had paid some money for work to a man named James Greenwood, of
Lobbmill; but a balance of four shillings was left unpaid. Before
daylight on Friday morning James Greenwood presented himself at Sammy's
door, having come for his four shillings. He was surprised to find the
door wide open. This excited his fears that some mischief had taken
place during the night. He knocked at William Greenwood's door, stated
the suspicious circumstance, and desired him to come out. On attempting
to do so, he found that the door would not open. James Greenwood then
discovered (it was still dark) that the door was fastened by means of
the wooden bar. It was now ascertained that Sammy's house had been
entered by robbers through the window, and that he lay lifeless in his
bed. His mouth was full of blood, and some had run out upon the
bed-clothes. The empty bucket was found outside the door. William
Greenwood, who had seen Sammy at half-past ten the night before in good
health, looked for the cotton pieces which he had taken in the previous
day, but they were gone. He observed one footstep leading to the window
which had been removed. It was the mark of a bare foot.
There was great consternation in the neighbourhood as soon as the murder
was known. Mr. Thomas Dineley, surgeon, of Hebden Bridge, was called in.
He gave his opinion that the deceased died of strangulation. It is
commonly said that he also pronounced Sammy to have been strangled by a
left-handed person; but some persons very likely to know most of the
facts have no remembrance of this circumstance.
The papers and documents were found at Carr Green early in the morning
by Olive Heyhirst, who was going to fetch milk.
Several persons expressed to each other their suspicions that Old Mike
was the criminal. A woman met him in Northwell Lane on Friday morning.
He said, "Have you heard that Old Sammy's murdered?" She replied, "If he
is, it's thee that's done it."
Mike afterwards confessed that the day after the murder he could neither
eat, drink, nor sleep, and was always uneasy wherever he was. On Friday
evening he went to Heptonstall to be shaved. He was in such a state of
restless agitation that the barber had much difficulty in fulfilling his
office, and when Mike was gone out, the barber said to some bystanders,
"Yon's the man that's murdered Sammy."
William Sutcliffe, the nephew, returned from his journey on Saturday
afternoon. A messenger had been sent to expedite his return; but he was
not able to get back more than a couple of hours earlier than he would
otherwise have done. He now privately made known to several neighbours,
and among others to Mr. John Sutcliffe, of The Lee, that among the
missing property there was an unsigned Mytholm note. It had been entered
by Mr. Barker, the clerk to Turner, Bent, and Co., but was not signed by
them. Having been pinned in the ready reckoner, it would show the marks
of pin-holes. At that time several firms near Hebden Bridge issued
private notes of various values. Messrs. Turner, Bent, and Co. issued
both guinea and one-pound notes, printed in black ink. Messrs. Rawden,
of Callis Mill, issued both guinea-notes and five-shilling cards,
printed in blue ink, and therefore called "blue-backs." Mr. John
Sutcliffe, of The Lee, issued cards, value three shillings and sixpence,
printed red. Mr. Edmondson issued seven-shilling notes. Mr. Richard
Chatburn, of Sprutts, issued three and sixpenny cards. Mr. Robert
Sutcliffe, of New Shop, put out five-shilling notes. Silver was very
scarce just then; the smooth shillings which had been current were being
called in by Government, and stamped ones were being issued instead.
Monday, February 10th, Mike attended service at Birchcliffe Chapel. The
minister, Mr. Hollinrake, during his sermon made some strong remarks
about the murder. His text was Matthew xxiv., 43--"But know this, that
if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would
come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be
broken up." This smote Mike's conscience so severely that he afterwards
declared that, if any one had looked him earnestly in the face, he might
have discovered that he was the man. An inquest was held at Heptonstall;
and poor old Sammy's remains were interred at Heptonstall church.
Standing outside the churchyard, at the east end, near the street, you
may read his epitaph through the rails:--"In memory of Samuel
Sutcliffe, of Hebden Hay, in Heptonstall, who died February 7, 1817,
aged eighty-one years."
John Greenwood had a brother living at Luddenden, named William. John
went to him, and gave the unsigned note into his hand. He then received
the note back again from his brother. This farce was enacted between
them to enable John to give an evasive answer to any one who should make
troublesome inquiries as to how he became possessed of the note. John
now went to the house of Thomas Greenwood, of Birchcliffe, and completed
the purchase of a clock from him, giving him in payment the unsigned
note, with some other money. Another version of the story is that given
by William Greenwood, the brother, at York, viz., that "John Greenwood
came to his father's house on Tuesday, February 11th, and on going home,
desired William to 'go agatards' with him; when he told him that he had
bought a clock of Thomas Greenwood that came to forty-two shillings;
that he would give him a note which the witness was to give to Thomas
Greenwood on John's account, and say that he had lent it to John. This
William did; but he then began to think that John had not come by the
note in an honest manner."
A woman named Betty Wadsworth, having had an illegitimate child, had
been disowned by her relatives, and was now living "afore t' friend" at
Rawholme with another William Greenwood, commonly known by the name of
"Will o' t' shop." She possessed a chest of drawers, which, to raise
money, she disposed of to Thomas Greenwood, of Birchcliffe, who in
payment handed over to her the unsigned note on Tuesday, February 11th.
The same evening she went to the shop of John Hoyle, of Woodend, to buy
groceries, and offered the unsigned note in payment. Hoyle refused to
receive it, seeing it was unsigned. She took it back to Rawholme.
Wednesday morning, the 12th, she sent it up to Thomas Greenwood by
Sarah, wife of "Will o' t' shop," complaining that he had paid to her a
note which was not genuine. Now this Thomas Greenwood[17] was a weaver
for Mr. John Sutcliffe, of The Lee; and on the day before Tuesday he had
received from Mr. John Sutcliffe, for wages, a Halifax banknote. Not
being able to read, he was not aware whether the rejected note was that
which he had received from William Greenwood, of Luddenden, or from Mr.
John Sutcliffe. Doubting whether he should be able to get a good note
from John or William Greenwood in exchange for it, he decided to try The
Lee first, and hope for a successful issue of the experiment. He went
immediately to The Lee, and found in the warehouse Mr. Richard Aked, who
was learning the business with Mr. Sutcliffe. To him he gave the note,
saying that Mr. Sutcliffe must have given him an unsigned note by
mistake the day before. Mr. Aked took the note to Mr. Sutcliffe, who was
breakfasting. He at once saw that this note was the key to the discovery
of Sammy's murderer. He sent for some constables, and meanwhile learned
from Thomas Greenwood that the note had come from "Joan o' t' Bog-eggs."
James Wilson, the constable, sizer, of Hebden Bridge Lanes, soon made
his appearance, and with him three others--viz., George Hargreaves, John
o' Paul's (Greenwood), and John Uttley, commonly called John Clerk,
being the clerk of Heptonstall church. Mr. John Sutcliffe and Thomas
Greenwood accompany the officers to Bog-eggs, and Joan is apprehended.
He declares that the note was paid to him by his brother William. Joan
is therefore set at liberty, and William is apprehended at Luddenden,
and taken to Halifax in proper custody the same day. He is brought
before Thomas Horton, Esq., J.P., at the justice-room, Copper Street. He
refuses to give any account of the note, being afraid of criminating his
brother, till Friday, February 14th. On that day William Greenwood
confesses the hoax as to the passing of the note from Joan to him, and
back again. The same day Joan is re-apprehended, and declares before Mr.
Horton that he received the unsigned note from Old Mike. William
Greenwood is set at liberty. Old Mike is looked for, but cannot be
found, his wife stating that he is gone off seeking for work.
Sunday, February 16th, Mike is apprehended at his brother's at Cowside,
near Blackshaw Head. He is kept in custody at an inn in Heptonstall for
the night. He declared to the Rev. J. Charnock, who visited him, "I am
as innocent as you are; I am as innocent as a child unborn."
Monday morning, February 17th, Mike was taken to Halifax, before Justice
Horton, with many other persons who had by this time been apprehended on
suspicion. (Some had already been brought before Mr. Horton at Halifax.
As many as sixteen or seventeen persons in all were taken up. Some of
these confessed other crimes, being, however, unconnected with this
murder, as of stealing meal and flour, and a gun from Handganroyd Mill,
sheep-stealing, &c. I believe that one or two persons were convicted of
sheep-stealing. The rest escaped, partly from the unwillingness of the
parties robbed to prosecute.) Mike is confronted with Joan, and denies
Joan's accusation. Joan contradicts himself by some blunder as to the
day of the week and day in the month when he went to Old Mike's to
borrow money. Hereupon Mike appears to be cleared, and is set at
liberty. Joan's father comes to Joan, and entreats him, if he knows
anything about the robbery, to confess it. At length he yields to this
persuasion, and unreservedly confesses all about both the robbery and
the murder. John Uttley, the constable, is in court, and having a horse
at the inn, he volunteers to pursue Old Mike on his way back to
Heptonstall. He overtakes him in King's Cross Lane, walking quickly
homewards, and eating "sweet parkin." Uttley calls out, "You must come
back with me." Mike, off his guard, asks, "What! has he been telling
something?" Uttley brings him quietly back to the magistrates' room.
Mike no longer denies the crimes of murder and burglary. When he and
Joan were confronted by each other there occurred such a scene of
crimination and recrimination that it was found necessary to place Joan
in the cell (or cellar) until the minutes of Joan's confession had been
read over to Mike. After Mike had confessed many circumstances connected
with the affair, the prisoners exchanged places, and the minutes of
Mike's confession were read over to Joan. Both were now consigned to
their cells.
Tuesday, February 18th, the prisoners were again before Mr. Horton, but
nothing new was elicited. They were this day committed to York Castle.
The same day James Wilson, the constable, searched Mike's house for the
third time. His evidence at York is that "he found, concealed under a
flag, under the bed, three fustian pieces and four warps, and some other
articles, and above the fireplace a gun. The cotton pieces were
identified by William Greenwood, Sammy's neighbour, who had taken them
into the house of the deceased and marked them; the other articles were
identified by William Sutcliffe."
The _Leeds Mercury_ of Saturday, Feb. 22nd, says that on Wednesday, the
13th, the two prisoners passed through that town, strongly ironed, on
their way to York Castle.
The trial took place at York Castle on Friday, March 14th, 1817. The
prisoners were arraigned on an indictment of murdering Samuel Sutcliffe,
and also on an indictment of burglary. Both admitted the burglary; both
denied the murder. By the recommendation of the judge they pleaded "Not
guilty" to both indictments. No fewer than 22 witnesses were taken to
York, including all the individuals whose names have been given above;
with Mr. William Sutcliffe, of Heptonstall, who made Sammy's writings;
Mr. John Barker and Mr. Jas. Bent, of Mytholm, and Mr. Henry Sutcliffe,
of Pendle Forest, &c. Mr. Hardy, in a very eloquent and perspicuous
opening, stated the facts of the case. The names of the witnesses whose
evidence is given in the _Leeds Mercury_ (Saturday, March 22, 1817),
are William Sutcliffe, William Greenwood (the neighbouring cottager),
Thomas Dyneley, Betty Wadsworth, John Hoyle, Sarah Greenwood, Thomas
Greenwood, William Greenwood, of Luddenden, Thomas Horton, Esq., Olive
Heyhirst, John Thomas, of Midgley, and James Wilson. John Thomas "was a
shoemaker, and received a pair of shoes from the prisoner, John
Greenwood, on the 8th of February, which he delivered to the constable,
and which, being produced in court, were identified by William Sutcliffe
as the shoes which he had left in the house" when he went on his
journey. The other witnesses gave evidence agreeing in most particulars
with the facts stated above.
The remainder of the proceedings at York we give in the words of the
_Leeds Mercury_ of Saturday, March 22nd, 1817. "The prisoners being
called upon for their defence, Michael Pickles said--John Greenwood came
to my house and said he was pined, and asked me to go with him to
Sammy's, of Hawden Hole, which I did, and he took the gun with him. When
we got to the old man's house, we got in at the window, and we both went
into the chamber where the old man was. He started up in bed when he
heard us, and we both ran away, and I never touched the man.
"John Greenwood said--The robbery was proposed by Michael Pickles, for I
did not know that there was such a house--I had never been there in my
life. When we got to the house, Pickles went in at the window, but I
stayed at the outside. I was never in the biggin' at all, but stood at
the shop-end all the time, and Pickles brought out all the goods to me
that he had taken out of the biggin'. He then told me that he had taken
the old man by the neck, and was afraid he had killed him; and I said,
'Surely thou hast not hurt the old man?' Michael Pickles gave me the gun
to carry, but I tied my handkerchief in two knots over the lock, for
fear I should do some mischief with it. When we got back to Pickles'
house, he told his wife he was afraid he had killed the old man; and his
wife began to cry. Pickles charged me that I should keep it a secret
from every one, even from my wife, for if I told I should be hanged.
"Three witnesses were called. Two of them spoke favourably of the
character of John Greenwood. The third stated that he had a wife and
three children, but that he did not know much about his character.
"His Lordship, in his charge to the jury, stated that where two or more
persons were jointly engaged in the commission of any burglary or other
felonious act, and one of the party killed a person in furtherance of
their common object, every one of the party would in law be guilty of
the crime of murder. And it was necessary, continued his Lordship, for
the safety of society, that it should be so, that associations in guilt
might be as much as possible prevented. If indeed an individual of any
such party should put a person to death to gratify his own private
revenge, and not for the furtherance of their common object, in that
case he alone would be answerable for the murder. His Lordship explained
that this furtherance comprises all acts done to prevent or overpower
resistance and to prevent discovery. Applying this rule to the case
before them, his Lordship said that if the jury were satisfied that both
the prisoners had gone to the house of the deceased for the purpose of
committing a robbery, and that one of them, to prevent any alarm or
discovery, had by violence occasioned the death of the deceased, it
would be murder in them both, though one of the prisoners should not
have been within the house at the time, and should have given no consent
to the murderous deed, or even not have known of its being committed.
That a burglary had been committed in the house was too evident to admit
of a doubt. It also appeared from all the circumstances of the case
that the death of Samuel Sutcliffe had been produced by strangulation,
and it was admitted by Pickles that he had seized him by the throat, and
that when he quitted his grasp he had reason to suppose he was dead. If
the jury were satisfied of these facts, and further thought that Michael
Pickles had committed this violence, not from any personal enmity (of
which there was not the least proof), but with a view to prevent alarm
and secure the accomplishment of their design of robbing the house, it
would be the duty of the jury to find both the prisoners guilty.
"The jury turned round in the box for a moment, and then pronounced
against both prisoners the fatal verdict of 'Guilty.' His Lordship
proceeded, after a most solemn and affecting address, to pass the
sentence of the law, which was, that they were both of them to be hung
by the neck on Monday until they were dead, and that their bodies should
be delivered to the surgeons for dissection.
"John Greenwood fell on his knees, begging for mercy, and protesting his
innocence of the murder.
"It is understood that since his conviction he has acknowledged to the
chaplain that he was in the house, and stood at the foot of the steps
with the gun.
"The sentence of the law was carried into execution on Monday, March
17th, a few minutes after eleven o'clock, and their bodies, after being
suspended the usual time, were delivered to the surgeons for dissection.
The body of Pickles has been sent to the Dispensary at Halifax."
FOOTNOTES:
[16] The circumstances of the murder and the discovery of the murderer
were collected with great care by the brother of a friend of the author,
now dead, and were communicated by him to the _Hebden Bridge Chronicle_
in 1856. The papers of the compiler have been kindly sent to the author,
and placed at his disposal. The facts of this extraordinary story were
collected partly from individuals now surviving, who lived in the
neighbourhood at the time, especially from one who was a principal
witness at the trial at York, and partly from documents. Of the latter
the principal are a good report of the trial given in the _Leeds
Mercury_ of Saturday, March 22nd, 1817, and a confession by the
condemned parties drawn up in the usual style of confessions, and
printed at Leeds for the purpose of being hawked about the streets. The
_Manchester Mercury_ of Tuesday, March, 18th, 1817, gives a short
account of the trial and condemnation of the prisoners, and concludes
with a confession of the principal prisoner; being a long verbatim
extract from the confession printed at Leeds for sale by hawkers. One of
the official books belonging to Heptonstall church contains a copy of
the charge of the judge to the jury at York, taken verbatim from the
_Leeds Mercury_ of March 22nd.
[17] Greenwood is probably the most prevalent name in the neighbourhood.
Out of 755 entries in a public register in the neighbourhood, the name
Greenwood occurs 48 times, Helliwell 34, Sutcliffe 33, Cockcroft 18,
Smith 18, Akroyd 15, Crabtree 15, Mitchell 14, Stansfield 13, Uttley 13,
Horsfall 12, Midgley 12, Gibson 11, Taylor 11, Pickles 9, Fielden 9,
Gill 9, &c. We may here remark on the prevalence of patronymic names,
which sometimes are really useful, however inelegant, in a district
where the same names recur so frequently. Thus "John o' Abbie's" and
"Joan o' Jim's" were the ordinary names of two individuals who were each
legally designated John Stansfield. By how many useful variations is the
name John Sutcliffe represented! To strangers this practice is the more
puzzling from the frequent use of abbreviations, such as Eam, Tham, Lol,
Abbie, Jooas, Kit (or Katie), Joan, Tim, and Tum; for Edmund, Nathaniel,
Lawrence, Abraham, Joseph, Catherine, John, Timothy, Thomas. There was
formerly a "Jimmie, o' Jamie, o' James, o'th Jumps." "George o' my
Gronny's" and "Will o' Nobody's" are bold specimens of what may be done
by the principle in question carried out with a little licence. Not
unfrequently, also, people are named from their residences, as "John up
th' steps," and "Old Ann o' th' Hinging Royd." Bye-names also become
sometimes attached as if they were real family surnames. If it were not
personal, many singular instances might be given. Persons are frequently
unable, without some consideration, to recognise the legal names of
their neighbours. Upon the hillside at Jumps, near Todmorden, I once
asked a little girl who was her father. "Will o' th' Jumps," she
replied. "And who's Will o' th' Jumps?" I again inquired. "He's Ailse o'
th' Jumps, fellie," replied the girl; and I doubt whether she had any
idea whatever of her legal surname.
MR. WIKES, OF LEASEHOLME.[18]
The living of Leaseholme, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, was held by
three successive generations of the Wikeses for upwards of a century;
all of whom were men of literary talents, popular preachers, great
oddities--but much given to the bottle. The first of the Wikes family
who held the living was a gentleman who had been captain in the army in
the reign of Charles I., and had fought for the unfortunate monarch
throughout the civil war. In one of the battles he received a wound in
his leg, which incapacitated him from further active service, and the
death of the king and the supremacy of Cromwell prevented him from
looking to Government for promotion.
But on the Restoration Mr. Wikes cast about for some berth in which he
might spend his declining years in ease and comfort. The living of
Leaseholme fell vacant, and he applied for it, remembering how his old
friend the sea-captain, Lyons, had obtained the bishopric of York from
Queen Elizabeth.
Captain Wikes was ordained by the Archbishop of York, and given the
living he solicited, King Charles II. being glad to reward an old
soldier of his father, who had shared his misfortunes, thus economically
to himself.
Mr. Wikes also held the incumbency of Ellerburn, near Leaseholme, and
took service in the morning at Leaseholme, and in the afternoon at
Ellerburn, or _vice versà_.
One year, when the 30th of January fell on a Sunday, Mr. Wikes marched
off to Ellerburn for morning service, with a pathetic sermon on the
martyrdom of his royal master in his pocket; but on his arrival at the
place he found the clerk and sexton near the churchyard, with a short
pole in their hands, watching a domestic quarrel that was going forward
on the opposite side of the beck that flows through the village. The
parson asked why the church was empty and his subordinates were not in
their places. The clerk pointed across the beck, and bade Parson Wikes
"look and see a woman combing her husband's head with a three-legged
stool."
Mr. Wikes at once plunged over the brook, and striking the husband with
his fist, tore the furious pair asunder, shouting, "Be quiet, you
brute!" to the husband, and "Hold your tongue, you vixen!" to the woman.
Both fell on him, and he had hard work in defending himself from husband
and wife. In the fray that ensued the yells of the parson--"Peace, you
monster! Have done, termagant! Hands off, you coward! Retire,
virago!"--were mingled with the abuse and blows of the disputants, till
the absurdity of the whole scene burst upon them all, as the crowd of
delighted parishioners and neighbours gathered in a circle about them,
and they fell back laughing, and shook hands all round.
But matters did not end here. When husband and wife disagree, and a
third party interferes, according to local custom, all three are doomed
to "ride the stang," whilst the people shout and caper around the
victims, chanting, as they beat frying-pans and blow horns--
"Rub-a-dub, dub-a-dub, ran-a-tan-tang,
It's neither what you say nor I say, but I ride the stang."