Street Scene at Conisborough – “Big Sticks” and “Hair Pulling.”

October 1892

Mexborough & Swinton Times – Friday 21 October 1892

Street Scene at Conisborough

On the Warpath

“Big Sticks” and “Hair Pulling.”

Eliza Stanworth, alias Davies, glassblower of Conisborough, was summoned by M.L. Hulley, married woman, for assaulting her on the Common at Conisborough on the eighth inst.

There was a cross summons for assault, alleged to have been committed by Hulley at the same time and place.

Mr Baddeley appeared on behalf of Mrs Hulley.

Mrs Hulley said some time ago she lent defendant’s wife 10s, and some other money with which to buy groceries. On Saturday she went to defendant’s house to get some of the money. She got a shilling and subsequently went to a neighbours called Briggs. Presently she re-passed defendant door on her way to the co-operative stores. Defendant came running out and said, “Now you b—–w—-  I’ve caught you.” He then knocked her down and struck her several times. She said nothing to him, in fact she had not time. He kicked whilst she was down. She was much hurt about the legs and body. He used threatening language to her, and called her a “cow” many times.

Answering defendant she denied that she went into his house and insulted him, and commenced the assault.

Annie Betts said she saw defendant come out of the house and rush after complainant. He caught her, knocked her down, and punched her many times. She never saw complainant strike defendant.

In reply to defendant she said she was about 30 yards away and could see everything. She saw the row commence, and saw it end.

Williams Gledhall, a close neighbour, said he was stood near the place when the assault occurred. He saw defendant knock complainant down. When she got up the complainant said, “I’ll fetch a summons.” Defendant replied, “I’ll give you something to fetch a summons for.”

The cross summons was then heard.

Yates said Hulley came into his house and commenced to insult him. He ordered her out of the house whereupon she immediately got up and struck him. She then pulled him towards the door and fell. She then took the key out of the door and ran away. Sometimes afterwards he saw her and asked for the key. She replied, “You must get the key as best you can.”

By Mr Baddiley: Defendant got hold of him first, and as he was pulled back by his wife he let go of the defendant and she fell backwards. He denied that he ever went out of the back door. He never ran after her. He never swore at her.

Mrs Thatcher, a neighbour, said defendant was drunk. She was near complainant’s house at the time and heard the defendant commence the bother. She refused to go out and complainant ordered her. At night her and her husband came down with big sticks to create a disturbance.

Witness, in answer to Mr Baddeley, said she saw defendant pull complainant’s hair.

John Baker saw defendant come out of the house with the key in her hand shouting, “Now you b—–‘s I’ve locked you in.” Defendant then fell off the payment. Later at night defendant and her husband came up the street drunk, with two big sticks, shouting and using threats. He asked them what they were going to do and they replied, “Will show the b—– — —.”

Emma Cross said she saw defendant deliberately go into complainant’s house and pull complainant out by the hair of the head. She used the most abusive language to complainant and ran away with the key. At night she came up the street was a big stick. She created another disturbance and awoke witness’s baby. Defendant was constantly creating bother in the neighbourhood.

The Chairman said the Bench believed defendant had not assaulted complainant and dismissed the cross summons. In the first case they believe that Yates assaulted complainant without provocation, and therefore he would be fined 40s including costs.