The Law is an Ass….

This apparently…is a true story !

I would just like to say that before you read this account…..Thomas Inskip is not related to my side of the family…. Honest….. he’s one of the other lot !

When one is researching the archives for these strange stories – just occasionally, we come across one that is too strange to believe. However, I can assure the reader that all these stories can be found in the Reference libraries. One of the strangest cases in Staffordshire criminal history has to be this one brought against Thomas James of Forsbrook, for allegedly having sex with an Ass. We say allegedly, because the only witness to this crime was Thomas Inskip, an illiterate workman who was known to dislike Thomas James.

Thomas James was accused of the crime of bestiality, which by today’s liberal standards, would be considered at the most, a minor offence. Unfortunately due to the very nature of the case, there are few records available to enable us to check the facts. What makes the details of this case completely ridiculous is, Thomas was brought to court on the evidence of just one man, a man who was known to be very unfriendly towards him, and what makes the case even more stranger is – there was no one who could corroborate his evidence.

The year was 1811 in Georgian England, murder was looked at as just another crime, in fact the newspapers of the day went to great lengths to report every gory detail of any murder trail. Sex however, was considered to be such a disgusting subject that any case brought before the court was only reported in the most guarded of terms.

There was nothing special about Thomas James, he was just an ordinary 60 year old village man, living in Forsbrook, Staffordshire with his wife and family. One can only assume that Thomas James must have been completely confused – and disgusted by the things that were happening to him.

Thomas James’s troubles began on a warm May afternoon in 1811, May 12th to be exact. It was on this day that Thomas Inskip made a statement to the Reverend E. Powys. Inskip claimed that at four o’clock on the previous Friday afternoon he had been walking by Stone House in Dilhorne when he saw Thomas James following a female ass into a nearby field.

Inskip went on to say that as he approached the field he saw James catch up with the ass, he then claimed he saw him remove his private parts from his trousers and insert them into the privy part of the said ass. He then said “I then saw the ass moved forward and the man’s private parts fell out”. Inskip went on to say he saw the man take hold of his private parts and put it into the female ass again.

Thomas Inskip claimed he went up to Thomas James and asked him what he was doing, but that James walked away without speaking to him. Inskip said that after James had gone he went up to the ass to see if its privy parts were wet, which he claimed they were.

What makes the timing of this statement so bizarre is, a few days earlier, Inskip and James had been involved in an argument. Thomas had seen Inskip beating his dog with a large stick. Thomas James then apparently told the man to stop beating the dog. For his troubles, James received a mouthful of abusive language from Inskip. According to a witness, the next thing that happened was, James took the stick from Inskip and threw it away.

Inskip was then heard to say that he would make James pay for interfering in his business. Mr. Frederick Johnson, who lived in the village, told the police that he had heard Inskip threaten to get even with James; despite this important evidence – evidence that would have saved Thomas James – Mr. Johnson was never called to give evidence.

It soon became obvious that Inskip was illiterate because when he was asked to sign his statement, all he was able to do was put a rough X against his name. Inskip however had not finished with Thomas James yet. The following day he again went to see Reverend Powys, saying that he wished to add to his statement. In this one, he claimed that after James had gone he saw something that looked like either a man’s – or ass’s seed, lying on the ground at the back of the ass.

The Reverend Powys knew the seriousness of the charge that Inskip was making against Thomas James; he therefore tried to persuade the man that there could be other reasons for the donkey being wet. He told Inskip that the donkey may have been wet because she was in season; he also said that there were jack asses in the next field. Inskip insisted it was James.

Reverend Powys then suggested to Inskip that he could have made a mistake and what he had really seen as he walked past the field, was one of the jack-asses serving the female. Inskip however, was adamant, it was Thomas James that he had seen having sex with the ass, he said. After he had again put his mark against his statement, he left.

Moving forward to May 16th, Inskip once again went to visit Reverend Powys. He wished to add further to his statement he said. This time he made his comments to Rev. Powys, Mr. J. Hulme and Mr. W.A Coney. This time he said “Thomas James private parts was in the privy parts of the ass the last time a minute and a half to two minutes, I believe the private parts of Thomas James had fallen out of the she-ass before James saw me, and before I interrupted him”. Once again, Inskip added his X to his statement.

The three men discussed Inskip’s statement, Hulme, a man who believed that sex was a diabolical sin and the work of the devil, wanted James arrested at once, but the Reverend suggested that they talk to the man first and hear what he had to say. On May 18th, Thomas James was summoned to appear at the local police station in Blythe Bridge. Once there he faced Coney, Hulme and Reverend Powys. When he was told of Inskip’s statement. James laughed, thinking the whole thing was a joke.

Thomas James was told that it was no joke – and he should not treat it as one. He was asked where he had been at four o’clock on May 9th, which was the previous Friday. James told the three that he had been in Cheadle attending the Market. When asked if anyone had seen him, James replied that plenty of people had seen him. When he was told of the charges, he told the authorities of the incident with Inskip and the dog. He also told them of Inskips’s threat to get even. Again he was asked if anyone had heard the threats, James said that Fred Johnson, who lived in Forsbrook, had been walking past at the time, so he must have heard.

Josiah Hulme, told James that performing such a disgusting act was a crime against humanity and an act of the devil and James had to be punished. James again said that he was innocent and before making such a statement, Mr. Hulme should check with Fred Johnson and people who had attended the market in Cheadle on that Friday afternoon.

Hulme, who did not like to be shouted at, reported the matter to the chief constable, but never mentioned either Fred Johnson or the fact that James claimed he had been at the market at the time. Thomas James was arrested and duly appeared at Stafford Assizes.

At the Stafford Assizes, held during the summer of 1811, the name of a certain Richard Jackson appears for the prosecution, although why it should have been done no one seems to know – for the man never gave evidence, or even made any kind of submission. By today’s standards, the whole sorry business is totally incredible, one could even say, laughable. Unfortunately the one person who did not find it funny was Thomas James, for on a shaky statement, made by an illiterate man – a man who everyone knew, did not like him. Thomas James was in danger of losing his life.

The judges at the Stafford Summer Assizes in 1811 were Sir Soulden Lawrence and Sir Simon de Blane. Police constable Henry Wilkinson, gave evidence on behalf of the police. Thomas James, who was a poor man could not afford to engage a solicitor to speak for him. However, he did tell the court that he was at Cheadle Market at the time of the alleged offence, he also told of Inskip’s threats against him. Despite this, the judges refused to allow any witnesses to give evidence.

Things then began to take on the role of farce when they said they could only consider the evidence of the police and the evidence of Inskip. All that James said was totally ignored, and it was therefore only the remarks made by them that convinced the jury to bring a verdict of guilty. They sad that in their option, Inskip’s evidence was “very clear if circumstantial”, and because of this Thomas James, an innocent man from Forsbrook, was sentenced to death – and all because he had stopped a brutal man from beating his dog.

Throughout the whole of the trial, and even up to the day of his execution, James protested his innocence and condemned the character of Inskip, but to no avail, the judges and the police continued to take the word of Inskip against that of Thomas James, despite the fact that Thomas James had never been in any kind of trouble, and despite the many people who came forward and said that James had in fact been at the market on that fateful Friday afternoon, Thomas James, had been given the death penalty, and the death penalty he would receive.

Now we come to of this ridiculous affair that leads me to believe that insanity must be ruling the courts that day. At the same assizes that these two eminent judges were sending a man to the gallows for such a trivial, they were handing out leniency like it was Christmas – for on that day it was not just Thomas James who faced the two judges. There were two murderers also on trial, and after seeing the sentence handed out to poor Thomas James, thy must have been quaking in their shoes, however, their luck was in.

The judges had obviously decided that allegedly having sex with an ass was a far worse crime than committing murder for, while Thomas faced the hang-man, these two – as the saying goes, “got away with murder”. John Clewlow was given just six months imprisonment for the murder of Thomas Phillips at Stafford.

Both Clewlow and Phillips were privates in the Eastern Regiment. According to the story told in court, on Saturday night, Thomas Phillips had had too much to drink, and as he passed the lodging house of Clewlow, he shouted some kind of abusive remark, a remark that was aimed at provoking his fellow private. Clewlow must have risen to the bait, because he rushed out of the house and began fighting with Phillips, two minutes later, Clewlow lay on the ground after being hit.

Clewlow then got up and ran into the house, returning a few seconds later brandishing a weapon – a weapon that was not even produced in court – Clewlow then began to strike Philips over the head, this attack resulted in Phillips receiving a fractured skull, an injury which resulted in his death however, a few days later. Clewlow was able to produce three men who gave him a good character reference, and on this evidence he was charged with manslaughter and given just six months.

The next case brought before these judges was that of a twenty three year old S. Gee, who had murdered John James, in what the court described as “just a casual fight” at Aldridge. Mr. Gee must have thought the Gods were smiling down on him. For these two judges, who only one hour earlier had sentenced Thomas James to death, now dished out the very severe sentence of six weeks imprisonment to our Mr. Gee.

Other sentences imposed on this very strange day at Stafford Assizes, included seven years transportation to William Edwards for stealing a small bag of Lime, while William Marwood was sentenced to fourteen years for receiving. For committing assault with intent to rape, D.T Sheridan was given two years.

In view of these sentences, why then was Thomas James sentenced to die?. There can be no logical explanation. However, despite several attempts to commute his sentence to imprisonment, the judges, stood firm – according to them, James’s crime had been so hideous, the only punishment suitable was to send him to the gallows. It was indeed a black day for justice.

Local people were not happy and four of them presented a petition to Judge Lawrence pleading for leniency. The Judge was very pleasant when he greeted the four men, however, he said that in the view of the terrible nature of the crime, there could be no pardon.

Jacob Brown, who had defended Thomas James, made a complaint about the way the judges had conducted the case. He said that his client, who had a total of nine witnesses – all able that Thomas James was no where near Dilhorne on that fateful Friday, was given no chance to prove his innocence – and in his opinion both judges should be struck off. There was a lot of publicity about Brown’s remarks but in the end nothing was done and James faced the hangman.

When the day arrived for Thomas James to spend his last minutes of mortal life he was remarkably calm as he accompanied the chaplain to the scaffold. Three months after James had been executed, Inskip was heard to say that he never meant to send James to the gallows – he told the landlord of The Cross Keys, in Cheadle that he was just trying to teach the man a lesson for making him look foolish and taking away his stick, then, having had too much drink, he admitted to the same landlord that he’d never seen James anywhere near the field in Dilhorne. The disgusted man reported it to the police.

As a result of this conversation, Thomas Inskip was prosecuted for committing perjury and received a three month prison sentence. Unfortunately – this did nothing to help poor Thomas James, or his wife and family.

Hell hath no fury like an Inskip scorned !