County Sessions: Wednesday: Before Earl Devon (chairman) and Biggs Andrews, Esq., Q.C.: The Court was opened at ten o’clock: The Rioting at Crediton: “Starving Alive”: Henry James, 18, shoemaker (imp.), and Barnett Elston (on bail), were charged with having, at Crediton, on Nov. 5th, with divers other persons, riotously and tumultuously assembled together to the disturbance of the public peace. Mr. Carter prosecuted; Mr. Clarke defended. The prosecuting counsel opened the case pointing out the technical differences between misdemeanour — the charge against the prisoners — and felony and having narrated circumstances of the riot stated he should prove by abundant testimony that the prisoners were not mere spectators, but that they took an active part in the riotous proceedings. The following is an outline of the evidence: Mr. John Cleave, baker, of East Street, anticipating the disturbance on Gunpowder Plot night, put his shutters at six o’clock. The rioters visited the shop with a shower of stones, doing damage to the amount of £5 or £6. Did not see the prisoners in the crowd: Mr. F. Elston was walking from West town to East Town about ten o’clock. Saw a large number of rioters — thirty or forty — recognised amongst them Barnett Elston: Knew him well, as they were natives of Crediton, and cousins. Heard him say several times “Down with the bakers; starving alive.” Others hollered at the same time. Saw both prisoners throw stones at Mr. Cleave’s windows. Several persons kicked the shutters. The prisoners followed the mob to the shop of Mr. Pinsent, baker. Cross-examined by Mr. Clarke — I helped roll the tar barrel; I did, not collect the money for it, but contributed towards the bonfire. The tar barrel and the bonfire were not one and the same thing — (a laugh). Did not speak to Barnett — not a word. Barnett was in the middle of the crowd, with whom the witness was running; did not recognise anyone else besides the prisoners — not even those who kicked the shutters. Barnett had been in the employ of witness’s father; he had worked for him since Nov. 5th. There was a constable nearby, and therefore the witness could not point out the prisoners to the police: Knew almost all the people in Crediton. Mr. George Stone, shoemaker, a Kirton man, gave similar testimony. Saw the prisoners in the crowd; heard Barnett cry out “Starving alive.” He kept bawling out with the others. This was near eleven, in West Town, near Mr. Lee’s shop. By Mr. Clarke — Did not see the witness, Fred. Elston, during the night: Witness had his hand bandaged, and was examined as follows by Mr. Clarke: You have met with an accident I see. How did it occur? I was cleaning a revolver for some gentleman. That was a dangerous thing to do; did you not know that the revolver was loaded? Mr. Carter interposed — Pray what connection had the revolver with this case? The court allowed the examination to proceed, and Mr. Clarke repeated the question. Witness — Yes, I knew it was loaded; but that has nothing to do with this case. Did it go off? Yes. What were you doing with the revolver; are you a gunsmith? — Why do you wish to tell lies? I have told you that l am a shoemaker. What were you doing with the revolver? — I am a shoemaker; but what has all this to do with the case? I was cleaning it for a gentleman. What gentleman? come out with his name. — Witness hesitated, and then asked the court whether he was bound to answer the question. The noble chairman answered in the affirmative. Witness still refused to give an answer, but when cautioned by the chairman he went out with it” — for a cousin of mine. His name is Stone. What day was it? — Last Friday fortnight. Were you not making preparations for Nov. 5th when the accident occurred? — No. If you want to get at it quickly, I will tell you all. My cousin is in the habit of going into the country and of being prepared. I was repairing his pistol for him, and while trying on the caps it exploded. Mr. Carter appealed to the chairman whether this questioning about the pistol was not a waste of time. The Chairman — cannot say that; Mr. Clarke may have some definite object. Mr. Clarke — Did you not go to Albert Elston’s for a soldier’s jacket? — Witness — No suggestion was made about it, but I did not borrow it. Did you not send for that jacket for the purpose of disguising yourself on Nov. 5th? Witness (hesitating) — No. Come now, did you not send for it? — No. Then why did you hesitate? — Because you began about the pistol, and it was all for nothing — (laughter). Did you deny before the magistrates that you asked for the jacket? Yes. Have you ever been charged with a little offence called burglary. Mr. Carter — A little “offence!” Mr. Clarke — A burglary at John Elston’s house? — Witness (emphatically) —Me, Sir; no, never. Mr. Edwin Lee, saddler, saw a crowd of about 150 or 200 in front of Mr. Lee’s shop; stones had been thrown at the windows. Recognised Barnett Elston about eleven o’clock: Knew him well by sight. P.C. Allen heard Elston when in the police cell say to James “believe that it is, that Fred Elston that has informed against us.” James replied, “believe it is so.” Elston then said “I’m …. if I care; if I was there, I can get plenty of witnesses to come forward and prove that I was someplace else.” This concluded the case for the prosecution. Mr. Clarke spoke on behalf of his clients. Riots of a most disgraceful character had taken place in the county, and he hoped they would not be repeated. The ringleaders should be punished; but had it been proved that the prisoners were amongst them? The evidence was unsatisfactory. Throwing a stone was a momentary act, but pulling down shutters was not; the former was spoken to by Fred. Elston, and yet he could not give any information as to the latter. He should show that Barnett Elston was standing amongst the crowd, and yet committed no act of violence whatsoever. Let the jury judge as to whether the witnesses had come forward in the cause of justice or to screen themselves. Evidence was called for the defence. Emma Chamberlain saw a mob break Mr. Cleave’s windows. Saw Barnett Elston standing nearby; but he was neither doing nor saying anything; he went quietly away. By Mr. Carter: — Was positive that Barnett did not damage Mr. Cleaves premises. Did not swear before the magistrates that she could not say Elston was not among the crowd when some stones were thrown. [The deposition of a witness before the magistrates was read; it showed that she had made that statement]. Mrs. Ann Woollacott was at her father’s house opposite Mr. Cleaves. Saw Elston, and said to him ” Barnett, don’t you have anything to do with this.” He replied that he should not, he knew who would be best off to-morrow. He took no part in the riot. Mrs. Charlotte Payne, wife of a shoemaker, heard a noise near her house in Deane Street. Went towards Mr. Cleaves shop: Saw Barnett Elston and Mrs. Woollaoott, and heard the conversation just spoken to by the latter. Henry Manning, mason, of Deane-street, saw Barnett Elston stand at his father’s door — neither saying nor doing anything to anyone, and this was while the mob were breaking into Mr. Cleaves’ shop. R. Ferris also saw Elston standing with his hands in his pockets “doing nothing” during the riot, near Mr. Cleaves. Mr. Clarke summed up for the defence, and Mr. Carter replied, arguing that the testimony of those who did not witness the prisoner’s rioting went for nothing. An Irishman, when caught with his hands in a man’s pocket, said he could bring hundreds to prove that they did not see it — (laughter). The noble Chairman having directed the jury on the case, the prisoners were found guilty on the fourth count in the indictment – riotous assembly. The rioters were later part of the day called up for sentence. His Lordship said — You have been convicted on very clear evidence of the offence charged against you in the indictment — that you connected yourselves with a riotous mob in Creditor the night referred to — that you went about the different parts of the town, breaking into the shops and plundering them of their contents. You seem to have gone considerably beyond that licence which is sometimes permitted on the 5th November, proceeding to appropriate to yourselves the property of others. You were sadly mistaken if you thought that you would bring down the price of bread permanently by such a course; but it is not for the Court to point out how foolish that conduct was. Whilst abstaining from expressing any opinion on the preliminary proceedings of the night — Gunpowder Plot – it is the duty of the Court to mark their sense of your offence by severe punishment — showing you and all others engage in acts of disorder that the law is strong enough to suppress. You are each sentenced to two months’ imprisonment.
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GROxxxx Crediton