Taunton Courier 31 May 1882 Somerton Petty Sessions includes Richard FOURACRE Small Farmer of Picks Hill High Ham

Sarah Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper Articles

Taunton Courier, and Western Advertiser Wednesday 31 May 1882

Page 6 Column 5


MONDAY. - Before Vincent STUCKEY, Esq., F. W. PINNEY, Esq., and Captain BUTT.

The license of the Cross Keys inn, East Lydford, was temporarily transferred from Mr. Alfred BROWN to Mr George BARTLETT. He also applied for an extension of one hour on the 30th inst., on the occasion of the Club anniversary, which was granted. - Mr VENN, of the Devonshire Arms, Long Sutton, applied for an extension of one hours for a similar affair on Trinity Monday, which was also granted.

STRAYING. - Thomas HOOPER, of Keinton Mandeville, was summoned by Superintendent GILES for allowing a horse and a donkey to stray on the highway. Defendant was order to pay the cost of the summons. - Richard FOURACRE, a small farmer, of Pick's Hill, High Ham, was summoned by Superintendent GILES for allowing 1 cow, 2 heifers, 1 yearling and a donkey to stray on the highway on the 27th of April, and again on the 7th of May. Police constable CURTIS, stations at Aller, deposed seeing the animals straying, who afterwards gave them up to defendant's son. Police-constable MELMOUTH, stationed at High Ham, proved seeing the same animals (with the exception of the donkey) straying on the 7th inst. Defendant was fined 9s including costs for the first case, the second being dismissed. - William TUCKER, of Barton St. David, was summoned by Superintendent GILES for allowing his horse to stray on the 16th of May. Ordered to pay the cost of the summons.

CRUELTY TO A HORSE. - Robert Longman FORD, a baker, of West Camel, was charged with cruelty to a horse, by cutting its tail off with a chisel and wilfully neglecting to shear and dress the stump, causing the blood not to stop for a long space of time, on the 13th April last. - Superintendent GILES deposed that on the day in question he was at West Camel and saw a horse in an orchard belonging to the defendant. He noticed the animal had white legs, and it was saturated with fresh blood about its tail and legs. Witness afterwards went, in company with Police-constable WATTS, to defendant's house and saw him. Witness said, “What have you been doing to the house?” He replied, “Cut his tail off.” Witness said, “Have you sheared it?” He replied, “He will do all right; if it don't that is my look-out.” Witness than had the horse driven in the barton, where he examined the tail and found it was still bleeding, two small streams running from it, and a piece of string tightly bound round the tail several times, and the bone was protruding ¾-inch from below the skin. Witness said to him, “You have done nothing to stop the bleeding, and it has been taken off very roughly. What did you cut it off with.” Defendant replied he cut it off with a chisel and rubbed an iron over it, and he would do all right. Witness said the tail had been cut off that day. - Inspector APLIN, of Bridgwater, deposed that on the 24th April he went to West Camel. He saw the defendant and asked him if he would let him see the horse that the Superintendent had seen. He went to a field about 400 yards from defendant's house and saw the horse. Its tail was swollen, and a piece of string was tightly bound round three or four times, and the horse appeared to be in pain. Witness called defendant's attention to it, and he cut the string off with great difficulty. Witness said, “How did you do it?” Defendant replied he placed the tail on the wall and chopped it off with a chisel and mallet. Witness told him he was not allowed ot dock the horse at all. He replied, “That is how I have always done them.” - Thomas SYMES, veterinary surgeon, practising at Yeovil, deposed that on the 24th April he went with the previous witness to West Camel to examine a horse belonging to defendant. It had its tail docked, and a piece of string tightly tied round about an inch from the lowest extremity, causing strangulation of the blood vessels, and mortification of the last bone that was left. Witness told defendant that the string ought to have been taken off at the time of amputation, and not allowed to remain on 11 days. The tail appeared to have been squeezed, and not cut off. - The bench gave defendant a good reprimand, and cautioned him as to the future, and find <sic> him £1 and £1 4s costs.

OLD FRIENDS FALLING OUT. - Samuel FEVIN (73), a labourer, of Pitsbury, was charged with assaulting and beating Charles HARTLAND (73), of the parish of Huish, on the 16th of May. It appears that they fell out about cracking a heap of stones, which both parties had to break. Being both cripples, they fought at each other with their sticks until defendant's wife came to the rescue. - The bench listened very attentively to what they had to say to find out who struck the first blow, and after some little trouble they decided to inflict a small fine of 6d and 2s 6d costs on the defendant.

George CHARD, Henry MOODY, Robert SEALY, Frank DERRICK, Charles CHARD, and Jabez CHARD, young men of East and West Charlton, were summoned by Superintendent GILES for wilfully obstructing the highway by beating up old tins and making all sorts of noises on the 13th of May. All the defendants appeared with the exception of SEALY and Jabez CHARD. The bench find each defendant present 9s 6d, including costs.

SCHOOL CASES. - Henry GOVIER, John KING, John WEST, and James LANE, of the parish of Street, were summoned by Mr GIFFORD, school attendance officer, for non-attendance of their children. GOVIER was fined 2s 6d; KING, 2s 6d; WEST, 5s; LANE 2s 6d. - Frederick WALLACE, Walter FIDO, and Elizabeth BAKER, of the parish of Huish Episcopi were summoned by Mr Thomas LANGPORT, school attendance officer, for similar offences. - Each defendant was fined 5s including costs.

SWINE FEVER.- At the request of the Superintendent, the bench declared the parish of Walton to be free from swine fever.

Back to Miscellaneous Page

Back to Home Page