Home Page

Thomas Munn a boy fifteen years of age and belonging to Buckland, was charged with stealing a skylark value 15s the property of James West of 1 Brookfield Cottages Buckland. Sarah West, wife of James West living at 1 Brookfield Cottages, Buckland, said she had seen the prisoner before as he had been in the habit of coming to the house with greengrocery though she never dealt with him but once. She had a skylark and on quitting her house on the previous morning she left it safe in the cage, which was hanging outside the house out of reach. Anyone to get to it must have got upon the windowsill. She returned to the house about five and the bird was then gone from the cage, the cage being left empty in the garden lying on the ground. The value of the bird was 15s but it was a pet bird and she would not have parted with it for any money.

Robert Licence son of Mr. R. Licence of the Marine Library; I was near the Brookfield Cottages Buckland yesterday about a quarter past twelve. I saw the prisoner near the corner of the cottages. He had a barrow and I saw him put a bird in a basket and cover another basket over it. By the prisoner; there was only one boy standing near the barrow when I saw the bird put into the basket and that was you. On the application of the police the prisoner was remanded till Friday in order to permit of the bird being traced. (1870)

Thomas Munn the boy remanded from the Wednesday previous on a charge of stealing a skylark, the property of James West of 1 Brookfield Cottages, Buckland, was brought up again. From the evidence adduced at the previous examination it appeared that Mrs. West left her house the previous morning with the skylark hanging in a cage outside but out of reach and that when she returned about five in the afternoon she found the bird gone and the cage lying in the garden empty. The only evidence connecting the prisoner with the loss of the bird was that given by another boy who said he saw him about a quarter past twelve on the previous day near to Brookfield Cottages with a bird in a basket and that on the prisoner seeing him he covered it over with another basket.

It seemed that the bird had not been traced and the superintendent of police said he was very doubtful whether any further evidence could be obtained. The magistrates considered that the evidence already adduced was not sufficient to warrant the further detention of the prisoner and they therefore dismissed him but at the same time informed him that if further evidence should be forthcoming he might be taken into custody and brought before them again. The boy who protested that he was innocent of stealing the bird then left the court. (1870)