150 Years Ago, from The Bicester Herald, September 1874

Friday 4 September 1874

PETTY SESSIONS An Extension of Innkeepers’ Time for Launton Feast Mr William Gessey, landlord of the Bull Inn, Launton, made application for an extension of hours on Monday August 31, in consequence of being “feast time” at that village. Mr Marsham asked for the Act of Parliament, and said every village had its feast; if they (the Bench) granted it to one they would be expected to do so to others.

In reply to the Earl of Jersey, Mr Gessey said he wished for permission to keep his house open two hours later, and he would see that everything was conducted properly.

The Chairman stated that the new Act would come into operation on October 10, and by that it apparently was not the wish of the Legislature to extend the time at all. After Mr Marsham had told Mr Superintendant Moulden that no drunkenness or rioting must be allowed at these feasts, he said Mr Gessy’s application would be granted.

[Report of the Petty Sessions held some time previously, but reported in this edition.]

Friday 18 September 1874

Mr Gessey, Bull Inn, Launton, sustained, on September 10th , severe lacerations to two fingers on the left hand, when assisting in removing a weighty cask.

PETTY SESSIONS Launton Feast Drunkeness John Marriott, known by the cognomenof “Pettit,” labourer, Launton, was summoned by Police-constable GeorgeStockford, for being drunk and riotous in the parish of Launton, on Tuesday evening, September 1st.

In reply to the charge, defendant said – I am guilty of having a “drop” of beer. I don't know that I was riotous. I went home when I was ordered.

PC Stockford, in support of the summons, stated that, on the Tuesday evening in question, he was on duty in Launton. Shortly after ten o'clock at night, he saw the defendant with a lot of people around him, and he was challenging to fight any one there. Witness requested defendant to go home, but he refused. He afterwards took defendant home, with the assistance of a young woman. After that defendant came into the street again, and was quarrelsome.

The Chairman (to defendant) - What have you to say to this?

Marriott– I had had some beer, because it was feast time. I did not know what I was about.

In answer to Marriott, PC Stockfordsaid – You did not go home when I first ordered you to go.

Superintendent Mouldenput in previous convictions against the defendant. One in January, 1878, for refusing to quit a public-house when requested to do so, and he was also committed for 21 days’ hard labour, for being concerned with others in stealing, in December last, money from a public-house.

Marriott, in answer to the Chairman, stated – I am 20 years of age. I have been at work for nobody lately. I am now working on the farm at Grave Hill Wood.

The Chairman – A young man like you ought to keep steady. It is bad for a healthy-looking fellow like you to lose your character.

Marriott – I am steady enough; only it was feast-week.

The Chairman – It was not the time for fighting if it was.

Superintendent Moulden said Marriott had been charged with poaching, but let off on payment of expenses.

PC Stockford stated that was about four years ago.

Marriott having promised not to again take too much beer, and that he would go on different in future, The Chairman said the magistrates taking into consideration that it was feast time, would only order him to pay a fine of 1s, and the costs 10s6d.

Marriott paid the amount named, and left, thanking the Bench for their kindness.