R v Elizabeth Salmon
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1802 |
| Date | 01 January 1802 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 168 E.R. 665
LINCOLN'S INN
1802. rex v. elizabeth salmon. (In an indictment on the 9 Geo. I. c. 22, for setting fire to a hay-stack, it is no answer to the charge that the prisoner had no malice or spight to the owner of the stack. It is not necessary to aver in the indictment that the stack " was thereby burnt.") The prisoner was tried before Mr. Justice Grose, at the Lent awsizea for Thetford, in the year 1802, on an ittdictment upon the 9 Geo I. c. 22 (fr), for voluntarily, wilfully, and maliciously setting tire to the hay-stack of one John Catling. It was proved by the prosecutor, John Catling, that one Frosdike had for several years, till within a week before the 7ti of August, 1801, lived with the prisoner m a house belonging to her ; and that in the summer of that year Frosdike erected a small stack of clover, hay, and fodder in the yard of the prisoner's, near her house. The stack was made of some fodder that he took from the common without leave of the owners, and some clover, said to have been bought by him ; but Frosdike, not being bound over, was not present, and therefore the property was not precisely ascertained. [11] It appeared, that on the 7th f August, at two o'clock in the afternoon, the prosecutor, in the presence of the prisoner, bought of Frosdike the stack and a pony, for which he paid him fourteen guineas, the pony being worth twelve At the time the money was paid, the prisoner, who was present, said she would burn the stack to the ground ; and she immediately, in the presence of ten or twelve of her neighbours (some of whom were called as witnesses), took some coals from the fire in her house, and carried them uf on a hod, and put them upon the hay-stack, which not immediately taking fire, she went again into the house and took a pair of bellows, with which she blew the coals, and then the stack and an adjoining hovel belonging to her were consumed, in the sight of her neighbours, who did not interfere to prevent it. The prosecutor, Catling, had known the prisoner nine or ten years, but had no eoranuiftieation with her for the last three or four years, and said that she had no spite or malice whatever against him. The prisoner being called upon for her defence, said that she had been ill treated by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gender and Editorial Outcomes at Legislative Studies Quarterly: The Reviewer Pool
...time while male scholars recom-mend accept 11% of the time. Female reviewers recommend R&R 26% of the time while male scholars also recommend R&R 26% of the time. Female reviewers recommend reject 15% of the time while male scholars recommend reject 25% of the time. Female re-viewers are un......