KING
What is a Gypsy Tunbridge Wells Advertiser dated 19th March 1909 an Article entitled “What is a Gipsy? – Amusing Defence at the Police Court” (via Journal of Gypsy Lore Society) . “I am not a gipsy. I was bred and born, and had a father and mother”. Such was the indignant assertion of John King on Saturday at the Tunbridge Wells County Bench. The debatable point, however was not so much whether the author of the above original statement was of Bohemian habits or whether, like Topsy he “growed” and came into existence without parents, as to whether he was guilty of assaulting and beating two Sussex constables, who, following in the paths of duty, were bold enough to arrest him six weeks ago at Lamberhurst for an offence at Rye. Since that eventful day King had been “quietly resting” in His Majesty’s prison at Lewes. His existence, however, was not forgotten during this period and he renewed the acquaintance of his captors once again as he emerged from the seclusion of the Government establishment at the expiration of his “time”. Now the sin which he purged by six weeks confinement and enforced daily activity was committed in Sussex, but the spirited resentment which he showed at the time of his arrest constituted a breach of the law in Kent. Therefore, John King had perforce to accept the escort of constables Potter and Crouch to interview the Tunbridge Wells County Bench, and explain his rough conduct to Mr F Wadham Elers and Mr F. G. Smart. “Are you guilty of this charge?” The prisoner’s reply to this formal question by the Chairman was somewhat evasive. “I’m guilty of assaulting ‘em perhaps but not of beating ‘em”. “Sure I could not beat two of ‘em. PC Potter related the story of the struggle, from which it appeared that King’s behaviour on the 21st January at Lamberhurst was most violent, as will be seen from the constable’s statement:- “He threw a pot of paint in my face, cutting my lip. The paint went into my mouth and eyes and he kicked me violently on the left knee. It blinded me for an instant. PC Crouch took hold of him but King threw him down. Then King called to a woman to bring a hammer, saying “I’ll kill the beast”. She came with a large iron stake, and King made a grab at it but I snatched it from him and threw it away. I struck King on the hand, and hit him with a wooden mallet because he was so violent”. PC Crouch corroborated his comrade’s story and described the “throw” a la jui jitsu, with which the arrested one put him almost hors de combat. He also told of sundry kicks and bruises received in the desperate encounter and of the ultimate victory to the arm of the law which was accomplished by the aid of handcuffs - and a mallet. The now penitent breaker of the law listened with interest to the graphic accounts of the tussle given by the men in blue. “I never did half what they said,” he expostulated, with a look of injured innocence. In spite of this defence the magisterial view of the fracas was not inclined to leniency, and the Chairman pointed out to him the heinousness of his offence in assaulting policemen in the execution of their duty. They thought a month in prison had been well earned, and refused to “make it a fine” even though John, as stated above, so vehemently repudiated any connection with the wandering tribes of Romany. Possibly they were of opinion, in the face of several convictions which already stained the character of the occupant of the dock, that is was quite within the bounds of possibility that the act of policemen beating was not the exclusive possession of gipsies.
There are no threads for this page.
Be the first to start a new thread.