Star.
London, England, 1819-10-23 00:00:00

CIaSHIRE aIIARTER SESSIONS.

•
KNUTSFORD, OCTOBER 21.
CHARGE OF RIOT AGAINST A SCHOOLMASTEI

TIM KING V. WILLIAM GILES.
The defendant took his seat immediately behind his
Counsel, Mr. ASHWORTH. It happened rather oddly
for a defendant, in a case of assault and riot, that his
face was disfigured.by livid and swollen bruises, his
head bound up with a silk handkerchief, and his
body supported by crutches. His bruises had, how-
ever, been occasioned by a fall from a gip and the
crutches were required in consequence onus wanting
one of his legs. He was accompanied by two or
three well-dressed and ingenuous looking boys, his
pupils. The Court, which is quite new, and uncom-
monly commodious, was very much crowded, prin-
cipally by genteel ladies and young boys, who seemed
to take a lively interest in the proceedings.
The indictment was read. It charged William
Giks,(the master), Samuel Worthington, Thomas Tay-
lor, and William Elliott, (boys), with having assaulted
James Gray and Cyrus Dumville. There was ano-
ther count, charging them with a riot.
Mr. HILL, (the same Barrister who was observed
presiding as Chief Commissioner in the Court of Re-
quests, at Manchester.)—Gentlemen of the Jury,
there are two counts in this indictment; the first for'
a riot ; the second for an assault. But you will dig.
miss the assault entirely from your consideration, as
no evidence can be offered to you that Mr. Giles per.
sonally assaulted the prosecutor, Mr. Dumville. The
prosecution has been instituted in consequence of the,
riotous and tumultuous conduct of the defendant to-
wards his neighbours. The object is to restrain him
from such conduct. You will be of opinion with me,
Gentlemen, when you hear the evidence, that there
has seldom been a grosser case than this. The;
schoolmaster bra large school instigated his scholars
to this act.. Gentlemen, he has encouraged his boys
to this riotou; conduct, setting a very different exam-
ple before them from what he ought to have given.
There •is na intention of pressing the prosecution
against the boys. The object, the only object, is to
restrain the master from such conduct; but it was
necessary ti include the boys in order to convict the
master, as three or more must be engaged to consti-
tute a riot. (Here the Learned Counsel read the law
as to that po'nt.) The facts, Gentlemen, are these:—
Mr. Giles, the defendant, is a schoolmaster, living at
011erton, near Knutsford, and has a large and popu-
lous school. On the 23d of April last he had his
boys-at school. Near the school there is a common.
Mr. Gleggs has a field adjoining the common, which
he holds under Mr. Potts. Mr. Giles enclosed, some
years ago, a part of this common adjoining Mr.
Giegg's field. This was an encroachment; but the
late and present Messrs. Potts made no objection, and
allowed it, as the object was to let the boys have
gardens. Mr. Glegg had a hedge round his field.
To the hedge belonged, of course, a ditch, on the out-
side. But Mr. Giles filled up with earth, the ditch,
so far as the garden,extended along tilt side of the
hedge. sow, how was the hedge to be repaired,
unless the earth was taken from the ditch ? Cattle got
from the common into Mr. Giles's garden. They
were driven thence through the fence, into the field
of Mr. Potts. This was good neighbourhood, you
will think. A bailiff employed by both Mr. Potts
and Mr. Glegg, sent a man to repair the fences. The
boys came out of the school to interrupt this man.'
You will judge whether boys can all at once break
out from school without leave of their master. They
threw stones, soil, and earth. They boys were ac-
tive, naturally considering this an encroachment on
their garden. The man went fur Mr. Cyrus Dum-
ville ; when he was there, no interruption was given,
but as soon as he was gone, out they came again.
You see they had ingress and egress at their plea-
sure in this scilool. I take it for granted, and so wil
you, that all this was without instruction from the
master ! Well, they come out a second time. This,
was good fun for boys at school. So boys always
think it. You thought so, and I thought so, when
we were at school. Mr. Dumville was again brought.
Then' Mr. Giies came out himself. Dumville had
lived formerly with the late Mr. Potts. Mr. Giles, in
allusion to elis, said to him, " You are put into em-
ployment again; poor thin, starved thing! I must
employ a taylor to take a piece out of your coat;
you are be:ome so thin since you ceased to lick the
plates of Mr. Potts." Such was the language used
by Mr. Giles. But he said further, " The boys are
d—d fools if they do not pull down the fence." This,
Gentlemen, was the language of the master, who was
bound to teach his boys morality and religion. The
boys got sticks to attack Dumville and the other
man. The defendant, Giles, called out, " Lay on
them, lay un them." Is he not guilty, then, of a
riot? Is he not the ringleader? One boy, who is as
large as any of you, Gentlemen, struck Dumville,
and was struck by him again. He stripped and
challenged Dumville to fight. This youth has not
been found since. Perhaps he found it convenient to
be no longer under the tuition of Mr. Giles. The
defendant, I understand, says that Dumville was
committing a trespass. A trespass uponthe grounds
enclosed from the common, part seven yeais ago, and
part only three years ! It was not so; but if it was,
the defendant had no right to take the law into his'
own hands, and thus commit such violence bn those
who endeavoured to do their duty. The silence,
Gentlemen, was aggravated by the boys being under
the tuition of the defendant. Whatever contempt
Mr. Giles may feel for the laws of England, I trust
that you will convince him that there are men in
Cheshire who obey them, and who will teach him to
keep good neighbourhood.
The evidence of Gray and. Dumville was then
heard at great length. and was in the main corro-
borative of the details in the speech of Mr. Hill. In
tire course of Gray's examination, he deposed, that
he did not hear Dumville say to Mr. Giles, " Go into
your school, and pay your way." He would not
swear that he did not say it.
Mr. ASHWORTH— Will you swear he did not say
it ?—I did not hear it.

Mr. HlLL—That is enough. The question is too
ridiculous to be answered in any other way.
Mr. AsuWORTH-.--TOO ridiculous ! It is the usual
course of examination.

Mr. the course some where else,
but it will not be allowed here.
After the case was finished for the 'prosecution.
Mr. &imam said—lf that is ray learned friend's