Peculiar Poaching Charge at Conisborough.

June 1901

Mexborough and Swinton Times, June 28.

Peculiar Poaching Charge at Conisborough.

Some singular evidence was given in a case in which John Hallam, a glassblower, of Conisborough, was summoned for an offence under the Poaching Prevention Act.

The defendant pleaded not guilty.

PC Duffin stated that at 12 o’clock noon on the date in question he was in company with Sgt Philipson and PC Thompson, when he saw the defendant coming along the highway from the direction of Burcroft.

He was carrying something wrapped in paper under his arm, and when he got near the officers he tried to conceal the parcel under his coat. The witness asked him what he had got, and he refused to let the officer’s look, and tried to run away.

The officers seized him, and the witness after searching him found he had in his possession a rabbit, which was quite warm, and appeared to have been recently killed. The witness asked the defendant when he had got it from, and he said he was taking it to a friend. The defendant refused to say where you got the rabbit from, and in consequence the witness charged him with an offence under the Poaching Preventing Act.

Sgt Philipson and PC Thompson gave similar evidence.

The defendant said that on the Saturday, previous to the day on which he was stopped by the police, he went to a rabbit coursing leger at Swinton, and bought a couple of rabbits. On the day of the summons he had been to the Three Horseshoes Inn, Conisborough, and met a friend to whom he promised to give one of the rabbits. He went to his home to fetch it and was returning when the officers stopped him.

Annie Bell, and a woman named Night, neighbours, stated that they saw the defendant coming out of his own house with something wrapped in paper under his arm.

William Liversedge a Mexborough man, said that on the previous Saturday. He was at a rabbit coursing Leger at Swinton, and there saw the defendant, to whom he sold two young rabbits for a shilling each.

The Bench found the defendant guilty, and he was fined five shillings and the costs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.