MAN CHARGED WITH PICKING POCKETS AT HYDE
At the Hyde Borough Police Court, on Monday, Henry SHEPLEY,
16 Ellison-street, Ashton-under-Lyne, was charged with attempting
to steal from the person in Market-street, Hyde, on April
18th. – Mr J A GARFORTH appeared for the prisoner.
The Chief Constable said this
was one of the meanest kind of offences, and one of the
most difficult for detection. If the case were proved, he
hoped the Bench would inflict such a penalty as would be
example to others.
John Charles JOHNSON, a piecer,
living at 53 Riding-lane, Hyde, stated that he had known
the prisoner by sight for the last eighteen months. He saw
him at ten minutes past nine on Saturday last in Market-street,
near the Clarendon Hotel. He saw him attempting to pick
the pocket of a lady whist she was getting on a car. Prisoner
was supposed to be helping her in the car, but he was really
picking her pocket.
Witness gave information to Detective-Sergeant
ATKINSON, and continued to watch him. Prisoner kept following
the cars from the Clarendon Hotel to Greenfield Mill. He
attempted to pick two pockets by mixing up with the people
as they were getting in. He could have got on the first
car if he had wanted. The reason why he watched him was
because he had seen him attempt to pick pockets before.
He saw prisoner arrested by Sergeant ATKINSON, and he was
attempting to pick a pocket. Cross-examined, witness had
never known him personally. He did not know whether prisoner
was a respectable man, and did not know the family.
John ATKINSON, 7 Rochfort-street,
Hyde, a cabinet maker, stated that on Saturday night he
was with the last witness. Prisoner kept walking from Greenfield
Mill to the Clarendon Hotel, and as people got round the
tram he mixed with them and tried to pick their pockets.
He saw him watch about four cars. Prisoner could have got
on the first or second car if he wanted. He saw him twice
attempting to pick pockets. – Cross-examined: He never
saw him take anything. He must be a poor hand if he did
not get something.
Detective-Sergeant ATKINSON stated
that on Saturday night he watched the prisoner from what
the first witness had told him. He saw him first at the
corner of Corporation-street, and he went as far as Greenfield
Mill, where a car was stopped. Some people were trying to
get on the car, and prisoner went behind them. He got hold
of the dresses of two ladies as though he were looking for
their pockets, and when they got on the car he walked away
in the direction of the Clarendon Hotel.
He could easily have got on that
car, which was going in the direction of Ashton. Prisoner
stood on the footpath on the opposite side to the Clarendon
Hotel. There was a car stopped in the loop which had come
from Gee Cross. He followed the people in the rear and acted
as before. Witness went to change his coat and hat and watched
Prisoner again mixed with the
people. Witness was very close to him, and he saw him put
his hand in a lady’s pocket. He refused to give any
account of himself whatever when he brought him to the police
station. In answer to the charge prisoner said, “I
was not trying to pick pockets.” On searching him
he found a slip of paper in his pocket containing his name
and address, which he ascertained was correct.
Cross-examined: He found a shilling
in his pocket. He was not alone. There was another man with
him whom witness arrested on Sunday morning, but did not
proceed with the charge.
The Chief Constable said that
was the case for the present. He had a sergeant from Ashton
whom he wished to call later on. Prisoner was then charged.
He elected to be tried there instead of by a jury. Prisoner
pleaded not guilty.
Mr GARFORTH addressed the Bench
on behalf of the prisoner. He said that an attempt which
was entirely unsuccessful might have been misjudged by the
witnesses. The prisoner and another man were in Hyde with
the intention of going to the Theatre. They did not go,
however, and they were trying to get on a car to go back
to Ashton when he was arrested.
There was nothing in the character
of the prisoner or his antecedents to suggest that he was
a professional thief. His father was a respectable tradesman
– a master clogger. Prisoner worked for his father
at good wages. He had a wife and one child. He asked that
prisoner be dealt with leniently. He was a young man with
much of his life before him. He asked that he should be
dealt with leniently for the sake of his family.
After a brief consultation the
Bench inflicted a fine of £2 and costs. – The
Mayor complimented the witnesses for the way in which they
had given their evidence. – The Chief Constable said
they were very much obliged to the witnesses for what they
had done. They had great difficulty in detecting these pickpockets,
and he asked for a special allowance should be given to
both witnesses. This the Bench agreed to do, and the fine,
along with costs, amounted to £3 1s 4d.
CITY FOOTBALL CLUB
There was a large attendance at the annual meeting of the
Manchester City Football Club Company Limited, which was
held on Thursday night. In the absence through indisposition
of Mr Edward HULTON, jun., (chairman of directors), Alderman
WATERHOUSE, of Ashton, presided. In moving the adoption
of the report and balance sheet, he said it was a satisfactory
one in every respect. It converted a serious debit balance
into a credit balance of £233.
They had saved £1,000 in
players’ wages (about £60,000 at today’s
value – Ed), an £400 on hotel and travel expenses
– a result which reflected great credit upon the management
an upon the secretary (Mr MALEY), the latter of whom said
they were determined to have the best possible team they
could get. The retiring directors (including Mr C H WATERHOUSE)
were unanimously reappointed.
A HYDE BANKRUPT’S
At the Ashton County Court, on Thursday, Mr G RHODES (barrister,
Manchester), made an application to the Judge for his approval
of a composition proposed by Jos. PHILLIPS BEDSON, Newton
House, Hyde, bankrupt, for payment of his debts to his creditors
in full, with interest at 4 per cent per annum, and the
annulment of his bankruptcy.
Debtor was the managing director
of the Clayton Engineering Electrical Contracting Company
Ltd, Hyde. The receiving order was made on August 6th, 1902,
on the creditor’s petition. In the opinion of Mr C
J DIBB, official receiver, the terms of the proposal were
reasonable, and calculated to benefit the creditors, to
whom it was proposed to pay a composition of 20s and interest
as aforestated. If the estate were to be wound up in bankruptcy
it would, in the official receiver’s opinion, probably
yield less than the amount offered in the bankrupt’s
proposal, viz 2s 6d in the pound only. Mr DIBB described
it as an unusual claim.
The matter had been through the
Board of Trade and the Board thought that under the special
circumstances of the case that it might be brought before
the Court. Apparently, the composition was being paid only
a very small portion of the liability. – His Honour
said it seemed to be a case of misfortune only simply. He
saw no reason why he should not sanction the scheme in everybody’s
MR WADDICON: - This gentleman, who is
on a visit to America, went there simply for pleasure and
to see relatives and friends. His health, we are glad to
hear, is not at fault, as reported in our last week’s
ENTERTAINING BAZAAR WORKERS.
– To mark the success of the recent bazaar
held in connection with the King-street Conservative Club,
Hurst, the workers who gave their services so willingly
were entertained to a tea party and social in the Co-operative
Society’s room, Hillgate-street, on Saturday night.
There were about 120 people present to tea, and after proceedings,
which consisted of singing and dancing, were of a very pleasant
character, there being present amongst others, the president
of the club, Dr HILTON, Councillor SCHOFIELD, and Mr T DEAN.
DRUNK AND DISORDERLY.
– On Wednesday, at the Ashton County Police
Court, Joseph LEES was summoned for being drunk and disorderly
in Hillgate-street on Sunday, the 5th inst. – Defendant
did not appear, but sent a representative who pleaded guilty.
– In reply to the Bench, Superintendent HEWITT said
the defendant had been up four times, but not since 1892.
Mr Able BUCKLEY, the presiding magistrate, told the representative
that they would have to make an example of the defendant,
and fined him 10s and costs.
DEATH OF AN OLD RESIDENT
OF HURST. – The funeral took place on Friday
afternoon of last week, at the Cemetery, Dukinfield, of
William SEYMOUR, retired farmer and cattle dealer, formerly
of Hazlehurst Farm, and of the Junction Farm up to the time
of his retirement some twenty years ago.
He died on April 14th at the
house of his daughter, Mrs BARDEN, of the Junction, Mossley-road.
Deceased was 87 years of age. He formerly did a big business
in the buying and selling of cattle, and was well known
and highly respected by all cattle dealers attending the
Ashton cattle fairs. He was the brother of the late Benjamin
SEYMOUR, registrar of births and deaths for Ashton.
Sir, - The treatment meted out to Mr Alderman SHAW’s
motion at the last Council meeting had an ugly look about
it. Can it be that that the health of the town may be treated
as a mere pawn to be sacrificed in a game? However, that
may be Nemesis has soon overtaken the chairman of the Highways
Committee (Mr Alderman SIDDALL), who with a sapience that
is inimitable said, “Tell us where there is a sewer
that is choked, and we will look at it.”
Well, a congested sewer has been
found for him by his own department – Hill-street
and Higher Wharf-street, between Mill-lane and Cavendish-street.
I need not say that the discovery was unintentional. I think
there ought to be a pilgrimage for inspection by all sensible
ratepayers, for a more disgraceful state of things I have
not come across for some time. – Yours &c,
THE LICENSING ACT AT ASHTON
The Servant in Hysteria and Early Morning Supper
A Visitor from Oldham
At the Ashton Borough Police Court, on Monday, Mary Jane
ROYLE, licensee of the Cambridge Inn, was summoned (1) for
keeping her licensed premises for the sale of intoxicating
liquors during prohibited hours on the 10th April, and (2)
opening her premises for the sale of intoxicating liquor
on the same date. – Mr J B POWNALL appeared for the
defence, and pleaded not guilty.
Inspector TULSON was sworn, and
stated that at 1.30 on the morning of the 10th inst, he
was on duty in Cambridge-street along with Constable HESKETH.
When he got to the Cambridge Inn he saw a light in a room
at the front of the house, and the bar was lighted on. On
passing the window he heard someone talking, and he told
HESKETH to knock at the front door. He did so and five minutes
elapsed before the door was opened.
He and HESKETH then entered,
and when they got into the room found two men and two women,
one being the defendant. One man gave his name and address
as James BROCKLEHURST, 20 Neal-street, Oldham, the other
Samuel WILLIAMSON, 4 Bennett-street, Ashton, and Grace BELL,
150 Oxford-street, Ashton. He asked the landlady what account
she chose to give of these persons being there. She said
BROCKLEHURST was a friend, and was staying there, WILLIAMSON
was her waiter on, and Miss BELL was a friend.
On the table there were three
glasses, two containing spirits and one empty. He told the
landlady he should report her, and she said, “All
right.” At the time the defendant was under the influence
of drink. – Mr POWNALL: As to that, was it not excitement
and not drink? I don’t think so. – Didn’t
she tell you the servant had been taken ill, and they had
been bothering with her? No, it was never mentioned.
I take it that, like most ladies,
when the police came in, she was excited? No, she had drink.
– There was no concealment about this! No. –
Did you notice any indications of supper? There was a pie,
but no knives and forks. It did not look like a supper table.
Did you know that Miss BELL is a friend of Mrs ROYLE’s?
No. – The Chairman: Was anything said that night about
the servant being ill? No. Constable HESKETH gave corroborative
Mr POWNALL said that no offence
had been intended or committed. Miss BELL lived adjoining
the Cambridge Inn, and was an intimate friend of Mrs ROYLE
ever since she became tenant on the death of Mr MOORS. Anyone
who knew Miss BELL would say she was there for the purpose
of committing an offence against the Licensing Act. Being
a close friend, she had often been in the house after 11
WILLIAMSON was undoubtedly one
of the barmen. Mr BROCKLEHURST, who was an old friend of
the landlady’s, turned up between nine and ten o’clock.
He was asked to stay and have some supper when business
was over. Whilst he was there the servant went into hysterics,
and through that fact that supper was postponed at the time.
On the following day, Dr CHEETHAM
saw the girl, and he would tell them that she was genuinely
ill. Of course, it was very awkward, that the police should
have come on the scene when the presence of so many people
had to be accounted for, but he asked the Bench to believe
this was a genuine story and a reasonable excuse.- Mrs ROYLE
gave evidence bearing out Mr POWNALL’s statement.
The Chief Constable: What time
was the servant girl taken ill? Between ten and eleven o’clock
– What did you do with her? We could not get her to
bed. – What did you do with her? – We could
not put her to bed. – What time did you get her to
bed? It was about one o’clock. – Have you ever
told anyone she was suffering from drink? – No. –
You are on oath; did you say anything to Inspector TULSON
about the girl’s illness? – No. – Why
not! I was confused.
Were you sober yourself? Certainly.
– This Mr BROCKLEHURST, how long have you known him?
Eight years, - What was his business that night? He came
as a friend. – Did he often stay at night? –
No. – Did he stay that night? Yes, because we were
very upset. - The police came after? One o’clock,
did it take all that time to get the servant girl rectified?
– Yes. – How do you account for Miss BELL being
there so late? I asked her to stay until things were settled,
- Had she anything to drink? No. Samuel WILLIAMSON, the
barman, said that the girl was taken ill.
James BROCKLEHURST, 20 Neal-street,
Oldham, also gave evidence. He said he had known Mrs ROYLE
for some time, and often visited her. – The Chief
Constable: How long have you been visiting this house? Many
years. – What for? As a friend. – Any business
in particular? No. – Of course, you know Mrs ROYLE
is a married woman? Yes. – Is her husband living at
the Cambridge? No. – Oh, how often have you stayed
there? I have stayed at week-ends many times.
Were there any other women in
the house? Yes. – The servant? Yes. – You are
not a married man? No. – What is your business? Rope
and twine maker. – Do you tell the bench you visit
there every week-end? Well, yes. I visit there every week.
– And stay all night? Yes, from Saturday to Sunday
night. – Do you take part in the business? Yes, if
they are busy. – It is very good on your part. Is
not the illness of the servant a second thought? I don’t
think it was in fact. – But none of you mentioned
that to the police.
Where is the lady’s husband?
I don’t know much about him. – You know they
are not living together? Yes. – When you go there,
do you always have your drink free? – Yes. –
Dr CHEETHAM was called, and proved being called to the servant
girl on the afternoon following. At that time there was
no evidence of drink about her. The Bench imposed a fine
of 10s and costs.