Tag: o

Western Times: Saturday 15th June 1850

RIVER AND HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS: Election of Clerk: There has been much contention here during the past week relative to the resignation of Mr. Pearce (who is about to leave the neighbourhood) the clerk of this body, and the election of another person in his stead. The only candidates in the field were Mr. Mackenzie, of the well-known firm of Tozer, Whidborne, and Mackenzie, and Mr. Pidsley, of the firm of Pearce and Pidsley. Perhaps there never was a more active canvassing. The interests of the two firms are very great in this neighbourhood and this was fairly a trial of strength between them; Mr. Pidsley only withdrew at the last hour. It will be recollected that Mr. Tozer was a candidate in the field with Pearce, when the bill was before the house, and only withdrew them because he thought it unfair to oppose when Pearce had obtained the bill; but it was with the understanding that he should be again in the field, if ever there was an election. The election took place at the CourtHouse. There were present Commissioners Bartlett, Tozer, Cartwright, Goodridge, Sweetland, Strachan, Stephenson, Jordan, Mortimore, Eaton, Branscombe, Vallance, Bearne, Baker and Pinsent, jun. …  (continues – Mackenzie elected) …. 

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

St. James’s Chronicle: Saturday 15th June 1850

Guildhall: On Thursday Hugh R. Macklin, Henry Osborne, Mary Macklin, and Susannah Paul, were brought up before Sir Chapman Marshall for further examination. charged with stealing a gold chain, value 20 guineas, two silver spoons, a large quantity of wearing apparel, together with a very valuable collection of Roman cameos, jewellery, and other articles of virtue, the property of Mrs. Pincent, at present residing at Inspruck. The case was briefly stated to the alderman as follows: — The female prisoner (Macklin) and Henry Osborne were in the service of Dr. Tilt, of York-street, Portman-square. About two months ago, eight boxes, which contained a considerable amount of property of various descriptions, and which were in Dr. Tilt’s kitchen (having been deposited in his care by his sister-in-law, Mrs. Pincent, about four years previously), were broken open by the prisoners Osborne and the two Macklins, and the most valuable of the property abstracted therefrom. Subsequently Osborne left the service of Dr. Tilt, and soon after Hugh Macklin and Susannah Paul were given into custody on suspicion, for attempting to pledge the chain and the spoons for a very trifling amount. The following day Osborne came forward for the purpose of exculpating the two prisoners who were then in custody, and he was also detained. When Mary Macklin appeared to vouch for his character, which led to her apprehension a few days after, she confessed all she knew relative to the robbery. On the last examination Susannah Paul was admitted to bail, because the alderman considered she was the least guilty party, having been led into the attempt to pledge the articles by the prisoner Hugh Macklin. The following was the additional evidence taken on Thursday: — George Wardell said he went to No. 26, Chancery-lane, the house of a Mr. Toogood, where he saw Hugh Macklin’s sister-in-law, who immediately placed the cameo in his possession which Mary Macklin stated she gave her. She was unable to attend and give evidence in consequence of ill health. The officer produced the cameo, which was of the most exquisite workmanship, and without any setting. He had inquired at various jewellers and ascertained its value in its present state to be about five guineas. He also produced several duplicates of some articles of dress which had been given to the husband of the prisoner Paul by Hugh Macklin. He wished the alderman to remand the prisoners for a week, as there was a party implicated in the robbery who was not at present in custody, and whom it would be necessary to obtain time to apprehend, as also for the purpose of tracing the remainder of the property which had been stolen. Bail was again taken for Susannah Paul, and the case was remanded for a week for further evidence. 

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

GRO0469 Hennock: Jane Sparrow: 1809 – 1891
GRO0835 Hennock: Thomas Pynsent: 1808 – 1887

Morning Herald (London): Friday 14th June 1850

POLICE: GUILD HALL: — Yesterday Hugh Robert Macklin, Henry Osborne, Mary Macklin, and Susannah Paul, were brought up before Sir Chapman Marshall for further examination, charged with stealing a gold chain, value 20 guineas, two silver spoons, a large quantity of wearing apparel, together with a very valuable collection of Roman cameos, jewellery, and other articles of vertu the property of Mrs. Pincent, at present residing at Inspruck. The case was briefly stated to the alderman as follows: The female prisoner (Macklin) and Henry Osborne were in the service of Dr. Tilt, of York-street, Portman-square. About two months ago, eight boxes, which contained a considerable amount of property of various descriptions, and which were in Dr. Tilt’s kitchen (having been deposited in his care by his sister-in-law, Mrs. Pincent, about four years previously), were broken open by the prisoners Osborne and the two Macklins, and the most valuable of the property abstracted therefrom. Subsequently Osborne left the service of Dr. Tilt, and soon after Hugh Macklin and Susannah Paul were given into custody on suspicion, for attempting to pledge the chain and the spoons for a very trifling amount. … (continues) … 

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

GRO0469 Hennock: Jane Sparrow: 1809 – 1891
GRO0835 Hennock: Thomas Pynsent: 1808 – 1887

London Standard: Friday 14th June 1850

Police: Guildhall: Yesterday Hugh Robert Macklin, Henry Osborne, Mary Macklin and Susannah Paul, were brought up before Sir Chapman Marshall, for further examination charged with stealing a gold chain, value 20 guineas, two silver spoons, a large quantity of wearing apparel, together with a very valuable collection of Roman Cameson, jewellery and other articles of virtue, the properly of Mrs. Pincent, at present residing at Inspruck. The case was briefly stated to the alderman as follows: — The female prisoner (Macklin) and Henry Osborne were in the service of Dr. Tilt, of York-street, Portman-square. About two months ago, eight boxes, which contained a considerable amount of property of various descriptions, and which were in Dr. Tilt’s kitchen (having been deposited in his care by his sister-in-law, Mrs. Pincent, about four years previously), were broken open by the prisoners Osborne and the two Macklins, and the most valuable of the property abstracted therefrom. Subsequently Osborne left the service of Dr. Tilt, and soon after Hugh Macklin and Susannah Paul were given into custody on suspicion, for attempting to pledge the chain and the spoons for a very trifling amount. The following day Osborne came forward for the purpose of exculpating the two prisoners that were then in custody, and he was also detained. When Mary Macklin appeared to vouch for his character, which led to her apprehension a few days after, she confessed all she knew relative to the robbery. On the last examination Susannah Paul was admitted to bail, because the alderman considered she was the least guilty party, having been led into the attempt to pledge the articles by the prisoner Hugh Macklin. The following was the additional evidence taken yesterday: — George Wardell said he went to No. 26, Chancery-lane, the house of a Mr. Toogood, where he s»w Hugh Macklin’s sister-in-law, who immediately placed the cameo in his possession which Mary Macklin stated she gave her. She was unable to attend and give evidence in consequence of ill health. The officer produced the cameo, which was of the most exquisite workmanship, and without any setting. He had inquired at various jewellers and ascertained its value in its present stale to be about five guineas. He also produced several duplicates of some articles of dress which had been given to the husband of the prisoner Paul by Hugh Macklin. He wished the alderman to remand the prisoners for a week, as there was a party implicated in the robbery who was not at present in custody, and whom it would be necessary to obtain time to apprehend, as also for the purpose of tracing the remainder of the property which had been stolen. Bail was again taken for Susannah Paul, and the case was remanded till this day week for further evidence. 

[see also Morning Post: Friday 14th June 1850] 

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

GRO0469 Hennock: Jane Sparrow: 1809 – 1891

Morning Post: Friday 7th June 1850 

Police Intelligence: Guildhall: Yesterday: Mary Macklin was placed at the bar before Sir Peter Laurie, charged with being concerned, to a small extent, in stealing a lady’s neck-chain, two silver spoons, and other articles, the property of a lady now at Inspruck. The chief clerk explained to the magistrates that on a previous day two persons now in custody had been charged by a pawnbroker with offering to pledge some property supposed to be stolen. They alleged it was the property of a relation of theirs. Subsequently a groom came forward to claim the property as having found it and authorising these parties to pledge it for him. He was detained, and the prisoner who was then at the bar attended on that occasion to speak on the behalf of the groom. The officer suspecting that the master of the last two prisoners had been robbed waited upon that gentleman, and, after looking at the property, he said he knew nothing of it, and that the officer was quite mistaken. From some information the officer afterwards received, it appeared that the property had in fact been stolen from that gentleman’s house, and this led to the apprehension of the prisoner at the bar. Wardle, one of the City’s detective force stated that from information he had received, he went to Dr. Tilt’s. 8, York- Street, Portman-square, the master of the prisoner Mary Mackhn, and asked if he had the care of any boxes containing property belonging to a lady abroad. Dr. Tilt said he had, and that they belonged to his sister-in-law, Mrs. Pincent who was travelling on the Continent, and had been for the last four years. He, Wardle, told him that he had heard that the boxes had been broken open, and the property abstracted. He then went into the kitchen with Dr. Tilt, and there saw eight large boxes, on examining which he found them all to have been broken open, and a great portion of the contents abstracted, and the remainder in great confusion. They principally contained books and wearing apparel. Two or the locks had been nailed on again. Prisoner was present during the greater part of the examination of the boxes. He, Wardle, afterwards went up to the parlour, where he found the prisoner in the care of George Mullineux, another detective officer. He, Wardle, told her that he had been told the gold negligee and two silver gravy spoons had been stolen from those boxes, and she replied that “the cook had been the first instigator of if.” and that she and the cook first commenced breaking them open. The latter took out a shawl, scarf, piece of linen, piece of calico, and a number of very valuable cameos. She told him (the officer) that her brother, Charles Macklin, anil Henry Osborne, who are now in custody, came to her on Thursday last, at Dr. Tilt’s, and that her brother took the chain and the spoons from separate boxes. He threw the chain into the air and caught it again, exclaiming, “I’ve done the odi gal at last, I’ve got the chain and she’s got the box.” Previously, Osborne took from one of the boxes, a lady’s dress, a piece of linen, and another of calico, and pledged them: they also took away several pairs of boots and shoes. The only portion of the property she had was a single cameo, which was now in the possession of her brother’s sister-in-law. The officer then took her into custody and conveyed her to the station. The boxes had been opened about two months ago, a short time previous to Osbome leaving the service of Dr. Tilt. The chain and spoons have been valued, the former at about 20 guineas and the latter at about£4; but Dr. Tilt could not identify either, never having seen them before. But he stated that he had heard frequently that his sister- in-law had in her possession two very old and very heavy silver gravy spoons, which description perfectly corresponded with the spoons produced. Sir Peter Laurie said it was a very important case, and great praise was due to the officers engaged in it for bringing the parties to justice. The case appeared to have been wrapped in great mystery, but he had no doubt that portions, if not all, of the missing property would be forthcoming at a future examination. Dr. Tilt said that Mrs. Pincent had brought from Rome, when she was last in England, a very valuable collection of cameos, none of which had been set, and he believed they were the same that the prisoner had stated his cook had stolen. Sir Peter Laurie said it would be necessary to give time for Dr. Tilt to write to Mrs. Pincent, at Inspruck, to ascertain where she bought the negligee, so that they might be able to have the jeweller’s evidence to identify it, and which would be the means of completing the case against the prisoners. He was particularly anxious to see the case thoroughly investigated, as it was one of servants, robbing their master, and he would accordingly remand it till to- morrow, in order that the prisoners might be brought up and all charged together.

[see also London Morning Chronicle: Friday June 7th 1850] 

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

GRO0469 Hennock: Jane Sparrow: 1809 – 1891