say the grave I took it out of is, that there were two watchmen on the
ground, and they intrusted me, and being men of family, I don't wish to
'deceive' them. I don't think I can say anything more. I took it for
sale to Guy's Hospital, and, as they did not want it, I left it there
all night and part of the next day, and then I removed it to the King's
College. That is all I can say about it. I mean to say that this is the
truth. I shall certainly keep it a secret where I got the body. I know
nothing as to how it died.
CORONER.--You have a right not to implicate yourself; and certainly
I must say, that the account which you have given is by no means
satisfactory.
Bishop was then removed, and the prisoner May was brought forward, and
cautioned in the same way as the other prisoners. He was told that the
result of the inquiry might affect his life, and if he said anything,
it would be produced as evidence against him.
The prisoner said he wished to say what he knew, and would speak the
truth. He then said, that his name was James May, and that he lived
in Dorset-street, Newington. He went into the country on Sunday week,
and returned on the evening of Wednesday, and went to Mr. Grainger's,
in Webb-street, with a couple of subjects. On the following morning
(Thursday) he removed them to Mr. Davis's, at Guy's; and, after
receiving the money, he went away to the Fortune of War, in Smithfield,
and stayed there about two or three hours. Between four and five
o'clock, to the best of his recollection, he went to Nag's-head-court,
Golden-lane, and there he stopped with a female until between eleven
and twelve o'clock the next day (Friday). From Golden-lane he went to
the Fortune of War again, and stopped drinking there until six o'clock,
or half-past. Williams and Bishop both came in there, and asked him, if
he would stand anything to drink? which he did. Bishop then called him
out, and asked him, where he could get the best price for 'things?' he
told him where he had sold two (meaning Guy's); and he (Bishop) then
told him, that he had got a good subject, and had been offered eight
guineas for it. He (May) replied, that he could get more for it; and
then Bishop said, all that he could get over nine guineas he might have
for himself. He agreed to it; and they went from thence to the Old
Bailey, and had some tea at the Watering-house there, leaving Williams
at the Fortune of War. After tea they called a chariot off the stand,
and drove to Bishop's house. When there, Bishop showed him the lad in
a box or trunk. He (May) then put it into a sack, and brought it to
the chariot, and conveyed it to Mr. Davis, at Guy's. Mr. Davis said,
you know, John, I can't take it, because I took two of you yesterday,
and I have not got names enough down for one, or I would take it. He
(May) then asked him if he could leave the body there that night? and
he said he might. Bishop then desired Mr. Davis not to let any person
have it, as it was his subject, but to deliver it to his own self. He
(May) also told Davis not to let the body go without him, or he should
be money out of pocket. May then went on to state, that he went to his
own house, and slept there that night, and the next morning he went to
Guy's, and Bishop and Shields came in with a hamper, which was taken to
King's College, where he was taken into custody. The prisoner said that
he had spoken the truth, and nothing else. He was then removed, and the
other prisoner,
JOHN WILLIAMS, was brought in; and being cautioned not to say anything
to criminate himself, he stated that, in the first place, he met Bishop
on last Saturday morning, in Long-lane, Smithfield, and asked him where
he was going? He said he was going to the King's College. They then
went into the Fortune of War public-house, and after that Bishop went
to Guy's Hospital, and then to the King's College. May and the porter
met them against the gate. Bishop went in, and he (Williams) asked him
to let him go in with him. That was all he had got to say, except that
a porter took a basket from the Fortune of War to Guy's Hospital, and
he (Williams) helped him a part of the way with it.
[Illustration: Bishop, &c. at Entrance of King's College]
The prisoner was then removed.
JAMES SEAGROVE, a cabriolet driver, swore positively, that a quarter
before six o'clock on Friday evening he was sitting in a public-house
in the Old Bailey, when two men (May and Bishop) came in, and the
taller of the two told him that they wanted him to do a job. Witness
answered that there were a great many jobs, long and short ones. May
then said, that he wanted him to carry a 'stiff un.' Witness asked what
he meant to pay him for it. The witness then went on to state, that he
declined the offer of May and Bishop, and afterwards saw them trying
to make a bargain with a coachman on the stand. May had previously
offered witness a guinea for the job. The witness added that he meant
to do them, and appeared to consent at first merely for the purpose of
hearing a little of the tricks of body-snatchers.
The room was about to be cleared, when
WILLIAM HILL, the porter at the dissecting-rooms, King's College,
begged to add to his former evidence, that when there was a delay in
paying Bishop and May for the body, the former said to Mr. Partridge,
Give me what money you have got in your purse, and I will call for
the remainder on Monday. It was very unusual for persons selling dead
bodies to go away with part payment only, unless something was wrong;
they generally wait for their money.
The room was then cleared, and at half-past ten o'clock the Jury came
to the following verdict:--
We find a verdict of WILFUL MURDER against some person or persons
unknown; and the Jury beg to add to the above verdict, that the
evidence produced before them has excited very strong suspicions
in their minds against the prisoners Bishop and Williams, and they
trust that a strict inquiry will be made into the case by the
Police Magistrates.
We understand that Mr. Corder received directions from the Home Office
to forward the result of the examination before the Coroner to the
Secretary of State, as soon as it should be made known; and it was
further stated, that a reward would be forthwith offered for such
evidence as might tend to fix the crime upon the guilty parties. The
prisoners still remained in custody on the charge, namely, suspicion
of murder, for which they were brought to Bow-street on the previous
Saturday night; and Mr. Minshull, before whom the examination then took
place, expressed his determination to pursue the inquiry to the utmost.
Previously to entering into any further statement of the measures
adopted for obtaining the necessary evidence to bring the commission
of the crime home to the accused parties, we may be allowed to offer
a few reflections on the indelible disgrace which is attached to this
country, by the tacit encouragement which is given to the horrid
vocation of the resurrectionists, and which has now become such a
settled system, that not only the sanctuary of the grave is violated,
but human life is sported with as if the laws had no restraining hand
upon the criminals, and they were to be allowed, in the open face
of day, to carry on their murderous trade, in defiance of humanity,
religion, and the laws. Would it be credited, were it not obviously
true, that after the discovery of such till then unheard-of depravity
as that exhibited in the crimes of Burke and Hare, two years should
elapse without any measure being adopted by the Legislature to amend
the system which tempts to such horrors, and that the subject should
be forgotten until similar atrocities are repeated in the metropolis
of the kingdom, at the very source of legislation, and under the very
eye of a police supposed to be the most efficient in Europe? People
talk, or rather used to talk, of some species of crime not being
English--Alas! that England should now stand indelibly stained by guilt
of so foul, so unnatural a blackness, that all other 'detested sins'
which, when exposed, 'stood bare and naked, trembling at themselves,'
compared with this, are blanched into the complexion of natural,
perhaps generous impulses, culpable only in their misdirection and
excess! It seems reserved for the British schools of anatomy to offer a
premium for murder not prompted by passion, not provoked by injury, not
justified even to the murderer by revenge, but premeditated with cold,
diabolical, mercantile calculation, as to the price which will be given
for the corpse of the victim.
The depravation of the actors of these crimes appears to us almost
inexplicable. It has been said, that all are not men who bear the form
of men; and the resurrectionist, in his horrid vocation, bears no
alliance to humanity; 'the common damned shun his society;' but can we
acquit of blood guiltiness, those who having authority to legislate
on the subject, and knowing such practices to exist, try not every
possible means, and we may almost say impossible ones, to prevent them?
There existed formerly in Portugal an officer of state whose duty
it was to ask pardon formally for every person condemned to death,
whatever were the nature and number of his offences. It is recorded,
that when the officer was interceding, as usual, in favour of a person
condemned to die for his twentieth murder, the king refused the pardon
asked, on the plea that the number of the crimes rendered the criminal
an object unfit for mercy. 'He is as fit an object now, replied the
officer, as he was at first. He is only guilty of the first murder:
your Majesty, by overlooking that, is responsible for all the others.'
The senseless clamour which was raised against Mr. Warburton's Bill,
on account of the pain which it would cause to the feelings of a
few paupers, provokes us to wish, that all those who excited it may
be haunted with the anguish of that unutterable dread which led Mr.
Hare to view the body of the murdered stranger boy, in the horrid
expectation that it might be that of his lost son. In regard to the
outrage on the feelings of the pauper, we suspect that, were a law
to be enacted, giving the body of every pauper, not claimed by any
relative, for dissection, it would have a very salutary effect in
thinning the workhouses of a number of paupers, who throw themselves
on the parish as being too idle to work, and who would never think of
entering a workhouse if they thought dissection was to be their fate
after death.
We shall have occasion, in the progress of this work, to enter more
fully into the important question of the great encouragement which
is given to murder by the facility with which the corpse is disposed
of to the hospitals and the dissecting-rooms; and therefore, for the
present, we shall merely ask, whether a study carried on by means,
which, setting the murders out of the question, deteriorate the moral
sense, has prolonged life beyond the limits of human existence in
the days of Galen and Hippocrates? Whether, if it have, a degree of
science sufficient for general utility might not be obtained from
those perfect representations in wax of the internal machinery of the
human frame, such as are found on the Continent, and from bodies which
might be legitimately obtained? And whether, if the answer be in the
negative, the preservation of the perishable part of one being for a
few days longer than it might otherwise enjoy or suffer, be not too
dearly purchased by the depravation of the spirit which is to live for
ever? Perish the science of prolonging life, if we are constrained to
maintain it at such a cost!
From the day on which the Coroner's inquest terminated, to the 18th
of November, Mr. Corder was most actively employed in obtaining that
information which could trace the commission of the murder to the
four men who stood charged with the crime; and, on the above day,
they were brought to the Public Office, Bow Street, and placed at the
bar, before Mr. Minshull, the presiding magistrate, who was assisted
by Dr. Robinson and Mr. Mallard, county magistrates, and Mr. Swabey,
late of Union Hall. The office was crowded to excess long before the
examination commenced, and the greatest anxiety was exhibited to get a
view of the prisoners, and hear the evidence produced against them. The
bench was also crowded by gentlemen, many of whom were surgeons.
Mr. CORDER, who appeared on behalf of the Parish of St. Paul's,
Covent-garden, said, he should, in the first instance, call evidence to
show that the prisoners had not met in the manner they had described
when before the Coroner's jury, and with this view he called
HENRY LOCKER, who deposed that on Friday, the 4th of November, instant,
he was waiter at the Fortune of War public-house, in Giltspur-street.
He knew the prisoners, who used to frequent that house. Bishop, May,
and Williams called in between eleven and twelve o'clock on Friday
morning, and had something to drink; they remained in the tap-room
about an hour and a half, and then went away. They returned about
three o'clock, and remained until it was dusk, when they went away
again, and came back again at eight o'clock or past. They had with them
a strange man, who appeared to be a hackney-coachman. They said they
had had a ride, and went into the tap-room and had something to drink.
Shortly after, the prisoner May came out of the tap-room and went to
the bar. He had a handkerchief in his hand, which seemed to contain
something. He poured some hot water on the handkerchief, and began to
wipe its contents, which proved to be human teeth. Witness remarked
that they seemed to be the teeth of a young person, and that they were
worth something. May answered, that they were as good to him as two
pounds. The prisoners and the other man soon after went away. On the
following morning (Saturday), Bishop, Williams, and Shields called
again, and had some beer to drink. Bishop asked what they should do for
a hamper, and Williams said, there was one inside the railings of the
hospital (Bartholomew's). The prisoner Shields went and fetched it, and
all three went away.
Mr. MINSHULL asked the witness to describe May's dress when he first
saw him.
WITNESS.--I do not exactly remember.
Prisoner MAY.--How can you tell the hour when you first saw me?
WITNESS.--Although I cannot speak to your dress, I am certain as to the
hour.
The WITNESS, in reply to a question by Mr. Minshull, said, that when
May was engaged in washing the teeth, he had on a dark-coloured
smock-frock.
Mr. CORDER said, that as it was not intended on this examination
to offer any evidence with respect to the exchange of clothes in
Field-lane, it was not very material as to the dress of the prisoner.
With respect to that circumstance, evidence would be produced on a
future occasion.
JAMES SEAGROVE, the cabriolet driver, who gave evidence before the
coroner, was again called forward. He stated, that on the Friday
evening, about six o'clock, being at tea in a watering-house in the
Old Bailey, he was called out to the prisoners Bishop and May. The
latter asked him if he wanted a job, and added, 'I want you to carry a
stiff un,' adding, 'we will stand a guinea for it.' Witness declined
the job, and left the prisoners apparently making a bargain with a
hackney-coachman.
Mr. MINSHULL asked the prisoners if they wished to put any questions to
the witness.
MAY.--No: the man answers perfectly correct.
THOMAS TAVERNOR, the waterman at the stand in the Old Bailey, proved,
that he was directed by two men to call out the last witness from
the Watering-house: they said, they wanted to hire his cab. Witness,
however, could not identify the man, as the night was dark.
Mr. MINSHULL asked, if the men were carrying anything, and whether the
witness saw the coach in which they drove off?
The WITNESS replied, that the men were not carrying anything when he
saw them, and he did not see in what manner they left the place, for he
went away as soon as he had called the witness Seagrove.
GEORGE GISSING, a boy about fifteen, proved that he was the son of
a publican, who lived in Birdcage-walk, Bethnal-green. On Friday
evening, between six and seven o'clock, he was standing at his father's
door, when he saw a yellow-bodied chariot stop at the corner of Nova
Scotia-gardens. The prisoners, Bishop, May, and Williams, jumped out of
it, and the two former went up Nova Scotia gardens; they were dressed
in smock-frocks, and May had a pipe in his mouth. Williams, who had on
a light fustian jacket, remained leaning against the fore-wheel of the
chariot, in conversation with the coachman. Bishop and May returned in
a short time, carrying a sack containing something heavy. May had the
sack on his back, and Bishop was holding it up behind; the sack was
placed in the chariot, and after the prisoners had taken their places,
it drove off through Crabtree-row, in the direction of Shoreditch
Church.
THOMAS TRADER, another boy about the same age as the last witness, gave
similar evidence, having seen everything which Gissing had witnessed.
Mrs. Cannell, who was also present, told witness that something strange
was going forward, and she told him to go down the gardens and watch
the motions of the two men (May and Bishop), but witness declined to do
so.
ANN CANNELL corroborated the statement of the last witness, and added,
that she saw two men jump out of the coach. They both wore dark
smock-frocks, and one of them had a pipe in his mouth. (The witness was
here directed to look well at the prisoners Bishop and May, and after
doing so, she declared that she could not identify them as the two men
whom she had so seen.) The last witness stood by, and she (witness)
said to him, 'This looks strange; see where they are going so quick.'
The lad replied, 'I am sure I won't go after them, for if I did, they
would not mind giving me a topper.' The coachman never got off his box
until the men returned, and this circumstance excited her suspicions
the more.
JOHN CHAPMAN, having been sworn, stated that he was porter at Guy's
Hospital. At seven o'clock on the evening of Friday, the 4th instant,
the two prisoners, Bishop and May, drove to the Hospital in a
hackney-coach or chariot. They came to his (witness') lodge, and he let
them in. They had a sack with them, which the shorter man (Bishop)
carried. Witness did not know what the sack contained: they went
towards the dissecting-room.
By Dr. ROBINSON.--The sack appeared to contain something heavy. It
is usual for coaches to draw up to the gate of the Hospital, and no
questions are asked. I knew the persons of the men before, but did not
know their names.
BISHOP.--Now, John, are you certain that it was I who carried the sack?
WITNESS.--Yes, I am.
MAY.--Why it was I who carried the sack, and not Bishop. It is a matter
of no moment, but it only shows how careful men ought to be when on
their oath.
JAMES DAVIS, the porter to the dissecting-room at Guy's Hospital,
repeated the evidence which he gave before the Coroner, as to the body
having been offered for sale to him, by Bishop and May, on the night
of Friday; and after he had declined to purchase it, Bishop requested
him to take charge of it all night, which he did. Witness observed a
human foot protruding from the sack, (a previous witness has sworn that
it was the knee,) and from the size of the foot he concluded, that the
subject was either a youth or a female. The body was removed from the
Hospital on the following morning, James Weeks, the assistant porter,
having delivered it to May and Bishop. Witness saw them both at the
Hospital in the morning, in company with the prisoner Shields, and
another man.
JAMES WEEKS, the person referred to, proved that he delivered the body
to May and Bishop. When they were at the Hospital the previous night,
May said, 'The fact is, the subject belongs to Bishop and not to me.'
Witness was positive that when May and Bishop came for the body in the
morning, the prisoners, Shields and Williams, accompanied them.
MAY.--When we were going to leave 'the thing,' did not Bishop say it
belonged to him?
WITNESS.--No, not to my knowledge.
Mr. MINSHULL.--Had anything been said that you remember?
WITNESS.--Yes; May said, 'Don't let the subject go, unless I am here
with Bishop.' Bishop said so likewise.
JAMES DAVIS recalled.--I don't recollect that May said, Don't let
the body go; but some conversation having passed to that effect, the
impression that it left upon my mind was, that the body was not to be
removed from the Hospital, unless both prisoners were present.
JOHN APPLETON, porter to Mr. Grainger's Theatre of Anatomy,
Webb-street, Borough, proved, that on Friday night, after May and
Bishop had left Guy's, they came and asked if he wanted a subject.
Witness answered in the negative, and they went away.
WILLIAM HILL, porter at the dissecting-room, King's College, repeated
the evidence which he had previously given, and added, that after
he had communicated with Mr. Partridge, and had offered Bishop nine
guineas for the body, May, who appeared to be tipsy, said, they ought
to have ten guineas. May then slipped aside, and Bishop, who appeared
to be more anxious to sell the body than May, said, 'I will bring it
in for nine guineas; he (meaning May) is tipsy.' The witness then
proceeded to state, that on the same afternoon, the four prisoners
brought the body of the deceased in a hamper to the College, and
after describing the appearances which it presented, and stating the
suspicions which were excited in consequence, added, that Bishop wanted
Mr. Partridge to give him whatever money he had in his purse, and
said, they would call again for the remainder. While they were waiting
to be paid, Bishop wished witness to give him but eight guineas in
the presence of Williams, saying, that he wanted the other guinea for
himself, and he promised witness half-a-crown for himself if he would
do so.
BISHOP.--Yes, you get many a guinea in that way.
Mr. MINSHULL.--Is it customary for persons in your situation to receive
such presents?
WITNESS.--Yes, sir, sometimes.
Mr. MINSHULL.--Did you perceive any marks of dirt upon the body, as if
it had been scraped with a dirty sleeve, or smeared over with a hand?
WITNESS.--I did perceive such marks.
Mr. SWABEY.--Did they appear to have been made by design or accident?
The witness could not say; but in answer to a question by Mr. Corder,
he gave it as his clear opinion, that the body had neither been laid
out nor buried.
BISHOP.--It is impossible for you to tell that. You know nothing about
raising bodies. Is there not a difference in soil? Besides could not
clay have got into the coffin?
The witness went on to state, that when the body was taken from the
sack, at the College, the left arm was doubled up. The hand also was
clenched.
MAY.--When the body was laid on the floor, was the arm doubled up?
WITNESS.--Yes, and I unclenched the fingers myself, and observed that
the limbs were very stiff.
BISHOP (smiling). The fact is, you are not in the habit of seeing fresh
subjects, and you don't know anything about it. (Here Bishop and May
both laughed.)
Mr. THOMAS suggested to the prisoners, that they had better be quiet,
as they were doing themselves no good.
BISHOP.--I can do myself no harm at all events.
Mr. BEAMAN, the surgeon, who had minutely examined the body after
death, was again called forward and re-sworn. He repeated his former
opinion, founded on the _post mortem_ examination of the body, that
death had been produced by extravasation of blood in the spinal canal,
an effect, which must have been produced by violence on the back of
the neck. The violence might have been produced by a blow from a round
stick or bludgeon, or even by the wrist of a strong man's arm. It was
barely possible, certainly, that the injury might have been occasioned
by a fall down stairs.
Mr. PARTRIDGE, demonstrator of anatomy at the King's College, agreed
with Mr. Beaman in every particular, in regard to the causes which had
produced death.
Mr. MINSHULL.--Is it your opinion, then, that the boy came to his death
by violence--in short, that he was murdered?
Mr. PARTRIDGE.--I certainly do believe that the death of the deceased
was effected by violence.
Mr. MINSHULL.--Is it from the state of the neck merely, or from other
appearances, that you have come to that conclusion?