- ReferenceQSR1887/2/5/2a
- TitleDepositions of Thomas Purrett, farmer of Luton. In the case of Joseph Thomas Turner accused of obtaining by false pretences 75 tons of hay, the value of £300.
- Date free text27 January 1887
- Production dateFrom: 1887 To: 1887
- Scope and ContentThomas Purrett: a farmer at the Someries, Luton. On 9 July the prisoner called on him. He was a stranger to him. The prisoner said he had heard that Purrett had a lot of hay to sell. The defendant said he was a large forage contractor so he showed him his ricks and they agreed on the sale of 6 ricks for £400. The accused said he had 3 £500 contracts for hay and his address was 65 George Street, Portman Square, and that he was paying £200 a year rent. The defendant said he was going to move to more extensive premises in Kilburn. Turner asked to be allowed to begin 2 of the ricks at once and Purrett offered no objection. Turner began to take them away. On 17 September Turner said he had been buying a large quantity of hay and people had been pressing him so he asked for credit. Turner produced a promissory note for £200 which he signed. On 17 November Purrett received a cheque for £50 which he cashed. Turner came down later the same day and gave him another cheque for £50 which he also cashed. Purrett told Turner that the hay was being moved very freely and he would want security for the rest of the money. Purrett said he would send me £100 in a few days and would give him a bill at one month for the remaining £200. He was sent a bill a few days later but it was not payable to anyone. In consequence he went to see him at 58 Paddington Street where he said he had his letter left. The address was a shoemakers shop kept by a man called Webb. He waited an hour for the prisoner to come in and told him he had brought back the bill as it was no use. Turner signed a bill Purrett had drawn up, but the bill was not met on maturity. Turner put is private address of 141 Marylesbone Road on it. He also pressed Turner for £100 and was given a cheque which was later returned dishonoured. He received no part of the £300 and took action against him, obtaining judgement but never received the money. He did not know where the hay went to and he had been ill at the time. He heard Dumpletons had some of his hay. Statement of the accused: he was not guilty of obtaining the good by false pretences.
- Exent6 pages
- Reference
- Level of descriptionitem
- Persons/institution keyword
- Keywords
Hierarchy browser