Malcolm Bull's Calderdale Companion : Foldout

27th November 1874

Raid on Betting House
On Monday morning, considerable excitement prevailed in the town, in consequence of a number of persons being in custody and being expected to be brought before the magistrates on charges of having been assembled for the purpose of betting and gambling.
The vicinity of the Magistrates Office was the centre of attraction and a good number of people assembled there for the purpose of seeing the prisoners arrive from the lock-up at Shade where they had been confined from some time early Sunday morning.
About half past nine, eleven prisoners were marshalled through the streets guarded by a force of half a dozen police officers. They were first taken to the Magistrates Office and then to the Queen Hotel where arrangements were made for hearing the case. The room was soon packed and the approaches to it soon blocked up, in fact the crowd was so great that it became necessary after a time to clear the house so that those engaged in the case might have free passage. The cause of all the excitement was a raid which the police had made upon a house in Cobden in the occupation of William Fielden, Oat bread baker.
Armed with a warrant Sergeant Burton and a number of constables went to the house between one and two o'clock on Sunday morning and having effected an entrance they found eleven persons assembled all of whom they took into custody, they also secured some implements of gaming.
The names of the prisoners were –

William Fielden of Mill Street, the occupier of the house
John Postlethwaite of Well Lane
Jubb Barstow of Style
Alfred Winsby of Back Brook Street
Thomas Stansfield of Blind Lane
Enoch Bentley of George Street
John Sutcliffe of Eagle Street
Stephen Sutcliffe of Eagle Street
Tom Blackburn of Harley Bank
James Crossley of Union Street South
John Stansfield of Lydgate

Messrs Ormerod & Hinchliffe were on the bench. Mr Gould appeared on behalf of John Postlethwaite and asked on behalf of the other prisoners that the case might be adjourned for half an hour, Mr Learoyd of Huddersfield, who was engaged to defend them, not having arrived. The application was granted and as Mr Learoyd did not arrive by train, by which he was expected, Mr Gould applied for a remand to some other day observing that the prisoners were arrested at 1:30 on Sunday morning and he had no opportunity of getting up a case for the defence. He also asked that the prisoners might be allowed to go at liberty on bail. The Magistrates decided to remand the prisoners to the Petty Sessions and to liberate them on bail. Fielden in £50 and two securities in £25 each, and the rest in £10 and two securities of £5 each. All the prisoners found the required security and were released.
It had been suggested that the prisoners be transported to the Court by cab, but Sergeant Burton refused this but agreed to use an omnibus which was arranged to collect the prisoners at about 9:30 am. It did not arrive

31st December 1874

Trial of William Fielding and Others
Mr Cottingham of Manchester (barrister) was to defend all parties. Before the defendants pleaded he would say the information was bad upon the face of it. It contained two charges against Fielden under two different acts of parliament, one under the Betting and Gaming House Act, and another charge of having received monies from betting upon certain contingencies. The two offences were quite different. The act of parliament under which action was brought was Jervis's Act which prohibited joining of two separate offence under the same charge.
The Clerk said
Neither one nor the other of the charges was an information in the proper sense of the word. They had been arrested under it but they might be charged in any other way.
Mr Cottingham
Surely it was on this information that the officer was furnished with that the warrant was issued to visit the house.
The Clerk
Fielden was charged with two separate and distinct offences, and each of the others with aiding and abetting. If they got the facts the magistrates could take the evidence on this information to fish out some other offence with which the defendants might be charged. He did not understand this jumbling up on incongruities.
There was
the betting upon certain contingencies
The information seemed to him to be so inconsistent that it could not be amended. He would like to have the ruling of the bench stated distinctly in case they should take it to the Queen's Bench. The Clerk having read over the charges afresh, each of the defendants pleaded not guilty. In court, Sergeant Burton and his officers told how after listening outside the house on a few occasions they had heard obvious signs of betting and gambling. They heard cries of
I'll bet five shillings on Crossley
Fielden said
I'll take thee
Postlethwaite said
I'll bet anyone a shilling that we win the game
Some other person said
Done
and threw money on the table. Fielden said:
That's one to me and three times to thee
Crossley said
Let me have jack and I'll bet any money we win the game
In the room the police found a quantity of draughts, draught boards, marking board with 3 pegs in it and a box of dominoes, also copies of "Racing Chronicle for 1873, "Abbotts Turf Recorders" and a "Sporting Life" newspaper for 1874.
PC O'Hara said in court
I was card playing at Doncaster, on the railway, for money. I played 'all fours', had played before last year but had got a little out of practice. I have played all games and dominoes. I played out of my jurisdiction. I was in plain clothes. I knew it was illegal but no catch him no have him
Mr Cottingham:
You may go. I must say you are the most candid policeman I have met with for some time
A small note book was mentioned containing the names 'Bosco Bell' which referred to Cowell the ticket collector at the station. The name 'Light Muffin' was Jack Crossley a baker and 'Malleable Iron' was Winsby an Iron Moulder.
The evidence concluded at 5:25 pm. Mr Cottingham for the defence said
The evidence is now closed, it would be his duty to make remarks upon it. He really must say that some of the most curious evidence has been brought against the accused which he had heard in a somewhat large experience.
The prosecution was not in the hands of any independent professional person, but practically it devolved on the Clerk to the magistrates. The magistrates were both the prosecution and judge. There was nothing alleged against these men who were arrested inn the middle of the night in a private house, these free born Englishmen were arrested, hand-cuffed like felons, kept all Sunday in confinement, and the day following taken through the streets hand-cuffed. The warrant to break into the house did not warrant the police in hand-cuffing them or taking them to the lock-up. The police went to the house on the Saturday, heard the shuffling of cards and money. Did that support the charge that anything illegal was going on? Suppose they had gone and listened at the door of the library or drawing room of Sir Charles This or Lord That and heard the shuffling of cards and the jingling of money, were persons to have their rooms invaded by police. The playing of cards was not illegal else what would be the position of clubs. He asked the Bench how they would arrive at the distinction between this house and any gentlemen who were members of a club. The magistrates sitting there to dispense even-handed justice ought not to sanction these proceedings.
The magistrates said they would take the case into their consideration and give their decision in a fortnight

8th January 1875

The Gambling Case.
After the case against William Fielding and 10 others had been heard, PC O'Hara charged one of the defendants – James Crossley of Patmos – with assaulting him on the 24th December 1874. Crossley was said to have struck PC O'Hara on the forehead.
A charge of assault which had been preferred against John Lever was adjourned. The assault was said to have been witnessed by PC Geo. Lister. Crossley was alleged to have said
let's throw this bxxxxx policeman over the rails
A witness said he heard Crossley say
if you take hold of me again that way, over the rails you go
Crossley said his coat had been torn by the policeman and a witness said
Jack, what's ta been doing with thy coat
The defence said no witnesses were called for the prosecution, but policemen whose conduct was in question.
How was it that so many people were on the stairs, but only policemen have been called?
After an absence of about 10 minutes, the Bench fined Crossley £10 and costs 8s, or two months imprisonment with hard labour.
The fine was paid

William Fielden & gambling at Mill Street, Cobden.