Sheerness Guardian 17 December 1859.

QUEEBOROUGH PETTY SESSIONS.

Before L. S. Magnus, Esq., Mayor, and S. J. Breeze, Esq.

On Monday the 12th inst, three respectable looking young men, named Daniel Leddell, a joiner, Charles Hammond, a sawyer, and John Gallagher, a sailmaker, all residing in Blue Town, Sheerness, were charged on remand, with stealing four fowls value 8s., at Queenboro' on Sunday the 4th of December, the property of Mr. Obadiah White.

Mr. Obadiah White of the "Ship Inn" Queenborough, (who gave his evidence reluctantly), stated that about 5 o'clock on the day in question, the parties accused, had something to drink at his house. Alter staying a few minutes they left by the back door. Shortly afterwards he missed 4 fowls, and found 3 fowls' heads left behind. He proceeded to Sheerness, and gave information to the police. During the same evening, he saw some fowls at the police station, but could not say they were his property. The skin of one of them was now produced, but witness could not swear to it.

William Normile, son of Michael Normile, of Blue Town, deposed that he was on Queenborough wall, on the night of the robbery, and saw Charles Hammond lying on the wall drunk. With the assistance of a boy named Wheller, and another named Jones, he got Hammond home. He did not see that Hammond had a fowl. If Hammond had one he must have seen it. He denied telling police-constable Okill that Hammond had a fowl, and that he had several times asked for it.

George H. Okill. P.C., 187, stated that he met Hammond on the wall about six o'clock in the evening of the 4th. He was drunk, and two boys were leading him, one of whom was carrying a dead fowl. On the evening of the 11th, he spoke to the witness Normile on the subject, when the latter stated that Hammond did have a fowl and that the boys carried it for him; also that Hammond asked for it several times on his way home.

The boy Normile was then re-called, and flatly denied the policeman’s statement.

George Palmer, (teller to the plaintiff,) deposed to the loss of the fowls, but could not identify the heads and skin produced.

Sergeant Ovenden, deposed as follows:— On information being given to me of the robbery, I went to Leddell's house. At my request two fowls were produced. I asked Daniel Leddell where he obtained them? He said they were given to him. I said who by? He replied that he didn't know. I took possession of the fowls and apprehended D. Leddell. I found two more fowls at the house of Gallagher, and one at the house of Hammond. Gallagher was soon afterwards brought to the station, when I asked him to account for the possession of the fowls. He replied that Leddell had killed them and given him them. Hammond was also brought to the station, I asked him where he obtained the fowl, and he replied that Leddell had asked him to carry it. On the same evening I showed the fowls to Mr. White, when he pointed out one and said "that is my Tommy, I will swear to it."

At this stage of the proceedings, superintendent Green asked for a further remand, on the ground that gross perjury had been committed which required investigation.

The same three prisoners, were then charged with stealing a fowl from the "Rose Inn," at Queenborough, on the same day, value 2s. The case was not gone fully into, as the magistrates expressed their desire to remand it, and both cases were accordingly adjourned.

Sheerness Guardian 24 December 1859.

THE FOWL STEALING CASK AT QUEENBORO'

The three young men, Leddell, Hammond, and Gallager, remanded from the previous week, were again brought before L. S. Magnus, Esq, on Tuesday last. Mr. Prail, jun., of Rochester, attended to defend the prisoners. The additional evidence presented was as follows:—

William Pratten proved receiving 3 fowls’ heads, from Mr. White on the day of the robbery, and that they were found by sergeant Ovenden to be of the same colour as three fowls found at prisoners' lodgings.

W. Normile (15 years old) reiterated what he had said on the previous occasion. He was sure that he did not see that Hammond had a fowl. He was positive he never picked one up nor carried one, neither did he see any of the other prisoners on the day of the robbery. (The witness was cautioned as to the nature of the oath he had taken, and that if he swore falsely, he would be sent to prison, but it in no way tended to alter his evidence).

Edward Wheller, aged 18, was next called, and on being sworn, said, that on the 4th December, between 5 and 6 o'clock in the evening, I was in company with the last witness (Normile), and another boy named Samuel Mark Jones, returning from Mr. Jessup's garden toward Sheerness. When near the Gas House, we saw Charles Hammond lying on the wall. He had a dead fowl lying by his side. We helped him up and Jones led him towards Sheerness. Wm. Normile picked up the fowl and walked behind us carrying the fowl in his hand. After carrying the fowl some distance, he gave it to Jones. Jones then carried it a short distance and gave it to me; I carried it the remainder of the journey and left it at Hammond's lodgings. The prisoner Hammond asked where the fowl was twice, on the way home I am quite sure Normile picked up the fowl and carried it the first part of the journey home.

Samuel Mark Jones, an intelligent looking lad, aged 15, on being sworn, corroborated Wheller in every particular, and added about half an hour before we picked Hammond up to bring him home, we were going from Sheerness toward Mr. Jessup's garden, and then saw Hammond near the Gas House. The prisoner Leddell was with him at the time. We then saw the fowl, and saw Leddell take it in his hand and throw it down again. It was as we returned from the garden that we saw Hammond alone and brought him home. Hammond appeared drunk.

Mr. Prail cross examined the two last witnesses, but their testimony remained unshaken.

The prisoners were then committed for trial at the Borough Quarter Sessions on the charge.

The same three young men were then charged with stealing another fowl on the same day, (the 4th inst), the property of Mr. Jenkins, of the "Rose Inn," Queenboro, but in consequence of the absence of two witnesses they were remanded till Monday next, the 26th inst. Bail was accepted for their appearance.

The boy, William Normile, was then apprehended, and charged before the mayor, with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury. On the application of superintendent Green, he was reminded till Monday next, the 27th instant. The boy's father asked for bail, but the mayor said the charge was of so serious a nature, that he could not accept it under any circumstances.

Sheerness Guardian, 14 April, 1860.

POLICE CASES.

The following cases were heard at Queenborough on Tuesday last, the 10th instant, before L. S. Magnus Esq, (mayor) and S. J. Breeze, Esq.

S. Ruke and S. Griggs, were charged with assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty. Rake appeared in answer to his recognisances, but Griggs did not appear. George Marshall, P. C. 154 East Kent Constabulary, stated that about four p.m. on the 19th of March several persons complained that the defendants had been brutally ill-using a man. Upon the information he received, he went to the "Ship Inn," where he found a man with his face blackened and his clothes very much torn. The man was drunk and disorderly. About seven p.m., the defendants brought the man out of the "Ship" with his arms tied to his waist. Rake had hold of one end of the rope and Griggs of the other end, and were thereby earning considerable distinction in the town. The countable stopped them and told them to let the man go, but Griggs replied that he should do as he pleased. He therefore apprehended the man and handcuffed him for being drunk and disorderly, when both of the defendants protested against his being taken into custody, and said they would kill the policeman before they would give him up. A struggle ensued. The defendant pulled the man's hands so effectually as to withdraw them through the handcuffs and then they rescued the man. After this, Griggs returned with his clothes off and offered to fight the policeman. The latter not feeling disposed to accept the challenge, Griggs aimed a blow at him and damaged his hat. Both the defendants swore they would kill him before they slept. On a question from the defendant Rake, the constable stated that when the man had one hand out of the cuffs, he unlocked the other, to prevent the defendants from breaking his arm. John Constable, high constable, said that Marshall asked him to assist in taking the man into custody. They handcuffed him and were about to do so, but were prevented by a mob of some 40 or 50 persons, who bustled the policemen in such a way us to defeat their object, whilst Griggs and Rake held on to the man and attempted and effected his rescue.

Fined 40s. The police applied for a warrant for the apprehension of Griggs, which was granted.

Sheerness Guardian, 8 September, 1860.

SUICIDE AT QUEENBOROUGH.

At about 1 a.m. on Sunday morning last, a woman named Caroline Kisby, the wife of a fisherman at Queenborough, deliberately hung her head out of the bedroom window and committed suicide by cutting her throat with a table knife.

Her husband and one of her sons were in the lower part of the house at the time, and on hearing the blood trickle down, they imagined it was raining, but on going into the yard, they were appalled to find that the poor woman had committed suicide and that instead of rain failing, it was blood which was flowing from the wounds she had inflicted. It appears that this poor creature had been suffering from bronchitis for some time and had been confined to her room for about a fortnight. She leaves a large family.

An inquest was held on the body at the "Ship Inn" on Tuesday, and a verdict of temporary insanity returned.