INSOLVENCY CASES. RE JAMES PITHER.

This insolvent, late horse-dealer, living at Newbury, came up for his final hearing. He was supported by Mr. Griffits, and opposed by Mr. Cripps. The grounds of opposition were stated to be the following :—The incorrectness of the schedule ; that a debt was omitted to be inserted; that the debt of the opposing creditor, Mr. Thomas Chillingworth, was contracted means of fraud and breach of trust; and that the insolvent had defended an action when he had no real ground of defence to it. The total amount of debts the schedule, which extended over a period nine years, were shown to he £843, which was included the sum of £397/. 10s. 5d., on account of his having become security for sheriff 's officer, and also £200 by the loss of nine horses from disease. Good debts amounted to £94  1s 6d.

The insolvent was examined and said, in August, 1853, he sold two horses for Mr. Francis Chillingworth, of Theale, one for £30. and the other for £32  Mr. Chillingworth had two horses from him, one of which was of the value of £40; and the other, he (Pither) had back, and paid Mr. Chillingworth £5 He was no scholar —could neither read nor write—and could not say what balance was due to Mr. Chillingworth. He could not say what had been his profits for the last nine years. He lost nearly £400. from having been security for a sheriff's officer, and had a great loss by the death of nine horses, which occurred from one having been brought among them that had disease the time. When he sold the horses for Mr. Chillingworth he told him (insolvent) to keep the money for a time it might be of service to him. He saw Mr. Chillingworth four or five times, and each time he said, "if it is of any service to you Pither, you can use it for a time." He had not defended any action : he merely went to solicitor to write to Mr. Rupert Clarke to ask for time to pay a debt that was due to Mr. Chillingworth.

Mr. Thomas Chillingworth, farmer, Bradfield, said, the insolvent in July, 1853, had a horse to sell commission. He sold it for £12 5s., and when he offered to pay him he said, " never mind Tom, give it another day." the following October, he let the insolvent have another horse to sell. He did not press him for the money because he said he had bought several horses to bring to the February fair.

 The Judge.—How came you to let him have the second horse before he had paid for the first ?—Mr. Chillingworth : Because I thought a pound or two would do him good. He commenced an action against him through Mr. Rupert Clarke.

.By Mr. Griffits.—He knew the insolvent very well. He had objection to let him have the money, thinking he would pay him. This was the first time he had heard of the insolvent having a great loss by some horses dying. He had seen insolvent about the country, at different fairs, but did not ask him for the money until January last year. He kept promising to pay, but as he did not keep his word he made up his mind to do something with him. He would sooner have had the money, than have put him into prison.

Mr. Francis Chillingworth, of Theale, stated that the insolvent had two horses of his to sell, which realised £62, towards which he had a horse of the value of £40., and £5. cash, leaving balance of £17. His name was not inserted the schedule for the amount.

Mr. Grithts said, the insolvency was the result of pure misfortune. The sheriff's officer became a defaulter, and the insolvent being security had to pay £397 10s 5d and besides this, he lost upwards of £200 from nine horses dying from distemper.

His Honour said, he considered this was a case in which the insolvency was accounted for by misfortune —by the death of nine horses, and liability which had been incurred through being security for a sheriff's officer. The aggregate amount of debts was £843 then, there were deducted the £397. 10s.5d. for the sheriff's officer, and £200 by death of horses, the real amount of debts was under £250.  Then the good debts were about £91, so that there was small balance against Pither in respect of debts, for which he had received consideration, and which remained unpaid. With respect to the opposing creditor, he seemed have had a high opinion of the insolvent up to a very recent

period, and had evidently been anxious to serve him allowing him to retain his money to use in dealing. None of the debts appeared to have been contracted fraudulently, but in the ordinary course of business. There did not seem to have been any vexatious defence to the action, and the omission of Mr. Fras. Chillingworth's debt of £17. from the schedule was not wilful, but inadvertent. He would give the insolvent leave to amend his schedule, and when that was done, he might he discharged.

McGraw seems a disliked character as this letter of 9 sept. 1837  Reading Mercury shows

To the reformers of Berkshire.

Friends and fellow countrymen  You are aware I make no doubt, that numerous notices of objections to the electors of the county numerous , have been served in the different districts »>f the county. Such notices were signed by a person of the name of McGraw . Many of you do not know who or what this man is. I will tell you. He resides at Speen And is an officer of the sheriff’s . Being an exceedingly good instrument further purpose appan which he has been employed because of his notoriety in the way of his honourable profession . He was selected probably by some pettifogging attorney as his protégé and who being in want of an occupation seeks assistance from McGraw to aid him in the crusade on which he has embarked against your rights and liberties . In order to show the system which has been pursued in regard to the shameful and vexatious manner in which these notices were served I will only mention one instance, which occurred in the Newbury district.  Four men voting upon precisely the same qualifications,record their votes at the late election in the following manner. Oone voted P. P and F,  two plumped for E., and the last gave his vote to P. P. and B.  The three first have been objected to and the last is passed over.  Such is Tory impartiality, and such a specimen of Tory trickery!

To revert to McGraw it should be known that he is described in the list of the electors for the county of Berkshire published under the authority of the clerk of the peace as living at Newbury and he himself on his notice of objections says that he lives at speen. I believe it is very well known that he never resided in Newbury consequently his place of abode is wrongly given in the register. Now on returning to the Reform Act it will be seen at section 39 that in the instance of third parties. serving notices of objection, they must be not only electors but also must give their places of abode therefore McGraw of Newbury and not McGraw of Spain must be the person entitled or qualified to sign such a notice because the first McGraw is the person who votes for a freehold at Wallingford an not the latter. A young McGraw did live Newbury but he has left the town and hence to qualify himself as an elector he must again go through the process of sending in a fresh claim to the overseers for a vote before he can place himself in a situation if he is the person who signed the notices entitled to object to the vote of another. It is possible that this magraw what a frightful name may know coming from that town something of the Miller of Wallingford for judging from the various chameleon like changes of habiliments in which he at times appears in the streets of Newbury he might have assumed the garb of a knight of the dusty order if so it is no wonder that McGraw being an adept in the practises of the days of yore was employed upon the present occasion being of his efficiency to well execute the duties imposed upon him. It is presumed however that now McGraw fired with the vox populi   acts apon the most praiseworthy the most disinterested and the most unbiased motives in endeavouring to eradicate from the register all those ragged rascals who daring to think for themselves are termed by the Tories in the way of reproach radicals- reformers, look to these things

 your friend AN ELECTOR.

Newbury September 8 1837

Newspaper: Reading Mercury Date: 3 November 1860

INQUESTS BEFORE JOSEPH BUNNY ESQ., THE BOROUGH CORONER

A third inquest was held on Thursday evening at the Lion Public House, West-street, on the body of Mr. Thomas Pither, aged 57, landlord of that house, who was well-known as a horse dealer, in this and the adjoining counties. It appeared that the deceased went to bed on Wednesday evening, about nine o'clock, saying he felt rather poorly. When his wife went to bed about two hours after, she found him dead. Medical aid was immediately in attendance, but was of no avail. Verdict: "Died from natural causes by the visitation of God."

Newspaper: Berkshire Chronicle
Date: 3 November 1860
SUDDEN DEATH - A case of sudden death occurred to Thomas Pithers, on Wednesday last. The deceased was well known both in this and the adjoining counties as a horse dealer. He resided at the "Lion" public house, West-street, in this town. It appears that a short time since, he was injured at Marlow by a horse rolling over him, and at times he complained of pains in his chest. On the day of his death he did not feel well, and retired to rest earlier than usual. Mrs. Pithers went to bed about a quarter to eleven o'clock, and spoke to her husband, but he not answering she touched him, and found that he was dead. She immediately gave an alarm, and some neighbours soon came to her assistance. An inquest was held on the body on Thursday evening, before J. Bunny, Esq., coroner, when a verdict of "Died by the Visitation of God was returned."

Newspaper: Reading Mercury
Date: 3 November 1860

DEATHS—On the 310 ult., suddenly, at his residence, West-street, Newbury, Mr. Thos. Pithers, aged 57.

 Berkshire Chronicle
Date: 27 January 1855 

INSOLVENT DEBTORS to be heard before the Judge of the County Court of Berkshire, holden at Reading, on Tuesday, the 13th day of February 1855, at the hour of half-past ten in the forenoon precisely. THOMAS PITHER, late of number 21, West street, Newbury, in the County of Berks, and previously of the Red House, Greenham, in the Tithing of Thatcham, in the County of Berks, Horse Dealer and Dealer on Commission.

Newspaper: Berkshire Chronicle
Date: 17 February 1855
READING COUNTY COURT — Tuesday (Before J. B. Parry, Esq., Q.C.) IN RE JAMES (sic) PITHER This insolvent was formerly a horse dealer at Newbury. The schedule showed that his liabilities were £843, but it was evident that he had been reduced to his present position by misfortune. In 1846 he had become surety for McGraw, tax collector at Newbury, who was a defaulter and absconded, leaving the insolvent £483 (sic) to pay. Then again, two years ago, he had had several horses die of distemper, which caused him a further loss of £250.
Mr. Cripps opposed on behalf of Mr. Francis and Mr. Thomas Chillingworth: Mr. J. 0. Griffits supported the insolvent. The Messrs. Chillingworths were examined, but their opposition amounted to nothing; in fact they spoke well of the insolvent up to the time of his filing his schedule, and being a fair dealer.
The insolvent was accordingly discharged forthwith. The court rose shortly after six o'clock.
..,
.—

BOROUGH POLICE.—M0NDAY.
Before J F Hickman, Esq., and E. W. Gray, Esq
A DESERVED BUT UBLAWFUL CHASTISEMENT
 A horse dealer, was charged with having, on Fri.day last assaulted John Dibley.
 The complainant bargained with the defendant for some straw, and afterwards he sold it to another party. On the above day, in Cheap. street. they came in contact with each other, when the defedant enquired the reason complainant had not sent the straw, who said that he had sold it, and, at the same time, made use of a most foul expression; for which he .gave him a sound and desearved horse whipping. The defendant admitted the complaint, but stated, in extenuation that he was provoked to commit it.   The bench  said the defendant had admitted the assault and therefore they were compelled to inflict a fine but as there were extenuating circumstances connected with the case, although he was not justified in taking the law into his own hands they would find him in the mitigated penalty of 6d and costs 10s_

Source: Berkshire Chronicle dated 18 June 1853

Insolvent -- James Pither, a horse dealer, in the habit of attending the fairs in this and other counties, came up for his discharge from prison under the Insolvent Act.  Hiss misfortunes arose from having had to pay about £400 as security for a sheffiff's officer, and a loss of £200 by the death of several horses from disease. He passed his examination, and was discharged
Source: Windsor & Eton Express dated 17 February 1855

Transfers  Tbe Monument Inn from William. Shad. well to Henry Gibbs; the Lion, West Street., from Henry Deane to Thomas Pither ; the Castle from J T Satchell to William Batten.- and the Hatchet from John Fisher to George. Perkin.

Source: Berkshire Chronicle dated 21 April 1860, page 8. Repeated in Reading Mercury same day.