150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK (3 - 9 JULY 1873)
This week's many stories include the annual gathering of the miners of St Helens and Haydock, another fire strikes St Helens Town Hall, the eccentric night soil dumper of Rainford, there's two similar cases of wife beating, the two sons that beat up their father in Westfield Street and the stone throwing and egg chucking in Parr.
We begin with the sad death of Charles Harrison of Park Road. It was common for children to take meals to their fathers at work and the 10-year-old had been taking his Dad his breakfast. William Harrison worked at the Hardshaw Brook Chemical Works in Peasley Cross and an engine that was shunting waggons struck his son on his head. The boy died from his injuries several days later.
Builders were presently resubmitting their bids to construct the new St Helens Town Hall in what would become known as Corporation Street. The old building in New Market Place – which had been partly destroyed by fire in May 1871 – was still in use, although in a very limited way. A temporary wooden roof had been added allowing the building to be used as a small public library and Corporation store rooms. The adjacent police station was also still in operation.
On the 3rd there was another conflagration at the old Town Hall and after battling the flames for an hour, the Fire Brigade succeeded – as one newspaper put it – "in getting the mastery of the flames". However, the whole of the temporary roof was destroyed and a fireman named Ellison was injured when he fell from the first floor into a fire that was burning below.
On the 5th the coal miners of St Helens and Haydock who were union members held their annual gathering. About 1,500 men carrying banners and accompanied by bands marched through the main streets of the town. Afterwards a public meeting was held on the fairground, off Salisbury Street, in St Helens attended by over 2,000 men. A resolution was passed deploring the decision of the "masters" to place the responsibility for propping up coalmines on the workers.
Instead of having specialist teams to undertake the task, the mine owners wanted the less experienced miners to undertake the job at their place of work. That speeded up coal-digging operations but cost lives. In 1887 Government Inspector Henry Hall of Rainhill said more people were killed by falls of roof down coalmines in the St Helens district than in any other part of the UK. To underline the point, two days after the miners' meeting a fall of the underground pit roof at Ravenhead Colliery caused the death of Archibald Wilson.
The St Helens Newspaper was published on the 5th and described how there had been another night soil prosecution in the Petty Sessions. Night soil was the euphemism for human faeces and was so called because a collector normally removed it at night from the privies, pits and pail closets that people used as toilets. However, some people simply dumped it on the street, such as John Blackburn.
He admitted the offence but said in his defence that he’d been doing it for several years. PC Wilson said the man had cleaned out his midden dump and then left his night soil in the middle of the road all night. The Newspaper said Blackburn had conducted himself in court in an eccentric way and his case was adjourned for a week.
Ellen Bowe from Parr had also been in court charged with breaking a door belonging to Thomas King. The latter's wife accused Bowe of throwing stones at her house. The Newspaper then wrote: "Not content with that, and in reckless defiance of the present high prices, she also threw half a dozen of eggs"! However, it transpired that Thomas King had recently been fined for assaulting Ellen Bowe and the egg and stone chucking were part of the same incident. Her solicitor said the prosecution was simply spite and the Bench agreed and dismissed the case.
Many families shared yards that might be used for such things as water supplies and hanging out washing. Such communal facilities led to many squabbles, often initiated by children. The Newspaper also described how Ann Hayes of Watery Lane in Sutton had summoned her neighbours Catherine Barnes and Mary Brown to court charging them with defamation.
They had accused Mrs Hayes of starving her children and other alleged misdeeds. The Newspaper wrote: "Such language was so provoking that high words resulted, and then they used language calculated to intimidate her." The Bench clearly thought it was much ado about nothing and dismissed the case, without even hearing the defence side.
There were two very similar cases this week in which two brave women summoned their husbands to court for assaulting them. Catherine McCormick accused her husband John of having beaten her a few days before and telling her that he intended to kill her. He didn't show up in court and in his absence was fined 20 shillings and costs.
And Ann Dolan summoned her husband Michael for assault, telling the court that the incident had occurred on the previous Tuesday. Her husband had come home to have his supper and as he was eating his meal calmly told Ann that he intended to take her life very soon. She said she did not pay much attention to the threat – which appeared to annoy him. So he knocked Ann to the ground and upon getting up she ran out of the house in fear of her life. Michael Dolan also didn't attend court and was similarly fined 20 shillings and costs in absentia.
The two husbands probably did not turn up to their hearings, as they did not want to lose a day's pay. Married women were then so dependent upon their husbands that it was very likely that both women returned to their spouses. However, the fines would have done them no good, as it was simply money from the household budget that would be going to the court. A binding over to be of good behaviour with refundable sureties was often the best solution, as it gave the husband a financial incentive not to hit his wife – at least for a set period.
Grown-up sons attacking their fathers was a common crime in the 1870s. There were a variety of reasons behind the assaults, including young men getting their own back after a brutal upbringing. This is how the Newspaper under the headline "Ruffianly Conduct Of Sons" covered such a case in the Petty Sessions this week:
"Joseph Jones, and John Jones, the younger, were charged with assaulting John Jones (the elder) who stands in the relationship of father. Since the service of the summons the son Joseph had fled to parts unknown. The complainant, a carter living in Westfield street, said that on Friday last, while an inventory of his household property was being taken, the son in the box [dock] assaulted him, threw him out of the house, broke a lot of furniture and consumed it on the fire.
"A woman named Yates, a neighbour, said that she saw the boys use their father most shamefully, and on the occasion immediately in question the defendant kept beating the old man until a stranger interfered and pulled him away. The Chairman said it was a most aggravated case, and the defendant would be fined £2 and costs, or two months' imprisonment, and the bench were sorry they could not order him to be flogged."
James O’Hara and Catherine Gee were also in court charged with assaulting Ellen Fairclough in Duke Street in St Helens. The woman said that she had been sitting on her doorstep minding her own business when O’Hara came up the street shouting that he intended to kill someone. After repeating that threat several times, he flung a stick at Mrs Fairclough causing her to run inside her house and close the door. She said she waited a while before opening it again when she thought it was quiet. But O’Hara was still outside carrying a bucket of water and he gave her what was described as a "complete shower bath".
The woman also claimed that later that night the young man had assaulted her. And then on the following day Catherine Gee was said to have struck Mrs Fairclough a violent blow with a milk jug, which inflicted a serious gash on her arm. Several witnesses supported the complainant's case. However, another witness said that Mrs Fairclough had started the dispute through calling the young man "very foul and offensive names". The Bench fined O’Hara fifteen shillings and costs and Mrs Gee five shillings and costs.
When the St Helens Branch of the Irish Home Rule Association's inaugural meeting was held in January 1872, the venue for the gathering in Hardshaw Street was attacked and its windows were broken. That was after posters had appeared in St Helens calling for loyal subjects to put down the event. Another meeting was held on the 7th but this time there were no reports of any trouble.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's many stories will include the boy thieves in St Helens Market, the Royal panorama in the Volunteer Hall, the contract to build the new Town Hall, the thieving tramp in Eccleston and St Helens councillors are accused of being incompetent and reckless.
We begin with the sad death of Charles Harrison of Park Road. It was common for children to take meals to their fathers at work and the 10-year-old had been taking his Dad his breakfast. William Harrison worked at the Hardshaw Brook Chemical Works in Peasley Cross and an engine that was shunting waggons struck his son on his head. The boy died from his injuries several days later.
Builders were presently resubmitting their bids to construct the new St Helens Town Hall in what would become known as Corporation Street. The old building in New Market Place – which had been partly destroyed by fire in May 1871 – was still in use, although in a very limited way. A temporary wooden roof had been added allowing the building to be used as a small public library and Corporation store rooms. The adjacent police station was also still in operation.
On the 3rd there was another conflagration at the old Town Hall and after battling the flames for an hour, the Fire Brigade succeeded – as one newspaper put it – "in getting the mastery of the flames". However, the whole of the temporary roof was destroyed and a fireman named Ellison was injured when he fell from the first floor into a fire that was burning below.
On the 5th the coal miners of St Helens and Haydock who were union members held their annual gathering. About 1,500 men carrying banners and accompanied by bands marched through the main streets of the town. Afterwards a public meeting was held on the fairground, off Salisbury Street, in St Helens attended by over 2,000 men. A resolution was passed deploring the decision of the "masters" to place the responsibility for propping up coalmines on the workers.
Instead of having specialist teams to undertake the task, the mine owners wanted the less experienced miners to undertake the job at their place of work. That speeded up coal-digging operations but cost lives. In 1887 Government Inspector Henry Hall of Rainhill said more people were killed by falls of roof down coalmines in the St Helens district than in any other part of the UK. To underline the point, two days after the miners' meeting a fall of the underground pit roof at Ravenhead Colliery caused the death of Archibald Wilson.
The St Helens Newspaper was published on the 5th and described how there had been another night soil prosecution in the Petty Sessions. Night soil was the euphemism for human faeces and was so called because a collector normally removed it at night from the privies, pits and pail closets that people used as toilets. However, some people simply dumped it on the street, such as John Blackburn.
He admitted the offence but said in his defence that he’d been doing it for several years. PC Wilson said the man had cleaned out his midden dump and then left his night soil in the middle of the road all night. The Newspaper said Blackburn had conducted himself in court in an eccentric way and his case was adjourned for a week.
Ellen Bowe from Parr had also been in court charged with breaking a door belonging to Thomas King. The latter's wife accused Bowe of throwing stones at her house. The Newspaper then wrote: "Not content with that, and in reckless defiance of the present high prices, she also threw half a dozen of eggs"! However, it transpired that Thomas King had recently been fined for assaulting Ellen Bowe and the egg and stone chucking were part of the same incident. Her solicitor said the prosecution was simply spite and the Bench agreed and dismissed the case.
Many families shared yards that might be used for such things as water supplies and hanging out washing. Such communal facilities led to many squabbles, often initiated by children. The Newspaper also described how Ann Hayes of Watery Lane in Sutton had summoned her neighbours Catherine Barnes and Mary Brown to court charging them with defamation.
They had accused Mrs Hayes of starving her children and other alleged misdeeds. The Newspaper wrote: "Such language was so provoking that high words resulted, and then they used language calculated to intimidate her." The Bench clearly thought it was much ado about nothing and dismissed the case, without even hearing the defence side.
There were two very similar cases this week in which two brave women summoned their husbands to court for assaulting them. Catherine McCormick accused her husband John of having beaten her a few days before and telling her that he intended to kill her. He didn't show up in court and in his absence was fined 20 shillings and costs.
And Ann Dolan summoned her husband Michael for assault, telling the court that the incident had occurred on the previous Tuesday. Her husband had come home to have his supper and as he was eating his meal calmly told Ann that he intended to take her life very soon. She said she did not pay much attention to the threat – which appeared to annoy him. So he knocked Ann to the ground and upon getting up she ran out of the house in fear of her life. Michael Dolan also didn't attend court and was similarly fined 20 shillings and costs in absentia.
The two husbands probably did not turn up to their hearings, as they did not want to lose a day's pay. Married women were then so dependent upon their husbands that it was very likely that both women returned to their spouses. However, the fines would have done them no good, as it was simply money from the household budget that would be going to the court. A binding over to be of good behaviour with refundable sureties was often the best solution, as it gave the husband a financial incentive not to hit his wife – at least for a set period.
Grown-up sons attacking their fathers was a common crime in the 1870s. There were a variety of reasons behind the assaults, including young men getting their own back after a brutal upbringing. This is how the Newspaper under the headline "Ruffianly Conduct Of Sons" covered such a case in the Petty Sessions this week:
"Joseph Jones, and John Jones, the younger, were charged with assaulting John Jones (the elder) who stands in the relationship of father. Since the service of the summons the son Joseph had fled to parts unknown. The complainant, a carter living in Westfield street, said that on Friday last, while an inventory of his household property was being taken, the son in the box [dock] assaulted him, threw him out of the house, broke a lot of furniture and consumed it on the fire.
"A woman named Yates, a neighbour, said that she saw the boys use their father most shamefully, and on the occasion immediately in question the defendant kept beating the old man until a stranger interfered and pulled him away. The Chairman said it was a most aggravated case, and the defendant would be fined £2 and costs, or two months' imprisonment, and the bench were sorry they could not order him to be flogged."
The woman also claimed that later that night the young man had assaulted her. And then on the following day Catherine Gee was said to have struck Mrs Fairclough a violent blow with a milk jug, which inflicted a serious gash on her arm. Several witnesses supported the complainant's case. However, another witness said that Mrs Fairclough had started the dispute through calling the young man "very foul and offensive names". The Bench fined O’Hara fifteen shillings and costs and Mrs Gee five shillings and costs.
When the St Helens Branch of the Irish Home Rule Association's inaugural meeting was held in January 1872, the venue for the gathering in Hardshaw Street was attacked and its windows were broken. That was after posters had appeared in St Helens calling for loyal subjects to put down the event. Another meeting was held on the 7th but this time there were no reports of any trouble.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's many stories will include the boy thieves in St Helens Market, the Royal panorama in the Volunteer Hall, the contract to build the new Town Hall, the thieving tramp in Eccleston and St Helens councillors are accused of being incompetent and reckless.
This week's many stories include the annual gathering of the miners of St Helens and Haydock, another fire strikes St Helens Town Hall, the eccentric night soil dumper of Rainford, there's two similar cases of wife beating, the two sons that beat up their father in Westfield Street and the stone throwing and egg chucking in Parr.
We begin with the sad death of Charles Harrison of Park Road. It was common for children to take meals to their fathers at work and the 10-year-old had been taking his Dad his breakfast.
William Harrison worked at the Hardshaw Brook Chemical Works in Peasley Cross and an engine that was shunting waggons struck his son on his head. The boy died from his injuries several days later.
Builders were presently resubmitting their bids to construct the new St Helens Town Hall in what would become known as Corporation Street.
The old building in New Market Place – which had been partly destroyed by fire in May 1871 – was still in use, although in a very limited way.
A temporary wooden roof had been added allowing the building to be used as a small public library and Corporation store rooms. The adjacent police station was also still in operation.
On the 3rd there was another conflagration at the old Town Hall and after battling the flames for an hour, the Fire Brigade succeeded – as one newspaper put it – "in getting the mastery of the flames".
However, the whole of the temporary roof was destroyed and a fireman named Ellison was injured when he fell from the first floor into a fire that was burning below.
On the 5th the coal miners of St Helens and Haydock who were union members held their annual gathering.
About 1,500 men carrying banners and accompanied by bands marched through the main streets of the town.
Afterwards a public meeting was held on the fairground, off Salisbury Street, in St Helens attended by over 2,000 men.
A resolution was passed deploring the decision of the "masters" to place the responsibility for propping up coalmines on the workers.
Instead of having specialist teams to undertake the task, the mine owners wanted the less experienced miners to undertake the job at their place of work. That speeded up coal-digging operations but cost lives.
In 1887 Government Inspector Henry Hall of Rainhill said more people were killed by falls of roof down coalmines in the St Helens district than in any other part of the UK.
To underline the point, two days after the miners' meeting a fall of the underground pit roof at Ravenhead Colliery caused the death of Archibald Wilson.
The St Helens Newspaper was published on the 5th and described how there had been another night soil prosecution in the Petty Sessions.
Night soil was the euphemism for human faeces and was so called because a collector normally removed it at night from the privies, pits and pail closets that people used as toilets.
However, some people simply dumped it on the street, such as John Blackburn. He admitted the offence but said in his defence that he’d been doing it for several years.
PC Wilson said the man had cleaned out his midden dump and then left his night soil in the middle of the road all night.
The Newspaper said Blackburn had conducted himself in court in an eccentric way and his case was adjourned for a week.
Ellen Bowe from Parr had also been in court charged with breaking a door belonging to Thomas King.
The latter's wife accused Bowe of throwing stones at her house. The Newspaper then wrote: "Not content with that, and in reckless defiance of the present high prices, she also threw half a dozen of eggs"!
However, it transpired that Thomas King had recently been fined for assaulting Ellen Bowe and the egg and stone chucking were part of the same incident.
Her solicitor said the prosecution was simply spite and the Bench agreed and dismissed the case.
Many families shared yards that might be used for such things as water supplies and hanging out washing. Such communal facilities led to many squabbles, often initiated by children.
The Newspaper also described how Ann Hayes of Watery Lane in Sutton had summoned her neighbours Catherine Barnes and Mary Brown to court charging them with defamation.
They had accused Mrs Hayes of starving her children and other alleged misdeeds.
The Newspaper wrote: "Such language was so provoking that high words resulted, and then they used language calculated to intimidate her."
The Bench clearly thought it was much ado about nothing and dismissed the case, without even hearing the defence side.
There were two very similar cases this week in which two brave women summoned their husbands to court for assaulting them.
Catherine McCormick accused her husband John of having beaten her a few days before and telling her that he intended to kill her. He didn't show up in court and in his absence was fined 20 shillings and costs.
And Ann Dolan summoned her husband Michael for assault, telling the court that the incident had occurred on the previous Tuesday.
Her husband had come home to have his supper and as he was eating his meal calmly told Ann that he intended to take her life very soon.
She said she did not pay much attention to the threat – which appeared to annoy him. So he knocked Ann to the ground and upon getting up she ran out of the house in fear of her life.
Michael Dolan also didn't attend court and was similarly fined 20 shillings and costs in absentia.
The two husbands probably did not turn up to their hearings, as they did not want to lose a day's pay.
Married women were then so dependent upon their husbands that it was very likely that both women returned to their spouses.
However, the fines would have done them no good, as it was simply money from the household budget that would be going to the court.
A binding over to be of good behaviour with refundable sureties was often the best solution, as it gave the husband a financial incentive not to hit his wife – at least for a set period.
Grown-up sons attacking their fathers was a common crime in the 1870s. There were a variety of reasons behind the assaults, including young men getting their own back after a brutal upbringing.
This is how the Newspaper under the headline "Ruffianly Conduct Of Sons" covered such a case in the Petty Sessions this week:
"Joseph Jones, and John Jones, the younger, were charged with assaulting John Jones (the elder) who stands in the relationship of father. Since the service of the summons the son Joseph had fled to parts unknown.
"The complainant, a carter living in Westfield street, said that on Friday last, while an inventory of his household property was being taken, the son in the box [dock] assaulted him, threw him out of the house, broke a lot of furniture and consumed it on the fire.
"A woman named Yates, a neighbour, said that she saw the boys use their father most shamefully, and on the occasion immediately in question the defendant kept beating the old man until a stranger interfered and pulled him away.
"The Chairman said it was a most aggravated case, and the defendant would be fined £2 and costs, or two months' imprisonment, and the bench were sorry they could not order him to be flogged."
James O’Hara and Catherine Gee were also in court charged with assaulting Ellen Fairclough in Duke Street in St Helens.
The woman said that she had been sitting on her doorstep minding her own business when O’Hara came up the street shouting that he intended to kill someone.
After repeating that threat several times, he flung a stick at Mrs Fairclough causing her to run inside her house and close the door.
She said she waited a while before opening it again when she thought it was quiet.
But O’Hara was still outside carrying a bucket of water and he gave her what was described as a "complete shower bath". The woman also claimed that later that night the young man had assaulted her.
And then on the following day Catherine Gee was said to have struck Mrs Fairclough a violent blow with a milk jug, which inflicted a serious gash on her arm.
Several witnesses supported the complainant's case. However, another witness said that Mrs Fairclough had started the dispute through calling the young man "very foul and offensive names".
The Bench fined O’Hara fifteen shillings and costs and Mrs Gee five shillings and costs.
When the St Helens Branch of the Irish Home Rule Association's inaugural meeting was held in January 1872, the venue for the gathering in Hardshaw Street was attacked and its windows were broken.
That was after posters had appeared in St Helens calling for loyal subjects to put down the event.
Another meeting was held on the 7th but this time there were no reports of any trouble.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's many stories will include the boy thieves in St Helens Market, the Royal panorama in the Volunteer Hall, the contract to build the new Town Hall, the thieving tramp in Eccleston and St Helens councillors are accused of being incompetent and reckless.
We begin with the sad death of Charles Harrison of Park Road. It was common for children to take meals to their fathers at work and the 10-year-old had been taking his Dad his breakfast.
William Harrison worked at the Hardshaw Brook Chemical Works in Peasley Cross and an engine that was shunting waggons struck his son on his head. The boy died from his injuries several days later.
Builders were presently resubmitting their bids to construct the new St Helens Town Hall in what would become known as Corporation Street.
The old building in New Market Place – which had been partly destroyed by fire in May 1871 – was still in use, although in a very limited way.
A temporary wooden roof had been added allowing the building to be used as a small public library and Corporation store rooms. The adjacent police station was also still in operation.
On the 3rd there was another conflagration at the old Town Hall and after battling the flames for an hour, the Fire Brigade succeeded – as one newspaper put it – "in getting the mastery of the flames".
However, the whole of the temporary roof was destroyed and a fireman named Ellison was injured when he fell from the first floor into a fire that was burning below.
On the 5th the coal miners of St Helens and Haydock who were union members held their annual gathering.
About 1,500 men carrying banners and accompanied by bands marched through the main streets of the town.
Afterwards a public meeting was held on the fairground, off Salisbury Street, in St Helens attended by over 2,000 men.
A resolution was passed deploring the decision of the "masters" to place the responsibility for propping up coalmines on the workers.
Instead of having specialist teams to undertake the task, the mine owners wanted the less experienced miners to undertake the job at their place of work. That speeded up coal-digging operations but cost lives.
In 1887 Government Inspector Henry Hall of Rainhill said more people were killed by falls of roof down coalmines in the St Helens district than in any other part of the UK.
To underline the point, two days after the miners' meeting a fall of the underground pit roof at Ravenhead Colliery caused the death of Archibald Wilson.
The St Helens Newspaper was published on the 5th and described how there had been another night soil prosecution in the Petty Sessions.
Night soil was the euphemism for human faeces and was so called because a collector normally removed it at night from the privies, pits and pail closets that people used as toilets.
However, some people simply dumped it on the street, such as John Blackburn. He admitted the offence but said in his defence that he’d been doing it for several years.
PC Wilson said the man had cleaned out his midden dump and then left his night soil in the middle of the road all night.
The Newspaper said Blackburn had conducted himself in court in an eccentric way and his case was adjourned for a week.
Ellen Bowe from Parr had also been in court charged with breaking a door belonging to Thomas King.
The latter's wife accused Bowe of throwing stones at her house. The Newspaper then wrote: "Not content with that, and in reckless defiance of the present high prices, she also threw half a dozen of eggs"!
However, it transpired that Thomas King had recently been fined for assaulting Ellen Bowe and the egg and stone chucking were part of the same incident.
Her solicitor said the prosecution was simply spite and the Bench agreed and dismissed the case.
Many families shared yards that might be used for such things as water supplies and hanging out washing. Such communal facilities led to many squabbles, often initiated by children.
The Newspaper also described how Ann Hayes of Watery Lane in Sutton had summoned her neighbours Catherine Barnes and Mary Brown to court charging them with defamation.
They had accused Mrs Hayes of starving her children and other alleged misdeeds.
The Newspaper wrote: "Such language was so provoking that high words resulted, and then they used language calculated to intimidate her."
The Bench clearly thought it was much ado about nothing and dismissed the case, without even hearing the defence side.
There were two very similar cases this week in which two brave women summoned their husbands to court for assaulting them.
Catherine McCormick accused her husband John of having beaten her a few days before and telling her that he intended to kill her. He didn't show up in court and in his absence was fined 20 shillings and costs.
And Ann Dolan summoned her husband Michael for assault, telling the court that the incident had occurred on the previous Tuesday.
Her husband had come home to have his supper and as he was eating his meal calmly told Ann that he intended to take her life very soon.
She said she did not pay much attention to the threat – which appeared to annoy him. So he knocked Ann to the ground and upon getting up she ran out of the house in fear of her life.
Michael Dolan also didn't attend court and was similarly fined 20 shillings and costs in absentia.
The two husbands probably did not turn up to their hearings, as they did not want to lose a day's pay.
Married women were then so dependent upon their husbands that it was very likely that both women returned to their spouses.
However, the fines would have done them no good, as it was simply money from the household budget that would be going to the court.
A binding over to be of good behaviour with refundable sureties was often the best solution, as it gave the husband a financial incentive not to hit his wife – at least for a set period.
Grown-up sons attacking their fathers was a common crime in the 1870s. There were a variety of reasons behind the assaults, including young men getting their own back after a brutal upbringing.
This is how the Newspaper under the headline "Ruffianly Conduct Of Sons" covered such a case in the Petty Sessions this week:
"Joseph Jones, and John Jones, the younger, were charged with assaulting John Jones (the elder) who stands in the relationship of father. Since the service of the summons the son Joseph had fled to parts unknown.
"The complainant, a carter living in Westfield street, said that on Friday last, while an inventory of his household property was being taken, the son in the box [dock] assaulted him, threw him out of the house, broke a lot of furniture and consumed it on the fire.
"A woman named Yates, a neighbour, said that she saw the boys use their father most shamefully, and on the occasion immediately in question the defendant kept beating the old man until a stranger interfered and pulled him away.
"The Chairman said it was a most aggravated case, and the defendant would be fined £2 and costs, or two months' imprisonment, and the bench were sorry they could not order him to be flogged."
The woman said that she had been sitting on her doorstep minding her own business when O’Hara came up the street shouting that he intended to kill someone.
After repeating that threat several times, he flung a stick at Mrs Fairclough causing her to run inside her house and close the door.
She said she waited a while before opening it again when she thought it was quiet.
But O’Hara was still outside carrying a bucket of water and he gave her what was described as a "complete shower bath". The woman also claimed that later that night the young man had assaulted her.
And then on the following day Catherine Gee was said to have struck Mrs Fairclough a violent blow with a milk jug, which inflicted a serious gash on her arm.
Several witnesses supported the complainant's case. However, another witness said that Mrs Fairclough had started the dispute through calling the young man "very foul and offensive names".
The Bench fined O’Hara fifteen shillings and costs and Mrs Gee five shillings and costs.
When the St Helens Branch of the Irish Home Rule Association's inaugural meeting was held in January 1872, the venue for the gathering in Hardshaw Street was attacked and its windows were broken.
That was after posters had appeared in St Helens calling for loyal subjects to put down the event.
Another meeting was held on the 7th but this time there were no reports of any trouble.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's many stories will include the boy thieves in St Helens Market, the Royal panorama in the Volunteer Hall, the contract to build the new Town Hall, the thieving tramp in Eccleston and St Helens councillors are accused of being incompetent and reckless.