity of flour, the property of Wm. HART, of St. Austell, and Mary NORTHEY, 24, was charged with receiving the same, knowing it to be stolen. The prosecutor is a baker residing in St. Austell, and the prisoner was in his employ until some time in January last, when he missed some flour from a room next to the bake-house. At this stage of the proceedings, the attention of the Court was called to the female prisoner, who was "enceiate", and who complained of illness. A woman standing by having put a few questions to her, said she thought she ought not to remain. Mr. Hughes, the counsel for the prosecution, said he would not offer any evidence against her, and the Learned Judge therefore immediately directed her discharge. The prisoner examined his master at great length, as to whether there had not been a second batch of bread baked on the morning when he said he had missed the flour. The prosecutor denied that th! ere had. The constable was then called to prove an admission by the prisoner of the robbery, but it appeared that the witness, when he apprehended him, had said to him that the red-haired woman (meaning Mary Northey) had "let the cat out of the bag" and told him all about it. His Lordship refused to receive the evidence, thinking it probable that the assertion of the constable operated on the mind of the prisoner as an inducement to make the confession. The prisoner then addressed the jury, and stated that the flour had been all used for the purpose of making an extra batch of bread. The Learned Judge summed up, and the Jury found a verdict of NOT GUILTY.
John BOVEY, 32, was indicted for stealing on the 26th of March, a counterpane, the property of Margaret WILLIAMS. The prosecutrix is a widow residing in Tywardreath, and she left the counterpane in a field to dry, but when she went out for it in the evening it was gone. James HOSKINS, a constable, found the counterpane, which he now produced, in the house of the prisoner, at Par, lying on the corner of a table. He had never heard any harm of the prisoner before.
Mrs. HOSKINS stated that she resided in another house under the same roof as the prisoner. � On the evening of the 29th of March, the prisoner's wife came running into the room of the witness in very great distress, and in consequence of what she said, witness went into the prisoner's house, and there saw the counterpane now produced. The prisoner appeared to be drunk - but she could not say that he was so drunk as to be unable to know what he was about. She had known him for about three years, and had never heard any harm of him before. The prosecutrix stated that the counterpane produced was her property. The prisoner, in his defense, said that he was drunk, and did not know what he was about. The jury found a verdict of GUILTY, but in consideration of his previous good character, recommended him to mercy. His Lordship, in the course of sentencing the prisoner, enlarged upon the effects of drunkenness, when the prisoner interrupted him by exclaiming that he meant to ! be a "teetotal" in future. The simple way in which he expressed this determination excited much laughter, which was closed, however, by the prisoner being sentenced to three months' hard labour.
This being the last criminal case, the Court then rose, and Mr. Justice MAUL left the town about seven o'clock the same evening.
Robert PERRY, 27, was charged with having stolen a mare, the property of Samuel PHILLIPS, of St. Ives, and with cutting her throat.
Samuel PHILLIPS lives at St. Ives. In January last had a mare and cart. On the 24th, about eight o'clock in the morning, the wheel of his cart was broken, when he let the mare loose, that he might get the cart repaired. He afterwards went on the Lelant road, and about 2 � miles from where he loosed the mare, he found her, and the prisoner standing with her. When prisoner saw witness coming up, he turned the mare, made her head fast, and cut her throat with a knife, and down she went. Witness had the mare seven months. He bought her of prisoner for GBP 2, and had paid 11s. and 7s and 9s toward it.
John AUSTIN proved the purchase of the mare, and prosecutor's continual possession of her from that time.
The Learned Judge thought there was no evidence of a felonious taking. It was probable that the prisoner imagined, though falsely, that he had a right to take the mare, as the purchase money was not all paid. NOT GUILTY.
Samuel CHENOWETH, 13, charged with stealing at Wood Mine, in Kenwyn, a woolen jacket, the property of Rd. JENNINGS. The prosecutor was a working miner, and on Monday the 14th of January, missed his coat from where he had placed it on the Saturday. On the Thursday following, prosecutor went to Hallenbeagle Mine, and found the jacket in custody of a constable. The charge was fully proved by John PENROSE, a miner at Hallenbeagle, and by the constable Richard TIDDY. GUILTY. One months' hard labour, and solitary confinement, and to be privately whipped.
Henry WHERRY, 22, charged with stealing a shirt and trowsers from William and Samuel HARPER, of the Iron Mine, in Lanlivery. This was another depredation by a miner on a mine. The case was clearly proved by the prosecutor, his brother, and Isaac HAWKINS, constable of Tywardreath. GUILTY. Two months' hard labour.
A second indictment was preferred against the prisoner, for stealing a pair of shoes from Thos. ANEAR, of St. Neot; but the charge was not proved.
Matthew DANIELL, jun, 23, charged with stealing from a changing-house on Morvah and Zennor Mine, a pair of trowsers, and a pair of drawers, the property of Thomas CARNOW.
The prosecutor, a working miner, proved that he had put his clothes together in the changing house, on the 22nd of February, on going under ground, and when he came up again, the trowsers and drawers were gone.
Henry ROWE saw prisoner go into the changing-house on the day in question, and on going in afterwards found the clothes thrown about. James Thomas was with prisoner, and they went away together.
James THOMAS was going to Morvah on the 22nd of February, with Daniell, who went into the changing house and brought out a shirt, trowsers, and drawers, and asked witness to carry them. He refused, and advised Daniell to carry them back, but he refused.
Walter GENDELL, constable of Morvah, (a constable of such a stamp, that the Learned Judge asked if they chose constables in Morvah for their stupidity,) gave a most blundering statement of his share of the business, from which we gathered that Dicky NEAL took the prisoner and delivered him to witness. GUILTY. A certificate of a former conviction was put in, and the prisoner was sentenced to fourteen years' transportation.
���������������������������������
James THOMAS, 21, one of the witnesses in the last case, was charged with stealing a bridle and horse cloth, the property of Richard DENNIS, of Morvah. The prosecutor, a farmer, missed a bridle and horse-cloth from his premises on the 26th of January; which, on the 24th of February, were found in a stable of St. Ives. Prisoner was then apprehended, and allowed that he had taken the things.
Walter HAMBLY, a carrier, of St. Ives, the owner of the stable, stated that he bought the goods of prisoner in January; and that the prisoner told him he had had them for nine months.
Walter GENDALL, the constable, produced the articles, which were identified by the prosecutor. Witness said he had not taken prisoner into custody - a fact which the learned Judge said he could readily believe, as he appeared scarcely able, as yet, to find himself. (laughter.) GUILTY. Fourteen years' transportation.
There was, in this case also, a certificate of former conviction; and two other indictments against the prisoner, not proceeded in.
Rebecca PRYOR, 43, was charged with stealing, from the house of Andrew HENNAH, of St. Austell, about 2 lbs. of flour. The case was fully proved; but the constable gave the prisoner a good character. GUILTY. Two days' imprisonrment.
����
John COLLINS, 31, charged with stealing a copper boiler and a pair of boots, the property of Wm. HODGE, of Callington, pleaded GUILTY - twelve months' hard labour.
Peter STRIKE, 34, was charged with stealing, at Stokeclimsland, some pieces of turf, the property of John MOORE. The parties were next neighbours; and prisoner was seen by daughter of prosecutor taking a few turves from the rick. The prisoner, in defense, said the charge was made in revenge; and the witness, for the prosecution, admitted there had been quarrels between her father and the prisoner. NOT GUILTY.
��
Isaac Hodge, 18, and John BLAMEY, 17, charged with stealing iron from Carn Brea mine.
John WILLIAMS, manager of the smith's shop, on the 8th of February, missed part of an air pump rod, and a chisel marked S. Saw them afterwards before the magistrates at Redruth.
William TREVORRAH, constable, apprehended the prisoners; when Hodge told him that he and Blamey had taken the iron, and put it in a pair of under-ground trowsers. Witness found the iron and the trowsers concealed in a back yard. He showed them to prisoners, and Blamey owned that the trowsers were his. Witness produced the iron, which was identified by the first witness. BOTH GUILTY. Two months' hard labour, and each to be privately whipped.
���������
Hannah JORY, 27, charged with stealing, from the person of John MAGOR, in Truro, 12s., 10 1/2d.
The prosecutor, an elderly man, was, on the 5th of March, in a beer-shop in Calenick-street, where he saw the prisoner, and gave her a glass of beer. He then went with her to another beer-shop, where she called for a plat of beer, which witness paid for. Witness then called for a bottle of porter, and while he was drawing the cork, he felt prisoner shoving up against him, and he found his money was gone. She ran off like a hare, but he caught her, and she gave up 4s.1d., saying that was all she had. Witness hat not given her a single farthing. William ROWE, constable, took her to the Golden Lion, and told her what she was charged with. She said all she had was 1s.9d. which she threw out on the table. Witness then requested the landlady to search her. Mrs. Elizabeth COE, who kept the Golden Lion, found 3s. in the clenched hand of the prisoner, and 1s. on the ground where she was standing. GUILTY - six months' hard labour. The Learned Judge said he saw no reason why in the case of a fellow going from beer-shop to beer-shop, drinking with prostitutes, the county should pay the expenses of prosecution. He should only allow the expenses of the constable and Mrs. Coe.
John SMITH, 25, charged with stealing a piece of bread, a piece of beef, and a piece of tripe, the property of Robert BETTY, innkeeper, at Bodmin. The prosecutor having missed articles of food from his cupboard, was watching from his front parlour about six in the morning on the 7th March. He presently saw the prisoner, a farm servant of his, creeping in cautiously, and looking about him. He then went to the cupboard and helped himself to bread, beefsteak, and tripe. �Witness followed him into the kitchen and said "ah! The old fox caught at last!" �Prisoner said "what master." Witness told him to turn out his pockets, in which, and in his hat, witness found beefsteak and tripe. (laughter) Prisoner begged for forgiveness; but witness said it was very hard to be paying him weekly wages, while he was robbing him, and leading him to suspect others. GUILTY. Four months' hard labour. The Learned Judge commented severely on the breach of trust, and on the injury done to the innocent, as one of the worst consequences of these robberies by servants.
Thomas BEHENNA, and William RICHARDS, (on bail) two young men of respectable appearance, charged with stealing a duck, the property of Christopher ROBINS of Kenwyn. The prosecutor was a carpenter living in Stickler's Corner, and on the 20th of January missed a duck. Witness afterwards found the prisoners at Chiverton Arms, in custody of the constable. John WOOLCOCK, blacksmith, at Stickler's Corner, on the 20th of January, saw the two young men in Robins's meadow, beating along by the hedge with sticks, and presently he heard a duck quack. The young man on the hedge jumped off into the road to the other, having a duck in his hand. They then went away together, and witness followed them to the Chiverton Arms. Witness saw them in custody of a constable. Behenna had a bundle in his hand, and on witness's asking what he had been there, he replied "a duck"; and said he got it out of his father's flock.
Matthew MANUEL, constable of Kenwyn, apprehended the prisoners, and accused them of the theft. He proceeded to search them, but they resisted him, when he [.] and found the duck in the handkerchief. The duck had its wing broken, and was bleeding. The duck was now produced, and identified by prosecutor, by means of a mark in the toe. BOTH GUILTY. Two months' hard labour and solitary confinement.
�������������������������������
THE GWENNAP MURDER - The Grand Jury this day ignored the bill against Jesse LEAN, charged with the murder of his wife.
Joseph VYALL and John BROWN were indicted under an Act of Parliament, recently enacted, for feloniously severing on the 4th of January, a quantity of copper ore, the property of the Adventurers in Wheal Perran, with intent to steal. Mr. M. Smith opened the prosecution, stating the nature of the offence among miners, commonly called "kitting" which he believed was very frequent in this county. Where this was practiced in the same mine - where the ore was removed merely from one pitch to another, within the same sett - it had been decided it was not larceny. But in the present instance, the ore was taken from an adjoining mine, and there could be no pretense of right.
Samuel OSBORNE, miner in Great St. George, met prisoners in the 20-fathom level; he asked prisoners if they belonged there. Brown said they had a pitch at the back and bottom of the level. Asked Brown if he had been at work in the back; Brown pointed to an area. Witness went in to see if they had been working there, and found about two tons of copper ore lying as if just broken. Told Brown they had been working in Wheal Perran right, and they had better not work there again, for, if caught, would go to prison.
Cross-examined: Knew there had been a long dispute about the bounds of St. George and Wheal Perran. ... [Lots of technical testimony regarding the mines; evidently, the levels went between the two mines, and were shared.]
Joseph VIVIAN, managing agent at Wheal Perran; had not set any pitch to Vyall and Brown, but had some time before. They knew the mine. The quality of the ore was from three to four pound a ton; set at 4s. a pound.
Stephen FERRIS, agent for Wheal Perran, had not at any time set a pitch to prisoners. They had been working in Great St. George. Found them there on the 8th of January, in the thirty-fathom level. That was a poor pitch. They had 13s.4d in the pound.
Mr. Rowe addressed the jury for the prisoners, alleging that nothing had been proved against Vyall [all the testimony dealt with Brown] and if a mistake had been made, the mines were continguous, and no ore had been removed.
Verdict - Vyall, not guilty. Brown, guilty. The Learned Judge did not know whether there had been yet a conviction under this statute. He was therefore disposed to be lenient; but it must be understood that the offence rendered a prisoner convicted liable to transportation for seven years. Sentence, three months' hard labour, and solitary confinement.
William JENKIN, 20, charged on an inquisition taken before the Coroner, with manslaughter of Joseph HARVEY, at Gwennap.
John BRAY examined - On the evening of Saturday the 1st of September, about ten o'clock, was on the road leading from St. Day to Twelve Heads, with six men and six females. The same party had been drinking at a public house. While walking on, the prisoner came up and insulted Elizabeth CORNISH, one of the two women. She was not leading by any body. Jenkin came up, and said she should take hold of him, and he would accompany her home. She refused. The young man who kept company with Elizabeth Cornish said "you let her alone, the maid don't want to have any thing to say to you." Jenkin still continued as he was before. Witness turned about and said "if you had been insulting any body belonging to me, as you have insulted that girl, I would make you be quiet." Jenkin said he would fight either one of the company. Witness turned about and struck him, and they had a scuffle, in which Jenkin was thrown on the ground, and when he rose, he took a stone in his right hand and threw it at witness. The stone did not strike witness, but went behind him. Jenkin then went into CURNOW's house close by. Witness, on turning round, saw Joseph HARVEY on the ground about 10 yards from where witness had stood, in the direction the stone took. Witness lifted Harvey, and perceived blood flow from his nostrils and forehead. Witness said "Joe, what's the matter?" but could have no mouth-speech. Harvey lived from Saturday evening about ten o'clock till Monday noon.
Mr. Samuel Pellew ARTHUR, surgeon. On Sunday, the 2nd of September, was called to attend Joseph Harvey, and found him labouring under all the symptoms of fractured skull. He died on Monday. Witness made a post mortem examination, and found that a fractured skull had been the cause of death. The blood vessels were lacerated, and there was an extensive fracture.
The Judge, in summing up, said, when a man did an unlawful act, by which he caused the death to another, whether the person be the one intended by him, or not, was equally manslaughter, which was "doing [an action] by which death was caused." Verdict, GUILTY.
The Judge commented on the consequences of little .. regulartities, and hoped this would induce caution in the prisoner's future conduct. In consideration of the circumstances, and of the punishment the prisoner had already received, the sentence would be lenient. Sentence 20 days, no hard labour. The Judge desired Mr. Everett not to put the prisoner among the thieves.
The Judge also made some observations to the jury on the diversity in the crime of manslaughter, and on the large discretion vested in Judges in consequence of the diversity.
John BLAKE, 60, was found guilty of stealing a pair of cart-reins from the stables of the Exeter Inn, at Launceston, on the 16th of March. The reins were the property of a butcher named Sampson PARSONS, and they were left in the stables while he went to the market. Six weeks' hard labour.
Robert BARNES, 42, was found guilty of stealing a piece of salt pork from the shop of William TEAGUE, at Redruth, on the 20th of March. The prisoner was seen in the act of taking the pork, and he first attempted to put it into his breeches' pocket, but in that he did not succeed; and while trying to force the pork into other quarters, he was taken into custody. Six weeks' hard labour.
John WILLIAMS, 29, was charged with having feloniously assaulted and robbed Elizabeth Ann GREGOR of eighteen five pound notes, and a certain bill of exchange, a silk bag, and other articles. Mr. Montague SMITH appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Smirke for the prisoner. The case having been stated:
Elizabeth Ann GREGOR was called and examined. I am the daughter of Capt. Wm. Gregor. I live at Praze, about three miles from Camborne. On the afternoon of Saturday, the 19th of January, I went from my own house to Camborne. I started about two in the afternoon. I had to take a bag containing a letter and GBP 95 in five pound notes; and a letter directed to Mr. Newton of Camborne, which contained a bill for GBP 18.18s. They were in my own silk bag. I reached Camborne a little after three, and went towards the bank, which I found closed. I carried my bag on the outside of my arm. After returning from the bank, I remained at Camborne about twenty minutes, and then returned towards Praze along the high road. I observed a man following me. About two minutes afterwards something happened to me. I had got only a mile from Camborne, and the man who was following me came up, and seized the bag from my arm. He pulled for some time, and I resisted; he either pulled or knocked me to the ground, and whilst I was there he took the bag from my arm. He cut my mouth very bad, and knocked my teeth very loose. I fell upon my face, and stayed there about two minutes, and just after I got up from the ground he went over the hedge. Soon after that, a man and a young woman came up to me, and put me into a house. I believe the prisoner to be the man who knocked me down. He wore a fustian jacket and a red cravat, which I believe to have been worsted. He had on light trowsers.
Cross-examined: Some of the notes were of the Union and some of the East Cornwall Bank. I saw them myself. I did not myself see the amount. I observed the prisoner near the lodge at Pendarves. I had observed him following me twice, once at a good distance behind me. There are two lodges at Pendarves; it was the first one from Camborne. I was very much frightened when he came up on me. When I was first spoken to about this, I was asked about his height. I said he appeared to be about five feet seven inches high; he did not then appear to be standing at his height. He was stooping when he was walking along. Many people were walking on the road. I saw the prisoner about seven weeks afterwards on a hill near Gweek; that was the day before he was taken before the magistrates; he was not then in custody. We were in quest of him, and met him accidentally. My mother and Mr. TIPPET, the constable of Camborne, and myself were together, and I expressed my belief he was the person. I had two dozen all black hooks and eyes in my bag which I had bought at Camborne. By Mr. Smith - I saw Mrs. EUSTACE and Mrs. WINNOW before I was attacked.
Mrs. EUSTACE examined: I am the wife of Henry EUSTACE. I remember going to Camborne market on the 19th of January last, and meeting Miss Gregor between three and four in the afternoon. I met her near the first footpath leading toward Pendarves, about a quarter of a mile from Mr. Pendarves's lodge. At the time I met her, I observed a man following her. I met the man, he was about three yards from Miss Gregor when I passed him. To the best of my knowledge the prisoner was the man; he was dressed in fustian clothes; I did not observe his cravat. I believe that his other clothes were nearly all one colour.
Cross-examined: He did not appear to be standing to his height by a great deal; he was doubled up. There had been a great deal of talk about this before we went to the magistrates. The morning had been stormy, but it was a dry afternoon. I cannot swear positively that this is the person, but I have not a doubt about it.
Grace WINNOW examined: I am the wife of James WINNOW. [testimony was much the same as above, except that Grace Winnow was asked at a later time to pick out the person she saw following Miss Gregor, and she picked out the prisoner without his being pointed out to her.]
John MEDLIN. Constable. On the 15th of March I went to search the prisoner's house. He lives about half a mile before we reach Gweek, in Boskenwin Downs. I saw the prisoner near his house in conversation with Mr. Magor. When I came up, Mr. Magor was asking him a question about a mine. The prisoner said it was nearby; Mr. Magor asked him to put him into the road, and he would reward him for it. He did so partly, and went about 12 yards, when he turned round and said he wished to .. in his great coat. Mr. Magor said "nonsense", but the prisoner refused to go, and Mr. Magor then laid hold of his collar and I took him. I told him we were going to put him to Gweek. After we had put him in our way to Gweek, he said "what is the matter? I have committed no highway robbery." Mr. Magor asked him "who said you did my man? Have you heard of any in the neighbourhood of late?" He said he had heard of some robbery in the neighbourhood of Redruth. Then there was no conversation until we reached Gweek. The prisoner was afterwards brought to the house. The prisoner was taken upstairs, and we found, in different apartments, GBP 81.3s. That consisted of 60 sovereigns and a half, four GBP 5 notes, and 13s in silver. After we had searched the down stairs room, we proceeded up stairs; knowing that the prisoner's wife was absent, I asked him if he had the key of the chest - if he had not, we should be under the necessity of breaking open the chest. He put his hand at the top of the bedstead and took down the key; when the chest was unlocked, he reached down his hand into the corner of it, and took up this bag. He said "now you may search the chest." I said "You give me the bag, and then I will search the chest." He would not; Mr. Magor insisted upon it, but he refused to give it. Two other constables being present, we made him give it up. We found 50 sovereigns and four GBP 5 notes in the bag. Then I put my hand in the chest, and took up a small bit of paper, which contained three sovereigns and a half more. He then said, now you may search the house over, there is no more money here." Mr. Magor said he would not take his word. On a further search, Mr. Magor found a woman's "housewife". Mr. Magor said there is cash here. He said there is no cash there unless it is a few half-pence. On opening it, there were seven sovereigns and eight shillings, and then in another small piece of paper there were two half-crowns. The whole amounted to GBP 81.3s. After we had found the "housewife", he said "that is money my wife has been saving unknown to me." The prisoner's cottage was very mean. I would not give GBP 8 for all that was in it after taking away the wearing apparel.
John Penberthy MAGOR, Esq., proved the signature of the prisoner to his statement, in which he declared that he had not been in Camborne for two years previous to the robbery.
Cross-examined: He might have asked to be allowed till the following Monday to produce evidence to show that he was not at Camborne on that day. He said he had been attending a dying horse at home till three o'clock in the afternoon, when he left for Helston market, and he arrived at Helston a little after four, when he went to see Russell's horse, but it was too dark. That was not put into the prisoner's statement. He asked for some time, and witness told him that the case must go before a jury.
George Dennis JOHN, Esq., examined by the Judge: Am clerk to the Magistrates. I remember the prisoner making the observation about his being in Helston. The reason they are not written I believe to be this - that his examination had been taken down before. I believe that he afterwards asked for time, and it was on account of the Magistrates having closed the case that that was refused.
John MARTIN examined - I live at Camborne, I carry on the business of innkeeper. I have known the prisoner for 21 years; but I have not seen him often during that period. I saw him on the day in question. I am positive of the day now. When I came out of the house, he was standing close by the door looking towards the back. He saluted me and said "hallo" I said "hallo!" He said "I suppose you don't know me now: I was at school with you." He said "my name is Williams" and I knew him then. I cannot say to half and hour up or down, but that was somewhere between two and four o'clock. While I was speaking to this man, Mr. MATTHEWS came forth and asked me how the people on the bus had got on. He said his son came home on last Sunday, and asked him to buy him a portable desk. The bazaar had not been there more than one Monday, and left on the following Monday. I was telling him as we were going up there I had not spoken to the prisoner for twenty years. The bazaar was at my house from the Friday week before till the Monday following. It was there two market days. I was enabled to say that it was on the day in question that I saw the prisoner because Mr. Matthews said his son was there the Sunday before. I am sure he is the man. I said to him you have got here then, have you? He said yes. I said "how long have you been here?" He said "a week or two." He denied ever seen me in his life, and said that he did not know me.
Mr. MATTHEWS examined: I live at Camborne. I remember the day on which Miss Gregor was robbed - I saw the last witness on the day of the robbery. I went to Martin's house. Martin was talking to somebody who I thought was a person belonging to the Bazaar. All I heard when I came up was, Martin said "I know you well, we were in school together." and he then left him. I asked him how he was getting on with his bazaar - whether there many people in? He said "no, very few." [Said he wanted to purchase a desk; bank was closed; thought other man was with bazaar, but previous witness said no, he was an old school-fellow of mine; I remember him perfectly well, but he has not seen me upwards of 20 years.]
The witness underwent a long cross-examination, but neither his evidence, nor that of the previous witness was at all shaken.
Mr. Smirke then addressed the jury at considerable length, on behalf of the prisoner, stating the facts of the evidence that he should produce in order to prove an alibi, and to show that the prisoner had been in possession of some money before the time of the robbery. He then called: Mary TRIPP. I am an unmarried woman, and live near the prisoner - a mile or a couple of miles from him in the parish of Wendron. I never heard anything against the prisoner. I saw him at Helston market on Saturday the 19th of January. I heard of the robbery several times after it was committed. I had gone to market that day. [.] My father lives out at Tressel. I went to the market to buy [my sister] a pair of shoes; she had left the employ of Mr. PASCOW on Thursday the 17th. When I got there [to market] I saw the prisoner Williams and his wife, and I bid them the time of day, and went on.
By Judge: My sister is not here. I had my attention called to this matter last week by the prisoner's wife. She asked me whether I did not remember seeing her and her husband on the 19th.
Thomas RUSSELL examined: I am a cattle dealer at Helston, and frequent the market there. I remember seeing the prisoner on the 5th of January. He asked me if I had got any horse that would suit him. He wanted to purchase one. I said I had not at the present time, but I might be able to get one for him. [Met prisoner later at Horse and Jockey, asked prisoner if he had the money to pay for the horse, and twice was answered "yes".] He pulled out his purse and showed me ten sovereigns. There was more money left in the purse. He then agreed to meet me on Monday to go to St. Keverne, but he did not come in on the Monday. I asked him how much he would go, and he said ten or twelve pounds, it did not much matter. I said I would get one as soon as I could. I next saw him on the 19th. It was the market day at Helston. We went to the Red Lion, and we drank the share of three pints of beer together. [noted time was 20 min. before four, when they left pub, as he had an! appointment with a farmer named LAWRY at Tresidder's.] [Later in evening, about seven, met prisoner at Tresidder's.] Saw Bennett POLKINGHORNE there; the prisoner was in sight, and wished him good night. Prisoner came the next day, and paid the agreed sum [GBP 6.6s] for the horse. I had no acquaintance with the prisoner before, but I knew him by sight.
Cross-examined: I was sent for on the Sunday night, after the prisoner was committed on the Saturday. Mr. JULIAN's son, of Helston, fetched me. I was asked several questions about the prisoner, and I then said I had seen him on the 19th of January at Helston. I am sure of that because I have the day of the month down that the farmer (Mr. Lowry) paid me the money, and the day that I sold him the horse. Here is the book. That writing was made on the day that the horse was bought. I have books of my transactions for the past four years. ... I have not shown the book produced to Mr. Rogers, since I have been in Bodmin.
By the Judge - I keep my cattle-dealing accounts in a larger book than that. Some of my sales of horses are entered there. They are not all entered in that book, because this is a smaller one for me to carry in my pocket than the other. I don't know how to spell his name, for I am no scholar. I can't write. (This reply to the searching enquiries of the Learned Judge caused the greatest sensation in court, as it came out only by accident, the witness being one of those gentlemen who prefer repeating, for some private reasons of their own, every questions before they give it answer.) �These rows are not my entries. I did not write any of that book - my neighbour put down the entries for me. John WILLIAMS has put down what is there; that is not the prisoner. He is not here.
Thomas Borlase ROBERTS examined - I am a mercer and draper at Helston. I know the prisoner and his wife; they have dealt with me; I remember they bought articles of me in January; they bought cloth, merino, and a great many other articles, amongst the articles there were I think two dozen hooks and eyes. I believe the whole amount that the bought was somewhat about GBP 4. He pulled out a purse and paid me in sovereigns.
Richard GUNDRY - I am a farmer living at Helston. I have a farm about two miles and a half out. I know the prisoner's house at Boskenwin Downs - it is about half a mile from my farm. Just before Christmas I was at my farm in a cattle house in one of my fields. It is an open house. When I went there I had 84 sovereigns and four GBP 5 notes in a bag. (MEDLIN the constable was here recalled to produce the bag.) That is my bag; I cannot say whether I should know my notes again. I put them in the side of the linbay under some straw, and left them there. It was a Saturday before Christmas-day. Never found the money since.
Mary THOMAS - I am housekeeper to Mr. Gundry, the last witness. I made a bag for him. The bag produced is the bag.
Mr. Rogers was called to prove the distance of Helston from Camborne. After which Mr. Smith addressed the jury.
The Judge summed up, in the course of which he dwelt with great force upon the evidence of Russell, especially the book he had produced, which he said tainted the whole. The Jury found a verdict of GUILTY. The case excited the greatest interest in Court during the many hours which it occupied.
Edward HEADDON (alias OLIVER) 34, charged with feloniously assaulting and putting in bodily fear and danger, Nicholas DAVEY, and stealing from his person 18s. and a bundle of various articles of drapery.
Nicholas DAVEY, the prosecutor, a rather young man, lived at Broadoak, about 6 miles from Liskeard. On Saturday, the 15th of December, he was at Liskeard, and after being at several houses on business, was at the Clarence Inn, which he left about eleven o'clock, and went towards his home, by Dean-street, where he fell in with two men, and asked them where they were going. � They said, to Moorwater, and a great deal further. They all went on together. Witness went into a house to receive a bundle, at Moorwater, and the two men waited for him. They afterwards walked on together, and witness heard the two men whisper at times. They walked on as far as Doubleboys, when prisoner struck witness in the face with his fist. Both men then struck him, and put him on the ground, beat him, and took away his money. One man took it, while the other held his mouth. Witness was almost choked with blood, and his wrist was cut with a stone while he was lying on his back. They beat him! very bad after they took the money, and witness said "My dear men, don't murder me. You have got my money, spare my life." They beat him and left. After a few minutes, witness rose up, but could not see. Had no doubt prisoner was the man that robbed him.
By the Judge - Witness had drunk about two pints of beer that day. His reason for knowing the man was his figure and voice; not by his face.
William CRABB, a wool-stapler, living at Liskeard, knew the prisoner, and had seen him at different times. On the 15th of December, he was at Doney's public-house, about eight o'clock in the evening. Prisoner and prosecutor were there. Prosecutor said he was going to St. Neot. Witness saw prisoner look very hard at the prosecutor said "I should take the [.] for that." Witness believed the prisoner saw the prosecutor's money when he paid the waiter. Prisoner drank up his beer, and left the house about five minutes after prosecutor. On the Wednesday following the robbery, witness saw the prosecutor at DAVEY'S. There was a great quantity of people there.
Prosecutor pointed out the prisoner and said "that's the person who robbed me." Prisoner was handcuffed, but he showed fight. He afterwards said, "the thing's done, and can't be undone. You can't scrap (hang) me, you can only lag (transport) me."
Theophilas JAMES, a waggoner at Liskeard, had known prisoner for years, and saw him on Saturday, the 15th of December, in Bar..street, Liskeard. Saw prosecutor there, and talked with him. Prisoner and another man were close behind. When prosecutor went away, the two men went directly after.
William DONEY, a publican at Liskeard. On the evening in question, prosecutor and prisoner were both at his house. Prosecutor left about eight o'clock; and prisoner shortly thereafter.
Anthony TREFRAIN was at Snell's public house the night of the robbery, and left about half-past two, when he met prisoner and another coming down D.. -street from the west. Doubleboys was west of Liskeard. Joseph MOON, butcher, lived next door to prisoner, at Snell's public house. � About three in the morning, he heard prisoner call a woman whom he lived with "Jen, Jen," and presently he heard a latch heave and a door open and close again. Believed that was the door of the prisoner's house.
John DAW, constable - on the 18th of December, he found prisoner at his house, and said "I want you." Prisoner said "I know what you want me for." Witness told him there was a robbery on Saturday night, and he was charged with it. Next day the prosecutor pointed prisoner out, among many people, as the person who had robbed him; and prisoner shook his head and grinned his teeth, and said "Lets have none of your d___d chaff." In the way to gaol, prisoner said to Crabb "what shall I do with this?" Crabb said "you know what to do as well as I can tell you.," Prisoner said, "I know what you mean - to turn King's evidence, but that's too late now."
Richard CUNDY, a constable, assisted in taking prisoner to gaol, when he said "Tom Jones will be glad to see me down. I shall have to pass before his ward. I split upon him once, and gave him two years of it; but I shall take my chance in the mobey before him. Never mind; I shall be over digging potatoes next season, and there's more than six there that I know."
John MARTIN was at Doney's on the 19th of December, and said to prisoner "this is a bad job; if it had happened a few years ago, you would be hung." He said "they can but transport me, and transport me where they will, I am sure to have good luck."
Mr. Davey, the prosecutor, being recalled, said he was visited by the surgeon, and also shewed his wrist and forehead to the jury, both bearing marks of blows and cuts.
Samuel HONEYCOMBE saw prosecutor about half-past four in the morning after the robbery. He was swelled and quite blind. His wrist was cut in two places. � The prisoner said in defence, that he was in bed at the time, which was also sworn to by Edwin Oliver, his step-father, with whom he lived. This witness said he saw prisoner about half-past nine in his house, and that he went to bed about ten o'clock, not rising till the next morning. GUILTY, death recorded.
Thomas ADAMS, 30, charged with having on the first of February, feloniously assaulted John TEAGUE, at Redruth, with intent to rob. Mr. SMITH addressed the jury for the prosecution, and called - Capt. John TEAGUE, who stated that he lived in Illogan, and on the first of February, between nine and ten o'clock at night, he was proceeding home from Redruth, on horseback, and as he was coming down Blowing House Hill, he received a severe blow on his head, which caused him to fall towards the near side. At that instant, a man called Adams came up and pulled him violently from the horse. After that he received some violent blows to his head. He saw a woman who, he was certain, struck him. Soon after that, he lost his senses, but previously had struck Adams on the nose, and gave him a bloody nose. Witness had not known prisoner before that night. It was very good moonlight. When witness came to his senses, a man named BENNETTS was by him in the road. Witness was .. three weeks before he could get out of bed, and still suffered a great deal from the injuries to the head, leg, and collar-bone. There was a concussion of the brain. Witness could not recollect that he lost any thing that night.
Mr. W. RICHARDS, surgeon, of Redruth, who was called on the night of the 1st of February, to attend Captain Teague, gave a professional [assessment] of the injuries sustained by the prosecutor. There were several assailants in his opinion; they could not have been occasioned by one blow, or one fall from a horse. The prosecutor was in danger three weeks.
Cross-examined by Mr. COCKBURN - The contusions had [.] the appearance of such as would be caused by being dragged from a horse. Contusions so caused would be .. like abrasions of the skin; but these looked as if they were effected by something heavy and flat. Did not think it possible that some of the contusions could be produced while the hat was on the head.
George WILLS. (The witness had been committed by the Magistrates to take his trial with Adams; but had since been admitted to give evidence.) He stated that he was in company with Adams on the night of the 1st of February. Adams and his wife and witness were together; Adams's wife was his sister. On Blowing-house-hill they saw Captain John Teague on horseback, coming on trotting. They were walking on the road when he overtook them. Adams up with his foot and gave the horse a kick; and a short distance on, the horse slipped and the man fell off the near side. Adams went forth to the man; and when witness came up, Adams was lifting him, and feeling inside his waistcoat. Witness said "my dear man! Are you dead?"; the man was quite senseless. Adam said "D__m him, if he's not dead, I'll d__m soon make him dead." The man [Adams] dashed him down on the frost and snow again and again. Witness said, "Leave the man alone; you shant hurt him" and took him up, holding him on his knees for about a quarter of an hour. Adams said "I will go back and fetch a doctor" and he went to fetch a doctor. � Witness remained with the man till BENNETTS came. When Adams dashed the man upon the ground, he struck him on the head with violence. The man's hat was off.
In cross-examination, this witness admitted that he had been transported for seven years, and returned the day after Christmas-day. When he was examined before the Magistrates, he did not tell the truth exactly. He thought it was a very nice thing to speak against his brother-in-law. He was clear himself, and thought he would try to clear his brother-in-law.
James BENNETTS was called, when the Learned Judge stopped any further examination and addressed the Jury - "This was a very proper inquiry, because Capt. Teague had suffered a grievous injury. But still whatever suspicions you may have, we must have very clear and decisive evidence of the fact against the prisoner. I have before me the information of Capt. Teague, sworn, one on the day after, the other three weeks after the transaction. I place no reliance on that given the day after, because one would not expect great accuracy at that time. But the other account, three weeks after, does not consist with that given today. [wording was clear; this is what was written.] In the information, there is no mention of any woman. At present, he recollects there was a woman. There is, therefore, a variation which makes us distrust, not Capt. Teague's veracity, but the accuracy of his information. Then, with regard to Wills's evidence, that requires strong corroboration. In the account he gave the magistrates, there is not a single word of Adams's having kicked the horse, which was the first step taken. It would be very dangerous to trust Wills, considering he has now so enlarged his evidence.
I learn that the remaining witnesses state that the prisoner was seen, with blood on his face, running for a surgeon; and that the next day he goes to make inquiry for Capt. Teague, at his house; certainly more like the conduct of an innocent man. Under these circumstances, it does appear to me that it would be dangerous on this sort of evidence to go the length of conviction. If you wish the case to go further it shall; if not, we will stop it here if you please. There is a further fact, that Capt. Teague had money; and, in the prisoner's intent were to rob, it is extraordinary that when Capt. Teague lay defenseless, that intent was not carried into effect. NOT GUILTY.
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR A CHURCH RATE RIOT - [abbreviated; original took 2 full pages! I used their sentences, eliminating excess & redundant ones.]
Richard BARRETT, draper, Jacob Corin EDWARDS, ironmonger, Samuel RANDALL, pipe-maker, Richard SPARR, carpenter, and William BALL, watch maker, all of Truro, were called upon to answer to an indictment charging them with a riot at Truro, on the 8th of May last. The trial excited great interest, and the Hall was crowded throughout the day by people anxious to hear the proceedings. The following persons were sworn on the jury -
William Bate, Joseph Bennett, Wm. Brown, James Carveth, Thomas Cleave, Peter Cock, Nicholas Grose, William Hicks, Samuel Higgs, Richard Julian, Christopher Lean, and William Thomas. The Counsel for the prosecution were Mr. Crowder, and Mr. Montague Smith; attorneys Messers Paul, Smith, and Roberts, and Messrs. Hodge and Hockin, from Truro. Counsel for the defendants, Barrett, Edwards, and Randall, Mr. Moody and Mr. Merrivell; for the defendants Sparr and Bull, Mr. Cockburn; attorney for all the defendants, Mr. Stokes of Truro.
[Many paragraphs about how the jury had probably heard of the case, and they should not let any of that influence them.] The defendants stand charged with riotously assembling in the town of Truro, and endeavouring to prevent a person of the name of William Jane OKE from the pursuit of his lawful avocation as an auctioneer, on the 18th of May. � There had been previously to that month a necessity for obtaining through the medium of a distress, the payment of certain Church-rates that were due from the three defendants Barrett, Edwards, and Randall.
Wm. Jane OKE called: [auctioneer, employed by Mr. MINERS, a constable, to sell some goods; advertised them in usual way; went to conduct sale in his sale room. Found a large mob waiting, including Henry TREWOLLA and Wm. ROWE, a shoemaker. Sold some goods. Barrett came to Oke and asked for an account of the sale. Oke said he couldn't provide particulars, but he sold one hat for 4d, the other things for GBP 2. Barrett wrote into a notebook, then walked across the room and announced to the people "Oke has sold GBP 26 worth of goods for GBP 2.4s. I will publish him in every paper in England." The people started to boo and hiss. The constables tried to make them leave. Mob rushed in, and despite Oke's objections, counter was knocked over, and the window glass broken. Oke's coat was torn (especially the tails) and took shelter in the kitchen, then ran to another house to take refuge. He escaped via the back entrance.]
[Cross-examined: Oke testified he had not been interrupted in passing through the people at all in the open street upon his departure. While he was the prosecutor, the "ostensible prosecutors" were the churchwardens, who were paying all expenses. Much testimony regarding a Mr. Joseph EDWARDS, who Oke wished to testify. [[Oke said during the 'riot' he had turned to Edwards and asked what he should do; Edwards supposedly replied he should postpone the sale, which he did.]] Mr. Edwards demurred, saying "mind Oke, if I do [testify], I shall neither turn to my right hand nor to my left, to this man or to that." Oke agreed Edwards said that. Defense asked if Mr. Edwards was a watch-maker, which Oke denied; he did admit Edwards sold watches, however. The question then arose if Oke had offered to buy "a very handsome watch" from Edwards after the trial, if the prosecution were successful. Oke did not answer directly, but swore he did not want a watch, and eventually said p! erhaps Edwards had offered him a watch. Then Oke insisted Edwards HAD offered him a watch. Maintained he never mentioned the testimony at Bodmin along with the watch. Did not say he was 'not particular' about the watch price.]
[Joseph EDWARDS was called later; testified Oke did offer to buy a watch upon the successful conclusion of the trial for his testimony; did not see who was involved in riot; saw Barrett standing at the side, making notes regarding goods sold, etc.]
[George CLYMOS, printer in Truro, was applied to in May to print something for Barrett and Edwards. Made 100 placards on May 3rd. Randall came for a part of them; Barrett and Edwards picked up the remainder. They made no secret of this. I never heard a word against either Barrett nor Edwards; Edward is a Minister of the Bible Christians.]
The Officer of the Court then read out loud the following paper "State-Church Prosecution." "This is to inform the public that those summonses which have been so frequently served on us during the past month (21 in number) has this day been carried into execution, by the distraining of our property to a very considerable amount, so as to form a complete bazaar of plunder. The prosecution against us is instituted by Mr. John FERRIS, carrier and tanner, and Mr. William WARREN, attorney, the impartial churchwardens of this town, no doubt through the instigation of a party who covet their neighbour's goods and anything that is his. The mock sale will take place at Mr. Oke's in Pydar-street (he being once a rigid dissenter, now a churchman, what he will be time will tell) on Tuesday the 8th of May instant, at ten o'clock precisely; probably that the church party may have a better opportunity of dividing it among themselves, as have been generally practiced towards the socie! ty of friends for three centuries past; but we give this information for the satisfaction of our friends, and to assure those who may be disposed to become possessed of those goods, we shall notice their part also in this religious persecution, by handing down their names as family memorials in connection with this religious crusade against us, inflicted because we deem it right to be dissenters. The articles are very appropriate; viz. one bible, three japan waiters containing good likenesses of the Rev. J. Wesley, and three ditto of Mr. Samuel Drew, and one with a church in the centre, and several others with interesting representations, together with a general assortment of linen drapery, household furniture, etc. We shall be in attendance for the purpose of informing strangers the particulars and articles of sale. And we are with respect, fellow townsmen, yours truly, Richard Barrett, Jacob Corin Edwards, Samuel Randall," dated "Truro, May 3rd, 1839".
Oke was asked if the people bidding on the goods were church members [or members of the church party]. [He first denied any of the church wardens were present, but after being asked 3 times said some were present, and were magistrates and the mayor. �Mayor had brought police constables, and parish constables were present "by desire of the church-wardens". They let some gentlemen in by a side-door, who they knew, before the sale started. Defense suggested that might have started the disturbance. Witness identified two persons who were dissenters, who purchased items - Richard CROCKER and Hugh PEARCE, but then could not swear they were dissenters. Also brought out Oke was "of the church". � Had been a "dissenter", a member of the Bethesda chapel, but was "turned out". Admitted Barrett and Randall were members of the congregation, and there had been a "disagreement", after which Oke left. � Had been charged with libel in regard to an election. Denied having a debt wit! h Barrett of over GBP9 for hats; admitted he had made purchases on credit, however.]
Richard CROCKER, a shoemaker of Truro, attended the sale. [Heard a bugle blowing, followed crowd to sale room. Heard people saying all goods were stolen, and no one should buy them. Saw all defendants but Ball. Went in with crowd; bid on hat, and won it for 6s. Another man said he shouldn't buy it, but he insisted. Passed money to another man, to give to auctioneer, and his money "disappeared", and there was "a great tumult". Very, very noisy. � Oke called upon Lawry to keep order, and Lawry left room. Oke suddenly left the room, and the sale was postponed. Went back later (at 2pm), was let in the back door with some others. � Thomas COCK, Thomas RAPSEY, MINERS, and MINTERN were there. The shelves were not very strong. Heard a kicking at the door; saw Barrett kicking with his heels, and Edwards with him. The under part of the door burst in, and Mr. Barrett was first to enter. Mr. Oke tried to converse with some of the mob, then tried to sell, but could not.]
-verbatim-
Hugh PEARCE examined: I am a grocer and constable of the parish of St. Clement, and I live at Truro. Went to Oke's shop in the afternoon, was let in the back door. About 2:15, heard noise in the shop. There was a sudden crash, and Barrett entered, followed by Edwards, with the mob behind them. Heard cried of "pull his head off" and "give him a settler". Oke escaped, went into the kitchen and asked witness for advice. Oke left shop, and took refuge in the building next door.
Thomas COCK examined: A smith, living in Truro. Went to Oke's. Saw Barrett kick the door as if he would kick it in. Saw Michael HEARN pull down a shelf and hurl it through a window. Saw Philip ROWE with his shoulders under a shelf heaving it up, and as he heaved it so were the windows breaking.
Cross-examined: Was on his way to work when saw crowd; went in by back door; was there by chance. Asked by Judge: had no one asked you to come down before? Witness said yes, they had asked him. Judge - who asked you? Reply - John BARRETT. Did you receive any money for coming down? Reply - yes , sir, I had 2s.6d. Judge - What? He gave you 2s.6d for being there? Reply - yes, sir. Judge - he told you he should want you as a witness, did he not? Reply - no sir, just that if there was any thing done that should not be done to let him know. [testified this was the first time he had been hired for - had never been hired to make rows at elections.]
This closed the case. Mr. Moody and Mr. Merrivale raised objections to the first count, that Oke was a licensed auctioneer. Oke produced his license. The Judge overruled the objection.
Mr. Moody addressed the jury on behalf of the defendants Barrett, Edwards, and Randall, but space did not permit a report.
Mr. Cockburn followed on behalf of the other defendants. He boldly and eloquently advocated the conduct of the defendants, and denounced the intolerance of the church party in the present prosecution. He strongly justified the placard published by the three defendants, and instanced this as one of a series of persecutions long ago commissioned by the Tories of Truro. He maintained the right of the defendants to call public attention to the sale, as they had been deprived of their property for the support of a church to which they conscientiously objected, while they paid for their own place of worship, and contributed to the promotion of education in the principles of their religion. He mentioned the witness Edwards, whose conscience did not allow him to be influenced. He attributed all the interruptions that occurred to the 340 to 400 people allowed into a room of eighteen feet by eleven.
Altogether the speech was one of the most splendid specimens of forensic eloquence that we have had the good fortune to hear. The following witnesses were then called for THE DEFENSE
Charles COURTIS, Constable of Truro - went to sales room in the afternoon. The door was open at that time. Saw Mr. Barrett there, also saw the two Barretts, the clerk of the parish and his brother John. I tried to put some persons out; they said it was a public sale room, and they had as much right to be there as the Barretts. The defendant Barrett was begging the people to be quiet. I saw glass broken by the rush. The defendant Barrett was on the other side of the room. [Was there by order of the Mayor; did not see any thing calling for his assistance. Saw no breach of the peace.]
Cross-examined: [did not see the effect of the rush; if there was a counter broken it was before he went in. When he was there, Oke was standing between kitchen door and salesroom. He did not do any thing. Witness helped to close the shop; was not asked to stay in the house. Was not asked to take any one into custody.]
John BURNETT examined: borough constable of Truro. Attended the morning session at the request of the Mayor; the after noon sale by the request of the church-wardens. In morning were about 150 to 200 people. People seemed in a very good mood, laughing and jesting with one another. � [Returned in afternoon. Was near Barrett by the door. Saw door opened from inside about six inches; and those near to it were carried in by the pressure of the people. People were laughing and joking; heard some glass break. Did not see how; was not asked to take anyone into custody. Saw sale from the window. After Oke was finished selling, he came down stairs, and witness went in and told people the sale was over. As they left, heard something give way. Was not asked to take up any one. Cross - There was no disturbance at all. All that I saw broken was a pane of glass.] John MINERS, constable, testified [basically the same as above.]
George HALL, constable, of Truro, called: I attended the sale about ten o'clock in the morning. When I went there the room was not very much crowded; it afterwards became as full as it would hold. I saw Barrett, Randall, and Edwards there. I heard Mr. Barrett tell the people to be quiet, and let the sale go on peaceably. I saw the hat sold, and the waiter. I did not see the money handed by the purchaser. Nothing took place when it was sold, but a noise and bustle. There was a vast number of boys. They were hulloing. No one called upon me to interfere in any way. Oke never said anything to me about my interference. In the afternoon, he said "Hall, I insist upon you doing your duty." I told him that I came there entirely for that purpose. Q - did you take any one into custody? A - there was no occasion for it. I never heard a work of threat against Oke. When the sale was said to be postponed, the people went away peaceable and quiet. I saw Barrett, Edwards, and Randall frequently in the morning. I never heard them make any violent expressions. I came there again about two o'clock. The door was not opened; there were several people assembled outside the doors by then. [Heard the parish clerk call people in - James PE.., Thomas COCK, and Richard CROCKER among them. Other people waiting outside saw and heard; some people made a complaint about it. Thought door was opened from inside. Saw Edwards and Barrett for about a quarter of an hour; they created no disturbance. Did not hear constable Roberts order any one to go away. Did hear Roberts say it was the brightest lark he had ever seen.] Cross-examined : Did not know why Mr. Oke adjourned, unless the room was too warm.
John WOODGATE sworn: I am a cordwainer. [Saw persons going in the side door. Mr. Barrett knocked the door lightly; it was opened from the inside. Saw Spurr, Ball, Barrett and Edwards; remained there until Mr. Oke went upstairs. Did not see either of the defendants threatening any body.] Cross - examined: Did not hear Spurr use any bad expressions.
John COE, innkeeper of Truro, and contractor for the conveying of prisoners. [Attended both sales, did not hear or see anything negative. Thought crowd was calm and cheerful. Saw no one kick in the door. Saw no breach of the peace.]
Thomas JOLLIFFE called - [this witness spoke like the others to the absence of all violence. ..]
Thomas BARLOW examined: I am a shop owner near Mr. Oke's in King street. I stayed in my shop looking through my door nearly the whole of the time. I did not find it necessary to close my shop at all. The only thing I saw that was at all noisy was youths splashing each other with water, and laughing in consequence of it. I saw nothing vicious at all. In the afternoon the crowd began to collect about two o'clock. I heard them cry out several times for the door to be opened. It was not opened until 25 minutes before three. � When the door was opened, I observed a great [crush?] of people - I heard occasionally glass broken; I could not see how it was done. I should not have minded sending my youngest child through the crowd; there was no violence. I passed up the street in the morning while the sale was going on; I saw Randall there sitting quiet with his head in his hands. They are all three [business]-keepers in the town. I have known all the defendants a good while. They are all peaceable neighbours.
Joseph EDWARDS examined by Mr. Moody: [verbatim testimony] I live at Truro. I was subpoenaed here for the prosecution. I had some conversation with Oke about coming here as a witness. Q - did he say to you `if you will go to Bodmin so that I may win the trial, I will have from you when I come from Bodmin, a very handsome watch - the price I shall not be particular about. A. He did, sir. (The greatest sensation was excited in court on hearing this evidence.) Cross-examined by Mr. Crowder: I was a hair-dresser by trade. I have a license to sell watches. Mr. Smith sent Mr. Oke to me for the purpose of being examined. I told him that I would not give my evidence till I got into court. This conversation took place with Oke about a fortnight ago, in my own shop. No one was present but me and Mr. Oke. He came down and requested me to go to Mr. Smith, by Mr. Smith�s orders. I refused to go. I was present at this transaction in the morning, at the time the sale was a! djourned. I advised him to adjourn. He could not go on with the sale in consequence of one calling upon Mr. Oke to put up a handkerchief - another a bible, and so on. I heard a bible asked for many times. Q - Did you hear much noise? A - It was all in good humour. Q - When they asked him to put up the bible? A - Yes. I heard Mr. Oke say he would not put up a bible. I don�t recollect the waiter being put up. When the sale was adjourned, Mr. Oke went into the kitchen. Q - Was his coat torn? A - I don�t think any body put a hand to him; I should have seen it, I would think. I have not been examined in the hall by Mr. Stokes [defense counsel], or anywhere else. I have seen him in the hall, but not to speak to him - I have given no evidence to either party. I attended the afternoon�s sale, from beginning to end. I had not mentioned to anybody, before I saw Mr. Oke, what I had seen or what I could prove. Cross-examined by Mr. Moody: I was never examined by either party. Q Have you spoken to either of the defendants about when you know of this matter? A. No, sir; since I have been here, I was asked by one that came here, whether I was not bribed by Mr. Oke, and I could not answer him to say I was not, for my conviction, at the time I spoke to him, about the watch. The Judge - Don't tell us about that. Mr. Moody - You were asked by some person connected with the defendants? A - Yes.
Mr. Joseph CARNE, merchant of Truro, Mr. Joseph HICKS, draper and merchant of Wadebridge, and formerly of Liskeard; Mr. James LOWRY, dyer of Truro; Mr. Henry MILLARD, merchant of truro; Mr. Robert LIDGEY of Truro; and the Rev. W. MOORE, of Truro, gave the defendants Barrett, Edwards, and Randall, their decided testimonial as to their peaceable and quiet habits. Another gentleman would have been called, but the Judge said that was quite satisfactory.
Mr. Crowder then addressed the jury on behalf of the prosecution...
The Learned Judge then summed up [and a complete transcript of that followed] [The Judge was "disgusted" at the placard printed by the defendants, saying that "a more disgraceful publication I have never had the misfortune to read." � [He then repeated much testimony regarding statements the prosecution maintained Barrett had made. ] "There don't appear to be any expressions proved against Edwards and Randall except that about Randall saying put up the bible. Edwards seem altogether more silent. Spurr said "down with the church", and "who would be a church man", and against Ball it is imputed that he used the very same words used by Spurr " how can you sell people's goods to support a d__d b___y church!" [Defense said it was inconsistent both would use the exact same words; Judge did not think so.]
"Then on part of the defendants the witnesses speak of there being no disturbance of the peace. What these constables apprehend to be a disturbance of the peace I don't know; but it is to be observed that negative evidence is nothing like so strong as positive evidence. The evidence for the prosecution states certain acts to have been done, and certain acts to have been used. When we find that doors were broken - that shelves were broken - that the counter was broken - that 35 panes of glass were broken - it really requires much charity to suppose these constables saw nothing but what any man of common sense would not deem a breach of the peace." [As to Edwards, the Judge pointed out that there was no corroboration; Oke denied the attempted bribe, and all of his other evidence was corroborated. There was no mention of the prosecution witness who corroborated Oke's evidence, and who admitted to being paid.]
"The questions before you [the jury] is this - did these defendants conduct themselves with the people, in such a manner as to produce the riot charged in this indictment, upon which you have the evidence of the facts that took place, and a placard under their own hands, in which they tell you, beforehand, that they shall be there to record the names of those who bid, for the purpose of transmitting their names to posterity, as persons joined in the state church persecution. Gentlemen, consider the case on the evidence- you will, I trust, lay aside all you may have heard elsewhere - and upon that evidence, upon your oaths, pronounce the verdict."
The Jury immediately found all the defendants GUILTY.
The Sentence - The Judge then said - Richard Barrett, Jacob Corin Edwards, Samuel Randall, Richard Spurr and William Ball, you have been convicted of the crime of riot, and that crime has received great aggravation from the motive by which it was promoted - by the intention which was manifested by that placard which three of you have disgraced yourselves and the body to which you belong by publishing with your names. It is absolutely necessary that the law should be obeyed - and they who set themselves up in opposition to the law will find, sooner or later, that the law is too strong for them, and that they would have consulted their own happiness as well as their own respectability if they had obeyed the law. The conduct which has been observed by you distinguishes the case of three of you from the other two; therefore, I shall distinguish your cases. The sentence upon you Barrett, Edwards, and Randall is that you be imprisoned one calendar month - that you pay a fine of GBP 25 each - ! that you Spurr and Ball be imprisoned one calendar month and that you all enter into recognizances to keep the peace for three years in the sum of GBP 100; and that you be further imprisoned till such fine be paid and until such recognizances be entered into.
The defendants appeared to receive the sentence without any feeling of surprise or annoyance. They were immediately surrounded by a host of friends who shook them cordially by the hand and expressed their heartfelt sympathy for their sufferings. The trial lasted rather more than twelve hours. This trial terminated the assizes.
NEWS
ROBBERY OF FOUR THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED POUNDS - On Monday se'nnight, two boxes of gold dust, valued at GBP 4,600, consigned to the Brazilian Mining Company of London, were obtained from the wharfingers at the Dublin Steamboat Wharf, St. Katherine's, by means of a forged order, under the following extraordinary circumstances. The two boxes containing the precious metal, brought to this country by her Majesty's packet brig SEAGULL, were shipped on board the City of Limerick steam ship at Falmouth, and were landed on the wharf on Sunday afternoon. They remained in custody of the wharfingers until Monday at noon, when a well-dressed man, of genteel address, drove up to the wharf in a yellow-bodied box cab, and asked for the boxes, stating that he was the person authorized to receive them. He produced documents giving a description of the boxes, which corresponded with what appeared on the ship's manifesto respecting them. He also showed a letter, bearing the Falmouth post-mark, and addressed to the company to whom the boxes were consigned. It was compared with a letter, also bearing the Falmouth post-mark, received by the agents of the Dublin Steam Company, at their office in John-street, Crotched Friars, respecting the delivery of the boxes, and was found to correspond. The stranger paid the wharfage and other dues, and the people at the wharf, believing the documents to be genuine, delivered the property to him without hesitation; and the foreman of the wharf deposited the boxes in the cab. The stranger thanked the foreman for his attention, and after presenting him with a shilling, the cab drove off. Two hours afterwards, a person connected with the Brazilian Mining Company came for the boxes, and the fraud was then discovered. No time was lost in obtaining the aid of the police, and several officers, including Lea, of Lambeth street, were immediately sent to look after the thief. On the same evening, Lea traced the cab which brought down the thief to the Dublin Steam wharf, and carried him and the boxes away. The driver said he was hired by the man in the city, and returned with him to Cheapside, when he complained that his horse did not go fast enough, and paid him his fare and got another cab, which proceeded in a westerly direction. No further trace of the thief has been obtained. There is no dobut that the person who obtained the boxes of gold dust was in league with a confederate at Falmouth, who knew when the boxes were shipped. The weight of each box was about 100 lbs; they were 18 inches square, and marked with the initials "C.B. 18 - 19". It is feared that the gold dust has been placed in a crucible, and converted into bars for the purpose of destroying all chance of proving its identity. The loss will fall upon the agents and wharfingers of the Dublin Steam Company. Late on Tuesday night it was reported that a clue had been obtained which is likely to be the means of apprehending the parties concerned in the robbery.
ST. IVES - On Tuesday, the 2nd instant, a public meeting was held in the Town-hall, at this place, at which Roger Wearne, Esq., the mayor, presided, for the payment of distributing the rewards obtained for the pilots and others, for having so intrepidly exerted themselves [to save] the lives of the crew of the "Rival", of Bristol, wrecked there on the 24th of December last, and also to [xx] the desirableness of establishing a life-boat in this [port]. The subscriptions &c received were as follows:
For the nine successful men:
The Royal Humane Society � GBP 10 � 10 0 -and nine of the Society's bronze medallions
From Lloyd's �10 � � 0 0
E.H. Adams, Esq., London �5 � � 0 � 0
Local subscriptions 17 � � 8 0
To be distributed among the whole who risked their lives.
From the London Royal Shipwreck Society � 25 � 0 � 0 and four of the Society's medals to the four who risked their lives
W. T. Praed, Esq., M.P. 5 � 0 � 0
[The rest of the paper was crinkled, as to make the rest non-sensical. It seems some of the money was given to the original nine, and then secondary prizes were awarded to the boat crews - excepting the Captains - some 40 persons in all.]
WAR WITH AMERICA - We hear from the Falmouth correspondent, that many of the timber vessels for Quebeck(sic) have been prevented from sailing, in consequence of the underwriters refusing to insure them, owing to the rumors of an American War.
DISCOVERY AND APPREHENSION OF A ROBBER [Merrett spelled various ways, ie, Merrit, Merret, Merrett; most frequently used version has been shown.] Our readers will remember that a short time since, we reported a series of burglaries committed or attempted in the neighbourhood of Camborne and Redruth. It has now transpired that a young man called Thomas Merrett, residing with his mother and sister in an obscure part of Illogan, left his home for London on the 18th ult., and on Friday last, a Bow-street officer, Keys, came down with the intelligence of his being apprehended. Among the robberies with which he was charged was that of the clerk's house, at the Cornish Bank, Redruth; and on the arrival of the officer, Mr. Robert Tweedy, the manager of that Bank, repaired with him to Merrett's residence; when, on their asking his mother respecting him, she said he had slept there the night previously, and had never slept out before. The premises were searched, and a variety of articles which are well known to have been stolen from various places, and which can be sworn to, were discovered. There was a violin and some other trifling articles, stolen from the residence of Messrs. Tweedy and Co's Clerk; a silver patent pencil case belonging to Mr. Roach, clerk to the late Thomas Teague, Esq., whose name is engraved thereon; with other articles, papers, &c, stolen from Capt. Teague's office; a pocket-book cover belonging to Lady Basset, a pen taken from the shop of Mr. Newton, Stationer, at Camborne, and a great variety of other articles, including pistols and implements for house breaking, which are found to correspond exactly with the marks made in the unsuccessful attempt on the office of Mr. Blamey, of Pool. [article went on regarding numerous items, such as cheeses & tea, found in the room. Merrett was arrested in London, when he attempted to have an engraver make plates and print bills for him on the Cornish Bank. The engraver contacted the bank's agents to inquire if they really wanted him to print the bills; they contacted Cornwall, and the bank's president immediately repaired to London, where the Bow-street officers arranged to arrest Merrett once he had taken possession of the plates and bills.]
SMASHING - William George GERRISH, 22, and Elizabeth BROOM, 23, were charged with having tendered a counterfeit half-crown, knowing the same to be such. The case was opened by Mr. Damon, and Mr. Moody briefly stated the facts. It appeared that on the 15th of February last, the two prisoners went into a beer shop at St. Columb, kept by Mrs. Mary CRAPP, and there they bought some rags and had some beer, for which the female prisoner tendered half a crown, and received 2s. in exchange. The son of the prosecutor examined the half-crown shortly after, and it proved to be a bad one. The prisoners were then pursued, and found in another public house in the town, where they were searched. On the person of the female prisoner was found two good shillings, while in a bag on the other prisoner were found nine counterfeit half-crowns, but no good money. The prisoners were then taken to the lock-up house, near which was afterwards found a quantity of counterfeit sixpence. GUILTY. The male prisoner twelve months' hard labour, and the woman, six months.
Richard MATTHEWS, 29, was charged with having stolen a chisel, the property of Joseph HENNESSEY, a workman employed in the Redruth Union Workhouse, in January last. The evidence was slight, and the Jury found a verdict of NOT GUILTY. The prisoner was again indicted for stealing 50 lbs weight of steel; the property of Richard ISABEL, and the Jury found a verdict of GUILTY. Six months' hard labour.
William ST. JOHN, 22, was charged with having stolen a quantity of flour, the property of Wm. HART, of St. Austell, and Mary NORTHEY, 24, was charged with receiving the same, knowing it to be stolen. The prosecutor is a baker residing in St. Austell, and the prisoner was in his employ until some time in January last, when he missed some flour from a room next to the bake-house. At this stage of the proceedings, the attention of the Court was called to the female prisoner, who was "enceiate", and who complained of illness. A woman standing by having put a few questions to her, said she thought she ought not to remain. Mr. Hughes, the counsel for the prosecution, said he would not offer any evidence against her, and the Learned Judge therefore immediately directed her discharge. The prisoner examined his master at great length, as to whether there had not been a second batch of bread baked on the morning when he said he had missed the flour. The prosecutor denied that th! ere had. The constable was then called to prove an admission by the prisoner of the robbery, but it appeared that the witness, when he apprehended him, had said to him that the red-haired woman (meaning Mary Northey) had "let the cat out of the bag" and told him all about it. His Lordship refused to receive the evidence, thinking it probable that the assertion of the constable operated on the mind of the prisoner as an inducement to make the confession. The prisoner then addressed the jury, and stated that the flour had been all used for the purpose of making an extra batch of bread. The Learned Judge summed up, and the Jury found a verdict of NOT GUILTY.
John BOVEY, 32, was indicted for stealing on the 26th of March, a counterpane, the property of Margaret WILLIAMS. The prosecutrix is a widow residing in Tywardreath, and she left the counterpane in a field to dry, but when she went out for it in the evening it was gone. James HOSKINS, a constable, found the counterpane, which he now produced, in the house of the prisoner, at Par, lying on the corner of a table. He had never heard any harm of the prisoner before. Mrs. HOSKINS stated that she resided in another house under the same roof as the prisoner. � On the evening of the 29th of March, the prisoner's wife came running into the room of the witness in very great distress, and in consequence of what she said, witness went into the prisoner's house, and there saw the counterpane now produced. The prisoner appeared to be drunk - but she could not say that he was so drunk as to be unable to know what he was about. She had known him for about three years, and had never heard any harm of him before. The prosecutrix stated that the counterpane produced was her property. The prisoner, in his defense, said that he was drunk, and did not know what he was about. The jury found a verdict of GUILTY, but in consideration of his previous good character, recommended him to mercy. His Lordship, in the course of sentencing the prisoner, enlarged upon the effects of drunkenness, when the prisoner interrupted him by exclaiming that he meant to be a "teetotal" in future. The simple way in which he expressed this determination excited much laughter, which was closed, however, by the prisoner being sentenced to three months' hard labour.
This being the last criminal case, the Court then rose, and Mr. Justice MAUL left the town about seven o'clock the same evening.
[ CONTINUED ] [ BACK ]