James Thorogood

BEFORE THE TRIAL: From the 'Weekly Dispatch', February 24, 1856, p.12 (http://www.perthdps.com/convicts/w4604.htm): CATASTROPHE AT THE SHIRE-HALL CHELMSFORD About 12 o’clock on Friday, a sad catastrophe, accompanied with the loss of one life and the maiming of several other persons, occurred at Chelmsford by the falling of a part of the central stone staircase at the Shire-hall, owing to the pressure of the crowds upon it who were endeavouring to reach the Petty Session room to hear the examination of the five men charged with the murder of Sir John Tyrell’s keeper. The examination was fixed for 12 o’clock; the prisoners had been brought up in the van, and taken upstairs into the court, where the chairman and some others had already assembled, and the rush of the crowd to endeavour to get admittance completely blocked the passage at the upper part of the stairs. About 60 had been admitted into the room. and Sergeant Simpson and other officers, by desire of Major Skinner, were trying to keep the way clear, lest danger should arise from admitting too many into the court, and were using all their exertions to induce the parties to quit the stairs, pointing out to them the peril in which they were placing themselves when suddenly a short but fearful creak was heard by those within the court, followed by a crash of falling stones, and succeeded by groans and cries of alarm. These stairs are composed of stone steps, embedded into the wall at one end, and resting at the outward point upon each other, edge upon edge, with geometrical nicety, so as to carry out the principle of the arch. It appears that from the pressure of the crowd the balusters first gave way, and from the weight of the crowd pressing on the outer edge, the entire flight of some steps broke in two at the opposite end, leaving a portion in the wall. The whole mass of people suddenly sank with the several stones on to the flight of stairs beneath; and mingled as they were with the heavy falling materials, it is surprising that the sacrifice of life has not been more extensive than it is. The scene was most appalling. When those who were uninjured, and in many instances there were most miraculous escapes, had scrambled from the rubbish, the body of one young man was seen lying on one of the stones, with his face partly cut off, his skull crushed and his brains scattered about. It is understood he was upon the flight of stairs which fell, and that as he reached the bottom one of the stairs from above struck him on the head. It was sometime before he could be recognized, but at length he was identified by inscriptions upon the watch, which he had in his pocket as Mr. J. E. Moss, the son of Mr. James Moss, builder, a young man, about 18 years old of Chelmsford. Captain Haselfoot, who was lying near the deceased, was injured though it is hoped, not seriously. He was borne out of the hall between two men. As quickly as possible, the other parties were rescued, and taken into the small room between the courts, when Mr. Lovell, Mr. Copland and Mr. Gibson, surgeons, were speedily in attendance. It was then found that a boy, 13 years old, named Scott, residing in Arbour-lane, Springfield, had one leg broken, and the other bruised; Robert Baker, a felimonger, in Moulsham, had the cap of one of his knees broken; Sergeant Rogers the landlord of the Army and Navy public-house, Baddow-road, late of the Fleece, was bruised in the head which had been pressed up between two of the stones, and also appeared to have received serious internal injury; and a person named James Brewster, from Willingale, was wounded but not seriously, in the leg. The wounded persons were as soon as possible conveyed to their homes. As the news of the frightful accident spread through the market, the exchange was thronged, and large numbers crowded to the foot of the staircase, although repeatedly warned there was the danger from the shattered state of the lower flight. By the gap left in the staircase the descent of those who had already assembled in the court was cut off, and the Chairman, the prisoners, and others found egress from the window to the roof of the adjacent building, and descended into the churchyard. The examination of the prisoners took place in the Crown Court, the Chairman with much feeling alluding to the accident, which would have induced him at once to adjourn had it not been for the importance of the case before him. The prisoners were remanded. Men were soon after employed in shoring up the lower portion of the staircase. --0--

TRIAL: 3 March, 1856: At Chelmsford Assizes, convicted and sentenced to death, commuted to transportation for life, for the murder of William Hales (previous conviction in 1849 for poaching). --00--

NEWSPAPER REPORT OF THE TRIAL: From the 'News of The World', March 9, 1856, p.7: THE ASSIZES HOME CIRCUIT Murder of Sir J. Tyrell’s Gamekeeper James Thurgood, 29, William Thurgood, 22 Thomas Thurgood, 23 (brothers), and James Guiver, 30, all described as labourers, and who are athletic young men, were charged at the Chelmsford Assizes with the wilful murder of William Hales. Ebenezer Chalk, the accomplice, was the first witness examined. He appeared to be about 20 years old. He said: I know all the prisoners. On the night of the 18th of Feb. we were all at Shedreck’s Beer-shop, at Fairsteed, and we turned out about ten o’clock. I heard William Thurgood say that we were to go to Sir John Tyrell’s wood. We walked towards Duke’s Wood, which was the place we were to go to. I and Guiver did not walk quite so fast as the others, and we fell back, and William Thurgood seeing this called out, “Come on, you seem to hang back there.” I said, in reply, “I don’t think I shall go.” James Thurgood then said, “Come on, don’t be frightened; I shall not be taken this night by any one. I shall shoot any one before I will be taken this night.” We then went into the wood, and I heard three shots fired, and two pheasants were killed, and they fell into a pond close by. I put one of them into my pocket, and I picked up the second, and Guiver told me to give it to him, and he said it was his bird, and he knew what to do with it. I saw Guiver shoot this bird, and when he had done so he loaded his gun again, and we all proceeded further into the wood. I then said I thought I heard some one coming up the wood towards us, and one of the prisoners replied, “Come on, there is no one coming.” I said, “I shall go now,” and ran out of the wood. I had no gun. When I had got a short distance I heard a strange voice say, “Come on, mates; here they are.” I was running away at this time, and almost immediately after I heard these words there was the report of a gun. I kept on running and saw nothing more of the prisoners till I got home, and after I had been there about ten minutes Guiver and William Thurgood came up, and Guiver asked me if I had seen anything of Teddyfor which was a nickname for James Thurgood. I said I had not, and William Thurgood then said, “I dare say he is taken.” The Prisoners had their guns with them at this time. Joseph Wisby, a keeper in the service of Sir John Tyrell, said “I and my father and the deceased, who were also gamekeepers, were out in Duke’s Wood, for the purpose of watching. It was a moonlight night, but occasionally cloudy. We all went into a hut in the wood, and while we were there we heard three shots fired in the wood. It was then about half-past twelve o’clock. We proceeded in the direction of the sound, and as we were passing a long the cart ride I heard the report of another gun in the wood. The deceased went away from us into the wood, and almost immediately afterwards I heard him cry out, “Come on mates, here they are.” Upon his saying this I and my father went into the wood in the direction of his voice. I was in advance of my father, and when I had got a very short distance I heard the deceased say, “Oh dear,” and at the same instant I saw a flash of a gun and heard the report, and then there was the sound of some heavy body falling to the ground. I kept on my way into the wood, and a few yards further on saw James Thurgood. He was coming towards me, but the moment he saw me, he ran across the pond. At this time he had a gun in his hand. I ran after him, and stopped him on the other side of the pond, and my father came up at the same time and took the gun away from him, and threw it into the pond. I could see that the gun was not loaded at the time. When I laid hold of the prisoner, he said, “Don’t hurt me. I’ve hurt no one.” My father said to him, “No: you have only shot that poor man.” We then took the prisoner to Duke’s Lodge farm, and as we were going along, I asked him who had shot the man, and he said he did not know; there were three or four about him, and he did not know which of them shot him. My father said something to the prisoner which I did not hear, and he, in reply, said, “He fell back like a dead man, certainly.” The prisoner was searched and some powder and shot and percussion-caps were taken from him. I saw no other man but the prisoner in the wood, but I heard the sound of several men’s footsteps running away. After the prisoner had been searched, I and my father and some other persons went back to the wood and found the deceased lying on his back and quite dead. James B. Wisby, the father of the last witness, corroborated his testimony. The jury found the prisoner, James Thurgood, guilty of being accessory to the murder, stating at the same time that they were not quite satisfied with the evidence to show that he had actually discharged the gun. The other three prisoners were acquitted. James Thurgood was sentenced to death. The prisoner was not in the least affected, and when the judge had concluded the sentence, he exclaimed, in an impudent tone, “Thank you, sir; God bless you all.” The other three men were then placed at the bar to plead to another indictment charging them with night poaching. They all pleaded guilty, and were sentenced each to four years' penal servitude. --00--

JAILS: February 1856: He was held at Springfield County Gaol and House of Correction, Springfield Road, Chelmsford, in Essex. He served 3 months 14 days in separate confinement (Western Australia, Australia, Convict Records, 1846-1930; Convict Department, Registers; Convicts Transported Per Nile (R32)). “After a sentence of transportation was handed down, the prisoner entered into a separate stage where he was placed into an individual cell, isolated from others, apart from brief periods of exercise and attendance at chapel. However, no communication of any kind with other prisoners was permitted at any time. The philosophy behind this penal methodology had its provenances in the religious, monastic traditions; i.e., that in the isolation of his cell the malefactor would be able to contemplate the errors of his way, unadulterated by the negative influences of former contemporaries, and be reformed.” (Edgar, 2018, pp39-40) When first put into practice, the mandated period of separate confinement was 18 months. By the late 1840s, authorities had conceded that such conditions of imprisonment were “injurious to many prisoners’ mental health” and the stint was reduced to 12 months. Periods of separate confinement were reduced further “as a prisoner displayed good behaviour tendencies” (Edgar, p40). --0--

3 June, 1856: Admitted to Millbank prison, London; inmate #2768. Listed as James Thorogood alias Thurgood, 29, single, labourer, able to read and write, Church of England; sentenced to transportation for life for "murder by firing a gun at a gamekeeper"; next of kin -- his father Samuel Thorogood, labourer, Fairstead. He was visited there by his father and two brothers on 26 December, 1856. He served 9 months 8 days in separate confinement; behaviour "good" (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951; Millbank Prison; Register of Prisoners to 1885). --0--

11 March, 1857: Admitted to Portsmouth prison in Hampshire; inmate #3749; called Thorogood, alias Thurgood. Portsmouth, Portland, Chatham and Spike Island in Ireland were listed public works stations and the second stage in the penal process. After separate confinement, prisoners were “placed on work parties at various locations, most commonly naval stations, where maintenance of facilities was vital for the effective protection of Britain’s far flung commercial and military influences around the world. While there, attitude and behaviour were monitored closely. In theory, only after consistently positive reports was a prisoner moved on to the third stage of his incarceration—transportation.” (Edgar, p40) --0--

September, 1857: Sent to board the Nile for transportation to WA; listed as #2/3749 (Western Australia, Australia, Convict Records, 1846-1930; Convict Department, Registers; Convicts Transported Per Nile (R32)). --00--

IN WA: From his Fremantle jail record: THOROGOOD, James; #4604, arrived 1 Jan 1858 per Nile Alias: THURGOOD, Joseph Date of Birth: 1828 Marital Status: Unmarried Occupation: Farm labourer Literacy: Semiliterate Sentence Place: Chelmsford, Essex, England Crime: Murder Sentence Period: Life, commuted Ticket of Leave Date: 8 Jan 1861, at Guildford Conditional Pardon Date: 10 Jul 1866 (https://fremantleprison.com.au/). --0--

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION ON ARRIVAL: Thorogood, James: #4604, farm labourer, single, no children; 5'2¾" tall, brown hair, hazel eyes, full face, fresh complexion, middling stout build, no scars/marks (http://www.perthdps.com/convicts/conwad21.htm). --0--