John Howard's Trial

Tragic Accident Results in Acquittal

On the 5th of February 1931, Salford’s Coroner, Mr. A. Howard Flint, presided over the inquest into the death of Constance.

Jean, her cousin who lived on Lullington Road, Salford, recounted their journey home.  She explained that, as the tramcar approached Buile Hill Park, they walked onto the platform, saying, “I turned around and saw Constance hanging on the step. I ran to the footpath. I heard a bang and saw Constance being dragged along by a car. I didn’t hear any horn sounded.” She then noticed one of her shoes was missing and speculated that it might have been caught by the car as she crossed.

Walter Saddler, the tram driver, stated that he had stopped at the designated car stop when he heard a crash from the rear. The motorcar then passed by, and Saddler saw the child under the running board as the back wheel rolled over her.

George Kelly**, a passenger from Romley Street, Pendleton, described the car approaching at a “terrific rate.” He noted that after the accident, the car came to a stop about 30 feet ahead of where Constance’s body lay. Kelly suggested that had Howard turned to the offside of the tram, the accident might have been avoided.

Other witnesses confirmed that the tram had been stationary for some time before Howard's car struck it, adding that Howard would have had a clear view of the tram for at least 150 yards.

In his defence, John Howard stated he was traveling at approximately 30 mph, believing the child on the platform had seen him. He reported braking and sounding his horn when he was about 15 yards from the tram. As Jean ran across the road, Howard claimed he swerved to the right to avoid her, which resulted in his collision with the tram.

After reviewing all the evidence, the jury reached a verdict of “Manslaughter”, and the coroner committed Howard to the Manchester Assizes.

Following Proceedings and Bail

On 6th February 1931, John Howard appeared on a coroner’s warrant at Salford Police Court, where he was formally charged with unlawfully killing Constance Crawford, following the jury’s manslaughter verdict at the inquest. Mr. W. H. Robinson, Deputy Town Clerk, explained to the magistrates that Howard’s car had struck the girl as she alighted from the tram on Eccles Old Road. Howard was granted bail of £100, with two sureties of £50 each.

On 12th February 1931, Howard made his second appearance before the Salford Stipendiary Magistrate, Mr. P. W. Atkin, facing charges of manslaughter and dangerous driving.

Trial at Manchester Assizes 2nd March 1931

John Howard appeared at the Manchester Assizes on 2nd March 1931, pleading “not guilty” to charges of manslaughter and driving dangerously.

Mr. N.B. Goldie, K.C., representing the prosecution, Constance Crawford, with her 10-years-old cousin, Jean Anderson, was returning home on a Salford Corporation tram along Eccles Old Road, Pendleton, and the vehicle came to a standstill at Sandy Grove. The conductor saw a motor-car approaching and put out his arm to warn the motorist. The two children were on the step and the conductor put his hand on the shoulder of Constance and advised her to wait a moment, but Jean Anderson alighted and ran across to the pavement. "The car had been coming at a tremendous speed," said Mr Goldie, "and it crashed into the rear of the tramcar with such force that it wrenched the step upon which Constance was standing from its fastenings.

The impact swept Constance off the step, carrying her under the running board, where the rear wheel passed over her. The car continued 118 feet, eventually mounting the pavement and carrying her 87 feet further before stopping.

Mr. Goldie added that in Howard’s statement to the police, he had claimed to have been driving around 30 mph. He asserted that the tram had stopped quickly and that he assumed the girl on the platform had seen him. When Jean crossed in front of him, he swerved to the right to avoid her, resulting in his collision with the tram.

Defence and Acquittal

Mr. J. C. Jackson, K.C., defending Howard, stated that his client had been driving for three years without any prior accidents. Jackson argued that Howard saw no warning signal from the conductor and thought that the guard of the tram was waiting for him to go through He described the incident as an unfortunate error in judgment. Howard testified that he had braked and sounded his horn when 15 yards away. He thought the girl on the platform had seen him, so he proceeded, swerving right to avoid hitting Jean.  

Peter, John’s son, shared that the only time his father ever spoke about the accident was during a conversation after Peter had been involved in a minor road accident.   It was clear that the incident in 1931 had left a profound emotional impact on John’s life.

During their talk, John mentioned that his boss had hired a high-profile King’s Counsel (KC) to defend him. The KC had skillfully exposed a key witness**  in the trial as unreliable. The witness claimed to have seen everything, but the KC demonstrated that their view was obstructed, casting doubt on their testimony. This may have been a crucial factor in the jury’s decision to find John not guilty.

The jury acquitted Howard of both manslaughter and dangerous driving charges, concluding that the tragedy was an error in judgment rather than criminal negligence.

After being found “not guilty,” John Howard resumed his role as manager of the Ambassador Cinema on Monday, 16th March 1931, following a short break. This return to daily life was likely accompanied by personal challenges, as he would have had to pass by the site of the tragic accident on his way to work—a lasting and difficult reminder of the events that had unfolded.

For Constance's cousin, Jean, the impact was surely profound as well. Having witnessed the accident, she may have struggled with painful memories and the “what-ifs” of that day. It’s possible she reflected on whether things might have turned out differently had she stayed on the tram rather than crossing the road.

Constance's parents, Stanley and Ethel, living mere yards from where they lost their young daughter, faced daily reminders of her absence. This proximity to the scene of the accident would have intensified their grief, making it difficult to escape or process the tragic loss that had unfolded so close to home.

Finally, there is the loss of Constance herself—a young life ended in such a devastating way, leaving a lasting impact on all who knew her and on those involved in the accident.