Tag: 1879

Western Daily Press: Friday 7th March 1879

Floral and Industrial Exhibition for Redland and Kingsdown: …  Prize for Clean and Neatly Arranged Homes: … Second year competition: 1st prize, 10s 6d, Mrs. Thorn, 5 Walker Street; Mrs. Burgoyne, Portland Street; Mrs. Crocker, 5 Caroline Row; Mrs. Simmonds, Simmond’s Cottages; Mrs. Hedges, Oxford Cottages; Mrs. Holder, Mornington Road; Mrs. Dawes, Quarry Steps; Mrs. Robert, Prospect Place; Mrs. Pinsent, Woodbury Lane, Mrs. Quick Woodbury Lane and Mrs. Luker, Woodbury Lane: Second Prize …

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

GRO0592 Bristol: Louisa Pinsent: 1867 – 1936

Western Times: Friday 17th January 1879

Newton: Police: Yesterday: Before Dr. Atkinson: …

Alleged Pocket Picking: Jane Grey and Mary Ann Pritchard were charged with stealing from the person of Diana Charlotte a purse containing a half sovereign, two half crowns, and some coppers on the previous night. Prosecutrix, an elderly woman, stated that she was going down Queen Street about seven o’clock the previous night, when the prisoners called after her and asked the way to the station. The witness told them, and then said they were wrongly directed. Prichards pressed close to her whilst Grey questioned her as to who lived in the shop close by. They then left her and she, putting her hand in her pocket and immediately after missed her purse and its contents. The witness then returned and caught the prisoners, and Pritchard she accused of stealing her purse, which she denied, and called the witness “a nasty old wench”. Someone picked up a purse close to their feet, and asked the witness if it was hers? She said it was. Prisoners subsequently offered her half a crown to let them go but she said, “Don’t you take it, and I will fetch the sergeant”. Prisoners then made off, and the witness followed them, and shortly after Sergt. Nicholls arrived. The purse produced was her property; it contained only half a sovereign, the two half crowns and coppers were gone. Minnie Heawards said she was in Queen Street the previous night and saw the prosecutrix and the prisoners there. Passing by Mr. Pinsent’s shop, she picked up a purse on the pavement; prosecutrix and the prisoners were just off the pavement in the road … 

Prisoners were then remanded to the Petty Sessions on Tuesday next.

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 xxxxx

Shipping and Mercantile Gazette: Monday 6th January 1879

St. John’s (N.F.), Sailed (Dec. 14) Eudoia, Pinsent, for Sydney. 

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

GRO1409 Teignmouth: William Pinsent: 1837 – xxxx

Western Times: Friday 12th December 1879

Exeter County Court: Tuesday: Before Judge Fortescue: Dispute as to the Sale of Cider: Hellier v. Gibbs: Mr. Friend appeared for the plaintiff, who is a farmer residing at Dunsford, defendant, an innkeeper of Newton Abbot, was represented by Mr. Creed of that town. The action was brought to recover £15 4s being the price of eight hogsheads of cider sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. The sale took place in the early part of October 1878. It was new cider. Defendant upon receipt of it “racked” seven of the hogsheads and returned the casks; the other cask was not returned for some time after, but in the meantime no complaint was made as to the quality of the cider. In June last, plaintiff sent in his bill, and then for the first time, as he alleged, complaint was made as to the quality of the cider. … … (dispute over quality of cider) … Defendant found that it was not worth two-pence to him, as it was three parts new cider. There were bits of cork, paper etc. n the cider which the plaintiff sent. Mr. Holmes, agent to Messrs. Pynsent of Newton, brewers, who was present when the sale was affected, and had since tasted the cider corroborated the defendant’s evidence … A labourer, who was in the employ of the plaintiff when the cider was sold, was called to prove that Mr. Hellier mixed two hogsheads of old and inferior cider with that which he forwarded to the defendant, and not one hogshead only of old cider as plaintiff himself had stated … His Honour expressed himself of opinion that the plaintiff had acted somewhat dishonestly in mixing the old cider with the new, unknown to the defendant. He though, however, plaintiff was entitled to a verdict for £5, including the amount paid into Court. …

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

GRO0518 Devonport: John Ball Pinsent: 1819 – 1901

Hampshire Advertiser: Saturday 6th December 1879

Marriages: At the Cathedral, Madras, on the 27th ult., Charles Pinsent, second son of Henry J. Pinsent, Portswood, Southampton, to Harriett, eldest daughter of James Soden, Lower Clapton.

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

GRO0133 India: Charles Powell Tronson Pinsent: 1849 – 1904
GRO0398 India: Harriet Ann Soden: 1860 – 1949
GRO0420 India: Henry John Pinsent: 1812 – 1894

Hampshire Post and Southsea Observer: Friday 5th December 1879

Marriage: Pinsent – Soden: On the 27th ultimo, at the Cathedral, Madras, Charles P. T. son of H. J. Pinsent, Portswood Southampton, to Harriot A., eldest daughter of James Soden, of Lower Clapton.

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

GRO0133 India: Charles Powell Tronson Pinsent: 1849 – 1904
GRO0398 India: Harriet Ann Soden: 1860 – 1949
GRO0420 India: Henry John Pinsent: 1812 – 1894

Madras Weekly Mail: Saturday 29th November 1879

Marriages: Pinsent – Soden: On the 26th November, at St. George’s Cathedral, Madras, by the Venerable Archdeacon Drury, Charles, second son of Henry J. Pinsent, Portswood, Southampton, to Harriet, eldest daughter of James Sodden, Lower Clapton, London.

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

GRO0133 India: Charles Powell Tronson Pinsent: 1849 – 1904
GRO0398 India: Harriet Ann Soden: 1860 – 1949

The Pall Mall Gazette: November 29th, 1879: Issue 4609

Marriages: Pinsent – Soden: At the Cathedral, Madras, Charles P. T., son of Mr. H. J. Pinsent, Portwood, Southampton, to Harriet A., daughter of Mr. James Soden, of Lower Clapton, Nov. 27th.

[see also Morning Post: Monday 1st December 1879]

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

GRO0133 India: Charles Powell Tronson Pinsent: 1849 – 1904
GRO0398 India: Harriet Ann Soden: 1860 – 1949
GRO0420 India: Henry John Pinsent: 1812 – 1894

Western Times: 26th July 1879

The County Assizes: Nisi Prius: Thursday: On the opening of the Court at ten o’clock the hearing of the unfinished case of Pinsent v Stockman was resumed: Mr. Cole, in opening the defence, said there had been some extraordinary muddle about this barley. If they looked at the history of the case there appeared to be no doubt that Mugford in November 1874, sold Pinsent 98 bags of barley. Then they came to the first curious fact in the case. They found that although the barley did not suit for malting it was not sold again until February 1875. People did not usually keep barley brought for malting in their possession four months – His Lordship: Is that so very unusual.? Mr. Cole thought it was. People were not usually so flush of money as to buy barley so long before they wanted to use it. The barley did not suit Mr. Pinsent, and he told them he gave Mugford orders to sell it for him. They Mugford appeared on the scene and told them he sold the barley to Mr. Stockman. As far as Mr. Stockman was concerned, nothing was heard of this barley for nearly five years. That was another very extraordinary fact. Although there were dealings between the parties in the interim, and Pinsent has said that Mugford told him he had sold the barley to Stockman, northing was said about it in all that time. How was it that no demand had been made for payment either by Pinsent of Mugford or by Mugford of Stockman? There was no entry of the transaction in Pinsent’s books of any account against Stockman but there was an entry at the bottom of an account with Mugford, “We shall be glad to have the barley account settled.”  It was a most extraordinary and curious case altogether, and every circumstance in it appeared to be odd. His case was that Stockman never had but one transaction with Mugford for barley, and that was in June 1873. The among was £16 15s, and it was clearly set out in the counterfoil in Stockman’s cheque book. He submitted that it was Mugford who was seeking to excuse himself from the payment of his barley. It was really Mugford’s case, and it was for him to prove that he sold the barley to Stockman. Mugford went to Mr. Pinsent and told them he sold the barley to Stockman, and they sent in a bill in November 1874, for 49 quarters of barley at 44s. Stockman said they were putting it upon him, but it could not have been him, because at the time his mill was burnt down. After that another account was made out, under date February, for £64 odd. Then they had heard n support of this claim witnesses who declared that after an interval of four years, without any previous talk about the matter, they perfectly remembered delivering the barley to Mr. stockman. He did not wish to impute motives to anyone, but it certainly did seem to him that Mr. Pinsent had brought this upon himself by the way in which he kept his books. … (continues at length) … verdict for the plaintiff …

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

GRO0518 Devonport: John Ball Pinsent: 1819 – 1901