Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

asking what place she was at then, he said it was the Bricklayers Arms. The prisoner immediately cried out, "O! that is right, I believe, for it is from this place the Brighton Coaches go." Witness said, that it was not, and that the Brighton coaches went from the Elephant and Castle. At this time the child was very "wranglesome." The prisoner asked for something to drink, and witness brought it to her. While she was drinking, seeing her in trouble, he said, "Dear me, why do you flurry yourself so much: the child is only a little wranglesome and cross." Witness then went back as desired to the Elephant and Castle; and when he arrived, by ber request, asked whether there was any stage, or return chaise, going to Brighton. There, however, was no conveyance of any kind going that road. After having got a little milk for the child, and some more drink for the prisoner, she asked him what he would charge to take her to Croydin? Witness replied that he would take her for 25s. She said it was too much, but finding she could get no other conveyance, she said, "I find you are very civil, and I wish you would go with me. The agreement was made, and witness was to stop at a house or two on the road, to give something to the child. He then proceeded on the road, and when he arrived at Streatham, the child again began to be "wranglesome." He stopped at the Horse and Groom, where the child was nursed and fed for about 20 miDutes. He arrived at Croydon at about half-past 10 o'clock at night, and the prisoner, after paying for

the coach, took a return chaise, and told the post-boy to drive to Brighton. two in the morning witness got back to London, and upon going into his room as usual, his wife said to him, "Why, Woolhead, there has been a hue and cry after you; there is a child stolen." In consequence of the information of his wife, the witness went to Mr. Porter's house, and after some to his coach, and set off with the conversation, put a pair of horses prosecutor and his father in search of the prisoner. He first went to Croydon, then to Reigate, to Crawley, Brighton, and from thence to Chichester, where he arrived about two o'clock in the evening of the next day, and there the Golden Fleece inn. saw the prisoner and the child at

At about half-past

trade, and resided at No. 3, QueHenry Porter was a butcher by bec-street, Portman-square. He was married on the 14th of April, 1816. In the month of June last Louisa Wood was employed in his service, to attend particularly to his child. About half-past five in the evening of the 6th of June she went out with the child to take a walk, and about a quarter before seven o'clock a person informed him that his child was stolen. Witness and his wife unmediately went in search of the child, one going one way and the other another. At a little before three in the morning Woolhead came to his house; and witness, in company with his father, proceeded in a coach to Chichester. He found the prisoner at the Golden Fleece at Chichester. She was then leaning over the child, which was lying crying on the bed. Witness

said to his hild, "Ah! Henry, what have I found you;" and the child immediately began to smile. The prisoner appeared much confused. He immediately went for a constable, and had her taken into custody, carried up to London, and placed in Marylebone wat hhouse.

After some further evidence, the prisoner handed in a paper of four or five folto sheets, in her defence, in which she stated that in taking the child she had no malicious intention, or or depriv. ing the parents of their child for any length of time. It then proceeded at much length to enter into a statement of the facts of the case; and concluded with beseeching that the jury would duly weigh all the evidence, and not to suffer their minds to be influenced by public reports.

The jury found a verdict Guilty.

HUNTINGDON ASSIZES, JULY.

of

This was an indictment against Jane, the widow of John Scarborough, a respectable innkeeper at Bugden, on the North-road. The prisoner, a respectable looking woman, about 40 years of age, stood at the bar, accompanied by her daughter, a beautiful young woman about 19. The indictment charged the prisoner with feloniously stealing a letter, containing a rem ttance of a 201. Bank of England note, from Richard Preston, Esq. of Lincoln's-inn, barrister at law, MP which was addressed to his son. W. S. Preston, Esq. a pupil of the Rev. Dr. Maltby, at Bugden. In the first count the note was charged to be the

property of R. Preston, Esq. sen. and in the second count as the property of W. S. Preston, Esq. jun.

John Sharp, clerk to Mr. Preston, sen. proved the sending of the letter on the 16th of October, 1815, and Mathew Cromartie proved the delivery of it to the bellman, who put it in his bag.

James Fisher Park, letter-carrier for Charlotte-street, Blackfiiars-road, had no recollection of receiving the letter on the 16th of October, 1815; but if he did receive it, is positive he forwarded it the same evening to the General Post-office. The letters being once put into the bag could not be taken out till the bag was received at the Post-office, where the key was kept.

Philip Franks, clerk in the General Post-office, stated, that if the letter was put into the bag in Charlotte-street, he had no doubt whatever that the letter must have been forwarded.

Wm. Joseph Wall, teller in the General Post-office, made up the bags for the York mail. If such letter came to his hands, he had no doubt it was regularly forwarded by the mail-coach to Huntingdon.

John Hatfield, post-master at Huntingdon, received and forwarded the letters for Bugden as received on the 17th of October.

Wm. Cox, an elderly man, stated that he is post-master at Bugden. On the morning of the 17th of October, 1815, remembers that he received by the bag from Huntingdon a letter, which he delivered to Mrs. Scarborough, the prisoner at the bar. He took it to

her

her because he could not make out the direction, which was much blotted, and not legible. Mrs. Scarborough received it from witness at the bar of the George inn at Bugden, saying, "I know the gentleman for whom it is directed, and will deliver it to him; you had better leave it." Witness saw Mrs. Scarborough some days after, who informed him the letter had been safely delivered to the person to whom it was directed. On cross-examination, witness admitted that he was frequently in the habet of delivering letters to the prisoner for persons whom he did not know, and particularly for travellers upon the North-road, who put up at her inn. He is positive that letter was never returned to him. When Dr. Maltby came to the witness, some days after this letter should have been received, witness told Dr. M. he had no recollection of having received any such letter. It was not till several months after, when w.tness received a letter on the subject from the Postmaster-general, that he recollected that on the day in question he delivered a letter to the prisoner, the direction upon which he could not distinctly read. The circumstance inqrred into by Dr. Maltby did not bring it to the recollection of wit ness then; but near twelve months after, the letter he received from the Postmaster-general brought these circumstances and conversation with the prisoner to his entire and perfect recollection.

Mr Wm Scott Preston, stated that he was a pupil of Dr. Maltby, from May 15, until the following September; his letters, of which be received many from his father

and other persons, generally franked by his father, were all severally received, except the one in question; and it was not until some days after its miscarriage, that, having been disappointed of a remittance, he ascertained the fact of such letter never having been received.

Cross-examined. Does not recollect whether or not he received a letter on the 17th of October; but is certain that he never received the letter in question.

Wm. Jervis, clerk to an attorney at Peterborough, had an interview with Mr. Bond, an attorney at Leicester, together with Mrs. Scarborough, at the Bell inn, Stilton, kept by Mr. Green, who is son of the prisoner. Mr. Bond had a claim against Mr. Green of 481. which Mrs. Scarborough paid for her son, to Mr. Bond The payment consisted of one note for 201. one for 10l. three for 54. and three 11. notes. These Mr. Bond put in his pocket, and took away with him.

Mr. Robt. Bond stated, that he is an attorney at Leicester. He had a debt against Mr. Green, son of the prisoner, and came to the inn at Stilton for the purpose of obtaining payment. He did not see Mr. Green, but saw the prisoner, who paid him the notes in question. He put them into his pocket with other notes, but he had no other Bank of England notes in his pocket than those he received from the prisoner. On Thursday following he paid the 20 to Mr. Price of Leicester. This was about the 20th of September last.

Mr. Price lives at Leicester. He received that note from last witness on the 23d of September,

1816. He immediately forwarded ters were frequently left at her

it to Mr. Fourdrinier, wholesale stationer in London.

Mr Charles Fourdrinier proved the receipt and delivery to Henry Hunt, his clerk.

Henry Hunt received the note from his employer, and marked it as received from Mr. J. Price, of Leicester. He took it to the Bank, where it was stopped as stolen property.

Mrs. Scarborough (who bore this investigation with great composure, that might have credited her innocence), gave in a written defence to the following effect:"She trusted in her deliverance from the present charge, which she did not blame her prosecutors for instituting against her. She could only lament, that she had fallen under it through the most strange and unhappy circumstan ces. She trusted the honourable judge and the jury who tried her would allow her to know herself incapable of such a crime as dishonesty. She had held her situation for 30 years, and for 20 years as innkeeper herself, since the death of her husband. She had brought up a family of sons and daughters in respectability, all of whom, except the one who sat beside her, were well married, and themselves had families. Many thousands of pounds had passed through her hands in carry ing on an extensive business; and the first families, including nobility, were in the habit of using her house. These would not suspect her of dishonesty, much less that she should have committed such an act as that with which she was now charged. She had no knowledge of this letter. Let

house for strangers, whom she knew not further than their inquiring for letters so left with her. The 201. note she gave to Mr. Bond she received of a stranger who came to Stilton, and changed horses, only a day or two before. She had no means of finding out who he was; he sat on the dickey of the coach, and her servants would prove the fact that she so took it: but she added, she did not believe it was the same note which she was charged with paying to Mr. Bond. She lamented that the gentlemen of the postoffice, who were in fact both prosecutors and witnesses against her, had thought proper to bring her to trial. All she could rely upon for her defence was a character until this time, not merely unimpeached, but free from suspicion. She regretted the absence of the Lord Bishop of Lincoln, and of John Hodgson, Esq. as they would have added to the honourable testimony she should produce in favour of her general character. She trusted to the favourable reception she hoped to receive from the court and jury, that she and her family might be once more restored to happiness and peace of mind; and that which alone could restore her to society and the respect of mankind, which she and her family had so long enjoyed, was a verdict of Not guilty."

The prisoner's counsel called her servants.

Thomas Standish, a waiter, said he returned this letter to Cox, the post-master, by desire of his mistress. He did not put it into his hand, but laid it on the table of the kitchen, where Cox then was.

Her

Her housekeeper and hostler saw her take a 201. note of a stranger the day before she paid Mr. Bond. They could not swear to the identity of the note.

The following witnesses were then called to her general character: Sir James Jubilee, George Thornton, Esq Lawrence Reynois, Esq. Dr. Maltby, George James Gora, Esq. banker, Dr. Alaway, &c.

Chief Justice Gibbs remarked upon the strong testimony and Quincidence of circumstances to prove the prisoner guilty There was, however, great allowance to be made for persons in her situation rot being able to account for the possession of notes which might be charged at her house by strangers passing or using her house, and whom she could know nothing of. The jury would say to which side the evidence preponderated and return their verdict accordingly.

The jury retired till a late hour. The judge having gone home to his lodgings, waited to receive their verd ct. After several hours' deliberation, they found the priBoer Guilty-Death.

01FORD CIRCUIT.—MARCH 7.

Setting fire to Hay and Barley Stacks -William Archer, an oplent farmer, who had been out

on his own recognizance, was and cted capitally, for maliciously setting fire to two ricks, on the 27th of July last, at the parish of Great Bourton, the property of Ann Buckett; and John Haycock, also a considerable farmer, was capitally indiered for feloniously

setting the said ricks on fire, or with being an accessory thereto. The trial is one of the greatest importance. When the prisoners were put upon their trial, Mr. Justice Park commented with considerable force on the impropriety of Archer being admitted to bail upon a charge of such a heinous and important nature.

John Buckett deposed, that he is son to the prosecutrix, Mrs. Ann Buckett, of Great Bourton: she rented a small farm there. On the 27th July his mother had the misfortune to have her ricks burnt; the fire took place about two o'clock in the morning; they were barley, and clover hay. The barley was of the year 1815 harvest, the hay was of the summer 1816. They stood about half a mile from his mother's house, between 18 and 20 yards from each other. The clover rick was not thatched: it had been put together about ten days: it was put together dry it was not at all heated. There is a footpath from thence down to Great Bourton. On the night before, at ten o'clock, witness came home, and found one Ward at his mother's house. Witness went to bed a little before eleven o'clock, and at two o'clock he was awoke, and found the clover rick nearly burnt down, and the other about half burnt. The wind was north-west, and blew from the barley to the clover rick, and if the clover rick was set on fire, the barley rick could not have been burnt. The barley rick would have taken longer to have been burnt. The outsides of both ricks were burnt. About seven yards from the clover rick there was some straw, which was

not

« ForrigeFortsæt »