TRESPASS IN PURSUIT OF GAME

POLICE INTELLIGENCE
The Preston Guardian etc (Preston, England),
Thursday, December 24, 1857; Issue 2365.

(Before Messre. Winstanley)
TRESPASS IN PURSUIT OF GAME, - Thomas Pyke,
shoemaker, of Fulwood, appeared to answer a charge of
trespass in pursuit of coneys, on land in Haighton, in the
occupation of Mr. Corless, farmer, and over which Mr.
Anderton has the right of shooting. - John Bradley, game-
keeper, said the offenence was committed on Wednesday
morning, the 9th instant. Saw Pyke with a lurcher dog,
on the land, about a quarter to eleven o' clock, and watched
him above an hour, during which time he was beating for
rabbits with a stick. At last he started a rabbit and the
dog caught it. Pyke then took it up and put it in his
pocket. Witness then went to him, and charged him with
taking rabbits. He at first denied that, but afterwards ad-
mitted having one, which he said he found. - The defend-
ant said the rabbit mentioned by Bradley must have been
dead three or four days, and he had thrown it away ; it had
evidently from the wound in its neck, been killed by a
ferret. He had no intention of taking any rabbits. A
previous conviction was proved against the defendant, and
he was fined £1 and the costs, in default of payment to be,
imprisoned one month. - The money was immediately paid.

POACHING

Police Courts
The Newcastle Courant etc (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England),
Friday, February 2, 1877; Issue 10545.

POACHING.
Geo. Walton, otherwise Geo. Thompson, was charged with
poaching on the Rokeby estates on January 4th, A game
watcher, named Spence, discovered, on the morning in
question, about nine o'clock, footprints in the snow, and
afterwards came upon the defendant, who had two hares
in his pockets, and had with him a lurcher dog. Defend-
ant, who did not appear, was fined £1 and the costs. -John
Nicholson, a labourer, was then charged by a game watcher
named Wim. Calvert, with killing two rabbits on Sunday
the 31st December, near Gilmonby. On being seen, de-
fendant decamped, but he was afterwards identified. De-
fendant was fined £1 and the costs, which were paid.