Arson by a Little Boy in Kingsteignton: Charles Quick (on bail), a little boy, nine years of age, was indicted for having, on the 10th September at Kingsteignton, set fire to a stack of corn, the property of Gilbert and Ann Pinsent. Mr. Clarke prosecuted, and Mr. Mortimer defended the prisoner. In the course of his opening statement, Mr. Clarke said the prisoner was the son of a labourer living at Hackney, a village situated about half mile from Wear Barton, prosecutor’s farm. On the 10th September Mr. Pinsent’s servant dropped box of matches in the farmyard, and it would seem that the prisoner, who came to the Barton with other children for milk, must have picked up the box, and on his way back to Hackney he set to a rick of corn. The fire was discovered soon afterwards, but the wind was blowing hard and the flames were not put out until fifteen ricks of corn and oats, worth £2500, had been totally destroyed. The learned counsel explained to the jury that in the case of a child so young as the prisoner the legal presumption was in favour of his innocence; but he should call a witness, who was not produced before the magistrates, and after hearing his evidence the jury would have to decide whether any malicious intention on the part of the prisoner had been proved. His Lordship said he had read through the depositions, and he could not find sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of innocence and evidence for that purpose must be very strong in the case of a boy so young. Mr. Clarke said he was bound to admit that the prisoner was the son of respectable parents, and he had no doubt in his mind that his setting fire to the corn was an accident. From the evidence of Tullidge, the boy whom he was prepared to call, it seemed that Quick set fire to some straw which was lying near to the corn rick, that he tried to put it out but, failing to do so, the boys ran away. Mr. Mortimer said the boy Tullidge was even younger than the prisoner. His Lordship: The depositions contain no evidence to show that the prisoner set the rick on fire, and now the additional evidence shows distinctly that he did so without any malicious design. The learned Judge directed the jury that there could be no conviction in this case, and they accordingly returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.” The prisoner was discharged.
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
GRO0065 Hennock: Anne Pinsent: 1833 – 1907
GRO0369 Hennock: Gilbert Pinsent: 1840 – 1918