Print Bookmark

Documents


Matches 1 to 50 of 79     » Thumbnails Only

    1 2 Next»

 #   Thumb   Description   Linked to 
1
28_29.09.1940 No. 9 Squadron Wellington IC T2472 WS-G F_Lt. Anthony Howard Caldicott Cox.pdf
28_29.09.1940 No. 9 Squadron Wellington IC T2472 WS-G F_Lt. Anthony Howard Caldicott Cox.pdf
 
 
2
ANTHONY Gerald Caldecott b1883.pdf
ANTHONY Gerald Caldecott b1883.pdf
 
 
3
Bachelors in the Bush and The Pioneer's Daughter - Charlotte.pdf
Bachelors in the Bush and The Pioneer's Daughter - Charlotte.pdf
 
 
4
CALDECOTT Alfred b1850.pdf
CALDECOTT Alfred b1850.pdf
 
 
5
CALDECOTT Cecil Leonard & HAEUSLER Olive Kathleen.pdf
CALDECOTT Cecil Leonard & HAEUSLER Olive Kathleen.pdf
 
 
6
CALDECOTT John Alexander b1835 - Rugby Advertiser 1887.pdf
CALDECOTT John Alexander b1835 - Rugby Advertiser 1887.pdf
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\cocoartf1561\cocoasubrtf400
{\fonttbl\f0\fswiss\fcharset0 Helvetica;}
{\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;}
{\*\expandedcolortbl;;}
\pard\tx560\tx1120\tx1680\tx2240\tx2800\tx3360\tx3920\tx4480\tx5040\tx5600\tx6160\tx6720\pardirnatural\partightenfactor0

\f0\fs24 \cf0 EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE OF ASSAULT.\
John Alexander Caldecott, of Long Lawford, gentleman, was summoned for assaulting C Charles Thomas Caldecott, of Holbrook Grange, at the parish of Newbold-on-Avon, on Dec. 25th. -Mr. T. Wright, of Leicester, appeared for the prosecution. -Defendant pleaded not guilty, but before the case proceeded he wished to say that he had a little experience in military law, but not in civil, and therefore did not know the procedure of Civil Courts. He did not know whether he might not with reason object to Allesley Boughton-Leigh sitting in the case on consideration of what had passed between them, and that he was a witness against him (the defendant) on a matter with his brother which might perhaps be brought before this Court. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh said he had never heard anything of this case, nor did he know what it was about at all; and therefore he intended to sit. -The defendant said Col. Cooper would bear him out that it was the practice is military law to ask a soldier whether he had any objection to be tried by the president or any of the members appointed to try him by Court Martial on the ground that they might be biased. - Col. Cooper replied that the two Courts, civil and military, never clashed, and each showed respect to the other; but these remarks as to military law were extraneous to the subject now before the Bench. -The defendant said he did not wish to speak in a disrespectful spirit, but he merely wondered whether he had the chance in a Civil Court that he should have in a Military Court. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: If you have any objection to my sitting here your proper course will be eventually at the close of this case to apply to the Lord Chancellor.\
Mr. Wright, in opening the case, said Col. Caldecott felt compelled to institute these proceedings against his brother. The magistrates would readily understand that his position was a very painful one, but he was compelled to take it not simply for the actual occurrence on the 25th December, but because it was one of a series of annoyances, threats, and insults, which he and other members of his family had been unfortunately subjected to by the defendant for some years past. The defendant had for some reason of his own chosen to indulge in the most violent threats, and not long ago he called at the police station, before proceeding to Col. Caldecott\'92s to say he was going there, and there would probably be bloodshed, so that a policeman had better remain at hand if his services should be required. That was only one instance of the violence indulged in by the defendant. On Christmas Day he went up to Col. Caldecott as he was coming out of church, and, after using offensive language, hustled him, and put his fist in his face, threatened to smash him and used other threats, so that at last Col. Caldecott felt compelled to come to the Court for protection. It was not in a vindictive spirit that Col. Caldecott appeared that day, but it was more in consequence of the system of annoyance he had been subjected to by the defendant in sending post-cards of a vile character to Holbrook Grange, in placing offensive placards and notices on the gates leading to Holbrook in red chalk to represent blood, and other annoyances, which made life almost unendurable. Col. Caldecott was only animated by the kindest possible spirits and if the magistrates found the case proved he would only ask that his brother should be bound over in substantial sureties to keep the peace for a reasonable time towards himself and all other of her Majesty\'92s subjects. There was no desire on his part to ask for any serious punishment. He (Mr. Wright) had hoped that the defendant would have sent that his wiser course was to plead guilty, so that he might have saved the necessity for public discussion on matters of this kind, but it might be that the defendant was not aware that his action towards Col. Caldecott upon this occasion really amounted to an assault. Mr. Wright, in conclusion, briefly referred to other means the defendant had taken to annoy Col. Caldecott and the members of his family by inserting absurd advertisements in the local newspapers; but that he would not go into further - he would simply ask the magistrates to takes such steps as he would protect Col. Caldecott and his family from such annoyances in future.\
Col. Caldecott deposed: I reside at Holbrook Grange, and Defendant is my brother. On Dec. 25th last I saw my brother at Newbold, both on me going in and said \'93Good morning.\'94 As I was leaving the church by the north door to go up for Newbold he came up to me, and said he wasted to speak to me \'93Are we to be friends or enemies?\'94 I told him that we were willing to be friends if he would behave himself. -Defendant (interrupting): I don\'92t remember those words. -Complainant continuing, said: He began saying that something must be settled - that we must either be friends or we should be enemies. I then said that as long as he went on sending objectionable post-cards, writing on the gates, and cursing and swearing at my mother and sisters we could not be friends. He had been in the habit of sending large number of offensive post-cards to myself and to the other members of my family, and that is what I referred to. He said to me\'94I\'92ll have things settled, or there will be a b____y row some day.\'94 He then commenced to hustles against me and push me with his elbow and shoulder. I asked him not to push against me, and he immediately lifted his fist towards me, and put it within two or three inches of my face. He did not say anything the - at least, I don\'92t remember that he did. I asked Mr. T. G. Norman, who was near, if he saw that, and defendant immediately said, \'93Oh! If you want witnesses I\'92ll do it again,\'94 and he held his fist in my face nearer than before, quite close, and nearly touching me. His first was held in a threatening position. He went on talking in the same way till we got up to Mr. Norman\'92s house, and when we got there he said, \'93Haven\'92t I often called you a damned cur?\'94 I said \'93Yes, you have very often.\'94 He then said \'93 You are a damned cur,\'94 and lifted up his fist and said he would smash my damned face in. He was within striking distance - in fact, he was nearly touching me at the time. When he put his fist in my face at Mr. Norman\'92s door, several people were present. After his last threat I went into Mr. Norman\'92s house to escape from further annoyance. From his threats and his manner for some time past I am afraid he will do me or some member of my family some serious injury, unless restrained.\
On being asked if he wished to question the witness, defendant began to state that there was a little confusion, but Mr. Boughton-Leigh told hime he mist not make a statement; he must confine himself at present to questions upon the evidence that had been given. -Defendant to witness: Where did I speak to first - just inside the churchyard, wasn\'92t it? A: Yes, it was just inside. - Were you walking along? A: I had stopped to wish different people a happy Christmas, and you spoke to me directly I had finished. -Q: What were the words said to you? You had said \'93Good morning, and I asked you whether you meant to speak to me further. -A: I don\'92t remember you asking that. -Q: Didn\'92t I ask you whether you meant to speak to me further, and what you meant by merely nodding to me after my \'93Good morning\'94 to you; and on your saying that you did not, didn\'92t I say that it was mean and cowardly. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Look here, Cape Caldecott, you must confine yourself to asking questions on the matter which has been given in evidence before the Court, and not make a statement. -Col. Caldecott: I don\'92t mind answering him. He did not mention anything to me about being mean or cowardly. -Defendant: I don\'92t know whether I said that; I cannot exactly remember all these things. (To witness) Where did I hustle you? -A: At the corner just as we had got outside the gates. -Q: How did I hustle you? -A: You shoved me with your shoulder two or three times. -Q: And on you saying something I desisted, didn\'92t I? -A: You shook you fist in my face- within a second. -After a few questions as to the precise locality where the assault occurred, the defendant said he could not remember all the evidence, and asked that it should be read over. That having been done, he continued to witness: You said you knew what I wanted. That do you mean by that? -Witness: Am I bound to answer that? -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Yes. -Witness: Well, I know he hustled me for the purpose of trying to make me strike him; he has done it often - at least not hustled me, but he wants me to strike him. Defendant: How do you know that? -A: I have been told so. Q: By whom? A: By lots of people. -Q: Have they any authority for saying that. Who is your authority? -A: I shall not give up my authority. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: It was an impression upon your mind from some information you received. I don\'92t think you need answer that question. -Defendant: What did you say? You and I are both deaf, and we cannot hear very well. Were you speaking to me? -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: No; I was speaking to the witness. -Defendant: I though you were speaking to me, sir. I beg pardon. To witness: How do you know that what they say is true. Its hearsay evidence isn\'92t it? -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: It was the impression upon his mind. We wish you to confine yourself as close as possible to the assault, and not go into matters that have previously taken place. -Defendant: I beg your pardon. I don\'92t understand a Civil Court. I understood I could cross-examine him on any part of his statement and evidence. This is most important to me I consider, because he says he is in danger and fear. He says he knows I hustled him to make him strike me. Didn\'92t he know that I wished him to be friendly with me if he would, and that I said I would make him speak to me. -Col. Cooper: You put it so indistinctly. he has already said you were to be friendly if you would behave yourself. -Defendant to witness: Did you said that at that time - that if I desisted. - Witness: No; I said that as long as you swore at my mother and sisters and did these other things, we could not be friends. -Q: Then you said that you knew I hustled you to make you strike me. Don\'92t you know that I also said that if I made you take the law against me that would be sufficient, and you said you knew that I wanted to take the law against you. -A: Yes, you have often said that. -Defendant continued to question witness with reference to his statement that he knew the he hustled him to make him strike him, until Mr. Boughton-Leigh again told him that that was the impression on the Colonel\'92s mind. -Defendant to witness: Was my behaviour excited or violent? -A: Decidedly so - both. -Q: Why was my behaviour that of a gentleman or a blackguard? -Mr. Boughton-Leigh to witness: We don\'92t wish you to answer that question. - Mr. Wright: That\'92s quite hypothetical. - Mr. Boughton-Leigh: It was implied. -Defendant: If it is implied it is quite sufficient for me that it should be put down as blackguardly behaviour. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: We only say that the answer is implied. - Defendant repeated the question; Mr. Wright objected to it, and the Bench would not allow it to be pat. Defendant: Had I lost my self-control? -A: Very nearly. -Q: or seem as if I hadn\'92t my senses? -Defendant was again reminded that he must confine his questions to the actions that formed the subject of the charge. - Defendant: It seems to me that they bring up each of the evidence that suits their cause, and leave out the other. - Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You must ask him questions on the evidence he has given. -Defendant to witness: Did you not think that it might have been an instance of the hereditary lunacy which you say exists in our family? -Mr. Wright: I object; don\'92t answer that question. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: We are not trying that now. This Court has no power to go into that question. -Defendant: I am only asking it in my defence. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Have you any other question as regards the assault? -Defendant: I don\'92t remember what all the evidence is. -Mr. Wright briefly repeated the facts, and defendant said: There are other questions, but I have nothing more to say now.\
Mr. T.G. Norman, of Newbold-on-Avon, farmer, deposed that on December 25th he saw the defendant coming into Newbold Church. After service witness saw him near the north door, and saw defendant speak to Col. Caldecott. Defendant said to the Colonel in effect, \'93What do you mean by saying \'91Good morning;\'92 you must say more or less - we must either be friend or enemies.\'94 When they got into the street the Captain shook his fist in the Colonel\'92s face in a threatening manner. A variety of things were said as to his cursing and the way in which defendant treated his mother and sisters. When they got up to witness\'92s house, defendant shook his fist in Col. Caldecott\'92s face twice and told him he was a damned cur. -By defendant: You asked me to listen to what you said.\
This completed the case for the complainant.\
Before proceeding with his defence defendant asked whether he could make any observations on Mr. Wright\'92s opening. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You can say anything you like - we cannot tell until you have said it. - Defendant then went on to say that his defence was, firstly, provocation, and, secondly, that it was a technical and not an actual assault. What he did in the first instance in shouldering his brother - was certainly a slip and more than he intended to do. He went there with the view of having the matter settled because he thought bad blood was best out. By that he did not mean, as Tom Duke told him, that it meant murdering people, but that it meant murdering people, but that if differences existed between people it was better to have it out and make friends than to let little matters rankle into big ones. Therefore he went with the intention of committing a technical assault upon his brother as to make him swear the peace against him. As regarded the provocation, this matter had been going on for years - it had arisen from a family quarrel and family misunderstandings - from the want of plain and straightforward speaking and behaviour, and from family differences and obstinacy on the part of his relatives - because he wished the truth to be spoken, and his mother, and sisters, and brothers were determined that it should not be spoken. He wished it spoken for the public good, and they wanted the truth kept back. And there had been a gross miscarriage of justice, partly through his ignorance of the law, and partly because he was subjected, without being pout on his defence, to the cruel torture, degradation, insult and dangerous infections of a madhouse - Mr Boughton-Leigh: Mr Caldecott, you must really confine yourself to the assault. -Defendant: I want to show my motives for action. Mr. Wright: I purposely kept this out. - Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You much recollect that this court cannot try you sanity, these things are perfectly irrelevant; all you have to do is to answer the question of this assault. You have already said that you committed a technical assault for the purpose of enabling your elder brother to cause you to be bound over to keep the peace - and we don\'92t want to go into your motives. -Defendant: Can I appeal against this. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You must consult your solicitor; but you don\'92t know what we shall do yet. -Defendant: In justice I claim provocation, and I must put my case before you. -Mr. Wright pointed out that defendant ought to have asked questions showing provocation at the time of the assault; what took place weeks or moths before was not provocation. - Defendant said he did not know the law, but he maintained that in a Court of Justice he ought to be allowed a fair hearing. He claimed that what happened a short time before should bear on the case, and he claimed to be allowed to say that there had been bad blood between himself and and the members of his family, and they had had quarrels every since. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: I really don\'92t think you can go into that. -Defendant: There is bad blood between us in consequence of my having been put into a mad-house. They say they are compelled to take this case against me; why did not they take long ago? I believe he knows very well that my object was to make him take the law against me. He has threatened me with the law, and I said \'93take it\'94 because I wanted it to be brought before the public through the medium of the Police Court, for I say like Mrs. Weldon that without publicity justice is not going to be had; and i am not going to let this matter drop her. The immediate provocation that I complain of, that drove me to act as I did was this. I say there had been bad blood between us fro years, and I wished to be on friendly terms, and so I said, \'93Let\'92s either be friends or open enemies; but let us be really friends.\'94 -At this point Mr Boughton-Leigh said they were going to adjourn the Court for five minutes; and the magistrates retired to the ante-room. - On returning into Court, Mr. Boughton-Leigh said the magistrates were sorry to interrupt the defendant, but the proceedings were being prolonged. Defendant: Oh, thank you; I should have been glad to have adjourned with you. I daresay you were well employed. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You were speaking about provocation. -Defendant having appealed to the Court to know where he left off, and having been informed by the reporters, went on to say that on October 23rd he sent his brother a post-card to the effect that he would endeavour to behave himself. -Mr. Wright objected to say reference to that, because it was not asked for in cross-examination. -Defendant: I mean to show provocation, and I plead extenuating circumstances. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Do you mean to say you sent a post-card to cause him to provoke you? -Defendant: Yes, collaterally. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: I am afraid we cannot go into that. - Defendant contended that it ought to be entered into. He had made concillatory advances to the family, and had said he would endeavour to abstain from violence or offensive gestures or language to any of them, but they would not accept his advances. His brother had told him he would not have anything to do with him until he could speak to him properly; but how, he (defendant) asked, were they to know whether he could do that if they did not speak? -Defendent was again reminded that he wanted to prove provocation. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh pointed out to him that if the assault had immediately followed the provocation in hot blood it might have been considered; but what had taken place beforehand was no provocation. -Defendant went on to say that he met his brother several times after he had promised to behave himself, when he simply said \'93Good morning,\'94 and nothing else. He (defendant) hoped he was merely trying him and waiting to see whether he would behave quietly; he hoped and wished to be friendly, and that his brother would accept his advances. On Christmas Day he went to the church in the hope that his brother would meet him on friendly terms. He (defendant) said \'93Good morning\'94 to him, hoping that he would stop and be friendly, but he passed by, and that cut him (defendant) to the heart as it had done before. As he had told his brother, and as his family were aware, the things that made him (\'91) before he was put into an asylum, and since them that his own relations should so misjudge him, and pass him without speaking or with just a distant nod. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: But this is the point. I say it is mean and cowardly and hypocritical on his part to pretend to accept my advance and to nod to me before the world, apparently friendly, to deceive the world into the idea that we are friendly, whereas, in his heart, he does not mean to accept my advances. When I have made advances to my friends they would not accept them. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: According to the evidence, your brother said he would be very happy to be good friends, but he could not so long as you cursed his mother and sisters. -The defendant contended that it was provocation when he went to the church hoping his brother would be friendly, and he would not be. He wanted to have it settled one way or the other, and his object was only to commit a technical assault. He never intended to strike his father in May, 1881. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You need not go into that. -Defendant (continuing): In May, 1881, when I was put into a madhouse. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You cannot go into that; confine yourself to the assault. -Defendant repeated that he only committed a technical assault. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Hustling him and shaking your fists in his face was not a technical assault. -Defendant: I acknowledge that the hustling was a mistake on my part, and then I changed it to the other. - I wanted a technical assault so as to have the matter settled one way or the other. -Mr Boughton-Leigh: Is that all you want to say about the assault? -Defendant: I mist speak to extenuating circumstances. - Mr. Boughton-Leigh: All you have said about the assault had nothing to do with the case. It\'92s really waste of time. Provocation for an assault of that sort does not arise except it is in hot blood. -Defendant admitted that he made a mistake in hustling his brother, but he did not intend an actual assault. He went on to say that his brother\'92s manner had been offensive to him, and they had been nearly coming to blows; and if meant of their age came to blows it meant something. If they were to strike each other there was no knowing where it would end. Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You are doing your case no good saying so - you make it worse. -Defendant repeated that he wished to be on friendly terms with his brother, but they had behaved in an irritating and annoying manner to him.\
This being the conclusion of the case, Mr. Seabroke said there was another complaint against the defendant, asking that he should be ordered to find sureties of the peace to be for good behaviour. He asked the defendant if he had anything to say why as an order should not be made upon him. -Defendant\'92s answer was to the effect that he was quite willing to be friendly with his brother, and there was no necessity for it. He wished to be on the best possible terms with him. -Mr. Seabroke: The magistrates will have to judge of that. Have you anything to say why an order should not be made? -Defendant: I have said it is not necessary. I have brought the matter before the public, as I felt I ought to do.\
The magistrates were about to retire, when defendant said he wished to make objection to words used by Mr. Wright, that the post-cards he sent were of a vile character. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh remarked that it was only a statement, not evidence. -Defendant: But it was said in open court. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You can make a statement in open court to say they were not a statement in open court to say they were not vile. -Defendant: I want to be shown which of the post-cards were of a vile character. I deny it. -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You deny it, and that\'92s sufficient.\
The magistrates then retired to consult, and returned into Court after an absence of about ten minutes. - Addressing the defendant, Mr. Boughton-Leigh said: Capt. Caldecott - Defendant: I am not Capt. Caldecott; I am John Caldecott -Mr: Boughton-Leigh: Well, Mr. Caldecott - John Caldecott, the magistrates have heard this case and have given it their most careful consideration, and we find you guilty of what we consider a very serious assault upon your brother. -Defendant: A serious assault? -Mr. Boughton-Leigh: Don\'92t speak now please. I\'92ll tell you why we consider it serious if you wish. You came out of church, you shook your fist in your brother\'92s face on two occasions, and made use of the expression that you would smash his d____d face in or something of that. We consider that a very serious assault. You also hustled him, and, according to your own statement, you went to meet him, and committed a technical assault upon him for the purpose of inducing him to take out sureties of the peace against you. We find you guilty of the assault, and we sentence you to pay a fine of \'a35, and we also order you to find sureties of the peace for your good behaviour for six months - yourself in \'a3300, and two sureties in \'a350 each; and, in default, one month\'92s imprisonment. -Defeendant: I want just to say - Mr. Boughton-Leigh: You can stand down now.\
On Tuesday the defendant had not obtained the required sureties.} 
 
7
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
8
CALDECOTT Margaret Elizabeth b1830.pdf
CALDECOTT Margaret Elizabeth b1830.pdf
 
 
9
CALDECOTT_CECIL_LEONARD.pdf
CALDECOTT_CECIL_LEONARD.pdf
 
 
10
CALDICOT-BULL Richard Cuthbert G b1908 - IMDB.pdf
CALDICOT-BULL Richard Cuthbert G b1908 - IMDB.pdf
 
 
11
CALDICOTT Alan.pdf
CALDICOTT Alan.pdf
 
 
12
CALDICOTT Albert William b1872.pdf
CALDICOTT Albert William b1872.pdf
 
 
13
CALDICOTT Alice Maud b1863.pdf
CALDICOTT Alice Maud b1863.pdf
 
 
14
CALDICOTT Arnold Clive b1922.pdf
CALDICOTT Arnold Clive b1922.pdf
 
 
15
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
16
CALDICOTT Clive James & MORRISON Florence Esther.pdf
CALDICOTT Clive James & MORRISON Florence Esther.pdf
 
 
17
CALDICOTT Constance & DOUGLAS Hugh Norman.pdf
CALDICOTT Constance & DOUGLAS Hugh Norman.pdf
 
 
18
CALDICOTT Elva Gladys b1917.pdf
CALDICOTT Elva Gladys b1917.pdf
 
 
19
CALDICOTT Emma Victoria & PENNY Harry Hubert.pdf
CALDICOTT Emma Victoria & PENNY Harry Hubert.pdf
 
 
20
CALDICOTT Emma Victoria & PENNY Hubert Harry.pdf
CALDICOTT Emma Victoria & PENNY Hubert Harry.pdf
 
 
21
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
22
CALDICOTT Francis Joseph b1920.pdf
CALDICOTT Francis Joseph b1920.pdf
 
 
23
CALDICOTT Harriet Mary b1888.pdf
CALDICOTT Harriet Mary b1888.pdf
 
 
24
CALDICOTT Henry Oswald b1889.pdf
CALDICOTT Henry Oswald b1889.pdf
 
 
25
CALDICOTT Hilda Grace & BISHOP William James.pdf
CALDICOTT Hilda Grace & BISHOP William James.pdf
 
 
26
CALDICOTT Howard Toy b1924.pdf
CALDICOTT Howard Toy b1924.pdf
 
 
27
CALDICOTT Isabel May & VICKERS Maxwell John.pdf
CALDICOTT Isabel May & VICKERS Maxwell John.pdf
 
 
28
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
29
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
30
CALDICOTT Lance Morrison b1919.pdf
CALDICOTT Lance Morrison b1919.pdf
 
 
31
CALDICOTT Leonard Ernest & THULBORN Alice Ethel.pdf
CALDICOTT Leonard Ernest & THULBORN Alice Ethel.pdf
 
 
32
CALDICOTT Leonard John & HUGHES Kathleen Alice.pdf
CALDICOTT Leonard John & HUGHES Kathleen Alice.pdf
 
 
33
CALDICOTT Leslie James b1925.pdf
CALDICOTT Leslie James b1925.pdf
 
 
34
CALDICOTT Lloyd Frank b1926.pdf
CALDICOTT Lloyd Frank b1926.pdf
 
 
35
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
36
CALDICOTT Maud Alice & BISHOP Gerard Charles.pdf
CALDICOTT Maud Alice & BISHOP Gerard Charles.pdf
 
 
37
CALDICOTT Merle Gladys & DORLING William Richard.pdf
CALDICOTT Merle Gladys & DORLING William Richard.pdf
 
 
38
CALDICOTT Murray Lyall b1921.pdf
CALDICOTT Murray Lyall b1921.pdf
 
 
39
CALDICOTT Pauline Dorothy b1926.pdf
CALDICOTT Pauline Dorothy b1926.pdf
 
 
40
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
 
 
41
CALDICOTT Rex Trevor b1930.pdf
CALDICOTT Rex Trevor b1930.pdf
 
 
42
CALDICOTT Thomas Weaver b1854.pdf
CALDICOTT Thomas Weaver b1854.pdf
 
 
43
CALDICOTT Victoria Eileen & SHAUGNESSY Tom Peter.pdf
CALDICOTT Victoria Eileen & SHAUGNESSY Tom Peter.pdf
 
 
44
CALDICOTT_ALLAN_STEPHEN.pdf
CALDICOTT_ALLAN_STEPHEN.pdf
 
 
45
CALDICOTT_ARTHUR.pdf
CALDICOTT_ARTHUR.pdf
 
 
46
CALDICOTT_BERNARD_GEORGE.pdf
CALDICOTT_BERNARD_GEORGE.pdf
 
 
47
CALDICOTT_Charles Stevenson.pdf
CALDICOTT_Charles Stevenson.pdf
 
 
48
CALDICOTT_CHARLES.pdf
CALDICOTT_CHARLES.pdf
 
 
49
CALDICOTT_Frederick.pdf
CALDICOTT_Frederick.pdf
 
 
50
CALDICOTT_FREDERICK_CHARLES.pdf
CALDICOTT_FREDERICK_CHARLES.pdf
 
 

    1 2 Next»