Murder? or accidental death?

[The two reports below are from the same newspaper, printed two weeks apart, and presumably refer to two different inquests into the same mishap. The second report also refers to a report one week earlier, which has not (yet) been electronically archived]


OXFORD, Saturday, Nov. 30
Jackson’s Oxford Journal (Oxford, England), Saturday, November 30, 1822; Issue 3631

Thursday last an inquest was held, at the pub-
lic house at Tingewick, Bucks, before Mr. Burn-
ham, Coroner for that county, on view of the
body of — Wells, keeper of the Old Angel public
house at Buckingham, who was found murdered
on the road, near the turnpike at Tingewick.
From the best information we can collect, we
learn that the deceased, with another man named
Brewerton, were returning, in a gig, from a
meeting held in Banbury for letting turnpike
tolls, on Monday last, and had quarrelled on
their road home; Brewerton had been heard to
say, “he would do for him.” When the de-
ceased was found, it was at first supposed his
death was occasioned by falling out of the gig;
but on a closer inspection of the wounds, there
was no doubt of his having been brutally mur-
dered. He had several severe blows about the
head and face, and one blow across his hand,
which it is probable was received when endea-
vouring to save them from his head. After a
very long investigation, the Jury returned a ver-
dict of Wilful Murder, against some person or
persons unknown.


INQUEST
Jackson’s Oxford Journal (Oxford, England), Saturday, December 14, 1822; Issue 3633

INQUEST

Upon Mr. W. Wells, of Buckingham
Held on Wednesday, Nov. 27, before Mr Burnham,
one of the coroners for that county
[THE CIRCUMSTANCE WAS GIVEN LAST WEEK]
Charles Cross, of Tingewick, shoemaker, deposed,
that on his road home from Buckingham last Monday
evening, the 25th of November, in company with his
apprentice, John Durrant, he met a horse and gig,
about half-past nine o’clock, without any person in it.
— that on approaching nearer Tingewick, they found
the body of a man lying by the road side — it was
quite cold — and a quantity of blood was under the
head and near it. Deponent immediately went to the
toll-gate (about 200 yards further on) to get as-
sistance, and on enquiring there whether a horse and
gig had lately passed through, the collector, Thomas
Brewerton, replied there had about half an hour ago;
and that the person who was with it was Wm. Wells,
of Buckingham. Whilst deponent was in coversa-
tion with the collector, in consequence of the ap-
prentice having gone into the village and given the
alarm, Benjamin Brewerton ran past the collector
and the deponent, as if alarmed, and on being called
to by name by the housekeeper at the toll-gate (Su-
sannah Stokes) he did not answer, but continued
running. Deponent followed, and on arriving again
at the place where the body lay, saw Benjamin Brew-
erton, who had arrived there about half a minute
before deponent, examining the head of the deceased;
and he (Brewerton) said he thought it was broken,
and expressed much surprise at finding Wells dead,
he having been to Banbury with him that day. De-
ponent waited till other persons came up, and then
left the place.
John Durrant, apprentice to the last witness, cor-
roborated his master’s testimony as to seeing the
empty gig and the body. On his master’s stopping
at the toll-gate, the witness ran on to Tingewick and
gave the alarm of the deceased having been found.
Went to several houses for that purpose, and amongst
others to that of Benjamin Brewerton, who was sit-
ting with his wife by the fire side. Benjamin Brew-
erton immediately ran out of his house towards the
toll-gate.

The Rev. Mr. Risley, of Tingewick, deposed that
on Monday evening the 25th of November, on his
return home from Buckingham in his gig with his
servant Richard Steeden, he met a horse and gig,
having no person in it, going towards Buckingham;
this was between nine and ten o’clock. Deponent
called to a waggoner who was passing at the time,
and desired him to take charge of the empty gig and
bring it back towards Tingewick. On deponent’s
road home, when about 200 yards on the Buckingham
side of the Tingewick toll-gate, observed three or
four persons standing by the side of the road, and,
on enquiring of the cause, learnt that William Wells
had been found dead. Deponent to ascertain the truth
got out of his gig and put his hand to the face
of the deceased and found it cold, and that he was
quite dead. Benjamin Brewerton was one of the
persons standing near the body, who said to depo-
nent that he had been to Banbury with the deceased,
and that upon their return they had called at
the Red Lion, and had quarrelled there — that the de-
ceased had used him very ill; in some further con-
versation with Brewerton on their way home, Brew-
erton expressed himself as being an innocent and an
upright man, and that he knew nothing of how the
deceased came by his death. Brewerton further
added, that the deceased was not intoxicated at the
time he had parted company with him at the Red
Lion.

William Stowe, of Buckingham, surgeon, deposed
that he had been called on to go to Tingewick about half-
past ten on the night of Monday the 25th ult. to see
a person who had been found lying on the road within
200 yards of Tingewick turnpike. On reaching the
spot, he found the body of William Wells, who ap-
peared to have received several wounds about the
head, and was quite dead. After noticing the posi-
tion of the body and limbs, and making such other
examinations as might tend to elucidate the cause of
the death, he directed that the body should be taken
to the nearest public-house for the purpose of inquest.
On farther examination in the presence of the Jury
this day, both ears were found severely lacerated, a
wound about two inches long on the right cheek, a
smaller one on the chin, the upper lip swollen, and a
front tooth deficient, an extensive wound on the back
of the right hand, and fluid having a spirituous smell,
was trickling from the left ear. Under the direction
of the coroner, he opened the head and removed the
brain, when a fracture was discovered extending across
the basis of the skull from ear to ear, which might
have been occasioned by falling on the top of the
head, or by considerable force applied overy one ear
while the opposite ear was on the ground — the left
ear had gravel in it, as if the injury had been sus-
tained while the head was in that position. Depo-
nent, on his first seeing the deceased, searched his
pockets and took from them 3l. 1s. 9d which, his wife
on receiving said, was within a shilliing or two of
what he had with him when he left home in the morning.

Joseph Terry, of Tingewick, labourer, deposed
that soon after eight o’clock on Monday evening last,
he heard the voice of Benjamin, exclaiming “Damn
his eyes, he shall have it.” Deponent lives next door
but one to Brewerton, and he (deponent) saw him
from his window at the time. Brewerton was wran-
gling afterwards with his wife or some person in the
house, and pulled his door to on coming out of it;
he returned again immediately, and on opening it said
to the persons inside the house, “D–n you, follow
me if you dare.” Brewerton then went towards
Tingewick turnpike-gate, passing deponent’s house,
and muttering to himself a the time, “D–n his
eyes, he shall have it.” Deponent thought at the
time Brewerton had been quarrelling with Edmund
Side, who was in Brewerton’s house.

Edmund Side, of Tingewick, labourer, deposed
that he was at the house of Benjamin Brewerton from
six till about nine o’clock on Monday evening the
25th of November. That Brewerton was absent at
the time he first went, but came in a quarter before
eight. He (Brewerton) appeared rather fresh — did
not remain above five minutes. That he then went
down to the turnpike, and was gone a quarter of an
hour, having been fetched home by his wife. That
he then remained ten minutes, during which time he
said he had had a few words with Wells, and behaved
very abusively towards his wife, saying he would go
out again and desiring her not to follow him. That
no words whatever passed between deponent
and Brewerton, nor did they even speak to each other —
That upon the request of Benjamin Brewerton’s wife,
deponent went to call John Brewerton to fetch Benj.
who did so, and brought Benjamin home. That Ben-
jamin remained in the house till deponent and his
wife left it, which was about half-past nine. — This
witness, on his re-examination said, that Brewerton
had said he would “wallop” Wells. And the evi-
dence generally came from him very reluctantly.

Charlotte Side, wife to the last witness, deposed
as to Benjamin Brewerton coming to his house, she
being there with her husband; that they left it to-
gether about nine o’clock; that, soon after they got
home, her husband went to the door and said “here
is the gig and Wells in it; he seems very fuddled, for
he sways about.” That about ten minutes after-
wards deponent went to Benjamin Brewerton’s house to
ask his wife to have some camomile tea, and saw
Benjamin Brewerton, and John Brewerton, drinking
beer together.

Mary Mansfield, the wife of Daniel Mansfield,
of the parish of Tingewick, victualler, deposed that
between the hours of 6 and 7 in the evening of Mon-
day, November 25, W. Wells and Benj. Brewerton got
out of a gig at deponent’s door; that they went into
the tap room together, and drank two pints of ale
with two half-quarterns of gin in it; they appeared
friendly towards each other at first, but afterwards
words arose between them about some money, which
the deponent cannot exactly speak to. Brewerton
appeared violent; threatened to knock Well’s teeth
down his throat; but on deponent’s interfering they
appeared good friends again, and got into the gig and
went away together. A few minutes afterwards
they came back to the door again and into the house;
Wells said on entering, “I don’t know what to make
of this fellow; he wants to fall out with me on the
road,” alluding to Brewerton, who said, “it was
only my fun.” Wells soon afterwards went to the
door, and got into the gig and drove off by himself,
leaving Brewerton in the house, who followed on foot
almost immediately. — Mansfield keeps the Red Lion,
at Finmere, but the house is in Tingewick parish.

Jas. Holton, butcher, of Tingewick, deposed that on
Monday evening the 25th ult. about 8 o’clock, Wm.
Wells, of Buckingham, called at deponent’s house,
in Tingewick, and told him that he (Wells) had come
from Banbury with Benjamin Brewerton, that even-
ing; that they had had words on the road, and again at
the Red Lion, where Brewerton at last promised to
drop it and shake hands; that Brewerton, when in
the gig again, used abusive language, and threatened
to fight Wells, who thereupon turned about to go to
the Red Lion again, where they agreed to settle the
dispute; but that Wells ordered the horse to be
ready, that he might drive away alone, for that Brew-
erton had threatened to knock his (Wells’) teeth down
his throat. Wells left deponent’s house about
twenty minutes past eight, but called again in the
gig on his way home, a little before nine o’clock;
nothing particular was said then; Wells appeared
a little fresh, but talked with deponent rationally,
and appeared perfectly capable of going home alone.

Susannah Stokes, housekeeper to Thos. Brewerton,
keeper of the Tingewick toll gate, deposed that she
did not leave her master’s house at all on Monday
evening the 25th of Nov. That Benjamin Brewerton
came there about half past eight; that he appeared
fresh, and had a few words with his father, and men-
tioned having had some with Wells. That deponent
sent Sarah Bedford to fetch Benj. Brewerton’s wife,
which she did; that Benj. Brewerton left the house
with his wife, but returned soon afterwards alone;
that he remained there about ten minutes, and quar-
relled with deponent about family affairs; that Ben-
jamin afterwards left the house in company with his
brother John, and did not return that evening. That
a gig, in which was William Wells, went through the
gate soon after nine o’clock. Benjamin and John
Brewerton had left the house some time.

John Brewerton, of Tingewick, labourer, deposed,
that between 8 and 9 o’clock, last Monday evening,
Edmund Side came to his (deponent’s) house, to re-
quest him to fetch his brother Benjamin away from
his father’s at the turnpike gate, as he was making
a disturbance there. That deponent went for his
brother immediately, and took him from his father’s
to his (Benjamin’s) own house; that he remained with
him drinking beer till past ten o’clock, and
never left him from the time he first went to the toll
house to that hour.

The evidence closed with this witness, and the
Jury, after taking another view of the body, and of
the gig from which the deceased is supposed to have
fallen, returned the their verdict, under the
direction of the Coroner, of Accidental Death.

Advertisements

Isaac Coote: convicts in Van Diemen’s Land

Timeline

  • 1822 (Sep 8) – baptism of Eliza Cross in Tingewick, Buckinghamshire
  • 1832 (Mar 15) – Isaac Coote sentenced to death, commuted to transportation for life, at Bury St. Edmonds, Suffolk
  • 1832 (Apr 6) – arrival in Tasmania of John and Frances Cross and ?five children aboard ‘Forth
  • 1832 (Dec 29) – arrival of Isaac Coote in Hobart aboard ‘York
  • 1838 (Feb 28) – Eliza Cross marries Isaac Coote
  • 1838 (Jun 17) – baptism of Matilda, dau of Isaac (‘tailor’) and Eliza Coote
  • 1840 (May 5?) – birth of Emily, dau of Isaac (‘taylor’) and Eliza **Coots**
  • 1841 – Isaac Coote granted Ticket of Leave
  • 1842 (Aug 16) – birth of Clara, dau of Isaac (‘tailor’) and Eliza Coote
  • 1845 (Dec 15) – Isaac Coote granted Conditional Pardon
  • 1847 (Aug 21) – birth of Alfred Richard, son of Isaac (‘tailor’) and Eliza Coote
  • 1848 – Isaac and Eliza Coote recorded on census with 2 daughters + son, with another unmarried freed convict
  • 1850 (Sep 29) – Isaac Coote becomes licensee of the Angel Inn, Charles Street, Launceston (until 1854)
  • 1851 (Nov 13) – birth of Adelaide Frances, dau of Isaac and Eliza Coote
  • 1854 (May 9) – Isaac Coote becomes licensee of the Jolly Farmer, Perth (Tasmania)
  • 1855 (Nov) – birth of Arthur Isaac, son of Isaac and **Sarah** Coote
  • 1862 (Jan) – Isaac Coote becomes licensee of the Hadspen Inn, Launceston (until 1865)
  • 1868 (Feb 26) – death of Eliza Coote – death notified by Isaac, widower
  • 1869 (Apr 14) – marriage of Isaac Coote and Adeline Laird
  • 1870 (Jun 30) – birth of Thomas James Coote, son of Isaac and Adeline Coote
  • 1873 (Dec 25) – death of Isaac Coote,  (‘tailor’) , of ‘dropsy’, aged 58

In 1832, John Cross – a mason from Tingewick – and his wife Frances née Terry arrived in Tasmania aboard the ship ‘Forth‘.  He seems to have led a most interesting life and I’m hoping one of his more knowledgeable descendants might write about him here in due course.

John and Frances’ second surviving daughter Eliza was barely fifteen and already pregnant when she married convict Isaac Coote, to whom she bore at least five children before dying of ‘paralysis’ in 1868, aged just 45.

Who, though, was Isaac Coote?  My search led me to discover the wealth of information available through the Tasmanian Archives Online website and its Tasmanian Names Index – a vast number of searchable scans, freely available.  A word of warning, though – the images are HUGE and very slow to load, so not something to attempt on a mobile phone signal!

Lent Assizes for Bury St Edmunds, 1832 (from Ancestry.com)

Lent Assizes for Bury St Edmunds, 1832 (from Ancestry.com)

Isaac was, it seems, convicted of housebreaking at Bury St. Edmonds Assizes on 15th March 1832, one of thirteen men sentenced to death for offences ranging from sheep-stealing to sacrilege.  As often happened at the time, none of the sentences were carried out: most were commuted to transportation – one for  7 years, the others (including Isaac) for ‘life’  but one man (a sheep-stealer) was merely imprisoned for 12 months!

Six months later, Isaac was one of 200 convicts aboard the ‘York‘ sailing from London and Plymouth, arriving in Hobart on 29th December 1832 after a three month voyage.

1832Coote,Isaac-description-CON18-1-21_00261_L_c

Description list from Linc Tasmania CON18/1/21

 

On arrival, his description was carefully noted: he was 5’5½”, aged 19, with fair complexion and a small head.  His hair was brown and he had ‘small’ brown whiskers.  His ‘visage’ was small and narrow, his forehead low and retreating.  His eyebrows were dark brown, his eyes dark grey, his nose small and his mouth ‘normal width’.  His chin – in proportion with the rest of his face – was ‘small’ and he had a blue mark on his left arm.

Once disembarked, he was assigned the number 1442 and assigned to work for a Mr Fletcher as a ‘house servant’.

Conduct record from Linc Tasmania CON31/1/7

 

According to his conduct record, he had a few brushes with authority – absconding, ‘neglect of work’, and helping himself to his master’s ‘porter’ and chickens.

Marriages at Launceston, 1838 from Linc Tasmania, http://stors.tas.gov.au/RGD35-1-42p34j2k

Marriages at Launceston, 1838 from Linc Tasmania, RGD36/1/3

However, in February 1838 he was granted permission to marry Eliza Cross; in June their daughter Matilda was born followed by Emily (1840), Clara (1842) and Alfred Richard (1847)  – Isaac’s occupation recorded as a ‘tailor’ on each of the birth / baptism records.

Approx. 1845, from ancestry.com HO 10/59 page 102

Approx. 1845, from ancestry.com HO 10/59 page 102

In 1841 he was given a Ticket of Leave and granted a Conditional Pardon in December 1845.  The governor’s recommendation states that his ‘conduct having been good for many years past and … having completed beyond the ordinary servitude with a Ticket of Leave

1848 census of Van Diemen’s Land from Linc Tasmania CEN1/1/98

The 1848 census return gives a full and interesting view of their household.  The house was brick-built, in parish ‘No 2’   There were three adults (aged 21-45) living there, presumably Isaac and Eliza and another unmarried male.  Both men seem to have been freed former convicts.

1848 census of Van Diemen's Land from Linc Tasmania CEN1/1/98

1848 census of Van Diemen’s Land from Linc Tasmania CEN1/1/98

 

 

 

 

 

Although Isaac and Eliza had four children by the last day of 1847, only three were recorded as living at home at the time of the census.  All are said to have married and had children: who and where was the missing child?  Matilda was by this time 10 years old, soon to be 11.  Was she, perhaps, already working in another house in the town?  No names are given in the census, so we may never know.

Rather surprisingly, both men and the baby are said to be Church of England, but Eliza and the two girls were Roman Catholics!  Isaac’s occupation falls under the heading of  ‘Mechanics and Artificers’: the other man was a ‘Domestic Servant‘.

Births at Launceston, 1851 from Linc Tasmania, RGD32/1/3  http://stors.tas.gov.au/RGD32-1-3-p673j2k

Births at Launceston, 1851 from Linc Tasmania, RGD32/1/3

The Launceston Examiner, Wed. 8 September 1852 (from trove.nla.gov.au)

The Launceston Examiner, Wed. 8 September 1852 (from trove.nla.gov.au)

 

 

In 1850, Isaac took up a new career – licensee of the Angel Inn in Charles Street Launceston – a licence he renewed three times, the third time in October 1853.  This new occupation is reflected in the baptism record of their daughter Adelaide Frances in 1851.

In May 1854, Isaac took on the licence of another hostelry – this time the Jolly Farmer in the township of Perth on the plains to the south of Launceston.

Births in Longford, from Linc, Tasmania, RGD33/1/33

Births in Longford, 1855, from Linc Tasmania, RGD33/1/33

18 months later, there is a rather odd birth recorded at Longford (close to Perth and around 7 km / 4.5 miles to the West): Arthur Isaac Coote, son of **Sarah** and Isaac Coote: father’s trade is given as “Licensed Publican” so it seems reasonable to assume this is ‘our’ Isaac.

It’s been suggested that Sarah might have been Sarah Cross – Eliza’s sister – but I’m unconvinced.  She was married to James Devall, had borne him a daughter in the previous year or so and would bear him another two years later.  My best guess is that the wife’s name has been mis-heard, mis-written – or even mis-remembered by the registrar.  The page does not seem well-maintained – several entries (including this one) are lacking the informant’s signature, and the mother’s maiden name is also omitted.

By 1862, they were back in Launceston, this time running the Hadspen Inn, renewing the licence each year until at least 1865.

1868 death record from Linc Tasmania

Deaths at Launceston, 1868 from Linc Tasmania RGD35/1/37

In 1868, Eliza Coote died of “paralysis”, aged 45, and two days before her 30th wedding anniversary.  Her occupation is given as “Publican’s wife” and Isaac registered the death.  Hardly the actions of an estranged husband who was living with another woman, since they had grown-up children who could have done what was necessary.

 

18690414-Coote,Isaac-marr-IMAGE_282_c

Marriages in Launceston, 1869, from Linc Tasmania RGD37/1/28

 

Fourteen months later, Isaac married again – this time to the 24 year old Adeline Laird.  The marriage took place in his house in Youngtown.

 

Launceston birth record from Linc Tasmania RGD33/1/48 no 59

Births at Launceston, 1870 from Linc Tasmania RGD33/1/48

Their son Thomas James was born the following year, 1870: Isaac was still recorded as a ‘Licensed Victualler’.

 

from Linc Tasmania RGD35/1/42 no 2239 Deaths at Launceston, 1873

Deaths at Launceston, 1873 from Linc Tasmania RGD35/1/42

Isaac died at Launceston on Christmas Day 1873 of ‘Dropsy’, aged 58 – having apparently reverted to his original occupation of ‘tailor’.


What, though, of Isaac’s origins?  My money is on Isaac Coot, born (according to Ancestry) 29th November 1814, at Sudbury in Suffolk, son of Isaac Coot and Matilda.  There are other births recorded for the couple: Robert (15 Oct 1812), Richard (8 Mar 1817) and Eliza (17 May 1819) but I’ve not found their marriage.


On 29 Jan 1761, at All Saints, Sudbury, an (earlier) Isaac Coot  married Sarah Pain.

On 10 Oct 1734, at All Saints, Sudbury, an (earlier) Isaac Coot  married Elizabeth Sneell.

Crime and punishment – 1803-1830

From the Buckinghamshire Quarter Sessions, extracted from the National Archives website:

Michaelmas, 1803

R. v (Prisoner’s name not given), Tingewick, No details of offence Witness: Nicholas Franklin, overseer of Tingewick

Michaelmas, 1805

R. v Nicholas Franklin (tailor), Tingewick, Misdemeanour Witness: John Price, keeper of Tingewick, Workhouse

Easter session 1819:

R. v William Matthews Tingewick, Stealing 3 yards British Lace, value 10s.6d., and also a Lace Box, value 1s. property of Mary Moss. Witnesses: James Cross, Tingewick, Mary Moss, Tingewick, lace-worker. Richard Perkins, Buckingham, lace dealer at Winslow. Hennah Skelton, sister-in-law of prisoner. Thomas Dickens, constable of Tingewick. – Bradford, Guilty – 12 months’ imprisonment, hard labour, and to be publicly whipped 200 yards, once in Tingewick and once in Buckingham, on a market day.

Michaelmas 16th October 1821

R. v Susan Swift Buckingham, Sending threatening letters to Mainwaring Davies, Esq., with the purpose of extorting money from him, charging him with the crime of sodomy Witnesses: Mainwaring Davies, Esq. (Mr. Adolphus), of Addington House, nr. Buckingham (78 years old), Capt. Dayrell, William Gunn, Tingewick, Thomas Dickens, Not guilty.
R. v Susan Swift and Richard Sabine Buckingham, Conspiracy Witnesses: Richard Dayrell, Esq., Rev. Mr. Reed, “the other magistrate” – King, clerk of the magistrates Mr. Davis, Not guilty.

Appeals  …  Tingewick v Little Horwood, Pauper not named, lived with Mr. Scott of Tingewick, Order quashed.

Michaelmas Session, 1821 (a different copy / extract for the same session)

R. v Susan, otherwise Susannah, Swift, [Addington], Sending letters to Mainwaring Davies, Esq., threatening to accuse him with crime punishable by law with death, with intent to extort money. Witnesses: Mainwaring Davies, of Addington House, Richard Dayrell, Esq., magistrate. William Gunn, of Tingewick. Thomas Dickins. Not Guilty
R. v Richard Savin Susan, otherwise Susannah Swift. [Addington], Conspiring to extort from Mainwaring Davies, Esq. £600 by threatening to accuse him with the crime of sodomy. Witnesses: Evidence of Mr. Davies in last prosecution admitted. Richard Dayrell, Rev. J.T.A. Reed, magistrate [Incomplete, as page torn from book]

Tingewick v Little Horwood Witnesses: John Walton, who lived with Mr. Scott at Tingewick, pauper. Wm. Scott. Order quashed.

Easter Session, 1822

R. v Wm. Ellard, Tingewick, Assaulting Wm. Everett, Constable, in execution of his office Witnesses: Wm. Everett, constable of Tingewick, John Wells, publican of “The Crown” Guilty – to be imprisoned 2 months in Common Gaol and to enter into sureties to keep peace for 2 years especially towards Wm. Everett.

Epiphany 1823

R. v William Harris, John Grantham, Tingewick [near Paper Hill Spinney, adjoining Bennett’s Close, near mill], For being armed with bludgeons and entering a wood and close with the intent of killing game at night. Witnesses: William Bateman, constable, James Verney, Joshua Lawrence, Thomas Ayres, William Spencer, keeps the Cross Keys at Buckingham, Thomas Lewis, lives at Gawcott (with the accused when the crime was committed), Mr. Stow, the surgeon of Buckingham, Mr. H – ? Both guilty – 7 years’ transportation

Misdemeanours  [no ref. or date] – 1828?

R. v Edward Hervey, Tingewick, Assault on William Kew, on 10th April. Witnesses: William Kew, keeps the Royal Oak at Tingewick, George Nelson, Butcher at Buckingham. Guilty: 6 weeks’ imprisonment.

Easter Session, 20 April 1830

R. v Harten Tompkins [aged 38], Tingewick, Stealing 2 bushels of wheat, 17/6, property of his master, Wm Treadwell [no date given] Pleaded guilty: 9 months’ hard labour.