]
He was identified as having been seen in the company of Matilda Clover,
and also by a policeman as the man who left the house in Stamford Street
on the night that Marsh and Shrivell were murdered.
Dr. Stevenson, who made the analysis of the body of Matilda Clover on
May 6, 1892, stated in his evidence that he found strychnine in the
stomach, liver, and brain, and that quantitatively he obtained
one-sixteenth of a grain of strychnine from two pounds of animal matter.
He also examined the organs from the bodies of Alice Marsh and Emma
Shrivell. He found 6·39 grains of strychnine in the stomach and its
contents of Alice Marsh, and 1·6 grain of strychnine in the stomach and
its contents, also 1·46 grain in the vomit, and 0·2 grain in a small
portion of the liver of Emma Shrivell.
The jury, after deliberating for ten minutes, returned a verdict of
guilty, and Thomas Neill, or Neill Cream, as he was otherwise known, was
sentenced to death. He was executed on November 15, 1892.
CHAPTER XI
SOME POISON MYSTERIES IN FRANCE
For centuries past poison has played a prominent part in love intrigues
which form so common a feature in French life. Such crimes are generally
incited by jealousy or the desire to remove some obstacle that obstructs
the path of the ardent lover. A typical case of this character and one
which caused a great sensation at the time, occurred at Bordeaux in
1906, when Madame Canaby was tried for attempting to poison her husband.
Monsieur and Madame Canaby were people of good position and well known
in Bordeaux society. The arrest of the lady, therefore, caused
considerable interest. The story is somewhat remarkable. Early in 1906
Monsieur Canaby was taken ill with influenza, and on the 27th of that
month his cook called at a pharmacy in the city with a prescription
which contained a large quantity of aconite and digitalin, two very
powerful poisons. The prescription was signed by a “Dr. Gaube.” The
pharmacist, who happened to be the uncle of Madame Canaby, knew that his
niece and her husband were friendly with Dr. Gaube, who lived some
distance away from Bordeaux. His natural surprise at the large quantity
of the powerful poisons ordered was somewhat allayed by a note which
accompanied the prescription, stating that Dr. Gaube required the
poisons for experimental purposes. M. Fouries, the pharmacist, then
wrote a note to his niece, whom he had not seen for three years,
explaining that although he had dispensed this prescription he could not
in future deliver such dangerous drugs by a messenger. He further
cautioned the servant, saying, “Be careful; there is enough there to
poison thirty men!”
On May 1 M. Erny, the pharmacist who usually dispensed for Madame
Canaby, received a prescription for one gramme of digitalin, signed by
Dr. Gaube, also accompanied by a note similar to that presented to M.
Fouries. This was followed by another prescription on May 4 for one
gramme of aconitine and five centigrams of digitalin. Five days
afterwards a third prescription was presented for one gramme of
potassium cyanide and one gramme of digitalin, both of which are
extremely virulent poisons. The pharmacist’s suspicions now being
aroused, he refused to dispense the last prescription, and on May 11 he
called on Dr. Guérin, whom he knew to be attending M. Canaby, and showed
him the prescription. The following day Dr. Guérin called in four
physicians, and after a consultation it was decided to remove M. Canaby
to a private hospital under the charge of Dr. Villar. Here, carefully
watched, M. Canaby gradually made some progress toward recovery.
Meanwhile, the doctors submitted the prescriptions to Dr. Gaube, who at
once pronounced them forgeries and lodged a complaint with the Procureur
of the Republic. A police inquiry followed, and a search was made in the
Canabys’ house, which resulted in the discovery of a large number of
empty bottles which had formerly contained Fowler’s Solution of Arsenic.
An analysis being made of the hair of M. Canaby, it revealed the
presence of arsenic to the extent of forty milligrams per kilo, and in
hair from his beard twenty-six milligrams.
The arrest of Madame Canaby quickly followed, and she was committed for
trial on the charge of attempting to poison her husband. The motive for
the cause was assigned to an intimacy Madame had formed with a Monsieur
Rabot, a friend of the family.
At the trial M. Canaby, still weak and ill, was brought to the Court and
strongly affirmed his wife’s innocence. He stated his belief that a
discharged servant had by means of anonymous letters instigated the
prosecution. He ascribed the presence of arsenic in his beard to patent
medicines which he had been in the habit of taking in large doses. M.
Rabot, whose intimacy with Madame Canaby had given rise to some scandal,
denied that any improper relations existed between him and the lady. The
onus of proving the case then rested with the medical men who had been
in attendance on M. Canaby. Beyond a few explanations, however, they
declined to say anything, stating that they could not say more without
betraying the secrets of their patients, which professional usage
forbade.
The President of the Court informed Dr. Villar, the chief medical
witness, that his refusal to speak would probably tell against the
prisoner.
“I will ask her to release you from your pledge,” continued the
President.
“I want the truth to be told; I don’t want anyone to keep silence on my
account,” broke in Madame Canaby.
“So now you can speak,” remarked the President.
“Not at all,” replied the doctor. “No one can release us from our pledge
of secrecy, and certainly not Madame Canaby, who was not our patient.”
“But every good citizen under pain of punishment is bound to disclose
any criminal act that is known to have been committed by another,” said
the President sharply.
“On the contrary,” replied the witness, “the law punishes those who
violate professional secrecy and did so recently in Paris. Even if we
know an accused person guilty, we would refuse to speak.”
For the defence, evidence was adduced that M. Canaby was in the habit of
taking a certain patent medicine that contained arsenic. Of the three
experts who were called to give an opinion on the writing of the
prescriptions, one declared the writing resembled that of M. Rabot,
while the others averred that it was unquestionably that of Madame
Canaby, who had attempted to disguise her hand.
Madame herself declared that the poisons when received had been handed
to her by a fair young man, who came presumably from Dr. Gaube, but as
to his identity she could trace nothing.
In the end, Madame Canaby was acquitted on the charge of attempting to
poison her husband, but was found guilty of forging medical
prescriptions, by which poison was fraudulently obtained by her. For
this she was sentenced to fifteen months’ imprisonment and a fine of a
hundred francs.
Another strange case, the motive for which can only be assigned to a
disordered brain, happened in Varennes, a village near Saint
Amand-Montroud. In April, 1905, a well-to-do farmer named Gilbert died
suddenly, and six months afterwards his wife expired in a similar
manner. In September of the following year, another farmer in the same
district, called Renaud, died very suddenly, and within a month his wife
succumbed to a mysterious illness. In the meantime, one of their farm
labourers also died from an unexplained cause, and a young man, who was
steward of a neighbouring château, together with his little daughter,
was likewise fatally attacked. No suspicions of foul play were
apparently aroused until a considerable time afterwards, when Madame
Pallot, a villager, found a small cheese on her window-sill, which she
took to be a present from a neighbour. She ate some of it with her
lunch, and in less than three hours she was dead.
The origin of the cheese, which on analysis proved to be strongly
impregnated with arsenic, was traced to a young married woman named
Jeanne Gilbert, the daughter of the farmer Renaud and the
daughter-in-law of M. and Mme Gilbert, all of whom had died in a similar
manner. She was arrested and charged with the murder of Madame Pallot.
M. Bouillot, a pharmacist of Saint Amand, was able to prove from his
poison register that Jeanne Gilbert had bought arsenic by the half pound
from him, stating that she required it for poisoning rats on the farm,
and she might have had two pounds of the poison in her possession at one
time. Jeanne at first stoutly denied that she had purchased the arsenic,
and declared she did not even know the pharmacist. Even when confronted
with the _juge d’instruction_ she continued her denials, but the
pharmacist had been careful to make her sign his register on the
occasion of each purchase. The judge required her to sign her name, with
the result that the identity of the writing was at once established.
When compared, the dates of sales and the deaths of the woman’s
relatives practically corresponded. She subsequently admitted the
purchases of the arsenic, but adhered to her original assertion that she
used it for destroying rats. Altogether, it is suspected that Jeanne
Gilbert poisoned no fewer than eleven persons.
The most extraordinary feature of the case was that she appeared to have
no possible motive for committing these terrible crimes, as she was
comfortably settled in life. Her parents were in good circumstances, and
she could expect no advantages to accrue from their deaths, or that of
her future mother-in-law and the other persons she is believed to have
poisoned. The only explanation offered is the statement of her husband
that her mind may have been affected by an illness after which he had
noticed that she sometimes acted strangely.
A more recent case which excited great interest throughout France was
that of Henri Girard, who died in prison while awaiting trial. About
1909 this individual, who passed as an insurance agent, was living at
Montreuil-sous-Bois. Well educated, of good appearance, and apparently a
cultured man with a leaning towards music, literature and science, he
soon became popular among a wide circle in the district in which he
lived and also in Paris. Among his acquaintances was a wealthy man named
Pernotte, who after some persuasion consented to have his life insured
in two different companies for a total sum of £8,400, which was to be
payable to Girard in case of Pernotte’s death.
A short time afterwards all the members of Pernotte’s family were
stricken with typhoid fever, but in the course of time they recovered
and went away for a holiday. On their return, however, as M. Pernotte
was still feeling weak, his friend Girard, who claimed to have some
medical knowledge and was interested in science, gave him a hypodermic
injection which he said would speedily put him on his feet again.
Pernotte died soon afterwards, and the physicians who examined the body
declared that death resulted from poisoning.
Girard, it was afterwards discovered, made an entry in his diary at this
time as follows: “Poisons; prepare bottle, tubes, rubber gloves; buy
microbe books.”
Police inquiries were set on foot and disclosed the fact that Girard at
this time was studying bacteriology, and had actually bought cultures of
typhoid bacilli, and a selection of toxic organisms and poisons were
found at his house.
Meanwhile Girard calmly took possession of the £8,400 for which he had
insured the life of M. Pernotte.
He appears to have been a man possessed of the most extraordinary power
of attraction for both men and women; his manners are said to have been
charming, and the courtly tone of his conversation gave him the name
among his acquaintance of “Gentleman Girard.”
Once his intimate friends came within the sphere of his magnetic
personality they seem to have surrendered their wills entirely to his.
In 1913 he became very friendly with a M. Godel, and the latter agreed,
at the suggestion of Girard, to take out a joint life insurance for
£8,000. In case of the death of one, the money was to go to the
survivor. M. Godel after lunching one day with Girard was taken ill with
typhoid fever; he eventually recovered, but becoming suspicious, he
refused to see Girard again, to which decision he no doubt owed his
life.
Girard was mobilized during the war and served in the automobile service
in Paris where he made the acquaintance of a soldier called Delmas.
Delmas became very friendly with Girard, and, after having signed bills
in favour of the insurance agent, also took ill and developed typhoid
fever. He was sent, however, to a military hospital and recovered.
It is stated that Girard was experimenting with microorganisms and had
bought quantities of typhoid cultures from wholesale druggists. At this
time, too, he fitted up a bacteriological laboratory in the house of a
woman with whom he lived at Neuilly.
Finding that his efforts in using pathogenic organisms had proved so
uncertain in effects, he next turned his attention to the study of
poisonous fungi, and used the resulting poison on his next victim, a M.
Duroux, a post office employee, whose life, as in the previous cases, he
had insured for a large sum without the latter’s knowledge.
Having invited him to dine at his house, it was said that he took the
opportunity of placing the poison in his food. The servants, it is
alleged, were told not to wash up, and they say that Girard and one of
his mistresses washed the plates and knives and forks in a bath full of
antiseptic solution. Duroux, however, was none the worse. Girard’s
notebook at this time shows the following entry: “Mimiche
Dinner—mushrooms,” opposite the dates May 10 and 11, 1917. The dinner
took place on May 14. In December of the same year Duroux twice went to
a café with Girard and each time was taken violently ill afterwards.
The next victim was a Madame Monin, a widow, with whom Girard became
very intimate. Having taken out four insurance policies on her life, he
then decided to poison her. He persuaded her to come to the house of his
future wife, a Mlle Drouhin, to see some hats, and while Mme Monin was
so engaged, Girard offered her some refreshment and wine was brought
into the room. The hat having been selected, the lady partook of a glass
of wine handed to her by Girard, which is said to have contained a
poison he had prepared from fungi specially for this purpose.
It acted very rapidly, as the unfortunate lady was taken ill in the
street almost directly afterwards, and after being taken by two
policemen to her home, she died three hours later. A post-mortem
examination revealed the fact that she died from mushroom poisoning.
Girard, however, was bold enough to make a claim on the insurance
policies, but owing to the refusal of one of the companies to pay £400,
the amount of one policy which he had taken out with them on the life of
Mme Monin, he was arrested.
It was then discovered that two other insurance companies had already
handed over to Girard or his accomplices over £800 without inquiries.
Girard, as agent, having secured the business in each case, had
according to custom been paid the first premium as his commission.
After his arrest, on his house being searched, in his laboratory, which
was completely equipped, were found a considerable number of poisons and
a number of glass jars containing typhoid cultures and other organisms.
Inquiries revealed other mysterious cases on which Girard had operated
back to 1913, and brought to light another, of a man whom he had invited
to dinner and who had died after drinking an apéritif which had been
offered to him by Girard.
The preliminary legal investigation into this remarkable series of
crimes lasted nearly three years, and in the end Girard was sent before
the Chamber of Criminal Indictment, but before the trial took place at
the Paris Assizes death had cheated the guillotine. Girard died in
prison after he had made, it is said, a full confession of his crimes.
CHAPTER XII
THE HORSFORD CASE
Towards the close of the year 1897, a widow, called Mrs. Holmes, was
living with her three children at Stonely, near Kimbolton. She had a
cousin named Walter Horsford, a well-to-do young farmer who occupied a
farm at Spaldwick, about twelve miles away, and who frequently came to
Stonely to visit her.
A romantic attachment eventually sprang up between them, which resulted
in a too intimate acquaintance.
After a while Horsford’s affection began to wane, and in the end he
married another lady. Shortly afterwards Mrs. Holmes left Stonely and
took up her residence at St. Neots.
About December of the same year she wrote a letter to Horsford,
informing him of her condition, a piece of news which appears to have
greatly upset him, as he was in fear the information might reach his
wife.
On December 28 he called at a chemist’s shop in Thrapstone, a
neighbouring town, and asked for a shilling’s worth of strychnine, some
prussic acid, arsenic, and carbolic acid, which he stated he required
for poisoning rats. The chemist, to whom he was a stranger, requested
him to bring a witness, which he did, and the chemist’s poison register
was duly signed by Horsford and a man who introduced him. He took the
poisons, which consisted of ninety grains of strychnine, one pound of
arsenic, and some prussic acid and carbolic acid, away with him.
About a week afterwards Mrs. Holmes received a letter from Horsford. It
was taken in by her daughter, who recognized his handwriting, and the
envelope is also supposed to have contained two packets of strychnine.
On the evening of January 7, 1898, Mrs. Holmes retired to bed,
apparently in her usual health, about half-past nine. The only other
persons in the house were her daughter Annie, her son Percy, and her
infant. The daughter noticed that her mother took a glass of water
upstairs with her, which was an unusual circumstance. On going to her
mother’s bedroom shortly afterwards, she found her suffering great pain,
and she saw the glass, now almost empty, standing on a chest of drawers.
Percy Holmes ran out and called in the assistance of some neighbours,
and then went for a doctor. When medical aid arrived, the unfortunate
woman was in convulsions and died shortly afterwards.
The day after her death the police searched the house, but failed to
find any trace of poison, and an inquest was held on January 8, which
Horsford was summoned to attend.
In his evidence before the coroner, he swore that he had neither written
to nor seen the deceased woman. The medical evidence proved that death
was caused by strychnine.
The inquest was adjourned for a week, and in the meanwhile Mrs. Holmes
was buried. From information received by the police, a further search
was made in the house, with the result that two packets were discovered
under the feather bed in Mrs. Holmes’s bedroom. One packet of
buff-coloured paper was found to contain about thirty-three grains of
strychnine in powder, on which was written the words, “One dose. Take as
told,” in Horsford’s handwriting. On the second packet, the contents of
which had been used, was written, “Take in a little water. ’Tis quite
harmless. Will come in a day or two.” This was also in Horsford’s
writing. A letter was also found downstairs, presumably from Horsford,
saying he would come over on Friday to make arrangements, and that he
did not wish to write any more letters, as he did not want his wife to
know.
On January 10 Walter Horsford was arrested on the charge of perjury
committed at the inquest, and it was resolved to have another
examination made of the body of the deceased woman. On examination of
further documents and letters discovered by the police, the charge of
wilful murder was added to corrupt perjury against Horsford, and he was
committed for trial.
The trial began on June 2, 1898, at Huntingdon, before Mr. Justice
Hawkins, and lasted five days.
Evidence was given by Dr. Stevenson, scientific analyst to the Home
Office, who stated that he had received and analysed the contents of the
stomach of the deceased woman. He extracted 1·31 grains of strychnine,
which was a dose fatal to an adult. He detected no other poison. The
buff-coloured paper marked “One dose. Take as told,” contained 33¾
grains of strychnine, and the other paper which presented the appearance
of having had the powder shaken out, had a few minute crystals of
strychnine adhering. In each case it was the pure alkaloid.
On January 26 he made an examination of the exhumed body of Mrs. Holmes.
The fingers and lower limbs were rigid. This was an unusual condition
nineteen days after death. He had observed one case like it before, and
that was the case of Matilda Clover, who was poisoned by Neill Cream. He
removed the brain, spinal cord, heart, lungs, spleen and both kidneys
and found strychnine in all the organs analysed. There was no appearance
of disease in the vital organs. There could not have been less than 7
grains taken, more likely 10 or 12 grains. 1·31 grain would be an
absolutely fatal dose for an average adult. In cases of strychnine
poisoning, death occurs about half an hour after the beginning of the
symptoms, and they come on about twenty minutes after the poison has
been taken. Six hours is the extreme limit. The mind of a person
suffering from strychnine poisoning would be very apprehensive of death.
Death was caused in one of two ways—suffocation, by the muscles of the
chest becoming fixed, or after a spasm of exhaustion. He could imagine
no more terrible death.
He had examined some Dover’s Powder found in the workbox of Mrs. Holmes,
but found no trace of strychnine.
He further stated that if strychnine were poured off a paper he would
expect to find a few crystals adhering to the surface of the paper. If a
person took strychnine in water the greater part would go down to the
bottom of the glass as sediment. What was drunk would be the portion
floating on the top.
Mr. Anderson, the medical practitioner called in to attend Mrs. Holmes,
described her condition when he saw her. His opinion was that she was
suffering from tetanus caused by strychnine poisoning. The convulsions
were of a tetanic character and the spasms succeeded each other in rapid
succession.
A specialist in handwriting was then called, who said that having
compared the letter from Horsford in which he spoke about the
“arrangements” with the two papers marked “Take in a little water. ’Tis
quite harmless” and “One dose, take as told,” he came to the conclusion
they were in the same handwriting, and in his opinion the handwriting
was natural and there had been no attempts to disguise it.
Mr. Wild, for the defence, said there was no proof that the prisoner
administered the poison and there was no motive for the crime. What
evidence was there that the prisoner ever sent poison to the deceased?
Everything in the case, he contended, depended upon the handwriting, and
he urged that some of the handwriting produced as that of the prisoner
was utterly unreliable.
The judge, in summing up, told the jury that if anyone wilfully caused
another to take a deadly poison, whether intending to kill or not, and
death resulted thereby, it was murder.
The question of handwriting was of vital importance, and it had not been
shown that there was any single other soul in the neighbourhood who was
interested in the deceased woman’s death, or who wrote in a hand like
that of the prisoner. He enjoined them to remember these things and to
deal with the case according to the evidence, and return the verdict
which the evidence compelled them.
The jury returned at 1.20 p.m., after deliberating for twenty minutes,
with a verdict of “Guilty,” and sentence of death was passed.
Horsford was hanged at Cambridge Gaol on June 28, 1898, and before he
died made a full confession of his crime.
CHAPTER XIII
AMERICAN POISON MYSTERIES
One of the most carefully planned murders by means of poison in modern
times was investigated at the trial of Roland B. Molineux, who was
charged with causing the death of Mrs. Catherine J. Adams in New York in
1899.
On November 10, 1898, Mr. Henry C. Barnett, a produce broker, who was a
member of the Knickerbocker Athletic Club, one of the most prominent
social organizations in New York, received by post at the club a sample
box of Kutnow’s Powder. He was in the habit of taking this and similar
preparations for simple ailments, and soon after receiving the box he
took a dose of its contents. He became ill immediately afterwards, and
was thought to be suffering from diphtheria. That he had a slight attack
of this disease there is little doubt, as the fact was proved from a
bacteriological examination made by his medical attendant. He left his
bed earlier than the doctor advised, and died presumably of heart
failure.
The contents of the box, however, were examined, which led to the
discovery that the powder had been tampered with and mixed with cyanide
of mercury, and although Mr. Barnett had died from natural causes, it
seemed clear that an attempt had been made to poison him by some one who
knew he was in the habit of taking this powder. The investigation,
however, does not appear to have been carried further.
The next chapter in the story occurred in connection with a Mr. Harry
Cornish, who occupied the position of physical director to the
Knickerbocker Athletic Club.
A day or two before Christmas in the same year, a packet directed to him
was delivered by post at his address. It contained a box in which, on
opening, he found at one end a silver article for holding matches and
toothpicks; at the other end was a bottle labelled “Emerson’s
Bromo-seltzer,” and between the two was packed some soft tissue paper.
Mr. Cornish was at first under the impression that some one had sent him
the packet as a present. After removing the articles from the box, he
threw it and the wrapper into his wastepaper basket, but on second
thoughts he cut the address from the wrapper and kept it.
The bottle, labelled “Bromo-seltzer,” which is a saline preparation well
known in America, was sealed over the top and bore the usual revenue
stamp. After tearing off the outside wrapper, Mr. Cornish placed the
bottle and the silver holder on his desk.
On the following Sunday he remarked to his aunt, Mrs. Catherine Adams,
that he had received a present. Mrs. Adams and her daughter, Mrs.
Rogers, joked him about it, saying he must have some admirer, and was
afraid to bring his present home, as the sender’s name was probably on
it. On Tuesday night Mr. Cornish took the bottle and the silver holder
home with him, and presented them to Mrs. Rogers, saying they were no
use to him and she might have them.
The next morning Mrs. Adams complained of a headache, and her daughter
suggested a dose of the Bromo-seltzer. Mr. Cornish was present, and
mixed a teaspoonful of the preparation from the bottle with a glass of
water, and gave it to his aunt. After drinking it she at once exclaimed,
“My, how bitter that is!”
“Why, that’s all right!” said Mr. Cornish, as he took a drink from the
glass.
A few moments afterwards Mrs. Adams collapsed, and died within a short
time. Mr. Cornish was seized with violent vomiting, which doubtless
saved his life, and he recovered.
A post-mortem examination revealed the fact that Mrs. Adams had died
from cyanide poisoning, and on the bottle of Bromo-seltzer being
analysed the contents were found to have been mixed with cyanide of
mercury.
For a long time the affair seemed a complete mystery, and the police
investigations appeared likely to be fruitless. Then the particulars of
the death of Mr. Barnett, who was Chairman of the House Committee of the
Knickerbocker Club, were brought to light; and connecting them with the
fact that Mr. Cornish was also a prominent member of the club, and had
received the bottle of Bromo-seltzer by post in the same manner, it
seemed highly probable that both the poisoned packets which contained
cyanide of mercury had been sent by the same person.
Further examination proved that the bottle used was not a genuine
Bromo-seltzer one, and that the label had been removed from a genuine
bottle and carefully pasted on that sent to Mr. Cornish.
A firm of druggists in Cincinnati then came forward and stated that, as
far back as May 31, 1898, they had received a written application signed
“H. C. Barnett” for a sample box of pills, and another similar
application on December 21, 1898, which was signed “H. Cornish.”
Both these applications were found to be in the same handwriting, which
was also strikingly similar to the address on the packet sent to Mr.
Cornish, which he had fortunately kept. The address given by the
applicant who called himself “H. C. Barnett,” was 257, West Forty-second
Street, New York, a place where private letter-boxes are rented for
callers. The address given by the applicant signing himself “H.
Cornish,” was a similar place at 1,620, Broadway, in the same city. From
these facts it seemed evident that an attempt had been made to poison
both Barnett and Cornish by some one who knew them, and the poisoner had
concealed his identity by employing the names of his intended victims.
The nature of the poison used, cyanide of mercury, was also a slight
clue, as it is a substance which is not used in medicine and must in all
probability have been specially prepared for the purpose by some one
with a knowledge of chemistry.
At the coroner’s inquest, which began on February 9, 1899, certain facts
were elicited that tended to bring suspicion on Roland B. Molineux, who
was also a member of the Knickerbocker Club and well acquainted with
Barnett and Cornish. He was also known to have quarrelled with the
latter. At the close of the inquest Molineux was arrested and removed to
the Tombs prison.
Owing to legal technicalities in the original indictment, which charged
him with the murder of both Mr. Barnett and Mrs. Adams, he was twice
liberated, and then for the third time arrested.
The trial of Molineux for the murder of Mrs. Adams was a memorable one,
and lasted nearly three months. It began on November 14, 1899, at the
Central Criminal Court, New York, and was not concluded till February
11, 1900.
The evidence was entirely circumstantial. Most of the experts in
handwriting who were examined declared that the address on the packet
sent to Mr. Cornish was in Molineux’s handwriting, and that he had also
written both applications to the druggists in Cincinnati. Further,
Molineux was engaged as a chemist to a colour factory in which cyanide
of mercury was used, which would enable him either to make or procure
that special poison, from which only three other fatal cases had been
recorded.
No witnesses were called for the defence, and the jury found Roland B.
Molineux guilty of “murder in the first degree,” which, according to
American law, is murder with premeditation.
In January, 1911, a mysterious case that for some time baffled the
united exertions of the police occurred in Cumberland, Maryland, U.S.A.
On Christmas Eve of 1910, the night before their wedding, a Mr. Trigg
and Miss Grace Loeser, who were well known in Maryland, were found
sitting together in an upright position on a sofa in the drawing-room of
Miss Loeser’s home, both apparently dead. An hour before they were thus
discovered, Mrs. Loeser had seen them sitting exactly in the same
position, full of life and animation and talking over the arrangements
for their wedding on the following day.
Returning an hour later, she found them still both sitting in the same
position but lifeless. Nothing was found in the room to indicate the
cause of death.
Before the ghastly discovery Mrs. Loeser had heard them laughing and
talking in the drawing-room; then she heard the telephone bell ring, and
heard her daughter go to it and speak to a friend at the other end of
the wire about the final arrangements for the wedding.
A doctor who was immediately summoned and examined the bodies, noticed
that the lips of both the man and the woman were burned, and in the
mouth of the man was found a piece of chewing-gum, which he believed
might contain poison. According to the doctor, Mr. Trigg had apparently
taken poison and then kissed his fiancée and poisoned her in doing so.
A post-mortem examination was held and revealed traces of potassium
cyanide in the organs of both young people, but how the poison came to
be swallowed there was nothing to indicate, beyond the fact that the
tongues of both were burned and there was a larger quantity of the
poison found in the stomach of Trigg.
The chewing-gum habit is very common in America and a package of it with
one stick missing and the wrapper on the floor, was found in Mr.
Loeser’s bedroom. The questions that arose were: was the chewing-gum the
cause of death, and had they divided the one stick missing from the
packet between them, and if the gum was poisoned why had they thus
decided to take their lives?
Mrs. Loeser protested against the theory of suicide as being beyond all
reason, as both young people were absolutely devoted to one another and
had never even quarrelled.
A younger sister of Miss Loeser’s, to whom Mr. Trigg is said to have
first paid attentions before he became engaged to Grace Loeser, in
giving evidence said that she also had symptoms of cyanide poisoning.
She was upstairs when Trigg came to the house that afternoon, and the
first she knew of the tragedy was her mother screaming. She swore that
she had no poison in her possession, and had never heard of hydrocyanic
acid before her sister’s death.
Mrs. Loeser when brought to the court to give evidence, was practically
in a state of collapse, but she swore that no poison of any kind was
kept in the house and that both her daughters were on friendly terms.
Dr. Foard, the medical man first called in, described how he found the
young couple sitting upright together on the sofa; the woman was
breathing stertorously, with her teeth clenched and the pupils of her
eyes dilated. A slight froth issued from her lips, all of which, said
the doctor, were symptomatic of hydrocyanic acid or cyanide poisoning.
Dr. Broadrup, another medical practitioner, corroborated Dr. Foard’s
statements. When he visited the house he was called upstairs to see Miss
May Loeser, who was in her room, and when he got there he found the
bedroom was full of a strong odour of gas.
The evidence went to prove that Trigg at the last moment did not wish to
carry out the marriage with Miss Loeser, and it was suggested that he
may have poisoned her with the chewing-gum, only swallowing a small
portion himself in the belief that he would easily have survived the
effects.
At the coroner’s inquiry, it was stated that cyanide of potassium was
found in the chewing-gum, and the jury returned a verdict that both
persons had died of cyanide poisoning “administered in an unknown
manner.”
Another mysterious case which aroused great interest in America,
concerned the death of a millionaire pork-packer, and the arrest of his
wife, on the charge of attempting to murder her husband.
This lady is said to have begun life as a country waif; at the age of
twenty she became a waitress and married the man whom she was accused of
attempting to murder. It appears that the marriage was bitterly opposed
by the husband’s family on account of her social position, which placed
a stumbling-block between them and the position they aspired to attain,
and since the marriage her brother-in-law was said to have been her
greatest enemy.
It was alleged, that the wife not only made her husband ill by giving
him small doses of poison by placing it in his medicine, but also in the
water that she gave him to drink during the night in his sick-room.
The chief witness against the accused was the nurse who attended her
husband during his illness. She said that despite the wife’s lowly
origin she was greatly beset by social ambitions. She wished to shine in
the best Virginia society, and her husband stood in the way. She had
always showed considerable animus against her husband’s family, and told
the nurse that when he died, she was to search his pockets and get the
keys, especially those of his despatch box, as she did not want the
family to get them.
The nurse said the accused consulted two fortune-tellers, and informed
her, that both of them told her that her husband could not live until
Christmas. She showed little attention to him while he was ill, and he
had complained to her that the water given to him to drink had an
unusual taste; he said it made him sick, and when she drank a glass of
the water in the room, to see if it was all right, she too became ill.
Suspicions being aroused, the sick man was removed to a hospital, which
his wife declared was a plan of the family to get her husband out of her
influence.
According to the prosecution, the wife’s motive for getting rid of her
husband was her admiration for a shop-assistant in the town in which
they resided, and this man was called as a witness for the prosecution.
From his account the lady must have conceived an extraordinary
infatuation for him, loading him with presents such as fur-lined coats,
silver cigar boxes, embroidered vests, dressing-gowns and other things
of considerable value.
It transpired later that, owing to the suspicions of the family, they
arranged for a female detective to be employed in the house as a nurse.
This person was instructed to win the confidence of the wife and
endeavour to find out what was wrong.
At the trial she declared, that while in the house the accused had
offered her a thousand pounds to give her husband a poisoned pill. She
also stated that the accused frequently cried and made no secret that
she wished “that man would die,” and declared again and again, every
time she received news from the bedside that he was worse, that she was
the happiest of women and prayed night and morning that she should be
awakened in the morning by a telephone call announcing that her husband
was dead.
She once asked her, “How much would you take to do it?” “I told her,”
continued the detective, “that I was a poor woman, but said I would do
it for a thousand pounds if she prepared the poison.” She replied, “I
haven’t a thousand pounds, but I could get the poison, and if you will
give it to him I will give you two hundred pounds in cash, and when he
is dead and the estate comes to me I will give you the other eight
hundred.”
The detective said she agreed to this but insisted on a promise in
writing, so that she could demand the eight hundred pounds afterwards.
The accused said she would be afraid to give anything in writing, for it
might fall into the hands of her brother-in-law and would certainly
delight him, but she afterwards promised to do so and said, “I will get
the poison and I will meet you outside the hospital at eleven o’clock
to-morrow morning and bring it with me. You are on night watch and you
can put it in his medicine when he is half asleep; or if you don’t want
to do that, just leave his medicine by the bedside and tell him when the
time comes to take it. He will take the poison himself.” She asked her
to let her know the instant her husband died, so that she could get
possession of her husband’s body.
A doctor who was called, stated that the accused had bought an ounce of
sugar of lead from him, and afterwards came to him for a solution of
arsenic, which he refused.
For the defence, counsel asserted that the husband had suffered from
severe pains for some months and called in his medical man, who said
that his condition was consistent with ptomaine poisoning.
After a trial lasting more than a fortnight the jury considered for over
twenty-four hours, but were unable to agree; they were then discharged,
and the case collapsed.
CHAPTER XIV
THE SOUTHWARK POISON MYSTERY
In the last week of July, 1902, a girl named Maude Marsh, about twenty
years of age, was admitted as a patient into Guy’s Hospital suffering
from internal inflammation and vomiting. She was placed under treatment,
and in a few weeks’ time her condition so improved that she was
discharged from the institution. She was employed as a barmaid at The
Crown, a licensed house in the Borough High Street. There she passed as
the wife of the proprietor, with whom she lived. About a month after her
return to The Crown she was again seized with a similar illness, and was
attended by a local medical practitioner and also seen by a medical man
from Croydon who had visited her at her father’s request. The former was
told by the sick girl that the doctor at Guy’s Hospital thought she was
suffering from peritonitis, but after visiting her several times he came
to the conclusion she was suffering from inflammation of the stomach and
bowels. On calling to see his patient on the afternoon of October 22,
the doctor was told she had died two or three hours earlier. He refused
to give a certificate and insisted on a post-mortem examination. The
examination failed to reveal the cause of death, and the doctor removed
certain internal organs and submitted them for analysis. In consequence
of the report he received, he then communicated with the police.
On October 25 South London was gaily decorated in honour of the State
procession of the King and Queen, and the streets were thronged with
people. Shortly before the royal procession was due to pass through the
Borough High Street, two detectives entered The Crown public-house,
which was festooned with flags, and passed into the bar. A notice on the
wall announced seats to let to view the pageant, and the windows were
already filled with sightseers, who took no notice of the two men who
had entered so quietly.
Behind the bar was the landlord, a small, dark-complexioned man with
prominent cheek-bones and sallow skin.
“Are you George Chapman?” asked one of the detectives.
“Yes,” was the reply.
“I am an inspector of police and wish to speak to you quietly.”
Chapman motioned the detectives towards the billiard-room at the rear
and the three men entered together.
“Maude Marsh, who has been living with you as your wife, has been
poisoned with arsenic,” said Detective-Inspector Godley at once.
“I know nothing about it; I do not know how she got the poison. She has
been in Guy’s Hospital for the same sort of sickness,” replied Chapman.
Chapman was asked to accompany the inspector to the police station,
where he was detained pending inquiries, and at 10.15 that night he was
formally charged with the wilful murder of Maude Marsh.
When the accused man quietly took his place in the dock at the police
court the following morning, no one could imagine that the curtain was
about to be withdrawn from a series of murders which for sheer
heartlessness are almost unprecedented in the annals of crime.
The only witness was Inspector Godley, who gave but sufficient evidence
to obtain a remand pending the inquest. He stated that from inquiries he
had made, he had found that Chapman was the only person who had fed the
girl, and that he would not allow anyone else to give her food or to go
into the kitchen when it was being prepared. He found five books, all
dealing with medicine, in the possession of the accused, and also some
white powders which had not yet been analysed. Arsenic, however, had
been discovered in a portion of the viscera which had been removed from
the body of Maude Marsh at the time of the post-mortem. The doctor who
had attended Chapman’s former wife during her fatal illness had been
called in to attend Maude Marsh, and he had noticed that both women had
displayed the same symptoms. Chapman was then remanded.
Meanwhile, a further examination of the body was made by Dr. Stevenson,
the official analyst to the Home Office, the result of which was given
at his next appearance before the magistrate. He stated that he found no
evidence of natural disease to account for death.
“Was arsenic suggested to you as the cause of death?” asked the
solicitor who prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury.
“Yes, but I suggested to the other doctors present I did not think
arsenic had been the cause,” replied Dr. Stevenson. “I attributed it to
another metallic poison, antimony, which I found in the stomach and its
contents, the liver, the spleen, the kidneys, the brain and elsewhere in
the following quantities:—
_Metallic Antimony_
In the stomach 0·23 grains.
„ „ abdomen 5·99 „
„ „ liver 0·71 „
„ „ kidneys 0·14 „
„ „ brain 0·17 „
————
Total 7·24 grains.
_Tartar Emetic._
In the stomach 0·64 grains.
„ „ abdomen 16·64 „
„ „ liver 1·98 „
„ „ kidneys 0·39 „
„ „ brain 0·47 „
—————
Total 20·12 grains.
“In every organ and tissue that I examined I found some antimony,” added
Dr. Stevenson.
He further stated that two grains of antimony had been known to produce
fatal results in a very weak person, but in the case of an ordinary
person, fifteen grains would kill. In the case of repeated doses three
grains taken at a time might be expected to result in death. From the
position of some of the antimony he thought a dose was taken within a
few hours of death. Dr. Stevenson said he received from the police over
thirty articles, including pills and ordinary medicines, and analysed
them, but found neither arsenic nor antimony in any but one. This bottle
was apparently empty when he received it, but he found there were a few
drops of a liquid in it and looking into it he saw a little bit of white
powder sticking to the side. He rinsed the bottle out with water and
then analysed it and found the water contained both bismuth and
antimony.
At this stage the case was adjourned; meanwhile the coroner’s inquest on
the body of Maude Marsh was concluded, which resulted in a verdict of
wilful murder against Chapman.
When he was brought before the magistrate for the tenth time on December
31, 1902, the Counsel for the Treasury had the sensational announcement
to make that Chapman had since his last appearance been further charged
with the murder of two other women, viz. Mary Isabella Spink (or
Chapman) on Christmas Day, 1897, and Bessie Taylor (or Chapman) on
February 13, 1901.
These two women, said the counsel, had lived with him for some time
prior to their deaths. It had also been discovered that the prisoner’s
real name was Severino Klosowski, and that he had assumed the name of
George Chapman since coming to live in England. He was a Polish Jew and
had studied medicine and surgery in Warsaw.
The story of Klosowski’s life is an extraordinary one. He was born in
1865 and educated at a military school in Poland. Afterwards he became a
male nurse in a hospital at Warsaw and learned something of medicine. In
1888 he emigrated to England and obtained work in a small barber’s shop
in Whitechapel Road, London. After he had been in London about twelve
months, he married a woman named Lucy Baderski, who was then living. At
one time they went to America, but she returned alone, and does not
appear to have lived with him again.
In 1895 he left Whitechapel and was next heard of in a barber’s shop at
Tottenham, where he was recognized by a hairdresser’s traveller who had
known him in Warsaw. He next started a small shop on his own account,
and at this time was living with a girl called Annie Chapman, whose name
he afterwards adopted. His business failing, he again took a situation
in Church Lane, Leytonstone, where he earned thirty shillings a week.
While living at Leytonstone in 1895 he became acquainted with a Mrs.
Spink, whose husband deserted her. Klosowski, or Chapman, as he now
called himself, became on intimate terms with Mrs. Spink, and after a
time he informed a Mr. Ward with whom he lodged that he and Mrs. Spink
were going to be married. One day in October, 1895, they went out, and
on their return stated that the wedding had taken place, and afterwards
lived together as husband and wife.
Mrs. Spink had about £560, which was vested in a trust deed, and while
she lived with Chapman some £250 had been advanced to her by the
trustee. In 1897 the balance was handed over to the couple and they left
London for Hastings, where Chapman purchased a barber’s business in
George Street.
About February, 1897, Chapman’s affection for his wife seemed to wane,
as he is said to have treated her cruelly, and she complained of his
treatment to people they knew. Then she became ill, suffering from
irritation of the stomach, which resulted in great weakness and
depression. In April of that year Chapman is known to have purchased an
ounce of tartar emetic (tartarated antimony) from a chemist in Hastings.
In August they left Hastings and took a beerhouse called The Prince of
Wales in Bartholomew Square, St. Luke’s, London. Mrs. Chapman, who had
been better for a time, again became ill with the same symptoms, and her
husband is said to have recommenced his ill-treatment of her. As she
grew worse, a Dr. Rogers was called in to see her. Here a Mrs. Doubleday
came upon the scene, and she noticed that Chapman frequently felt his
wife’s pulse, and was much occupied in consulting medical books. He
prepared her food and also her medicine, sending every one out of the
room while he did it. She suffered terrible pain with vomiting and
diarrhœa and finally died on Christmas Day, 1897. The doctor appears to
have had no suspicion of poison and gave a certificate that the cause of
death was phthisis.
After her death Chapman advertised for a barmaid and eventually engaged
a woman named Bessie Taylor in that capacity. She came from Cheshire and
had been in a situation as housekeeper at Peckham before coming to
Chapman at Easter in 1898. She told a friend she was going to be married
before going to live with Chapman at The Prince of Wales. In August,
1898, they left London and went to live at Bishop Stortford, where
Chapman took an inn called The Grapes. In March, 1899, the couple again
returned to London, Chapman first becoming tenant of The Monument, a
public-house in Union Street Borough, and afterwards removing to The
Crown in High Street. A Miss Painter, a friend of Bessie Taylor’s, who
called to see her at The Crown, noticed that Chapman treated her with
indifference and once even threatened her with a revolver. Calling to
see her on another occasion some time later, Miss Painter found she was
very ill and was troubled with persistent vomiting. Chapman attended to
her, cooking her food and feeling her pulse.
In January Dr. Stoker, a local practitioner, was called in to see the
sick woman, and he attended her until her death in February, 1901. The
doctor had no suspicion she had been poisoned and certified the cause of
death as intestinal obstruction, vomiting and exhaustion. The bodies of
both women were exhumed under an order from the Home Secretary, and an
analysis was made in each case by Dr. Stevenson.
The analysis of various organs removed from the body of Mary Isabella
Spink revealed the presence of antimony in all the viscera examined:—
In the stomach 0·08 grains
„ „ intestines 1·15 „
„ „ liver 2·42 „
„ „ kidneys 0·18 „
————
Total 3·83 grains of tartarated antimony
Dr. Stevenson remarked on the amazing preservation of the body after
being interred for five years. He found the head and features were so
well preserved that they were as little altered as though only buried a
day. This he attributed to the preservative properties of antimony,
which in sufficient quantity practically mummified the body. He could
find no case like this on record, and he regarded it as unique. There
was no indication of phthisis, the cause of death being gastro-enteritis
caused by the administration of antimony.
The analysis of the body of Bessie Taylor also revealed the presence of
antimony in the following quantities:—
In the stomach and its contents 0·32 grains
„ „ intestines „ „ 23·43 „
„ „ liver 4·55 „
„ „ kidneys 0·82 „
—————
Total 29·12 grains of tartarated antimony.
Taylor’s body was also in a remarkably good state of preservation after
being buried twenty-one months, and showed no appearance of recent
disease, but signs of acute non-ulcerative gastro-enteritis set up by
antimony were evident.
It was about eighteen months after Bessie Taylor’s death that Chapman
engaged Maude Marsh as a barmaid at The Monument public-house, and her
illness and death, the story of which closely resembles that of the
other women with whom Chapman had consorted, has been already related.
He was committed for trial on December 19, 1902, and was arraigned
before Mr. Justice Grantham at the Old Bailey on March 16, 1903.
For the defence the counsel for the prisoner urged the absence of motive
for the crimes, and although he admitted that antimony had been found in
the bodies of the three women, he asked if the methods of science were
absolutely conclusive? There was, he contended, room for mistake unless
such evidence was accompanied by corroborative evidence of the most
powerful kind. There was no proof that Chapman had antimony in his
possession since 1897, and his behaviour had been that of an innocent
man.
The Solicitor-General, Sir Edward Carson, in his reply, said that
although the prisoner was indicted only with regard to Maude Marsh’s
death, the cumulative evidence of the two earlier murders was perhaps
the most fatal testimony. One woman after another was betrayed and
abandoned, and all poisoned in the same way and with the same poison.
Each received the same “attention” on Klosowski’s part during their
fatal illnesses. As to motive, the history of the man was one of
unbridled, heartless, cruel lust. If a man were proved a murderer, one
need not look for motive, but if motive were wanted in this case, it was
easily to be found.
The judge, in summing up, said the case was unique from three points of
view, viz. legally, chemically and medically. Chemically, it was unique
by reason of the discovery which it enabled Dr. Stevenson to make of the
power of antimony to preserve the tissues of the body in almost a
perfect state of embalmment; from the legal point of view, because it
was the first time the antecedents of a prisoner had been investigated
in the way they had been in this case.
Medically, it was a sad reflection that a man who had only been a
hairdresser’s assistant should be able to defy the doctors of this
country, and for years carry on a practice of this kind without the
slightest fear of being found out. The only question for the jury to
determine was by whom the antimony was administered.
After a consultation of ten minutes, the jury returned a verdict of
guilty, the foreman adding “We are all agreed.” Klosowski, or Chapman,
was then sentenced to death, and paid the penalty of his crimes at
Wandsworth Gaol on April 7, 1903.
CHAPTER XV
SOME IRISH POISON MYSTERIES
A curious case with many unusual features was investigated at Armagh in
June, 1905, when two women named Pearson and Black were charged with
murdering Alice Pearson, aged seventy-four, the mother-in-law of the
former and mother of the latter, insurance benefits being alleged as the
motive for the crime.
The case came to be investigated through the statement of one of the
women while she was in gaol. Sarah Pearson, one of the accused, was
arrested in Montreal while in prison, and made a confession of the
crime, implicating herself, her husband and her sister-in-law. She said
she bought three pennyworth of strychnine in Armagh and mixed it with
mashed potatoes and eggs. When her mother-in-law was eating the meal she
said that it tasted sour and she did not like it. Both she and her
sister had also partaken of the food.
Evidence went to prove that systematic attempts were made to kill the
old woman for the sake of the little money, some forty pounds, which she
possessed; that Pearson and Black had first tried metallic mercury, but
eventually put strychnine into the meal of potatoes and eggs which
caused her death. According to the evidence of a witness, one of the
accused women came to his house and said she had seen “Old Alice’s
ghost,” and added that her husband had dreamed that his mother was going
to die.
The analyst who made an examination of the organs said that he
discovered two hundred and ninety-six grains of pure metallic mercury in
the body and had not been able to trace any record of a case where
mercury in such large quantities had been found in any human body. The
mercury, however, was not the cause of death and did not act as a poison
while in a metallic state. He found one-seventh of a grain of strychnine
in the stomach, liver and kidneys and there was little doubt that
strychnine had been the cause of death.
The jury found Sarah Pearson guilty and she was sentenced to death.
Perhaps one of the most curious defences to a charge of poisoning that
has ever been put forward in court, was that advanced in a case which
was tried in Ireland, where a woman was charged with murdering her
husband.
The victim was a farmer who was taken ill after eating a supper prepared
by his wife, which consisted of a poached egg. He died, apparently from
the effects of strychnine poisoning, the following morning.
A week later one of his daughters, a child of three, also died from the
effects of strychnine poisoning after drinking some milk. A post-mortem
examination was made on both bodies, and led to the discovery of half a
grain of strychnine in the stomach of each.
At the trial, the counsel for the defence declared that he could satisfy
the jury that no human hand was laid upon the egg eaten, from the moment
it was broken in the pan until it reached the deceased man. He contended
that the poison had _fallen from the rafters_, and _accidentally dropped
on the egg_, portions of which he could prove the accused woman had also
eaten. Her husband before he died had expressed this view, and it was
proved that some strychnine to poison rats had been placed on the floor
of the loft immediately above the kitchen, and some of it had fallen
from the rafters on to the egg as it was being removed from the fire to
the table. Although the Crown contended this accident could not have
happened, the jury found the accused not guilty, and she was discharged.
CHAPTER XVI
THE DEVEREUX CASE
In 1905 a poisoning case of an unusual character was disclosed at the
Central Criminal Court. On April 13 of that year the attention of the
police was called to a large tin trunk that was found in a warehouse in
Kensal Rise. Round the trunk was a strap and an endeavour had been made
to seal it with wax. The lock was forced and the lid opened, and in it
was found another covering consisting of a number of pieces of wood
wedged tightly together, over which had been placed a mixture of glue
and boric acid, which made the box absolutely air-tight.
On the wood covering being removed, three human bodies were discovered
beneath, which appeared to be those of a woman and two children. The
result of a post-mortem examination and analysis of the organs showed
that all three had been poisoned with morphine. More than sufficient of
the poison had been administered to the woman for the purpose of taking
her life, and sufficient was found in the bodies of the children to
achieve the same result.
The body of the woman was identified as that of Beatrice Ellen Maud
Devereux, the wife of Arthur Devereux, a chemist who lived at Milton
Avenue, Harlesden, and the children were found to be her twin boys.
The Devereuxs were married in London in 1898, and had three children,
the twin boys being born at Stroud, where the family had moved in 1902.
In 1904 they returned to London, where Devereux became manager of a
pharmacy at Kilburn.
In December Devereux took a flat at 60 Milton Avenue, Stonebridge Park,
stating that he wanted it only for six months. There was another flat in
the house which the landlord, at his request, left empty.
On the afternoon of January 28, Devereux made arrangements for one of
the boys to go to a day school in the neighbourhood and on the evening
of the same day Mrs. Devereux was out shopping with her mother. They
parted near Milton Avenue, and she was never seen alive again by anyone
outside her own family. At the end of the following week Devereux
appears to have decided to dispose of a number of things in the house,
including a perambulator and women’s clothing. He gave out that his wife
and the twins were away in the country, and arranged for himself and the
other boy to go into lodgings in the Harrow Road. His belongings were
removed by a local firm, who at the same time undertook to warehouse for
him a large trunk which he said contained boxes of chemicals.
Shortly after this, Devereux obtained a situation with a chemist in
Coventry, giving himself a reference in the name of Taylor. Mrs.
Devereux’s mother, not having heard from her daughter for a considerable
time, and finding the house in Milton Avenue empty, communicated with
the police, which led to inquiries and the discovery of the trunk at the
depository.
Devereux was arrested at Coventry and brought to London on April 13. He
made the following statement to the police:—
“I, Arthur Devereux, hereby declare that one evening towards the end of
January or the beginning of February last, after having been out for a
few hours with my child Stanley, I returned to find my wife and twins
lying dead on their beds, evidently, to my mind, having died from
poisons taken or administered. Rather than face an inquest I decided,
with a recent trial fresh in my mind, to conceal the bodies in a trunk
which I had had in my house for the past two years. This I proceeded to
do at once. I missed some poisons—chloroform and morphine—which I always
kept in my writing-desk after leaving my last situation, in the event of
my wishing to end my own life rather than face starvation. The room
smelt strongly of chloroform, so I concluded that my wife had
administered it to herself and the children, and probably also the
morphine. I had had a violent quarrel with her before going out, also
many times quite recently and during the past twelve months.”
The autopsy revealed no signs of disease in any of the bodies, and death
was supposed to have been caused by asphyxiation.
Sir Thomas Stevenson, who examined the organs, said that he found
altogether in the internal organs, 1·12 grains of morphine. In the case
of the children he found morphine in small quantities which could not be
accurately determined, but he believed it to be originally a fatal dose.
In his opinion all three of the persons had died of morphine poisoning.
There was no evidence of chloroform having been given.
After the police inquiry Devereux was committed for trial on the capital
charge, and the case was tried at the Central Criminal Court on July 27,
1905.
The trial lasted for four days, the prisoner being defended by Mr.
Elliott, who urged that he was a man of weak mind, and that, confronted
by a crisis, was not likely to act like an ordinary person. He commented
on the fact that Devereux had left traces of himself behind in London on
going to Coventry, which showed him if not as a cunning criminal, at
least as one who was free from the stain of murder. He also commented on
the lack of motive for the crime.
Mr. Matthews, who prosecuted for the Crown, endeavoured to reconstruct
the tragedy as he conceived it to have happened, and fixed it as
occurring on the night of Sunday, January 29. He suggested that at
supper time morphine was introduced into the food of the unsuspecting
Mrs. Devereux and children, and on their going up to bed in a drowsy
condition, Devereux could have easily administered chloroform to make
assurance doubly sure. There was no evidence that the prisoner was
insane.
The judge, in summing up, referring to the gruesome nature of the case,
said there was a strong body of evidence against the prisoner. After
only twelve minutes’ consideration, the jury returned with a verdict of
guilty, and Devereux was sentenced to death.
CHAPTER XVII
THE CRIPPEN CASE
In 1883 an American named Hawley Harvey Crippen came to England to
attend various hospitals for the purpose of seeing operations. He was
born at Coldwater, Michigan, U.S.A., in 1862, where he was educated at
the Homœopathic College at Cleveland, and took a degree as Doctor of
Medicine. After being in England some months, he returned to the States
as an assistant to a Dr. Porter, of Detroit, but later he specialized in
the eye and ear, and after his marriage he went to live in New York.
It was here in 1893, after the death of his wife, he first met Cora
Turner, whom he eventually married, and removed to Saint Louis, where he
started practice as a physician and optician. Cora Turner was the
daughter of a Russian Pole and a German mother, and her real name was
Makamotsky. A woman of extravagant tastes, who delighted in jewellery
and dress, she seems to have been fascinated by Crippen. Possessing a
fine voice, it was her ambition to go on the operatic stage, and
Crippen, at this time having been offered a post as physician to
Munyon’s Remedies Company, removed to New York, where he paid for the
training of his wife’s voice; but when it was completed, it was found
she had no chance of singing in opera.
Crippen was transferred by the Company first to Philadelphia and then to
Toronto, where he managed Munyon’s business. About 1900 he was sent to
England in charge of the Company’s branch, but leaving them he became
physician to what was known as the Drouet Institute. He left the
Institute to become medical adviser to a company known as “The Aural
Treatment and Sovereign Remedy Company.” This also appears to have
failed, and he went back to Munyon’s Remedies Co., where he acted as
manager till he took on the business as agent. At the same time he was
running a business called the “Gayle Teeth Specialists Company,” in
which he had a partner named Rylands, but the head-quarters of his
“Aural Remedies” was at Craven House, Kingsway. Here a Miss Ethel Le
Neve was employed as a typist and clerk, and to her Crippen seems to
have confided his domestic trials and found in her a sympathizer.
When the Crippens came to London they took a house at 39 Hilldrop
Crescent, Kentish Town, where Mrs. Crippen had the assistance of a
charwoman to help her in the housework. After they had settled down,
Mrs. Crippen wanted to go on the music-hall stage, and her husband paid
a fee on several occasions so that she might have a trial turn at minor
music halls. In spite of an attractive personality, elaborate dresses,
and a pleasant, clear voice, she could not get a sympathetic hearing,
proving that she had no stage talent whatever. She was known on the
stage as Belle Elmore, and being bitterly disappointed at her inability
to get engagements, she became nervous and irritable and subject to fits
of violent temper.
Crippen’s domestic infelicities were commonly known to his friends,
before whom his wife would openly abuse him, often for the most trivial
occurrences. His home affairs went from bad to worse, and his wife gave
him continual uneasiness and trouble. On several occasions she
threatened to leave him and go off with another man with whom she had
become intimate.
On January 31, 1910, in the afternoon, Crippen called upon two friends
and invited them to his house for the evening to have a game of cards.
They agreed, and came to dinner, Mrs. Crippen preparing the meal and
helping to serve it, there being no servant present. Apparently husband
and wife were on quite good terms, and their guests departed about one
o’clock in the morning, leaving Crippen and his wife alone in the house.
This was the last time Mrs. Crippen was seen alive.
On February 2 there was a meeting of the Committee of the Music Hall
Ladies’ Guild, of which Mrs. Crippen was the honorary treasurer, and a
regular attendant, but this time she did not put in an appearance. To
explain her absence, Miss Le Neve came to the meeting, bringing with her
two letters. One was addressed to Miss May, the secretary of the Guild,
and stated the illness of a near relative had called Mrs. Crippen to
America at a few hours’ notice, and tendering her resignation. This was
signed “Belle Elmore, per pro H. H. C.”
The other letter, which was addressed to the Committee of the Music Hall
Ladies’ Guild, was similar in purport, and repeated her resignation of
the honorary treasurership, and enclosed a cheque-book and deposit-book
for the immediate use of her successor. The letter concluded by saying,
“I hope some months later to be with you, and in the meantime wish the
Guild every success.” This was also signed “Belle Elmore,” although the
letter was obviously in her husband’s writing.
The reading of the letters took the members of the Committee by
surprise. A few days afterwards a friend of Mrs. Crippen, who was very
fond of her, met Dr. Crippen and asked him more particularly about his
wife’s journey, but could gain nothing very definite in reply. Shortly
afterwards this lady again saw Crippen, who informed her that he had
that morning heard from his wife who stated she had been rather ill,
having something the matter with her lungs.
About the last week in February, there was a dinner given by the Music
Hall Artists’ Benevolent Fund. Dr. Crippen attended it, accompanied by
Miss Le Neve, and it was noticed that she was wearing a brooch that
several persons recognized as one they had often seen Mrs. Crippen
wearing. During dinner, a lady member of the Guild asked Crippen some
details of his wife’s whereabouts, and he told her that she was then up
in the mountains in the wilds of California.
As time went on her friends still continued to make inquiries about her
mysterious disappearance, and on March 21 a letter was received by Mr.
and Mrs. Martinetti from Crippen, in which he said he had been upset by
serious news about his wife, having received a cable that she was
dangerously ill with double pneumonia. A day or two later, meeting Mrs
Martinetti, he said he was expecting a cable at any time saying his wife
was dead. On March 23 he sent a telegram to Mrs. Martinetti saying he
had heard his wife was dead. Three days later he inserted an
announcement of the death in the _Era_ and gave notice to his landlord
that he would be leaving the house in Hilldrop Crescent on June 24.
Mrs. Crippen’s friends still continued puzzled about her mysterious
disappearance and her supposed death, and a Mr. Nash, who was connected
with the music-hall profession, on returning from America, where he had
been on a visit, interviewed Crippen. He was evidently dissatisfied with
Crippen’s replies to his questions respecting the disappearance of his
wife, and he went to Scotland Yard, placing his suspicions before
Inspector Dew.
After exhaustive inquiries with a view if possible of finding Mrs.
Crippen or some trace of her, the inspector decided to see Crippen
himself, and to find out if he could obtain some information. He called
at Hilldrop Crescent on July 18, about 10 in the morning, and saw Miss
Le Neve, who was there with a young French servant girl. The inspector
asked where he could find Crippen, and Miss Le Neve was unable to give
him any information, but she gave him his business address at Albion
House in Oxford Street. Inspector Dew went there and saw Crippen, and
asked him what light he could throw on the supposed death of his wife.
Crippen replied, “Well, I suppose I had better tell the truth. All my
stories about her illness and death are untrue; so far as I know she is
not dead at all.”
He then made a long detailed statement to the inspector, which he
committed to writing and signed.
In this statement, which began with an account of his career from the
time he was born, he said that his wife had often threatened to leave
him, saying she would go out of his life and he would never hear from
her again. On the night that their friends came to dinner they had a
quarrel after they left, and she said, “I shall leave you to-morrow and
you will not hear from me again.”
“She told me,” he stated, “that I was to arrange to cover up any scandal
from our mutual friends; I went to business next morning and on
returning home between five and six o’clock I found she had gone. I then
wrote the letters to the Guild secretary, and realizing this would not
be sufficient to explain her not coming back, I added she was ill with
pneumonia and afterwards that she had died in California.
“When my wife went away I cannot say whether she took anything with her.
She took some of her jewellery, I know, but she left her rings behind. I
do not know what clothes she took away. It is true that I was at the
Benevolent Fund dinner at the Criterion with Miss Le Neve, and she wore
the brooch left behind. She also wore my wife’s furs. After I told them
my wife was dead, Miss Le Neve and I went to Dieppe for five days. My
belief is that my wife has gone to Chicago to join Bruce Miller, a man
whom she knew and who, I believe, had speculated and made money.”
Crippen signed this statement and Inspector Dew said, “That is all very
well, but your wife has got to be found,” and suggested an advertisement
in the newspapers and discussed with Crippen the form of it. They drew
up an advertisement between them, as follows:—
“Makamotsky. Will Belle Elmore communicate with H. H. C. or authorities
at once. Serious trouble from your absence. Twenty-five dollars for
communicating her whereabouts to ——”
The address was left open for Crippen to decide upon.
On Crippen’s invitation, Inspector Dew made a search of the house in
Hilldrop Crescent, but found nothing of a suspicious nature. The next
morning Crippen arrived at his place of business a little earlier than
usual, and his clerk remarked on his worried appearance. Crippen said
that he had been bothered, as there was a little scandal. He told him
that he was going away, and that if anything happened to him the clerk
must deal with the letters. He then sent him out to purchase a suit of
boy’s clothes, and about 11.30 Miss Le Neve came to the office, where
she changed her clothes for the boy’s suit purchased by the clerk, and
left the office without anyone noticing her, disguised as a boy. Crippen
then saw the manageress of Munyon’s Company and asked her to change him
a cheque for £37, showing his pass-book at the Charing Cross Bank, where
he had a balance to that amount. He produced a cheque signed Belle
Elmore, the account being in their joint names, and the manageress gave
him cash in exchange.
This occurred on July 9, and from that date Crippen and Miss Le Neve
disappeared. On July 11 Inspector Dew again went to Hilldrop Crescent to
have a further interview with Crippen and Miss Le Neve, and found they
had gone. He then began a systematic search of the premises, and on the
13th his suspicions were aroused by something he saw on the floor
leading to the cellar. He decided to examine it more carefully, and
finding some bricks which appeared to be loose, he decided to take up
the floor. The result was, that he discovered what were obviously human
remains, and sent for the divisional sergeant of police. The remains
were as far as possible uncovered, but not removed, and on July 14 they
were examined by Mr. Pepper, at whose request they were removed to the
mortuary for closer examination. The remains having been buried in
quicklime were found to be in a fairly good state of preservation, most
of the internal organs, such as the heart, the spleen, intestines and
stomach being intact. The extraordinary part of the matter was, that no
bones were found, and the head, hands and feet were missing. It was
apparent that the individual who had carried out the evisceration had
done everything possible to prevent identification as regards the body.
Some things, however, were forgotten, such as portions of articles of
clothing, and some hair done up in curling pins, some strands of which
were fully eight inches long, proving they belonged to a female.
Another point noticed was, that the hair had been bleached. The articles
of clothing showed the arm-piece of a suit of pyjamas, and separately,
the right back portion of the jacket of a similar suit, with the maker’s
name on it. The woman’s clothing consisted of a camisole. The name on
the pyjamas was discovered to be the same as on those which Crippen wore
and which were found in his box.
Following this discovery, a warrant was issued on July 16 for the arrest
of Crippen and Miss Le Neve.
The scene now changes to the Atlantic. On July 20 the steamship
_Montrose_ sailed from Antwerp bound for Quebec, and among the
passengers who embarked at that port were a Mr. Robinson and his son.
They mixed freely with the passengers on the ship, but circumstances
arose when they were a few days out, to cause the captain to make
particular observation of the son, and from certain characteristics, he
began to doubt his sex. Communicating his suspicions to two of the
passengers, they soon confirmed his belief that Mr. Robinson junior was,
in fact, a girl.
Suspecting something was wrong, on July 22 the captain sent a wireless
message asking the police to follow and board his ship, as he was
convinced that Mr. Robinson and his son were the Dr. Crippen and Ethel
Le Neve who were being sought for by the police. It was probably the
first time that wireless telegraphy had been used in connection with
suspected criminals.
The day after the receipt of the message, Inspector Dew and Sergeant
Mitchell sailed from Liverpool in the s.s. _Laurentic_, which overtook
the _Montrose_ at sea. During the voyage, Crippen had become very
friendly with the quartermaster of the ship, and a couple of days before
the vessel was due at Quebec, the quartermaster gave him a hint that the
Canadian police were on his track. It is said an arrangement was made
between them, in order to avoid the police on landing, that Crippen
should be concealed among the cargo, and at an appointed hour there
should be a splash in the water as if some one had fallen or jumped
overboard, while in the cabin a tell-tale message was to be found. It
was thought that no one would think of searching the cargo for the
missing man, and thus the fugitive was to get clear away, Miss Le Neve
in the meanwhile being advised of an address where she might join him
afterwards if all went well.
All Crippen’s arrangements, however, were upset by Inspector Dew
boarding the s.s. _Montrose_ at Farther Point, Quebec. The inspector saw
Crippen pacing the deck near the captain’s cabin. “Good morning, Dr.
Crippen,” he remarked. “Good morning, Mr. Dew,” replied Crippen. Dew
then told him he would be arrested for the murder and mutilation of his
wife, Cora Crippen, in London, on February 2. Miss Le Neve, who was
still dressed in her suit of boy’s clothes, was also arrested. A written
card, evidently intended for Miss Le Neve, was found on Crippen. It was
in his handwriting and said that he could not stand the horrors he had
gone through. There was nothing bright ahead and he had made up his mind
to jump overboard that night.
Crippen and Miss Le Neve were brought back to England by Inspector Dew
on the s.s. _Megantic_, and they landed at Liverpool on August 27, and
were taken to London. A great crowd had assembled at Euston Station,
where the prisoners had a hostile reception, being greeted with groans
and hisses. On August 29 they were charged at Bow Street, and committed
for trial at the Central Criminal Court, one on the charge of murder,
and the other as being accessory after the fact.
At the trial of Crippen it transpired that on January 19 he had
purchased at a pharmacy in New Oxford Street five grains of hyoscine
hydrobromide, for which he signed the poison register, stating it was
required for making homœopathic preparations. At this shop Crippen had
previously purchased a number of drugs such as cocaine, morphine, and
mercury, and was well known there. He had also written prescriptions
which had been prepared for him.
Mr. Augustus Pepper, surgeon to St. Mary’s Hospital, gave the result of
his examination, and in his opinion, he concluded that the remains were
undoubtedly those of a woman, adding that the person who removed the
various organs showed considerable dexterity. The remains were buried
very soon after death, and approximately they had been in the ground
from four to eight months. On a portion of the body found there was a
scar, the result of an operation which it was discovered Mrs. Crippen
had undergone some time ago. This was important as evidence of
identification. He had examined the hair which was found in the curler,
and said that the longest was eight inches long and the shortest two and
a half inches. It showed signs of having been artificially dealt with,
and was partially bleached, but the natural colour of the hair was
probably a dark brown. The very lightest portion was a pale yellow.
Dr. Marshall, who assisted Mr. Pepper, stated that there was no evidence
at all that suggested the remains were those of a male. What little
evidence there was pointed to their being those of a female. He was of
the opinion that the scar was the result of an operation, and his
impression was there were also marks of stitches.
Dr. B. H. Spilsbury, pathologist of St. Mary’s Hospital, who was called
for the prosecution, stated he had made a microscopical examination of
this piece of skin, and confirmed the opinion that it was undoubtedly an
old scar which had been stretched.
Dr. W. H. Willcox, senior analyst to the Home Office, gave evidence as
to the examination of the organs of the body found. He stated that he
had tested the extracts he had made from the organs physiologically, and
in each case got complete paralysis of the pupil of the eye. He also
made chemical tests in the case of the liver and intestine, and he
concluded that hyoscine was present, corresponding approximately to
one-thirtieth of a grain in the whole stomach. He also found an amount
of alkaloid corresponding to one-fortieth of a grain in the whole of the
kidney, and an amount corresponding approximately to one-seventh of a
grain in the intestines, and in the liver approximately an amount of
one-twelfth of a grain. He believed the alkaloid found to be hyoscine,
and the total amount to be two-sevenths of a grain approximately. In his
opinion there must have been present in the whole body more than half a
grain, and the probable fatal dose of hyoscine hydrobromide would be
from one-quarter to one half a grain. It was not commonly prescribed,
and was chiefly used in sedatives in such conditions as mania and
meningitis, in doses from one two-hundredth to one hundredth of a grain.
He was of the opinion it had been administered by the mouth and not as
an injection, because of the large amount found in the intestines. He
believed the cause of death was poison by hyoscine or a salt of
hyoscine.
The counsel for the prisoner suggested that alkaloidal substances
resembling atropine or hyoscamine had been met with in decomposed meat,
but Dr. Willcox negatived the suggestion.
Dr. Luff, scientific adviser to the Home Office, said he had followed
Dr. Willcox’s tests in evidence, and he agreed that the poison found was
undoubtedly hyoscine. During seventeen years’ experience he had always
tested for animal alkaloids in toxicological cases, and before that he
had conducted a long series of investigations for animal alkaloids, but
only on one occasion had he come across them, and that was in some
putrefied meat. It was quite impossible that hyoscine could be mistaken
for an animal mydriadic alkaloid under Vitali’s test.
Mr. Tobin, who defended Crippen, contended that the alkaloid found by
Dr. Willcox in the remains might have been traced to an animal alkaloid
produced after death as the result of putrefaction. He dwelt on the fact
of the lack of motive Crippen had for the suggested crime; and that
although he had purchased five grains of hyoscine hydrobromide, he had
signed his name in the poison register, although there was no need for
him to have done so. He bought the drug in January when he was still
agent for Munyon’s Remedies, for the purpose of making it into a liquid
and using it in the form of the tiny homœopathic tablets which he sold
in bottles of three hundred each, to patients. He said that although no
obligation rested upon Dr. Crippen to go into the witness-box, he chose
to go of his own accord, and he would call him.
Crippen was taken through the story of his life by the examining
counsel, and coming to the question of his purchase of drugs he said he
always made up the preparations he sold, and had bought considerable
quantities of different poisons, such as aconite, belladonna and _Rhus
tox_. He had frequently used hyoscine in making his homœopathic
preparations in extremely minute doses. He admitted purchasing the
hyoscine and explained how he used it, by first dissolving it in
alcohol, then saturating a certain amount of small disks or tablets, two
of which would equal ¹⁄₃₆₀₀th part of a grain. He used it in nervous
diseases.
Crippen, examined by the Lord Chief Justice, said he took no steps to
find out where his wife had gone to, up to July 8. For three hours he
stood the fire of cross-examination by Mr. Muir, the leading counsel for
the Crown, and from beginning to end appeared to be utterly devoid of
emotion or anything in the least approaching it, nor did he ever lose
his self-possession or show the slightest sign of being ruffled.
During the trial Mr. Bruce Miller, whose name had been mentioned by
Crippen in connection with his wife, was called, and swore that he had
not seen Mrs. Crippen since she left America in 1904.
The Lord Chief Justice, in his summing up of the case, impressed upon
the jury that they must be satisfied by the whole of the evidence that
the Crown had made out their case, and if not, the prisoner was entitled
to the benefit of the doubt. The crime of murder charged against Crippen
was that he wilfully and intentionally killed his wife by poison, and
then mutilated the body and buried the remains in the cellar at 39
Hilldrop Crescent, in order to conceal his crime. There was no question
here of suggesting that it was by some other means or by some other
method or agency that Crippen had caused the death of his wife, and it
involved two questions: first, whether the remains found in the house
were those of the body of Cora Crippen; if they were not, there was an
end of the case; if they were the remains of this woman, then it was a
question, was her death occasioned by the wilful act of her husband?
These were the two issues upon which the jury must concentrate their
attention.
After exactly half an hour’s absence the jury returned and declared they
unanimously found the prisoner guilty of wilful murder, and Crippen was
sentenced to death.
The following morning the trial of Miss Le Neve took place, she being
indicted upon the charge of being accessory after the fact of the wilful
murder of Cora Crippen. No witnesses were called for the case, and after
some formal proceedings the jury found a verdict of acquittal.
The case was brought before the Court of Criminal Appeal, but the appeal
was dismissed, and Crippen was executed at Pentonville Prison on
November 23, 1910. It is said he made no confession of his crime.
Thus ended the trial of one who was described by Lord Alverstone as an
extraordinary man. Throughout the trial he never showed a symptom of
concern or trace of emotion or fear; he appeared to be never at a loss
for a word or explanation, and showed remarkable self-possession all
through, the only argument his counsel could adduce in his defence. But
after all this is one of the salient characteristics of poisoners. In
Crippen’s case we have a man possessing some medical knowledge; who had
deliberately chosen a little-known poison to carry out his evil design.
He had probably prepared and planned the deed at least a fortnight
before it was committed, and then eviscerated the remains of his victim
to try and baffle the ablest investigators. He evidently thought his
escape from justice sure. But the Nemesis which dogs the footsteps of
all poisoners followed those of Crippen, and he made three fatal
mistakes. First in burying a portion of the suit of pyjamas belonging to
himself with the remains; second, although he destroyed the major parts
of the body to prevent identification, he left the very remains which
contained traces of the poison by which he murdered his victim; and
third, and most remarkable of all, he forgot to remove the portion of
the body containing the scar, which ultimately established beyond all
doubt the identity of the remains as those of Cora Crippen, his wife.
This case is noteworthy as being the first on record in which hyoscine
was used for criminal poisoning in this country. The presence of the
alkaloid was clearly demonstrated, although the remains had been buried
for six months.
CHAPTER XVIII
THE MYSTERY OF THE SEDDONS
There have been few cases in the history of poisoning where a man and
his wife have been charged on the capital charge, therefore the trial of
Frederick Henry Seddon and Mary Anne, his wife, on the charge of
murdering Elizabeth Barrow at 63 Tollington Park, N., on September 14,
1911, is one of some interest. The mysterious circumstances connected
with the case are also somewhat out of the ordinary, as the evidence
largely was of a circumstantial character.
In 1901 Seddon, who was a superintendent of canvassers for an industrial
insurance company, was living with his wife and three children at 63
Tollington Park, and on July 26, 1910, a Miss Eliza Mary Barrow, a woman
of 49 years of age, came to lodge with them. She appears to have been a
person of a somewhat strange temperament. She was very deaf, and had in
her charge a small boy named Ernest Grant, an orphan of some people with
whom she formerly lived. Miss Barrow was the possessor of a considerable
sum of money, amounting to about £4,000, part of which was invested in
stocks, and she was also the owner of some leasehold property. She had a
curious, but not unusual, characteristic of hoarding gold and notes to a
large amount in a cash-box, which she kept in a box in her room. There
was probably £400 in gold and a considerable number of five-pound notes,
said to be at least thirty-three, kept in this cash-box.
All this property disappeared by September 14, 1911, and on that date
there appeared to be little cash left in her possession. All the
property had found its way into the hands of the Seddons, which included
£600 of India stock, the leasehold property and some £200 in cash as
well. During October both Seddon and his wife were dealing with
five-pound notes which undoubtedly belonged to Miss Barrow, and which
had been in her cash-box. On the day when the India stock and leasehold
property were transferred, Mrs. Seddon changed two five-pound notes,
endorsing them with a false name and address. Six other notes were also
paid into Seddon’s banking account.
According to Seddon, the money had been transferred to him by agreement
with Miss Barrow, and he was to give her an annuity of a pound a week in
exchange for the interest on it. He said that he had a verbal agreement
with her by which he was bound to pay her an annuity of £72 a year in
addition to the rooms in the house, in return for the property of the
India stock.
On September 1 Miss Barrow became ill, from what her medical adviser
diagnosed as epidemic diarrhœa, and this continued for at least eight or
nine days, after which she began to improve and seemed to be getting
better. While she was ill, Mrs. Seddon was the only one who attended to
her, with the exception of Seddon, who was known to have gone into her
room on September 11, when she made a will, appointing him as her sole
executor and trustee. Mrs. Seddon saw after the cooking of Miss Barrow’s
food and did everything necessary for her, and no servant went near the
apartment.
On the night of the 13th she became rapidly worse, but the doctor was
not called in until about six o’clock in the morning of the 14th, when
she died. Seddon saw the doctor and obtained a certificate to the effect
that death was due to epidemic diarrhœa, and two days afterwards the
funeral took place. There were some significant facts with regard to
what happened after her death. No relative was present at the funeral,
nor were they informed of her death until September 20.
After the funeral there was some inquiry from one of the relatives, a
Mr. Wonderahe, who had an interview with Seddon. His suspicions being
aroused that all was not well, he communicated with the authorities, and
inquiries were instituted, which resulted in an order being given for
the exhumation of the body on November 15. A post-mortem examination was
made, and it was found that Miss Barrow died from the effects of
arsenic, the poison being widely distributed throughout her body. The
doctor had not prescribed arsenic in his treatment during her illness,
and as Seddon and his wife were the only two people who had come near
her during the period, they were arrested and charged with the crime.
How the poison was obtained, and who administered it were the paramount
questions at the trial.
During Miss Barrow’s illness no one else appeared to have entered her
bedroom but the man and his wife, and yet the quantity of arsenic found
in the body was so large, that it was found even in the hair and nails.
Shortly after Miss Barrow’s death, Seddon was seen by two of his
colleagues to be in possession of considerable sums of money, including
£200 in gold and also jewellery. He bought shares in a Building Society,
which he paid for in cash, and made several payments amounting to £150
in gold.
A chemist at Crouch Hill stated, that a girl he had since identified as
Seddon’s daughter, purchased from him a packet of six arsenical
fly-papers; she asked for arsenical papers and not the “sticky” ones.
A doctor who treated Miss Barrow in August, 1911, said she was then
suffering from congestion of the liver, and at the end of the month had
an attack of asthma, but the symptoms were not severe, and she made no
complaint of pain or sickness. The doctor who was called in to attend
her on September 2 had attended the Seddons for some years. He found her
suffering from sickness and prescribed for her. On the 13th the symptoms
of the illness had returned, but he did not consider her condition
critical. The following day Seddon came to see him and said Miss Barrow
was dead, and he gave a certificate that death was due to epidemic
diarrhœa, but he never prescribed arsenic in any form for her during her
illness.
Dr. Spilsbury, who conducted the post-mortem examination, stated that
the body was in an abnormal state of preservation, and after witnessing
tests made by Dr. Willcox, he was of the opinion that death was due to
acute arsenical poisoning, which meant poisoning by one or more large
doses of arsenic. He had found no sign of internal disease, and in this
particular case he could find no external or internal indication of
chronic arsenical poisoning.
Dr. Willcox, who made the analysis for the Home Office, said he found
arsenic in all the remains and tissues, the largest proportion being in
the stomach, intestines, liver and muscles; there was arsenic in the
skin, heart and nails, and it was distributed throughout the body. He
agreed with Dr. Spilsbury as to the cause of death. He estimated that
there was in the remains 2·01 grains of arsenic, and that would indicate
to him that more than that amount had been taken. There might have been
an amount of five grains taken within three days of death. In his
opinion the fatal dose was given within two or three days of death,
probably two days. Two grains of arsenic would be a poisonous dose, and
might be enough to kill an adult person, and two or three such doses
within a short period of time would be fatal.
Dr. Willcox said he had heard a suggestion in this case that carbonate
of bismuth contained arsenic. He had made an analysis of some and found
a very faint trace of about one in a million, so at least two
hundredweight of bismuth carbonate would be required to give two grains
of arsenic.
He made an analysis of the arsenical fly-papers and found arsenic in a
quantity varying from 3·8 to 6 grs. per paper. If the paper was actually
boiled in water for some minutes, practically all the arsenic would be
got out, and he had obtained 6·6 grs. by boiling one, 6 grs. from
another and 3 grs. from another. In his opinion the 2·01 grs. he found
in Miss Barrow’s body would be sufficient to kill an adult person.
A considerable point was made by the counsel for the prosecution in the
cross-examination of Dr. Willcox as to the finding of arsenic in the
tips of the hair. Counsel remarked, that one of the most important
subjects of investigation before the Royal Commission of inquiry into
arsenical poisoning, was the presence of arsenic in the hair and the
length of time it must have taken before it reached the hair tips.
Counsel said that the fact that arsenic was found in the tips of Miss
Barrow’s hair proved that it must have been given for a period extending
over two or three months. Dr. Willcox said that it need not mean that
arsenic was being taken continuously, but some might have been taken a
year or more previously, and in the present case he was inclined to the
opinion that there had been one fatal dose given in the last three days
before death.
Mr. Marshall Hall, who defended Seddon, submitted that there was not
sufficient evidence to give to the jury, and suggested the case was
absolutely a unique one. In all other cases of poisoning there was some
direct tracing of the poison, and in the cases of some men who had been
tried previously, such as Lamson and Cream, there had been medical
knowledge in the possession of the prisoners, but in this case there
were two people charged on circumstantial evidence and it could not be
said which of them did it. Beyond the evidence of the chemist who said
he had sold Margaret Seddon certain fly-papers, there was no proof of
any poison being in the possession of either party. Mrs. Seddon said
that she herself bought some fly-papers in consequence of the request
from Miss Barrow, that something should be done to mitigate the nuisance
of flies in the room. She remembered that on one occasion, the contents
of four saucers were emptied into one which was placed on the washstand
in the room.
Seddon was then called to give evidence and stated that Miss Barrow had
asked him about reinvesting her money, as she was losing capital, and he
suggested an annuity, which she agreed to in exchange for her India
stock and the lease of her property. He denied ever handling the
fly-papers which came to his house and beyond giving her a little brandy
the last night when she was very ill, he had never given her anything to
eat or drink. He had not the smallest suspicion at that time that she
was fatally or dangerously ill. He declared he had never purchased
arsenic in his life in any shape or form, and swore that he had never
either administered or instructed the administration of it.
Mrs. Seddon, who also went into the box, said there were a great many
flies in Miss Barrow’s room, and Miss Barrow asked her to get some
fly-papers, “Not the sticky ones, but those you wet.” She herself bought
them at the shop of a neighbouring chemist and took four on being told
she could get them at a reduced price. The papers were shown to Miss
Barrow and placed in a saucer in her room with water on them. During
Miss Barrow’s illness, she waited upon her, and on one occasion, only,
did Mr. Seddon give Miss Barrow any medicine. She had never bought a
fly-paper until she bought these, and she had never sent her daughter
for anything of the kind. She began by putting them in saucers singly,
two on the mantelpiece and two on the chest of drawers. Then there was
an accident, she remembered, and she emptied them into a soup-plate and
repeatedly moistened them if they were going dry.
Mr. Justice Bucknill, in summing up, said if the prisoners were guilty,
it was a crime which had been carefully thought out and carefully
committed in secret. The history of great poisoning cases showed that
the poisoner did not poison in open daylight, in the presence of other
persons. It was a secret crime, done in the dark, and if this particular
crime was proved against these people there could be no doubt as to its
being an abominable one, and that the love of gold led to it.
The question to answer was, what was the cause of Miss Barrow’s death? A
considerable amount of arsenic had been found in the body; how did it
get there? There was no direct evidence that Seddon had ever been seen
to handle a fly-paper or the water in which one had been soaking. In
view of the medical evidence it ought not to be difficult to decide that
Miss Barrow died from arsenical poisoning, and it was for the jury to
decide whether that arsenic was administered by the prisoners or either
of them.
After considering for an hour and five minutes, the jury found Seddon
guilty and his wife “Not Guilty.” Before sentence was passed upon the
man, he read a long statement in which he again denied that he was
guilty of the crime. Seddon was condemned to death and his wife was
acquitted, and he suffered the extreme penalty of the law on April 18,
1912.
The verdict was much discussed in the Press, and some ten thousand
persons, including Mrs. Seddon, assembled in Hyde Park and presented a
petition at the Home Office to get the verdict set aside. The Court of
Criminal Appeal was asked to quash the conviction, but the judges said
they saw no reason to say the verdict was wrong or unreasonable.
In November, 1912, Mrs. Seddon made a remarkable statement in the Press
which was published in the _Weekly Dispatch_ of November 17. In it she
stated, that Seddon committed the crime, that she saw him give the
poison to Miss Barrow, that on the fatal night he deliberately
substituted for the medicine the water from the fly-papers and white
precipitate powder and gave it to Miss Barrow. She continued:—
“Soon afterwards she breathed her last and I threatened to call the
police, but he pointed his revolver at my head and told me if I informed
on him he would blow my brains out. He had always slept with a loaded
revolver under his pillow. It was Seddon who told me about the flies in
Miss Barrow’s bedroom and asked me to buy the fly-papers. He would not
let me arrange them in the room but took them himself. Late that night
Miss Barrow complained to me about the medicine tasting funny. Something
made me look round. I found a saucer that I had not put there. It was
damp, and I put my finger to it and then on my tongue. It tasted very
queer. On the night of her death Seddon went out to a theatre; several
times during that evening Miss Barrow had called out “I am dying,” and I
told my husband this when he came in, but he laughed. Later on he went
to the bedroom and I followed him. Miss Barrow begged him to send for
the doctor, but he refused; I left the room for a few minutes. On coming
back Seddon did not notice me standing near the doorway. I saw that the
doctor’s medicine had been put on one side, and my husband was mixing
water from fly-papers and white precipitate powder which was to make the
mixture look like that sent by the doctor. Then I saw him approach the
bed and give Miss Barrow several doses.”
Sir William Willcox, commenting on this case,[9] said it was of interest
because arsenic was found in all the organs of the victim, Miss Barrow,
and a computation of the total amount of arsenic in the body was made by
a determination of the arsenic present in each organ. The corpse was
actually weighed for this purpose, as well as the individual organs. A
fatal poisonous dose of 2 gr. was proved to be present in the body. For
the purpose of this analysis the electrolytic Marsh-Berzelius test was
used for the first time in determining quantitatively the amount of
arsenic in each organ.
Footnote 9:
Presidential Address before the Harveian Society, Jan. 11, 1923.
CHAPTER XIX
THE DALKEITH COFFEE POISON CASE
In the early part of February, 1911, a Mr. Charles Barrett Hutchison and
his wife, in celebration of their silver wedding day, gave a whist and
supper party to some friends at their house at Bridgend, Dalkeith, near
Edinburgh.
There were four tables in the room, eighteen people being present, and
at midnight supper was served. Coffee was taken to the ladies in the
drawing-room, and on Mrs. Hutchison tasting it she called to her son
John, who had been pouring it out in the dining-room, that there was
something wrong. Mr. Hutchison and a Mr. Alexander Clapperton, a grocer
and wine merchant of Musselburgh, were among those who were drinking the
coffee and smoking in the dining-room. Shortly after drinking it, one of
the party began to experience a peculiar sensation and to have a
disagreeable dryness in the throat. Then it was discovered that most of
the ladies in the drawing-room were also in great distress, and in a
short time every one who had partaken of the coffee became ill, and the
results threatened to become serious.
One of the guests hurried for assistance, and medical men soon arrived
and did what they could to aid the sufferers. Mr. Hutchison’s eldest
son, John, who had been a dispenser, mixed an emetic of mustard and
water, which gave the sufferers a certain amount of relief and then he
motored to Edinburgh for further assistance. Mr. Hutchison, who had been
assisted to bed, passed away shortly after the doctor’s arrival, and his
friend, Mr. Clapperton, died about three hours afterwards. Practically
the whole of the party of eighteen were affected with greater or lesser
severity, but only the host and his friend succumbed.
The coffee had come from the shop of Mr. Clapperton, one of the victims,
and although samples of it were subjected to analysis, no trace of
poison could be found. The sugar and milk were also examined without
result, but clear traces of arsenic were discovered by the analyst in a
portion of the prepared coffee that had not been consumed. It was
evident that the quantity of arsenic introduced must have been very
large to have affected so many people, but where had it come from? That
was the mystery. The poison books of the chemists in Dalkeith and
Musselburgh were examined by the police, but all arsenic sold during the
previous twelve months was satisfactorily accounted for. All kinds of
theories were adduced. One brought forward was, that the coffee had been
prepared in an old urn which might have absorbed the poison from the
metal, but the vessels in which the coffee was made were examined and
not a trace of arsenic was found, and so the mystery remained unsolved
for over a fortnight.
The police still continued their inquiries beyond the neighbourhood, and
eventually at Musselburgh it was found, that a bottle of arsenic was
missing from a chemist’s shop which had apparently been surreptitiously
removed. It then appeared that John James Hutchison had been an
assistant to the chemist from whose shop the bottle was missing. This,
coupled with the fact, that it was he who had carried the poisoned
coffee from the kitchen to the dining-room in his father’s house, led to
the issue of a warrant for his arrest.
It was then found that John Hutchison had left Bridgend for Edinburgh,
ten miles distant, very early in the morning. He was recognized at
Waverley Station, Edinburgh, at nine o’clock entering a south-bound
express for Newcastle and King’s Cross, and on Wednesday a letter dated
from an hotel in the Strand reached one of his friends. It contained a
passage saying, that the writer intended to throw himself into the
Thames off Waterloo Bridge.
Inquiries meanwhile proved that he had been speculating on the Stock
Exchange, and his speculations in oil and copper proving unfortunate, he
was heavily in debt.
When the inspector, armed with a warrant, arrived at the hotel in London
to which he had been traced, he found that he had left. All trace of him
was lost for a time, but a description being issued, it was discovered
that he had travelled to Southampton and taken a boat to the Channel
Islands. Passing through Guernsey, he travelled to Jersey, where he
stayed a night and returned to Guernsey again. To a boarding-house in
the latter island he was traced by the local police and recognized from
a photograph that had been sent to them. The police sergeant found him
in a sitting-room alone, and after charging him made the arrest. When in
the passage leading from the room, Hutchison suddenly darted upstairs,
followed by the sergeant. He made for his bedroom, and as he opened the
door he drew his hand out of his trousers’ pocket and put a phial to his
lips before the sergeant could interfere.
A doctor was sent for, and although emetics were administered, he died a
few minutes after his arrival, or about ten minutes after taking the
fatal draught. He gave no information to the sergeant, except saying in
the room below, that he would prove he was not Hutchison. He had taken
his room in the hotel under the name of Henderson, but from papers and
other documents found in his possession there was no doubt he was John
James Hutchison, of Dalkeith.
The poison by means of which he had committed suicide turned out to be
prussic acid, which he had probably had in his possession for some time.
It is an extraordinary psychological problem how a young man of this
type, apparently so much liked and popular among the people of the town
where he lived, and said to be of a generous, kindly and gentle
disposition could have perpetrated the deed. According to his friends,
he was the last person in the world who would be thought likely to
commit such a terrible crime.
After the death of his father he had been perfectly collected, was the
chief mourner at the funeral, and became the object of general sympathy.
Extravagance and social ambition appear to have been his chief faults,
but it is difficult to discover the motive which prompted him to the
commission of a wholesale crime such as he attempted. The only
conclusion that could be arrived at was, that it was the act of a man
whose mind was unbalanced and distorted, as he had nothing to gain by
his father’s death nor from any of the guests he attempted to poison.
CHAPTER XX
THE AGRA POISON MYSTERY
One of the most remarkable cases of criminal poisoning in the annals of
Indian justice was brought to light in December, 1912. There was living
in Agra at that time, a Lieutenant Clark, who was an officer in the
Indian Subordinate Medical Department, and his wife, Mrs. Clark, a lady
of about fifty-five years of age. Both husband and wife were Eurasians.
On the night of November 17, Mrs. Clark was found in the bedroom of
their bungalow badly wounded and died shortly afterwards of her
injuries. She had apparently been stabbed to death with a sharp
instrument. Her husband informed the authorities that she had been
murdered by a native, and suspicion fell upon a servant named Buddhu who
was at one time employed by the Clarks.
During the official inquiry which was called to investigate the matter,
Miss Clark, the daughter of the victim, said she saw her mother sitting
up in bed bleeding profusely from several wounds. The lamp was low in
the room and she was unable to recognize any assailant. The whole affair
seemed to be shrouded in mystery until the police brought to light a
correspondence between Lieut. Clark and Mrs. Fulham, the wife of an
Assistant Examiner of Military Accounts, who had died under suspicious
circumstances in the previous October. This correspondence showed a
connection between the deaths both of Mrs. Clark and of Mr. Fulham, and
Lieut. Clark was arrested on November 29, and charged with the murder
both of his wife and Mr. Fulham.
Mrs. Fulham was also charged with the murder of her husband and Mrs.
Clark, and Buddhu, the native servant, was also arrested. The latter
offered to give evidence, and testified that Lieut. Clark had given him
three powders that he was to place in Mrs. Clark’s tea, and promised him
fifty rupees when he had done it. The witness took the powders and asked
what they were for, and was told that they were aperient medicines. At
the same time Clark threatened to throttle him if anything leaked out.
He gave the powders as he was told, and then left the service of Lieut.
Clark immediately.
Miss Clark stated that her father was very violent with her mother at
times and had been very intimate for some time with Mrs. Fulham. Mrs.
Clark had objected to this and as a result quarrels had taken place.
Twice, the daughter stated, her mother had been taken ill after a meal,
and referring to one of these attacks in a diary Mrs. Clark kept, she
wrote that the cook had put something in her tea.