Mexborough & Swinton Times – Friday 06 FAlleged Assault at West Meltonebruary 1891

Alleged Assault at West Melton

William Bums, miner, of West Melton, was summoned fur having assaulted a married woman named Mary Jane Appleby, of Concrete Cottages, on the 21th ult.

Mr. Gichard prosecuted, and Mr. Hickmott defended.

ln stating the case, Mr. Gichard said on the 24th January, about half-past seven o’clock at night, complainant went into the house of Mrs. Eyre, where the defendant lodged, for the purpose of calling upon her to go to Wombwell Market. There were eight or nine persons in the room, and two or three pints of beer were sent for. A quarrel afterwards arose, and in order to get out of the disturbance, complainant left the house by means of the back door.

Defendant followed her, struck her, knocked her down, and kicked her three times. The woman screamed out murder. She had since suffered considerable pain, and had not been able to do her work.

Subsequently complainant husband spoke to the defendant about his conduct, and Instead of him denying the assault or saving that he was very sorry for what he had done, kicked him (the husband) also.

Complainant gave evidence concerning Mr Gichard opening statement. She said she never spoke to the defendant before he assaulted her.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hickmott: She had had no quarrel with the defendant. She had been on good with him having known him for a couple of years. She could not give any reason why he should ill-treat her. She had not been in any public-house previous to the assault. While in Mrs. Eyre’s house she remembered a boy bringing a pint of beer in. She did not want to drink, but she had a share of it. Defendant never said she had no right to drink. She drank of the beer three times. She denied that she was drunk when she went into the house, or that in consequence of being intoxicated she fell down the steps. She did not see her sons—one with a poker and another with a rolling pin— and invited the defendant out.(Laughter)

Tom Pearce, driver at Corton Wood Colliery, gave evidence on behalf of the complainant. The woman was perfectly sober, and never did anything to irritate the defendant.

Complainant’s husband was also called. When he spoke to the defendant he never denied having assaulted his wife, but took a run kick at him.

Crow-examined by Mr. Wilmot: His wile was not in the habit of going with ten or eleven miners, and drinking out of pints of beer.

Mr. Hickmott said his case on the heart of the defendant was that the complainant was under the influence of drink and she wanted to drink of the defendant’s beer to which he (the defendant) objected. The woman then struck him in the face and in running away—being the worse for drink—she fell down the steps. Two of the complainant’s sons afterwards came out, one with a tolling pin and the other with a poker —and Invited the defendant out.

Richard Eyre and his wife gave evidence on defendant’s behalf, stating that he was never out of the house. Complainant was not assaulted at all. She was the worse for drink when she came in.

The bench considered the evidence of very contradictory and they therefore dismissed the case.