The History of Wandsworth Common

Wandsworth Common

IN THE NEWS

1838

Essex Herald — Tuesday 13 March 1838

[VIOLENT CRIME IN ESSEX — SAUSAGES DELIVERED TO WANDSWORTH COMMON — SENTENCE OF DEATH]

[PB: A complicated story involving burglary by a gang in Essex, sausages, and Wandsworth Common, including Mr Du Buisson. Might be worth sorting out.]

(Click on image to enlarge)

ESSEX LENT ASSIZE

Burglary at Mountnessing

Dales William Thomptom, a tall middle-aged man, of respectable appearance, who had been out on bail . . . Mountnessing.

Mr Knox was . . .

The witnesses having been ordered out Court on aidea, prosecutrix, an elderlywoman, end daughter, deuiled, with much ciearneat, Ibe parucnlan of tbc cue at the trial of Sepmour, flierr.,l,k, *

Summer Auire. The faouae.

entered in night nf lit of April, four persons, who, after plundenng the premises, tied down the poor woman, her husband, and daughter, in their beds, with cords, but, although armed with plough coulter and an iron hammer, no other violence. They remained in the house regaling themselves upwards of two

l^*.**** having lighted candle in bia hand. Mrs. Young and her daughter had opportunity of the person of the taller man, and swore positively tbat prisoner Thompson was the He it was, Mrs.

il1 '

Pfoogb coulter, stood over her husband's bed, and said, Now, old man. lour blood

money we want, and lk<

A 0? loob Ymmg'a purse out of

nll clothes which were behind his pillow. Thompson di..aliitied with Ibia, and Yoddb gate Mm three balf-erown* and two .billinn, which lay Wi,!
be had m bee pocket, and gave him 2a. Thompson theo went ber dangbier

a room, with the other

*

> pry open . box, Mr.. Young begged b.mlode.m, and .be would unlock it. fie auSered MrtodOM,iad turned out.ll iiacoDtenl.: amoog.t wa. . bottle of wine, put which le drank, baring ant pulled down handkerchief, which preconcealed part of bia face. Both Mn.Vonng hrr danihler Cad now ample opportunity see Jr*/^

lur .*f and both spoke to his Mvniitv without the slightest hesitation.

Thompson u Young several times, and assisted

beir beds.

On her crosscsamiiistion bj Mr. Dowling, Mrs. Vonog said, she

new fatbmr, who lived about two miles Horn her honse. She denied that abe had ever told Mrs. Loyd that she would not swear to the men.

k n, '

t believed him be the & 1101 *?. ri

hl down" to him. thM Billericay, proeed,

JMfonce of the prosecutnx:

* T,

9 the tall man would have killed bun had it not been for him (Seymour.)

Robl. deposed that whilst had charge of the prisoner, (Thompson) said, hoped old woman would swear him, for would rather be of the country than aa for old man, be did not think As could swear to him. also asked wit

how long Cnrtis had bed warrant for him. and added. If had known had one against me I would not hare shown my face here

Master Billy Seymour or Dim moat bare said something about me, or they would never have had suspicion against me."

Geo. Curtis corroborated Joalin.

Mr. Dowling then addressed the Jury, ctAnmenting the evidence for Ibe prosecution, and stating that ne snpold ciaorly prove the prisoner's innocence, at Wandsworth during the whole h *he Ist of April. It wss roost w wheTSyj

Couusel argued, that when the **>ktn >0 positively to tha prf

OMT** pmoj were way they l.ad

_________

ssoner's perso were attacked in the way they had described

by the five armed ruffians, their extreme terror would render it most difficult for them make soch obsecrations wonld enable them to say with certainty who the parties were.

With respect to the expressions made use of, and prored by that active and respectable officer, Curtis, they, contended, proved no confession on the part of Thompson, but *t

confirm the propncty of the conviction of the three men who were now salfcrinc for the offence. Guilty men would frequently make confidants of others, and tell the whole story of particular acts of delinquency, but it was too much say that had any connection with them, merely from that circumstance.

As to his saying be did not care whether were sent out of the country or not, that have been merely as an idle joke. should call fore them witnesses who would prove him to be a man of Rood reputation, and that was at such a distance from Mountnessing. at a time which would render it morally impossible he could hare been one of the number who committed the robbery.

The Learned Counsel then called John Robinson, a tailor, Wandsworth, and his wife, who swore positively that the prisoner was at house, where he lodged, next door them, at 11 o'clock that night. They particularly remembered that it was the 1st of April from their little boy having made some person an April fool, about which some conversation occurred with the prisoner -

These witnesses were cross-examined at some length Mr. Knox, but their evidence in substance did not disagree.

William Howard, of Wandsworth. Francis Gough, of Putney, Thomas Rumball. of Mountnessing, Giles Moore, of the same place, and John Clark, of Hutton, gave the prisoner good character most of them stating that they had known him several years, and nearly all of them bearing testimony the respectability of his parents.

Joseph Samuel Lescber, Esq. Sooth Weald, was called, but said knew nothing of the prisoner; he knew his father respectable and had done business with him.

William Curtis being recalled by Mr. Knox, repealed the state menl made by the prisoner when apprehended, and the Her. Thomas prored the examination of the prisoner, when declined making any reply to the charge.

Mr. Dowling again addressed the Jury contrasting the evidence for and against the prisoner,, and urging that the evidence given by the witnesses I for the defence was more worthy of their belief than that which had been given by the old lady and Iter daughter, who were the time labouring under the effects of terror and alarm.

Mr. Knox replied at considerable length, contending that the opportunities for observation of the prisoner's person, on the part of the witnesses for the prosecution, were such clearly to enable them to speak poaitively upon the subject. The statements made by the prisoner himself were such | could only be made by guilty man or madman there was no appearance of insanity about him, and his whole story tended to confirm the evidence given against him. The old woman, he had predicted, swore to him, but the old man could not do to.

The prisoner being called on for his defence, desired that George Hume might be called; he proved that Thompson took sausages to the house of Mr. Dubuisson where he (Hume) lived, on Wandsworth Common, on the 1st of April 5 that he stopped there till nearly nine o'clock night, and witness walked with him to Wandsworth town.

On his cross-examination he admitted that he had come down from town with the prisoner and his witnesses; his memory was good said for what he came to say, but he could not recollect when he was asked to tell this story.

Mr. Dowling and Mr. Knox severally again addressed the Jury, sod his Lordship summed the evidence, leaving it to them to decide between the conflicting testimony.

After some deliberation the jury declared that they had agreed to withdraw, and a bailiff being sworn, they retired, one of them previously asking whether proof had been given that the prisoner kept horse and cart. It did nut appear that there was any evidence to that fact.

ln about ten minutes the jury returned into court and delivered verdict of Guilty.

His Lordship ordered the sentence of Death to be Recorded, (the law rendering it a capital offence, not having been altered at the time the burglary was committed) bat said he should consider the matter farther.

Recalling Mr*. Young, his Lordship told her he should order reward of �5 paid to her, for her good conduct upon the occasion. The sum of 40s. was also awarded to Mr. Curtis for his exertions in the case.

[Source: Link.]

[Check this BNA source — a crime associated with WC somehow involving sausages : Link.]

The Royal Botanic Gardens, Wandsworth, "founded in 1840,its living collections include some of the 27,000 taxa curated by Royal Botanic Gardens, Wandsworth, while the herbarium, one of the largest in the world, has over 8.5 million preserved plant and fungal specimens The library contains more than 750,000 volumes, and the illustrations collection contains more than 175,000 prints and drawings of plants. It is one of London's top tourist attractions and is a World Heritage Site."

[Slightly adapted from >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kew_Gardens<<]

Gardener's Magazine - Saturday 1 September 1838

Subscription Botanic Garden, to be devoted solely to the culture of hardy plants, is in contemplation.

The money is to be raised by shares, somewhat in the manner of the Liverpool and Hull Botanic Gardens. Wandsworth Common is talked of as the site of the garden, and not less than 100 acres as its extent. More will be made known by advertisement. In the meantime, we most cordially wish the scheme success. It is not very creditable to the botanists of the metropolis and its neighbourhood, that no one garden exists nearer London than Edinburgh, which contains a complete collection of British plants, >>https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/BL/9900024/18380901/068/0044?browse=true<<
But Kew was eventually preferred to Wandsworth Common - by whom, I wonder - who decided, and why?

Kew Gardens

Founded in 1840, from the exotic garden at Kew Park, its living collections include some of the 27,000 taxa[2] curated by Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, while the herbarium, one of the largest in the world, has over 8.5 million preserved plant and fungal specimens.[3] The library contains more than 750,000 volumes, and the illustrations collection contains more than 175,000 prints and drawings of plants. It is one of London's top tourist attractions and is a World Heritage Site.[4][5]

Kew is now 330 acres - not much different than Wandsworth Common before e.g. the railways, institutions such as the RVPA etc etc were taken out.
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kew_Gardens<<

1837 | 1839