Person:Walter Keyte (1)

Walter William Keyte was born in 1864 at Broadway in Worcestershire, son of a boot binder named Mary Keyte, formerly Lies, and her husband Richard Keyte, a slater and plasterer. Walter appears in the 1871 census as a scholar, living at China Square in Broadway with his parents and siblings. In 1881 he was still living at home with his parents, and working as a slater's labourer, presumably for his father.

In 1884, Walter was involved in a fight and fined. In 1891, Walter was assaulted by two brothers called Smith and the case was reported in the Worcester Journal.

1. ↑ Births index, in General Register Office. England and Wales Civil Registration. (London: General Register Office).

   b. Walter William KEYTE, December Quarter 1864, Evesham Registration District, Vol. 6c, page 352

2. ↑ England. England and Wales. 1871 Census Schedules. (
   Kew, Richmond, Greater London TW9 4DU, United Kingdom:
   The National Archives (abbreviated TNA), formerly the UK General Register Office.)
   Class RG10; Piece 3061; Folio 34; Page 22, 2 Apr 1871.

   Address	China Square, Broadway, Worcestershire
   Name	Relation to head	Marital status	Sex	Age	Implied birthdate	Occupation	Birthplace
   Richard Keyte	head	married	male	49	1821/1	Slater and Plasterer	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Mary Keyte	wife	married	female	49	1821/2	Shoe Binder	Evesham, Worcestershire
   Ann Keyte	daughter	unmarried	female	16	1854/5	Gloveress	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Joseph Keyte	son		male	14	1856/7	Lab	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Mary Keyte	daughter		female	11	1859/60	Scholar	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Walter W. Keyte	son		male	6	1864/7	Scholar	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Emma M. Keyte	daughter		female	2	1868/9		Broadway, Worcestershire

3. ↑ England. 1881 Census Schedules for England and Wales, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands: . (
   Kew, Richmond, Greater London TW9 4DU, United Kingdom:
   The National Archives (abbreviated TNA), formerly the UK General Register Office.)
   Class RG11; Piece 2927; Folio 37; Page 21, 3 Apr 1881.

   Address	Springfield Road, Broadway, Worcestershire
   Name	Relation to head	Marital status	Sex	Age	Implied birthdate	Occupation	Birthplace
   Richard Keyte	head	married	male	58	1822/3	Slater	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Mary Keyte	wife	married	female	59	1821/2	formerly Shoe Binder	Evesham, Worcestershire
   Anne Keyte	daughter	unmarried	female	26	1854/5	Servant (domestic)	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Walter W. Keyte	son	unmarried	male	16	1864/5	Slater's Labourer	Broadway, Worcestershire
   Emma M. Keyte	daughter		female	12	1868/9	Scholar	Broadway, Worcestershire
   George P. Keyte	grandson		male	3	1877/8	Scholar	Broadway, Worcestershire

4.   Worcester Journal Saturday 27 Dec 1884
   EVESHAM
   COUNTY PETTY SESSIONS. - MONDAY.
   Before Rev. M. Amphlett. Messrs. R.F. Tomes, T.S. Shekell, W.H. Ashwin, and I. Averill.
   CHARGES OF ASSAULT.-Walter Keyte, plasterer, of Broadway, and Adam Badger, hawker, of Banbury, were summoned for assaulting Frederick Pethard, of the Sandys Arms Inn, Wickhamford, on the 8th inst. Keyte was also charged with assaulting Mr. George Pethard, father of Frederick, on the same date. There were cross-summonses charging both Pethards with assaulting Keyte, and William Porter, labourer, of Broadway, was summoned for assaulting Badger. Mr. George L. Eades appeared for the Messrs. Pethard, and Mr. Geoffrey New for Badger and Keyte. The cases were all heard together by consent. The evidence on behalf of the Pethards was first heard. Frederick Pethard stated that his father kept the Sandys Arms Inn, Wickhamford, where witness lived. On 8th December witness was in the bar when he heard a disturbance in the kitchen. He went to see what it was, when Keyte struck him, and he was also struck by others from behind. With the assistance of a man named Jauncey he put the disorderly men out and shut the door. About 7 p.m. his father came home and opened the front door. Keyte was outside, and tried to come in. He told his father that Keyte was the man who had assaulted him. Witness' father told Keyte he should not come in, and caught him by the arm, and in the struggle both fell. When they got up Keyte struck witness' father several times in the face. Witness then caught him by the left arm and his father by the right. Badger struck witness on the side of the head, and foced him to loose Keyte's hand. Witness forced Badger down the passage, but did not strike him. Keyte and Badger were both in drink. He did not see Porter till it was all over. George Pethard corroborated, and denied striking Keyte. Mr. A.L. Haynes, surgeon, stated that G. Pethard consulted him on the 9th instant. He had two black eyes and two teeth loosened and an abrasion on the forehead. Pethard had only just recovered from a serious illness. The injuries he received would cause him much pain. George Jauncey, carter, of Evesham, stated that he was at the Sandys Arms. There was a fight between Porter and Badger. F. Pethard tried to stop it. Keyte struck Pethard. Witness helped to put them out doors. Frederick Allen, wheelwright, corroborated. William Porter stated there was quarrelling between him and Badger, and when he got outside he was knocked down. For the defence Mr. New called Keyte and Badger, both of whom denied striking the Pethards. Keyte said he went back to the house for Badger's coat. Several other witnesses were called on behalf of Keyte and Badger. After a long hearing the Bench decided to convict Keyte and Badger. Keyte was fined £1 and £1 11s. 6d. for assaulting George Pethard, and 10s. and 18s. costs for the assault on F. Pethard. Badger was fined 10s. and 17s. 6d. costs. The remainder of the cases were dismissed with costs, 3s. each in each case against Badger and Keyte.
5.   Worcester Journal, Saturday 26 Sep 1891
   SERIOUS ASSAULT AT BROADWAY.-Roland Smith (48), Albert Henry Smith (25), and Lewis Smith (18), labourers, Broadway, were summoned by Walter Keyte, slater and plasterer, Broadway, for assaulting him at the New Inn, Broadway, on September 5th. Mr. Geoffrey New appeared for the prosecutor. The charges against Albert Henry Smith and Lewis Smith were first heard, Roland Smith, the father of the other defendants, objecting to his case being heard with the others. The story of the prosecutor and a number of witnesses was to the effect that he was standing at the kitchen door of the New Inn when, without any provocation, Albert Henry Smith struck him a blow knocking him across the room to the fireplace. When he tried to get up Smith, who was stripped for fighting, struck him again on the top of the head two or three times. Lewis Smith then joined in the attack and Keyte was kicked and struck several times while on the ground. He was afterwards assisted home and did not recover consciousness till twelve o'clock that night. His mother feared that he would die, and he had four or five fits, four people holding him down. He was unable to leave his bed till the following Wednesday, and then only for two hours. Albert Smith, in defence, alleged that Keyte first struck him in the passage, but this story was not corroborated. He added that there had been enmity between them ever since about 1884, when Keyte struck his father and pulled him off a horse, for which he was punished. Defendant had several times avoided a quarrel with Keyte who challenged him to fight on club day. It was alleged that Roland Smith assisted his sons in the assault, but this was stoutly denied by Smith, and there was little evidence in support. Albert Henry Smith and Lewis Smith were also summoned by John Cotterell, landlord of the New Inn, for being disorderly and refusing to quit his premises, on the same occasion. Mr. G.L. Eades prosecuted. The evidence showed that when the disturbance commenced the landlord at once ordered the Smiths out, but they refused to leave, and the police were sent for. Only Lewis Smith had been supplied with drink, but both men were sober, though excited. For refusing to quit the defendants were each fined £1 and 7s. costs or, in default of distress, 14 days. The charge against Roland Smith was dismissed. Lewis Smith was fined £2 and £1. 3s. 9d. costs or, in default, 21 days' hard labour for the assault. Addressing Albert Smith Mr. Ashwin said, a more brutal and unprovoked assault he had scarcely ever heard of, and though it was true that that was a first offence, and that he came there with a good character from the Army, he would be sentenced to 21 days' hard labour. Albert Smith said he would also "do" the 14 days rather than pay expenses in the other case. Lewis Smith asked for time which was refused. The renewal of the licence of the New Inn was granted, the Chairman stating that the landlord did his duty in this case.