Northampton Mercury 5^th December 1846, transcribed by Susan Manton.

Charge against Superintendent Knight

Mr. Curtis appeared to support a charge he had previously made against Superintendent Knight, for (what he termed) cruel and inhuman conduct towards certain parties of Rushden, who were concerned in the ‘mop and pail’ riot in the village. Our readers will recollect that a person named Gilbert and other were apprehended under a bench warrant and bound over to appear at the last Northampton Sessions having through some error of their legal adviser left the Court just previous to their names being called. It was on these grounds the bench warrant was granted and five persons, amongst whom was Gilbert, were apprehended, and brought in custody to Wellingborough. It was the manner in which they were brought to the lock-up that Mr. Curtis complained of. Having laid a petition before the bench signed by the clergyman, churchwarden and other respectable inhabitants of Rushden, praying the magistrates to investigate the matter, they (the magistrates) retired into a private room with Mr. Goddard, the Chief Constable, who attended with Mr. Young, specially to hear the case. On their return into the hall, they stated to Mr. Curtis that Mr. Goddard was willing to admit that Superintendent Knight had exceeded his duty but if Mr. Curtis would talk the matter over with Mr. Goddard, they had no doubt the case would be settled to the satisfaction of all parties. Mr. Curtis said he must beg to protest against such a mode of entering upon business; he had made a serious charge publically against a public officer and he thought for the credit and satisfaction of all parties, it ought to be publically heard but he was in the hands of the magistrates, he must bow to their decision. Mr. Curtis then went into the private room and shortly returned and stated to the magistrates that he was not satisfied with the manner in which the case had been met; he thought it but little satisfaction to the poor man, William Gilbert (whose case he had then intended to have brought before them) to be told that such sufferings as he had endured should not be inflicted on any other person. This poor man, if the petition he had that day presented was to be relied on (and he thought no one would dare to doubt it) had a character to lose, equally dear to him was the character of any one in that room, and was highly respected for his religious and moral worth; but he had, like the worst of felons, on the 10^th day of October last, been dragged from home, chained to a cart and dragged through the streets of his own town to the gaze and astonishment of numerous spectators, locked up in a solitary dungeon from Saturday to Monday and bound over to appear at the last Northampton Sessions, where he did attend at a considerable expense and neither perpetrator nor witness appeared to give him an opportunity of clearing his character from the paltry charge that had been preferred against him; each being the case, could it be expected that he could be satisfied with the matter being dismissed in such a manner. The magistrates assured Mr. Curtis that they felt as strongly on such matters as he did but thought that the explanation given by Mr. Goddard ought to be satisfactory. Mr. Curtis said that he would with the permission of the bench, mention a report which he had brought to him on Saturday last viz: That Superintendent Knight received from the county 1s per day for the maintenance of each prisoner while in the lock-up under his care; he could scarcely believe it and he mentioned it to give Superintendent Knight an opportunity of publically contradicting it if such a case for the five prisoners from the 10^th of October to the meeting of the bench must cost 15s. Superintendent Knight not having the papers with the accounts at the period the matter was allowed to stand over.