150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK 11 - 17 NOVEMBER 1874
This week's many stories include the homeless man that was living in a brickfield, concern over cases of fever at Whiston Workhouse, the effigy that was burnt in Gerards Bridge, the boys who stole turnips from a Duke Street farm, the 19th century version of virtual reality on Croppers Hill and the courageous Rainford wife who prosecuted her violent spouse.
The fuss that was made over poor persons sleeping rough in the 1870s does seem amazing. There was no compassion or understanding shown – instead the homeless were all perceived as lazy tramps and sent straight to Kirkdale prison. At least it solved their accommodation problem for a week or two but did nothing to resolve their issues.
Some rough sleepers in St Helens got out of the cold and sneaked inside some industrial building to take night's kip. On the 11th of this week Henry Holding appeared in St Helens Police Court having been caught in a shed in a Gerards Bridge brickfield. However, Henry had not needed to break in as he had previously worked there and knew that at night a key to the cabin was hidden under a brick.
The owner of the brickworks was a Mr Penketh who learnt of Holding's nocturnal activities and told PC Gilligan that if necessary he could "burst open the door, or pull the hut to pieces" in order to get the intruder out. The St Helens Newspaper wrote: "The officer waited till two o’clock in the morning, and then went to the hut, prepared to carry out his orders to the letter, but some vigorous battering at the door induced the tenant to open it and walk out into custody. Sent to prison for a fortnight."
The Newspaper also reviewed Haigh's Panorama which was being exhibited in the Engineer Hall on Croppers Hill (pictured above). A panorama was the 19th century version of virtual reality – a series of large, moving paintings that gave the viewer the impression of being immersed in a scene. The Newspaper wrote:
"The series of views exhibited give a vivid idea of some of the principal places on the vast American continent, embracing the overland route to California. A country so rich in natural and artificial curiosities offers abundant material for pourtrayal [sic]. Mr. and Mrs. Haigh give vocal and musical illustrations which highly embellish the entertainment, and make the journey of the mind-tourist of the pleasantest character."
This week the rent dinner of the St Helens Brewery was held at the Fleece Hotel in St Helens. It was a tradition for licensees to pay the rent on their houses every six months and in return Greenall's brewery gave them a dinner. As well as a sumptuous meal for the 300 guests to enjoy, there were many loyal toasts proposed and drunk.
John Whitley represented the firm and also gave the usual toast to the town and trade of St Helens, commenting how its recent growth had been slow with keen rivalry from Widnes. He also warned the licensees to manage their houses well as it placed Greenall's in an awkward position if magistrates withdrew a licence and shut up a pub. "No alternative is left," Mr Whitley added, "but to give notice to anyone against whom a conviction is recorded."
The Prescot Board of Guardians met on the 12th and heard a report from a Poor Law Inspector called Mr Dancey. He expressed concern at the meeting about cases of measles, scarlet and typhoid fever inside Whiston Workhouse's infirmary, diseases that were collectively known as fever. The inspector called for the new infectious diseases hospital at Whiston to be completed as soon as possible, so that fever patients could be properly isolated.
One ordinary infirmary patient had caught scarlet fever and then typhus as a result of fever patients having to be accommodated on general wards through shortage of space. Mr Dancey was informed that the architect of the new fever hospital had reported that only minor work still needed undertaking and they could occupy it at any time.
Surprisingly, all the patients on each ward had to share a single pair of slippers and the inspector called for more to be provided. Mr Dancey said even patients that could not move about should be allowed to sit up for a few hours each day and wear slippers.
And his final complaint was that the supply of water to the infirmary was deficient. During his inspection Mr Dancey said he had found the female side had scarcely any water and the nurse had informed him that was frequently the case. Later in the meeting after the inspector had left, concern was raised as to what would happen if fire broke out in the workhouse. A guardian called Mr Hall said:
"Suppose one occurred in the new hospital, there would be nothing for it but to burn the place down, and it was therefore high time that some steps should be taken by the board to settle this question." He described how for the past six months there had been a "hue and cry" as to the probable cost of buying fire hose and that the matter had continually been shelved.
The Clerk to the Guardians informed Mr Hall that the purchase of the hose had been deferred until the new hospital buildings had been finished. In the end it was agreed that the master of the workhouse should purchase hose with the same quality and bore as used by St Helens Corporation. That was so if in an emergency more fire hose was needed, they could send to St Helens for some.
Persons involved in disputes would sometimes create an effigy of their foe and then burn it – usually after prancing round the streets with their dummy followed by a large, noisy crowd. This is how the Newspaper described how such a case in Gerards Bridge had been dealt with in the Petty Sessions:
"Martha Berrin was summoned for slandering Mary Arnold. The accusation in this case was the defendant charged complainant on the 31st ult. [October] with being improper in her conduct, and got some lads to burn her in effigy. [Witness] Jane Burrows said she saw the effigy on fire, and on inquiring for whom it was intended, was informed that the complainant [Mary Arnold] was the object of the holocaust.
"There was a great disturbance all round, as a large number of persons gathered, supposing at first that the 5th November had come suddenly. The defendant [Martha Berrin] was on the scene, and used very foul and disgusting language. For the defence, witnesses were called, who accused complainant of having made use of very slanderous and offensive language towards the defendant. Defendant was bound over."
Frederick Hesketh and William Holt – described as two small lads – were hauled into court accused of stealing two turnips from a field belonging to farmer Ralph Smith. According to the 1871 census his farm was off Duke Street and he said he was greatly troubled by boys going into his turnip fields.
The father of one of them told the court that he was sorry that a complaint had not been made directly to him, as he would have chastised his son. Both boys – or more accurately their fathers – were fined 6p each and had to pay 6s 6d costs.
For the vast majority of unhappy couples they had no choice but to continue living together. That was particularly so for battered wives who would be considerably worse off financially if separated from their husband. But the man also needed someone to keep his house and look after his children and so separation for him was not a good option.
However, it can't have done much for a couple's relationship and the atmosphere in their home if the wife kept taking her spouse to court because of his violent acts. When Ann Forshaw from Rainford summoned her husband Thomas to St Helens Petty Sessions this week the Newspaper wrote that the defendant was "accustomed to act strangely towards his wife, and she had to have him up several times." Acting strange is an odd way to describe domestic violence and by "have him up" they meant, of course, up in court.
It was certainly courageous of Ann to prosecute her husband – but it could be said not to have been pragmatic. That was particularly if it did not stop his repeat offending, as fines given to her husband meant less money in her household budget. The court heard that Thomas had come home one afternoon and refused his tea and instead went upstairs as if going to bed.
After a few minutes he came downstairs and accused his wife of being over-friendly with a male servant called Beasley. Thomas then thumped Beasley and followed up his attack by giving his wife Ann a blow. She told the court that they had only been married two years and her jealous husband had regularly accused her of immoral conduct with other men and on four occasions she had briefly left him.
Thomas Forshaw's solicitor denied any assault on the wife had been committed – saying his client had simply pushed Ann out of the way to get at his servant. Although the defendant was only fined ten shillings, court courts and two sets of solicitors' bills would considerably increase the financial penalty – for both him and his wife.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the long working hours of a Bridge Street barber's apprentice, the strange stealing by finding case and the election campaigners who were accused of dirty scheming and committing unmanly and paltry tricks.
The fuss that was made over poor persons sleeping rough in the 1870s does seem amazing. There was no compassion or understanding shown – instead the homeless were all perceived as lazy tramps and sent straight to Kirkdale prison. At least it solved their accommodation problem for a week or two but did nothing to resolve their issues.
Some rough sleepers in St Helens got out of the cold and sneaked inside some industrial building to take night's kip. On the 11th of this week Henry Holding appeared in St Helens Police Court having been caught in a shed in a Gerards Bridge brickfield. However, Henry had not needed to break in as he had previously worked there and knew that at night a key to the cabin was hidden under a brick.
The owner of the brickworks was a Mr Penketh who learnt of Holding's nocturnal activities and told PC Gilligan that if necessary he could "burst open the door, or pull the hut to pieces" in order to get the intruder out. The St Helens Newspaper wrote: "The officer waited till two o’clock in the morning, and then went to the hut, prepared to carry out his orders to the letter, but some vigorous battering at the door induced the tenant to open it and walk out into custody. Sent to prison for a fortnight."
"The series of views exhibited give a vivid idea of some of the principal places on the vast American continent, embracing the overland route to California. A country so rich in natural and artificial curiosities offers abundant material for pourtrayal [sic]. Mr. and Mrs. Haigh give vocal and musical illustrations which highly embellish the entertainment, and make the journey of the mind-tourist of the pleasantest character."
This week the rent dinner of the St Helens Brewery was held at the Fleece Hotel in St Helens. It was a tradition for licensees to pay the rent on their houses every six months and in return Greenall's brewery gave them a dinner. As well as a sumptuous meal for the 300 guests to enjoy, there were many loyal toasts proposed and drunk.
John Whitley represented the firm and also gave the usual toast to the town and trade of St Helens, commenting how its recent growth had been slow with keen rivalry from Widnes. He also warned the licensees to manage their houses well as it placed Greenall's in an awkward position if magistrates withdrew a licence and shut up a pub. "No alternative is left," Mr Whitley added, "but to give notice to anyone against whom a conviction is recorded."
The Prescot Board of Guardians met on the 12th and heard a report from a Poor Law Inspector called Mr Dancey. He expressed concern at the meeting about cases of measles, scarlet and typhoid fever inside Whiston Workhouse's infirmary, diseases that were collectively known as fever. The inspector called for the new infectious diseases hospital at Whiston to be completed as soon as possible, so that fever patients could be properly isolated.
One ordinary infirmary patient had caught scarlet fever and then typhus as a result of fever patients having to be accommodated on general wards through shortage of space. Mr Dancey was informed that the architect of the new fever hospital had reported that only minor work still needed undertaking and they could occupy it at any time.
Surprisingly, all the patients on each ward had to share a single pair of slippers and the inspector called for more to be provided. Mr Dancey said even patients that could not move about should be allowed to sit up for a few hours each day and wear slippers.
And his final complaint was that the supply of water to the infirmary was deficient. During his inspection Mr Dancey said he had found the female side had scarcely any water and the nurse had informed him that was frequently the case. Later in the meeting after the inspector had left, concern was raised as to what would happen if fire broke out in the workhouse. A guardian called Mr Hall said:
"Suppose one occurred in the new hospital, there would be nothing for it but to burn the place down, and it was therefore high time that some steps should be taken by the board to settle this question." He described how for the past six months there had been a "hue and cry" as to the probable cost of buying fire hose and that the matter had continually been shelved.
The Clerk to the Guardians informed Mr Hall that the purchase of the hose had been deferred until the new hospital buildings had been finished. In the end it was agreed that the master of the workhouse should purchase hose with the same quality and bore as used by St Helens Corporation. That was so if in an emergency more fire hose was needed, they could send to St Helens for some.
Persons involved in disputes would sometimes create an effigy of their foe and then burn it – usually after prancing round the streets with their dummy followed by a large, noisy crowd. This is how the Newspaper described how such a case in Gerards Bridge had been dealt with in the Petty Sessions:
"Martha Berrin was summoned for slandering Mary Arnold. The accusation in this case was the defendant charged complainant on the 31st ult. [October] with being improper in her conduct, and got some lads to burn her in effigy. [Witness] Jane Burrows said she saw the effigy on fire, and on inquiring for whom it was intended, was informed that the complainant [Mary Arnold] was the object of the holocaust.
"There was a great disturbance all round, as a large number of persons gathered, supposing at first that the 5th November had come suddenly. The defendant [Martha Berrin] was on the scene, and used very foul and disgusting language. For the defence, witnesses were called, who accused complainant of having made use of very slanderous and offensive language towards the defendant. Defendant was bound over."
Frederick Hesketh and William Holt – described as two small lads – were hauled into court accused of stealing two turnips from a field belonging to farmer Ralph Smith. According to the 1871 census his farm was off Duke Street and he said he was greatly troubled by boys going into his turnip fields.
The father of one of them told the court that he was sorry that a complaint had not been made directly to him, as he would have chastised his son. Both boys – or more accurately their fathers – were fined 6p each and had to pay 6s 6d costs.
For the vast majority of unhappy couples they had no choice but to continue living together. That was particularly so for battered wives who would be considerably worse off financially if separated from their husband. But the man also needed someone to keep his house and look after his children and so separation for him was not a good option.
However, it can't have done much for a couple's relationship and the atmosphere in their home if the wife kept taking her spouse to court because of his violent acts. When Ann Forshaw from Rainford summoned her husband Thomas to St Helens Petty Sessions this week the Newspaper wrote that the defendant was "accustomed to act strangely towards his wife, and she had to have him up several times." Acting strange is an odd way to describe domestic violence and by "have him up" they meant, of course, up in court.
It was certainly courageous of Ann to prosecute her husband – but it could be said not to have been pragmatic. That was particularly if it did not stop his repeat offending, as fines given to her husband meant less money in her household budget. The court heard that Thomas had come home one afternoon and refused his tea and instead went upstairs as if going to bed.
After a few minutes he came downstairs and accused his wife of being over-friendly with a male servant called Beasley. Thomas then thumped Beasley and followed up his attack by giving his wife Ann a blow. She told the court that they had only been married two years and her jealous husband had regularly accused her of immoral conduct with other men and on four occasions she had briefly left him.
Thomas Forshaw's solicitor denied any assault on the wife had been committed – saying his client had simply pushed Ann out of the way to get at his servant. Although the defendant was only fined ten shillings, court courts and two sets of solicitors' bills would considerably increase the financial penalty – for both him and his wife.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the long working hours of a Bridge Street barber's apprentice, the strange stealing by finding case and the election campaigners who were accused of dirty scheming and committing unmanly and paltry tricks.
This week's many stories include the homeless man that was living in a brickfield, concern over cases of fever at Whiston Workhouse, the effigy that was burnt in Gerards Bridge, the boys who stole turnips from a Duke Street farm, the 19th century version of virtual reality on Croppers Hill and the courageous Rainford wife who prosecuted her violent spouse.
The fuss that was made over poor persons sleeping rough in the 1870s does seem amazing.
There was no compassion or understanding shown – instead the homeless were all perceived as lazy tramps and sent straight to Kirkdale prison.
At least it solved their accommodation problem for a week or two but did nothing to resolve their issues.
Some rough sleepers in St Helens got out of the cold and sneaked inside some industrial building to take a night's kip.
On the 11th of this week Henry Holding appeared in St Helens Police Court having been caught in a shed in a Gerards Bridge brickfield.
However, Henry had not needed to break in as he had previously worked there and knew that at night a key to the cabin was hidden under a brick.
The owner of the brickworks was a Mr Penketh who learnt of Holding's nocturnal activities and told PC Gilligan that if necessary he could "burst open the door, or pull the hut to pieces" in order to get the intruder out. The St Helens Newspaper wrote:
"The officer waited till two o’clock in the morning, and then went to the hut, prepared to carry out his orders to the letter, but some vigorous battering at the door induced the tenant to open it and walk out into custody. Sent to prison for a fortnight."
The Newspaper also reviewed Haigh's Panorama which was being exhibited in the Engineer Hall on Croppers Hill (pictured above).
A panorama was the 19th century version of virtual reality – a series of large, moving paintings that gave the viewer the impression of being immersed in a scene. The Newspaper wrote:
"The series of views exhibited give a vivid idea of some of the principal places on the vast American continent, embracing the overland route to California. A country so rich in natural and artificial curiosities offers abundant material for pourtrayal [sic].
"Mr. and Mrs. Haigh give vocal and musical illustrations which highly embellish the entertainment, and make the journey of the mind-tourist of the pleasantest character."
This week the rent dinner of the St Helens Brewery was held at the Fleece Hotel in St Helens.
It was a tradition for licensees to pay the rent on their houses every six months and in return Greenall's brewery gave them a dinner.
As well as a sumptuous meal for the 300 guests to enjoy, there were many loyal toasts proposed and drunk.
John Whitley represented the firm and also gave the usual toast to the town and trade of St Helens, commenting how its recent growth had been slow with keen rivalry from Widnes.
He also warned the licensees to manage their houses well as it placed Greenall's in an awkward position if magistrates withdrew a licence and shut up a pub.
"No alternative is left," Mr Whitley added, "but to give notice to anyone against whom a conviction is recorded."
The Prescot Board of Guardians met on the 12th and heard a report from a Poor Law Inspector called Mr Dancey.
He expressed concern at the meeting about cases of measles, scarlet and typhoid fever inside Whiston Workhouse's infirmary, diseases that were collectively known as fever.
The inspector called for the new infectious diseases hospital at Whiston to be completed as soon as possible, so that fever patients could be properly isolated.
One ordinary infirmary patient had caught scarlet fever and then typhus as a result of fever patients having to be accommodated on general wards through shortage of space.
Mr Dancey was informed that the architect of the new fever hospital had reported that only minor work still needed undertaking and they could occupy it at any time.
Surprisingly, all the patients on each ward had to share a single pair of slippers and the inspector called for more to be provided.
Mr Dancey said even patients that could not move about should be allowed to sit up for a few hours each day and wear slippers.
And his final complaint was that the supply of water to the infirmary was deficient.
During his inspection Mr Dancey said he had found the female side had scarcely any water and the nurse had informed him that was frequently the case.
Later in the meeting after the inspector had left, concern was raised as to what would happen if fire broke out in the workhouse. A guardian called Mr Hall said:
"Suppose one occurred in the new hospital, there would be nothing for it but to burn the place down, and it was therefore high time that some steps should be taken by the board to settle this question."
He described how for the past six months there had been a "hue and cry" as to the probable cost of buying fire hose and that the matter had continually been shelved.
The Clerk to the Guardians informed Mr Hall that the purchase of the hose had been deferred until the new hospital buildings had been finished.
In the end it was agreed that the master of the workhouse should purchase hose with the same quality and bore as used by St Helens Corporation.
That was so if in an emergency more fire hose was needed, they could send to St Helens for some.
Persons involved in disputes would sometimes create an effigy of their foe and then burn it – usually after prancing round the streets with their dummy followed by a large, noisy crowd.
This is how the Newspaper described how such a case in Gerards Bridge had been dealt with in the Petty Sessions:
"Martha Berrin was summoned for slandering Mary Arnold. The accusation in this case was the defendant charged complainant on the 31st ult. [October] with being improper in her conduct, and got some lads to burn her in effigy.
"[Witness] Jane Burrows said she saw the effigy on fire, and on inquiring for whom it was intended, was informed that the complainant [Mary Arnold] was the object of the holocaust.
"There was a great disturbance all round, as a large number of persons gathered, supposing at first that the 5th November had come suddenly. The defendant [Martha Berrin] was on the scene, and used very foul and disgusting language.
"For the defence, witnesses were called, who accused complainant of having made use of very slanderous and offensive language towards the defendant. Defendant was bound over."
Frederick Hesketh and William Holt – described as two small lads – were hauled into court accused of stealing two turnips from a field belonging to farmer Ralph Smith.
According to the 1871 census his farm was off Duke Street and he said he was greatly troubled by boys going into his turnip fields.
The father of one of them told the court that he was sorry that a complaint had not been made directly to him, as he would have chastised his son.
Both boys – or more accurately their fathers – were fined 6p each and had to pay 6s 6d costs.
For the vast majority of unhappy couples they had no choice but to continue living together.
That was particularly so for battered wives who would be considerably worse off financially if separated from their husband.
But the man also needed someone to keep his house and look after his children and so separation for him was not a good option.
However, it can't have done much for a couple's relationship and the atmosphere in their home if the wife kept taking her spouse to court because of his violent acts.
When Ann Forshaw from Rainford summoned her husband Thomas to St Helens Petty Sessions this week the Newspaper wrote that the defendant was "accustomed to act strangely towards his wife, and she had to have him up several times."
Acting strange is an odd way to describe domestic violence and by "have him up" they meant, of course, up in court.
It was certainly courageous of Ann to prosecute her husband – but it could be said not to have been pragmatic.
That was particularly if it did not stop his repeat offending, as fines given to her husband meant less money in her household budget.
The court heard that Thomas had come home one afternoon and refused his tea and instead went upstairs as if going to bed.
After a few minutes he came downstairs and accused his wife of being over-friendly with a male servant called Beasley.
Thomas then thumped Beasley and followed up his attack by giving his wife Ann a blow.
She told the court that they had only been married two years and her jealous husband had regularly accused her of immoral conduct with other men and on four occasions she had briefly left him.
Thomas Forshaw's solicitor denied any assault on the wife had been committed – saying his client had simply pushed Ann out of the way to get at his servant.
Although the defendant was only fined ten shillings, court courts and two sets of solicitors' bills would considerably increase the financial penalty – for both him and his wife.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the long working hours of a Bridge Street barber's apprentice, the strange stealing by finding case and the election campaigners who were accused of dirty scheming and committing unmanly and paltry tricks.
The fuss that was made over poor persons sleeping rough in the 1870s does seem amazing.
There was no compassion or understanding shown – instead the homeless were all perceived as lazy tramps and sent straight to Kirkdale prison.
At least it solved their accommodation problem for a week or two but did nothing to resolve their issues.
Some rough sleepers in St Helens got out of the cold and sneaked inside some industrial building to take a night's kip.
On the 11th of this week Henry Holding appeared in St Helens Police Court having been caught in a shed in a Gerards Bridge brickfield.
However, Henry had not needed to break in as he had previously worked there and knew that at night a key to the cabin was hidden under a brick.
The owner of the brickworks was a Mr Penketh who learnt of Holding's nocturnal activities and told PC Gilligan that if necessary he could "burst open the door, or pull the hut to pieces" in order to get the intruder out. The St Helens Newspaper wrote:
"The officer waited till two o’clock in the morning, and then went to the hut, prepared to carry out his orders to the letter, but some vigorous battering at the door induced the tenant to open it and walk out into custody. Sent to prison for a fortnight."
A panorama was the 19th century version of virtual reality – a series of large, moving paintings that gave the viewer the impression of being immersed in a scene. The Newspaper wrote:
"The series of views exhibited give a vivid idea of some of the principal places on the vast American continent, embracing the overland route to California. A country so rich in natural and artificial curiosities offers abundant material for pourtrayal [sic].
"Mr. and Mrs. Haigh give vocal and musical illustrations which highly embellish the entertainment, and make the journey of the mind-tourist of the pleasantest character."
This week the rent dinner of the St Helens Brewery was held at the Fleece Hotel in St Helens.
It was a tradition for licensees to pay the rent on their houses every six months and in return Greenall's brewery gave them a dinner.
As well as a sumptuous meal for the 300 guests to enjoy, there were many loyal toasts proposed and drunk.
John Whitley represented the firm and also gave the usual toast to the town and trade of St Helens, commenting how its recent growth had been slow with keen rivalry from Widnes.
He also warned the licensees to manage their houses well as it placed Greenall's in an awkward position if magistrates withdrew a licence and shut up a pub.
"No alternative is left," Mr Whitley added, "but to give notice to anyone against whom a conviction is recorded."
The Prescot Board of Guardians met on the 12th and heard a report from a Poor Law Inspector called Mr Dancey.
He expressed concern at the meeting about cases of measles, scarlet and typhoid fever inside Whiston Workhouse's infirmary, diseases that were collectively known as fever.
The inspector called for the new infectious diseases hospital at Whiston to be completed as soon as possible, so that fever patients could be properly isolated.
One ordinary infirmary patient had caught scarlet fever and then typhus as a result of fever patients having to be accommodated on general wards through shortage of space.
Mr Dancey was informed that the architect of the new fever hospital had reported that only minor work still needed undertaking and they could occupy it at any time.
Surprisingly, all the patients on each ward had to share a single pair of slippers and the inspector called for more to be provided.
Mr Dancey said even patients that could not move about should be allowed to sit up for a few hours each day and wear slippers.
And his final complaint was that the supply of water to the infirmary was deficient.
During his inspection Mr Dancey said he had found the female side had scarcely any water and the nurse had informed him that was frequently the case.
Later in the meeting after the inspector had left, concern was raised as to what would happen if fire broke out in the workhouse. A guardian called Mr Hall said:
"Suppose one occurred in the new hospital, there would be nothing for it but to burn the place down, and it was therefore high time that some steps should be taken by the board to settle this question."
He described how for the past six months there had been a "hue and cry" as to the probable cost of buying fire hose and that the matter had continually been shelved.
The Clerk to the Guardians informed Mr Hall that the purchase of the hose had been deferred until the new hospital buildings had been finished.
In the end it was agreed that the master of the workhouse should purchase hose with the same quality and bore as used by St Helens Corporation.
That was so if in an emergency more fire hose was needed, they could send to St Helens for some.
Persons involved in disputes would sometimes create an effigy of their foe and then burn it – usually after prancing round the streets with their dummy followed by a large, noisy crowd.
This is how the Newspaper described how such a case in Gerards Bridge had been dealt with in the Petty Sessions:
"Martha Berrin was summoned for slandering Mary Arnold. The accusation in this case was the defendant charged complainant on the 31st ult. [October] with being improper in her conduct, and got some lads to burn her in effigy.
"[Witness] Jane Burrows said she saw the effigy on fire, and on inquiring for whom it was intended, was informed that the complainant [Mary Arnold] was the object of the holocaust.
"There was a great disturbance all round, as a large number of persons gathered, supposing at first that the 5th November had come suddenly. The defendant [Martha Berrin] was on the scene, and used very foul and disgusting language.
"For the defence, witnesses were called, who accused complainant of having made use of very slanderous and offensive language towards the defendant. Defendant was bound over."
Frederick Hesketh and William Holt – described as two small lads – were hauled into court accused of stealing two turnips from a field belonging to farmer Ralph Smith.
According to the 1871 census his farm was off Duke Street and he said he was greatly troubled by boys going into his turnip fields.
The father of one of them told the court that he was sorry that a complaint had not been made directly to him, as he would have chastised his son.
Both boys – or more accurately their fathers – were fined 6p each and had to pay 6s 6d costs.
For the vast majority of unhappy couples they had no choice but to continue living together.
That was particularly so for battered wives who would be considerably worse off financially if separated from their husband.
But the man also needed someone to keep his house and look after his children and so separation for him was not a good option.
However, it can't have done much for a couple's relationship and the atmosphere in their home if the wife kept taking her spouse to court because of his violent acts.
When Ann Forshaw from Rainford summoned her husband Thomas to St Helens Petty Sessions this week the Newspaper wrote that the defendant was "accustomed to act strangely towards his wife, and she had to have him up several times."
Acting strange is an odd way to describe domestic violence and by "have him up" they meant, of course, up in court.
It was certainly courageous of Ann to prosecute her husband – but it could be said not to have been pragmatic.
That was particularly if it did not stop his repeat offending, as fines given to her husband meant less money in her household budget.
The court heard that Thomas had come home one afternoon and refused his tea and instead went upstairs as if going to bed.
After a few minutes he came downstairs and accused his wife of being over-friendly with a male servant called Beasley.
Thomas then thumped Beasley and followed up his attack by giving his wife Ann a blow.
She told the court that they had only been married two years and her jealous husband had regularly accused her of immoral conduct with other men and on four occasions she had briefly left him.
Thomas Forshaw's solicitor denied any assault on the wife had been committed – saying his client had simply pushed Ann out of the way to get at his servant.
Although the defendant was only fined ten shillings, court courts and two sets of solicitors' bills would considerably increase the financial penalty – for both him and his wife.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include the long working hours of a Bridge Street barber's apprentice, the strange stealing by finding case and the election campaigners who were accused of dirty scheming and committing unmanly and paltry tricks.