Cambridge Chronicle 6 Jul 1888: John and Sidney Bailey guilty of theft

MISLEADING A YOUNGER BROTHER. — A young man named John Bailey, of Trumpington, and his brother, Sidney Bailey, a boy of ten years of age, were charged with stealing a half-sovereign, the property of Albert Rayner, on the 23rd of June. Albert Rayner, baker, of Trumpington, stated that, on the 23rd of June, he left his waistcoat in his bakehouse with a watch and three half-sovereigns in the pockets. On Monday, the 25th of June, he missed one of the half-sovereigns. On Monday afternoon, he saw the younger defendant and said to him “Your sister has been down here, and says you have got half-a-crown in your box; how did you come by it?” The defendant answered “My sisters do tell lies; I have not got a half-crown.” On Tuesday, witness took the boy to a police officer, at Trumpington and the constable asked him what he knew about the money. The defendant replied that he knew nothing about it, and, in answer to P.c. Giles, he further stated that he knew his brother Jack had not had it. After some further conversation, the boy said that his brother Jack found out where the money was, on the Saturday, and then told him to go and “nick” one of the half-sovereigns. The boy further stated that he gave two shillings to his father, one to his mother and six to his brother, he bought a quarter of a pound of cheese and had some coppers for himself, and his brother promised to give him some more of the money. Susanna Moss, of Trumpington, said that on the 23rd ult., at about six o’clock in the evening, the younger prisoner went into her shop, and asked her to give his father change for half-a-sovereign, and she gave the boy the change he asked for. P.c. Giles said the evidence of the complainant as to the conversation which took place in his house was correct, and, further, stated that, in consequence of what transpired at that time, and of other information, he went in search of the elder defendant, whom he found at the “Coach and Horses,” Trumpington. He took the defendant into his father’s house, where the younger boy again said that John told him to get the money, and showed him how to slip the catch of the case which had contained it. Mr. Bailey asked the younger defendant what he did with the money, and he replied, “I gave you a shilling, mother a shilling; 10 1/2d I laid out for cheese, vinegar and other things, and I spent the rest of the money except 6s. When I went upstairs on Saturday night, Jack was there, and when he heard me ‘jink’ the money, he asked me what I had got. I told him I had got the rest of the half-sovereign. He asked me for the money, and I gave him it.” The elder prisoner then said his brother had told him that he got the six shillings as payment for holding a horse for somebody, and he spent the money on Monday. Both prisoners elected to be dealt with summarily. The elder prisoner denied that he knew anything about the money being stolen. He further alleged that his brother told him that he had found the six shillings which he gave him, and said he would not have taken the money had he known that it had been stolen. Sidney Bailey pleaded guilty, and said his brother told him to take the money, and explained to him the way in which the case could be opened. He took the money, and changed it; he gave his father and mother each a shilling, he bought some cheese, vinegar, and beer, spent about sixpence besides, and gave the remainder of the money to his brother. On Monday, his brother told him to get another half sovereign, which he refused to do, whereupon his brother said “You little fool, you might as well get another ‘half-a-quid’ out of him, and it there are two in, have both”. After a short consultation, the CHAIRMAN, addressing the elder prisoner, said it was a very lamentable case, both for himself and his parents, for it was clear his father and mother knew what was going on, and he (prisoner), an elder brother, had misled a little brother of ten years old. Of course, his brother was under his influence, and took the money when he was told to do so, and it was not surprising that the boy gave it to him. The elder prisoner would have to go to prison for six weeks. Addressing the younger prisoner, he said he need not have taken the money, though his brother persuaded him to do so. The Magistrates, however, did not wish to brand him as a convict, so they would let him off this time, and he (the Chairman) hoped this position at that moment would be a warning to him for the rest of his life.