Sarah
Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper
Articles
Taunton Courier. Bristol and Exeter Journal, and Western Advertiser Wednesday 30 Nov 1921
Page 3 Column 3 & 4
TAUNTON BOROUGH POLICE-COURT.
WEDNESDAY. - Before Mr. G. HINTON (in the chair), Mrs. C. MINETT, Messrs. T. S. PENNY, J. WHITE, and W. DRAYTON.
LICENSING.
On the application of Mr. T. BROOMHEAD, the license of the Crown and Tower Hotel, Silver-street, was temporarily transferred from Richard Morgan DAVIS to Henry PARRISH. - On the application of Mr. F. W. WILLMOTT, the license of the New Inn, East-street, was permanently transferred from Bertie PIKE to Mr. William C. WOODMAN.
Mr. WILLMOTT also applied for a certificate under Section 3 of the Licensing Act for permission to serve liquor with meals for one hour after the usual closing hour. Mr. WILLMOTT quoted the section under which the application was made, and the Chairman intimated that by a majority the Bench had decided to refuse the application.
Mr. WILLMOTT: Before you give that decision I think I had better put Mr. ROBINSON in the box, because with the greatest respect and submission to the Bench your Worships have only to be satisfied that there is accommodation available, and if you are satisfied on that point the certificate follows.
Mr. DRAYTON: Supposing there is accommodation in half a dozen other places?
Mr. WILLMOTT: That does not matter. Here we have a case where your Worships have inspected the premises, and are satisfied that he accommodation is there, and the Deputy-Chief Constable is also satisfied. Passengers arrive late at night, and are unable to get the refreshment such as this section was intended for. I ask you to be good enough to reconsider your decision and not to put my client to the expense of applying for a madamus.
Mr. DRAYTON: Why don't you apply for all night?
Mr. WILLMOTT: I am not permitted to; the Act says I shall have one hour.
Mr. DRAYTON: But trains come in all night.
Mr. WILLMOTT: Supposing they do, they have to put up with it. I submit your Worships have no power to refuse the application.
The Chairman: The Bench are still against you.
Mr. WILLMOTT: I ask your learned Clerk to advise you upon this point, because I am right about it.
Mr. T. S. PENNY: Our learned Clerk advises us it is within our discretion.
The Bench, having further discussed the matter, the Chairman and the Bench had re-considered their decision, and would grant the application.
Mr. T. S. PENNY: Of course, we have no discretion in the matter.
Mr. WILLMOTT: I agree, sir
ALLEGED MALICIOUS WOUNDING.
CHARGE REDUCED.
Alfred OATEN, drover, of 15 Court, East Reach, Taunton, pleaded not guilty to having, on the 18th inst., maliciously wounded, with a table knife, John WATTS, his brother-in-law, of the same address.
Dr. A. E. JOSCELYNE stated that on November 18th he examined complainant at about 11 a.m. He had a superficial cut about 2½ inches long across the throat, sufficiently deep in one place to penetrate the skin, but otherwise it was more of the nature of a scratch. It might have been done with the knife produced.
By Deputy-Chief Constable BROWN: The wound was right across the centre of the throat, which is a dangerous place.
Complainant, carter, of 15 Court, East Reach, who described himself as a “Bristolian,” stated that at about 8.15 a.m. On the day in question he was in bed. He heard a row taking place between his wife and defendant. His wife was a sister of defendant, and they lived in the same house. Witness went down and interfered. He did not wish to press the charge, as he could no say if the wound was caused by the knife or the pin, which he now produced. Defendant was cutting a piece of bread when he (witness) spoke to him, and he threatened to stab him. Witness rushed in at defendant to take the knife from him, and he had a cut in the throat, and was told to go to the doctor by the police. He could not say what statement he made to the police, as he was so upset. Defendant picked up a brush and threatened him, and then ran out of the Court, and witness thought that he had gone. Defendant returned about half-way up the Court, and threw two bricks at witness, missing him, but hitting a sheet hanging on the line. Witness chased him to South-street, where he took off his belt and threatened witness with it. Witness closed with him, and tried to take the belt from him, when Mrs. OATEN (a sister-in-law) came down and told witness to leave him alone. He asked her if he was to allow defendant to stab him without defending himself.
The Bench decided to reduce the charge to one of common assault, and to this defendant also pleaded not guilty.
P.C. HANNAM stated that he received a complaint from the previous witness that defendant had wounded him with a knife, and later he arrested defendant on a warrant.
Defendant stated that on Friday morning the row was started by complainant, who knocked him down.
Defendant was bound over in the sum of £5 for six months, and pay the costs, £2. He was given two months in which to pay.
THEFT FROM ALLOTMENTS.
CHARGE AGAINST LABOURER DISMISSED
A. E. CLARKE, labourer, of Paul-street, was summoned for having, on the 15th inst., stolen a quantity of vegetables from an allotment, the property of George Wm. PARKER, an employee of the Post-office Engineers' Department, of 3 Court, East Reach. He was also charged with a similar offence in respect of vegetables belonging to William HOPKINS, of 3, Roman-road, Taunton.
Mr. Ivor JONES (Messrs. Alms & Jones), for defendant, pleaded not guilty to each offence.
Mr. WILLMOTT, for the prosecution, stated that defendant rented an allotment at String-lane, which was situated between those of PARKER and HOPKINS. On the 15th November, between four and 4.30 p.m., defendant was seen to go to PARKER's allotment, take the key of the hut from where it was secreted, and get a bag from the hut. He cut three cabbages and four Brussel sprouts from PARKER's allotment, and six cabbages from HOPKINS' allotment. He was under observation the whole of the time by a man named BOWKER, who was in his hut, and saw defendant cut the vegetables, put them in a bag, and take them away. Defendant went into the lane, and BOWKER followed, and met another allotment-holder, named SKINNER. Together they watched the movements of defendant, and saw him go along the lane with the bag of cabbages, throw them over the wire fence, get though the fence, and proceed along the hedge, and get to the top of the allotment to procure his bicycle. It is quite obvious, continued Mr. WILLMOTT, that there must be common honesty among allotment-holders, and if they cannot be honest one with another, no man's allotment would be safe, and he would be deprived of the fruits of his labour. As a result of the theft PARKER had to buy vegetables for the week-end.
Evidence was given by complainant, and Edgar BOWKER, of 4, Haydon-terrace, who, in reply to Mr. JONES, admitted that there was a notice offering £5 reward for a conviction, but that did not come into his mind. The man was wearing a dust coat, or a mackintosh. It was getting dusk, and he lost sight of the man, but he was certain of his identity.
Replying to Mr. WILLMOTT, witness said defendant passed within 10 yards of him, and he had a side-view of his face. He had seen defendant on the allotment several times.
Samuel SKINNER, of 5 Court, East Reach, also gave evidence.
Mr. JONES said his defence was an absolute denial of the offences, and he would prove an alibi. The offence was a very serious one, and out of all proportion to the value of the cabbages. The man served right through the war, and had been unemployed for some time, and he felt that the charge was wrongly brought against him.
Defendant stated that he lived at 1, Chapel-terrace, Paul-st., and on the 15th inst. went to the allotment between 10 and 11 a.m., and cut some Brussel sprouts for dinner. He was away on business during the afternoon, and got home at 4.15 p.m. After tea he took his wife and family to the pictures. On the following night Mr. LANE (secretary of the Association), accompanied by Mr. BOWKER, called at the house, and BOWKER, in reply to Mr. LANE as to whether he (witness) was the man, said, “I am almost certain.” Mr. LANE told him that it would be a summonsing job, but if he would go before the Committee and confess they would deal leniently with him. He denied having taken the cabbages.
By Mr. WILLMOTT: He was unemployed. His party at the pictures consisted of six, but it only cost him 1s 1d. They went to the pictures twice a week as a rule.
Defendant's wife stated that her husband was in her company after 4.15 p.m. on the day in question.
Mary SPENCER, defendant's mother-in-law, also spoke of the visit to the house, and said that BOWKER said he was not quite sure that he was the man.
Witness BOWKER, re-called, stated that when they called at the house on the Wednesday evening, defendant did not give any explanation as to where he had been. He did not hear him say he went home at 4.15, had tea, and then went to the pictures, but he did not offer that explanation when before the Committee.
By the Bench: He had no doubt about the man's identity.
The Bench announced that the case would be dismissed.
A DESERTER.
Albert BEVAN, a sailor, pleaded guilty to being an absentee from H.M.S. Vivid at Devonport from Monday last. - Deputy Chief Constable BROWN asked for a remand to await an escort, and this course was adopted.
A CASE STOPPED.
Sid. William BARLOW, and Alfred James MANUEL, his adopted son, dealers, of Providence-place, High-street, Taunton, were summoned for having, on the 21st inst., stolen a waggon cover, valued £1 10s, the property of E. R. BRYANT.
Mr. F. W. CLARKE, for defendants, pleaded not guilty.
Ernest Robert BRYANT, carrier of 29, East Reach, stated that on Monday, November 21st, he was at the Railway Station, and left a waggon sheet at the goods yard, and when he returned on Tuesday the sheet was missing. He interviewed defendants, and identified the sheet now produced.
P.C. DAVIS stated that on the 22nd he received a complaint from the previous witness. He made enquiries and went to Providence-place and saw defendants, who said they knew nothing about it. He took them to the police-station after they had produced the sheet now in Court.
By Mr. F. W. CLARKE: The sheet was on a pair of trucks, and was not hidden. They first of all produced their own waggon sheet, which had a name on it.
P.C. HILL gave corroborative evidence.
Mr. F. W. CLARKE stated that on the Monday his clients went to the railway station and loaded their waggon with pottery. When they had finished loading they saw a waggon sheet on the ground by their waggon, and, having one similar to it, they thought it was theirs, so they put it on their waggon and drove away. They left their waggon in the yard for the night, and next morning it was unloaded by the elder defendant, the cloth being put on one side. It was a pure mistake, and there was no intention of committing an offence.
Evidence was given by Sid. Wm. BARLOW, and, without calling on the other defendant, the Bench dismissed the case, stating that they did not think there was any intention to steal.
ALLER SCHOOL-MISTRESS'S LAPSE.
A SILLY, STUPID STATEMENT.
Elsie LEWIS, school teacher, of Aller, Langport, was brought up in custody charged with having, on the 12th inst., obtained from Herbert S. HARE, jeweller, of Taunton, the sum of £3 10s by false pretences.
Mt. Ivor JONES (Messrs. Alms & Jones) for the defendant pleaded not guilty.
Complainant, in the course of an almost inaudible statement, said prisoner came to his shop on Saturday, the 12th inst., and said she had no money, as her husband, who was following on his cycle, had missed the train, and he had the money with him. She asked him if he would be kind enough to lend her £3 or £4, and he lent her the sum of £3 10s. He thought no more about it until the Wednesday, and, as she had not re-paid the amount as she promised, he made enquiries, and subsequently gave information to the police.
By Mr. JONES: Prisoner rang him up on the 'phone on the following Saturday, and said she had been away, but had intended to bring the money in on that day, and asked if she should sent it, as it was late. He replied that the case had gone out of his hands. He did not wish to press the case. He lent the money on her representation that she would re-pay it, and as far as he knew she had never said that she would not re-pay it.
Mr. JONES submitted that no offence had been committed, as the money was lent on the representation that it would be repaid, and his client had never said that she would not re-pay.
Thomas JEANES, farmer of Aller, stated that defendant's husband was in his employ, and was working for him from 7 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. on the day in question.
By Mr. JONES: He was one of the managers of the school, and Mrs. LEWIS came to them with excellent testimonials. He had always found her to be an excellent teacher, and they had always had good reports of her work. She had four children dependant upon her, and her husband was out of work for some time before he was employed by him.
Mr. JONES, addressing the Bench, submitted that there was no evidence of intention to defraud. She made a silly, stupid statement when she told Mr. HARE that her husband had missed the train, but she was in financial difficulties, and wanted money to do her shopping that day. She intended to re-pay the money on the following Saturday, but was called away on business. She did not return to Aller until Saturday evening, and she then immediately 'phoned to Mr. HARE and asked if she should send the money, but Mr. HARE, quite rightly, replied that the matter was out of his hands. Defendant had held good and honourable positions in her time, and she had spent two days and nights in the cells, and, therefore, he was of the opinion that she should be dealt with in the most lenient manner possible.
Defendant said she had all along intended to re-pay the money, and she did not think she had done wrong in keeping Mr. HARE until the following Saturday before re-paying him. On the Saturday she had the money in her pocket to re-pay Mr. HARE, but when she got to Aller it was five o'clock. She had had a lot of sickness in the family.
The Bench retired, and on their return announced that they had given very careful consideration to the case, and fully appreciated Mr. HARE's generosity in helping the defendant. They had decided to put her on probation for six months, and she would have to pay the costs. She was given time in which to pay.
TROUBLE AT EAST REACH.
Caroline OATEN, widow, of No. 15 Court, East Reach, pleaded not guilty to a charge of using indecent language in East Reach on the 18th inst. - P.C. HANNAM stated that at nine a.m. he was on duty in East Reach, when he heard the defendant using very indecent language before a crowd of other people. - Deputy Chief Constable BROWN said the defendant was a nuisance where-ever she lived, and she had been before the Court repeatedly from 1905-1916, but she had not been up since then. - The Chairman of the Bench said that the defendant ought to be fined heavily, but they had taken into consideration the fact that she had not been up since 1916, and would only fine her 10s. Although the defendant stated that she would not pay, she was allowed a week in which to do so.
Caroline OATEN, Lucy BURT, and William BURT were then charged with assaulting and beating one another, the last two defendants being charged with beating the former, whilst she was charged with assaulting Lucy and William BURT.
All three parties gave somewhat incoherent statements as to the alleged offences, and the cases were all dismissed.
<NOTES: Alfred John or Alfie OATEN son of Charles Robert OATEN and Caroline Louisa KITCH
John WATTS married Annie May or Annai OATEN
Alfred James MANUEL son of Alfred James or James MANUEL and Sarah WEBBER, married Beatrice May BICKNELL. Adopted son of William Wheeler BARLOW or WHEELER-BARLOW
William Wheeler BARLOW or WHEELER-BARLOW associated with Sarah WEBBER, married Beatrice Ellen FLAMANK
Caroline Louisa KITCH daughter of John KITCH and Sarah TRUMP, married Charles Robert OATEN>