22 August 1903
SCENE IN A DUKINFIELD
Insulting the Barmaid at the Queen’s Arms
At the Dukinfield Police Court, on Thursday, a case was
heard in which a considerable interest has been taken
during the development stages. Reuben CROSSLEY, labourer,
of Wharf-street, summoned Joseph HULME, manager of the
Queen’s Arms, Wharf-street, for assaulting him on
the 11th August. There was a cross summons, in which HULME
summoned CROSSLEY for being disorderly in the house and
refusing to quit when requested to do so.
Both cases were taken together. Mr Joseph
HURST appeared for CROSSLEY and Mr J A GARFORTH represented
the Dukinfield Licensed Victuallers’ and Wine and
Beersellers’ Association. At the request of Mr HURST,
all the witnesses were ordered out of the Court.
Mr HURST stated that on the 11th August,
about four o’clock in the afternoon, his client
CROSSLEY went into the Queen’s Arms Hotel, and saw
the head barmaid at the bar. There was no one else there.
He asked her for a glass of ale. He was served and the
1½d was taken in payment.. She placed the beer
on the counter in the vault, and went behind the bar.
A moment or two afterwards the defendant
HULME came rushing into the bar. The complainant was standing
there, rubbing some tobacco in his hands. HULME said,
“You had better apologise for what you have said.”
CROSSLEY asked what he had said. “I will let you
know.” “Then let me know,” said CROSSLEY,
and HULME thereupon came out of the bar into the vault,
and struck CROSSLEY between the eyes.
He was dazed for a second or two. HULME
then grabbed him by the arm tightly and punched him in
the face with his fist. They got to the floor and there
HULME struck him almost 20 blows. CROSSLEY got up, and
sat on a form, and HULME continued to punch him. Immediately
CROSSLEY could get out of the house he went and showed
his landlady his bruises. He was in bed four days suffering
from the injuries inflicted upon him. His eyes were blackened,
the bridge of his nose was cut, and his ribs and shoulders
were injured, and there were severe pains in his back.
On the Saturday following CROSSLEY went
to see if HULME could not allow him something for the
damage he had sustained. But he used some filthy language
and turned him into the street.
He next saw Superintendent CROGHAN and showed
him some of the injuries he had sustained. He was advised
last Saturday to take out a summons. It was served on
Tuesday, and immediately afterwards HULME took out a cross
summons. They all knew the object of these cross summonses.
The object was to complicate the issues, but he thought
he should be able to prove CROSSLEY had been very grievously
assaulted. He had lost eight days’ work at 5s per
day, and although they could not take cognizance of that
there, he thought the Bench would see that CROSSLEY had
suffered some material damage.
Rueben CROSSLEY then gave evidence that
he was a mason’s labourer, and lodged at 71 Wharf-street.
He confirmed Mr HURST’s statement. Witness explained
to the police, and they said they could do nothing as
they had not seen the affair. If it had been HULME that
had been assaulted in that case they would have been after
him (CROSSLEY) likes hares — Mr HURST: You were
not disorderly in the house? No. — And you were
not drunk? No, I had only had a few pints and a glass
of whiskey all day. — You were not rowdy or quarrelsome
in the house? No, there was no one to quarrel with.
Mr GARFORTH: You are a rather well-known
fighting character, are you not? No. — Have you
been sacked by one or two places on account of fights
with your mates? No. — You swear that is not the
reason given? Yes. — Do you want to tell the Bench
that you are a quiet, orderly character? I mean to say
this; I am as quiet and decent a man as walks Dukinfield.
You are not living with your wife and children?
— No. Did they go away and leave you on account
of your drunken, quarrelsome habits? No, they went away
because I would not let them be masters over me. —
And the children are now keeping your wife? Yes, except
a bit I do for her. I have sent her £3 this last
month. — They won’t have you back?
Now, listen to me, do you say there was
no one there when Mr HULME came to you? I don’t
remember seeing any one. — Do you know a man named
ADSHEAD, generally known as Adsey? Yes. — Did you
invite him to go into the Queen’s and have a drink?
No, I never saw him. — You swear he did not go in
with you? Yes. — Well he is here, and is going to
do some swearing.
Did you order two drinks? No. — Were
you served with two drinks? No. — Did you use filthy
language to the barmaid? Never. I only saw her for half
a moment. — Did she leave the bar and complain to
the landlord? She left the bar. — Did you see a
man named SMITH come in with a child in his arms? No.
They might have come in when the disturbance was on. —
Did Mr HULME complain about you having used filthy language
to the barmaid? No. — And he would not have that
sort of conduct in his house? Never. — That he always
tried to keep it respectable, and if you could not use
better language you must go out? No.
Did he go to the front door to look for
a policeman? I don’t know. — Did you defy
him, and say he could not put you out? No. — Did
he not then come round into the vault and you rushed at
his legs? He came rushing at me, and struck me between
the eyes. — Did he tell you that if you would apologise
he would let you drink up your beer and go? No. —
Did you then say you would not go out for him, and he
could not put you out? No.
Mary Alice HIBBERT, with whom CROSSLEY lodged,
testified to his condition when he came home after the
alleged assault. He was bleeding from the face, and was
in bed three days afterwards. He had not been drunk and
was upset. — Have you had some bother with him before?
Mr GARFORTH then addressed the magistrates
on behalf of Mr HULME. “He was there as solicitor
for the Dukinfield Licensed Victuallers’ Association,
and the members were most anxious that the houses of Dukinfield
should be kept perfectly respectable. Mr HULME, who had
been in the trade 21 years, had received a very great
deal of complaints of bad language being used by frequenters
in the vault to the two or three barmaids he employed.
He had to remonstrate with CROSSLEY on a
previous occasion, and he was told that if he did not
moderate his language he must cease coming to the house.
On the afternoon in question Mr HULME was laid down on
the sofa in the kitchen opposite the bar, and heard CROSSLEY
enter the vault in company with ADSHEAD, and order two
drinks. CROSSLEY used some filthy remarks to the head
barmaid, Miss BOYLAND, and she told Mr HULME about his
conduct. He was very much annoyed about it, because he
and others seemed to imagine they could say anything they
liked to these defenceless girls.
He went into the bar, and told CROSSLEY
he had warned him before that he would not have filthy
language used there, and he would either have to apologise
or go out. ADSHEAD was so disgusted with the language
that he went out, and then there was no one in that part
of the house except CROSSLEY. He refused to apologise
or go out, and wanted to know who was going to turn him
Mr HULME told him he would fetch a policeman,
and went to both doors, but no policeman happened to be
about at the time. He came into the house again, and told
CROSSLEY he would give him another chance either to apologise,
or go out. He would not do so, and said “Come round,
and I’ll do something at you. Mr HULME went from
the bar to the vault, and just as he entered CROSSLEY
ran at him to take his legs.
Mr HULME then acted on the defensive, struck
at him, and most likely hit him in the face. CROSSLEY
caught him by the middle, and they both fell on the vault
floor. Mr HULME happened to get on the top, and struck
him once. It was in this melee that CROSSLEY got his injuries.
With some difficulty the man was got into the street.
When Mr HULME got his summons for assault
he went to the president of the Licensed Victuallers’
Association and the other officers, and they at once told
him to go and see him (Mr GARFORTH) as to whether they
must bring CROSSLEY before the magistrates, and see if
they could not have protection from such people when trying
to conduct their houses right. It was then that he advised
Mr HULME to take out summons against CROSSLEY for refusing
On the Saturday morning, five days after
the affair, Mr HULME was standing at his front door when
this man came up to him in a menacing way, and asked what
he was going to give him. He at once said, “I shall
give you nothing; you deserved all you got.” The
interview ended with a threat on the part of CROSSLEY,
“to bring law.”
Joseph HULME was called, and bore out Mr
GARFORTH’s statement. — Cross-examined by
Mr HURST: Is this the way you usually deal with people
who must apologise? No. I tried all I could before I put
him out. — You suggest that you did not strike him?
— Yes, certainly I did not. He came for me.
Have you some malice against the man? Not
the slightest. — Do you remember about five weeks
ago when you were very rough with someone? Were you turning
some woman out with a child? — I don’t remember.
— Do you remember hitting a woman? No. — And
the child got knocked down? — I don’t remember
anything of that description.
Was CROSSLEY drunk? He had had some drink,
but he was not drunk. — Why did you take his drink
away? Because I thought he had had enough, and on account
of his language. I thought it time to get rid of him.
Have you ever complained to the police about this man’s
conduct? No. I never went that far. — You say you
would not have taken the summons if he had not taken out
a summons against you? No.
Emily BOYLAND, head barmaid, said she remembered
CROSSLEY and ADSHEAD coming in and ordering two penny
gills. CROSSLEY made a nasty observation to her and she
complained to Mr HULME. The latter asked him to apologise
or go out, and he refused. Mr HULME went round into the
vault to put the man out. Rueben rushed at Mr HULME, there
was a scuffle, and she told them to give over.
By Mr HURST: He had insulted her before
he touched his beer. Did not Mr HULME go to the door to
see if the coast was clear to throw the man out? No, he
went to look for a policeman
William ADSHEAD said he met CROSSLEY in
King-street and the latter asked him to have a gill with
him. He went into the Queen’s Arms and they were
supplied by the last witness. He heard CROSSLEY make a
nasty observation to her and he was so disgusted that
he left the house and left him.
The Chairman: Did you drink your beer? —
Aye, I supped up. — (Laughter.) Mr HURST: You were
not too disgusted to drink his beer? No. — You did
not see the assault? No. — You are positive you
were there? Aye. — At this stage the magistrates
intimated that they had heard enough and dismissed both