REFUSED RAIL
SIR,—I must draw your attention to an inaccuracy in your number dated October 16. This is on page
506 under the heading 'A Spectator's Notebook.'
Pharos there refers to the case of two young men 'who were brought before the magistrates' court in
Pershore, accused of taking Is. 21d. from a tramp.'
He goes on to quote Mr. Justice Finnemore's com- ments on the fact that these men were not granted bail—'What do the people who administer justice in this city think bail is intended for?' No doubt Per- shore will blush at its new-found status as a city! But alas, the fact is that this case never came before the magistrates' court in Pershore nor were Mr. Justice Finnemore's remarks directed to the magis- trates of that 'city.'—Yours faithfully, K. G. JOHNSON Clerk to the Justices Magistrates' Clerk's Office, De Montfort House, Evesham
[Pharos writes: 'For Pershore, read Worcester : my apologies. The confusion arose because on the same day Mr. Justice Finnemore referred to a second case, of a man who had been refused bail by the Pershore magistrates ("You have been punished enough," he said, granting the man a conditional discharge), and in the account which I read the two cases were clided..—Editor, Spectator.]
Previous page
