| No. in Admissions Register: | 688 |
| Age: | 13 |
| Whence received: | H M Prison Derby |
| Description: | |
| Complexion: | Fresh |
| Hair colour: | Brown |
| Eyes colour: | Grey |
| Visage: | Oval |
| Particular marks: | Cast in right eye; mole on left side of neck |
| State of health: | Good |
| Able-bodied? | Yes |
| Date of admission: | 13 February 1882 |
| Late residence: | Marehay, Ripley, Derbyshire |
| Parish he belongs to: | Pentrich, Derbyshire |
| Customary work and mode of life: | Labourer at earthenware works |
| Whether illegitimate: | No |
| State of education: | |
| Reads: | Imperfectly |
| Writes: | Imperfectly |
| Offence: | House breaking |
| Circumstances which may have led to it: | Bad company |
| Date of sentence, by whom and court: | 4 January 1882; Quarter Sessions |
| Where imprisoned: | H M Prison Derby |
| Sentence: | 1 month in prison, 5 years at Saltley |
| Previous committals: | |
| Number: | Nil |
| Length: | - |
| For what: | - |
| Father's name: | Herbert Jackson |
| Occupation: | - |
| Mother's name: | Amy Jackson |
| Occupation: | House keeper- |
| Parents dead? | Father |
| Survivor married again? | No |
| Parents' treatment of child: | Indifferent |
| Character of parents | The mother, Amy Jackson, living with a man; states as house keeper |
| Parents' wages: | 3s and board per week as house leeper |
| Amount parents agree to pay: | Nil |
| Parents address: | Amy Jackson, Marehay, Ripley, near Derby |
| Superintendent of police (to collect payments): | Mr Superintendent Hancock, Langley Mill, Nottinghamshire |
| Person making this return: | C E Gargahan, Governor, H M Prison Derby |
[Although the Admissions Register gives his forename as Herbert, the newspaper report and the 1881 census give his name as Thomas]
4 January 1882 There is a lengthy report of the crime in the Derby Daily Telegraph Wednesday 4 January 1882 p.3 cols.3-4: HOUSEBREAKING BY BOYS AT PENTRICH. Thomas Jackson, 13, potter, and Albert Lancashire, 16. collier, surrendered to their bail and were indicted for having broken and entered the dwelling house of Samuel Parker, and therein stolen 3s., a purse, and a gold ring, the monies and goods of the said Samuel Parker, at Pentrioh, on November the 6th, 1881. - Mr. Tonman Mosley appeared for the prosecutor, and Mr. Weightman for the defence. - The case for the prosecution was that the prosecutor, who is a blacksmith, went out with his wife, on Sunday, November 6th, about three o'clock ia the afternoon, and returned about a quarter to ten at night. When they went out of the house they had shut all the doors, and closed all the windows, except one, which was left partially open. During the prosecutor's absence from home, the prisoner's were seen with other boys lingering and loitering about the back- door of the house. When the prosecutor came home he found that a work-box had been moved, and brought downstairs, had been broken open. He missed trousers, a ring, a purse, and other articles. He gave information to the police and they the next morning apprehended the two prisoners and two other boys. They were pat together and charged with housebreaking. Jackson then said (pointing to a lad named Hulland, who was also in custody), "Don't tell a lie, didn't you shove me up to the bedroom window?" Jackson also said "We are all as bad as one another." On the 3rd of November, the Thursday before the Sunday in question, the prisoner Jackson wont the back door of the prosecutor's house, and asked for some tobacco, which was sold by the prosecutor. A short time before he did so, the key was in the door, but it was found to have disappeared shortly after he left. In consequence of this, the door could not be locked between that day and the one on which the robbery was committed; but, it had merely to be latched. It was so left when the prosecutor went out on the Sunday, but, curiously enough, when he returned the door was locked, and it was believed that one of the boys locked it at the time of the robbery. When apprehended, Lancashire had a knife in his pocket, and there were marks under one of the windows, which was opened in order to commit the robbery, which corresponded with the blade of the knife. - Mr. Weightman submitted, justly, that the charge had not been proved at all. None of the stolen property had been found on either of the prisoners, although they were apprehended the very next morning after the robbery. In the second place, he said that even if the prisoners did get into the house, they were but the tools of elder boys (who should stand instead of them in the dock, if anyone ought to do so.) As regarded Jackson, he further submitted that Jackson could not be convicted, as he was between the ages of seven and 14, and therefore was incapable of having a guilty knowledge that he was doing wrong. That was a question for the jury to consider, and he contended that the prosecution had failed to prove that Jackson was eo capable, was moreover a lad of mischievous tendencies. - The jury found both the prisoners guilty, but strongly recommended them to mercy, especially Jackson. - Mr. Weightman asked the Court to grant him a case in reference to Jackson, on the ground that there was no undisputed malicious propensity proved against him; but the Court refused to grant the case.- Lancashire was sent to gaol for two calendar months' hard labour, and Jackson was sentenced to one month's imprisonment, and five years' detention in a reformatory, the Chairman explaining that it was necessary to send him to gaol for a time, during which a school might be found for him, and that be was ordered to go to a reformatory, as it appeared that he really had no "home," although his mother is living.
| ← Prev | Next → |
|---|
This web page © 2020 Fred Miller