Alleged Assault at Denaby

A grocer, named Joseph Venables, was summoned for assaulting Mary Coyne, a miner’s wife, at Conisboro’ on the 13th inst.

Mr. Baddiley appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Andrews for the defendant.

Complainant stated that she lived at 78, Doncaster-road, Conisboro’, and her husband was a miner now working at Denaby Main, as he had done for 35 years.

On the date in question she was in defendant’s shop for the purpose of purchasing a quarter of potatoes.

When she entered the shop defendant was standing outside, and when she asked for the potatoes the defendant’s wife replied, “I cannot serve you until my husband comes in, because we cannot serve blacklegs.”

Complainant replied, “You are a foolish woman.”

Defendant rushed into the shop, seized her by the waist, and threw her on the floor, and said, “If I am a cripple I wouldn’t be like your old man—a blackleg.”

A boy named Patrick Higgins assisted her to her feet and helped her home.

She had been attended by Dr. Huey, and his charge up to the present was £1 2s. 6d., and she was still attending her.

Cross-examined by Mr. Andrews, she said she was not the first to mention “blacklegs,” and she did not say “Don’t be offended for what I said on Wednesday, as there are worse people in Denaby than blacklegs.”

She did not fall down, or use bad language.

She did not use bad language to defendant’s wife.

Re-examined by Mr. Baddiley, she said, “I have never been in this court before.”

Patrick Higgins gave corroborative evidence, adding that he heard defendant say he would stand his hands being chopped off if he was the same as complainant’s husband.

This concluded the case for the prosecution.

Mr. Andrews then handed to the magistrates a letter, stating that it was from the Denaby Main Colliery Company, and that he (the speaker) would either stand or fall by it.

He had not seen inside it.

Defendant was sworn, and stated that he resided at 84, Doncaster-road, Denaby, and was a shopkeeper.

On the date named he did not get hold of the complainant by the waist and throw her on the floor.

He said that he would rather have his hands chopped off than be a blackleg.

The witness made use of that expression at the shop, complainant had said that he came “blacklegging” twenty-three years ago.

Complainant said her husband was not “blacklegging.”

He (defendant) had just come into the shop after taking a customer from the dray.

He told complainant to leave the shop, and she refused, and he was making room for her she fell at his feet.

He did not raise a hand to her.

There are several witnesses present.

He did not say anything to complainant concerning her husband.

He had not spoken to her until she said she hoped he would not be “blacklegging” at the pit on Wednesday.

He told complainant that he did not want any bad language in his shop, as he did not use it himself.

Cross-examined by Mr. Baddiley, she was not supplied with the potatoes as she would not pay for them.

Witness did not get hold of her.

Harriet Venables gave evidence, stating that complainant said that when her husband came there he came “blacklegging,” and her husband said it was a lie.

Her husband did not push complainant down.

Mr. Baddiley (to witness): Did you refuse to serve her?

Witness: No, neither did I say my master refused to serve “blacklegs.”

Arthur Lupton and Michael Higgins also gave evidence.

The Chairman said it has been a very long case, and the Bench think the evidence is so conflicting that the case must be dismissed.