On this day 146 years ago…..

…. Magistrates heard a case brought against a resident of Muckley Corner near Lichfield. Mr Eglinton, also resident at Muckley Corner, had put his hand in his pocket and bought a few glasses of whisky for a neighbour down on his luck. When he was found in a drunken state he was charged and thus in court, where magistrates fined him and his previously clean record had been spoiled.

Once again Mr Eglinton came to his rescue and paid his fine. However, magistrates did not think much of his benevolence and urged the police officers in the court to charge him with aiding and abetting, which they did. Eglinton was fined ten shillings and charged the costs for both cases.

Now I have the perfect excuse for not buying anyone a drink ever again.

The Second Titanic Murderer

William Mintram was a fireman stoker aboard the Titanic when it was hit by the iceberg. While Robert Hitchens’ accusations came after the sinking, Mintram was gaoled in 1902.

Married to Eliza since August 1886 – they had five children, their daughter Rosina married Walter Hurst, also a fireman stoker on the Titanic - a row between them in October 1902 (he complained his wife had pawned their son’s shoes to pay for her drinking) he stabbed her in the back. In court he gave evidence saying he was drunk at the time and remembered nothing other than her rushing at him.

Sentenced to twelve years after being found guilty of manslaughter but was released after three and joined the ill-fated maiden voyage along with his son-in-law. Mintram did get his hands on a lifejacket, but when he saw his son-in-law Walter without same, he passed across his lifejacket thus helping to save his life.

Bomb Idioms

Several words have found themselves used in a number of phrases. We looked at 'dog' last time and this time it's 'bomb'.

Bomb has had, at least for most of its existence, the one use as referring to an explosive – all related to Greek bombos and Latin bombus meaning ‘a deep, hollow, or booming sound’ and thus named from the sound the explosive made. But since the middle of the 20th century, ‘bomb’ suddenly took on other uses: from 1953 it referred to an old car; from the following year it meant entirely the opposite of ‘success’; then in 1961 we find it swinging back to its earlier usage with ‘a failure’.

Bomb is also used from 1966 to mean ‘travel quickly’.

Bombed is used as a slang term for ‘drunk by 1956.

The atomic bomb is first recorded in 1945.

Bomb-proof is seen for the first time in writing in 1702, that source being the Century Disctionary and so it must already have been in use. We also find ‘bomb-proof’ used as contemptuous slang for those who were never exposed to the dangers of war (for whatever reason) in 1755, that war being the US Civil War.

Bombshell, referring to the casing of the explosive, is first seen in 1708; the term is first used to express shattering or shocking news in 1859; and as a reference to a very attractive (particularly blonde) female by 1942. This latter reference is almost certainly a result of the film released in 1937. Originally entitled Bombshell, it was renamed The Blond Bombshell before release. Starring Jean Harlow, it is said to have been based on screen star Clara Bow.

Nobody carpet-bombed anywhere until 1945.

The firebomb, referring to an explosive designed to create a conflagration, is first referred to in 1895 although the term had earlier been used to describe a firework and also a cannonball. It is seen as verb from 1941 to describe a military aviation manoeuvre, and from 1945 to describe acts of vandalism or terrorism.

An etymologist's look at everyday 20th century words no longer used

Note it is often said the OED not only adds words each year but removes others. This is not the case, the OED merely marks some as 'obsolete' or 'no longer in use'. Here are some which you may or may not remember.

Regulo was a number used to give a setting on a temperature scale in gas ovens in Britain. It would often be heard or seen on television and in recipes: "Preheat the oven to 200 degrees, regulo 6" or "220 degrees, regulo 7". Today we hear the phrase "gas mark" but the scale is the same. The term 'regulo', while not specifically a trade name, was used by manufacturers for many years. It is clearly derived from 'regulate', itself from Latin regula 'a straight piece of wood' and Proto-Indo-European reg 'move in a straight line'.

Fuzzle is a word meaning 'to make drunk, the confuse' and likely a mispronunciation of fuddle also meaning 'to get drunk' and today still seen in 'befuddle'.

Resistentialism was a theory that inanimate objects showed spiteful behaviour. Confused? (Or even fuzzled?) The idea being that such things as a ball refused to bounce correctly and would have to be chased - when really the ball had been bounced incorrectly; or keys would deliberately hide - and not that the owner had forgotten where they had put them. No wonder the word fell out of use.Clearly derived from 'resist', as in not doing what is expected, this verb came to English through Old French and Latin from Proto-Indo-European sta 'to stand, make firm'.

Lumming spoke of how gentlemen would go for a walk after a meal and smoke (usually a pipe). This has its origins in the slang term 'lum', a reference to the flue drawing smoke from an open fire into the chimney and away from the house.

Aerodrome began to give way to 'airport' from 1909 and has now disappeared entirely. It comes from the Greek aerodromos 'running through the air', and first used as a name for an early flying machine.

Overmorrow is not tomorrow but the day after tomorrow. Clearly from 'morrow', a word sharing an origin with 'morning' in coming to English through the Germanic languages and ultimately from Proto-Indo-European mer 'to blink, twinkle', and a reference to the breaking of the new day.

Groak is to 'stare at someone eating', presumably in the hope of being offered a share. Origins are obscure, although it is tempting to suggest it is related to 'gaek' and 'gawp'.

Thrape is to punish, beat, to thrash. Latterly rarely used in the physical sense, but more likely used to describe a verbal tirade, and also a heavy defeat in a sporting contest.

Ludicrous British Laws

As with last time, the following is the result of finding something while researching, something I was not looking for.

Walking home with something you have purchased made from wood, is against the law. Now, this is only against the law in London, and only if walking home. Thus if you live next door to the London retailer, make sure you go in your vehicle, or use a handcart, to avoid a potential £500 fine.

Another £500 fine awaits those who enjoy themselves in London. I often hear how the current crop of youngsters are glued to their devices, have no idea how to have fun and play out 'like we did when we were kids'. Londoners who play games, fly kites, or create slides on icy streets are falling foul of the law, and have done since 1839.

Ever been attired in fancy dress? What did you go as? A vicar, a tart, nurse, caveman? Hopefully you didn't go as a soldier or naval figure, for passing yourself as a member of the armed forces can land you with thirty days in a prison cell.

A £200 fine awaits anyone found to be drunk. Not drunk and disorderly, simply drunk. Almost a license to print money, one would think.

If you want to part with £500 in a fine, try indulging in one of the following: Belfast, Knicky Knocky Nine Door, Knock Down Ginger, Knock Out Ginger, Belletje trekken, Klingelstreich, Belleke trek, Knock and Nash, Chicky Melly, Chappies, Knick Knack, Cherry Knocking, Ding Dong Ditch, Sonne Decriss, Tok Tokkie, Rin-Rin-Raja, or Bel-Twi. Those are all the same game as it is known around the world, and simply knocking someone's door or ringing the doorbell and running away.

Don't make the mistake of having a pig sty at the front of your property if you're living in a town. Should the pig(s) escape, you could find yourself paying a fine of £1,000.

London householders beware, do not clean a mat or carpet in the street after eight o'clock in the morning. If you do, it's a fine of £500.

Vagrancy is also a crime, one which carries a month in a prison cell. But it covers any request for money. Ever asked for something for the parking meter?

Section 32 of the Salmon Act of 1986 points out that 'handling salmon in suspicious circumstances' is an offence. Unfortunately, it doesn't specify just what suspicious handling entails and thus perhaps you've been breaking this law for the last 36 years without even knowing it and could have spent two years in prison as a result.

The reason these seemingly ludicrous laws are still on the books? Because while it is difficult enough to get a new law passed or changed, it is nigh impossible to get laws removed as it is well-nigh impossible to foresee every possibility in the future. Rest assured you are never going to fall foul of these laws, as the powers that be are not going to enforce them - they have much more important jobs to do.

Drunken Assault

15th February 1902 and Maud Shipley, aged 28 of Lombard Street was arrested when found running down Lombard Street at 10:40pm by PC Williams shouting, “Oh my lad, what have I done?” At her home on the sofa in the kitchen they found her husband Frank. Part of the lobe of his left ear was missing, there was a wound to his neck, and a 1.1/2-inch gash to his face – he was bleeding heavily. A white-handled knife also covered in blood was also present.

At the inquest adjournment followed, as victim was unable to attend. A week later, head swathed in bandages and looking very unwell, he gave evidence. He was a waggoner, employed by Mr Summerfield, a coal dealer. He left work, called at the Mitre Inn for a pint, then arrived home to find his wife very aggressive, agitated, excitable, the worse for drink and demanding money. He refused and went out for a shave. On coming out of the barbers’ she was waiting for him and again demanding money. She followed him home, again and again demanding money. Eventually he went back to the Mitre Inn to fill a bottle with beer so he could drink it with his supper.

The couple had three children, the oldest 5 and youngest almost 2. Sister said she had seen her sister Maud several times that day complaining of money, she had shared a beer with her, and two other women had got her from the Grapes Inn, and thought her ‘half and half’ with the drink. A passer-by saw her banging on her door, screaming “I will finish the bastard before the night’s out”. She then re-entered, he watched as she picked up a knife and stabbed Frank three or four times in quick succession. He passed her as she ran out and attended to the man who was bleeding profusely and he stated “She was three sheets”. A second passer-by arrived to assist. Second witness went for the doctor and the police. When the doctor arrived, he noted a great deal of blood both inside and outside the house, the place looked like a slaughterhouse. Sent to court she claimed her husband had thrown that very knife at her twice before, although there was no evidence to support this. She was sentenced to three months with hard labour.

Friday the 13th

Friday 13th April 1832. The following week the local press reported the sad death of a groom, he in charge of three horses belonging to “a most worthy gentleman” passing through the city on his way to London. The youth was described as “a fine, handsome, and intelligent young man of the lower classes” – amazing how wonderful he was and yet they didn’t bother to find out his name – was obviously not sober before he arrived in Lichfield but was most inebriated by the time he left the city. As time passed his “drunkenness increased its despotic tyranny over him” – until 10 miles down the road he fell from his horse and to his death. He died from a fractured skull at 10am on the following morning, Saturday.

Herbert and Maud Freeman

4th September 1911 and at Hanch, north of Lichfield near the present golf club, Herbert Freeman, aged 46, attempted to kill his wife Maud aged 33. Had been living at Craddock’s Yard, Wilcox’s Entry, Tamworth Street, Lichfield. They only married on August 8th, 27 days earlier, and it had already proved to be a terrible marriage.

Their wedding reception was held at the Windsor Castle Inn, Lichfield. Here they fought and were asked to quit but refused and so found themselves in front of magistrates charged with disturbing the peace – at their own wedding reception! Over the next four weeks matters did not improve. On the 4th September they were out on Cannock Chase together and called at the Roe Buck Inn, Wolseley Bridge - now known as the Wolseley Arms. Here they found Alfred Black, a dreyman of the Lichfield Brewery. and obtained a lift back on his float.

All went well until they reached Handsacre, as they left she put her hand in her husband’s pocket. He accused her of trying to rob him, although later claimed it was a joke. Words ensued, then he pulled out a long-bladed knife and threatened to kill both his wife and the driver, Alfred Black. The driver was alarmed but offered to help when Maud said she was hurt, he offered to take her to the nursing home in Lichfield. On reaching Hanch Hall the passengers alighted, husband saying he would take care of her. It seems he took care of both of them – first cutting his wife’s neck before turning to his own and severed the windpipe. When police and doctors arrived at 9pm, two bodies were found lying in a pool of blood. He was dead, she found unconscious but when taken to Rugeley District Hospital she gave an incoherent account of events.

Maud Shipley, as she had been known, was previously married to a workman for the local council, until he met with an accident at Lichfield Isolation Hospital the previous year and had died at Birmingham Accident Hospital from his injuries. Herbert’s daughter Alice Freeman said her mother died in December 1903 and her father had had no regular employment for the last 12 months but was a good father and fed and clothed his children well. Since the fight on their wedding night there had been many quarrels. On the day in question both were taking the train from Lichfield Trent Valley to Hagley, he to seek employment in the railway track widening work, she to look for a home at Hagley as they had been given notice at Wilcox’s Entry. Inquest was adjourned until October 3rd to trace further witnesses.

When reconvening, Alfred Black said Herbert had knocked her to the floor and thrown her from the float, she appeared to be hurt. Another witness driving a car picked up the story. He saw two people near Hanch Hall apparently fighting. He raised the alarm when he discovered the woman on the ground and apparently dead, while the man was still alive. He went to Hanch Hall to summon assistance, it was they who discovered Maud had two deep cuts to her neck although Herbert had but one cut but was dead. Another witness, a labourer at the hall, described how Herbert had hit his wife twice across the face with his umbrella, words were exchanged and there was much pushing. Policeman described the spring knife as that which poachers knew as a rabbit-legger or a buck-sticker. By the time the doctor arrived the man had been dead for 1.1/2 hours. Wife had two deep wounds about 3 inches long, one from the middle of the neck to the left side of the jaw and 3/4 inch deep and opened up a similar gash in the gullet, the right side was but a scratch. She also had a blackened left eye, finger-shaped bruises on her arms and other bruises about the body and legs. The man had fingernail scratches on his arms and face. He had a 4 inch wound to the throat, deep enough to expose the back of the palate, jugular was severed and death would have come in a matter of seconds. The man was also missing a finger and thumb on the left hand but this was from an old injury. His body also showed signs of alcoholism.

Then the wife gave evidence, having recovered from her injuries. She said on the afternoon of their marriage he had tried to strangle her. Soon after had got her on the sofa and held a knife to her throat, but released her when someone tapped on the window. She maintained he was a good man with no drink in him. On August 27th he had forced her upstairs and threatened to kill her, even sleeping with the open knife in his hand should she attempt to move. When drunk he was a jealous monster, sober he complained of pains in his arms and head. The tussle was exactly as others had described, adding he grabbed her around the neck with his left arm, she could not get away, he was too strong. He pushed the knife into her throat. She collapsed and laid her down and he kissed her forehead. She awoke to see him lying three feet away to her right, the poachers knife on her left but she did not know this until later. He was clutching his throat, his face down. With some deliberation as to the location of the knife the jury delivered the verdict of suicide after attempting to murder his wife.

A Bloody Tale

February 1902 and PC Williams is following his regular route around the streets of Lichfield, coming along Lombard Street at 10:40pm. It was here he saw a woman running towards him and crying out "Oh my lad, what have I done?" Being a good officer he took hold of her and took her back to investigate further. On entering the house, he discovered her husband, Frank, on the sofa in the kitchen. Blood was everywhere. Maud Shipley was arrested.

The first inquest had to be adjourned as the main witness, the victim, had been too ill to come to court. Indeed, the following week he appeared heavily swathed in bandages and looking most frail. It was then the story began to unfold. Frank Shipley had been employed by Mr Summerfield, a coal deal, as a waggoner. Leaving work he had called in to the Mitre Inn for a well-earned pint on his way home.

Arriving at his home in Lombard Street he discovered his wife to be most agitated, in an aggressive and excitable state, clearly the worse for drink and demanding money. Frank refused and turned on his heel, going out to get a shave. When he emerged from the barber's shop he was met by his wife who, once again, was demanding money and this continued as she followed him home. No sooner had he reached home than Frank went back out, this time to the Mitre Inn to fill a bottle with beer so he could drink it with his supper.

At this point the inquest heard from her sister who had spent some of the earlier part of that day with her. Indeed had seen her on a number of occassions, each time she had been complaining of a lack of money. Both she and two other women had shared their beer with Maud, eventually brining her home from the Grapes Inn where she was described as being "Half and half with the drink".

Another witness came to the stand and spoke of Maud banging on the door screaming "I will finish the bastard before the night's out". He followed her into her house to witness her picking up a knife and stabbing Frank three or four times in quick succession. She passed him by as she ran into the street, while he went to see how he could help the man who was bleeding profusely. He described Maud as being "Three sheets".

A second passer-by then entered and went back out to summon medical assistance. When the doctor gave evidence he described the scene as looking like a slaughterhouse. Mr Shipley having several wounds about the head, including a severed ear lobe, a two-inch gash across his face, and a wound to the neck.

When the case came to court the accused claimed she had acted in self-defence, that the very knife brought as evidence had been thrown at her by Frank at least twice. There was no evidence to support this claim and Maud Shipley, aged 28, was found to be guilty of the assault on her husband and sentenced to three months hard labour. This left Frank, himself still far from well, to look after their three children - the eldest five years and the youngest just two.