QSR1869/4/5/24

Depositions of John Baker, labourer of Eaton Bray. Charles Thorne, farmer and baker of Eaton Bray. John Tingey, a churchwarden of the parish of Eaton Bray. Frederick Roberts and John Hedges, overseers of the poor for Eaton Bray. Robert Sherman Thorpe, clerk to John Newton, clerk to the Board of Guardians of the Leighton Buzzard Poor Law Union. Sarah Ann Baker, single woman and daughter of John Baker, the prosecutor and resident with him. In the case of Charles Lee, collector of Poor Rates for the parish of Eaton Bray, accused of obtaining money by false pretences.

10 August 1869

From: 1869 To: 1869

John Baker: he was a labourer at Eaton Bray and a rate payer of that parish. He owned 2 cottages, a garden, a little barn and a pigsty. He occupied the cottages as the 2 cottages now formed 1 cottage. The defendant had called upon him at different times for the payment of poor rates. He could not say what money he had paid him but he always paid what was demanded and was always given a receipt. He had given these receipts to his attorney. He sent the money afterwards down with his daughter. He sometimes paid the money himself. His daughter would take down the money and bring back the receipt. He always put the receipts on the file. No one but he had his daughter paid the rates. He occupied no other property in Eaton. He had paid his rates fro over 2 years. He had a barn which he let out on a lease but it tumbled down. No one ever slept in it. The cottages, barn and pig sty came into his possession 7 or 8 years ago. There was no double barn and it was a farmer’s barn to thresh corn. It was let to someone when it he came into his possession. There was no land attached to the barn. Reuben Hutchings did once occupy the barn before it came into his possession but did not occupy the land for 2 years after he came to the property. He did not live at the cottage before his father died. The barn tumbled down some time ago. He did not let the barn to anyone except last August when he let the barn to some men for 4 or 5 months. It was William Travell. He built a new barn partly where the old barn stood. He did not let the old barn to anyone. A man by the name of Room had the barn to put wood in. He did not know he paid a rate except for the cottage. He never noticed the barn was on his receipts. He asked the defendant why he was charged a shilling more than his neighbour Scott and he was told it was for the barn. David Scott bought the land but he did not buy the barn. He did not know he was charged for the barn. On 22 February 1868 he couldn’t swear he paid the prisoner 10d as no receipt said it. He always paid what was demanded. Nor could he swear he paid 1s on 11 May 1868. On 3 august 1868 he believed he paid the rates himself. On 5 December he either paid or sent down the money. He was seldom at home when the defendant called but he sometimes met the defendant on the road and was asked for it. He knew he took the defendant the rate last harvest and he had been in his shop and he called as he went past. The defendant Mr lee told him in the Spring that he had made a mistake. The first time he asked what he was charged or the barn the defendant replied that he knew what he was charged for the barn. The prisoner afterwards said it was wrong and he would right it. That was last March or April. He was hoeing peas at the time and it was long after the old barn had tumbled. He let the new barn to a straw factor. He had not been charged the extra shilling since the defendant said he had made a mistake. He compounded for his taxes. Mr Thorne was the rate payer for Eaton Bray and he came to his house and asked for the receipts. The receipts were given to Mr Thorne for the purpose of the enquiry before the Board of Guardians. He went to the defendant after something his wife said. The prisoner said he supposed he had come to put the rate right. The defendant laid a piece of paper down and he put his hand to it and made an ‘X’. He did not know what was in the paper and it was not read to him. He gave the defendant a penny for the paper as he said it had cost him that. He took possession of the barn in 1862 when Room left. Room had more barn than he did now. Charles Thorne: he lived at Eaton Bray as a farmer and baker. He had served a copy of the notice on the defendant on 2 August. He served the copy of the subpoena on John Tingley, one of the churchwardens on 2 August and also Frederick Roberts, one of the overseers of Eaton Bray. On 4 August he served a copy of the subpoena on John Hedges, another of the overseers. He had sent the Rate book of 14 January 1869 and looked to no. 153 John Baker. It read John Baker, owner and occupier £2 9s 6d rateable value. The same information was then repeated. George Scott was rate precisely as John Baker by way of 2 cottages and 2 twenty poles of land. He was no. 158. The defendant produced the Rate Books on that occasion. He applied for more Rate Books but did not see them as the defendant declined to produce them despite being asked for them several times. He did not know Baker occupied a barn distinct from his occupation. The parish was under the Small Tenements act. Looking at the receipts there was nothing to correspond with the shilling charged. It was an overcharge on Baker of the rate of 2s 5d ½ He had been to the defendant’s house since the last Petty Session and was present at the Petty Session. He offered himself 5 years ago to the Board of Guardians to take the office of Collector. He offered to dot he work at a £1 loss. He received the receipts from Baker on 21 June. He took copies of the Rate Books. He went to Mr Shepherd’s office with Baker but did not know if Baker occupied more than Scott. There was an old barn on the property Baker occupied which was blown down about 2 or 3 years ago. He did not know if the barn was ever occupied by David Scott. John Tingley: he was one of the churchwardens in the parish of Eaton Bray. He had none of the documents mentioned in the subpoena. He never had any of the books in his possession. He did not now where they were and had never had any of them. He had been a Churchwarden since last Lady’s day. They did not keep old rate books it was the custom for the rate books to lay for 7 days before the audit for inspection of the parishioners. A notice would be put on the church doors. After this no care was taken of the books. He did not know what became of them. He had known the defendant for 11 years and he had been honest from what he knew and the defendant had always been straight forward. He had not been an overseer during the past 3 years. There had been no audit since January and he did not know if the books for the rate on the 14 January and 8 April had been open for inspection. Frederick Roberts: he was one of the Overseers for Eaton Bray. He was appointed last March. He did not have any of the books that the subpoena showed nor had he seen them. He did not know that he signed the rate book of 8 April. He did not know in whose possession it was. He may have signed the rates since 30 March but he could not say how many. He did not recollect reading the Declaration on the Rte Book. His recollection was bad. He had not seen any book since he was in office. John Hedges: was one of the Overseers for Eaton Bray. He had seen none of the documents mentioned in the subpoena. He had seen 4 or 5 rate books since he had become an overseer in March 1868. He had seen them when the defendant brought them to be signed. He had signed all of them since March 1868. He had signed the usual declaration without reading it through. He had sent eh books at Mr Lee’s house when he wanted to see them and had sent the last book within the week. He did not know of the rate books being taken away from the overseers when they were done with. He had known the defendant for 10 to 12 years and had never known anything amiss of him and believed him to be honest now. The defendant was appointed assistant overseers. There was a party in the parish who did not like him but he was re-elected. Robert Sherman Thorpe: he was the clerk to Mr Newton, the clerk of the Board of Guardians of Leighton Union. He produced a copy of the valuation lists for the parish of Eaton Bray which were deposited with the Board of Guardians on conformity with the Parochial Assessment act. He had made the copy himself. He knew the defendant was the paid collector. He had looked through the valuation list in respect of John Baker and he was assessed to £2 19s 6d gross and £2 9s 6d rateable value cottage and garden, as 288 on the list. 289 on the list was for a similar amount. 290 was for George Scott and was the same amount. 291 was the same as the last. There was no other property assessed to John Baker on the list. There was nothing on the list which answered the £1 shown on the receipt. Supplementary Valuation lists did not mention John Baker. Sarah Ann Baker: she was a single woman and lived at home with her father, John Baker. She took care of the papers as he could not write. Since the commencement of 1868 no one had paid rates except her and her fathers. When she paid the rate she had a receipt from the defendant. The receipts were put on file. When the defendant called he mentioned the amounts for which he had called and she would write it down. Overcharges were made by her father. Her father built a small wood barn independent of the one that had tumbled down. She had sent he defendant several time when he called. She remembered the old barn being on the premises. It was there when they went to live there in 1862 but she could not say if Reuben Hutchings occupied it. She thought 2 different people had occupied the barn since her father had been there. She remembered the barn tumbling down and thought it about 2 years ago. He father now let the new barn to a corn factor who pays for it by the year. Statement of the accused: he was not guilty.

item

Baker, John,
Lee, Charles,
Thorne, Charles,
Tingey, John,
Roberts, Frederick,
Hedges, John,
Thorpe, Robert Sherman,
Newton, John,
Baker, Sarah Ann,
Hutchings, Reuben

EATON BRAY, false pretences, Leighton Buzzard Poor Law Union, LEIGHTON BUZZARD, Overseers, farmer, baker, churchwardens, collector of rates