|
THE HULL PACKET |
|
Friday, 25th April 1845. |
|
(Page 6, Col 4) |
|
HULL POLICE COURT - WEDNESDAY |
|
Before Messrs. Jalland, Cookman, and Henwood. |
|
CUTTING AND MAIMING. – A woman named Elizabeth Gooderson, of very dissipated habits, was charged with cutting and wounding Mary Iveson with a large fish-knife, (sharpened like those used by butchers.) |
|
No specific cause was given for this act, but it appeared that the parties, who live in one of the squares in the neighbourhood of the Gas-works, had been on bad terms, and that Gooderson, who was in the almost daily habit of getting intoxicated, had used violent language towards Iveson, and expressed a strong and rather unamiable anxiety to see "her heart’s blood." |
|
On the previous evening, it appeared complainant had been at a neighbour’s house, and on opening the door to leave it, she met the prisoner with a large fish-knife in her hand; after swearing roundly at her, prisoner endeavoured to stab her in the head with the knife; prosecutrix raised her hand to defend herself, and in so doing her fingers were very severely cut. In the scuffle which ensued, prisoner also struck Iveson a severe blow on the forehead, with the handle of the knife. Prosecutrix also stated that Gooderson had threatened to put gunpowder in her house and blow her up. It appeared that no one had seen the attack complained of by the prosecutrix, but some witnesses were called who had heard the prisoner say she would see Iveson’s "heart’s blood," and who, coming up during the scuffle, had taken the knife out of Gooderson’s hands. In defence, the prisoner said she had never any intention to wound Iveson with the knife in question, and that her fingers were accidentally cut in the scuffle between them. She further produced a torn cap, and a large handful of hair, and said that the one had been torn off her head, and the other pulled out of her head by the prosecutrix. Unfortunately, however, for her veracity, the hair she produced in her hand did not exactly correspond in colour to that which was on her head; and although she said she could, if she liked, shew the place it had been torn from, she very wisely refused to be put to the proof, and didn’t like to uncover her head. |
|
The magistrates said it was just possible that the prosecutrix had had her fingers cut in the scuffle; and but for that possibility, and the absence of witnesses who saw the affray, they should have felt it their duty to send the case to York. As it was, they should fine the prisoner £5, and in default of payment, send her to gaol for two months. At the expiration of that period they would require two sureties in £5 each, or one in £10, for her good behaviour for twelve months. |