A lot of posts overnight. Just to add to the story about Louisa's fight, that article was from "The Illustrated Police News" of 14 June 1879. This was a weekly newspaper that featured sensational reports (and illustrations on the front page) of murders and other crimes.
I wouldn't have thought that two women having a fight in a pub would be newsworthy, but there you go. One thing I found funny from the report was the very last sentence "She was removed to the cells waving her handkerchief". Defiant to the end it seems.
Also, Louisa had form for this sort of thing. There are two earlier reports of her being up before the bench and it looks like she may have ended up doing time on at least one occasion. The first was when she was just 13, where she turned up to court on her own.
The first from "The Essex Halfpenny Newsman" of 18 April 1874, page 4 col. 3
Petty Sessions
Maldon, April 14
Magistrates present - Dr May and W Humpherys Esq
A Girls' Quarrel
Louisa Allen, a young hopeful of 13 years, appeared in answer to a charge of assault and malicious injury to a dress, brought against her by another juvenile of the same age, named Mary Alice Rivers.
Dr May expressed his regret that the case had not been settled out of court and urged upon the complainant's father the advisability of arranging the matter, but there being no one present who would enter into any arrangement on Allen's behalf the case was allowed to go on.
From the evidence it appeared that on Tuesday last the complainant was in her yard, when Allen came up to her and demanded a marble, which she said belonged to her; Rivers politely informed her that she wouldn't get it, for it "worn't" hers. The penalty for this speech was to be taken up in Allen's arms, "chucked" on the ground, knocked about, have her hair pulled and dress torn.
The defendant made no defence, and the magistrates imposed a fine of 6d for the assault, 1s damage to dress, and costs (half of which the clerk remitted in consideration of her tender age), which brought the amount to 13s 6d
Allen's father was sent for to pay the amount, but he refused to do so, although the alternative would be a fortnight's confinement in gaol for his daughter, and on being informed that to prevent such an event happening she would be allowed a week for payment, Louisa informed the bench in anything but a respectful manner that she wouldn't pay nor would she allow her father to do so.
.
The second is from 1877 and, if this Louisa is the mother of Edith then these events would have taken place while Edith was just four months old. Louisa is with her sister Margaret and brother in law Charles Yaxley
From "The Chelmsford Chronicle" of 30 Nov 1877 page 6 col. 5-6
Petty Sessions
Maldon, Nov 27
Magistrates present W Humpherys Esq (Mayor), J Barritt and A Warren Esqrs
The Police and the Public
Margaret Yaxley, Chas Yaxley and Louisa Allen, fish-hawkers, all of Maldon, were charged with riotous behaviour while drunk, on the night of Friday 23rd inst
The two first named defendants failing to appear, the service of the summonses upon them was proved by PC Balls, and warrants were directed to be issued. The case of the younger defendant, Louisa Allen, was proceeded with.
PC J Frost said: On the night in question he saw defendant in a thoroughfare leading from the Hythe to the Wants; she was drunk and two others were trying to pick her up; they were all down together and were using bad language; witness told her to go home, but she could not walk because she was so drunk; the three went up the Wants making a great noise, disturbing the inhabitants, and went into George Allen's house.
Defendant admitted being drunk, but endeavoured to excuse herself on the ground that some friends had induced her to take a glass or two, she denied that she made use of bad language, and stated that her sister Margaret Yaxley and Charles Yaxley were not drunk, but were trying to get her home, because she had a screaming fit and couldn't walk.
The bench inflicted a penalty of 3s 6d with costs, with the alternative of 14 days hard labour.
Margaret Yaxley and Charles Yaxley, the other two defendants, then came into the court having driven from Rochford.
The evidence of the constable was repeated so far as it was applicable and he further stated that an hour later both the defendants were fighting in the Wantz road.
The male defendant questioned him with a view to showing that he with his co-defendant were doing their best to get Louisa Allen home and were not drunk. The constable, however, was positive that all three were drunk, and very drunk, and were using disgusting language and making a noise.
Both defendants denied the offence and said they asked the constable to speak to Allen and tell her to go home because she might know his voice. They did their best to get her home. She was making a noise because she had a screaming fit, but they were quiet.
The bench convicted both defendants, fining them 2s 6d each and costs, or seven days hard labour.