From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 31 December, 1859.

COMMENCING BUSINESS IN A RURAL DISTRICT

Samuel Pollard, a young man described on the charge-sheet as  a draper, was brought up by Kent County Constable Hasmore, charged with stealing on the previous Friday sixty turnips, the property of Mr. Joshua Page, inn-keeper, of Barham.

It appeared that the defendant had recently taken up his about at Barham, where he has a brother living carrying on the trade of watch and clock maker. The brother, it would appear, had a fancy for rabbits, and this, unfortunately, led the defendant into his present dilemma; for on the evening of the 23rd inst., having assisted his brother to carry home a clock to a neighbouring farmer's, it occurred to the brother, as they were passing Mr. Page's turnip field that a few turnips would be relished by the rabbits. They without more ado filled a clothes basket with the esculent favoured by a rabbit tribe; but before they could convey it home, they were met by constable Hasmore, whose suspicions were excited. The defendant was taken into custody in consequence; but the brother ran away, and had not up to that time been heard of.

James Hasmore, Kent county constable, said that on the evening of the 23rd, he was near Barham Church when he saw the defendant and his brother carrying between them a basket full of turnips. He asked them where they had got them, when the brother said he had been to carry home a clock to Denne Hill Farm, and had had permission to bring back a basket full of turnips. Their conduct excited his suspicions he detained the turnips to make enquiries respecting them, which he did on the following morning, when he discovered that they had been taken from a field belonging to Mr. Page. He then took the defendant into custody; but on going to look for the brother he found he had disappeared. When he apprehended the defendant he told him he did so for stealing some turnips, when defendant begged him not to press the charge.

Bt defendant - I am positive you were assisting your brother to carry the basket containing the turnips when I met you on Friday evening.

Joshua Page, farmer, living at Barham - On the evening of the 23rd, at about half-past seven, the defendant and his brother came to me at my house, saying that the police had taken some turnips from them, and wished me to tell the police I had given them permission to take them. I told them I could do no such thing, because I had given the police strict orders to look to my turnips, having lost a great many. I told them, however, that if they went to the police and they chose to overlook it I had no objection. At that time I was not aware of the number they had stolen. From what they said I gathered that they had taken only from half a dozen to a dozen, or a dozen and a half, but finding, on the following morning, that the basket taken from the defendant contained a great number, I went to the spot at which the defendant and his brother were apprehended, and between that and my field I picket up here and there a turnip to the number of eleven, corresponding exactly with those in the basket. The turnips are a peculiar sort, viz., red rind and green rind mixed together and I should think you would not find such another sort in this country - certainly not in the parish of Barham. I traced the turnips along to a spot in my field where a number of turnips had been freshly pulled. The turnips produced resemble mine exactly, and I have no doubt they were taken from my field. The lowest value I can put on the sixty is 1s.

In reply to enquiries from the Bench, Mr. Page said he believed from what he had heard that the defendant was a very respectable young man, and had filled good situations in London. He had come to Barham for the purpose of opening a draper's shop, he believed. He, (Mr. Page) thought that he had thoughtlessly allowed himself to be led into the scrape by his brother.

The defendant, in reply to the charge, said that he was asked by his brother to assist him in carrying home a clock to Denne Hill Farm, the evening in question, and that on their return his brother proposed they should "get a turnip or two" for his rabbits. He admitted helping his brother to pull up the turnips and to carry home the basket.

Dr. Astley fined him 5s., 1s., the value of the turnips, and costs 9s.; in all 15s. In default of payment he would go to prison for fourteen days. The worthy Magistrate remarked that it was very disgraceful for a young man in the defendant's position to go and pillage the field of his neighbour, and he should have thought better of him had he when taxed by the policeman, at once acknowledged what he had done instead of endeavouring to cover the theft with a lie.

Defendant said he would pay the money if allowed to return to Barham in charge of the constable.

The Magistrates said that if the constable liked to become responsible for the payment of the fine he might, but the defendant could be suffered to depart on no other understanding.

The constable declined, and committal appeared the only alternative, when the prosecutor stepped forward and said he would pay the fine on defendant's behalf reiterating what he had previously said as to his good opinion of the defendant, and his belief that he had been led into his present dilemma by his brother.

The Magistrate remarked that whatever influence the defendant's brother might have had over him, defendant himself must have known that he had no right to assist in carrying off a clothes basket full of another person's turnips. The prosecutor was certainly behaving very kindly to him and he trusted that, although he was now escaping easily, what had transpired would be a lesson to him for the future.

THE TURNIP STEALING BY TRADESMEN

James Pollard, a clock-maker carrying on business at Barham, and the brother of the young man fined on Monday, was brought up charged with stealing a quantity of turnips from a field belonging to Mr. Josiah Page, inn-keeper, of Barham.

The evidence is the same as that given on Monday, and after some severe animadversions by the Magistrate on the nature of the offence and the position of the parties committing it, the defendant was fined 10s. and the costs, which he paid.