The Birkenhead News and Wirral General Advertiser. — 1884-02-02 (Birkenhead, Merseyside, England)

WIFE BEATER.—WM. Hodging, a dock labourer, was charged with having been drunk and disorderly and assaulting his wife in Victoria-road, Seacombe.—Constable 301 stated that, hearing screams of murder he went to prisoner's house where he saw him kick her and strike her. She was crouched in a corner with a baby three weeks old in her arms. Prisoner, who was using very bad language to her, took off his belt and thrashed her with it. —Constable 223 gave corroborative evidence regarding the latter part of the affair. While being taken to the police office he behaved in a very violent and disorderly manner, and tore the coat of one of the officers.— Inspector Dutton stated that the prisoner had been up two or three times previously and produced notes from the Liverpool and Birkenhead bridewells which also gave a very bad account of the prisoner.—He was sent to gaol for a month with hard labour. CHARGE AGAINST THE TRAMWAY CO,—A case was called in which the Wallasey Local Board had summoned them for having on the 23rd Jan. carried a greater number of passengers in a certain stage carriage than it is constructed to carry.—Mr. Simpson conducted the prosecution and Mr. Archer the defence. The former stated that in the last case in which the board had summoned the company the validity of the by-law had been called in question, but he had now before him what he had not then, u..n which he could prove them to be valid.— j. r. Archer intimated that he took preliminary objection to the summons which did not specify the street in which the offence took place, the particular carriage, whether the passengers were inside or outside, whether it was on a highway or other road, and what statute they were charged under. Last time the Tramway Company had been summoned tinder one statute'and the case had been argued under another.—r. Simpson cited a Metropolitan case or two to show that such minute data was not required.—Mr. Roberts, Deputy Justices' Clerk, advised the court that the summons was perfectly correct, but admitted tat it would have given the defendants a much wbehtetenrtakcheann cbe of fend y Surprise had tthheeeemsethlingvess been specified.—lnspector Dutton said that it was no surprise to the defendants they knew all about it.—Mr. Archer still held that the summons was' bad on the face of it and argued that had a summons of the same kind seen served in Liverpool the company would have been under the necessity of bringing forward all the people employed on the tramcars to enable them to meet a possible charge. He asked the gammons to be diBmissed.-3lr. Simpson did not object to an adjournment of the case but pointed out that &dismissal would place them beyond the time when a fresh summons could be heard.—The Justice decided on hearing the evidence in support of the complaint and evidence was given by Constables Lawton and Ryan showing that on the 23rd January they saw tramcar No. 3, of the Wallasey way Company proceeding through Brighton-street, from the ferry, at 20 in the evening. In the inside there were 27 passengers and on the back platform there were 7. The evidence of Inspector Dutton showed that both in September last and immediately after the laying of the present information he had examined the tramcar No. 3. The measurement inside was twelve feet ten inches, and at each end inside there were conspicuous, in large painted letters, the words "constructed to carry eighteen passengers inside." Outside there was an announcement in front of a sumlax kind, intimating that the space was constructed to accommodate four passengers. Be saw the same intimation behind.—The Magarates decided to adjourn the case.