Ann (Radford) Sommers [Convict "Mary Ann" 1816]

Ann RADFORD (aka REDFORD) was born 18/12/1796 Exeter, Devon, UK (daughter of George RADFORD and Mary STILE)

Ann was convicted of perjury and sentenced to 7 years transportation. She arrived in Sydney Cove on 19/1/1816 on "Mary Ann"

Ann married Charles SOMMERS on 10/6/1816 at Parramatta and they had the following children

• Mary Ann 1816
• Frances Eliza 1817
• Charlotte Mary McDonald 1817
• Caroline Louisa 1821
• Harriet Blanche 1823
• Charles John 1825
• Sophia Ellen 1828
• Julia 1830
• Junius Franklin 1832
• Jane Emily 1834
• Elizabeth Henrietta 1836
• George Sidney 1840

Ann died 29/6/1867 at Windsor and was buried 1/7/1867 at Windsor

Do NOT confuse with

• Ann RADFORD, came free, "Amelia Thompson" 1836, married John GALL

  ---

LINKS

• http://australianroyalty.net.au/individual.php?pid=I72128&ged=purne...
• https://convictrecords.com.au/convicts/radford/ann/78014
• http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENANZ/2009-06/124563...
• http://www.markbutz.com/genealogy/sommers_fg.html
• http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=743076.0
• http://www.australian-english-genealogy.com/johnteale/pafg02.htm
• Reference: MyHeritage Family Trees - SmartCopy: Sep 27 2017, 21:34:50 UTC

Ann Radford should have been a fantastic storyteller to her many children listed in the 1828 Census, since it was fantastical storytelling that got her transported to Australia, charged with wilful and corrupt perjury. And it was vicious storytelling, since she’d falsely accused a young man who she’d once been seeing, with violently murdering another young man in her presence.

She made her accusations before the Exeter Magistrates on 1 November 1814. The same day, she was put into custody (perhaps as a possible accessory?) and remained there because she was unable to raise the money needed as a surety for her turning up to court, her father after all being only a gardener.

In January 1815, the week prior to the Exeter Assizes commencing, the Grand Jury at Exeter found a a true bill against the man she accused, John Bird [note his name is spelled “Burd” in the November 1814 newspapers]. On 18th January 1815, his trial came on at the Exeter Assizes, and he was arraigned at the bar, and the indictment read.

Why did she make up this story?

In the 1815 book, “The London Guide, and Stranger’s Safeguard Against the Cheats, Swindlers that Abound within the Bills of Mortality” published 1819, at page 75, Ann Radford’s case was referred to. She was used as an example of a “low class of society” making charges against an innocent person of committing a crime. Supposedly they would then extort money from the victim. However, it all went very wring in Ann’s case, she not seeming to get to the extorting stage since she made a report to the magistrates. This book also stated she was a prostitute, however there was no evidence of that in the trial reporting.

The False Story:

The evidence that Ann had given against the prisoner had been reported in Exeter’s newspaper of 2nd November 1814:

Truman’s Exeter Flying Post, Thursday, November 3rd 1814, p.4 ‘Mysterious charge of Murder “AN extraordinary circumstance has occurred in this city, which has in no small degree excited the public’s attention.

 “On Monday evening last [ i.e. the 1st November], Ann Radford, daughter of Mr Radford of this city [Exeter], Gardener, preferred a charge of murder against a young man named John Burd, a coal-carrier, with whom it seems she had a for a long time kept company. The man was in consequence immediately apprehended, and an examination took place yesterday [i.e. 2 November] before the Magistrates, in the Council Chamber at the Guildhall, of which the following are the particulars:

“ANN RADFORD, single woman, deposes that “about two years and a half since she went toward Heavitree soon after eight o’clock in the evening, accompanied by John Burd, and near the sport where the gallows stood, on the Magdalen Road, they met William Buckhill, who was butler to a Mr Phillips, who lodged at Mr Pyne’s on Southernhay. That Buckhill said to Burd “What have you to do with my girl?” Burd replied, “She is as much mine as yours”. That Buckhill then struck Burd a violent blow in the stomach. That Burd then seized him by the collar and said “ I will be your butcher.” Buckhill implored that he would not murder him. That he then struck Buckhill a blow on the temple which brought him to the ground, and he did not speak afterwards. That Burd then struck him several blows with a stick across the head, and he groaned with the first blow.

“That Burd then took the body on his back and carried it to Underhill’s field which is about 300 yards distant, and threw it into a ditch, and then went with the deponent [i.e. Ann Radfield] to his master’s stable in Magdalen Street (Exeter) for a shovel, and returned and buried the body with its clothes on. That Burd took some papers from the waistcoat pocket of the deceased, which he read, and said they were of no consequence; but he did not search whether he had any money, or a watch. That the whole of the transaction did not occupy more than an hour. That it was not very dark at the time. That they came together to her father’s house and then separated.

“That she has had several conversations with Burd on the subject, the last on Sunday when he threatened that if she ever divulged it, he “would be her butcher”.

George Radford, brother of the deponent, sworn and examined says “that he recollects, upward of two years since, his sister coming home of an evening, about nine o’clock;’ she sat herself down, laying her head on the table, and burst into tears; On his asking her the cause she replied ‘there was cause enough, that she had seen that evening what she should never forget, that Underhill’s field would be her ruin.’ He urged her to explain further but she said that she would never disclose to him, or any other person, what she knew.”

Clearly, her story had a whiff of untruth. The Exeter Flying Post went on to say:

“There are many circumstances which seem to invalidate this woman’s testimony, and which would lead us to doubt the truth of this extraordinary charge. The length fo time that has elapsed since the murder took place; the carrying the body to a field at a distance of 300 yards when there were others close at hand — the early hour of eight o’clock in the midst of summer — and the publicity of the road where there is continual passing; render it altogether highly improbable.: while, on the other hand, the girl is extremely clear and positive in her statement and in no respect has deviated in the merest particular. She has been taken to the field and has pointed out, to the best of her recollection, the spot where the body was buried; but although several laborers have been employed in digging the whole of yesterday, and no discovery has been made. Burd is remanded to Southgate Prison, Exeter, for further examination, and his accuser also remains in custody for want of sureties.”

John Bird did know Ann Radford. At the trial in January 1815, he said she was aged about 16 or 17 when he’d first met her two years earlier. But the truth was that he had never quarrelled with her over any person and he had never met William Buckhill. When Ann made her charge against him on 1st November 1814, he’d been with her the day before, drinking a few glasses together, and she seemed intoxicated.

PROVED TO BE LYING

Ann’s story came completely undone with the news that the supposedly murdered William Buckhill was on his way to Exeter to appear at John Bird’s trial, alive and well.

The following information is from the Exeter Flying Post dated 19 January 1815, p.4.

Ann had remained “firm and obstinate in her story until Saturday last” i.e. 14th January 1815, when she was told that Buckhill was coming to Exeter to confront her at Bird’s trial. At that point she publicly confessed that her story was false. Great excitement was generated in the public because they expected that perjury charges would follow on Bird’s acquittal.

The Exeter newspaper reported that, on trial day, Wednesday 17 January, the justice Hall was crowded beyond anything ever remembered, and many hundreds waited outside, and “every eye was fixed on her” and that “she seemed greatly agitated”. When she was asked what she had to say against the prisoner at the bar, she replied “Nothing Sir. I am guilty”.

Since she had no charges to make, the evidence she’d given to the Magistrates back in November was disproved. Accordingly, on the same day, she herself was charged with wilful and corrupt perjury based on new evidence given then to the Grand Jury by the originally accused man, Bird, the supposedly murdered man, Brickhill, and others.

The perjury charge repeated all the evidence she gave in November “whereas none of these things actually had happened, the said Buckhill being still alive, and that she the defendant knowing that all these things were false &c” (Exeter Flying Post, 19/1/1815, p. 4)

“Joseph” Buckhill gave evidence that he’d lived with Lord Beauchamp for fourteen years, as his servant. He had come to Exeter in the summer of 1813 attending on Lady Beauchamp (who had lodged with Mr Pyne on Southernhay) and they’d stayed ten or eleven days. He’d met Ann Radford when he’d gone to her father’s garden to purchase fruit for Lady B.

So, where had William Buckhill been for two years? He was not an Exeter local, so it was easier for Ann to make up her story. Buckhill had been in France it seems, having only recently returned to England. The employer of the accused John Bird, a coal dealer named Mr White, travelled 700 miles at his own personal expense to fetch Mr Buckhill down to Exeter so as to prove his servant innocent.

Ann was found guilty by the jury, all on the same day that Bird was to have been tried for murder. The Recorder (judge) sentenced her to 7 years transportation in an address that “frequently drew tears from the unhappy culprit”.