EVER since he moved to the Isle of Wight, Francis Darcy had been inexplicably and constantly heckled by children. Eventually his patience wore thin and he over-chastised a young girl, shaking her with one hand and punching her in the face with the other.

Naturally the subsequent proceedings were reported in the press but on this occasion given more prominence than usual, his lapse attracting lurid headlines as well as a packed public gallery at the Isle of Wight Magistrates’ Court.

The defendant was a Catholic priest.

It was September 25, 1851, and the sun was just setting when waterman John Corke, walking through West Cowes, passed the cleric who was accompanied by a boy. Suddenly he heard someone “screech out” and turned to see Darcy grabbing a young girl.

He was shaking her with one hand so violently that her bonnet had fallen off and with the other was punching her to the face.

“I hollered out to him, ‘You, catholic priest, you leave that child alone.’ He then let go and he and the little boy went off as fast as they could go. I told him he must come back.

“We went back to the children. There were seven or eight on the bank together, and asked what the matter was.”

Ellen Maynard, the victim’s 11-year-old sister, said as Darcy passed them, he told boys in the road to stop throwing stones at trees. They were not with them, she said. When he came back, he demanded to know who had “hollowed” at him.

“We pointed to the boys. He caught hold of my little sister and asked if it was her. He took her by the arm and shoved her bonnet off, pulled her hair and ears and beat her in the face. He struck her with the back of his hand. She cried out. We were not near the boys who threw the stones. We never talked or spoke to them. We did not know them.”

The girls’ mother, also called Ellen, accepted her daughter’s face was unmarked but was adamant her face and ears were very red and her hair was tumbled as if it had been pulled.

“I thought it very cruel of you,” she bemoaned under cross-examination. “Had it been the bigger child I should have thought it served her right and that she had done something to deserve it but I could not put up with your conduct towards the little girl.”

Darcy then called the young girl into the witness box.

“Did I hurt you?” he asked.

“Yes,” she replied.

“How much did I hurt you. Did you feel pain afterwards?”

But before she could answer, the court objected that such questioning should be directed at a young girl and directed Darcy to give evidence.

He immediately complied, telling the court in so low a tone that much of his evidence was inaudible but what could be ascertained was the level of abuse he had suffered from youngsters since moving to Cowes.

On that particular evening, he had been walking with a young man under his care when he saw a boy and a girl flinging stones at every passer-by and warned the boy of the danger that posed. “The biggest girl and all the tribe then called out ‘A fine fellow, you are,’ ‘Who are you?’ and such language of a similar insulting kind.”

He walked on but on the way back he saw the girl was still throwing stones and from past experience knew it was useless talking to her, so he ignored her.

“I passed by peacefully when the girl called out ‘Roman Catholic, Roman Catholic’. As I had put up with these insults or two or three years, I turned round to administer a reprimand when a good many of them cantered off but the girls stood their ground. I asked them whether they wanted him, what they had hallooed after him for, and which of them had hallooed.

“The big girl pointed to the little one and though I knew the big girl was the most guilty, I was glad she had pointed out the little one as I hoped I could make some impression upon her and I took her by the arm when she began to cry.”

Darcy insisted he had not harmed her and only wanted to “frighten” her into being of good behaviour in the future but she “screeched out” before he had touched her.

“It is utter nonsense to suppose for one instant by anyone who knows my character, to be guilty of any harshness to any infant like that,” he stressed, imploring the court to take into account the constant annoyance to which he had been subjected.

The chairman, the Hon W A’Court Holmes, said they were sorry to hear of his plight and would be happy to enter into any charge he brought before the court but the provocation that day did not justify a breach of the peace and by his own admission he had committed an assault.

Passing a fine and costs totalling £1, the chairman advised him: “If any offence is committed against you in the future, bring it before the magistrates and they will deal with it as it deserves.”

He replied:”I was not aware I had any remedy against the parties for committing this nuisance.”

The chairman then admonished those involved: “The conduct of these children is deserving of the severest reprimand and the court will not allow anything of the kind to go, either at Cowes or at one other place.”