Tag: o

Newton Abbot: Petty Sessions: Before C.H. Munroe, Esq., Chairman & A. Chichester, Esq.: James Wootton, gamekeeper to Mr. Comyns of Wood, Bishopsteignton, was summoned, on the information of William Roberts, gamekeeper to Mr. Hines, of Kingsteignton, for trespassing on a close of land called Brimble Hill, in the occupation of Mr. John Pinsent. Mr. Lane appeared for the prosecution and Mr. Francis for the defence. The defendant pleaded “not guilty”. Mr. Pike, labourer, of Kingsteignton, stated that he saw a man on Brimble Hill, at four o’clock, on the 28^th September, whom he knew to be James Wootton. The man had a gun and a dog with him, and the witness saw the dog raise a pheasant, at which the defendant fired; the bird fell to the ground, crippled, and the dog brought it back to Wootton. Defendant reloaded his gun and dog “put up” another pheasant, which the defendant killed and pocketed. The Chairman asked the witness how the defendant was dressed. The witness stated that he had on a dark coat, and a round “darkish” hat, and was cross-examined by Mr. Francis, in order to prove that the defendant was not present, and that the witness was mistaken in the identity of the party. Richard Laskey, labourer, on the railway, stated that on the 28^th September, he was between the Weir engine house and Hackney cutting, and heard a gun. He then ran up the bank and saw the defendant at about 50 yards distance, dressed as described by the last witness. Witness did not hear a second shot fired, and when he saw the defendant, he was trying a hedge. Witness was not acquainted particularly with a man named John Boon but had “seed ‘en be sight”. Would swear, notwithstanding the great resemblance between Boon and Wootton that it was not the former who was trying the hedge after the gun was fired. Mr. Tucker applied to the Bench to hear a removal case as he wanted to go off on pressing business. The Chairman asked Mr. Tucker if he was going off by a balloon. Mr. Tucker said he was going by the railway, which he considered more punctual. The removal case was then heard. Mr. Francis, after which, resumed his case, and called for the defence, Mr. Clarke, gunsmith, of Newton, who stated that the defendant came to his house on the 28^th September, to pay for a double barrelled gun, which he had bought on the previous Monday. Defendant looked over some guns, and then by the invitation of the witness went to the Jolly Sailor with him and had a glass of beer. They invited Mr. Payne, the landlord of the Jolly Sailor to have something with them, but he refused, not having been to dinner. Mr. Payne then went to dinner and returned and drank with them until half past three. Defendant wore a light coat and cloth cap and had no gun. Mr. Payne corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. Joseph Ward, blacksmith, of Kingsteignton, proved that he saw the defendant riding a pony towards Newton on 28^th September. A black spaniel dog was with him, about half past three the witness saw him returning. Kingsteignton is a mile and a half from the wood. It would take a person 20 minutes to get to Wood from Kingsteignton, at the pace the defendant was going. It was impossible for a man to go to Brimble Hill and be back to Wood by four o’clock. The cook at Mr. Cumming’s stated the defendant went to Newton on the 28^th inst. he returned, cleaned his horse, and was eating his dinner at four o’clock; and remained there half an hour afterwards. Samuel Rossiter, yeoman, stated that he had known the defendant for nearly 20 years. On 28^th September, he saw Pike, a workman of Mr. Pinsent, and was in conversation with him about pheasants, pigs and so on. Just before he saw Pike, he saw a man with a gun and a light spotted dog. The man had on a light coat and hat. He fired a gun and the witness saw a bird drop. Wootton was not the man who fired the gun. It was John Boon, of Bishopsteignton who did so: Would swear that Wootton was not the man. At this stage of the proceedings, the Chairman said that the Bench was of the opinion that the case should be dismissed and wished to say a few words to Pike and Laskey. From the evidence which had been adduced in opposition to the evidence of these men, it appeared that they had been mistaken, and it would be well before they entered the witness box again to be more certain as to the identity of the person. On the application of Mr. Francis costs were awarded to the defendant. 

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

GRO0508 Hennock: John Pinsent: 1799 – 1858