afterwards, when he was induced to confess, that through the means of a
bribe offered to the person who swept the cells, he was enabled to
procure impressions in wax of the keys which would be required to open
the doors through which he and his fellow-prisoner would have to pass.
Having obtained these, he soon got keys made, and he was assisted in his
flight by this "friend at court." It was supposed, however, that he had
some other more powerful ally than a sweeper, and considerable changes
in the management of the jail were subsequently made.
The punishment for the crime of forgery, a few years only before this
time, was much less severe than that which was now inflicted, the
increase of the offence having rendered an alteration in its severity
necessary. It would appear, however, that the efforts of legislators
produced anything but the desired effect, the frequency of the offence
being increased instead of diminished. The ancient punishment for this
crime we find thus minutely described in a London periodical publication
for the year 1731:--
"_June 9th._--This day, about noon, Japhet Crook, _alias_ St. Peter
Stranger, was brought to the pillory at Charing Cross, according to his
sentence for forgery. He stood an hour thereon; after which a chair was
set on the pillory; and he being put therein, the hangman with a sort of
pruning-knife cut off both his ears, and immediately a surgeon clapped a
styptic thereon. Then the executioner, with a pair of scissors, cut his
left nostril twice before it was quite through, and afterwards cut
through the right nostril at once. He bore all this with great patience;
but when, in pursuance of his sentence, his right nostril was seared
with a red-hot iron, he was in such violent pain that his left nostril
was let alone, and he went from the pillory bleeding. He was conveyed
from thence to the King's Bench Prison, there to remain for life. He
died in confinement about three years after."
JANE COX.
EXECUTED FOR MURDER.
The practice of apothecaries selling poison in their shops to strangers,
who purchase it under the pretence of its having to be employed in
killing rats, is one which cannot be too severely reprobated, and even
punished. In Mantua of old, it appears from Shakspeare's _Romeo and
Juliet_, that it was an offence punishable with death, for the
Apothecary says,
"Such mortal drugs I have, but Mantua's law
Is death to any he that utters them;"
and the peace and safety of society might be secured, and crime and
suicide rendered much less frequent, if some such provision were made in
England.
On the subject of selling poison for the purpose of committing murder,
we find, from "Hill's Journey through Sicily and Calabria," that in the
year 1791, at Palermo, a city not far distant from Mantua, an old woman
was executed for dealing out such mortal drugs.
"Many people in this town and neighbourhood," (Palermo,) says this
author, "died in a sudden and extraordinary manner; they were generally
seized with vomiting, and expired in a few hours. A young woman went to
an officer of justice to make some complaints concerning her husband; he
desired her to be reconciled, and refused to proceed against him, upon
which she turned away in a rage, muttering that she knew how to be
revenged. The magistrate paid attention to what she said, and gave
orders for her being arrested; when, upon strict inquiry concerning the
meaning of her word, she confessed that it was her intention to poison
her husband, by purchasing a bottle of vinegar from an old woman, who
prepared it for that purpose. In order to ascertain the truth of this
story, another woman was sent to the old jade, to demand some of the
vinegar, which was sold for about ten pence a bottle. 'What do you want
with it?' said the vender: 'Why,' replied the other, 'I have a very bad
husband, and I want to get rid of him.' Hereupon the old woman,
seventy-two years of age, produced the fatal dose; upon which she was
immediately seized, and conducted to prison, where she confessed that
she had sold forty-five or forty-six bottles. Many people were taken up;
but as, upon further inquiry, it was discovered that several of the
nobility had been purchasers, the affair was dropped, and the old woman
alone suffered death."
To proceed, however, to the case of the unfortunate prisoner whose name
heads this article. On the 9th of August, 1811, she was indicted at the
Assizes for the county of Devon, for the wilful murder of John Trenaman,
an infant sixteen months old; and Arthur Tucker was indicted as an
accessory before the fact.
The latter was a respectable farmer, living at Hatherleigh, in
Devonshire; and the infant was his natural child. It appeared that Jane
Cox had, on the 25th of May, 1811, administered to the child a quantity
of arsenic, by putting it into the child's hands, which it put into its
mouth and ate, and in consequence died in about two hours. The prisoner,
in her written confession, had implicated Tucker, as having persuaded
her to commit this act, and stated that he had taken the arsenic from
under the roof of a cottage, and given it to her, and promised her a
one-pound note if she would administer it to the child.
The prisoner, Jane Cox, after a trial of seven hours was convicted; but
Tucker, who called a number of respectable witnesses who gave him a very
high character, was acquitted, the woman's story being unsupported by
evidence, and being disbelieved.
On Monday the 12th of August, 1811, pursuant to her sentence, the
unfortunate woman was brought to the "new drop," the place of execution,
and underwent the sentence of the law.
She addressed the spectators at some length, and in a very audible
manner; she repeated her former confession, with some further
particulars respecting the means used by Tucker to prevail on her to
commit the horrid deed, for which she acknowledged she ought to die, but
lamented that the person who had instigated her to the commission of it
was not also to suffer with her.
MICHAEL WHITING.
EXECUTED FOR POISONING HIS BROTHERS-IN-LAW.
Crime has different shades; but a deeper dye cannot be given to it, than
when one in the assumed robe of sanctity attempts to dip his hands in
human blood, particularly when that blood is united to him by ties of
consanguinity.
Michael Whiting lived at Downham, where he occasionally preached, being
a Methodist parson; but as the bounty of those who listened to his pious
exhortations was not very large, he endeavoured to add to his resources
by keeping a shop in which he sold bread, meal, &c. and also drugs,
being at once a comforter of the soul and body.
This hypocrite had two brothers-in-law, named George and Joseph Langman,
who resided on a small farm near Downham. They were both under age, and
had two sisters, one of whom was married to Whiting, and the other, aged
ten years, lived with her brothers. To possess himself of the small
estate of these youths, Whiting had recourse to a most diabolical plan.
The little sister was sent to his shop for some bread, and, learning
from her that the housekeeper of the brothers was about going from home
for a few days, he affected much kindness, and promised paying them a
visit. He did so, and with unusual liberality brought with him materials
for making a pudding or two, observing to the housekeeper, "Catherine,
be sure you make the boys a pudding before you go." After doling out a
few texts of Scripture, which he had ready on all occasions, and which
he applied with about as much judgment as Sancho Panza did his proverbs,
he departed, taking with him the little girl, tenderly remarking that
her sister would take better care of her than her brothers, during the
housekeeper's absence.
Catherine made the puddings; but remarked, during the process, that the
dough would not properly adhere, and when she departed she left them in
a kneading-trough. The brothers, not suspecting that any mischief was
intended, boiled one of the puddings for dinner, and when properly done,
sat down to partake of it; but before they had swallowed three
mouthfuls, they were seized with violent vomitings. Suspecting that the
pudding was poisoned, they threw a small piece of it to a sow in the
yard; which she had scarcely swallowed, when the poor animal was taken
sick, and after lingering a short time died.
The elder brother, by the application of proper medicine, soon
recovered; but the younger lingered for a long time ere he regained his
health. The pudding was now analysed by a professor of chemistry, who
found it to contain a large quantity of corrosive sublimate of mercury,
and no other poisonous ingredient,--a fact which destroyed the defence
set up by Whiting, that he had laid some _nux vomica_ for rats, some of
which he supposed had got among the meal.
For this offence Whiting was indicted at the Isle of Ely Assizes, on
Thursday the 5th of March, 1811; when, in addition to the above facts,
it was proved that, in the event of the Langmans' death, he would come
in for their property, in right of his wife, as the next heiress of her
brothers.
The trial lasted till six o'clock in the evening, when the jury retired,
and, after a deliberation of ten minutes, found the prisoner Guilty,
when he was immediately sentenced to be hanged.
HARRIET MAGNIS.
TRIED FOR CHILD STEALING.
The offence for which this woman was tried was one which, at the time of
its commission, attracted a very considerable degree of attention. The
child stolen was the offspring of a respectable couple living in
Martin's-lane, in the City, named Dellow; and it appears that he was
playing with his little sister in the neighbourhood of his mother's
house, when he was suddenly missed, and all tidings of him were lost. A
woman, it was proved, had been seen in the neighbourhood immediately
before the child was lost, and suspicion rested upon her; but although
the most vigilant search was made, her person could never be identified.
Suspicion first fell upon an innocent lady, the wife of a surgeon in the
navy, and, after two examinations of several witnesses, all of whom
mistook her person, she was committed for trial at the Old Bailey.
On her trial, however, she was acquitted, as indeed there appeared to be
no proof of her identity, and the case was still pervaded by the same
uncertainty as before.
At length the mystery began to develop itself. The first information
received in London was from a magistrate in Gosport, acquainting Mr. and
Mrs. Dellow of the discovery that their child was safe there, and ready
to be delivered to its parents. The father instantly set off, and soon
after returned home with his son, when he was required to appear before
the Lord Mayor of London, where he found William Barber, the keeper of
the Gosport prison, ready to give evidence against a woman of that town
of the name of Harriet Magnis, in whose possession the child was found.
This man having seen a hand-bill describing the child, got information
that it was at Gosport, and went to the lodgings of Mrs. Magnis, who
lived in a very respectable way. He asked her if she had a child, and if
it was her own; to which she replied, rather faintly, that it was; but
upon his saying that he doubted it, and desiring to see the child, she
took him very readily to the room where it was in bed, and confessed to
him that she had found the boy in London.
She afterwards, however, confessed the whole affair, and her motive for
the robbery. She said that her husband, who was a gunner on board one of
his Majesty's ships, and had saved a considerable sum of money for a man
in his station of life, was extremely partial to children, and had often
expressed his most anxious wish to have a little darling, as he used to
term it. His wife, not less anxious to gratify him in this respect,
wrote to him while at sea, that she was in the family way. The gunner,
highly delighted that he had obtained his desired object, sent home the
earnings of many a cruise, amounting to three hundred pounds, with a
particular charge that the infant should be well rigged, and want for
nothing; if a boy, so much the better.
The next letter from his hopeful wife announced the happy tidings that
his first-born was a son; and that she would name him Richard, after his
father. The husband expressed his joy at the news, and counted the
tedious hours until he should be permitted to come home to his wife and
child.
At home he at length arrived, but at an unfortunate time, when the dear
Richard was out at nurse, at a considerable distance; change of air
being necessary to the easy cutting of his teeth. The husband's time
being short, he left England with a heavy heart, without being able to
see his offspring; but he was assured that on his next trip to Gosport
he should have the felicity he had so often pined for, of clasping his
darling to his bosom. It was not until November 1810 that he was at
liberty to revisit home, when he had again the mortification to find
that his son, whom he expected to see a fine boy of three years old, had
not yet cut his teeth, or that he was from home on some other pretence.
The husband, however, was not to be pacified thus: he would go and see
his son, or his son should come to him. Mrs. Magnis, finding him
determined, thought the latter the much better way, and accordingly set
off to fetch the boy. The metropolis occurred to her as the market best
calculated to afford her a choice of children; and, passing down
Martin's-lane, she was struck with the rosy little citizen, Tommy
Dellow, and at once determined to make him her prize. He was playing
with his sister at the greengrocer's shop-door, into which Mrs. Magnis
went, with the double view of purchasing some apples, and carrying off
the boy. She made much of the sister, caressed the boy, and gave him an
apple. The children being pleased with her attention, she asked the
little girl to show her to a pastry-cook's shop to buy some cakes, when
she got clear off with the boy, and left the girl behind.
Poor Magnis felt a parental affection for the boy; and when the
imposition was discovered before the magistrate, he was grieved to the
heart at being obliged to part with him under all the circumstances of
the transaction.
The woman, upon evidence being produced of these facts, was committed to
Winchester jail for trial; but at the assizes she escaped, on account of
her being indicted in the wrong county, the felony having been committed
in London.
BENJAMIN WALSH, ESQ., M.P.
TRIED FOR FELONY.
The name of Mr. Walsh was long known in the City as that of a daring
mercantile speculator; and it appears that having thrown himself into
considerable difficulties, he succeeded in wiping them all off by a
commission of bankruptcy, and almost immediately afterwards obtained a
seat in Parliament.
Among the dignified members of the House of Commons, Sir Thomas Plomer
seemed to entertain an opinion of Mr. Walsh which was in no degree
altered by his recent transactions, and he intrusted him with £22,000 to
purchase government securities for him. Mr. Walsh, however, laid out the
greater part of the money in the stocks of the United States of America
on his own account, and endeavoured to flee to that land of refuge for
the guilty, but was overtaken by the arm of justice at the very port
from which he intended to sail from his native country. He was
unfortunately for his own design too pertinacious of his privilege of
franking letters, and he continued even while flying from London, when
one would have supposed he would have endeavoured to remain unknown, to
despatch letters to his friends indorsed "Free, B. Walsh." These
communications being stopped by an order of the government, the course
of his flight was discovered, and he was followed to Falmouth by a
Bow-street runner, and the solicitor of Sir Thomas Plomer, by whom he
was secured and brought to London.
He was indicted at the ensuing Old Bailey Sessions for the offence of
stealing the money, when Mr. Garrow appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. Scarlett for the defence.
Upon the witnesses being examined, Sir Thomas Plomer stated that he had
given the money to the prisoner for the express purpose of purchasing
exchequer bills. He had given it to him in a check, for which he got
cash. The prisoner did afterwards lodge £6000 of the bills at Sir
Thomas's bankers.
Mr. Scarlett, in addressing the Court for the defence, hoped he should
not be understood to entertain any other sentiments of this offence than
a conviction of the moral turpitude of the prisoner; and he was
satisfied the prisoner himself entertained no other sentiment, and felt
all the contrition belonging to such a crime; but it now became his duty
to make such objections as occurred to him:--First, there could be no
charge of this sort for stealing the check, for it was in evidence that
the prosecutor had given it to the prisoner for a specific purpose; and
it was not altogether misapplied, for he had purchased some exchequer
bills, and the law did not allow the act of felony to be in part
separated. The second objection was under the statute of the second year
of the reign of George II. by which the security intended by the
legislature was given to such property as was still available to the
party prosecutor. In this case the party prosecutor had parted with all
control over the check by delivering it to the prisoner. Thirdly, the
felonious intent of the party taking was not in itself sufficient to
constitute a felony when the party to whom the property belonged had
relinquished his control over it; and in support of these objections, he
referred to several cases in point.
After some observations by Mr. Garrow, it was agreed that the jury
should find a verdict subject to the future opinion of the twelve judges
upon the chief baron's report.
The chief baron acquiesced in this arrangement, and then adverted to
that part of the evidence which went to show the previous intent of the
prisoner to commit the felony; observing, at the same time, that it was
impossible, upon such evidence, not to find the prisoner guilty, who, in
consequence of the objections made by his counsel, would have the
benefit of the judgment of the twelve judges hereafter.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of--Guilty.
During the whole of the trial the prisoner was much affected.
The result of the argument before the judges was, that the facts proved
did not, in estimation of law, amount to felony; and as Walsh had been
convicted of that offence, he received a free pardon.
The Commons expelled him from his seat in their house; and he was again
made a bankrupt, whereupon Sir Thomas found himself entitled only to a
pitiful dividend under the second commission.
THE MURDER OF THE MARRS AND WILLIAMSONS.
The close of the year 1811 was productive of two scenes of blood, which
struck horror into all hearts; we allude to the murders of the families
of the Marrs and Williamsons, in Ratcliffe Highway, which were
accomplished under circumstances of the most frightful atrocity, and of
the most extraordinary mystery.
It appears that Mr. Marr was a linen-draper in a respectable way of
business living in Ratcliffe Highway, and that his household
establishment consisted of himself, his wife, and infant child, a
shop-boy and a servant woman. It was his custom to close his shop at
about eleven o'clock, when he and his assistant proceeded to dispose of
the commodities which had been exposed for sale during the day by
placing them on the shelves. On a dark evening at the beginning of the
month of December 1811, he was engaged in the customary manner, his shop
being closed, when the servant woman was despatched to procure some
oysters for supper from a neighbouring shop. On her quitting her
master's house she left the door a-jar, in order that she might procure
a ready access on her return, and she went directly to the house of a
person who resided only a few doors off to purchase the fish. She found,
however, that they had sold the whole of their stock, and she was
therefore compelled to go further; and having purchased the quantity
required, and had them opened, she returned immediately to the residence
of Mr. Marr. On her reaching the door, she found that it was closed, and
she rang the bell. No answer was, however, returned and she repeated her
application to the wire. Still no one came, and a watchman coming up at
the moment inquired what she was doing there? She informed him of the
errand on which she had been sent, and that she could not obtain an
entrance, upon which he pulled the bell with great violence, but his
efforts were attended with no better effect than those of the servant
girl. Some alarm was now begun to be felt, and the next-door neighbour
coming out, to learn the cause of the interference of the constables,
three or four persons soon collected, amongst whom a consultation was
held as to the best mode of proceeding. Various courses were suggested,
a continued application to the knocker and bell being made in the mean
time; and at length, no answer being given, it was determined that the
wall which divided Mr. Marr's back premises from those of the adjoining
house should be scaled, in order that the cause of the silence might be
ascertained. The watchman, aided by the strangers who had collected near
him, soon made an entrance into Mr. Marr's premises, but on going into
the house a sight met his eyes, before which the stoutest heart would
have quailed. The murdered remains of Mr. Marr and his shop-boy lay
before him in the shop; the body of Mrs. Marr was in the passage, and
that of the infant in its cradle, all warm and all steeped in gore.
The watchman, having recovered from the effect of the stupor which this
horrid sight had produced in his mind, immediately ran to the door, and
having opened it gave an alarm to those outside of the frightful murders
which had been committed. An apprehension was entertained that the
assassins might still be employed in plundering the house, and instant
search was made, but without success; and it was ascertained that the
murderers, intimidated probably by the girl's ringing the bell, had
escaped from the back window, across some mud which lay in the back
yard, and through a way whose intricacies could have been threaded by
none but persons who had previously reconnoitred the situation. In the
mean time the report of the murders had spread like wild-fire, and
thousands of persons collected round the house, notwithstanding the late
hour of the night; but, although many volunteers were found, and an
instant search was made through the whole of the surrounding district,
nothing was discovered which could in the remotest degree afford a clue
to the discovery of the persons implicated in the diabolical
transaction. A minute examination of the house took place when daylight
afforded an opportunity for it to be done with good effect, and then a
ripping chisel or hook, such as are used by carpenters and joiners, was
found lying near the body of Mr. Marr, and some marks of blood were
discovered on the window, through which the murderers had escaped; but
nothing was found which could induce a supposition that any goods or
money had been carried off.