RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 1/1
    1. Western Post, 13 July 1861 - Cranford, Donovan, Kelly, Miller, McCoughland, McLaughlan, Perry, Jupp, Andrews
    2. Annette Piper
    3. From Western Post, 13 July 1861: Friday 12th July Before the Police Magistrate. Robert CRANFORD charged with being drunk in Market-street, was fined 5s it being his first offence. Mrs DONOVAN was summoned for using obscene language. Constable KELLY was on duty in Market-street on the night of the 29th June, when his attention was called to a great noise proceeding from defendant, who was using very bad language within hearing of several persons who were passing at the time. Constable MILLER confirmed KELLY's statement. The language is unfit for publication. Mrs DONOVAN in defence, first said she had not said "ha'poth" of what the constables had accused her of; it was no use saying anything, as they would swear to anything.. She did not know that she was guilty of uttering such language till she received the summons. Fined £5 or one month's imprisonment. J McCOUGHLAN alias McLAUGHLAN, was brought up on remand, charged with stealing a side of leather. J PERRY, the party who laid the information, and who appearance it was found necessary to issue a summons to compel him to attend, very reluctantly said that the prisoner was the man he charged with the offence. On the 10th June he resided with prisoner in a house belonging to Mr JUPP; no other person lived in it. The leather he had lost, was kept in a room in which the prisoner slept. He did not which to press the charge against him, and could say nothing about it. He obtained the warrant because he suspected him; the leather had not been found. Thomas ANDREWS, bootmaker, said he had bought a piece of leather of prisoner for 5s., a few weeks since; he said he wished to sell his stock as he was going to leave Mudgee. PERRY was again called, but equivocated so much that he would have been imprisoned had the lock-up not been so full. Mr BRODRIBB, who appeared for prisoner! , said if the Bench were acquainted with the full particulars of the case, they would find that PERRY was the man who ought to be in the dock. The case was dismissed. ***END*** N.B. All care has been taken to transcribe the above accurately, however errors may have been inadvertently made. Spelling of names/places should be as appears in original. Transcribed from microfilm available from the State Library. Annette Piper Coolah NSW

    12/09/2002 09:24:27