150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK (24th - 30th AUGUST 1870)
This week's stories include an experiment to cure the evils of the Sankey Brook, the prevalence of foot and mouth disease in Eccleston, the Irish diorama at the Volunteer Hall and the man who used a stone to bash his son in front of the Parr police.
We begin in St Helens Police Court on the 24th when Elizabeth Friar – described by the St Helens Newspaper as a "middle-aged woman of wretched aspect" – was charged with begging. The woman had been seen going into several shops in Church Street to "solicit alms". In one shop she was refused money and became abusive and had to be removed by a policeman. Elizabeth was sent to prison for seven days.
At the Liverpool Summer Assizes on the 26th there was another case of a farmer suing Sutton Copper Works for damaging his crops. Nobody doubted that pollution from the dozens of chimneys that dotted the St Helens' skyline damaged farmers' fields. But how could you prove that the Sutton Copper Works was the sole or main offender, when the wind could send noxious fumes many miles?
Thomas Leather of Bold Lane was the latest to try to extract cash from the copper company, demanding £62 compensation for the sulphurous smoke that had damaged his crops. There was also the question of the extent of the actual damage done, as farmers would often exaggerate their loss. The defendants accepted partial liability having already paid £9 6s into court. After hearing the evidence, the jury decided to award the farmer a further sum of £6. So he got a quarter of the cash he was seeking.
What was described as the annual excursion of the children of Parr Mount Day Schools took place on the 26th. But the 500 to 600 kids didn't go very far. They trooped from their school to Hughes's Park – as the St Helens Newspaper described Sherdley Park – bearing a "profusion of flags and banners" and then they indulged in "rural games and sports".
On the 27th the St Helens Newspaper wrote that several members of the Town Council had been among a group that had recently witnessed an experiment on the Sankey Brook. This, of course, is the waterway that runs through St Helens by the remnants of the canal. The paper wrote:
"The evils of the Brook are two-fold; the town suffering from the horrible stench that arises from its water, and which at nights, or in damp and foggy weather, covers the roads and pavements with an oily blue slime. And the railway company complaining of the acid nature of the water that gets into the canal, and does considerable damage to the canal works."
The London & North-Western Railway owned the canal, which explains the last comment. According to the Newspaper the experiment had been designed to remove both the "noxious smell" and acidity of the water and had proved successful. It supposedly worked by exposing to the air the chemical waste that got pumped into the brook before it came into contact with the water. However it was clearly not a long-term solution to the problem, which would dog the town for many years to come.
The Newton Petty Sessions were held on the 27th and a squabble between two neighbours from Lawrence Street in Earlestown (which used to be near Duke Street) was described in court. Elizabeth Phillips summoned Jane Rosbottom for assault, accusing the woman of dragging her around by the hair and the defendant cross-summoned her. The trouble had begun – as so often happened – with an argument between their children. Mrs Phillips claimed that the young daughter of Mrs Rosbottom had struck one of her own kids on the head.
She rebuked the girl and ten minutes later while she was sweeping the floor, Mrs Rosbottom approached her and said she would "do" for the Welshwoman for abusing her child. The complainant said she ran into her parlour to escape Mrs Rosbottom but she followed her in and dragged her out by the hair. However Mrs Rosbottom’s version of events was that Mrs Phillips had thrown her little girl into the middle of the street and when she went to talk to her about it, the woman had attacked her with a brush.
Several women gave evidence of seeing the child being put into the street and the Bench felt the case against Elizabeth Phillips had been proved. She was fined ten shillings and costs and probably regretted instigating court action as her own summons against Mrs Rosbottom was dismissed. The magistrates also expressed a wish that the neighbours would endeavour to be on better terms in the future – some hope!
In the St Helens Petty Sessions on the 29th William Whitley was charged with breaching the peace at Parr. Superintendent James Ludlam – the head of St Helens Police – said he saw the man going up Smithy Brow in an excited state carrying a stone. Without any provocation Whitley then struck a young man in the face with the stone. The man's defence was that it had been his own son that he'd bashed, claiming he'd been "laying on him". Whitley's mistake was to commit the violent act in front of a policeman and he was ordered to find sureties for his good behaviour.
It was revealed in the next case that foot and mouth disease was prevalent in Eccleston. That was when James Johnson was prosecuted for failing to notify the authorities that the disease had broken out amongst his cattle. Superintendent Ludlam gave evidence that after receiving a tip off, he had been to the man's farm and found three cows with foot and mouth.
Upon being asked why he had not notified the authorities, James Johnson replied that he had only discovered it the day before. However a farm worker had already told the police that the disease had been on the farm for a week. The cattle belonged to a dealer and not to Johnson and the magistrates decided to dismiss the case as they felt it had not been sufficiently proved.
They bred women tough in the 1870s and some were happy to engage in fisticuffs – with men! Bridget Grey and her husband Thomas appeared in the Sessions charged with committing a breach of the peace in Peasley Cross, along with Thomas Fahey. The latter had assaulted Bridget's husband and so she came to her spouse's rescue with her fists.
However when Thomas Fahey was put in the witness box he said he was so drunk at the time that he couldn't remember anything of what had happened. So the charges against the Greys were dropped. However a policeman had seen Fahey knock down Thomas Grey and so the former was bound over to keep the peace.
There were no more than a handful of black people in St Helens during the 19th century and West Indies-born George Daniels of Moss Nook in Sutton was one. He was prosecuted after falling asleep while driving a carriage. There were many similar prosecutions as drivers of horses and carts and similar conveyances dozed off on quiet, unlit country roads at night, often with some drink inside of them! However George – who endured considerable prejudice – was treated leniently and simply ordered to pay court costs. In seven years time he would get into trouble after stabbing one of his persecutors.
On the 30th the St Helens Newspaper wrote: "One of the most delightful dioramas ever presented to the public is the one now exhibiting in the Volunteer Hall [shown above]. Ireland, its beautiful scenery, music, and antiquities, are most faithfully represented. We would advise our readers who desire to spend an agreeable and instructive evening to visit it without delay, as its stay in St. Helens is limited to a few days." The diorama was quite a theatrical experience and is said to have astounded audiences. Light was manipulated in a manner that made landscape paintings appear to change their appearance.
There were no paid holidays for workers but some large firms paid for an annual treat for their employees. The Newspaper wrote how around 1,000 workers at Sutton Glass Works had recently been to Llandudno. The company had paid their fares but then left them:
"…at liberty to enjoy themselves each after their own tastes, inclinations, and circumstances, an arrangement which appears to have given general satisfaction and enabled the excursionists to form exploring parties with persons of similar tastes, striking into the valleys or roaming over the hills in the neighbourhood in search of the picturesque and the beautiful, while, at the same time, enjoying the refreshing breeze and the delightful sunshine."
And then they returned to the foul, disgusting air of St Helens. What a contrast that would have been!!!
Next week's stories will include the wife beater from Parr, the window smashing at the Liverpool Inn, the firm fined for illegally working a "great lump of a lad" and there is another complaint about the purloining of Thatto Heath by private individuals.
We begin in St Helens Police Court on the 24th when Elizabeth Friar – described by the St Helens Newspaper as a "middle-aged woman of wretched aspect" – was charged with begging. The woman had been seen going into several shops in Church Street to "solicit alms". In one shop she was refused money and became abusive and had to be removed by a policeman. Elizabeth was sent to prison for seven days.
At the Liverpool Summer Assizes on the 26th there was another case of a farmer suing Sutton Copper Works for damaging his crops. Nobody doubted that pollution from the dozens of chimneys that dotted the St Helens' skyline damaged farmers' fields. But how could you prove that the Sutton Copper Works was the sole or main offender, when the wind could send noxious fumes many miles?
Thomas Leather of Bold Lane was the latest to try to extract cash from the copper company, demanding £62 compensation for the sulphurous smoke that had damaged his crops. There was also the question of the extent of the actual damage done, as farmers would often exaggerate their loss. The defendants accepted partial liability having already paid £9 6s into court. After hearing the evidence, the jury decided to award the farmer a further sum of £6. So he got a quarter of the cash he was seeking.
What was described as the annual excursion of the children of Parr Mount Day Schools took place on the 26th. But the 500 to 600 kids didn't go very far. They trooped from their school to Hughes's Park – as the St Helens Newspaper described Sherdley Park – bearing a "profusion of flags and banners" and then they indulged in "rural games and sports".
On the 27th the St Helens Newspaper wrote that several members of the Town Council had been among a group that had recently witnessed an experiment on the Sankey Brook. This, of course, is the waterway that runs through St Helens by the remnants of the canal. The paper wrote:
"The evils of the Brook are two-fold; the town suffering from the horrible stench that arises from its water, and which at nights, or in damp and foggy weather, covers the roads and pavements with an oily blue slime. And the railway company complaining of the acid nature of the water that gets into the canal, and does considerable damage to the canal works."
The London & North-Western Railway owned the canal, which explains the last comment. According to the Newspaper the experiment had been designed to remove both the "noxious smell" and acidity of the water and had proved successful. It supposedly worked by exposing to the air the chemical waste that got pumped into the brook before it came into contact with the water. However it was clearly not a long-term solution to the problem, which would dog the town for many years to come.
The Newton Petty Sessions were held on the 27th and a squabble between two neighbours from Lawrence Street in Earlestown (which used to be near Duke Street) was described in court. Elizabeth Phillips summoned Jane Rosbottom for assault, accusing the woman of dragging her around by the hair and the defendant cross-summoned her. The trouble had begun – as so often happened – with an argument between their children. Mrs Phillips claimed that the young daughter of Mrs Rosbottom had struck one of her own kids on the head.
She rebuked the girl and ten minutes later while she was sweeping the floor, Mrs Rosbottom approached her and said she would "do" for the Welshwoman for abusing her child. The complainant said she ran into her parlour to escape Mrs Rosbottom but she followed her in and dragged her out by the hair. However Mrs Rosbottom’s version of events was that Mrs Phillips had thrown her little girl into the middle of the street and when she went to talk to her about it, the woman had attacked her with a brush.
Several women gave evidence of seeing the child being put into the street and the Bench felt the case against Elizabeth Phillips had been proved. She was fined ten shillings and costs and probably regretted instigating court action as her own summons against Mrs Rosbottom was dismissed. The magistrates also expressed a wish that the neighbours would endeavour to be on better terms in the future – some hope!
In the St Helens Petty Sessions on the 29th William Whitley was charged with breaching the peace at Parr. Superintendent James Ludlam – the head of St Helens Police – said he saw the man going up Smithy Brow in an excited state carrying a stone. Without any provocation Whitley then struck a young man in the face with the stone. The man's defence was that it had been his own son that he'd bashed, claiming he'd been "laying on him". Whitley's mistake was to commit the violent act in front of a policeman and he was ordered to find sureties for his good behaviour.
It was revealed in the next case that foot and mouth disease was prevalent in Eccleston. That was when James Johnson was prosecuted for failing to notify the authorities that the disease had broken out amongst his cattle. Superintendent Ludlam gave evidence that after receiving a tip off, he had been to the man's farm and found three cows with foot and mouth.
Upon being asked why he had not notified the authorities, James Johnson replied that he had only discovered it the day before. However a farm worker had already told the police that the disease had been on the farm for a week. The cattle belonged to a dealer and not to Johnson and the magistrates decided to dismiss the case as they felt it had not been sufficiently proved.
They bred women tough in the 1870s and some were happy to engage in fisticuffs – with men! Bridget Grey and her husband Thomas appeared in the Sessions charged with committing a breach of the peace in Peasley Cross, along with Thomas Fahey. The latter had assaulted Bridget's husband and so she came to her spouse's rescue with her fists.
However when Thomas Fahey was put in the witness box he said he was so drunk at the time that he couldn't remember anything of what had happened. So the charges against the Greys were dropped. However a policeman had seen Fahey knock down Thomas Grey and so the former was bound over to keep the peace.
There were no more than a handful of black people in St Helens during the 19th century and West Indies-born George Daniels of Moss Nook in Sutton was one. He was prosecuted after falling asleep while driving a carriage. There were many similar prosecutions as drivers of horses and carts and similar conveyances dozed off on quiet, unlit country roads at night, often with some drink inside of them! However George – who endured considerable prejudice – was treated leniently and simply ordered to pay court costs. In seven years time he would get into trouble after stabbing one of his persecutors.
There were no paid holidays for workers but some large firms paid for an annual treat for their employees. The Newspaper wrote how around 1,000 workers at Sutton Glass Works had recently been to Llandudno. The company had paid their fares but then left them:
"…at liberty to enjoy themselves each after their own tastes, inclinations, and circumstances, an arrangement which appears to have given general satisfaction and enabled the excursionists to form exploring parties with persons of similar tastes, striking into the valleys or roaming over the hills in the neighbourhood in search of the picturesque and the beautiful, while, at the same time, enjoying the refreshing breeze and the delightful sunshine."
And then they returned to the foul, disgusting air of St Helens. What a contrast that would have been!!!
Next week's stories will include the wife beater from Parr, the window smashing at the Liverpool Inn, the firm fined for illegally working a "great lump of a lad" and there is another complaint about the purloining of Thatto Heath by private individuals.
This week's stories include an experiment to cure the evils of the Sankey Brook, the prevalence of foot and mouth disease in Eccleston, the Irish diorama at the Volunteer Hall and the man who used a stone to bash his son in front of the Parr police.
We begin in St Helens Police Court on the 24th when Elizabeth Friar – described by the St Helens Newspaper as a "middle-aged woman of wretched aspect" – was charged with begging.
The woman had been seen going into several shops in Church Street to "solicit alms".
In one shop she was refused money and became abusive and had to be removed by a policeman. Elizabeth was sent to prison for 7 days.
At the Liverpool Summer Assizes on the 26th there was another case of a farmer suing Sutton Copper Works for damaging his crops.
Nobody doubted that pollution from the dozens of chimneys that dotted the St Helens' skyline damaged farmers' fields.
But how could you prove that the Sutton Copper Works was the sole or main offender, when the wind could send noxious fumes many miles?
Thomas Leather of Bold Lane was the latest to try to extract cash from the copper company, demanding £62 compensation for the sulphurous smoke that had damaged his crops.
There was also the question of the extent of the actual damage done, as farmers would often exaggerate their loss.
The defendants accepted partial liability having already paid £9 6s into court.
After hearing the evidence, the jury decided to award the farmer a further sum of £6. So he got a quarter of the cash he was seeking.
What was described as the annual excursion of the children of Parr Mount Day Schools took place on the 26th. But the 500 to 600 kids didn't go very far.
They trooped from their school to Hughes's Park – as the St Helens Newspaper described Sherdley Park – bearing a "profusion of flags and banners" and then they indulged in "rural games and sports".
On the 27th the St Helens Newspaper wrote that several members of the Town Council had been among a group that had recently witnessed an experiment on the Sankey Brook.
This, of course, is the waterway that runs through St Helens by the remnants of the canal. The paper wrote:
"The evils of the Brook are two-fold; the town suffering from the horrible stench that arises from its water, and which at nights, or in damp and foggy weather, covers the roads and pavements with an oily blue slime.
"And the railway company complaining of the acid nature of the water that gets into the canal, and does considerable damage to the canal works."
The London & North-Western Railway owned the canal, which explains the last comment.
According to the Newspaper the experiment had been designed to remove both the "noxious smell" and acidity of the water and had proved successful.
It supposedly worked by exposing to the air the chemical waste that got pumped into the brook before it came into contact with the water.
However it was clearly not a long-term solution to the problem, which would dog the town for many years to come.
The Newton Petty Sessions were held on the 27th and a squabble between two neighbours from Lawrence Street in Earlestown (which used to be near Duke Street) was described in court.
Elizabeth Phillips summoned Jane Rosbottom for assault, accusing the woman of dragging her around by the hair and the defendant cross-summoned her.
The trouble had begun – as so often happened – with an argument between their children.
Mrs Phillips claimed that the young daughter of Mrs Rosbottom had struck one of her own kids on the head.
She rebuked the girl and ten minutes later while she was sweeping the floor, Mrs Rosbottom approached her and said she would "do" for the Welshwoman for abusing her child.
The complainant said she ran into her parlour to escape Mrs Rosbottom but she followed her in and dragged her out by the hair.
However Mrs Rosbottom’s version of events was that Mrs Phillips had thrown her little girl into the middle of the street and when she went to talk to her about it, the woman had attacked her with a brush.
Several women gave evidence of seeing the child being put into the street and the Bench felt the case against Elizabeth Phillips had been proved.
She was fined ten shillings and costs and probably regretted instigating court action as her own summons against Mrs Rosbottom was dismissed.
The magistrates also expressed a wish that the neighbours would endeavour to be on better terms in the future – some hope!
In the St Helens Petty Sessions on the 29th William Whitley was charged with breaching the peace at Parr.
Superintendent James Ludlam – the head of St Helens Police – said he saw the man going up Smithy Brow in an excited state carrying a stone.
Without any provocation Whitley then struck a young man in the face with the stone.
The man's defence was that it had been his own son that he'd bashed, claiming he'd been "laying on him".
Whitley's mistake was to commit the violent act in front of a policeman and he was ordered to find sureties for his good behaviour.
It was revealed in the next case that foot and mouth disease was prevalent in Eccleston.
That was when James Johnson was prosecuted for failing to notify the authorities that the disease had broken out amongst his cattle.
Superintendent Ludlam gave evidence that after receiving a tip off, he had been to the man's farm and found three cows with foot and mouth.
Upon being asked why he had not notified the authorities, James Johnson replied that he had only discovered it the day before.
However a farm worker had already told the police that the disease had been on the farm for a week.
The cattle belonged to a dealer and not to Johnson and the magistrates decided to dismiss the case as they felt it had not been sufficiently proved.
They bred women tough in the 1870s and some were happy to engage in fisticuffs – with men!
Bridget Grey and her husband Thomas appeared in the Sessions charged with committing a breach of the peace in Peasley Cross, along with Thomas Fahey.
The latter had assaulted Bridget's husband and so she came to her spouse's rescue with her fists.
However when Thomas Fahey was put in the witness box he said he was so drunk at the time that he couldn't remember anything of what had happened.
So the charges against the Greys were dropped. However a policeman had seen Fahey knock down Thomas Grey and so the former was bound over to keep the peace.
There were no more than a handful of black people in St Helens during the 19th century and West Indies-born George Daniels of Moss Nook in Sutton was one.
He was prosecuted after falling asleep while driving a carriage.
There were many similar prosecutions as drivers of horses and carts and similar conveyances dozed off on quiet, unlit country roads at night, often with some drink inside of them!
However George – who endured considerable prejudice – was treated leniently and simply ordered to pay court costs.
In seven years time he would get into trouble after stabbing one of his persecutors.
On the 30th the St Helens Newspaper wrote: "One of the most delightful dioramas ever presented to the public is the one now exhibiting in the Volunteer Hall [shown above].
"Ireland, its beautiful scenery, music, and antiquities, are most faithfully represented. We would advise our readers who desire to spend an agreeable and instructive evening to visit it without delay, as its stay in St. Helens is limited to a few days."
The diorama was quite a theatrical experience and is said to have astounded audiences.
Light was manipulated in a manner that made landscape paintings appear to change their appearance.
There were no paid holidays for workers but some large firms paid for an annual treat for their employees.
The Newspaper wrote how around 1,000 workers at Sutton Glass Works had recently been to Llandudno. The company had paid their fares but then left them:
"…at liberty to enjoy themselves each after their own tastes, inclinations, and circumstances, an arrangement which appears to have given general satisfaction and enabled the excursionists to form exploring parties with persons of similar tastes, striking into the valleys or roaming over the hills in the neighbourhood in search of the picturesque and the beautiful, while, at the same time, enjoying the refreshing breeze and the delightful sunshine."
And then they returned to the foul, disgusting air of St Helens. What a contrast that would have been!!!
Next week's stories will include the wife beater from Parr, the window smashing at the Liverpool Inn, the firm fined for illegally working a "great lump of a lad" and there is another complaint about the purloining of Thatto Heath by private individuals.
We begin in St Helens Police Court on the 24th when Elizabeth Friar – described by the St Helens Newspaper as a "middle-aged woman of wretched aspect" – was charged with begging.
The woman had been seen going into several shops in Church Street to "solicit alms".
In one shop she was refused money and became abusive and had to be removed by a policeman. Elizabeth was sent to prison for 7 days.
At the Liverpool Summer Assizes on the 26th there was another case of a farmer suing Sutton Copper Works for damaging his crops.
Nobody doubted that pollution from the dozens of chimneys that dotted the St Helens' skyline damaged farmers' fields.
But how could you prove that the Sutton Copper Works was the sole or main offender, when the wind could send noxious fumes many miles?
Thomas Leather of Bold Lane was the latest to try to extract cash from the copper company, demanding £62 compensation for the sulphurous smoke that had damaged his crops.
There was also the question of the extent of the actual damage done, as farmers would often exaggerate their loss.
The defendants accepted partial liability having already paid £9 6s into court.
After hearing the evidence, the jury decided to award the farmer a further sum of £6. So he got a quarter of the cash he was seeking.
What was described as the annual excursion of the children of Parr Mount Day Schools took place on the 26th. But the 500 to 600 kids didn't go very far.
They trooped from their school to Hughes's Park – as the St Helens Newspaper described Sherdley Park – bearing a "profusion of flags and banners" and then they indulged in "rural games and sports".
On the 27th the St Helens Newspaper wrote that several members of the Town Council had been among a group that had recently witnessed an experiment on the Sankey Brook.
This, of course, is the waterway that runs through St Helens by the remnants of the canal. The paper wrote:
"The evils of the Brook are two-fold; the town suffering from the horrible stench that arises from its water, and which at nights, or in damp and foggy weather, covers the roads and pavements with an oily blue slime.
"And the railway company complaining of the acid nature of the water that gets into the canal, and does considerable damage to the canal works."
The London & North-Western Railway owned the canal, which explains the last comment.
According to the Newspaper the experiment had been designed to remove both the "noxious smell" and acidity of the water and had proved successful.
It supposedly worked by exposing to the air the chemical waste that got pumped into the brook before it came into contact with the water.
However it was clearly not a long-term solution to the problem, which would dog the town for many years to come.
The Newton Petty Sessions were held on the 27th and a squabble between two neighbours from Lawrence Street in Earlestown (which used to be near Duke Street) was described in court.
Elizabeth Phillips summoned Jane Rosbottom for assault, accusing the woman of dragging her around by the hair and the defendant cross-summoned her.
The trouble had begun – as so often happened – with an argument between their children.
Mrs Phillips claimed that the young daughter of Mrs Rosbottom had struck one of her own kids on the head.
She rebuked the girl and ten minutes later while she was sweeping the floor, Mrs Rosbottom approached her and said she would "do" for the Welshwoman for abusing her child.
The complainant said she ran into her parlour to escape Mrs Rosbottom but she followed her in and dragged her out by the hair.
However Mrs Rosbottom’s version of events was that Mrs Phillips had thrown her little girl into the middle of the street and when she went to talk to her about it, the woman had attacked her with a brush.
Several women gave evidence of seeing the child being put into the street and the Bench felt the case against Elizabeth Phillips had been proved.
She was fined ten shillings and costs and probably regretted instigating court action as her own summons against Mrs Rosbottom was dismissed.
The magistrates also expressed a wish that the neighbours would endeavour to be on better terms in the future – some hope!
In the St Helens Petty Sessions on the 29th William Whitley was charged with breaching the peace at Parr.
Superintendent James Ludlam – the head of St Helens Police – said he saw the man going up Smithy Brow in an excited state carrying a stone.
Without any provocation Whitley then struck a young man in the face with the stone.
The man's defence was that it had been his own son that he'd bashed, claiming he'd been "laying on him".
Whitley's mistake was to commit the violent act in front of a policeman and he was ordered to find sureties for his good behaviour.
It was revealed in the next case that foot and mouth disease was prevalent in Eccleston.
That was when James Johnson was prosecuted for failing to notify the authorities that the disease had broken out amongst his cattle.
Superintendent Ludlam gave evidence that after receiving a tip off, he had been to the man's farm and found three cows with foot and mouth.
Upon being asked why he had not notified the authorities, James Johnson replied that he had only discovered it the day before.
However a farm worker had already told the police that the disease had been on the farm for a week.
The cattle belonged to a dealer and not to Johnson and the magistrates decided to dismiss the case as they felt it had not been sufficiently proved.
They bred women tough in the 1870s and some were happy to engage in fisticuffs – with men!
Bridget Grey and her husband Thomas appeared in the Sessions charged with committing a breach of the peace in Peasley Cross, along with Thomas Fahey.
The latter had assaulted Bridget's husband and so she came to her spouse's rescue with her fists.
However when Thomas Fahey was put in the witness box he said he was so drunk at the time that he couldn't remember anything of what had happened.
So the charges against the Greys were dropped. However a policeman had seen Fahey knock down Thomas Grey and so the former was bound over to keep the peace.
There were no more than a handful of black people in St Helens during the 19th century and West Indies-born George Daniels of Moss Nook in Sutton was one.
He was prosecuted after falling asleep while driving a carriage.
There were many similar prosecutions as drivers of horses and carts and similar conveyances dozed off on quiet, unlit country roads at night, often with some drink inside of them!
However George – who endured considerable prejudice – was treated leniently and simply ordered to pay court costs.
In seven years time he would get into trouble after stabbing one of his persecutors.
"Ireland, its beautiful scenery, music, and antiquities, are most faithfully represented. We would advise our readers who desire to spend an agreeable and instructive evening to visit it without delay, as its stay in St. Helens is limited to a few days."
The diorama was quite a theatrical experience and is said to have astounded audiences.
Light was manipulated in a manner that made landscape paintings appear to change their appearance.
There were no paid holidays for workers but some large firms paid for an annual treat for their employees.
The Newspaper wrote how around 1,000 workers at Sutton Glass Works had recently been to Llandudno. The company had paid their fares but then left them:
"…at liberty to enjoy themselves each after their own tastes, inclinations, and circumstances, an arrangement which appears to have given general satisfaction and enabled the excursionists to form exploring parties with persons of similar tastes, striking into the valleys or roaming over the hills in the neighbourhood in search of the picturesque and the beautiful, while, at the same time, enjoying the refreshing breeze and the delightful sunshine."
And then they returned to the foul, disgusting air of St Helens. What a contrast that would have been!!!
Next week's stories will include the wife beater from Parr, the window smashing at the Liverpool Inn, the firm fined for illegally working a "great lump of a lad" and there is another complaint about the purloining of Thatto Heath by private individuals.