A VIRTUOUS PIG: EXETER, 1859

In January 1859 at Exeter Crown Court, John Staddon,  a farmer  of Colaton Raleigh, was sued for compensation by a cheese-dealer who had been wounded in the thigh by Staddon's boar-pig when he, the pig , was being shown at Newton  Poppleford Fair.  The judgment of the court turned on the character  of the pig; indeed The Exeter Flying Post (27th January 1859) called the case PIG "TEAR-EM v. THE VIRTUOUS PIG.   The  plaintiff gave the court much amusement for which I have not found room  but the  defence was formidable and the merriment in the court-room seems to have been unconfined. The Staddon family and friends had come to town in force to uphold the character of their pig:

" - Mr Staddon the elder, was then called and said he had known the boar in question "from a zooker."  (laughter)  - "had druv it to Newton for shaw; nivver zeed the peg bite, zeed the plaintiff in the vair who zed to ma, 'your peg bite ma.'   Bite you, zed I, why he nivver bite a living Christian in es life." -  (Laughter,)

Mr FLOUD,  (the defending counsel) Did you ever know him bite a converted Jew?

Witness,  Naw, zir.

Mr FLOUD,  or an orthodox Christian Jew?

- Witness,  Naw. [It is due to the witness to state that he did not seem thoroughly to understand this question.....]

To show the lamb-like character of the animal, witness produced two youngsters who, he said, had driven the boar to the fair.  One was his grandchild and some merriment was caused in Court by the grandmother bringing in the boy in her arms.

Henry Staddon, the younger, stated that the plaintiff whipped the pig and that was the reason for his biting.  The pig never did it before.

Ann Staddon, senr, said that when the pig returned from fair "he failed at his meat" and the boy (last witness) had told her that a man had "at en about the head".  There were marks on the animal.

Herman Staddon, jun,  said  "the peg was quiet and honest."  (Laughter)

Samuel Crook, Elizabeth Sanders and a man called Pengelly also gave the pig a good character for docility.

Mr Carter,  another witness, said,  "I niver heerd any harm of the pig in my life."   (Laughter)

Fulford,  under bailiff of this Court, said,  "When I went to serve the summons on the defendant, he implored me to look at the pig.   I did so and the animal did not appear to be a savage pig but looked fat and happy."  (Laughter)

This was the defendant's case.

HIS HONOUR said that under all the circumstances he must non-suit the plaintiff.  A verdict for defendant was then entered.  but an application for costs, by Mr Floud, was refused."