Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General
Advertiser, Saturday 25 August 1849.
Robbery by a licensed victualler and his son.
At the Central Criminal Court on Tuesday last, James Watson, 53,
a licensed victualler, Jonathan Richard Watson, 23, labourer, and
Robert Hawley, 29, a labourer, where indicted for stealing 500
bricks, the property of John Brogden, the master of Hawley.
Mr. Prendergast prosecuted; Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Parnell defended
the Watson's, who are father and son; and Mr. Payne appeared for
Hawley.
The case, which lasted nearly the whole day, excited a great
amount of interest, on account of the respectable position filled by
the prisoners Watson, and the Court was very full.
The evidence adduced in support of the charge, although of great
lengths, merely established the following simple facts:- The elder
Watson is a licence victualler keeping the "White Horse," New
Charlton, Kent, and where he had resided for nearly 20-years,
hitherto enjoying and unblemished reputation, as also had his son,
who stood indicted with him; and the prisoner Hawley was in the
employ of the prosecutor, who is the contractor for the New North
Kent branch of railway open to Gravesend. In the course of
constructing the line, it became necessary to pull down some houses
at Woolwich, which, preceded their removal, were sold by auction,
and, about the middle of April, the elder Watson, who is a builder
as well as a publican, bought one of the houses for £40, and taking
advantage of the opportunity afforded him in the removal of
materials so bought, he removed a stack of bricks, the subject of
the present indictment, to his own premises, which was clearly not
included in the purchase; and the younger Watson was on the
premises, directing them to be taken away. The circumstance having
been found out, mention was made of it to the auctioneer, who had
sold the the premise brought by the elder prisoner, and he (the
auctioneer) immediately went to the Watson's, and asked them how
they came to take away those bricks, when the Elder Whatson said he
had bought and paid for them, and it was no matter from whom. Mr.
Davis, auctioneer, then said that if he did not tell him from whom
he had brought them, he should give him in custody, and he then said
he had bought them from a man at the engineers office, who was
understood to be the prisoner Hawley.
In the course of examination it turned out that, besides the
house that Whatson bought, the clerk to the auctioneer had sold to
him an unclaimed lot of old bricks, which, although not those
claimed by the prosecutor, were placed near to them.
The Court said they did not think that there was a any case
against Hawley.
Mr. Clarkson, for the elder Watson, contended that the affair was
a mistake, the bricks being sufficiently near those his client had
brought to have been taken by accident.
Mr. Parnell, for the son, adopted the same line of defence,
adding that the son had also acted under the advice of the father.
The Common Sergeant said there could not be a case against
Hawley, and there was not any evidence to show that the son might
not have thought his father had bought the bricks, and the only real
defence he could see for the elder Watson was that he might have
taken them by mistake.
The jury, after a short consultation, acquitted them.
The Watsons were again indicted in conjunction with a labouring
man named John Record, for having stolen, on the 26th of May, at
Woolwich, 1,000 bricks, the property of the same prosecutor.
In this case it appeared that, near the spot where the houses
before mentioned are situated, the railway companies works were
being carried on, and a vast number of new bricks were continually
received and carted from there to the tunnel at Charlton. About a
week before the date named in the indictment the elder Watson asked
Mr. Barnes, a builder, living at Sandhill, Plumstead, if he wanted
to buy any new bricks, and he agreed to take 4,000 or 5,000, at £1
8s. a thousand, and about a third of the quantity were sent in, but
the rest not arriving, Mr. Barnes called, on the 25th, at Watson's,
to know why they had not come, and he (Watson) said they should be
there the next morning. The Watsons then engage the man Record to go
to the brick-stack in question and bring away 1,000 bricks, at the
same time that the other carters were taking them, and if any
questions are asked, to say they were for the works at the Charlton
tunnel. One of the men connected with the works seeing the cart
engaged by the Watson's, made some enquiries, and the answer not
satisfying him communicated with the foreman of the works, that once
instituted enquiries, and the result was that the cart, which had at
first started off in the direction of the tunnel works, was traced
to Watson's premises, and a quantity of new bricks were there found
stacked over with old ones. Upon being taxed with the robbery, the
elder Whatson said there must have been some mistake, and wished to
pay for them. The police were then called in, and the elder Watson
seemed extremely anxious to have the affair hushed up.
The jury found both of Watson's guilty, recommending them to
mercy on account of their previous good character, and, by the
direction of the Court, acquitted Record.
The Common Serjeant said it was an extremely bad case, especially
against the Elder prisoner; still the younger one had taken an
active part in the matter, which he had most likely been led into by
his father.
The younger Watson said he had.
The Common Serjeant:-. But you were old enough to know you were
doing wrong, and it is a very bad case; here is no poverty, want, or
excuse of any kind, and a person in good circumstances carrying on a
wholesale system of robbery. However, the jury and the prosecutor
have both recommended them to mercy, and the sentence was, that the
younger prisoner being prison for 6, and the elder one for 18
months, and kept to hard labour.
|