[list-cumbria] list-cumbria Digest, Vol 6, Issue 12

Sun May 12 11:07:16 UTC 2024

Thank you Petra, as Mr Saul and Mr Norman the Solicitor are both involved in this case, I must save it to study when I have the time.
Love your transcriptions, many thanks.
Anne
Sent from my iPhone

> On 12 May 2024, at 11:29, list-cumbria-request at list.cumbriafhs.com wrote:
> 
> Send list-cumbria mailing list submissions to
>    list-cumbria at list.cumbriafhs.com
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    https://list.cumbriafhs.com/mailman/listinfo/list-cumbria
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    list-cumbria-request at list.cumbriafhs.com
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    list-cumbria-owner at list.cumbriafhs.com
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of list-cumbria digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Carlisle Patriot, 31 Jan 1824 - Public Office (1)
>      (Petra Mitchinson)
>   2. Carlisle Patriot, 31 Jan 1824 - Public Office (2)
>      (Petra Mitchinson)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 13:21:43 +0100
> From: "Petra Mitchinson" <petra.mitchinson at doctors.org.uk>
> To: "CUL Google Group" <Genealogy-Cumberland at googlegroups.com>
> Cc: "Cumbria Mailing List \(CFHS\)" <list-cumbria at list.cumbriafhs.com>
> Subject: [list-cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 31 Jan 1824 - Public Office
>    (1)
> Message-ID: <018501daa39d$c8e53b30$5aafb190$@doctors.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Saturday 31 Jan 1824   (p. 3, col. 4)
> 
> 
> 
> PUBLIC OFFICE?TOWN HALL.
> 
> 
> 
> At this office on Saturday, an information was heard, which excited considerable curiosity.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. G. SAUL, addressing the Magistrates, said this was a complaint lodged by Major HODGSON, of Moorhouse Hall, against John STORDY,
> William STORDY, and John ROBINSON, of the village of Moorhouse, 'for that they did on the 17th of January instant, endeavour to
> destroy and kill the house-dog (Newfoundland breed) of the said Richard HODGSON.' Having stated an outline of the facts proved in
> evidence, Mr. SAUL observed that the proceeding was under the wilful trespass act, which afforded protection to property "of any
> nature or kind whatsoever," and admitted of summary proceeding; penalty on conviction might be levied as high as ?5.
> 
> 
> 
> The Court had no doubt of the power given by the act, and Mr. SAUL called his witnesses.
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas CARRUTHERS sworn.?I live as a servant with Major HODGSON, at Moorhouse-Hall. On Saturday last, I went behind our cart from
> the Hall to Moorhouse, and the Major's dog was with me. I have lived in my place since Martinmas; the dog was there when I came, and
> I have always found it a peaceable animal. While in the road at Moorhouse, William STORDY's hound dog, ran out of his house and
> attacked our's, which turned upon it; a fight ensued, our's had the best of it, and the hound was turned up upon the ground. Just as
> it was in that situation, William and John STORDY came out of their yard in haste. William ordered John to go and get a gun; and in
> the meantime William kicked the Major's dog with his clogs many times. Wm. ROBINSON came over the hedge with an axe in his hand,
> with which he struck at our dog with great violence: the first blow missed; the second hit the dog at the back of the ears; and in
> attempting to strike a third blow, the axe flew out of his hand. After the dogs had separated in consequence of the second blow,
> John STORDY arrived with the gun. The dog was then going home; but seeing me, he returned to me. John STORDY fired at him; and his
> brother told him to fire the other barrel also. I cannot tell whether he was hit the first time or not. Some minutes intervened; the
> dog ran round about the legs of the persons present, and he could not readily get a shot at it. He fired a second time; the dog was
> severely wounded thereby in the hind and fore leg, and is now in a very bad state; the fore leg was mashed to pieces; the leaders
> were turned right out. Wm. STORDY ordered John to load again; but I got hold of the dog, and carried it off. The animal is quiet; I
> never knew him to bite any one; nor ever saw him attack any dog except on this occasion.
> 
> 
> 
> Cross-examined by Mr. PEARSON for the defendants. I knew nothing about the dog till I went to Moorhouse-Hall at Martinmas: it is
> often chained up, both night and day, but not on account of fierceness. I never heard that it had bitten several people. The hound
> dog came out of Mr. STORDY's house, and his girl was at the door, shouting, 'Take our dog off.' I swear positively that I saw
> ROBINSON strike the dog with his axe. The STORDYs made no complaint.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. SAUL said he had other witnesses to the same facts; but he thought he need not call any more until the testimony already given
> was contradicted: enough had been proved to support the information.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. PEARSON then called for the defendants
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth NIXON, who deposed?I am a servant with William STORDY, and was present the whole time. The day before, the Major's dog
> 'waur me,' before our own door, before which it walked up and down, and I could not go in; it seems a very fierce dog; but I do not
> know that it ever did any damage. Having seen the whole affair, I can swear that ROBINSON did not strike the dog with the axe, for
> it flew out of his hand. I saw him heave it up, but he did not strike; so what CARRUTHERS has sworn is false. William STORDY choked
> the great dog off our's.
> 
> 
> 
> Cross-examined by Mr. SAUL.?I was not out at the time that the hound dog first went out, though I said I saw the whole. I can't say
> that I am afraid of the dog. But I was afraid of him when he was before the door: he did not growl nor offer to molest me. Our dog
> is a hound: I suppose it is Mr. NORMAN's, but it is at our house; I have heard the family say that it is old Mr. NORMAN's?its name
> is Driver. I saw ROBINSON with the axe uplifted; if it had come down, the blow would have been violent; in my opinion, he was going
> to strike.
> 
> 
> 
> By the Court.?I saw John STORDY fire at the dog twice; and it did not seem to lame after the second shot. I will positively swear
> that I did not see that it was wounded.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. SAUL.?That's conclusive as to her credit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [to be continued]
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/pipermail/list-cumbria/attachments/20240511/e98345be/attachment-0001.htm>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 11:27:39 +0100
> From: "Petra Mitchinson" <petra.mitchinson at doctors.org.uk>
> To: "CUL Google Group" <Genealogy-Cumberland at googlegroups.com>
> Cc: "Cumbria Mailing List \(CFHS\)" <list-cumbria at list.cumbriafhs.com>
> Subject: [list-cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 31 Jan 1824 - Public Office
>    (2)
> Message-ID: <000001daa457$04434b40$0cc9e1c0$@doctors.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Saturday 31 Jan 1824   (p. 3, col. 4)
> 
> 
> 
> PUBLIC OFFICE?TOWN HALL.
> 
> 
> 
> [continued]
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. PEARSON said he merely appeared for Mr. NORMAN, the solicitor, and he knew nothing of the case before he came into Court. As to
> the dog, he had heard that it was a very fierce one, and had repeatedly annoyed and assailed different animals and persons. But no
> property in it had yet been proved; nor a word as to the amount of the damage sustained.
> 
> 
> 
> Major HODGSON himself was then sworn.?The dog was a valuable one?it was a present to Mrs. HODGSON; he would not have taken any money
> for it. It was very lame at present. He would not have taken ?5 for the dog; but he could not put any real value on it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cross-examined by Mr. PEARSON.?I do not know that my dog attacked and killed a grey-hound of Mr. LOWRY's of Stanwix?it did not do
> so. I don't believe that it does, in general, attack other dogs first. It is not particularly fierce?not too fierce for a house-dog.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By Mr. SAUL.?It is fierce only when disturbed. I never saw it leap at a man.
> 
> 
> 
> John HODGSON sworn?I was witness to the whole affair at a few yards distance. I saw ROBINSON strike at the dog twice or thrice with
> an axe; but whether he hit it or not I was not near enough to ascertain.
> 
> 
> 
> Cross-examined by Mr. PEARSON.?I know the dog well?it is not very fierce. I never knew it attack any one, without it was molested.
> It is in general tied up: but when loose, goes into the house, and no precaution is there taken in respect to the children.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. PEARSON.?Are the Magistrates perfectly satisfied that the case is within the act of Parliament (The Court nodded assent). It
> appears to me that the Legislature, by every kind of personal property, looking at the preceding part of the sentence, merely meant
> wood cut down, which then becomes personal property peculiarly liable to damage and depredation.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. SAUL.?The act is as strong as words can make it.
> 
> 
> 
> Clerk of the Peace.?Whatever judgment the Court may pronounce, an appeal is given to the Sessions.
> 
> 
> 
> The Magistrates (the Mayor, Rev. W. FLETCHER, and Mr. FAWCETT,) retired a short time. On returning,
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. FLETCHER said the Court had convicted the defendants. If the dog had been killed it would have awarded the full penalty; but as
> the matter stood, it had fined John and Wm. STORDY 10s. 6d. each, and John ROBINSON 5s., exclusive of costs.
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. SAUL.?I am desired to say, that if the penalties are paid without appeal, Major HODGSON does not wish himself to receive any
> part of them.
> 
> 
> 
> The defendants, after a short consideration, declined appealing, and paid the penalties, which, together with costs, amounted to
> 40s. Major HODGSON left the fines to be distributed among the deserving poor.
> 
> 
> 
> A warrant was granted against John ROBSON, labourer, and William ROBSON, mason, of Aglionby, for a most violent assault upon James
> BELL, labourer, and also upon his wife, in their own house, into which they rushed on the preceding Thursday evening (a quarrel
> having previously taken place near Warwick) having first burst open the door and broken the window. The complainant was tied up
> about the head, and exhibited marks of very severe punishment on the face and throat. He said that if he had not obtained
> assistance, he should have been murdered: that they knocked down his wife, and seized him by the throat, threw him back upon his own
> bed, and then attempted to throttle him. His marks certainly bore out his statement.
> 
> 
> 
> A warrant was also granted against two men named HASKINS, one RUMNEY, and another man, all weavers at Upperby, they having assaulted
> Philip ??, at that place on the 22d inst., while he was attending a sale.
> 
> 
> 
> On the 22d, James FERGUSON, of Nealhouse, applied to Mr. FLETCHER at Dalston, and obtained a warrant against Margaret MURRAY, on
> lodging a charge against her of stealing various articles of wearing apparel, and money out of his pockets, in his mother's dwelling
> at Nealhouse. The parties appeared at the public office this day; when it came out that they had had a quarrel, and that some
> revenge was in the case; moreover, the alleged offences were committed more than a year ago. The complaint was dismissed.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, Mr. E. ROWLAND was convicted, on the information of Mr. PEET, in a penalty of five pounds, for refusing, when
> required, to give him a receipt for money paid for rent, on stamped paper, having previously given a receipt without a stamp. Mr. R.
> denied that the last-mentioned document was ever written by him?in short, he declared it to be a forgery; but the evidence adduced,
> and the handwriting itself, were such as to induce the Court to convict. There is a dispute between the parties as to a distraint
> for too much rent; and as Mr. ROWLAND immediately gave notice of an appeal to the sessions, we shall have an opportunity of
> reporting the particulars of the case more at large.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/pipermail/list-cumbria/attachments/20240512/56af7093/attachment.htm>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This mailing list is run by Cumbria Family History Society for the benefit of the general public. For further information, or for terms and conditions and a privacy statement please go to www.cumbriafhs.com/maillist
> 
> To unsubscribe send an email to: list-cumbria-leave at list.cumbriafhs.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of list-cumbria Digest, Vol 6, Issue 12
> *******************************************