150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK (29th MARCH - 4th APRIL 1871)
This week's stories include a most brutal assault on a Parr beerhouse keeper, the St Helens mayor sues for libel, the 1871 census is taken and the violent Haydock mother-in-law who was armed with a poker.
We start on the 30th when the Annual General Sessions for the county of Lancaster were held in Preston. One of the subjects for debate was the level of expenditure in the three main Lancashire lunatic asylums. A magistrate called Cooper wanted to know the reason why the running costs at the Rainhill and Prestwich asylums were greater than at Lancaster. The answer he received was that there was a "different class of lunatics" at Lancaster. They were less violent and chronic compared to the other two asylums and so these individuals needed less looking after and consequently cost less.
Mr Neilson – one of the magistrates charged with inspecting Rainhill – said that in that asylum there had been a steady increase in the number of Irish patients "of the lowest class". The cost of their maintenance was, as he put it, "thrown upon the county rates, and these patients formed a considerable proportion of the incurables." However nearly 40% of the admissions during the past year at Rainhill were deemed to have recovered.
Mr Cooper commented how there appeared to have been a "great partiality for porter as a part of the dietary" at Rainhill. Mr Neilson added that after a careful comparison, it had been found that porter was "the most valuable liquor on medical grounds for the patients". And the patients drank a lot of liquor! In total at the three lunatic asylums of Prestwick, Rainhill and Lancaster, £4,036 had been spent on beer, wine, spirits, porter, tobacco, and snuff during 1870.
As I recall the Larkin family in TV's 'Darling Buds of May' did have their ups and downs but their experiences were sweetness and light compared to the Larkins of Haydock. On April 1st the Leigh Chronicle under the headline "A Violent Mother-in-Law" described a family dispute that had ended up in Newton Petty Sessions:
"Margaret Larkin was summoned for having assaulted Catherine Larkin at Haydock, on the 11th March. The complainant said that she lived with the defendant, who was her mother-in-law. She was a very violent woman, and was often reminding her of the claims she had upon her gratitude. On the day in question she had been out shopping, and on her return the defendant began telling her of the many kindnesses she had received at her hands.
"She (complainant) told her that she was “an old bad-un,” and she then gave her a slap in the face. Witness then got up and returned the compliment, after which the defendant took the poker and struck her across the back. Complainant's husband wrested poker from the defendant, who afterwards intimated her intention of “putting the complainant on the fire and jumping on her.” From the evidence of the defendant it appeared that the complainant was of an equally amiable disposition, and that during the quarrel she had used equally provoking language. – The case was dismissed."
The 1871 census that was taken eight days after the hearing reveals that 48-year-old widow Margaret Larkin – the "old bad-un" – was living in a house near the Haydock Toll Bar with six of her children, a grandson and a boarder. One of her sons at the house was 25-year-old Michael Larkin. However his wife Catherine, who had taken his mother to court, was not amongst them.
The 20-year-old was elsewhere in Haydock, at Ram Row off Penny Lane, with her parents and their brood. In total there were twelve persons living at the house, including a boarder and Catherine and Michael's one-year-old daughter Anne. However the 1881 census reveals that not only was the young couple back together again – with no sign of interfering parents or mothers-in-law – but little Anne now had five siblings! So perhaps there was a bit of sweetness and light for the Larkins after all…
The Leigh Chronicle also reported that the Newton Petty Sessions had granted a police application for a canine lockdown to prevent rabies. This is how it was reported: "Mr. Supt. Jackson said he had to renew an application that he had made at Leigh Petty Sessions on the previous Monday, with reference to the confinement of dogs on suspicion of canine madness. During the last three weeks no less than three dogs had gone mad in the neighbourhood of Leigh, and they with 17 others which they had bitten had to be destroyed. After some conversation the application was granted, and notices were ordered to be posted throughout the district, that dogs would have to be confined for a period therein named."
The actual day of taking the 1871 census was April 2nd. I don't think anyone in St Helens got hurt during the process. However in Liverpool a young woman named Jane Parry was filling up the census form in her own home when she fell backwards and died almost instantly. The results of the survey would reveal 8,000 occupied homes in St Helens accommodating a population of 45,200. That's an increase of 7,000 on the 1861 census with almost six people to a home – despite 1,400 new houses having been built in the borough over the past ten years.
The most striking aspect of reading local newspapers from the 1870s is the low number of entertainment listings. Cinema, of course, had yet to be invented and there was only one theatre in St Helens – although musical performances did take place in pubs and school buildings and occasionally in the Town Hall. The town's second Theatre Royal was situated at the corner of Milk Street and Waterloo Street, in the premises until recently known as the Citadel. The first version had been a simple, wooden building at the bottom of Bridge Street and its successor had opened in 1862.
The theatre rarely advertised its shows in local newspapers – probably because they felt most of their clientele did not read them and so instead concentrated their advertising on posters. And this was certainly the era of bill posting, with many adverts and notices emblazoned over the walls of St Helens – as shown in the above photograph in Corporation Street. But there was a rare newspaper advert on the 2nd from the Theatre Royal in the London paper called The Era that went:
"THEATRE ROYAL, ST. HELENS, and other Theatres. Wanted, an Entire Company, to open on Saturday, April 8th; also Scenic Artist and Lime Light. Stars and novelties, to open at once. Address, Miss Adeline Bathurst, Manageress, 22, New Cross-Street, St. Helens. Note – Send lowest terms." It sounds like the theatre had been let down and needed acts in a hurry – but still wanted them on the cheap!
I’ve often commented on the toleration of violence 150 years ago compared to the intolerance of theft. On the 3rd Michael Tracey, James Johnson, and Robert Johnson were charged in St Helens Petty Sessions with committing what was described as a "desperate assault" on Peter Smith who ran a beerhouse in Parr. It was shown that the Johnson brothers had knocked Smith down in his own house on very slight provocation and then kicked him in the face and ribs "most brutally".
One newspaper described the assault as having been in a "murderous manner". Tracey was acquitted but the Johnsons were ordered to pay £1 and costs each. If they had stolen something from the beerhouse then a prison sentence would almost certainly have been imposed.
As well as the Liberal supporting St Helens Newspaper owned by Bernard Dromgoole, there was also the St Helens Standard. This was a cheerleader for the Conservatives and the paper's proprietor was Frederick Hodgson. In 1877 he would sell the Standard to the owners of the Prescot Reporter and eleven years later the combined paper would be renamed the St Helens Reporter. This week the Mayor of St Helens, Llewellyn Evans, sued Hodgson for libel for what appears to have been a fairly minor defamation. For some reason the hearing took place at the Gloucester Assizes on the 4th before a Chief Justice and a special jury.
Llewellyn Evans – a partner in a chemical works in Pocket Nook – had taken exception to a passage in a letter printed in the Standard that said: "From the many sinister insinuations and insults he [the mayor] has of late heaped upon the surveyor, [it seems] that there is some other animus rankling within his breast other than a pure desire to serve the interests of the town."
Hardly dreadful to me but Evans demanded £500 for the slur on his reputation. After a trial lasting 5½ hours, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff but only awarded the wealthy industrialist £50 – but still that was around a year's wages for many a labourer in St Helens.
Next week's stories will include the thieving St Helens postman, hopes rise that the town's serious water shortage could be ameliorated, there's a rum do on Sutton Mill Dam and the great fire of Newton-le-Willows.
We start on the 30th when the Annual General Sessions for the county of Lancaster were held in Preston. One of the subjects for debate was the level of expenditure in the three main Lancashire lunatic asylums. A magistrate called Cooper wanted to know the reason why the running costs at the Rainhill and Prestwich asylums were greater than at Lancaster. The answer he received was that there was a "different class of lunatics" at Lancaster. They were less violent and chronic compared to the other two asylums and so these individuals needed less looking after and consequently cost less.
Mr Neilson – one of the magistrates charged with inspecting Rainhill – said that in that asylum there had been a steady increase in the number of Irish patients "of the lowest class". The cost of their maintenance was, as he put it, "thrown upon the county rates, and these patients formed a considerable proportion of the incurables." However nearly 40% of the admissions during the past year at Rainhill were deemed to have recovered.
Mr Cooper commented how there appeared to have been a "great partiality for porter as a part of the dietary" at Rainhill. Mr Neilson added that after a careful comparison, it had been found that porter was "the most valuable liquor on medical grounds for the patients". And the patients drank a lot of liquor! In total at the three lunatic asylums of Prestwick, Rainhill and Lancaster, £4,036 had been spent on beer, wine, spirits, porter, tobacco, and snuff during 1870.
As I recall the Larkin family in TV's 'Darling Buds of May' did have their ups and downs but their experiences were sweetness and light compared to the Larkins of Haydock. On April 1st the Leigh Chronicle under the headline "A Violent Mother-in-Law" described a family dispute that had ended up in Newton Petty Sessions:
"Margaret Larkin was summoned for having assaulted Catherine Larkin at Haydock, on the 11th March. The complainant said that she lived with the defendant, who was her mother-in-law. She was a very violent woman, and was often reminding her of the claims she had upon her gratitude. On the day in question she had been out shopping, and on her return the defendant began telling her of the many kindnesses she had received at her hands.
"She (complainant) told her that she was “an old bad-un,” and she then gave her a slap in the face. Witness then got up and returned the compliment, after which the defendant took the poker and struck her across the back. Complainant's husband wrested poker from the defendant, who afterwards intimated her intention of “putting the complainant on the fire and jumping on her.” From the evidence of the defendant it appeared that the complainant was of an equally amiable disposition, and that during the quarrel she had used equally provoking language. – The case was dismissed."
The 1871 census that was taken eight days after the hearing reveals that 48-year-old widow Margaret Larkin – the "old bad-un" – was living in a house near the Haydock Toll Bar with six of her children, a grandson and a boarder. One of her sons at the house was 25-year-old Michael Larkin. However his wife Catherine, who had taken his mother to court, was not amongst them.
The 20-year-old was elsewhere in Haydock, at Ram Row off Penny Lane, with her parents and their brood. In total there were twelve persons living at the house, including a boarder and Catherine and Michael's one-year-old daughter Anne. However the 1881 census reveals that not only was the young couple back together again – with no sign of interfering parents or mothers-in-law – but little Anne now had five siblings! So perhaps there was a bit of sweetness and light for the Larkins after all…
The Leigh Chronicle also reported that the Newton Petty Sessions had granted a police application for a canine lockdown to prevent rabies. This is how it was reported: "Mr. Supt. Jackson said he had to renew an application that he had made at Leigh Petty Sessions on the previous Monday, with reference to the confinement of dogs on suspicion of canine madness. During the last three weeks no less than three dogs had gone mad in the neighbourhood of Leigh, and they with 17 others which they had bitten had to be destroyed. After some conversation the application was granted, and notices were ordered to be posted throughout the district, that dogs would have to be confined for a period therein named."
The actual day of taking the 1871 census was April 2nd. I don't think anyone in St Helens got hurt during the process. However in Liverpool a young woman named Jane Parry was filling up the census form in her own home when she fell backwards and died almost instantly. The results of the survey would reveal 8,000 occupied homes in St Helens accommodating a population of 45,200. That's an increase of 7,000 on the 1861 census with almost six people to a home – despite 1,400 new houses having been built in the borough over the past ten years.
The most striking aspect of reading local newspapers from the 1870s is the low number of entertainment listings. Cinema, of course, had yet to be invented and there was only one theatre in St Helens – although musical performances did take place in pubs and school buildings and occasionally in the Town Hall. The town's second Theatre Royal was situated at the corner of Milk Street and Waterloo Street, in the premises until recently known as the Citadel. The first version had been a simple, wooden building at the bottom of Bridge Street and its successor had opened in 1862.
"THEATRE ROYAL, ST. HELENS, and other Theatres. Wanted, an Entire Company, to open on Saturday, April 8th; also Scenic Artist and Lime Light. Stars and novelties, to open at once. Address, Miss Adeline Bathurst, Manageress, 22, New Cross-Street, St. Helens. Note – Send lowest terms." It sounds like the theatre had been let down and needed acts in a hurry – but still wanted them on the cheap!
I’ve often commented on the toleration of violence 150 years ago compared to the intolerance of theft. On the 3rd Michael Tracey, James Johnson, and Robert Johnson were charged in St Helens Petty Sessions with committing what was described as a "desperate assault" on Peter Smith who ran a beerhouse in Parr. It was shown that the Johnson brothers had knocked Smith down in his own house on very slight provocation and then kicked him in the face and ribs "most brutally".
One newspaper described the assault as having been in a "murderous manner". Tracey was acquitted but the Johnsons were ordered to pay £1 and costs each. If they had stolen something from the beerhouse then a prison sentence would almost certainly have been imposed.
As well as the Liberal supporting St Helens Newspaper owned by Bernard Dromgoole, there was also the St Helens Standard. This was a cheerleader for the Conservatives and the paper's proprietor was Frederick Hodgson. In 1877 he would sell the Standard to the owners of the Prescot Reporter and eleven years later the combined paper would be renamed the St Helens Reporter. This week the Mayor of St Helens, Llewellyn Evans, sued Hodgson for libel for what appears to have been a fairly minor defamation. For some reason the hearing took place at the Gloucester Assizes on the 4th before a Chief Justice and a special jury.
Llewellyn Evans – a partner in a chemical works in Pocket Nook – had taken exception to a passage in a letter printed in the Standard that said: "From the many sinister insinuations and insults he [the mayor] has of late heaped upon the surveyor, [it seems] that there is some other animus rankling within his breast other than a pure desire to serve the interests of the town."
Hardly dreadful to me but Evans demanded £500 for the slur on his reputation. After a trial lasting 5½ hours, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff but only awarded the wealthy industrialist £50 – but still that was around a year's wages for many a labourer in St Helens.
Next week's stories will include the thieving St Helens postman, hopes rise that the town's serious water shortage could be ameliorated, there's a rum do on Sutton Mill Dam and the great fire of Newton-le-Willows.
This week's stories include a most brutal assault on a Parr beerhouse keeper, the St Helens mayor sues for libel, the 1871 census is taken and the violent Haydock mother-in-law who was armed with a poker.
We start on the 30th when the Annual General Sessions for the county of Lancaster were held in Preston.
One of the subjects for debate was the level of expenditure in the three main Lancashire lunatic asylums.
A magistrate called Cooper wanted to know the reason why the running costs at the Rainhill and Prestwich asylums were greater than at Lancaster.
The answer he received was that there was a "different class of lunatics" at Lancaster.
They were less violent and chronic compared to the other two asylums and so these individuals needed less looking after and consequently cost less.
Mr Neilson – one of the magistrates charged with inspecting Rainhill – said that in that asylum there had been a steady increase in the number of Irish patients "of the lowest class".
The cost of their maintenance was, as he put it, "thrown upon the county rates, and these patients formed a considerable proportion of the incurables."
However nearly 40% of the admissions during the past year at Rainhill were deemed to have recovered.
Mr Cooper commented how there appeared to have been a "great partiality for porter as a part of the dietary" at Rainhill.
Mr Neilson added that after a careful comparison, it had been found that porter was "the most valuable liquor on medical grounds for the patients".
And the patients drank a lot of liquor! In total at the three lunatic asylums of Prestwick, Rainhill and Lancaster, £4,036 had been spent on beer, wine, spirits, porter, tobacco, and snuff during 1870.
As I recall the Larkin family in TV's 'Darling Buds of May' did have their ups and downs but their experiences were sweetness and light compared to the Larkins of Haydock.
On April 1st the Leigh Chronicle under the headline "A Violent Mother-in-Law" described a family dispute that had ended up in Newton Petty Sessions:
"Margaret Larkin was summoned for having assaulted Catherine Larkin at Haydock, on the 11th March.
"The complainant said that she lived with the defendant, who was her mother-in-law. She was a very violent woman, and was often reminding her of the claims she had upon her gratitude.
"On the day in question she had been out shopping, and on her return the defendant began telling her of the many kindnesses she had received at her hands.
"She (complainant) told her that she was “an old bad-un,” and she then gave her a slap in the face.
"Witness then got up and returned the compliment, after which the defendant took the poker and struck her across the back.
"Complainant's husband wrested poker from the defendant, who afterwards intimated her intention of “putting the complainant on the fire and jumping on her.”
"From the evidence of the defendant it appeared that the complainant was of an equally amiable disposition, and that during the quarrel she had used equally provoking language. – The case was dismissed."
The 1871 census that was taken eight days after the hearing reveals that 48-year-old widow Margaret Larkin – the "old bad-un" – was living in a house near the Haydock Toll Bar with six of her children, a grandson and a boarder.
One of her sons at the house was 25-year-old Michael Larkin. However his wife Catherine, who had taken his mother to court, was not amongst them.
The 20-year-old was elsewhere in Haydock, at Ram Row off Penny Lane, with her parents and their brood.
In total there were twelve persons living at the house, including a boarder and Catherine and Michael's one-year-old daughter Anne.
However the 1881 census reveals that not only was the young couple back together again – with no sign of interfering parents or mothers-in-law – but little Anne now had five siblings!
So perhaps there was a bit of sweetness and light for the Larkins after all…
The Leigh Chronicle also reported that the Newton Petty Sessions had granted a police application for a canine lockdown to prevent rabies.
"Mr. Supt. Jackson said he had to renew an application that he had made at Leigh Petty Sessions on the previous Monday, with reference to the confinement of dogs on suspicion of canine madness.
"During the last three weeks no less than three dogs had gone mad in the neighbourhood of Leigh, and they with 17 others which they had bitten had to be destroyed.
"After some conversation the application was granted, and notices were ordered to be posted throughout the district, that dogs would have to be confined for a period therein named."
The actual day of taking the 1871 census was April 2nd. I don't think anyone in St Helens got hurt during the process.
However in Liverpool a young woman named Jane Parry was filling up the census form in her own home when she fell backwards and died almost instantly.
The results of the survey would reveal 8,000 occupied homes in St Helens accommodating a population of 45,200.
That's an increase of 7,000 on the 1861 census with almost six people to a home – despite 1,400 new houses having been built in the borough over the past ten years.
The most striking aspect of reading local newspapers from the 1870s is the low number of entertainment listings.
Cinema, of course, had yet to be invented and there was only one theatre in St Helens – although musical performances did take place in pubs and school buildings and occasionally in the Town Hall.
The town's second Theatre Royal was situated at the corner of Milk Street and Waterloo Street, in the premises until recently known as the Citadel.
The first version had been a simple, wooden building at the bottom of Bridge Street and its successor had opened in 1862.
The theatre rarely advertised its shows in local newspapers – probably because they felt most of their clientele did not read them and so instead concentrated their advertising on posters.
And this was certainly the era of bill posting, with many adverts and notices emblazoned over the walls of St Helens – as shown in the above photograph in Corporation Street.
But there was a rare newspaper advert on the 2nd from the Theatre Royal in the London paper called The Era that went:
"THEATRE ROYAL, ST. HELENS, and other Theatres. Wanted, an Entire Company, to open on Saturday, April 8th; also Scenic Artist and Lime Light. Stars and novelties, to open at once.
"Address, Miss Adeline Bathurst, Manageress, 22, New Cross-Street, St. Helens. Note – Send lowest terms."
It sounds like the theatre had been let down and needed acts in a hurry – but still wanted them on the cheap!
I’ve often commented on the toleration of violence 150 years ago compared to the intolerance of theft.
On the 3rd Michael Tracey, James Johnson, and Robert Johnson were charged in St Helens Petty Sessions with committing what was described as a "desperate assault" on Peter Smith who ran a beerhouse in Parr.
It was shown that the Johnson brothers had knocked Smith down in his own house on very slight provocation and then kicked him in the face and ribs "most brutally".
One newspaper described the assault as having been in a "murderous manner".
Tracey was acquitted but the Johnsons were ordered to pay £1 and costs each. If they had stolen something from the beerhouse then a prison sentence would almost certainly have been imposed.
As well as the Liberal supporting St Helens Newspaper owned by Bernard Dromgoole, there was also the St Helens Standard.
This was a cheerleader for the Conservatives and the paper's proprietor was Frederick Hodgson.
In 1877 he would sell the Standard to the owners of the Prescot Reporter and eleven years later the combined paper would be renamed the St Helens Reporter.
This week the Mayor of St Helens, Llewellyn Evans, sued Hodgson for libel for what appears to have been a fairly minor defamation.
For some reason the hearing took place at the Gloucester Assizes on the 4th before a Chief Justice and a special jury.
Llewellyn Evans – a partner in a chemical works in Pocket Nook – had taken exception to a passage in a letter printed in the Standard that said:
"From the many sinister insinuations and insults he [the mayor] has of late heaped upon the surveyor, [it seems] that there is some other animus rankling within his breast other than a pure desire to serve the interests of the town."
Hardly dreadful to me but Evans demanded £500 for the slur on his reputation.
After a trial lasting 5½ hours, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff but only awarded the wealthy industrialist £50 – but still that was around a year's wages for many a labourer in St Helens.
Next week's stories will include the thieving St Helens postman, hopes rise that the town's serious water shortage could be ameliorated, there's a rum do on Sutton Mill Dam and the great fire of Newton-le-Willows.
We start on the 30th when the Annual General Sessions for the county of Lancaster were held in Preston.
One of the subjects for debate was the level of expenditure in the three main Lancashire lunatic asylums.
A magistrate called Cooper wanted to know the reason why the running costs at the Rainhill and Prestwich asylums were greater than at Lancaster.
The answer he received was that there was a "different class of lunatics" at Lancaster.
They were less violent and chronic compared to the other two asylums and so these individuals needed less looking after and consequently cost less.
Mr Neilson – one of the magistrates charged with inspecting Rainhill – said that in that asylum there had been a steady increase in the number of Irish patients "of the lowest class".
The cost of their maintenance was, as he put it, "thrown upon the county rates, and these patients formed a considerable proportion of the incurables."
However nearly 40% of the admissions during the past year at Rainhill were deemed to have recovered.
Mr Cooper commented how there appeared to have been a "great partiality for porter as a part of the dietary" at Rainhill.
Mr Neilson added that after a careful comparison, it had been found that porter was "the most valuable liquor on medical grounds for the patients".
And the patients drank a lot of liquor! In total at the three lunatic asylums of Prestwick, Rainhill and Lancaster, £4,036 had been spent on beer, wine, spirits, porter, tobacco, and snuff during 1870.
As I recall the Larkin family in TV's 'Darling Buds of May' did have their ups and downs but their experiences were sweetness and light compared to the Larkins of Haydock.
On April 1st the Leigh Chronicle under the headline "A Violent Mother-in-Law" described a family dispute that had ended up in Newton Petty Sessions:
"Margaret Larkin was summoned for having assaulted Catherine Larkin at Haydock, on the 11th March.
"The complainant said that she lived with the defendant, who was her mother-in-law. She was a very violent woman, and was often reminding her of the claims she had upon her gratitude.
"On the day in question she had been out shopping, and on her return the defendant began telling her of the many kindnesses she had received at her hands.
"She (complainant) told her that she was “an old bad-un,” and she then gave her a slap in the face.
"Witness then got up and returned the compliment, after which the defendant took the poker and struck her across the back.
"Complainant's husband wrested poker from the defendant, who afterwards intimated her intention of “putting the complainant on the fire and jumping on her.”
"From the evidence of the defendant it appeared that the complainant was of an equally amiable disposition, and that during the quarrel she had used equally provoking language. – The case was dismissed."
The 1871 census that was taken eight days after the hearing reveals that 48-year-old widow Margaret Larkin – the "old bad-un" – was living in a house near the Haydock Toll Bar with six of her children, a grandson and a boarder.
One of her sons at the house was 25-year-old Michael Larkin. However his wife Catherine, who had taken his mother to court, was not amongst them.
The 20-year-old was elsewhere in Haydock, at Ram Row off Penny Lane, with her parents and their brood.
In total there were twelve persons living at the house, including a boarder and Catherine and Michael's one-year-old daughter Anne.
However the 1881 census reveals that not only was the young couple back together again – with no sign of interfering parents or mothers-in-law – but little Anne now had five siblings!
So perhaps there was a bit of sweetness and light for the Larkins after all…
The Leigh Chronicle also reported that the Newton Petty Sessions had granted a police application for a canine lockdown to prevent rabies.
"Mr. Supt. Jackson said he had to renew an application that he had made at Leigh Petty Sessions on the previous Monday, with reference to the confinement of dogs on suspicion of canine madness.
"During the last three weeks no less than three dogs had gone mad in the neighbourhood of Leigh, and they with 17 others which they had bitten had to be destroyed.
"After some conversation the application was granted, and notices were ordered to be posted throughout the district, that dogs would have to be confined for a period therein named."
The actual day of taking the 1871 census was April 2nd. I don't think anyone in St Helens got hurt during the process.
However in Liverpool a young woman named Jane Parry was filling up the census form in her own home when she fell backwards and died almost instantly.
The results of the survey would reveal 8,000 occupied homes in St Helens accommodating a population of 45,200.
That's an increase of 7,000 on the 1861 census with almost six people to a home – despite 1,400 new houses having been built in the borough over the past ten years.
The most striking aspect of reading local newspapers from the 1870s is the low number of entertainment listings.
Cinema, of course, had yet to be invented and there was only one theatre in St Helens – although musical performances did take place in pubs and school buildings and occasionally in the Town Hall.
The town's second Theatre Royal was situated at the corner of Milk Street and Waterloo Street, in the premises until recently known as the Citadel.
The first version had been a simple, wooden building at the bottom of Bridge Street and its successor had opened in 1862.
The theatre rarely advertised its shows in local newspapers – probably because they felt most of their clientele did not read them and so instead concentrated their advertising on posters.
But there was a rare newspaper advert on the 2nd from the Theatre Royal in the London paper called The Era that went:
"THEATRE ROYAL, ST. HELENS, and other Theatres. Wanted, an Entire Company, to open on Saturday, April 8th; also Scenic Artist and Lime Light. Stars and novelties, to open at once.
"Address, Miss Adeline Bathurst, Manageress, 22, New Cross-Street, St. Helens. Note – Send lowest terms."
It sounds like the theatre had been let down and needed acts in a hurry – but still wanted them on the cheap!
I’ve often commented on the toleration of violence 150 years ago compared to the intolerance of theft.
On the 3rd Michael Tracey, James Johnson, and Robert Johnson were charged in St Helens Petty Sessions with committing what was described as a "desperate assault" on Peter Smith who ran a beerhouse in Parr.
It was shown that the Johnson brothers had knocked Smith down in his own house on very slight provocation and then kicked him in the face and ribs "most brutally".
One newspaper described the assault as having been in a "murderous manner".
Tracey was acquitted but the Johnsons were ordered to pay £1 and costs each. If they had stolen something from the beerhouse then a prison sentence would almost certainly have been imposed.
As well as the Liberal supporting St Helens Newspaper owned by Bernard Dromgoole, there was also the St Helens Standard.
This was a cheerleader for the Conservatives and the paper's proprietor was Frederick Hodgson.
In 1877 he would sell the Standard to the owners of the Prescot Reporter and eleven years later the combined paper would be renamed the St Helens Reporter.
This week the Mayor of St Helens, Llewellyn Evans, sued Hodgson for libel for what appears to have been a fairly minor defamation.
For some reason the hearing took place at the Gloucester Assizes on the 4th before a Chief Justice and a special jury.
Llewellyn Evans – a partner in a chemical works in Pocket Nook – had taken exception to a passage in a letter printed in the Standard that said:
"From the many sinister insinuations and insults he [the mayor] has of late heaped upon the surveyor, [it seems] that there is some other animus rankling within his breast other than a pure desire to serve the interests of the town."
Hardly dreadful to me but Evans demanded £500 for the slur on his reputation.
After a trial lasting 5½ hours, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff but only awarded the wealthy industrialist £50 – but still that was around a year's wages for many a labourer in St Helens.
Next week's stories will include the thieving St Helens postman, hopes rise that the town's serious water shortage could be ameliorated, there's a rum do on Sutton Mill Dam and the great fire of Newton-le-Willows.