PET CAT’S DEATH

Evening Star, Issue 23292, 14 June 1939, Page 7

PET CAT’S DEATH

LONDON CELEBRITY NEIGHBOUR SAW RED The death of “Sir Richard Whittington,” the Mansion House, cat presented to Sir ■ Harry Twyford when he was Lord'May or of London last year, was. the subject of a case at _ Wimbledon, when Charles Tyrrell Giles pleaded guilty to,a summons by the R.S.P.C.A. for causing unnecessary suffering to the cat by killing it in an improper manner, He* was finedl' £2O, with 12gs costs. Mr Gordon. Jones, for the prosecution, said that in view of the plea of guilty it might be possible to save the magistrates the ■ task of hearing at length from witnesses the full details of this “ distressing case.” The cat, he said, was a great pet of Sir Harry Twyford and his family. It accompanied him on the bench and followed 1 him about like a dog, and it was a very docile and affectionate creature. It was present at most of the Mansion House functions, and was specially noted by Royalty. When Sir Harry Twyford terminated his period of office, he returned to his home in Wimbledon, where he lived 1 next door to the family of Sir Charles Tyrrell Giles. Sir Harry Twyford was a very close and- intimate friend of Sir Charles Tyrrell Giles, the father of the accused. Sir Harry Twyford’s daughter, on or about April 10, missed her pet. * She telephoned next door, counsel continued 1 , and Mr Charles Tyrrell Giles answered the telephone. In the course of the conversation it transpired that the cat had gone into Mr Charles Tyrrell Giles’s ground and he admitted that,he had.killed- it. , Miss Twyford ••

communicated with the police. A police officer went to! see -Mr Giles, and Mr Giles took him-to a'spot in the grounds, and! there the' police'officer disinterred the body of the cat. A LOVER OF BIRDS. It had apparently been the subject of a savage and prolonged'attack. Its skull had been smashed, by what appeared to be repeated ' blows, to a pulp. ■ Saying - that Sir Harry Twyford’s family did not wish to be vindictive, Mr Jones asked that -a second summons for maliciously killing a domestic animal should be withdrawn. The magistrate agreed to this. Mr W. -BT Manley, defending, said that for the whole of Mr Giles’s lifetime and for years before he was born the grounds of the house in which he lived had' been maintained as a sanctuary for birds. Ou the evening of Sunday, April 9, Mr. Giles was walking round , the grounds of his sanctuary. It was the nesting season and there were several bird's sitting on their eggs. He caught the. sight of what to him was an unknown black cat. Knowing what a cat’s presence meant' among birds, and being a devoted lover of birds, on the spur of: the moment 'he killed the animal. Mr Giles, he said, was just under 50 years of age. He served' throughout the war honourably if not with distinction. Towards the end of the-war he was very badly wounded and since then he had been living at the house with his birds. “ I dtan’t know, but I suppose he saw red and killed the cat at one blow,” remarked Mr Manley. There was, no evidence that it suffered at all. The magistrates retired, and on their return Mr E. Trim, the chairman, said: “ Defendant has pleaded- guilty to this act of cruelty.' Ido not suggest inflicting any kind of address or saying anything further except that the penalty must be fitting to the offence. There will 'be a fine of £2O, with 12gs -costs.”--