|
Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald, 26 March 1870.
Kentish Gazette, 22 March, 1870. (Ashford)
SHOCKING OCCURANCE.
On Friday afternoon an inquest was held at the "British Volunteers Inn,"
New Street, touching the death of a young woman, aged 24 years, named
Sarah Sutton Hill, the daughter of Mr. William Hill, millwright, who
committed suicide under very distressing circumstances. The deceased, we
hear, came down as usual early on Tuesday morning and began making
preparations for breakfast. She seems then to have gone upstairs and
with a sharp pocket knife belonging to her brother cut her throat in a
very determined manner, making two severe wounds, besides stabbing
herself in the side. She appears to have made no noise, and her father
coming home about half-past seven o'clock went upstairs and found her
bleeding, with the knife clasped in her hand. G. F. Wilks, Esq.,
surgeon, sewed up the wound, but she sunk and died on Thursday. Mr. A.
Hart was chosen foreman of the Jury, and after viewing the body, the
following evidence was taken:—
Mr. William Hill, father of the deceased, who seemed overwhelmed with
grief, deposed:— On Tuesday morning last I found my daughter in her
brother’s bedroom with her throat cut. She died yesterday morning from
the injury. She had been strange at times for some period: I think I may
say for some few years; she had the gastric fever, and I think it left
an aberration of intellect behind.
By the Jury:— She had been worse for the last three or four weeks. I have
heard that on Monday night she went down the street wearing my boots. We
have tried since the act was committed to get from her why she did it,
but she could give no reason. She has never said anything which would
lead us to think she would commit suicide. I found this penknife in her
hand when I discovered her.
The brother of the deceased was about to be examined but Mr. A.
Williams, one of the jury, said he did not think it necessary to hear
any further evidence.
One or two jurymen said they had not heard
anything as to how the death was caused, and suggested that the medical
gentleman should be sent for; but the Coroner observed there could not
be a doubt the poor girl took her own life in a state of insanity, and a
verdict to that effect was accordingly returned.
|
|
Kentish Gazette, 11 January 1876.
SECOND COURT. STEALING FOWLS.
Before C. J. Plumptry, Esq., (in the chair); Captain Hilton, J. J.
Harvey, K. W. Wilkie, and F. W. Curteis, Esqs.
Edward Swaffer, alias "Navvy" Swaffer, and Walter Swaffer,
labourers, were charged with stealing fourteen live tame fowls,
value £10, the property of Owen Russell and Charles Edward Andrews,
at Kingsnorth, on the 14th November.
Mr. Deering prosecuted, and Mr. Ormerod defended.
Owen Russell, one of the prosecutors deposed that he and his
brother-in-law (the other prosecutor) kept fowls in a lodge at
Kingsnorth. On Sunday, 14th November, there were 23 fowls in the
lodge. They were then safe, and the lodge was secured with a padlock.
On the following morning when he visited the lodge, he discovered
that it had been broken open, and there were fourteen birds missing.
The police showed him twelve fowls and he identified several of
them. He was certain four out of the game cocks were his.
Charles Cooms stated that he was a labourer and employed by the last
witness's brother-in-law (the prosecutor Andrews). The two
prosecutors kept fowls in a lodge at Kingsnorth and he attended to
them. When he went to the lodge on Monday morning, the 15th November,
he found that there were several missing. The padlock had been broken
off and was lying on the ground. He was shown several fowls at the
police-court and identified five or six of them as belonging to the
prosecutors.
Felix Giles, landlord of the
"British Volunteer Inn," Ashford, said
that on Sunday evening, the 14th November, the two prisoners came
into his house. The prisoner Walter asked witness if he bought fowls,
and he replied that he did not. He then asked him (witness) if he
would give him 12s. for twelve fowls, which he declined to do;
prisoner then offered them to him for 10s. 6d., and which offer he
also declined. Both prisoners had a bag in their hands, and he
noticed that they looked rather bulky. The other prisoner (Edward)
did not say anything. The prisoner Walter asked the way out the
back, and he showed both prisoners into his yard.
John Bird, plumber, living at Ashford, gave evidence to the effect
that he was in the "Old English Gentleman" public house at Ashford,
on the Sunday evening. he was standing at the bar and the prisoner
Walter beckoned him to come into a room. He went and the prisoner then
took a white fowl out of a bag and showed it to witness. He was
looking at it when a policeman came in and took possession of it.
Thomas Mills deposed that he was a police-constable residing at
Ashford. On the evening of the 14th inst. (Sunday) he went into the
"Old English Gentleman" public house; he was the prisoner Walter
sitting on a seat in the front room/The last witness was standing
near the prisoner and had a fowl in his hand. There was a bag lying
on the seat near the prisoner, in which he found a fowl which the
prisoner said was his property. he told the prisoner he did not
believe him, and should take him into custody on a charge of
stealing them. On taking him to the police station the prisoner said
he bought the fowls of a man up the street. On Monday, the 15th
November, he went into the garden at the back of the
"British
Volunteer" public house, and found a bag containing either fowls
near a faggot stack. The fowls were the same that had been
identified by the witness Cooms and Russell. On the same day he
visited the lodge at Kingsnorth, and noticed footprints on the
ground leading to and from the lodge.
Police constable Lane, of Ashford, proved going to the prosecutors'
premises on the 15h November, and discovering some footprints near
the lodge, he obtained the prisoner Walter's boots, and upon
comparing the shoes with the footprints found them to correspond. He
cut out the footprints, but they had since fallen to pieces. He also
corroborated the last witness as to finding the bag at the back of
the "British Volunteer."
Mr. Ormerod, in an able address for the
prisoners, contended that
there was not the slightest evidence against Edward Swaffer, and
argued that although the evidence was stronger against the other
prisoner it was not sufficient to convict upon.
The Jury, after some
consultation acquitted Edward Swaffer, and
found the prisoner Walter, "Guilty."
A sentence of six months' had labour was inflicted.
|
)
