150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK 6 - 12 JANUARY 1875
This week's stories include the Oddfellows' generosity towards a blind miner, the mysterious deaths of three men whose bodies had lain in the canal for over a month, the Parr boy who died after stirring up the kitchen fire, the battered wife who changed her mind over court action, the Sutton woman who died despite only injuring her ankle and the runaway husband who showed a rare bit of common sense.
We begin on the 6th when the inquest on James Twist was held at the Princess Royal Inn in Park Road. The 6-year-old was an orphan who had lived with his aunt by the Double Locks in Parr. With it being extremely cold in St Helens, a fire had been kept burning in the family's kitchen throughout the night.
And the boy – probably mimicking what he had seen his aunt do – rose from his bed early one morning and decided to stir up the fire. Then in order to warm himself, James stood on the fender. His shirt, which would likely have been made of highly flammable flannelette, accidentally caught fire. The Newspaper wrote:
"His screams at once brought his aunt down stairs, who speedily extinguished the flames, and brought in the child's grandmother, who lived next door; and they jointly did all they could for the little sufferer, but he gradually sunk under the severity of the injuries he had received, and expired at five a.m., on the 2nd inst. A verdict of “Accidental Death” was returned."
It was not uncommon for a miner blinded in one eye at his work to return to his job, as he still needed to earn a living. But what happened to Edward Foster was unusual. The St Helens man had suffered two separate accidents in which he had lost both eyes and so Edward was now totally blind.
Automatic compensation was decades away and it was unlikely that his employer would have made any payments to him. Destitution loomed if it had not been for Edward's membership of a friendly society. These provided basic insurance, making payments to their members at times of illness, injury, unemployment and death. The money was not much but was enough to tide people over at difficult times in their lives.
Edward had been a member of the Lily of the Valley Lodge of Oddfellows, which met at the Griffin Inn in Eccleston (pictured above) and he was entitled to the usual benefits of someone who had been deprived of their livelihood. However, the Newspaper described how the lodge had considered Edward a special case and had decided to go one step further by granting him a rare testimonial.
Collections had been made from members of several Oddfellows' lodges from within the district with the intention of raising a substantial fund that would allow Edward to support himself in some form of business. On New Year's Day a presentation had been made in which Edward was handed the princely sum of £31. That was the equivalent of about five months' wages as a coal miner. The Newspaper wrote: "Several speeches were afterwards made, all expressive of sympathy and esteem towards their afflicted but deserving brother."
The St Helens / Sankey Canal was so long and deep that it could take weeks to give up its dead. William Hollingsworth had been missing from his home in Morley Street on Cowley Hill since December 1st. His disappearance was such a puzzle that St Helens police had taken the unusual step of issuing handbills giving a description of the missing man.
But nothing further was heard until January 8th when some boatmen found the body of the 40-year-old floating in the canal near Newton Common. The Newspaper wrote: "From the advanced state of decomposition in which the body was found, it is supposed that he has been in the water since he was first missed. The deceased was well known in Widnes and St. Helens, he being engaged some time since in both towns as a chemical works' manager."
The body of William Connor was also discovered in the canal this week – but this time near Marsh's chemical works in St Helens. The middle-aged married man had like William Hollingsworth been missing for around a month and the state of his body also suggested that he had spent all that time in the water.
Canal deaths were more common in the winter months with the evenings in St Helens being so dark and with many people choosing to walk to their homes by the banks of the canal. Those that were returning from the pub in inclement weather were particularly at risk of falling into the water and being unable to get themselves out.
That appears to have been the cause of Richard Moors' demise, who was this week's third canal victim. A boy skating on the ice at Smithy Brow Bridge found the body of the 72-year-old. Moors lived in Bolton Street and he had not been seen alive since the end of November.
Then he had been drinking heavily and, as was common practice, his body was taken to the nearest pub – which in this case was the George and Dragon Inn – to await an inquest that would be held on the premises a day or two later. And so Hollingsworth, Connor and Moors joined the lengthy list of persons that had mysteriously died in the canal with only the latter's demise having some possible explanation.
The night-time pitch blackness of much of St Helens also appears to have seen off Elizabeth Shanton this week. The 63-year-old from Primrose Hill in Sutton had left her home at 10:30 pm on December 19th for an unknown reason. An hour later she was discovered a quarter of a mile from her house lying on the road and explaining that she had fallen and hurt her ankle. People in the 1870s responded badly to shock and Mrs Shanton – despite being cared for in St Helens Cottage Hospital – died this week, a good fortnight after her fall.
It was quite straightforward for an aggrieved person to take out a court summons (aka warrant) against someone who they alleged had committed some sort of offence against them. A summons cost very little – around 6 shillings – and all they needed to do was visit the town clerk's office, pay the money and state the bare details of their complaint.
They would pass that information on to the police who, a day or so later, would send a constable to serve the summons on the accused. Although a summons was easy to take out, stopping the thing if you changed your mind seems to have been impossible. When a drunken George Lilly bashed his wife Winifred on Boxing Day, his furious spouse went to get her warrant. But after subsequently hearing her husband's pleas for forgiveness and promise to sign the pledge, Winifred decided to drop her charge against him.
After all, it was not in the wife's financial interests to pursue such a claim, as any fine that the magistrates inflicted would affect her as much, if not more, than her husband. And separation would mean the woman would be even worse off. So a battered wife like Winifred had to hope that her violent husband would mend his ways.
When the policeman came to her house to serve the summons on her husband, Winifred had told him she wanted it stopped. But the bobby said it needed to be served and so Winifred "did all in her power to keep her husband out of the way". That was stated at a St Helens Petty Sessions hearing this week with the wife apparently thinking that if the constable could not locate her husband and serve the summons on him, it would all go away.
But the officer was persistent and during the hearing Mrs Lilly – who was sporting a black eye – explained that her husband was very good to her except when he was in drink. But she said she believed the promises he had made and thought she would have no cause for complaint in the future. And George Lilly told the Bench that he would sign the pledge and behave better to his wife. Under those circumstances the case was dismissed.
Occasionally, someone with a smattering of intelligence turned up in court and impressed the authorities by doing all the right things. Just before Christmas Peter Harrison had walked out on his wife and child, perhaps after having had a row. Mrs Harrison was left with no money and she had to apply for the so-called parish relief from the Prescot Union. This was the little bit of cash given to paupers living in the community.
But it was a husband’s job to provide for his family and failing to do so was a criminal offence. So a warrant was issued for Harrison's arrest but instead of being dragged into court, he voluntarily attended the office of the relieving officer in St Helens and apologised for his behaviour.
At this week's hearing in the St Helens Petty Sessions, the magistrates were told that Harrison had promised to behave better in future. As only one relief payment had been made to his wife, the relieving officer applied to withdraw the case as long as the defendant repaid the money and paid the costs. Many men who thought they could ignore such demands were sent to prison but Harrison's pragmatic approach impressed the magistrates and they allowed the case to be withdrawn.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the renewal of interest in a Mersey Tunnel, the boy sent to prison for stealing his mother's dress, the Parr rabbit trap that was known as a grin and the death of a Sutton pit sinker at Bold.
We begin on the 6th when the inquest on James Twist was held at the Princess Royal Inn in Park Road. The 6-year-old was an orphan who had lived with his aunt by the Double Locks in Parr. With it being extremely cold in St Helens, a fire had been kept burning in the family's kitchen throughout the night.
And the boy – probably mimicking what he had seen his aunt do – rose from his bed early one morning and decided to stir up the fire. Then in order to warm himself, James stood on the fender. His shirt, which would likely have been made of highly flammable flannelette, accidentally caught fire. The Newspaper wrote:
"His screams at once brought his aunt down stairs, who speedily extinguished the flames, and brought in the child's grandmother, who lived next door; and they jointly did all they could for the little sufferer, but he gradually sunk under the severity of the injuries he had received, and expired at five a.m., on the 2nd inst. A verdict of “Accidental Death” was returned."
It was not uncommon for a miner blinded in one eye at his work to return to his job, as he still needed to earn a living. But what happened to Edward Foster was unusual. The St Helens man had suffered two separate accidents in which he had lost both eyes and so Edward was now totally blind.
Automatic compensation was decades away and it was unlikely that his employer would have made any payments to him. Destitution loomed if it had not been for Edward's membership of a friendly society. These provided basic insurance, making payments to their members at times of illness, injury, unemployment and death. The money was not much but was enough to tide people over at difficult times in their lives.
Collections had been made from members of several Oddfellows' lodges from within the district with the intention of raising a substantial fund that would allow Edward to support himself in some form of business. On New Year's Day a presentation had been made in which Edward was handed the princely sum of £31. That was the equivalent of about five months' wages as a coal miner. The Newspaper wrote: "Several speeches were afterwards made, all expressive of sympathy and esteem towards their afflicted but deserving brother."
The St Helens / Sankey Canal was so long and deep that it could take weeks to give up its dead. William Hollingsworth had been missing from his home in Morley Street on Cowley Hill since December 1st. His disappearance was such a puzzle that St Helens police had taken the unusual step of issuing handbills giving a description of the missing man.
But nothing further was heard until January 8th when some boatmen found the body of the 40-year-old floating in the canal near Newton Common. The Newspaper wrote: "From the advanced state of decomposition in which the body was found, it is supposed that he has been in the water since he was first missed. The deceased was well known in Widnes and St. Helens, he being engaged some time since in both towns as a chemical works' manager."
The body of William Connor was also discovered in the canal this week – but this time near Marsh's chemical works in St Helens. The middle-aged married man had like William Hollingsworth been missing for around a month and the state of his body also suggested that he had spent all that time in the water.
Canal deaths were more common in the winter months with the evenings in St Helens being so dark and with many people choosing to walk to their homes by the banks of the canal. Those that were returning from the pub in inclement weather were particularly at risk of falling into the water and being unable to get themselves out.
That appears to have been the cause of Richard Moors' demise, who was this week's third canal victim. A boy skating on the ice at Smithy Brow Bridge found the body of the 72-year-old. Moors lived in Bolton Street and he had not been seen alive since the end of November.
Then he had been drinking heavily and, as was common practice, his body was taken to the nearest pub – which in this case was the George and Dragon Inn – to await an inquest that would be held on the premises a day or two later. And so Hollingsworth, Connor and Moors joined the lengthy list of persons that had mysteriously died in the canal with only the latter's demise having some possible explanation.
The night-time pitch blackness of much of St Helens also appears to have seen off Elizabeth Shanton this week. The 63-year-old from Primrose Hill in Sutton had left her home at 10:30 pm on December 19th for an unknown reason. An hour later she was discovered a quarter of a mile from her house lying on the road and explaining that she had fallen and hurt her ankle. People in the 1870s responded badly to shock and Mrs Shanton – despite being cared for in St Helens Cottage Hospital – died this week, a good fortnight after her fall.
It was quite straightforward for an aggrieved person to take out a court summons (aka warrant) against someone who they alleged had committed some sort of offence against them. A summons cost very little – around 6 shillings – and all they needed to do was visit the town clerk's office, pay the money and state the bare details of their complaint.
They would pass that information on to the police who, a day or so later, would send a constable to serve the summons on the accused. Although a summons was easy to take out, stopping the thing if you changed your mind seems to have been impossible. When a drunken George Lilly bashed his wife Winifred on Boxing Day, his furious spouse went to get her warrant. But after subsequently hearing her husband's pleas for forgiveness and promise to sign the pledge, Winifred decided to drop her charge against him.
After all, it was not in the wife's financial interests to pursue such a claim, as any fine that the magistrates inflicted would affect her as much, if not more, than her husband. And separation would mean the woman would be even worse off. So a battered wife like Winifred had to hope that her violent husband would mend his ways.
When the policeman came to her house to serve the summons on her husband, Winifred had told him she wanted it stopped. But the bobby said it needed to be served and so Winifred "did all in her power to keep her husband out of the way". That was stated at a St Helens Petty Sessions hearing this week with the wife apparently thinking that if the constable could not locate her husband and serve the summons on him, it would all go away.
But the officer was persistent and during the hearing Mrs Lilly – who was sporting a black eye – explained that her husband was very good to her except when he was in drink. But she said she believed the promises he had made and thought she would have no cause for complaint in the future. And George Lilly told the Bench that he would sign the pledge and behave better to his wife. Under those circumstances the case was dismissed.
Occasionally, someone with a smattering of intelligence turned up in court and impressed the authorities by doing all the right things. Just before Christmas Peter Harrison had walked out on his wife and child, perhaps after having had a row. Mrs Harrison was left with no money and she had to apply for the so-called parish relief from the Prescot Union. This was the little bit of cash given to paupers living in the community.
But it was a husband’s job to provide for his family and failing to do so was a criminal offence. So a warrant was issued for Harrison's arrest but instead of being dragged into court, he voluntarily attended the office of the relieving officer in St Helens and apologised for his behaviour.
At this week's hearing in the St Helens Petty Sessions, the magistrates were told that Harrison had promised to behave better in future. As only one relief payment had been made to his wife, the relieving officer applied to withdraw the case as long as the defendant repaid the money and paid the costs. Many men who thought they could ignore such demands were sent to prison but Harrison's pragmatic approach impressed the magistrates and they allowed the case to be withdrawn.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the renewal of interest in a Mersey Tunnel, the boy sent to prison for stealing his mother's dress, the Parr rabbit trap that was known as a grin and the death of a Sutton pit sinker at Bold.
This week's stories include the Oddfellows' generosity towards a blind miner, the mysterious deaths of three men whose bodies had lain in the canal for over a month, the Parr boy who died after stirring up the kitchen fire, the battered wife who changed her mind over court action, the Sutton woman who died despite only injuring her ankle and the runaway husband who showed a rare bit of common sense.
We begin on the 6th when the inquest on James Twist was held at the Princess Royal Inn in Park Road.
The 6-year-old was an orphan who had lived with his aunt by the Double Locks in Parr.
With it being extremely cold in St Helens, a fire had been kept burning in the family's kitchen throughout the night.
And the boy – probably mimicking what he had seen his aunt do – rose from his bed early one morning and decided to stir up the fire. Then in order to warm himself, James stood on the fender.
His shirt, which would likely have been made of highly flammable flannelette, accidentally caught fire. The Newspaper wrote:
"His screams at once brought his aunt down stairs, who speedily extinguished the flames, and brought in the child's grandmother, who lived next door; and they jointly did all they could for the little sufferer, but he gradually sunk under the severity of the injuries he had received, and expired at five a.m., on the 2nd inst. A verdict of “Accidental Death” was returned."
It was not uncommon for a miner blinded in one eye at his work to return to his job, as he still needed to earn a living. But what happened to Edward Foster was unusual.
The St Helens man had suffered two separate accidents in which he had lost both eyes and so Edward was now totally blind.
Automatic compensation was decades away and it was unlikely that his employer would have made any payments to him.
Destitution loomed if it had not been for Edward's membership of a friendly society.
These provided basic insurance, making payments to their members at times of illness, injury, unemployment and death.
The money was not much but was enough to tide people over at difficult times in their lives.
Edward had been a member of the Lily of the Valley Lodge of Oddfellows, which met at the Griffin Inn in Eccleston (pictured above) and he was entitled to the usual benefits of someone who had been deprived of their livelihood.
However, the Newspaper described how the lodge had considered Edward a special case and had decided to go one step further by granting him a rare testimonial.
Collections had been made from members of several Oddfellows' lodges from within the district with the intention of raising a substantial fund that would allow Edward to support himself in some form of business.
On New Year's Day a presentation had been made in which Edward was handed the princely sum of £31. That was the equivalent of about five months' wages as a coal miner.
The Newspaper wrote: "Several speeches were afterwards made, all expressive of sympathy and esteem towards their afflicted but deserving brother."
The St Helens / Sankey Canal was so long and deep that it could take weeks to give up its dead.
William Hollingsworth had been missing from his home in Morley Street on Cowley Hill since December 1st.
His disappearance was such a puzzle that St Helens police had taken the unusual step of issuing handbills giving a description of the missing man.
But nothing further was heard until January 8th when some boatmen found the body of the 40-year-old floating in the canal near Newton Common.
The Newspaper wrote: "From the advanced state of decomposition in which the body was found, it is supposed that he has been in the water since he was first missed.
"The deceased was well known in Widnes and St. Helens, he being engaged some time since in both towns as a chemical works' manager."
The body of William Connor was also discovered in the canal this week – but this time near Marsh's chemical works in St Helens.
The middle-aged married man had like William Hollingsworth been missing for around a month and the state of his body also suggested that he had spent all that time in the water.
Canal deaths were more common in the winter months with the evenings in St Helens being so dark and with many people choosing to walk to their homes by the banks of the canal.
Those that were returning from the pub in inclement weather were particularly at risk of falling into the water and being unable to get themselves out.
That appears to have been the cause of Richard Moors' demise, who was this week's third canal victim.
A boy skating on the ice at Smithy Brow Bridge found the body of the 72-year-old. Moors lived in Bolton Street and he had not been seen alive since the end of November.
Then he had been drinking heavily and, as was common practice, his body was taken to the nearest pub – which in this case was the George and Dragon Inn – to await an inquest that would be held on the premises a day or two later.
And so Hollingsworth, Connor and Moors joined the lengthy list of persons that had mysteriously died in the canal with only the latter's demise having some possible explanation.
The night-time pitch blackness of much of St Helens also appears to have seen off Elizabeth Shanton this week.
The 63-year-old from Primrose Hill in Sutton had left her home at 10:30 pm on December 19th for an unknown reason.
An hour later she was discovered a quarter of a mile from her house lying on the road and explaining that she had fallen and hurt her ankle.
People in the 1870s responded badly to shock and Mrs Shanton – despite being cared for in St Helens Cottage Hospital – died this week, a good fortnight after her fall.
It was quite straightforward for an aggrieved person to take out a court summons (aka warrant) against someone who they alleged had committed some sort of offence against them.
A summons cost very little – around 6 shillings – and all they needed to do was visit the town clerk's office, pay the money and state the bare details of their complaint.
They would pass that information on to the police who, a day or so later, would send a constable to serve the summons on the accused.
Although a summons was easy to take out, stopping the thing if you changed your mind seems to have been impossible.
When a drunken George Lilly bashed his wife Winifred on Boxing Day, his furious spouse went to get her warrant.
But after subsequently hearing her husband's pleas for forgiveness and promise to sign the pledge, Winifred decided to drop her charge against him.
After all, it was not in the wife's financial interests to pursue such a claim, as any fine that the magistrates inflicted would affect her as much, if not more, than her husband.
And separation would mean the woman would be even worse off. So a battered wife like Winifred had to hope that her violent husband would mend his ways.
When the policeman came to her house to serve the summons on her husband, Winifred had told him she wanted it stopped.
But the bobby said it needed to be served and so Winifred "did all in her power to keep her husband out of the way".
That was stated at a St Helens Petty Sessions hearing this week with the wife apparently thinking that if the constable could not locate her husband and serve the summons on him, it would all go away.
But the officer was persistent and during the hearing Mrs Lilly – who was sporting a black eye – explained that her husband was very good to her except when he was in drink.
But she said she believed the promises he had made and thought she would have no cause for complaint in the future.
And George Lilly told the Bench that he would sign the pledge and behave better to his wife. Under those circumstances the case was dismissed.
Occasionally, someone with a smattering of intelligence turned up in court and impressed the authorities by doing all the right things.
Just before Christmas Peter Harrison had walked out on his wife and child, perhaps after having had a row.
Mrs Harrison was left with no money and she had to apply for the so-called parish relief from the Prescot Union.
This was the little bit of cash given to paupers living in the community.
But it was a husband's job to provide for his family and failing to do so was a criminal offence.
So a warrant was issued for Harrison's arrest but instead of being dragged into court, he voluntarily attended the office of the relieving officer in St Helens and apologised for his behaviour.
At this week's hearing in the St Helens Petty Sessions, the magistrates were told that Harrison had promised to behave better in future.
As only one relief payment had been made to his wife, the relieving officer applied to withdraw the case as long as the defendant repaid the money and paid the costs.
Many men who thought they could ignore such demands were sent to prison but Harrison's pragmatic approach impressed the magistrates and they allowed the case to be withdrawn.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the renewal of interest in a Mersey Tunnel, the boy sent to prison for stealing his mother's dress, the Parr rabbit trap that was known as a grin and the death of a Sutton pit sinker at Bold.
We begin on the 6th when the inquest on James Twist was held at the Princess Royal Inn in Park Road.
The 6-year-old was an orphan who had lived with his aunt by the Double Locks in Parr.
With it being extremely cold in St Helens, a fire had been kept burning in the family's kitchen throughout the night.
And the boy – probably mimicking what he had seen his aunt do – rose from his bed early one morning and decided to stir up the fire. Then in order to warm himself, James stood on the fender.
His shirt, which would likely have been made of highly flammable flannelette, accidentally caught fire. The Newspaper wrote:
"His screams at once brought his aunt down stairs, who speedily extinguished the flames, and brought in the child's grandmother, who lived next door; and they jointly did all they could for the little sufferer, but he gradually sunk under the severity of the injuries he had received, and expired at five a.m., on the 2nd inst. A verdict of “Accidental Death” was returned."
It was not uncommon for a miner blinded in one eye at his work to return to his job, as he still needed to earn a living. But what happened to Edward Foster was unusual.
The St Helens man had suffered two separate accidents in which he had lost both eyes and so Edward was now totally blind.
Automatic compensation was decades away and it was unlikely that his employer would have made any payments to him.
Destitution loomed if it had not been for Edward's membership of a friendly society.
These provided basic insurance, making payments to their members at times of illness, injury, unemployment and death.
The money was not much but was enough to tide people over at difficult times in their lives.
However, the Newspaper described how the lodge had considered Edward a special case and had decided to go one step further by granting him a rare testimonial.
Collections had been made from members of several Oddfellows' lodges from within the district with the intention of raising a substantial fund that would allow Edward to support himself in some form of business.
On New Year's Day a presentation had been made in which Edward was handed the princely sum of £31. That was the equivalent of about five months' wages as a coal miner.
The Newspaper wrote: "Several speeches were afterwards made, all expressive of sympathy and esteem towards their afflicted but deserving brother."
The St Helens / Sankey Canal was so long and deep that it could take weeks to give up its dead.
William Hollingsworth had been missing from his home in Morley Street on Cowley Hill since December 1st.
His disappearance was such a puzzle that St Helens police had taken the unusual step of issuing handbills giving a description of the missing man.
But nothing further was heard until January 8th when some boatmen found the body of the 40-year-old floating in the canal near Newton Common.
The Newspaper wrote: "From the advanced state of decomposition in which the body was found, it is supposed that he has been in the water since he was first missed.
"The deceased was well known in Widnes and St. Helens, he being engaged some time since in both towns as a chemical works' manager."
The body of William Connor was also discovered in the canal this week – but this time near Marsh's chemical works in St Helens.
The middle-aged married man had like William Hollingsworth been missing for around a month and the state of his body also suggested that he had spent all that time in the water.
Canal deaths were more common in the winter months with the evenings in St Helens being so dark and with many people choosing to walk to their homes by the banks of the canal.
Those that were returning from the pub in inclement weather were particularly at risk of falling into the water and being unable to get themselves out.
That appears to have been the cause of Richard Moors' demise, who was this week's third canal victim.
A boy skating on the ice at Smithy Brow Bridge found the body of the 72-year-old. Moors lived in Bolton Street and he had not been seen alive since the end of November.
Then he had been drinking heavily and, as was common practice, his body was taken to the nearest pub – which in this case was the George and Dragon Inn – to await an inquest that would be held on the premises a day or two later.
And so Hollingsworth, Connor and Moors joined the lengthy list of persons that had mysteriously died in the canal with only the latter's demise having some possible explanation.
The night-time pitch blackness of much of St Helens also appears to have seen off Elizabeth Shanton this week.
The 63-year-old from Primrose Hill in Sutton had left her home at 10:30 pm on December 19th for an unknown reason.
An hour later she was discovered a quarter of a mile from her house lying on the road and explaining that she had fallen and hurt her ankle.
People in the 1870s responded badly to shock and Mrs Shanton – despite being cared for in St Helens Cottage Hospital – died this week, a good fortnight after her fall.
It was quite straightforward for an aggrieved person to take out a court summons (aka warrant) against someone who they alleged had committed some sort of offence against them.
A summons cost very little – around 6 shillings – and all they needed to do was visit the town clerk's office, pay the money and state the bare details of their complaint.
They would pass that information on to the police who, a day or so later, would send a constable to serve the summons on the accused.
Although a summons was easy to take out, stopping the thing if you changed your mind seems to have been impossible.
When a drunken George Lilly bashed his wife Winifred on Boxing Day, his furious spouse went to get her warrant.
But after subsequently hearing her husband's pleas for forgiveness and promise to sign the pledge, Winifred decided to drop her charge against him.
After all, it was not in the wife's financial interests to pursue such a claim, as any fine that the magistrates inflicted would affect her as much, if not more, than her husband.
And separation would mean the woman would be even worse off. So a battered wife like Winifred had to hope that her violent husband would mend his ways.
When the policeman came to her house to serve the summons on her husband, Winifred had told him she wanted it stopped.
But the bobby said it needed to be served and so Winifred "did all in her power to keep her husband out of the way".
That was stated at a St Helens Petty Sessions hearing this week with the wife apparently thinking that if the constable could not locate her husband and serve the summons on him, it would all go away.
But the officer was persistent and during the hearing Mrs Lilly – who was sporting a black eye – explained that her husband was very good to her except when he was in drink.
But she said she believed the promises he had made and thought she would have no cause for complaint in the future.
And George Lilly told the Bench that he would sign the pledge and behave better to his wife. Under those circumstances the case was dismissed.
Occasionally, someone with a smattering of intelligence turned up in court and impressed the authorities by doing all the right things.
Just before Christmas Peter Harrison had walked out on his wife and child, perhaps after having had a row.
Mrs Harrison was left with no money and she had to apply for the so-called parish relief from the Prescot Union.
This was the little bit of cash given to paupers living in the community.
But it was a husband's job to provide for his family and failing to do so was a criminal offence.
So a warrant was issued for Harrison's arrest but instead of being dragged into court, he voluntarily attended the office of the relieving officer in St Helens and apologised for his behaviour.
At this week's hearing in the St Helens Petty Sessions, the magistrates were told that Harrison had promised to behave better in future.
As only one relief payment had been made to his wife, the relieving officer applied to withdraw the case as long as the defendant repaid the money and paid the costs.
Many men who thought they could ignore such demands were sent to prison but Harrison's pragmatic approach impressed the magistrates and they allowed the case to be withdrawn.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the renewal of interest in a Mersey Tunnel, the boy sent to prison for stealing his mother's dress, the Parr rabbit trap that was known as a grin and the death of a Sutton pit sinker at Bold.