Wrexham Advertiser – Saturday 31 January 1880
ANOTHER "WELSH CLERICAL SCANDAL." On Wednesday, before the mayor and other magistrates, at Chester police court, William Barrowclough, clerk in holy orders, who gave Criccieth, Carnarvonshire, as his residence, was charged with being drunk and incapable on the 20th instant. Police-officer No. 206 said that at eleven o'clock in the morning of the date mentioned the defendant was drunk in Brook Street, and witness took him to the police station and locked him up. The chief-constable (Mr. Fenwick) said the defendant was afterwards, when sober, bailed, and allowed to go away on his giving his word to appear on Wednesday. The defendant denied being drunk. He said that he was ill, and, on trying to walk, fell down. He added that for a considerable time previous he had not gone out without someone to assist him in walking, and that even yet he could scarcely walk about without help. Police-Inspector Goode said the defendant was brought to the police station by Police-constable 206 and a man who had helped the officer out of pity. The defendant was so drunk that he could neither stand nor articulate. He was unable to give his name, and witness saw, when he was placed in the cell, that there would be no danger of his being suffocated. Three hours afterwards he recovered somewhat, so as to be able to speak, and told witness to be careful what he was about. He then appeared to think he was at a railway station, and not a police station. The defendant again denied being drunk. He was fined 10s with costs added. (Writer’s note – there was collar number 206 in the City Force, however, the number 206 appears in the numerical roll of the Force and this number was allocated to Pc Thomas Gilbride who served between 1879 and 1890.)
The Cheshire Observer - Saturday 19 February 1881
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE CHESTER.          Death of Detective -Sergeant Wallace This well-known officer of the City Police Force died at his house in Cambrian-road, Chester, on Saturday morning from bronchitis. Every winter for the last few years he has suffered from sharp attacks of the disease to which he has at last succumbed.      Mr. Wallace joined the Chester police in June, 1865, and consequently had, at the time of his death, served about 15 years. He had previously served six years in the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and his experience there helped to secure for him rapid promotion in the Chester police. He was very much esteemed by his superiors and the magistracy for his uniform courtesy and the faithful discharge of a duty requiring intelligence and tact in no ordinary degree.      The funeral of the deceased took place on Tuesday afternoon, when his remains were accompanied to the Chester Cemetery by a large number of the city and county police forces. The funeral cortege left the late residence of the deceased shortly after two o'clock in the following order:— Six members of the County Constabulary and a sergeant, under the superintendence of Superintendent, Williamson (Runcorn) and Inspector Leah; then a large contingent of the city police force under the superintendence of Inspector Farrall; a deputation from the Deva Lodge of Oddfellows (M.U.), of which the deceased was a member.     Then followed Sergeant-Major Yates and Quartermaster-Sergeant Stanning, of the 22nd Regiment.     The supporters were Inspectors Lindsay and Good and Sergeants Good and Price.     At the Cemetery the remains were met by the Chief Constable (Mr. G. L. Fenwick), Dr. Harrison (surgeon to the police force), Mr. T. Snelson, and other friends.
The burial service was read by the Rev. W. H. L. Cogswell (vicar of St Oswald's) and the Rev. H. Grantham (miner canon).
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 25 June 1881
ST. JOHN'S AMBULANCE ASSOCIATION. MEETING OF THE CHESTER CENTRE. A public meeting, in connection with the Chester centre of the St. John's Ambulance Association, was held on Thursday afternoon, in the Assembly Room of the Town Hall, for the purpose of hearing the opening report of the centre and witness the giving of certificates to all successful candidates, as well as badges to the police and railway officials who had passed the examination successfully. Police: George Lee Fenwick (chief constable), Thomas Farrell (Inspector), George H. Nixon (detective-sergeant), James Murphy (detective-sergeant), John Goodwin Dunn (constable), William Lough (constable), Joseph Beatty (constable), William Hatton (constable), William Saunders Rose (constable), George Thomas (Constable), Thomas Gallagher (constable), Thomas Lee (constable) Patrick Roe (constable).
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 20 August 1881
CITY POLICE COURT. Saturday.— Before the Mayor (C. Brown, Esq.), W. Johnson, and F. A. Dickson, Esqrs.      A SERIOUS STABBING CASE Thomas Barry, of Herbert's Court, Crook-street, and Mary Phillips, Tan Yard Court, the latter on her own confession, were brought up on remand charged with wounding Mary Ann Finn, with intent to do grievous bodily harm, on Saturday night last. The prosecutrix, who resided at 107, Christleton-road, with her mother, said that on Saturday night, while at the Cross, about eleven o'clock, with Mary Ann Noon and her mother, the prisoners and Ellen and Patsy Barry followed her, and Ellen Barry on overtaking her said " I'll warm you." A disturbance then ensued, in the course of which Ellen Barry spat in her (witness's) mother's face and the police separated them. Knew the prisoners well, and when she and her mother and Mary Ann Noon got as far as Queen-street, on their way home, Ellen Barry came behind her, in company with the two prisoners, and said, " You thing, I have you now, and I'll give it you." The prisoner Barry struck her a blow with something sharp on the right ear, and witness, on feeling that she bled freely, shouted out, "I'm killed." She was also stabbed on the shoulder by the female prisoner. The witness produced in Court the clothes she wore on the occasion, and they were found to be saturated with blood. Ellen Barry, she added, caught hold of her by the hair of the head, as also did the female prisoner, when the latter stabbed her on the right shoulder. Detective-Sergeant Murphy and another police-officer took her to the Infirmary, and before her arrival there she became unconscious.      Mr. Frederick E. Woodward, house surgeon at the Infirmary, said the last witness was brought to that institution between twelve and one o'clock on Sunday morning by Detective Sergeant Murphy, and he found her suffering from a punctured wound about half an inch in length and about three-quarters of an mob deep in front of the right ear. The wound injured a branch of the temple artery, and the bleeding was profuse, and he had some difficulty in stopping it. There were also two wounds over the right shoulder blade which were very likely done by a knife or a pair of scissors, like those produced. All the wounds were clean cut. The wounds were not yet healed, but the prosecutrix was out of danger. When brought to the Infirmary the prosecutrix was more drunk, than unconscious.      P.C. Dunn (possibly John Godwin Dunn served 1878 to 1883) said that on Saturday while at the Cross in company with Inspector Lindsay, about eleven o'clock, he saw four females fighting and creating a disturbance. They were at once sent away. The prisoners were among those who were quarrelling.      Mary Ann Noon, who stated that she lived with the Finns at 107, Christleton-road, stated that she was in company with Mrs. Finn, Mary Ann Finn, and a girl on Saturday night. When at the Cross, a disturbance took place between the prosecutrix and Ellen Barry. The police separated them, and on arriving at the end of Queen-street on their way to Christleton-road, Ellen Barry caught hold of Mary Ann Finn and said, "Now, you thing, I'll give it you," and at the same time the prisoner, Mary Phillips, caught hold of her by the throat. While these two were thrashing the prosecutrix, the male prisoner had hold of Mrs. Finn's hands, but he suddenly released his hold and running at Mary Ann Finn struck her on the side of the head, and she fell down screaming, "Oh, mother, I'm killed." When the prosecutrix fell the two prisoners ran down Love-street. On picking up Mary Ann Finn, who was, "swimming in blood" at the time, witness found the knife produced close to her. She showed it shortly afterwards to Ellen Barry, and said, "In the name of God, who's been using the knife?" holding the knife in her hand. The prisoners were present at the time, as was also Ellen Barry and Patsey Barry. Ellen Barry said, "Give me the knife," and then pulled it out of her hand and went away with it. Phillips was present at the time, but witness did not see her do anything. Sarah Ann Bellis, a young woman, residing at 20, Charles-street, said that while in Foregate-street on Saturday night last she saw the prisoner Phillips strike Mary Ann Finn on the shoulder several times. She also saw a black-hafted knife in her hand, and two young men out of Bridge-street tried to take the knife off her, but did not succeed in doing so. At the same lime she saw a man strike the prosecutrix on the side of the head, but whether he used his fist or any other weapon she did not know. On her falling to the ground it was found that she bled profusely, and great difficulty was experienced in stopping it. Witness did not know who the man was that struck the prosecutrix, as he went away immediately afterwards. Mrs.Elizabeth Antrobus, of 2, Tanyard-court, said the female prisoner formerly lodged in the same house with her, and on Saturday last about three o'clock in the afternoon, while talking to witness, she said, "I have a pair of scissors which I will stick into Mary Ann Finn's heart as far as they will go."      The prisoner had been out during the evening, and returned at a quarter to twelve o clock. Witnesses observed that her apron was covered with blood, and heard her say to Ellen Barry, who was with her at the time, "I have done it, and I could do it again to half of them that are in Chester."      The prisoner Phillips had but recently come to Chester, and on Sunday morning, about half-past seven, witness saw her take the knife produced and a pair of scissors out of a box in the bedroom. Ellen Barry, who was present, said, "Poll, you should never do such a thing like that; why don't you fight with your hands? " and added, "You have got my brother into trouble," and the prisoner replied, "No, I have not; I have done it myself, and I could do as much more." There was a little blood on the knife, and plenty on the scissors, which witness afterwards cleaned.      Detective-Sergeant Murphy stated on Saturday night, while in Foregate-street, about eleven o'clock, be heard a good deal of shouting close to the end of Queen-street, and on going there, he found the prosecutrix on the ground bleeding profusely. She said that the prisoner Barry had stabbed or kicked her, Barry was then going rapidly away in the direction of Love-lane. Witness did all he could to stop the bleeding, and removed the prosecutrix to the Infirmary. On the following morning he arrested Barry in Herbert's- court, Crook -street, and on being charged with stabbing Mary Ann Finn, he said "I never touched her; I only separated them. I admit I ran away."      After, he was brought before the magistrates and remanded on Monday last, the female prisoner came to him while at the back of the court and made a voluntary statement. She said "It was I that stabbed Finn; I never touched her about the head;* "I stabber her only in the back, and she deserves all she got. I threw the knife over a wall into a garden in John-street; and from the description she gave, he went to the place indicated and found the knife in a tree. — Both prisoners were committed for trial at the next Assizes.
The Times - Tuesday 4 October 1881
A Costly Prisoner. Yesterday, at the Chester City Police-Court, John Ogden, smith, who has for some time been in the work-house, was charged with being drunk and assaulting the Police, on the previous Saturday evening. The Chief Constable said that this was Ogden’s 110th appearance, for drunkenness. He had calculated that he and his family has cost the City of Chester more than £1,000. The Bench, declaring that prisoner appeared to be irreclaimable, gave him three months’ imprisonment with hard labour.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 25 February 1882
THE CHARGE OF MURDERING A CHILD AT CHESTER. CORONER'S INQUEST. An inquest was held by Mr. J. Tatlock, the city coroner, on Monday afternoon at the Newgate Tavern, upon the body of Hannah Millett, a child fifteen weeks old which was found in the River Dee on the previous day. The painful circumstances under which the body came to be in the river are already familiar to the public      The jury having viewed the body, which was lying at Ainsworth's boat-house, the first witness called was Mrs. Mary Atkin Farley, wife of Thomas Farley, 3, Church-street, who stated that she knew the deceased, who had lived next door to her; the name was Hannah Millett, and she was the daughter of Jonathan and Mary Ellen Millett. The deceased was fifteen weeks old. Last saw the deceased alive on the 3rd of January when its mother brought it into witness's house. Suckled the child to pacify it as she had been accustomed to do in consequence of the inability of the mother to do it. Mrs. Millett on that occasion told witness that if somebody did not suckle it, it would die; she appeared not to take much notice of the child, and kept it dirty, so witness frequently washed and dressed it. It was sometime between three and four o'clock in the afternoon when witness last saw the child. Mrs. Millett frequently spoke about poisoning or drowning the child, but on that day she said something about putting it under the train; witness did not think she spoke like a woman in her right mind. Mrs. Millett had asked both witness and her husband what they would do to her if she poisoned the child, and whether they would open the body. On the last occasion Mrs. Millett stayed with witness about an hour, and then went home taking the baby with her, which witness did not see alive again. The body shown to the jury was that of Hannah Millett, witness identified it by marks on its body and by its clothes. By the Jury: The woman's husband knew of what she had been saying. They had lived as neighbours for two years and nine months, and witness did not consider that she was in her right mind during that time. Mrs. Millett was fond of children, but seemed to take a dislike to the deceased, saying she, ' Didn't want it." There was one other child living and two had died. Witness thought the death of these two children preyed upon the woman's mind.      Joseph Foden, 4, Walker-street, Bishopsfield, a letter carrier, said on the 4th January, about half-past four o'clock in the afternoon, he was in the Groves, near the river, delivering letters, when he saw Mrs. Millett standing against the river wall behind the park with a child in her arms. Did not notice how the child was dressed, neither could he identify the body of the deceased as that of the child Mrs. Millett had in her arms. After witness had got about fifty yards away be heard her call out, "I have thrown my child into the river; come here quick! " Witness ran for a boat, seeing the woman had no child in her arms. Mr. Pringle and one of the boatmen rowed round to the spot, but witness had to go on with his letter delivery. Would not swear that the words used were that she had "thrown " the child into the river, as he was too far away to be certain. By the Jury: The woman seemed very excited when she called out, and held up her right hand as if to beckon witness. He thought she was crying.      George Clarke, 6, Trinity-court, Trinity-street, labourer, said as he was going home to tea on Wednesday 4th January last, he saw Mrs. Millett on Seller-street Bridge. She said to Mr. Edge, butcher, Egerton-street, to whom witness was talking, "Go down to the coal-yard and tell my husband I have thrown the child into the river." He said, "Oh, nonsense, woman," and she said, " Yes, I have; if you won't go let me." She then ran down Egerton-street in the direction of the coal-yard. Mrs. Millett had a little shawl or something in her band, which she waved about as she ran away. The woman looked very wild, and witness remarked to his friend that she was either drunk or mad.     P.C. John Hill, 12, Wellington Street, said he arrested Mrs. Millett on the 4th January last, and charged her with murdering her child by throwing it into the river Dee; and she replied, "It fell in; I told the postman to take it and he wouldn't." Witness then took her to the station. She appeared to be in a very excited state. It was in Morris's coal-office, Black Diamond-street, and in the presence of her husband that the woman was arrested. Witness remained in the cell with Mrs. Millett until ten o'clock at night in the presence of another woman. Mrs Millett made several rambling statements. She said that a week previous to that she went down to the railway station with the deceased, with a view of putting it under one of the passing trains, but an "angel” came to her dressed in white and told her not to do so." She said also that she saw two mourning coaches coming for the child long before it was born. Witness's impression was that she was utterly insane.      PC. Beatty, 3, Hunters-walk, said that about two o'clock on Sunday afternoon (19th instant), he was at the bottom of Dee-lane, Boughton, on duty, and saw an object floating in the river some distance off; he stopped for a time, and when it came opposite to him witness saw it was the body of the deceased; the toes of her boots and her knees were above water. Witness got a boat and took the body out of the water, and carried it to Ainsworth's boat-house.      The Coroner having summed up the evidence, and directed the jury that it was not their province to inquire into the state of the woman's mind — although she was now in a lunatic asylum — the jury retired, and in a few minutes returned with a verdict of " Wilful murder " against Mary Ellen Millet, they being of the opinion that the child was thrown into the water.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 19 August 1882
Charge of Permitting Drunkenness. — Mr. John Smith, landlord of the Dublin Packet Inn, was summoned for permitting drunkenness on Thursday, 10th instant. Mr. W. H. Churton appeared for the defenoe. — Police-officer 30 (Thomas Lee) said that on the morning of the 10th August about eight o'clock he was at the office on duty He was sent to the Dublin Packet in company with another officer (Culliford). On getting to the vault he found two persons there — one named Thomas Brown, and the other Swindley. They had two glasses before them containing drink. The barman said Brown's contained limejuice, and Swindley said his own contained gin and limejuice. Brown was drunk, and refused to give his name. Witness called the attention of the barman to his state, and he said he was not drunk. — Cross-examined: It was Sergeant Plimmer who directed witness to go to the house. Witness went to the defendant's house through the market, but did not run or trot. (Laughter.) Did not know that Brown was deaf, but knew he was either deaf or stupid. (Laughter.) Brown asked witness to have a drink. Swindley was all right.— Police-officer 17 (Culliford) corroborated. He said that the contents of both glasses were of the same colour. Brown was drunk, and Swindley had evidently been drinking. The barman denied that Brown was drunk, but admitted that he had "had his fair share." — Police-sergeant Plimmer said that on the morning named he saw the two men alluded to going towards Mr. Smith's house. Brown was staggering, and witness sent two officers to defendant's house to see if the men were being served with drink — Cross-examined : Witness had never had a row with defendant, and was not unfriendly with him. — Mr. Churton, for the defence, said that Mr. Smith had kept the house for many years, and had always endeavoured to adhere to the law, and to prevent any infractions thereof. It was always a matter of opinion whether a man was drunk or sober, and in order to establish a charge of "permitting " drunkenness, they must be satisfied that there was knowledge, assent, privity, or connivance on the part of the publican. The man Brown was a sculptor by profession, and had an unfortunate habit of putting his hat on the back of his head and reciting Shakspeare.(sic) (Laughter.) — Thomas Brown said that he had two two-pennyworths of gin with lime-juice in it before going to the Dublin Packet, where he called for a similar mixture for Swindley, and for a small lime juice for himself, when the officers came in. He had no gin himself. After this he went home, had a "good breakfast," and wrote some correspondence. — John Swindley, master joiner, Claverton-row, gave corroborative evidence. He said that Brown quoted "a little bit of Shakspeare (sic) or something" to the officers. (Laughter.)— Alfred Mills, barman at Mr. Smith's, corroborated the foregoing witnesses. He said that he had frequently refused to serve policemen on duty. He refused to serve P.C. 30 about six weeks ago, about 8 to 9 o'clock on a Saturday morning. (At the request of Mr. Fenwick a note was taken of this statement.) — Mr. Fenwick: Did you tell anyone that you had refused to served 30? Witness: Yes • I told Mrs. Smith.— Mr. Fenwick: When? Witness: The same day. — Mr. Fenwick : You did not tell any sergeant or inspector ?— Witness : No.— Mr. Fenwick : You kept it till now ? — Witness : Yes.— Mr. Fenwick : You thought it would come in useful. (Laughter ) — Mr. Aston, news agent, deposed to having seen the two men crossing the square at about 8.15 on the morning named. They then appeared to be sober.— Mr. Smith, the defendant, was next called. He was not present when the men came in.— Mr. Churton said that was the case for the defence, subject to the fact that Mr. Barlow, who was an important witness, did not appear, although every effort had been made to secure his presence.— A charge of being drunk on licensed premises was also preferred against Brown. — The Bench retired, and were absent for twenty minutes. On returning to court, the Chairman said the Magistrates had given very careful consideration to the case, which was one of the most difficult cases they ever had to decide, there being so many witnesses on one side who swore white, and so many on the other who swore black. However, they could not think that the police had come there to perjure themselves, but believed that Brown had been found drunk on licensed premises. He must therefore pay a fine of 5s. and costs, or seven days. With regard to the other case, it seemed to be pretty clear law that if they allowed that Brown was drunk, the landlord was not liable to be convicted unless he (Brown) was supplied by the landlord with liquor, which had not been clearly shewn. At all events, it involved a great doubt. There were no complaints against Mr. Smith before, and it was perfectly certain he was not on the premises at the time. As there was a doubt in the case, they were bound to give Mr. Smith the benefit of it, and therefore they would dismiss the case. — The court was crowded during the hearing.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 23 September 1882
HAWARDEN. Arrival or the Premier at Hawarden. — The Premier arrived at Hawarden Castle from London on Saturday evening, having left Euston by the 2. 45 train, which reached Chester General Station just before half-past seven. The fact that Mr. Gladstone was expected was kept as secret as possible; but, as the train drew up to the platform, the rumour of his arrival spread rapidly through the station, which is generally well filled on Saturday evenings. A number of persons gathered around the Premier as he stepped upon the platform, and he was repeatedly compelled to acknowledge their respectful salutations. 'The police protection was renewed immediately upon his arrival, the Flintshire Constabulary being represented by Mr. Aplin (chief clerk) and Sergeant Matthews (Holywell), while the Chester force was represented by Detective-Sergeant Murphy and Inspector Farrell. On getting outside the station, the right honourable gentleman was surrounded by a crowd of about a hundred persons, who set up three ringing cheers as he drove off for Hawarden, followed in another conveyance by the two officers of the Flintshire Constabulary. Mr. Gladstone appeared to be in excellent health and spirits, and seemed to be gratified by the reception, notwithstanding that he had endeavoured to escape notice.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 4 November 1882
A Fall from the City Wails.— On Saturday evening about seven o'clock, P.C. Brocklehurst, of the Chester City Police force, found a man named Willam Melia, of Fosbrook-street, lying insensible in the Groves, near the Wishing Steps. The man, who had been drinking, had evidently fallen from the City Walls. He was removed to the Infirmary, where he is progressing as well as can be expected. It is believed that no bones are broken, but the sufferer has a bad cut and contusions on his head, and is suffering from concussion and shock.
Cheshire Observer – 10 February 1883
VIOLENT ASSAULT ON A POLICE-CONSTABLE. Robert Owens, a middle-aged man, of Herbert's Court, Chester, was placed in the dock charged with being drunk and riotous, and also with causing grievous bodily harm to a police-constable, named Edward Tutty, in the borough of Chester, on Sunday night, the 21st January. Edward Tutty, the complainant, said he was a police- constable in the Chester borough police force. He was on duty on Sunday night, the 21st January, and Crook-street and Herberts-court were part of his beat on that night. A little after twelve o'clock he was in Crook-street, and heard the prisoner shouting and making use of very bad language in Herberts-court. Prisoner lived in Herberts-court. Complainant went to him, and found him mad drunk; be was knocking at a door and cursing and swearing. Witness took hold of him by the arm and said, "You must come to the police office with me." He replied, 'I will not; all the police in the force will not bring me to the police office " He then tried to put his hand in his pocket, and said, "I'll stab you," but witness took hold of his hands and prevented him getting the knife. Prisoner also said that the Chief Constable had put the officer there specially to watch him, which game had been tried on often enough; but, of course, this was not true. He then tried to strike and to kick the complainant, and tripped him up, and they both fell to the ground together. Whilst they were on the ground P.C. Ennion came up. Up to this time prisoner had had no boots on; but a woman brought him some boots from his own house, which he put on. When he got his boots on he said he would go quietly, but he afterwards suddenly tripped up the complainant again, who fell; and whilst he was on the ground he kicked him twice, and broke his ribs. Complainant said he felt his ribs were broken; he was not able to speak. A third policeman then came up - and the prisoner was taken away. Witness was still under surgical treatment, and was off duty — For the defence prisoner said that the complainant fell on his lamp, and that the fall broke his ribs; but this was denied, as the complainant said the lamp was hanging at his back, and it was the kicks of the prisoner which broke his ribs. Dr. George Harrison, surgeon to the Chester police force, said the constable, Edward Tutty, called upon him on January 22nd, in the morning. Witness examined him, and found him suffering from a fracture of the ninth and tenth ribs, near the angle of each of them, and also dislocation of the sixth rib from its cartilage in front. The injury must certainly have been caused by direct violence; a kick or a very severe blow would have caused it. With regard to the other injury, it might have been caused by a very severe fall, but great force must have been applied to the fall, or it would not have caused the injury. The officer was going on all right at present, but at least two blows must have been given to produce the injuries. Prisoner explained that the stones were slippery at the place, and they were struggling together, and the officer fell on his lamp. Samuel Rowlands, labourer, of 13, Herbert's Court, said on the Sunday night in question, the 21st of Jan. last, about 12 o'clock, he heard a row and prisoner's voice, and also the policeman's voice. He saw that prisoner was wrestling with the policeman, and he came downstairs and went out, and saw the prisoner and the constable Tutty on the ground. Witness had previously heard the prisoner knocking at the door. When they were on the floor the officer knocked his stick on the ground for assistance. Witness told the prisoner it would be better for him to go quiet. Prisoner was in a "rough state ;" he was drunk, and had no shoes on. Prisoner said, "I won't go for nobody." Another policeman then came up, and prisoner was lifted up. They then all fell down together, but witness did not see any kicking or tripping. He would swear to this. He did not hear prisoner say anything about a knife. It was witness's door that the prisoner had been knocking at, and he was calling out for "Mary Ann," a woman whom he lived with. This woman had come to his house a little before 12 o'clock for protection. He had been knocking at the door for about ten minutes, but the woman was afraid to go out, as prisoner had been abusing her. He heard the prisoner "shouting and blating" by which he meant cursing and swearing. P.C. Samuel Kennion said about midnight on Sunday, the 21st January, he heard a policeman signal for help. He went to his assistance in Herberts-court. He found the prisoner and P.C. Tutty on the ground struggling. Witness got hold of the prisoner and lifted him to his feet. Prisoner was drunk and very violent. He had no boots on at the time, and said Tutty had "been put there by the Chief Constable to watch him”, but they could never get him, for "no ******** policeman on the force could take him." His boots were brought and he was allowed to put them on, and then he said he would go with the officer quietly. He afterwards deliberately put his leg round Tutty and threw him. He shouted to a woman for his knife, and said, "Now, death or glory!" Prisoner was eventually got to the police-office. P.C. Tutty said he was "done up" and quite exhausted with the falls. When they were on the ground prisoner was kicking about with his feet. He tried to kick at witness, but witness did not see him kick P.C. Tutty. Mrs Pierson, wife of Samuel Pierson, chainmaker, of 23, Herberts-court, said on the night in question she heard the prisoner "agate," falling out with "Mary Ann," after ten o'clock. There was a great noise, the prisoner having been drinking since the previous Thursday. Prisoner put "Mary Ann" out of the house at half-past ten, and she took refuge in a neighbour's house. Witness soon afterwards went to bed, and then heard the struggle in the yard and went downstairs. She saw the officer and prisoner struggling on the floor in the yard. Prisoner was very stubborn, and would not go with the officer, and shouted "Mary Ann, fetch my knife—death or glory!" The woman told him to go quietly. The boots were brought, and witness did not see anything else that happened, as she went down the yard for a policeman. This was the case for the prosecution. For the defence the prisoner called a witness named Sarah Poison, his sister, living at 27, Herberts-court, whose evidence did not affect the case at all, as she said she did not see the disturbance. The Prisoner said he was very sorry for what had taken place, and asked the magistrates to deal with the case summarily. The Chairman, however, told him it was too serious a matter for them to deal with, and he was committed to take his trial at the next sessions, substantial bail being accepted for his appearance.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 17 March 1883
ATTEMPTING TO MURDER A CHILD IN CHESTER.        FIENDISH CONDUCT OF A MOTHER. At the Chester City Police Court, on Monday, before F. Bullin, Esq. (chairman), W. Parish, Esq., W Johnson, Esq, and R. Frost, Esq, a young woman named Elisabeth Roberts, of Seaville-street, Boughton was brought up in custody charged with causing grievous bodily harm to and attempting to feloniously kill and murder her infant, named Mary Ann Roberts, by throwing it on the fire on Sunday, the 4th instant. The Court was crowded during the hearing of the case, and the greatest interest was manifested. The prisoner, a repulsive looking woman, was undefended. The first witness called was Elizabeth Antrobus, a married woman, who said she lived at No. 5, Seaville-place, Boughton, and was joint tenant of the house with the prisoner. On Sunday, the 4th inst., prisoner came home about three o'clock in the afternoon. Another woman named Harriet Plevin was also in the house. Prisoner had been out all the morning. She had a little child named Mary Ann Roberts, about 14 months old, which had been left in the house with witness. When she returned, witness and the woman Plevin were getting their dinner, and the child was sitting on a stool by the side of the fire. Prisoner was seen to be the worse for drink. The first thing she did when she came in was to go across the house to the child. She took it up and said "You little thing, I will shake your liver and lites out." She held the child by the front of its clothing, and then threw it on the top of the fire. It was a small fire-place, by the side of which was an oven in which witness had been cooking dinner. The oven was red hot, but the fire had just been made up with fresh coals, and was not blazing at the time. Witness at once dragged the child from the fire and said to the prisoner, "Don't be so cruel to the poor baby." Prisoner seized the child from witness and said, "Come here you little bastard; I'll finish you out and out." She shook the child two or three times, and then began to curse and swear, and afterwards again threw it on the fire, adding, "I may as well finish you now as at any other time; and I will burn you to death, you little "Git." Witness struggled with her, and again tried to take the child off the fire, whilst prisoner did all she could to prevent her from doing so. The child was almost in fits with crying. Witness succeeded in getting it off the second time, and just then a neighbour named Brayford came in to look at her dinner, which was cooking in witness's oven. Whilst witness was dragging the child off the fire the second time prisoner got hold of a kettle of boiling water which was on the hob and tried to throw some over the child. Some of the boiling water went over the child and some over witness's arm. The child's clothes did not take fire, being made of woollen cloth, but they were scorched. Witness here showed her arm, and appeared to be suffering acutely from the scalding water.      Prisoner, on being asked if she had any questions to ask, replied what witness had said was all right, but she had to thank no one but her for being there.     Mr Henry Wm. King, house surgeon at the Chester Infirmary, said about a quarter to four o'clock on Sunday afternoon, the 4th of March, a little child named Sarah Ann Roberts was brought to the Infirmary. The child would be about a year old. She was suffering from scalds on the back, and also on the right thigh and right arm. The scalds extended from a little above the middle of the back downwards, and at the back and outside of the right thigh, and also from the middle of the right arm downwards almost to the wrist. The child was still under his care, but he believed it was out of danger, although its life had been in danger from the time of the occurrence till the present, owing to the severity of the injuries. There were no burns, and he could not see that the clothes of the child had been scorched; but its clothing was wet. The scalding water had raised blisters the whole extent.      Harriet Plevin said she was staying at the prisoner's house, and was there on Sunday, the 4th of March. She was at dinner with the witness Antrobus when the prisoner came in on the afternoon in question. Antrobus asked the prisoner to sit down and have her dinner. Witness at once observed that prisoner had been drinking. The child was sitting on a stool by the side of the fire. Antrobus took the child on her knee. The little one wanted the breast, which the prisoner would not give it. She said she did not intend to give it any more, and might as well start to wean it that day as any other. The child then began to cry, and it was placed on a stool. As it continued to cry prisoner exclaimed "You little bastard," and tried to get at the child. Antrobus interfered, and said the child should not be hurt, and prisoner replied that she would do as she liked, as the child was her own. Suiting the action to the word she seized the child by the legs and by the clothing, and said she might as well finish it then as at any other time. She made a dash, and threw the child on the fire. Antrobus took it off, and handed it to witness. Witness saw that the child's elbow was burned, and called prisoner's attention to it. She also tried to bandage it up. Prisoner replied that she would do as she liked with her own child, and whilst witness was binding up the arm prisoner knocked her over, seized the child once more, called it more foul names, said she might as well finish it then as at any other time, and threw it again on the fire. Antrobus once more took it off, and there was a struggle between her and the prisoner. The kettle of boiling water stood on the hob, and after everything was over witness picked up the kettle from the floor, and the child and all the floor was covered with soot. Witness then went out. She had lived with the prisoner about two months, and whenever prisoner had any drink she "spit her spite" upon the infant. (Sensation) About a fortnight or three weeks before this occurrence prisoner tried to strangle it, and said she would choke the child. (Sensation)      Harriet Brayford, who lives at 8, Seaville-place, four doors from the prisoner, said on Sunday afternoon, the 4th of March, she was at home, and went into the prisoner's house, about a little after three, to see if her meat, which was cooking in prisoner's oven, was done. In the house, besides the prisoner, were two other women, named Antrobus and Plevin. Witness saw Plevin (the last witness) with the baby in her arms, which was covered with soot. She told witness the prisoner had put the child on the fire twice. Witness asked what kind of women they were to allow her to put the child on the fire, and added, "I'll send for a police-man." Prisoner heard witness say this, and she at once seized a black-handled table knife and said she would put it up to the haft into her heart if she did so. (Sensation.) Prisoner was coming towards her with the knife in her hand, when witness struck her a blow and knocked her on to a sofa. Witness then looked into the oven after the meat, and whilst she was doing this prisoner once more seized the child and threw it on the fire. Witness snatched the child from the fire and handed it to someone outside the house, and afterwards took it to the Infirmary; and the skin from its body stuck to her hands where it had been scalded. The fire was black, and witness felt sure bad she not been there that the infant would have been burnt to death. Prisoner: Did you ever see me try to strangle the child?. Witness: Well, I heard a row in your house about a fortnight ago, and I went into the house and was told that you had been trying to strangle the child, and I took it home with me on that occasion and kept it there till one o'clock in the morning, so that you should not abuse it or strangle it. (Sensation.)      The witness Antrobus was then recalled, and, in reply to the question, said she had not seen the prisoner abuse the child very much before. She had, however, seen the prisoner flog the child, and remembered Mrs Brayford taking it away one night because the prisoner was ill losing it.      Rhoda Rowlands, a single young woman, residing at 4, Seaville Plaoe, next door to the prisoner, said on Sunday, the 4th of March, she was at home in the afternoon. About three o'clock she heard a noise in the prisoner's house, and looked through the door, which was open, to see what was the matter. Witness saw the baby on the fire, and the kettle was on the floor, and witness saw Mrs Brayford run in and take the child off the fire. She then ran for a policeman.      Sergeant Culliford said on the Sunday in question he was on duty in Boughton. From a complaint which was made P.C Evans and himself went to the court in which the prisoner lived. Prisoner was in the court outside the house, and witness was shown the child, and was told it had been thrown on the fire. He saw it was suffering from wounds of some kind, and the prisoner was accordingly arrested. In going along she said, "Sergeant, God knows I did not do it; me and Mrs Antrobus were quarrelling, and in the scuffle she knocked the kettle over; that's how the child got scalded." Prisoner was very far gone in drink. P.C James Evans, said he was with Sergeant Culliford on the afternoon in question, and assisted in bringing the woman to the police-office. In the Kaleyards she made the following statement :— "I did not burn my child. I was standing on the left side of the fire, with my arm round the child, when Antrobus knocked the kettle over on me and the child." Witness asked if it was done accidentally, she said "no, on purpose," and showed her hands which appeared to be scalded. On the following Monday witness charged her with attempting to murder her child by throwing it on the fire, when she denied the charge.
P.C. Gallagher said after the prisoner was remanded on the previous Monday, he removed her to the Castle. On the way she said, "They said I tried to strangle the child, a fortnight ago, but it's a lie. But what can I do? I have to keep it myself; nobody gives me anything to keep it with. and I have got to work hard to keep it, and it’s no joke either. It will be a good job if it does die— (sensation) — and I get the rope round my neck for it. But just let me get out of this mess, and I’ll take good care to get out of Chester quick. (Sensation.)     This was all the evidence, and the prisoner had nothing to say in answer to the charge. The Chairman said it was no part of the duty, of the Bench to give expression to the horror with which they had listened to the evidence in the case. Prisoner would be tried before a higher court. The duty of the Bench was simply to commit her to take her trial at the next Assizes. Prisoner was then removed below, amid the hisses of some of the spectators.
Wrexham Advertiser - Saturday 27 January 1883
At Chester Police Court on Monday
Robert Owens, shoemaker, was charged with being drunk and riotous and assaulting the police at Chester. The police were about to arrest him, when he threw Police-Constable Tutty to the ground with great violence, breaking one of his ribs. A medical certificate was put in to that effect, and prisoner was remanded for a week.
 
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 17 March 1883
ATTEMPTING TO MURDER A CHILD IN CHESTER. FIENDISH CONDUCT OF A MOTHER. At the Chester City Police Court, on Monday, before F. Bullin, Esq. (chairman), W. Parish, E<q., W Johnson, Esq, and R. Frost, Esq, a young woman named Elisabeth Roberts, of Seaville-street, Boughton was brought up in custody charged with causing grievous bodily harm to and attempting to feloniously kill and murder her infant, named Mary Ann Roberts, by throwing it on the fire on Sunday, the 4th instant The Court was crowded during the hearing of the case, and the greatest interest was manifested. The prisoner, a repulsive-looking woman, was undefended. The first witness called was Elizabeth Antrobus, a married woman, who said she lived at No. 5, Seaville- place, Boughton, and was joint tenant of the house with the prisoner. On Sunday, the 4th inst., prisoner came home about three o'clock in the afternoon. Another woman named Harriet Plevin was also in the house. Prisoner had been out all the morning. She had a little child named Mary Ann Roberts, about 14 months old, which had been left in the house with witness. When she returned, witness and the woman Plevin were getting their dinner, and the child was sitting on a stool by the side of the fire. Prisoner was seen to be the worse for drink. The first thing she did when she came in was to go across the house to the child. She took it up and said "You little thing, I will shake your liver and lites out." She held the child by the front of its clothing, and then threw it on the top of the fire. It was a small fire place, by the side of which was an oven in which witness had been cooking dinner. The oven was red hot, but the fire had just been made up with fresh coals, and was not blazing at the time. Witness at once dragged the child from the fire and said to the prisoner, "Don't be so cruel to the poor baby." Prisoner seized the child from witness and said, "Come here you little bastard; I'll finish you out and out." She shook the child two or three times, and then began to curse and swear, and afterwards again threw it on the fire, adding, "I may as well finish you now as at any other time; and I will burn you to death, you little "Git." Witness struggled with her, and again tried to take the child off the fire, whilst prisoner did all she could to prevent her from doing so. The child was almost in fits with crying. Witness succeeded in getting it off the second time, and just then a neighbour named Brayford came in to look at her dinner, which was cooking in witness's oven. Whilst witness was dragging the child off the fire the second time prisoner got hold of a kettle of boiling water which was on the hob and tried to throw some over the child. Some of the boiling water went over the child and some over witness's arm. The child's clothes did not take fire, being made of woollen cloth, but they were scorched. Witness here showed her arm, and appeared to be suffering acutely from the scalding water. Prisoner, on being asked if she had any questions to ask, replied what witness had said was all right, but she had to thank no one but her for being there. Mr Henry Wm. King, house surgeon at the Chester Infirmary, said about a quarter to four o'clock on Sunday afternoon, the 4th of March, a little child named Sarah Ann Roberts was brought to the Infirmary. The child would be about a year old. She was suffering from scalds on the back, and also on the right thigh and right arm. The scalds extended from a little above the middle of the back downwards, and at the back and outside of the right thigh, and also from the middle of the right arm downwards almost to the wrist. The child was still under his care, but he believed it was out of danger, although its life had been in danger from the time of the occurrence till the present, owing to the severity of the injuries. There were no burns, and he could not see that the clothes of the child had been scorched; but its clothing was wet. The scalding water had raised blisters the whole extent. Harriet Plevin said she was staying at the prisoner's house, and was there on Sunday, the 4th of March. She was at dinner with the witness Antrobus when the prisoner came in on the afternoon in question. Antrobus asked the prisoner to sit down and have her dinner. Witness at once observed that prisoner had been drinking. The child was sitting on a stool by the side of the fire. Antrobus took the child on her knee. The little one wanted the breast, which the prisoner would not give it. She said she did not intend to give it any more, and might as well start to wean it that day as any other. The child then began to cry, and it was placed on a stool. As it continued to cry prisoner exclaimed "You little bastard," and tried to get at the child. Antrobus interfered, and said the child should not be hurt, and prisoner replied that she would do as she liked, as the child was her own. Suiting the action to the word she seized the child by the legs and by the clothing, and said she might as well finish it then as at any other time. She made a dash, and threw the child on the fire. Antrobus took it off, and handed it to witness. Witness saw that the child's elbow was burned, and called prisoner's attention to it. She also tried to bandage it up. Prisoner replied that she would do as she liked with her own child, and whilst witness was binding up the arm prisoner knocked her over, seized the child once more, and called it more foul names, said she might as well finish it then as at any other time, and threw it again on the fire. Antrobus once more took it off, and there was a struggle between her and the prisoner. The kettle of boiling water stood on the hob, and after everything was over witness picked up the kettle from the floor, and the child and all the floor was covered with soot. Witness then went out. She had lived with the prisoner about two months, and whenever prisoner had any drink she "spit her spite" upon the infant. (Sensation.) About a fortnight or three weeks before this occurrence prisoner tried to strangle it, and said she would choke the child. (Sensation.) Harriet Brayford, who lives at 8, Seaville-place, four doors from the prisoner, said on Sunday afternoon, the 4th of March, she was at home, and went into the prisoner's house, about a little after three, to see if her meat, which was cooking in prisoner's oven, was done. In the house, besides the prisoner, were two other women, named Antrobus and Plevin. Witness saw Plevin (the last witness) with the baby in her arms, which was covered with soot. She told witness the prisoner had put the child on the fire twice. Witness asked what kind of women they were to allow her to put the child on the fire, and added "I'll send for a policeman." Prisoner heard witness say this, and she at once seized a black-handled table knife and said she would put it up to the haft into her heart if she did so. (Sensation.) Prisoner was coming towards her with the knife in her hand, when witness struck her a blow and knocked her on to a sofa. Witness then looked into the oven after the meat, and whilst she was doing this prisoner once more seized the child and threw it on the fire. Witness snatched the child from the fire and handed it to someone outside the house, and afterwards took it to the Infirmary; and the skin from its body stuck to her hands where it had been scalded. The fire was black, and witness felt sure bad she not been there that the infant would have been burnt to death. Prisoner: Did you ever see me try to strangle the child? Witness: Well, I heard a row in your house about a fortnight ago, and I went into the house and was told that you had been trying to strangle the child, and I took it home with me on that occasion and kept it there till one o'clock in the morning, so that you should not abuse it or strangle it. (Sensation.) The witness Antrobus was then recalled, and, in reply to the question, said she had not seen the prisoner abuse the child very much before. She had, however, seen the prisoner flog the child, and remembered Mrs Brayford taking it away one night because the prisoner was ill using it. Rhoda Rowlands, a single young woman, residing at 4, Seaville Place, next door to the prisoner, said on Sunday, the 4th of March, she was at home in the afternoon. About three o'clock she heard a noise in the prisoner's house, and looked through the door, which was open, to see what was the matter. Witness saw the baby on the fire, and the kettle was on the floor, and witness saw Mrs Brayford run in and take the child off the fire. She then ran for a policeman. Sergeant Culliford said on the Sunday in question he was on duty in Boughton. From a complaint which was made P.C Evans and himself went to the court in which the prisoner lived. Prisoner was in the court outside the house, and witness was shown the child, and was told it had been thrown on the fire. He saw it was suffering from wounds of some kind, and the prisoner was accordingly arrested. In going along she said, "Sergeant, God knows I did not do it; me and Mrs Antrobus were quarrelling, and in the scuffle she knocked the kettle over; that's how the child got scalded." Prisoner was very far gone in drink. P.C James Evans, said he was with Sergeant Culliford on the afternoon in question, and assisted in bringing the woman to the police-office. In the Kaleyards she made the following statement:— "I did not burn my child. I was standing on the left side of the fire, with my arm round the child, when Antrobus knocked the kettle over on me and the child." Witness asked if it was done accidentally, she said "not on purpose," and showed her bands which appeared to be scalded. On the following Monday witness charged her with attempting to murder her child by throwing it on the fire, when she denied the charge. P.C. Gallagher said after the prisoner was remanded on the previous Monday, he removed her to the Castle. On the way she said, "They said I tried to strangle the child, a fortnight ago, but it's a lie. But what can I do? I have to keep it myself; nobody gives me anything to keep it with. and I have got to work hard to keep it, and it’s no joke either. It will be a good job if it does die— (sensation) — and I get the rope round my neck for it. But just let me get out of this mess, and I’ll take good care to get out of Chester quick. (Sensation.) This was all the evidence and the prisoner had nothing to say in answer to the charge. The Chairman said it was no part of the duty, of the Bench to give expression to the horror with which they had listened to the evidence in the case. Prisoner would be tried before a higher court. The duty of the Bench was simply to commit her to take her trial at the next Assizes. Prisoner was then removed below, amid the hisses of some of the spectators.
 
Cheshire Observer – 14 April 1883
CHESTER OITY SESSIONS. The Quarter Sessions of the Peace for the City of Chester were held on Thursday, before Horatio Lloyd, Esq. (Recorder), The Mayor (Sir T. G. Frost), the Sheriff (Mr J. McHattie), and Messrs. F. Bullin, W. Johnson, W. Parish, and T. Q. Roberts paid their respects to the learned Recorder on the Bench. A POLICE OFFICER IN THE EXECUTION OF HIS DUTY. Robert Owens (42), shoemaker, was indicted for unlawfully and maliciously inflicting upon one Edward Tutty certain grievous bodily harm, in the City of Chester, on the 21st Jan. last. The Hon R. C. Grosvenor prosecuted; prisoner was defended by Mr E. H. Lloyd. Prisoner was indicted under three counts, first, for assaulting the officer in the execution of his duty, secondly, for inflicting grievous bodily harm, and thirdly, with a common assault. On the date named, Sunday night, the officer was on duty when he heard a great disturbance about twelve o'clock at night in the neighbourhood of Herbert's-Court, Crook-street, and on going there he found the prisoner kicking against a house door, swearing, and making a great noise, disturbing the neighbourhood. The police-officer finding the prisoner thus engaged determined to apprehend him and take him to the police-station, but the prisoner, who had not then his boots on, resisted the constable with all his might, struck him, and would not let the officer apprehend him under any circumstances. Being a powerful man he tripped up the officer, and they both fell together. The constable made a signal for assistance, and another officer named Kenyon came up and found the prisoner and the officer struggling together upon the ground. He pulled the prisoner off the prosecutor, and on their preparing to take the prisoner to the police-station he said he would go quietly if they would allow him to put his boots on. This was allowed, but the officers had hardly started with their prisoner before he again became exceedingly violent, managed to trip up Tutty, and when he was down— so it was alleged- kicked him twice. He had two ribs broken and another dislocated, being six weeks unable to attend to his duties.— The prosecutor, P.C. Samuel Kenyon, Samuel Rowlands, and Mary Pearson, wife of Samuel Pearson, having been examined in support of the charge, Mr G. Harrison, police-surgeon, said prosecutor's ninth and tenth ribs were broken on the left side, and his sixth rib was dislocated. Being cross-examined, he said it was quite possible that the ribs might have been broken by the policeman falling on his lamp, but he should say that it required great force and a direct blow to dislocate the sixth rib. In his opinion it mast have been caused by direct violence. It might certainly have been dislocated if he fell sideways.— The Hon. R. C. Grosvenor : Assuming that the constable was tripped up falling upon and fracturing his ninth and tenth rib, would you expect as a result that his sixth rib would be dislocated? Witness: No.— This was the case for the prosecution; and Mr Lloyd, for the defence, called Samuel Polson of the 3rd Cheshire Regiment, who said during the scuffle between the parties he heard the prisoner say, "If I have done anything wrong summon me. I have been a ratepayer for sixteen years;" and the constable replied, "I have got you now, and I'll have you." He told the constable to keep his staff off him. The constable had his staff in his hand, and was knocking it about with the intention of striking the prisoner, and Mrs Pearson rushed out and took the staff off him. He never saw the prisoner kick in the slightest.— Alfred Taylor, James Donaldson, other residents of Herbert's-Court, gave evidence for the defence, showing that the officers and the prisoner all fell together, and that they never saw the prisoner kick the constable.— The learned counsel for the prisoner, in addressing the jury for the defence, contended strongly that the case of malicious injury had not been made out. that the injuries might have been inflicted by a fall, and that the prisoner was strictly within his right in resisting apprehension.— Mr Grosvenor having also addressed the court, the learned Recorder summed up, explaining the law of arrest to the jury.— The latter, after a short consultation, found the prisoner guilty on the first count of the indictment, and having already been in custody three months, he was now sentenced to a further three months' imprisonment with hard labour.
 
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 03 June 1893
The Chief Constable of Chester (Mr. G. L. Fenwick), in an able article in the Police Review on "The Appointment of Chief Constables," says : 'In nearly all our county forces the command has been given to military men, and the same thing may be said of the principal appointment in the metropolitan police. In the whole country less than a tithe of the chief officers had any police experience before they were appointed. In cities and boroughs the practice, for whatever reason, has been exactly the reverse. It is the rule in the latter case, in advertising the post, to stipulate for previous police training. It would be invidious to refer to counties or cities by name, but no one will contend for an instant that for smartness and efficiency the forces of some of the centres of industry will not compare favourably with any county force, no matter under whose command. When city authorities make a mistake it is rather the result of the happy-go-lucky method which obtains than a wilful offending." "An advertisement brings 60 or 80 candidates for a post, and to select the best man is obviously a most difficult task. What, then, is the remedy for a state of things bordering' on the chaotic? It is suggested that there should be (1) previous police training, not necessarily as a constable, but effective; (2) that there should be a certificate of educational fitness after examination: (3) a maximum age, physical fitness, and special aptitude for wor. If the Home Secretary, county and city authorities could agree upon the requirements, which need not be of a dead-level kind, but varied according to the importance of the office, and establish or nominate an existing examining body, the first and most difficult step would be taken. The merits of the examinees could be determined by marks, as in army and other examinations This would weed out 75 per cent, of the candidates, who now worry and perplex the authorities, and they would only have qualified men—hall-marked men, so to speak— to deal with. Local men would still have the advantage of local influence, but a very uneasy feeling, prejudicial alike to the forces and their work, would be got rid of, and co-operation, which is one of the first essentials in police work, would be permanently assured."
 
     Cheshire Observer - Saturday 23 June 1883
CITY POLICE COURT. Saturday.— Before the Mayor (Sir T. G. Frost), in the chair ; W. Johnson, C. Townshend, C. J. Blelook, and W. Farish, Esqrs.      A Dip in the River and Too Much "Restoratives." Arthur J. Cooke, a respectably-dressed man, bailing from Upper Oriel-street, Dublin, was summoned by P.C. O'Reilly for being drunk in Foregate Street. The constable said defendant was found so thoroughly intoxicated as to his unable to take care of himself on Sunday afternoon in Foregate-street. Defendant's clothes were saturated with water, and he was taken to the Police-office, where his clothing was dried. Cooke admitted the truth of the constable's story. He had been attending a funeral, and was a stranger to Chester. On Sunday afternoon he went in company with a lady to the Groves, and hired a boat with the intention of going to Eaton Hall. An unlucky hitch occurred at the embarkation. Just as defendant was stepping on board the boat, his foot went on to the gunwale, and he slipped over the side into the water.      Having been rescued from the dangers of the river, he was taken in an exhausted condition to a neighbouring beer-house, where restoratives in the form of brandy were applied. Defendant maintained that he was sober before the accident, and that it was against his wish that brandy was sent for, because he was not a drunkard; but after swallowing the stimulants he became over- powered and remembered nothing.      He requested to be dismissed, as he had neither money nor friends here.      The Chief Constable stated the circumstances were on the whole as defendant had recited them, and mentioned that after the mishap the defendant's lady companion suddenly decamped.      The Magistrates dismissed the case.
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 21 July 1893
Hiring a Boat to Drunken People.— Samuel Davies, 19, Union-street, was summoned for hiring a boat to two drunken persons. — William Rose, River Constable, said that on Saturday he saw two men in the Groves quite drunk. They went to one boathouse and attempted to hire a boat, but the owner would not let them have one. At another place the owner was not present, but a youth was left in charge, and Davies proceeded to take a boat against the boy's will and took in the drunken men referred to. When they got up to Eccleston one of the men fell into the river and was nearly drowned. The summons was taken out for a contravention of the river bye-law No. 11. When he met defendant the following day (Sunday) and spoke to him about the matter, be replied that he "would do the same again." In answer to defendant the witness said he only knew the man fell in the river from being told so.— Defendant urged in extenuation that he had been on the river forty years and knew his business He had saved fifty-five lives, and as to saying that the man was nearly drowned it was simply absurd, as he only slipped accidentally into the water and was out again directly. The men, it was true, had had a little drink. He rowed them up the river, and they got "all right," having nothing but a bottle of ginger beer. How could the constable say the man was nearly drowned when he knew nothing but it what had been told to him? The fact was, he said, instead, of being dragged there he ought to be in the I receipt of a medal for saving life as he had done, having gone in the river during all seasons of the year for that purpose, and permanently injured his health through it. ' What he had done was well known to nearly everybody in Chester.— The Chief Constable said the object of the police was simply to convince boat owners and others that they must not transgress the bye law.— As it was the first offence, the Bench fined him 5s and costs, or seven days hard labour. Allowed a week to pay.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 28 July 1883
Inspection of Chester Police.— The members of the Chester City Police Force were on Wednesday inspected by Capt. the Hon. C G. Legge. The muster took place within the Town Hall Buildings, and there were on parade besides the chief constable, 3 inspectors, 4 sergeants, 1 acting-sergeant, 1 detective officer, and 28 constables. There were also present to witness the inspection Alderman Johnson (chairman of the Watch Committee), Dr Harrison (surgeon of the force), and Councillors T. W. Jones, Rigby, Bird, and R. Roberts. The clothing of the force was examined, and the men executed several movements, the inspecting officer at the close expressing his satisfaction with the result.
Manchester Evening News - Monday 3 September 1883
Pc Evans: This officer's name appears in an news article in the Manchester Evening News - Monday 3 September 1883 :- ATTACKING A POLICEMAN WITH A RAZOR. At Chester Police Court this morning, Edward Seamore was charged with theft. The prisoner was seen to take a piece of bacon from the shop of Mr. Paris, provision merchant, and on P.C. Evans going to arrest him the prisoner struck at the officer with a razor fastened to a piece of wood. The officer quick as thought drew his truncheon and hit the prisoner a heavy blow on the wrist, which disabled him. The prisoner was committed for trial. (Researchers Note - A search of the City Nominal Roll has so far not found a man of this name serving in this time frame.)
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 7 October 1893
In order to make the policeman's lot a little happier, the Chief Constable of Chester has been instrumental in organising a police athletic club. The Duke of Westminster has become the patron, and has given permission to the members to play in the Grosvenor colours. so that "the men in blue" will make their debut in the field as "the boys in yellow." The club has our best wishes for its success, for there is nothing more necessary for members of the police force than athletics and gymnastics. Although fine strong fellows when they join the ranks, a few year‘s spent in perambulating the pavements soon impairs their muscular powers, and some fresh physical exercise is needed. THE CHESTER POLICE ATHLETIC CLUB - The modern rage for athletics appears to have reached the members of the city police force, and the wonder is that it has not manifested itself before in that quarter. Many forces have for a long time had athletic clubs, and it will not be denied that the physique of the Chester police compares favourably with that of others. It is too late in the day to insist upon the value of such exercises, which, if better for one class or calling than another, it is surely so for the police force. They are usually picked men, practised in the gymnasium, and in the cricket and football field, which is bound to improve their health and bearing. The Chester city force is fortunate in having in its ranks several well-known football players, one or two good all round gymnasts, and as was seen at the Autumn Sports, a capital lot of pedestrians of very respectable pretensions, with a few cyclists of no mean calibre. It is not surprising, there-fore, to find that the force has started an athletic club of its own, the bounds of which are not to be confined exclusively to those serving on the force; hut the rule on that point has apparently been carefully framed to keep out any but those who would be accept- able. It is said that a number of the leading citizens have signified their approval of the movement by enrolling themselves as honorary members, and the movement, therefore, has commenced well, and promises to be a success. His Grace the Duke of Westminster (Lord Lieutenant of the county) has kindly consented to become its first patron, and has given special permission to the club to play in the Grosvenor colours, viz "yellow and black," which so often have been carried to victory. The Mayor, Sir T. G. Frost, Alderman Frost, and other civic authorities are also patrons, and several well-known outside football players have joined the club, with the result that the new organisation will soon be able to place a strong team in the field.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 26 January 1884
CHILD MURDER AT CHESTER.          A discovery made at Chester Cemetery on Wednesday morning has founded the suspicion that a child murder was committed in the city early this week. From what has transpired it appears that soon after eight o'clock that morning one of the labourers in the cemetery, while passing along near the Grosvenor-road end of the grounds found the dead body of a newly born female child lying on the embankment which skirts the burial ground at that place. The man communicated his discovery to the police, who took the body to the police office. Thence it was conveyed to the General Infirmary, where a post mortem examination was made by Dr. Macpherson, the house surgeon, revealed the fact that death had been caused by haemorrhage and exposure to cold.     When found, the corpse was perfectly nude, a blood-strained piece of cloth lying a few feet off. The police have not yet discovered the guilty party. Mr J. Tatlock, city coroner, opened an inquest on the body at the Infirmary on Wednesday afternoon.     Henry Mallard, labourer, deposed that he lived at Handbridge, and on Wednesday morning about eight o'clock he went to his work at the Cemetery. He was working at the Handbridge end of the Cemetery, and when passing a shed near the Grosvenor-road end of the grounds, where he was going for some tools, he saw what he thought was a piece of paper, and he called the attention of Samuel Powell to it. He then went to the spot and found the body of a baby lying on the bare ground without any wrapping. About two yards from the place where the body lay was a small piece of cloth, which witness had mistaken for a paper. Witness at once went to Mr Jarvis, superintendent of the Cemetery, and he sent witness to the Police Office. Sergeant Price accompanied him back to the Cemetery, and took charge of the body. There was no blood to be seen on the cloth, neither did witness find any piece of string or cord near the body. The corpse was found at a spot within half a dozen yards of the Grosvenor-road, which at that point is bordered by a holly hedge less than four feet high. Witness did not notice if there was any mark on the soil where the child was lying, and saw no footsteps in the vicinity.      Police-Sergeant Price said he went to the Cemetery on Wednesday morning, acting on information given by the previous witness. P.C. Hatton accompanied him, and on reaching the Cemetery they found lying in a small recess in the embankment the dead body of a child. There was a blood stain on one corner of a piece of cloth lying near the corpse, An examination of the body being made, witness found no marks of violence on it. It was taken to the Police Office, and afterwards to the General Infirmary, by Detective Sergeant Murphy.      Dr Alfred MacPherson, house surgeon of Chester Infirmary, stated that Detective-Sergeant Murphy handed him the body and cloth in question that morning at that institution. Witness examined the corpse externally, and found it was the body of a newly- born female child. Witness could not say whether it bad been born alive or not, but a post-mortem examination would enable him to decide the question.      At this point the inquiry was adjourned till Friday morning for the purpose of allowing a post-mortem examination of the body to be made.      The inquest was resumed yesterday (Friday) morning at the Infirmary, where Dr. MacPherson, recalled, deposed that on Wednesday evening he made a post-mortem examination of the body, from which he found that the child had been born alive. It must have lived some minutes, though he could not say how much longer. The lungs were fully expanded. There were no marks of violence internally, and all the organs of the body were in a healthy state. In witness's opinion death had been caused by haemorrhage consequent on neglect and exposure to cold. That was his belief, but he could not state positively. No attention had been paid to the child at birth, it not having been even washed, and he attributed the death partly to exposure to cold; because the haemorrhage of itself would have taken longer to kill the child than the time during which it appeared to have been alive. Witness also examined the cloth found near the body, and noticed on it stains of human blood.      There being no further evidence, the Coroner said they had heard how the child had been found, and from the doctor's description of the body the infant seemed to have received no attention whatever at its birth. He supposed the jury would find a verdict in accordance with the doctor's evidence, and so leave it open for the police to pursue the matter further if they could. There was no evidence of any injury, externally or internally, to the body, and the organs all seemed to have been in a healthy state. The jury returned an open verdict, in accordance with the doctor's testimony.
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 17 May 1884
THE POLICE.— A COMPLAINT. The Watch Committee submitted a report for the year ended 29th September, 1883, of the Hon. C. G. Legge, H.M. Inspector of Constabulary for the Northern District, on his inspection of the police force of the city. An extract from the report read is follows :— " The cells and police-offices were clean and in good order; the books and returns ware well kept; the numbers and distribution of the force have been efficiently maintained." Alderman Johnson, who proposed the adoption of the report, regarded it as very satisfactory. Alderman Gerrard seconded. Mr W. Brown said in London the police were particularly courteous, assistance being readily given by them to individuals however hard they might be worked and however much there was to be done. But he much regretted that he could not credit the same amount of courtesy to the police-force of Chester. First of all they knew nothing, and secondly their courtesy was of the scantiest kind. (Hear, hear.) They gave no assistance to the general public; at least there were few oases in which they did it. He would not have mentioned the matter, although he had frequent experience of it, if a case had not come prominently before him. He happened to go to the Theatre on Friday week with his wife, and there was a policeman there leaning against the wall, whilst he (Mr Brown) had to lean over his wife to open the carriage door. When they had got out of the carriage, and as he was closing the door, he asked what time carriages were to be ordered. "Oh," the policeman replied, “I suppose about eleven o’clock”. He thought the man would be likely to know, and said to him, “There was a further thing you might have done; you might have opened the carriage door." "Oh," said he, I am not paid for that!" He mentioned this as a specimen of the courtesy of the police of Chester, thinking that the latter was an excessively uncalled for remark on the part of the officer. Mr Bird said he could quite endorse what Mr Brown had stated; the police didn't do their duty, he could say from his experience. Alderman Johnson was understood to say that he would make inquiries and get the matter rectified.
Liverpool Echo – Wednesday 9 July 1884
SCENE IN CHESTER POLICE COURT. During the sitting of the Chester City Police Court, this morning, James Murphy, a well-known detective-sergeant, was suddenly seized with illness. He fell heavily on the stone pavement, and sustained a large wound on the head.
Liverpool Mercury – Tuesday 22 July 1884
CHESTER CITY QUARTERSESSIONS - TRIAL OF PRISONERS  Charge of Attempted Suicide in Police Cells :- Thomas Gill, 28 years of age bricklayer was indicted for indicted for attempting to kill himself in a police cell in the Town Hall on the 5th June The prisoner was locked up at noon for drunkenness and at half-past seven o’clock was found bleeding from a wound in his stomach. The state pf the cell led to the conclusion that the prisoner had partially pulled in the iron window guard, and run his body against the spikes at the bottom end of it. Prisoner afterwards said to Detective Steen “I am very sorry it has not gone deep enough, but I will do it before the night is over.” For the Defence it was contended that prisoner merely wounded himself while attempting to escape.  The jury acquitted the prisoner.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 4 October 1884
A POLICEMAN STABBED IN BOUGHTON.               Late on Thursday night an affair which might have been attended with most serious consequences ocourred in Chester. As Police-constable Tutty was going his rounds in Boughton a, few minutes before midnight, he found an elderly man (who proved to be Samuel Cawley, salt boiler, from Chapel-street, Over) reposing on a doorstep. The officer roused the man, who in a fit of intoxication or insanity thereupon commenced a violent assault on him, making use of a short-bladed knife, with which he dealt several thrusts at the officer's person. Tutty, who defended himself with his staff, was unaware of the formidable weapon which his opponent wielded till he felt the blade penetrating his hand. He then managed to secure the prisoner and take him into custody. The policeman's hand was badly gashed, and at the dose of the encounter he discovered that his waterproof cape was cut in several places, and his overcoat similarly rent in about half-a-dozen places on the breast, luckily the knife was an ordinary dinner knife with the point ground off so that it could not stab much, but gash.
The prisoner was brought before the magistrates at the City Police Court yesterday (Friday), when P.C. Tutty described the finding of the man and the assault, as stated above. In his opinion the prisoner was not too drunk to be unconscious of his actions. Prisoner: He is not telling the truth. Are you? — Witness: Yes. (Laughter) Prisoner: No; I think you are not telling the truth. You have done it yourself (pointing to the rents in the cape and coat), and you want to lay it on me now. Look at me and say whether you are not telling a lie. I doubt you are a great sinner. (Laughter) If you say it in this Court mind it will, may be, have to go to a higher tribunal. I will tell you that, young man, and if you have told a lie it is a serious thing. (Laughter)— The Mayor: It is a very serious charge.
Mr C. Corderoy, public-house keeper, Boughton, stated that at a quarter to twelve o'clock on Thursday night he went downstairs to lock his door, and found the prisoner sitting on the doorstep. He asked what he was doing there, but the man, who seemed to be chewing a stick, replied that witness should mind his own business, and that it was all right. The policeman then made his appearance and elicited the man's name and his errand to Chester, which he said was to buy horses and cows. Witness withdrew, and as he was going to bed heard Cawley exclaim, "Oh, it is you, you! You want to kill me." When witness ran to the door he saw Cawley rushing with a knife at the policeman, who was warding off the blows with his staff. Witness said to the officer, "Knock him down," and Tutty rejoined, "Oh, no; the man is not right." Witness offered his assistance, but the policeman assured him he could manage. The man seemed more insane than drunk. The Chief Constable (Mr Fenwick) then applied for an adjournment, to admit of enquiries being made into the case, and the prisoner was remanded till Monday.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 17 January 1885
A MOCK BIRTH IN CHESTER. PECULIAR CASE.          A Charge of a peculiar character was preferred on Thursday at Chester City Police Court, before the Mayor and other Magistrates, against a young and respectably attired widow, named Jane Hughes, who gave her address as 79, Ashton-street, Liverpool. The accusation was that on the 23rd August the prisoner unlawfully and wilfully stated to Chas. George Haswell the registrar of births and deaths for the sub-district of Chester Castle, that a certain child named Rhoda Celia Hughes had been born at No. 33, Seller-street, Chester on the 30th July, 1884, while the truth was that no such child was then born there or elsewhere, and this she did with intent to have the same entered on the register. Mr E. Evans-Lloyd, who prosecuted, said he understood the charge was admitted, but be would briefly state the case against this unfortunate young woman. He appeared on behalf of the Registrar General to prefer a rather serious charge against this poor woman, the allegation being that she went to the registrar of this district and gave him the particulars of a supposed birth of a female cohild, named Rhoda Celia Hughes, to her, she being the wife of George Hughes, deceased, and her maiden name being Pennington. She at the same time stated that the occupation of her father was farming, that she then resided at 38, Seller-street, Chester, and there and then on the 23rd August those particulars were furnished in reply to questions which it was the duty of the registrar to put. His (Mr Evans- Lloyd's) instructions were— indeed he believed the woman had practically admitted it— that really no such child was ever born to this woman, and that at the time she was not even enceinte. There was, however, a motive for making this entry, which he did not propose to eater into, as he did not think he should import that into the case. It was merely his duty to show that this entry was false. The section under which the present proceedings were taken was the 40th of 37 and 88 Victoria, cap. 88, which provided that any person who wilfully made a false answer to any question put to him by a registrar relating to the particulars required concerning any birth or death, or made say false statement with intent to have it entered on the register of births add deaths, should be liable to a penalty not exceeding £10. The present charge was that she had completed the offence there contemplated, she had given a false statement with intent to have it entered on the register, and evidence would be given in proof of his assertions The prisoner had told Mr Haswell she was at the time living at 83, Seller-street, and they had now summoned the woman who then occupied that house— her sister and she would state that no such birth whatever took place. He wished to add that he bad instruction from the Registrar General to request that the prisoner be summarily convicted. He was sorry to have to press the case against her, but these were his instructions.      Mr C. G. Haswell, registrar of births and deaths for the sub-district of Chester Castle and registrar of marriages for the district of Chester, was then called, and said the prisoner came to his office on the 23rd August, saying she wished to register a ohild. The first question put to her was "ls it your ohild." She replied “Yes." Witness then asked when it was born, and she answered in the 30th July, 1884 Questioned as to where it was born, she stated that it was at No. 88, Seller- street. The particulars then entered were read over to the prisoner, and she signed her name to the entry. She gave her husband's name as George Hughes, deceased. The prisoner, when asked to cross-examine the witness, said : My husband was dead two years and seven months. I did do it. I have been cruelly deceived, and I did it just to purpose to frighten the party that I did it for. I did not know that I was doing anything wrong at the time. The witness stated that when the prisoner came to his office she said her husband had been dead only seven months. Mr Evans-Lloyd said that was the only witness he proposed to call respecting the register. He should be prepared to prove that no such birth did take place in that house, but he thought the prisoner's own admission would be sufficient. Detective Steen was then examined. He said he arrested the prisoner on Wednesday in Liverpool on a warrant charging her with making a false declaration. After bearing the warrant read she replied, "Is this Mr Haswell's doings. I will tell you the truth. I did go to Mr Haswell's, in Foregate-street, in August last, and registered a ohild of the name of Rhoda Celia Hughes, but I did it to frighten Mr Jardine. I did not know that I was doing any wrong, or else I would nave apologised to Mr Haswell ; but let me get out of this and I will make Mr Jardine sit up." (Laughter.) Mr Evans-Lloyd, in addressing the court, impressed on the bench the gravity of the charge. They all knew how much depended on the accuracy of the, entries in the register-book, and any attempt to pass a fraud upon an officer representing the public in that way was of very great gravity; and though he did not wish to press it unnecessarily he was instructed to request the Magistrates to bear in mind this very serious offence against society. If a person was able to go and give false particulars as to the entry of a birth which never took place it went to the very root of society. This was not other "mock marriage "— (laughter)— it was a case of mock registration of a birth. The prisoner said she had nothing to advance in her defence, and chose to be summarily dealt with. The Mayor said the decision of the Bench was that the prisoner be fined £2 10s and costs, or go to prison for a month. This she must consider a very lenient sentence because she had made herself liable to two years imprisonment.
London Standard – Tuesday 19 May 1885
News from the Provinces:- At Chester Police-court yesterday, Henry Filmore, of no fixed place of abode, was charged with the homicide of a boy named Charles N. Pritchard, 16, and a man named Joseph Dale, of Warrington. On Sunday the Prisoner, with Dale and others, who had been attracted to Chester by the races, were in drink, and attempted to hire a boat for a row upon the River Dee, but were refused. They walked up the river side, and suddenly and unexpectedly jumped into a boat, licensed to carry two which was being rowed by Pritchard close to the side. Hale jumped in first with no evil result; but when the Prisoner jumped in the boat was swamped, and Dale and Pritchard were drowned. The Prisoner was remanded pending the inquest. At an inquest subsequently held a verdict of manslaughter was returned against Filmore.
London Standard – Tuesday 28 July 1885
News from the Provinces - An inquiry before a Crown Commissioner was held at Chester yesterday relating to the property of Abraham Price, who died without having made a will, leaving property of the value of nearly one thousand pounds. Abraham Price, better known in Chester as "Abraham Hodge, the miser, 'was for many years in the Chester Police Force. On his retirement he opened a second-hand bookstall in one of the recesses in the ancient rows of Chester, which was much frequented by Americans and visitors. Every investigation to discover his relations has been fruitless. The Jury found that Price died intestate, and all his property goes to the Crown.
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 30 January 1886
THE CHARGE AGAINST A POLICE SERGEANT. Mr E. H. Lloyd informed His Honour that John Plimmer, police sergeant, who had been found guilty of misdemeanour at the July Sessions, and whose sentence had been deferred, was present to submit to judgment.— Plimmer was then formally asked by the Recorder if he had anything to say in extenuation of his offence — He replied that he had lost20 years service superannuation money and his title to a pension, as well as having been out of employment about three months. He was at present in a situation but if he was imprisoned he should loose it. He also urged that he had a sick wife dependent upon him. The Reoorder having briefly reviewed the circumstanoes of the defendant's conviction, said the only question to be deoided was the punishment to be inflicted. He had very carefully and anxiously considered wbat was his duty in that respect. He had considered that defendant had been 20 years in the police force gradually working himself up to a position of trust and honour. Defendant had made contributions like the others to tbe superannuation fund tbe benefit of wbich he had now forfeited; he had also been put to considerable expenditure in his defence and must have suffered considerable mental punishment during the six months whioh had elapsed since tbe trial. Having regard to all these oircumstances be thought the oourt might take a lenient view of the case though he felt that the offence was aggravated to a certain extent by being committed by a person in defendant's position. That was in itself to some extent a scandal and required the visitation of considerable punishment. Under all the oiroumstances, however, having regard to the pecuniary loss the defendant had sustained— which he had on the best authority amounted to £50— the loss of his position and pension and all the other advantages accruing from 20 years polioe servioe, he thought the ends of justice would be met by a sentence of one day's imprisonment, which would entitle the defendant to be discharged.
London Standard – Thursday 4 March 1886
News from the Provinces: - An extraordinary case was brought before the Justices at the Chester Police-court, yesterday. An infirm lady, living in the fashionable suburbs of Chester, Mrs Venables Clegg, had in her employ a cook and housemaid. On Sunday it was reported to Mr. Fenwick, chief constable, Chester, by Mrs. Wilson, the cook, that her mistress's house had been burglariously entered. Hearing a noise, she ran downstairs, and met a man coming up armed with a revolver, and having a blackened face. The burglar said, "Get out of my way, or you will hear a report." She screamed, and the burglar ran downstairs and leaped through the drawing-room window, and escaped. An examination revealed the fact that three 5 pound notes, two sovereigns, and some keys were missing. Detective-serjeant (sic) Good was sent to investigate the case, and from what he reported Mr. Fenwick came to the conclusion that the whole story was a fabrication. The housemaid, however, confirmed it in every detail, even to describing holes in the burglar's stocking. Female searchers were taken to the house, and while they were searching the cook was seen to throw some papers on a fire, resembling 5 pound notes, which were burnt. The housemaid, being further interrogated, then confessed that the whole story was a malicious fabrication. Mrs. Wilson was arrested.
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 8 January 1887
ATTEMPTED WIFE MURDER IN CHESTER. EXCITING SCENE IN BRIDGE STBEET. On Tuesday afternoon, shortly betore four o'clook, a scene was witnessed whioh created a great sensation in one of the crowded thoroughfares of Chester. A few minutes previously the foot passengers in Bridge-street Row had observed a middle aged man and his wife quarrelling. The woman eventually walked off, and descended by a flight of steps to the street beneath, whither, however, she was followed by the man apparently, though sober, in a state of great excitement. He was heard to swear he would "do for her," at the same time making use of a foul expression, and without a moment's warning he drew a big clasp knife from bis pocket and, it is alleged, plunged it into tbe woman's left breast. The woman ran orying “Murder" and seeking shelter up Commonhall-street, whither she was pursued by her husband still brandishing the open knife. A young labouring man, Samuel Price, who had been an eye-witness of tbe occurrence, rushed with commendable pluck after the pair, and some distance up Commonhall-street his efforts and those of Sergeant Gardner, of the Cheshire Eegiment (who had also joined in the attempted capture), were rewarded by bringing their man to ground. When he fell, the prisoner was noticed to close the knife, and it was promptly wrenched from his hands, and Sergeant Gardner and Price escorted him to the Police Office. He there gave the name of Edward Davies, residing at the Commercial Hall. He is between fifty and sixty years of age, and has been for some time a railway labourer employed by the Great Western Eailway Company at Saltney. It is also said he is a pensioner, and was at one time a member of the Canadian Rifles. He has always while in Chester borne a good character for sobriety and equanimity of temper, and when arrested he gave no evidenoe of indulgence in intoxicants. In his pooket was found a large clumsy looking clasp-knife, with the blade closed. The injured woman who is his wife, appears to be about the same age as her husband, and on being taken to the General Infirmary she was found to have sustained serious injury, the blade of the knife (about 3 inohes in length) having penetrated the left lung. On Wednesday morning at the City Police Court, before the Mayor (W. Brown, Esq.), the ex-Mayor (G. A. Dickson, Esq), W. Johnson, Esq., and General Ingall, C.B., the prisoner was brought, up on a charge of wounding his wife, Elizabeth Davies, 1, Hamilton-court, Watergate Row (North), with intent to murder her. PRISONER IN THE POLICE COURT The Chief Constable (Mr Fenwiok), in opening the case, said the prisoner was arrested the previous day on a oharge of stabbing his wife with intent to murder her, in Bridge-street. He was a labourer, at present living in Commercial-hall, and had been working for a long time on the railway as a labourer. His wife was an upholsteress at Mr Garnett's. The oouple, having a domestic difference, parted company six weeks ago, tbe woman living in apartments in Watergate Row, and tbe man living in Commercial-hall. He met her on Tuesday in Bridge-street Row, and wanted her to go home with him. She would not, and he struck her onoe or twice. She got away from him, but he pursued her into the middle of the street, and a witness would be oalled who would state he heard the prisoner say "You b*****, if you do not come home I will be the death of you." With that be opened a large clasp knife, rushed at her, made a violent stab at her breast, and then he was seized by some of the bystanders. The woman had received a large wound over one of the lungs, and he had information that under the most favourable circumstances it would be eight days before she was able to attend. Under the oiroumstances he proposed to call all the witnesses he had that day, and then ask for a formal remand for a week. Samuel Price, labourer, Handbridge, said:  I was in Bridge-street Row, near the bottom, at half past three o'clock yesterday afternoon. Prisoner was about 30 or 40 yards from me. I saw him strike a woman with whom he was quarrelling. He said to her "Come on home," and she replied " Where is a policeman ? I will bave you locked up." Prisoner then hit her in the mouth with his fist, whereupon I interposed, and said "Leave her alone." Prisoner said "It is my wife." The woman then went up the Row, and her husband followed. She turned round, gave him a push, and ran down the steps into the street. Prisoner ran after her, caught her, and struck her somewhere about the face wiih his fist. She struggled from him, but he caught her again at the end of Commonhall-street. While following her he said "Come on home you. Then he exclaimed twice "I will be the death of you," and putting his hand into his pocket, drew out a large clasp knife, similar to the one produced, opened it and put it into the woman's breast. He struok her once only. She then pushed him away, and rushed up Commonhall-street, prisoner running after her with his knife open. When prisoner first got out his knife, I ran after him and caught him just after he had tunrned up Commonhall-street. I got him down on the ground. Prisoner did not speak, and I said, "you have stabbed your wife." He closed his knife against the kerbstone and held it in his hand. Sergeant Gardner wrestled the knife from him. The wife came out of a house as soon as we had got the man secured. A polioeman came up and took ber away. We took prisoner to tbe polioe offioe, but he never spoke a word. In my opinion he was sober. Thomas William Lawson, insurance agent, Walter-street, deposed: I was in Bridge-street Row yesterday afternoon from half-past three to a quarter to four o'clock. I heard a squabble between prisoner and a woman. The woman ran away, with prisoner in pursuit. She was shouting "Murder," and I heard her say frequently "I am stabbed, I am stabbed." She was then running up Commonhall-street, and, seeing a military sergeant standing by his door she said "For God's sake let me come in." He at once let the woman in. Just at this moment Price came up and caught him by the back of the neck. Prisoner had a knife like that produced, which Sergeant Gardner took from him while he was on the ground. I was helping to hold him. The woman was taken to the Infirmary. While Sergeant Gardner was taking tbe knife out of prisoner's hand tbe wife came to the door, and I observed a gash in her breast from which blood was flowing. A policeman arrived directly after, and I helped to bring this man to the Polioe Offioe. Sergeant J. S. Gardner, of the Depot Cheshire Begiment, and residing at 15, Commonhall-street, said: Between half-past three and four o'clock I was at home when I heard a woman screaming "murder" in the street. I went to tbe door and saw a woman about three yards from my door running and calling "For God's sake, let me in or I shall be murdered." Prisoner was about four yards behind her. He had a olasp knife in his hand (produoed). The woman went into my house and I closed the door and faced prisoner. I made a dash at him and tripped him. The knife was in his right hand, Price then came up and I took the knife from prisoner, who did not say anything. As soon as I saw him secured I examined the wound whioh was bleeding profusely. I said, "Fetoh a oab as quiok a possible." I then left her to the people who were looking after her, and I helped to bring prisoner to the Police Offioe. Police Inspeotor Goode gave evidenoe to the effect that he was in the Polioe Office when prisoner was brought in. Witness produoed the knife, whioh he received from Sergeant Gardner. The Mayor: Was tbere any blood on the knife? The Chief Constable: Apparently; there were some stains. Inspector Goods, continuing, said he told prisoner he would be detained on a charge of stabbing his wife. He said "Never." He was of opinion prisoner was drunk. P.C. Beatty deposed: I saw a crowd running up Commonhall-street at twenty minutes to four o'clock yesterday afternoon. I saw prisoner and two men, and they said he had been stabbing a woman. I went and found the woman bleeding from a wound in the left breast. I took her to tbe Infirmary. William Lees, House Surgeon at the Infirmary, said a woman named Elisabeth Davies was brought to the institution by a police-constable, about four o'clock on Tuesday afternoon. She was suffering from a wound between one inch and one inoh and a quarter in length, above the left breast, about the level of the third rib. It was a jagged, incised wound, and had evidently penetrated the lung. It wonld require considerable force to inflict a wound of that character; the knife (produoed) would probably cause it. The wound was bleeding when she arrived at the Infirmary, and a slight return of hemorrhage ensued in the evening. That morning, however, she was a little better, but was not out of danger at present. Under very favourable circumstanoes, she would not be able to appear in Court before ten days or a fortnight. The Chief Constable applied for a remand for a week. The Bench granted the remand. Prisoner maintained a downcast and sullen demeanonr throughout tbe proceedings, never cross-examining any of the witnesses.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 15 January 1887
CITY POLICE OOURT SATURDAY.— Before the Mayor (W. Brown, Esq.) the ex-Mayor (G. A. Dickson, Esq ), and General Ingall, C.B. The Alleged Assault on the Police.— John Moran, Parry’s Entry, was oharged on remand with assaulting, and rescuing from, the polioe. — P.C. Large repeated his evidence, which will be found under last Saturday's police report,, and added that because of his resistanoe prisoner had to be brought to the Police Station in a cab. — Prisoner : You are doing nothing but trying, to swear my life away.— P.C. Shires deposed that on the evening in question he was directed to go and assist P.C. Large in Foregate-street. The latter offioer, who was just in the act of arresting Moran, said he had arrested Mary Ann Moran, but prisoner had rescued her from his oustody. Prisoner was resisting at the time. Witness said to prisoner "Come quietly Johnny, for oome you will!" Prisoner tried to trip him and kioked him violently on both legs, from the effects of whioh he had been off duty ever sinoe and attended by tbe dootor. There were between 20 and 30 soldiers on tbe spot, and witness called upon one of them to assist him, but when he was kioked by prisoner in tbe stomach he went away. A oab came up and prisoner was put into the vehicle and conveyed to tbe police-office. Witness remained in the street, being hardly able to walk.— Prisoner: Does it stand to sense that two officers could put me into a oab if I was in that state. Why, if I liked, it would have taken nine cf them to do it. He asserted that P.C. Shires was blind drunk at the time.— P.C. Stokes deposed that on Christmas Eve he was in Foregate-street. P.C. Large was there and Mary Ann Moran was disorderly. Prisoner said, "If you put your hands upon her, I will split the both of you." P.C. Shires came up and Moran oommenced kioking him violently. He was then arrested and became very disorderly, kicking and striking all the time. Witness arrested the woman but she likewise resisted. Subsequently she was rescued by the crowd and witness assisted in getting Moran to the police station. — Prisoner said tbe officer asked him to take his wife home and it was her whom he threatened. — Private Henry Mills, depot Cheshire Regiment, deposed to being stationed es a military policeman in Foregate- Street. He was called upon to assist tbe police on Christmas Eve, whioh he did. Witness was violently kioked by one of the orowd, and then again by the prisoner in the stomach, whioh disabled him, and he had to retire.— Private Robert Vial, military polioeman, gave evidence to the effeot that, after assisting the police for about ten minutes he was called away by a corporal to arrest a military offender. — Dr Harrison, police surgeon, said P.C. Shires was suffering from several severe wounds on the legs and one on the forehead. They had probably been oaused by kicks.— Polioe Inspector Lindsay deposed to P.C. Shire’s sobriety on the evening in question. — Prisoner, in defenoe, called William Milton, manager of the White Lion Inn, who said he was summoned by prisoner aa a witness. He saw Moran kicking P.C.Shires. Prisoner said to the offioer "If you let me loose I will go quietly."— Private W. H Phillips, of depot Cheshire Regiment, said he was not present at the occurrence. Afterwards he saw P.C. Shires holding up his hands and shouting "I have lately been married," and witness believed the officer was drunk.— Prisoners mother rose up in court and said: "I don't care what you do with him. He is a lost sheep, and you can give him seven years."— Prisonsr was committed to the Sessions, bail being allowed prisoner in his own recognisance of £25 and two sureties in £12 10s each.
Alleged Theft of a Coat— John Menighan was oharged by Miohael Tully, labourer, Jones' Court, Handbridge, with having stolen a ooat, valued at 6s, from his possession. Prosecutor said he was carrying his coat on his arm in Cuppin-Street when he met prisoner and another man. The latter asked him how muoh he wanted for tbe coat, and prosecutor said 6s. Prisoner said " Won't 4s 6d do?" but before he could answer prisoner snatched the coat from him, and the two ran in the direction of Pepper-street. Witness was present wben he was arrested in a hiding plaoe in Globe-court, Pepper-street, but he did not notice what prisoner said. — Cross-examined : He (prosecutor) was drunk at the time. Wben prisoner's companion took the ooat he did not say he would take it to its owner. — P.C. Higginson said in consequenoe of a communication he went to Globe-court in Pepper-street and found prisoner concealed. He said "Here is the coat ; it was stolen by another man." Prosecutor identified the coat, and prisoner, pointing to the prosecutor, said, " That's the man who stole the coat ; he must be locked up." When oharged at the polioe offioe he said he intended to return it to the man from whom prosecutor had stolen it. He thought he might get a shilling. — William Povey, Handbridge, said on tbe day in question he heard some people shouting " Polioe." When near St Michael's Church he saw prisoner running along Pepper-street with a dark coat on his arm. He turned up tbe nearest oourt, and prosecutor coming up witness went for the polioe. — Prisoner was committed to tbe Sessions.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 5 March 1887
CLEVER CAPTURE BY CHESTER DETECTIVES.       Through the clever action of Detective Culliford and Acting Detective Hughes of the Chester City Police Force, two notorious characters, Mary Ellen Bates, and Thomas Townley, who have been “wanted" by the Staffordshire police since August last on a charge of feloniously wounding two constables at Hanley, have been at last arrested.      On the 18th of August, during serious row at Hanley, in which the two prisoners were concerned, two constables interfered, whereupon (it is alleged) the woman Bates stabbed one policeman four or five times in the neck with a knife, and Townley " went for " the other guardian of the peace with a flat iron, both officers being dangerously injured.      Townley and Bates decamped at once, and eluded tbe police vigilance up till this week, when their capture was brought about in a remarkable way.      Detectives Hughes and Culliford, on Wednesday, had their suspicions aroused that the missing parties were in concealment somewhere in Cheater, and diligent enquiries and search resulted in the discovery of Townley and Bates living under an assumed name as man and wife in a lodging-house in Castle-street. Their attempt at concealment of identity was of little use in view of one striking special peculiarity Townley posseses an extraordinary pair of cross-eyes — and this was the ohief means of identification. At midnight, on Wednesday, the detectives and several policemen proceeded to the lodging-house, and effected the arrrest without resistance.      On Thursday afternoon, an inspector of the Hanley police arrived in Chester, and took his prisoners south with the 4. 20pm train.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 25 June 1887
THE CHESTER POLICE.              A LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHESHIRE OBSERVER.
Sir,
Yesterday morning I was reminded by a Chester lady, whose family for centuries have been esteemed for their active benevolence that she had failed to see any recognition of the admirable services of the Chester police, acting as they were under the superintendence of our excellent Chief Constable, Mr Fenwiok, on the day of the Jubilee. That a great and responsible duty devolved upon the police all must admit, and that they succeeded in maintaining the peaces and good order of our old city by their forbearance and tact none can doubt. I would, therefore, respectfully suggest that, while numerous classes have partaken of the hospitality of our citizens, the police should not be forgotten. My friend assured me she would willingly contribute her mite, and I need not say that it will give me much pleasure is following suit. I would suggest that the whole of the force should be entertained in the year of Jubilee to a substantial supper, under the management of our Chief Constable. My friend will give her guinea, I will give mine, and any further subscriptions I shall have much pleasure in receiving. — l remain your obedient servant, Henry Churton. West Mount, Boughton, Jane 23rd, 1887. (Solicitor and Coroner)
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 17 March 1888
Assaulting the Police.— John Kelly, Steven Street, Was charged with being drunk and riotous and with assaulting the police on Sunday at Boughton. — P.C. Tutty stated that on the day in question the prisoner was fighting with another young man, and on going to separate them prisoner struck witness in the eye, and the crowd which collected also assaulted him till another officer came to his assistance. — For being drunk and riotous he was fined 10s and costs, or in default seven days; and for assaulting the police one month's imprisonment, with hard labour in each case.
Liverpool Mercury – Wednesday 16 May 1888
THE CHESTER MURDER MYSTERY INQUIRY YESTERDAY. The tragedy which was enacted at Lumley Place, Chester, at mid-day on Friday the 4th but instant, must for the present at any rate, says our Chester correspondent, rank as the most mysterious affair that has transpired in or about the city for many years. That it was a case of murder seems to be getting every day more clear, but how and in what manner it came about, who was the culprit, and what was the motive, are all questions which are as far off solution as ever. Lumley- Place is made up of small model cottages belonging to the Duke of Westminster; it lies in a somewhat retired spot just off the highway from John-Street to the old church of it St John's, in close proximity to the Chester City and County Conservative Club premises on the one hand, and to the to beautiful school erected two or three years ago through the munificence of the Duke of Westminster on the other. At number 7 lived Henry Williams, an upholsterer by trade, who enjoys the confidence of his employers, and is member of the Blue Ribbon Army. With him lived his wife, Ellen Williams, 65 years of age Ellen. Williams went to his work as usual at half-past eight on the morning of the 4th May, and returned to dinner at noon, to find his wife, whom he had left less than four hours before in her accustomed good health, lying unconscious on the floor, with an ugly bleeding wound on the back of the head. She only recovered momentary consciousness on the following day, and on Monday last expired. Nothing was missing from the home: her purse, which at first was supposed to have gone, and thus to have supplied a motive for the crime, was found by her husband in her bed-room with 9s 4d inside. The theory favoured by the relatives is that a beggar, who had been refused relief some days previously, and who had muttered something about “doing for her," had returned to execute his threat in the husband's absence. At present this theory has very little to support it. The police are unceasing in their efforts to unravel the mystery. The inquest was held in the Town Hall, yesterday, by Mr. J. Tatlock. City coroner and a jury. The chief constable (Mr. George Lee Fenwick) was also present. Dr. James Taylor, the first witness called, said that about one o’clock on Friday afternoon, the 4th May, the husband of the deceased stopped him in Pepper-street, and asked him to go to his house, where his wife was bleeding. He asked the husband where she was bleeding from, and he said he did not know. When he got to the house he saw the deceased lying on a couch, partly on back and partly on her right side, with a pillow under her head. He noticed that there was blood at on her bead, especially about the crown, and the blood was oozing from the matted hair. He at once began to cut away the hair, and while he was doing this he noticed some movement of the left hand and arm, but the right arm and hand lay quite still. After cleaning away the hair he found a big wound five or six inches long. It was on the upper part of the back of the head, and was of a crescentic form and its direction was slightly upwards and forwards. The points of the crescent looking forwards formed a flap of scalp. The depth of the wound from the most convex part of it forwards to the front forward part of the wound under the scalp would be two or three inches. Two small arteries spurted whilst he was baring the wound. Of which he at once secured with forceps and afterwards with ligatures.     She died on Monday, and they made a post-mortem examination on Tuesday afternoon. The wound might have been caused a by a bar of metal, a poker, or a stout a walking stick. (Writers note – the medical evidence has been greatly condensed) Detective-Sergeant Goode and Detective Hughes gave evidence as to their examination of the house. The Coroner having summed up, the jury delivered a verdict of "Wilful murder against person or persons unknown”
Wrexham Advertiser - Saturday 1 September 1888
Funeral of a Police Constable.— At Nant-clwyd, on Saturday, the body was interred of Robert Lloyd, a constable in the Chester City Police Force, who died on the preceding Wednesday of apoplexy. Lloyd joined the force nearly nine years ago, but six months later enlisted into the Grenadier Guards, with which regiment he served in the Egyptian Campaign, and was engaged in the battle of Tel-el-Kebir. He rejoined the Chester police two years ago, and won great popularity amongst his comrades, who in large numbers followed his remains to Chester General Station.
Liverpool Echo - Wednesday 23 January 1889
MIDNIGHT ONSLAUGHT ON CHESTER POLICE. To-day, at the Chester City Police Court, five rough-looking young fellows named Autie Gill, labourer, 41, Charles-street; George Bennett, labourer, 41, William-street; John Gill, labourer, 8, Charles-street Joseph Martin, labourer, 25, Charles-street; and George Taylor, labourer, William-street, were brought up custody charged with assaulting Police-Constable Griffiths, on Saturday evening last. The Chief Constable (Mr. G. L. Fenwick), in briefly stating the case the bench, said the officer was in the neighbourhood of Seller-street Bridge between eleven and twelve o'clock on the evening in question, and near where several public houses were situated. The prisoners had congregated near the bridge, and some of them commenced to fight. He interfered, whereupon he was attacked in the most savage manner by the prisoners, who knocked him down and kicked him. Prisoners were sentenced to two months' imprisonment with hard labour, without the option fine.
Cheshire Observer - Saturday 6 April 1889
Retirement of a Chester Police-Inspector — Inspector Alexander Lindsay, who for over 23 years has been connected with the Chester Police Force, has just retired, having been medically certified unfit for service; and the Watch Committee have, subject to the approval of the Town Council, granted him a retiring allowance of 19s 9d a week, which is the maximum scale of the Metropolitan and other large forces. The inspector has had a long and adventurous career. Prior to joining the police force he served for 21 yean in the famous Black Watch regiment, and received the Crimean medal with three clasps for Alma, Balaclava, and Sebastopol, the Turkish medal, the Indian medal, and a medal for good conduct and long service. He was through the Indian Mutiny and Crimean War, and although he had seen much active service, he was never wounded. When he joined the police force he was two years over the prescribed age, but he was admitted to the service by special permission of the Government Inspector of the day in consequence of his previous public service. Mr Lindsay, who is a native of Scotland, was endowed with a very robust constitution, and was only eight or nine days ill during his long period of police duty, which is all the more remarkable in view of the fact that for two-thirds of the time he had been on night duty. He shewed himself to be a very capable and energetic officer, and won golden opinions from his chief for his staunch integrity and reliability. Mr Lindsay is now recovering after a serious illness, and the universal wish of the citizens is that he may be spared to enjoy his well-earned rest after half-a century of hard service to his Country.
Cheshire Observer – Saturday 27 April 1889
CITY POLICE COURT. Tuesday.— Before the Mayor (George Dutton, Esq.), George Dickson, and H T. Brown, Esqrs. Exposing His Stump. — A one-armed man named Thomas Johnson, of no fixed residence, was charged on the information of P.C. Griffiths with begging in Foregate-street on Saturday afternoon — The officer stated that prisoner was exposing the stump of his lost arm as an inducement to almsgiving, and whenever refused he made up of the most abusive language. He had been ejected from some adjoining cocoa-rooms. — Sentenced to seven days hard labour.
A Musical Beggar.— Thomas Jones, in custody, was accused of begging by singing in Brook-street on Saturday night.— Prisoner, a healthy-looking labouring man, was apprehended by P.C. William Burgess, and despite all the cautions of the officer would persist in his singing, which he continued till they reached Frodsham-street Bridge.— Having nothing to say except that he was "quite destitute," prisoner was committed to gaol for seven days with hard labour.
Juvenile Thieves.— Three boys, named James Roach (14), John Peers (14), and Amos Jones (10), ware summoned for stealing a shilling from Eliza Jane Griffiths, daughter of John Griffiths, 22, Seaville-street. From the evidence of the girl, her mother, and P.C. Wm Burgess it appeared that the lads on Saturday intercepted the child on an errand, and Jones threatened to throw her into the canal near by if she did not give them some sweets. She refused, and Peers then held down her head while Roach took the shilling from her hand.— The Mayor, after admonishing the lads, sentenced the two elder to receive five strokes, and the younger three strokes, with the birch rod.
Cheshire Observer Saturday 28 September 1889
RIOT AT CHESTER. DESPERATE STRUGGLE WITH THE POLICE.      At Chester City Police Conrt, on Wednesday, before the Mayor (George Dutton, Esq.), C. Dutton, and W. Farish, Esqrs., George Chapman, a tall, powerful looking navvy, who resides at 7, Garden-lane, was charged in custody with being drunk and refusing to quit licensed premises, and with assaulting three constables.      William White, landlord of the Union Vaults, Foregate Street, stated that prisoner entered his premises on the previous evening about seven o'clock, and in con - sequence of his condition — not sober - witness would not serve him. When asked to go out prisoner refused, and created a disturbance, whereupon witness sent for a Constable, and P.C. Salmon arriving on the scene ejected him. Prisoner was very violent outside, and objected to go with the constable. P.C. Salmon stated that he found prisoner viciously drunk. While assisting the landlord to eject prisoner witness had the collar of his tunic torn, being nearly choked, and outside prisoner tried to get away. He kicked witness several times, eventually throwing him down, and when help was obtained he also kicked at the assistants. In con- sequence of sis injuries witness was off duty, and had received a certificate from the police surgeon, which the Chief Constable now read to the effect that he was unable to perform his duty on account of severe bruises and abrasions on the left knee. Continuing, witness said prisoner damaged his tunic and trousers. He fought like a madman, and made the fire fly from the pavement like a horse.      P.C. Hughes deposed to making his appearance on the scene of action when prisoner was fighting near the Bear's Paw. There was a disorderly crowd round him, and he kicked witness twice on the knees from which be felt stiff now. The street was full of people, and when the police had escorted prisoner as far as the Grosvenor colonnade he lay down exhausted, and they had to send for a truck.      The Chief Constable here pointed out that the disturbance lasted nearly three-quarters of an hour. The town was kept in a state of riot, not so much by the prisoner as the respectably dressed crowd who would have trodden him down. Proceeding, witness said the crowd was composed mostly of shop boys and the "mashers" of the town. (Laughter) It was surging so that they had to protect prisoner from being trodden to death.      Deteotive Sergeant Gallagher said he caught prisoner under the Grosvenor oolonnade when he bad broken away from his captors owing to the help of the crowd. Witness noticed the crowd rushing upon them, and in trying to save prisoner from being trampled to death they were thrown down, and about 50 people passed over them. He estimated that come 1200 people were assembled there. Witness and several people round about him were assaulted. A man complained to him that be had received a severe out on the head from prisoner.  The Chief Constable remarked that prisoner had assaulted a number of people, and damaged several uniforms. He was not, however, charged with the last offence.  Mr Farish enquired where prisoner obtained his last drink, but the man could not give a satisfactory answer. The magistrates fined prisoner 10s and costs, or in default 14 days bard labour, for being drunk, and for assaulting the three Constables he was sentenced to 14 days' hard labour in each case. Prisoner, who appeared to treat the matter indifferently, uttered a defiant "Thank you " as he descended the steps.
      Cheshire Observer - Saturday 23 November 1889
CITY POLICE COURT.    Saturday. — Before the Mayor (J. Salmon, Esq.), W. Johnson, R. L. Barker, L. Gilbert, and J. E. Edwards, Esqrs.             Two light-weights named Peter Leek and John Lee, a ragman, were charged in custody with fighting. — P.C. Roe deposed that about four o'clock the previous after-noon the prisoners were stripped and fighting on the canal towing-path between the Northgate and King Charles's Tower. A large crowd congregated both on Northgate Bridge and on the towing-path. Witness and an officer approached the combatants from opposite sides and secured them. There were three others backing them up and urging them to fight.— The Chief Constable (Mr Fenwiok): It was not a glove fight ?— Witness: No.— Leek explained that they had had a drop of drink, and they went "to a nice quiet place" where nobody could see them. (Laughter.)— Mr Edwards: What were you fighting about ? — Leek: We had a drop of drink, and had a few words together, I suppose.— The Chief Constable explained that it was not a usual fight, and in the end the seconds began to fight. There were hundreds of people looking on both on the towing-path and Northgate- street. — Mr Gilbert : They stood a chance of a ducking. —Mr Fenwiok : It is a thousand pities they didn't get it. It is a long time since they had a ducking, I should think. (Laughter.)— Each of the prisoners was bound over to keep the peace for three months in his own recognisance of £5, and one surety of 50s. The alternative was 14 days hard labour.