As we are all unable to go outside, apart from essential tasks at the moment, I thought about what I could do to help and, after a suggestion from my son Chris, have decided to write a ‘Lockdown Book’. This will be reproducing again some of the many true crimes I have already written about in books and newspaper articles. The book will be mainly aimed at new readers who have not read any of my books before, but as it also contains new cases I am hoping that it will appeal to the ‘constant reader’ also. All royalties for this book (and hopefully other ‘Lockdown Criminals’ books to follow) will be donated to the NHS for the sterling work they are doing during this worldwide crisis.

Are you self isolating at home through this present national emergency?
Do you come from Rotherham?
Are you interested in true murder cases that really happened on the town’s dark streets?

If you answered yes to all the above then you will love my new book called ‘Rotherham’s Dark Streets’. The book, in your imagination at least, takes you along the same roads and streets of Rotherham accompanied by someone plotting revenge or murder? Walk along Sheffield Road where John Thomas Kay planned to kill his paramour, or follow Samuel Barker as he made his way over Coronation Bridge and along Psalters Lane, not knowing that he was going to his death.

This book covers murders and attempted murders which really happened in Rotherham between the years 1900 – 1959 from which four men from Rotherham were executed on the scaffold and other sentenced to life sentences for crimes committed on Rotherham’s dark streets. The book costs £3.99 (Kindle version) or £8.99 (Paperback version) and is ready to either download or buy from Amazon if you follow this link.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=rotherham+dark+street

Enjoy!

On Friday I met an up and coming Rotherham based documentary writer, called Joshua Daniels who has several youtube videos on Rotherham and its history. They are under the title of Historic Rotherham and the subjects he has covered are the Buildings of the Wentworth Family, Rotherham Town Hall, the Minster and the Chapel on the Bridge. If you have ever asked yourself why there is a cannon outside the Town Hall, or what were the little green men of the Minster, or even what does the inside of the Hoober Stand looks like, and what the view is like from the top, these are some of the things that these documentaries will tell you. One comment I particularly found amusing was when talking about the Chapel on the Bridge and how, in 1779 it was turned into a prison, Joshua says ‘where services were carried out, now sentences were carried out’. Magic!

Anyone who follows my books and website will know that I am passionate about the two subjects of History and the towns of Rotherham and Sheffield, so to meet someone who is as passionate as I am about such topics, was delightful. I do believe that these documentaries are a powerful tool to teach future generations about the towns in which they live. I feel that such documentary writers and presenters should be encouraged and supported to continue to make these programmes about the history of our towns and cities.

Joshua is currently working on a documentary about the Blitz in Sheffield for its 80 year anniversary. His aim is to tell the story of the city on the two worst nights of the bombing, but also to hear the stories from those who were alive at the time. If you, or anyone you know, lived through such bombing, has an object that survived the bombing, or has a story to tell about the Sheffield Blitz, I know he would be very pleased to hear from you. You can get in touch with him on joshdanielshist@gmail.com or his phone 07730356338 I know he would love to hear from you!

When King George awoke this morning at Wentworth he was informed of yet a third explosion which had taken place at Cadeby in the early hours, but thankfully, although there were several men down the pit at that time, the only casualties were two who men were rather badly gassed. They were immediately taken to the surface and after receiving medical attention were sent home. Due to this third explosion, colliery bosses were forced to consider what course of action they should now take to make the pit a safe one again. It was therefore decided that they would brick up the southern part of the mine in order to prevent any further catastrophes, a job which was completed during the afternoon. Today the King and Queen were to due to spend the third day of their Yorkshire tour visiting industrial areas of the North Riding of Yorkshire. Once again accompanied by Earl Fitzwilliam they left the beautiful estate at Wentworth at 10 am. It had been arranged that today they were to travel in the Midland Railway Company’s train, which had been fitted with a Royal saloon. The 59 foot carriage, which had been especially built at Derby, was placed on two four wheel bogies, and was divided into three compartments. These comprised of a main saloon, a boudoir and a smoking compartment, which were richly panelled with inlaid mahogany and upholstered in green silk. The smoking compartment was made of fumed oak and the upholstery was in green Morocco leather. A royal coat of arms was placed on the outside of the carriage which was painted in crimson, the standard colour of the Midland Railway.

The Royal couple’s first tour was to Rylands Glass Works at Stairfoot near Barnsley which was one of the largest establishments in Yorkshire, where the King and Queen would see the process of glass manufacture. Once again the route to the glassworks was lined with cheering crowds of people and houses decorated with flags and bunting. In honour of their visit a glass arch had been erected at the entrance to the glass works. On the face of the arch in gold were the words:

GOD SAVE THE KING

The arch was over 18 feet high and contained over 1,000 battery jars of green glass which looked most effective in the sunlight. The previously grimy sheds were now covered with tasteful decorations, and a green carpet had been laid for their Majesties to walk on. At the conclusion to their visit, the King signed his name on a parchment recording the visit. An amusing incident took place while the Royal couple were in the packing department. There they could hear sounds of singing from the glass blowers which turned out to be a song called ‘Mary’ and the refrain ‘kind, kind and gentle is she’ could clearly be heard by the King and Queen. It was a charming compliment to Her Majesty who smiled in delight. As they left several glass novelties were presented to them including glass pigs, glass swans and other wildfowl. Just before they got into the Royal car, a Mrs Frank Wood presented her three children to the Queen. They were Doris aged nine, Haslam aged six and Hugo the youngest, dressed in a white sailor suit aged three. Hugo shyly approached the Queen and offered her a beautiful bouquet of pink carnations, which the Queen graciously accepted and thanked him.

Back at Cadeby it had been decided that a service would be held at the pit head in the colliery yard today by the Archbishop of York, who had motored over from Wentworth. He had been joined by the Bishop of Sheffield and several local clergymen. Before taking the service, the party had visited the temporary mortuary and said a prayer over the bodies which still remained. The congregation of the service included hundreds of employees, mine officials, men who had been engaged on rescue work, nurses and ambulance crews. The Archbishop stated that he grieved with them, not only for the men who had worked in the pit who had been killed, but also expressed his:

‘high admiration for those who had given their lives in the attempt to rescue their comrades. They died as heroes, performing a duty which appealed to them because of their love for their brother men. I pray that the God of all comfort would be with those who were left behind, in this their hour of deep trial and sorrow’.

His Grace then visited several homes of the victims of the catastrophe, where he offered solace to the residents who had lost loved ones. It was reported in that mornings newspapers that the remains of Mr Pickering had been now brought to the surface and had been returned to his home in Doncaster, but at that point those of his colleagues, Mr Hewitt and Mr Tickly were still underground. It was decided that the funeral for the men who had died in the explosion would be held in Denaby Main Parish Church on Friday 12 July where the Archbishop of York agreed once more to officiate. The many coffins would be carried by other employees of the colliery.

The Royal couple now proceeded into the town of Barnsley itself where it was estimated that 70 – 80,000 people had lined the route. At the bottom of the hill which descended into Barnsley, a large stand draped in scarlet had been erected, with a scarlet carpet in front. Every window of the adjoining houses was crowded with cheering and waving persons, and some intrepid workmen made themselves comfortable on roof tops looking down on the scene beneath them. The square was full of gay coloured bunting and soon there arrived the 5^th Battalion of the Yorks and Lancaster Regimental band, which marched up from Church Street at the top of Market Hill, to Queen Street at the bottom. The people realised their Royal visitors were on their way when Mayoress took her place on the stand about 12.45 pm. Within moments she was joined by the Mayor and other civic dignitaries. As the Queen alighted she shook hands with the Mayor and commented to the Mayoress on how thankful she was that there had been no more deaths at the explosion which had occurred that morning. The Mayor recalled to the King the fact that his grandmother Queen Victoria, had visited Barnsley whilst she was still a Princess aged 17 years of age, when she called at the Royal Hotel, on her way to Wentworth in 1836. All too soon it was time for the Royal couple to leave and the National Anthem played as the car slowly departed over the hill. The train then took their Majesties on to Wakefield where they visited several works, including a boat building firm and a cloth weaving establishment. But perhaps the most significant event on the visit took place at Messrs E Green and Co when they went into the foundry department. They were accompanied by Sir Edward Green who explained the various processes. The party stopped and workmen hurriedly poured red hot metal into a specially made mould. To the Royal party’s surprise the mould spelled out the words

LONG LIVE KING GEORGE AND QUEEN MARY

The King appeared to be very pleased and smiled happily at the workmen as he asked Sir Edward if the men would be allowed a half day paid holiday which was agreed. The Royal couple then went to the Stainless Steel Boat Company which made steel lifeboats. At the gates as they were leaving, the King expressed his pleasure at the visit before he was presented with a model lifeboat for Prince John.

Whilst the King and Queen were at Barnsley and Wakefield, it was announced that 71 bodies had now been brought out of Cadeby pit, but another ten still remain underground. The bodies of five more men were still in the Fullerton Hospital although only three of them had been named. An inquest was held in the hospital board room by Mr Coroner Allen which was purely for identification purposes, before being adjourned to Tuesday 23 July 1912. This would allow time for the findings of the Board of Trade to be published. Before the inquest was concluded however, one of the jury, a Mr W Wilson of Conisbrough stated that he wanted to express sympathy with the people of Cadeby and concluded that:

‘There are bright patches even in the darkest calamities, and the brightest part of this disaster was the magnificent way in which volunteers came forward and offered to go down the mine even after the second explosion.’

He spoke about one man called William Davis, who had finished his shift and after checking on his horse was on his way home when he heard the explosion, and went back to help in the rescue. His offer was accepted and Mr Davis went back down the pit he had so recently left, and a few hours later he was dead. The coroner told the inquest that he had been at the pit head all morning, talking to the widows and friends of the men who had been killed, and it had left him with a very heavy heart. He had personally known about one third of the men who had died, from the lowly pit boy to the Chief Inspector of Mines. Mr Coroner Allen stated that when he arrived, it felt like there was not an old friend left in Conisbrough to shake hands with. As he had come through to Cadeby he could not help but notice that most of the cottages had drawn blinds at the windows. Great crowds had assembled on the bridge leading to the colliery and the streets around, as they discussed the remaining bodies still in the mine waiting to be brought to the surface. To add to the anxiety of the disaster local newspapers reported that because of the accident at that moment in time, over two thousand local men were now unemployed at Cadeby, and at Denaby another three thousand men were also out of work. What seemed most improbable to those in the know, was that it had seemed impossible that the accident had happened at Cadeby which had always been thought of as a ‘safe pit’ with all the most up-to-date appliances. During the morning several trains, trucks and lorries brought empty coffins to the mine from Mexborough, Sheffield and Barnsley. A reporter noted that the sight of an open dray with the coffins on board brought a fresh tear to many of the women who watched its silent progress across the pit yard. The bodies of the men in the mortuary were then conveyed to their homes, to be with the families left to mourn. Newspapers reported one local woman who had been left with seven children who went bravely to meet the coffin in which the remains of her deceased husband lay. Upon seeing it however her courage failed her and she collapsed and had to be helped back inside her home. Such scenes continued until most of the bodies had been removed.

It was now time for the Royal party to have lunch with Lord and Lady St Oswald at Nostell Priory. However they did not remain long with their hosts before it was time for their visit to Dewsbury where there was yet another civic reception. All the local mills had been closed at noon and all the school children given a half day holiday, in order for them to see the Royal visitors. Special stands were erected in the Market Place, in front of the Town Hall to accommodate around 8,000 people. The Dewsbury Town Hall itself was covered with trellis work of laurel branches on which was spelled out in pure white roses, the motto:

WELCOME TO OUR KING AND QUEEN

The Mayor, councillors and townspeople were particularly honoured as it was the first time that any monarch had visited the town in the history of Dewsbury. A bugle announced the arrival of the Royal couple as they came into Town Hall Square and were greeted by the Mayor and Mayoress. A Royal address was read out to which the King replied, but all too soon the National Anthem was sung and it was time for King George and Queen Mary to leave for Batley. There they entered the woollen mill of Messrs C & J Stubley and Company where the Queen was presented with a bouquet. Once again they were shown the different processes in which they showed particular interest. Before their departure they were shown a great variety of woven cloth, two of which was presented to their Majesties for a motor coat. The King selected a grey cloth and the Queen one of navy blue. The King then made a short speech stating that he was delighted with the rapturous welcome he had received. Afterwards the Queen also made a short speech in which she said:

‘I am enjoying the tour very much indeed and I have been touched by the sight of the children assembled in the square, the sight is one I’ll never forget. I am sorry that it has not been possible to spend more time in the town’.

Then the Royal couple were due at Brighouse where they had another rousing reception. As they stepped into the Brighouse station to leave, the King and Queen passed over thickly carpeted platforms. Once again they were met by cheering crowds, many of which were working men and woman still in their work clothes. Despite the celebrations and the euphoria of the Royal visit the Sheffield Daily Telegraph summed the feelings of both Royals and commoners alike. The reporter stated that:

‘Uppermost in everybody’s mind was the awful catastrophe of the previous day and the grief-stricken community just a few miles away. The sight of these hardy sons of toil gave a touch of sadness to the scene of rejoicing’.

Their Majesties got into the Royal train and returned back to Wentworth, but when the train arrived at the station another surprise met the Royal couple. The railway station had been decorated with flowers and a bower of rambler roses. The Queen looked delighted as she stepped down from the train. The Mayor and Mayoress of Rotherham, Mr and Mrs P Bancroft Coward were particularly delighted to be included in the house party that evening to dine with the King and Queen.

Questions about the terrible mining disaster in South Yorkshire had reached London by this time and it resulted in questions being asked in the House of Commons. The Home Secretary, Mr McKenna was asked by Thomas Edmund Harvey the MP for Leeds for the latest information on the disaster. He wanted to know exactly how many lives had been lost at Cadeby Colliery and the exact cause of the explosion which had killed men including the Inspector of Mines and his two assistants whilst undertaking rescue work. Finally it was asked if the Home Office would be sending a representative to the inquest. Mr McKenna stated that the Inspector who had been at Cadeby since the death of Mr Pickering, Mr Redmayne was

‘Returning to London as nothing further remained to be done there for the present. I will immediately consult with that officer as to steps which were necessary to investigate the circumstances of the disaster.’

He also confirmed that a representative would attend the inquest.

Next week

More bodies brought up from the pit at Cadeby

The Royal couple visit some workers cottages at Slaithwaite and a Yorkshire farm

A baby girl is renamed ‘Mary’ in honour of the Queens visit

The Yorkshire Miners bid a torchlight ‘goodbye’ to their Sovereigns on the lawns at Wentworth

On the morning of Tuesday 9 July, as King George awoke at Wentworth Woodhouse, he was informed of the catastrophe at Cadeby and he immediately sent messages of condolences to the colliery company. The telegram which was sent to Mr Chambers, the managing director stated:

‘The King and Queen are shocked to hear of the terrible accident at your colliery, and the fact that their Majesties were near to the scene in the midst of so much rejoicing when they visited Conisbrough yesterday, bring home to them still more the sorrow and sadness which now prevails amongst you. I am desired to express their Majesties heartfelt sympathy with the families of those who have perished and with the sufferers in their grievous calamity’

After some consultation on the matter it was agreed that the King and Queen would continue with their previously arranged duties, in order not to disappoint the thousands of people who were hoping to see the Royal visitors. At Cadeby the telegram, along with other messages of sympathy from the Home Secretary and the Bishop of Sheffield, were pinned to the gates of the colliery and caused some women to sob out loud as the messages were eagerly scanned. Whether or not it gave them any comfort was not reported.

Nevertheless the Royal tour had to continue, and their Majesties first stop today was at Rotherham, where they were greeted enthusiastically by people. The car drove slowly along College Street, College Square, Doncaster Gate and along Doncaster Road which were lined with people. At the hospital, both patients and staff had been assembled in the grounds alongside the road leading to the hospital grounds, and those confined to bed were placed in a row at the front. The Royal car passed slowly as their Majesties acknowledged the cheering crowds. At the Clifton Park entrance gate a motto had been erected which read:

‘WELCOME TO OUR KING AND QUEEN’,

On the gate pillars Union Jacks and emblematic shields flourished. From the early hours people had been collecting and it was estimated that there was between 40,000-50,000 people gathered to greet the Royal couple. All long Doncaster Road, the villas overlooking the park were joyously decorated and as they entered the gates a merry peal of bells rang out from the Parish Church (now the Minster). The car came to a halt in front of the bandstand, which also was decorated with flags and streamers for the occasion. The Mayor greeted King George and Queen Mary on behalf of the Corporation and the inhabitants of the town. He pointed out that he was especially delighted that they were able to come to the same park which had been opened by his father in 1891, and which had proved to be a great boon to the people of the town. At the close of the formal celebrations, the Royal visitors were then introduced to Ambrose John Rowe aged 15 a young bricklayer of Kimberworth. Sometime previously he had suffered an attack of scarlet fever where mortification had set in, and had been forced to have both legs amputated. Rowe had a neighbour Mrs Terry who had read of a similar case where the King had donated a pair of artificial limbs for another similar victim. She encouraged the boy to write to the king seven weeks previously. Now with the aid of his artificial legs and two sticks, Rowe was able to walk again. He shook hands with the King, who asked him if his legs were comfortable and the boy replied that they were and thanked him graciously.

Later the Royal couple left Clifton Park by the Birdcage Lodge entrance as their next visit was to Silverwood Colliery. There is little doubt the King and Queen still had Cadeby on their minds, however they gave no sign as they were shown around the operations of screening, sorting and sifting the coal. Both Royal visitors took a great interest in all the mining procedures as it was explained. Then there was quite a novel ceremony as the Queen found that a chair had been placed onto platelayers trolley, and she was asked to sit on this novel contraption, which was then propelled by a guard of miners. From Silverwood the Royal car then went out of Rotherham, along St Ann’s Road, Fitzwilliam Road and Rawmarsh Road to the Parkgate Iron and Steel Company. There workmen gathered in their thousands to greet their Majesties, many of them sitting on the wall which surrounded the works. The Sheffield Daily Telegraph described the men, dirty and unshaven as they showed their loyalty to their Sovereigns:

‘Big, strong working men they were – grimy from the forge, the furnace, or the rolling mill, dressed in corduroys and blue smocks; as typical a set of Yorkshire workmen as anyone would wish to look upon.’

The Ironworks were busily decorated with Union Jacks and it was said that the people of Parkgate could hear the roar of cheering long before the Royal car could be seen. As they passed the King raised his hat and the Queen bowed frequently from inside the Daimler which sported the Royal Standard. The car then drove through the villages of Swinton, Mexborough, High Melton, Sprotborough and Woodlands. This latter was a village which was occupied by many of the employees at Brodsworth Colliery. What wasn’t expected, and was prompted no doubt by the news of the disaster at Cadeby, was the next stop at a miners cottage. Suddenly the graceful car stopped and their Majesties entered the cottage which belonged to Mr and Mrs William Brown. It was one of the smallest cottages known as No 3 the Park, Woodlands, and Mrs Brown had been standing on a chair in front of the cottage holding her little girl in her arms. When she realised that the King and Queen were getting out of the car and intent on entering her little cottage, she rushed inside the house, followed by a neighbour. Mrs Brown could hardly believe her eyes as King George, Queen Mary, the High Sheriff of Yorkshire and the manager of the colliery all entered her little cottage and shook hands. The Queen asked if she might look around as Mrs Brown seemed quite overcome by the unlooked for honour. The Royal visitor was shown around the bedrooms, to which she commented that they looked ‘very comfortable and airy’. The King asked her how much rent she paid to which she replied was 5s 3d a week. He asked how much her husband earned and she told him 7s 6d a day. At the end of the short visit, the Royal couple only reached the car with some difficulty, as so many neighbours had entered the garden in order to peer through the windows. Interviewed afterwards Mrs Brown told reporters that although she knew the Royal couple were coming to the village, she had not expected them to enter her lowly little cottage. The proof of this was evident as she invited the reporters inside. There they saw the families clothes hanging before the hob to dry and preparation for dinner lay still undisturbed on the table.

Afterwards their visit to a miners humble home, the King and Queen went to the Georgian stately home of Hickleton Hall, situated about six miles west of Doncaster, where had lunch with Lord and Lady Halifax. The Hall had been built in 1790 and was situated in a beautiful park with well cut lawns and charming gardens. The comparison between the lowly miners cottage and the beautiful mansion must have resonated with the Royal couple. Nevertheless it was reported that long before the royal car arrived, the villagers of Hickleton began to assemble in the park. Lord Halifax had ordered there was to be no restrictions for the people and he walked among them shaking hands with many local people he recognised. There was also assembled a group of 500 children on the front terrace and they waited anxiously until the guests began to arrive. The Royal guests were greeted in the main entrance to the Hall by Lord and Lady Halifax at around a quarter to two. Whilst at Hickleton, the news was given to the King that three of his Inspectors of mines had been killed at Cadeby in a second explosion which had taken place earlier that morning. They were W H Pickering the Chief Inspector of Mines for Doncaster, along with his Assistant Inspector of Mines, G Y Tickle and R H Hewitt the Inspector of Mines for Sheffield, who had all joined a rescue party. After lunch the boy scouts outside put their caps onto poles as they heartily cheered the King and Queen as they went to exit the park. Before they left however, his Lordship showed his Royal guests Hickleton’s memorial to the late King Edward placed opposite the main drive to the Hall, which they both admired. Finally the Royal pair left Hickleton and travelled through Goldthorpe, and Bolton-upon-Dearne, where, unbeknownst to the King and Queen an embarrassing incident had just occurred. Among all the patriotic Union Jack flags and ribbons of red white and blue was a home-made banner, abutting a row of houses upon Furlong Road. The flag was azure blue and written upon it was the inscription:

‘WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE.

WE ARE BEASTS OF BURDEN FOR THE IDLE RICH.’

The attention of two constables had been drawn to the sign and they urged the man standing proudly beneath it to ‘take it down’. When he refused one of the constables reached up and tore the banner down and took possession of it. Unaware of this, the royal car went past waving and smiling, The Queen at this point left the Royal car to return back to Wentworth and King George then proceeded to Wath, Brampton Bierlow and finally to Elsecar where they arrived at 3.40pm.

The colliery was owned by Earl Fitzwilliam and had been sunk in 1908 and he was anxious to present it as a fully working mine. The Earl and his manager Mr Newbould accompanied the King into the lift at the pit head. As King George stepped out of the lift at the bottom of the mine he saw all the filled tubs waiting to be taken to the top. The party then went to the lamp room where the King was given an electric hand lamp as they waiting for the rest of the party to arrive. The next cage which descended from the pit head, included the Archbishop of York wearing his episcopal gaiters and a silk top hat. The whole party were then taken to the pit horse stables, where every horse had a roomy well equipped stall of its own. The Royal party then proceeded to the coal face where the King and Earl Fitzwilliam watched the men at work. As they made their way back to the cages, the group passed a group of colliers made up of men and boys. King George politely raised his hat to them as the colliers cheered him. It was reported that Her Majesty the Queen had arrived back at Wentworth Woodhouse just after 4pm and the king arrived punctually at 5.30pm.

It was expected that the Royal visitors would have retired for the night at Wentworth, so it was to some surprise then that shortly after 7pm, the King and Queen decided to make an unscheduled visit to Cadeby. There had been no announcement of the visit and in fact it was only when the Royal party emerged from the car and were entering the door of the colliery office, were they recognised by people in the crowd. News of the arrival quickly spread and a tremendous gathering soon collected in the road. The managing director, Mr Chambers greeted his unexpected guests and showed the King a plan of the colliery, as he explained the force of the explosion and how the men had met their deaths. As the Royal couple left the office it was noted that the King now looked very solemn and the Queen was weeping. Someone tried to raise a cheer but unusually, there was little response from the crowd. About 7.45pm the royal couple met some members of the second rescue party, who had not even time to remove the dust from their hands and faces. King George simply grasped the dirty hands of the men who had risked their own lives in order to try rescue any trapped miners, and shook them warmly. The Royal couple chatted animatedly with the men before leaving. Afterwards Mr Chambers posted the following statement which said:

‘Their Majesties, the King and Queen have visited the Cadeby Colliery today, to ascertain personally on the spot, particulars of the sad calamity, which has deprived many of us of those whom we loved. They commanded me to express to all who have suffered the loss of any who were dear to them, their deep sympathy with them in their grief’.

Accounts of the disaster were now filling the local newspapers of the period. One of the first rescue party who survived many of his colleagues fate, later described what he saw. Sergeant Winch went in with the first rescue party from Wath Rescue Station bring with them lots of equipment they might need. He described finding many of the miners bodies from the first explosion, some of which were shattered and scorched whilst others looked as if they were peacefully asleep. Sergeant Winch described to a reporter a boy he found lying with his arms around the neck of a pit pony, who were both quite dead. He said that most of the men were not wearing heavy respirators as the air was quite good and they were so heavy. At the time they had recovered about 24 bodies when the sergeant realised that it was time to charge the batteries on the electric torches, and he set off to get the chargers which had been left at the pit bottom with two other men. The trio had not gone more than 100 yards when there was a sudden loud roar and he was thrown to the ground. Sergeant Winch described how for a moment, the darkness was exacerbated by swirling dust, which he said was like a great black torrent. Suddenly he saw a light shining from the torch he had dropped. Going back to find out what had happened to the other members of the rescue party, they found two or three men who were very badly cut about. The others were hidden behind a heavy roof fall caused by the explosion. Sergeant Winch stated that fall had saved all their lives, by cutting off the after-damp which would otherwise have choked them all. They made an attempt to shift some of the rocks and timbers and soon the second rescue party arrived to help. However they made such little headway, that after a while they gave up and walked to the pit head to obtain picks and shovels. At the head of this second group was Mr Chambers, whose son had been in the first rescue party. Finally a small hole was made in the rock fall just enough for Mr Chambers to crawl through. Sadly the first dead body he found was that of his own son Douglas, but other bodies were scattered around in all directions. Another member of the party to be discovered by his son, Basil was that of Mr W H Pickering’s the Inspector of Mines. Indeed only one man was found alive, he was Mr Bury the General Manager of the mine. Thankfully he was able to be resuscitated and was helped back up to the surface, although he died later of his injuries.

Another witness’s report was that of a 21 year old miner Horace Dunkinfield from Denaby, who told a reporter how he, too was one of the first rescue party to go down the mine with Mr Pickering and Mr Bury. He was the only one wearing a respirator and they carried stretchers to bring out the dead. He said that it looked like the men had all been killed instantly and they would not have suffered. Six or seven dead horses were lying about too. He said the members of the rescue party were talking quite casually, when all of a sudden their was what he described as ‘a trembling of the air.’ No one had time to find a place of safety, before the explosion was on them. Thankfully he was not affected by the dust and smoke, but as it cleared he saw the bodies of Mr Pickering and Mr Bury lying as if asleep. He staggered around for a while trying to get his bearings, before collapsing on the ground utterly exhausted. Thankfully he soon heard footsteps approaching and two of the rescue party took him to the pit bottom. Another middle aged miner called Joseph Pearson described how he had been in the same party and had been in the act of putting a dead body into a waggon to take it up to the surface, when the second explosion took place. He was thrown for several yards and for some time lay insensible. When he came to, he was upon the ground with the corpse beside him and they were both buried in the suffocating dust. Eventually he managed to struggle free and he crawled to the pit bottom. He was badly cut about the body, but after some medical attention he was allowed to go home.

As witnesses stories were recounted in all their horror, there was some comfort for local people in the fact that the King and Queen of Great Britain were near and sharing their sorrow. The intention of the visit was for their Majesties to understand the working life and conditions in which many of their subjects lived. Now they could see and experience at close quarters the real dangers facing many miners every day in their workplace.

Coming Next Week

A third explosion at Cadeby

King and Queens visit to Barnsley and Wakefield

Memories of the visit of Princess Victoria in 1836

Mourning scenes at Cadeby, Denaby and Conisborough

When local press got wind of the visit of the King and Queen to the Yorkshire region, the palace was anxious to impress on them that the Royal couple would not be attending glittering ceremonies or performing state functions. They would instead visit industrial works in order to gain first hand knowledge of the conditions under which their people are employed and live. To this end Earl Fitzwilliam, who had been instrumental in arranging the visit, told local reporters:

‘I am instructed by His Majesty that he wishes informality to be the watchword and it is in no sense a State visit. The King and Queen have expressed a desire to see men and women in working conditions and we have impressed upon the owners of works and establishments honoured by a Royal visit, that a great deal of whitewash is not what is required’.

Although there had been heavy rainfall for many days beforehand, thankfully the sun was shining as the Royal train pulled into Doncaster station on Monday 8 July 1912. The Royal party had that day travelled up from Kings Cross and were expected to arrive at Doncaster at 3.55 pm, however to the pleasure of the waiting crowd, they arrived a few minutes early. It was reported that:‘Her Majesty was wearing a pale green, shantung braided coat and skirt with a black trimmed hat with roses around the brim. King George was wearing grey suit a brown felt hat, brown boots and carried light grey gloves’. On the platform they were met by local dignitaries, including Earl Fitzwilliam with whom they shook hands.

The Royal couple and the Earl then seated themselves in a big powerful Daimler car, which was a closed car with both sides made of glass, allowing their Majesties to be clearly seen by the local populace. The car with the Royal Standard on the front, stood out amongst the other official cars, as it made its way from Doncaster to Conisbrough Castle. The Royal Standard flag had also been erected above the battlements, and it was said that this was the first time that a King and Queen had visited the castle since the visit of King John in March 1201. The Royal couple left the car at the entrance to the outer ward, before walking among lines of school children and boy scouts who took their place on both sides of the narrow entrance to the castle. The Queen took her place in the marquee, which had been erected on the grass of the inner ward, where Lord and Lady Yarborough would serve tea to the Royal couple. King George accompanied by Earl Fitzwilliam and other men of the party, ascended the stone steps to the wooden door leading into the keep which was 20 feet above the ground. Then the party disappeared from view before climbing up the dark and narrow steps to the top. The King then appeared and walked around the top of the castle, delighting the seven thousand colliers waiting below by raising his hat to loud cheers. King George and his party then descended and joined the Queen as tea was served in the marquee. The outer wards were filled by miners and their wives, who were allowed to watch the unusual spectacle of the King and Queen having their tea. The Royal pair appeared to enjoy the idea so much that they lingered longer than was expected.

Finally, the honoured guests returned back to the car for the drive to the Wentworth Woodhouse estate, once again accompanied by the Earl. As they passed through Hooton Roberts, the main thoroughfare was ablaze with the colours of flags, both large and small which the village had erected in honour of the Royal visit. The car moved at walking pace through the village allowing all the assembled crowds to clearly see the King and Queen, as a crimson avalanche of roses were thrown at the car. At Piccadilly, it was noted that although the assembled men and women cheered loudly, many workmen had not time to change out of the work clothes before the arrival of the Royal car. Nevertheless their Majesties waved and smiled to the assembled miners and their wives. There were more dirty faces as working men and their families assembled at Picadilly, where the reception was just as warm. As the car arrived at the top of the hill beyond Kilnhurst, the Royal couple saw schoolchildren, every one of them, wearing bonnets or ribbons decorated in red, white and blue, and many of them holding and waving miniature Union Jacks. At Hoober the car slowed to allow their Majesties to see the Stand and the Fitzwilliam Mausoleum towering above the trees. The road to the great park at Wentworth was lined with enthusiastic spectators as the car past slowly through, 20 minutes later than expected at 5.50pm. As the car entered through the north gate there was a sound of a bugle, and as the car approached the great house, there on the lawn the King and Queen saw over 4,000 servicemen and ex servicemen of the West Riding National Reserve. The Royal couple alighted from the car and the Queen, accompanied by other ladies, took her place on the balcony overlooking the parade of men below. The King inspected them as they marched past to the strains of ‘Where are the boys of the Old Brigade’ as the Sheffield Daily Telegraph reported proudly ‘they were there’. Afterwards King George, showing no urgency to leave, chatted with the men to their great delight.

At last it was time for the Royal couple to go inside and Colonel Hughes shouted for ‘three cheers for the King and Queen’. The men responded with much enthusiasm and heartiness as their Majesties finally retired inside the great house. It was reported that they had been given apartments in the old Strafford portion of the house which overlooked the beautiful lawns. The rooms contained some rare and priceless articles which had been gifts from King Charles I to the Earl of Strafford. One of the prized articles included a picture of Thomas Wentworth dictating to his secretary on the night before his execution. A private house party was then given where it was reported that an orchestral band played through dinner. It was fairly late in the evening as the crowds finally left the park, all hoping no doubt to catch a glimpse of the Royal couple once more. However in the early hours a gloom was cast over the success of the Royal visit by the terrible news that morning that a disaster had taken place at Cadeby Main Colliery, only a few miles away from Conisbrough Castle. In fact it had happened just a few hours after the Royal couple had left. It seems that there had been an explosion of accumulated gas in the southern part of the mine at about 1-2am. Thankfully the pit had less men working in it than normal due to the royal visit, but it was probably that some of the men with dirty faces who had cheered the royal couple, would have come from or been working in the Cadeby pit at the time of the catastrophe. The King and Queen were told that two men who had been working 400-500 yards away, first felt the heat from the blast and decided in consultation with the pit deputy, that an explosion had taken place. They tried to get to the place where many of their colleagues were working, but foul air meant that they had to return to the pit bottom. A rescue crew arrived, but shortly after their descent another explosion was heard. Yet a second rescue crew was sent down, which sadly included a Mr Basil Pickering the manager of the Wath Main Colliery. There he found the dead body of his father, W H Pickering the Chief Government Inspector of Mines for Yorkshire, who had gone in the first rescue team. The party had found the remains of their ill fated rescue colleagues who had been cut off by a fall of roof, shutting out the vital air that they needed, and killing all but three or four of the first rescue party. During the early hours of the following morning hundreds of local people, anxious relative and employees alike gathered at the pit head to see a continuous procession of ambulance men bringing up the bodies and placing them in the pay room. Long tables had been quickly erected and soon held the corpses, wrapped in white sheets. It was later estimated that there was 91 victims, of which thirty four were brave men who had gone to the rescue of their stricken colleagues.

Coming Next Week

More about the  Cadeby disaster and an unscheduled Royal visit

The Royal visit to Rotherham Hospital and Clifton Park

Their unexpected visit to a cottage on the Park, Woodlands

The Kings descent into Elsecar Colliery

The single protester of Furlong Road, Bolton-upon-Dearne

On the evening of Sunday 12 December 1841 Maria Parker, a servant girl, was sent by her mistress Mrs Didsbury of Canklow Lane to go to the cellar and bring up some food for supper. Entering the cellar the girl the girl picked up the required items and being security conscious, at the same time noted that the grate was fastened and the door to the outside was secure. However the following morning upon entering the cellar between six and seven o’clock she found that it had been broken into. Among the stolen items was a quantity of cheese, bread and butter, a small ham and some mutton and beef. Maria also saw that the door which led into the wine cellar had been broken open and eight bottles of wine were missing. Another empty bottle of wine, which presumably had been drunk by the thieves, lay broken upon the cellar floor. Shocked the girl ran back upstairs and reported the theft to her mistress. Mrs Didsbury immediately proceeded to the cellar and confirmed that the items had indeed been stolen. The local police were informed and constable John Bland was dispatched immediately to the house.

Starting his search in the garden, the constable immediately noted that the thieves had got into the property by scaling the back wall. He also found several footprints in the soil of the flower border nearest to the grate which led into the cellar. One of the prints was larger than the other, but both of them were very distinct and perfect. On the larger impression, the sole of the right shoe showed three rows of small nails, each row coming within an inch of the other. There was also a single row near to the heel of the shoe which appeared to be very worn down. The other shoe had similar marking as well as a distinct crack across the sole. The constable noted that both impressions of the shoes were very clear in the soil and he noted the same prints near to the garden gate. He made sketches of the two separate soles before examining the disturbed contents of the cellar. Returning back to the police office Bland made several enquiries and found a night watchman Joshua Hemsill who had an interesting incident to report. He stated that about 1.45 am on the Monday morning he was making his rounds along Westgate when he noticed a light was still on at the house of Benjamin Turton. He lived at the house with his wife and his daughter Harriet and was a man well known to the police. Out of curiosity the constable listened at the door for a while. He could hear voices and someone walking about in the kitchen before continuing with his designated round. A little after 2 am he went past the house again and once more saw a light  was still on in the kitchen.

Another witness was a man called James Taylor a shoemaker of Rotherham, who stated that on Monday afternoon about 1 pm he was walking from the cattle market into Wellgate when he saw Harriet  Turton drunk on Quarry Hill. Taylor told Bland that the girl was  so drunk that she fell down into the channel at the side of the road. The witness helped her back on her feet, but the girl simply stated ‘oh dear what will become of me’. She then tried to walk away, but fell once more against a wall and hurt her head. Another witness was Frances Maria Lidster the wife of Samuel Lidster, who told Bland that she too had seen Harriet very inebriated that same afternoon. She said ‘she was very drunk and was taken away by a little girl’. On Monday evening of 13 December constable Bland and constable Womack went to the house of Benjamin Turton, but found only Harriet and her mother were present. Bland told the girl that her and her father were under suspicion for the robbery at Mrs Didsbury’s house and demanded to search the house. Whilst searching, Womack asked Harriet for her father shoes and she told him that she was wearing them at the time, as her own shoes needed mending. She took them off and handed them to Bland who carefully examined them. He found they corresponded exactly with the larger set of prints in the soil at Mrs Didsbury’s garden. They also examined the girls shoes, which were waiting to be repaired, and noted that it had a large crack running across the sole. They then returned to Mrs Didsbury’s garden and carefully compared the prisoners shoes with the footprints in the garden. The two officers found that the prints matched in every degree.

On Thursday 16 December 1841 Benjamin and Harriet Turton of Westgate were brought into the Court House at Rotherham charged with suspicion of committing the burglary. At that point they were simply remanded in order for the police to continue with their enquiries and to give them time to search for the stolen property. When the prisoners were brought back into court on Monday 20 December they had a solicitor, Mr J Badger who was defending them. The servant Maria Parker was the first witness and she told the magistrates that after she had discover that some items were missing, she had gone into the garden to examine the grating from the outside. There she had found some of the cheese, ham and a piece of beef which had been left by a wall, presumably by the two prisoners, who were undoubtedly tipsy following their consumption of the stolen bottle of wine. Constable Bland described to the magistrates how, accompanied by constables Womack and Dearnelly, they had gone  to Mrs Didsbury’s garden and confirmed that the prisoners shoes matched the footprints in the garden. Constable Dearnelly confirmed his colleagues evidence. Another witness was Edward Calton a labourer, who told the magistrates that he was a gardener and had worked in the garden for Mrs Didsbury from the 6th to the 11th December of that year. On the Saturday he had finished work at 4pm having previously raked off the soil in the flower bed. He swore that he had not left any footprints in the soil and had left it tidy and clear.  The magistrates conferred briefly before stating that the evidence of the shoe prints, as well as the girl being seen drunk in the streets following the night of the robbery, was enough evidence to find both father and daughter guilty. He sentenced them to take their trial at the Sheffield Quarter Sessions where they appeared on Friday 28 February 1842. After hearing all the evidence Benjamin and Harriet Turton were both found guilty and given six months imprisonment.

Apprenticeship schemes were used extensively during the 19th century in order, it was hoped, to provide children with a stable employment. It was thought that these schemes would make them useful members of society and not be a drain on parish resources when they became adults. As such, apprenticeships were exceptionally popular for workhouse children. However they were not always viewed as such by the young people themselves. Indentures lasted seven years and young people could be brought before the magistrates for any infraction of the rules. When one young Rotherham lad found himself in front of the Rotherham magistrates resulting in his being sent to prison for six weeks, it took two years for him to get his revenge on his master.

On Wednesday 24 July 1844, blacksmith William Roberts charged his apprentice, Joshua Crawshaw with being a disorderly apprentice and he was committed by the Rotherham magistrates to gaol for six weeks. We have no evidence as to how old Joshua was, but two years later on Monday 7 September 1846, Joshua charged his master with not giving him sufficient food and decent lodgings which was contrary to his indentures. William Roberts was a married man with two children aged ten and eleven years of age. Joshua told the court that his master wife, Mrs Roberts had for several months been declared insane and as a consequence was confined to her bedroom. He stated that she had only been out of her room once in all that time. In her absence the care of the house was left to the eldest child, a girl aged 11 years. Not surprisingly because of her very young age, the house was in a most filthy state and Joshua complained that he had been obliged to sleep in bedclothes which had not been changed since the previous Christmas. The apprentice also complained that he did not have a clean shirt for a fortnight at a time and when he finally complained, his master had given him an old one of his own with one sleeve torn off. He told the magistrates that the meat for the family was bought by the little girl, and after it was cooked was kept in a drawer in the masters bedroom in which he slept with his two children. Inevitably when the meat was served up, it smelt so bad that the apprentice could not eat it, and the bread it was served with, was mouldy and disgusting. Joshua told the court that the house was never cleaned except very occasionally, when some of the neighbours came in to clean it out of pity for his master and his wife. He said that a short while previously, there had been fever in the house and one of the masters children, a little boy had died. Joshua had also been taken poorly at the same time, and had been bed ridden and unable to work for fifteen weeks. Since that time the house had never been cleaned once. The house was not only a nuisance to those who were forced to live in it, but to the neighbours also.

At this point Mr Roberts was asked if he had anything to say following his apprentices statement and he told the magistrates that Joshua spoke nothing but lies. He claimed that his daughter, although small, could clean the house ‘uncommonly well’. He also claimed that he had only kept the meat in the bedroom drawer to preserve it from the rats that infested the house. He asked the magistrates to cancel the indentures in order for him to rid himself of  his disorderly apprentice. One of the neighbours, a woman called Ann Stainrod described as ‘a respectable, elderly looking woman’ then gave her evidence. She told the court that she lived near Mr Roberts and said that the state of the house and Mrs Roberts was painful to see. She confirmed Joshua’s evidence that the house was completely filthy throughout and had not been cleaned for months. She said:

‘it was grievous to see the state of both the defendants, the children’s and the apprentice’s beds. No person could tell what the pillow slips or sheets were made of, they were so dirty. As for Mrs Roberts, she had been treated worse than a pig, as a pig had cleaner bedding, which she had not, and she was not washed more than once a month’.

The witness said that she had seen the meat which the family had to eat and it was generally bad, in consequence of the filthy state of the house. Mr Roberts himself had told her that they were forced to put more of their meat and bread in the pig trough than they had to eat themselves. Mrs Stainrod said that it was shocking and pitiable to see the state of Mrs Roberts  and that every time anyone came to the house, she would call out to them and beg them to bring her food. No person could pass the window of her room, which was over the blacksmith’s shop, but she would call out to them to help her. Every square of glass in the window where she was confined had been broken and the room was icy cold. At this point the magistrate, Mr Walker asked William Roberts if his wife ‘was the same female who was always at the window of the shop at Kimberworth, who had her hair cut very short?’ When Mr Roberts confirmed that she was, Mr Walker stated that he had frequently seen the poor woman at the window when passing through the village. Another of the magistrates, Mr Bosville told Mr Roberts that:

‘if through the will of the Almighty your wife was afflicted in that manner, that it was your duty not only to have some person to take care for her and the house, but to  have her removed as early as possible to some place where she would be under proper medical supervision and treatment.

At this point the Hon. and Rev. William Howard who was a magistrate as well as being on the board of the Guardians of the Poor, claimed that the matter had been looked into by the workhouse, but at that time there was just no place for her to go. Coroner Mr Badger, who was also in the court room, warned him that the Rotherham Board of Guardians would be liable if anything happened to the poor woman, and if she died and he had to hold an inquest ‘he would remember their laxity’. Mr Howard said that the Guardians had only recently been informed of the case, and had taken steps for the woman’s removal, but they could not find a vacancy in any of the Yorkshire Asylums.

Another neighbour called Sarah Bates confirmed the last witnesses statement and said that she had often gone to the house and was appalled at the condition in which the inhabitants lived. She concurred that the boy Joshua had been forced to wear dirty shirts for long periods and the bed linen was as black as soot from the chimney and unfit for any human beings to sleep in. She too had seen the meat for the family, which had been quite green on at least three different occasions, and the bread was so bad that it ‘drew out like cobwebs’.  Mr Whitfield on behalf of Joshua told the court that he had other witnesses who he could call if necessary, but he submitted that the witnesses evidence alone proved that Mr Roberts ‘did not supply his apprentice with sufficient good, wholesome food and lodgings’.  Mr Roberts only defence was to deny the witnesses statements and he claimed that the charge had been made out of malice by his apprentice for taking him to court two years previously. After consulting with the other magistrates on the bench, Mr Walker told Mr Roberts that after listening to all the evidence it was clear that there was serious negligence on his part. He would not cancel the indentures without Mr Roberts giving Joshua another trial, but he warned:

‘you must provide him with clean and proper lodgings in the village, where he could be comfortably accommodated and where he was given both clean bed and body linen to wear. He must also have sound food provided. We do not say  that it was impossible for the food to be unwholesome, as this might happen from meat being kept uncooked in hot weather, or the bread being made from bad corn. From the peculiar circumstances of your wife’s illness, we will give you another chance, but you must commence the amendment that very night or the boys indentures will be cancelled’. 

Mr Walker concluded that unless his wife was properly taken care of, Roberts would render himself liable to very serious consequences, before ordering the defendant to pay the court costs of 7s 6d.

There is no evidence as to whether Mrs Roberts  was taken to be cared for in an asylum, or whether Joshua successfully finished his apprenticeship to the blacksmith. Certainly the description of life at the shop in Kimberworth is terrible for us to read. However two years later in 1848 the town council was forced to appoint the Rotherham and Kimberworth Board of Health. From that point, the board members would regularly have to report to the council all such unsanitary living conditions experienced by the people of the town, and slowly matters began to improve.

In January of 1854 the Station Inn (also known as the Railway Inn) on Westgate did a roaring trade. The inn was quite a substantial property and consisted of three excellent cellars, two sitting rooms, a tap room, a bar, a kitchen and a larder on the ground floor. On the upper floor was a splendid billiard room. private sitting room, a store room and eight convenient lodging rooms. A dwelling house adjoined the property along Westgate was used as offices by architect Mr John Axelby. The Station Inn was run by a man called James Allen, who quickly established good local trade, combined with the proximity of the railway station across the road, generally ensured good business. Occasionally Allen was so busy at the inn that his sister, Margaret Waugh would come and help. On a market day it was usually so crowded, that for the past year Allen had also employed a married woman Mrs Jane Knowlson as a cook to help out in the kitchen. The other staff he regularly employed consisted of two women cleaners named Margaret Dyson and Mary Tansey. At some point around the previous Christmas, Allen began to suspect that he had a thief on the premises. He called in Sergeant Timms who made a note that bottles of sherry, brandy and other spirits had disappeared. Making an inventory, Allen discovered that there were also other items missing apart from alcohol, which including lump sugar, a bottle of capers, knives, forks, two silk handkerchiefs, table cloths, curtains and bedding. The landlord also found that a pair of boots which he had last worn on Christmas Day, had also disappeared. Sergeant Timms asked him about his relations with his staff, which he told them was very good, although he admitted there had been some disputes between Jane Knowlson and the two part time cleaning women.

When items continued to go missing, Mr Allen decided that it was time to take action. Consequently at 5 am on the morning of 22 January 1854, Sergeant Timms and two constables as well as Allen’s sister, Margaret Waugh called at the lodgings on Westgate where Mary Tansey resided with her husband. The sergeant told her that he had come to apprehend her on suspicion of stealing certain articles from Mr Allen’s house. Tansey denied all knowledge, but nevertheless the rooms were searched and in her box he found two bottles of brandy, two bottles of gin and three bottles of port wine. The woman claimed that she had been given the wine and gin on New Years Eve by Jane Knowlson. She claimed that the other cleaner, Margaret Dyson had also given her the brandy during a recent, severe snow storm. Tansey was arrested and placed in a cell. Later that same morning at noon Sergeant Timms still accompanied by the landlord’s sister Margaret Waugh, went to Margaret Dyson’s lodgings which she shared with her husband on Wellgate, Rotherham. The couple were still in bed as the Sergeant told the woman that she was suspected of stealing some port wine, spirits and other items from Mr Allen’s house, and once again he searched the rooms. At this point Margaret Dyson also claimed that she had been given some port wine and brandy by the cook, Jane Knowlson on New Years Day, along with two pitchers of wine. Sergeant Timms read out to her the list of stolen articles, and Dyson admitted that he would find some of them in her husband’s box. Searching it, the sergeant also found more bottles of cherry brandy, port wine and gin and the two silk handkerchiefs. Margaret Dyson was also arrested and taken to the Rotherham police station and placed in a cell. Several of the items which had been recovered were shown to Mr Allen who identified them as his own property. When the landlord heard the women’s statements, he told them that he had never authorised Jane Knowlson to give either women any alcohol. His sister Margaret Waugh was also shown some of the recovered items and she identified some bolster pillow slips, which she had made herself, three glass cloths and a window blind which she confirmed was her brothers property.

Whilst the two woman were in the calls, later that morning the sergeant returned with landlord, Mr Allen to the rooms belonging to the Dyson’s at the lodging house on Westgate to search more thoroughly. His search was rewarded. There he found some boots under the bed which Mr Allen identified as those he had last seen on Christmas Day. Richard Dyson told him that the boots were not stolen, and claimed that he had bought the boots off a tramp. A quantity of knives and forks were also found, which  Dyson claimed he had bought at Barnsley. Sergeant Timms and Mr Allen then went to Mary Tansey’s lodgings and found a valuable snuff box, hidden between the mattress and the bed, some curtains and two pictures, all of which were identified as being stolen from the Station Inn. More wine was also found, which again Mr Tansey said had been given to his wife by Jane Knowlson. The two cleaning women Tansey and Dyson were charged with stealing, and their respective husbands were charged with receiving the stolen items. To her horror Jane Knowlson was also charged with stealing the items, which she denied.

All five prisoners were brought before the Earl of Effingham at the Rotherham Petty Session on Monday 23 January 1854. They were all found guilty and sent to take their trial, but because of her good character, only Jane Knowlson was allowed bail. By the time the prisoners were due to take their trial at the Sheffield Intermediate Sessions on Tuesday 28 February, only the two Tansey’s and the Dyson’s appeared before the bench. In the interim Jane Knowlson had been cleared of all guilt, following positive statements from solicitor Mr Joseph Badger, and Mr Bland the Superintendent of Rotherham police. Now she acted as the principal prosecution witness against the other four prisoners. Thomas Tansey was found to have no direct evidence against him and was discharged, although his wife Mary received six months imprisonment. Margaret Dyson and her husband Richard were tried together, she charged with stealing and her husband charged with receiving the articles knowing them to be stolen. The defence solicitor Mr Johnstone made an urgent appeal to the jury in his summing up on behalf of Mr Dyson. He claimed that the property had been stolen by his wife, and conveyed to the room he shared with her, without his knowledge or consent. Nevertheless Margaret Dyson was given six months, whilst he was given a four month sentence for receiving. Jane Knowlson was thankfully dismissed of all charges.

Sadly little is known of the fate of Jane Knowlson or the reason why two other workers at the inn took against her to such an extent that she was accused of crimes she did not commit. Petty jealousy’s are common in such a busy workspace, but thankfully her own good character exonerated her from all guilt.

On the night of Tuesday 22 May 1888 a man called Edward Larkin aged 22 and his mother aged 55 were drinking in the Phoenix Hotel on Masbrough Street. By 8.25pm the pub was crowded and a man called Joseph Hollings caused an uproar that night by noisily dancing up and down in a manner that was described ‘as if he was not right in the head’. Diplomatically Sarah Larkin asked him to be quiet and invited him to come and have a glass of beer with her. He did not answer her but without a reason struck out at her and she fell against a table. A man called John Carrol went up to remonstrate with him, and the row caused the landlord Mr Davy to turf the noisy party outside. As a result, Edward, his mother, Carrol and Hollings were all ejected. Edward Larkin and Hollings then started to fight, but Mrs Larkin intervened once again and pleaded with them both ‘do be quiet, lets be jolly and have no fighting’. It was later claimed that someone pushed at her at that point and she fell in the middle of Masbrough road, the back of her head coming in contact with some stones. John Carrol maintained that it was Hollings that had pushed her, but he denied it. The police were called and when the chief constable, Mr Pollard attended and tried to lift the woman from the road, he heard her say to her son ‘Oh Edward, thou hast done me’. Sarah was taken home and despite being attended to by Dr Collinson, she died at 10.30 am three days later.

On Saturday 26 May 1888 the local newspaper the Sheffield and Rotherham Independent described:

‘yesterday afternoon the higher part of Masbrough Street, Rotherham was in a state of considerable excitement, owing to the death of a woman named Sarah Larkin, who lived with her husband at 155 Masbrough Street. At the moment the police are very reticent on the subject’.

The reporter, who in his haste to put the case before the reading public, made several mistakes in his copy, quoted the man Hollings as being named Rollins and stating that Sarah had intervened to prevent him from striking her son. He also stated that her death was as a result of  concussion of the brain, despite the fact that a post mortem hadn’t been undertaken at that point. The reporter even wrongly claimed that the party had all been drinking at the Travellers Rest at the coroner of Masbrough Street and Main Road, Rotherham and not the Phoenix Hotel. The unreliable report then concluded:

‘Whether the woman fell to the floor owing to her having been drinking and thus received her injuries. Or whether they were caused by the blow or push she received from Rollins, or whether her death is attributable to another cause, are matters which will undoubtedly be set at rest when the police authorities have completed their enquiries. But the belief prevailed last evening that the injury had been caused by her falling, when struck or pushed by Rollins at the Travellers Rest’.

 The case was brought before the coroner, Mr D Wightman on Monday 28 May 1888 at the Queens Hotel, Masbrough Street. The first to give evidence was the police surgeon Dr Cobban who told the inquest that he had completed a post mortem the previous day, and found a contused wound at the back of the deceased woman’s scalp. There were no other outward sign of violence on the rest of her body, but he found the membranes of the skull very congested. He concluded that the cause of death was compression of the brain caused by violence to the back of the head. The surgeon clearly stated that the injury was caused when she fell to the floor and could not have been caused by a man’s fist. He admitted that he had not examined the woman’s internal organs, but said that he was aware that the deceased had been in the habit of drinking heavily. Dr Cobban was questioned as to whether the wound could have been caused by a blow from a stick or a poker for example, but he did not think that would have been possible. The surgeon concluded that in his opinion the wound was caused by her falling onto a hard kerbstone or something similar. The woman’s husband Hugh Larkin was the next to give evidence and told the court that he had lived with his wife on Masbrough Street for about 35 years. He said that she was not a regular drinker, but a glass or two of beer would be too much for her. However he added that she had always been a very healthy woman. On the night in question she had been brought home insensible by two people, a man called Kirby and a woman, and that she had died on Friday 25 May. He had sent for Dr Collinson, but the poor woman never recovered sufficiently to be able to tell him how her injuries had been caused. Mr Larkin also said he was the father of Edward and said that he was not aware of any argument between his wife and his son. A witness called Herbert Deakin was passing the Phoenix about 8.30 pm, when he saw Edward Larkin and two men come out to fight. He clearly saw the woman come out after them and she tried to separate the two men. He said that he saw Edward Larkin hit his mother on the mouth, and saw her fall to the ground striking the back of her head on the road. Deakin said that he heard the woman say ‘Oh Edward thou hast done me’ before becoming insensible. He claimed that the son had hit his mother on purpose and that all the people involved had been drinking and were intoxicated.

Joseph Hollings gave evidence of the men being turned out to fight and blamed the reason for the argument on John Carrol from Sheffield who had caused the trouble by his dancing about in the Phoenix that night. He also said that in his opinion Edward Larking and his mother were sober and that the deceased woman had simply tried to prevent the men from fighting. He said that Hollings had pushed her and she had fallen into the road. Carrol in his evidence claimed that Edward Larkin did not strike his mother. Another witness was a young single woman called Fanny Young who claimed that it was Hollings who had hit the woman. The chief constable cross questioned her which proved that she was keeping company with Edward Larkin for the past two years and was expected to marry him. So he told the jury that her evidence had to be discounted. The coroner stated that the evidence from all the witnesses was so contradictory that he could hardly expect the jury to come to a decision. The chief constable said that he had not the slightest doubt as to who had done it, the only difficulty was trying to prove it. He told the coroner that the Larkin’s had impeded the police investigation by refused to say where the witness Carroll lived, and the Sheffield police had eventually traced him. The girl Young also refused to give the name of anyone else in the Phoenix that night. A servant girl named Maria Shaw described the argument which had broken out and described the men being ejected by the landlord, Mr Davy. She said that the deceased woman was sober and they were not noisy until Carrol interfered with Hollings. Another witness was Eliza Bennett the wife of a mill roller of Sarah Street, Holmes, was passing the public house on that night. She said that she did not know the family or anyone in the party before they started fighting. Mrs Bennett claimed that she did not see Larkin strike at his mother, but thought he might have pushed her. She also said that she saw Larkin picked his mother up off the ground and drop her again on the floor. She too heard his mother say ‘Oh  Edward you have done me’. Her husband was the next to give his evidence and he corroborated his wife’s statement and he thought that the deceased woman was intoxicated.

The coroner in summing up stated that the weight of evidence was against Larkin, even to his mother’s last words. He said that the witness Mrs Bennett had claimed that there was more than one fall, but whether the first fall killed her, or the second, or a combination of them both was immaterial. However the witness statements were so contradictory, that he could not send the man for trial as he could not see how he could be convicted of manslaughter. He concluded:

‘nothing would give me greater pleasure than to send Edward Larkin for trial. Yet it is my duty, as a coroner  to tell you the jury, that I do not see any prospect whatever of a conviction on the evidence’.

Even the members of the jury were unclear as to who the attacker was. One stated that he thought that Hollings was just as guilty as Larkin, and felt that his name should also be added to the charge. But the foreman of the jury said that he did not think on the evidence that they had, they could come to any other conclusion other than that the death had been accidental. He added that it was just possible that the deceased herself was as much to blame as the two men, if indeed she was intoxicated. After much discussion the jury came to the conclusion that the deceased had died ‘from concussion of the brain caused by a fall, during a quarrel with Edward Larkin her son. But as to how she fell, there was not sufficient evidence to show’. Nevertheless when the enquiry came to an end Edward Larkin was arrested on the charge of ‘causing the death of Sarah Larkin by striking her with his fist’.

On Tuesday 29 May 1888 Edward Larkin was brought before the Rotherham magistrates, but was simply remanded. The chief constable Mr Pollard said that he hoped the magistrates would not grant bail to the prisoner, as he had made threats against the witnesses. However the magistrates agreed that he could be bailed with substantial sureties. Larkin’s sister stated that she could produce two respectable witnesses who would provide two sureties of £20 each and bail was granted. When the adjourned enquiry was resumed on Thursday 4 June, Inspector Barham said the coroners jury had returned what was in effect an open verdict and up to the present the police had not been able to get any further evidence against the prisoner. The Mayor addressing the prisoner told him that as there was no clear evidence  against him, he would be remanded at large, and be liable to be brought up if any further evidence should be obtained to throw light upon the case. Larkin was then bound over in the sum of £25 on his own recognisance’s to appear when and if called upon. Alderman Neill told him he had better look upon this as a warning, because he had a very narrow escape’. Sadly there is no conclusion to this case and so we are left with the question, was it matricide or manslaughter?