23 August 2002

WAKES ITEMS
Fun and Adventure

Whilst the centre of attraction during the wakes time was the Market Ground with its many allurements and ever-changing kaleidoscope of human automata, other attractions were provided in the town, and proprietors of hostelries were not behind in the matter of providing an attractive musical bill of fare for the visitors. The theatre, which had been closed for a week, was re-opened with Messrs GARTH and OGDEN's Company in the great Irish musical comedy "McKenna's Flirtation."

The crush and excitement of the Market Ground on Saturday night did not, as might have been expected, result in any serious accident taking place, although several minor mishaps occurred, and in one or two instances it was more good luck than management that there was no permanent injury to life and limb. One man, who seemed as if he had been having an extra whiff of the beer barrel, fell off the roundabouts and alighted in a heap on the stone setts on the ground. Strange to say, he got up apparently none the worse for his shaking.

Mishaps of this character were frequent, all owing to the utter recklessness and indifference to danger shown by some of those going in for a razzle-dazzle. The same might be said of those wanting to "show off" by standing up in the swings, and of others to be seen swing a heavy wooden hammer round, and who in their feverish desire to ring the bell fixed aloft, did not seem to care whether man, woman, or child were passing at the time.

On Tuesday and Wednesday conveyances were chartered from the Borough Mews (Mr S MILLWARD's) for drives in the country. On Thursday Mr J W LOWNDES, tourist agent, organised one of a series of personally conducted picnics to the Dukeries, which included a drive round the stately mansions of the nobility. Mr J CROSSDALE, tourist agent, who has for many years instituted trips to the Dukeries, once more announced a trip to this charming district for Wednesday. Numerous trips were, as usual, organised by the various railway companies, and these are mentioned elsewhere.

About 10.30 on Monday night a woman, named Margaret HILL, of Dukinfield, fell off the steam roundabouts on the Market Ground, sustaining slight injuries. She was assisted to a cab and driven home.

About nine o'clock on Wednesday evening a bit of fun and amusement was provided on the Market Ground. A man from one of the steam roundabouts had been filling a water barrel by means of a hose pipe connected with a hydrant. In trying to stop the water the man turned the handle in the opposite direction, with the result that the water rushed out with terrible force. The man seemed flabbergasted and kept on turning, which increased the volume of water until a huge rent occurred in the hose pipe, and the water spurted out like the Great Geyser, right across the street. Several people had a dousing, and a passing electric tramcar received a bit of a washing. At length, Detective-sergeant TOLSON came to the rescue, and taking in the situation at a glance, turned the handle in the opposite direction and shut off the water.

SUDDEN DEATH AT DENTON
Poison for Headache Powder

A sad case of poisoning by misadventure was reported to the Denton police on Thursday week. It appears that Mary Ellen TOWNSEND, wife of Edward TOWNSEND, an insurance agent, residing at Osborne-road, Denton, had for a few days previously been suffering from a severe headache, and she had been compelled to stay in bed all day on Wednesday. The deceased had been in the habit of taking headache powders, and these she kept in a kitchen drawer. About a week before, we understand, Mrs TOWNSEND purchased a packet of salts of lemon, a deadly poison, to remove some stains from a garment, and this packet she put in the same drawer as the powders.

Mr TOWNSEND went to bed as usual on Wednesday night, and about 4am the next morning his wife woke him and informed him that she had taken the salts of lemon in mistake for the headache powders. She asked him to get her some milk, but as there was none in the house the husband gave her some salt and water. This caused the deceased to vomit, but it also evidently helped on the death of the unfortunate lady, the salt and the poison having this tendency. Dr CAMPBELL was at once summoned, but Mrs TOWNSEND died before his arrival.

The inquest was held on Friday at the Coach and Horses Hotel, before the district coroner, Mr J F PRICE. The only witness called was the husband of the deceased, who bore out the above statement, and the jury subsequently returned a verdict of "Death through misadventure." They also tendered a vote of condolence to Mr TOWNSEND in his sad bereavement.

AN ECHO OF MOTTRAM WAKES AT DUKINFIELD
A Brutal and Cowardly Attack

At the Dukinfield Police Court on Thursday, James BRADLEY, labourer, was in the dock charged with assaulting Rebecca STEWART, Spring-street, Hollingworth, on the 18th instant. Mr H BOSTOCK, solicitor, of Hyde, defended and pleaded not guilty.

Complainant, who had two black eyes, stated that she lived at Spring-street, Hollingworth. On Monday last at noon the prisoner leathered her boy severely. She went to his assistance, and he said he would ——— well give her the same. He then struck her in the eye once with his fist. Then he struck her on the back of her head several times and kicked her. She reeled against a wall and fell, and he kicked her whilst she was down. She had black flesh all over her. On the Tuesday after she had been for the warrant, Mrs BRADLEY said: "Have you been for the ——— summons?

Mr BOSTOCK here interposed, and objected to anything being said as to what took place on the Tuesday. — Complainant said that remark was made because she had taken out a warrant for the arrest of the prisoner. — Mr BOSTOCK: Did you issue a warrant for common assault, and has he not been in gaol since Tuesday? Yes. — Have you not had unpleasantness respecting children before this? Yes. — When this alleged assault was committed, was Mrs BRADLEY there? Yes. She said, "Give it to her, Jim." — Wasn't it Mrs BRADLEY, and not her husband who assaulted you? No. — Did she strike you? Yes, on the Tuesday, but not on the Monday. — Didn't you fall against a wall? Yes, through a blow he gave me.

Were you in drink on the Monday? No. — Not even on Wakes Monday? No. — Are you a quiet, inoffensive woman? Yes, unlest they meddle with me. — What do you do then; let them have right and left? No. — (Laughter.) — With your feet? No. — Do you get them by the hair? No. — Have you fought Mrs LOMAS? No, she fought me. — Did you black her eyes? I decline to answer.

Sarah HANDFORTH, Maria BOOTH, and Nellie LAKE, of Spring-street, testified to the assault by the prisoner. Mrs HANDFORTH said she called the prisoner a coward, and told him it was a man he wanted against him, and not a woman, whereupon he turned upon her and said he would give her the same. — In reply to Mr BOSTOCK, witness said Mrs BRADLEY did not touch the complainant on the Monday. She said to her husband, "Give it her, Jim." He was sober.

Mr BOSTOCK asked the Bench not to attach too much importance to the appearance of the complainant that morning. The defendant was only charged with committing a common assault on Monday, and the evidence of the complainant herself was that she only had one black eye as a result of that assault. What occurred on the Tuesday did not concern the magistrates. A most unusual course had been taken in obtaining a warrant for the man's apprehension. He was arrested on Tuesday, and from that time to this he had been in gaol — two days and two nights. His instructions were that it was not the prisoner who committed this assault, but his wife. The women had words about their children. Complainant struck Mrs BRADLEY first. She struck her back, and let her have it right and left, making her the black eye.

The complainant would have the court believe that she was a quiet, inoffensive woman. On the contrary, she was very quarrelsome with her neighbours, and had had several fights with them. Having regard to the fact that the prisoner had already been in custody two days, he asked the Bench to say he was entitled to his discharge.

Mrs BRADLEY was called, and said the dispute arose between herself and Mrs STEWART. She struck the latter and fell, then complainant said to her husband, "I will do thee for this, BRADLEY." Her husband did not touch her. — Mr UNDERWOOD: Your husband is not a very peaceable man, is he? Yes. — Mr UNDERWOOD: You have been up here with him? Yes, but there is nothing else against him. — Mr BOSTOCK: She may have deserved it. — The Clerk: You have argued that she has not on many occasions. — (Laughter.)

Harriet BRADLEY, daughter of the prisoner, said her father did not do anything at Mrs STEWART. It was her mother who assaulted her and gave her the black eyes. — Mary TOWNLEY said Mrs STEWART struck Mrs BRADLEY the first, and then the latter struck her back. She was justified in doing so, and witness would have given her more had it been her. — The Clerk: You have heard the evidence of the complainant and her witnesses? Yes. — Do you say they have committed perjury? Yes. Mrs BRADLEY did it. The prisoner was not there. — Alderman KERFOOT: You have all sworn to tell the truth, but someone is telling lies. — (Laughter.)

The Bench retired with the Clerk to consider their decision. After a short absence they returned. — Alderman KERFOOT said they would like to hear what the police had against the prisoner. — Superintendent CROGHAN said prisoner had been six times convicted for assaults upon his wife, the last occasion being on the 14th November, 1900, when a separation order was granted with an allowance of 3s per week. He had served as much as three months.

Mr BOSTOCK said the convictions against him extended over a period of 10 years, and in every instance it was between man and wife. He had never been before the court for anything which had happened to any other person. — Alderman KERFOOT told the prisoner they had come to the conclusion that he had committed a brutal assault upon the complainant. — Prisoner: I never touched her. — Alderman KERFOOT: We sentence you to two months' imprisonment with hard labour.

TOY PISTOL CASE
Sad Occurrence at West Gorton
 

A boy named Harold CLAYTON (14), of Willesden-street, West Gorton, was at the Manchester City Police Court on Tuesday, charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm upon Frank GOODWIN (10), of Shrewbridge-street, West Gorton. GOODWIN's story was that while he was playing in the street on Saturday CLAYTON, producing a toy pistol, said "Hold up your hands." Thinking the weapon was not charged witness did so, and, the pistol being fired, he was shot in the hand with a pin.

PC TRIPPIER informed the court that GOODWIN's condition was serious, for the doctor had stated that blood poisoning having set in, the lad's hand would probably have to be amputated. CLAYTON's father said he did not know until Monday that his boy possessed a pistol. Questioned as to the weapon, the accused boy said he bought it for 2s 6d, receiving also a box of cartridges. He expressed regret for what had occurred. The magistrates ordered a fortnight's remand on bail.

GORTON HAWKER'S WINDFALL
The Story of a Legacy

Mr SMELT, the city coroner, conducted an inquiry at Manchester on Monday into the circumstances attending the death of Elizabeth Ann FINDLOW, the 14 months' old child of Samuel FINDLOW, a hawker, living at 51 Gardner-street, West Gorton.

The mother said that she began to feed the baby on boiled bread and milk when it was three weeks old. After it reached six months she gave it such food as potatoes. She had had eleven children, and had brought them all up in the same manner. Deceased seemed well until the 8th inst. She then became ill with diarrhœa, and witness took her to a doctor, who gave her a prescription, but she was unable to get the medicine as she had no money and could not borrow any.

Mr SMELT questioned her as to a legacy which had been left to her husband, and Mrs FINDLOW said the amount was about £1,000, and was left to him about 13 months ago. Mr SMELT: How much is there left? — Witness: I can't say.

Oh yes you can. Haven't you already stated that it's nearly all gone? — Oh, no. It's nearly all to come. He has not got it. He has drawn on account, but he has not got it.

He has drawn money on account, and that has gone. Well that's the same thing. How much had he borrowed? — I can't tell you; a few pounds. He would not tell me. He has had the handling of it, not me.

Continuing, witness said deceased became worse, and was seized with convulsions on Wednesday, the day on which she died. Witness went on to say that nearly all the bedclothes she had were in pawn, but they had not been short of food. Her husband had been drinking a good deal since the money was left him. "He looked after himself, not after me," said Mrs FINDLOW.

The Coroner: He has hardly ever been sober, has he, since the money was left him? I don't think so. — Did you drink with him? No; he likes himself better than his wife. — Supposing this child has died of neglect, then who is to blame? He is not and I am not. — How many children have you lost altogether? This is the fifth, but the first on which an inquest has been held.

Dr HESLOP, police surgeon, who had examined the body, said it weighed eleven pounds. The full weight of a child of that age should be over twenty pounds. The child has suffered from bronchitis and pneumonia. The latter, probably accelerated by diarrhœa, had caused death.

Inspector KILMINSTER, of the NSPCC, said that when he saw the child on June 21st it was very poorly, filthy dirty, raggedly clothed, and very poorly nourished. The mother was beastly drunk, and the child was sitting on the bare boards. The rooms were indescribably filthy. There was no clothing on the beds. On a subsequent visit he found deceased wrapped in a dirty piece of sacking. He again drew the woman's attention to the child, but she only laughed.

Samuel FINDLOW, the father, said he was away from the house all day, but kept the house as respectable as he could when he was there. After inspector's first visit he bought five blankets, but they were now in pawn. Questioned by the Coroner, the witness there was £4,650 as well as some rents, to be divided among ten persons, and he was entitled, he thought, to at least £500. On the strength of that he had borrowed £20. He asserted that he had done the best he could for the child.

The jury retired a verdict in accordance with the medical evidence that the parents should be censured for neglect.

THE BOOKMAKING PRACTICE AT HYDE
Raid by the Police

At Hyde Borough Court on Thursday a case of great interest to the betting fraternity came on for hearing. The parties to the charge were Thomas MOORE, 37 Union-street, and Joseph KING, 36a John Shepley-street. They were both charged in three instances — MOORE with unlawfully frequenting a public place, to wit, the Hyde Market ground, for the purpose of book-making and settling bets contrary to the Borough Bye Laws on the 29th July and KING with aiding and abetting Thomas MOORE in receiving certain bets on the Hyde Market ground on the same date. Mr WESTBROOK conducted the case for the prosecution, and Mr F KNOWLES defended.

Mr WESTBROOK, in opening the case, remarked that this was the first case that had been brought into that court under the Corporation Bye Laws, which were made in June last year. No. 1 bye-law read: "No person shall permit to be used any street or public within the borough either on behalf of himself or any other person for the purpose of book-making, or betting, or wagering, or agree to wager with any person or persons by receiving, betting, and settling bets. The penalty shall be a sum not exceeding £5."

The facts in this case were shortly these: The defendant MOORE was, he believed, a bookmaker, and had carried on business for some time in the borough, and the defendant KING was his assistant. The police for some time had been on watch for MOORE, and on the date in question, July 29th, he was seen to make certain bets, and KING was seen to assist him on different parts of the market ground. They did good business, and the same thing occurred on the 30th and 31st July. The Chief Constable had determined to put betting down, and had his men watching on different occasions. If the bench were of the opinion he had made out his case he asked that such a penalty be inflicted as would prevent the defendants from betting, and deter other men from doing the same. The police did not want Hyde to attain the notoriety that other towns had attained in betting.

Chief Constable DANBY said he had the authority of the Watch Committee to take these proceedings and also the Corporation Bye-Laws, which were sealed with the corporation seal. Mr KNOWLES: I admit the bye-laws and the Watch Committee's authority.

Detective-Serg. ATKINSON said that on the 31st July, in company with Constable GARRETT, between 12.25 and 1.50pm, he was in the vicinity of the market ground, when he saw defendant MOORE take several slips from different men and pass on to KING. He did not see any money pass. He took KING to the police station and KING handed to him eleven, the writing on which tallied with the names of horses mentioned in the newspapers. He told KING he could go, but he would be reported. MOORE was brought to the police station by Constable GARRETT, and in his pockets were found £2 7s 6d in silver. In a coat at MOORE's house were found £4 in gold and 18s 1d in other monies.

Cross-examined, witness said that when he saw MOORE he would be in some instances 20 or 30 yards away. He was concealed. Mr KNOWLES: Where were you concealed? Witness: I do not care to answer that question. The Magistrates' Clerk: Were you in a position to see clearly what you have described? Witness: Yes. Mr KNOWLES: Do you refuse to say where you were concealed? Witness: Yes, I do. Mr KNOWLES: Do you know cases that have been dismissed in other towns on account of a constable refusing to say he has been concealed? Witness: No, I do not. The Magistrates' Clerk: There was a case some time ago. Mr KNOWLES: There have been several cases.

Cross-examination continued, witness said he had never warned the defendants about betting because he did not think it was his duty. He found a draw book on MOORE relating to "draws" in connection with a bazaar, and it was possible that the slips of paper found upon him related to this draw. Constable GARRETT gave corroborative evidence, and was submitted to the same as the previous witness.

In his address to the bench Mr KNOWLES submitted that the evidence of the police was mere conjecture. They saw, they said, certain individuals pass slips of paper, but yet they had not brought a single person to court that day to say that they made a bet with MOORE. The Magistrates' Clerk: That is not the charge.

Mr KNOWLES (continuing) said he thought if they had it would have established the case better. They had not done so despite the fact that the police had been watching for three days. The police came to the court and said in effect that they had been peeping through some window, and that the nearest point they were from the defendants was about 20 yards. The police had admitted also that the defendant MOORE had a draw book on him and that he might have been selling draw tickets. MOORE would tell them he did not take a single bet on the date in question, and that all he was doing was simply trying to push the bazaar "draw" on. Concluding, Mr KNOWLES said that if the bench thought there was a case, he would ask them to deal leniently with it. The defendants were only two lads, and he thought there were other betting men in the town who might have been got at before them.

COLLAPSE OF THE CASE
Defendant MOORE on going into the box denied that he received any slips or that he made any bets. He was authorised he said on behalf of St Paul's Bazaar Fund Committee to sell tickets for the draw, and he believed that he sold one to a person named KERFOOT, of Thornley-street, Hyde. Cross-examined: He was 20 years of age, and was a machine-man, but had not worked for about seven weeks. His father and mother had been keeping him. He got nothing from selling draw tickets, and had to send the money in. KING worked at Romiley, but on the date in question he was taking bets for him. In a sense he was a bookmaker; KING took the money, and gave it to him afterwards.

By Mr KNOWLES: The bets only related to small sums — 6d or a 1s. This concluded the evidence in this particular case, and Mr WESTBROOK suggested that if they found the defendants guilty, that probably Mr KNOWLES would plead guilty with regard to the other two cases. Mr KNOWLES said he thought it would meet the justice of the case if the bench convicted in this case to drop the other two. He would, however, leave it with the bench. Mr WESTBROOK: Perhaps your worships will take that into account in dealing with this case. With regard to defendant KING we do not think his case is as grave as MOORE's. We consider MOORE is the ring-leader, and KING has simply acted on his instructions.

THE RESULT
The bench fined MOORE £3 and costs, and KING £1 and costs, and they were ordered to pay the costs in the other cases. Advocate's fee of two guineas was also allowed.

STREET ACCIDENT AT ASHTON
About 6.55 on Saturday evening, a farmer named Jos. TAYLOR. Luzley Hall Farm, Luzley, was driving a horse attached to a milk float along Katherine-street, Ashton, and when near the Bowling Green, a man named John BOYLE, labourer, of 32 City-road, Manchester, was crossing the street, and the shaft of the milk float caught his shoulder, knocking him down on the ground. Fortunately the horse was pulled up in time to prevent any further damage, and the man was able to get up and walk away.

THE DISPUTE AT CURZON MILL, ASHTON
Notice was tendered last week by the operatives employed in the spinning and carding departments at the Curzon Mill Company, Hurst, but as these would have expired during the current week, which is the Wakes holiday, objection was taken by the employers. It was therefore arranged that fresh notices to strike work should be tendered next week, and we understand this will be done in due course. The dispute, as previously explained, is in connection with the carrying of weft in the spinning department and the providing of a weft carrier. The cardroom workers also state that they have grievances which need rectification.

WORKHOUSE INMATES AT THE WAKES
On Wednesday afternoon, about 120 workhouse inmates were treated to the "fun of the fair" on Ashton Market Ground. They were received by Mr J SNELL (Chief Constable), who had kindly arranged an extensive programme for them, which they carried out under the direction of Detective Sergeant TOLSON. There were also present Messrs T PLATT and A ADAMS (guardians) and Mr SHORE (workhouse master).

A visit was paid to Col CLARKE's cinematographic show, and whilst there Mrs Thos WOOD (Town Hall Inn) gave each of them a threepenny bit. Capt PAYNE's cinematographic show was afterwards visited, also P COLLIN's gondolas, John COLLIN's horses and switchback, John GREEN's switchback, and to the fish market where, as in past years, they were entertained to all kinds of savoury edibles by Councillor WHITEHEAD. Messrs HOWSON and Son also gave them brandy snaps and nuts. Before returning to the Union Workhouse, the visitors gave three cheers for Councillor WHITEHEAD, and expressed their gratitude to the others who had kindly entertained them.
Creative Commons License Rhodes Family History by Ian Rhodes (1999-2017 v.3.0) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available by contacting me.
Use OpenDNS