Rainee
Member
26 March 1858; Frampton trial, and others
.
RESISTING POLICEMEN - HAMBLY GEORGE, 37, miller, was indicted for assaulting JOHN BONE, a peace officer, in the execution of his duty, at St. Teath, on the 23rd of February. Mr. COLERIDGE for the prosecution; Mr. COLE for the defence. It appears that about twelve o'clock at night of the 23rd of February, St. Teath fair-day, Bone, one of the county constabulary, was sent for by the landlord of the White Hart inn, to suppress some disturbance and fighting going on there. Bone, accordingly, went to the public-house, and stopped the disturbance; another policeman called HARRIS also being present, and both dressed in their police uniform.
.
It was after the suppression of this disturbance, among people up-stairs, that the prisoner, using some violent language, committed the assault on Bone by striking and kicking him. The assault was proved by Bone and Harris, and Mr. Cole said, although he had witnesses who would state that the prisoner did not strike the policeman, he would refrain from calling them, feeling assured, after the evidence given by Bone, that these witnesses, in the confusion of the affray, must have been mistaken. He would, however, call some respectable witnesses to character, and then would leave the case in the hands of his lordship; the prisoner was generally of quiet, orderly behavior, and the prosecution was not anxious to press for severe punishment.
.
Evidence that the prisoner was a quiet, respectable, inoffensive man, was given by Mr. CHARLES HICKS and Mr. SECCOMBE, farmers, and by Mr. JOHN PEARCE, of St. Teath. Verdict, Guilty.
..................................................................
SAMUEL LOBB, 21, labourer, was indicted for assaulting JOHN BONE, a peace officer, with intent to resist and prevent the lawful apprehension of HAMBLY GEORGE, his uncle. This case was proved and dealt with in the same way as the preceding; and the prisoner received a good character from mr. Seccombe and Mr. John Pearce. Verdict, Guilty.
.
In passing sentence, the learned Judge [said that a policeman, when called on to quell a disturbance, is to be respected. Their duties are important, and they and their office must be respected. It was given that both defendants were in liquor, and have good characters. They did not resort to violence, but merely tried to get away. They had been in gaol a month; the prosecutors did not wish to press for punishment, and they had good characters given them.] Therefore, the judge gave them a light punishment - a week's imprisonment, without hard labour. The men appeared very grateful for the leniency shown them.
....................................................................
JAMES DONEY, 21, a miner, was charged with stealing on the 24th of December, a pistol, the property of William SHORT, a farm labourer in the service of Mr. OLIVER, of Calstock. He was convicted, and sentenced to Two Months? Hard Labour.
.
SECOND COURT - Monday, March 22 (Before Mr. Justice WILLES)
.
JOHN POMEROY, convicted of stealing fowls, was brought up, and sentenced to Three Calendar Months Hard Labour.
....................................................................
THOMAS TOZER and WILLIAM LOGG were charged with stealing, from the roof of a house, some lead, the property of the Duke of Northumberland; and Logg also with receiving the same. Mr. BULLER prosecuted; the prisoners were undefended.
.
On the 27th of January, MR. WILLIAM BURT, a builder, discovered that the lead was missing, and communicated the fact to MR. HENRY BURT, the superintendent of the Duke's property. Tozer had access in his work to the yard adjoining the building from which the lead was taken.
.
DANIEL HUGGINS, a young man in the employ of Mr. HAYMAN, of Launceston, a marine-store dealer, deposed that on the 25th of January, the prisoner Tozer came to the shop with some lead for sale. MARY HICKS, whose brother-in-law, JOHN HUGGINS, is a marine-store dealer in Launceston, also deposed to having on several occasions purchased lead about this time from Logg.
.
INSPECTOR FLEET, of the County Police, who took the prisoners into custody, produced the lead. That sold by prisoners to the marine-store dealers corresponded with what remained on the roof. The prisoners were together at the Bridge Inn, Launceston, on the evening of the 16th January. While in custody, Logg said to SERJEANT DRESDON, of the police, that Tozer brought him the lead to sell for him, saying that he found it.
.
WILLIAM SKOWN, who worked at the same place with Logg, deposed to Tozer having sent messages to Logg to meet him.
.
Logg, in his defence stated that he had the lead from Tozer; and the latter said he had it from a waggoner. Tozer was found Guilty of stealing the lead, and Logg of receiving it knowing it to have been stolen. Four Calendar Months Hard Labour.
.....................................................................
JOHN FRAMPTON and RICHARD LANSALLES were charged with cutting and wounding James and Joseph HICKS, at Lawhitton, near Launceston, with intent to do them some grievous bodily harm. Mr. OXENHAM prosecuted, Mr. CARTER defended the prisoners.
JAMES HICKS said that, on the evening of December 22nd, he was returning to Launceston from his mother's funeral, with his brother JOSEPH HICKS and his two young daughters. At Lawhitton Cross, they saw prisoners before them, rambling about the road. Prisoners began to push against them as They came up. After they had passed on, JOSEPH HICKS called back to prisoners that they had better go home, saying, "I am a bit of a peace-maker myself." One of them said "We will see whether you are, or not" and Frampton ran up and collared JOSEPH HICKS. Witness went to his brother's assistance, and in the scuffle which ensued, his brother called out "Hold him tight, James, he has cut my trowsers, and I think he has cut my leg."
.
After this, witness was cut by Frampton over the wrist. They held Frampton, and took him to the Bennett Arms; he was afterwards taken by the policeman to Launceston. Witness showed his wrist to a surgeon. Had not been able to work since. Prisoners appeared very tipsy.
.
Cross-examined: They first took hold of Joseph Hicks, and witness then went forward and laid hold of Frampton. Joseph Hicks said "Hold him tight, James; he has cut my trowsers, and I think he has cut my leg." It while holding him after this that witness was cut. Lansalles meanwhile had gone away.
.
Witness saw no knife in Frampton's hand, and believed he must have had it in his hand when they came up, as he had no time to take it from his pocket.
.
JOSEPH HICKS, brother of the last witness, deposed to the same facts. Witness advised prisoners to go home, saying "I'm a bit of a peace-maker myself." They said, "We will see whether you are or not," and came up and collared him. In the scuffle which followed, witness felt a cut across his leg. His brother afterwards said, "hold him tight, he has just cut my hand off."
.
Cross-examined: Frampton said when they came up that he had charge of a drunken man; but witness did not see "that one was drunker than the other." Witness saw no knife. The trousers which were cut were here produced, and shown to the jury.
.
ELIZABETH HICKS, daughter of James Hicks, corroborated the evidence of the preceding witness.
.
EDWARD LAWRENCE WEST, a surgeon practicing at Launceston, said that James and Joseph Hicks were brought to him. The former was almost fainting from loss of blood; he had a clean cut on the back of his left wrist, about three or four inches long, it extended down to the muscles and tendons; it exposed the tendons, but without injuring them. There was also a shorter cut on the back of the right hand, which cut down to the tendon, and an artery, exposing them but without injuring them. Did not think the injury would be permanent. The knife in charge of the police would have produced such wounds.
.
---- WEST, a policeman, who took Frampton and Lansalles into custody, produced Frampton's trowsers, which were much marked with blood; when the trowsers were taken, the blood was fresh; this was in the evening, after Frampton was in bed.
.
INSPECTOR FLEET, of the police, produced a knife. After being taken into custody, Frampton said, "Richard Lansalles saw and heard the whole of it." Frampton accounted for the blood on his trowsers by saying he had hurt his leg; there was no wound found on his leg, and he then said he had hurt his hand, and pointed to an old wound on it.
.
[from here to the end of the case, the image I?m using for transcription is fuzzy; there may be some small mistakes. This is my best effort.]
.
JOHN BURT, a shoemaker, picked up a knife by the side at Lawhitten ... the same knife to that produced by the Inspector. The knife was that and there was no appearance of blood on it.
.
Mr. CARTER contented for the defense, that there was no evidence whatever against Lansalles and that, as regarded Frampton, there was no evidence that the knife was his, or that he had any knife in his possession, and that even if he had used one it was used in order to get away from James and Joseph Hicks, and to resist an unlawful apprehension.
.
His Lordship observed to the jury that there appeared to be no evidence against Lansalles, and that the evidence against Frampton appeared to be rather of unlawfully wounding, than of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm. It was for the jury to consider whether the fact of unlawfully wounding had been proved.
.
The jury Acquitted Lansalles, and found Frampton Guilty of unlawfully wounding. Three Calendar Months' hard labour.
.....................................................................
.
JOHN THOMAS was charged with setting fire to a mow of wheat at Kenwyn, the property of THOMAS SOLOMAN. Mr. COX prosecuted; Mr. CARTER defended the prisoner.
.
THOMAS SOLOMAN said: I am a farmer at Rose-in-valley, in Kenwyn. On the morning of the 27th November, about four o'clock, I was awakened by my wife; I got up and found the wheat mow on fire. The mow was in a field, not in the mowhay. I should think it had been burning three or four hours. On the Saturday following, I saw two foot marks about fourteen inches from the hedge near the mow, as if a man had jumped from the hedge. They were directed toward the mow. After that, I saw other footsteps in a field of seeds near; they were going from the mow rather towards HOLMAN's, which is about a mile off. I only traced the steps a few yards. On the Sunday morning, the Superintendent of police, in my presence, found a box of lucifers in the mowhay. On the night of Tuesday following, I set a boy called TANK to watch, with a? dog; Tank afterwards showed me some foot marks. Prisoner is a son-in-law to a man called HOLMAN, with whom I have had a law suit.
.
Cross-examined: Holman was my landlord in part. I had an insurance in the "West of England" office. About four years ago I had a fire in the thatch of a house. I was paid the insurance money in both cases. We saw it was useless to attempt putting out the fire in the mow. Prisoner has worked at Great Devon Consols. I never heard him say anything in anger about the case between myself and Holman. After the boy had been watching, he told me that he had seen somebody go away about my size. We covered over the foot marks with boards and stalks, to keep them secure. Miners frequently pass my premises, both by day and night.
.
ROBERT TANK: On the Tuesday night after the fire, I watched in the mowhay with a dog. About twelve, the dog got very uneasy. I saw a man about thirty-five feet on the other side of the hedge; I looked over the hedge. It was bright moonlight. We made a noise, and the man went away. I could not see his face, but he was dressed in a dark suit. I am quite sure that prisoner is the man.
.
Cross-examined: The man was in a stooping position when he went away. My master came out in the course of the night - he had on a bluish jacket. I recognized the man I saw by his clothes, and by his height. I did not see his face. I did not see the man do anything. It was a fortnight after that I saw the prisoner and recognized him as the man I had seen in the night.
.
WILLIAM LAWTON: I am an inspector of police. Prisoner was asked by the superintendent to show his boots; he said he had none but what he had on. I afterwards found at St. Day, in a public-house, a bag containing under-ground clothes, and a pair of boots and shoes. I recognized the shoes as having been worn by the prisoner. I saw them shown to the prisoner, and the latter said they were his. I examined the footmarks on the premises, and compared them with the shoes I had found in the bag. They corresponded in every particular. The shoes were not alike, having particular marks. One had a toe-plate, and the other a 'skute.' (The shoes were here produced.)
.
Cross-examined: The impressions were not complete where the man appeared to have jumped from the hedge; as the heels only were there deeply indented. The house where the shoes were found is the house where the van stops, and I was told they had come by the van.
.
SUPERINTENDENT JARRETT: I found footmarks where the man appeared to have jumped from the hedge. They were impressions of the entire feet, but more deeply indented at the heels. They were more plain when I saw them first than afterwards when the comparison was made. There were also other footsteps distinct. Afterwards a place was pointed out to me as the spot where Tank had seen the man. I saw footmarks in the hedge; I did not compare them with the boots, but could see two different toe-marks. I took the prisoner into custody, and he said he came down from Wheal Maria on the 29th, and returned on the 30th; that he was at Wheal Maria on the 28th, and at home on the 27th. I took his boots and compared them with the tracks, and they exactly corresponded. There were a great number of footmarks of persons about the mow.
.
His Lordship here asked the jury whether they wished to hear the Counsel for the defence; he thought the evidence was exceedingly vague. The jury agreed with his lordship that there was not evidence enough for a conviction, and Acquitted the prisoner.
......................................................................
HENRY PASCOE was charged with stealing brass from Kelly Bray Mine. Mr. CARTER appeared for the prosecution; Mr. COX for the defence. There appearing to be no evidence to prove that the brass produced had ever been the property of the prosecutors, his Lordship directed an Acquittal.
........................................................................
EDWARD SANDERS was charged with stealing hay, &c., at Truro, and EDWARD CRAGOE with receiving the same. Mr. STOCK prosecuted.
.
ALFRED TEDDER said: I am a coach proprietor, at Truro. I keep in my stables, which I rent of Mr. PEARCE, hay, oats, beans, Indian corn, and chaff. I have other stables near the gas-works, and it had been the duty of Sanders to take the oats, chaff, &c., when mixed in the latter stables, down to the former, for the horses of the early mail.
.
WILLIAM WOOLCOCK, police-sergeant of the borough of Truro: On the morning of Saturday, January 9th, I saw Sanders at Lemon Quay, coming with a bundle of straw or hay. He turned into Tabernacle Street, near which Cragoe has a stable. On the Tuesday following, in consequence of information received, I went to Cragoe's stable, between three and four in the morning. I went into the stable, and examined the contents of the corn-bin. I found white beans mixed with bran and oats; the beans were crushed.
.
Next day I went again, about a quarter after four in the morning, and found there Indian corn, beans, and oats. I took a sample. I obtained samples, unmixed, from Mr. Tedder's stable on the Tuesday, and also some on the 18th in a mixed state. (The samples were here produced, and shown to the jury.) There was no hay in Cragoe's stable when I went in on the morning of the 13th. Having gone up into the loft, I heard some one come into the stable below. I opened the loft window, intending to jump out, when I saw Sanders leave the stable and close the lock; he had nothing with him. I went down into the stable and found a truss of hay near the corn-bin. I marked the truss with a twist in the bind. I had to go upstairs again and get out of the window, as although not locked, the padlock was closed, and could not be opened from the inside.
.
Afterwards, Mr. NASH and I watched for several mornings, and on the following Sunday morning about a quarter after five, while concealed opposite Cragoe's stable, I saw Sanders come up with hay, and carry it into the stable. Mr. Nash and I followed him into the stable and took him into custody on a charge of stealing his master's corn and hay. He said it did not belong to his master, and that it was the first he had brought there. I told him he had brought a bundle of hay there on Wednesday, and he said that was the only one he had taken from his master. We could see no other hay until we had tumbled over the straw in the loft, when we found two trusses - one of them the truss that I had marked.
.
Cross-examined by Sanders: I saw you on the Wednesday morning by gas light. I saw your face plainly.
.
SUPERINTENDENT NASH, of the Truro police, deposed to having seen Sanders enter the stable with hay, when he watched with last witness, and to Sanders having said that the bundle of hay which he took there on Wednesday morning, was the only one he had taken from his master.
.
Cross-examined by Cragoe: The straw over the hay was loose. Except some hay which he put into the rick for the horse, he brought away all the hay.
.
ALFRED TEDDER re-examined: I have examined the samples taken from Cragoe's stable, and they correspond exactly with mine. I had trusses of hay on my premises like that produced, but cannot say it is the same.
THOMAS STANNING, a hay-trusser, who had been in the habit of trussing for Mr. Tedder, said he could identify the hay found in Cragoe's loft, as being Mr. Tedder's property. He was strongly cross-examined on this point by Cragoe.
CRAGOE, in his defense, said that he bought the hay of a man in Ladock, and found the beans, oats, Indian Corn, and chaff, in a bag, on Lemon-Quay. The jury found Sanders Guilty of stealing, and Cragoe of Receiving.
There was another charge to which Sanders pleaded Guilty; no evidence on this was offered against Cragoe. Cragoe called on Mr. Nash for a character. Nash said he could not say anything in his favour, though he did not know of his being engaged in any felony before.
In passing sentence, his lordship said he should take into consideration the fact that Sanders had been some time in gaol. He sentenced Sanders to Four Calendar Months' Hard Labour, and Cragoe to Seven Calendar Months Hard Labour.
...............................................................................
JOHN OLD, who had pleaded Guilty, on Saturday, of perjury, was now brought up for judgment, and sentenced to Six Calendar Months' Hard Labour.
...........................................................................
JOHN BRAY was charged with stealing two fowls, the property of WILLIAM SOWDEN, at Lanivet. Mr. HOLDSWORTH prosecuted; Mr. COX defended.
.
On the evening of Saturday, January 16th, Mr. Sowden saw his fowls safe at roost. On the following morning, on going to the pigs' house, he found a hat, and on looking for his fowls, found that two were gone. He saw some footsteps outside. He went towards the prisoner's house, and about two hundred yards from it, found a quantity of feathers, the same sort as those of his fowls. About four or five o'clock on Sunday afternoon, he pointed out the foot-marks to MARSHALL, a constable, and on Monday, they got some boots from the prisoner's mother. These boots belonged to the prisoner's brother, but the prisoner had worn them on the Saturday night.
.
Cross-examined: the fowls and pigs were kept in the same house. There were houses besides the prisoners on the common.
.
WILLIAM MARSHALL, constable of Lanivet, went to the prisoner's house, and found a part of a fowl, and a quantity of blood on the floor. Under a heap of ashes he found a quantity of fowls' bones. At the mother's house, next door, he got a pair of boots; he took one and compared it with the foot-prints near Mr. Sowden's fowl-house. They corresponded; the heel of the boot was worn away on one side. The footsteps were near the road from Bodmin to the prisoner's house.
.
CAROLINE BRAY, niece of the prisoner, said that on Saturday the 16th January, prisoner came into his mother's house, and got a pair of his brother's boots.
.
WILLIAM HARRIS, constable, of Bodmin, on the night of Saturday, the 16th of January, went to the Garland Ox. Prisoner was outside the door, in fits. They took him inside. After he had recovered somewhat, he asked for his hat, which had mud on it, and was like the one produced.
.
Mr. SOWDEN was re-called, and stated that the feathers found were those of his fowls.
.
Mr. Cox addressed the jury, contending that there was no evidence to show that the hat or the tracks were those of the prisoner; or that the bones and feathers which were found were those of the prosecutor's fowls.
.
Verdict, Guilty. THOMAS DUNGEY, head warder at the county gaol, proved a previous conviction against the prisoner. Six Calendar Months' Hard Labour.
The business of the assizes terminated at seven o'clock on Monday evening; and next morning the Judges left Bodmin for Somersetshire.
West Briton Transcriptions,?1836-1856 at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wbritonad
.
RESISTING POLICEMEN - HAMBLY GEORGE, 37, miller, was indicted for assaulting JOHN BONE, a peace officer, in the execution of his duty, at St. Teath, on the 23rd of February. Mr. COLERIDGE for the prosecution; Mr. COLE for the defence. It appears that about twelve o'clock at night of the 23rd of February, St. Teath fair-day, Bone, one of the county constabulary, was sent for by the landlord of the White Hart inn, to suppress some disturbance and fighting going on there. Bone, accordingly, went to the public-house, and stopped the disturbance; another policeman called HARRIS also being present, and both dressed in their police uniform.
.
It was after the suppression of this disturbance, among people up-stairs, that the prisoner, using some violent language, committed the assault on Bone by striking and kicking him. The assault was proved by Bone and Harris, and Mr. Cole said, although he had witnesses who would state that the prisoner did not strike the policeman, he would refrain from calling them, feeling assured, after the evidence given by Bone, that these witnesses, in the confusion of the affray, must have been mistaken. He would, however, call some respectable witnesses to character, and then would leave the case in the hands of his lordship; the prisoner was generally of quiet, orderly behavior, and the prosecution was not anxious to press for severe punishment.
.
Evidence that the prisoner was a quiet, respectable, inoffensive man, was given by Mr. CHARLES HICKS and Mr. SECCOMBE, farmers, and by Mr. JOHN PEARCE, of St. Teath. Verdict, Guilty.
..................................................................
SAMUEL LOBB, 21, labourer, was indicted for assaulting JOHN BONE, a peace officer, with intent to resist and prevent the lawful apprehension of HAMBLY GEORGE, his uncle. This case was proved and dealt with in the same way as the preceding; and the prisoner received a good character from mr. Seccombe and Mr. John Pearce. Verdict, Guilty.
.
In passing sentence, the learned Judge [said that a policeman, when called on to quell a disturbance, is to be respected. Their duties are important, and they and their office must be respected. It was given that both defendants were in liquor, and have good characters. They did not resort to violence, but merely tried to get away. They had been in gaol a month; the prosecutors did not wish to press for punishment, and they had good characters given them.] Therefore, the judge gave them a light punishment - a week's imprisonment, without hard labour. The men appeared very grateful for the leniency shown them.
....................................................................
JAMES DONEY, 21, a miner, was charged with stealing on the 24th of December, a pistol, the property of William SHORT, a farm labourer in the service of Mr. OLIVER, of Calstock. He was convicted, and sentenced to Two Months? Hard Labour.
.
SECOND COURT - Monday, March 22 (Before Mr. Justice WILLES)
.
JOHN POMEROY, convicted of stealing fowls, was brought up, and sentenced to Three Calendar Months Hard Labour.
....................................................................
THOMAS TOZER and WILLIAM LOGG were charged with stealing, from the roof of a house, some lead, the property of the Duke of Northumberland; and Logg also with receiving the same. Mr. BULLER prosecuted; the prisoners were undefended.
.
On the 27th of January, MR. WILLIAM BURT, a builder, discovered that the lead was missing, and communicated the fact to MR. HENRY BURT, the superintendent of the Duke's property. Tozer had access in his work to the yard adjoining the building from which the lead was taken.
.
DANIEL HUGGINS, a young man in the employ of Mr. HAYMAN, of Launceston, a marine-store dealer, deposed that on the 25th of January, the prisoner Tozer came to the shop with some lead for sale. MARY HICKS, whose brother-in-law, JOHN HUGGINS, is a marine-store dealer in Launceston, also deposed to having on several occasions purchased lead about this time from Logg.
.
INSPECTOR FLEET, of the County Police, who took the prisoners into custody, produced the lead. That sold by prisoners to the marine-store dealers corresponded with what remained on the roof. The prisoners were together at the Bridge Inn, Launceston, on the evening of the 16th January. While in custody, Logg said to SERJEANT DRESDON, of the police, that Tozer brought him the lead to sell for him, saying that he found it.
.
WILLIAM SKOWN, who worked at the same place with Logg, deposed to Tozer having sent messages to Logg to meet him.
.
Logg, in his defence stated that he had the lead from Tozer; and the latter said he had it from a waggoner. Tozer was found Guilty of stealing the lead, and Logg of receiving it knowing it to have been stolen. Four Calendar Months Hard Labour.
.....................................................................
JOHN FRAMPTON and RICHARD LANSALLES were charged with cutting and wounding James and Joseph HICKS, at Lawhitton, near Launceston, with intent to do them some grievous bodily harm. Mr. OXENHAM prosecuted, Mr. CARTER defended the prisoners.
JAMES HICKS said that, on the evening of December 22nd, he was returning to Launceston from his mother's funeral, with his brother JOSEPH HICKS and his two young daughters. At Lawhitton Cross, they saw prisoners before them, rambling about the road. Prisoners began to push against them as They came up. After they had passed on, JOSEPH HICKS called back to prisoners that they had better go home, saying, "I am a bit of a peace-maker myself." One of them said "We will see whether you are, or not" and Frampton ran up and collared JOSEPH HICKS. Witness went to his brother's assistance, and in the scuffle which ensued, his brother called out "Hold him tight, James, he has cut my trowsers, and I think he has cut my leg."
.
After this, witness was cut by Frampton over the wrist. They held Frampton, and took him to the Bennett Arms; he was afterwards taken by the policeman to Launceston. Witness showed his wrist to a surgeon. Had not been able to work since. Prisoners appeared very tipsy.
.
Cross-examined: They first took hold of Joseph Hicks, and witness then went forward and laid hold of Frampton. Joseph Hicks said "Hold him tight, James; he has cut my trowsers, and I think he has cut my leg." It while holding him after this that witness was cut. Lansalles meanwhile had gone away.
.
Witness saw no knife in Frampton's hand, and believed he must have had it in his hand when they came up, as he had no time to take it from his pocket.
.
JOSEPH HICKS, brother of the last witness, deposed to the same facts. Witness advised prisoners to go home, saying "I'm a bit of a peace-maker myself." They said, "We will see whether you are or not," and came up and collared him. In the scuffle which followed, witness felt a cut across his leg. His brother afterwards said, "hold him tight, he has just cut my hand off."
.
Cross-examined: Frampton said when they came up that he had charge of a drunken man; but witness did not see "that one was drunker than the other." Witness saw no knife. The trousers which were cut were here produced, and shown to the jury.
.
ELIZABETH HICKS, daughter of James Hicks, corroborated the evidence of the preceding witness.
.
EDWARD LAWRENCE WEST, a surgeon practicing at Launceston, said that James and Joseph Hicks were brought to him. The former was almost fainting from loss of blood; he had a clean cut on the back of his left wrist, about three or four inches long, it extended down to the muscles and tendons; it exposed the tendons, but without injuring them. There was also a shorter cut on the back of the right hand, which cut down to the tendon, and an artery, exposing them but without injuring them. Did not think the injury would be permanent. The knife in charge of the police would have produced such wounds.
.
---- WEST, a policeman, who took Frampton and Lansalles into custody, produced Frampton's trowsers, which were much marked with blood; when the trowsers were taken, the blood was fresh; this was in the evening, after Frampton was in bed.
.
INSPECTOR FLEET, of the police, produced a knife. After being taken into custody, Frampton said, "Richard Lansalles saw and heard the whole of it." Frampton accounted for the blood on his trowsers by saying he had hurt his leg; there was no wound found on his leg, and he then said he had hurt his hand, and pointed to an old wound on it.
.
[from here to the end of the case, the image I?m using for transcription is fuzzy; there may be some small mistakes. This is my best effort.]
.
JOHN BURT, a shoemaker, picked up a knife by the side at Lawhitten ... the same knife to that produced by the Inspector. The knife was that and there was no appearance of blood on it.
.
Mr. CARTER contented for the defense, that there was no evidence whatever against Lansalles and that, as regarded Frampton, there was no evidence that the knife was his, or that he had any knife in his possession, and that even if he had used one it was used in order to get away from James and Joseph Hicks, and to resist an unlawful apprehension.
.
His Lordship observed to the jury that there appeared to be no evidence against Lansalles, and that the evidence against Frampton appeared to be rather of unlawfully wounding, than of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm. It was for the jury to consider whether the fact of unlawfully wounding had been proved.
.
The jury Acquitted Lansalles, and found Frampton Guilty of unlawfully wounding. Three Calendar Months' hard labour.
.....................................................................
.
JOHN THOMAS was charged with setting fire to a mow of wheat at Kenwyn, the property of THOMAS SOLOMAN. Mr. COX prosecuted; Mr. CARTER defended the prisoner.
.
THOMAS SOLOMAN said: I am a farmer at Rose-in-valley, in Kenwyn. On the morning of the 27th November, about four o'clock, I was awakened by my wife; I got up and found the wheat mow on fire. The mow was in a field, not in the mowhay. I should think it had been burning three or four hours. On the Saturday following, I saw two foot marks about fourteen inches from the hedge near the mow, as if a man had jumped from the hedge. They were directed toward the mow. After that, I saw other footsteps in a field of seeds near; they were going from the mow rather towards HOLMAN's, which is about a mile off. I only traced the steps a few yards. On the Sunday morning, the Superintendent of police, in my presence, found a box of lucifers in the mowhay. On the night of Tuesday following, I set a boy called TANK to watch, with a? dog; Tank afterwards showed me some foot marks. Prisoner is a son-in-law to a man called HOLMAN, with whom I have had a law suit.
.
Cross-examined: Holman was my landlord in part. I had an insurance in the "West of England" office. About four years ago I had a fire in the thatch of a house. I was paid the insurance money in both cases. We saw it was useless to attempt putting out the fire in the mow. Prisoner has worked at Great Devon Consols. I never heard him say anything in anger about the case between myself and Holman. After the boy had been watching, he told me that he had seen somebody go away about my size. We covered over the foot marks with boards and stalks, to keep them secure. Miners frequently pass my premises, both by day and night.
.
ROBERT TANK: On the Tuesday night after the fire, I watched in the mowhay with a dog. About twelve, the dog got very uneasy. I saw a man about thirty-five feet on the other side of the hedge; I looked over the hedge. It was bright moonlight. We made a noise, and the man went away. I could not see his face, but he was dressed in a dark suit. I am quite sure that prisoner is the man.
.
Cross-examined: The man was in a stooping position when he went away. My master came out in the course of the night - he had on a bluish jacket. I recognized the man I saw by his clothes, and by his height. I did not see his face. I did not see the man do anything. It was a fortnight after that I saw the prisoner and recognized him as the man I had seen in the night.
.
WILLIAM LAWTON: I am an inspector of police. Prisoner was asked by the superintendent to show his boots; he said he had none but what he had on. I afterwards found at St. Day, in a public-house, a bag containing under-ground clothes, and a pair of boots and shoes. I recognized the shoes as having been worn by the prisoner. I saw them shown to the prisoner, and the latter said they were his. I examined the footmarks on the premises, and compared them with the shoes I had found in the bag. They corresponded in every particular. The shoes were not alike, having particular marks. One had a toe-plate, and the other a 'skute.' (The shoes were here produced.)
.
Cross-examined: The impressions were not complete where the man appeared to have jumped from the hedge; as the heels only were there deeply indented. The house where the shoes were found is the house where the van stops, and I was told they had come by the van.
.
SUPERINTENDENT JARRETT: I found footmarks where the man appeared to have jumped from the hedge. They were impressions of the entire feet, but more deeply indented at the heels. They were more plain when I saw them first than afterwards when the comparison was made. There were also other footsteps distinct. Afterwards a place was pointed out to me as the spot where Tank had seen the man. I saw footmarks in the hedge; I did not compare them with the boots, but could see two different toe-marks. I took the prisoner into custody, and he said he came down from Wheal Maria on the 29th, and returned on the 30th; that he was at Wheal Maria on the 28th, and at home on the 27th. I took his boots and compared them with the tracks, and they exactly corresponded. There were a great number of footmarks of persons about the mow.
.
His Lordship here asked the jury whether they wished to hear the Counsel for the defence; he thought the evidence was exceedingly vague. The jury agreed with his lordship that there was not evidence enough for a conviction, and Acquitted the prisoner.
......................................................................
HENRY PASCOE was charged with stealing brass from Kelly Bray Mine. Mr. CARTER appeared for the prosecution; Mr. COX for the defence. There appearing to be no evidence to prove that the brass produced had ever been the property of the prosecutors, his Lordship directed an Acquittal.
........................................................................
EDWARD SANDERS was charged with stealing hay, &c., at Truro, and EDWARD CRAGOE with receiving the same. Mr. STOCK prosecuted.
.
ALFRED TEDDER said: I am a coach proprietor, at Truro. I keep in my stables, which I rent of Mr. PEARCE, hay, oats, beans, Indian corn, and chaff. I have other stables near the gas-works, and it had been the duty of Sanders to take the oats, chaff, &c., when mixed in the latter stables, down to the former, for the horses of the early mail.
.
WILLIAM WOOLCOCK, police-sergeant of the borough of Truro: On the morning of Saturday, January 9th, I saw Sanders at Lemon Quay, coming with a bundle of straw or hay. He turned into Tabernacle Street, near which Cragoe has a stable. On the Tuesday following, in consequence of information received, I went to Cragoe's stable, between three and four in the morning. I went into the stable, and examined the contents of the corn-bin. I found white beans mixed with bran and oats; the beans were crushed.
.
Next day I went again, about a quarter after four in the morning, and found there Indian corn, beans, and oats. I took a sample. I obtained samples, unmixed, from Mr. Tedder's stable on the Tuesday, and also some on the 18th in a mixed state. (The samples were here produced, and shown to the jury.) There was no hay in Cragoe's stable when I went in on the morning of the 13th. Having gone up into the loft, I heard some one come into the stable below. I opened the loft window, intending to jump out, when I saw Sanders leave the stable and close the lock; he had nothing with him. I went down into the stable and found a truss of hay near the corn-bin. I marked the truss with a twist in the bind. I had to go upstairs again and get out of the window, as although not locked, the padlock was closed, and could not be opened from the inside.
.
Afterwards, Mr. NASH and I watched for several mornings, and on the following Sunday morning about a quarter after five, while concealed opposite Cragoe's stable, I saw Sanders come up with hay, and carry it into the stable. Mr. Nash and I followed him into the stable and took him into custody on a charge of stealing his master's corn and hay. He said it did not belong to his master, and that it was the first he had brought there. I told him he had brought a bundle of hay there on Wednesday, and he said that was the only one he had taken from his master. We could see no other hay until we had tumbled over the straw in the loft, when we found two trusses - one of them the truss that I had marked.
.
Cross-examined by Sanders: I saw you on the Wednesday morning by gas light. I saw your face plainly.
.
SUPERINTENDENT NASH, of the Truro police, deposed to having seen Sanders enter the stable with hay, when he watched with last witness, and to Sanders having said that the bundle of hay which he took there on Wednesday morning, was the only one he had taken from his master.
.
Cross-examined by Cragoe: The straw over the hay was loose. Except some hay which he put into the rick for the horse, he brought away all the hay.
.
ALFRED TEDDER re-examined: I have examined the samples taken from Cragoe's stable, and they correspond exactly with mine. I had trusses of hay on my premises like that produced, but cannot say it is the same.
THOMAS STANNING, a hay-trusser, who had been in the habit of trussing for Mr. Tedder, said he could identify the hay found in Cragoe's loft, as being Mr. Tedder's property. He was strongly cross-examined on this point by Cragoe.
CRAGOE, in his defense, said that he bought the hay of a man in Ladock, and found the beans, oats, Indian Corn, and chaff, in a bag, on Lemon-Quay. The jury found Sanders Guilty of stealing, and Cragoe of Receiving.
There was another charge to which Sanders pleaded Guilty; no evidence on this was offered against Cragoe. Cragoe called on Mr. Nash for a character. Nash said he could not say anything in his favour, though he did not know of his being engaged in any felony before.
In passing sentence, his lordship said he should take into consideration the fact that Sanders had been some time in gaol. He sentenced Sanders to Four Calendar Months' Hard Labour, and Cragoe to Seven Calendar Months Hard Labour.
...............................................................................
JOHN OLD, who had pleaded Guilty, on Saturday, of perjury, was now brought up for judgment, and sentenced to Six Calendar Months' Hard Labour.
...........................................................................
JOHN BRAY was charged with stealing two fowls, the property of WILLIAM SOWDEN, at Lanivet. Mr. HOLDSWORTH prosecuted; Mr. COX defended.
.
On the evening of Saturday, January 16th, Mr. Sowden saw his fowls safe at roost. On the following morning, on going to the pigs' house, he found a hat, and on looking for his fowls, found that two were gone. He saw some footsteps outside. He went towards the prisoner's house, and about two hundred yards from it, found a quantity of feathers, the same sort as those of his fowls. About four or five o'clock on Sunday afternoon, he pointed out the foot-marks to MARSHALL, a constable, and on Monday, they got some boots from the prisoner's mother. These boots belonged to the prisoner's brother, but the prisoner had worn them on the Saturday night.
.
Cross-examined: the fowls and pigs were kept in the same house. There were houses besides the prisoners on the common.
.
WILLIAM MARSHALL, constable of Lanivet, went to the prisoner's house, and found a part of a fowl, and a quantity of blood on the floor. Under a heap of ashes he found a quantity of fowls' bones. At the mother's house, next door, he got a pair of boots; he took one and compared it with the foot-prints near Mr. Sowden's fowl-house. They corresponded; the heel of the boot was worn away on one side. The footsteps were near the road from Bodmin to the prisoner's house.
.
CAROLINE BRAY, niece of the prisoner, said that on Saturday the 16th January, prisoner came into his mother's house, and got a pair of his brother's boots.
.
WILLIAM HARRIS, constable, of Bodmin, on the night of Saturday, the 16th of January, went to the Garland Ox. Prisoner was outside the door, in fits. They took him inside. After he had recovered somewhat, he asked for his hat, which had mud on it, and was like the one produced.
.
Mr. SOWDEN was re-called, and stated that the feathers found were those of his fowls.
.
Mr. Cox addressed the jury, contending that there was no evidence to show that the hat or the tracks were those of the prisoner; or that the bones and feathers which were found were those of the prosecutor's fowls.
.
Verdict, Guilty. THOMAS DUNGEY, head warder at the county gaol, proved a previous conviction against the prisoner. Six Calendar Months' Hard Labour.
The business of the assizes terminated at seven o'clock on Monday evening; and next morning the Judges left Bodmin for Somersetshire.
West Briton Transcriptions,?1836-1856 at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wbritonad