11 April 1903

Fined at Stalybridge

Peter HIGGINSON, blacksmith, 74 Herbert-street, off Victoria-street, Openshaw, was on Wednesday charged in his absence at the Stalybridge Police Court with having travelled on the London and North Western Railway without paying his fare. There were two charges. – Mr LAMBERT, solicitor, Euston Station, prosecuted.

Frederick GARSIDE, ticket collector at the Stalybridge Station, said that on the day in question he saw the Leeds 4pm train arrive at Stalybridge. Defendant and a boy got out of a compartment, and when witness asked defendant for his ticket he replied that he had booked one and a half from Huddersfield to Manchester, but had lost his ticket between the booking office and he train. He gave the address of Carmen-street, Ashton Old-road, Openshaw. Defendant was not able to say how much he had paid for the ticket.

John HUGHES, ticket collector at Wortley, near Leeds, said that on the 5th January defendant arrived at Wortley with a little boy, and when asked for his ticket he said he had lost them. Defendant gave the address Gorton-road, Manchester. – Horace SIMS, booking clerk at Exchange Station, Manchester, spoke as to having issued 11 singles and two children’s tickets by the train upon which defendant travelled. John CARTER, also a booking clerk at Exchange Station, gave similar testimony, and two booking clerks at Huddersfield Station also spoke as to the number of tickets they issued on the day in question, all of those being accounted for by Geo F EVANS, a Euston clerk to whom all tickets were despatched.

W C KYNASTON, railway detective sergeant, said he had much difficulty in tracing defendant. Ultimately he found him at his work in Newton-street, Openshaw, and upon asking him if he had any explanation to offer he replied that he had lost the tickets. Defendant offered to pay the fares “if there was going to be any bother.” Subsequently defendant said he had had a drop of drink on the day in question, and must have made a mistake.

The Mayor said the Bench were satisfied that defendant had defrauded the company. He would be fined 20s and costs in each case, or one month in respect to each charge, the sentences to run concurrently.

James Walter KNIGHT, a well-known Stalybridge character, was on Monday convicted at the Knutsford Quarter Sessions for having stolen eight fowls from Slack’s farm, Stocks-lane, Stalybridge. The facts will be fresh in the minds of our readers. About three weeks ago Constable HULME was on his beat about midnight on Saturday, when he saw KNIGHT emerge through the gateway which leads to prosecutor’s farm.

The officer spoke to prisoner, who replied, “Jesus Christ, I’m coopered!” following up the remark with a blow at the officer with his fist. HULME closed with his assailant and a desperate struggle ensued, but thanks to the assistance rendered by two residents in the locality – who had been attracted to the spot by the policeman’s whistle – KNIGHT was secured and taken to the Town Hall

When first seen by the constable, prisoner had no less than seven hens in his possession, and later on another dead fowl was discovered in the cote. KNIGHT was found guilty, and sentence of six moths with hard labour was passed.

The Assessment Appeal at Preston

The hearing of the appeal of the Blackpool Tower Company Limited against the Assessment Committee of the Fylde Union was considered at Preston Quarter Sessions on Saturday. The committee assessed the Tower and holdings around at £15,000 gross and £10,500 ratable in July 1902, and in accepting the gross assessment, the applicants claimed that proper deductions meant the gross annual value had not been made. The committee thereupon knocked of the £500, but the company urged that sufficient deduction had not been made, and therefore the present appeal was brought.

In the course of the hearing, Mr Thomas DRYDEN, consulting and practical engineer, Preston, was cross-examined by Mr HYDE, with regard to his statement that 288ft and 312ft of the Tower was corroded. He repeated that if the corrosion continued during the coming ten years as it had done the past ten years that a ???? of 24ft, weighing some 500 tons, would have to come down, and to replace that would cost £20,000.

Colonel William Henry WALSTEAD, rating valuer, Hull, gave it as his view that there would be nothing left of the original Tower at the end of 15 years if the corrosion went on at the same rate and no renewals were done. – The court reserved judgment.

Alfred OVERION was charged at the Ashton Borough Police Court, on Thursday, with unlawfully wounding Elizabeth HEMMINGWAY on the 3rd of April. – The Chief Constable said the woman was in a somewhat serious condition, and asked for a remand for a week. – The Clerk: Is she in immediate danger? – Sergeant HEIGHWAY said she was not. The assault however was a very serious one. – Prisoner was remanded, and bail allowed, providing a surety of £20 was forthcoming.

CHARGE OF ASSAULT. – Squire LOWNDES was summoned by Winifred LOGAN for assault on the 2nd of April. He pleaded not guilty and was defended by Mr W M WADDINGTON. – The wife of the licensee of the Old House at Home said complainant was drunk when she came to the house. She wanted drink, but witness’s husband refused to serve her, and complainant hit him on the arm so severely that he had to have the wound cauterised. – The offence was flatly denied, and the case dismissed.

Lucy DEWHURST was summoned for assaulting Mary OLDFIELD on the 4th of April. – Complainant said defendant was “raging mad,” and she broke the windows of her dwelling and struck her in the face. – Mr A LEES, solicitor, defended and pleaded not guilty. – Complainant said she was frightened of defendant; she was like a villain. She flung the door open and stood there like a man. – (Laughter.) – Mr LEES: Didn’t you and all your friends set about her? – Complainant: No. – Who dragged her about the street? No one; we hadn’t chance.- Mr LEES denied the assault, but the Bench considered it proved, and fined defendant 5s 6d and costs, or 14 days.

Mary Jane OLDFIELD was then summoned by Mary Elizabeth CORCORAN for assaulting her on 3rd of April. – A witness aid they both quarreled together, and added that complainant threw a glass of beer over defendant, who struck her back. – The case was dismissed.

Mary BARDSLEY summoned James MAYOR for assault. He pleaded guilty to striking her. – He was fined 5s 6d and costs, or 14 days.

Hetty MULLEN summoned John Joseph HOWARD for assault. She told the Bench the offence took place on St Patrick’s Day, and he struck her in the house when she was seated near the fire. – A witness said defendant threatened to throw the lamp at her. – Defendant denied the offence. – The Bench fined him 5s 6d and costs, or 14 days.

DRUNK IN CHARGE. – John LAW was summoned for being drunk in charge of two horses and a dray on the 7th of April. – He pleaded not guilty. – The case was proved by Constable TURNER, and the alleged offence took place at Cockbrook. – Defendant said he asked to be taken to a doctor, but the police refused. – This was his first offence, and he was fined 10s for costs, or seven days.

DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR. – Maria SAVAGE, Sarah HINES and John LAW were charged with being drunk and disorderly. – Nominal fines were imposed. SAVAGE was fined 5s and costs, or seven days. HINES was dismissed.

GAMING. – Joseph OUSEY was summoned for gaming at Ryecroft on the 27th of March. Defendant, along with others, was seen tossing. OUSEY stopped to pick the money up, and he was caught by the police. He now said he was only watching. – He was fined 2s 6d for costs.

LARCENY CASES. – Mary Ann OLDFIELD was charged with stealing 2s 6d from the person of Sarah Ann LEWIS, of Wellington-street, on the 4th of April. – The parties were school children. – Complainant was sent on an errand, and on her return defendant came to her and said, “Mr LESTER has given you too much money.” She opened complainant’s hand and took away half-a-crown from the change. – She was arrested by Constable TUMELTY, and she admitted the offence. – Defendant expressed her sorrow to the Bench, and said she spent it on Sunday amongst two girls. The Bench severely admonished her, and dismissed her.

John Robert McGARRY was charged with stealing a shirt, the property of Nancy SCHOFIELD, on the 30th of March. – Complainant, of 83 Birch-street, told the Bench the shirt was worth 4s 11d. She missed it from the clothes line at the rear of her house on the 30th of last month. – Constable TUMELTY proved arresting the boy, and he replied, “Yes” in answer to the charges. Defendant said he found it on the floor. – The Chief Constable said the lad had been in reformatory for stealing. – The Bench discharged the defendant, and the chairman gave him some advice as to his future behaviour.

A Rejoinder to Mr Alderman Shaw

Sir, - I shall be extremely obliged if you will allow me space as a rejoinder to Mr Alderman SHAW reply to myself. Mr SHAW says he had the authority of the chairman and several members of the Tramways Committee for saying that such a request was made by the deputation that appeared before them (meaning, of course, a previous reference in his letter, “that the electric cars should enter and leave the town by Stamford-street.”)

For Mr SHAW to hide himself behind others who have said so-and-so is certainly not acceptable evidence of fact, and no one knows better than Mr SHAW that such evidence would not be received within the walls of the court of which he is such a shining light. The chairman and several members of the Tramways Committee were not the only gentlemen present when the deputation waited upon that body, and if the chairman and his friends have the courage to put their statement in a form to be read, let them do so, that the public may be the judges of who is in the right.

Mr SHAW was singularly unfortunate in asking your readers to see the Reporter of the 21st March as a search in that paper does not improve his position, but weakens it materially. What do we find? That in a meeting of 50 (I should rather say over 60) tradesmen of the town, there was a strong feeling that for passengers coming into the town it was a most understandable course to take them and through a back street, as Old-street.

They did more; they passed a resolution unanimously that a deputation be formed who should wait upon the Tramways Committee, “to ask them to reconsider their decision, and to ask that all cars entering the town from Manchester shall do so by Stamford-street.” Not a word in the resolution about leaving.

The resolution was moved by Mr W M HYSLOP (of ROEBUCK and Co), seconded by Mr Samuel WARD (of Stamford-street), and unanimously agreed to and this will be found in the weekly Reporter of 21st March, which Mr SHAW asks your readers to see. – Yours truly,
Henry LEES

P.S. – Mr HYSLOP, in introducing the deputation to the Tramways Committee, said he, and perhaps some of those with him, might have preferred the cars to enter and leave by Stamford-street, but being told there were difficulties in the way of doing so, they as a deputation simply asked the Tramways Committee to reconsider their decision, and to ask that were from Manchester to enter the town by way of Stamford-street.
H. L.

There is a considerable amount of emigration to Canada at the present time. We rarely read of such numbers leaving the Old World for the new. We can only hope that their change will be for the better, and that they will always retain a warm feeling for the land of their birth, as well as for that of their adoption.

The April circular issued by the Emigrants’ Information Office, Broadway, Westminster, S. W., states that a new pamphlet with map has been issued on the Orange River Colony. It adds that this is the best season of the year for emigration to Canada, and there is an excellent demand for almost any kind of labour all over the Dominion. Emigrants should prepare to start at once.

There is a very large demand for farm hands, especially in Ontario and the North West, and any able-bodied farm labourer or young man wishing to learn farming will have no difficulty in finding a place. At Sydney, in Nova Scotia, there is a good demand in the steel and ironworks, and in the coal mines, for general labourers, machinists, machinist’s helpers, and coal miners, especially those who can operate cutting machines.

Both in Nova Scotia and Ontario men, skilled and unskilled, are wanted for sanitary earthenware works and brickyards. The building trades are busy in all parts, and carpenters, bricklayers, plasterers, and others are wanted. At Winnipeg, in Manitoba, there is also a demand for a number of harness makers. The metal trades are very busy in Ontario. There is a brisk demand in all parts of Canada for female servants, both in towns and on farms.

In New South Wales female servants are always wanted, but a great many men are out of work, and no one is advised to go to this State at present on the chance of procuring employment. In other parts of Australia there is little demand for more labour.

In New Zealand there is a good demand for men in the building and coachbuilding trades. The clothing trade is busy in most parts, and men in the engineering trade have been generally well employed.

In Cape Colony there is a demand for wheelwrights, bodymakers, coachsmiths, trimmers, plasterers, bricklayers, carpenters, and first-class painters. The cost of living is high. Permits are still required by those proceeding to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony.

A novel and amusing situation was created in connection with the candidature of Messrs Geo HENSHAW and S F HOWARD, for a seat on the Limehurst District Council. It so happened that both candidates received the same number of votes, viz., 26. The difficulty came in when the Returning Officer was asked to give his casting vote, for not being a parochial elector, he was not entitled to vote.

The matter was, however, settled by an arrangement in which it was decided to draw lots, this mode of procedure being allowed by the provisions of the Act of Parliament regulating Rural District Council elections. As to how they should draw lots was another question to decide. One suggestion was to decide the matter in the old fashioned way by a long and short matchstalk, the one fortunate enough to pick the long matchstalk to be declared the successful candidate.

One of the candidates, however, being a little bit dubious on the point, demurred to the suggestion, and after a little parleying, in which both sides displayed a tendency for “jibbing” on account of the haunting suspicion that Dame Fortune might fail to smile upon them, it was resolved to settle the matter by placing their names on pieces of paper inside a hat, along with blank pieces of paper, the first name drawn out to be regarded as the successful candidate. Mr HOWARD’s name came out first, and he was thereupon declared elected.

Mr HENSHAW was consequently removed from the Council upon which he had served ever since its formation in 1894, during a portion of which period he had acted as chairman. In him the Council has lost a good member, and there is an element of regret that he should have been deposed in such an unprecedented manner.

Another curious circumstance arose in connection with the voting. Two soldiers entered the police station to record their votes, as was afterwards stated, in favour of Mr HENSHAW. It was discovered that by some means their Christian names had been given wrongly They were requested to make an affirmation on oath that they were the right persons, but as they did not seem to fully understand the matter they refused, being apparently afraid of committing themselves in any way, and so their votes were lost.

The Ashton Mill Company Fined

A summons was preferred against the Atlas Mill Co, at the Ashton County Police Court on Wednesday, by Mr J H CRABTREE (H.M. Inspector of Factories) for a breach of the Factory Act. – Mr A LEES appeared on behalf of the company, and pleaded guilty.

Mr CRABTREE said that in consequence of certain information he paid a visit to the Atlas Mill Co on March 6th. In company with his colleague Mr THOMAS, and found the manufacturing going on in the first spinning-room at 5.35pm, and this was continued for another minute longer. He took the names of nine young persons and he brought this action under Section 33 of the Factory and Workshops’ Act, 1901, which prohibited young persons from being allowed to remain in a room.

The Chairman (Mr J BEARDON-GRUNDY): They plead guilty, so is it unnecessary to go into detail. – Mr CRABTREE said the company were liable to a penalty of £27, viz., £3 in respect of each case. He asked the Bench to impose such a fine as would make it cheaper to keep the law than to break it.

Mr LEES said the directors and managers had every wish to conform to the requirements of the law. The manager (Mr CLARKSON) went to make some inquiries with regard to some work going on, and whilst he was away the engineers were allowed to run a matter of only five minutes over time, the engineer being detained in the engine-room. It was quite unforeseen. There were no females working at the time on that part of the premises which were running.

Mr CRABTREE: The cardroom was not working. – The Chairman: Will you view it as an accident? – Mr CRABTREE: I can hardly do that, sir. – The Magistrates imposed a fine of 20s and costs in the first case, and 5s 6d and costs in each of the other eight cases.

Creative Commons License Rhodes Family History by Ian Rhodes (1999-2018 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.