Hawkins Genealogy Site
Taunton Courier. Bristol and Exeter
Journal, and Western Advertiser Wednesday 09 Nov 1904
Page 2 Column 7
TAUNTON BOROUGH POLICE.
WEDNESDAY. - Before the Mayor (Councillor A. VILLAR), Alderman A. E. PERKINS, Alderman H. J. Van TRUMP, Mr. T. PENNY, and Alderman W. LOCK.
CHARGE OF ASSAULT WITHDRAWN.
Thos. ROWLAND, a travelling showman, was charged on remand with having on the previous Saturday assaulted Henry OATEN. - Mr. C. P. CLARKE, who appeared for the prosecution, stated that when he asked for the remand on Monday he thought a more serious charge might have to be preferred against the defendant, but he had since ascertained that a charge of common assault was the proper one. Defendant, it appeared, rented the poor ground for a travelling show, and Mr. HARRIS, the tenant, instructed Mr. WOOLLEN to distrain for five or six days' rent to the value of about 17s or 18s. Messrs. WOOLLEN, HARRIS, and SULLY went to the ground and the money not being forthcoming SULLY attempted to distrain on one of defendant's horses. Before doing so he asked the prosecutor, OATEN, to help him, and a man named PETERS, a friend of the defendant's, interfered with the result that a fight took place between him and OATEN, during the progress of which defendant came up and kicked OATEN in the eye. He (Mr. CLARKE) understood that defendant's wife and family were destitute, and defendant's brother hearing of the affair asked OATEN not to proceed with the summons, promising if he did not he would be compensate him for his injuries, and pay the costs he had incurred. As however the defendant had been arrested on a warrant he (Mr. CLARKE) did not care to withdraw the summons without the consent of the Bench, but OATEN felt defendant, who had been in custody two days, had been sufficiently punished, and would withdraw with the permission of the Bench on payment of the costs. - Defendant said he was very sorry indeed for what had happened, and the magistrates allowed the case to be withdrawn, defendant's brother paying the costs.
THEFT OF A BICYCLE LAMP.
Wm. WOOLRIDGE, a respectable young man, of Pitminster, was charged with having on the 15th October stolen a bicycle lamp, value 16s, the property of Alfred John PANTY. - Prosecutor, who lives at Orchard Portman, stated that on the date in question he came to Taunton and left his bicycle at the Phoenix Hotel with the lamp attached. When he returned to the hotel at 10 o'clock at night the lamp had gone, and he had to go home without it. He did not see the lamp again till P.C. HOLLARD showed it him on the 29th ult. - P.C. HOLLARD stated that in consequence of a complaint received on the 29th October he went into the Phoenix Hotel yard, where his attention was drawn to a lamp on a bicycle there, which prosecutor identified as his property. Witness subsequently saw defendant and asked him if the lamp belonged to him, and he replied in the affirmative. Even after being cautioned defendant persisted that the lamp was his, and that he bought it at Wells, but he could not give the name or address of the person from whom he bought it. In reply to a question as to whether there was any mark on the lamp by which he could identify it he drew attention to his initials which had been scratched on it. Witness told him he had every reason to believe the lamp was a stolen one, and on the way to the Police-station defendant said “Well, I did steal the lamp, and I'm very, very sorry.” - Defendant, who was represented by Mr. C. P. CLARKE, elected to be dealt with summarily, and pleaded guilty. - Mr. CLARKE said the defendant undoubtedly committed a very foolish act, and for the time being must have lost his reason. On the day of the theft defendant had met with an accident while cycling into Taunton and damaged his lamp, and seeing the prosecutor's nice looking lamp at the Phoenix appropriated it. To have taken the lamp back to the very same place again in his opinion pointed to the fact that there must have been something wrong with defendant. He had previously borne an excellent character, and Mr. CLARKE appealed to the Bench to deal leniently with him. - The Mayor said the magistrates would be sorry to damage his future career, and bound him over in his own recognisances to come up for judgment when called upon.
DRUNK. - Thos. MONKHOUSE, painter, of Wood-street, who did not appear, was summoned for being drunk in North-street, and was fined 1s and costs. - P.S. GILSON proved the case.
DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR. - Rose BAILEY, of King-street, pleaded guilty to disorderly behaviour in North-street on the 25th October. - P.C. HOLLARD said the offence was committed near the Castle Hotel, and Superintendent DURHAM asked the Bench to inflict such a penalty as would put a stop to this kind of thing. - Fined 10s and 5s costs, in default 14 day's imprisonment.
OBSCENE LANGUAGE. - For using obscene language towards his wife Wm. STARR, labourer, of Prince's-street, who had been previously convicted, was fined 7s 6d and 5s costs. - P.C. DENING stated the facts of the case, which Mr. DURHAM described as a particularly bad one. - Fred PLENTY, labourer, of Queen-street, pleaded guilty to a similar offence in East Reach on October 13th, and was fined 2s and 5s costs.
SUNDAY EVENING OBSTRUCTION. - Walter SULLY, Charles SULLY, labourers, and Florence FORD, domestic servant, all of Bishop's Lydeard, pleaded guilty to obstructing the footpath in Bridge-street on the 23rd October. - P.C. HOLLARD, who with another constable was on duty in plain clothes in consequence of the complaints received, said he watched them for a quarter of an hour on the Sunday evening in question. They obstructed the footpath, and forced several people to go into the road to pass. - Superintendent DURHAM said these defendants probably did not know of what had taken place with regard to this obstruction in Taunton as they were strangers, and they were not disorderly. - Defendants said they did not know they were breaking the law, and were let off on payment of the costs, 2s 5d each.
A DRUNKEN WOMAN. - Jane BISHOP, a married woman, pleaded guilty to being drunk in East-street on the 27th October. - As nothing was known against her the case was dismissed on payment of the costs.
Back to Miscellaneous Page
Back to Home Page