Edward Joire.
15th April 1724
Reference Numbert17240415-10

Related Material

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Navigation< Previous text (trial account) | Next text (trial account) >

Edward Joire , of the Parish of St. Michael's Cornhill , was indicted for violently assaulting and robbing Sarah Wood on the High-Way, and taking from her a Pocket, a Pair of Silver Buckles, a half Moidore, a Duccatoon, a broad Piece, and 7 l. 17 s. in Money , the 30th of August last. The Prosecutor depos'd, That she having her Sister by the Arm, the Day mentioned in the Indictment, was coming through Exchange-Alley , about 8 a Clock, and that some Body came by her side, gave her a violent Push, and she fell against the wall, and putting his Hand under her Petticoat pull'd off her Pocket, that it put her into a Fright, and such Disorder, that she did not recover her self in two Months.

John Godfrey depos'd, That he having been formerly imploy'd in cleaning out Justice Kerby's Ship Yard, became acquainted with the Prisoner about 15 Months since, and that the Prisoner told him, he himself had done a few Disploits (meaning Exploits) and that he this Evidence did not go as he should do, and that afterwards they went a robbing together, and meeting with the Prosecutor at the Time mentioned in the Indictment, the Prisoner shov'd her down, and pull'd off her Pocket, in which were the Things mention'd in the Indictment. Jonathan

Wild depos'd, That the next Morning the Prosecutor came to him, and acquainted him of the Manner of her being robb'd, and the Description that she had given him was, that there were 2 Persons at the Commission of the Fact, and that one of them was a little Man, with a Cap under his Hat, and he having before been inform'd that he had been concern'd in rearing off Pockets, he sent for John Godfrey, having signified to him, he might come and go without being detained; that he did come to him, and inquiring of him, he at first was not willing to own he knew any Thing of the Matter, but afterwards told him, if he would secure Edward Joice the Prisoner, he would say something material; that he did afterwards by Accident apprehend the Prisoner, and sending for John Godfrey, he came voluntarily, and charg'd him with the Fact.

The Prisoner deny'd the Fact, or his having any Knowledge of John Godfrey the Evidence, and call'd Evidences to his Reputation, and also that should prove that he was elsewhere, at the Time when the Fact was committed.

The first was his Master, Francis Roche , who depos'd, that he being a Sawyer , the Prisoner had been his Apprentice , and had served his Time to him very truly, had always been an honest and faithful Servant, and was out of his Time the 2d of August last. But some Persons present desir'd the Court to inquire whether he had not been out of his Service during his Apprenticeship, and at Sea for 18 Months, or more? To which he reply'd, he had, but he receiv'd his Wages, and so accounted him to have serv'd his Time to him Faithfully. He was also interrogated, whether he had not so behav'd himself in his Service, that he procur'd him to be committed to Bridewell? He acknowledged he had so done, but would insinuate, it was only for being drunk or so. The Court perceiving him to prevaricate in favour of the Prisoner, order'd him to be taken into Custody, and bound by Recognizance with two Securities to appear at the Court the next Sessions, to answer to such Matters as should be alledg'd against him. Two or Three other Persons appear'd to his Reputation, who depos'd, That they knew no ill of him.

The Prisoner's Father appear'd in his behalf, and depos'd, He held a small Farm in Tottenham, Freehold, and that the Prisoner being out of his Time the 2d of August, came to him, and was with him about a Month, and after that went with him farther into the Country, for about a Month more. But being interrogated, whether the Prisoner was never from him, nor at London in all that Time? He did own that he had sometimes come to London about his Business, but came Home to him again orderly; nor could he take upon him on Oath to say the Prisoner was actually at Tottenham with him, when, according to the Evidence, this Fact was committed. The Prisoner's Sister spoke also much to the same Purpose. To this the Prisoner reply'd, That indeed he did go to his Father, and into the Country, but it was to skreen him from being apprehended, he being in an Information of one Henry Salter . Upon a full hearing of the Matter, the Jury found him guilty of the Indictment, Death .

View as XML