The Trial and Conviction of That Infamous Hypocrite John Church: The Surrey Tabernacle Preacher, Borough-road, St. George's Fields, for an Abominable Offence; Including the Whole of the Evidence; Tried Before Lord Ellenborough, at the Surrey Assizes, Croydon, Saturday, August 16, 1817. To Which Is Added, His Life, Confessions, Notes of One of His Sermons, the Whole of the Love-letters, &c. &c. — John Shaqi
The Trial and Conviction of That Infamous Hypocrite John Church: The Surrey Tabernacle Preacher, Borough-road, St. George's Fields, for an Abominable Offence; Including the Whole of the Evidence; Tried Before Lord Ellenborough, at the Surrey Assizes, Croydon, Saturday, August 16, 1817. To Which Is Added, His Life, Confessions, Notes of One of His Sermons, the Whole of the Love-letters, &c. &c.Anonymous
Religion
The Trial and Conviction of That Infamous Hypocrite John Church: The Surrey Tabernacle Preacher, Borough-road, St. George's Fields, for an Abominable Offence; Including the Whole of the Evidence; Tried Before Lord Ellenborough, at the Surrey Assizes, Croydon, Saturday, August 16, 1817. To Which Is Added, His Life, Confessions, Notes of One of His Sermons, the Whole of the Love-letters, &c. &c.
Anonymous
Church, J. (John), approximately 1780-approximately 1825 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Sodomy) -- England
_By Lord Ellenborough_.—Then it was the day but one after, namely, the
morning of the 27th that the boy made the communication to you?—Yes; my
Lord.
Did not see Foreman on the night of witness’s return—not to speak with
him. On the morning of the 27th he made the communication to witness
respecting this transaction. Witness told Foreman he was extremely sorry
for what had happened. Witness had had many applications from the
congregation, to whom he made it known. It was in consequence of the
information they had received from general report, that they applied to
witness for authentic information. Several of the congregation made
those applications. There was a meeting upon the subject. In
consequence of applications made to witness from the congregation, he
went to the Defendant, Church. Thinks it was on the 9th of October.
There had not before that been a meeting of the congregation, at which
witness was present. Did not take any steps between the 27th of
September to see Church, and the 9th of October, upon the subject. That
was the first communication witness had with Church upon the subject.
Church said to him, he took it extremely kind of witness in calling upon
him. Witness told him he might take it as he pleased; that he did not
come willingly, but that some of his congregation thought that witness
ought to see him on the business. Patrick cannot say Church, appeared to
be apprized of the subject before witness began; but believes he was
apprized from what afterwards occurred. Witness told him he (witness)
waited upon him, having seen a letter wherein he denied three particular
points of the boy’s statement; and witness wished to know what those
points were. He said that he denied having hold of the boy, or the boy
having told of him; or he, Church, saying that he was the boy’s mistress.
He admitted he was in the room, but denied laying hold of the boy’s
private parts; did not state any reason for being in the room at all. He
said that he denied three particular points, two of which witness had
already named. The other was something that did not occur to witness to
be important, and which he did not take any notice of, consequently does
not remember it. Witness told him that, of these two points mentioned,
the boy was positive, and witness had no reason to doubt any thing that
the boy had said, as he had never known him to tell a lie. He said that
he was sorry for it, because that confirmed _antient reports_; witness
told him it did so; and, of course, that now he should believe all that
he had heard heretofore. Witness then wished him a good morning. Did
not see him at any time afterwards to speak to him; has seen him, but not
spoken to him since. The letter that witness had seen, which he spoke to
Church about, was a letter dated the 6th of October, addressed to a Mrs.
Hunter. Witness took an exact copy of it. Mr. Harmer has it. Is that
the copy? (_A paper put into the witness’ hand_.) Yes; it is an exact
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account