Liverpool Mercury, July 12th, 1894

Liverpool Police Court

Wednesday July 11th, before Mr STEWART

Unfit for human food

William EDWARDSON, farmer, Hough Green, Ditton, was summoned for having on the 27th June, exposed for sale at the abattoir, in Trewbridge St, Liverpool, the carcase of a cow unfit for human food. Mr PIERCE [towns-clerk office] appeared in support of the information, the defendant was represented by Mr HUSBAND. The evidence of Inspector LUYA and his officials was to the effect that that the cow had suffered from dropsy, the flesh and fat being wet, soft and flabby, and unfit for human food. Mr HUSBAND submitted that the defendant was not aware the flash of the cow was unfit for human food. The animal was killed on the advice of a veterinary surgeon, simply because it was believed the cow had swallowed a nail. That proved to be correct. The flesh was considered to be sound, in fact, defendant and his family ate some of it. Richard EDMONDSON and John E. YATES, veterinary surgeons St Helens, stated they saw the cow and considered that it would make first-rate beef. John WENSTER, butcher, who killed the animal, deposed that the cow was in good condition. At the close of evidence Mr STEWART stated that he was satisfied that the meat was unfit for human food, but seeing that the defendant had taken the opinion of the veterinary surgeon on the condition of the animal before it was killed, a fine of only 20s and costs would be imposed. The meat should have been examined after the cow was killed.

Assaulting a baths superintendent

Michael MULCROWE, licensed victualler was summoned for having assaulted Samuel BUIST, superintendent of the Corporation Baths in Burrough's gardens on Sunday, 1st July. Mr PIERCE appeared in support of the summons, and Mr LYNSKEY defended. The case for the complainant was that at 8.50am on the day in question the defendant entered the baths buildings and asked for a ticket for a private bath. He was told he was too late but was allowed to go into the plunge bath for a time to watch the bathers. In a few minutes he came back and went to complainant's office, used very strong language to him and struck him in the face, knocking him to the ground. An insinuation was made, said Mr PIERCE, that the complainant was not sober. The complainant stated he was a teetotaller and did not know the taste of drink. Witness was cross-examined to show that other persons were allowed to enter the baths after the defendant had been refused a ticket. This was not admitted by complainant. The defendant stated it was between 8.10 and 8.15 am when he asked for a ticket, he afterwards saw other people going in. The complainant on being spoken to about the matter ordered witness out of the place and then shoved him. They struggled together and fell. Witness denied having struck complainant in the face. The attendant was called and stated she had refused tickets to people who came to her just before the defendant. The Magistrate said it seemed there had been some misunderstanding as to the time. Defendant should have complained about complainant to the Baths Committee, and not have assaulted the man. Fined 20s and costs.

Licensing prosecutions

Thomas BULFIELD Jnr, licensee of the house 31 and 33 Grinfield St, was summoned for selling drink to a drunken woman, and with having permitted drunkenness on his premises. Mr PIERCE appeared for the prosecution, Mr BERRY defended. According to the sergeant of police Mary ROBERTS who was in drink was in the house of the defendant on the night of 30th June and had a glass of beer in front of her. The defence was that the woman had not been served, that she had been ordered out of the house and that the glass of beer in front of her belonged to a man who was having a glass of beer with some friends. Defendant fined 20s and costs. The woman ROBERTS was fined 5s and costs.

Mary Ellen LANGDON, licensee of a house, 278 Falkner St was summoned for having on the 3rd July sold drink during prohibited hours, and for having permitted gaming on the premises. Mr NEALE defended. Sergeant B4 of the police stated that about 1,50 am on the date in question he heard the noise of coins whilst he was passing the defendant's house. Along with a constable he went to the back of the place, got on a wall, and watched what was going on in the parlour. There were 4 or 5 people in the room, 2 were playing cards and money was passing. Witness saw the defendant go out of the room and return with glasses of beer, and receive some money. The defence was that the licensee being a widow, she and her brother and his wife living with her, were the three along with two other people, who were in the room, and they were up late in order to see a friend off to London by the midnight train, on returning to the house they had some refreshments and the defendant's sister pretended to tell some of them their fortunes with the cards. No drink was paid for and there was no gaming going on at all. Fined 5s and costs for permitting gaming, the other information’s were dismissed.

Ann WATERS, licensee of the house 38 Standish St was fined 40s and costs for having kept her house open during prohibited hours on Sunday, 1st inst.

A dangerous practise

William WILLIAMS, a youth was summoned for throwing stones, and thus endangering travellers by the Cheshire Lines Railway. Mr Percy DAVIES prosecuted, and said owing to the many complaints the railway company had been bound to take action. The lad admitted having thrown stones at a kite in Caryl St, but he did not think that the stones were falling on trains passing along the cuttings near Brunswick Station. Under the bylaws his worship imposed a fine of 40s and costs or a months imprisonment in default. A similar fine was also imposed on John SHERRIDAN for an offence of the same nature.

Before Mr P. F. GARNETT

Alleged highway robbery

Henry LEVY a young man, was charged with having stolen a gold watch and chain, valued at £20, from the person of William George BANNER, estate agent, Huskisson St. The prosecutor was entering his house at midday on the 9th inst, when he heard someone behind him ask a question. He turned round and saw the prisoner, who, it was alleged, immediately snatched his gold watch and chain and ran off. The prosecutor followed and called out "stop thief." A lad noticed the prisoner meeting another man in Parliament St, pass him something and change hats with him. Prisoner later on was arrested by a detective in an ashpit in an entry off Morpeth St. The watch and chain had not been found. The case was sent to the assizes for trial


Patrick MURPHY, aged 24, was charged with having entered the house of Bernard COSGRIFF in Canterbury St, Liverpool on the 3rd July and assaulted Mrs COSGRIFF. Mr LOWNDES appeared for the defence. According to the evidence of Mrs COSGRIFF on the night of the 2nd inst her husband remained in the kitchen as he had, had, some drink, about 2am the prisoner entered her room and assaulted her. She called her husband, who gave the prisoner a sound thrashing and then let him go. Subsequently he was apprehended, as the case presented a serious aspect, the prisoner was sent to the assizes for trial.

County Magistrates Court

July 11th, before Messers S. H. PARKER, and W. H. TATE

Alleged assault at Garston

Patrick DOYLE, a labourer, and Mary MURPHY, were together charged with having assaulted Margaret DAVIES at Garston on the 25th ult. The case for the prosecution was that MURPHY dragged DAVIES to the ground and that then the DOYLE kicked her several times, fracturing two ribs, since the date of the assault she has been an inmate of Mill Rd, Infirmary. For the defence it was stated that the injuries received by the prosecutrix had been inflicted by her husband, and after hearing several witnesses the magistrates said that there seemed to be a doubt in the case. They were not satisfied that the prisoners caused the injuries to DAVIES, the prisoners were discharged.

License Transfers

A number of transfers of licenses were granted by the bench. The transfer of one a beerhouse in Edge Lane, was opposed by the police, Superintendent SMITH stating that since 1881 there had been 16 tenants. No sooner did they go into the house than they wanted to get out again. Mr ENTWISLE who appeared for the ingoing tenant, said he had know people who had been successful in the house. No objection was made to the character of the tenant and the transfer was granted.

Wallasey Police Court

July 11th, before Messers W. T. JACOB, W. HEAP and T. JOYNSON

Unlabelled margarine

Robert WRIGHT, grocer, 72 Wheatland Lane, Seacombe, was fined 5s and 14s-6d costs for exposing for sale margarine which was not labelled as such. Inspector LAIRD proved the case, and for the defence Mr WRIGHT'S assistant said the label was in front of the margarine and had fallen down.


Liverpool Mercury, Aug 3rd 1894

Liverpool Assizes

Aug 2nd, Crown Court before Mr Justice COLLINS

The alleged child murder at Toxteth

Matilda Alice ROYLE, aged 27, barmaid was charged with the wilful murder o her illegitimate child, Bruce Wallace ROYLE, in December 1892, at Toxteth Park. She was further charged with abandoning the child in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to its health. Mr T. SHEPHERD LITTLE, M.P, and Dr SPARROW conducted the case for the prosecution, and the prisoner was defended by Mr SWIFT. To the charge of murder the prisoner pleaded not guilty, to the indictment for abandoning the baby the prisoner pleaded guilty.

Mr LITTLE, for the prosecution, said, the prisoner for some years had been employed as barmaid and waitress in and about Liverpool. In 1891 she was staying at the house of a Mrs MAITLAND at Seacombe, and there on Christmas day she gave birth to a child. After staying with Mrs MAITLAND for five months she left, as also did another young woman Miss KRAFT. The prisoner put the child out to nurse with a Mrs WILLIAMS, arranging to pay her 5s per week. As the prisoner did not keep up her payments regularly she had to take the child away from Mrs WILLIAMS on the 19th Nov 1892. Prisoner came over to Liverpool with it, and for a while she seemed not to know what to do with it. Ultimately she took the Dingle tram to St Michael's and put the baby in a hole on a piece of waste ground in Marmion Rd, before leaving it she took its dress off and wrapped it in her own woollen skirt, leaving with it also the feeding bottle. The child was then some 10 mths old. The same night the prisoner gave Miss KRAFT some of the child's clothes, part of which the young lady kept and part of which she burned as they were dirty. On the 27th January 1893, portions of the body of a child were found on this piece of waste ground, but they were much charred owing to some lads having lit a fire close by.

The main difficulty the jury would find in the case, on a murderer or manslaughter charge, would be whether the parts of the body found in January 1893, were parts of the body of the child left there by the prisoner ten weeks previously. The remains were examined, and the doctor could not say definitely how old the child was or how long it had been dead. The prisoner was arrested in June 1894 and admitted she had left a child on the land in question, and stated at the time it was snowing.

His Lordship said he had listened attentively to the opening statement of Mr LITTLE, who had frankly admitted the difficulties. He had also read the evidence, and he thought that it would be unsafe on the evidence to put the prisoner on trial on the capital charge. He thought there were serious difficulties in the way of asking the jury to say that the body found was that of the child the prisoner had left on that ground. It might have been the body of another child altogether. Mr LITTLE agreed with his lordship, and said that was why he at once drew attention to the fact. The prisoner had pleaded guilty to having abandoned the child, and therefore on the capital charge he would offer no evidence. The jury, at the direction of his lordship, found the prisoner, "not guilty" of murder.

Mr SWIFT, said he would now like to say a few words on behalf of the prisoner, who had pleaded guilty on the charge of abandoning the child. Up to this she had borne a good character, and held respectable situations, and had been well thought of by her employers. Partly through the want of employment and partly through the default of the father of the child, the prisoner had been unable to pay for the nursing of it, and could not take care of the baby herself, as she had to go out and earn a living. She wanted to put the child in a hospital, but there were difficulties in the way. However, in the end she left it on the waste land, hoping that someone in the well-populated neighbourhood would find it and care for it. She took off its wet clothing, wrapped it up in her warm woollen skirt, and left the feeding bottle with it. She did not attempt to do away with the baby, but left it within a few feet of the road.

His Lordship, said that the prisoner had left the baby in an out of the way place, at a time when snow was falling, and in a place where it was very unlikely it would be found. He would bear in mind all the facts that had been brought forward by counsel for the prisoner, and he would remember also that the prisoner had been 6 weeks in jail awaiting trial. She must go back to prison for twelve months with hard labour.


Burglary at Liverpool

George MILLER, aged 20, a labourer, pleaded guilty to having burglariously entered the house of Matilda SPICER and stolen 48 silk handkerchiefs and other articles on the 16th June at Liverpool and was sentenced to 6mths imprisonment with hard labour. For having received part of the stolen property, Benjamin PARKER, aged 18, labourer was sent to jail for 4mths with hard labour. The jury acquitted James ASHLEY, aged 18, labourer and Samuel SARGENT, aged 18, ship's cook, of having received any of the stolen articles.

Theft at St Helens

Margaret FORD, Ellen DAVIES and Peter WOODS, were indicted for having stolen a watch from Martin CHURCHILL, on the 23rd July, at St Helens. The jury acquitted WOODS and the other prisoners were found guilty. His Lordship, said that FORD and DAVIES who had been previously convicted must go to jail for 14 mths with hard labour.


William Horner STATHAM, aged 53, described as a manager in Liverpool, and an organist at Blundellsands, pleaded guilty to three acts of indecency at Litherland. Mr Collingwood HOPE appeared for the prosecution, and the prisoner was defended by Mr M'CONNELL and Mr WRIGHT. His Lordship said the prisoner must go to jail for a year with hard labour on each charge, the sentences to be accumulative.

Patrick MURPHY, aged 24, was indicted for having entered the house of Bernard COSGRIFF in Canterbury St, Liverpool on the 3rd July and assaulted Mrs COSGRIFF. Mr ROSE BROWN prosecuted, Mr MADDEN defended. The evidence in support of the charge was that the prisoner entered the house at 2am, and whilst Bernard COSGRIFF was asleep in the kitchen, went upstairs and assaulted Mrs COSGRIFF. When the husband was aroused he gave the prisoner a sound thrashing. The defence was that the prisoner had been drinking heavily, and did not recollect what happened that night. Prisoner was convicted and sentenced to 7 yrs penal servitude.


Edward DARRINGER, aged 23, labourer was found not guilty of having, on the 22nd July, at Liverpool, wounded Richard KELLY, and was discharged

Robert REDHEAD, aged 30, labourer, was acquitted of having on 1st May, at Bootle, assaulted Sarah Ellen SQUIRE, aged 14.



Liverpool Mercury, 6 February 1895

Liverpool Police Court Feb 5th.

John M'Culloch was sent to hard labour for three months for having assaulted Constables 273 C and 67 C. The former officer saw prisoner loitering in the a street, and asked him what he was doing. He replied that he was “looking for a soft brick," and then rushed at the constable and knocked him down. Police-constable 67 C, who went to his comrade’s assistance was also assaulted.


© 2011 to date all rights reserved