Welcome to The Briercliffe Society Forum

The forum is free to join and you do not need to be a member of the society. You will receive an email to activate your account before you will be able to log in. Please check spam filters and junk mail folders for this email.
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:40 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:26 am 
Spider Lady
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 8053
Location: Staffordshire
The Preston Chronicle

Saturday 22 October 1831

John Harper, 21, was charged with stealing sundry articles of machinery, brass-steps, &c. of Messrs. Massey and Co., at Habergham Eaves, and Christopher Harper, his brother. The prisoner John said he had received the articles from his brother who told him he had had them since he had given up his shop, two years before. Christopher had previously been convicted. They were both found guilty.

William Bury, charged with entering a dwelling house at Colne with intent to commit a felony, was told that an indictment would be preferred against him, and that he would be committed to Lancaster Castle for felony. Mr. John Addison, stated that the reason they could not make it out on the capital charge before, was, because they could not then prove that any thing had been stolen.

Thomas Smith, 15, pleaded guilty to stealing, in July last, a hand-vice, at Burnley, the property of his employer. -Three months' hard labour.

William Whittaker, Henry Ellis, and William Riding, were charged with stealing in the month of May last, at Colne, ten hens and one cock, the property of John Phillips. Riding pleaded guilty. Several witnesses giving Whittaker and Ellis good characters, Whittaker said that he did not know the fowls were stolen; that Riding had met him, told him he had exchanged some gears for some hens and if he would go with him to see them sold, he (riding) would be 1s. towards drink. The two prisoners were found guilty, but recommended to the mercy of the Court, on account of their previous good character.
Dr. Brown said that the prisoner Riding was implicated in breaking an entry in the day time into the dwelling of John Duxbury, at Colne, along with a maan named Bury, who had escaped.
Askwith, the constable of colne, being asked if he knew any thing of Riding, said "I can't say any thing in his favour."
Chairman - Can you say any thing against him?
Askwith - "No Sir."
The Chairman said, that Riding had now been convicted with two persons younger than himself, and that he was included in an indictment for burglary, and had previously been convicted of a minor offence. (The prisoner denied being concerned in the burglary.) The sentence of the Court was that he should be transported for seven years.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:39 am 
Spider Lady
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 8053
Location: Staffordshire
The Preston Chronicle

Saturday 22 October 1831

John Heys and George Nuttal, were charged with stealing, on the 2d. august, at Newchurch, a parasol and other articles, including a pie, the property of Alice Roberts, and her daughter Ann Roberts. Dennis Maden had been included in the indictment, but was admitted King's evidence, and on his testimony the case chiefly rested. It appeared that Heys and Maden had been together late on a Saturday night, on a hay-mow near Newchurch, when Heys persuaded the latter to enter the house of the prosecutrix by a back window, saying there were but herself and her daughter in the house, and they could not catch him. He did enter, very early on Sunday morning, but (as stated by him in evidence) being all of a tremble could not lay his hands upon any thing. Heys, who was waiting outside, no sooner found this than with an oath he entered and took the articles himself. Their footmarks were observed on the floor (one with stockings and one barefooted) and both being apprehended, they appeared to correspond. It did not appear that Nuttal was present at the robbery; but he was proved, by other evidence, to have brought home a dish, with part of a pie, after midnight on the night in question,-to have left it on the window shelf, and to have taken it away at a later hour the same morning. He stated that he had found it, and on first going out in the morning, hearing of the robbery, he was afraid of being implicated, and therefore took it away and concealed it. The empty dish was found in the corner of an adjacent field. The jury found Heys guilty, Nuttal not guilty.
The Chairman, addressing Heys, said he had been guilty of an offence for which had he been capitally indicted he would have been sentenced to death. He had seduced another, a mere boy, forcibly to enter premises in the dead hour of the night, and had done so himself and stolen the articles. The sentence of the Court was that he should be transported beyong the seas for 14 years.
The prisoner on being taken away, repeated what he hadfrequently said during the trial, "that he was innocent as the child unborn."

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group