cornwall england newspaper
1849 NEWS
APRIL
6 April 1849, Friday
The Grand Jury ignored the bill against JOHN PEARCE, BENJAMIN PEARCE,
BENJAMIN PEARCE the younger, and WILLIAM PEARCE, charged with
assaulting JAMES FRIGGINS at Gulval, and stealing from his person
GBP10. 17s.
JOHN TURNER, 20, pleaded Guilty of stealing, at the parish of Pelynt,
on the 20th of March, a fowl, the property of JOHN ROSKILLY. Sentence,
Three Months' Hard Labour.
JAMES ROOKE, 16, pleaded Guilty of stealing a [sh..ller?] the property
of JOHN COLWELL, of Blisland. Also of stealing a watch, the property
of EDWARD MARSHALL. The prisoner was sentenced to Three Months' Hard
Labour for the first offence, and One Month additional for the second
offence.
HENRY PEARCE, 31, of St. Stephens by Saltash, was committed for a
breach of the peace towards his wife[?]. As, however, she did not
appear against him, he was discharged with a suitable caution.
THOMAS GUY HOGGAN, 27, of Padstow, was committed under similar
circumstances, but as his wife did not appear to prosecute, he was
reprimanded and discharged, with a caution as to his future conduct.
SARAH HOCKIN and JANE CORNISH, two vagrants committed by the Mayor of
Penryn, were remanded and discharged.
APPEALS - Penryn, appellant, Mr. HOCKIN and Mr. DARKE; Feock,
respondent, Mr. SHILSON and Mr. WILLIAMS. This was an appeal against
the removal of JOHN FRANCIS, and MARY his wife, from respondent to
appellant parish. Mr. Hockin objected that no complaint of
chargeability had been made to the justices previous to making the
order, and that such chargeability had not been set forth in the
grounds of removal; therefore, under those grounds respondents could
not give evidence of the fact of complaint. Mr. Shilson replied that
the objection was not sufficiently set out on the grounds of appeal;
and the court decided that it could not be taken on those grounds. Mr.
Hockin next objected that the paupers were not removable from Penryn,
inasmuch as they had resided there five years and upwards. The pauper,
he said, was removed from Penryn to Feock more than five years ago
under a former order. He was taken over in a cart by the overseers,
and delivered to the overseers of Feock. But the pauper did not want
to be removed, as he had work at Penryn, and therefore with the
concurrence of the Penryn overseers he went back again on the same day;
and he contended that as the pauper returned on the same day, there was
no breach of residence. The court however, were of opinion that there
had been a breach of residence. Order confirmed. Common costs:
maintenance 16s. 3d.
An appeal in a case of affiliation, NICHOLAS SIMMONS v. ELIZABETH
GRENFELL, was then heard, and dismissed on a technical objection, with
GBP10 costs.
DEATH OF Mr. BULLER OF MORVAL - Meeting at Looe - A meeting of
inhabitants of East and West Looe, by notice given on the 30th ultimo,
was held on the 3rd day of April, 1849, at the Guild Hall, in East
Looe, for the purpose of expressing to JOHN BULLER, Esq., of Morval,
the sense the inhabitants entertained of his repeated acts of
generosity and kindness towards them. WILLIAM WILLCOCKS, Esq., Mayor,
was in the chair. The sudden death of Mr. Buller, at his residence at
Morval, on the morning of the day in which the meeting was held having
deprived the meeting of the satisfaction of addressing the expression
of their feelings of gratitude to Mr. Buller himself, it was resolved
that letters should be forwarded to Mrs. Buller, and to Mr. J. F.
Buller, stating the object for which the meeting had been called, and
intimating the sympathy of the inhabitants of Looe with them in their
said bereavement.
THE LATE MAJOR BAMFIELD - The "Friend of India" has the following
notice of the death of the late Major Bamfield, and those who knew him
will, we are satisfied, feel that it does not exaggerate this work:-
"15th of January - Of his wounds received in the action fought with the
Sikhs on the 13th instant, Major DANIEL BAMFIELD, commanding the 56th
regiment, Bengal Native Infantry, aged 43 years, universally and
deservedly regretted by all who had the pleasure of his acquaintance,
and one in whom the state has lost a valuable and highly gifted
officer, whether we view him as a gentleman, a scholar, or a soldier;
or in the less public characters of a friend, a husband, or a father,
we discern in him all that could ennoble the man, and attract our
warmest admiration. As a husband he could not be excelled; as a father
he possessed all the endearments calculated to awaken love, respect,
and veneration; as a friend he was generous, constant, unwavering, and
invaluable; as a Christian, he dared to be singular under all
circumstances; "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from
henceforth - yea saith the spirit, that they may rest from their
labour, and their works do follow them."
ST AGNES - WAR MEDAL - Lieut. HUSSEY, R.N., Inspecting Lieutenant of
the Coast Guard of this district, has had the honour of receiving a War
Medal for the battle of Algiers, 1816. He was serving at that battle
on board the "Glasgow" 50 guns. Lieutenant Hussey is also entitled to
a clasp for the capture of the "Flotilla" on Lac Borgue, and served on
shore in the operations against New Orleans, in 1814, which will be
received shortly. This was a most difficult and severe action.
LIBERALITY OF A CLERGYMAN - The Rev. Mr. GRIFFITH, Vicar of Manaccan,
has generously allowed ten per cent. to the tithe payers of that
parish, although unasked for. A committee has also been appointed to
solicit Mr. GREGOR, the owner of the rectorial tithes, for some
abatement; but no answer has yet been received.
PARISH MEETING - The annual parish meeting of St. Agnes was held last
week at the vestry-room, but adjourned to the St. Agnes institution for
accommodation, Mr. HITCHENS in the chair. The outgoing officers were
re-elected, and the expenditure of the last year showed a decrease of
GBP50 from the preceding year, which gave general satisfaction to the
rate-payers, who had suffered materially from the late extraordinary
depression.
THE "GENERAL PALMER" EMIGRANT SHIP - It will be no doubt a
satisfaction to those persons who had friends and relations in the
"General Palmer," emigrant ship, which left Plymouth, on the 28th of
December last, to know that she was met near the Cape De Verd Isles,
all well, on the 9th of January, with a fair prospect of making a
quick passage to Port Phillip.
NAVAL APPOINTMENT - Mr. GEORGE DOHERTY BROAD, midshipman, (son of Mr.
R. R. BROAD, of Falmouth,) from the "Cambrian," (40), to the
"Southampton," (50), flag ship of Admiral REYNOLDS, C.B. on the Cape
station.
ST. AGNES PETTY SESSIONS - The St. Agnes petty sessions were held
last week at Mr. BAWDEN's Hotel. The magistrates sitting were Mr.
STEPHEN DAVEY and Mr. JAMES WILLYAMS. Several interesting cases were
entered into, and business connected with this and the adjoining
parishes transacted. From the great population of this district, and
its distance from Truro, the holding of courts here will unquestionably
prove a great accommodation to the inhabitants of this locality.
BEGGING LETTER IMPOSTOR - On Wednesday last week, a fellow calling
himself JOHN SILVERTON, waited upon Mr. BOLITHO, the Coomb, Chyandour,
and presented a brief, to which were attached the names of several
gentlemen as having contributed various sums. Mr. Bolitho, not having
any small change at hand, despatched one of his domestics to change a
sovereign for the purpose of assisting him. But Silverton obviously
feeling some uneasiness at the delay and probably suspecting that a
constable had been sent for, suddenly made off at a rattling pace. He
was soon afterwards however apprehended, and having been taken before
the Rev. H. E. GRAHAM, it was proved that he was an impostor, and that
signatures to the brief were forgeries. He was accordingly committed
to Bodmin jail for three calendar months.
ROBBERY AT REDRUTH - On Saturday night, the workshop of Mr. CHARLES
ROUSE, wheelwright of Redruth, was broken into and several hand-saws,
planes, squares, spokeshaves, and other tools carried off. No traces
of the thieves have as yet been obtained.
ACCIDENT - On Monday evening last, as Captain KEMPTHORNE, H.E.I.C.,
and three ladies were coming from Colquite to Bodmin in a vehicle, when
descending the very steep hill at Dunmeer, the horse fell and was
killed on the spot. Captain Kempthorne and the ladies sustained severe
injuries.
MINE ACCIDENT - An accident from a sudden explosion took place at
North Roskear, on the 28th of March, which caused the loss of sight to
JOHN RULE, and severely injured ANTHONY COOK, miners.
FATAL ACCIDENT TO A SEAMAN - THOMAS JENKINS, aged 23 years, a seaman
belonging to the "President," NEUMAN, and a native of the Scilly
Islands, fell from the topsail yard of that vessel a few hours after
land was made; all efforts to save him proved fruitless.
CORNWALL SPRING ASSIZES - (Concluded from our last papers) - Crown
Court. Thursday, March 29. RICHARD CLIMO, 40, JOHN ELLERY, 23, and
WILLIAM EVANS, 26, were indicted for stealing thirty-six gallons of
wheat, the property of HENRY THOMAS of Lanivet, on the 11th of January.
Mr. MOODY conducted the case for the prosecution; Mr. HOLDSWORTH
defended Ellery and Climo. The prosecutor was a farmer, living at
Tremail[?], about two miles from Bodmin, on the Truro road, in the
parish of Lanivet. About nine o'clock in the evening of the 11th of
January, he, with his servant lad JOSEPH HANCOCK saw a quantity of
wheat secure in a kieve covered with a sack, in his corn chamber,
which, on leaving, he locked with a padlock outside. The next morning,
about seven o'clock, he went to the corn-chamber, and found that the
door had been broken open and the hasp taken out; and on entering, he
found that a quantity of wheat was gone from the kieve. The prisoner
Ellery left the service of the prosecutor on the 2nd of January. On
the robbery being discovered, on the morning of the 12th of January,
Joseph Hancock observed several pairs of foot-marks, one pair of which
he knew to be Ellery's. PRISCILLA VICARY lodged at the Spry's Arms, in
the upper part of Bodmin, with her husband, who is a rag merchant, and
who was out round the country on his business during the week in which
was the 11th of January. The prisoners, Evans and Ellery, lodged at
the Spry's Arms, and were at home there in the evening of Thursday the
11th of January. Witness and the servant girl went to bed about ten
o'clock, leaving Ellery and Evans sitting by the fire with Mrs. INGRIM,
the landlady.
On the following evening, about eight o'clock, witness saw Climo there
talking with Evans. After Climo left Ellery came. Evans asked witness
to ask Mrs. Ingrim if Mrs. BURTON would take that bushel of wheat she
talked of. Mrs. Ingram's servant girl fetched Mrs. Burton, who went
up-stairs into a bedroom with Mrs. Ingram and Evans. That evening,
witness saw Ellery and Evans in the house together, and also saw Ellery
go out at the front door with a wheelbarrow, between eight and nine
o'clock. Climo afterwards came in and inquired for Evans, and then
left at the back door. Some time afterwards, that evening, on going to
the brew-house for coal, she met Climo and then Ellery. Ellery was
coming into the brew-house with a bag on his back. Climo also had a
bag on his back; and they both went into the brew-house. Shortly
afterwards, she met Climo going out at the front door. Ellery and
Evans soon afterwards, came in at the back of the house. CATHERINE
BRAY, servant at the Spry's Arms, stated that about two o'clock in the
morning of the 12th of January, her mistress, Mrs. Ingram, was taken
unwell; and, in consequence thereof, witness went down stairs and went
out near the brew-house for fire-wood. She heard footsteps in the yard
at the back of the premises. The following morning, about seven
o'clock, she called Evans and Ellery, who slept in the same room. On
Friday evening the 12th, Mrs. Ingram sent witness for Mrs. Burton; and
on the same evening, about eight o'clock, she heard a wheelbarrow
driven through the passage from the back to the front of the house; and
the same evening, saw Ellery and Evans come down into the back of the
house through the cellar. JAMES LAMPIER, constable of Bodmin, on the
morning of the 12th of January, was shown by the boy HANCOCK, some
footmarks near prosecutor's mowhay gate, about seventy or eighty paces
from the corn-chambers. Between the gate and the corn-chamber the
ground was covered with straw, and foot-marks could not be traced
there. The witness here related his tracings of footmarks across
several fields. On the Saturday, witness apprehended Ellery and a man
called HUGO, who was afterwards discharged. BRAY, the constable,
apprehended the other two prisoners. After these four men were in the
lock-up, witness and Bray took their four pairs of shoes, and found
footmarks clearly corresponding with the shoes of the three prisoners,
from the back of Ingram's house, to fields and open ground on the
Beacon, and thence to Jones's barn, in Barn-lane, which is about a
quarter of a mile from the town of Bodmin, and between the town and the
prosecutor's farm. It was much further from Jones's barn to Ingram's
by way of the beacon, than by the regular road. The witness also spoke
to having traced the track of a wheelbarrow from near the back of
Ingram's house to Jones's barn, with the traces of the footmarks. He
also found the footmarks near the prosecutor's farm-place, to
correspond with the three pairs of shoes belonging to prisoners.
William Bray, constable, besides corroborating the evidence of the last
witness, as to tracing of footmarks, stated that about seven o'clock in
the morning of Saturday the 13th of January, he found some wheat in two
bags concealed under some rags in the brew-house of the Spry's Arms,
and afterwards found a wheel-barrow there. HENRY JONES, stated, that
he had open, unlocked outhouses near Barn-lane, to which any person
unknown to him might have access. He did not know of any corn being
placed there, and had not himself placed any. John Lampier, constable,
on Saturday morning, the 13th of January, found a bag under some old
rags in the brew-house of the Spry's Arms; it contained wheat. This
witness also produced a sample of the wheat, which he had obtained from
the prosecutor's kieve. He also produced the shoes of the prisoners.
The samples of wheat from the prosecutor's kieve and from the bags in
the brew-house were found to correspond, - the wheat being a mixture of
old white, red and red chaff. The jury found all three prisoners
Guilty. Against Climo, two previous convictions were proved, on one of
which, in 1840, he received sentence of seven years' transportation for
wilfully damaging apple trees the property of Mr. ELSON, of Bodmin.
There was another indictment on the present occasion, which was not
tried, for stealing a shirt, the property of JOHN MCKENNY, of Bodmin.
The prisoners were sentenced each to Ten Years' Transportation.
(Both spellings of Ingrim and Ingram given!)
CONCEALMENT OF BIRTH - JANE CARNE, 18, was charged with having
concealed the birth of a male child, of which she had been delivered in
the parish of St. Kew. The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty; on which the
learned Judge said, if he were a friend of the prisoner, he would ask
her whether she thought there was the slightest chance of any defence
against the charge, and whether it would not be better for her, and
more decent, to avoid the public disclosure that must take place if the
trial were gone into. After a few moments' consideration, the prisoner
begged to withdraw her former plea, and pleaded Guilty. She was
afterwards sentenced to Imprisonment until the 19th of next August,
having been already imprisoned from the 19th of last August.
MARY ANN MURLEY, 24, was charged with unlawfully endeavouring to
conceal the birth of her male child, at the parish of Paul, pleaded Not
Guilty; and almost immediately was taken out of court in a fit. On her
return, she withdrew her plea, and pleaded Guilty. Four Months'
Imprisonment.
GRACE STEPHENS, 26, was charged with having unlawfully endeavoured to
conceal the birth of her illegitimate female child, at St. Ives. This
prisoner also at first pleaded Not Guilty, but afterwards withdrew her
plea, acting on the previous suggestion of the learned Judge, and
pleaded Guilty. Five Months' Imprisonment.
PHILIPPA SMETHERAM, 18, was charged with unlawfully endeavouring to
conceal the birth of her male child, at the parish of Camborne. She
pleaded Guilty. Two Months' Imprisonment.
In proceeding to pass sentence on these prisoners convicted of
concealment of birth, the learned Judge said the public have a right to
know that all women who may be about to become mothers, should take
proper means to give their children a chance of living and doing well
on their coming into the world. He thought the prisoners had done very
right in pleading guilty; and that it was very desirable that persons,
similarly situated, should know that it was not at all desirable
unnecessarily to bring forward the particulars of such cases in court.
It only tended to excite a prurient curiosity in persons, and did not
at all tend to the improvement of public morals.
BENJAMIN DOWER, 24, was charged with having, on the 26th of October
last, assaulted, at the parish of Illogan, ELIZABETH JANE MAY, a child
under nine years of age, with criminal intent; there was a second count
for common assault. Mr. BEVAN conducted the prosecution. In this
painful case, it appeared that the prosecutrix, who stated that she was
eight years old, was passing by a show at Illogan, one morning, when
the prisoner came to her, asked her to go inside to see some pictures,
took her by the arm, and pulled her inside the show. He then conducted
himself towards the child in a way which, on her own evidence,
supported by that of her mother and of Mr. HARRIS, surgeon, as to
subsequent examination of the child's person, could leave no doubt that
he had made the attempt charged in the indictment. The child's
evidence of circumstances up to the time of her being taken inside the
show was corroborated by a witness called JOSEPH ROBERTS. Guilty. Two
Years' Hard Labour.
WILLIAM MICHAEL CHYNOWETH, stated in the calendar to be thirteen years
old, but according to evidence upwards of fifteen, was charged with the
commission of an unnatural crime on the 13th of July last, at
Rosemundy, in the parish of St. Agnes. The disgusting offence was
clearly proved, and also that it was not the first offence of the same
kind which he had been seen to commit. Guilty. - Death Recorded.
THOMAS DEACON, 19, and MARY ANN PRESTON, 22, (brother and sister) were
charged with having in their possession, at the parish of St. Andrew's
Plymouth, on the 18th and 19th of November last, a metal watch, a flute
case, and various other articles, the property of WILLIAM BUDGE, of
Callington, watchmaker, and others. (GEORGE OLIVER, who was charged
with burglary at Mr. Budge's shop on the 28th of October, and with
having stolen therefrom the articles named in the indictment, had
previously pleaded Guilty). Mr. MAYNARD conducted the prosecution; Mr.
HUGHES defended the female prisoner. In support of the present charge,
Mr. Budge stated the fact of his shop having been broken into and
robbed of about twenty gold and silver watches, some metal watches, a
musical box, two flute cases, &c. WILLIAM COLE, constable, stated that
on Saturday the 18th of November, he searched the house of Mrs.
Preston, one of the prisoners, in Plymouth. On Deacon's person he
found a watch, which he said he got from his sister, who was present
and said she had bought it of a young man for her brother for ten
shillings, and that her brother had that day given her five shillings
towards it. This witness then produced the watch, which was identified
by WILLIAM ROGERS, of Callington, as the property of his apprentice,
JOHN TREGAY, who had let if for repairs with the prosecutor. GEORGE
BLOYE, on the 19th of November, lived in the same house with the
prisoner Deacon, in High Street, Plymouth; and, in a room up-stairs,
where Mrs. Preston's husband kept lumber, found a musical box, a
watch-key, and a centre bit. -------HOPPER, a pawnbroker of Plymouth,
had a watch pawned to him, on the 6th of November, by a person who gave
his name JOHN RIGGS; that person was not the prisoner. This watch was
identified by Mr. Budge, as his property. JOHN HENWOOD, constable of
Callington, on the 19th of November searched the house in which the two
prisoners lived, and between the floor and ceiling of a lumber-room
upstairs, found a flute case, and a centre-bit. This flute case was
identified by THOMAS MARTIN, as his property; he stated that about two
years ago, he had placed it with Mr. Budge, to be sold. Both prisoners
were Acquitted.
WALTER ELLIS, was indicted for maliciously stabbing and wounding SAMUEL
LEAN, with intent to maim. On being arraigned he pleaded Not Guilty,
but subsequently begged to withdraw his plea, and pleaded Guilty on a
second count of common assault. Three Months' Hard Labour.
SINGULAR ASSAULT - MATTHEW HOBBS, 18, was charged with having, on the
22nd of September last, feloniously stabbed and wounded FERDINANDO
HICKS, at the parish of Menheniot, with intent to murder him. A second
count charged with intent to maim and disable; and a third count, with
intent to do some grievous bodily harm. Mr. COLERIDGE conducted the
prosecution. Ferdinando Hicks, the prosecutor, aged 12 years, stated
that on the day named, he was going to his home from Trelawny mine, and
in a field met prisoner. The witness related particulars of childish
talk between them, about nuts and bargaining for a knife stating that
prisoner said, "if you tell I have got the knife, I will cut your head
off; and if you don't I will give you some apples." After proceeding
further on his way, prisoner jumped on a hedge, as if to see that
nobody was near and then threw down the prosecutor, and said "Now you
must die," and cut his throat. The prosecutor then caught away the
knife, and threw it away; on which the prisoner pitched to kicking the
prosecutor, dragged him about the field with a rope and threw him over
the ledge. The prosecutor then got away and went to his home, about a
quarter of a mile on. Had had no quarrel with the prisoner. RICHARD
MATTHEWS, constable, on the 22nd of September, went to the house of
prosecutor's father, and saw the boy there seated on a chair with a cut
on his throat and very weak. Then went and apprehended the prisoner in
Tregarion? town place, about half a mile from the boy's home. There
were some marks of blood on his shirt and on his face. Witness and Mr.
Rowe then went to the place where the boy told them the assault took
place and Mr. Rowe found there a clasp-knife in the hedge; it was then
laying open, with a little blood on the blade. William Rowe, who went
with the last witness to apprehend the prisoner, corroborated his
evidence, and added that, while going through the field with the
prisoner where the deed was committed, he asked him why he did it, and
prisoner said he meant to kill him. Witness then asked him what he had
done with the knife, and he said he had thrown it over the hedge.
Witness found the knife in the condition stated by the previous
witness, and prisoner acknowledged that that was the knife with which
he did it.
JOHN HODGE LAWRENCE, surgeon, of Liskeard, stated that on the 22nd of
September, he was called in to see the boy, and found him in a very
weak state, with his face much bruised, his forehead contused, a small
wound on the left side of the neck, and on the right side of the neck a
wound rather more than an inch long, almost perpendicular, and
communicating with the air passage. There was an escape of air.
Should say the wound was caused by a stab. The wound was a very
dangerous one. The boy was in a very weak state, and had evidently
lost blood. The Judge asked if there was any one present who could
speak to the prisoner's intellect. A juror replied that he had known
prisoner's family for many years, and he believed that none of them
were quite right in mind. The witness Matthews also said that he
believed the prisoner to be deficient in intellect, but added that he
worked with a farmer, driving oxen, &c., earning sixpence a day. In
summing up, the learned Judge observed on the duty of examining very
carefully all pleas of madness or insanity. The jury found a verdict
of Guilty, but recommended the prisoner to mercy on the belief that he
was not perfectly sound in mind. The learned Judge passed sentence of
Death Recorded; and then addressing the prisoner, said he was very glad
the jury had returned such a verdict, as he considered it was right on
the facts of the case. He had no doubt that the prisoner had
sufficient intellect in making him aware that he ought not to give way
to violent passion and to commit such assaults as that which had so
nearly endangered the prosecutor's life. His lordship said he should
be very sorry for such persons of the prisoner, and his family were
said to be in point of weak intellect to suppose that they were not
bound to control their passions; for it was well known that half-witted
persons could be brought to restrain their passions, when they knew
that the consequences would affect themselves. His lordship in
conclusion assured the prisoner that though sentence of death was
recorded against him, yet as the jury had recommended him to mercy, his
life would be spared.
A PUBLISHER'S CASE - JOHN BUCKINGHAM, 28, was charged with obtaining
one shilling, under false pretences, from WILLIAM RUTTER. Mr. MAYNARD
conducted the prosecution; Mr. SLADE the defence. The prosecutor, it
appeared from his evidence, was a book-seller at Plymouth, and employed
the prisoner to obtain subscribers for various publications, receiving
a certain commission on each order so obtained. He used to give in his
orders at the end of every week. The prosecutor produced one of these
orders containing the name of a Mr. PERKINS as a subscriber; and on
this order, he stated that prisoner obtained one shilling from him as
his commission. On cross-examination, the prosecution stated that he
was agent for TALLIS and CO., publishers, London, to whom he was
answerable for the books he received from them, and whom he charged, in
account, with the moneys he paid, as commission, to the prisoner and
other collectors of subscriptions. The prisoner, as collector would
obtain one shilling on leaving a work with a subscriber; another
shilling on handing in the subscriber's name on his list; and a third
shilling on the order proving to be a good one. A collector would for
his own benefit, as well as the employer's, push the sale of works.
The prisoner, or any other collector of orders, would not be entitled
to the first two shillings if the order should prove a bad one. The
Judge. - On the order proving bad, does he give you back the first
shilling? Witness:- No. The Judge. - Do you charge him the first
shilling to account, or make him repay you at once? Witness. - We do
neither; we expect him to supply a good order in place of it. Mr.
SLADE:- Suppose that he got you two orders, one bad and the other good?
Witness:- He would have two shillings on each; and then he would have
the third shilling on the good order after we found he supplied a
certain number of parts of the work ordered. Mr. Slade:- What do you
call a good order? Witness:- When the fourth part is supplied to a
subscriber, we consider that a good order and take it on our own hands.
Mr. Slade:- Then if he sells four monthly parts, he is entitled to
these shillings? Witness:- Yes. Mr. Slade:- Suppose that he had not
supplied four parts? Witness:- He would have nothing to do but to
supply the first parts, and send us up a list of subscribers. He never
returns any money at all. Mr. Slade:- Suppose he had six bad accounts,
on which he got his six shillings; then [that] he gets six good
accounts for which he obtain six three-shillings; what is done with the
six shillings on the bad orders? Witness:- Of course, he is indebted
to us. The Judge:- You do not pay him what he is entitled to on the
good orders, because he has sent you a bad order? Witness:- Just so,
my Lord.
Re-Examined. At the time the prisoner received the shilling in
question, there was no back shilling due to him. Perkins stated that
some time between Michaelmas and Christmas last, prisoner asked him to
become a subscriber to some works which he was carrying round, and
proposed to leave with him, the History of the Earth and of Animated
Nature. Witness did not agree to subscribe to that work, because he
did not approve of it; and he told the prisoner so. Never subscribed
to that work, or any other work of prisoner's. Cross-Examined.
Prisoner left that work with him, and witness looked at it, but did not
like it. Did not return it to the prisoner, but left it for him at the
Market Inn, where it had been left for witness. For the defence, Mr.
Slade addressed the jury, contending that assuming the evidence for
plaintiff to be correct, there was no false pretence proved, but merely
a matter of account between the parties, as to the balance of good
orders and bad; and that from the fact of Perkins not having returned
the book to the prisoner, it might reasonably have been assumed that he
meant to keep it, and that Buckingham was entitled to his commission.
The prisoner received a good character for honesty from the Prosecutor,
from Mr. W. BUDGE of Callington, and Mr. SAMPSON JASPER. The Judge in
summing up, submitted as the only question, whether Perkins had
authorised Buckingham to take his name as a subscriber. And if such
was not the case, his lordship did not think that the prisoner's having
to make a subsequent settlement of accounts with the prosecutor, would
do away with the false pretence in the first instance. The jury found
a verdict of Acquittal.
ASSAULT ON THE HIGH SEAS - JOHN BOWEN, 22, was charged with having on
the 1st of July, 1848, on board a boat belonging to the brig "Mary
Clark," then being on the high seas, unlawfully, wilfully, and of
malice aforethought, stabbed and wounded GEORGE GASKINS, on the left
side of his breast, with a knife, with intent to murder. A second
count charged with intent to maim and disable; and a third count
charged with intent to do some grievous bodily harm. Mr. BEVAN
conducted the prosecution. He stated that he should not be able to
produce the principal witness, the man who had been assaulted, for
although bound in recognizances to appear to prosecute, he stated that
he was an apprentice on board the brig "Mary Clark." About July 1848,
she was laying at anchor in the roadstead off Pernambuco. On the 1st
of July, witness, Gaskins, prisoner, and a man called KIRKHAM, were
pulling off in the brig's boat, to the brig; and, after pulling for
about an hour, Gaskins said to prisoner "Give way on her, Jack." Bowen
replied, "I am giving way; I'm pulling as hard as I can pull." They
got making use of bad language; and Gaskins gave prisoner a blow; and
with that, prisoner went on his bended knees down in the boat. Gaskins
fell back in the stern sheets and exclaimed "I am stabbed." Kirkham
went to him, put his hand to his breast, and it came out covered with
blood. Bowen then lay down in the boat, and would not pull; and the
consequence was that they could not fetch the brig, but were obliged to
fetch a French barque. The next day they went ashore, and Bowen was
taken up. GEORGE JULYAN, constable of Falmouth, produced Bowen's
knife, placed in his charge by the Captain of the brig. JAMES CORNISH,
surgeon of Falmouth, was called on in last September to see a sailor
named Gaskins. He had a large wound on his left breast. He had been
stabbed just below the collar bone. The instrument with which he was
stabbed, was diverted in a slanting direction, or probably, he would
have received a mortal wound. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty on
the third count only. Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.
FREDERICK BURGESS, 20, was charged with having on the 13th of October
last, at Falmouth, feloniously cut, stabbed, and wounded Thomas
KIRKMAN, with intent to maim and disable, or to do him some grievous
bodily harm. It appeared that about half-past eleven at night, on the
13th of October, two girls named ROWE and DUFREEZE were near the quay,
and three men, one of whom was Kirkman, and during some squabbling and
fighting, the origin of which was not clearly stated, the prisoner drew
his knife and stabbed Kirkman in the belly. The prisoner, who was said
to be tipsy at the time, then ran off, but in about half an hour
afterwards, was apprehended as he was asking for a night's lodgings at
the house of the prosecutor. Kirkman was conveyed to Mr. BROUGHAM's,
the surgeon, who now stated that the wound was in the bowels, and was a
very dangerous one; he had difficulty in reducing it, and the patient
was under his care some weeks; eventually he recovered and went to sea.
In defence, the prisoner, after attacking, in no measured terms, the
character of the two girls who were the principal witnesses against
him, saying that they would swear a man's life away for a glass of gin,
gave a long story of a drunken squabble at the public-house where he
had been drinking on the evening in question, and in the streets; he
said that, during the fighting, his own knife, which was in the
waist-band of his trowsers, fell out, and that before he could pick it
up, he was struck again; but the man who committed the deed on Kirkman,
was gone to sea. He asked the jury whether they could suppose, if he
had stabbed Kirkman, he should have gone immediately to his house to
ask for lodgings. The jury found the prisoner Guilty; and he was
sentenced to Twenty Months' Hard Labour.
JOHN SCOBLE, WILLIAM GREY, and ISAAC WATTS, were indicted for having on
the 20th of January last, at the parish of Gwennap, assaulted JOHN
VEALE, a constable, while executing his duty in the preservation of the
peace. At first, the prisoners pleaded Not Guilty, but subsequently,
on the advice of their counsel, Mr. SLADE, they withdrew that plea, and
pleaded Guilty. Mr. KARSLAKE, for the prosecution, under the
circumstances, interceded with the court on behalf of the prisoners;
and the learned Judge ordered them to be discharged on their entering
into recognizances of GBP40 each to keep the peace for two years, and
also to appear to receive sentence on the present convictions if called
on.
THOMAS MEWTON, 36, was charged with having on the 29th of January,
unlawfully obtained from EDWARD PENMAN, of Redruth, two yards of broad
cloth, two yards of kerseymere cloth, one piece of silk velvet, and one
umbrella, by falsely pretending that he was the son of RICHARD MEWTON,
of Short-lane's-end, in the parish of Kenwyn. The Prosecutor stated
that on Friday the 26th of January, the prisoner came to his shop, and
asked him to let him have some goods, saying that one of Penman's
assistants had frequently solicited orders from him, and that he wanted
to have some goods then. Prisoner represented himself to be the son of
Richard Mewton, the gardener at Short-lane's-end, and that he was in
the habit of coming to Redruth and other markets, selling trees for
Richard Mewton and that if he would let him have the goods, he would
call and pay. Prosecutor told him that he could not let him have the
goods without seeing his assistant. On the 29th of January, prisoner
again came to him, and said he had seen his assistant, ANGUS SHAW, on
an omnibus, and that the assistant, not having time to give him a
written order, had told him that he might call and have what goods he
liked to order. Prosecutor then let him have cloth for a coat,
kerseymere [.....?] a trowsers, and a silk waistcoat piece, with
trimmings for all three and an umbrella. The Judge asked the
prosecutor whether he was not a north country man; and on his answering
in the affirmative, humorously expressed surprise that he should so
readily have believed the prisoner's story. Angus Shaw, prosecutor's
assistant, related the circumstances of the prisoner's calling on him
at the White Hart Inn, Truro, and stating that he was to have a suit of
clothes of Mr. Penman, and that his name was Thomas Mewton, the son of
Richard Mewton, of Short-lane's-end. The prisoner was an utter
stranger to him before that. Did not at any time tell him to go and
get anything at Mr. Penman's. THOMAS BLENNING, constable of Padstow,
apprehended prisoner in that place on the 13th of February, and charged
him with having obtained goods on false pretences of Mr. Penman.
Witness found on him an umbrella and a waistcoat piece. These were
produced and identified by the prosecutor. For the defence, Mr. HUGHES
urged that there was no evidence that the prisoner was not the son of
Richard Mewton. The learned Judge, however, in summing up, said the
prisoner was also charged with falsely pretending that he had been sent
for the goods by Angus Shaw, and false pretence had been proved, as
also that the prosecutor had supplied the goods on the faith of that
statement being true. Guilty. Three Months' Imprisonment.
JOHN EMERY, who had pleaded Guilty of burglary after former conviction,
was not sentenced to Transportation for Ten Years.
JOHN ORCHARD, who had pleaded Guilty of sheep-stealing, also received
sentence of Transportation for Ten Years.
CORNWALL SPRING ASSIZES.
Friday, March 30. The following Nisi Prius case was tried this day
before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN. TOLL v. LEE:- Mr. MAYNARD and Mr.
KARSLAKE for plaintiff; attorney, Mr. G. W. SNELL. Mr. M. SMITH and
Mr. COLLIVER for defendant; attorney, Mr. FRY. The plaintiff in this
case was Mr. JAMES TOLL, who carried on business at Callington as a
timber-merchant. The defendant was Mr. JOHN DUNKIN LEE, a sail-cloth
and sack manufacturer, living in Leadenhall-street, London. The action
was brought to recover the sum of GBP31. 8s. 11 1/2 d., for timber
supplied to Wheal Mary mine, in which defendant was an adventurer at
the time of the supplies in October, 1845. Mr. Maynard, in opening the
case, stated that the mine company in question was formed on the
cost-book system, and in September, 1845, defendant accepted a transfer
of some shares in the mine, which transfer was certified in the usual
manner to the purser and by him registered in the book of the mine. In
the course of the year 1845, it became necessary to sink a shaft and
erect some machinery on the mine and timber for the purpose was ordered
of the plaintiff, of which, there was supplied by him in the month of
October, 1845, after the defendant became a shareholder, to the value
of GBP31. 8s. 11 1/2 d., including a small charge for carriage. In
December 1845, there was held in London, a general meeting of
shareholders, at which the defendant was present and took part in the
proceedings. Afterwards, when it became necessary to give up the
working of the mine, the shareholders were severally called on to pay
their proportions of what was due to tradesmen who had sent supplies to
the mine. Several of the shareholders did pay their proportions; and
had the defendant chosen to do the same, the tradesmen would have been
satisfied. To show that the defendant had had opportunity afforded him
of so settling his arrears, the learned counsel read the following
letters addressed to the defendant by Mr. WILLIAM SNELL, a relative of
the purser, and who was employed by the purser to assist in settling
the affairs of the mine:-
36, Gibson Square, Islington, London, February 12, 1849. Wheal Mary.
Sir, - There is due to bankers, merchants, and others upwards of GBP337
from the adventurers in this mine. In consequence of many of the
shareholders having become bankrupts, insolvents, and others dead, it
unfortunately falls heavy on a few, and the consequence of which is
there are only 231 shares that are in solvent hands. Your proportion
will be GBP1. 12s. per share on the sixteen shares. I shall therefore
thank you to remit me a cheque for the amount (GBP23. 12s.) on or
before Friday morning next; or in case you decline to do so, be pleased
to inform me the name of your attorney that I may send process for
entering appearance for you. It is very unpleasant for me to make this
application, but the merchants are determined to have their money; and,
for the purpose of saving law expenses, I have adopted this mode of
dividing the amount due according to the numbers of shares held, as
well as to prevent each shareholder from paying more than his
proportional part. I am, Sir, your obedient servant. W. Snell. J. D.
Lee, Esq., 97, Leadenhall Street. To that letter the defendant replied
as follows:- Sir, - I have received your communication of the 12th,
and have given it my attention. I shall be glad to pay my share of any
outstanding claims against Wheal Mary, upon the accounts being audited
by those gentlemen who have the management of that mine in London. I
am, Sir, your obedient servant, John Dunkin Lee.
The learned counsel went on to say that among other pleas put in by the
defendant, was one, that other shareholders had been called on to pay
their proportions - that one of them had come forward and done so, and
that that payment was in discharge of the whole. But the fact was that
another shareholder, whose name was SAUNDERS, was sued in the same way
as the other shareholders, and, knowing that he had no defence, he came
forward to pay his proportion, and it was agreed that on his paying
what was due from him on calls, the action against him should be
discontinued, and that the amount actually paid by him, GBP10, should
be taken on account of what was due to the plaintiff. GEORGE WELLS
SNELL, solicitor, was then examined. He stated that he was purser of
Wheal Mary mine, and he produced the register of shareholders, of which
he had the custody as purser, &c., in which was the name of the
defendant, as entered by witness at the time of the transfer, which the
witness also produced, and stated that he knew it to be signed by
defendant. The transfer was dated the 29th of September, 1845. Mr. M.
Smith objected to the stamp on the transfer. The stamp was a 2s. 6d.
one. The document being an assignment of a share in the mine, required
a larger stamp. Mr. Maynard, on the other hand, contended that the
document was not an assignment of a share, but only a certificate that
a share had been assigned by deed. The point was reserved, and the
document, which it was stated was in the usual form, was put in and
taken as read. The witness then gave evidence of his having registered
the defendant's name as shareholder, and of his having seen defendant
at a meeting of the shareholders at the Corn-Exchange Hotel, London, in
December, 1845, held for the purpose of discussing the affairs of the
mine. Witness was in the habit of ordering goods for the carrying on
the works of the mine, and in October, 1845, ordered timber from the
plaintiff. Witness referred to the particulars of demand in this
action, and stated that the goods mentioned in it were ordered by him
in October, 1845, and were supplied to the mine. The prices charged
were the same as those charged at other quays, in the same month; and
the timber so supplied was necessary for the workings of the mine.
Cross-examined - Had been purser from the commencement of the mine in
January, 1845. The mine had now been stopped for some time. Plaintiff
was witness's father-in-law. Would swear that he had plaintiff's
authority for bringing this action. Had brought four actions in Mr.
Toll's name, in this same mine. There was one action against a
shareholder named Saunders. Believed there was another action now
pending against Saunders, but could not say positively without seeing
his agent's book. There were writs issued against several of the
shareholders. Could not say how many, without looking to his agent's
book. Knew there were not twenty. Was purser of the mine, and
attorney for the person bringing actions against the shareholders. The
mine was professed to be carried on on the cost-book principle; but
could not say whether or not it was so conducted. There was no deed of
settlement; but there were rules and regulations for the conduct of the
mine. Until the management was changed to London, which was in
November, 1845, it was usual to have the merchants' accounts sent in
every two-months, and entered in the cost-book. Distinctly recollected
ordering the goods now in question, of Mr. JAMES TOLL, junior, who
never was in partnership with his father. Young Toll was a shareholder
in October, 1845. Certainly, it was not on demand being made on James
Toll, jun., for calls, that James Toll the elder made a demand on the
mine for timber. This account of Toll's was first entered in the
cost-book in February 1847. Merchants' accounts ought to be entered in
the cost-book every two months; but sometimes the merchants would leave
their accounts for five or six months or more, and this appeared to
have been one of such cases. Toll's account was entered in the same
month in which the mine was stopped. Witness issued circulars for all
persons having claims on the mine to send them in, and among others,
this one of Toll's came in. Re-Examined - After the management was
transferred to London, witness had nothing to do with entries in the
cost book. Saunders had settled one action against him, and witness
did not know about another action against him. James Toll, jun., was
son of the plaintiff, and was clerk to his father in October, 1845.
During that month, witness received orders from Mr. Snell, the purser
of Wheal Mary, and made entries in a book at the time he received them.
Witness referred to the book, and pointed out the orders received by
him, which made up the present claim. Sent the goods to the mine by
men called WILTON, STUDDEN, and GEORGE. The prices were reasonable,
and were the same as those charged anywhere on the Tamar.
Cross-examined - Had never been in partnership with his father.
Witness was a shareholder in the mine, but his father had no interest
in the shares. Was a shareholder before his father knew of it. Had no
doubt that his father knew of his being a shareholder before he sent in
his bill to the mine; but could not ay decidedly. Evidence of delivery
of timber in October, 1845, from the plaintiff's yard to the mine, was
given by the carriers, Wilton Studden, and George. The letters which
had been opened by the plaintiff's counsel were then put in and read,
and on that of the 15th of February, Mr. Snell being recalled, stated
that he was not aware that the accounts had yet been audited by the
gentlemen in London.
JOHN ELLIOTT FOX agent to plaintiff's attorney, stated that in the
beginning of February, 1849, he was employed to bring an action at the
suit of Toll against Saunders. There was a previous action in 1847,
which settled in 1848, by Saunders paying GBP10 in respect of his calls
in arrear. Cross-examined - The particulars of demand in that former
action against Saunders included the particulars in the present action,
together with some others. In that former action against Saunders, Mr.
SLEAP was defendant's attorney, and witness negotiated with him a
settlement of that action and gave him the following receipt:- In The
Exchequer - Toll v. Saunders. Received this 7th day of February, 1848,
of the defendant, by payment to J. T. Sleap, Esq., his attorney, the
sum of GBP19 the amount agreed to be accepted in discharge of the
defendant's arrears of calls and the costs, and in settlement of this
action. John Elliott Fox, Witness had an interview with Mr. Sleap,
when the money was paid, and proposed originally merely to give a
receipt for Saunder's calls, and drew it up in that form. Mr. Sleap
did not say that he would not settle the action on those terms; but he
requested witness to put in the words "in settlement of this action."
That was before the money was paid, and witness consented to those
words being inserted. Witness said to Mr. Sleap, the understanding is
that if Saunders will pay GBP10 we shall not proceed further against
him. Witness told Mr. Sleap that that was to be without prejudice to
other rights. He expressly stated to Mr. Sleap that he had no
objection to give a receipt for GBP10, in discharge of Saunders,
inasmuch as there were other persons against whom they could proceed
for the residue of the demand. The particulars in Toll v. Saunders,
included all the particulars in respect of timber supplied by Toll on
the mine. The following letter was then put in. February 4th, 1848.
Mr. Sleap, - Sir, My client has been prevailed on to accept GBP10 from
your client in discharge of your client, on condition that the costs be
paid him as between attorney and client, on the higher scale; the extra
costs will not exceed 20s. and I will send the account of such costs.
John Elliott Fox. This concluded the case for the plaintiff. Mr.
Smith then addressed the jury on the defendant [.....?] serving that
the real question was whether this [.....?] had not been discharged by
what had taken place in the action brought by Toll against Saunders.
The learned Judge, reserving the point on the legal construction of the
words at the close of the receipt to Saunders, effected a verdict for
plaintiff for GBP31. 8s. 11 1/2 d., with 40s. costs, with leave to
enter a verdict for defendant, should the effect of the receipt be such
as had been contended by the defendant's counsel.
HERNAMAN AND OTHERS - Assignees, v. CORYTON. - This was a Special
Jury case, in which the Assignees of RICHARD PENWARDEN, of Launceston,
a bankrupt, were plaintiffs, and AUGUSTUS CORYTON, Esq., the late
Sheriff of Cornwall, was defendant. The case being called on, and the
jury sworn, it was arranged to take a verdict for plaintiff for
GBP2,000 damages, and stated in the declaration, subject to a reference
on all points of law, to JOHN SHAPLAND STOCK, Esq., barrister-at-law.
The jury were then discharged, the Lord Chief Justice left the Court,
and in the course of the afternoon, left the town for Killerton, the
seat of Sri T. D. ACLAND, Bart., en route to Taunton.
IMPORTANT REFERENCE - At one o'clock, the reference in the case of
the Assignees of RICHARD PENWARDEN against AUGUSTUS COR[R]YTON, Esq.,
was opened at the Grand Jury Room, before the arbitrator J. S. STOCK,
Esq. Mr. KARSLAKE appeared as counsel for plaintiffs; Mr. CARPENTER
ROWE for the defendant. The attorneys were, Mr. STOGDON, of Exeter,
for the plaintiffs; Mr. GURNEY, of Launceston, for defendant. The case
appeared to excite great interest, especially among inhabitants of the
town and neighbourhood of Launceston, of whom there was a large number
in attendance as witnesses. It will be seen too that the case itself
involves some legal points of considerable interest and importance to
the commercial world. Briefly stated the points in issue were:-
Whether the Sheriff had or had not conducted the sale of the bankrupt's
goods in a reckless and unfair manner. Whether the assignees, or the
execution creditors, were entitled to the proceeds of the sale. If the
assignees were entitled to the whole of any part of the proceeds,
then, from what time did their title begin. If their title did not
begin until the fiat in bankruptcy arrived at Exeter, then the sale of
Penwarden's effects being over by that time, the whole proceeds would
go to the execution creditors. But, if the fiat was to be considered
complete, from the moment when it was signed by the Lord Chancellor,
then the assignees would take the proceeds accruing from that time.
Mr. Karslake opened the pleadings to the arbitration, [but first
count?] stated that, before the issuing of the fiat in bankruptcy
against Penwarden, viz, on the 31st of May, 18..?, a writ of fieri
facias was issued against Penwarden's goods and chattels, at the suite
of the [..... .....?] for the sum of GBP299. 5s. 9d., including
interest [........ .......?] that on the 5th of June, before the
issuing of the fiat in bankruptcy and before the plaintiffs became
assignees, the sheriff seized and took in execution divers cattle,
goods, and chattels of Penwarden, to the value of GBP2,000 greater by
GBP1,700 than was sufficient to pay the sum of GBP299. 5s. 9d.,
indorsed to be levied, and sheriff's poundage and expenses of levy; and
that afterwards, on the 7th of June, the sheriff, under colour and
pretence of the said writ, did sell the whole of such cattle, goods,
and chattels, and did conduct the said sale wrongfully, negligently,
&c., so that the said cattle, goods, and chattels realised only GBP500,
instead of GBP2,000, their alleged value, and which it was stated might
have been realised had the sale been conducted in a fit and proper
manner. The second count contained a similar charge in respect of a
writ of fieri facias issued on the 31st of May, against Penwarden's
goods and chattels, at the suit of CHARLES GURNEY, for a debt of
GBP260. 6s., including interest. The third and fourth counts were in
trover; the third count laying the property in Penwarden up to the time
of issuing the fiat; and the last count alleging that, after the time
of the issuing of the fiat, the property was in the plaintiffs, as
assignees. To the two first counts - those of misfeasance - the
defendant put in a general plea of not guilty. To the third count the
defendant pleaded that Penwarden was not lawfully possessed, as of his
own property, of the goods and chattels therein mentioned; and to the
last count, the defendant pleaded that the plaintiffs, as assignees,
were not lawfully possessed. The learned counsel went on to state the
facts of the case.
He stated that, on the 4th of August 1847, Mr. Penwarden, who was a
currier and saddler at Launceston, gave a warrant of attorney to DAVID
DERRY, the registered public officer of the Devon and Cornwall Banking
Company, for the purpose of securing a sum of GBP500 with interest at
five per cent payable on the 1st of September, 1847. On this warrant
of attorney, judgment was signed and execution issued on the 31st of
May 1848, and on the 5th of June a writ of fieri facias was lodged with
the Sheriff. On that same day, the warrant was issued, and was
executed the same evening. Then, there was another warrant of
attorney, dated the 4th of August, 1848, in favour of Charles Gurney,
to secure GBP250 and interest payable on the 4th of November 1847. On
this warrant, as in the one before mentioned, judgment was signed on
the 31st of May, 1848, and the write of fieri facias lodged with the
sheriff on the 5th of June, but not executed until the 7th of June. It
appeared that on Monday the 5th of June, Penwarden who was then
threatened with proceedings on the write of fieri facias at the suite
of the Bank determined on being made a bankrupt. On that same day, Mr.
Gurney went to the Under Sheriff at Liskeard, lodged his writ, got a
warrant issued, and in the evening of the same day, Penwarden's goods
were taken in execution of that writ. Penwarden's declaration of
insolvency was sent to town that same night. It was filed in town on
the morning of the 6th; and about ten or eleven o'clock on the 7th the
fiat was signed by the Lord Chancellor, on the bankrupt's own petition.
At four o'clock in the afternoon of the 7th the fiat was sent by post.
On the 8th it was received at the Exeter District Court of Bankruptcy.
The sale of Penwarden's goods by the Sheriff took place on the 7th;
beginning at nine o'clock in the morning, and continuing till past nine
at night. And at this point it was that the question arose as to the
construction of the Act of Parliament, concerning the time when the
fiat was complete. If it should turn out that the fiat was complete
and issued before any sale, then the plaintiffs would be entitled on
the counts of trover, to recover for the whole of the goods sold. If
the fiat was complete and issued at any period of the day of sale,
while the sale was in progress, the plaintiffs would be entitled to
recover for what had not been sold at that time. Mr. Karslake then
observed, as to the two first counts, which charged that the Sheriff
had sold in a negligent and reckless manner, that the evidence would
shew that the object of the defendant was to sell before any fiat in
bankruptcy should issue. It was known that a fiat might come down at
any moment on the 7th, and stop the sale, and therefore the sale was
hurried on to prevent interruption; and it would be shewn that, from
want of sufficient notice of the sale, and from the manner in which it
was conducted, there was a very great sacrifice of the value of the
goods.
The levy on Derry's writ took place in the evening of the 5th; on the
next day the bills announcing the sale were put out; and the sale
commenced at nine o'clock on the morning of the 7th. Mr. Karslake
proceeded to call witnesses:- PETER GLUBB stated that he lived at
Liskeard, and was Under-Sheriff during Mr. Coryton's sheriffalty.
Remembered the two writs of execution in the cases of Derry and Gurney,
being brought to his office on the 5th of June. One was brought by Mr.
Gurney's clerk, between one and two o'clock; that was the one in the
case of Derry. In about half an hour afterwards, and while the clerk
was in witness's office, Mr. Gurney himself came with the other writ.
Warrants were issued immediately on those two writs. Had searched for
those warrants in his office, and had not found them. Did not know if
the writs had been returned. Mr. Karslake to witness:- Did Mr. Gurney
make a declaration to you? Mr. Rowe objected to the question on the
ground that the declaration of an execution creditor was not evidence
in an action against the sheriff - the sheriff not being an agent for
the execution creditor. The Arbitrator took a note of the objection,
and the examination was resumed. At the time Mr. Gurney called, he
wished witness to grant a warrant and said he wished the writ to be
speedily executed, and that his clerk should be entered in the warrant
at bailiff. Nothing was stated as to Mr. Gurney's object, except that
witness could collect from him, that it was a case in which no time
should be lost. The names of the usual bailiffs for the district, and
also that of Mr. PAYNE, Mr. Gurney's clerk, were put into the warrant.
The bailiffs in Cornwall were not bound bailiffs. Did not know that
the sheriff was indemnified in this case. Witness, as Under Sheriff,
considered himself safe, from the respectability of character of
Messrs. Gurney and Cowlard. During the time of his being Under
Sheriff, witness had held several sales. On the next question put, Mr.
Rowe submitted that, as in the counts for misfeasance, the breaches
charged against the defendant, were, according to the wording of the
counts, alleged to have occurred during, and not prior to the sale, it
was not competent in the plaintiffs to go into evidence to show that
there was not sufficient notice of sale. The Arbitrator quite agreed
that if the damages were claimed on the specific ground that the
sheriff had sold, say within twenty-four or forty-eight hours, whereas
he ought not to have sold in less than a week, then there was no breach
alleged in the present case in that form. But he did not understand
that the plaintiffs' claim was thus limited. Damages were claimed
because the goods were sold improperly, and as one reason for the claim
it was stated that the goods were sold without sufficient notice.
Under these circumstances, he did not see how they could avoid having
the history of the whole transaction.
Examination Resumed. - Believed it was the practice to give four or
five days' notice of a sale. Sometimes sales were made earlier; but if
a sum of GBP400 or GBP500 was to be realized, he should give four or
five days' notice. Sometimes it was the practice for the sheriff to
make a bill of sale to the execution creditor, instead of holding a
sale. Had not seen the warrants in these present cases since they were
issued by him. Witness produced his process-book, in which he entered
short memoranda of warrants issued, and of the person in whom they were
issued. The warrant in Derry's case was sent by a special messenger
and the other was delivered into Mr. Gurney's hands, and witness had
not seen either of them since. Mr. Rowe objected that the proper mode
of proof of the warrants was by the production of the warrants
themselves. Mr. Karslake, on the defendant's admission that the writs
had been returned, contended that it might fairly be assumed that the
warrants were in proper custody - that of the sheriff or under-sheriff;
and therefore, if the warrants were not produced, the plaintiffs were
entitled to give secondary evidence of them. Mr. Rowe said it was the
custom in Cornwall and in other counties not to return the warrants to
the sheriff. The plaintiffs in this case had means of knowing into
whose hands these warrants passed, and were bound to subpoena the very
men who alone could produce them. In point of law, the sheriff was not
bound to have the warrants in his possession. And, in point of fact
the plaintiffs had actually served subpoenas duces tectum on some four
or five persons for the production of these warrants. Mr. Karslake
replied that the sheriff was entitled to demand from his servants the
production of the warrants, and therefore the sheriff was bound to
produce them in court; and if he did not produce them, secondary
evidence might be offered. The Arbitrator; I really entertain very
little doubt about the question that a notice to the sheriff to produce
is not sufficient to let in secondary evidence; but I do not decide the
point.
EMSWORTHY TAPSON, sheriff's office, was next examined. He produced the
warrant in the suit of David Derry against Penwarden; and said he had
had in his custody at one time the warrant at the suit of Mr. Gurney.
The same day he received it, he delivered it to his assistant, JOHN
HIGGS, and witness did not recollect having seen it since FREDERICK
ANDREW PAYNE, clerk to Mr. Gurney, stated that he delivered the writ at
the suit of Gurney, to the last witness some time on Tuesday, the 6th
of June, and had not seen it since. The Arbitrator, after some further
arguments by counsel, now decided on the admissibility of secondary
evidence of the warrant. The next witness called was WILLIAM DANN,
Usher of the Court of Bankruptcy at Exeter. He produced the fiat in
bankruptcy against Penwarden, which he received at Exeter, by post, on
the 8th of June, 1848. Cross-examined: It reached by post, under
cover addressed to the Registrar of the Court of Bankruptcy. Witness
saw it on that day, the 8th of June, between half past nine and ten
o'clock. Saw it first at the court, in the same state, he believed, in
which it issued from the Lord Chancellor. It was a fiat issued on the
declaration of the bankrupt. There was no petition in this case. A
copy of the declaration was produced with the usual affidavits, and
these the documents by which the court was put in motion in cases of
declaration of insolvency. These documents were all produced at the
court on the 10th. The affidavit was sworn on the 8th at Launceston -
the affidavit of Mr. Gurney that he had seen the bankrupt sign the
declaration. All the exhibits bear date on the 10th. EDWARD WILLIAM
SMITH, chief clerk at the Secretary of Bankruptcy's office, produced
the docket paper in the fiat of bankruptcy against Penwarden. The fiat
was bespoken on the 6th of June. After the solicitor has bespoken a
fiat, the course is to make out that fiat for the Lord Chancellor's
signature. On filing declaration, a party may petition for fiat. The
petition for fiat was in fact what went by the name of the docket
paper. The fiat is made out by one of the clerks in the office. When
the draft fiat is made out, it is left for the messenger, to carry, on
the next morning, for the Lord Chancellor's signature; and the
Messenger is to be at Westminster, or wherever the Lord Chancellor may
be by ten o'clock in the morning. The fiats are signed by his Lordship
immediately, and brought back to the Office by the Messenger. In the
course of business, that fiat made on the 6th of June, would have been
signed on the next morning by ten o'clock, and then brought back to the
office by the messenger. After the fiats are returned to the office,
the course is to transmit country fiats by post, the same day, to the
different district courts. The hour for posting was four o'clock, at
the closing of the office. Had an entry of the sending of this
particular fiat on the day named. It was the practice occasionally to
send off fiats when the Lord Chancellor had signed them, without
bringing them back to the office. They were complete when the
Chancellor had signed them. The fees were always paid when the fiat
was bespoken.
Cross-examined. - It sometimes happened that a docket was
countermanded. It never happened that a fiat was not transmitted,
after the Lord Chancellor's signature. By the 5th and 6th Victoria,
parties were forbidden to apply themselves for the fiats. Was certain
that the Lord Chancellor's name was on this particular fiat, at five
minutes past twelve, on the 7th of June; witness had it in his own
custody at that time, with the Chancellor's signature. WILLIAM
GOODBODY, purse-bearer to the Lord Chancellor. Was so on the 7th of
June last. According to regular course of business, fiats in
bankruptcy are brought by Messengers, and are then placed in his
lordship's room for signature; and, those fiats are all signed before
his lordship goes into court. They are all signed immediately the Lord
Chancellor comes into his room; that is the first thing he does. Had
known instances in which the Messenger, having received the fiat, made
it up immediately and sent it off, without taking it back to the
Bankruptcy office. Evidence of a very lengthy and minutely
circumstantial character was then gone into, on the counts which
charged the Sheriff with reckless and negligent conduct of the sale and
alleged a consequent sacrifice of the bankrupt's property. The
witnesses examined for the plaintiffs, were:- JOHN PARSONS HARRIS,
clerk to Mr. DARKE, solicitor, of Launceston; THOMAS PALMER, currier,
of Tavistock; WILLIAM ANDREWS, saddler of Tavistock; JOHN DAVEY
WILLIAMS, foreman to Mr. Penwarden; WILLIAM BROWNING, saddler and
harness-maker, in Mr. Penwarden's employ; the Rev. CHARLES CARPENTER of
St. Stephens by Launceston; JOHN BRIMMALL, in the employ of Mr. BRAY,
bookseller, Launceston; JOHN BENNETT, relieving officer of the
Launceston Union; GEORGE M. GIFFORD, land surveyor; SILAS LIDDELL,
bookseller, Bodmin; and RICHARD PENWARDEN, the bankrupt. Mr. Rowe for
the defendant, briefly stated that in the evidence she should adduce,
he should content himself with rebutting the plaintiffs' evidence on
the counts for misfeasance; and he should contend that whatever had
been done in the conduct of the sale, had been the necessary result of
the bankrupt's own conduct. The evidence on the other counts, he
believed was complete. The first witness called for the defence was
HENRY BURT, auctioneer, of Launceston, who sold the goods and stock of
the bankrupt. At the close of this witness's evidence it being then
nearly two o'clock in the morning, the Court was adjourned till nine
o'clock, when the inquiry was resumed, and the following witnesses were
examined. - THOMAS W. MADDOX, bookseller, Launceston; JOSEPH BRANWELL,
manager of the East Cornwall Bank, Launceston; J. G. MASON, saddler,
Callington; JOHN HENDER, saddler; Mr. HOOPER, saddler; Mr. W. JENKYN,
furniture broker; Mr. HONEY, grocer; Mr. HENDER, currier; Mrs. J.
LETHBRIDGE COWLARD, attorney; Mr. F. A. PAYNE, clerk; Mr. LANGDON,
clerk to the auctioneer; Mr. EMSWORTHY TAPSON, bailiff; and Mr. BUXHAM,
auctioneer and innkeeper. The inquiry terminated at about twelve
o'clock; we understand that the Arbitrator's decision will probably be
given early in Easter Term.
TRIAL OF THE VALIDITY OF A WILL - The Court was opened at nine
o'clock, and soon became crowded in every part, great interest having
been excited by the trial of the following cause:- DOE dem. STEVENS v.
STEVENS. - (Special Jury.) Mr. COCKBURN, Mr. BUTT, and Mr. SMIRKE,
for the plaintiff - attorney, Mr. PRESTON WALLIS; Mr. CROWDER, and Mr.
MONTAGUE SMITH for the defendant - attorney, Mr. STOKES. The witnesses
on both sides were ordered out of Court. This was an action of
ejectment brought for the recovery of certain premises, and Mr. Smirke
having opened the pleadings, Mr. Cockburn stated the case. The right
to recover the premises in question depended on the validity of the
will of a man of the name of NICHOLAS STEVENS, who died in September
last at Bodmin. There was no question as to the legal formalities
required by the law in making a will having been complied with; the
only question was whether at the time the will was made, the testator
was in a state of mind to render him capable of making that testament.
It would be necessary to give the jury some account of this Nicholas
Stevens, in order to throw light on the question. He was a man who
owed his fortune to his own exertions, who began the world with
nothing, and succeeded in amassing a considerable amount of money.
Some half-century ago, he settled in Bodmin as a horse dealer; he was
very illiterate, but possessed a vigorous understanding and strong
common sense, with a shrewd knowledge of the world, great thrift, and
indefatigable industry. He was a man in early life, and until of late
years, of a strong and powerful frame, and as is the result of
sometimes of physical energy and intellectual vigour, he had a very
strong will of his own. He was naturally irritable, and at all times
arbitrary; he could not endure any interference with his inclinations,
and did not easily forget or forgive. He married and had seven
children, four sons and three daughters. The eldest son was John, the
defendant in this action, the second son was called Joseph, the third
William, and the fourth Nicholas, who was the plaintiff in the present
action. The three daughters were Mary, who married Mr. TRETHOWAN; Ann,
who married Mr. GEAKE; and Jane, the youngest, who remained unmarried,
and continued to live with her father. As John grew up the father took
him into the business, first as an assistant, and afterwards into
partnership. Subsequently as Joseph became a man, he also was taken
into partnership, and so things continued till 1836[5?], when John
married a person of Redruth, and went to this town to live. The
partnership was continued for some time, but John finding himself a
long way from his father, and having some difference with his brother
Joseph, the result was that he insisted on a dissolution of
partnership, and set up at Redruth for himself. He also withdrew from
his father a man named BROWN, who had been his father's foreman and
confidential man for many years, and by this means he withdrew a
considerable portion of his father's connexion and business, which had
consisted to a large extent in furnishing horses for the mines. This
affected the old man a great deal, as he thought John had behaved
unkindly; not that it precluded all intimate relations between them; on
the contrary he saw John from time to time, and made him one of the
executors of his will, though he had often been heard to complain of
his conduct. After this Joseph and William entered into partnership,
but as they did not agree, each went into business for himself, and
they succeeded in their respective callings. These two having left
their father's business, there remained the youngest son, Nicholas, who
was with his father up to the time of his death, Nicholas being then
about thirty years of age. The two daughters, Anne and Mary, had
married and Jane remained at home, living with her father and her
brother Nicholas. The old man was a penurious turn; he had no idea of
his children living without working, and to those who lived at home he
was by no means an easy task-master. He had bought and leased land,
and farmed a good deal, and though the man was worth thousands, he made
his son Nicholas work on the farm like any common labourer. Nicholas
had no wages, but some part of his clothes were provided, and he had a
run allowed him for five or six sheep on the farm. The old man had
given up horse dealing for some years, and only followed farming; and
he was often heard to say that he intended to keep his land in the same
name - that of Nicholas, - that the premises should be his at another
day, and that Nicholas should never want to work after his time. He
also made his daughter Jane do the work of the house, as if he could
not afford to keep a servant. The old Stevens was subject to attacks
of erysipelas in the face, which was sometimes aggravated by a tendency
to take a drop too much. On the 9th of September, he was taken ill of
this disease. As is the case sometimes with men of strong muscular
frames and general good health, if illness came upon him, he was very
soon prostrated, and what he had recourse to was to go to bed.
Accordingly at this time he went to bed, and up to the day of his
death, on the 20th of September, he never left it, except at certain
intervals. At first the disease developed itself with considerable
rapidity. His face and head became much swollen and inflamed, and the
swelling of the face produced partial blindness, his eyes being closed.
He became very irritable under the disease; he dozed occasionally, and
when he did so he sometimes talked in his sleep. He remained in this
condition till the 12th or 13th of September, but after that the acute
symptoms of the disorder began to subside; the swelling of the face
lessened, the inflammation decreased, and he felt generally better.
There was, however, a great deal of disease remaining, and also great
irritability of mind. It was suggested to him that he should have
medical advice, but it was one of the peculiarities of the man that he
had the greatest possible aversion and contempt for medicine and
medical men from an early period of his life. Being a man of strong
powerful frame and health, he conceived that the taking of physic was
nonsense. The only thing he would ever take was what is termed milk
and sulphur. He used to say that this erysipelas was nothing but gout,
and that a little brandy and milk and sulphur would carry it off better
than anything else, he therefore rejected with scorn the idea of having
a doctor. On the Tuesday after he was taken ill, and on the Thursday
evening he took some of his favourite milk and sulphur, a teaspoonful
and a half at each time. Whether from that or not he was seized with
violent discharges from the bowels, which partook in some degree of a
bloody character. The effect was apparently two-fold; it relieved the
system, and tended to lower the inflammation, he recovered his
eye-sight, his eyes resumed their usual size and appearance, and his
head became considerably relieved. But whilst these discharges
relieved the head, they no doubt produced a considerable degree of
exhaustion and weakness. However, from that time he began to get
better; he occasionally got out of bed himself, and was decidedly
better up to Saturday the 16th of September. On the Sunday he was
washed, his skin began to peel off, he was better in his head, but
still there was much weakness. He dozed a great deal during that time,
and muttered when sleeping; he was restless, and when in this state
would utter incoherent language, but when awake he was altogether
rational and conversed with his friends about him. About seven o'clock
on Sunday evening, Mr. WARD, a surgeon, called at the house, having
been requested to do so by one of the family without the assent of the
old man. Mr. Ward had some conversation with him; he said he had the
gout in his head, but Mr. Ward told him it was the erysipelas, and
spoke of his bloody discharges. The daughter Jane had told Mr. Ward of
this symptom, but had not previously informed her father. She asked
Mr. Ward if he could not give him something to strengthen his bowels,
but the old man refused to take anything; it was a frequent saying of
his that old people ought not to take medicine. Mr. Ward left, and
shortly afterwards Miss ROSCORLA, an old maiden lady, called on him.
She was a person of a very religious turn of mind, and having known Mr.
Stevens and his wife for many years, and administered consolation to
the latter on her deathbed, she took a great interest in the old man's
state of mind. She was a member of the Wesleyan persuasion, and wished
to awaken in him a sense of those religious obligations and feelings
which she felt so strongly herself. She had called on him some days
previously, and found him quite alive to his worldly affairs, but by no
means so to the danger of his condition, and to his interest hereafter.
On Sunday she had a prolonged conversation with him, prayed with him,
and asked him many questions on religious subjects. After she left he
fell asleep about ten o'clock, and slept till four on Monday morning,
when having had a deep sleep he awoke considerably refreshed. They
brought him arrow-root, and he took it, feeding himself without
difficulty. He fell asleep, and again awoke about six, when he was
evidently much better, and quite conscious of what he was about.
Nicholas and Jane who lived with him were dependent on him, and
something had been said about the matter, he determined on making his
will. He then gave Nicholas instructions, which he took verbally, and
retired from the room to commit them to writing. When he went into the
next room, his sister Jane, Mrs. Geake and Mrs. Stevens, the wife of
William Stevens, were there. As Nicholas was not very apt at
scholarship, Jane offered to write for him, and she took down from his
mouth what the old man had told him. While this was doing, Mrs. Geake,
who was a widow, suggested that something ought to be added. As he
(Mr. Cockburn) had stated, John, the eldest son, had formerly been in
partnership with his father, and had left him; but before the
partnership terminated, the old man had purchased land worth nearly
GBP400 on leasehold for lives in the neighbourhood of Bodmin, and he
had bought this in John's name for him to have the benefit of it. He
has also purchased a property called Tredenham, worth about GBP800,
which he intended for William, and bought it in his name; but he had
stipulated that these two properties should remain in his own
possession during his life. When Miss Jane Stevens was writing the
instructions for the will from Nicholas's mouth, as given by his
father, Mrs. Geake suggested that a legacy of GBP50 in addition to
Tredenham estate should be put down for William Stevens, and that two
sums of GBP25 should be put down for her own two sons. Jane put down
these sums, but Nicholas hesitated and said he [would?] not venture to
read to his father the two legacies. When therefore he afterwards read
over what was written to his father, he read only the GBP50 legacy to
William, to which the old man assented. They next proceeded, by desire
of the old Mr. Stevens, to send for Mr. GEACH, a conveyancer, who then
lived in Bodmin, but had since removed to Liskeard. Mr. Geach arrived
about ten o'clock on Monday morning, when written instructions were
handed to him by the daughter Jane, and at the same time a will was
given to him which was the will of a person called Stevens, at Brixham,
and which the old Mr. Stevens had in his house. This will contained a
clause to prevent litigation, and the old man had wished to have a
similar clause inserted in his own will. Mr. Geach went into the sick
man's room, who immediately knew him, and expressed his satisfaction at
seeing him. Mr. Geach told him about the litigation clause and read
over to him the instructions he had received for the will, asking him
after each provision whether it was his will and desire that such
should be inserted. He received such an answer as left no doubt on his
mind that the man perfectly understood the whole; and when he came to
read the GBP25 legacies to the two Geakes, the old man said he did not
wish to have anything inserted in his will that he knew nothing about,
showing that his mind at the time was clearly right. The sons, John
and William, were named as executors, and also Mr. PETHYBRIDGE, the
manager of the East Cornwall Bank at Bodmin; and when Mr. Geach read
those names, Mr. Stevens said he wished Mr. Pethybridge to be a
trustee, because he had always known him to be a very trustworthy man.
Mr. Pethybridge, however, and Mr. Oliver, who was afterwards named,
declined to be trustees, and Mr. FREDERICK CHAPPLE consented to act.
Mr. Geach withdrew for the purpose of making the will conformable to
the instructions, and said he would do it in a hurry, but the old man
said he did not think himself in extremity, and he was to do it
carefully. While Mr. Geach was in the house Mr. WARD called, but as
Mr. Stevens was engaged about the will, he was desired to call at
another time. After this the old man fell into a deep sleep, and
between one and two o'clock Mr. Ward came again to the house, and
walked directly into the sick man's room, calling out loudly, "Well,
Mr. Stevens, how are you to day?" Now it was a constitutional
peculiarity of the man that if roused suddenly out of sleep, he was
some time before he could collect himself; and he had a particular
dislike to being aroused in this way, as the effect was to produce in
him great palpitation of the heart. On Mr. Ward speaking to him, he
looked up and muttered something which was unintelligible. Mr. Ward
felt that his pulse was very high, and intimated to his daughter that
he was weaker than when he saw him before. Mr. Ward was not there
above two or three minutes, and after he left, having come to himself,
the old man reprimanded his daughter Jane, for allowing Mr. Ward to
come in in that way; he said he would not have been hurried in that way
on any account. After this a man called MARSHALL, a carpenter, with
whom the testator was friendly, was sent for to be a witness to the
will, Mr. Geach having gone to his office to prepare it. When Marshall
came, the old man immediately recognised him, asked him how he and his
wife were and the little fellow, meaning Marshall's son, of whom he was
fond. They had some conversation, and about half-past three on the
same day (Monday) Mr. Geach arrived, bringing the will with him. While
he was preparing it at his office, he had received a communication
through one of the young Geakes, and fearing Mr. Stevens's increasing
illness, he made the more haste about it. He had not put in the
legacies to the young Geakes, because Mr. Stevens had objected to it,
but on his daughter Jane speaking to him, and telling him of Mrs.
Geake's condition, she being a widow, the old man gave his consent to
the insertion of the two legacies, and said they should be paid in
twelve months. Mr. Geach having made the insertion, went into the room
with the will, and found Mr. Stevens awake and perfectly sensible. He
read the will over to him, and when he had read about three parts of it
he heard Mr. Stevens breathe loudly. He looked at him, and his
daughter Jane said "Mr. Geach, you can read on, father hears you." She
knew her father's habit was sometimes to sigh loudly when any matter
affected him. After the will had been all read to him, John Marshall
was called in to witness it, and Mr. Geach told him to observe the
state of Mr. Steven's mind. A pen was then put into Mr. Stevens's hand
to sign the will, but his hand being unsteady, Mr. Geach put his hand
on the old man's wrist to steady it, and the testator then made his
mark in four places in his usual manner, the mark being a peculiar one
in the form of a gallows. As was before stated, he was illiterate; he
could write his name but badly, and generally made his mark instead.
After he had thus signed the will, Mr. Geach called on him to make the
usual declaration in publishing it, which he did and repeated after Mr.
Geach the words which he uttered. He was then asked what should be
done with the will; he said he had no suspicion of anybody, and it
could be altered if he recovered. Mr. Geach and Mr. Marshall signed
the will as witnesses, and after Mr. Geach had left, the testator spoke
to Marshall about making his coffin. It was a singular characteristic
of the old man, that [for some?] for some years before, he had
purchased some oak [timber?] which he had cut up into four-inch planks
to make his coffin and he had taken a fancy to keep this oak in his
back premises. He had many times spoken to Marshall about making his
coffin, and on this Monday (when the will was made) he talked to
Marshall about cutting the oak into three-inch planks, and about having
the grave sunk deeper that he might be buried side by side with his
wife. When these parties had left, Miss Roscorla entered the room, and
conversed with the old man on spiritual subjects; she read the
scriptures, prayed with him, and endeavoured to comfort him. He
appeared to perfectly understand her, and in reply to her inquiry said
he had hopes of heaven. After she left he fell asleep about six
o'clock in the evening and slept until twelve, when he awoke much
altered in appearance and evidently sinking. But still the man's mind
was alive; he was aware of his condition, prayed earnestly, spoke of
his deceased wife, and expressed a hope of seeing her again. His
daughter Jane was naturally affected by his references to her mother,
and she repeated some words of a religious purport which the deceased
woman had uttered on her death-bed. He took them up when she had only
partially repeated them, and completed the sentence in the very words
his deceased wife had uttered. On Tuesday morning he continued to get
worse from hour to hour, but was generally sensible, and he died on
Wednesday afternoon at the age of seventy-six. These were the
circumstances, the conversations and conduct of the deceased testator,
from which the jury would have to judge of the validity of the will in
question. The freehold property of the deceased was worth about
GBP4,516. 15s., and the personal property about GBP2,159, making
altogether GBP6,675. He left by his will the bulk of his real estate
to Nicholas, amounting to GBP3,391. To Jane he left the house called
John Broad's house, worth GBP195; to Mrs. Geake he bequeathed two
houses of which he had the reversion in fee, subject to two lives,
worth about GBP120. In the GBP4,516 freehold property was included
Tredenham estate, worth GBP810 as leasehold; and out of the personal
estate of GBP2,159 there were sums to be paid amounting to GBP1,169,
after which the residue was to be divided amongst Mrs. Geake, Jane,
Joseph William and to John, if he gave up the leasehold fields worth
nearly $400, so that the residue would give about GBP250 to each. Mr.
Cockburn then called as witnesses George Geach, conveyancer, John
Marshall, carpenter, and Jane Stevens, daughter of Nicholas Stevens.
These witnesses deposed to the circumstances already stated, as well as
to other minute particulars; and they considered the testator to have
had the proper use of his understanding and reason at the time the will
was made. Each of the witnesses was subjected to a long and rigorous
cross-examination by Mr. Crowder; the last witness, Miss Jane Stevens
spoke in the witness-box upwards of seven hours. The court rose at
nine o'clock.
Friday, March 30 - STEVENS v. STEVENS - The trial was resumed this
morning at nine o'clock, when there were examined on the part of the
plaintiff, Mrs. Ann Geake, Charles Geake, and Miss Ann Roscorla. The
last witness stated that when she visited the old Mr. Stevens for
religious purposes, he named Redruth and Falmouth, and some other place
as localities where his children lived who had left him, and he said he
would "cut them off." He said they did not care anything about their
old father, he might die in the Union for what they cared. In
cross-examination Mr. Crowder asked her whether old Mr. Stevens had not
told her he had been robbed, and whether she did not afterwards say he
had been talking "quite out." The witness replied that she did not say
so, for she considered that his talking about losing his money was a
mistake, and was a suggestion of the devil. Mr. Crowder - But how can
the devil bring people to make a mistake? Witness - I don't know how
he works on our minds, you know he worked on our mother Eve.
(Laughter). Mr. Crowder - I am sure I don't intend to talk in a
profane manner, but do you think he made a mistake. Witness - What do
you mean the devil? (Loud Laughter). Mr. Crowder - No, but when Mr.
Stevens spoke about the sovereign, don't you think he was under a
delusion? Witness - He was deceived by the devil as you and I have
been many times. (Renewed laughter, in which the Judge and counsel
joined). The witness said she had often seen with sick people that
when any one attempted to turn their attention to good, the devil would
put other things into their minds. Mr. Stevens having said he knew
when she was converted. Mr. Crowder asked (with the view of eliciting
whether the old man had shown any aberration of intellect) if she had
told him when that took place, or if she knew the time herself?
Witness - Yes, twenty-nine years ago, the 21st of next September, God
converted my soul. Mr. Crowder - What time of day was it? Witness
said she did not tell him the date, but he said it was the old Stephens
who was hung so many years ago that he thought was an instrument of her
conversion. She was talking to him about being born again, and he said
he did not think that one out of seven hundred had it so clear as she
had. She did not think that his mind was out.
RICHARD BURROW, a cooper, RICHARD BRAY, town-clerk of Bodmin, JONATHAN
MEGGAR[?], blacksmith, WILLIAM HARREY[?], ROBERT MULLIS, butcher,
BARTHOLOMEW DINGLE, master mason, RICHARD RICH, currier, EDWARD
OLIVER[?] master carpenter, and JOHN VEALE ROWE, butcher, were
[determined??] They gave evidence of the old Mr. Stevens having
retained his faculties to a late period of his life when they had seen
him, and that on occasions he had expressed his intention of taking
care of Nicholas and Jane, his children who lived at home with him.
The witness Dingle said he spoke on one occasion of his son William
having struck him on the hand with a whip or stick, and said it should
be a dear cut for him, the worst day's work he ever did, and that he
was not the sort of man to forget it. This closed the evidence for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Crowder addressed the jury for the defendant. He
said defendant was under a disadvantage in the present action, inasmuch
as his case would make a greater impression if as heir-at-law he
appeared as plaintiff in the cause. A great deal of unnecessary
evidence had been given, and yet evidence of a certain kind had been
omitted, which must excite astonishment in the minds of the jury. In
the whole course of his experience he could not recollect a case of a
disputed will, when that will was alleged to have been made by a sick
man within two days of his death, the body at the time gradually
weakening, and the medical man of the family being present within a few
hours before, and two hours after the making of the will, without that
medical man being called before the jury. But the reason was, that if
called he would have distinctly negatived the other evidence given on
the part of the plaintiff; he would have shown that the testator was
totally unfit to make a will at the time he was stated to have made it.
He then cited cases to show that a man must be proved to have a sound
disposing mind and memory in order to make a valid will, that it was
not sufficient to prove he was not absolutely insane, or was able to
answer questions on familiar subjects. He appeared on the part of John
Stevens, the eldest son, who as heir-at-law had a prima facie title to
his father's landed property, and the onus lay on the other side to
establish a will for setting aside that title. He then proceeded to
remark on the evidence as deposed to by plaintiff's witnesses. It was
said that the old man had been greatly aggrieved by John's misconduct,
and that William had had a quarrel with his father in 1843. But he
should prove that at the time of the old man's death, the sons were on
good terms with him; the vague declarations made at pot-houses so long
ago, as some of the witnesses had stated, were of the least possible
weight as evidence. No sufficient reason could be shown for the old
Stevens's disposition of the property in the way this will had disposed
of it; but it was all plainly a fabrication, concocted and manufactured
by the parties interested. Miss Jane Stevens had been called on the
other side, and she was as cunning a witness as ever he saw in the box;
she fenced with him on every question, but he should be able to
contradict her flatly by evidence he should produce. He had also a
letter written during the old man's illness, and which must clearly
show the jury that he was then in an unfit state of mind to dispose of
his property by will. This letter was written by young Charles Geake
(Mrs. Geake's son) to his uncle William:- "Dear Uncle, - Since you
left, grandfather has been very ill, he says it is the gout in the
head. His face is swelled very much, so that he is not able to see
sometimes, and he has been very weak. We received your letter this
morning. If grandfather gets worse, we can write you again at
Barnstaple. We cannot persuade grandfather to have a doctor; Aunt
Stevens (Jane) thinks he is dangerous."
Now upon this letter, (said Mr. Crowder) Nicholas writes a bit, and
also Jane Stevens. He asked Jane, on her cross-examination, - on your
oath do you not believe your father was out of his mind so early as the
16th of September? And she replied, "I never said so, I never thought
so, nor did Nicholas, and I do not believe the Nicholas ever said so."
Now Nicholas writes on this letter as follows:- "Dear Brother, - It is
my wish, and also your wife's and Jane's, that you come home
immediately, as father is very dangerously ill, to see about different
things. His face and head are quite all over like a blister, and
getting further down his neck, his breath quick and short. I think he
cannot continue long. His face is swollen dreadfully. We want you to
get him to have a doctor, and see about the will, or we are all done.
He is quite out of his mind." This letter was written by the plaintiff
in the present action, who now sought to establish the validity of the
will. It was sent from Bodmin, on the 16th of September, on a
Saturday; and early on Monday, less than forty-eight hours afterwards,
the will was made. If he had not been prevented by the adroitness of
Miss Jane Stevens, when under examination from putting in that letter,
he believed it would have been unnecessary for him to have troubled the
jury with any further evidence. And this letter was written to
William, the man who was said to have quarrelled with his father! The
jury would further see by the letter that they did not want John, the
heir-at-law, to know anything about his father's illness. This was the
next sentence:- "You can persuade him to have the doctor, and talk to
him about different things; you well know he will not hearken to us.
Be sure don't say to John, or Daniel (William's man) or any body, any
thing about very ill, or we shall soon have a house-full. We will send
to Redruth about it when they are gone.
Mr. Crowder continued - John and Joseph, who lived in Redruth, were
going to Barnstaple fair, which took place on the 19th of September.
William had gone to Barnstaple and he is desired not to tell John and
Joseph of the old man's illness; therefore when he died on the 20th of
September, John did not hear of it till two or three days afterwards.
Now to this letter written by Nicholas Stevens, Miss Jane Stevens added
the following postscript:- "He is generally dozing and talking in his
sleep." Now after this, could they believe what Jane said, that
neither she nor Nicholas uttered a word about his being out of his
mind, and that they had no idea of being "done" if the will was not
made? This letter did not reach William in time, so that he did not
arrive at Bodmin till the 22nd, his father having died on the 20th.
From what William heard, he knew that the will had been concocted; he
proceeded to make inquiries, and was told what would be stated in
evidence. Mr. Crowder next remarked on discrepancies in the statements
of the witnesses, and said it was a suspicious circumstance that the
instructions for the will were not taken down in the old man's
presence, but taken verbally by Nicholas, and written down in the next
room by Jane, because she saw he was nervous. He also remarked on the
suspicious nature of the bequests, being principally to the parties who
were present. The greatest discrepancy, however, was between the will
itself and the instructions received. In the will were these words:-
"I devise all that dwelling-house and premises, with appurtenances,
situate in Turf-street, in the borough of Bodmin, in the occupation of
John Broad, unto my daughter Jane Stevens, her heirs and assigns for
ever." The discrepancy was that in the will this house was devised in
fee, whereas in the instructions according to Mr. Geach, the old man
said it should be "for her natural life." When therefore Mr. Geach
inserted it in the will in fee, and read over that provision to the old
man, it showed that he was not in a fit state to make a will, that his
mind was not alive, and that he did not understand what was read to
him, because he did not detect the difference between the will and the
instructions he had given. It was not pretended that anything escaped
the old man during the reading of the will but a sigh, so that there
was no evidence that he had allowed the alteration to be made. He also
remarked on the fact as being of a suspicious nature that Marshall
should be sent for from Lanivet to witness the will, while there were
so many neighbours at hand. He next endeavoured to throw imputations
on the conduct of Mr. Geach, and remarked on the omission of Nicholas
and Jane Stevens to call in Mr. Ward at the time the will was made, in
order that the old man's state of mind might have been judged of by a
competent person. Only an hour and a half before the will was
executed, Mr. Ward called and saw the patient was in a perfectly
hopeless state and yet they did not ask him to remain to see the will
completed. Marshall, the attesting witness, said his attention was
called to Mr. Stevens's state of mind by Mr. Geach and yet it appears
they thought it unnecessary to have the doctor to judge of the same.
No doubt Mrs. Geake, as well as the others present, was looking after
her own interests, and though she was said to have been a favourite
with her father, he could show that she had quarrelled with him. Jane
Stevens, in her evidence, could state nothing of the probable
consequences of the disease, but he should produce medical evidence to
show that the disease had struck to the brain, and rendered the
testator incapable of making a will; his repeating the usual words
after Mr. Geach on the publication of the will, did not show him to be
in the state of mind required by law on the making of that instrument.
Miss Roscorla stated that the old man said on the 14th, he would cut
off those (his children) living at Falmouth and Redruth; but being on
good terms with those children, such a saying by the old man could only
show a temporary aberration of mind. And when the old Mr. Stevens
spoke of the robbery, he (Mr. Crowder) thought it more likely to have
been a mental delusion than (as was considered by Miss Roscorla) an
instigation of the devil. If the instrument before them was not the
testator's will, by reason of his attention not having been properly
called to it at the time, or on account of the man's mind being
incapable, in either case the defendant was entitled to their verdict.
The court rose about seven o'clock.
Saturday, March 31. - STEVENS v. STEVENS - The court sat this
morning at half-past eight, and the first witness called on the part of
defendant was Mrs. Mary Stevens, wife of William Stevens, who deposed
that she and her husband were on good terms with old Mr. Stevens. She
spoke of his having accused Mrs. Geake's children of robbing him during
his illness, and deposed to hearing him use incoherent language on the
Thursday preceding his death, and that Jane Stevens said, "he is
talking quite out". She described his appearance on Saturday and
Sunday, and said he mistook Miss Roscorla for Miss SOWDEN; also that
Mr. Ward said on Sunday that his pulse was going at a tremendous rate,
that he was very ill and delirious. Mr. Ward talked to him about
medicine, and he said "brandy, brandy." On Sunday evening Miss Stevens
asked witness was not Nicholas a great stupid not to see about making a
will. After it was made, witness said "I believe, after all, what you
have done will be of no use," to which Mrs. Geake replied, "well, I
don't know." Miss Stevens said, "Geach, when reading the will looked
very frightened, and read it through very fast; she thought her father
would have died before he had read it." (This statement about Mr.
Geach, Miss Jane Stevens firmly denied on her cross-examination).
After Mr. Geach had received the instructions, and left the house to
prepare the will, Mrs. Geake expressed her satisfaction, on which
Nicholas said, "stop, you fool, let us see it finished first." (This
was also denied by the witnesses for plaintiff). The witness further
said that Mr. Stevens was unconscious and in a stupor when the will was
made; she did not recollect telling Mr. GROSE on the Tuesday that he
was sensible; nor did she recollect telling the two Mr. VERCOES that
her father-in-law had died quite happy and made a will. She and her
children were cautioned (by Miss Jane more particularly) as to what
they said about their grandfather's illness.
William Stevens, brother of plaintiff and defendant, and living at
Bodmin, deposed that himself and his brother John were on the best of
terms with their father, but Mrs. Geake and her children were scarcely
allowed to come into his presence. After returning from Barnstaple
fair, and hearing that his father was dead, he went to his father's
house, where he saw Nicholas, and his sisters, Jane, Mrs. Trethowan,
and Mrs. Geake. He asked when father was taken ill, and they said he
had drunk cider with a person on the day he had left. He afterwards
asked when father first said anything about making a will, on which
Nicholas said, father told them on Sunday evening to get a sheet of
paper against the morning, to come in and sit down, take time, consider
the thing over, and make the will. Witness stated some conversation
about the legacy, to himself, and said he afterwards saw Nicholas in
the stable. He said to him, "I am given to understand the will was not
made as you represented to me." "No" he said, "not exactly." I said,
"and how was that?" He replied, "father was too far gone to say
anything against the Monday morning." "Too far gone" I said, "then how
did you manage it?" He said "I and my sister Jane, and Mrs. Geake made
out a copy of a will, and sent for Mr. Geach to make it into a will."
"Well," I said, "what do you mean by too far gone?" "Why," he said,
"against the Monday morning father was in a stupor and unconscious, and
knew nothing that was going on." I then asked how did Mr. Geach manage
about reading the will to my father? He said, "Geach read the will as
fast as he could for his life, for they thought he would have died
before the will was signed." I said, "I am certain the family will not
stand that, Nicholas." "They are bound to it," he said. Witness said
he was on very good terms with his brother Nicholas before this time.
He further deposed to having read the letter (which Mr. Crowder had put
in) when several of the family were present, and that Jane tried on two
occasions to snatch it from him. After he had read the letter,
Nicholas offered to give him two stables and a dwelling house on
Market-street in addition to what was put down on the will. Witness
also produced an estimate of his father's property, which materially
differed from what had been previously submitted by Mr. Cockburn. He
estimated the landed and leasehold property devised to Nicholas at
GBP4661, whilst Tredenham estate, which his father had given him some
years ago, was worth only GBP300[?] and John's four fields were only
worth GBP300 at the most. The personal property, which by the will was
to be divided amongst all the children, would in fact only be about
half his father's debts, there being sums due to him and his brothers.
The medical evidence was then produced. Mr. Ward said he was a member
of the College of Surgeons, and had been a medical practitioner at
Bodmin for twenty-five years. He was called to see Mr. Stevens about
seven o'clock on the evening the 17th of September. Mr. Stevens
recognised him, and he made a medical inspection of the patient. He
then described the symptoms of the disease, who he said was erysipelas,
and in his opinion there had been an extension of the disease to the
brain. For the first moment or two, when he saw Mr. Stevens, he was
delirious, and made use of several incoherent expressions. He
afterwards refused to take medicine. When he left the room he told
Miss Jane Stevens, that he considered her father to be in the utmost
peril, and that he had no hope of his restoration. He told her that
Mr. Stevens was in a state of delirium, and Miss Jane Stevens replied
that he had been talking out in his sleep and that he was generally in
a very confused state when first aroused. He answered her that that
might be, and in his opinion the delirium under which Mr. Stevens
laboured was the effect of the disease. He saw him again on Monday
between one and two o'clock when he spoke to him and asked him how he
was; he did not know that Mr. Stevens answered, or if he did, it was
only by muttering out something he could not understand. As he did not
at first reply, he spoke to him in a louder tone of voice in the hope
that being aroused he would be enabled to answer. He was considerably
worse in every respect than when he had seen him before. From the time
he had seen him in on the Sunday at seven in the evening, and his
condition at two o'clock on Monday, when he next saw him, he considered
it was highly improbable that he could have been in a fit state to
dispose of his property by will at ten or eleven o'clock on Monday
morning. On Tuesday morning between ten and eleven o'clock, when he
saw him for the last time, he was insensible and dying. He found him
to be much worse at two o'clock in the afternoon of Monday and that in
his opinion it was much more improbable that he could have made the
will after that time than before it. Mr. Crowder - Where there is that
pressure on the brain, or the morbid state of it which you have
described, may the patient answer common questions without having the
capacity to make a will? Mr. Ward - Certainly, where a powerful
stimulus is applied, such as speaking to the person in a loud voice,
and rousing him, he may then recognise persons and answer questions put
to him. Mr. Crowder - And would that take place with a pressure on the
brain which would incapacitate the patient from disposing of property
as a person of sound mine? Mr. Ward - In my professional opinion
certainly; and for this reason, that the duration of sanity, of
rational moments, would not be long enough for the calm exercise of
discretional power; but in the majority of cases the patient would very
rapidly pass back to the state of coma which previously existed.
The witness was cross-examined with considerable strictness by Mr.
Cockburn, who, among other questions, put the following:- You speak of
its being highly improbable that the patient was in a fit condition to
make a will on the Monday, am I to understand that it was impossible?
Mr. Ward - My medical opinion is that it was very highly improbable;
without any convincing proof to the contrary I should think it was
impossible; but I do not take upon myself to say it was impossible.
Dr. CHARLES BARHAM said he had been in practice as a physician, about
twenty years, and had held the office of senior physician of the Royal
Cornwall Infirmary for between eleven and twelve years. He was a
graduate of the University of Cambridge. Having heard the statements
given by Mr. Ward, and considering the symptoms, the evacuations, the
age and habit of the man, he thought it exceedingly improbable that Mr.
Stevens was in a fit state of mind to make a will between ten and
eleven o'clock on the Monday, as had been stated. It was quite
compatible with the symptoms described that a man should be able to
answer questions, casual ordinary questions, or to talk on ordinary
subjects with which he was familiar; but in his opinion it was
incompatible with those symptoms that he should exercise a sustained
effort of the understanding such as was implied in his exercising a
disposing power over a considerable property. He could not, however,
undertake to say that in this case there was an extension of erysipelas
to the brain. Dr. Bullmore, said he was a member of the University of
Dublin, and was in practice at Truro. He had been a medical
practitioner for twenty two years. He had attended to the statements
made to Mr. Ward, and in his opinion Mr. Stevens was decidedly not in a
fit state to dispose of his property by will between ten and eleven
o'clock on Monday, as had been stated, or at four o'clock on the same
day. He did not consider the effect arose from an extension of the
disease. He believed the erysipelas was a consequence of the
derangement of the digestive organs, that it was a local inflammation
of the skin. It went through its various stages in that part which
affected the head, and afterwards decided action was set up in the
brain. He agreed with Dr. Barham that the patient might be able to
answer questions such as they had heard about his coffin, and not be in
a condition to make his will. He came to this conclusion, not merely
from what Mr. Ward had stated, but also from the evidence of persons
who had been around the sick bed. Mr. Crowder then read the disputed
will, after which Mr. Cockburn addressed the jury for the plaintiff in
a brilliant and powerful speech of about four hours' duration. He
quite agreed that the question to be determined was not whether the man
was capable of answering affirmatively or negatively to questions put
to him, but that the real matter to be considered was whether the man
had a disposing capacity at the time he executed his will. But then
they must not be misled by high sounding words, and must not suppose
that a disposing capacity presupposes any remarkable vigour of mind
such as would enable a man to solve a problem in Euclid, or to go
through a train of metaphysical reasoning. The simple questions was
did the man know what he was about at the time? - did he know he was
making a disposition of his property, and of what that property
consisted? - did he know who had a claim on his affections, and for
whom it would be his duty to make the necessary provisions? He next
stated the law as applicable to the question, and then called attention
to the facts of the case, contending that the provisions of the will
accorded with what might have been expected under the circumstances.
Some of the witnesses he had brought before them he admitted were open
to observation as being interested parties, but if the facts they had
deposed to were not true, they must have been guilty of one of the most
outrageous conspiracies ever yet entered into for obtaining a
fraudulent fabricated statement, and to that they must have now added
the most wilful and deliberate perjury ever uttered in a Court of
justice. But if some of the plaintiff's witnesses were open to
observation, - if Jane Stevens was interested in this matter, she was
not more so than William Stevens, she was not more so than Mrs. William
Stevens. But there was a witness for the plaintiff on whom it was
impossible that a moment's suspicion could rest, - he alluded to Miss
Roscorla, she had no earthly interest in this matter. The letter on
which so much reliance had been placed was written on Thursday the 14th
of September, although sent on the Saturday, and Miss Roscorla's
evidence went to show that Mr. Stevens was rational on the Friday, also
on the day when the will was made, and subsequently, and that he
carried on with her a sustained conversation on religion, which was one
of the most intricate subjects of human inquiry. No doubt the
discharges that had taken place had relieved the patient's system, and
given him increased calmness of mind. He then contended that the
meaning of the letter put in by Mr. Crowder had been misapprehended;
and with regard to the evidence for plaintiff he submitted that
examination showed that the story on the part of his witnesses and the
will had not been fabricated. He vindicated Mr. Geach from the
imputations that had been cast on him; and denounced those imputations
in the strongest terms. Mr. Geach, he said, was a man of the highest
character, insomuch that although he had lived in Bodmin twenty years,
the opposing parties were unable to bring one act of his life in
support of their imputations. With regard to the difference between
the will and the instructions in one particular, he said his learned
friend on the other side had prevented the explanation of that
circumstance by objecting to receive in evidence a communication to Mr.
Geach respecting the matter. He then proceeded to answer other points
urged by Mr. Crowder, and to throw discredit on the statements of the
witnesses Mrs. Mary Stevens, and Mr. William Stevens. And in the
course of his speech he excited roars of laughter by his ridicule of
medical testimony in cases like the present. He said the doctors might
do very well in talking about a man's inside, but in regard to any
questions of intellectual capacity, they could give no better evidence
than any other person. The jury must not be imposed on by
high-sounding words and scientific jargon; they were not to judge of a
man's sanity by the redness of his face, by being told of subsultus,
justitation, comatose state, and such things, but by his conversation
and conduct as deposed to by credible witnesses. It would however, be
impossible to do justice to this eloquent speech of the learned
counsel, except by a long report, for which we cannot afford space
after our statement has already extended to so great a length. The
learned Judge then summed up, first pointing out the law as applicable
to the case. It was necessary, he said, that the testator should have
had a sound disposing mind, rendering him capable of disposing of his
property with understanding and reason. And, in the words of the Hon.
THOMAS ERSKINE, "to constitute a sound disposing mind, a testator must
not only be able to understand that he has by his will given his
property to the object of his regard, but he must also have capacity to
comprehend the extent of his property, and the nature of the claims of
others who by his will he is excluding from participation in that
property." A testator's mind might be weakened or deteriorated by
weakness or old age, and still he might retain a capacity to dispose of
his property; and when a man was affected by delirium, or even by
insanity, if during the cessation or intermission of the disorder, he
did a testamentary act, such testamentary act would be valid. He then
read and commented on the evidence at great length, and throwing aside
the evidence of the Stevens's family, as interested parties, he
directed attention to the testimony of Mr. Geach, Mr. Marshall, and
Miss Roscorla on the part of the plaintiff, as against the medical
testimony, and the letter written to William Stevens, and produced by
Mr. Crowder on the part of defendant.
The jury retired to consider their verdict at eleven o'clock on
Saturday night, and after an hour's deliberation, returned a verdict
for the plaintiff, thus affirming the validity of the will. With this
cause, which lasted three days, the business of the assizes terminated,
and Mr. Justice WILLIAMS left Bodmin for Taunton at five o'clock on
Sunday morning.
13 April 1849, Friday
PARISH OF GERRANS - A contested election for a Guardian for the
parish of Gerrans took place between Mr. E. H. HILL and Mr. C. FERRIL,
at the Board Room, Truro, last week. Mr. Hill having had much
experience in the guardianship for this parish, is considered a very
able person for the office. The number of votes for Mr. Hill was 57,
and for Mr. Ferril, 21; majority for Mr. Hill 36.
ST AUSTELL - THE GENERAL STATE OF THE TOWN AND DISTRICT - This very
extensive parish represents within itself a portion of most, if not
all, our principal industrial county interests, mining and mineral,
agricultural and commercial, maritime and manufacturing (principally
foundries). The present population range is about twelve thousand, and
its parish valuation rental about GBP23,000 per annum. The aggregate
of the different parish rates collected in the past years was between
GBP5,000 and GBP6,000, being an increase of about fifty per cent. since
the introduction of the new poor law into this district. This enormous
increase is now felt as an intolerable burden by many of the
rate-payers, and a rapid and serious depreciation in the sale of all
[.....?] property has been the consequent result. The new [.....?] has
most signally failed in this locality in its paramount professed object
- a reduction of parochial expenditure - and the system of "union and
centralisation" works wretchedly, from the great expense of its
complicated machinery in costly [...cions,?] staff of other heavy
burdens the parish of St. Austell has been saddled with a church-rate
within the last two years. Attempts were made by some of the
well-disposed parishioners to substitute a voluntary assessment,
instead of a direct rate. This, however, was contemptuously rejected
by the church party. The vast majority of the inhabitants of the
parish are dissenters, and from twenty to thirty places of religious
worship apart from the establishment are supported by the various
Christian sects. The enforcement of the payment of church-rates leads,
in this parish as in many other parts of the kingdom, to scenes alike
disgraceful to our common Christianity and to the legislation of the
nineteenth century. We deeply regret to state that, owing to
discrepancy and confusion in the accounts of the Actuary of the "East
Powder Savings Bank," centralized at St. Austell, its operations have
lately been suspended, at least in respect to further receipts or
deposits. We fear that this event will cause serious inconvenience if
not positive distress to many of its numerous depositors. From the high
character and principle, however, of some of the trustees, we have no
doubt but that, after a suitable time, the affairs of this institution
will be satisfactorily arranged. But confidence in these useful and
excellent institutions is now most seriously impaired amongst the
industrial and economical masses of this densely-populated district.
The exposures which have lately taken place in this country and Ireland
of the loose and irregular system of management of many of these
concerns, will compel the government to pass more stringent laws for
their better security and management. It is a singular and by no
means creditable fact connected with the town of St. Austell, that no
institution, having for its object the social, intellectual, and
physical welfare of the community, has been able to maintain its
standing in the place, but ultimately sinks or breaks down, and such
has been the case with its Savings Bank, Literary Institution, Public
Library and Reading Room, and Farmers' Club. We hope its newly formed
Cottage Gardening Society may meet with better and more lasting success.
APOTHECARIES' HALL - Mr. JOHN WAKEM, son of Mr. Wakem, of Lambessow,
near Truro, passed his examination at the Apothecaries' Hall, and
received his certificate on the 6th instant. Mr. Wakem had the
shortest examination of any who appeared and was complimented by the
court who said he had passed with the greatest credit and had done
honour to the college to which he belonged. Mr. Wakem was a pupil of
Dr. Bullmore, of Truro.
WAR MEDALS - Captain MARRETT, R.N., of Penzance, has received a medal
with four clasps, for the capture of the "Reunion" by the "Crescent"
frigate, the battle of L'Orient, the battle of St. Vincent, and the
battle of the Nile. We have had the pleasure of seeing a naval medal,
which has recently been received by Admiral Tancock of Truro. The
obverse has a representation of Britannia seated on a sea horse, and
bearing a trident and laurel branch; on the reverse is a medallion
portrait of the Queen, with the motto, Victoria Regina, 1848. The
medal is pendant from a ribbon of white and navy blue, and is
surmounted by five clasps which bear the subjoined inscriptions
recording actions in which the gallant admiral was engaged:- Gut of
Gibraltar, 12th of July, 1801; Nile; St. Vincent, 23rd of June, 1795;
and Crescent, 20th of October, 1793.
FALMOUTH - The German and Danish merchants, being fearful that
inconvenience or loss might arise to them by allowing their vessels to
proceed up channel in consequence of the threatening aspect of affairs
between Denmark and Germany, have issued orders in several cases, to
prevent their vessels proceeding up channel, and to wait at Falmouth
for further instructions.
The "Seagull" packet, Lieutenant SMALLS, arrived on Sunday last, with
mails from Rio de Janeiro, whence she sailed on the 29th of February.
Freight about GBP20,000, of which GBP16,000 is for the St. John del Rey
Mining Company.
PORT OF PENZANCE - On Tuesday last, the Netherland ship "Johannes
Cornelius," Capt. KABSHOECK, from Batavia, for Rotterdam, arrived at
Penzance, with loss of foremast and bowsprit, and other damages,
consequent on having been in contact, on the 23rd of March, with a
large ship, name unknown. The "Johannes Cornelius" has a jury-foremast
and bowsprit well secured and rigged, and will proceed on her voyage.
Mr. PEARCE, the consul, has sent off at the master's request a supply
of fresh provisions by H. M. R. C. "Sylvia," Mr. FORWARD.
HELSTON QUARTER SESSIONS - These sessions were held on Monday last,
before C. D. BEVAN, Esq., Recorder, and the borough magistrates. There
was only one case for trial. JAMES JEFFERY and WILLIAM THOMAS were
indicted for having stolen a gun on the 13th of January, from Mr.
THOMAS MARSHALL DAVIS, of the Helston Grammar School. It appeared from
the evidence that Mr. Davis had lent the gun to Mr. GEORGE ROGERS, son
of Mr. T. Rogers, solicitor, who used it on the 12th of January, and on
his return put it into the hayloft. On going for the gun on the 14th,
he found it had been stolen, and nothing was heard of it for nearly two
months, when it was found that the boys, Jeffery and Thomas, had sold
it to a person called CHARLES, for 4s., and it was subsequently offered
to another person, who saw that it was the gun which had been stolen.
The prosecution was conducted by Mr. Rogers jun., and the defence by
Mr. FORFAR. The jury after about half an hour's deliberation, returned
a verdict of guilty, and the Recorder sentenced the boys to one month's
imprisonment each, and to be once privately whipped.
HELSTON COUNTY COURT - At this court, held on Monday last, thirteen
cases were entered for trial, two of which had been adjourned from the
preceding court. The case of C. H. T. HAWKINS, Esq., v. EDWARD CARTER
was tried before a jury, and occupied the court several hours.
Plaintiff sought to recover GBP8 from the defendant for taking down and
carrying away the roof, doors, and partitions of a linhay, which was
rope-thatched, and also a dry stone hedge from a small tenement in Ruan
Minor. Mr. CHILCOTT, of Truro, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr.
PLOMER, for the defendant. The tenancy and removal of the property was
not denied by the defendant, but it was contended that according to the
weight of evidence adduced on the point, the linhay was not affixed to
the soil in such a manner as to bar the defendant's right to remove it;
and that if it could be proved to be a fixture belonging to the
landlord, the real value of what had been removed was very considerably
less than the sum which plaintiff's witnesses had stated was requisite
in order to restore it to its former condition. Witnesses on both
sides were called, and the Judge having summed up, the jury without
hesitation returned a verdict for the defendant.
Another case BEAGLEHOLE v. SAMPSON, also occupied the court a
considerable time. Plaintiff sued the defendant in damages for GBP15,
for an illegal distress, and the judge after hearing the witnesses on
both sides (fourteen in number) delivered judgment for plaintiff, with
nominal damages of one shilling. Mr. TYACKE, appeared for the
plaintiff; and Mr. HILL and Mr. FORFAR, for the defendant. One of the
witnesses for the defence, is son of defendant, excited a great deal of
merriment, by the manner in which he gave evidence; he endeavoured to
excuse himself from answering one of the questions put to him by saying
"he could not speak, for the candle was near him, and he could not see
to do so."
PENZANCE - At this court, on Tuesday last, the case of RODD v.
CHARLES LADNER, executor of WILLIAM LADNER, was tried. This was an
action for recovery of a bill of costs of GBP17 due from defendant as
the acting executor under the will of his father. Defendant pleaded
that he had no assets to discharge the claim, and the question to be
tried was whether the deceased died insolvent. Mr. DARKE appeared for
the plaintiff, and Mr. [H......M?] for the defendant. After the case
had occupied a long time, a verdict was given for the amount claimed?
The case of POLLARD v. MILLETT was an action brought by a livery
stable-keeper against the Mayor of Penzance for an alleged assault and
false imprisonment. The plaintiff was nonsuited.
UTTERING COUNTERFEIT COIN - On Thursday, the 5th instant, MARY
ROBINSON alias MARY STEERS, was apprehended at Penzance, on a charge of
having passed a counterfeit half-crown. Three bad sixpences were found
on her, and she was remanded in order to give time to communicate with
the mint.
FIRE - On Saturday last, a fire broke out in the house of JOSEPH
SEMMENS, a labourer, living at Woodstock, in St. Hilary. The man, who
is said to be very penurious had a considerable sum of money in the
house, and after the fire had been subdued, he found the old kettle in
which the treasure was secreted, to the amount of between GBP200 and
GBP300, some of which had been melted by the heat. It was with much
difficulty that he was prevented from entering the house through the
flames.
FATAL MINE ACCIDENT - A man named THOMAS THRETHEWAY was killed at
Great Polgooth mine, on the 5th instant, by falling from a plat to a
depth of twenty fathoms. He has left a wife and seven children to
lament their loss.
CORONER'S INQUEST - The following inquest has been held before Mr. E.
T. CARLYON, deputy coroner. On Tuesday last, at the George and Dragon
Inn, Truro, before a respectable jury of fifteen, on the body of a
newly-born male infant, whose mother was ANN MENHEIR, of Bodrean Old
Lodge, in the parish of St. Clement. From Mr. Carlyon's address to the
jury, it appeared that reports prevailed in the neighbourhood that the
child's death had taken place under suspicious circumstances, the
mother (as was stated) having been previously heard to say, that she
should never have a living child again. Mr. ANDREW, of Bodrean,
hearing of these reports, wished to have the matter investigated, and
with that view wrote to the coroner. It was then determined to hold an
inquest, and Mr. R. T. Carlyon requested Mr. ANDREW, a surgeon to go
with him to see the child and to make a post mortem examination. The
inquiry was considered necessary to promote the ends of public justice,
or if the death were a natural one, it was but right to relieve the
woman from suspicion. The first witness sworn was ANN PEARCE, who
lives in the adjoining house to that of Ann Menheir. She stated that
she was called to Menheir's house on Monday morning about six o'clock.
The child was born alive before she came in, and she attended to what
was requisite with regard to it; she then observed that the head and
face were of an unnaturally blue colour. She left the house but
returned in about a quarter of an hour, and found the child still
alive. She again left the house about five minutes to make tea for the
mother, and after giving her the tea she looked at the child and saw it
was dead, on which the mother expressed her sorrow. In answer to the
jury, witness said Menheir had previously had three children, two of
whom are alive, and the other was an eight months' child. She seemed
to be very fond of the children who are living.
MARY SAWLE, wife of JOSEPH SAWLE, sexton of Ladock, and mother of Ann
Menheir, deposed that she was called by her daughter's husband to go
and see her on Monday morning, but the child was dead before she came.
The head and face of the infant were discoloured; her daughter had
never had any medical man at the birth of her other children, nor had
she in this instance. Mr. ANDREW, surgeon, deposed that he had
examined the child at Menheir's house, and found nothing but a slight
mark on the nose, which he attributed to the child having fallen on the
floor of the room when it was born. In every other respect it appeared
a healthy child, and without any external blemish. He observed a
little oozing of blood and mucus from the nostril, and he then
determined to have it taken to his surgery, and to make a post mortem
examination. On examining the chest, he found that the child had
breathed, and that the viscera were in a healthy state, also in the
abdomen the viscera were in a healthy state, and the bladder was
distended; in all probability had violence been used it would have been
empty. He next examined the brain to see if he could find any cause
for the blood oozing from the nose, but the skull was perfect, and had
not been penetrated by any instrument. He considered that the blood
and mucus has been partly swallowed during birth, which was often the
case. The head did not appear to be more congested than was natural in
a newly born infant, and the only cause of death which he could suggest
as the most probable were convulsions produced by irritation of the
cord, consequent with the manner in which it was tied. Mr. Andrew
attributed to this the purple appearance of the face and body of the
child, and gave some further explanations; had a medical man been in
attendance, in his opinion life would have been saved. It further
appeared that there had been no attempt at concealment by the mother,
and that when visited by Mrs. Andrew she did not seem to be greatly
excited. The jury returned as their verdict that the child died from
natural causes, at the same time expressing their opinion that if a
medical man, or an experienced person had been present at the birth,
the infant would have lived.
LINES - Written after leaving Mr. BULLER's funeral at Morval Church,
on Easter Tuesday. - "Why seek ye the living among the dead!"
He is not really dead, love cannot die,
Dead rather we; he lives, though yet awhile
We lose the soft inquiry of his smile,
His winning look of calm benighity:-
He lives, if ever there be memory
In good men's hears: the poor, the fatherless,
And widow, long his much-loved name will bless;
This is not death, but life begun; while we
Mid sin and darkness here must wander on,
Striving, as best we may, as others strove
Who fall, like leaves around us one by one.
His pilgrimage is past; with Saints above
His name is numbered, and his crown is won;
He lives, to die no more, with Him whose name is Love.
20 April 1849, Friday
NEW CHURCH AT DULOE - A district has been formed at Herodsfoot,
including a portion of the parish of Lanreath, and a portion of the
parish of Duloe. The Rev. R. SCOTT, the incumbent of Duloe, has
actively exerted himself to procure the necessary funds, in which he
had received aid from his neighbours as well as from persons at a
distance, who sympathize with him in his efforts. The appeal was also
responded to by both the Diocesan and General Church Building
Societies, the former contributing GBP70, and the latter GBP80, towards
the church. A suitable site having been procured close by the village
of Herodsfoot, and the necessary arrangements having been made, it had
been determined to lay the first stone some days since, but it was
postponed until Tuesday last, on account of the sudden death of the
late Mr. BULLER, of Morval, a benefactor to the building fund, and who
had engaged to perform the ceremony of laying the foundation-stone. On
Tuesday last, the ceremony was performed by his son, Mr. J. F. BULLER,
of Morval. Divine service having been celebrated in the parish church
of Duloe, the congregation proceeded to Herodsfoot, and on reaching the
gate of the proposed church-yard, a procession was formed, and headed
by a large number of clergymen, proceeded to the site of the new
church, repeating the 132nd Psalm. Several hundred persons were
congregated, and in the course of the service the stone, a large block
of granite, was lowered, and Mr. J. F. Buller assisted in adjusting it
to its bed. The service was conducted by the Rev. RICHARD BULLER, of
Lanreath, and the Rev. ROBERT SCOTT, of Duloe. The church will be
built by Mr. RUNDLE, of Tavistock, from a design by Mr. HAYWARD, of
Exeter, in the early English style. The church, which is to be called
"All Saints", will be fitted with sittings for one hundred and sixty,
the whole of which are to be free; and there are to be school-rooms
adjoining. The estimated cost of the edifice is GBP1,500, and an
endowment is promised as soon as it is built.
THE LANDRAKE PARISHIONERS AND THEIR MINISTER - The annual meeting of
the parishioners of the parish of Landrake took place in the vestry on
Monday week; it being called for confirming the appointment of
Churchwardens. Shortly after the time fixed on, the Rev. G. T.
SHARLAND entered the vestry room, and asked whether the chairman, Mr.
H. BLAKE, had been property elected. On being answered in the
affirmative, the rev. gentleman said they had better at once proceed to
business. Mr. Sharland said he was sorry to say there did not appear to
be a better feeling now than last year, which he very much regretted.
The Chairman - You can expect no other, Mr. Sharland, whilst you
continue to do everything in your power in opposition to the
parishioners. Mr. Sharland - I can do no other; you drove me in a
corner and challenged my right, which I knew I could establish. Mr. R.
O'DOGHERTY - You contend for a right on the supposition that the parish
will not think it worth their while to go to law about it; for my part
I should not have the least objection to try the right. Mr. Sharland -
I shall proceed at once, and nominate and elect WILLIAM DYER, as my
Churchwarden for the year ensuing. The Chairman - We have nothing to
do with your appointment; we do not acknowledge your right to do
anything of the sort. Mr. Sharland - I do not wish you to do so; you
will acknowledge I have nominated William Dyer at this vestry. I
expected you would keep the parish books from me; I have, therefore,
made my appointment on this paper, which, perhaps, Mr. THOMAS BLAKE,
you will take, and see that it is correct. Mr. T. Blake - I can
receive nothing of the sort; you had better refer it to the chairman.
But he also declined to receive it. The rev. gentleman, after some
time got Mr. W. PALMER to take it, and then left the room. The
following resolution was then entered in the vestry book:- "At a
Vestry, held in the Vestry Room, Landrake, on the 9th day of April,
1849, being Easter Monday, Mr. Thomas B. Blake and Mr. PHILIP BLAKE,
were unanimously re-appointed, and are hereby duly elected as
Churchwardens for the parish of Landrake for the ensuing year."
CAMELFORD UNION - At a meeting of the board of guardians of the
Camelford Union on Friday last, Mr. THOMAS RICKARD AVERY, of Boscastle,
was elected chairman; and Mr. GILES LOCKWOOD HAWKEN, of Dannonchaple,
St. Teath, nephew of Mr. G. J. LANG, was re-elected vice-chairman.
HELSTON - On Thursday the 12th instant, Mr. FREDERICK HILL, and Mr.
GEORGE LANYON, were elected churchwardens of this borough for the
ensuing year. The accounts for the preceding year were passed without
opposition.
PENRYN - On Monday last, Mr. S. STEPHENS, wine merchant, was elected
councillor; and on Tuesday, Mr. ROBERT EARLE, was elected mayor, to
fill the place of the late Mr. TRENERY.
APOTHECARIES' HALL - The following passed their examination in the
science and practice of medicine and received certificates to practice,
on Thursday the 12th instant:- Mr. CHARLES AUGUSTUS WEST, Camelford;
Mr. HENRY WILLIAM BORLASE, Helston, and formerly a pupil of Mr.
VAWDREY, of St. Austell.
CALLIGRAPHY - On Saturday last, a committee of ladies, pupils of Mr.
SLEEP, professor of calligraphy, &c., at Falmouth, presented him with a
splendid edition of Henry's Family Bible, as an acknowledgment of the
benefit they had derived from his instructions.
EMIGRATION - On the 12th instant, the barque "Belle," JOHN BISSON,
master, sailed from Padstow for Quebec, with one hundred and thirty
steerage passengers on board. This vessel was fitted out under the
management of Mr. EDMUND NORWAY, the owner, who spared no expense to
make everything convenient and comfortable, and her sailing at the time
appointed met the approbation of all on board and their friends.
SUDDEN DEATH OF WILLIAM DAVEY, Esq., of Redruth - Mr. William Davey,
who has been clerk of the Redruth Union from its first establishment,
was in attendance at the Union-House on Monday morning a little before
ten o'clock, awaiting the assembling of the new board of guardians, and
while conversing with some gentlemen of the board in the gateway of the
house he dropped his stick from sudden paralysis of the left arm, and
on stooping to take it up fell prostrate on the ground. He was
immediately carried in a nearly insensible state into the porter's
waiting-room, and a medical man arriving in a few minutes, bled him
with an apparently favourable result. His consciousness was restored,
and he spoke cheerfully of being soon able to attend to the business of
the day; his left arm and leg however, continued paralysed, and
apoplectic symptoms soon presented themselves. Having been removed to
his residence in Redruth and put to bed, he expressed himself as "much
relieved". These were, however, his last words. In spite of all the
efforts of his medical attendants total insensibility rapidly
supervened with all the most alarming symptoms of apoplexy, and about
six o'clock in the evening the lamented gentleman breathed his last.
No man could have been more generally beloved; his death has cast a
great gloom over the neighbourhood in which he resided, and he will, we
are sure, be deeply lamented by every one who knew him.
COUNTY COURTS - Launceston - This court was held on the 11th
instant, before W. MACKWORTH PRAED, Esq. Several cases were entered
for trial, the first of which, McATEER v. COLE, was tried by jury, and
excited considerable interest. Mr. PETER was attorney for the
plaintiff, and Mr. MORGAN for the defendant. The action was brought by
Mr. JAMES McATEER, to recover the sum of GBP5 as compensation in
damages for an assault alleged to have been committed by the defendant
Mr. SAMUEL COLE, who resides in the parish of Boyton. It appeared from
the evidence that the plaintiff formerly kept the Little White Hart
Inn, at Launceston, but he now travels with a pack. Mr. PHILP,
son-in-law of plaintiff, now keeps the same Inn, and the plaintiff's
wife is in the habit of attending on market days to assist in the
business. She was so assisting on the 17th of February last, and the
plaintiff went there on the evening of that day, about half-past
eleven, to fetch his wife. He there saw the defendant, who had been
drinking for some time, and had also been entering into controversies
with the plaintiff's son, the result of which was, that he was ordered
to leave the house. He at first refused to do so, but on Mr. Philp
going for a policeman to eject him, defendant proceeded to leave the
house, and plaintiff took a candle to light him out; on the defendant
getting to the door, he struck the plaintiff several severe blows on
the head, and left him lying in the street senseless. It did not
appear that plaintiff had spoken to defendant before the assault was
committed. The several witnesses called for the plaintiff were
subjected to a severe cross-examination by Mr. Morgan, who attempted to
show that the plaintiff was drunk at the time the assault was
committed, and that he first assaulted the defendant. Dr. PETHICK was
called to prove the extent of the injury the plaintiff had sustained,
and this closed the case for the plaintiff. Mr. Morgan then addressed
the jury for the defendant, commenting on the evidence produced for the
plaintiff, and stating that he should call the defendant, who would
prove that the plaintiff was very tipsy at the time, and first
assaulted him, and that he would put a very different colour on the
proceedings from what appeared from the evidence of plaintiff's
witnesses. Defendant was then called, and on cross-examination by Mr.
Peter it appeared that he recollected but little of what took place.
Mr. Peter then addressed the jury for the plaintiff in an able speech,
and submitted that the plaintiff would have been entitled to much
greater damages than he had claimed if he had not limited it to GBP5 by
his plaint, for that it was a most unwarrantable attack by a powerful
young man, on an old and infirm person. The Judge summed up with much
minuteness, observing that in his opinion the plaintiff was entitled to
a verdict for the full amount of his claim; he also told the jury that
if the action had been brought in the superior court, plaintiff most
probably would have had a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount
claimed. Then an order was made for payment of the same forthwith with
costs amounting to GBP5. 3s. 6d.
FALMOUTH - At this court the case of SELDON v. THE WAYWARDENS OF
FALMOUTH excited some interest. Plaintiff who is a plumber, summoned
defendants for 18s. 2d. for repairing gas pipes. Defendants' workmen
when repairing the gutter of a back street, fractured a pipe, and
informed defendants, who ordered them to acquaint plaintiff, and desire
him to repair it. Plaintiff did so, and tendered his bill for repairs
to defendant, who refused to pay the amount. On the part of defendants
it was contended by Mr. GENN that they should not have been charged,
because Mr. WYNN the proprietor of the gas works, had directed
plaintiff to refit the pipes when they were only out of order; that the
pipes were only permitted to be laid in the street by sufferance of the
waywardens; that defendants did not order plaintiff to repair the pipe;
and that the workmen did not do the injury. A witness was called in
support of defendant's case, but after two or three hours had been
occupied, the case was adjourned until next court.
REDRUTH - At this court held on Wednesday and Thursday, the case of
RICHARD POWNING v. JOHN ROGERS, was tried. Plaintiff is a grocer,
living at St. Day, Gwennap, and defendant also lives there. Plaintiff
supplied defendant's daughter with goods to the value of GBP4. 2s. 1d.,
some of which, it appeared, she carried to her father's house. Money
had been given to her as usual by her mother to purchase goods at Mr.
Powning's shop, which she gave to a woman, living near by, whose
husband is abroad. This woman promised to give the girl a silk frock,
as she expected a present from a relative. Judgment was given for
defendant.
In the case of TOBIAS MARTIN v. MICHAEL MARTIN and NICHOLAS ANDREW the
defendant is the assistant overseer, and the latter defendant the
collector of poor and way rates of the parish of Stithians, but lately
removed to Bellare Farm, in Mylor. It was an action for excessive
distress for poor rates, laying the damages at GBP4. 17. 6d. The case
lasted several hours. Verdict for defendants.
TRURO - At this court, held on Friday last, there were thirty-three
cases entered for trial. In the case of JOHN ALLEN, of Veryan v.
EDWARD BELLRINGER,) the bailiff of the court), Mr. HOCKIN appeared for
the plaintiff, and Mr. STOKES for the defendant. It was an action
brought against defendant for converting to his use a mare belonging to
plaintiff. Bellringer was merely the nominal defendant [.......?] acted
as bailiff of the county court in levying an execution on the goods of
JOHN BOADEN of [Tre......n?] in the parish of Veryan. Judgment had
been obtained in an action against Boaden by Mr. GEORGE HILL, of
Gerrans, and the high bailiff of the court seized the mare as Boaden's
property. The plaintiff, JOHN ALLEN, now claimed the mare as his
property, alleging that Boaden had sold her to him. This sale, it was
contended on the part of defendant, was not a bona fide transaction,
but that Boaden had nominally parted with the animal to avoid her being
taken in a distress for rent by his landlord, the Rev. R. M. N.
USTICKE. Witnesses were called on both sides, and a good deal of
contradictory evidence was given; but the Judge considered that the
bona fide nature of the sale to plaintiff was not satisfactorily
proved, and gave a verdict for defendant.
BLAKE v. ROBERTS was an action brought by a farmer at Ladock against a
bailiff of the Court, to recover a sum of GBP8. It appeared that, in
the course of last year, the plaintiff employed Roberts to take out
summonses in this Court, against two persons named BENNETT and PEARCE;
and according to plaintiff's evidence, Roberts agreed to take nothing
for his trouble in these actions, except a glass of grog or so. It
seems, however, that the suits proceeded more jollily than is usually
the case in so dry a business as law; for evidence was given of pretty
many glasses of grog, &c., and, on one occasions, a supper was given to
a party of seven men. The plaintiff succeeded in his actions against
Bennett and Pearce; but Roberts, obtained the plaintiff's notes
retained so for his trouble in the actions. The sum constituted part
of the plaintiff's present claim; the remainder being a sum of GBP3
disputed in the defendant's statement of account as given in his set
off. His Honour after listening to lengthy, contradictory evidence,
deferred judgment in order to look over the accounts between the
parties.
FALMOUTH POLICE - On the 12th instant, Mr. C. W. CHARD, tea dealer,
preferred a charge of robbery against an errand boy in his employ,
called RICHARD LAWRENCE. From Mr. Chard's statement, it appeared that
the preceding evening, Lawrence was sent down to the stores below for
two pounds of sugar, which he brought into the shop. Later in the
evening, in the course of checking the shop, Lawrence was missed, and
on his return, his replies so much excited the suspicion of his master
that he took a candle and searched the passage behind the premises,
where he found two small parcels of sugar of the same description as
that for which he had been sent in the early part of the evening. He
eventually admitted having put it there for the purpose of taking away
at a convenient time, and was assisted in the robbery by an accomplice
called BISHOP. The magistrates sentenced Lawrence to be taken back to
prison and well-whipped next day. Some circumstances having afterwards
come under the notice of Mr. Chard, on Tuesday, he brought up Bishop as
being a receiver. From the admission and evidence of the parties, it
appeared that a systematic plain of robbery had been in operation for
some time, and the magistrates committed Bishop to take his trial at
the next Borough Quarter Sessions.
CORONERS' INQUESTS - The following inquests have been held before E.
T. CARLYON, Esq., deputy coroner. On Monday last, the 16th instant, at
the Victoria Inn in the parish of Kenwyn, on the body of MARY ANN
MICHELL, aged 22. From the evidence it appeared that the deceased had
been courted by a young man of the name of COLMAN, who had come
frequently to her father's house, for the purpose of seeing her; from
last July up to within four or five weeks since, from which time he had
for some reason left her, after it is said having made her a promise of
marriage. This behaviour of his, coupled with a feeling that existed
in her mind that Colman had left her for some other young woman of the
neighbourhood seemed to have so preyed upon her , that on Monday the
9th instant, in a fit of despair, she took a large dose of some arsenic
which had been brought to her father's house for the purpose of killing
rats, from the effects of which she died on the following Sunday,
notwithstanding all the usual remedies were used, for her recovery, by
Mr. MOYLE, surgeon, of Chacewater. The jury were of opinion that the
deceased had taken the poison whilst in a state of temporary insanity,
and returned a verdict accordingly.
On the same day at Gorran Haven, on the body of JANE DAVIES, aged 70,
who, on the previous day, whilst in the act of conversing with a
neighbour by her fire side, apparently in good health, fell from the
stool on which she was sitting, and died almost immediately. Verdict,
"Died by the visitation of God."
An inquest was held on Monday last, at the Redruth Union House, on the
body of JAMES ROWE, aged 70 years, who died suddenly on Sunday, soon
after eating his dinner. He walked around the yard of the hospital,
came in and fell down on the bed and died. He had been a little insane
for thirty years, but was very harmless and quiet, and was respectably
connected. He has a son a mine agent in Camborne, to which parish he
belonged. Mr. HARRIS, surgeon, was examined and gave it as his opinion
that deceased died from the rupture of a blood-vessel in the brain,
causing apoplexy. Verdict accordingly.
The following inquests have been held before Mr. JOSEPH HAMLEY,
coroner. At the Torpoint Union house on the 9th instant, on ELIZABETH
COLLINS, an old woman. It appeared that she slept in a room with two
other old women, one of whom heard her making an unusual noise in the
night, and called to her, but received no answer; and being a cripple
she could not get out of bed, but made an alarm and some of the other
inmates in an adjoining room called the nurse, who got a light, and on
coming in found the old woman dead. The nurse and surgeon of the Union
were examined, and the jury being satisfied returned a verdict of
"Natural Death."
At Roche on the 16th instant, on THOMAS TRETHEWEY. He was the engine
man in Beam mine. About a week since he was screwing up the corner of
the engine when it slipped and fell over the stairs on his head. He
was taken up and was sensible for a few minutes. He was carried to his
home but never spoke afterwards, although he lived a week. One of his
comrades who was holding the candle to him at the time of the accident
gave evidence as above. Verdict, "Accidental Death."
At Bodmin, on the 17th instant, on JOHN BRENTON, a miner. An inquest
was considered necessary, in consequence of a report that he had died
from want of the common necessaries of life. It appeared from the
evidence of his family that he had not worked for the last six months,
being subject to asthma and difficulty of breathing. He had been
relieved by the Board of Guardians at different times; but, latterly
was refused in consequence of his having a daughter who had an
illegitimate child living with him. However, he did not appear to have
wanted as he was maintained by his wife, who went out to work, and
several of his children who lived with him; and Mr. ROBINSON, surgeon,
stated that he had attended him occasionally for the last three years,
- that he was subject to spasmodic asthma which he considered had been
brought on by working under ground in foul air. He saw him on the
night of the 16th and gave him an emetic, and it appeared he felt
better after it; but on the following morning his daughter went to him
to give him his breakfast, and saw that he was much worse. She alarmed
the neighbours, several of whom came in, but found him quite dead. Mr.
Robinson had no doubt but that death was occasioned by suffocation
consequent on spasmodic asthma, and the jury being satisfied, returned
a verdict accordingly.
27 April 1849, Friday
OPENING OF A NEW TEMPORARY CHURCH AT TRURO. - The district of St.
George has been taken out of the populous parish of Kenwyn, under Sir
ROBERT PEEL's Church Endowment Act. The district contains about 2,500
inhabitants, and the first minister appointed was the Rev. WILLIAM
FOUNTAINE ADDISON. On the arrival of the minister a room was licensed
for the celebration of divine service. Sunday and day-schools were
also established, there being connected with the latter about two
hundred children. The licensed room proved too small for the
congregation; efforts were therefore made to obtain a site for a
permanent church; but these being unsuccessful, it was determined, with
the sanction of the Bishop of the Diocese, to erect a temporary
building. A site was rented from a tenant of the Earl of Falmouth, who
with his usual liberality, gave GBP5 towards the cost of the structure.
Mr. WHITE, architect, gratuitously gave his services, and the building
being completed, was opened for divine worship on Monday last. At the
morning service there was a very full and respectable congregation from
Truro and its neighbourhood, and about forty clergymen were present.
The choir of St. Mary's church, Truro, were in attendance with Mr.
HEMPEL, the organist, who performed on the seraphin. There was a full
choral service, and the Rev. E. SHUTTLEWORTH, vicar of Egloshayle, and
the Rev. R. K. CORNISH chanted the prayers. The first lesson was read
by the Dean Rural, the Rev. F. WEBBER, of St. Michael Penkivel, and the
second lesson by the Rev. TOWNSEND BOSCAWEN. The venerable Archdeacon
PHILLPOTTS read the communion service; the epistle was read by the Rev.
R. K. Cornish, and the gospel by the Rev. Prebendary LAMPEN. Before
the sermon Handel's "Hallelujah chorus" was sung by the choir, and the
sermon was then preached by the Rev. Prebendary Cornish, from the 1st
of Corinthians 14th chap. And 40th verse. "Let all things be done
decently and in order." The preacher discoursed of the excellency and
stability of Episcopacy as compared with other systems; he traced its
establishment to the apostolic age, and declared it to be of divine
institution. After the sermon the offertory sentences were read by the
Rev. W. F. Addison, and the offerings of the congregation were
received; the prayer for the church militant was also read by the Rev.
W. F. Addison, and the blessing was pronounced by the Archdeacon. At a
quarter past six there was an evening service, and a very crowded
congregation attended. The prayers were chanted by the Rev. R. K.
Cornish; the lessons were read by the Rev. J. HARDIE, and the Rev. G.
L. CHURCH, and the sermon was preached by the Rev. W. F. ADDISON from
Malachi 3rd chapter 3rd verse. A considerable amount in pence was
received at this service; and added to the sum received in the morning,
the whole contributions, with one or two subsequent donations, amounted
to about GBP33. A gentleman also has desired Mr. Addison to make any
addition to the present arrangements of the church to the amount of
GBP20 cost, imposing as a condition that his name should not be
mentioned. In the afternoon the children of the schools, numbering
about two hundred, marched to Kenwyn, and on their return took tea
together in the school-room. Having thus stated the proceedings of the
day, we shall next describe the church. It is constructed of wood, and
the style is the first pointed, commonly called the Early English
style. The exterior is rigidly plain, with a bold cross at the eastern
and western ends of the roof, and a wooden bell-cot surmounted with a
banner cross, to mark the division between the nave and the chancel.
The east window is a triplet, the side windows are couplets, and at the
west end are two lancet windows. The chancel is 19 feet by 20; the
nave 56 feet by 20; the height 10 feet to the wall-plate, and 25 feet
to the ridge. On the south side there is a sacristy, and a priest's
door on the north side. The chancel has returned stalls, at one of
which, on the south side, prayers are said. The lessons are read from
the lectern in the centre of the chancel. A plain open chancel screen
extends to the eaves of the building, the lower part being boarded and
finished with a row of pierced quatrefoils. The pulpit is plain, but
good, the panels being ornamented with well-executed decorative
painting, of which the subjects are the monogram J.H.S., the Greek
monogram X.R., and St. George's cross on a shield. There is also some
ornamental needle-work, namely, the cover of the communion table, the
pulpit cushion and frontal cloth, and the hangings of the reading desk
and lectern. This needle work was the gift of ladies interested in the
welfare of the church. On the frontal cloth of the pulpit is a red
floriated cross, worked in yellow silk, with four small crosses at the
angles, in yellow and green wool. The hangings of the stall from which
prayers are said, and of the lectern, are of blue cloth, embroidered in
green, yellow, and crimson silk. The cover of the communion table is
of crimson cloth, with a St. George's cross in the central division of
the frontal. The panels of the roof in the chancel are coloured blue,
and the decoration over the communion table is painted in distemper,
with appropriate taste. Around the church are painted illuminated
texts of scripture, and a painted string is continued around, carried
under the windows and over the doors. The nave is furnished with low
moveable benches, with straw mats for kneeling; the building will seat
about three hundred and thirty persons including the choir, and the
cost has been about GBP230, towards which several gentlemen of the
neighbourhood have contributed. Daily service will be celebrated in
this church.
CHURCH MISSIONARY SOCIETY - The annual meeting of the Penzance branch
of this society was held on Monday evening last, at the Guildhall, the
Rev. HENRY BATTEN, incumbent of St. Mary's, Penzance, in the chair.
The attendance was more numerous than usual, and a lively interest was
manifested in the proceedings. The chairman addressed the meeting, and
requested Mr. BEDFORD, the treasurer, to read the financial report.
The receipts from the places included in the district, including the
jubilee fund and donations, enabled the treasurer to transmit to the
parent society GBP174. 8s. 1d. which exceeded the sums transmitted in
former years. A young lady had handed him GBP1. 4s. 10d. towards the
funds of the society, which he hoped would act as a stimulus to other
young ladies to follow so good an example. The Rev. A. TOWNSEND,
missionary from Western Africa, then addressed the meeting in a speech
of much interest, giving convincing proof of the great benefit of the
labours of the society's missionaries in that heathen country. The
Rev. J. PUNNETT followed in an admirable speech. On the motion of Mr.
W. Bolitho, seconded by Mr. T. S. BOLITHO, a vote of thanks was then
passed to the chairman, who briefly acknowledged the compliment. The
contributions amounted to GBP15. 15s., being GBP2. 15s. more than were
received last year.
THE REV. JAMES SHORE - A meeting to take into consideration the
imprisonment of the Rev. J. Shore and the state of the law affecting
clergymen, desirous of seceding from the church of England, was
convened on Friday last, by Mr. T. MUDGE, the mayor of Bodmin, in
pursuance of a requisition numerously and respectably signed by the
inhabitants. Mr. Shore's case was ably and succinctly stated by the
Rev. T. WHITTA, and resolutions condemnatory of the persecution to
which he had been subjected, as well as of all religious intolerance,
and in favour of the most complete liberty of conscience to all classes
of her Majesty's subjects, were moved and seconded by the Revds. T.
Whitta, B. ELVINS, J. HARLEY, J. McKENNY, W. MASON, and by Messrs.
PASCOE, TONKIN, COOM, and BALKWILL. Petitions to the Houses of
Parliament, founded on the resolutions, were unanimously adopted. A
resolution expressive of deep and unfeigned sympathy with Mr. Shore, in
his present very trying and painful circumstances was also passed, and
a deputation was appointed to wait on him with the resolutions. The
Clergy Relief Bill was not approved of by the meeting after the
mangling it has undergone in the committee. The Mayor, in
acknowledging a vote of thanks for his conduct in the chair, remarked
that he had been assailed for having called the inhabitants together
for such a purpose, but his reply was that he had done so for two
reasons - first because he deemed it his duty to attend to any
requisition signed by so many of the respectable burgesses of the
borough, and secondly because he most fully sympathised with the object
of the meeting, as he always had been, and still determined to be a
determined enemy of all tyranny, ecclesiastical or otherwise. This is
the first meeting held in the county on Mr. Shore's behalf since his
imprisonment, and it is hoped that other towns will speedily follow the
example of Bodmin.
TESTIMONIAL OF RESPECT TO A HEBREW PASTOR - The Rev. JOSEPH RINTEL,
Rabbi of the Jews at Falmouth, being bout to leave that place after a
ministry of eighteen years, for London, has been presented by his
congregation, amongst whom he had much endeared himself by his general
conduct, with a silver salver bearing the following inscription:-
"Presented to the Rev. Joseph Rintel, by the members and friends of the
Falmouth congregation, as a testimonial of their respect and esteem.
A.M. 5609."
TEETOTALISM - Mr. MASON, the teetotal advocate, delivered several
lectures in favour of total abstinence at the Scilly Islands during the
past week, and a great many became converts to the principle.
HELSTON FLORA-DAY - Notwithstanding the badness of the times, and the
very unsettled state of the weather, which in most cases tends to
depress the spirits, it appears that many of the inhabitants of this
town and neighbourhood, are again on the alert to commemorate the
festivities of the "Helston Flora;" and many are making preparations to
join the accustomed dance, that being the prominent feature of the day.
It is also understood, that the "Hale and Tow," whose popularity are
well known, intend gaining reinforcements, to add to their vocal powers
and the beat of the drum. Should the weather prove favourable, the
occasion will be one of a very joyous description.
APOTHECARIES' HALL - At a meeting of the Court of Examiners, on the
19th inst., Mr. THOMAS HUTCHINSON, of Camborne, passed his examination
in the Science and Practice of Medicine, and received a licence to
practice.
A BRIG LAUNCHED - On Tuesday last, a handsome brig, three hundred
tons burden, belonging to the Shipping Company at Penzance, was
launched from the building-yard of Mr. SYMONS. The vessel was fully
rigged, and gaily decked in colors, the present of Miss AGNES RICHARDS,
who christened the brig, naming her the "Ledgerdemain". She is to be
commanded by Capt. TRENOWETH, and will immediately proceed to the West
Indies.
FOWEY HARBOUR - The "Sisters," LAMB, master, came in here on Friday
last, having lost one anchor and cable, and unstocked and broken off
the fluke of the other, when riding in Mount's Bay in the late furious
gales. It occupied the master and crew four hours to get the broken
anchor and chain on board. The Captain ran the vessel up Pont, where
vessels of any burden can be put in perfect safety without anchor or
cable, and be safely moored by warps to either shore. We regret that
such a harbour as this, possessing so many and excellent natural
advantages, should be so little known; but we are happy to say that it
is getting a little into note, for we find occasionally it is used even
by strangers who have heard it spoken well of by others in foreign
parts, who had seen it and benefited by its safety; and we are pleased
to hear the expressions of astonishment of many who come in the first
time to find so good, safe and convenient shelter. Although we have
excellent pilots, they have great difficulty in persuading foreigners,
especially, that so much safety can be found in what appears to them
such a dark spot. But they require no coaxing when they come this way
a second time; they are well satisfied with everything here, even the
pilot fees, anchorage dues, &c., &c. The whole of the vessels in the
harbour rode the gale out in perfect safety.
THE LATE GALES - At eleven o'clock on Wednesday night, the schooner
"Lark," of Brixham, Capt. DRAKE, in ballast, from Plymouth for Neath,
parted and went ashore with the wind at W.S.W. on the S.W. corner of
St. Michael's Mount, where she lied bilged with no chance of coming off
again. On the wind veering to N.N.W., she lay sufficiently sheltered
by the point of rock to enable the crew to be got out, and on the ebb
tide she was stripped of her stores and materials, which were safely
warehoused.
On Thursday forenoon, the schooner "Agenoria," of Ilfracombe, Capt
GERMAN, in ballast, from Plymouth for Wales, capsized her windlass, and
in a squall from N.N.E., went on shore near Penlea Point, on the
western side of the bay, the crew being saved.
The smack "Mary Stephens," Capt. SKINNER, of Padstow, from Torquay for
Wales, in ballast, parted both chains about the same time, and
succeeded in getting safe into Newlyn pier. Upwards of eighty sail of
windbound vessels were lying at this time at anchor in the Roads,
besides those in the several piers.
On Tuesday last, the "Agenoria" was got off and brought into the pier,
the damages sustained not being so severe as were anticipated.
TRURO POLICE - On the 13th instant, CATHERINE BRYANT was charged with
stealing five pairs of trousers from the shop of JOHN PLYMIN RAINS, in
the High Cross, Truro. The trousers were stolen from prosecutor's shop
on Friday evening, the 23rd ult. About a fortnight afterwards,
prisoner offered to pledge a pair of trousers at the shop of Mrs.
BEHENNA, pawnbroker, Pydar-street. Mrs. Behenna had heard of Mr.
Rains's loss, and on showing him the trousers he identified them as his
property. It was then found that the prisoner had previously pawned
two of the stolen trousers at the shop of Mr. JAMES, pawnbroker. She
stated in her defence that she found the three pair of trousers by the
side of the pump in the High Cross. She was committed for trial.
On Monday last, SARAH GILBERT was committed for one month to the House
of Correction for being a disorderly character and behaving in a
riotous manner.
On Wednesday last, SUSAN WILLIAMS, was committed for two months to hard
labour, for sleeping in the open air, having no visible means of
subsistence, and not giving a good account of herself.
ACCIDENT AT SEA - The "Johnson and Elizabeth" whilst on her passage
from London, on Thursday last encountered very heavy weather off the
Isle of Wight, carrying away her jib-boom, and lost two men overboard.
FATAL ACCIDENT - A most melancholy accident occurred on Monday
evening last. As Mr. JOHN MENHENICK, of Burnier, near Wadebridge, was
riding on the Egloshayle road, his horse shied, (as is supposed, for no
one saw the accident), and Mr. Menhenick was thrown against the curb of
the path raised from the road, through which his neck was dislocated,
and he died before medical aid could be procured. The deceased was
highly respected and beloved, and his sudden and distressing death has
cast a gloom on the whole neighbourhood. He was thirty-eight years of
age, and had left a wife and six young children. On Wednesday last an
inquest was held on the body before Mr. HAMLEY, coroner, and a verdict
of "accidental death" was returned.
CORONER'S INQUEST - The following inquest has been held by Mr.
HAMLEY, coroner. - On Friday last at West Looe, on the body of THOMAS
HAINES, of that place, apprentice on board the schooner "Concord."
This young man, with the mate, came ashore from the vessel, then lying
in the roadstead, to take the captain on board on Thursday morning, the
19th instant. The mate left the apprentice with the boat while he went
to the captain's house, and on his return in about seven or eight
minutes the young man was gone. After fruitless inquiries the captain
and mate went on board, and the vessel proceeded to Plymouth. About
seven o'clock the body of deceased was found in the water by a
waterman. No marks of violence were visible. Verdict, "found drowned."
PREROGATIVE COURT - Thursday, April 19. (Before Sir H. J. FUST.)
BENNETT v. FREE. - This was a business of proving in solemn form of
law, the last will and testament of the late Capt. BRITTON, of
Falmouth, bearing date the 11th of November, 1846. The cause was
promoted by Mr. EDWARD BENNETT, the sole executor named therein,
against Miss CHARLOTTE SUSANNAH FREE, the sole executrix appointed by a
will and codicil, bearing date respectively the 13th of May, 1843, and
the 19th of April, 1844. The property does not exceed GBP4,000. The
pleadings in the case are of an enormous length, consisting of 1,200
sides, and each side runs from forty to forty-five lines. The
allegations were to-day admitted, with the answers. Dr. ADDAMS is for
the will; and Drs. JENNER and HARDING are in opposition to the
testament. The formal pleadings have been opened, the arguments were
postponed until the next court day.
EXETER DISTRICT COURT OF BANKRUPTCY - Tuesday, April 17. (Before Mr.
Commissioner BERE.) Re: J. S. COBBLEDICK, of Whitstone, draper and
shopkeeper. The bankrupt came up on his last examination, but no
balance sheet had been filed. Mr. STOGDON, who appeared for several
creditors, examined the bankrupt, and complained that the bankrupt had
suffered all his property to be swept away under an execution, and then
petitioned the court. In the course of his examination, bankrupt said
that he had sold a life interest in some property, which brought him in
GBP15 per year clear, for GBP20, to his mother-in-law, MARTHA SMALE,
but that was as much as it was worth, as the life on which it was held
was 62 years old, and was in America. He had been a relieving officer,
and had placed in his schedule GBP70 as a debt due to the Union from
him, or to his security. This he said had accrued in consequence of
there being no workhouse; the pauper children were farmed out among the
farmers; he charged their expenses weekly, but was in the habit of
settling with the farmers once in six months. His Honor remarked
incidentally, that this was another instance of farmed out pauper
children, which he hoped they would have heard no more of. The
examination was then adjourned to the 14th of May.
[ BACK ]