Public Executions In Chester From 16th Century
George Marsh burnt at Spital, Boughton
A woman burnt at Boughton for poisoning her husband
John Taylor – Gaoler of the Castle
William Geaton – servant to the Bishop of Chester – his body hung on chains on
Grappenhall Heath A woman named Candy was pressed to death at Chester Castle
Arnet servant of Saltney Side hung Sir Timothy Featherstonhaugh shot in the Corn
Market of Chester by
order of Parliament Two Irishmen executed – gibbeted at Two Mills Three men hung
for burglary
Execution of James Knight for murder
Christopher Lawless. Isaac Hutchinson, Alexander Solomon and Isaac Josephs
executed for robbing the shop of Mr Pemberton, jeweller. They were buried behind
the Rodney Cop opposite Overleigh
S. Thorley executed for the murder of Ann Smith, a ballad singer near Congleton.
He cut off her head and part of her he actually broiled and ate. He was hung in
chains on the Heath
William Ellis for burglary William Loom for discharging a loaded pistol at
Charles Warren Sarah Jones for stealing 28 yds. of chintz Resolution Heap and
Martha Brown for burglary Elizabeth Wood for poisoning
John Oakes hung for coining
Execution of Peter Steens
Execution of Edwart Holt
Execution of Thomas Hyde aged 35yrs for horse stealing
Execution of James Buckley for burglary in Newgate Street 1786 Oct 7th
1789 Feb 4th
1790
1791 April 21st
1791 Oct 8th
1796 April 30th
1798
1798 Oct 4th
1800
1800 Oct 12th
1801 May 9th
1801 Oct 3rd
1809 May 6th
1810 May 2nd
1810 Oct 1st
1813
1813 June 26th Execution of Thomas Buckley aged 20 yrs
Thomas Hoate for the murder of John Parry a constable in Handbridge – on the
gallows he charged his wife with infidelity (she was 70 yrs of age)
John Dean for the murder of his wife who was 7 months pregnant
Execution of Lowndes for robbing the Warrington Mail. He was hung in chains at
Helsby Hill
Knox for burglary. The gallows were moved to the other side of the road after
Thomas Brown and James Price for robbing the Warrington Mail. They were hung in
chains at Trafford Green and remained there until 1820. In the skull of Price
was found a robin’s nest.
John Thornhill for the murder of his sweetheart
Peter Martin for firing at a boat’s crew of the Actaeona in the Mersey employed
in the impress service
Thomas Bosworth for forgery
Alexander Horton for felony
Mary Lloyd for forgery
Thompson, Morgan and Clare for burglary.
Aaron Gee and Thomas Gibson hung out of a temporary window way on the south side
of the old Northgate. They were propelled from the window about 5 feet and
dropped near 40 inches
Execution of George Glover and William Proudlove in front of the House of
Correction for shooting at an excise officer. The drop was used for the first
time and the rope broke. New ropes were procured and the sentence carried out
about 1 hour later
John Done was executed for the murder of Betty Eckersley, a woman of bad
character. He denied the offence to his last moment.
Smith and Clarke for burglary. They were buried in St Martins Churchyard
Edith Morney for the murder of her husband. Immediately after conviction
shepleaded pregnancy and a jury of matrons pronounced her quick with child.
William Wilkinson. James Yarwood and William Burgess for a rape on Mary Porter
near Weston Point
Simeon Betson. William Berson and James Renshaw for burglary.
1814 May 28th
1815 April 22nd
1817 May 10th
1818
1818 Sept 26th
1819 May 8th
1819 Sept 25th
1820
1820 Sept 16th
1821 May 5th
1822 May 4th
1822 Sept 14th
1823 April 14th
1823 May 20th
1823 Sept 13th
1824 April 21st
1826 April 26th
1826 Aug 26th
1829 May 9th
1829 William Wilson aged 70yrs for arson. The man caused a stir before and at
the execution.
Griffith and Wood for burglary
Joseph Allen for uttering Bank of England Notes Abraham Rostern and Isaac Moors
for burglary John Moor for burglary
Joseph Walker – highway robbery
Samuel Hooley and Jon Johnson (a man of colour) for burglary
Jacob McGhinnies for shooting Mr Birch Ralph Ellis for burglary and William
Ricklington for setting fire to a rectory house at Coddington
Samuel Healey for highway robbery at Stockport William Tongue for a rape on an
infant George Groom for highway robbery Thomas Brierley for highway robbery
Samuel Fallows for the murder of his sweetheart
John Kragan for a rape on an infant
Edward Clarke for highway robbery
Joseph Dale for murder
Philip McGowan for robbery and Abraham Stones for robbing Mr Marsden. A
gentleman of upwards of 70yrs of age near Cow Lane Bridge. On this occasion the
apparatus for execution was removed from the east to the west of the city gaol
John Green for burglary
John Proudlove for highway robbery
John Levi for burglary Joseph Woodhouse for a rape on his own daughter
Sept 26th Joseph Henshall for firing at gamekeepers 1832 Samuel Cumberledge for
arson 1834 Samuel Thorley for murder John Carr for felonious shooting James
Mason for attempting to procure a miscarriage 1841 Bartholemew Mourray for
murder 1843 James Ratcliffe for murdering his wife 1844 Mary Gallop for
poisoning her father at Crewe
1848 William Bates for murder 1856 Dec William Jackson for the murder of his two
children in Handbridge, 26th Chester
1857 John Blagg 1861 Martin Doyle 1862 Alice Hewitt 1866
April 23rd Samuel Griffiths
The Northgate Gaol taken down in 1808. The City Gaol erected in 1807. Over the
West Entrance the County and City prisoners were publicly executed. It ceased to
be a gaol in 1871 and prisoners moved to the County Gaol at the Castle.
Notice
By Order of the Visiting Magistrates – 10th April 1805
We the publicans permitted to serve the prisoners within the Castle of Chester
with “ale” etc do hereby publicly declare, that from the date hereof. We will
exonerate every prisoner, on his discharge, from all debts whatever we may have
permitted him to contract with us, either for ale, porter or wine.
Witness our hands
Signed Rob Oldham
Rob Goff
In 1877 the Government took over all the local prisons numbering 113 and closed
38 of them at once. The County (Chester) Gaol continued to be used for prisoners
and Mr J B Manning remained in charge until 1884 when it was closed as a County
Prison and the prisoners removed to H M Prison at Knutsford. A small part of the
1843 Sept 2nd
1844
1848 April 22nd
1856 Dec 20th
1857 Aug 20th
1861 Aug 27th
1863 Dec 28th
1866 April 23rd prison was used as a military prison under the charge of Mr J
Martin. Military prisoners were afterwards moved to Stafford.
The following is a list of condemned prisoners whose names appear on Chester
Castle Tombstones in the possession of Mr W G Parker. The executions are listed
previously but this gives additional details.
James Ratcliffe for the murder of his wife at Stockport on the previous 22nd
June. - R Huxley Sheriff
Mary Gallop for poisoning her father, Richard Gallop, at Crewe – Edward Tilston,
Sheriff
William Bates for the murder of William ……………. At Arlington - John Green (?)
Sheriff
The first execution at Chester at 8.0.a.m.
William Jackson native of Handbridge for the murder of his two children, Mary
Jane aged 7 and John aged 6, by cutting their throats and afterwards burying
their bodies in a pit in Richard Roger’s orchard. Old Wrexham Road. – J Jones,
Sheriff
John Blagg for the murder of John Bebbington a gamekeeper to W Corbett of
Tilston Lodge – J Jones, Sheriff
Martin Doyle for cutting and wounding (with intent to kill) Jane Brogine at
Holmes Chapel – James Rowe, Sheriff
Alice Hewitt for the murder of her mother, Mary Bailey, at Stockport
– Robert Little, Sheriff
Samuel Griffiths for the murder of Isaac Newport at Dunham – C Dutton, Sheriff
The first malefactor to be buried in the City Gaol
What had become an odious duty to the City and its Officials was this year
transferred by Act of Parliament to the Sheriff of the County
JG Lady Day 1906
BROADSIDE REGARDING A MURDER IN
DUBLIN AND A MURDER IN CHESHIRE
Transcription
An Account of two Horrid MURDERS
The one committed on a Skipper in Dublin.
And the other a Young Woman in the County of Cheshire.
THERE was lately a Fellow in Dublin called Charles Lovegrive A- pothecary from
Gremany, who seeing his Bed-fellow the Skipper of a small Vessel, receive some
Gold and Money, Killed him when he was asleep; and to conceeal the Murder, he
cut off his Head from his Shoulders, and burnt his Scull in the Fire, Quartered
and divided him into Piece, and at several times carried him to the Water side,
and threw him in at Esseks- Key; However his Policy being defeat he was at last
taken, and after confessing the Fact was Arrign'd, Condenm'd and Executed. The
like may warn People of all Ranks to Guard against bad Fellowship.
In the County of Cheshire there lived one James Walter, a Farmer, who after his
Wife died, took home a Young Woman, a Relation of his owu to be his House
Keeper, this Man some way or other debatched this Young Woman and got her with
Child, some while after, fearing least it might be discovered, he procured a
Russian called Mark Sharp to Murder her and the better to compleat it, he gave
put to the Young Woman that he had provided her a place where to lye in
privately, wherer she was to go with speed, and that when she was delivered and
well, he would take care of the Child, and she should return and look after his
House as former- ly; The Young Woman consented to this, and the day appointed he
sent her away with the Rogue he had engaged to destroy her, the Fellow & she at
length coming to a great Moss, and being far from People, he with a Pick, they
did dig Coals withall, knocked her upon the Head, wherewith giving her several
Wounds; he received some of her Blood springing out of her wonnds on his
Stockins, which he though to have washed off, but the more he washt, it still
grew the clearer, and then he threw them with the Pick into a Truff of Moss, and
then covered her with Moss, and so went a way and told the Farmer what he had
done, the Farmer thinking that it would never be Discovered, payed the Murderer
his Money, which they had agreed upon for that Action. But the Ghoast of the
Murdered Woman appearing to a certain Man in that place, and relating to him the
manner of her murder, and bididg him to Declare the same, which he accordingly
did, and they Confessed the Fact, and are expected to be punished as the same
Deserves.
EDINBURGH, Printed in the Year 1717,
1777 MURDER
of
Mary Pemberton in Northwich
This tale involves a couple who should have been looking forward to spending the
rest of their lives together but their wedding plans ended with the death of the
bride to be.
Mary Pemberton was a 19 year old chamber maid from Leftwich Old Hall and Samuel
Thorley was a local farm labourer. They had met at the annual Witton Wakes and
had been going out with each other for 18 months.
The couple were planning a spring wedding in 1777 and then they were going to
rent a small cottage from Samuel's employer, Mr Ted Leather.
One Sunday evening, Mary had not returned back to Old Leftwich Hall and her
employers thought she had been caught up in the thunder storm and she had stayed
at her aunty's house in Northwich. But by the following day, they went to her
aunty's house and then found out that her boyfriend, Samuel, hadnt reported for
work either. People started to think that the couple had eloped to Gretna Green
and as the couple were both well respected in the area, no body thought anyelse
but that they had gone to get married and they would return a few days later.
But six days later, a gruesome discovery was made. Mary's body was found in a
willow bed on land belonging to Mr George Gorst. A search was started for
Samuel. A couple of people reported that they had seen Mary and Samuel arguing
by these willow beds a few days before.
Ten days later, Samuel walked into Chester Castle looking tired, dirty and
unkempt. He told them he had walked from Northwich and had been living rough in
Delamere Forest. He admitted to killing Mary. He explained that they had
quarrelled over wedding plans and in a fit of temper he had strangled her.
Samuel's trail took place at Chester and he was hung on April 10th, 1777. His
corpse was then gibbeted.
This murder shocked the town because both Mary and Samuel were so well thought
of. A local ballad of Samuel was later sung by girls in Northwich.
Little remains today to remind us of the murder. Leftwich Old Hall was
demolished and a farm house was built on its site but ghost stories and reports
of strange happenings fill this area.
Murder in Audlem 1812
Edith was born Edith Coomer and married George Morrey, a farmer’s son, on
Tuesday the 18th of April 1797 at St. Chad’s Church in Wybunbury in South
Cheshire. She was then about nineteen years old and the daughter of a well to do
farmer. Initially the marriage was happy and they settled in the Cheshire town
of Nantwich. George opened a grocery store there and the couple made a
reasonable living over the next four years.
In early 1801 they returned to the village of Hankelow, near Audlem, to take
over George’s father’s farm when he retired. They were blessed with seven
children, three boys and four girls, although one of the girls died in infancy.
George tended the farm whilst Edith made cheese for sale locally and looked
after the family.
The Morrey’s were wealthy enough to have servants and by Christmas 1811 they had
a maid, Hannah Evans who had been with them nearly a year and a twenty year old
farmhand called John Lomas who had just joined them. At this time Edith was once
again pregnant but was to have a miscarriage in February 1812.
We have no means of knowing Edith’s emotional state at the time, so soon after a
miscarriage, but it was quite possibly rather fragile; for whatever reason Edith
quickly fell for John and they began having an affair. Over the next two months
or so Edith started to think in terms of marrying this young man, some fifteen
years her junior, however there was one obvious impediment, George! No doubt
Edith was not prepared to give up her children and comfortable life style by
simply running away with John, nor was she willing to face the social disgrace
that this course of action entailed at the time. So another way had to be found
to keep John’s affections and rid themselves of George. Edith determined that
John should kill George and afterwards they could be together.
On Saturday the 11th of April 1812 George had been to Witton Wakes, a major fair
in Northwich and did not return home until midnight. Edith and Hannah Evans were
still up at this time and George had supper before he and Edith retired to bed.
Hannah went a little later after she had cleared away the supper. Hannah was
soon awakened though, by the sounds of a commotion from inside the house. She
and John Lomas ran to the house of a neighbour to raise the alarm. The pair then
returned to the farm with a couple of neighbours, Thomas Timmis and John Moores.
The two men found Edith sitting by the fireplace and then opened the door into
George’s bedroom where they made a grim discovery. George was laying face down
on the floor with an axe handle projecting from underneath him. He had several
axe wounds and in addition had had his throat cut, so there was blood
everywhere. Timmis and Moores decided that George’s brother, Jem, should be sent
for and told Lomas to go to his house. Returning with them, John Lomas told him
that the house had been burgled, with one hundred and fifty pounds missing from
George’s desk and that his master had been killed by the intruders. However
aspects of this story did not ring true. John was wearing a clean shirt on the
Sunday morning which raised suspicion and there were no signs of any forcible
entry into the house. When questioned on this John showed unconvincingly, how
easy it was to open the front door from the outside. Unconvincingly, because it
relied upon the nail that was the bolt not being fully inserted.
The police arrived in the shape William Dooley, the Parish Constable and John
Groom who was a special constable and also a solicitor. John Groom questioned
Edith and got the same story that John Lomas had given. He also noticed that
John had dried blood on his nose and on his wrist. He asked John to produce his
dirty shirt and John refused saying that he had worn the present one all week.
Groom began a search of the house now that it was getting light outside and they
could see a little more. As they got to the bottom of the stairs they noticed a
hand print in dried blood and looking carefully were able to follow a trail of
blood spots which went back through the kitchen to John’s room. The constables
examined John further and noticed blood stains on the cuffs of his jacket. They
then demanded that John open his box which he kept in his room. They all went to
his room only to find Edith already there and were in time to see her take
something from the box and attempt to conceal it. This was of course the blood
stained shirt. Constable Dooley now arrested John on the strength of this
evidence. John told the constable that the shirt had been bloodied due to having
to bleed George’s mare at the blacksmiths earlier in the week. Dooley took John
back to his house in Audlem where he made a confession and implicated Edith as
the principal in the killing, telling the constable that she had given him the
signal to enter his master’s bedroom when she was sure that George was asleep
and handed him the axe. She held a candle for him whilst he struck the blows and
passed John the razor when it became clear that George was still alive. William
Dooley asked how long Edith and John had been planning the murder and he told
the constable that it had been some time.
Back at the farmhouse Constable William Hall, from Hankelow having heard John’s
confession and allegations against Edith decided to arrest her. He told her that
he was taking her into custody and she asked to be allowed to get ready which he
allowed. She slipped into another room and moments later returned with blood
pouring from a razor wound to her throat. Fortunately the local surgeon was on
hand having come to view George’s body for the inquest and he managed to staunch
the flow of blood and sew up the wound before Edith bled to death.
Constable Dooley had a full search made of the premises and as part of this
drained the pond which revealed the murder weapon. Lomas had closed the blade
before throwing the razor into the pond and it was seen to have blood and hair
on it. Edith was placed under the guard of Richard Thursfield, who was constable
Dooley’s deputy and he had been told to record anything Edith said when she came
to. She told him she wished she had not lived and that she had not been in her
right mind of late.
As was usual at the time the inquest on George was held at the village pub, The
White Lion, on the Monday afternoon following the killing, before Chester
Coroner, Mr. Faithful Thomas. Also as normal, witnesses were called to give
their accounts of the murder, a practice which tended to prejudge any subsequent
trial. Edith and John were both declared to be guilty of murder and committed
for trial. George’s body was buried on April the 15th at St. Chad’s Wybunbury.
John was taken to Chester Castle to await trial and Edith transferred there on
the 4th of May when she was sufficiently recovered from her suicide attempt.
Chester was part of the Welsh Circuit and thus its assizes were known as the
Great Sessions. The court sat at the Shire Hall in the outer bailey of Chester
Castle. Edith and John stood trial on Friday August the 21st before Chief
Justice Robert Dallas and Francis Burton, a more junior judge. They were both
charged with Petty Treason rather than murder, as the deceased was the husband
of one defendant and the master of the other. The prosecution was led Samuel
Benyon, assisted by David Jones. Edith was represented by John Cross and John
Hill, John being represented by John Lyons.
The evidence and witness testimonies from the inquest were repeated, lasting
some four hours.
John Cross questioned Hannah Evans as to the state of the Morrey’s marriage and
as to whether she had noticed any impropriety between mistress and servant. She
confirmed that she thought her employers were happily married and that she had
not seen any intimacy between Edith and John and that there seemed to be no
tension in the house when George returned home on the Saturday night. John Cross
also tried to introduce the jury to the possibility that burglars had killed
George rather than the defendants. John Lyon suggested that William Dooley had
put pressure on John Lomas to make a confession but he refuted this and assured
the court that had neither bought pressure upon John nor promised him leniency
in return for his confession.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty against both prisoners after just a few
minutes discussion. Judge Dallas then addressed both of them, suggesting that
although he believed that John had actually carried out the killing it was Edith
whose guilt was the greater for planning and organising the destruction of her
husband. Asked if had anything further to say before he was sentenced John told
the court that he deserved his execution and hoped to be quickly forgotten. On
Edith’s behalf John Cross told the court that she was pregnant and thus could
not be sentenced to death at this time. A panel of matrons were sworn in from
the married women in the court at the time and they were taken with Edith to the
house of Matthew Hudson the governor of the county gaol at Chester Castle where
she was examined and determined to be “quick with child” to use the contemporary
expression. She was about five months pregnant.
Robert Dallas proceeded to pass the death sentence on them both and John was
removed to the condemned cell to spend his last three days. Edith was respited
until after she had given birth and also housed with the County Gaol in the
castle. The governor of the gaol allowed Edith and John to meet twice over the
weekend before he was hanged and even allowed them a final embrace.
Uniquely in Britain, Cheshire county executions were not carried out at the
county gaol at all, but rather at the Chester City Gaol which had opened in
1808, under the jurisdiction of the Chester Sheriff. On the morning of execution
John had thus to be transferred to the City Gaol where the gallows was erected
on the flat roof of the gatehouse. John’s hanging took place there on Monday the
24th of August 1812. He spent sometime with the chaplain, the Reverend William
Fish, before being led out up to the roof for his appointment with Cheshire’s
hangman, Samuel Burrows. A large crowd had gathered to witness the event and the
usual broadsides were sold. John made a short speech from the gallows warning
others not to follow his example. His body was dissected after death by Owen
Titley at the infirmary next door to the gaol.
Edith remained in the County Gaol and on the 21st of December 1812 gave birth to
a healthy male child who was taken from her a week later for adoption. In law
Edith could now be hanged within a month but in fact this was not to be so. Her
execution warrant was signed by Robert Dallas, her trial judge, at the next
Great Sessions on Wednesday April the 21st 1813 and her hanging scheduled for
two days later, on Friday the 23rd. Edith slept quite well on the Thursday night
and got up at five on the Friday morning. She dressed in her least valuable
clothes, as these would afterwards be the property of the hangman and drank a
little coffee but refused any breakfast.
She went to a service in the prison chapel at eight o’clock which lasted nearly
an hour. Matthew Hudson, the Governor, then had her taken into his parlour to
await the arrival of the under sheriff. He arrived a little before noon and
Hudson personally led Edith out to the cart waiting to take her to the City
Gaol. She was accompanied by John Robinson, one of the turnkeys, in the cart
which was flanked by constables for the short journey of around a hundred yards
between the two prisons.
On arrival at the City Gaol she was taken in through the gatehouse and then up
on to the flat roof where the New Drop gallows was waiting for her. Here she
ascended the platform without assistance and knelt in prayer with the Reverend
Fish before submitting herself to Samuel Burrows. He tied her wrists and arms
and also tied a cord round her legs before placing the noose around her neck.
She was given a handkerchief to drop by Burrows as the signal for him to release
the bolt before he pulled a white night cap down over her face. Chaplain Fish
exhorted her “to dismiss all worldly thoughts and fix her whole being on the
Redeemer”.
Edith thanked John Robinson for the kindness he had shown her and addressed the
crowd thus ”My dear Christians, I hope you will take warning by my melancholy
situation. My crime has been of a double nature. In the first place I have
broken one of God's commandments, by committing adultery, and defiling the
marriage bed, and in the next I have committed a most inhuman murder by imbruing
my hands in the blood of an affectionate and indulgent husband." Her final words
were " Lord unto thee I commit my spirit.” She then gave the signal just after
one o’clock in the afternoon and the drop fell, plunging her through it to knee
level. For whatever reason the black screens that usually surrounded the
platform were not erected for Edith’s execution so everyone was able to witness
her struggles over the next two and a half minutes or so as she fought her
loosing battle against the noose. At length her body became still and was left
on the rope for an hour before being removed for dissection. Her hanging had
attracted a crowd estimated at ten thousand people.
Edith’s dissection was carried out the next morning by Owen Titley. He only
opened her thorax and abdomen and removed her heart for preservation. After
having done so her body was sewn back up and left on display for a short while
before being taken for burial.
Edith’s baby was adopted by her parents, William and Edith Coomer and christened
Thomas. At the age of twenty he was convicted of theft and sentenced to
transportation to Australia for seven years.
One wonders how Edith’s miscarriage affected the balance of her mind and her
judgement in early 1812. She seemed to be on good terms with George even on the
Saturday evening but what were her true feelings for John Lomas, her junior and
in every way her inferior? In those days the miscarriage would not have been
considered a factor in her defence and there were no psychiatrists to examine
her and bring forward expert testimony.
Chester Chronicle -Friday 6 January 1826
CHESTER POLICE REPORT.
SATURDAY, Dec. 31—Present, the Mayor, Aldermen Francis, Masse; Morris, and
Harrison.
CONSTABLE'S DUTY Miss Evans, of Handbridge, lodged a complaint against Thomas
High, a Constable of Handbridge, who on being sent for to remove a drunken
fellow that made a noise and disturbance at her door, refused to come to her
assistance returning a message, that he would not attend ; and upon being
afterwards charged with his misconduct declared, that he never would give his
attendance, however often she might send for him he would always refuse her. In
his defence. High said, that when sent for, it was inconvenient for him to go,
his wife only being in the house, with an infant, that he could not neglect his
own concerns, and that moreover the complainant had insulted him in his own
house, on the preceding night. This was explained by Miss Evans, who admitted
she had waited upon him, but with a friendly intention, to obtain an
acknowledgement of his having acted improperly, which she would rather have
received, than lodge a formal complaint against him before the Magistrates—this,
however, he refused, and treated her very uncivilly. The charge therefore being
tacitly admitted, and justified only on the ground of his own convenience, the
Mayor very severely, and very properly reprimanded him, observing it" Was the
imperative duty of Constables promptly to attend when called upon to preserve
the peace; that the country expected, and the oath he had taken hound him to the
performance of the duty; and that on the present occasion, he had conducted
himself in a manner highly reprehensible. The least he could do was to offer an
apology to the complainant, with which she would probably be satisfied: and on
Miss Evans signifying assent, High, though in a way anything but gracious,
muttered something like “very sorry”, and the case was discharged.
(Officers details entered into appointments database 01/2012)
Chester City Police Office 1828
Information extracted from the Minutes Book of the Assembly Book 1805 ‐1838
At a Meeting of the New Market Committee held the 29 December 1828:
Present:
Mr Mayor; Mr Alderman Francis; Mr Alderman Lardon; Mr Alderman Hy Bowers;
“It was Ordered: That the Shop in The Exchange occupied by Lawrence Laurinson
and
James Blease, be taken for a Police Office and that they have Notices to Quit
the same”
Chester Chronicle - Friday 16 January 1829
CHESHIRE QUARTER SESSIONS. The Epiphany Sessions, commenced at ten o'clock on
Monday last, in the Court at the Castle, before Trafford Trafford, Esq.
Chairman, and a Bench of Magistrates, of whom were present, Townshend Ince, Esq.
Richard Congreve, Esq. C. Morrall, Esq. Rev. R. H. Gretton, the Rev. Thos.
Brookes, Rev. J. Armitstead, Richard Perryn, Esq. E. D. Davenport, Esq. M.P.
Edwin Corbett, Esq. Calveley Cotton, Esq. Major Tomkinson, Archdeacon Clarke,
and J. Feilden, Esq G. Walmsley, Esq. of Bolesworth Castle, qualified as a
Magistrate of the county.
The expenses for the Police of this County, last year, were at least £15,000;
and in Stockport alone, it amounted to £2,400, whilst the County Rate collected
in that town, was only £904; which was an aggregate above the rate of more than
£1,100.
The Magistrates of the County, alarmed at this increase of crime, had taken the
subject into their serious consideration; they could not attribute it to any
defect in the laws, for those had been considerably improved—nor to the
Magistrates, for no county possessed a more intelligent or active Magistracy He
considered, that from the appointment of what are called standing overseers,
great advantages had accrued.
In looking to the appointment of Constables, it must be acknowledged, that
hitherto there were many defects, as well as objections. If they resided in the
country, they were generally farmers, and in the towns, shopkeepers, men who
were altogether unacquainted with the duties of such and office; to this, in
some measure, might be attributed the increase of crime, for offenders were
seldom apprehended by them, and not one out of ten brought to justice.
The Magistrates thought that a great improvement might be made in the police of
the county, without interfering with the rights of the lords of manors, and the
present mode of appointing constables. A communication had been had with the
Secretary of State upon the subject, and a bill had been drawn out which would
be laid before Parliament in the next Session. It was very desirable that it
should be carried into effect; not only as tending to correct the demoralization
of the people, which is a subject of deep interest, but also by the prevention
of crime causing a reduction in the burthens of the County, to an infinitely
greater extent than any expense which could, by possibility, be incurred by
carrying the provisions of the Bill into effect. He could not, indeed conceive
that any objection could be brought against it. The Magistrates in
Petit‐Sessions would have a power, upon the representation of ten respectable
householders of any township, or in their own judgement where an obsolute
necessity may exist, of appointing an assistant Petit‐Constable for such
township; and the Magistrates in General Quarter Sessions would be empowered, in
cases where it may be deemed expedient, to appoint deputy High Constables of
hundreds, who would have the superintendance of the assistant Petit Constables.
These several officers, by being continued for some time in their office, and by
their residence in particular districts, would have an opportunity not only of
acquiring a of their duties, but also of the characters of the various classes
of people with whom they might have to deal. It would be also, the duty of the
deputy High Constable to give publicity to crimes, and descriptions of
offenders, in the Hue and Cry, County papers, and by handbills; also to
communicate with the deputy High Constables of the other divisions of their own
County, and other Police officers throughout England. Much also might be
effected by the vigilance of these officers in the prevention of crime, which
was always much more desirable than its detection. Such are the benefits
expected from the appointment of such officers, and the expense of them would be
but small.
It was proposed that the salary of an assistant Petit‐Constable should not
exceed £10 per annum, except in places where the duties imposed by a numerous
population should require a higher salary, which the Magistrates in
Petit‐Sessions would be empowered to order, on the representation of a majority
of the ley‐payers in each township, voting at a vestry in the mode prescribed by
the late Vestry Acts; such salaries to be payable out of the poor rates. The
salary of the deputy High Constable is proposed to be paid out of the County
rate, and to be limited to the following proportions:— A salary not exceeding
£100 per arm where the population of the hundred should be 50,000; where it was
less than that number, and more than 30,000, £80; if less than 30,000, and more
than 20,000, £60; and if less than 20,000, and more than 10,000, £40.
There were other provisions in the bill, as to the residence of the Deputy High
Constables, which would be fixed by the Magistrates of the Hundreds; and all of
them would be amenable to the Quarter Sessions for their conduct.
Chester Chronicle - Friday 5 June 1829
Apprehension of a Murderer
The circumstances attendant upon the death of Joseph Fletcher, of
Dunham‐on‐the‐Hill, who died in July, 1824 in consequence of the wounds
inflicted upon him by William Parkinson, a man with whose daughter Fletcher was
intimate, are doubtless still fresh in the recollection of our readers.
Parkinson found means to escape, and a Coroner's jury returned a verdict of
wilful murder against him; but the Grand Jury at the ensuing Autumn Assizes,
most unaccountably found a bill for manslaughter only. The Chief Justice's :
warrant was issued for the apprehension of Parkinson, who has since contrived to
elude the vigilance of the police, until he was apprehended by the
Worship‐street police‐officers, in London, last week. Burgess, the very active
constable of the hundred of Macclesfield, was despatched to London for the
prisoner; and after very properly refusing to remain in London several days at
the expense of the county, to give time for an application to the Judges to
admit the prisoner to bail, (unless his expenses were paid by the prisoner or
his friends), Burgess conveyed him to this city, and brought him before Charles
Morrall, Esq. on Wednesday last, by whom he was fully committed for trial at the
next Assizes. It is worthy of remark that Burgess found at the prisoner's
lodgings in London, a sort of sword‐bayonet, supposed to be the identical weapon
with which he inflicted the fatal wounds upon Fletcher. The prisoner is nearly
80 years of age.
(Entered on to Appointee’s Database 01/2012)
Chester Chronicle - Friday 17 July 1829
CHESHIRE CONSTABULARY ACT.
The following are the provisions of this important act which the Chairman (Mr.
Trafford) explained to the Grand Jury (see his charge) at the Quarter Sessions
on Monday. It is to be hoped that all the good effects, so confidently
anticipated will accrue from it. Indeed, it may be reasonably expected that, as
far as the probability (amounting almost to a certainty) of detection, and the
mere dread of punishment can operate to deter from the commission of crime, the
act will have that effect at all events, if only as an experiment, it is well
worth the trial; and we have reason to believe that if it should be found "to
work well" in this county, the leading provisions of the act will be extended to
the kingdom at large at no distant period.
The Preamble states, that it is expedient to provide more effectually for
carrying into execution the laws for the prevention of crime, and the detection
of offenders within the county palatine of Chester, and that, for that purpose,
the Magistrates of the county should have power to appoint Special High
Constables and Assistant Petty Constables.
It then goes on to enact:
That the Magistrates in Quarter Sessions may from time to time appoint a Special
High Constable for any hunched or division, or for any two or more adjoining
hundreds or divisions, for such period as they may think expedient.
And no such Constable shall resign his office, without having given a month's
notice of his intention to do so, to the Magistrates in Quarter Sessions.
The Magistrates in Quarter Sessions are also empowered to appoint Assistant
Petty Constables, on the recommendation of three Magistrates in Petty Sessions;
each Constable to act for one township or for two or more adjoining townships,
as may be deemed most expedient.
No person to be appointed to the office of Special High Constable, or Assistant
Petty Constable, unless he be of sound constitution, able bodied, and under the
age of forty years, and unless he can read and write; and no Constable to bold
such office after he is sixty years of age.
Constables under this Act to be sworn into office at the General Quarter
Sessions, in open Court; for the administering of the oath, seven shillings and
sixpence to be charged, and no more. And Constables so sworn are to be
Constables throughout the whole county, and to have all powers and privileges as
such.
Constables are to reside at such places within the several Hundreds and
Townships for which they are appointed, as the justices may approve, and as near
as may be to the centre of their several districts; and they are not to remove
from such places of residence without the approbation of the Magistrates by whom
they were appointed, or to be absent from home for the space of ten successive
days. And any Constable offending against this provision, shall be deemed guilty
of misconduct, and shall be liable to be removed from us office, or to be fined
not more than five pounds, on conviction before two justices. special High
Constables are to attend at the several Petty Sessions and, when required, at
the several Petty Sessions within the county, and report to the Justices upon
all such matters as they may think it necessary to report; they are to execute
all warrants, and to take measures for the apprehension of persons guilty, or
suspected to be guilty, of felony or misdemeanour; they are to give notice of
such felonies or misdemeanours to the Special High Constables of their adjacent
Hundreds or Divisions, and to such other persons as they may think proper; they
are to cause notices of such felonies or misdemeanours to be given in the
Hue‐and‐Cry Gazette, and in the newspapers, and also by means of hand‐bills;
they are to apprehend all reputed thieves, or persons suspected of felony; and
they are to assist the justices in the suppression of all riots and breaches of
the peace.
On any pressing emergency, Special High Constables may require the assistance of
Assistant Petty Constables in any part of the county, or of Constables as now by
law appointed, within their respective Townships, or the next adjoining
Townships. Assistant Petty Constables are to perform all the duties which belong
to Constables of Townships as now by law established, and to assist the Special
High Constables whenever called upon so to do.
Constables neglecting their duty, on conviction before two Magistrates, are
liable to a penalty not exceeding rive pounds, to be deducted from their
salaries, or levied by distress and sale of their goods and chattels; and if
there be no salary due, or no goods upon which distress can be made, then the
party offending to be committed to the House of Correction for not exceeding two
months. Penalties to be paid in aid of the county rate.
Magistrates in Quarter Sessions may discharge Constables for misconduct or
incapacity, or in case they think that the necessity for such an officer has
ceased. Magistrates in Petty Sessions may suspend any Constable until the
Quarter Sessions, and appoint a substitute ad interim.
In any action brought against a Constable for any act done in obedience to the
warrant of any Justice, such Constable not to be responsible for any
irregularity in the issuing of such warrant, but may plead the general issue,
and upon proof of the signature of such warrant, the jury shall return a verdict
for such Constable, who shall recover his costs. Common reputation to be
sufficient evidence in a court of justice as to the right of any Constable to
hold his office.
The salary of the Special High Constables to be fixed by the Magistrates at
Quarter Sessions. Where the population of the district exceeds 50,000 the salary
not to exceed £I50 per annum, where the population is less than 50,000 and
exceeding 30,000, the yearly salary not to exceed £110; where the population is
less than 30,000, but more than 20,000, the annual salary not to exceed £80; and
where the population is less than 20,000, the annual salary not to exceed £60.
And reasonable allowance is to be made to the Constables for any expenses they
may incur in the execution of their duty.
Salaries and allowances to Constables to be paid out of the county‐rate, and
repaid out of the hundred‐rate. Separate rates to be made upon each hundred for
the payment of the Constables' salaries and allowances; such rates to he
regulated as county‐rates are at present regulated.
If the same person be appointed Constable for two or more hundreds, such
hundreds are to contribute to his salary as above fixed, in proportion to their
population.
The county treasurer to keep separate accounts with each hundred, for which he
is to be allowed such sum as the Magistrates may think fit.
The towns of Stockport, Macclesfield, and Congleton, having separate police
establishments, are exempted from the operation of this Act, and from the
payment of any rate for carrying its provisions into effect.
The salary of the Assistant Petty Constables are to be paid by the overseers of
the poor of the Townships for which they are appointed, out of the poors rate,
to be fixed by the Justices in Quarter Sessions, and not to exceed £20 yearly in
each Township. Such salary to be a complete remuneration for all services
performed within the Township for which the Constable is appointed; and for any
services performed out of the Township the Justices are empowered to award such
recompense as they may think proper, to he paid from the county‐rate. Justices
in Petty Sessions may increase the salary of an Assistant Petty Constable to £50
per annum, such increase having been previously sanctioned by a vestry meeting
of the inhabitants of the Township for which such Constable was appointed.
Officers are not to accept any fee or gratuity beyond the salaries and
allowances above specified, on pain of forfeiting their situations or incurring
a penalty not exceeding £20. But they may receive allowances as prosecutors or
witnesses, and rewards for the apprehension of offenders.
No Special High Constable is to be engaged in any trade, without the permission
of two Justices. Proceedings are not to be void for want of form, or to be
removed into any of his Majesty's superior courts of record.
The existing powers of Constables in the county are not to be interfered with by
this Act.
Penalties to be recovered by summons.
Parties aggrieved may appeal to the Quarter Sessions.
Justices are empowered to administer oaths.
The expenses of obtaining this Act to be paid out of the county rate.
The Act to be deemed a public Act.
WANTED
Under the Cheshire Constabulary Act
A SPECIAL HIGH CONSTABLE
for the Hundred of Northwich
for which it is requisite that such Officer shall be able bodied, of a sound
constitution, and under the age of forty years; of good character for honesty,
sobriety, fidelity and activity, and able to read and write.
Any person wishing to be appointed to the situation aforesaid, is requested to
forward (if by letter post‐paid) his offer of service, together with
testimonials of character and sufficiency, to the offices of Messrs. Vawdrey &
Barker, Solicitors, Middlewich,
before Monday the 12th day of October next.
Any further information as to the duties of the situation may be had on applying
to Messrs. Vawdrey & Barker. Middlewich,
24th August, 1829.
Chester Chronicle
Friday 4 September 1829
Staffordshire Advertiser. July 1835.
MURDER AND SUICIDE AT DODDINGTON
The residents at this delightful place and neighbourhood (the demesne of Sir
J.Broughton) which, as most of our readers are aware, is on the confines of
Cheshire and adjoining to the western side of Staffordshire, were thrown into a
state of the greatest anxiety and alarm on Monday morning last, by the awful
intelligence that a young female had been found in a field cruelly murdered. The
melancholy tidings were speedily authenticated and almost all doubts as to the
perpetrator of the horrid crime were removed by another gloomy circumstance ‐the
discovery that a man had hung himself at a short distance from the place where
the poor girl had lost her life, and connected with suspicious circumstances
that naturally led to the conclusion that he had been the murderer. We proceed
to place before our readers the details of these tragical and melancholy
occurrences. The unfortunate female thus early brought to an untimely end, was a
domestic in the house of H. Davison, Esq., Sir John Broughton's land steward,
where she had lived about twelve months, during which time, her conduct had been
most exemplary. The age of the unfortunate female was 16, and she is described
as having been a remarkably fine girl, with pleasing manners, and of an address
rather superior to her situation in life. Her parents reside about a mile from
Mr. Davison's, and are said to have brought up their family in the most
praiseworthy manner. The deceased was the third of a family of six children. The
man suspected to have committed the murder, (Thomas Bagguley) was also in the
service of Mr. Davison, as a labourer in which service he had been for the last
four years. He had previously been employed for twenty‐one years by Mr. Richard
Dobson, and had the character of a quiet, honest, hardworking: he was of rather
a reserved disposition, and not given to conversation, He was about 50 years of
age and had a wife and a family of eight children living. From his conduct for a
number of years, the last suspicion that would have arisen was that he would
perpetrate any such offence as that now attributed to him, nor is it known that
the slightest intimacy existed between him and the young woman. The leading
facts connected with this melancholy affair at present known are as follows; ‐On
Monday morning, just after midnight, Mrs. Davison was awake by Mary Malpass, the
deceased, knocking at her door and asking if she might leave the house, as some
one had brought her word that her mother was dangerously ill, and wanted her to
go home directly. Mrs. D. did not ask her who the messenger was, but immediately
gave her permission, and heard her go downstairs and out of the doors, never to
return again. Mrs. D. soon afterwards went down to see that the door was secure,
when she found it was locked, and the key gone, taken as she supposed by the
young woman in order to let herself in again on her return. On Mr. Davison's
family rising in the morning, a ladder was found on the grass plot below the
window of the girl's room; it had been brought from another part of the
premises, and it is supposed for the purpose of awakening the young woman
without disturbing the family. The body of the young woman was found about five
o'clock in a field not a quarter of a mile from Mr. Davison's house, in the
state hereafter described. There was no footpath through this field, and it was
not the shortest way to the house where the parents of the young woman lived,
although a person might go that way, and it would be only a little circuitous.
The body of the man was found, as described by the witnesses, in about an hour
afterwards; and the two striking facts, that he would not go to bed at his own
house, though repeatedly desired to do so, but was left up; and that he had the
key in his pocket which the young woman had to let herself out of the
house, ‐These two facts prove almost to demonstration that Bagguley was the man
who inveigled the girl from the house under the false pretence of her mother's
illness, and in the sequel perpetrated the awful crime of murder. Our readers
will draw their own conclusion from the evidence given at the Inquest, and now
laid before them. The opinion formed by those who reside upon the spot, and are
best acquainted with the circumstances is, that the wretched man's contrivance
of decoying the ill‐fated girl from her master's house in the dead of night, was
only with the intention of gratifying a lust which, under all the circumstances,
cannot be attributed to anything less than Satanic influence; and then finding
the unfortunate object of his desires virtuous to death, and fearing his
iniquitous conduct would come to light, deprived his hapless victim of her life!
Supposing this view to be correct, it is easy to imagine, that stung with
remorse and goaded by the same fiend‐like spirit, the wretched man decided to
finish the tragical occurrence by a suicidal act. Inquests were held on view of
the bodies on Tuesday, before F. Thomas, Esq. coroner, and evidence given in
substance as follows. Mr. George, of Doddington Farm, was foreman of the jury.
The jury being sworn, viewed the body of the female at her father's house where
it lay, and then, for want of room, adjourned to Mr. Dobson's. After a patient
investigation of that case, and finding the verdict as stated below, they
proceeded to Mr. Davison's, where the body of the unfortunate man was, and
having heard the evidence, found the verdict, which is also given below.
INQUEST ON VIEW OF THE BODY OF MARY MALPASS.
Mrs.Davison, wife of Henry Davison Esq.,l and steward to Sir John Broughton,
Doddington, being sworn, deposed as follows:‐
The deceased, Mary Malpass, was my servant maid on the 28th of June, and on the
evening of that day she retired to bed about half‐past nine; I did not observe
anything particular or contrary to her usually modest deportment prior to her
retiring to rest. About half‐past twelve o'clock on the same night I was awoke
by some one knocking at my bedroom door, and the deceased said‐"Mistress, shall
I go and see my mother, who is taken dangerously ill, and likely to be dead." I
said‐"Certainly, you may go;" but did not ask her who called her up, supposing
it to be either her father or one of brothers. I did not hear anyone about the
house, but heard the deceased go down stairs, and in a short time leave the
house. I came down stairs to lock the front door, but found it locked and the
key gone. I supposed the deceased had taken it, that on her return she might let
herself into the house without disturbing the family. It was our invariable
custom to leave the key of the front door on the sideboard in the parlour. It
was left there when I went to bed; but in the morning both the inner door and
front door were wide open.
Simeon Davis, servant to Mr. George, Doddington Farm, deposed as follows ‐About
five o'clock on Monday morning, the 29th June, I was going to fetch up my
master's cows, and on going through Chapel Field, Hunsterston,(about a quarter
of a mile from Doddington) I saw a woman lying on the ground, near the hedge;
she was lying on her back, but inclining towards her right side; her gown and
petticoats appeared much disordered; she had her bonnet on, but it was much torn
in front, and her cloak was rucked up, and lay under her head as if she had been
violently struggling; two clean aprons which were folded up, and her comb, lay
by her side. I did not observe any marks of violence on her person; I felt at
her, and found she was quite dead; I did not know her; Ralph Latham, my fellow
servant, was with me; we neither of us knew her; her face was much drawn on one
side, and discoloured; we supposed she was a stranger; we both knew the deceased
well when she was alive, but had no idea that the woman we saw in the field was
Mary Malpass; we left her where we first saw her, and returned to our master's;
met several persons on the road, and told them there was a woman lying dead in
Chapel Field.
Mr. John Twemlow, surgeon, Hatherton, deposed –
About 10 o'clock on Monday the 29th ult., I was sent for to examine the body of
a woman, who was found dead in a field near Pepper‐street Moss; I found her
lying on her back, inclining to her right side. On examining her person, I found
considerable blackness and darkness round her neck, with here and there a
scratch; the discolouration on the neck seemed to have been made from violent
pressure of the hand and appeared general round the throat. On examining the
lower part of her body, I found a considerable degree of blackness on the inside
of her thighs, and several scratches. If to violate her person had been the
object of her destroyer, I have every reason to believe he did not effect his
purpose. The ground round about where she lay was much disturbed, as if two
persons had been violently struggling; and I am decidedly of opinion the
deceased came to her death by strangulation from some person's hands.
Mr.E.Barker, surgeon, Audlem, deposed;
about four o'clock p.m. on Monday the 29th ult. I saw the body of the deceased
Mary Malpass at her father's, John Malpass, Hunsterston Lodge. On examining the
upper part of her throat I found there had been much pressure and violence on
each side of her wind pipe, with the appearance of finger nails penetrating
through the skin, producing strangulation. On examining the thighs and legs I
found much redness and discolouration about them, produced apparently from
excessive friction, as though she had been struggling violently with some
person. I believe her person had not been violated, but that an attempt had been
made. There was also much blackness and redness about the face and on the upper
part of her breasts. The discolouration of the upper part of the body is to be
accounted for by the pressure on the vessels of the neck, preventing the return
of the blood; consequently the minute vessels would become distended, producing
blackness and swelling on the surface of the body. I am decidedly of opinion she
died from strangulation.
Ann Malpass, wife of John Malpass, bricklayer, and mother of the deceased,
deposed:‐
The deceased, Mary Malpass, was my daughter, and lived with Mr. Davison, of
Doddington. I did not send on the 28th ult. any one to my daughter to say I was
ill, and if she wished to see me alive must come directly. I was not at all
unwell on that day, but as well as ever I was in my life.
John Shuker, labourer, Hunsterston, deposed:‐
Yesterday morning the 29th of June, I went to the house of Mr. Davison, of
Doddington, to meet Thomas Bagguley, labourer, who had agreed the previous
evening to assist me in loading some calves. In consequence of Bagguley not
coming to his work at Mr. Davison's as usual, Mrs. Davison asked me to go to his
house to enquire for him. I saw his wife, who said he had not been at home the
whole of the night. On returning to Mrs. Davison's, she desired to tie up the
cows and suckle the calves, and by that time Bagguley might be come to his work.
After tying up the cows I went to fetch the calves out of a hay crib adjoining
the cow house, thinking the calves might be there, though it was not the usual
place they were kept in. The hasp was on staple of the door post and a hanging
lock through the staple, but not locked. On opening the door I observed a man's
legs. The knees of which were bent, and his feet touching the straw under him. I
started back alarmed; on recovering myself I went in, and taking him by the
shoulders I turned his face towards me, and saw it was Thomas Bagguley. He was
suspended by a rope tied round his neck with a running noose, fastened to a
ladder which was over the hole where the hay is put down into the hay crib below
to fodder the cows. On seeing his face, I knew it to be Thomas Bagguley, Mr.
Davison's labourer; he was quite dead. I alarmed Mr. Davison's family, and went
with two men to the hay crib, when Simeon Davis took out his knife and cut him
down. It was a small cord which was round his neck. I then and asked Mrs.
Davison for the keys of the stable: she could not find them, but said Bagguley
might have them in his pocket, and desired me to examine; on feeling in his
pockets I found several keys, which I took out; one of the keys opened the
stable door, and the rest I hung on a nail in the inside of the stable. I do not
know whether I took from his pocket the key of the front door, but if I see it I
can tell whether it is the same I took out of Bagguley's pocket. (The key of Mr.
Davison's door, by which the young woman let herself out, was brought). The key
now produced is one of those I took out of his pocket and hung on a nail in the
side of the stable.
(A gentleman who was present told this witness that if he ever should be placed
in the same unfortunate situation, and see a fellow creature hanging, he hoped
he would have courage enough immediately to cut him down, rather than lose all
chance of saving his life by wasting time in seeking for assistance, when
nothing more was wanted but presence of mind in the individual.)
Thomas Bagguley, labourer, son of the deceased, deposed –
I work on the rail‐road, but generally sleep at home at the week's end; I was at
my father's house on Sunday night the 28th ult; my mother asked my father to go
to bed several times, about half past 9 o'clock; she went to bed about 10
o'clock; she requested him to go with her; he said "I am coming," but did not
follow her; I then locked the door, and left the key in the lock, and said,
"Father, come to bed;" he again said "I am coming," but did not follow me. When
I was in bed I heard my mother several times call to him to come to bed; his
answer invariable was "I am coming;" about two o'clock my mother awoke, and not
finding him in bed she went down stairs; he was not in the house; the door was
locked and the key put under the door. I got up about 4 o'clock, and found the
door locked, and the key put under; when I went to bed I locked the door and
left the key in the lock.
Henry Davison, Esq., Doddington, deposed –
The key now produced, and sworn to by John Shuker, as the one he took out of
Bagguley's pocket, is the key of my front door, and was left on the sideboard,
in my parlour, on Sunday evening, about Half‐past 9, June 28.
The jury, after a few minutes consultation, returned a verdict of wilful murder
against Thomas Bagguley, deceased, for having in the night of Sunday, June 28th,
feloniously and wilfully destroyed the deceased Mary Malpass, by strangulation.
INQUEST ON VIEW OF THE BODY OF THOMAS BAGGULEY.
Simeon Davis, a labourer of Mr. George's, Doddington Farm, deposed as follows –
On Monday morning, June 29, I was alarmed by John Shuker, who came from Mr.
Davison's, saying that Thomas Bagguley had hung himself; I went with him to Mr.
Davison's, and on going to the place where fodder is put down for the use of the
cows, I saw a man hanging by a rope or small cord, fastened round his neck, with
his knees bent, and nearly touching the ground; I took out my knife and cut the
cord and laid him down; he was quite dead; it was the body of Thomas Bagguley;
the cord was fastened to the stave of a ladder, placed over the hole where the
hay is put down into the hay crib below.
John Shuker, labourer, deposed:‐
On Monday morning last, June 29th, I was at Mr. Davison's, of Doddington, when I
was desired to tie up the cows and suckle the calves, belonging to Mr. Davison.
After attending to the cows I went to a hay crib adjoining the cowhouse for the
calves, supposing they were there. The door was fastened by the hasp being
placed on the staple, and a hanging lock passing through the staple, but not
locked. On opening the door I saw the legs of a man who was hanging by a small
cord tied round his neck, his feet touching the straw under him, and his knees
bent. I was alarmed and stepped back. On recovering myself I went in, and laying
hold of his shoulders turned his face towards me; I then saw it was Thomas
Bagguley, and that he was quite dead. I left him hanging and fetched Simeon
Davis and Ralph Latham to my assistance. Simeon Davis took out his knife and cut
the cord by which he was suspended, and he fell down on the floor of the cow
bin, where he now lies. I saw him at two o'clock on Sunday afternoon, and
conversed with him some time; he was then in good spirits, and very pleasant, as
much so as I ever saw him. I never saw any signs of insanity in him, and have
known him for some years.
VERDICT
Verdict, that the deceased feloniously and wilfully destroyed himself by
suspending himself to a ladder, with a small cord, on the morning of the 29th
June.
RAPE, MURDER AND SUICIDE.
This county has obtained an unenviable notoriety for the commission of crimes of
the most revolting character. The following exhibits a picture of depravity and
crime which it is shocking to contemplate. A man advanced in years ‐a hoary
headed sinner with grown up children, leaves his own house, his wife and family,
in the dead of night, and succeeds in decoying a young female, only 17 years of
age, the servant of a neighbouring gentleman, from her master's house, under
pretence that her mother is dying and wishes to see her. In going across the
fields, he attempts the gratification of his brutal passion by violating her
person; and failing to accomplish his purpose he strangles his victim. And
adding catastrophe to this tale of depravity, he hangs himself in a cowhouse!
The following is a brief narrative of the particulars of this double tragedy,
and on the inquests held on the bodies.
The unfortunate female deceased was named Mary Malpass, and was in the service
of Mr. Henry Davison, steward to Sir John Delves Broughton, Bart. at Doddington
Park, near Nantwich. The suicide Thomas Bagguley, was a labourer also in the
employ of the said gentleman, and resided at Walherton. It appears from the
testimony of Baguley's son, that his father was at home at 11 o'clock on Sunday
night; and after the rest of the family had retired for the night, he was
repeatedly called to by his wife to come to bed, but he refused to do so. At two
o'clock in the morning, it was discovered that he had left the house, and he did
not return afterwards. Mrs. Davison stated that she and her family went to bed
about half past nine o'clock on Sunday evening. About one o;clock on Monday
morning, the servant girl, Mary Malpass, knocked at her bedroom door, to ask if
she might go to see her mother who was dying. Mrs. Davison, with out inquiring
how the girl obtained the information, gave her permission to go, and on going
downstairs to lock the door after her, she found that it was already locked, and
the key missing.
On Monday morning two labouring men named Simeon Davies and Ralph Latham, in
going through what are called the Chapel Fields, in Hunsterston, a short
distance from Mr. Davison's house, found the dead body of Mary Malpass. She was
lying on her back, her clothes were above her knees, and otherwise in dis‐order;
her bonnet was much torn; her combs were lying beside her; and the appearances
on the grass and the ground near the body clearly indicated that there had been
a violent struggle. About six o'clock on Monday morning, Baguley was discovered
in a shippon suspended by his neck with a rope from one of the steps of a
ladder. He was quite dead and cold. He appeared to have been resolutely bent
upon self destruction, for his feet rested upon the ground even with his knees
bent. In his pocket were found several keys, and among them the key of Mr.
Davison's front door.
From the testimony of Mr. John Twemlow and Mr. Edward Barker, the surgeons who
examined the body of the deceased female, it appeared that the neck was very
much discoloured all round, as if it had been clasped, and the windpipe
violently pressed by both hands, and the finger nails had penetrated through the
skin over the trachea. The face and breast exhibited marks of discolouration
from bruises. The general appearance indicated that there had been a violent
struggle, and left no doubt of the nature of the crime that was attempted to be
perpetrated before death, although, in the opinion of both these gentlemen, it
had not been accomplished. The coroner's jury, in the case of Mary Malpass,
found a verdict of wilful murder against Thomas Baguley; and in the second a
verdict of felo de se.
This dreadful affair has, as may well be supposed, excited a great sensation in
the neighbourhood. The family and relatives of both the deceased, are in a state
of distraction more easily conceived than described.
The Liverpool Times – April 3, 1838
Thursday
MURDER IN WARRINGTON
illiam Hill, aged 27, was charged with the wilful murder of Betty Minshull, at
Warrington, on
W the 8th of December last. The indictment alleged that, on the day in question,
the prisoner maliciously, feloniously, and with malice aforethought, assaulted
the said Betty Minshull, by pressing his hands upon her throat and neck, thereby
suffocating and strangling her, of which strangling and suffocation she then and
there instantly died. The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
Dr. BROWN, with whom was Mr. BOILEAU, stated the case for the prosecution, and
called the following witnesses:
Mary Pritchard examined by Dr. BROWN – on the 8th of Dec. last she was servant
to Mr. Higginson, who kept the Legh Arms, Warrington. Betty Minshull was a
housekeeper, and has been about a year and a half. She was his daughter. The 7th
of December was Thursday night, and Warrington Fair. Several persons were
drinking there. There was a club held there, and the prisoner and others came in
about eight o’clock. Mrs. Minshull treated them to half a gallon of ale
– her father also gave them a quart. There was some singing. The prisoner sung.
Mrs Minshull sat in the tap-room with them, but did not drink with them. About
twelve o’clock Mrs. Minshull ordered me to bed. There had been no quarrelling
then. I went to sleep immediately on going to bed, and heard nothing until five
o’clock in the morning. Besides master and myself there were only two persons,
one of whom was a soldier, and the other a person named Nicholas Murphy. Mrs.
Minshull usually slept with me. I awoke about five o’clock, and found she was
not in bed. I got up and struck a light and went to look for her. The back door
was open, and I went down the yard and found her in the privy lying on the floor
on her back. Her head was reared in one corner and her feet reached the door.
Her clothes were up to her knees and I pulled them down. She was dead. I found a
bunch of keys beside her – a lock, a candlestick and the lock and key of the
bottom gate – a gate close to the door of the privy, which leads to the mug
market. That door is usually locked about dark. There was no candle in the
candlestick, but the slide was raised up to the top. I called for assistance to
remove the body into the house. Nicholas Murphy and the soldier carried the body
into the house. I helped them the best I could. The deceased was sometimes in
the habit of carrying a snuff-box. She had a bone-hafted knife with two blades,
which she also carried in her pocket, and often had it out to cut lemons in the
bar. When she took money and silver she generally put in her pocket, and the
copper in the drawer. The day after I searched for her snuff-box in the house
but could not find it.
Cross-examined by Mr BRANDT – Mrs Minshull was a lusty woman and was subject to
fainting fits when put out of the way. She had a husband residing at Manchester
who visited her about once a fortnight. He had seen her last week. She had a
rather short neck, and the bone of her stays seemed pressed upwards on the left
side a little. Mrs Minshull was in the room when Hill sung and seemed pleased
with his singing. She sat in the room not far from them.
Ralf Crowfoot was at Higginson’s on the night in question, with the prisoner and
several others. The deceased came in the room, and sat above an hour near the
prisoner. There was a quarrel between twelve and one o’clock. No persons were
parties to the quarrel except Joseph Yates and Edward Cox. It lasted a few
minutes and then the parties left the house. Seven of us went out together, but
the prisoner remained in the house. Prisoner was in the same room where the
quarrel took place but did not take any part in it. Joseph Yates and Edward Cox
fought in the street near Higginson’s. After the fight witness went home.
Cross-examined by Mr BRANDT – I don’t mean to say that the prisoner did not come
out of the house, but I did not see him. There were eight men in the house and
Betty Minshull. She sat next to the prisoner. When the fight commenced it
created some confusion. I did not hear the deceased or any one else desire us to
leave the house.
John Boardman examined by Mr BOILEAU – Was at Higginson’s on the night in
question. There was a quarrel – John Yates and Joseph Yates took part in it.
Prisoner took no part in it. Witnesses attempted to part them. All then went out
except the prisoner, and the bar was closed.
Eliza Holbrook – Worked at the Cock Edge Factory. Is sister of James Holbrook.
Was at the Legh Arms on the night in question and left at nine o’clock. Prisoner
was there. Saw him next morning at six o’clock and observed that his face was
scratched. Went to dinner at twelve o’clock and heard what had happened to Betty
Minshull. On my return, I told him she was dead, and he said “Ay by -, is she” I
asked him what time he left, and he said he did not know. He said there was a
row among them, and he assisted the deceased to get them out; that then he went
into the house with her, stayed about a quarter of an hour, and they drunk what
drink was left. His face was scratched, and I asked him how he had got it
scratched, and he replied, “In the row”.
Cross-examined by Mr BRANDT – It was in reply to my asking what time he got home
that he said he did not know. He said Betty Minshull and he had drank what ale
remained in the jug.
Alice Thomas, who keeps a public house adjoining Higginson’s said she was up
about one o’clock on the morning of the 7th of December. She went into the front
room about that time, and heard a fight in the street. She then went to her own
bed-room in the back part of the house. She then heard the screams of a female,
which appeared to come from the back part of Mr Higginson’s house. They
continued very loud for some time, and then ceased suddenly. Witness did not go
out at that time. The screams became fainter and fainter previous to ceasing.
Witness closed the window and went to bed. There is a thoroughfare at the back
of our house. It is generally closed about ten o’clock. Mr Higginson’s is the
only thoroughfare except ours. When I heard screams I opened the window and
called out.
Isaac Bellas, plasterer, lodged at Mr James Langshaw’s at the bottom of the mug
market, opposite Mr Higginson’s back gate, in Dec. last. Went home on the 7th
Dec. between one and two o’clock. Could not get into the house at first, and had
to stand at the door about five minutes. When standing there saw the prisoner
whom he had known before, coming down the Legh Arms yard. First saw him about
twenty yards up the passage. It was a moonlight night. The prisoner was walking
towards witness, and passed within a yard of him. Witness spoke to him, and
said, “Bill, is that thee?” He went in a direction towards Lyon’s house.
In cross-examination, the witness stated that he was first examined the Monday
following the murder; but on reference to the depositions by the learned Judge,
it turned out that it was on the 1st of January.
In re-examination, he stated that he heard of the murder on Friday night, the
8th, and it was the night before that he saw the prisoner.
In reply to a question from one of the jury, he stated that when he said he had
seen the prisoner coming down the Legh Arms yard he meant coming down the
mug-market.
Richard Lyon said he was overlooker of the Cock Edge Factory. On Friday morning
the 8th of December the prisoner came to his house. Knows the Legh Arms.
Witness’s house is between a quarter and half-a-mile from the Legh Arms. The
prisoner lived in Coar Edge, nearer the factory than the witness’s house. It was
a few minutes before three o’clock when the prisoner came. He knocked at the
door, and witness got up to the window. Prisoner then requested witness to open
the door which he did. On his coming in, the prisoner said he had been to the
fair, and had had the best luck he had ever had in his life, adding that he had
had connection with a landlady. He then gave witness a knife with a buck-horn
haft, and said he was to keep it for memorandum. He wanted to stay with witness
all night, as he was afraid of being too late for his work. Witness persuaded
the prisoner to go home and said he would call him up. The prisoner went home,
and witness did call him up. Nothing further passed until Saturday morning, when
the prisoner asked witness to lend him a knife, when he returned the prisoner’s
over to him, a knife being the chief thing used in their business. On the
afternoon of Saturday, before wages were paid, the prisoner handed to witness
half a sovereign and six shillings, which he requested him to take care of, as
they intended to go to Bolton to see a young man. On Monday morning witness had
a conversation with the prisoner, when the latter told him what had passed
between them. (It is unfit for publication) He showed a snuff-box, which he said
he had taken from Betty Minshull; and he said he had also taken a knife from
her, which he had thrown into the reservoir; he also said he had thrown the
snuff-box into the reservoir.
The witness in further examination, stated that he engaged some persons to
search in the reservoir for the knife and snuff-box, and produced a snuff-box
which had been delivered to him by a person named Joynson.
The parties who searched the reservoir were then called, and they deposed to
finding the box, which was delivered to the last witness. Mary Pritchard was
called. She identified the box as the property of the deceased.
Dr John Davis examined by Dr BROWN – I graduated as a physician at Edinburgh and
have practised as a surgeon in Warrington between two and three years. I
examined the body of the deceased, by order of the Coroner, on the 11th of
December last. The body appeared very fat. On the right and left forearm were
several bruises, particularly about the elbow and on the wrists. There was a
mark on the wrist and another immediately under the right jaw. There was also a
partial discolouration about the integuments of the neck. I opened the body. On
removing the integuments on the right side of the neck I found the interior
curve of one of the muscles of a very dark colour and, containing extravasated
blood throughout the whole of the bruised part. On removing the integuments on
the opposite side there was also extravasated blood. On opening the chest I
found the lungs gorged with blood. Their structure appeared healthy. The stomach
also appeared healthy, and contained food undigested. The liver also appeared
healthy, with the exception of a small tumour on the interior margin, near the
gall bladder. Judging from the tumefaction of the integuments of the neck, from
the extravasated blood in the muscles, and from the gorged state of the lungs, I
am of opinion that death was caused by suffocation produced by pressure on the
neck. Pressure with the hands would produce the appearance I have described.
Nothing material was elicited from the witness in cross-examination.
The examination of the prisoner before the magistrates was then put in and read.
In it he admitted being in the house, and remaining a short time after the
company left.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr BRANDT (with whom was Mr Hulton) addressed the jury at considerable length,
and with much ability. He said the first question for the consideration of the
jury was whether the deceased had come to her death by violence – the second,
whether that violence had been committed by the prisoner under circumstances
that amounted to the crime of murder, - and observed that if the jury had any
doubt on either point they must give the prisoner the benefit of it. He
contended that neither fact had been proved, and said he did not believe it
possible in human nature that there could have been such a monster of barbarity
as the prisoner would have been had he acted in the manner alleged, or such a
beast in intellect so void even of the animal instinct of self-preservation as
he must have been if, with the consciousness of having occasioned the death of a
fellow creature, he had gone straight way at three o’clock in the morning, to
boast of what he had done, and furnished then, and subsequently the only
evidence that could convict him, - his guilt, if he were guilty, being then
known to himself alone. He admitted that if a man, in the attempt to commit, or
in the commission of a felony, occasioned the death of a fellow creature, the
offence was murder, although the offender had no intention to take away life,
and consequently that if the prisoner had, in the commission of a rape upon the
deceased, or an attempt to commit it occasioned the death of the deceased, it
was the duty of the jury to find him guilty. But he contended that this was not
made out in evidence, whilst, on the other hand, there was a strong presumption
that the deceased had died in one of those fainting fits to which she was
subject, and which they had heard were liable to be produced by any excitement.
Mr Justice PATTESON said that the law looked upon all cases in which death
ensued from violence as murder, and it lay with the persons who occasioned it to
show that it was otherwise. Though the prisoner, in this case might not intend
the death of the deceased, yet if actually did put her to death in the
commission, or attempt to commit another felony, his offence was murder. If the
jury were of opinion that the prisoner at the bar, in attempting to have
connection with the deceased against her will, and by force – that is, in
attempting to commit a rape, occasioned her death – it was immaterial whether he
intended to kill her or not, - the offence would be murder. In order to find him
guilty of that offence, the jury must be satisfied, first of all, that Betty
Minshull died by violence, and in the second place, that the violence was
inflicted by the prisoner at the bar. If they had a doubt on either point, they
must give the prisoner the benefit of it. His Lordship then went over the
evidence very minutely.
The jury retired at ten minutes to three o’clock. They returned into Court at
four o’clock, with a verdict of guilty.
His Lordship put on the black cap, and silence having been proclaimed, proceeded
to address the prisoner. He said that after a very full inquiry, and a most
patient consideration on the part of the jury, the prisoner had been found
guilty of the offence laid to his charge. He (the Judge) was not at all
surprised at the conclusion, for every person in the Court who had heard the
case must be convinced that he was in truth guilty of the offence imputed to
him. He by no means meant to say, nor did he think that one of the jury meant to
say, he believed that the prisoner, when he went out at the back of the house
with the unfortunate deceased, intended to murder her, or had any such notion
passing in his mind; but he did believe that the prisoner was determined at that
time to have connection with her, either with or without her consent, - in other
words, to commit a rape upon her; - that she resisted as much as, she could, and
that, in the attempt to stifle her screams, he had strangled her and occasioned
her death. The prisoner had, in fact, been guilty of murder, rape and robbery.
The case was a very aggravated one, and under the circumstances he should not
feel justified if he held out the slightest hope of mercy to the prisoner; in
this world he had none to expect; but in one respect he was in a better
situation than the unfortunate individual whom he had sent out of the world,
probably unprepared for such a change, and certainly on a sudden. The prisoner
had the opportunity of endeavouring to make his peace with God. In this world he
had no hope of mercy, but in that which was to come he might still hope to find
it. Every possible assistance would be afforded to him, and he trusted the
prisoner would avail himself of it. But a short time was left to him in this
world, and he should take advantage of it to endeavour to secure the pardon of
the Almighty, through the merits of the Redeemer in that which was to come.
His LORDSHIP concluded by passing sentence of death upon the prisoner in the
usual terms.
The prisoner was then removed. He manifested the utmost firmness throughout the
trial, and when taken down walked steadily from the bar.
From the Guardian Series, first published Wednesday 24th Oct 2001.
If we take a look at things that have happened in the history of where we live,
we just might see something that would make those spirits restless.
For the sake of justice, our ancestors were burned, boiled, branded, mutilated,
blinded, maimed, drowned, and often hung by their fellow citizens.
Hangings and burning at the stake took place at the top of Barrel Well Hill, at
Boughton, Chester.
On the way to Chester City Centre, you may have noticed a small obelisk
overlooking the river on the left‐hand side of the road. It was on that spot
that for many years Cheshire hanged its unwanted criminals. It was a very public
place, and if the felons were hanged high enough the spectacle could be seen for
miles around, a lesson to others!
In 1801 three men were being taken there for hanging, when one of them made a
desperate bid for freedom. He leapt from the cart, and painfully tumbled down
the steep hill and straight into the River Dee. Weighed down by his chains he
made a valiant effort at swimming to the far bank, but after only a few short
strokes, he sank beneath the water. The Sheriff commandeered a rowing boat, and
began to trawl the water with a grappling hook and after some time the body of
the prisoner was dragged to the surface. The body was taken back up the hill to
the cart, and the waiting crowd, and thrown in beside the other two prisoners.
The procession, somewhat delayed, then carried on and all three were hanged
together as the law had decreed.
The authorities did not want that fiasco repeated so the next executions took
place from the attic windows of the old prison. Once hung the prisoners kicked
out so much that they broke all the glass in the adjacent windows.
The first cart over the new Wardle Bridge in Middlewich, that had just been
built in 1809, carried the bodies of two hanged criminals, George Glover and
William Proudlove. At their hanging both their ropes broke and they had to wait
a further hour until new ropes were found. They were being returned to the scene
of their crimes to be gibbeted.
Joseph Allen of Weaverham was hanged in 1817 for forging Bank of England notes.
The forged notes had the wrong colour ink printed on the wrong paper, he died
protesting his innocence.
Samuel Thorley was a Northwich businessman who in 1835 murdered his fiancée, who
had threatened to finish with him. He slit her throat during an argument and
promptly walked to Chester to give himself up. He was hanged, despite
protestations that his was a crime of passion ‐his death warrant can be seen in
the record office.
Public executions ceased in 1866 and hanging then took place inside the walls of
the prisons.
The last Cheshire public hanging took place in 1863, when Alice Holt was hanged
for the murder of her mother for the insurance money.
James Phipps was hanged in 1912 for the murder of Eliza Warburton, in Winsford.
His execution broke the record for the quickest hanging in England, 47 seconds
from the hangman, Henry Pierpoint entering the condemned cell, until his neck
was broken. Phipps abducted Eliza and brutally murdered her in fields in Wharton
in 1908, a search party caught him fleeing the scene of his crime towards the
centre of Winsford. The Old Police Station at Wharton where James Phipps was
first detained after murdering Eliza Warburton has been haunted by the
unexplained sound of footsteps.
In 1946 Harold Berry from Winsford was hanged for the murder of Bernard Phillips
of Manchester.Berry murdered him for money to finance a weekend trip to London
with his mistress. He was only a night watchman at the CWS bacon factory, and
needed money to finance his passion.
A newsagent in Greenbank was the scene of a dreadful murder in 1942, where two
women were attacked with an iron bolt. A local youth, Donald Moore was convicted
of the crime, but could not be hung because of his age.
Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be hanged in England, was a frequent visitor to
Vale Royal. Her lover and would be racing driver David Blakely often came to
Oulton Park to race, and she accompanied him on several trips from London and
stayed locally.
Policing in Crewe.
1842 – Due to unruliness and damage to crops, game and fences 17 Farmers and
others from 3 or 4 miles around founded the Second Crewe and Coppenhall
Association for the prosecution of Felons which filled a gap in the Police
organisation of the time. There was 40 members with a subscription of 5/-.
1843 – The Reverent Appleton, Railway Company Chaplain appealed to the Board to
appoint a Police Officer to preserve order especially on the Sabbath and as a
result Crewe possessed two Company Policemen by 1846.
1847 – The Company and Magistrates were forced to build a police station in
Willaston (Now Eaton Street). The Company provided a Superintendent. In addition
there was an office for the railway police in Sandbach Street. A new county
police office was erected in Edleston Road in 1876 when the numbers of police
officers maintained in Crewe and the surrounding Townships was 14 under an
Inspector. It underwent an enlargement.
The Commissioner of Police granted to the Borough made no immediate attention to
the Crewe Police arrangements which would remain under the control of the County
authorities. The Corporation did not press for a separate Crewe Police Force as
it was cheaper for the Borough to be watched over by the county police. Crewe
Town Council did press from time to time for the removal of the Superintendent
from Nantwich to Crewe.
1902 – Not until 1st April 1902 did the Standing Joint Committee elevate to the
headship of a separate Police District including Shavington, Weston, Haslington,
Leighton, Rope and Willaston.
1910 – A branch police station was built in Ford Lane
1922 – Finial development came in 1922 when local Magistrates proposed a merger
of the Crewe and Nantwich Police Divisions and the reduction of the Nantwich
superintendencies to an inspectorship under Crewe .
Items taken from Birkenhead History Book of Interest
1845
Inspector Watson was awarded 2 guineas, Constable Yarwood £2, Constable Donoghue
£ l and Constable Mason F -I for their manly conduct in a riot with some
brickmakers at the Park Hotel.
1846
Inspector McNeill commended Constables Burgess and Doyle for courageous conduct
displayed in the recapture of a drunken and disorderly prisoner when furiously
attacked by a mob of about 200 men and women from Back Chester Street and the
adjacent locality, in an attempt to effect the offender's rescue.
Mr. Cowan, the Albert Dock Superintendent, rewarded Constable Reilly with a
handsome silver patent lever watch and guard of the same metal, and five guineas
in money, for his most praiseworthy conduct in rescuing a woman from a watery
grave in February.
1852
FIRST MENTION OF MURDER
About 1.15 a.m. on Sunday morning, 5th July, 1852, Constable 11 Bradshaw was
going his rounds when he found a man named William Green lying dead on the
footwalk of Beckwith Street. The deceased belonged to the brig "George" lying in
Birkenhead Docks. It appeared that between 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning
the man was walking along Park Street when he was set upon by 10 or 12 men, two
of whom knocked him down and left him lying on the ground. The unfortunate man
got up and ran into Beckwith Street, where he collapsed and was found later by
the Constable. Two women saw the men knock the deceased down and kick him, and
in consequence of a description given by them to the Police, several men were
apprehended, but only one could be identified. His name was Martin Byrne and on
the following morning he was brought before the Magistrates.
1855
On 26th December, Detective Officer Hodgson and Inspector Gunning were assaulted
in the execution of their duty in dispersing a prize-fight on vacant land
situated between Priory Street and White Street, when Hodgson's head was
severely cut by the blow with a stone thrown by one of the fighters, Thomas
Benyon.
1856
MURDER OF P.C. VAUGHAN
"The Superintendent has the painful duty to report to the Committee of the
melancholy death of the late Police Constable William Vaughan, who was stabbed
in the heart with a knife by a man named Thomas Smith, 9 Cobden Place, whilst in
the execution of his duty in Bridge Street at 2 o'clock on Tuesday morning, 23rd
December 1856. He was much beloved of the whole Force, and leaves an aged mother
and an infirm sister, of whom he was the sole support."
1860
THE FIELD STREET AFFRAY
"On 30th January the Superintendent reported that the navvies intended to turn
out to make an attack on the Bridewell in Hamilton Street with a view to
liberating the prisoners, who were committed for assaulting Constables Massey
and Randles in Field Street, on the 25th January, but fortunately there was no
breach of the peace or attempt at rescue. On the same day the prisoners were
removed to Chester Castle for safety in case a further attempt should be made on
the Bridewell. The Superintendent, with the assistance of the Committee, used
every precaution to prevent an outrage in the township. He had all the men off
and on duty in attendance. Captain Smith, Chief Constable for the County,
arrived in the town at an early hour with 120 of his men. Major Greig, by
direction of the Watch Committee (of Liverpool), had 150 men and two
Superintendents in reserve all day ready to be sent across in a moment's notice
in the event of a riot breaking out.
"The military at Chester were communicated with, and it was arranged that a
company of militia should be promptly in attendance should their services be
required."
VISIT OF THE HIGH SHERIFF
"The Head Constable has the honour to report that an Agent from the High Sheriff
of the County waited upon him on Saturday last to intimate the intention of the
High Sheriff to pass through Birkenhead in procession on Friday next, 1st April,
on his way to Chester to attend the Assizes there, the procession to be formed
at the Park Entrance by 11 a.m., pass through Conway Street, Argyle Street,
Hamilton Square, Market Cross and Chester Street. A number of the Police will be
required to attend the High Sheriff through the town, not only for the
preservation of order, but respect for his high office".
It is later recorded that the Head Constable was instructed to order a suitable
carriage for the Chairman of the Birkenhead Commissioners and a horse for his
own use. Seven Inspectors and 52 Constables were detailed to attend to the
procession.
1880
"The Superintendent has the honour to report that P.C. 25 Beard stopped three
men at Woodside Ferry on 15th September carrying three bags. He questioned them
as to what they contained and was told `sailors' luggage' and that they had been
engaged by a man named Antonio Fernandoz to carry them from South Castle Street,
Liverpool, to a Spanish ship in the Birkenhead Docks. Fernandoz then came up and
gave the P.C. a sovereign saying: 'It is all right, officer, they are a few
revolvers. We poor sailors do a little trade on the coast, do not be too hard on
us.' The P.C., thinking all was not right, called the Ferry Inspector and had
all the men brought to the Police Office, and on the bags being opened they were
found to contain four parcels in each of which were 25 canisters of gunpowder,
the whole weighing about 3 cwt. The men were then locked up and brought before
the Magistrate on the following morning.
"Fernandoz was fined £IO and costs for conveying a quantity of gunpowder across
the river in one of the Woodside ferries, contrary to the regulations. The other
three men were discharged. The gunpowder has been destroyed. P.C. Beard was
later allowed to keep part of the sovereign as a reward."
"Inspector Fenna reports that at 11.50 p.m. on 24th March, P.C. 30 Burns was on
duty in Chester Street and heard shouts of `Murder, Police' from St. Mary's
Gate. He ran up and saw a woman running along shrieking, 'My children, my
children'. He then saw one of the eldest boys, Robert, aged 11 years, jump out
of the front bedroom window of the dwelling house of Richard Dowell, No. 3 St.
Mary's Avenue, which was on fire. He broke in the door and found the house
enveloped in flames. Telling the neighbours to look after the inmates, he ran
blowing his whistle to the Police Office. P.C. 19 Coatup who was on duty there
heard the whistling and with the assistance of the Clerk got the reel and
ladders out before Burns arrived.
"They arrived at the fire at 12 midnight, being ten minutes after Burns first
heard shrieks of `Murder' and `Police', and found the above house in flames with
smoke issuing from the bedroom windows back and front. It was stated that the
children of Mrs. Dowell, six in number, were in bed. The second boy suddenly
jumped from the front bedroom window into the street. A ladder was put up to
this window but it was found impossible to gain access from the density of the
heat and smoke, although two branches were playing from a hydrant in St. Mary's
Gate. The ladder was then removed from the front to the back bedroom window,
which is over a deep yard with stone steps leading down and the ladder could not
be fixed in it, and Inspector McClelland on hearing that there were more
children in the room placed the ladder resting on the top of the wall and
ascended at great risk. The rooms were full of suffocating smoke and the flames
darting up the stairs. He groped till he found the bed and brought out Patty
Dowell, a girl six years of age, who was unconscious at the time, and on being
passed down the ladder P.C. Burns instantly took her to Doctor Cornwall where
she died on her arrival. Inspector McClelland on having a lamp passed to him
made his way to the front bedroom and there found the dead bodies of Margaret
Dowell, eight years of age and Thomas Dowell, 10 years of age, which were also
passed down the ladder and taken to a neighbour's house where Dr. Cornwall
stated they were both dead.
"The excitement of the spectators at Inspector McClelland's danger and his three
journeys into the burning house was very great. By this time the fire was got
under control, namely
12.50 a.m.
"The house was tenanted by Richard Dowell, his wife and six children. Dowell is
at present in Wrexham and at the time the fire broke out the occupants were Mrs.
Dowell and her six children. They having retired to rest and Mrs. Dowell having
been awoke by the flames at once rushed to the front door which was bolted. She
got out at the back door with her baby into the street in her nightdress. The
two eldest boys attempted to escape by the stairs but finding the flames too
strong escaped out of the front window."
1905
"With reference to the circular addressed by a number of members of Parliament
to Local Authorities re the Motor Car Act, 1903, the Chief Constable has the
honour to report that it appears to him that the strict enforcement of Clause 1
Section 1 of this Act would entirely meet the case." (The Section which deals
with reckless driving is then quoted.) "If this Section were strictly enforced
no speed limit appears to be necessary. The present system of timing cars over
short distances by the Police with stop watches is very unreliable and
unsatisfactory - such work can only be undertaken by experts.
"A suggestion is made in the circular that each Local Authority, should be
allowed to fix its own speed limit but that would make the use of motor cars
impossible as no driver when driving through a strange neighbourhood could
possibly know when he passed the limits of the jurisdiction of the various
authorities. The erection of the necessary notice boards would be a very serious
expense.
"The suggestion that the motor car should be impounded does not appear to be of
any practical use as that would not prevent the offending driver from driving
other motor cars. The more frequent and stringent enforcement of Section 4
(Sub-Section 1) of the Motor Car Act which provides for the suspension of the
licence of the offending driver and for his disqualification would have more
effect.
"The hands of the justices should also be strengthened in dealing with offenders
enabling them to impose a term of imprisonment with hard labour in substitution
for a fine. There is no doubt that the imposition of fines has been abortive in
many cases.
"At present there is no doubt that motor cars are a serious public danger owing
to the reckless and careless driving of a number of both professional and
amateur chauffeurs, but the Chief Constable submits that if the present Act were
strictly enforced and amended as regard the substitution of imprisonment for
fine there would be some amelioration of the present state of things."
1911
ATTEMPTED MURDER OF A CONSTABLE
At 9.40 p.m. on Saturday, 2nd December, 1911, P.C. McManus heard screams of
"Murder" and "Police" in Field Street. On enquiring into the case he found a man
named George R . . . and his wife quarrelling in the street, and R . . . had in
his possession an open razor. Upon being remonstrated with, R . . . immediately
turned his attention to the Constable and savagely attacked him, cutting his ear
and cheek and cutting through the collar of his cape and overcoat, inflicting a
serious wound on his neck. The Constable, "finding matters serious", thereupon
drew his baton and struck the man down. He then took him to the Bridewell where
it was found that both the prisoner and the Constable were in a state of
collapse and had immediately to be removed to the Borough Hospital where both
were detained.
R . . . was later sentenced to five years' imprisonment and Constable MIcManus
awarded the Merit Badge and £5.
1916
STRUCK BY LIGHTNING
At 4.0 a.m. on 17th March, 1916, Sergeant Towers was on duty in Brassey Street
during a heavy thunderstorm, when he was struck by a flash of lightning which
dazed him for a few minutes but he was afterwards able to complete his tour of
duty. On getting up from bed at 5
p.m. same day he found that his eyesight was very much affected and that he
could scarcely see. The Police Surgeon was called and attended to him. He did
not appear to make satisfactory progress and was seen by a specialist who
ordered treatment and said he would completely recover before long.
It is later reported that Sergeant Towers had to wear spectacles and finally was
pensioned because of his affected eyesight.
1917
ARREST OF ARMED CHINAMAN
On 3rd September, 1917, P.C. 22 Colligan was informed that a Chinaman named Lee
Que had run amuck in the house of another Chinaman named Lee Foo at 4 Cleveland
Street, and had shot at Mrs. Lee Foo with intent to kill her. When the Constable
got to the house he saw Lee Que standing in the lobby with a revolver in his
hand and, after considering the situation, deemed it advisable to enter the
house by the back way. On going round to the back and partly opening the yard
door, he saw Lee Que with a revolver still in his hand coming towards the door.
On seeing the Constable, he made a dash for the door which was closed and held
by the Constable and, failing to open it, he fired a shot from the revolver
which grazed the Constable's wrist, making a small wound. He then turned and
went back towards the house and Colligan then loosed his hold on the door and
slipped into the back yard opposite. In a few seconds Lee Que returned to the
yard door and opened it but before he could make further use of the revolver
Colligan pounced upon him, knocked him down with his staff, disarmed him, and
afterwards lodged him in the Bridewell. On further investigation it was found
that Lee Que, during his frenzy of madness, had deliberately fired two shots at
Mrs. Lee Foo and two at a Chinaman who lived in the house. The revolver was
found to contain one live and four spent cartridges. Lee Que was later sentenced
to three years' penal servitude for shooting with intent to murder.
1928
AWARD OF MERIT BADGE TO CONS. 44 GRIFFITHS
On 25th February, 1928, Constable Griffiths, whilst in the execution of his
duty, was savagely attacked by a man with a razor and dangerously wounded,
receiving a wound three inches long which cut through the muscles of the scalp
and extended down to the bone, necessitating five stitches and rendering him
unfit for duty for 39 days. His assailant was committed for trial at the Assizes
on a charge of attempted murder, but was found insane and ordered to be detained
during His Majesty's pleasure.
1936
KING'S POLICE MEDAL AWARDED TO CONS. 26 BOSTOCK
At about 10.25 p.m. on 15th April, 1936, Constable Bostock was in Tower Road,
Birkenhead Dock Estate, when he heard a shout "There's a woman in the Dock". He
ran towards Egerton Dock and saw a woman about 10 yards from the North East
corner of the Egerton Dock -East Float Passage.
Constable Bostock threw off his helmet and overcoat and jumped into the Dock. He
swam out and caught up to the woman. He caught hold of her and she began to
struggle and shout "Let me drown, let me go, I want to die".
Both were eventually rescued and afterwards taken to the General Hospital.
At the spot where the Constable entered the Dock the water was at least five
feet below quay level and there are no steps in the vicinity.
The depth of water in the Dock was 28 feet and at the time the temperature was
only a few degrees above freezing point.
1937
AWARD OF MERIT BADGE TO CONSTABLE 28 METCALFE
Arising out of a complaint made by three ladies at Slatey Road Station on 28th
October, 1937, Constable Metcalfe accompanied them to the place indicated and,
in order to render himself less conspicuous, wore a mackintosh and trilby hat.
On approaching the corner of Egerton Road and Palm Grove a man was seen standing
there and the three ladies at once said he was the man complained of. As
Constable went towards him he walked away and then began to run and vaulted over
the gate of 5 Egerton Road. Constable followed him, got him in a corner near a
garage and told him he was a Constable. The man at once viciously attacked
Constable with a steel jemmy wrapped in a sock and a terrific struggle ensued,
Constable drawing and using his baton. Constable received two more blows on the
top of his head, being stunned. His baton was forced out of his hand and,
although completely exhausted and almost unconscious, he managed to grab and
retain the man's jacket and raincoat. This jacket, as it turned out, proved to
be a most important clue as it ultimately led to absolute identification of the
wanted man.
After extensive enquiries in which the Liverpool Police rendered most valuable
assistance the man was arrested on warrant at his house in Liverpool. He was
tried at Manchester Assizes on 13th December, being sentenced to three years'
penal servitude for wilfully and maliciously wounding the Constable and to
twelve months' hard labour (concurrent) on each of three charges of
housebreaking, etc.
Constable Metcalfe, who received very serious head injuries necessitating much
stitching, was off duty for 33 days. He displayed tenacity and courage of a very
high order.
1940
AWARD OF MERIT. BADGE TO ACTING SERGEANT 49 DALY
On the evening of 17th September, 1940, Acting Sergeant Daly was at home, off
duty, when he heard bombs dropped quite close to his home.
He ran out of the house and was hurled off his feet by the blast of another bomb
which exploded nearby. On recovering, he ran into Rockybank Road where the bomb
had exploded, and found that a house had been hit by the bomb and that the
occupants were trapped beneath tons of debris.
With assistance, the Acting Sergeant removed sufficient debris to allow a free
passage of air to the trapped people and whilst this work was in progress his
clothes were covered in dust and soot.
After more than three hours work, two persons were rescued alive and the body of
a third recovered, but the body of a fourth person was so wedged in the wreckage
that owing to the increasing danger of the rest of the house collapsing, the
work of recovering the dead body had to be discontinued until daylight. During
the whole of this time the Acting Sergeant was in charge of the incident.
1945
AWARD OF KING'S POLICE MEDAL TO CONS. 10 BINGHAM
At about 4.35 a.m. on 26th March, 1945, Constable 10 Bingham was on duty in
Grange Road on the opposite side to the Services Club when he heard noises which
appeared to come from the Services Club. He immediately crossed the road and
heard someone inside the Club. He obtained the assistance of another Constable
whom he sent to the rear of the premises. He then forced the front door and made
a search of the lower floor. He noticed that property behind a counter had been
disturbed and on looking into a recess inside the front door saw a man who was
holding a revolver. This man pointed the revolver straight at him and said,
"This revolver is loaded and if you come any nearer I will let you have it". The
Constable closed with him, took the revolver from him, and took him into
custody.
Upon examination it was found that the weapon, a Service revolver in perfect
working order, was fully loaded in all six chambers.
The prisoner afterwards stated that the Constable was very decent with him but
that if he had raised his baton he would have shot him.
AWARD OF BRITISH EMPIRE MEDAL TO CONS. 240 ALLEN
At 3.30 p.m. on 14th September, 1956, a Mr. H . . ., aged 81 years, was boarding
a bus in Manchester when a man who was already inside the vehicle pushed past
him to alight, remarking that he had boarded the wrong bus. When Mr. H . . . had
boarded the bus he found that his wallet was missing. He informed Constable
Allen who was also travelling on the bus, in civilian clothes whilst off duty,
and the Constable chased and caught the offender. He attempted to arrest the man
who said, "I'll knife you", and struck the Constable on the face with an open
pocket knife, inflicting a wound four inches long on the left cheek. He than ran
away, but the Constable, although bleeding badly, pursued and caught him.
Constable Allen was treated for his injury at the Manchester Royal Infirmary,
six stitches being inserted in the wound.
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG ‐www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913
/ Virus Database: 2112/4806 ‐Release Date: 02/12/12