HE was really a postman but in anachronistic terms for the purpose of the indictment he was called a letter carrier.

But Edward Hinvers, 20, was still working for the Post Office at Lyndhurst and stood accused of stealing several packages.

But for the sake of simplicity, the Crown elected to proceed on one charge that he stole a parcel containing mittens.

Jurors at Hampshire Assizes heard in 1876 the package had been sent by a woman in London to her daughter who was in service at Sydd House, Lyndhurst but it never arrived.

Instead, alleged prosecutor Bernard Coleridge, it ended up in the possession of another young woman in Bournemouth who he knew.

His defence was that his late uncle had given him the mittens but the Crown’s chief witness, a travelling officer attached to the confidential enquiry branch of the Post Office, said when he questioned him, Hinves never mentioned the fact, and at the time his uncle had been still alive to corroborate it.

Mr Watterson, the Lymington past-master, told the court that the mittens were not the only items destined for delivery in the area that had gone missing.

They also included a pair of silk stockings, crochet mats, garden seeds, silk, velvet and lace as well as a knee cap which was found in the defendant’s home.

In his summing up the judge, Mr Justice Cave, reminded jurors that if his statement was true that his uncle had given him the mittens, he would have made that clear at the earliest opportunity. Nor he did mention it before magistrates.

“If the uncle had unlawfully come into the possession of the mittens, he would have hardly given them to the prisoner in a neighbourhood where they might be recognised.”

Jurors almost immediately convicted Hinves of theft.

“You have very much aggravated your case by trying to lay the blame elsewhere,” said the judge, giving him 15 months’ hard labour.