ATTEMPTED SUICIDE OF A YOUNG WOMAN AT DUKINFIELD
Shocking Disclosures
At a special police court held at Dukinfield on Saturday, before Alderman J KERFOOT, a young woman named Rose DOWD was charged with attempting to commit suicide by hanging herself in a bedroom at 5 Walker’s-yard at 12.30 on Friday last. It appeared that a woman named Mary Elizabeth RATHBONE, residing in the same house, had occasion to go upstairs at noon and was horrified to see DOWD suspended from a rope attached to two nails fastened to the wall.

She rushed out for a policeman instead of cutting the woman down, and fortunately Constable WILCOCKSON happened to be in the locality. He promptly proceeded to the house, got hold of the woman, eased the rope and then cut it. She was by the time in an unconscious state. The officer placed her on the chamber floor, and, being a member of the St John’s Ambulance, he proceeded to apply artificial respiration. In the course of 15 minutes his efforts were successful.

Dr MILLER had been sent for, and when he arrived he highly complimented Constable WILCOCKSON upon what he had been able to accomplish, and said there was no doubt whatever he had saved the woman’s life by his prompt action.. She was taken into custody on the charge above stated, and was remanded until next Thursday in order that the police might make inquiries.

At the Police Court, on Thursday, DOWD was brought up on a charge of attempting to commit suicide by means of a cord attached to a nail in the wall of a bedroom, thereby willfully and with malice aforethought of attempting to kill herself. The prisoner was charged in the usual manner by the Clerk. She said she was very sorry.

Superintendent CROGHAN informed the Bench that prisoner had only been living in Dukinfield since March last. She was up in Ashton on December 3rd 1901, charged with stealing a watch and chain, and she was sent to sessions where she got a month. She was again up on April 23rd this year for drunkenness, and fined 5s 6d and costs.

She had been cohabiting with a man named James GREGORY, who was now in custody on another charge. He did not wish to make any further remarks about him, for fear it might prejudice the case which was to come on. The prisoner DOWD was a known immoral character. The only relative she had was a married half-sister, a respectable woman living at Newton, and she was present to give evidence if the Bench wanted to know anything about the family history.

James GREGORY, who was in the dock, was then charged with willfully and knowingly living on part of the immoral earnings of Rose DOWD on diverse dates between 24th March and the 22nd May. He pleaded not guilty.

Rose DOWD was then taken out of the dock and put into the witness box. She said she was a single woman, and had been living with the prisoner GREGORY for nearly three years. Three months ago they came to live at Walker’s-yard, Dukinfield. During the whole of the time she had cohabited with the prisoner he had done very little work. He had sent her out into the streets, and lived on the proceeds of her immorality.

He had beaten and kicked her when she refused to go on the streets. On the 22nd May, he struck her, and made her mouth bleed. In reply to the prisoner, she denied drinking all the money she got. – Inspector TOLSON, of the Ashton borough police, said he had known DOWD three years and GREGORY 12 months. He knew they had been cohabiting together, and had warned GREGORY’s mother as to the consequences of keeping a disorderly house.

DOWD had complained to him about GREGORY’s conduct towards her, and said if it were not for him she would get work. He believed during the last few months she had tried to turn over a new leaf. She was not the habitual drunkard which GREGORY tried to make her out to be.

Jas. Hy. SCHOFIELD, brother-in-law to GREGORY, hawker of drapery, 5 Ogden-street, said he knew DOWD went into Ashton for immoral purposes, and gave GREGORY the money. She had really kept him during the three weeks they lived with witness. – Prisoner said the witnesses had told a pack of lies. She went out of her own accord. He called Esther and Sarah Ann GREGORY, but their evidence amounted to nothing.

The Chairman (Alderman FENTON): Although I have sat upon various benches for more than a quarter of a century, this is one of the most horrible cases I have ever heard. You (GREGORY) must go to prison for three months with hard labour. That is the extent we can give you, and I am sorry for it.

The prisoner DOWD was then replaced in the dock, and her half-sister promised to take her into her own home and look after her. She stated that DOWD had worked with her at one time, and there was not a better worker in the mill when she was all right. – The Clerk: Are you willing to go with your sister? – Prisoner: Yes. – Alderman FENTON: Upon that understanding we discharge you. I hope for the future you will live a different life than you have been.

You have got rid of this man, I hope for ever. Have no more to do with him, and no other man under similar conditions. You will be discharged. Prisoner, who appeared to be in a very weak condition, then left the dock, and GREGORY was removed to the cells.

GIRL KNOCKED DOWN BY A BREWER’S DRAY AT ASHTON
A sad accident occurred at 1.15pm on Monday to a girl named Emily KELSALL, aged 2 years, daughter of William KELSALL, miner, 69 Welbeck-street, Ashton. The girl was in the street near her home when she was knocked down by a horse attached to a brewer’s dray owned by the Openshaw Brewery Company, which was turning out of Church-street into Welbeck-street. The driver at once pulled up and carried her into her home. Dr SMITH was called in, and found her suffering from a lacerated wound in the right groin, for which he placed her under medical treatment at her own house. Constable RAMSBOTTOM was on duty close by, and rendered every assistance.

THE ALLEGED MURDER AT STALYBRIDGE
(This continues a report of the court inquiry into whether Benjamin RADLEY should be tried for murder or manslaughter, so apologies for ‘half a tale.’ – Ed)

After the “Reporter” had gone to press last Friday, several other witnesses were called on behalf of the prosecution against Benjamin RADLEY, who is in custody at Stalybridge on a charge of the willful murder of his wife Sarah RADLEY. Deceased’s sister (Mrs WHALLEY) had spoken at to having seen the poker in the fire, and having asked prisoner what it was for, when he replied, “I know.” Witness under cross-examination by Mr SIMISTER, who asked: Will you swear here to-day your sister had not had drink that night? Not that I saw of. – But was she perfectly sober? Yes. – Has your sister been in the habit of getting drunk? No, only a drink of porter. – Now do be careful, Mrs WHALLEY, other witnesses are coming here besides you. Now, I ask you again; have you ever seen her drunk? No, she was to weak to get drunk.

William Henry GAFFNEY, of No 8 Half-street, Stalybridge, said: I am a night-watchman for Messrs Underwood Bros. On the 25th April I was on duty near Daisyfield Terrace, Millbrook, a distance of over a mile from prisoner’s house. Between four and five o’clock on Sunday morning prisoner came to my box, and I said, “Hello Ben, what are you doing round here so early?” I have known prisoner since I was a child. He replied, “I went home drunk last night, she (meaning his wife) was drunk, and we had a bother. I am not sure if I put a thin poker in her eye or not. I came out to save further bother.”

Mr Eugene Charles McCARTHY, JP, surgeon, Stalybridge, said: On May 1st I was called by deceased’s daughter to see her mother. I found deceased lying on a couch with her left eye covered over. I examined the eye and found the surface acutely inflamed, all the blood vessels being congested. The eyeball was enlarged and very tender. Next day, I found eye was more tender and she complained of a slight headache. I advised her to go to the District Infirmary or the Eye Institution. She refused.

I again saw her the following day, when I found the left eye was decidedly worse. I told her then the left eye was irretrievably lost, would have to be removed, and I again advised her removal to the Infirmary for the operation to be performed, in order to prevent inflammation of the brain and probably the loss of the other eye. I saw her again on 4th May, when she was decidedly weaker, and staggered when attempting to walk.

On the Tuesday I saw deceased twice, and she went to the Infirmary later in the day. I saw her there in the evening, and was present at the operation performed by Dr SCOTT. – Mr IVES questioned the doctor as to the injury being the cause of the woman staggering on the night of the alleged attack, and witness said he should imagine the staggering on the first occasion was through drink.

Joseph Edward JUDSON said: I am house surgeon at the District Infirmary, and a registered medical practitioner. I remember the 5th of May when the deceased was admitted. She had two red marks on the outer surface of the right fore-arm, and ulcerations on both legs. The deceased gradually sank until her death on 22nd of May, about 6.10 in the evening.

Cross-examined by Mr SIMISTER: At the time I saw deceased I could not say whether the injuries to the eye had been caused by a hot or cold instrument. I agree with Dr McCARTHY that if the woman had been medically attended to immediately after the injury she would have stood a fair chance of recovery. It would have required more than a slight thrust to cause the fracture. The case was adjourned until Wednesday.

Prisoner was again brought up on Wednesday. Detective LEE was present, he having come down from the Infirmary in a cab to give evidence as to the arrest of the prisoner. He proved to be the only witness called. The officer’s statement was to the effect that on Friday, 22nd May, he arrested RADLEY at his home, and charged him with willfully and maliciously causing the death of his wife by putting a hot poker in her eye.

Mr SIMISTER then proceeded to address the magistrates with a view to their committing RADLEY for trial on the minor charge – manslaughter – if at all. Speaking in impassioned tones, and amid the breathless silence of a crowded court, he said prisoner was charged with the greatest crime known to our English law, the awful crime of murder; and the responsibility was cast upon the justices of saying either that the prisoner be tried for his life or that in the face of the evidence given by the prosecution the charge should be reduced from murder to manslaughter.

At the conclusion of Mr SIMISTER’s eloquent appeal a number of spectators in the body of the court gave vent to their feelings by applauding, though the police promptly suppressed the noise, and secured order. Rising a second time, Mr SIMISTER said he had thought the matter over, and did not intend to call any witnesses that day. He knew the whole circumstances, or he would not have spoken as strongly as he had done.

The magistrates retired, and were about fully ten minutes. Upon their return the Chairman said the Bench had given the case their most careful attention, and had arrived at the decision that there was a prima facie case of manslaughter. The Clerk then formally charged RADLEY with the manslaughter of his wife, and he replied “Not guilty, sir.” He was then committed to Chester Assizes, which commences on the 18th July.

DUKINFIELD
PITCH AND TOSS. – On Thursday at the Police Court, five lads named Thomas McCARTHY, John BAILEY, Joseph CLARKE, Richard HOMER, and Lawrence SHAW were summoned for playing pitch and toss in Fir Tree-lane on the 31st. They pleaded guilty. A constable stated that on Sunday afternoon last, the 31st May, he saw the defendants sitting in a field playing at pitch and toss. – Defendants were fined 1s each as costs, and severely warned as to their conduct in future.

DOG WITHOUT LICENSE. – At the Police Court on Thursday, William BROADHURST was summoned for keeping a dog without license. – Defendant said the dog followed him home, and he kept it a fortnight. Constable DALE stated that he visited the defendant’s house at Waterside and found a brown Irish terrier dog fastened up in the yard. Defendant’s wife said they had a license for the dog. He asked to look at it, and she said her husband had put it somewhere. In a few minutes afterwards witness saw the wife leave the house and go to the works where her husband was employed. Witness saw the defendant, and he admitted he had no license. – Fined 5s and costs.

AN ALLEGED RETIRED COLONEL. – A man who gave the name of Thomas HENNIGAN was arrested in the early hours of Monday in a smart manner by Constable EDWARDS. He saw the prisoner coming along the road from the direction of Hyde, and noticing his pockets were somewhat bulky he stopped him. On making a search he found a brass bell and certain tools in his pockets The man would not or could not give an account of how he became possessed of the articles, and EDWARDS locked him up.

Superintendent CROGHAN informed Alderman PICKUP at a special court on Monday that prisoner had since his arrest informed him that he had stolen the bell from a public house at Broughton-road, Manchester, on Saturday night. The six new files and one pair of pliers he had bought in the “flat iron” market. He did not think prisoner was “all there.” He had told him that he had been a Colonel in the army, and had recently left on a pension of £10 a week, and such rubbish.

He asked for a remand until the following day to make inquiries. On Tuesday prisoner was again brought up before Mr W UNDERWOOD, and handed over to the Salford police, where he was required on several charges.

FIRE AT DUKINFIELD HALL LIBERAL CLUB. – Early on Tuesday morning a fire was discovered to have broken out at the above club. A neighbour saw smoke issuing from the place and heard the cracking of burning wood inside. The curator, who does not reside upon the premises, was aroused, and immediately proceeded to the club. With assistance the fire was extinguished, and upon examination being made it was found that the bar counter had been burnt away.

The fire had also reached the shelves where bottles of beer were stored. The heat had knocked off the necks of the bottles as clean as though they had been struck with a sharp instrument, and the liquor had flowed on the floor. The flames had almost reached a cupboard where the spirits were stored. It is supposed the fire was caused by a smoker dropping a lighted match into a long spittoon filled with sawdust at the base of the front of the bar counter, and that this had smouldered until flame broke out.

PAINFULLY SUDDEN DEATH OF MR JAMES HAGUE, OF HOOLEY HILL
The inhabitant of the district were greatly shocked last Sunday afternoon to hear of the unexpected death of the above named well-known inhabitant which took place at his residence, 239 Guide-lane. Some short time ago, Mr HAGUE had the misfortune to break a blood vessel, from which, however, he seemed to have nicely recovered.

On Sunday morning, the deceased was watching the Wesleyan scholars’ Whitsuntide procession, and he then looked all right, and even at two o’clock he was seen talking in the street; but shortly afterwards the poor, unfortunate gentleman broke another blood vessel. Medical aid was quickly summoned, but medical services were fruitless, and the news was soon spread about that the deceased had passed away about four o’clock in the afternoon.

Much sympathy was expressed with the bereaved family on their loss of a good husband and father. Mr HAGUE was of a very kindly and jovial disposition, and made friends wherever he went. He was 52 years of age.

The funeral took place on Tuesday afternoon at St John’s, Hurst, the remains being placed in a paneled oak coffin, with heavy brass mountings, and conveyed to their last resting place in a splendid funeral car, and was followed by four coaches, which contained the following mourners:-

First coach, Mrs HAGUE and family, Mrs HADFIELD, Mr T SHAW.
Second coach, Mr and Mrs E HAGUE, Mr and Mrs PIKE, Mr and Mrs James HAGUE.
Third coach, Mr and Mrs SHAW, Mr and Mrs BRINDLEY, Mr J EDWARDS, Mr P GRUNDY.
Fourth coach, Mr G WILDE, Mr H WILDE, Miss Florrie PIKE, Miss Clara PIKE, Miss Ethel SHAW, Mrs R SHAW.

The following were the bearers:- Messrs C WORTHINGTON, J WOOD, W BROWN, G ROGERS, W HOWARD, J BRIERLEY.

ST FRANCIS’, WEST GORTON
Interesting Address by Father Bernard Vaughan
St Francis’ Church, Gorton, has latterly been in the hands of the decorators who have very materially improved the appearance of the sacred edifice. Naturally the re-opening of the church was looked upon with much interest by the worshippers, and with the view of celebrating this occasion special services were held on Sunday last.

There was a large attendance in the morning, when the sermon was preached by the Rev A POOLE, of St Bede’s College, Manchester, and the congregation was again large in the evening, when the preacher was the Rev Father Bernard VAUGHAN, who was for so long associated with the Church of the Holy Name.

He gave a very interesting discourse, and dealt principally with the subject of faith in matters of religion. He insisted that dogma could not be disassociated from Christianity. They were not infrequently told, he said, that one great need of the present age was a religion without theology, a code of morality altogether independent of dogma. If that were the present day demand he made bold to say there could be forthcoming no adequate supply to satisfy it.

As you could not have the heavens above without astronomy, nor the earth below without geology, so neither could you have God without theology, nor Christ without Christianity, nor Christianity without a religion bristling with dogma. It seemed to him to be one of the fatal mistakes in the education nowadays supplied by the State to the masses that it undertook scientifically to teach all subjects but one, and that one the most important of them all – religion.

Because Catholics had taken exception to that unscientific way of teaching religion and had insisted on its being taught scientifically – in other words, as springing out of dogma – they had been practically penalised for it. The Christianity of Christ could not be taught in any school without first of all answering the question, “Who and what is Christ?” Surely upon the answer to that double question depended a man’s relationship with Christ.

Faith was a necessity of life. From the cradle to the grave, man had to exercise faith – accept on the authority of others what he himself could not prove. As in his natural life, so in his spiritual life, man walked and lived by faith. Faith, however, without good work was a lamp in which the light was quenched.

”We as members of the Catholic Church,” continued the preacher, “are children of the household of faith. We are called the faithful. We are so called because we accept on the authority of the Church all her defined moral and dogmatic teaching as infallibly true. We give to them an unhesitating assent, believing them to be the teaching of the Master, Jesus Christ.

”To the Church, Jesus Christ has said, “He that heareth you heareth me.” Accordingly the Master and no other is responsible for our unconditional surrender to an authority which He assured us He invests with His own authority.”