Cambridge Independent Press 8 Sep 1855: John Utteridge accused of killing marked swan; case dismissed
CAMBRIDGE DIVISION.SATURDAY, Sept. 1. — Before the Rev. W. Smith and J.P. Baumgartner, Esq.
TRUMPINGTON, — John Utteridge, a labouring lad, about 18 years of age, was charged with having, on the 24th of August, maliciously and wantonly injured a swan, while in a stream of water, situate in the parish of Trumpington, the property of the Master, Fellows, and Scholars of St. John’s College. — Mr. FRANCIS appeared for the complainants, and Mr. STEPHEN ADCOCK for the defendant. — John Marshall, formerly a borough police-constable, said: I am gardener for the Master, Fellows, and Scholars of St. John’s College. They are in possession of six old swans and two young ones; the old ones are all marked but not the young ones. On Saturday last I saw one of the young swans dead. I saw it at Newnham in the possession of a person named Edmond. I made inquiries at Mr. Eddlestone’s, farmer, and there saw the defendant. He said, “I suppose you think I killed the swan?” I said I did not say so. I then asked him if he saw a boy on the opposite side of the river, and he said he did not. I said the boy saw you, and he was frightened and ran away. Defendant then said that he was very sorry the swan was killed; he saw the swans and flung a piece of stick at one of them. He then began to cry, and said, “I am sorry I did it; I wish I had not done it; the old swan came up to me; I flung a stick at it, and I missed the old one and hit the young one.” I said it is a bad job; but if you will take my advice you will go to the college and see the Bursar respecting the matter. He promised to go, and said that he hoped I would say that he was very sorry he did it. I am not aware that there are any swans kept for miles down the river. — Rev. Mr. SMITH: In what way were the birds marked? — Witness: By the pinion, on the right hand wing being cut. — Ledman, bird-stuffer, of Newnham, said: On Friday week I was on the Newnham side of the mill, in Mr. Fuller’s ground, near the Coe Fen, about seven o’clock in the morning. I saw two old swans and two young ones go up to the river; I could see for about 200 yards up the river. I remained in the same place till some of the swans came back again. Three came back, two old ones and a young one; this was about half an hour afterwards. I afterwards went up the river and found a dead swan — it was a young one. I believe it was the same which I saw go up the river with the others. I found it on the Grantchester side. My boy took the swan to my house, and it was delivered into the hands of the witness Marshall. — Mr. ADCOCK contended that the case ought to be dismissed, as there was no evidence that this swan, which was killed, was marked, and it was evident it was a stray bird. It was out of the jurisdiction of the college, and the defendant had therefore the right to kill it. If the swan was not marked the Magistrates had no jurisdiction to hear the case. — Mr. FRANCIS: The swan was a marked one. — Mr. ADCOCK: The cutting of the pinion was not a mark which was required by the Act of Parliament. The bird had strayed beyond the college jurisdiction, and it could not be said to be malicious and unlawful, as the defendant had told the witness Marshall this, “The old bird was attacking me; I threw a stick at it, which hit the young one instead of the old one.” This was accidental, and not malicious. — Marshall re-called: The swan was not a fierce one; never attacked anybody; children three years of age may feed them. — Mr. ADCOCK was surprised that such a penitent sinner as the defendant should be so pressed. —The Magistrates consulted for a few minutes, and then dismissed the complaint.