[list-cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 18 Oct 1823 - Public-Office (3)

[Petra Mitchinson]

Saturday 18 Oct 1823   (p. 2, col. 6 – p. 3, col. 2)

 

PUBLIC-OFFICE, TOWN-HALL. 

 

[continued] 

 

The Magistrates retired for about a quarter of an hour, and on their return asked Mr. DOWLING if he had bail, thereby intimating
that they thought the case should go before a jury. 

 

Mr. DOWLING—I have no bail here. I have been brought from Birmingham at a moment's notice; I could not consult my friends. I
apprehend that bail is not material. No man knows me and my connections better than Mr. HICKS there, who has often partaken of the
hospitality of my father's table. I have a house in town and an office, for which I pay 200 guineas annual rent; I hold a public
situation; have a brother a barrister, am well known to most public men in town; and, moreover, have a wife and seven children;
therefore no fear can be entertained that I shall evade such a charge as this. So far as assertion goes (though I am aware that my
word in such a situation cannot set aside that which has been stated on oath), I solemnly declare that I never saw nor heard of the
packet until charged as you now see. I came to Carlisle from Glasgow on the 12th, and sat up all night at the Coffee-House, writing
out the report of the dinner, in order to send it off by the mail. I could not possibly have any motive for taking such a parcel; it
would have been valueless to me; I would rather have seen the Times publish its contents, as I said before, in order to have enjoyed
the contrast. 

 

Mr. HICKS—I beg to observe that Mr. DOWLING's statement as to his connections and respectability is perfectly correct, and that I
never heard any thing to his prejudice till this charge. We wish not to do any thing harshly. 

 

Mr. HENSON said he should not object to Mr. SAUL being his client's bail: and Mr. S. accordingly entered into recognizance in £30,
Mr. D. also gave personal recognizance, and the witnesses were bound over to appear. Finally it was agreed that the trial should not
come on at the county sessions which commenced at Penrith on Tuesday. Mr. HENSON said he would prefer his bill; and if found, he
would not then oppose Mr. DOWLING's motion for a postponement to any future time. If the other side chose, he would let the trial
take place at the next assizes. 

 

The reason why Mr. DOWLING was apprehended at Birmingham, Mr. HENSON stated, was this—the warrant was sent to London, where they
thought Mr. DOWLING was, and having been put into the hands of RUTHVEN, he deemed it his duty to follow Mr. D. to that town, and to
bring him to Carlisle, where he knew he (Mr. HENSON) and Mr. HICKS were. There was no wish to annoy Mr. DOWLING, nor to deprive him
of every assistance that he might be able to procure. 

 

Both parties proceeded to the Quarter Sessions, which commenced at Penrith (13 miles from Carlisle) on the following day. Mr.
DOWLING and his Solicitor were on the alert. They went before the grand-jury as soon as they entered upon their duties, and
preferred a bill against all the parties mentioned in the Public-office investigation for a conspiracy. Mr. DOWLING himself
addressed them with considerable effect, reiterating his complaint of malicious prosecution on account of successful rivalry, and
urged them to cross-examine the boy MURRAY, with great care, in order to detect the inconsistencies and improbabilities of his
story. After the way had thus been skilfully prepared, the prosecuting party came up with their bill; the examination was a rigid
one; and the result, that both were thrown out. Mr. DOWLING hailed his triumph with great glee: in the exultation of the moment he
even threw up his hat in court. On Wednesday morning, he left Penrith for London. From certain expressions which escaped the
defeated prosecutors, we are led to conclude that the business will not end here. 

 

ILLEGAL PURCHASE OF WEFT. 

 

Richard HEBSON, of Penrith, weaver, was brought up at this office, on Monday, to answer to an information against him, under the
statute, for purchasing weft of an operative weaver, knowing him to be such. Richard BARKER, the man alluded to, was put into the
box and sworn. He stated that he worked for Messrs. J. J. & R. FERGUSON, of this city. So lately as the Carlisle race-week, he sold
defendant some weft at his (defendant's) own house. Witness carried it to him, because he had several times before dealt with him in
a similar way. Part of it was witness's own which he had left out of a web; he was then working for Messrs. DIXON. For more than a
year past he had sold defendant weft; and first applied to him because he heard people say that he purchased in that way. On the
last occasion, he got 8s. or 9s.—defendant gave from 4d. to 6d. a head. 

 

HEBSON denied the charge. He said the man had brought him some weft to sell, but he refused to purchase, and he understood that it
afterwards lay at a public-house, called the Joiners' Arms. 

 

BARKER said, the weft of which defendant now spoke was some that he had picked out of the lot and refused to buy on account of the
quality. 

 

HEBSON called Mr. W. WOOD to prove that he was in the habit of purchasing yarn of him: but the last he bought was so long ago as
May: he said, however, that he bought some at Meyrick THOMPSON's sale. 

 

He was convicted in a penalty of £30, but gave notice of an appeal to the Sessions. 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/pipermail/list-cumbria/attachments/20240202/2011666d/attachment.htm>