7(1
WOMAN
AND
CRIME
SOME BOOKS ON CRIME
THE STORY OP CRIME (English)
By H. L. ADAM. \V
Cloth, 12s. 6d. net.
By H. L. ADAM. With 54 Illustrations. Demy 8vo.
lof
"We have had in recent years so many highly coloured
descriptions of prison life from behind the bars that it is an
agreeable relief to turn to the plain unvarnished narrative
of a trained observer. It is here that Mr Adam is at his
best." Sptctat r,
TRUE STORIES OF CRIME
By ARTHUR TRAIN. Author of "The Prisoner at
the Bar." Illustrated. 65. net.
The deeds described have all actually taken place, and
the incidents came before the author in the course of his
profession. There are eleven chapters dealing with murder
cases, will cases, wire tapping, impostors, theft, and legal
tricks, and they are all wonderful examples of romance in
real life. The book has a number of curious illustrations.
ORIENTAL CRIME
By H. L. ADAM. 17 Pictures. 7s. 6d. net.
" Mr Adam's book is excellently written, and will attract
a large circle of those readers who are fascinated by the study
of the abnormal." Daily Mail.
THE PRISONER AT THE BAR
Side-Lights on the Administration of Criminal
Justice
By ARTHUR TRAIN. Demy 8vo. 8s. 6d.
Good stories and racy anecdotes, with much valuable infor-
mation in regard to the practices of criminal law.
LIFE IN THE LAW
By JOHN GEORGE WITT, K.C. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
A charming book of legal reminiscences and good stories
by an eminent and popular K.C.
WERNER LAURIE, CLIFFORD'S INN, LONDON.
WOMAN AND CRIME
BY
HARGRAVE L. ADAM
AUTHOR OF
"THE POLICE ENCYCLOPEDIA," "THE STORY
OF CRIME/' "ORIENTAL CRIME."
T. WERNER LAURIE
CLIFFORD'S INN
LONDON
CONTENTS
PART ONE
WOMAN AS A CRIMINAL
CHAP. PAGE
I. INTRODUCTORY 3
II. PHYSICAL CONFORMATION AND CRIME . 20
III. "SEXUAL MANIA" THE PROSTITUTE . 29
IV. POISONS 44
PART TWO
THE ORGANISERS OF CRIME
V. THE POISONERS 59
VI. THE POISONERS Continued .... 88
VII. THE POISONERS Continued .... 113
VIII. MURDER BY VIOLENCE 134
IX. MURDER BY VIOLENCE Continued . . 149
X. THE BABY-FARMERS 176
XL THE VITRIOL-THROWERS .... 208
XII. THE FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS ... 226
vii
viii CONTENTS
PART THREE
THE AIDERS AND ABETTORS
CHAP. PAGE
XIII. THE STAUNTON CASE MRS McLACHLAN . 255
XIV. MME. MURAVIOVA THE FEMALE SPY-
PERJURY AND DIVORCE MADAME
GUERIN 270
XV. PROVOCATION AND MURDER" THE UN-
WRITTEN LAW "THE THAW CASE
A SEDUCER OF MEN .... 286
PART FOUR
THE ACQUITTALS
XVI. MADELEINE SMITH MME. STEINHEIL . 301
XVII. " NAN " PATTERSON ADELAIDE BART-
LETTCOUNTESS KWILECKY . .319
XVIII. CONCLUSION 328
INDEX .335
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Day Room, Broadmoor Lunatic Asylum . . Frontispiece
Finger Prints (French Police) .... Facing page 20
Records of Criminals (Paris) .... ,, 22
Type of Municipal Police, Paris ... ,, 22
Photographing a Criminal (Paris) ... ,, 24
Lost Property Office (Paris) .... ,, 24
Prison Infirmary, Nanterre .... ,, 40
Female Prisoners Sewing, Nanterre ... ,, 40
Nursery, Nanterre Prison ,, 50
Home or Retreat, Villers-Cotterets ... ,, 50
Exterior of Morgue, Paris ,, 80
Interior of Morgue, Paris ,, 80
A Lecture on Physical Conformation . . ,, 96
Cycle Police, Paris 96
Sir Robert Anderson . . ... 104
M. L. Lepine ,, 104
Altar, Aylesbury Prison ,, 112
"First Aid" among Female Prisoners, India . 112
Types of Female Criminals, India ... ,, 124
Mrs Maria Manning 136
Catherine Webster 152
Madame Dumollard ,, 160
Mrs Dyer 184
Disguised Handwriting of Female Trade
Swindlers , ,. 232
ix
PART I
WOMAN AS A CRIMINAL
4 WOMAN AND CRIME
indeed, are, in baseness, cunning, callousness,
cruelty, and persistent criminality far worse than the
worst male offender known to the law.
In the ensuing pages no effort of mine will be
made to magnify or in any way unduly emphasise
the enormity of those members of the " gentle sex "
with whose crimes I shall deal ; on the contrary,
where possible, with due regard to truth and justice,
I shall advance extenuating circumstances or make
it clear that the wrongdoing in the female was an
outcome of malevolent male influence. In fact, I
shall consider cases in detail where female criminals
commit their crimes in association with, and beneath
the ascendancy of, male companions. Very properly
the law makes merciful allowance in dealing with
the female offender where it can be made apparent
that she has been impelled to commit breaches of
the law under masculine influence. She is either
acquitted altogether, under such circumstances, or
dealt with very leniently. Woman is pretty univer-
sally admitted to be " a mystery," and I am by no
means presumptuous enough, or sanguine enough,
to suppose that in the present volume I shall succeed
in " solving " her. To accomplish that would indeed
be an achievement to be justly proud of. I shall,
however, venture to lay bare some of her curious
and subtle characteristics as displayed in her criminal
exploits, and endeavour to analyse and trace to their
various sources her mysterious motives.
I think I may state, without fear of contradiction,
that one of the most puzzling attributes of the female
INTRODUCTORY 5
character is her sometimes invincible, unreasoning,
and self-sacrificing devotion to a most brutal ruffian
of a man. This trait in the female character enters
very extensively into her career as a criminal. What
may be the source or mainspring of this ill-conceived
and ardent attachment cannot be clearly ascertained.
Probably she could not account for it herself. It is
a case of Dr Fell reversed, and the reason of her
devotion she " cannot tell." She will be riotously
rebellious, persistently criminal, in gratification of
this sentiment alone. Just as she, as a wife, will
conceive a slavish and dog-like devotion to a brutal
ruffian of a husband, so, as a mistress, she will pur-
sue with equal canine servitude the criminal career
followed by her lawless paramour. In the former
case our various magistrates are sometimes brought
to their wits' end to know what to do in such matters.
Sometimes a woman, whose face has been beaten
almost to a jelly by her burly brute of a husband in
the dock, will plead ardently to the magistrate not to
be " hard on him " ; adding, perhaps, that he has
always been a very good husband, and never lays
hands upon her when he is sober. Which, perhaps,
is not very often! This sort of marital advocacy
altogether baffles male reasoning, and under the
circumstances the magistrate usually considers it
necessary to be cruel to be kind, and so, in spite of
wifely intercession, to give the inhuman husband a
spell of imprisonment. For that period at all events
the unfortunate woman will be safe from the rough
usage of her brutal partner.
6 WOMAN AND CRIME
In the case of the other devoted woman the
mistress of the male criminal the law, as I have
already pointed out, acts a merciful and benevolent
part, and protects the woman, as it were, from the
evil results of her own inexplicable attachment.
How shall we interpret these curious self-sacrificing
traits in woman? One can readily understand an
unswerving and unwavering fidelity to some worthy
object, but why to an unworthy object? One would
have thought that an evil man would have appeared
repugnant to the eye of a good woman, and that she
would have avoided him as much as possible.
There are of course evil women to whom evil men
appeal. But then there are also good women to
whom evil men appeal. Why? In addition to being
a mystery, woman is also sometimes a contradiction.
I repeat, how are we to interpret these hidden
motives? I think we shall find some approach to
an explanation, or a partial explanation, in the fact
that a woman is governed by her emotions ; a
man by his reasoning powers. If a woman reasoned
more, and felt less, she would not be a victim so
often of her own whole-heartedness. She would
less frequently become a victim of man. To me a
thoroughly criminal woman is a most repugnant
creature. Inasmuch as we shall presently make the
acquaintance of many such women, it is in the way
of preparing ourselves for an intelligent considera-
tion of them that we now at the outset discuss female
traits generally.
It has been somewhat frequently stated, but never
INTRODUCTORY 7
yet proved, that certain criminals were " born." It
is one of those statements which it is so easy to make
and so acquire a reputation for profound wisdom and
penetration, because it cannot be proved and is very
difficult of disproof. It is a statement that is " in
the air." I have gone into this subject at consider-
able length in another work of mine, where I have
ventured to contradict the theory in toto, and have
advanced instances which in my humble judgment
are hostile to it. Our present concern with the
doctrine is only so far as it affects female criminals,
who are, as a whole, as it is generally admitted, much
worse than male criminals. If there is some
malignant trait which male " habituals " have ac-
quired at their birth, and which renders them so
difficult of reclamation, then this must be truer of
female " habituals," who are far more persistent and
less curable than males. It is inconceivable in my
estimation, and speaking generally, that any such
malign influence is at work during the embryo stage
that, in short, the evil is wrought after birth by
environment and associations. If a child is reared
amidst evil surroundings it will naturally acquire an
evil bent of mind, and the longer it is kept in such
a moral, or immoral, atmosphere the more likely
is it to become incurable. One would suppose
though that a female child would less readily assimi-
late such moral malaria than a male child, in conse-
quence of the natural and gentler characteristics of
the sex. As a matter of fact, male criminals do very
largely outnumber females, although it is fair to
8 WOMAN AND CRIME
suppose that quite as many female children are born
into evil surroundings as male.
Although, however, as I have just stated, male
criminals so largely outnumber females, there exist
many more of the latter than appear in published
statistics. That is to say, women are the cause of,
directly or indirectly, a large amount of crime in men
for which they receive no statistical credit. It is
therefore one of the purposes of this book to make
that clear. And it will be done through the medium
of actual cases, which seems to me to be about the
only way in which it can be done. They will be
found, in my somewhat arbitrary division of the
work, among the " aiders and abettors " of crime.
I shall deal with each case separately, and endeavour
to show how those women who have not come within
the pale of the law are still, indirectly, concerned
in the crimes committed by others. It does not
necessarily follow that because a person has not
been convicted of a crime that he is not criminal.
There are heaps and heaps of people walking about
at the present day who have never been convicted of
a crime and yet who are simply steeped in crime.
That is why the published figures concerning the
number of female criminals are not reliable or
representative of the amount of crime committed by
members of the female sex.
There is another reason why statistics of criminals,
both male and female, fall far short of representing
the number of criminals in existence, and that is
because they do not, cannot, include the criminals
INTRODUCTORY 9
who commit crimes which do not come within the
scope of the law. And of these there are many.
There are crimes committed for which the law pro-
vides no punishment far graver than many for which
it does. I recall one by way of illustration. About
thirty years ago a gentleman of exalted family induced
a foolish and trusting barmaid to leave her situation
for the purpose of living with him. He dazzled her
with the liberality of his offer. He promised her so
the poor girl stated an allowance of 20 a month.
He took rooms in the West End, lived with her for
the brief space of four days only, communicated a
certain disease to her, and then deserted her. The
allowance he promised her this " gentleman " failed
to furnish. Finding herself thus afflicted, deserted,
and disgraced, the poor deluded girl she was only
22 years of age committed suicide, after framing a
scathing indictment against the author of her ruin
in the shape of a letter, the pathos of which was so
moving that it wrought the public to a pitch of wrath
and fury. An attempt was made to lynch the
scoundrel. And most grievous part of all the law
could do nothing with him. He was universally exe-
crated, and for a time his career was ruined. I say
for a time, for doubtless he would probably live " it
down," as many another " gentleman " has done
before, and probably will do again.
In this case the law, or law-makers, were culpable
by omission. And the blameworthiness of legislators
is the more heinous for the fact that, although the
case quoted occurred so long ago, there is still
io WOMAN AND CRIME
nothing to be found upon the Statute Book which
provides for so grave an offence.
In addition to the female aiders and abettors of
crime to whom I have made allusion, who have not
actually committed an offence which is punishable by
law, there are also other aiders and abettors who are
amenable to the laws women who work either in
conjunction with other women, or in conjunction with
men. And in both cases they may, although they are
only indirectly concerned, still be the instigators of
the crime punishable in the one case as an older
and more experienced woman urging a younger one
to commit crime, in the proceeds of which she will
share, or in the other by the exercise of sex influence
for a similar end. Thus we have female influence
over male criminals. And we must pause to consider
this at some length, this question of female influence
over men, because it is one which is important to our
subject generally.
I have already briefly discussed the curious devo-
tion which some women have for unworthy men.
That is a female trait a characteristic. But a far
more important one is that of the absolute ascendancy
which some women attain over men or at all events
over some men. It is important, because it has a
good deal to do with the true estimation of the part
which women play in crime generally. It is no
exaggeration to say that, although some women
commit crime while under the influence of men, as
has already been pointed out, so also do some men
commit crime while under the influence of women.
INTRODUCTORY n
And nobody but those who study crimes closely, and
have done so for a long time, know how extensively
female influence is answerable for male crime. And
this strange, subtle, and all-powerful domination of
man by woman is just as inexplicable as the un-
reasoning attachment of woman for man. Neither
seems to be capable of lucid explanation. There is
some indefinable personal magnetism about certain
women which seems to completely subjugate the will
of certain men. Personally I feel quite convinced
that some women wield hypnotic influence over men.
And it is invariably a malign influence. And,
curiously enough so mysterious is life altogether
the best of good women do not possess nearly the
same power over men that the evil-minded ones do.
To be sure, all women exercise a certain influence
over men, and a good woman has certain power over
a man she devotes herself to, but yet it falls far short
of the remarkable control which a bad woman seems to
be able to exercise over a man to whom she appeals.
I do not attempt to offer an explanation ; I am
content to record the undeniable fact. It has been
stated that bad women are more interesting to men
than good women. Myself, I think it is less a matter
of interest than of influence.
Well, this female influence is answerable for a
good deal of crime in men for which the women in
question receive no credit statistically. Let me put
a hypothetical case of what I mean by way of illustra-
tion. Suppose a woman, possessing such influence
over a man, uses that influence to induce him to
12 WOMAN AND CRIME
commit theft or fraud for her own personal benefit,
then she is a party to the crime, although she does
not come within the pale of the law. But the man
only will appear in statistics, the woman not at all,
although she is indirectly guilty. Also a woman who
lives with a man, and by her extravagance and
demands upon his financial resources forces him into
such a position that he is driven to commit theft is
indirectly culpable and concerned in the man's
offence. And this remark applies also to many
married women who, by their reckless expenditure
and self-indulgence, compel their husbands to resort
to dishonest means to keep them supplied with funds.
It is feeble and futile to argue that the woman may
not possess a guilty knowledge. Such women in-
variably know full well what they are doing, but are
quite callous of consequences. Indirectly, too, such
women defraud tradesmen extensively, by incurring
indebtedness which they have neither the means nor
the intention of discharging. Such offences are un-
questionably frauds, although the law provides no
punishment for them. Here again, then, the law
itself is culpable by omission. It provides for some
forms of fraud, but not for this particular one,
although it is a serious offence. And by that same
omission it encourages to the commission of the
offence, because an immunity from punishment is an
inducement to commit crime.
Although we cannot exactly define the influence
which women sometimes exercise over men, it is,
however, pretty safe to say that it is of sexual origin.
INTRODUCTORY 1 3
That, combined with will-power. I have known some
remarkable instances of this. I once knew a man
who, although he had been married many years, was
quite as infatuated and as much under his wife's
control as any callow youth suffering with a first
attack of calf-love. She treated him in a most
abominable manner, yet it seemed that nothing she
could do towards him, however cruel and humiliating,
was capable of curing him of his curious canine
devotion. Yet in business the man was most skilful
and adroit. Regarding his wife's relations with other
men he was most amazingly blind, for she was an
adulteress of boldness and enterprise. She was,
while refusing him the rights of a husband, con-
stantly committing herself with another man resident
beneath the same roof. In fact, she was doing it
under his very nose, yet he seemed to fail to see it.
I say seemed, because he appeared to entertain some
suspicion in the matter, although he evidently lacked
the requisite resolution to act upon it. He was, in
fact, a man of very weak will-power, while his
wife was just the reverse. And that is why
I maintain that such women wield hypnotic
power over their husbands, for hypnotism is but
the ascendancy of a strong will over a weaker
one. Weak-willed husbands are being thus
hoodwinked and humbugged every day of our
lives.
But, unquestionably, sexual attraction is at the base
of such power. Because it is inconceivable that a
woman who did not in the first instance sexually
14 WOMAN AND CRIME
appeal to a man could have any sort of influence
over him at all. (I shall deal somewhat at length
presently with the malady which I have named
" sexual mania.") A man who is sexually drawn to
a woman may be said to have already lost some of
his will-power. And if he happens to be a man of
weak will the woman will have very little difficulty
in attaining complete control over him. And the
woman may use such influence for either good or ill.
Where the man is weak and overyielding 1 am afraid
she wields it to his undoing, obeying that instinct for
working mischief to the opposite sex which women
would seem to have inherited from Mother Eve. A
weak man seems to be an irresistible temptation to
woman to deal contemptuously with him, just as one
who treats her with scant consideration appears to
inspire her unreasoning devotion. Doubtless a man
often works his own discomfiture with a woman by
his own behaviour. A man who loses both his self-
control and consequently his self-respect is a poor
sort of thing in the scale of humanity. It behoves
every man to exercise the one and so retain the other.
He will then also receive the respect of women. A
woman has no respect for a fool of a man. And a
man who yields utterly and completely to a woman
is a fool. The man who cannot, or does not, control
his carnal appetite becomes such an one. That is
the basis of woman's domination of man. Self-
control and self-respect depart in company. And if
a man has no respect for himself, how can he expect
a woman to have any for him? If the relations be-
INTRODUCTORY 15
tween the sexes were of a healthier character there
would be less crime.
We have thus far dealt in an introductory manner
with women who aid and abet crime in various ways.
We shall presently see more plainly and lucidly how
this works when we come to the handling of actual
cases. But it should be pointed out that the aiders
and abettors among female criminals, direct and in-
direct, form only a small proportion of the whole,
most female criminals being what I have termed
" organisers of crime." That is to say, they are,
in addition to being the instigators, also the actual
perpetrators of crime. And these may be further
divided into those who work alone, those who work
with other women, and those who work in conjunc-
tion with men. But in all cases they may be said to
be the leading spirit in the criminal enterprise. It is
not surprising to learn that most female criminals
are organisers or ringleaders, for it is a familiar fact
that when a woman abandons herself to anything
in particular she not only does it in earnest but she
invariably very extensively overdoes it. And this
applies to well-nigh everything she puts her hand to.
For instance, if she takes to drink she nearly always
becomes an incurable dipsomaniac ; if she takes to
crime, in enormity she far outstrips the worst male
criminal known to the records ; if she conceives an
aversion to a man, no matter how unreasonable it
may be, nothing is too fantastically cruel that she
can do towards him ; if, on the contrary, she develops
an affection for him, no matter how transparent a
1 6 WOMAN AND CRIME
fraud he may be, she will follow him to the ends of
the earth, or the gallows' foot; and if she takes to
reforming anything or anybody, she soon becomes
an all-round nuisance, as witness the doings of the
militant section of the Suffragettes. Would any male
would-be reformers, however urgent the necessity
for the reform might be, allow themselves to be
guilty of such tiresome and contemptible monkey-
tricks as those perpetrated from time to time by the
above-mentioned females ?
And to what must we attribute this thoroughness
in the militant and rebellious woman? We have
already stated that, as a reason for such extravagance
in female conduct, she is controlled by her emotions.
But that in itself is not sufficient to account for all her
excursions into the. regions of excess. Mere emotion
will, of course, cause the afflicted ones to do un-
reasonable things, but at the same time it is possible
to control the emotions and act rationally even under
stress. For that purpose will-power is required.
And that, I think, furnishes us with a clue to an
elucidation. Speaking generally, women have less
will-power than men, and therefore less self-control
upon emergency. That is undoubtedly the reason
so few, if any, female dipsomaniacs are ever
thoroughly cured. A drunkard's cure lies mainly
with himself, because it depends upon his strength
of will to abstain altogether long enough for the
habit to be overcome. And, lacking the necessary
stability and firmness of purpose, that is where a
woman drunkard fails to redeem herself.
INTRODUCTORY 1 7
But we must add another reason for female irre-
sponsibility, and this is a lack of moral responsibility.
In wrongdoing she knows neither limit nor degree.
Her moral vision becomes obscured, and she rushes
madly and blindly on. The reason of this is, she is
not by nature trained or ordained to observe limits
of that kind. In_the well-ordered schemejof jnatural
things man is the worker, .the bread-winner, who
fights the battle of life; woman is the dependent,
looking to man for protection and nourishment. A
'dependent is less likely to acquire moral responsi-
bility than a fighter. It is similar to the worker and
the queen bees. Did anyone ever hear of queen bees
going forth to gather honey ? If_ they did they would
probably become as great a nuisance as women do
when they encroach upon or intrude into the sphere
of man's natural industries. Therefore we may sum
it up that the various forms of excess which are ex-
hibited by woman when she departs from her natural,
sober, and well-ordered life are due to lack of will-
power, lack of moral consciousness, and super-
abundant emotion.
One of the most staggering and repugnant attri-
butes to man exhibited by bad women is their per-
fectly fiendish cruelty. It is all the more startling
by being displayed by one who is supposed to be
gentle by nature. It is certainly a matter for medita-
tion that the cruellest forms of crime are invariably
committed by women. Some of them indeed are so
terrible, both in conception and execution, as scarcely
to be credited to human agency. And when one
B
1 8 WOMAN AND CRIME
reflects that sometimes the female miscreant has
received scarcely any provocation, and possesses
hardly any motive for the deed, one is all the more
baffled and confounded. The only consolation, if
one can call it so, to be derived from such incidents
is the supposition that women of that kind are alto-
gether abnormal and rare comparatively speaking
that they are not, in fact, women in the ordinary
acceptation of the word, and that something malign
happened at their begetting w r hich sets them quite
apart from ordinary human beings.
The worst cases of secret poisoning to be found
recorded have been perpetrated by women. Later,
we shall consider many of these in detail. And when
one comes to consider that this is far and away the
cruellest crime of all, we have women raised to the
very pinnacle of criminal exaltation. Strange it is,
yet true, that we have women committing crimes from
which men even criminal men would shrink with
repugnance. And these, mark you, not crimes of
impulse, but carefully and calmly planned, with a full
and intelligent knowledge of the suffering to be in-
flicted, and steadfastly and adroitly carried out.
Sometimes, too, not only with invincible cruelty, but
also with superlative hypocrisy inflicting unspeak-
able torture with one hand, and smoothing the brow
of the sufferer with the other.
Then, again, we have the vitriol-throwers, who are
also mostly women. Very few men have been con-
victed of vitriol-throwing, and those were of a com-
paratively venial character. It is a particularly
INTRODUCTORY 19
heinous and cowardly crime, and later we shall deal
with some actual cases of the kind.
Among other cases we shall have to consider, in
addition to the organisers and the aiders and abettors
of crime, will be those where there has been an
acquittal, because it sometimes happens that, even
although a woman has been acquitted of a specific
charge, her conduct in other respects may be open to
question. The reader will also be invited, upon a
consideration of all the facts in the case, to form his
own opinion as to the correctness of the verdict.
CHAPTER II
PHYSICAL CONFORMATION AND CRIME
FOR some time it was held by certain persons, and
doubtless still is by many, that there exists some con-
nection between what are known as physical abnor-
malities and the criminal trait. The late Professor
Lombroso and other so-called crime " scientists '
took a good deal of trouble to make this appear true,
but in the present chapter I propose to endeavour to
show that it has no foundation in fact; that, in
short, it is an utter fallacy.
In his work, " The Female Offender," Professor
Lombroso declares that prostitutes have certain
" pathological anomalies." He also says, " Fallen
women ... are distinguished from criminals by the
following peculiarities: clinoid apophisis forming a
canal ; tumefied parietal prominences ; median
occipital fossa of double size ; great occipital irregu-
larity ; narrow or receding forehead ; abnormal nasal
bones ; spactal bone ; prognathous jaw and alveolar
prognathism ; cranial sclerosis ; a virile type of face ;
prominent cheek-bones."
The above sounds quite portentous, but as a
matter of fact there is very little in it. Happily long
20
I V
PHYSICAL CONFORMATION 21
words break no bones, although they may confuse
the understanding. There are certain people who
get credit for being " scientists " by adopting obscure
methods of investigation and clothing their conclu-
sions in linguistic fustian. The above might very
well be translated into ordinary diurnal language as
follows : " Certain cranial irregularities, which phren-
ologists call ' bumps ' ; receding forehead ; large
nose; prominent jaw and teeth; virile type of face
and prominent cheek-bones." The plain reference
to forehead, face, and cheek-bones shine out like
precious gems in matrix. It will, therefore, at once
be seen that such characteristics cannot be typical of
prostitutes, for they may be found among all classes
of women.
A Madame Tarnowsky, another of these " scien-
tists," made a number of measurements among
female criminals, which are given in the above work
of Lombroso's. The lady discovered that 45 per
cent, of infanticides were below the normal weight,
and 29.6 per cent, of other murderesses were also
below the normal weight, while 50 per cent, of infan-
ticides and 44 per cent of murderesses were below
the normal height ; 1 5 per cent, of prisoners were
deficient in weight and 25 per cent, in height; 19 per
cent, of prostitutes were deficient in weight and
28 per cent, in height; 21 per cent, of female thieves
were deficient in weight and 14 per cent, in height.
The lady also made measurements of the span of
the arms of a number of prostitutes, thieves, mur-
deresses and " moral persons," and came to the
22 WOMAN AND CRIME
conclusion that " the span of the arms being conse-
quently inferior among prostitutes and even criminals
when compared to the stature, than among the moral
poor, which result must be attributed to the greater
development of limbs in women who work."
The foolishness of the above may easily be seen.
When a woman stops growing her limbs cease
lengthening. No amount of labour will induce
them to become longer, although it will, of course,
increase their muscular development.
We also learn on the same authority that the upper
limbs of an illiterate working-woman of moral life
measure 0.608, as against 0.597 m thieves and 0.583
in prostitutes. The circumference of the thorax is
82.2 in prostitutes, which differs little from that of
moral women, although relatively to the height the
difference is greater.
What rubbish ! There is nothing definite whatever
to be drawn from such figures ; they (ajre merely
figures and nothing else. The whole thing is abso-
lutely inconclusive.
The lady also tells us that the hand is longer in
Russian prostitutes (right, 187; left, 184) than
peasant women and homicides (right, 185 ; left, 184),
and thieves (right, 178; left, 175). Thus we find
the hands of thieves the shortest. This is peculiar,
because one would have supposed that if anything
was calculated to lengthen the hands it would be
thieving. We are also told that the length of the
middle finger, on the outside, has some relation to
the breadth of the hand, and the length of the hand
!
<J
PHYSICAL CONFORMATION 23
to the height. Measurements were also made of the
circumference of the neck, thigh and leg of " normal
women." It is not surprising to learn that some
difficulty was experienced in getting subjects
for these experiments. I should object myself
I would not have Madame measuring me. No
such difficulties, however, were experienced among
prostitutes.
Another " scientist," Fornasari, obtained the fol-
lowing results: "Between the least circumference,
over the ankle bones, and the largest, round the calf,
there is a difference in Bolognese prostitutes of from
70 to 150, and in normal women of from 100 to 140
the median average for the first-named being 120,
and for the last-named 100. Normals consequently
have the calves least developed on an average, and
prostitutes show the maxima and minima of develop-
ment. Between the maximum measurement of the
calves and that of the jhighs the variation was from
120 to 240 in prostitutes of Bologna, and from 120 to
220 in normals the serial mean being for the first-
named 190, and for the second 150. The thighs of
prostitutes are consequently bigger than normal
women's in proportion to the calves. The foot in
proportion is also shorter and narrower than in
normals.''
What a nice occupation for a man to be engaged
in! And what nonsense it all is. As if we do not
know that prostitutes are of all sizes and shapes, from
the very thin to the very fat ; and the lean sometimes
become fat and the fat lean. I think that will do for
24 WOMAN AND CRIME
the legs; let us now see how the other extremity
fares under the calipers of these " experts."
A man named Marro, yet another " scientist," made
the following cranial measurements : " Horizontal
circumference," "longitudinal curve," "transversal
curve," " longitudinal diameter," and " transversal
diameter," comparing those of prostitutes, peasant
chaste women, educated chaste women, and thieves.
From which measurements he deduced the following
"probable cranial capacity," in the order given:
1452.3, 1465.3, 1466.8, and 1462.4. From which it
will be seen there is little variation, so what does it
indicate ? We are told that prostitutes have " small
cranial capacities." I doubt it. The largest cranial
circumference, Marro tells us, is to be found in homi-
cides (532); then come poisoners (who may also be
homicides 517), infanticides (who are homicides
501), and thieves (494).
We also have such measurements as " antero-
posterior diameter," " frontal diameter," " frontal
height," " bizygomatic diameter," and " bimaudibular
diameter." We are also told by this eminent author-
ity that dark eyes are not frequent among prostitutes
and thieves, and that the hair of prostitutes and
criminals is darker than that of normals ; that criminal
women of mature age have more wrinkles than others,
and that baldness in female criminals is less common
than with normals. We are further informed that
among female criminals are to be found the following
anomalies: Moles, hairiness, masseter muscles (this
is a most mysterious " anomaly," because it is the
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
PHOTOGRAPHING A CRIMINAL (PARIS).
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
LOST PROPERTY OFFICE (PARIS).
PHYSICAL CONFORMATION 25
masseter muscles which lift the lower jaw and enable
us to close our mouths), prehensile foot (never heard
of such a thing, except in a " side-show "), projecting
ears (an " anomaly " !), strabismus (a squint), and
anomalous teeth which may mean anything or noth-
ing. We are still further informed that " almost all
anomalies occur more frequently in prostitutes than in
female' offenders." Is not a prostitute a " female
offender " ? We are also asked to believe that there
is greater dullness in sense of touch among female
criminals than normals, that their sense of smell is
duller, and that they have a " delicacy of gustation."
Those who know anything of criminals will be able to
pronounce upon these conclusions.
When Lombroso tells, as he does, that insensi-
bility to pain is a marked characteristic of criminals
he is about as wrong as he can be. It is a well-known
fact that the only way to appeal to the understanding
of certain brutal criminals is through their own skins.
It is pain in other people that they are insensible to.
It was flogging that put down garrotting, and it is the
prospect of a flogging that keeps certain ruffianly
criminals from breaking into open rebellion in our
various prisons at the present day. Lombroso's " dis-
coveries " were always peculiar. He examined the
skull of Charlotte Corday, who killed Marat, and he
pronounced it a truly criminal type of skull. He was,
however, fully contradicted by two others Topinard
and Benedict who declared that it was an ordinary
female skull. Of course it was, for Charlotte was not
even an ordinary criminal. She was just an average
26 WOMAN AND CRIME
woman worked up to a pitch of fury by the brutal
behaviour of an inhuman monster, which she rightly
determined to kill. She was more in the way of being
a benefactress than a criminal.
Lombroso thus summarises the above measure-
ments and conclusions : " It must be confessed that
these accumulated figures do not amount to much,
but this result is only natural." Quite so, Professor.
I agree with you there absolutely. I even go further
and say they do not amount to anything. Anybody
can go and do the same as Madame Tarnowsky,
Fornasari and Marro did, if they care to do something
foolish and indelicate, and have plenty of time to
waste.
I induced M. Bertillon to send me a dozen sets of
measurements of female criminals. Below is a list of
the subjects :
P.M. (32), living at home convicted of theft
B.M. (38), no regular occupation theft and receiving
H.A.A. (34), housewife theft at the Louvre
H.C. (34), no regular occupation procuring abortion
H.Y. (35), chambermaid vagabondage
D.H. (37), domestic servant theft at Bon Marche
D.L.M. (31), living at home theft
B.A. (34), dressmaker theft
B.L. (34), living at home theft
B.Y. (37), domestic servant theft
H.H. (35), no regular employment theft
E.L. (31), laundress theft
The measurements were those of the waist, bust,
PHYSICAL CONFORMATION 27
head, arms, foot, middle finger, ear, height, etc. It
would be tedious to reproduce all these, so I give a
facsimile of one only of the cards (both sides) :
larqocs particolieres et cicatrice*.'
-IV.
U<UJ.
I applied a test to a number of females other than
criminals, and I obtained similar measurements to
many of those contained on these cards. So that
neither in the shape of so-called " anomalies " or
measurements can physical conformation be an indi-
cation of criminal traits. The thing is as dead as
28
WOMAN AND CRIME
Queen Anne or the " science " of the handwriting
expert. In a letter to me M. Bertillon says: " It is
out
Fane* to
no longer held that physical conformation has any-
thing to do with crime." The mystery is how such a
fallacy ever came to be taken seriously.
CHAPTER III
" SEXUAL MANIA " THE PROSTITUTE
WE are now about to discuss a subject which,
although a delicate one, will not shock any but the
prurient-minded. The lubricious can find food for
their obscene appetites almost anywhere and in almost
anything. They may even object to the sunbeam as
being too obvious. But my remarks are not ad-
dressed to such undesirable individuals, but to the
earnest student. There is a proper and an improper
way of dealing with the subject. One can be vulgar
over a lily and poetical over a parsnip. It is merely
a question of frame of mind. ' To the pure all things
are pure."
The question of sexual relationship must neces-
sarily be included in any intelligent and comprehen-
sive consideration of the subject of crime, inasmuch
as it has a good deal to do with a certain phase of it.
In this country we have always been inexcusably diffi-
dent to use no stronger word in dealing with a
human weakness which is the mainspring of a large
amount of wrongdoing. This is out of respect to the
prurient and feeble-minded Mrs Grundy. We have
never, as they have done on the Continent, recog-
29
30 WOMAN AND CRIME
nised the necessary evil of prostitution, with the result
that it prevails in a much worse state than if we did.
If we were more honest and fearless on the sex ques-
tion many afflicted men and women who now languish
in gaol would be tended in homes or asylums.
Although fashioned in the image of God, we all have,
more or less, the weaknesses of the flesh. And there
can be nothing repugnant in anything that is natural.
It is the unnatural which is repulsive and to be
avoided.
I have canvassed for opinions on this subject
among a number of medical men and those working
in connection with wrongdoers, and I have come to
the conclusion that even the medical profession itself
has not yet realised the importance and significance
of the matter in relation to the daily health and con-
duct of men and women. Those who seem to under-
stand it most are those who have for many years been
striving to reclaim wrongdoers such, for instance,
as Mr Holmes of the Howard Association and Mr
Wheatley of the St Giles's Mission. Both these
gentlemen will tell you that they are quite convinced
that this malady, this cerebral abnormality has a great
deal to do with a large percentage of crime. Mr
Wheatley says that although some cases of " drunk
and disorderly " among females are not attended with
acts of immorality, many of them are. Mr Holmes
testifies to the same effect. In fact, the drunkenness
may be said to be the culminating stage of rebellious-
ness which is induced by the cerebral disorder. This
has been proved to have been the case many times
"SEXUAL MANIA" 31
through the medium of practical experience. I mean
to say that women who have been convicted of such
disorderly conduct have been taken in hand, kept in
seclusion and away from the drink, while they were
vigilantly watched. And much the same thing has
occurred in each case. For a time they have behaved
with perfect propriety, exhibiting no signs or traces
of any undue exaltation, until at length they have
betrayed symptoms of approaching excitability;
finally and obviously, against their better judgment
and desires, they have been compelled, by that
strange though uncontrollable internal force, to break
away and plunge into riotous conduct. And to prove
that a craving for drink was not the impelling power
they have quite candidly confessed to their guardian
that their trouble was something quite apart from
that.
The malady affects men and women in different
ways, not always driving them to drink. Drink is
only one of the effects. For instance, there was the
case of a man who, although quite well-off, had a
mania during the periods of such visitations for steal-
ing pots of flowers from barrows. Again and again he
was convicted of this offence and never of any other.
He could, of course, well afford to pay for the plants,
but his desire was always to steal them. Dr Charles
Mercier, in his " Crime and Insanity," says of this
malady : " And in this way insanity contributes to the
commission of crime ; for the character of certain
mental disorders is in this very exaggeration of desire.
Some persons are assailed by most urgent desires,
32 WOMAN AND CRIME
which they abominate, repel and resist, to steal, to
injure themselves or other people, to set things on
fire, and to do other criminal acts. In a case at
present under my care, a footman of most mild and
gentle disposition, finds himself under a constant in-
clination to poison the soup, to put powdered glass
in the viands, to stab his master, or his master's
guests, at meals, to throw the children out of the
window, and so forth. In other cases the mania is
for stealing, but the motive of the act is not so much
gain as the motive of the collector ; for persons thus
affected usually limit their thefts to one class of things.
One will steal shoes, another spoons, another fans ;
and the value of the articles stolen has no relation of
the needs of the thief, who will, in many cases, steal
a thing tEat is of no value to him at all. The gratifi-
cation is in the doing of the act, and when it is done
the thing stolen is not valued or desired. It is often
given away, or put away and never inspected again."
One medical man whom I consulted, and who
called himself a physician, made the astounding state-
ment to me that there was no real necessity for any
man to have anything to do with women. There are,
of course, both men and women whose natures are so
continent that such remarks might apply to them
people compounded, as it were, of tea-leaves and saw-
dust. But to make such an assertion as a general
statement is simply ridiculous. And the good man
was not arguing from his own point of view, for he
was a married man with several children. I do not
suppose he procured the latter through the medium
"SEXUAL MANIA" 33
of abstention, although he was an Irishman. This
variation in the natures of men and women is answer-
able for many unhappy marriages. A certain lady,
whom the world heard a great deal of some years ago,
has put it on record in her private memoirs that she
was, in this direction, a great disappointment to her
husband. She further states that, physically, mar-
riage is undoubtedly a great lottery, inasmuch as " it
admits of no rehearsal."
Another doctor I consulted readily admitted that
there was a malady of the kind, which I have, rather
uncouthly I fear, called " sexual mania." He called
it something else; gave it a name which contained
about half the letters of the alphabet, but which we
need not trouble ourselves about here. He was also
prepared to prescribe certain drugs as a remedy for it.
There is only one proper remedy, however, and that
is Nature's. Some doctors are honest and bold
enough to recommend this, while others, such, for
instance, as our above-mentioned physician, profess
to think such a proceeding most improper. Why,
they do not condescend to say. I do not think many
people who are interested in the cure of crime can
have any doubt as to the existence of this malady
which causes so much of it. Mr Morrison, in " Crime
and Its Causes," says: "The actual percentage of
criminals who suffer from mental disorders in the
prisons of Europe is probably much greater than is
generally supposed. At the present time a knowledge
of insanity is no part of the ordinary medical
curriculum." And Dr Mercier, in " Sanity and
c
34 WOMAN AND CRIME
Insanity." says: "With respect to this malady the
great majority of medical men are themselves in
the position of laymen. They have not studied it.
It was not included in their examinations." In
short, we have yet to acknowledge the intimate con-
nection which exists between nervous disorders and
crime.
Let us now devote a little space to the considera-
tion of the prostitute in relation to crime. Lombroso
seems to have some doubt as to the relationship, for
sometimes he brackets her with ordinary criminals
and at others he makes a distinction between them.
Personally I do not regard the prostitute as an
ordinary criminal. Indirectly, she is the outcome of
shortcomings in the social system. Directly, there
are many causes for her being on the streets. But it
is not true, as has been thoughtlessly said, that she is
the victim of man's lust. That is a fallacy, an un-
warrantable slander on the male sex, a little easy cant
indulged in by ill-informed busybodies who are for
ever writing and talking about things which they have
not previously taken the trouble to inquire into.
There are, unfortunately, men who treat women in-
famously, but they are in a very small minority. No
man worthy the name treats a woman with cruelty
and treachery. I know for a fact that the police as a
rule are very indulgent and considerate towards the
women of the streets, except when their hands are
forced by some whited sepulchre or bawdy woman
on the prowl for cheap notoriety, when they are called
upon and compelled to do their duty. But to hunt
"SEXUAL MANIA" 35
such women from post to pillar is not prosecution but
persecution.
Admitted that men are the lure and bait for women
to become harlots, that they support them when they
become so, yet they do not compel or drive them to it.
The women themselves voluntarily adopt the calling.
It may be stated, without fear of contradiction, that
there exists nothing, absolutely nothing, which can
compel a woman to adopt or resort to an immoral
life. The very existence of baby-farms is proof of
this. Prostitutes are sometimes called " fallen
women." What is a fallen woman ? I take it literally
to mean a woman who has fallen from a condition of
chastity. That being so, the women of the pavement
do not by any means adequately represent them, for
there are heaps and heaps of women, both single and
married, who have so fallen but who are not on the
streets and are never likely to go there. And if the fact
of a woman having an illegitimate child is not suffi-
cient to compel her to go upon the streets, then it is
quite clear that nothing else will, for that is the most
serious thing that can happen to her.
Prostitutes are also sometimes referred to as " un-
fortunates." Well, it is safe to say that the majority
of them do not consider themselves unfortunate,
except when they are taken up by the police or in
hand by the " reformer." They have no false notions
of delicacy about their business, which they regard in
a purely commercial light. It is well known that
many of them accumulate money and eventually retire
to some more legitimate occupation. They do not want
36 WOMAN AND CRIME
to be reformed ; they would scorn to be reformed. In
fact, there is precious little reforming done among
them. This sort of social work is usually adopted by
well-placed ladies who are hard put to know what to
do with their leisure time and are in pressing need of
a hobby. The perfect nonsense which is talked on
the subject at the meetings which such people hold
periodically would cause the judicious to grieve, if it
did not make the very angels weep.
Women become prostitutes from various causes
some from a constitutional disinclination to work,
others from love of ease and the wearing of fine
raiment, others still who adopt the calling as an easy
way of obtaining money with which to have a " good
time " ; many, however, through being afflicted with
the malady which we have already discussed in this
chapter. And this I shall proceed to prove by
describing one or two cases of the kind which have
come under my personal notice.
The first case, then, with which I was intimately
associated, concerns a young woman whom we will
call Nell Standish. When I first met her she was quite
young, not more, I should think, than 16 or 17. But
she looked many years older. She was, in fact, alto-
gether abnormal. She was the daughter of highly
respectable parents, who kept a baby-linen establish-
ment in the West End. She was very pretty. She
was also something else. We will say she was very
ardent. Not to beat about the bush, she was common
to nearly all her male acquaintances. Although still
so young, she had already irretrievably "fallen."
"SEXUAL MANIA" 37
And in these liaisons she was always the leading
spirit, being so impetuous and energetic in her wrong-
doing as to take aback some of those who were the
recipients of her " favours."
Eventually a certain event happened, which need
not be described here, but which came to the know-
ledge of her parents, who decided to have her put
away while she was still under age. It fell out that
she (the girl) overheard this conversation, and she
was so alarmed at the prospect of being shut up that
she popped on her hat and fled from the house by the
back way. Naturally her parents were greatly
shocked at her escape, and used every effort to dis-
cover her whereabouts. In this search I gave them
my personal assistance. For weeks she was missing,
when one day I encountered her in South London.
I then learned from her what happened to her after
her flight. It appears she went straight to the house
where one of her male acquaintances lived. He was
the son of people in rather good circumstances. By
looking round the side of the house she was able to
see him playing tennis on the lawn. He saw and
came to her. Having learned from her the predica-
ment she was in, he procured her a lodging for the
night. She afterwards moved from here to the hardly
respectable thoroughfare called Stamford Street,
Blackfriars. Here she was living when I met her.
To my great regret, I found she had already
adopted the calling of an " unfortunate." Hand-
somely attired in evening dress, she was nightly
leaving her lodging in Stamford Street in a cab,
38 WOMAN AND CRIME
accompanied by another woman of the class, more
experienced and hardened than herself, for the
Empire, the Alhambra, or the St James's Restaurant,
known to the elect as " Jimmy's." I now used every
possible effort to get her back to her parents. My
position was a somewhat delicate one, not to say
awkward. In the first place she had sworn me to
secrecy concerning her address ; in the next I was
pledged to inform her parents the moment I should
discover her whereabouts. In addition to this, I felt
that I had not the heart to tell them the whole truth.
Already her poor mother had moved me with her
tears. So I temporised. I told them that I had met
her, that I was going to meet her again, and that
eventually I had no doubt I should succeed in
obtaining her address.
In the meantime I informed the girl that I was in
touch with her parents, using every possible effort of
persuasion to induce her to return home. I described
how her parents were suffering and how willing they
would be to forgive her if she would but retrieve and
return to them. Although she did not outright refuse,
she did not make any effort to return. It was rather
pathetic to observe how she clung to me as a kind
of link between herself and a life she would willingly
go back to had she the resolution and courage. I
quite dreaded my interviews with her mother, her
grief was so great.
Eventually Nell Standish moved to more comfort-
able rooms in the West-end, her companion going
with her. The rooms were taken for her by the young
"SEXUAL MANIA" 39
fellow who had befriended her on the night of her
flight, and who was keeping her. Clearly he did not
know the life she was leading, for soon after he
arranged to marry her. It was she who told me of
this, and I was very glad to hear it, for such a step
as this I thought might save her. She was introduced
to his friends, and the young fellow's mother, not un-
naturally solicitous for the fate of her son, put some
pertinent questions to his affianced, among other
things expressing her hope that she, Nell, was
thoroughly healthy. If the good lady had heard the
tone in which this information was subsequently con-
veyed to me I do not think she would have been
reassured.
The banns were duly published at a West-end
church, and I consented to act as " best man."
Eventually the morning of the wedding arrived, and,
arraying myself in festive garments, I wended my
way to Nell's rooms. When I entered the house I
was rather struck with the absence of any signs of an
approaching wedding, and when the servant who
admitted me looked askance at my garments, while
the shadow of a smile flitted across her countenance,
I began to " hae ma doots." I mounted to the first
floor, where the rooms were situated, and walked into
the sitting-room. Here also there was an entire
absence of preparations for imminent marriage.
There was not even a crescent of confetti nor a grain
of rice, not a hook nor eye nor strand of lace nor
petal of flower! Nothing but the usual contents of
the room. Her ladyship was reclining on a sofa,
40 WOMAN AND CRIME
reading a novel. I propose to give a portion of the
dialogue which ensued, as it indicates her frame of
mind.
As I entered the room Nell looked up and said:
" Hullo ! Well, you have got yourself up ! I've
never seen you look so c toney ' before. A silk hat
suits you. You look like like like a bank clerk ! "
I gazed at her in amazement.
" What about the wedding? " I asked.
" Oh," she replied tersely, " it's off. He's backed
out of it. I don't care. I don't want to get
married."
I felt cross.
"And I've come all this way specially for it," I
complained.
" What a shame ! " she said sympathetically.
"Poor old boy! Nevermind. Sit down and have a
chat. Do you like ' The Deemster ' ? " (The novel
she was reading.)
And so the desultory conversation continued for
some time, during which she hardly even alluded to
the marriage which was " off."
No doubt the young fellow or his friends found
out something at the last moment which stopped the
ceremony. I believe she spoke her mind when she
said she did not want to get married. Marriage
brings with it certain limitations, which would not
have been to her liking. Unfortunately I never could
get her back to her home, although she was inju-
dicious enough to consent to receive her parents at
her lodging. Her mother fled from the place as from
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.}
PRISON INFIRMARY, NANTERRE.
"SEXUAL MANIA' 41
a lazar-house, and subsequently described to me,
between paroxysms of weeping, the horror she ex-
perienced at finding herself at such a place. She
regarded it as the crowning iniquity of her daughter
to allow her to approach " that house." She also
described how she had had trouble with her daughter
since the latter's earliest years.
The air of callousness which the young woman
exhibited did not conceal her true feelings. I remem-
ber one evening we sat together in her handsomely
furnished sitting-room upon one of the many occa-
sions when I endeavoured to effect a reconciliation
between her and her parents. She fell into a remini-
scent mood. It was cold, and we sat by the fire.
Wistfully she recalled the days of her childhood, her
mother's loving care and the happy times she had
had during the period of her innocence. Presently
tears came to eyes that had not lately been accus-
tomed to shed them. And as the tears came into her
eyes a " lump " came into my throat. I felt that I was
prepared to make almost any sacrifice if by so doing
I could have placed her in her mother's arms and so
have saved her from the fate that awaited her. But
it was not to be. In the fair body of that beautiful
child, with her glorious golden hair, her soft, pensive
eyes, her sweet girlish lips and complexion as delicate
as an infant's, there was implanted a malign influ-
ence, more powerful than parental persuasion, than
energetic friendly counsel, that drove her headlong
to social destruction, that dragged her down and
down and down, against her better judgment and
42 WOMAN AND CRIME
finer instincts, down to the dregs and damnation.
Who shall solve the hideous problem, who minister
to the terrible malady?
Again I lost sight of her, and it was not till some time
after that I again encountered her. I then met her in
the West-end. Of course, she had a man with her.
It was clear that she had sunk a stage or two lower
on her inevitable journey downwards to the social
ditch. The bloom was off her beauty, and there was
indications that she was drinking not wisely but too
well. She saw and recognised me, but I hurried on.
It may have been cowardly on my part, but I could
do her no good, and I wished to retain intact as far
as possible the mental picture of her sweet face as it
was before she " fell." That was the last I ever saw
or heard of her. Poor Nell! I wonder how it has
fared with thee! Are we destined to meet again in
that state when the soul shall have given off its cor-
ruption and been released from the burden of the
flesh? I trust so.
I ask, was the above truly unfortunate young
woman a victim of man's lust?
I recall another case. In this instance the young
woman left her home in the country to come upon
the streets in London because, as she explained,
her home was rendered unhappy by the conduct of
her stepmother. That was scarcely an adequate
reason, though, as there were other things she might
have gone to. It happened that before she was
wholly committed to the life, she fell in with a certain
individual who took compassion on her. He took
"SEXUAL MANIA' 4 3
rooms for her, paid her rent and gave her money, so
that she should not have to go on the streets for a
subsistence. He also advised her to return home,
and subsequently she did so. Not long after, how-
ever, he met her again. She was back on the streets,
and had now contracted a disfiguring disease. So she
went the way of the unrighteous.
I again ask, was the above young woman a victim
of man's lust?
One might go on enumerating such cases indefi-
nitely. Civilisation and the " higher life " have
produced prostitution, which is unknown among
savage tribes. There is among the latter what
civilisation calls unchastity, but those who are guilty
of it are not conscious of doing any harm. Is it also
too much to suppose that civilisation has also pro-
duced such unfortunate creatures as Nell Standish?
CHAPTER IV
POISONS
As the crime of poisoning is one which is mostly com-
mitted by women, it will not be out of place to devote
a little space to the consideration of some of the
principal poisons themselves.
The task of limiting the opportunities for obtain-
ing lethal quantities of deadly agents by persons with
homicidal tendencies has always been a difficult one
with the authorities. It is quite impossible to prevent
the purchase of poisons by such persons, the most
that can be done is to put as many restrictions on
their sale as possible. Thus all chemists keep what
is known as a " poison book," which all persons pur-
chasing certain poisons are called upon to sign. A
witness is also required to be present, and the
purchaser is likewise asked to furnish a reason for
making the purchase. The latest legislation on the
subject, which came into force in October, 1911,
enacts that the following poisons should be sold in
bottles which can be distinguished by touch from
ordinary medicine bottles: Vitriol (sulphuric acid),
nitric acid, hydrochloric acid (spirits of salts), and
soluble salts of oxalic acid.
44
POISONS 45
Most poisons are scheduled and divided into two
classes, certain precautions and restrictions upon
their sale being imposed respectively. The following
form, issued by the Pharmaceutical Society, contains
all the information that is obtainable on the subject :
POISONS AND PHARMACY ACT, 1908.
SCHEDULE OF POISONS.
It is unlawful to sell any poison in this Schedule unless the
box, bottle, vessel, wrapper, or cover in which such poison is con-
tained be distinctly labelled (i) with the name of the article, (2)
with the word " Poison," and (3) with the name and address of the
seller ; it is also unlawful to sell any article in Part I. of the
Schedule to any person unknown to the seller, unless introduced
by a person known to both parties, and on every sale of such
article the seller must before delivery enter, or cause to be
entered, in the Poison Book (i) the date of sale, (2) the name and
address of the purchaser, (3) the name and quantity of the article
sold, and (4) the purpose for which it is required, these entries
berng attested by the signature of the purchaser and of his intro-
ducer, if any.
PART I
Aconite, Aconitine, and their preparations.
Alkaloids all poisonous vegetable alkaloids not specifi-
cally named in this Schedule, and their salts, and all
poisonous derivatives of vegetable alkaloids.
Arsenic, and its medicinal preparations.
Atropine, and its salts, and their preparations.
Belladonna, and all preparations or admixtures (except
belladonna plaisters) containing o.i or more per cent, of
belladonna alkaloids.
Cantharides, and its poisonous derivatives.
Coca, any preparation or admixture of, containing i or
more per cent, of coca alkaloids.
Corrosive Sublimate.
Cyanide of Potassium, and all poisonous cyanides and
their preparations.
Emetic Tartar, and all preparations or admixtures con-
taining i or more per cent, of emetic tartar.
4 6
WOMAN AND CRIME
Ergot of Rye, and preparations of ergots.
Nux Vomica, and all preparations or admixtures con-
taining 0.2 or more per cent, of strychnine.
Opium, and all preparations or admixtures containing
I or more per cent, of morphine.
Picrotoxin.
Prussic Acid, and all preparations or admixtures con-
taining o.i or more per cent, of prussic acid.
Savin, and its oil, and all preparations or admixtures
containing savin or its oil.
NOTE. It is unlawful to sell arsenic (including arsenious acid,
arsenites, arsenic acid, arsenates, and all other colourless prepara-
tions of arsenic), unless in addition to the requirements of the
Pharmacy Act, 1868, the following provisions of the Arsenic Act
be observed :
1. That the poison if colourless be mixed with at least one-
sixteenth its weight of soot or indigo, unless sold in a quantity
of not less than ten pounds and for a purpose (not for use in
agriculture) for which such admixture would render it unfit.
2. That the person to whom the poiso>n is sold or delivered
be of mature age.
3. That the occupation, as well as the name and address,
of the purchaser be entered in a book kept for that purpose.
4. That when the purchaser is not known to the seller, and
is introduced by some person known to both, this person shall
be present as a witness to the transaction, and shall enter his
name and address in a book kept for that purpose, as set
forth below :
Day of
Sale.
Name
and
Surname
of Pur-
chaser.
Purchaser's Place
of Abode.
Condition
or
Occupation
Quantity
of
Arsenic
Sold.
Purpose
for
which
Required.
i Sept.,
1851.
John
Thomas.
Hendon
Elm
Farm
Farm
Labourer.
5 It*
To steep
Wheat.
(Purchasers signature.) (Witness.)
JOHN THOMAS. JAMES STONE.
Or, if the purchaser cannot write, seller to
put here the words " cannot write"
PART II
(Seller's signature.)
GEORGE WOOD.
Grove Farm, Hendon.
All Preparations or Admixtures which are not included
in Part I. of this Schedule, and contain a poison within
the meaning of the Pharmacy Acts, except preparations
POISONS 47
or admixtures the exclusion of which from this Schedule is
indicated by the words therein relating to carbolic acid,
chloroform, and coca, and except such substances as come
within the provisions of Section 5 of this Act, e.g., Sul-
phuric Acid, Nitric Acid, Hydrochloric Acid, and Soluble
Salts of Oxalic Acid, which must, however, be distinctly
labelled with the name of the substance and the word
" Poisonous," and with the name and address of the seller.
NOTE. Special importance attaches to the above paragraph,
as the effect of it is to include in Part II. many preparations and
admixtures which are not specifically named in the Schedule, and
even preparations and admixtures of non-scheduled vegetable
drugs such as Calabar bean, colchicum, conium-gelsemium,
hyoscyamus, lobelia, stavesacre, stramonium, etc. which contain
poisonous alkaloids.
Almonds, Essential Oil of (unless deprived of prussic
acid).
Antimonial Wine.
Cantharides, tincture and all vesicating liquid prepara-
tions or admixtures of.
Carbolic Acid, and liquid preparations of carbolic acid
and its homologues, containing more than 3 per cent, of
those substances, except preparations for use as sheep
wash or for any other purpose in connection with agri-
culture or horticulture, contained in a closed vessel
distinctly labelled with the word " Poisonous," the name
and address of the seller, and a notice of the special
purposes for which the preparations are intended.
Chloral Hydrate.
Chloroform, and all preparations or admixtures con-
taining more than 20 per cent, of chloroform.
Coca, any preparation or admixture of, containing more
than o.i per cent, but less than i per cent, of coca alkaloids.
Digitalis.
Mercuric Iodide.
Mercuric Sulpho cyanide.
Oxalic Acid.
Poppies, all preparations of, excepting red poppy petals
and syrup of red poppies (Papaver rhceas).
Precipitate, Red, and all oxides of mercury.
Precipitate, White.
Strophanthus.
Sulphonal.
48 WOMAN AND CRIME
POISON REGULATIONS.
The following regulations for the keeping, dispensing, and
selling of poisons have been prescribed by the Pharmaceutical
Society with the consent of the Privy Council.
1. That in the keeping of poisons each bottle, vessel, box,
or package containing a poison be labelled with the name of
the article, and also with some distinctive mark indicating
that it contains poison.
2. Also that in the keeping of poisons, each poison be kept
on one or other of the following systems, viz :
(a) In a bottle or vessel tied over, capped, locked, or
otherwise secured in a manner different from that in
which bottles or vessels containing ordinary articles are
secured in the same warehouse, shop, or dispensary ; or
(b) In a bottle or vessel rendered distinguishable by
touch from the bottles or vessels in which ordinary
articles are kept in the same warehouse, shop, or
dispensary ; or
(c) In a bottle, vessel, box, or package kept in a room
or cupboard set apart for dangerous articles.
3. That in the dispensing and selling of poisons all lini-
ments, embrocations, lotions, and liquid disinfectants containing
poison be sent out in bottles rendered distinguishable by touch
from ordinary medicine bottles, and that there also be affixed
to each such bottle (in addition to the name of the article, and
to any particular instructions for its use) a label giving notice
that the contents of the bottle are not to be taken internally.
SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS.
With a view to the prevention of accidents, the Pharmaceutical
Society strongly recommends all Pharmacists to adopt special
precautions when dealing with the following articles : Acetanilide,
Amyl Nitrite, Antipyrine (Phenazone), Butyl-Chloral Hydrate,
Cannabis Indica and its Preparations, Elaterium, Phenacetin, and
Vermin Killers containing free Phosphorus. The sale of such
articles as Adrenine, Lead Plaster and Salts, Phosphorus and
Preparations containing it in the free state, Poisonous Glucosides
and Preparations containing such, Potassium Bichromate, Strong
Solution of Ammonia, Synthetic Cocaine-Substitutes, Zinc Salts,
etc. also demands special precautions.
The principal poisons consist of vegetable and
mineral products and derivatives, many of the former
being procured from plants which grow wild in fields
and gardens. In India the poison which is most fre-
quently used by homicides and thieves is that of
POISONS 49
" dhatura," which is easily obtainable from a plant
that grows profusely by the wayside. In England
one of the most deadly poisons, and one which was
used by the notorious Dr Lamson, is aconite, which
is derived from the plant known as monk's-hood. It
has a deep blue flower, the form of which resembles a
monk's-hood hence the name. Its root is very
like horseradish in shape, for which it has been known
to have been eaten, with, of course, fatal results. It
is an acrid poison, which causes a burning sensation
to the tongue, accompanied by great salivation. The
principal symptoms are vomiting and intense abdom-
inal pains.
Strychnine is the active principle of nux vomica,
which is the seed of an East Indian tree. It is an
alkaloid occurring in crystals, intensely bitter, colour-
less and inodorous. The symptoms closely resemble
those of tetanus. There is convulsive movement of
the muscles, with intense pain, the attacks remitting.
Consciousness remains throughout, the patient expir-
ing from exhaustion or asphyxia. In most cases of
poisoning the first remedy is an emetic. In the case
of strychnine-poisoning, chloroform also should be
administered; likewise, what is known as an
" antagonist," which in the case of strychnine is con-
sidered to be bromide of potassium.
The beautiful Foxglove renders the deadly poison
digitalis. All parts of the plant are poisonous,
although the seeds contain the strongest form of the
poison. It grows wild in nearly every county,
although no animals, not even goats, will browse
D
50 WOMAN AND CRIME
upon it. It is used for medicinal purposes, although
none but skilful and practised hands should be
allowed to administer it. The vegetable remedies
recommended by " wise old women " for all kinds of
maladies should be carefully avoided. There is a
case on record of one such woman herself taking the
juice of the Foxglove to relieve a swelling of the limbs,
and she died twelve days after. One of the symptoms
of poisoning by digitalis is an enlargement of the
pupil of the eye.
The poison atropine is procured from the perennial
herb the Deadly Nightshade. This plant grows to a
height of three or four feet, has a purplish-blue
blossom and shining black berries. All parts of it are
poisonous, although the root is most so. The berries
are sweet, and many children have been killed or made
ill by eating them. One of the symptoms of poison-
ing by this plant is also a dilatation of the pupil of
the eye. Another is a great dryness of the throat ;
there is also dryness of the skin, visual hallucina-
tions, a rapid pulse, sometimes a scarlet rush upon
the skin, and delirium. The drug belladonna is
also prepared from this plant. It is a good deal used
to apply to ladies' eyes, to which it imparts a bril-
liance. Hence the name : Bella donna (fair lady).
The poison colchicum is derived from the
Meadow-Saffron, a plant which grows in the meadows
of many parts of England. It has rose-coloured
flowers, not unlike those of the crocus. It is an
autumn flower. Both men and children have been
poisoned by it, children usually by chewing the
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
NURSERY OR CRECHE ATTACHED TO NANTERRE PRISON.
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
POISONS 51
petals and eating the young seeds. Animals have
also been poisoned by it. It has a bulb-like root,
and all parts are poisonous. It has a nauseous
odour. The poison colchicum is an irritant, causing
vomiting, purging, pain and collapse. Colchicum
has also an active principle called colchicin, which
is much stronger than the poison itself.
The biennial Hemlock (conium macidatum) is
a poisonous plant, which grows from three to six
feet. It has a smooth, spotted stem, and is to be
found in hedges and waste places. It produces a
kind of paralysis, killing in much the same way as
curara. It is believed that the death of Socrates
was caused by Hemlock.
The Henbane renders the poison hyoscyamus,
which was used by Crippen. It is an annual of the
Nightshade family, to be found growing in waste
grounds. It is about a foot in height, is hairy and
sticky, with large, deeply indented leaves, the
blossom being yellowish with violet-tinted veins.
It has an unpleasant, " unctuous " odour, and is
poisonous in all its parts, the most active principle,
however, being found in the seeds. It has a thick
root, which has been eaten in mistake for a parsnip.
No animals will as a rule touch it. The poison
produces stupefaction, and kills in a similar manner to
atropine.
Prussic acid, although obtained from cyanide of
potassium and iron, and known as " Prussian blue,"
is also found in bitter almonds and the cherry laurel
(prunus laurocerasus). As is generally known, it s
52 WOMAN AND CRIME
a very deadly poison, perhaps one of the most
deadly. It is said that it can be made strong enough
to kill a man by the smell only, and it is believed
that the Swedish chemist, Scheele, met his death in
some such way. It is very pungent in odour and
volatile in nature. It produces almost instant in-
sensibility. Its action is to impede the respiration
and produce a form of epilepsy or apoplexy. The
victim is pale and cyanotic, the eyeballs glistening.
There are also sometimes tetanic convulsions in the
final phase. The remedies are to empty the stomach
and administer salts of iron ; also, cold affusion and
artificial respiration should be persistently em-
ployed.
Prussic acid may also be found in apple pips, and
in this connection a curious thing happened in the
well-known Slough poisoning case. A man named
Tawell was convicted of poisoning, by means of
prussic acid, his mistress, who lived at Slough.
Before committing the deed he had sent her some
apples, several of which she had eaten. In her
stomach were found some apple pips, the defence
being that the acid which killed was introduced into
the stomach through the medium of these pips.
Very ingenious up to a point and then very silly.
It would have required many more pips than were
found in the deceased's stomach to have rendered
a fatal dose of poison, and then only by means of
chemical treatment.
Opium, from which morphia is obtained, is
derived from the White Poppy, which is distinct
POISONS 53
from other poppies by having a smooth stem and
foliage. The symptoms of poisoning by opium are,
first, transient mental excitement, then coma, deep,
profound sleep, stertorous breathing, pupils of eyes
contracted to pin-points, a cold and clammy skin,
low and laboured pulse, with gradually declining
respiration. The victim becomes completely in-
sensible, his muscular relaxation being very great.
The treatment is to wash out the stomach with a
solution of permanganate of potash, which has the
effect of oxidising the alkaloid, and so causing the
poison to lose a good deal of its lethal properties.
The next is to keep the patient awake by giving him
a douche, walking him about, flicking him with a towel
and so on. Tea and coffee should also be adminis-
tered as stimulants. Also small doses of atropine,
which is an " antagonist," or a counter-irritant.
Arsenic is a mineral poison, a soft, grey-coloured
metal. There is also white arsenic. It is a very
important poison, which has been used frequently by
the homicide and the would-be homicide. It is very
difficult to dissolve, even in boiling water. It is
peculiar in its action, there usually being an interval
between administration and the initial symptoms.
The duration of this interval depends upon the state
of the stomach and the way in which the poison is
given. If it were given neat, as it were, on an empty
stomach, the action would be quick. It would be
slower according to the amount of food contained in
the stomach or taken with the poison. The interval
has varied from eight minutes to as long as nine
54 WOMAN AND CRIME
hours. Arsenic is a caustic, and sets up intense
irritation in the stomach. As in the cases of other
poisons, there is vomiting, sometimes of bloody
material; there are also burning pains and intense
thirst, purging and cramps in the legs, and extreme
feebleness. It eventually sets up gastro-enteritis, of
which the victim expires. In fact, I make bold
to say that many a poisoner who has used arsenic
has escaped the consequences of his or her deed
by the death being ascribed to gastro-enteritis,
as others who have employed prussic acid have
escaped through death being attributed to " sudden
heart failure," that loose formula which so many
doctors make use of.
Towards the end there are also delirium, coma
and convulsions. Sometimes jaundice also appears.
There is also diarrhoea. The treatment is to empty
the stomach and administer demulcents. A very
good antidote is said to be the hydrated sesquioxide
of iron, freshly made by mixing the liquor ferri
perchlor, with solution of ammonia, and collecting
the precipitate and giving it suspended in water.
Antimony is a mineral poison, a brittle, bluish-
white metal of flaky, crystalline texture. Its effects
are similar to those of arsenic, except that it also
greatly depresses the heart, so that the victim suffers,
among other things, with extreme despondency. It
is usually administered in the form of tartar-emetic
and is soluble in water. Antimony is a strong emetic,
and if an over-dose be administered the whole might
be expelled by vomiting.
POISONS 55
Chloroform, which is a compound of chlorine,
carbon and hydrogen, is a colourless, volatile liquid,
having a sweet taste. It is sometimes used by homi-
cides, as in the Scotch case of Eugene Chantrelle.
Its effects are somewhat similar to those of prussic
acid, producing speedy insensibility and impeding
the respiration. Sometimes the victim has delirium
and rambles in an absurd fashion. The treatment is
by stimulants. The first thing to do is to give die
tongue a sharp tug forward and the next to employ
artificial respiration.
There are, of course, many other poisons, but I
think we have dealt with most of the principal ones,
both vegetable and mineral.
Many of the above poisons are used freely and
extensively in both art and commerce, which makes
the restriction of their sale so very difficult a matter.
PART II
THE ORGANISERS OF CRIME
CHAPTER V
THE POISONERS
WE shall now proceed to consider in detail some
cases of notorious female criminals. For the sake
of convenient handling and lucidity of treatment, I
have thought it advisable to group the cases under
the heads of the different crimes of which the women
were convicted. I shall first deal with poisoners, as
being the most serious form of crime committed by
women. Afterwards, I shall deal with cases where
murder has been committed by other means. Then
will come the " financial victimisers," as I term them
that is to say, female criminals who have perpetrated
financial frauds. And so on. As is my invariable
custom in dealing with cases, I shall present the facts
in narrative form, dropping in comments where I
consider them appropriate or called for.
The first case I shall deal with is that of the
notorious Christina Edmunds:
On the day of March 28, 1871, a lady called upon
a Mr Garrett, a chemist, of Brighton, and purchased
some toilet requisites. The chemist knew the lady
well by sight, having served her on many previous
occasions, but he did not know her name. Having
59
60 WOMAN AND CRIME
made the purchases of toilet articles the lady then
requested Mr Garrett to supply her with some
strychnine to kill cats. To this request Mr Garrett
demurred, but the lady pressed him to oblige her,
explaining that she had a garden, and the cats gave
her a great deal of trouble by raking up the seeds.
She also explained that although married she had no
children, and that therefore there would be no
danger, and that the poison would not go out of her
or her husband's hands. Mr Garrett was at length
persuaded to supply the lady with ten grains of
strychnine, but before doing so he said his customer
must produce a witness. This she volunteered to
do, went out, and shortly after returned with a
lady named Mrs Stone. The customer gave her
own name as Mrs Wood, of Hill Side, Kingston,
Surrey.
The strychnine was supplied, an entry made in the
poison book, and signed both by Mrs Stone and
Mrs Wood. Shortly after she (Mrs Wood) was
back at Mr Garrett's shop, when she stated that she
had used the poison and thrown the paper away.
On April 15 following she came again to Mr
Garrett's shop, declared that the poison had not
acted, and that she required some more, this time,
she explained, to kill a dog. She was accordingly
supplied with another ten grains, and signed the
poison book. On June 8 a boy walked into Mr
Garrett's shop bringing with him a paper, which
was supposed to be signed by Messrs Glaisyer &
Kemp, chemists, of Brighton, and asking to be sup-
POISONERS 61
plied with a quarter of an ounce of strychnine. Mr
Garrett scribbled a note on the back, and returned
it to the boy, who went away. In about half-an-hour
he returned with a letter containing two shillings
and sixpence, was served with a drachm of strych-
nine in a bottle and given some change, with which
he departed.
We must now go back a little. Shortly before the
occurrence above related, a boy named Adam May,
age n, saw a lady in Portland Street, Brighton, who
asked him to go an errand for her. He consented,
and she then directed him to go to a confectioner's
shop kept by a man named Maynard, and there pur-
chase for her sixpennyworth of chocolate creams, at
the same time handing him some money. The boy
went off to get the chocolates, while the lady waited
for him at the end of the street. He came back
shortly after with the chocolates in a paper bag,
which he handed to the lady, who, looking into the
bag, remarked that he had brought the wrong ones.
With this she walked off. Some time after this the
boy again met the same lady at the top of King
Street, and she again asked him if he would go an
errand for her, and again he consented to do so.
She thereupon gave him a note and told him to take
it to the shop of Mr Garrett, the chemist, and bring
back an answer. The boy did so, returning shortly
after with a parcel, which appeared to contain a book,
and which he handed to the lady. She then gave
him some coppers fourpence-halfpenny and
walked away with the parcel. Subsequently Adam
62 WOMAN AND CRIME
May saw the same lady a third time, in King Street,
when she gave him some sweets called " bullseyes."
During this same period, extending to about three
months, this same lady induced two other boys to
make mysterious purchases of chocolates at the shop
of Mr Maynard, some of which were returned as being
unsuitable. Upon these occasions Mr Maynard
noticed that some of the chocolates were broken,
and these he threw into the broken stock. Soon after
rumours reached him as to the chocolates making
people ill, and among others who complained was
the lady who had sent boys to purchase the sweetmeat
for her. She complained that there was something
wrong with the chocolates, making allusions to their
being poisoned, and declaring she would have them
analysed. To this Mr Maynard responded that he
wished she would do so, and heard no more about the
matter for some time, not, in fact, till his attention
to it was renewed by a tragic occurrence.
In June, 1871, there was staying at Brighton a
Mr C. D. Miller, a relation of his named Barker,
and a son of the latter, a small boy of four, named
Sydney Barker. On the I2th of the month Mr
Millar purchased some chocolate creams at the shop
of Mr Maynard for the little boy, Sydney. The
boy ate one, and about ten minutes after he began
to cry, his limbs became stiff, and in about twenty
minutes he died in convulsions. Up to the moment
of eating the chocolate he had been in good health.
Mr Millar also ate some, and about ten minutes after
he became dizzy in the eyes, there was a coppery
POISONERS 63
taste in his throat, and his limbs became stiff. He
tried to arouse himself, but could not ; afterwards he
got a little better, but subsequently the symptoms
returned. Eventually he recovered. When the boy
was taken ill Mr Millar sent for a doctor, but before
the latter could arrive the boy was dead. The creams
were tested, were noticed to have a coppery flavour,
and were thrown away.
Dr Richard Rugg, who saw the deceased boy,
became suspicious of the chocolates, and some more
were purchased at the same place and handed to
Inspector Gibbs. They were chemically examined
by Dr Henry Letheby, who found strychnine in them,
altogether a quarter of a grain sufficient to kill an
adult. A sixteenth of a grain would be sufficient
to kill a child. An inquest was held, also a
chemical analysis, strychnine being found in the
stomach of the deceased child. The inquest was
adjourned, and at the second hearing the lady who
had made the purchases of chocolates at May-
nard's, and had complained of their quality,
voluntarily came forward and offered herself as
a witness. She stated that she had made pur-
chases of chocolates at the shop in question, that
she had tasted them and found them to have a
coppery flavour, that they burned the throat, and
that she had complained about it to Maynard. In
the meantime the father of the dead child received
an anonymous letter relating to the chocolates, and
Inspector Gibbs wrote to the lady who had volun-
teered evidence at the inquest, to which he duly re-
64 WOMAN AND CRIME
ceived a reply. This letter he compared with the
anonymous epistle, and became satisfied that the
two were in the same handwriting. In her letter to
Inspector Gibbs the lady stated that she made
her last purchase of chocolates at Maynard's on
March 8, and that they had been analysed by a Mr
Schwitzer. This the police knew to be false, for the
purchases made for her by the different boys were
subsequent to this. Mr Maynard directed one of the
boys to follow another who had just made a purchase
of chocolates, and he saw him deliver them to the
lady in question. This decided the police on a
course of action, and they proceeded to the house
of the lady in question, and there arrested, not " Mrs
Wood," of " Hill Side, Kingston, Surrey," but Miss
Christina Edmunds, who had been living in Brighton
for several years.
But what was the object of this mysterious and
elaborately-planned crime, which miscarried so
tragically for the poor little fellow, Sydney Barker ?
For it may at once be stated that this boy's death
was no part of the murderous plan of Christina
Edmunds. Miss Edmunds, who was in easy circum-
stances, had, as I have already stated, been living for
some years in Brighton, and had always been re-
garded as a respectable woman. She had formed
the acquaintance of a Dr and Mrs Beard, the former
having attended her in his professional capacity.
Miss Edmunds would appear to have enter-
tained a regard for Dr Beard rather more cordial
than that of mere Platonic friendship, but found it
POISONERS 65
rather difficult to possess herself of the doctor's un-
divided attentions while Mrs Beard remained alive.
And, in keeping with most criminals, regarding
obstacles to the accomplishment of desired ends
removable, proceeded to act accordingly. In
December of 1870 Christina Edmunds was at the
house of Dr Beard, when she gave Mrs Beard,
apparently in the spirit of friendship, a chocolate
cream. The doctor's wife accepted it in good faith,
placed it in her mouth, but, fortunately for her,
noticing that it had an unpleasant taste, quickly
spat it out again. Although the lady received no
injury, the incident would appear to have quickly
aroused the suspicions of her husband it may be
that he possessed cogent reasons, other than this
incident, for entertaining misgivings concerning
Christina Edmunds' intentions and openly charged
Miss Edmunds with attempting to poison his wife.
This apparently considerably alarmed Miss
Edmunds, and, although no poison was traced to
her possession, circumstances remained in a de-
cidedly unpleasant shape for her. With this situa-
tion before us the subsequent actions of Christina
Edmunds appear more scrutable than they were
before. Her object was to divert suspicion from
herself, and so by doctoring the chocolates purchased
at Maynard's with strychnine it might, in the light
of complaints which were pretty sure to arise in con-
sequence, be borne in upon the mind of Dr Beard
that he had unjustly suspected her. Certainly a
desperate, not to say wild, unscrupulous, and highly
E
66 WOMAN AND CRIME
perilous scheme. But, as we shall see presently,
Christina Edmunds was no ordinary criminal.
She was tried at the Central Criminal Court on
the 1 5th of January, 1872, before Mr Baron Martin.
Serjeant Ballantyne and Mr Straight appeared for
the prosecution, and Serjeant Parry, Mr Worsley,
and Mr Poland for the defence. It was known as
the " Brighton Poisoning Case," and attracted a good
deal of notice. In the course of the evidence it was
proved that the prisoner had sent a boy to Mr
Garrett's shop with a note purporting to come from
the coroner who held the inquest on the body of
Sydney Barker, asking him to hand over his poison
book. This was the parcel for fetching which the
boy received fourpence-halfpenny. When Mr
Garrett received the book back again several leaves
were missing. The coroner knew nothing about
this letter. Mrs Stone, who witnessed the first
purchase of strychnine, was a milliner in Brighton,
and she testified that the prisoner came into her
shop, said she had neuralgia in the face, purchased
a " fall," and then asked her, Mrs Stone, if she
would do her a favour by signing a book at Mr
Garrett's, as she wished to purchase some poison
for stuffing birds, she and her husband being
naturalists and living at Kingston. The firm of
Glaisyer & Kemp also denied all knowledge of the
note asking for some strychnine, which was un-
doubtedly written by the prisoner.
The defence was based upon a theory of insanity,
and it is difficult to see what other defence could
POISONERS 67
have been put forward. The prisoner's mother,
Mrs A. Christina Edmunds, was placed in the
box, and caused a painful scene by weeping, as
did also the prisoner. According to her mother's
evidence, Christina Edmunds came of a family of
degenerates, for her father died in the Peckham
Asylum in 1847, an d a brother, Arthur Burn
Edmunds, died in the Earlswood Asylum in 1866;
other members of the family were also subject to
epileptic fits and hysteria, including the prisoner.
The Rev. J. H. Cole, chaplain of Lewes Gaol, and
who had had the prisoner under observation, remarked
her " peculiar formation and movement of the eye,"
her " unnatural calmness and exceeding levity," her
" extraordinary laugh," and her sudden transition
from " tears to laughter." In short, he considered she
was of unsound mind. Dr Woods, of St Luke's
Hospital, had also seen her, and she had stated to
him, " I would rather be convicted than brought in
insane." Evidence was also given by Drs Robertson
and Maudsley.
In spite of these medical opinions, however, the
jury found Christina Edmunds guilty, and made no
reference to insanity. Upon being asked if she had
anything to say, she replied in a low voice : " I wish
to be tried on the other charges brought against me,
and I want my whole connection with Dr Beard gone
into. I am sure Serjeant Ballantyne will go on with
the case. It is owing to the treatment I have re-
ceived from Dr Beard that I have been brought into
this trouble." No response was made to this, and,
68 WOMAN AND CRIME
looking wildly round the court, and in response to the
gaoler's " Come on ! " she disappeared below.
This case is curiously reminiscent of the Oriental
poisoner, for the poisoning of sweetments by crimi-
nals is a common practice in the East.
As might have been expected, Christina Edmunds
was afterwards reprieved, and consigned to Broad-
moor, to be confined there " during Her Majesty's
pleasure." She died a few years ago.
I class the above as a case of " sexual mania," for
Edmunds had undoubtedly conceived an ungovern-
able passion for Dr Beard, her subsequent extravagant
behaviour being the outcome of cerebral disorder.
The next case for our consideration is that of the
pronounced degenerate, Mary Ansell:
In the year 1899 a Miss Mary Ansell was in the
service of a Mr Maloney, who resided in Great
Coram Street, London. Her sister, Caroline Ansell,
a young woman of weak intellect, was an inmate of
the Leavesden Asylum, Watford. Mary had insured
her sister's life for 22 ios., and if death occurred
within three months from the time the policy was
issued Mary Ansell would have been entitled to
quarter benefit, if within six months to half benefit.
In the beginning of the year Mary Ansell made three
or four purchases of phosphorus paste in the neigh-
bourhood of Great Coram Street, and each bottle
contained sufficient poison to kill three adults. She
was not instructed by her mistress to make these
purchases, and when she made them she told the
shopkeeper that she required the poison to kill rats.
POISONERS 69
On February 22 a parcel of tea and sugar arrived
at Leavesden Asylum, addressed to Caroline Ansell,
and it was clear that it came from her sister, Mary
Ansell. The provisions were accepted in good
faith, and subsequently Caroline partook of some of
the tea, when she complained of its bitter taste.
Two days later Caroline received a letter signed
" Harriett Parish," conveying the intelligence that
her parents had died. This was false, and it was
believed that the letter had been written by Mary
Ansell. The letter was handed over to the father of
the sisters Ansell, who wrote back telling his daughter
of the parents' indignation that anyone should have
been so cruel as to tell such a falsehood. At the
beginning of March Mary Ansell bought more phos-
phorus paste, and on March 9 Caroline received a
cake done up in brown paper. She cut the cake and
ate a portion of it, dividing the rest among her com-
panions. All who partook of the cake were taken
ill, and Caroline, who probably ate more than any of
the others, subsequently died. The authorities at
the asylum became suspicious, and obtained the
permission of the father of the deceased inmate to
hold a post-mortem examination. When this be-
came known, Dr Case, the medical superintendent
of Leavesden Asylum, received the following
letter: '
i Tankerton Street, St Pancras.
DEAR SIR, For why do you want a post-mortem
examination on the body after she had been under
70 WOMAN AND CRIME
your care for years? We decline to give you the
authority to hold one. I remain, yours,
MRS ANSELL.
This letter, it was maintained, was written by
Mary Ansell. Shortly after the death Mary Ansell
wrote to a Mr Cooper, the agent who had effected
the insurance on Caroline AnselPs life, asking him
what she should do in order to obtain the money
payable on the policy. Dr Blair, assistant medical
officer of Leavesden Asylum, made an analysis of
some of the remains of deceased, and found that she
had died from phosphorus poisoning. Drs Scott
and Stevenson made similar tests with similar results.
The accumulation of so many suspicious circum-
stances led to the arrest of Mary Ansell, who was
charged with the murder of her sister by administer-
ing phosphorus poison in a piece of cake. When
arrested she told the sergeant of police that she had
not written to Caroline for some time as they were
not good friends. She also informed Superinten-
dent Wood that she intended to ask a number of
questions at the inquest, and these questions were
stated to be as follows : " Why was we not sent for
to see my sister before she was dead, so we could
have had a word with her about who sent the cake?
When the nurse was supposed to have examined the
cake why did she not make further examination and
see what it contained? When friends are sent for to
come and see a dead inmate, either in life or death,
is it a rule when the attendant takes you to the
POISONERS 71
place where the body is for him to shut the door in
your face ? When Caroline Ansell was placed in the
infirmary was it for sickness or poison? If they
had any idea she was suffering from a complaint,
why did they not send for the friends in time,
and this trouble would not have happened? " The
questions are given as they were prepared by the
prisoner.
When Mary Ansell was charged she said, " I am
as innocent a girl as ever was born." She was to
have been married at Easter, but the ceremony was
postponed until Whitsuntide on account of her
sweetheart's financial inability to enter upon the
business of housekeeping.
Mary Ansell, age 22, was tried for the murder
of her sister Caroline at the Hertford Assizes
in June, 1899, before Mr Justice Mathew. Mr J. P.
Rawlinson, Q.C., appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr Clark Hall for the prisoner. The prisoner, in
a firm voice, pleaded " Not guilty, my lord." In due
course she went into the witness-box, where she ex-
hibited a demeanour of callousness. She emphati-
cally denied writing the " Parish " letter, but admitted
writing the " Mrs Ansell " letter, which she explained
was dictated by her father. She also denied writing
the address on the parcel containing the poisoned
cake. Of course there was the handwriting expert,
who testified that both the " Parish " letter and the
address on the parcel were written by the prisoner.
I think we may accept this evidence as correct, not
because it was testified to by a handwriting expert,
72 WOMAN AND CRIME
but in spite of that fact. There are other and more
cogent reasons why the authorship of all these
documents must be attributed to the unhappy young
prisoner.
Questioned as to why she made the purchases of
phosphorus, the prisoner replied: " For my own pro-
tection against them (the rats), as I was frightened of
them." She was then questioned about the state-
ment which she made to a police-officer concerning
her being bad friends with her sister, but this she
denied, saying, " Two better sisters never lived
together; so help me, God." She also stated
that she had informed her mistress that she had
insured her sister's life. She denied sending any
parcels to Leavesden Asylum, asserting that she had
sent nothing since Christmas, when she sent her
sister a card, but admitted sending the letter to
Cooper. Asked as to how she disposed of the phos-
phorus in order to kill the rats she replied that she
spread it on a sack in the kitchen, but that it killed
no rats. She further stated, in answer to questions,
that she threw both the policy and premium book
on the fire by accident. Asked why she insured her
sister, she replied because Cooper had pressed her
so much, and because she wanted to give her sister
a good funeral, and bring her body to London to be
buried near other deceased members of the family.
But it being pointed out to her she had not filled up
the form for the body to be sent from the asylum
to London she observed that the people were
" peculiar at the asylum, and seemed to want to keep
POISONERS 73
the body." She admitted that the young man she
was engaged to was not well enough off to marry,
and that they were waiting until he was. It was
pointed out to her that she had made no claim, and
that she had allowed the body to be buried by the
asylum authorities, whereupon she declared that
" they seemed determined to keep her."
At length the jury retired to consider their verdict,
and having been away half an hour, returned with
the information that they were unable to agree. The
judge then asked, " Do you want any point in the
evidence made clear to you ? " To which the fore-
man merely replied, " My lord, may we have some
refreshments ? " At this the judge said angrily, " Go
back and stay there till you come to a decision one
way or the other! " Again the jury retired, and re-
turned in two hours and three-quarters. The prisoner
was brought back to the dock, when she looked
anxiously at the jury, and then relapsed into sullen
indifference. The verdict was " Guilty," and the
judge proceeded to address the unhappy prisoner as
follows : " Prisoner at the bar, it was impossible
for a jury of reasonable and conscientious men to
return any other verdict than this. It has been
shown to their satisfaction that you deliberately took
the life of your sister, an afflicted woman, who had
never been a burden to you, and who had a peculiar
claim on your affection. You were moved to this
terrible crime for the sake of a small sum of money
which you would receive on the policy of insurance.
Never in my experience has so terrible a crime been
74 WOMAN AND CRIME
committed for a motive so utterly inadequate. It is
no part of my duty to add to the misery of your
position. Your time on earth is short. Let that
time be employed in seeking mercy where alone
mercy can be found. I have only to pass upon you
the sentence of the law That you be taken hence
to the place whence you came, and thence to a place
of public execution * where you shall be hanged by
the neck until you are dead, and your body buried
within the precincts of the prison. And may the
Lord have mercy upon your soul ! "
It is not often that I dwell upon the hideous
wording of the old-time death sentence, but I do so
upon this occasion in order to emphasise the horror
of one of the most sanguinary judicial murders to
be found in the annals of crime. That Mary Ansell
was a mental degenerate, not legally or morally
answerable for her actions, who with a grain of
intelligence can fail to see! Why, her very utter-
ances and writings stamp her in unmistakable letters
as an illiterate, incoherent, hopeless pervert. I dare
assert that there are many inmates of Broadmoor at
the present time far saner than ever Mary Ansell was.
Yet the ruthless law must have its unholy revenge,
and in spite of the many efforts that were made
to obtain a reprieve, the bloody business was duly
consummated. Well might one of the Crown
officials, who figured in the trial, refer to her
as " poor Mary Ansell," for surely no prisoner who
ever stood in the dock charged with a grave crime
* There are no places of public execution now. AUTHOR.
POISONERS 75
was ever so devoid of friends, ever so relentlessly
marked down for unreasoning judicial vengeance!
At the conclusion of the death sentence, and ere
the chaplain had time to utter the concluding word
" Amen ! " piercing shrieks resounded through the
court, proceeding from the mother of the hapless
prisoner, who was in hysterics in the corridor. In
response, the prisoner gave a piercing wail, and as
she was hurried from the dock she cried aloud,
" Mother! Mother! Mother! " Many of those in
court were in tears.
A petition for reprieve was prepared, supported
by medical opinions, and the prisoner was hopeful
to the last. She sent the beads she was wearing
round her neck to a lady at Upper Tulse Hill, and,
grim coincidence ! they arrived about eight o'clock on
the morning of her execution. She also wrote a letter
to the lady, worded as follows : " I hope and trust
all of you are in good health. I myself is as well
as can be expect by this time. I can't think of any
news now, so please excuse short letter." In due
course the Home Secretary signified his inability to
" see cause " why the law should not take its course
(O, blind and unmerciful!), and the execution was
accordingly proceeded with. On the morning of the
execution the prisoner was in a collapsed condition ;
she sobbed and moaned, " Oh, my God in heaven ! "
and " Lord have mercy on my soul ! " and died a
victim to English criminal law.*
*The Criminal Court of Appeal had not then been established.
AUTHOR.
76 WOMAN AND CRIME
Mary Ansell was executed at St Albans, July 19,
1899, an d huge crowds gathered in the vicinity of
the prison at the hour of the execution.
It is such cases as this that force upon one the
conviction that there exists one law for the rich and
another for the poor. It is more than probable that
had Mary Ansell been moving in a higher circle of
society she would have been consigned to Broad-
moor, there to be carefully tended, and looked after
by her .well-placed relations.* It was fatal to Mary
Ansell that she was poor.
It is appropriate that our next case should be the
much-debated one of Florence Maybrick:
In the year 1889 there lived at a villa called
Battlecrease, in the suburbs of Liverpool, a cotton
merchant named James Maybrick, his wife, Florence,
and their two young children. The Maybricks had
been married eight years, and the husband was
many years older than his wife. Mrs Maybrick was
the daughter of a deceased merchant in the Southern
States of America, and her marriage to the Liver-
pool cotton merchant was a somewhat romantic
affair, although it would seem not to have been
altogether to the liking of some of Mr Maybrick's
friends. Mrs Maybrick was a refined and intelligent
woman, having been educated in Germany and
France.
Shortly prior to the date in question serious differ-
ences had arisen between husband and wife in con-
nection with a man named Briefly, who was a friend
* Compare with case of Christina Edmunds, p. 59
POISONERS 77
of Maybrick's and had visited and dined at Battle-
crease. Mrs Maybrick would also seem to have
entertained some suspicions concerning her husband.
Disputes were pretty frequent, and at least upon one
occasion Maybrick appeared to have used violence
towards his wife. These differences culminated in
a " scene " one day at the Aintree races, where the
Maybricks were well known among the visitors.
The man Brierly was also present, and it was doubt-
less his presence which caused Maybrick to openly
and publicly reproach his wife. The latter was so
stung with the indignity which she considered she
had unwarrantably been subjected to that she be-
came infuriated, and was heard by a lady friend to
threaten her husband with dire consequences. Not
long after this unpleasant incident happened to be
precise, on the 27th of April, 1889 Mr Maybrick
fell ill, and continued to grow worse until May n,
when he died. But before this the brothers of Mr
Maybrick, Edward and Michael, had been summoned
from London, and very soon entertained doubts and
suspicions concerning the nature and origin of Mr
Maybrick's illness. These suspicions were directed
against the wife, who had so far been acting as nurse
to her husband, being most assiduous in her minis-
trations to him. As a consequence of these suspicions
she was deposed from this position, and professional
nurses were installed in the sick room, wherein the
wife was not allowed to be by herself nor to ad-
minister anything to the patient.
On the eve of Mr Maybrick's death, when, indeed,
78 WOMAN AND CRIME
he was in extremis, and nearing the end of a pro-
longed and painful illness, his wife handed a letter
to one of the maids, telling her to post it. The
superscription was written in pencil, and it was ad-
dressed to the man Brierly. The maid afterwards
stated that one of the children who accompanied
her dropped the letter in the mud while they were
on their way to the post, and that the envelope in
consequence being so dirty she opened the letter
with the view to placing it in another and a clean
envelope. Thus becoming acquainted with the
nature of its contents, however, she deemed it advis-
able, instead of posting it, to hand it over to one of
Mr Maybrick's brothers, which she accordingly did.
The letter, which was also in pencil, ran as follows :
" DEAREST, Your letter under cover to John
K came to hand just after I had written to you
on Monday. I did not expect to hear from you so
soon, and had delayed in giving him the necessary
instructions. Since my return I have been nursing
M day and night. He is sick unto death!
The doctors held a consultation yesterday, and now
all depends upon how long his strength will hold out !
Both my brothers-in-law are here, and we are
terribly anxious. I cannot answer your letter fully
to-day, my darling, but relieve your mind of all fear
of discovery now and for the future. M - has
been delirious since Sunday, and I know now that
he is perfectly ignorant of everything, even as to
the name of the street, and also that he has
POISONERS 79
not been making any inquiries -whatever. The tale
he told me was a pure fabrication, and only intended
to frighten the truth out of me. In fact, he believes
my statement, although he will not admit it. You
need not, therefore, go abroad on this account,
dearest, but in any case please don't leave England
until I have seen you once again. You must feel
that those two letters of mine were written under
circumstances which must ever excuse their injustice
in your eyes. Do you suppose I should act as I am
doing if I really felt and meant what I inferred there ?
If you wish to write to me about anything do so now,
as the letters pass through my hands at present.
Excuse this scrawl, my own darling, but I dare not
leave the room for a moment, and I do not know
when I shall be able to write to you again. In haste,
Yours ever, FLORIE."
This letter was in reply to one she had received
from Brierly, according to the contents of which he
would seem to have worked himself into a condition
of funk, for he intimated his intention of leaving
England. It is not surprising that this letter lent
the utmost significance to the suspicions which were
already aroused in the minds of those within the walls
of that fateful house. Nor is it surprising to learn
that shortly after James Maybrick's death his widow
found herself a prisoner, suspected of encompassing
her husband's death. She was, in fact, eventually
charged with wilfully murdering him, by the adminis-
tration of arsenic. A search of the house revealed
8o WOMAN AND CRIME
sundry deposits of poison ; also she had been seen to
put something into a bottle of Valentine's meat juice,
which was intended for the patient, and which was
subsequently found to be poison. She was known
to have purchased from two different chemists large
quantities of fly-papers, and these were afterwards
seen by a servant soaking in a basin of water. She
was known to have been to London with the man
Brierly, with whom she stayed at an hotel as his wife.
As is nearly always the case in such criminal trials,
the medical evidence differed, some doctors declar-
ing that the deceased died from arsenical poisoning,
and others stating that they did not think so. As is
well known, in the end the prisoner was convicted
and sentenced to death, the sentence being after-
wards commuted to penal servitude for life, and that
after serving fifteen years she was released and went
to America.
It is pretty safe to say that no criminal trial of
modern times has aroused such a storm of contro-
versy as did that of Mrs Maybrick. That was, of
course, mainly on account of the social position of
the prisoner, her youth and refinement, the prejudice
which was imported into the case, and the disagree-
ment of the medical witnesses. People took sides,
some believing her innocent and clamouring for her
release, others on the contrary being convinced of
her guilt and demanding that the law should be
allowed to take its course. And there is no doubt
that these conflicting opinions are still entertained
by many people at the present day. There are still
EXTERIOR OF MORGUE, PARIS.
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
INTERIOR OF MORGUE, PARIS.
POISONERS 81
people who believe in Mrs Maybrick's innocence,
as there are people who still believe in her guilt. I
would that I could place myself on the side of the
former, but, alas! after a close scrutiny into the facts
of the case I find it impossible to do so. And I shall
now give my reasons for believing in the guilt of Mrs
Maybrick.
It was advanced against the judge who tried the
case, the late Mr Justice Stephen, that he took a too
metaphysical view of the crime. Now, if there is a
crime of any kind that calls for the analytical mind of
the metaphysician it is certainly that of the secret
poisoner. This also applies particularly to the May-
brick case. Here the law had to deal with a woman
of refinement, intellect, subtlety and determination,
whose smallest act had to be closely considered.
Let us take the admitted facts of the case and see how
far they are capable of an innocent construction.
That there existed, then, at the time of the occur-
rence painfully constrained relations between the
deceased man and his wife was proved and not dis-
puted. It was also proved that Mr Maybrick, in the
heat of a dispute with his wife concerning the man
Brierly, had given his- wife a black eye; he had also
publicly abused her on the racecourse, when she was
heard to threaten him with dire consequences. It
was likewise proved that she was actually carrying on
a guilty relationship with the man Brierly, with
whom, as has already been stated, she had stopped in
London.
Shortly after the quarrel at Aintree we find Mrs
F
82 WOMAN AND CRIME
Maybrick purchasing fly-papers from two different
chemists. In each case she gave, volunteered, a
silly and false reason for purchasing them. Bear in
mind that she was not asked what she wanted them
for. The only innocent purpose for which one
would purchase fly-papers is, of course, with which
to catch flies. Mrs Maybrick made the remark that
the flies were becoming troublesome. It was then
early in the year and there were no flies about. But
why, if she wanted them for an innocent purpose, did
she go to two chemists, instead of purchasing them
all at the same shop? I suggest that it is obvious
that the purchase of a large number of fly-papers at
one place might have aroused suspicion, so the pur-
chase was divided into two. As there were no flies
about, what did Mrs Maybrick really want these
papers for? It was stated that she wanted them in
order to extract the arsenic which they contained to
use as a face-wash. She did, indeed, put them into
soak in a basin, covering the latter with a cloth. A
servant, becoming inquisitive, lifted the cloth and saw
what was inside. After this the papers mysteriously
disappeared, and nobody seems to have known what
became of them, except, of course, Mrs Maybrick
herself. It was further explained on her behalf that
she had some years ago been given a recipe for a
face-wash, of which arsenic formed one of the con-
stituents, by a schoolfellow of hers, but that she had
mislaid it. Hence her purchase of the fly-papers.
But are we seriously to believe that a woman in Mrs
Maybrick's position would take all this trouble with
POISONERS 83
the fly-papers when she could have walked into any
chemist's shop and asked for a face-wash to include
arsenic? Chemists frequently make up such face-
washes for ladies, and it would have been quite an
ordinary thing for her to have made such a purchase.
There need have been no secrecy about it. Nor
would there have been anything discreditable about
it.
It has been maintained by the champions of Mrs
Maybrick's alleged innocence that her husband
having been an arsenic-eater for years, and a man
generally given to " dosing " himself, he must have
died from the effects of this evil habit. A few
moments' reflection will serve to demonstrate the
utter fallacy of this reasoning. A man who for years
has been addicted to such habits would probably be
immune from the evil effects of even large doses of
such poisons ! Would it not be very curious if, after
years of such indulgence with impunity, the poisons
should suddenly take a fatal effect? But does not
the possession of such knowledge, the knowledge of
a man's having for years been a poison-taker, suggest
that it might be used as a screen by a subtle indi-
vidual who had designs on the life of that man ?
I have questioned many persons intimately associ-
ated with this case, including the late Mr McConnell,
who was second to Mr Addison for the prosecution.
During a quiet chat on old times which I one evening
had with him at his house, the famous case cropped
up, and he showed me several photographs of Mr
Maybrick and his wife which he had kept. I took
84 WOMAN AND CRIME
this opportunity of putting a point-blank question to
him, of asking him for his own personal opinion about
the guilt or innocence of Mrs Maybrick, and his
prompt and emphatic reply was, " Guilty, without a
doubt ! " Of course it would be a much pleasanter
task for one to be able to strenuously defend the
woman and make out a case of innocence, but facts,
ugly but indisputable, forbid it. Only blind chivalry
could adopt such an attitude towards one so obviously
guilty. When it was first announced, after her
release, that Mrs Maybrick was to write an account
of her life, I believed that at last many of the dark
doubts with which this case was beset would be dis-
pelled. Here was an opportunity, thought I, for
Mrs Maybrick to tell us the whole plain, unvarnished
truth, and I devoted myself to perusing her own
account of the tragic business with avidity. But I
was doomed to dreadful disappointment. I read on
to the very end, but the expected information was
not forthcoming. The doubts were still there ; the
book left the case where it formerly stood. That
was convincing.
The attitude of the late Lord Russell in connection
with this case has been persistently misrepresented
by the champions of Mrs Maybrick, who have stated
again and again that he went to his grave firmly
believing in, and asserting, her innocence. Lord
Russell, of course, did nothing of the kind. What
he did state and maintain was that she had not had a
fair trial, and had not been properly convicted, which
is quite another matter. With this I quite agree.
POISONERS 85
After conviction many persons signed petitions for the
reprieve of Mrs Maybrick, not because they believed
she was innocent, but because they thought, as did
Lord Russell, that she had not been fairly tried. I
did so myself.*
* In Mrs Maybrick 's book, already referred to " My Fifteen
Lost Years " a statement on the case by the late Lord Russell
is quoted, which begins thus : " I will make no public statement
of what my personal belief is as to Mrs Maybrick 's guilt or
innocence. ..." But, after all, mere expressions of opinion, even
on the part of counsel engaged in the case, cannot carry any-
thing like the same weight as plain indisputable matters of fact.
Mrs Maybrick in her book failed to enlighten us as to why she
made two purchases of fly-papers, why she volunteered a stupid
and false reason for making the purchases, why, after a servant
had seen them soaking in a basin, they suddenly disappeared, and
what afterwards became of them. It is admitted in the book
much of it is written by somebody else on behalf of Mrs May-
brick, who contributes only a few lines in parenthesis to this
particular question that the fly-paper incident is one of the vital
features of the case, as of course it is. Therefore the fact that
it is left by the person chiefly concerned in the vague condition
I have described, speaks for itself in no uncertain voice.
There is also another peculiar feature about this book which,
although I do not wish to labour an argument about it, I feel it
incumbent upon me to draw attention to it. Mrs Maybrick de-
scribes her arrest while she still lay prostrate on a bed in her
own house, where she had been since shortly before her husband
died. We are given to understand that just before that tragic
event occurred she, Mrs Maybrick, collapsed into unconscious-
ness, and so remained, with brief intervals of sensibility, until
the formal arrest referred to. It appeared that several gentlemen
entered the room wherein she lay, one of whom advanced to the
bed and said : " Mrs Maybrick, I am superintendent of police,
and I am about to say something to you. After I have said
what I intend to say, if you reply be careful how you reply,
because whatever you say may be used as evidence against you.
Mrs Maybrick, you are in custody on suspicion of causing the death
of your late husband, James Maybrick, on the eleventh instant."
I presume the above is correctly given by Mrs Maybrick. At
86 WOMAN AND CRIME
I have been reproached because I wrote on a
previous occasion what I considered to be the truth
all events it is the kind of statement which is invariably made
by the police under such circumstances. Mrs Maybrick then goes
on in this book she is supposed to be recalling- her thoughts and
sensations at the time" Was I going mad? Did I hear myself
accused of poisoning my husband? " The italics are mine, and
I have made use of them because if the reader again refers to
the speech made by the superintendent of police, he will see that
that official made no reference whatever to the manner of
death. I repeat that if the incident is correctly described, Mrs
Maybrick ? s comment on her arrest is peculiar.
Another circumstance which is invariably advanced in defence
of Mrs Maybrick by her supporters is the fact that, had she used
arsenic obtained from fly-papers the fibres from the latter would
have been found, and that no such fibres were found, which in
itself forms convincing evidence of her innocence. This raises
an interesting point, and I feel that I am bound to deal with it.
It is generally known among those who take an interest in
criminology that criminals do occasionally copy one another's
methods, as witness the Grossman and Devereaux " trunk "
cases. A few years prior to the Maybrick case there occurred at
Liverpool please note the place the case of two women, named
respectively Flannagan and Higgins. These two women were
convicted of poisoning children for the purpose of obtaining their
insurance money. The poison they used was arsenic, which they
obtained by soaking fly-papers in water. In the bottles they had
used was a sediment, in which were found a number of fibres.
It was through this discovery that the prosecution were able to
determine how the prisoners had obtained the poison which they
used. Is it therefore too wild a supposition to entertain that
somebody else, being cognisant of the particulars of the Liverpool
case, and contemplating a somewhat similar crime, would adopt
the precaution of getting rid of the fibres by a process of filtra-
tion ? Such a process which is by no means a profound secret-
would certainly be within the knowledge, or would suggest itself,
to a person of education, intelligence, and resource. It would
not, of course, occur to such women as Flannagan and Higgins,
who were of a very low class, ignorant and illiterate. But a
well-educated, well-read person would certainly remove the evi-
dence which proved so fatal to the others.
POISONERS 87
about Mrs Maybrick while she was in prison, which
I had visited, and I was told that I was wanting in
gallantry. Whatever can an author be expected to
have to do with gallantry when writing of the terrible
crime of the secret poisoner? One cannot admit
sentiment into a record of facts. Nor is one answer-
able for the facts themselves which one records. One
thing is certain, had Mrs Maybrick been a poor,
illiterate woman, instead of an educated " well-
placed " one, she would have been dust long years
ago, as is the poor, afflicted Mary Ansell. Mercy by
all means for those who deserve it, but justice mete
out to those to whom it is due. Sometimes to be
sickly sentimental to one is to be unjust to others.
One of the most satisfactory features of this case is
the fact that the authorities of this country were not
moved by the flood of violent invective which poured
over here from the United States, especially issuing
from the female scribes and champions of Mrs May-
brick's " cause."
CHAPTER VI
THE POISONERS continued
STUDENTS of crime will remember the sinister career
of that arch-criminal, Mary Ann Cotton. We have
now to deal with another female poisoner of a similar
kind, although of different nationality to wit, Gesina
Margaretha Gottfried, a German. Nationality does
not apparently make any difference in the degree of
guilt of such female criminals, for the records con-
tain the names of four women Mary Ann Cotton,
Catharine Wilson, Madame Gottfried and Marie
Jeanneret two being English, one French, and the
other German, all of whose careers, for consummate
cruelty, superlative callousness and hypocrisy, and
long-continued immunity from detection, are strik-
ingly similar. I have yet to deal with two of these
cases, and we will now turn our attention to that of
Madame Gottfried.
Gesina Gottfried, then, so far as one can ascer-
tain, came of parents who had lived irreproachable
lives. The story of her sinister career may be said
to have begun when, while still quite young, she was
married to a man named Miltenberg. In addition to
being young, she was also, so it was said, extremely
88
POISONERS 89
attractive. The marriage, which her fond parents
at first thought a good thing for her, turned out a
dismal failure. Miltenberg developed into a habitual
drunkard, and even something worse. It was clear
that his wife never entertained any real affection for
him, so that he eventually became merely an ob-
noxious obstacle to her. To be sure, subsequent
events proved that the woman was altogether devoid
of natural affection and moral sense, so that, under all
the circumstances, the way she behaved towards her
first husband is not at all surprising.
Gesina determined to be rid of her convivial and
Inconvenient spouse. It so happened that a weapon
was ready to her hand. It appeared that her mother
was in the habit of purchasing white arsenic from the
druggist with which to poison mice. Gesina caught
her husband in his cups and dropped a pinch of the
powder in his beer. Thus she procured her release.
No suspicion was aroused as to the cause of his death,
which does not surprise one when it is taken into
consideration how limited was the knowledge of the
symptoms of poisoning at that period (1815), and the
fact that the victim had already drunk himself into a
state of mental and physical infirmity, which it was
confidently believed by most people who knew him
would shortly terminate in death. Thus nobody was
surprised when he did die, even though his death was
sudden. And in this connection I may perhaps be
allowed to intervene in the narrative to express my
confident opinion that many importunate persons are
so disposed of at the present day. The successful
90 WOMAN AND CRIME
poisoner is he, or she, who doses the victim while the
latter is really ill, so that the death causes little or no
surprise. The doctor who was in attendance, who
may in his own mind entertain some vague doubts
about the death, but who will probably keep such
doubts to himself, will ascribe the death to a sudden
" relapse " or " heart failure " the latter that vague
cause of sudden death which so frequently figures on
death certificates. Of course, all deaths are, per se,
due to heart failure. But the doctors invariably
associate it with another cause, and so give the
" primary cause," which is the illness itself, and the
" secondary cause," which is that which immediately
causes death. The loophole here for secret poisoning
is obvious. By way of illustration : Suppose a person
died from, say, pneumonia. The causes given on the
certificate would probably be, primary, pneumonia,
and secondary, exhaustion supervening on the disease,
or " heart failure." I knew a case of a man who was
said by a doctor to have been suddenly attacked by
asthma, and who described his surprisingly swift
death as due to " heart failure." My firm conviction
is that for every case of secret poisoning which comes
to light there are, at a modest computation, at least
a score of which we hear nothing, and for which
nobody is arrested.
But to return to our interesting subject, Gesina
Gottfried.
Had the wife of Miltenberg, then, committed no
other crime than the one we have just described, one
might have been able to view her act in the light of
POISONERS 91
leniency. Although one might not exactly approve
of such a means of seeking release from undesirable
matrimonial encumbrances, it could have been said
in partial mitigation that her provocation was great,
and that, although she sinned, she was also sinned
against. Unfortunately that privilege is denied us,
for the murder of Miltenberg was but the first step of
his wife upon a career which, for sheer horror, has
scarcely been equalled in the annals of crime.
It appeared that at the time of the death of her
husband, Frau Miltenberg had already become the
mistress of a friend of theirs, a man named Gottfried.
When she had contrived her own widowhood she
requested Gottfried to marry her. But to this con-
templated union Gesina's parents raised a firm objec-
tion. Now, Gesina was not in the habit of allowing
obstacles, either animate or inanimate, to stand in her
way. So she decided that her parents, with their
objections, must be " removed." She therefore
" gave them something," and they both died shortly
after, unsuspectingly blessing their precious offspring
with their last breath!
That obstacle removed, there arose another. By
Miltenberg, deceased, Gesina had had two children,
which survived. Gottfried advanced the existence of
these children as an insurmountable obstacle to their
union, inasmuch as he considered his means
insufficient to support all four. So Gesina resolved
to remove this obstacle also. She accordingly gave
the poor children " something," and they quickly
followed their grandparents to the grave. Their
92 WOMAN AND CRIME
inhuman mother followed them to their last resting-
place weeping bitterly.
Was ever such portentous criminal as this? Still
young, she stood between two generations, between
those who gave her life and those to whom she gave
life and she slew them both! And her motive?
Presumably it was the desire to be married to
Gottfried. But was there really any sincerity in this
sentiment, or was it merely a means to some other
end ? We shall presently see. Gottfried now found
himself on the brink of a precipice. In spite of the
fact that all obstacles were now removed, he still held
back from the contemplated alliance. It is not to be
wondered at, for he must have entertained some
doubts about the deaths of Gesina's relations, which
had followed so rapidly upon each other, in spite of
the medical testimony as to the deaths having been
caused by " inflammation of the bowels." However,
Gesina made up her mind that Gottfried should not
escape her, and the means she adopted to that end
were characteristic of her fiendish nature.
She had now become an adept in the administra-
tion of her white powder, knowing precisely how
much to give in order to bring about sudden death,
how much to cause a lingering death, and how much
that should create illness without causing death. She
therefore conceived the idea of bending Gottfried to
her purpose by dosing him in such a manner that even-
tually his will and strength would be so impaired that
he would become enslaved. She succeeded only too
well. Gottfried, after a lingering illness, died. But
POISONERS 93
not before he had surrendered himself and all he
possessed into the hands of his slayer. In his
depressed condition he entertained the notion that
he had done Gesina an injustice, so agreed to the
marriage, which was duly performed upon what
proved to be his death-bed.
I have not the space at my disposal in which to
chronicle in detail the many murders committed in
the ensuing years by this monstrous and uncanny
creature. Suffice it that we make passing reference
to a few of them. It is never certain how many
victims the secret poisoner has made. Madame
Gottfried, then, poisoned her brother, a dissipated
soldier, whose habits, she declared, " disgusted her."
She also poisoned a worthy man who sought her
hand in marriage, but whom she did not like. She
subjected him to similar treatment to that she meted
out to Gottfried, with the result that her luckless
wooer left her a small fortune. She owed an old
friend at Hamburg a sum of money, which she
deemed it inconvenient to pay, so she discharged the
debt by giving her creditor " something." Many of
her victims she killed out of sheer wantonness, as she
herself subsequently confessed.
We now move on to that period which saw the un-
masking of this colossal criminal. In the year 1825,
then, we find her in possession of a house in the
Pelzerstrasse, Bremen, upon which she had raised a
mortgage. Having been unable to keep up the
payments, the mortgagor had foreclosed, and sold the
house to a man named Rumf, a master wheelwright.
94 WOMAN AND CRIME
The house, like most German houses, was constructed
to accommodate several families, so Rumf, although
he installed himself and family in the place, allowed
Madame Gottfried, for whom he conceived a sincere
sympathy, to remain upon easy terms. Women of
the stamp of Madame Gottfried seem endowed with
the power of blinding those about them to obvious
defects in themselves. Rumf, for instance, in spite
of the ominous warnings of a friend, took Gottfried
into his confidence and his household. In short, she
became his housekeeper. Rumf had a wife and
several children. The former was near another
confinement, and shortly after gave birth to a son.
A few days later she died suddenly. All the children
followed in more or less quick succession. Rumf
himself, always a strong man, fell ill with a mysterious
complaint. He could not retain food, and daily grew
weaker.
And now the end of the career of this terrible
woman was fast drawing near. Rumf kept pigs, and
one day he had one of them killed and a portion of
the meat cooked. To his surprise and gratification
he found it did not disagree with him. He there-
upon had a portion of sparerib cut off and put away
for future use. Subsequently, going to the cupboard
to examine it, he noticed that one side of it was
covered with a White powder. He remembered that
he had seen a similar white powder on a salad he had
eaten, and in the form of a sediment in some soup he
had had, both of which had made him ill. At last
he would seem to have become suspicious, although,
POISONERS 95
as yet, not of Madame Gottfried. He wrapped the
meat in a piece of paper and carried it off to the
police. As a result of tests which were applied the
powder was proved to be white arsenic. Thereupon
an examining magistrate visited the house in Pelzer-
strasse, where an interrogation of the inmates led
to the arrest of Madame Gottfried. This was on
March 5, 1828.
Gottfried's imprisonment brought about a curious
change in her personal appearance. Before her
arrest she had appeared buxom, with still traces of
youthful freshness in her face. When she entered
the dock she was seen to be a haggard old woman,
" almost a skeleton." It transpired that she had been
extensively " made up." She was found to be wear-
ing thirteen corsets, her face had been whitened with
pearl powder and touched up with rouge. Also, her
teeth were false. It was but appropriate, though,
that she should be physically as well as morally
hideous.
She subsequently made confession, in which she
admitted having poisoned thirty people, fifteen of
whom perished. The judge who tried her gave it as
his opinion that the figure was rather under than over
the true number. Having been kept some time in
prison after conviction, she was at last handed over
to the headsman. She went to the scaffold like an
innocent victim of the French Revolution might have
done, apparently buoyed up with an invincible dignity
and courage. As a matter of fact her firmness and
imperturbability was the outcome of neither senti-
96 WOMAN AND CRIME
ment, but of that ignoble, base, and monstrous vanity,
the gratification of which had been the motive-power
of her execrable, criminal career.
We shall next deal with the case of Marie
Jeanneret.
In the year 1866 this young woman, who came of
a highly respectable family, was staying with a young
female friend named Berthet at the Pension Beraud
a kind of lodging-house at Vevey, on the lake of
Geneva. In this case we have not ignorance to
account for crime, for Marie was well educated ; nor
was she in actual need of money, for her parents, who
were both dead, had left her a modest competency.
In person she was attractive, with a pale but comely
face, black hair, and large dark eyes. She had also
a soft voice and a winning manner, which had
deceived many a victim to his or her complete undo-
ing. It may here be remarked in passing that some
of the worst women known to the annals of crime
have had the demure manner and the winning way.
They have used their gifts of nature as a screen
behind which to mature their nefarious plans, and with
which to lull their intended victims into a condition
of false security. It is quite a mistake to suppose
that although crime itself is ugly, those who commit
it are themselves also ugly. As a certain gentleman,
who has had a very long experience in dealing with
criminals, remarked to me one day, while discussing
this same topic : " I have met criminals who have
been as handsome as Apollo." And one may add,
also as beautiful as Venus.
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
CYCLE POLICE, PARIS.
(By Courtesy of M. Lepine.)
A LECTURE ox PHYSICAL CONFORMATION (PARIS).
POISONERS 97
Well, in addition to the personal attractions I
have enumerated above, Marie Jeanneret was also
apparently devout, being a regular attendant at
church. She was therefore looked upon by all who
knew her as being of irreproachable character. She
was also of a studious nature, and by dint of studying
medical books closely had acquired a certain know-
ledge of medicine. The manner in which she
employed that knowledge we shall presently see.
She was constantly complaining of her own maladies,
but they were mostly imaginary, or greatly exagger-
ated. In spite of her winning manner, she was ex-
ceedingly morbid and contemptibly vain.
Mademoiselle Berthet was a native of Nyon. One
day after dinner Marie proposed a walk, to which
her companion agreed. But before setting out
Mademoiselle, complaining of thirst, asked for a glass
of water. Marie, however, offered to mix her some
wine and eau sucree, which, she stated, would at the
same time quench her thirst and aid digestion. It
was prepared, and Mademoiselle drank it. The two
then went out. They had not gone far, however, when
Mademoiselle Berthet was taken ill. At Clarens
Marie gave her a little cognac and Mademoiselle
Berthet became better. When they got back Marie
prepared another draught, the ingredients of which
she obtained from a small medicine chest which
she always kept by her. Almost directly after
Mademoiselle Berthet had drank this she fell back
on the sofa in a semi-unconscious condition. She
was so ill, in fact, that the proprietress of the
G
98 WOMAN AND CRIME
establishment, Madame Beraud, telegraphed to M.
Berthet at Nyon, who on the following day came and
took his daughter away. That probably saved her
life. The doctor who attended her, Dr Lambassy,
ascribed the symptoms to belladonna poisoning. But
it never occurred to anyone concerned that the poison
had been administered by Marie intentionally. They
all thought she had given it in mistake. That
erroneous supposition cost a good many lives!
Soon after Jeanneret left Vevey for Locle, her
native place. This sinister young woman now
prepared to gratify what she declared had been the
chief ambition of her life, namely, to become a
professional nurse! She entered the Lausanne
School for Nurses in order to qualify. The manager,
M. Reynaud, was not predisposed towards her there
was " something " in her character he did not like.
He did not consider she would make a good nurse.
There were others who were fated to entertain a
similar opinion. While at the School she went out
to nurse a number of people at their own homes,
among them a Madame Chabloz, whom she " dosed "
with belladonna. She also dealt similarly with the
children. All were taken ill, but, it is satisfactory
to know, none of them died. No suspicions, however,
were aroused, and the comely young poisoner went
her triumphant way.
While at the Lausanne School, Jeanneret became
acquainted with a. Madame Juvet, who, with two other
ladies named respectively Madame Vaucher and
Mademoiselle Farsat, proposed to start a kind of
POISONERS 99
private convalescent home or hospital. Jeanneret
promptly offered her services, and as she expressed
her willingness to work for only board, lodging and
washing, her offer was accepted. Being duly
installed, she set about getting rid of Madame
Vaucher and Mademoiselle Farsat, which she did
by contriving a bitter quarrel between the ladies, in
consequence of which the two retired from the
partnership and left the house. In the light of sub-
sequent events these two ladies must have thanked
their lucky stars in having been allowed to depart
from that fatal house with their lives.
The convalescent home soon became a house of
death. Madame Juvet had two children, named
respectively Julie and Emile. All three were soon
taken ill, the illness in each case being similar, and
accompanied with violent pains and vomiting. The
children were taken ill after eating some of nurse's
bon-bons. Fortunately for the little boy, he was
taken away the next day, and so escaped with his life.
The other two, mother and daughter, died. Also
three other inmates of the establishment died under
similar circumstances, namely, an old woman named
Hahn, an aged spinster named Gay, and a third, also
a spinster, named Junot.
This put an end to the " convalescent home."
There now remained only M. Juvet, two servants,
and Marie Jeanneret, " the nurse." But the amaz-
ing part of it was that nobody, not even the doctors,
entertained any suspicions. Or if the latter did they
kept their suspicions to themselves. The nurse's
ioo WOMAN AND CRIME
horrible occupation was for the time being gone.
So she went into lodgings, simulated illness, and so
<k lay low " for a bit. And then a friend of hers, a
female friend, who regarded her as " an efficient nurse
and a sincere Christian " ! recommended her to apply
for a situation at the Baths of Divonne, a hydropathic
establishment at the foot of the Jura, about eight miles
from Geneva. In fact the friend accompanied
Jeanneret to the establishment in order to recommend
her. The proprietor and director of the Baths was
a Dr Paul Vidart, and the two women were received
by his wife, Madame Vidart. And now the first
breath of suspicion arose against this unspeakable
criminal. During conversation between the three
women, and after reference had been made to the
deaths at the " convalescent home," Jeanneret made
use of the following words : " But there are some
beautiful moments in death, dear madame."
It may be that the beauty of death did not alto-
gether appeal to Madame Vidart, or there may have
been something in the manner of the youthful
poisoner which appeared significant to her, for instead
of engaging her she temporised by promising to
write to her. She then communicated with her
brother, Dr Binet, asking for advice under the
circumstances. His reply was : " Don't have anything
to do with her ; all her patients die." So the nurse
was not engaged luckily for the inmates of the
hydropathic establishment at the foot of the Jura.
In spite of the fact that Jeanneret's sinister repute
was becoming generally known, she still continued to
POISONERS ioi
be engaged to nurse invalids, so invincible is the
credulity, so complete the blindness of poor humanity.
Making due allowance for the creature's extensive
powers of deception and dissimulation, the time that
elapsed between her initial essay in the art of secret
poisoning, as made upon her own familiar friend,
Mademoiselle Berthet, and her subsequent arrest, is
quite amazing. One wonders why Madame Vidart,
or her brother, Dr Binet, entertaining such grave
suspicions as they did, did not convey or communicate
those suspicions to the authorities. It is the duty of
every individual member of a community to perform
the offices of a police official, should circumstances
demand it, in the defence of life and property. The
neglect and apathy of people in this connection
makes possible such prolonged and destructive
criminal careers as that of Marie Jeanneret. This
criticism applies particularly to medical men, whose
seeming obtuseness in cases of poisoning is seemingly
capable of only two explanations: Either they are
really blind and dull-witted, or they are culpably
indifferent. Upon one occasion Jeanneret declared
that doctors were "all fools," and certainly the
behaviour of those with whom she came in contact
would seem to justify her low estimate of them.
Well, it was so decreed that several more lives
were yet to be sacrificed ere the hands of justice
should be laid upon the arch-poisoner. Having dis-
posed of a M. Gros, a retired schoolmaster, and his
widowed daughter, Madame Bouvier, Jeanneret went
to live at the Pension de Sarzaus, where she became
102 WOMAN AND CRIME
acquainted with a Mademoiselle Fritzergues. The
latter, having partaken of some lemonade prepared
by Jeanneret, was taken seriously ill. A doctor was
called in, who, recognising the symptoms of
belladonna poisoning, ordered her removal to the
cantonal hospital. And now at last there came upon
the scene a doctor who entertained grave suspicions,
and who had the courage of his convictions. This
was Dr Rapin, one of the house physicians. He
had heard of Jeanneret before, so he sat down and
wrote out a statement of the case, which he sent to
the Procureur-General. This of course was what
ought to have been done before. The Procureur-
General promptly had Jeanneret arrested, and thus
put an end to her career.
A long inquiry followed, into the details of which I
have not the space to go. Suffice it that she was
charged with attempting the lives of nine persons,
seven of whom had died. Three experts were
appointed to examine into her mental condition, and
they unanimously came to the conclusion that she was
sane. The poisons she used were atrophia,
morphine, and antimony. Atrophia is obtained from
belladonna, or the " deadly Nightshade," and
morphine from opium. Antimony is a mineral.
As a result of her trial, Marie Jeanneret was con-
victed of murdering six persons. But amazing to
relate ! the jury having found " extenuating circum-
stances," the severest sentence the Court could
pronounce upon her was one of twenty years'
imprisonment. I never entertained a very high
POISONERS 103
opinion of the wisdom, impartiality, and mental
lucidity of juries in general, but the jury that tried
Jeanneret hold the record, so far as my knowledge
goes, for what one can only characterise as inexcus-
able imbecility. There can be no doubt that, where
a prisoner happens to be a good-looking and attractive
female, the jury trying her are partially blinded by
their lascivious admiration of her. I have again and
again seen justice suffer in this way. I have heard
ex-jurymen indulge in the most lude talk about such
a prisoner, which made one disgusted to listen to. I
have also heard male members of the public present
in court giving expression to the most ardent admira-
tion of good-looking female prisoners, who were
guilty of the most atrocious crimes, who were, in fact,
among the vilest women who ever wore a skirt and
took a life, among the " gentlest " creatures who ever
cut a throat. It is impossible for some men to view
women, however abandoned and abominable, except
through the glasses of lascivious desire. And it is but
just that some of them should come to grief thereby.
The Jeanneret jury failed in a most distinguished
manner in doing their duty in accordance with their
oaths ; they stamped themselves for all time as being
among the most feeble and fatuous individuals who
ever sat in a jury box. It is not surprising that soon
after this trial capital punishment was altogether
abolished in the canton. To be sure they could not
very well execute anybody after extenuating the deeds
of such a human atrocity as Jeanneret.
Yet, in spite of the decision arrived at by the
io 4 WOMAN AND CRIME
three experts in mental diseases, I am inclined to
think that this modern Brinvilliers was not altogether
sane. And for this reason: Her manifold and
awful crimes were committed, not with merely an
inadequate motive, but without any motive at all. In
fact she was a loser by some of the crimes she
committed, for she lost a good and comfortable situa-
tion and gained nothing. Therefore we are thrown
back upon the only alternative supposition, and that
is, that she killed for the mere lust of killing, which is
a condition of mind scarcely to be regarded as normal.
And if a person is not normal-minded he must in a
degree be insane.
Although Jeanneret escaped capital punishment,
the authorities had made up their minds that she
should never be released any more. If she had served
her full term, they intended to charge her with other
murders, as there were, alas! plenty in abeyance.
However, she saved them the trouble by dying in
prison, which desirable event took place in the year
1884.
We have now to deal with a case which, in many
of its details, bears a striking resemblance to the May-
brick case. It is also worthy of note that it occurred
some years after the conviction of Mrs Maybrick. I
refer to the case of Mrs Edith May Carew. In
these two murders we have the following parallel
facts : Both women occupied a good social position,
both were many years younger than their husbands,
both were involved in an affair with another man,
both made use of arsenic, and both were condemned
POISONERS 105
to death and subsequently had the sentence com-
muted to penal servitude for life. Also, both were
confined in the same prison Aylesbury where, it
is said, they became very friendly.
The following are the facts of the Carew case :
Mrs Carew was the daughter of John Albert Porch,
Mayor of Glastonbury. At a ball at Bridport she
met the gentleman who subsequently became her
husband: Mr W. R. H. Carew, son of Major Carew
of Exmouth. The acquaintance thus made soon
ripened into a close attachment, for in three months'
time the two were married. This fateful event took
place in May, 1889. At that time the gentleman was
thirty-five years of age and the lady twenty-one.
The ceremony was made the occasion for local
rejoicing. Shortly after the marriage Mr and Mrs
Carew left England for Japan, where the former
intended to try his fortune.
The Carews took up their residence on the Bluff,
Yokohama the fashionable European quarter of
Japan, much patronised by English and American
society. They lived in good style, and Mrs Carew
became a very popular hostess. For some years
everything would seem to have gone smoothly and
well with the Carews, the people of Glastonbury being
periodically regaled with accounts of their doings and
prosperity. Although she was so far away, they
still took a keen interest in the life of the charming
daughter of their Mayor. In the year 1894 Mrs
Carew paid a visit to the home of her parents, when
Glastonbury gave her a most hearty and flattering
106 WOMAN AND CRIME
reception. For days people talked of little but the
Carews, discussed scarcely anything but things
Japanese. They also decorated the town with Jap-
anese, and English flags, and went about wearing
Japanese caps and kimonos so popular in Glas-
tonbury was the young married daughter of the
Mayor the young woman who was fated soon to
acquire an ugly and sinister repute of world-wide
extension.
Well, Mrs Carew returned to Japan, carrying with
her the good wishes, heartily bestowed, of the people
of Glastonbury. In about two years from that date
Glastonbury may be said to have been staggered by
the news that the young lady for whom they enter-
tained so much admiration and affection was in
custody in Japan, charged with the murder of her
husband. That was the brief but fateful message
which a cablegram from Yokohama contained. The
following are the circumstances which led up to this
startling event:
About the middle of October, 1896, Mr Carew fell
suddenly and mysteriously ill. A Dr Wheeler, who
was practically a friend of the family, was called in,
and he diagnosed the malady as that of diseased liver.
And for such he treated him. But Mr Carew did
not get better. The Carews had in their service as
nursery governess a Miss Jacobs, who was a
Londoner. On October 2ist Mrs Carew sent this
young woman to a native chemist to purchase a rather
large amount of arsenic and sugar of lead. While
making this purchase, Miss Jacobs was surprised,
POISONERS 107
and considerably alarmed, by being informed by the
chemist that this was the third supply of deadly
poison which had been procured by Mrs Carew. He
also remarked that she seemed to require a great deal
of poison. (Apparently there are not the same
restrictions over the sale of poisons in Japan as there
are in this country.)
Miss Jacobs became so nervous and apprehensive
for her own safety that she confided the matter to
a nurse, informing her that she felt it to be her duty
to impart the information volunteered by the chemist
to Dr Wheeler, which she accordingly did. Dr
Wheeler promptly had his patient removed to the
Naval Hospital. It was, however, too late, for Carew
died there on the 22nd. The same night Mrs Carew
made the following statement to the doctor:
* There is one thing I would like to tell you which
I suppose I ought to have told you before. Mr
Carew asked me if I would get him a small
bottle of arsenic. He also wanted some sugar of
lead."
I here interrupt the narrative in order to call the
reader's attention to another curious resemblance
between this and the Maybrick case. It will be
remembered by those who are acquainted with the
details of the latter case, that poison was found in a
bottle of Valentine's meat juice I did not refer
to this incident when I dealt with the case at length
which Mrs Maybrick admitted having put there, but,
as she explained from the dock, at the request of her
deceased husband. The reader will notice the
io8 WOMAN AND CRIME
resemblance between this statement and that volun-
teered by Mrs Carew to Dr Wheeler.
Well, in consequence of the communication made
to him by Mrs Carew, coupled with the fact that he
was convinced that Carew had died from arsenical
poisoning, Dr Wheeler referred the matter to the
coroner. An inquest was held, at which the evidence
was conflicting. On the one hand we have Dr
Wheeler expressing his confident opinion that Carew
died from arsenical poisoning and not from the effects
of a diseased liver. On the other it was asserted with
equal insistence that the deceased man was afflicted
with a diseased liver, and that he occasionally took
doses of arsenic for relief. (Yet another striking
resemblance to the Maybrick case.) But the coroner
pointed out that Carew took only small doses, that
he took those with great care, and that it was highly
improbable that he would have taken a lethal dose.
As a result of the inquiry the jury brought in an
" open " verdict, to the effect that Mr Carew had
died from arsenical poisoning, but by whom the
poison was administered there was not sufficient
evidence to show.
It now resolved itself into a matter for police inves-
tigation. As a result of police inquiries therefore
Mrs Carew was arrested and charged with the crime.
The trial, which lasted three weeks, began on January
5th. During its run many curious things happened
which deserve to be characterised as " sensational."
For instance, the governess, Miss Jacobs, already
referred to, was arrested as being guiltily concerned
POISONERS 109
in the murder. Mrs Carew, in her defence, also
declared that she, Miss Jacobs, was in truth a Miss
Annie Luke, that some years previously she and the
late Mr Carew had been on intimate relations, that
prior to his death her husband had expressed a desire
to see Miss Luke in order to " make amends " to her,
and that a letter had been discovered among the
dead man's papers signed " Annie."
It was further stated by the defence that a
mysterious female, known by the initials " A. L.," and
who was dressed in black and closely veiled, had
twice called upon Mrs Carew. Upon the first
occasion she left a card with the initials " M. I." and
" A. L." on it, and bearing the date 1888. Upon the
occasion of the second visit of this mysterious
individual, which was said to have been made while
Mr Carew was ill, she requested to be shown his bed-
room. The prisoner was defended by Mr Lowder,
and he produced several letters which he stated had
emanated from the elusive " A. L." One of them was
worded as follows :
" Dead men tell no tales no, nor dead women
either, for I am going to join him. Do you know
what waiting means for eight long, weary years?
I have watched and waited watched till I knew he
would grow tired of her, that silly little fool,
and then I came to him. What is the result?
We, between us, electrify Japan. By the time
you get this I shall be well on my way to join
him, my twin soul.
" I have bamboozled (i) the chemist, (2) the doctor,
i io WOMAN AND CRIME
and last, but not least, that fool his wife, and I am
now going to join him, my twin soul."
The writer of the above does not furnish any clue
as to when, where, or under what circumstances she
intended to join her " twin soul." The extravagant,
penny-novelette wording of it is very suggestive.
Up to this stage Mr Lowder had created a
decidedly favourable effect by his eloquent insistence
that the prosecution had not removed the ground for
reasonably supposing that the death was caused
inadvertently by an overdose of arsenic, and that they
had failed to show any motive. But soon after this
the case for the defence collapsed in a remarkable
manner. First, then, Miss Jacobs, for whom much
sympathy was felt, and against whom not the smallest
amount of reasonable evidence could be adduced, was
released. The next striking incident, and which
altogether did for the defence, occurred in connec-
tion with a letter. The prosecution put in a letter
signed " A. L. Price," which had been written to the
British Minister, complaining of the summing-up of
the coroner. This letter mysteriously disappeared
and was not seen again until the day before the trial
closed, namely, on January 2 9th, when it was found
concealed in a sleeve of the prisoner's dress. The
fact that she was able to obtain possession of it is
evidence of the loose way the prosecution was con-
ducted. Upon this discovery being made known Mr
Lowder retired from the case. The letter in question
was proved to be in the handwriting of the prisoner.
This was vital, because it will be seen that the
POISONERS in
initials of the signature, " A. L. Price," are the same
as those of the mysterious "Annie Luke." This
made it pretty evident that the prisoner had also
written the " Luke " letters, and that Annie Luke
herself was nothing more than a figment of her own
imagination. So that Mrs Carew was not only
convicted of killing her husband, but she also did
not hesitate to defame his memory.
Now for the motive. It was proved that Mrs
Carew had conceived a warm affection for a Mr
Dickinson, and the prosecution put in letters, couched
in the most affectionate terms, which had passed
between the two, and in some of which Dickinson
was urging Mrs Carew to obtain a divorce. Mr
Dickinson in this case shaped much better than did
the man Brierly in the Maybrick case. Dickinson
went into the witness-box and admitted the
authenticity of the letters in question. He also
defended his own behaviour and successfully I
maintain by stating that the prisoner had deceived
him by inducing him to believe that her husband was
very cruel to her, and that he systematically ill-treated
her. That was why, he declared, he urged her to
obtain a divorce. As a matter of fact it was made
abundantly clear that Carew was a most kind and
indulgent husband, and was universally held in high
esteem. It is no new thing, unfortunately, for a kind
and indulgent husband to be treated cruelly by his
wife. He gives her bread and she returns him a
stone.
The trial was held in the Consular Court, and after
ii2 WOMAN AND CRIME
a retirement of thirty-five minutes the jury returned
a unanimous verdict of " Guilty." Mrs Carew was
thereupon sentenced to death, the British Ambassador
subsequently commuting the sentence to penal
servitude for life. As there was no women's convict
prison in Japan the prisoner was transferred to
Aylesbury, where she remained thirteen years, when
she was released.
In all these cases of serious crimes committed by
well-placed women we find similar characteristics.
We find they have invariably been living idle and
useless lives, with no healthy occupation to keep their
minds engrossed, with nothing to do in fact but to
gratify their own appetites. Mere self-indulgence is
a fruitful source of evil-doing. It were well for such
women that they should be reduced to earning their
daily bread. " They toil not, neither do they spin,"'
and they have ever a ready ear for the voice of the
tempter, and a heart that pulses only for self-
gratification.
THE ALTAR, AYLESBLRY FEMALE CONVICT PRISON.
FIRST Am " AMONG FEMALE PRISONERS (INDIA).
CHAPTER VII
THE POISONERS continued
ALTHOUGH, in the next case we have to consider, the
woman involved was associated with a man, I place
it among the organisers of crime inasmuch as the
woman was clearly the leading spirit in the com-
mission of the crime, bringing her baneful influence
to bear upon the man, and so converting him into a
ready confederate. In these crimes committed
jointly by a man and a woman, where the motive is
a sensual one, it is the custom, apparently in defer-
ence to time-honoured chivalry, to regard the man
as the instigator of the crime, and the woman as
acting under his influence. In many such cases,
however, the very reverse is the true state of things,
the woman, in gratification of her own sensual
desires, having infected the man through the medium
of the influence she exercises over him. The case
we are about to deal with is such a one.
The sinister young woman who played the lead-
ing part in the terrible story we are about to unfold
was named Jeanne Daniloff. She was a Russian and
an orphan, whose father had never acknowledged
her, and whose mother died at an early age while a
ii4 WOMAN AND CRIME
political exile from Russia. Thus it will be seen that
Jeanne's early years were anything but propitious.
She was taken in hand by her grandmother, who
kept a boarding-house at Nice. In 1884, at the com-
paratively tender age of sixteen, Jeanne quitted Nice
for Paris in company with a single gentleman, with
whom she lived for about six months, thus early ex-
hibiting the possession of that abnormal and morbid
sensuality which was subsequently to lead to such
dire consequences. Her grandmother, however,
entertained such deep affection for her that she was
induced to overlook this little departure from the
narrow path of chastity, and took her back to the
boarding-house at Nice.
In that same year, while at a ball in the town,
she met a Lieutenant Weiss, who incontinently, and
to his subsequent great discomfiture, fell in love with
her. His affection or infatuation was indeed of such
a precipitate character that he almost there and then
offered her marrige. Jeanne Daniloff was un-
doubtedly one of those abnormally sensual women
who seem to cast such a glamour over the opposite
sex. However, the mother of Lieutenant Weiss,
fond and wise woman, flatly refused to consent to
the proposed union. It is not surpising to learn that
this opposition did but add zest to the unruly passion
of Lieutenant Weiss, fed already as it was by the
very presence of its object. In 1884, it so fell out,
Weiss was promoted to a captaincy and drafted to
Oran, Algiers. He took with him Jeanne as his
mistress. Things remained thus till 1886, when
POISONERS 115
Weiss resigned his military position, and accepted a
civil appointment in the Algerian service. At the
same time he at length contrived to obtain his
mother's consent to his marriage with Jeanne, which
accordingly took place. In the following year, 1887,
Madame Weiss gave birth tc a son, and two years
later, in 1889, a daughter was born to her.
In the last-named year M. and Madame Weiss
took up their residence at Ain-Fezza, near Oran.
So far Madame Weiss would appear to have led an
irreproachable life as a wife and a mother, displaying
much piety and assiduity in her devotions as became
one who had been brought up in the Lutherian faith.
In personal appearance Jeanne was attractive,
although, it was maintained, not actually pretty.
She had very fine eyes and well-defined eyebrows ;
in fact, her eyes were said to be of the " fatal " kind.
It is generally admitted that the power of the human
eye is great, and in women of the type of Jeanne
Daniloff it doubtless constitutes a dangerous
weapon. In this same year of 1889 there came to
Ain-Fezza an accomplished young engineer named
Felix Roques, who was working on the West Alger-
ian railways. He was fated to meet Madame Weiss
and find himself within the spell and under the
magical influence of those " fatal " eyes. For him
Jeanne Weiss conceived an overmastering passion
he " appealed to her " with a vengeance and in a
very short time all the morbid sensuality which was
innate in this latent degenerate rushed forth with
torrential force.
n6 WOMAN AND CRIME
Jeanne Weiss, brushing aside her Lutherian piety
with her duties as wife and mother, abandoned her
self unrestrainedly to the cultivation and gratifica-
tion of her unholy passion. Into the impetuous
stream of her irresistible desire she had soon drawn
M. Roques, who fell from his high estate never to
rise again. In an amazingly short space of time he
became completely infected with her horrible en-
thusiasm, henceforth readily playing the part of an
odious adulterer and cowardly dastard. When M.
Roques, a complete slave to the desire for reciprocity
she inspired in him, asked for a secret meeting, she
replied, " I don't wish to take on myself the responsi-
bility of a decision ; you know that, if we once begin
to love, it will be no light thing to me. I shall lead
you far, perhaps further than you think." In this
she was abundantly right. So she put it to the
decision of a tossed coin. If the coin came down
head, she would, she declared, be his ; if, on the
other hand, it came down a tail, there must be
nothing between them. Fancy a woman putting her
chastity, the happiness of her home, the honour of
her husband, and the welfare of her children, to the
toss of a coin ! And what a feeble device. The coin
came down head, but if it had been the reverse would
this estimable lady have abandoned her adulterous
intentions? I doubt it. I should, in fact, be quite
prepared to hear that she had used a double-headed
coin. One can very well judge as to the class of
woman Madame Weiss was by that one little
incident.
POISONERS 117
Promptly Jeanne Weiss became the mistress of
M. Roques. She was so enthusiastic about it that
she had engraved upon a ring the date of the first
illicit connection between them November 13,
1889. She also writes him ardent letters, which she
signs, " your wife, Jeanne." M. Weiss became sus-
picious, and adopted, poor man, several pathetic
devices to win back his erring wife. To please her,
as she complained of the dullness of Algiers, he sent
her to Nice. This was in March, 1890. M. Roques
also returned to France about the same time. In
the following August Madame Weiss gave birth to
a girl, the father of which was M. Roques. Her
husband had joined her in July. In September M.
and Madame Weiss returned with their children to
Algiers. M. Roques had gone to Madrid.
M. Weiss having become somewhat of an obstacle
to the continuance of the odious liaison, Madame
Weiss and her paramour were discussing the best
means of " removing " him. It was at length decided
that Madame should poison him with arsenic. Much
of the correspondence which passed between the two
Madame Weiss and M. Roques has been pre-
served to posterity, and to the psychologist affords
interesting reading. To sensitive people it would
doubtless be simply sickening. At the outset
Madame entertains misgivings as to what she is
about to do. In one letter, for instance, she says,
" I am beset with sad and depressing thoughts.
What I am about to do is very ugly." It was indeed
ugly! Further on she says, " I will give all my love
n8 WOMAN AND CRIME
to my children, to yours first of all" A positive
outrage on maternity! In another letter, written at
a time when the two are discussing the poison to be
used, she says, " I prefer Fowler's solution (Fowler's
solution of arsenic) to begin with. It is agreed,
Felix, you shall be obeyed. Have I ever hesitated
before anything except the desertion of my children ?
Crimes against the law don't trouble me at all. It
is only crimes against Nature that revolt me. I am
a worshipper of Nature." The wording at the
beginning of this precious epistle sounds as though
the various courses of a contemplated meal were
being discussed, instead of the preparations for the
perpetration of a horrible murder. Apparently
crimes against the law did not trouble Madame
Weiss, but a worshipper of Nature Faugh!
The next effusion is interesting as a sidelight on
this terrible creature's character:
" I have been playing the Danse Macabre as a
duet. My nerves must be affected, for it produced
a gloomy effect upon me ; I thought of death and
of those who are about to die. Can it be that this
feeling will return to me?
" I have read " Cruelle Enigme," the story of a
sensual and an intellectual love inspired at the same
time in the same women by two different men. I don't
see any very great enigma in that! ... I think that
five-sixths of the infidelities of people are to be ex-
plained in this way, and it is quite simple and natural."
Then she launches into a detailed description of how
she is arranging for the furnishing of their home,
POISONERS 119
after they have " got rid " of the inconvenient hus-
band. The letter concludes : " It is so sweet to
think that I am working for our nest."
The poisoning of M. Weiss had not yet begun,
and the following was the next outburst of
madam's :
"Oh, Felix, love me, for the hideousness of my
task glares at me. I want to close my heart and my
soul and my eyes ; I want to banish the recollection
of what he has done for me, for I worship you. I
feel such a current of complete intimacy between you
and me, that words seem unnecessary ; we read each
other's thoughts as in an open book. To arrest this
current would be to arrest my life. I may shudder
at what I am doing, after it is done, but go back I
cannot. Comfort and sustain me, help me to get over
the inevitable moments of depression, bind me under
your yoke. Make me drunk with your caresses, for
therein lies your only power. I will be yours, what-
ever happens ; so long as you give me your orders,
I will carry them out. But it seems to me I am doing
wrong. I love you terribly."
Yes, it seems to me also that she was doing wrong.
In fact, one might go further and say, with a distin-
guished poet: "Seems? nay, it is." And the
love was certainly terrible.
In another letter she says : " What I dread above
all is the awful time after the catastrophe ; the priests,
the mourning, the tears and condolences, and, worst
of all, the doctors ! " So it is not the death itself which
is troubling her so much as the fuss that is likely to
120 WOMAN AND CRIME
be made afterwards ! One can understand her object-
ing to the presence of the doctors.
At the beginning of October, 1890, M. Weiss fell
ill, exhibiting all the symptoms of arsenical poison-
ing. As is invariably the case in these dreadful
affairs, the wife was most assiduous in her attentions
to him, the while she was dosing every article of
food she gave him with Fowler's solution. M. Weiss
continued to grow steadily worse, in spite of or, as
we know, in consequence of the attentions of his
wife, and in the face of the industrious ministrations
of the doctor. This fact aroused the suspicions of
M. de Guerry, M. Weiss's secretary, who com-
municated them to the doctor. The latter confirmed
them. Then a curious thing happened. The post-
mistress at Ain-Fezza was favouring the correspon-
dence between Madame Weiss and M. Roques in
Madrid, although at the same time she was gossiping
about it to the wife of M. de Guerry. On October
9th Madame Weiss posted an important letter to
M. Roques, and the fact was conveyed to M. de
Guerry by his wife. Thereupon M. de Guerry went
to the post office, saw the letter lying on the counter,
quietly slipped it into his pocket and took it home.
There he opened it and found the following :
" You may as well know what a fearful time I am
going through at this moment, in what a nightmare
I live.
" Monsieur has been in bed four days, and the
best half of my stock is used up. He fights it,
POISONERS 121
fights it by his sheer vitality and instinct of self-
preservation, so that he seems to absorb emetics and
never drains a cup or a glass to its dregs. The
doctor, who came yesterday, could find no disease.
' He's a madman, a hypochondriac/ he said. ' Since
he seems to want to be sick, give him some ipe-
cacuanha, and don't worry ; there's nothing seriously
the matter with him. 5
" The constant sickness obliges me to administer
the remedy in very small doses. I can't go beyond
twenty drops without bringing on vomiting. Yester-
day, from five in the morning to four in the after-
noon, I have done nothing but empty basins, clean
sheets, wash his face, and hold him down in the bed
during his paroxysms of sickness. At night, when I
have got away for a moment, I have put my head
on Mdlle. Castaing's shoulder " (the postmistress)
" and sobbed like a child. I am afraid, afraid that
I haven't got enough of the remedy left and that I
shan't be able to bring it off. Couldn't you send me
some by parcel post to the railway station of Ain-
Fezza? Can't you send four or five pairs of chil-
dren's socks with the bill ? I'll take care to get rid of
the wrapper. Hide the bottle carefully.
" I am getting thinner every day. I don't look
well, and I am afraid that when I see you, I shan't
please you. Did you get the photograph?
" Forgive my handwriting, but I am horribly
nervous. I adore you."
The above is perhaps one of the most terrible
122 WOMAN AND CRIME
letters ever penned by a wife and a mother. The
letter which figured in the Maybrick case was bad
enough, but the above is infinitely worse. It is un-
speakably horrible, and the writer appears to be
rapidly graduating for the Tenth Circle of Hades.
As in the Maybrick case, the discovery of this
letter quickly led to the arrest of the writer. For
M. Weiss it was providential, for it saved his life.
M. de Guerry at once placed the letter in the hands
of the Procureur de la Republique, who, upon
October loth, paid a visit to the house at Ain-Fezza.
Being shown the letter, Madame Weiss admitted
writing it, admitted that she had been the lover of
M. Roques, but made a feeble effort to defend her-
self by stating that she had merely been pretending
to poison her husband. But this would scarcely hold
good when, upon a search of the house being made,
a large quantity of Fowler's solution, prussic acid,
and corrosive sublimate was found. A mere pre-
tension could hardly require such aids as these.
Thus finding herself in a hopeless position, Madame
Weiss attempted suicide by taking a dose of corro-
sive sublimate. In this, however, she failed, as she
survived the attempt after a painful illness of six
months' duration. Instructions were sent to the
police at Madrid for the arrest of M. Roques, but
upon October 2Oth he contrived to elude justice by
blowing his brains out. Perhaps the best thing he
could have done under the circumstances.
Thus we find retribution swiftly overtaking these
two despicable sensual would-be homicides.
POISONERS 123
Madame Weiss was allowed to take her infant
daughter to prison with her, where it subsequently
died. During the interval between her arrest and
trial, a period of about seven months, she wrote an
autobiography, in which she strove to fasten the
blame for the whole tragic business upon M. Roques.
This was rather a cowardly proceeding, as the man,
bad as he was, was still not alive to defend himself.
But her responsibilities were greater, and her guilt was
therefore the heavier. She was also clearly the leading
spirit and the ready implement in the plot. She also
subtly endeavoured to make out that her gravely-
wronged husband had forgiven her. She wrote :
" My husband, by his behaviour towards me, has
made me appreciate a thousand times more poig-
nantly the wrong I have done him ; instead of leaving
me to my punishment, he has surrounded me with
proofs of his pity. Yes, he has pitied me, for he
knows that the woman I have become in this last
year was not the woman who for five years made
him a happy home."
Now, under all the circumstances, this was calcu-
lated to put M. Weiss in an odious light. It would
make him out as playing the part of a poor, silly,
sucking-dove of a husband, and as exhibiting a
foolish way of showing his appreciation of his good
fortune in having his life spared to him. As a matter
of fact it was merely the invention of a still design-
ing woman. At the subsequent trial, and when
M. Weiss had concluded his evidence, he turned to
the jury and made the following statement : " I
124 WOMAN AND CRIME
desire, gentlemen, to make to you the following
declaration. I speak that I may reply to certain
calumnies that have appeared in the press. I have
never forgiven Jeanne Daniloff. I do not, and I
never will, forgive her. Henceforth she is nothing to
me. Whatever her fate, I stay near my children. I
only wish never to hear her name again."
These words were received with applause in court.
The sincerity of the declaration of M. Weiss is em-
phasised by the fact that he referred to her by her
maiden name only.
Upon the death of the offspring of her adultery,
Madame Weiss would appear to have become dis-
tracted, for she wrote :
"Good-bye to life!
" Whether I open a vein,
" Or hang myself.
" Or drown myself,
" Or throw myself under a train, I will get there
sure enough, even though all the Saints of Paradise
were there to bar the way. And they will not be
there, rest assured! "
I think not, Madame. More probably all the
fiends of hell will be there to hasten rather than retard
your progress!
In writing of her determination to take her own
life, Madame Weiss advanced as a kind of justifica-
tion that for her to remain alive in prison a convicted
criminal would be an everlasting disgrace to her
children. Formerly, however, she had said in a
letter to her paramour, when things were not going
POISONERS 125
very well with them, that the existence of the
children constituted an insurmountable obstacle to
suicide. This is the old form of " special pleading "
on the part of one who has been found out. What
was before an obstacle now becomes a justification.
As a matter of fact Madame Weiss did subsequently
take her own life, but not by any of the means
mentioned above.
After M. Weiss made his speech to the jury, which
I have already quoted, the prisoner was seen to raise
her handkerchief to her mouth and bite it, as though
she were giving expression to her rage at her hus-
band thus casting her off. In the hem of her hand-
kerchief she had concealed a fatal dose of strychnine.
At about four in the morning following her con-
viction, she put this handkerchief to her mouth, and
then asked the wardress in attendance for a glass of
water. This was handed to her, and with the water
she washed down the fatal dose of strychnine which
she had taken from the handkerchief. Although an
emetic was administered, she subsequently died in
great agony.
I have dwelt at considerable length on this case,
as I regard it as one of considerable importance to
a consideration of the subject of the female criminal.
Also many of the characteristics of it are to be found
in other cases of crimes committed by women. I
regard Madame Weiss as embodying well-nigh all the
attributes of the thorough-paced female criminal, as
standing at the very pinnacle-point of female enor-
mity. The jury who convicted her granted her ex-
126 WOMAN AND CRIME
tenuating circumstances. One searches in vain for
any justification for this leniency. Of the fatuity and
infantile complacency of juries there is no end. If
Madame Weiss, instead of being young and attrac-
tive, had been some repulsive old hag, that jury
would have failed to discover any grounds for
leniency. I suggest that female offenders of this kind
should be tried by a jury of women, whose mental
vision would remain unimpaired by the personal
appearance of the prisoner.
Madame Weiss was given the heaviest sentence
possible under the circumstances, namely, twenty
years' imprisonment. But, as events so turned out, the
sentence mattered little, for as we have seen, Madame
revised it herself. Certainly the children of Madame
Weiss were better without such a mother as her.
In many respects this case is a very striking one,
but in none more so than in the manner that death
fell upon nearly all those chiefly concerned. The two
wrongdoers, and the offspring of the intrigue, were
all wiped out. The man who was so grossly wronged
on the other hand, had his life preserved to him. It is
not often that such tragedies have so just an ending.
The true adjustment is invariably left to a Higher
Power.
It was almost inevitable, under the circumstances,
that the mental condition of Madame Weiss should
be called in question. During the trial, therefore, a
Dr Lacronique, who was well acquainted with the
prisoner, expressed his opinion of her mental condi-
tion in the following words : " Jeanne Daniloff is,
POISONERS 127
from the intellectual point of view, a woman of un-
balanced mind. In addition to this, her nervous
system is highly impressionable and excitable. She
yields easily to hypnotic suggestion. But her mental
condition is sound ; she acts with full consciousness
of what she is doing ; she is responsible."
In short, she was sane.
Madame Weiss was one of those morbid and
vicious-minded women who are made " heroines " in
so-called " psychological " plays and bawdy novels.
Such women are shallow-minded, insincere in every-
thing but evil, holding a distempered and distorted
view of life, and regarding members of the opposite
sex as a kind of natural prey. In short, human
vampires, whose only interest in life is the gratifica-
tion of their own lascivious desires :
" A fool there was who made his prayer
(Even as you and I)
To a rag and a bone and a hank of hair,
We called her the ' woman who did not care.'
The fool, he called her his ' lady fair.'
(Even as you and I)."
I am afraid they abound in our midst, and are made
worse than they would otherwise be by man's sickly
pandering to their petty vanity and unwholesome
self-esteem, for which they, the men, occasionally pay
a heavy price by arousing into destructive activity the
capacity for mischief that ever lies latent in such
female degenerates. Their easiest prey they find
among men of leisure and means, men who are a
counterpart of themselves in so far as being habit-
uated to self-indulgence goes ; men whose only out-
128 WOMAN AND CRIME
look on womanhood is through the glasses of sexual
intercourse, whose interest in a woman ceases when
their carnal appetite is satisfied or surfeited. It is,
however, but just that they should occasionally surfer
for their own grossness, and no right-minded person
would be anxious to raise a voice on their behalf.
Unfortunately, as we have seen in the Weiss case, by
their surrendering to the lust of such women they
sometimes are instrumental in visiting unmerited
wrong upon innocent persons, for whom there is
scarcely any adequate redress. We know there exist
many men who may be found ready to sympathise
with such women as Madame Weiss, and contend
that she was the victim of M. Roques. No doubt the
jurymen who tried her were men of that class. All
such men are not necessarily lascivious-minded, but
they must to a certain degree be feeble-minded, with
an unreasoning, slavish kind of devotion to the female
sex. Nothing can be more foolish and misleading
than to suppose that because it happens to be a
woman standing in the dock that it is therefore a case
for lenient treatment. Many a male criminal has been
far more deserving of leniency, which he has not
received, than female criminals who have. It
seems exceedingly difficult, if not altogether impos-
sible, for some, many, men to lift themselves above
what one may term the sickly sentimental view of
women. Mere sentiment has been the cause of more
injustice and unmerited suffering than crime itself.
A man's view of women should be a healthy one. If
this were so there would be fewer female criminals.
POISONERS 129
The next case we have to deal with is one which
bears a striking resemblance to the Carew and the
Maybrick cases. It occurred in France. Thus we
have this class of crime, almost identical in their
principal salient features, being committed in coun-
tries so widely asunder as England, Japan and
France. But human nature is human nature all the
world over, and the causes of crime are attributable
to the individual rather than the climate. In the
Weiss case it was said that, somewhat in mitigation
of guilt, that the climate of Algiers was calculated to
engender crimes of passion. It was a rather feeble
argument, however, as we have similar crimes of
passion committed, as I have already pointed out, in
other countries where the climate cannot be said to
be a contributory factor.
The case now under consideration occurred at
Marseilles in the year 1903. It was known at the
time as the " French Maybrick Case." The victim
in this case was a Captain Georges Massot, an
employe of the Messageries Maritimes. He was a
man who came of a good family, and was many years
older than his wife. The latter, formerly Alice
Martorell, was a young woman with a " past" ; in fact
her record was so bad that Massot's friends strongly
opposed the union. However, the woman's influ-
ence over him being so strong, he paid no heed to
these warnings, and so went blindly to his doom.
In all these crimes of passion we see the same sexual
ascendancy of the woman over the man, which seems
to blind the latter to the most obvious signs of danger.
I
130 WOMAN AND CRIME
And so Georges Massot married Alice Martorell,
and in due course two children were born to them.
In October, 1903, the Massots were living at the Villa
Toutes-Aures, Marseilles. Shortly after returning
from a voyage M. Massot was taken suddenly and
mysteriously ill. He was attended by his wife, and
on the 23rd he died. The doctor attributed his death
to " enteritis." So he was buried in the usual way,
his widow going weeping to his sepulchre. But it
so fell out that a female servant in the employ of the
Massots, named Lucie Clap, became suspicious of the
cause of her master's death. These suspicions were
soon after confirmed in a startling manner. Lucie
discovered the torn fragments of a letter which had
been written by her mistress, and by putting the
pieces together she found that it was addressed to a
young man named Edouard Hubac, a medical
student and the son of one of the vice-presidents of
the Civil Tribunal of Marseilles. The letter also
contained conclusive evidence that M. Massot had
been done to death by his wife, and that Hubac was
her paramour.
Lucie Clap thereupon confided in a neighbour
named Madame Dhost, who, strangely enough, had
herself entertained suspicions concerning the death
of Massot, as she had seen Madame Massot and
Hubac repeatedly together in the neighbourhood.
So the matter was placed before the authorities, and
on December 3rd, 1903, Madame Massot and Hubac
were arrested and charged with the murder of M.
Massot. The body of the latter was exhumed, and
POISONERS 131
as the result of an analysis which was held it was
found that death was caused by the administration of
the corrosive poison, bi-chloride of mercury. Other
letters came to light, through the medium of which
it was made abundantly clear that this was among the
most odious and cold-blooded murders of the kind.
In Madame Massot we have another of those
morbid, sinister, callous, morally atrophied, and
phenomenally sensual females, who must arouse in
the breast of every decent and healthy-minded man
nothing but a feeling of repugnance and detestation.
Married to a man who kept her in comfort, and
treated her with every respect and consideration, the
mother of two young children, she abandoned herself
to the most debasing and profligate conduct. It
appeared that Hubac was the successor of another
paramour of Madame Massot's, who had tired of her
and so passed her on, as it were, to his young friend.
It would also appear that M. Massot had become
suspicious of his wife and was contemplating institut-
ing divorce proceedings, which furnished an addi-
tional motive for the crime. As such wretched
creatures usually do under such circumstances,
Madame Massot professed sincere love for her chil-
dren, but the genuineness of this may be gauged by
the fact that, in consequence of an injudicious utter-
ance made by one of them in connection with their
father's death, the fond mother, it transpired, con-
templated sending it to join that parent.
While in prison both Madame Massot and Hubac
took to writing many letters. As these, under the
132 WOMAN AND CRIME
procedure of French law, had to be investigated, the
trial in consequence being delayed many months. In
fact it did not take place till more than a year after,
namely, in December, 1904. Many of Madame
Massot's letters were written to her mother, in
some of which she sought to put the blame upon the
shoulders of her confederate. Even in this detail
criminal history repeats itself in a striking manner.
In one of the letters she said : " Pestered by my
lover to do so, I let him believe that I had adminis-
tered poison to my husband. I never did more than
pretend." But this statement, unfortunately for the
lady, was contradicted in an unpleasant manner by
the tracing to her possession of large quantities of
poison, and the finding in her husband's body the
presence of such poison. In another letter, however,
she confesses her guilt, although the motive she
advances for committing the crime does but empha-
sise the sheer hypocritical phase of her horrible
character: "It was because I did not wish to be
separated from my children by the threatened divorce
that in a moment of passion and of folly I decided on
this atrocious deed. It was in the excess of my
maternal love that I conceived this crime."
As has already been pointed out, she contemplated
murdering one of those same innocents. May all
children be spared such " maternal love " as that of
Madame Massot.
The trial was eventually held at the Aix Assize
Court, and culminated in a verdict of " Guilty "
against both prisoners. But again we have a stupid
POISONERS 133
jury allowing " extenuating circumstances," the fore-
man explaining that they did so in order to avoid the
necessity of passing the death sentence. He candidly
confessed that they saw no other grounds for adding
such a rider to their verdict. Thus they failed in
their duty in a feeble-minded way, because their duty
was to return a verdict of " Guilty " or " Not guilty "
according to the evidence, and not concern them-
selves about the death sentence. To extend leni-
ency, under any plea whatever, to such criminals as
Madame Massot is but to bring the law into contempt,
to put a slight upon justice and create a bad impres-
sion with the community at large. It is not for a jury
to decide about capital punishment, or to allow preju-
dice concerning it to influence their judgment.
Many a miscarriage of justice has been brought about
by this means, and guilty persons allowed to go free
for the sake of upholding an opinion. It is for others
to decide about capital punishment, and while such is
the law it is the duty of a jury to observe it.
The part considered by the authorities to have
been played by the man in the Massot crime may be
estimated by the respective sentences passed upon
the two. Thus, Madame Massot was sentenced to
penal servitude for life, and Hubac to fifteen years'
hard labour. I do not complain that Madame Mas-
sot's punishment was not severe enough it was
much heavier than that of death but I still think
that it is mischievous that verdicts in such cases as
this should be in any way associated with " extenu-
ating circumstances " or any form of leniency.
CHAPTER VIII
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE
WE now have to consider some cases of murder,
where death has been caused by means other than
that of poison. The first case we shall deal with is
that of the notorious Maria Manning.
In the year 1849 there lived at 3 Miniver Place,
Bermondsey, a Mr and Mrs Manning. The latter,
whose maiden name was De Roux, was a Swiss, and
before her marriage she had been employed as
lady's-maid to Lady Blantyre, a daughter of the
Duchess of Sutherland. Herself, it is said, of some-
what attractive appearance, and, outwardly, of
refinement, it is somewhat of a mystery how she came
to marry a man like Manning a coarse, unwieldy,
actually repulsive-looking man, who had formerly
been a guard on the Great Western Railway. It
was an odd match, but doubtless an explanation may
be found in the fact that Maria Manning was an
extremely sensual woman, and with such women
personal appearance and refinement in their marital
oartners are subordinated to other considerations.
After their marriage the Mannings kept an inn at
Taunton, a business which apparently proved a
134
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 135
failure, for they subsequently removed to Ber-
mondsey. Before her marriage Mrs Manning had
been wooed by a man named Patrick O'Connor, a
man of means and a gauger employed at the London
Docks. So loose were the morals of this woman
that, although married to Manning, she also extended
to O'Connor the privileges of a husband. And the
worst feature of this odious liaison was the fact that
it was known to and countenanced by Manning, who
was among the most degraded of mankind.
O'Connor lived at Greenwood Street, Mile End,
where Mrs Manning was a frequent and familiar
visitor. In fact she practically had the run of
O'Connor's rooms, having access to the place even
in his absence. O'Connor was also a somewhat
frequent visitor at Miniver Place, and it was upon
the occasion of one of the latter visits that the crime
in question was committed.
Mrs Manning's familiarity with the worldly affairs
of her paramour doubtless suggested to her the com-
mission of the crime, for in addition to being sensual,
she was also avaricious and selfish. She was likewise
clearly the leading spirit and the guiding mind in the
carrying out of the crime, for her husband, although
a complacent and unconscionable reprobate, was
unquestionably subservient to the will of his resolute
and unscrupulous spouse. Admitted the man was a
ready confederate, he still' played but a secondary
part in the grim business. Mrs Manning was the
" organizer."
The murder determined upon, the preparations for
1 36 WOMAN AND CRIME
carrying it out were made with business-like celerity.
A bushel of lime, a crowbar, and a strong shovel
having been procured, the following note was
despatched to the hapless gauger : Ci Wednesday
morning. Dear O'Connor We shall be happy to
see you to dine with us to-day, at half-past five.
Yours affectionately, Maria Manning." Perhaps one
of the grimmest invitations to a meal ever sent
through the post! The mere penning of this note
stamps Maria Manning as a criminal of a superlative
order. This was on August 9th. Vital events now
followed one another in swift succession. The
gauger responded to the invitation. About five
o'clock that afternoon he was seen and spoken to
near London Bridge, and about a quarter of an hour
later he was seen in Weston Street, Bermondsey.
He was not again seen alive except by the inmates
of 3 Miniver Place.
On the following day, the loth, Mrs Manning
called at Greenwood Street and inquired for
O'Connor, and remained at the house some time,
apparently waiting for him. Then she left. The
next day, the nth, she called again, and again
remained some time in O'Connor's rooms. Upon
this occasion she took away with her some
valuable papers belonging to O'Connor. The
same day Manning realised on some of the papers
with a stockbroker. O'Connor's absence from
business was now causing some alarm, and a friend
of his, being aware of his friendship with the
Mannings, called twice at Miniver Place and
(Photo : Tussaud and Sons.)
MRS. MARIA MANNING.
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 137
inquired for O'Connor. Upon each occasion he was
received by Mrs Manning, who declared that she
had not seen the gauger since the 8th. These visits
doubtless made the Mannings somewhat uneasy. On
the morning of the I3th Manning sold his furniture
to a dealer named Bainbridge for ^13, and although
the furniture was not to be removed till the following
day, Manning arranged to stay in Bainbridge's house
that night. He was evidently getting " nervy."
About five o'clock that afternoon Manning went to
Miniver Place, but found the house deserted his
wife had already taken to flight, having gone away in
a cab with her luggage. Incidentally she had taken
with her nearly all the plunder. Shortly after
Manning himself disappeared.
On the 1 7th the police gained access to the house
in Miniver Place and made a diligent search of it.
Noticing that the flagged pavement in the kitchen
had recently been disturbed, they had the stones
raised, when they came upon the body of the missing
gauger. He had been shot through the head, which
had also been badly fractured. The weapons used
were probably an air gun and the crowbar already
referred to. My impression is that he was first shot
by Mrs Manning while she was in the act of caressing
him, but this not proving fatal she set her husband to
finish him with the crowbar. She then, as we have
seen, possessed herself of the dead man's property.
On August 2ist Mrs Manning was apprehended at
Edinburgh, and in her box were found a large sum
of money in notes and gold, which she had obtained
138 WOMAN AND CRIME
by selling some of O'Connor's securities. "Also a
good deal of scrip, belonging to the deceased man,
was found in her possession. Manning was taken
on the 27th at Jersey. Both were brought to London
and tried at the Old Bailey, before Mr Justice
Cresswell. Mrs Manning was defended by Serjeant
Ballantine, and Manning by Serjeant Wilkins.
Each endeavoured to fix guilt upon the other, but
neither defence prevailed, both eventually being
sentenced to death. They were publicly executed
on November i3th, outside Horsemonger Lane
Gaol.
During the trial Mrs Manning preserved a calm
and composed demeanour, but directly after convic-
tion she burst forth into a violent denunciation of all
concerned. She declared that she was treated less
like a Christian than a wild beast. She was certainly
more the latter than the former. She wound up her
tirade with "Base, shameful England! " casting some
of the rue from the ledge of the dock into the well of
the court. However, England did not seem exactly
crestfallen at her denunciation, but rather felt relieved
at her passing hence. Her composure and demure
manner was undoubtedly assumed for the purpose of
creating a favourable impression with the jury, know-
ing, as most women do, that an appearance of weak-
ness and gentleness invariably appeals to the
opposite sex. And with shallow-minded juries
guilt has repeatedly triumphed in this way. A
similar subterfuge was resorted to by another
notorious criminal, Mrs Chard Williams, at a later
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 139
date and in the same dock, but, as in the case of
Mrs Manning, it happily failed. I shall deal with
the trial of Mrs Williams, at which I was present, in
another place, when dealing with the " baby farmers."
In the next case we have again to consider a crime
committed jointly by a man and a woman, and to
judge as to the part played in it by the woman. I
refer to the case of Mrs Goold, to what was known as
the Monte Carlo " trunk crime." Let us first pass in
review the various facts which constitute the story of
the crime :
Early on the morning of August 5th, 1907, a man
and a woman alighted from a first-class carriage of
the Monte Carlo express at Marseilles station. The
man was carrying a large kit-bag, and calling a porter
he requested the latter to remove a large trunk from
the luggage-van and despatch it to Charing Cross,
London. The man, knowing very little French, had
some difficulty in making himself understood, so the
services of an interpreter were procured and the
matter satisfactorily arranged with the goods office
clerk, who was named Pons. The man and his
female companion then made their way to the Hotel
du Louvre de la Paix, where they gave their name as
" Javasaah," and their nationality as English. The
name, however, was a peculiar one for English
people to bear.
The goods clerk went to the baggage-room for the
purpose of attending to the business of forwarding
the trunk, but when he got near the latter he was
struck with the unpleasant odour which emanated
140 WOMAN AND CRIME
from it. He also noticed, on looking close at it, that a
red liquid was oozing out from beneath the lid. Thus
becoming suspicious that all was not right, he went to
the Hotel du Louvre and asked for an explanation.
The latter was readily forthcoming, the travellers
declaring that the trunk was filled with poultry, which
accounted for the appearance of the blood. Pons,
however, was not satisfied with the explanation, so he
communicated his suspicions to the chief of the rail-
way police. The latter advised Pons to return to the
hotel and inform the travellers that the Customs
would not allow the trunk to be forwarded without an
examination first being made of the contents. Pons
accordingly returned to the hotel, where he encoun-
tered the man and woman on the steps, the man
carrying the kit-bag, and on the point of going out.
They appeared to be somewhat disturbed, but Pons
induced them to accompany him, Pons, in a cab to
the station. On the way they unsuccessfully endea-
voured to bribe both Pons and the driver to let them
get away. Evidently something serious was amiss.
Arrived at the station the trunk was at once opened,
when the contents were found to consist of the trunk
and two arms of a woman ! In the kit-bag which the
man was carrying were found the head and legs.
When questioned the man said he was a British
subject, and that his wife was a French woman named
Marie Giraudin. They both expressed themselves
astonished at the contents of the trunk, and declared
they knew nothing about the crime. They were
lodged in prison, and being separately questioned
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 141
gave contradictory accounts of the affair. The woman
stated that the body was that of a visitor, to her house,
who had been killed by her sweetheart, and that they
were merely disposing of the remains. She described
how the crime was committed, and how the body was
dealt with, which did not agree with the man's
version in any one particular. It was clearly enough
a mere invention.
Subsequent investigations brought the whole truth
to light, revealing one of the ugliest stories of crime
to be found anywhere recorded. It appeared that the
prisoners were a Mr and Mrs Goold, who for some
months had been living at the Villa Menesimy,
Monte Carlo. The body found was that of a Madame
Emma Erika Levin, a Swedish woman aged thirty-
seven, the widow of a merchant of Stockholm. She
also had been staying at Monte Carlo. She was a
woman who was fond of and who possessed a large
quantity of valuable jewellery. She had also lent the
Goolds, with whom she had become on friendly
terms, ^"40, for the repayment of which she was at
the time of the crime pressing. These two factors
Madame Levin's possession of the jewellery and the
outstanding debt of ^40 were mainly those which
led to the commission of the deed. To these two
factors, however, must be added the fact that at the
time the Goolds were in an impecunious condition.
The motive for the crime was therefore clearly that
of robbery. The Goolds were in the act of flying
from the scene of the crime when they were provi-
dentially tripped up at Marseilles.
142 WOMAN AND CRIME
The crime was committed at the Goolds' house on
Sunday, August 6th. At the time the Goolds had
staying with them a niece, a young woman aged 24,
named Girodin. She was absent from the Villa
Menesimy on the day of the crime, with which she
was in no way connected. On the Sunday afternoon
in question, then, the Goolds had invited Madame
Levin to take tea with them at five o'clock. It is a
significant fact that Madame Levin was not keen on
accepting this invitation, but as she was anxious to
get back her ,40, so that she might leave Monte
Carlo, she was thus unfortunately induced to go.
The Villa Menesimy was a large building, which was
let out in flats, the flat occupied by the Goolds being
on the first floor. Beneath this was the office of the
concierge, or housekeeper. About 5.30 on the
Sunday in question a young woman who was acting
as servant to the concierge heard the noise of a scuffle
on the floor above. Listening, she heard feeble cries,
and a stifled voice say, " Let me go." Naturally
curious, she ran upstairs and listened at the door of
the flat, but hearing nothing further and supposing
that it was merely a domestic squabble, she returned
downstairs again.
When, later, Mile. Girodin returned she was told
by her aunt that her uncle had been taken suddenly
ill, and that he had been spitting blood. She also
said they would have to go to Marseilles to see a
medical man. It was intended at first to go on the
following morning, but the journey was afterwards
postponed till the Monday night, in consequence, as
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 143
Mrs Goold said, of the heat. Eventually, as we
know, they went by a night express, taking the trunk
and kit-bag containing the remains of their victim
with them, and leaving Mile. Girodin by herself at
the flat. When the police came to search the flat
they soon discovered evidence of the crime in the
shape of splashes of blood, torn garments, and a
dagger. Madame Levin, it was clear, had first been
stunned by being hit over the head with a blunt
instrument, and then finished off by being stabbed
with the dagger found. She had been struck many
times, two wounds penetrating to the heart. The
body had then been dismembered and disembowelled
in the bathroom, and packed in the trunk and kit-bag.
Much of Madame Levin's jewellery was found in the
possession of the Goolds.
In brief, that is the history of this revolting crime,
which in many respects bears a striking resemblance
to the Devereaux and Grossman crimes committed
in this country, I have not the space in which to
recount in detail the lives of the Goolds, which had
been both varied and adventurous. The man un-
doubtedly came of a good Irish family, and was
known as " Sir " Vere Goold, a title to which he had
no legal right. He would appear to have been a
victim to the drug habit, in addition to being a
copious absorber of spirituous liquors. It is also
quite clear that he was subservient to the will of his
determined and unscrupulous wife.
Mrs Goold has been described as " an adventuress
of great energy," and as having " complete authority
144 WOMAN AND CRIME
over her weak husband." I think this may be taken
as a fairly accurate description of the relationship
existing between them. There can be no sort of
doubt that she was the instigator and the actual
perpetrator of the murder of Madame Levin, making
her husband an assistant and a confederate. When
she was examined after being taken into custody she
was found to have a number of formidable bruises
about the body, the presence of which she sought to
explain by saying that she had fallen from a cab.
This was clearly false, for the bulk of the bruises
could not have been so caused. Mrs Goold was a
French woman, formerly a Marie Girodin, and Goold
appeared to have been her third husband. She was
first married to a young fellow at St Marcellin,
against the wishes of her parents. She left home
shortly after. Her subsequent career amply justified
the description of her as " an adventuress of great
energy." She travelled a great deal, held many
situations, and engaged in a variety of enterprises.
Her first husband unhappily or should we say
happily? died, but under what circumstances does
not appear to have been made clear. Her second
husband was a Captain Wilkinson, whom, as in the
case of her first husband, she married in spite of
opposition. It was, in fact, the way of this woman
to do things in spite of opposition, in fulfilling the
primary purpose of her life of self-gratification.
Three years later Wilkinson died, but again under
what circumstances does not appear to have been
known. About this time she was in such an impe-
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 145
cunious state that she was forced to sell her jewels,
with the proceeds of which she started a dressmak-
ing business in London. It was at this stage of her
career that she met Goold, and marriage now having
become a kind of habit with her, she married him. I
do not put it that he married her, because that would
not be exactly accurate. She married him. With her
third partner the third only so far as we know she
resumed her predatory peregrinations, going from
place to place, acquiring money by devious ways
getting money, honestly if it was convenient, but
getting it until at length she descended upon Monte
Carlo. It seems highly probable that she went there
on acquisitiveness bent, and not with any intention of
making money by legitimate means. She became a
confirmed gambler, and a frequent visitor to the
Casino. Her husband would appear not to have
been a gambler, for he was many times seen waiting
outside the Casino while his wife was inside " plung-
ing." He also, it was stated, not infrequently spent
nocturnal vigils at the Villa Menesimy while his
" energetic " spouse was wooing fortune at the tables.
Mrs Goold was not fated to " break the bank " ; in
fact her luck on the whole would appear to have been
rather bad, a circumstance which doubtless precipi-
tated the murder of the unfortunate Madame Levin.
Finding herself in low water, Mrs Goold set about
replenishing her coffers, as was the custom of her
life, no matter what the results might be to others.
In fact her motto might have been " Damn the con-
sequences." It is a detail that the consequences were
K
146 WOMAN AND CRIME
eventually destined to damn her. To such women as
Mrs Goold a husband is a very convenient article to
have about the house, because he can be made use of
as a kind of screen to hide much that is discreditable
in their lives. They thus acquire an outward appear-
ance of respectability, which serves to lull suspicion.
Well, the Goolds were eventually sent back to
Monte Carlo to stand their trial, they having in the
meantime both made stupid and false confessions
which deceived nobody. They were in the end both
convicted, and it is evidence as to which was the
instigator and prime mover in the crime that the
woman was sentenced to death and the man to penal
servitude for life. The sentence on the woman was
subsequently commuted to penal servitude for life.
What became of the luckless young woman, Mile.
Girodin? This poor girl, being deprived of her
guardians, was compelled to seek a situation.
M. Savard, the examining magistrate who conducted
the investigation into the crime, felt so much pity for
her that he took her into his service. But the shock
of the terrible business had such an effect upon her
health that she fell into a decline, which necessitated
her removal to the Monaco Hospital, where she soon
after died. Thus we find this young woman,
possessed of considerable personal beauty, upon the
threshold of what might have been a bright and
happy life, pressed into the grave beneath a weight
of woe at the early age of 27, as a result of another's
crime.
Alas, for the innocent!
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 147
The Goolds were removed to the French penal
prison at Cayenne. In July, 1908, Mrs Goold con-
tracted typhoid fever, of which she died. In
September, 1909, Goold committed suicide. Thus,
as in the Weiss case, we have nearly all the dramatis
personae wiped out.
In Gabrielle Bompard and the man Eyraud we
have a criminal couple similar to the Goolds, with the
woman taking the lead and the man acting the part of
confederate. Eyraud was Bompard's paramour, and
between them they planned the murder of a bailiff
named Gouffe*, who was also a recipient of Bompard's
" favours." The behaviour of this woman during the
commission of the crime ranks in my mind as a record
of callousness. The preparations for the crime were
somewhat elaborate. In a house to which the victim
was to be lured a kind of gallows was erected and con-
cealed behind some curtains. There was a rope or cord
attached, with a loop already at the end. Bompard
brought Gouffe, who was an old man, to the house
in question, where Eyraud was already concealed
behind the curtains. Near the latter was a sofa, and
upon this sat Bompard and her companion. The
infatuated old process-server proceeded to make love
to Gabrielle, who fondled him in return. And as she
fondled him she gradually drew him nearer to the
curtains. They, of course, had their backs to the
latter. Unseen by Goufte, Bompard got hold of the
noose, which was thrust through the curtains, and as
the old man appealed to her for a kiss she slipped the
noose over his head, and assisted her confederate to
148 WOMAN AND CRIME
hoist him aloft. They both then stood and watched
the old man's dying struggles.
When the old man was dead they packed the body
in a trunk, which they left at a railway station. They
then escaped to America. The motive of the
crime was robbery. The body having been dis-
covered and clues obtained, the police went in
pursuit, eventually taking both in America. They
were tried in Paris, the defence set up by the woman
being that she was acting under the hypnotic influence
of Eyraud. However, under all the circumstances,
it was scarcely likely that such a defence should
succeed, albeit Bompard made a pretence of being
afraid to look at the male prisoner during the course
of the trial. Both were convicted, the man being
sentenced to death and the woman to penal servitude
for life a distinction which was hardly justified by
the facts. Possibly the hypnotic theory had
something to do with it. Eyraud was duly executed,
although this time he was not called upon to erect
the gallows. Bompard, having served a number of
years in penal servitude, was eventually released from
the Clermont prison. She afterwards wrote her
" Confessions," which doubtless formed interesting
reading, although they may not necessarily have been
truthful.
CHAPTER IX
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE continued
FOR our next case we shall go to Italy and make the
acquaintance of two more or less distinguished female
criminals, named respectively the Countess Bonmar-
tini and Rosina Bonetti. But first let us briefly
review the details of the tragedy with which they
were associated, one as the instigator of it and the
other as one of the actual perpetrators.
On September 2nd, 1902, then, the neighbours of
a house on the Via Mazzini, Bologna, complained to
the local police of an unpleasant odour which eman-
ated from an apartment occupied by a Count Bon-
martini. They said that it " poisoned the staircase
of the house." Accordingly the police effected an
entrance to the apartment in question, and were
somewhat disturbed at what they beheld. Upon
entering the bedroom they observed the body of a
man upon the floor, which was in an advanced stage
of decomposition. Upon an examination of it being
made it was seen that a very desperate and blood-
thirsty murder had been committed, for the body bore
a large number of ugly wounds, one of which had
severed the carotid artery, and another had pierced
149
ISO WOMAN AND CRIME
the heart. The other wounds were distributed over
the breast, arms, face, and the back of the neck, in
which there were no fewer than fifteen deep stabs.
It was clear that the wounds had been caused by a
long, thin instrument, evidently a dagger. The
body was identified as that of Count Bonmartini.
That there had been a desperate struggle was made
apparent by the condition in which the room was.
The furniture, for instance, was overturned, empty
jewel cases lay about, and the victim's pocket-book,
minus its contents, was lying open on a chair. The
Count's watch-chain had also been forcibly torn from
his waistcoat. It would appear, therefore, that rob-
bery had been the motive for the crime. An empty
champagne bottle and two glasses made it clear that
the dead man had unsuspiciously entertained in
friendly intercourse his murderer before being
dispatched. A peculiar discovery was that of some
elegant female underclothing, which lay upon the
bed. I say peculiar, because it was carefully laid
upon the bed. The fact that it was in no way dis-
turbed, in spite of the otherwise abundant evidence
of a fierce struggle having taken place, was also
singular. It was likewise vital to the elucidation of
the mystery, because the underwear was obviously
placed where it was found after the commission of
the crime. It was therefore deposited there in order
to create an erroneous impression as to the identity
of the murderer or murderers. The cunning of this
device may be appreciated when it is known that the
late Count Bonmartini was in the habit of associating
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 151
somewhat intimately with certain ladies of ease and
elegance whose moral characters were not of such
pristine excellence as their wardrobes.
But cunning as the device was it was easily seen
through. If you associate this underlinen with the
empty pocket-book, the empty jewel-case, and the
missing watch-chain, the only inference to be drawn
therefrom is that the murder was committed for the
purpose of robbery by a lady of the class described,
who had been received in his room by the Count;
by her and a possible confederate. But this does not
fit in with the nature and number of the wounds. If
merely robbery had been the object of the murder,
why was the body so mutilated? The fact that
there were so many and such serious wounds points
clearly to the fact that revenge and not robbery had
been the motive of the crime. That being so, the
underlinen, the empty pocket-book, the empty jewel-
case, and the missing watch-chain are all connected
one with the other as details of a ruse which was
adopted to divert suspicion. Who, then, was the
murderer, or were the murderers?
Upon the wall of the room was the bloody imprint
of a woman's hand. I do not know whether the
police of Italy had then adopted the finger-print
system, but if so this blood-mark should have been
an invaluable clue to them. Did it come there by
accident, or was it impressed there designedly to
further strengthen the impression it was sought to
create that the murder had been committed by a
certain class of female? In the light of subsequent
WOMAN AND CRIME
discoveries I am inclined to favour the latter theory.
There were also found two towels soaked in blood.
The police, curiously enough, adopted the theory
that the murder had indeed been committed by a
woman of the kind referred to, and for whom they
made elaborate search. They also interrogated
well-nigh every woman of doubtful character in
Bologna. They, in addition, photographed the im-
print of the bloodstained hand, copies of which they
sent all over Italy. But all these efforts proved
futile, and the murderer or murderers remained at
large.
On September nth that is to say, nine days after
the murder the truth suddenly came to light in a
most dramatic manner. Early on that morning there
walked, or staggered, into the office of the magistrate
entrusted with the investigation of the case, an
elderly man, who was pale, haggard and dishevelled.
This was Professor Murri. In a state of agitation
he informed the magistrate that the murder of Bon-
martini had been committed by his, Professor
Murri's, own son, Tullio Murri! At first the police
would not believe him, but soon afterwards it became
only too painfully evident that he was speaking the
truth. It appeared that Tullio Murri, who was a
barrister, committed the murder, with the assistance
of his mistress, Rosina Bonetti, who was in the service
of his sister, the Countess, to revenge what he con-
sidered to be the ill-treatment of his wife by the Count.
The developments which ensued were remarkable.
It appeared that Count Bonmartini and his wife
(Photo : Tussaud and Sons.)
CATHERINE WEBSTER, EXECUTED FOR THE MURDER OF HER
MISTRESS AT RICHMOND.
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 153
were an ill-matched couple. She was a woman of
intelligence, keen-witted, and with an adroit mind ;
in addition to which, as events proved, she was also
both unscrupulous and lascivious. She was the
daughter of the well-known Professor Murri. The
Count was, on the contrary, although a man of ancient
and distinguished lineage and of great wealth, not
blessed with a superabundance of mental pabulum.
He shone in no intellectual sense. He possessed very
limited capacity for acquiring and retaining know-
ledge. The Murris in consequence, and intellectu-
ally, regarded and treated him with contempt; the
Count reciprocated this sentiment in a social sense.
The Murris were avowed Radicals, the Count was an
old-fashioned Tory. Thus in time a strong mutual
aversion arose between them, which culminated in
the tragedy under notice.
While still a girl the Countess Bonmartini, then
Linda Murri, had for a companion a pupil of her
father's named Secchi, a young fellow who subse-
quently developed a most odious character. Young
as she then was she conceived something of a passion
for Secchi, which, her parents becoming aware of,
led to Secchi being dismissed from the place and for-
bidden the house. Later the girl met Count Bon-
martini, who fell in love with her, the two subse-
quently being married. In course of time two chil-
dren were born to them, and the Countess would
appear to have been all that a wife and mother should
be. But she failed to stand the test of time, and
eventually there appeared the rift within the lute.
154 WOMAN AND CRIME
There were frequent quarrels, and the two became
estranged.
Among the Countess's acquaintances was a
notorious Marchioness, whose relations with the
opposite sex had been, and still were, vicarious and
fervid. Among her " friends " was Secchi, who had
by this time become a full-blown doctor Dr Carlo
Secchi. Incidentally, he had also become a most
obnoxious and detestable adulterer, morally among
the most degraded of mankind. The Countess knew
of these circumstances, yet she went to the house of
the Marchioness. Not to labour this part of the narra-
tive, suffice it to say that the Countess Linda became
the ready mistress of the odious Secchi. When a
woman falls she falls precipitately, usually never to
rise again. This was the Countess Linda's fall, the
first step in the wreckage of, not only her own life,
but that of many others.
The next step was that of murder. The Count
had evidently become objectionable to her, as she
had apparently become to him. He was also some-
what of an obstacle to the carrying on of her liaison
with her " early love." So she decided in her own
mind that he must be " removed." She set about it
in a very cunning way. She evidently lacked the
courage to do the business herself, so she inspired
others to accomplish it. She very artfully exclaimed,
in the presence of her brother Tullio, whom she
knew entertained very lively feelings of animosity
towards her husband, " My God ! Would that
someone would rid me of the soft-brained bigot! "
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 155
Her brother thereupon consented to render her that
service.
Tullio took counsel with Secchi, and it was at first
decided to carry out the murder by means of poison.
Certain objections to this having arisen, however,
they next endeavoured to induce another doctor, a
Dr Naldi, to commit the murder with a dagger,
Naldi's reward being "anything he could find in the
place." But Naldi would appear to have been
unable to overcome his scruples or his fears, and
probably had no hand in the murder. True, he was
arrested, but he was afterwards released and appeared
at the subsequent trial as a witness. Tullio would
then appear to have decided to commit the murder
himself, with the assistance of his mistress, Rosina
Bonetti. The value of the latter as a confederate
may be gauged by the fact that the Count had already
cast acquisitive eyes on her.
| A few days before the murder the Count decided
to send his wife to Switzerland. He was to accom-
pany her there, afterwards returning to Bologna.
She contrived, however, to spend a day or two at
Venice, the object of which was made clear when it
was known that she there had a private consultation
with Tullio and Rosina Bonetti. It was known
when the Count would return to Bologna, and the
day before Tullio and Bonetti obtained access to his
flat, and there awaited him. I think it is fairly easy
to reconstruct the actual murder. Tullio, armed
with the dagger, lay in hiding. Bonetti made her
presence known to the Count, with whom she
156 WOMAN AND CRIME
engaged in suggestive dalliance. While she thus
held him unconscious of his peril, Tullio crept from
his hiding-place and fell upon the Count unawares.
Physically the latter was more than a match for
Tullio, so the murderer must have come up behind
the Count and attacked him, a circumstance which
is confirmed by the many wounds which were found
at the back of the neck. Thus the Count was taken
at a disadvantage. Yet in spite of this he clearly
made good fight for his life, struggling until he fell
from loss of blood. It is also quite possible that
Bonetti was likewise armed with a dagger, and that
she attacked him simultaneously in the front, which
would account for the wounds on the breast.
All the lot were arrested, the Countess, Bonetti,
Tullio and Secchi, Tullio being taken in Switzer-
land, whither he had fled. After two years' prepara-
tion, the trial took place at Turin. All were con-
victed and sentenced to various terms of penal
servitude.
What raises the story from what one might call
muddy melodrama to the heights of tragedy is the
confession of Professor Murri, which savours of the
stoic heroism of a Roman father sacrificing his own
son. In a voice quivering with emotion he said,
" Seek no further for the assassin of Count Bonmar-
tini, for I have come to tell you his name. It is my
son Tullio." But how did he come to know who did
it? Did Tullio confess to him, or did he arrive at
that conclusion himself through the medium of sur-
rounding circumstances ?
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 157
In the next case it is again our pleasing task to
admit full mitigating circumstances. We have not
this time to deal with a repugnant and portentous
criminal, but one who, though grievously sinning,
was gravely sinned against. I refer to the case of
Emma, or " Kitty," Byron, who was convicted at the
Old Bailey of the murder of Arthur Reginald Baker
by stabbing him with a clasp-knife.
It appeared that Miss Byron had been living with
Baker, who was a kind of hanger-on at the Stock
Exchange. He was a man of very indifferent char-
acter. He was married, and his wife had already
served him with a citation of divorce, Miss Byron be-
ing named as co-respondent. Baker had behaved very
cruelly towards Miss Byron, who, however, in spite
of this and woman-like, entertained invincible affec-
tion for him. They had had frequent and bitter
quarrels, so frequent and so bitter, in fact, that their
landlady had been forced to give them notice to quit.
Their strained relations culminated in Baker desert-
ing Miss Byron, and on Monday, November loth,
the former left their lodgings with the expressed in-
tention of not returning again. He went straight to
the Stock Exchange and Miss Byron followed soon
after. She had no intention of allowing him to
depart in this manner. On her way she entered a
cutler's shop and purchased a formidable clasp-knife.
She subsequently entered the post-office in Lombard
Court, where she scribbled a note to Baker, request-
ing him to come to her as she wished to speak to him
" particularly." This she sent to the Exchange by
158 WOMAN AND CRIME
messenger. There can be no question as to her
intention, for she held the clasp-knife open in her
muff. She had also fortified herself with brandy.
In response to the note Baker came to her, and the
two stood for a few minutes talking in Lombard
Court. They were seen there by several persons.
What transpired at that interview nobody but their
two selves knew. One was dead and could not
speak, nor could the other speak, for at that time the
Act allowing a prisoner to give evidence in his own
defence was not passed. Thus it was never known
what passed between them. But evidently some-
thing the man said provoked the woman to a pitch of
fury, for she suddenly fell upon him and stabbed
him to the heart. He collapsed to the ground and
expired almost immediately. She then stooped
down and kissed him.
She was tried at the Old Bailey on December i7th
following. The judge was Mr Justice Darling, Mr
Charles Mathews (now Sir Charles Mathews, the
Public Prosecutor) appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr H. F. Dickens, K.C., for the defence. She
was eventually convicted and sentenced to death,
the jury, practically at the direction of the judge,
adding a recommendation of mercy to their verdict.
I was present during the hearing. The case was
remarkable for the eloquent and impassioned appeal
on behalf of the prisoner made by Mr Dickens, which
deeply moved everyone who heard it. It was a posi-
tive triumph of forensic eloquence. The case was
also remarkable for the extreme mental anguish
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 159
exhibited by the prisoner. Her face was livid, the
pallor being somewhat accentuated by contrast with
her raven-black hair. Her mouth was agape and
her whole body was trembling from head to foot. It
was as though she was writhing under some painful
physical operation. And it endured throughout the
whole hearing. I had never before, nor have I since,
witnessed such terrible suffering in the dock. Now
and again her counsel cast a commiserating glance
towards her, and was obviously much moved.
The death sentence was afterwards commuted to
one of penal servitude for life. Having served six
years at Aylesbury, she was released and became an
inmate of Lady Henry Somerset's industrial colony
at Reigate, Surrey.
These crimes of passion committed by women are
invariably the outcome of vicarious relations with
the opposite sex. I am afraid, however, it will not
profit us much to moralise thereon. It is, though,
worthy of note that the victims are invariably aiders
and abettors in the crime, as it were, by the provoca-
tion they offer to the assailant.
We shall cross to America for our next case. The
people of the United States are noted for " tall talk "
and " big things " generally, and it must be admitted
that few countries have produced such a colossal
criminal as Mrs Belle Gunness, known as the
" American Delilah." True, she was a Norwegian,
but she had been resident in the States most of her
life and was an American subject.
Mrs Gunness simply made murder her trade, and
160 WOMAN AND CRIME
despatched her victims with the readiness and regu-
larity of a machine. She is described as a big, coarse
woman, of repulsive appearance, although this may
have been somewhat of an exaggeration, for she
must have possessed some sort of attractions for
men. She had been married twice and had three
children, one of the latter apparently being an
adopted child. Both her husbands she had mur-
dered for their insurance money. One she poisoned
and the other she killed by causing a heavy weight
to fall upon his head. She then took up her resi-
dence at a farm at La Porte, Indiana, which subse-
quently came to be known as " Murder Farm."
Her method was to advertise for a husband in a
matrimonial paper, stipulating that he must be
possessed of certain means. She then induced the
applicants to come to the farm, bringing money with
them, when she promptly murdered them and buried
their bodies in the grounds.
Her letters were perfect masterpieces of hypocrisy
and dissimulation. I extract the following from one
of them :
" There are seventy-five acres of land and also
all kinds of crops, apples, plums and currants.
All this is pretty near paid for. I am alone with
three small children. The smallest is a little boy of
2, the largest are girls, all frisky and well. I lost
my husband by an accident five years ago, and since
then I have tried to get along as well as I could with
what help I could hire. I am getting tired of this,
and found it not well to trust others with so much.
(Photo : Tussaud and Sons.)
MADAME DUMOLLARD, ASSOCIATED WITH HER HUSBAND IN THE
COMMISSION OF INNUMERABLE MURDERS OF SERVANT GIRLS
OUTSIDE PARIS.
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 161
It is too much for me to look after things, and things
are not as I want them. Anyway, my idea is to take
a partner to whom I can trust everything. As we
have no acquaintances ourselves, I have decided that
every applicant I have considered favourably must
make a satisfactory deposit of cash or security. I
think that is the best way to keep away grafters, who
are always looking for opportunities. Now, if you
think you are able in some way to put up 1000
dollars in cash we can talk matters over personally.
If you cannot, it is worth while to consider. I would
not care for you as a hired man, as I am tired of
that, and need a little rest in my home and near my
children. With friendly regards,
" MRS P. S. GUNNESS."
At the beginning of May, 1908, the farm at La
Porte was burned down, the supposed bodies of Mrs
Gunness and her three children being found in the
ruins. Shortly after a man named Ray Lamphere,
who had been employed at the farm as a labourer,
and who was supposed to have a guilty knowledge of
the murders committed there, was arrested and
charged with having set fire to the farm. The news of
the fire reaching the ears of a Mr Asle Heldgren, he
reported to the authorities that his brother, Andrew
Heldgren, had gone to the farm and never been seen
again. Asle had written to Mrs Gunness on the
subject of his brother's disappearance, and in reply
received the following letter:
" DEAR, GOOD BROTHER OF THE BEST FRIEND I
HAVE IN THE WORLD, It is with tears flooding my
L
162 WOMAN AND CRIME
eyes and a heart overburdened with grief that I
write you about your dear brother, my sweet-
heart. He has gone from here. I know not
where. As I think of him my heart bleeds. May
God bless him, wherever he may be. I loved him
tenderly. From the first time I saw him I knew
that he was the man I loved. He came here and
was in my home for oh! such a short time. All was
pleasant between us, and the last words I had with
him were those of love. I could scarcely restrain
myself from throwing my arms about his neck every
time I saw him. He was the best man in the world.
Where he has gone I don't know. As I lay awake
at nights thinking of him I wonder where he is and
if he is safe. I would do anything in the world to
find him. He left my house seemingly happy, and
since that time in January I have not seen him. I
will go to the end of the world to find him. I love
him and will help you. Sell off everything he
owns, get together as much of your own money as
you can, and come here. During the first part of
May we will then go and seek him. Bring the
money, all in cash. It will be easier to handle it this
way. Oh, my dear, good brother-in-law, what a
happy reunion we will have when we find my own
Andrew! I will fly to his arms and never, oh, no,
never be separated from him again. Do not neglect
to bring the money in cash. I will be ready to go
when you arrive. Yours, in great sorrow,
" MRS BELLE GUNNESS."
When the horrible creature wrote the above she
had already murdered the man and buried his body
in her grounds! It will be seen that she was then
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 163
endeavouring to induce his brother to come to the
farm to meet with a similar fate. The woman was
like some ravening, mediaeval monster. Fortu-
nately, before Asle Heldgren could make up his mind
whether or no to accept the invitation came the news
of the fire. As a result of the communication made
to them by Heldgren, the police proceeded to dig
the grounds of the farm, when in a very short time
they disinterred many bodies, some of which were
identified as those of men who had been " missing."
In most cases the heads had been fractured and the
bodies buried in lime. The body of Andrew Held-
gren was among the first few found. The letter
written by the atrocious female which lured him to
his death was as follows :
:c To THE DEAREST FRIEND IN THE WORLD, No
woman in this world is happier than I am. I know you
are now to come to me and be my own. I can tell
from your letters that you are the man I want. It does
not take me long to tell when I like a person, and
you I like better than anybody in the world. The
King will be no happier than you when you get here.
As for the Queen, her joy will be small compared
with mine. I think how we will enjoy each other's
company. You are the dearest man in the whole
world. We will be all alone with each other. Can
you conceive anything nicer? You will love my
farm, sweetheart. In all La Porte county there are
none that will compare with it. (This was true, for-
tunately for the county of La Porte.) It is on a nice
green slope, near two lakes. The breeze is fine,
and it is very beautiful here. All my neighbours
1 64 WOMAN AND CRIME
are kind and lovable. You will love them I know,
sweetheart. Andrew, I think of you constantly.
When I hear your name mentioned, and this is
generally when one of the dear children speaks of
you or I hear myself humming it to the words of an
old love-song, it is beautiful music to my ears. My
heart beats in wild rapture for you, my Andrew. I
love you. Come prepared to stay here for ever.
When you find what a nice farming country this is
you will not leave for the world. It will suit you
and me. With many kisses,
" MRS BELLE GUNNESS."
In a letter to another man appeared the following
significant passage : " When people come to visit
me they never want to go away again. Next July
will be a fine time for you to come to La Porte,
and you will never want to go away again. "
In the following November Lamphere was con-
victed and sentenced to an indeterminate period of
imprisonment, ranging from one to twenty-one
years'. He probably fired the farm by way of revenge,
after having had some dispute with Gunness.
It is doubtful if any age or nation ever produced
a more callous, portentous, more prodigious criminal
than Mrs Belle Gunness. The very magnitude of
her crimes prompts one to question her sanity. If
she were not insane, however, then she was a vile
outrage on femininity a monstrous distortion of
human nature.
As a pronounced type of human vampire the
Countess Tarnovski occupies a permanent place in
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 165
criminal annals. As usually happens with such
women, she was possessed of certain personal attrac-
tions and a subtle influence over men which seemed
to render them helpless in her hands. The crime
which brought her career to the fore was committed
in September, 1907, and consisted of the murder of
a Russian Count named Kamarovsky at Venice by
a young fellow named Naumoff. Countess Maria
Nikolyeffna Tarnovski was a woman of twenty-eight,
descended from an Irish family, and a native of Kieff.
She had been divorced from her husband, who had
killed in a duel the man whom the Countess had
committed herself with. The Countess then took
up with the Count Kamarovsky referred to above,
who was a colonel in the Russian army and a man
of considerable wealth.
In addition to Kamarovsky the Countess had other
lovers. One was a Moscow solicitor named Prilukoff,
who had defrauded some of his clients on her behalf,
and another the young fellow Naumoff, already men-
tioned, who came of a good family, and who was
madly in love with the Countess. The latter had
promised to marry him and contrived to make him
jealous of Kamarovsky, whom she represented as
an obstacle to their union. She did this for an
ulterior purpose. She had induced the Count to
insure his life for ,20,000 and hand the policy over
to her. She then plotted his assassination so that
she might recover the money in addition to getting
possession of his fortune, he having made a will in
her favour.
166 WOMAN AND CRIME
She had also promised to marry Prilukoff, and en-
deavoured to get him to murder the Count, but the
Moscow solicitor would seem to have funked the
task, much as he was infatuated with the woman.
She succeeded with Naumoff, however, who, arming
himself with a loaded revolver, made his way to the
Count's house and shot the latter while he was in bed.
In order to make it appear that she had had no hand
in the crime, the Countess communicated with the
police, warning them that Naumoff, who, she said,
had a grudge against the Count, had expressed his
intention of committing the murder, and informing
them the time he intended to be at the Count's
house. The result was that two police officers
stationed themselves outside the house for the
purpose of taking the murderer. They did, in fact,
arrest a man they saw coming from the house,
but he turned out to be the wrong man, Naumoff
having effected his escape by another means. It was
proved that Prilukoff was a confederate with the
Countess in arranging the murder of the Count.
All three were taken, the men both making confes-
sions. All three were convicted and duly punished.
The Countess Tarnovski's case furnishes an illus-
tration of to what lengths an evil-disposed woman
may carry the influence of her sex. Every man who
came under her influence became as clay in the
hands of the potter. They were prepared to render
any service she might demand of them. One cannot
resist the conclusion that such women derive their
power over men from a hypnotic source.
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 167
In June, 1907, occurred the shooting of Edward
Guerin, the man who escaped from Devil's Is-
land, by a criminal named Charles Smith, a crime
which it was proved had been instigated by that
very dangerous woman, May Vivienne Churchill,
otherwise known as " Chicago May." Although
no murder took place in this instance, Guerin being
fortunately only wounded in the foot, murder was
unquestionably intended. Also the woman, May, it
was made clear, had in the past caused deaths to
men in the course of her criminal career. Thus I
deal with the case in this place.
It appeared that the woman Churchill had formerly
been closely associated with Guerin, who, however,
had since " washed his hands " of her. By way of
revenge she had reported him as a convict escaped
from the French penal settlement, as a result of
which Guerin was arrested and held for extradition.
He was confined at Brixton Prison for over a year,
where he met the man Smith. Smith was afterwards
released and got in touch with Churchill, whom he
would appear to have informed that Guerin, should he
regain his liberty, meditated reprisals towards her in
return for her treachery in betraying him. Guerin was
soon afterwards released, he having won the case
against his extradition in the High Court. This fact
must have decided Churchill, always a resolute and
unscrupulous woman, to take the bull by the horns
and attack Guerin first. So she enlisted the services
of Smith to do the shooting. Accordingly, on the
night of June i6th, Churchill and Smith went in
1 68 WOMAN AND CRIME
search of Guerin. Smith was armed with a loaded
revolver, and Churchill carried a formidable knife.
While they were driving along in a hansom cab
they saw Guerin near the Tube station, Bernard
Street, Bloomsbury. They pulled the cab up,
jumped out, and Smith fired five shots at Guerin,
one only, as we have seen, taking effect. Both were
taken.
They were tried at the Old Bailey on July 25th
before Mr Justice Darling. Guerin, in the witness
box, declared that he had had no intention of molest-
ing Churchill, nor did he say anything of the kind to
Smith. He further said that it was in consequence
of the treachery of Churchill that he had in the
first instance been sent to Devil's Island. Both
being convicted, Smith was sentenced to penal
servitude for life, and Churchill to fifteen years'
penal servitude. Upon hearing his sentence,
Smith burst forth into a volley of violent oaths
and curses, directed towards the judge. Churchill,
however, received her sentence apparently unmoved.
It were well if neither ever came out of prison
again.
The woman Churchill was a thorough-paced
criminal of a very dangerous type. Again we find
the female criminal with an attractive exterior and
with considerable influence over men. Churchill
used her influence in a most dastardly manner. She
had been in the habit of getting men into compromis-
ing positions and then blackmailing them. As a
consequence many of her victims were known to
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 169
have committed suicide. She was one of the most
notorious women in London and Paris. She was even
dangerous to her own criminal class, for she was
treacherous to a degree. She was born in Ireland
Ireland, by the way, has given us many notorious
female criminals but married an American and
became an American subject. When you have a
combination of Ireland and America in a female
criminal, you may be sure that you have something
fiendish to deal with. Churchill, or " Chicago May,"
had been many times convicted and sentenced to
prison before she appeared in company with Smith
at the Old Bailey. No doubt her latest sentence will
effectually spoil her personal appearance and thus
deprive her of her most dangerous weapon as a
criminal.
In Paris they have a class of female criminals who,
young and possessed of good looks, place themselves
at the head of a gang of " Apaches," the members of
which they direct and assist in carrying out murder-
ous assaults for the purpose of robbery. One of
these Amazons bore the fanciful title of " Casque
d'Or," which was conferred upon her in recognition
of the beauty and luxuriance of her reddish, golden
hair. Another, named Chiffonette, also bore the title
of " La Reine de La Courtille." She was the terror
of that place. She was a tall, strong young woman
of twenty-three, extremely cunning and of ferocious
courage. In 1908 a very pretty young girl of
eighteen named Palmyre Quignon, nicknamed Pepe,
became head of the Belleville Apaches. She sue-
170 WOMAN AND CRIME
ceeded Chiffonette, who had gone for a lengthy stay
at the St Lazare prison, where she had been sent for
killing another female Apache known as Andrea, but
whose real name was Louise Bonami. It appeared
that Chiffonette's " man," an Apache named or known
as Dede, had been betrayed to the police by some-
body and sent away. Chiffonette suspected Andrea
of being the one who informed the police. One
morning about three o'clock Chiffonette, in company
with a number of other girls of her own class, was
strolling down the Faubourg du Temple, when she
caught sight of Andrea coming towards her. In-
stantly she rushed upon her and a fight ensued.
Fighting desperately the two girls rolled over in the
road. Presently there came a shriek, and then a
pause. Chiffonette rose to her feet, but Andrea never
moved. She had been stabbed to the heart with a
stiletto. Chiffonette went into hiding, but the police
found her, and subsequently, as already stated, she
was sent to St Lazare.
The girl Quignon, or Pepe, was taken a fancy to
by what she herself would term an " aristo," or
aristocrat, who wanted to marry her. She appeared
to have lived with him for a couple of months,
during which she spent a large sum of money, then
grew tired of her " aristo " and returned to her old
haunts.
It was thought that the abolition of capital punish-
ment led to an increase of murderous violence on
the part of the Apaches, in consequence of
which it was revived. But there was no proof
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 171
that capital punishment decreased such crime to any
extent.
We frequently find crime among women intimately
associated with vicarious sexual relationship, some-
times even the immediate outcome of it. This is
not often the case with male criminals, except in
cases of motiveless crime, or where the crime has a
very feeble motive, such as those I have already dealt
with in a former chapter. Adultery had a good deal
to do with the crime of Madame Giriat, who contrived
the murder of her mistress, Mile. Eugenie Fougere.
The latter lady was rather dubiously described as a
" professional beauty." She had been an actress,
was possessed of a good deal of valuable jewellery,
and was living in style at Aix-les-Bains. She had a
maid and a companion, the latter being the Madame
Giriat already mentioned. One day in September,
on the 2ist, 1902, Mile. Fougere and her maid were
found strangled in the house at Aix-les-Bains. The
companion, Madame Giriat, was bound and gagged,
but was otherwise uninjured. Mile. Fougere's
jewellery was missing. It was clear somebody had
effected an entry into the house and committed the
crime, but who that somebody was remained a
mystery for some months.
Suspicion, however, was at length directed
towards the companion, Madame Giriat, who was
" shadowed " by the police. She was afterwards
summoned to appear before the Chief of Police at
Paris, when she was subjected to a severe interroga-
tory. Having fenced with her examiners for about
172 WOMAN AND CRIME
three hours, she broke down and made a confession.
She said that the crime had been committed by her
lover, a man named Bassot, who had, she further
stated, planned and carried it out himself for the
purpose of obtaining possession of her mistress's
jewellery. But subsequent events proved that
this was not altogether true. Madame Giriat,
finding herself in a desperate position, doubtless
made this confession in an attempt to save
herself, not hesitating, as such women rarely
do, in sacrificing others for that purpose. It trans-
pired that in addition to Henri Bassot, a man named
Cesar Ladermann was also concerned in the crime.
In fact, it was Ladermann who was supposed to
have actually committed the murders. He was
known as " The Costeau," which had reference to
his exceptional strength and swaggering and aggres-
sive manner. He was the son of a tailor, and was
living at Lyons. Bassot having been arrested, the
police went to Lyons for the purpose of also arresting
Ladermann, but the latter evaded them by blowing
his brains out.
Bassot, the paramour of Madame Giriat, was an
ex-convict who had been convicted of coining. He
had also been a kind of music-hall comedian, in
which capacity he had travelled about a good deal.
He was an unscrupulous adventurer and a most
audacious rogue. The crime was doubtless planned
by him and Madame Giriat, Ladermann being hired
to carry out the murders. On the night of September
20 Madame Giriat left the scullery window open,
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 173
through which Ladermann got into the house. Giriat
stated that, having done this, she retired to her bed-
room and fell asleep. Fell asleep, knowing that
murder was soon to be committed in that house!
She further stated that she was awakened later by
Ladermann, who told her that he had already
" settled " the mistress and the maid, and that she,
Giriat, must now submit to be gagged and bound,
so as to avert suspicion. He then proceeded to
bind and gag her.
This statement of Madame Giriat's does not ring
true. It is highly probable that she actually assisted
in the murders themselves. She was altogether a
most callous and abandoned woman, and when she
was taken to ; the house at Aix-les-Bains for the
purpose of " reconstructing " the crime, in accordance
with French criminal law, she indulged in the most
disgusting levity. While in the bedroom where Mile.
Fougere was murdered she jumped upon the bed
and kicked the pillows about, at the same time ex-
claiming, " Only to think that poor Eugenie was
strangled on these pillows! " While the grim cere-
mony was in progress, Madame Giriat displayed
such an intimate knowledge of all that happened in
the room on the night of the murder as to make it
plain the part she played in the deed itself. There
are not many male criminals who could have
behaved as Madame Giriat did during an ordeal
which has shaken the stoicism of the most call-
ous of men. Even the redoubtable Ladermann
destroyed himself at the approach of the police
174 WOMAN AND CRIME
officers as we have seen. But Giriat, a member
of the " weaker sex," retains her imperturbability
and invincible callousness to the end. Such
indifference is characteristic of most female
criminals, which they display in the dock under
circumstances which have caused men to completely
collapse.
This self-possession and calmness of demeanour is
often misinterpreted by those who have not sufficient
knowledge of the criminal. By such persons it is
taken as indicating the presence of the sedative
knowledge of innocence, which enables the person in
the dock to regard the proceedings with becoming
composure. It takes but a slight knowledge of
human nature to show how fallacious such a deduc-
tion is. The ordeal of the dock is a very severe one,
and requires considerable nerve to undergo with any
degree of tranquillity. A man who has had the nerve
to commit a grave crime would also have the nerve
to stand his trial with fortitude. But an innocent
man placed in such a position would be so shaken at
the peril of it that he would find it impossible to be
calm and collected. Most criminals have strong
nerves and are used to facing danger, and they there-
fore do not look on the ordeal of the dock with any
degree of fear or misgiving. And, as I have already
pointed out, the female criminal is even more in-
different and callous under such circumstances than
the male criminal. Madame Giriat's callousness
stamped her as a well-equipped criminal and as being
an active participant in the murder of Mile. Fougere.
MURDERS OF VIOLENCE 175
Both she and her paramour were, in fact, convicted
and duly punished.
Hysteria in women has often led to the commission
of crime. Under its influence they have become
morbid-minded and highly imaginative of unpleasant
things.
CHAPTER X
THE BABY-FARMERS
ONE of the most amazing things about certain
forms of female crime is the complete absence in
the criminals of the maternal instinct. This, which
is so powerful among animals, seems to find
no place in the breasts of such women, in spite
of the fact that many have offspring of their
own. It is altogether a baffling mystery. It applies
particularly to the class of criminals known as
" baby-farmers." Baby-farming also involves the
important social question of the illegitimate child.
As I write, the Home Secretary has reprieved the
woman Mary Ann Nash, who was condemned to
death for the murder of her little son. The case was
known as the " Wilts Well Mystery." Nash was a
domestic servant, and the child she was convicted of
murdering was illegitimate. In June, 1907, she went
away with the child, which was never seen again
alive. On April 23rd, 1908, the body of the little
boy was found in a well at Burbage, about two miles
from the cottage where Nash had been with her
child. An inquest was held and an " open " verdict
returned. Early in the present year, 1911, however,
176
BABY-FARMERS 17?
somebody addressed an anonymous letter to the
police, suggesting that the body found in the well
was that of Nash's missing child, and that she had
murdered it. Accordingly the police made inquiries,
as a result of which they arrested Nash and charged
her with having murdered her child and cast the
body in the well at Burbage.
In addition to the fact that no suspicion was
entertained towards Nash until the police received
information from so untrustworthy a source as an
anonymous communication, there were several very
grave doubts in the case. For instance, it was never
proved how the child whose body was found in the
well came by his death, whether, indeed, he was
murdered at all. There was also considerable dis-
crepancy between the respective ages of Nash's miss-
ing child and that of the child whose body was found
in the well. The strongest circumstances against
Nash were the facts that when questioned she had told
a lie as to what she did with her child when she went
away with it, and that the child has never since been
seen. What has become of it? It seems incredible
that if it were still alive and in the keeping of some-
body it would not have been produced to save the
mother from the gallows. With the widespread pub-
licity the case has been given, whoever had the child
must have become aware of the perilous position in
which Nash stood. The latter's explanation was that
while out with her child she fell asleep by the road-
side, and that when she awoke again her child was
gone, the inference being that somebody had kid-
M
178 WOMAN AND CRIME
napped it. This, of course, might have been so, and
the child might afterwards have died a natural death,
or even have been killed by somebody else.
The motive ascribed to the prisoner by the pros-
ecution was that she had killed the child to free
herself of the expense of its keep. She had already
entrusted it to several baby-farmers, whom, of course,
she had to pay for its maintenance. It was to get
rid of this expense and what was in itself an obstacle
and an incumbrance to her, the prosecution asserted,
that she committed the murder. If there were no
illegitimate children there would be no baby-farmers,
and in considering one we must also consider the
other. The fate of most of the former is indeed pitiable
in the extreme. /Disowned by their natural parents,
cast among strangers, buffeted from pillar to post,
always in the way and not wanted, neglected in
every conceivable manner, ofttimes brutally murdered
by their inhuman guardians, they cry aloud for the
interference of the State. Are they to continue to
plead in vain ? Is it not time that the law interceded
on their behalf? It is only now and again that
attention is called to the hapless fate of the child
who is " not wanted," when a case like the " Wilts
Well Mystery " occurs or a baby-farmer is brought
to justice. But the torture and slaughter of the
innocents is going on all the time. Quite recently a
case came under my notice which led me to make
inquiries. It appeared that a little girl about five or
six had been left on the hands of a certain lady by
its mother, who had not provided for it in any way
BABY-FARMERS 1 79
whatever. She had got rid of the child by means of
a trick or ruse. She was supposed to be coming back
for it, but she never returned, nor made any sort of
inquiry about it afterwards. The only clothes the
child had were those she stood up in, and they were
both poor and unclean. It appeared the child had
had many " homes " during its brief life, being left
in custody of various baby-farmers. As the mother
invariably after a time failed to keep up the very
meagre payments promised, the child was turned
away by one foster mother after another. The one
who had charge of her prior to her being planted on
the lady in question detained all her clothes except
those she was \vearing as a set-off, or a partial set-off,
to the money owing for her keep.
This poor mite, begotten in adultery and vicari-X
ously reared on " short commons," was afflicted in
various ways. She had an impediment in her speech, jf
and her sight was so bad that she had to wear strong
glasses ; she had previously had an operation per-
formed, which was necessary in order to prevent
her going blind. She was miserably thin, and had an
aspect as of one careworn, which in a child so young
was poignantly pathetic. As I have said, her devoted
mother never even made an indirect inquiry con-
cerning her, which is not surprising when one learns
that she upon one occasion said to the lady with
whom she left the child that she wished the
" little beast would die." All efforts to trace the
whereabouts of the mother proved fruitless, so the
lady who had her in charge, not being in a position
i8o WOMAN AND CRIME
to support the child without assistance, was com-
pelled to pass her on to the parochial authorities.
So once more the poor child was " moved on," given
into the custody of officials who dealt with her in a
business-like way, which took the form of unkind-
ness to one of such tender years and so haplessly
helpless. She was thrust through a doorway and told
to go " in there." In there were many other small
children in like pitiful case, the place being a kind
of " receiving house " for human sheep who are lost
indeed. Alas, for the innocents!
It appeared that the mother of the above child had
had three or four such offspring by the same father,
all of whom had been hustled away in the same
manner. They were all the results of illicit inter-
course. She had destroyed others in embryo. Being
asked what became of a certain child of hers, she
replied, " Oh, I got rid of that " how, was left to
the imagination. Once or twice she induced a mis-
carriage, and so in that manner " got rid of it." The
father was himself a married man with legitimate off-
spring. The mother was a single woman. The
only defence the woman can have, if indeed de-
fence be admissible, is the fact that her paramour
barely provided for her and her children. She had,
of course, laid herself open to a charge of child deser-
tion, and it would be the business of the parochial
authorities to find and prosecute her. The law, how-
ever, does not provide for the punishment of the
man, who certainly should be made to share any
penalty visited upon the woman.
BABY-FARMERS 1 8 1
But the whole subject of illicit intercourse and the
disposal of illegitimate offspring " love children," as
they are derisively called ought to be taken in hand
seriously by the authorities and some much-needed
legislation introduced to deal with what is a grevious
state of things. Among other steps some means
should be devised of penalising the fathers. The man
who gets a woman into such trouble and then deserts
her is among the most despicable of mankind, and
ought to be punished as a criminal. His act does,
in fact, frequently lead to crime. He should, there-
fore, be brought within the scope of the Statute Book.
There recently appeared in a daily newspaper an
article written by an able author and inspired by the
Wilts case. The writer, however, fell into the error
of confusing two distinct subjects. While denounc-
ing the treatment of illegitimate children, he con-
nected it with prostitution. As a matter of fact
the children who are " farmed " out are not as a
rule the offspring of harlots, but usually of women
who are regarded by those about them as perfectly
" straight." It is, in fact, frequently to keep up this
appearance of virtuous respectability that they get
rid of their offspring. Prostitutes do not, as a rule,
have children. There are to be sure plenty of
married prostitutes who have children, whom they
keep at home and treat thoroughly well. And there
are some who have illegitimate children, which they
also keep at home and treat well, mercifully preserv-
ing them in ignorance, of course, of their own discred-
itable calling. Again, there are those who send their
1 82 WOMAN AND CRIME
children away to a school. The clients of the baby-
farmer however are invariably single women who are
supposed to be virtuous, or married women who have
had a child or children by a man other than their
husbands.
Let us now consider the circumstances of a few
cases of baby-farming. The first we shall deal with
is that of the notorious Mrs Dyer.
In April, 1896, some men working on a barge on
the Thames fished a brown-paper parcel from the
water, which upon opening they found to contain
the dead body of an infant. It had been strangled
with a bootlace. The parcel had been weighted
with a brick, but the men on the barge had dis-
turbed the parcel with their poles, causing it to rise
to the surface. When the brown paper itself came
to be examined there was found written upon it the
name of Mrs Dyer, with an address at Reading.
Criminals sometimes do incredibly stupid things,
but there has scarcely been anything so stupid as the
wrapping of this baby's body in a piece of paper on
which was written the name and address of the
murderess ! One wonders what the woman can have
been thinking of at the time. She must somehow or
other have failed to see the writing, for it is incredible
that she used the paper knowing the writing to be
thereon. She may have done the parcel up in a bad
light and in haste, and so have overlooked the
presence of the writing. However it came about,
though, did not matter; fortunately for the ends of
justice and the lives of children, the writing was' there.
BABY-FARMERS 183
The police promptly went to the address at Read-
ing, where they found Mrs Dyer, who turned out to
be a woman who took in " nurse children." Evi-
dently the police were not satisfied with what trans-
pired on their visit, for they made further inquiries.
They also kept observation on Mrs Dyer's house.
They went further and searched the house, when
they found a large quantity of baby-clothing, also a
number of pawn tickets for baby-clothing. During
the search a piece of paper was found on which was
written an address at Mayo Road, Willesden. Upon
going there the police found that a daughter of Mrs
Dyer lived there with her husband.
On April loth, while the police were dragging the
Thames in the vicinity of where the brown-paper
parcel was found, they fished up a carpet bag, which
was tied round with a cord. When it came to be
opened it was found to contain two dead infants and
a brick. (It will be seen that the parcel and the
bag were both weighted in a similar manner.) It was
clear from these discoveries that the murder of infants
on a somewhat extensive scale had been perpetrated
by somebody. The police therefore arrested Amelia
Elizabeth Dyer as that " somebody," and the hus-
band of her daughter, who lived at Mayo Road,
Willesden, as an accessory after the fact.
The chief witness against Mrs Dyer was her
married daughter already referred to, who gave very
important evidence. In fact, had it not been for her
testimony the prosecution would have had some
difficulty in completing their case. The evidence
1 84 WOMAN AND CRIME
she gave was as follows: On March 3ist, 1896,
Mrs Dyer received from its mother at Cheltenham a
baby named Doris Marmon, aged ten months. It
appeared that Mrs Dyer had got into communication
with the mother in the name of " Harding." One of
her letters to the mother was as follows : " Dear
Madam, In reference to your letter of adopting
a child, I beg to say I shall be glad to have a little
baby girl, one I can bring up as my own a child
with me would have a good home and a mother's
love and care. We belong to the Church of
England." In another letter she said : " There is
an orchard opposite our front door. You will say it
was healthy and pleasant. I think Doris is a very
pretty name. I am sure she ought to be a pretty
child."
A few hours after receiving Doris she murdered
it by strangulation, and deposited the body in a
carpet bag. She then wrote to the mother : " My
dear little girl is a traveller, and no mistake. She
was so good, and did not mind the journey a bit. A
long letter next time." The circumstances under
which Doris Marmon was done to death were as
follows : She took the child with her to her
daughter's house at Willesden. Her daughter who
opened the door to her, noticing she had a child with
her, asked her to come in. But Mrs Dyer replied:
" No ; I'm holding the baby for someone who is
coming on behind." The daughter then went to the
back of the house, leaving her mother on the door-
step. The latter was also carrying a carpet bag.
(Photo : Tussaud and Sons.)
MRS. DYER.
BABY-FARMERS 1 85
When the daughter returned her mother was in the
sitting-room putting the carpet bag under the sofa.
There was no baby visible now, Mrs Dyer explaining
that the person she referred to had come up and taken
it away. The child in question was in fact, then, a
corpse, and had been deposited in the carpet bag!
The clothes of Doris Marmon Mrs Dyer handed to
her daughter, who also had a " nurse child," named
Harold, which she had received for a lump sum of
money.
On the following day, April ist, Mrs Dyer and her
daughter, taking Harold with them, went to Padding-
ton station, where they met a woman who handed over
a thirteen-months'-old child, named Harry Simmonds.
She also paid Mrs Dyer the sum of $. Mrs Dyer
and her daughter then returned to Mayo Road,
carrying the thirteen-months-old addition to their
" stock." At six o'clock the daughter went in to her
bedroom and put Harold to bed, leaving her
mother in the sitting-room with the boy Simmonds.
On their way home the child had been somewhat
troublesome, crying a good deal. But soon after
returning to the house in Mayo Road, and while the
daughter was in her bedroom, the little boy suddenly
became quiet. When the daughter went into the
sitting-room she noticed that the boy was lying quite
still upon the couch, covered over with a shawl
Mrs Dyer furnished the explanation that he was
asleep and was not to be disturbed. Her daughter's
husband was also present.
The next morning the little boy Simmonds was
1 86 WOMAN AND CRIME
nowhere to be seen. But there was a parcel under
the head of the couch. Having had her breakfast,
Mrs Dyer went to the back of the house and picked
up a brick, which she deposited under the couch.
That same evening Mrs Dyer had arranged to return
to Reading, and requested her daughter and son-in-
law to accompany her as far as Paddington. Her
daughter accordingly went into the bedroom to
dress herself, leaving her mother in the sitting-
room, where there was a carpet bag, a parcel,
and a brick. When the daughter returned to
the sitting-room she noticed that the carpet bag
was now tightly packed, so full, indeed, was it
that it would not close at the top, so a piece of
brown paper had been placed inside. The bag was
also tied round with a piece of cord. There was now
neither parcel nor brick. All three then made their
way to Paddington.
The daughter, according to her evidence, inquired
about the little boy Simmonds, and was told by her
mother that it was " all right." And with that vague
explanation she was satisfied. Mrs Dyer departed
for Reading and her daughter and husband returned
to Mayo Road. The daughter then noticed that her
work-box had been opened and a skein of tape taken
away. About ten minutes to eleven that night an
engineer employed at Reading Prison passed a
woman under a railway arch. She was coming from
the direction of the river. He recognised her as Mrs
Dyer. Subsequently, as already related, the bag
was fished out of the river, the two bodies it contained
BABY-FARMERS 187
being those of Doris Marmon and Harry Simmonds.
Tied tightly round the throat of each was a piece of
tape, which were portions of the skein missing from
the work-box at Mayo Road.
It was never known precisely how many children
this hideous female murdered, but other bodies were
subsequently found in the river by the police. Also
in the garden of a house once occupied by Mrs Dyer
were found the remains of children. She had been
carrying on the horrible business for some consider-
able time, and obtained possession of the children
through the medium of advertisements offering a
comfortable home and a " mother's care " to such
offspring. In this way she had received various sums
of money, ranging from 5 to as much as ^50 and
^80. At the very outset, and shortly after her arrest,
she voluntarily exonerated her daughter and son-in-
law from all blame and guilty knowledge. This was,
however, before she was aware that her daughter was
to appear as a witness. One may say, however,
that it seems very singular that the disappearance of
little Harry Simmonds, the parcel and the brick at
the same time that the bag assumed such a plethoric
aspect did not arouse in the minds of the daughter
and her husband some grave suspicion.
Mrs Dyer was convicted, sentenced to death and
executed. Her son-in-law was acquitted. During
the trial Mrs Dyer, who was a heavy, obese woman,
sat imperturbably and lugubriously in the dock,
taking scarcely an intelligent interest in the proceed-
ings. The defence was based on a plea of insanity,
1 88 WOMAN AND CRIME
and it transpired that she had on several occasions
been an inmate of a lunatic asylum. But these were
only transient attacks, and during the time she was
carrying on her gruesome occupation of baby-
farming-cum-murder, her sanity was amply demon-
strated by her business-like methods. There was
nothing whatever in these transactions to indicate the
presence in her of the smallest degree of mental
instability. She was a curious compound of merciless
and callous cruelty and religious fervour. In regard
to the latter she was a canting hypocrite. While in
the condemned cell she wrote the following verse on
a sheet of paper :
By nature, Lord, I know with grief
I am a poor fallen leaf
Shrivelled and dry, near unto death.
Driven by sin, as with a breath.
But if by Grace I am made new,
Washed in the blood of Jesus, too,
Like to a lily I shall stand
Spotless and pure at His right hand.
It was signed " Mother." It seems positively
revolting as emanating from a bloodthirsty creature
who murdered with amazing assiduity poor, defence-
less little children for mere money. It was not until
she was laid by the heels and was awaiting a well-
merited doom that she entertained the notion that
she was likely to become " spotless " as a " lily."
One can scarcely place much confidence in the possi-
bility of such a wondrous bleaching process. It was
certainly true that she was " near unto death," but
it was hardly correct to say that she was as
BABY-FARMERS 1 89
yet " shrivelled and dry." Although the woman was
not absolutely insane, one derives some consolation
from the conviction that she was not precisely normal,
and that she had a " kink " in her mental structure.
While the police were carrying on their investigations
into her manifold crimes, and in their own adroit way
" finding things out," she gave expression to a child-
like wonder at their success, and came to the conclu-
sion that they must be " very clever." It may be that
she was merely assuming this mental feebleness to
create the impression of insanity, for she was an
adept at dissimulation and one of the greatest
hypocrites that ever lived. When she fell through
the trap at the end of the rope which now hangs in
the " Black Museum " at Scotland Yard, the world
was well rid of one of the most colossal petticoated
atrocities that ever blackened the fair fame of
womanhood.
We now pass to the case of the baby-farmers
Annie Walters and Amelia Sach, the former aged 54
and described as a nurse, and the latter 29 and also
described as a nurse. They were placed on trial at
the Old Bailey on January i5th, 1903, before Mr
Justice Darling, Mr Charles Mathews (now Sir
Charles Mathews, the present Public Prosecutor),
and Mr A. H. Bodkin appearing for the prosecution,
Mr Guy Stephenson appearing in defence of Walters,
and Mr Leycester for Sach.
It appeared that in the month of November, 1902,
Sach occupied a house called " Claymore House," in
Hertford Road, East Finchley, where she carried on
WOMAN AND CRIME
the business of a certified midwife and nurse, the
place being described as a " private nursing home."
The house was subsequently pointed out to me by
the chief usher at the Old Bailey, the late Mr Field,
who then lived in the same neighbourhood. Sach
was in the habit of inserting the following advertise-
ment in the newspapers : " Accouchement, before and
during skilled nursing ; home comforts ; baby can
remain." The prisoners had been known to one
another for some considerable time. In August,
1902, an unmarried woman named Galley went to
Claymore House and arranged with Mrs Sach to stay
there. She was to pay 3 35. a week for a fortnight,
and i is. a week during the remainder of the time
she was in the house.
At the end of September accordingly Galley went
into residence at Claymore House. At that time
there were several others there. Before Galley's child
was born Mrs Sach asked her whether she would
like it adopted, as she, Sach, knew some people
without children of their own who would be willing to
adopt any from her house. Galley asked how much
it would cost, and Sach told her ^30 or ^35. Galley
said that was too much, whereupon Sach said she
she would see if the people would not take less.
Later she told Galley that it could be done for ^25,
and to this Galley agreed. On the morning of Satur-
day, November i5th, Miss Galley gave birth to a
boy. Sach immediately took it out of the room, and
its mother never saw it again. On the same day the
father of the child called and paid Sach ^25 in bank
BABY-FARMERS 191
notes. These notes were afterwards traced, and it
was found that the money had been divided between
Sach and Walters, which made it clear that Sach had
no intention of giving the child over to anybody to
adopt.
The child was born at eight, and at eleven Sach
sent a telegram to Walters at n Danbury Street,
Islington, worded as follows : " Come to-night, eight;
same place." That same evening Walters left her
lodgings at 6.30, and three hours later she returned
with a newly-born child. She told the landlady that
it was a girl, but the latter found that it was a boy.
Walters explained that it was going to be adopted by
the wife of a coastguardsman at Kensington, who
was to give the mother 10, of which she, Walters,
was to receive ics. On November I2th Walters
brought home another child from Claymore House.
She then sent out for a bottle of chlorodyne, two
drops of which would be sufficient to kill a baby.
Two or three days after Galley's child had been
brought home by Walters it died. She, Walters,
said it died in bed beside her. But there can be no
doubt that she killed it by administering chlorodyne
to it.
Curiously enough, Walters lodged in the house of
a police constable, who had become suspicious of
her actions and movements. We have from time
to time recorded egregiously foolish things done by
criminals. It seems difficult to understand why
Walters allowed herself to live and carry on her
criminal trade in the house of one whose business it
192 WOMAN AND CRIME
was to be suspicious of people. One looks in vain for
an elucidation of this mystery. One can merely
record the fact that Walters did that very stupid thing
and so practically assisted in her own detection.
About nine o'clock on the morning after the child
died, Walters left the house carrying the dead body
with her. She was followed to South Kensington
Railway Station, where she was taken into custody
and charged with murdering the child. Shortly after
Inspector Kidd went to Claymore House, where he
arrested Mrs Sach. When charged she said : " I
don't know Mrs Walters, and I have never given -her
any babies. I take in ladies to be confined ; there is
one in my house at present. She was confined on
Saturday with a baby girl. It is with its mother now. v
Inspector Kidd then asked to see the baby, but Mrs
Sach said the mother was too ill to allow of it. A
doctor was then sent for, when Mrs Sach admitted
that the child had been taken away. She further said :
" Do you mean to say that this person (meaning
Walters) has been making away with babies ? Do you
really mean to say that these babies are dead that
she has killed them ? " She also at length admitted :
" I know the woman, as she has worked for me, but
I never gave her any babies."
Walters also made a number of statements, among
other things admitting that she put two drops of
chlorodyne in the child's milk as it was so cross. But
she stoutly denied having killed it. She, however,
admitted having been a " foolish woman," and said
that she intended to wander about until it was dark
BABY-FARMERS 193
and then do away with herself. A post-mortem
examination was held on the body of Galley's child,
which it was proved had died from asphyxia brought
about by some preparation of morphia, which is one
of the principal constituents of chlorodyne. Another
case which was proved against the prisoners was that
concerning the child of a woman named Pardoe.
The mother paid Mrs Sach 30 to have it adopted,
Mrs Sach representing that it was to be taken by
some persons in a good station in life. As a matter
of fact the money it was proved was devoted to Mrs
Sach's own personal uses. The baby was disposed
of in a manner similar to that of Galley's. A telegram
was sent to Walters, who took the child away to
Danbury Street. A couple of days after Walters took
the child out with her and entered a coffee-room with
it. One of the waitresses remarked that the child
looked dead, when Walters said: "I have just
brought it from the hospital, where it has been under
an operation. It is chloroform that you see it under,
and it will probably recover in an hour or two."
Walters then left, returning to Danbury Street at
eight o'clock the same night in a state of intoxication,
and minus the child, which she stated she had handed
over to the person who had agreed to adopt it. This
sort of thing had been going on for a considerable
period, during which Sach and Walters had been in
constant communication with one another, frequently
visiting one another, and dealing with the children
born at Claymore House. It was proved that Mrs
Sach had conceived these crimes, which Mrs Walters
N
194 WOMAN AND CRIME
had carried out ; that the former was the " head " and
the latter the " hands " in the black business.
The two women presented an odd appearance in
the dock, being as dissimilar in every respect as could
be imagined. Walters was a short, plebeian, stubby,
plain-faced woman, shabbily attired, while Sach was
tall, fashionably dressed, very attractive, and carrying
herself with an air of refinement. Their very personal
appearance clearly indicated which was the " head %>
and which the " hands," which the conceiver and
which the executant. Mrs Sach presented the ap-
pearance of having just returned from the theatre,
with a fashionable cloak thrown over her shoulders.
Mrs Walters looked as though her occupation in life
was " charing." The respective demeanour also of
the women was quite distinct. Mrs Sach was evi-
dently acutely feeling her perilous position, her face
denoting considerable mental suffering. Walters on
the contrary maintained a stolid, almost indifferent
aspect towards the proceedings ; she occasionally
scribbled something on a slip of paper and passed it
to her counsel. Once or twice she smiled faintly at
something that was said in court. The look on the
face of Mrs Sach was one of deep dejection mingled
with almost uncontrollable agitation. Every now
and again her face twitched and quivered.
I am a poor hand at witnessing human suffering of
any kind, particularly in the case of a woman, and I
am bound to say, in spite of the detestable and brutal
character of the crimes attributed to Mrs Sach, and
of which she was in due course convicted, I could not
BABY-FARMERS 195
help feeling somewhat sorry for her. Odious as the
crimes themselves were, they were not so brutal as
those committed by Mrs Dyer. The children were
taken away newly-born and " dosed " when but a few
days old, when there could have been scarcely any
physical suffering. But this does not, of course,
lessen the gravity of the crimes generally and as
against the State. The peculiar part about Mrs
Sach's conduct was the fact that she herself had
children of which she was extremely fond. This sort
of contradiction in human nature is altogether very
puzzling. Such persons seem to be possessed of a
double nature or personality, one being brutal and
the other affectionate. And it seems that the one
nature is not concerned or affected by what the other
nature does.
Both women were convicted and sentenced to
death. Curiously enough, during the period inter-
vening between condemnation and execution the
demeanour of the two women would seem to have
become reversed. For Mrs Sach maintaind an un-
broken composure, while Mrs Walters broke out into
protestations of innocence and declared that she had
been " betrayed " by Mrs Sach. She also wrote many
letters, and as these indicated the state of her mind
and threw sidelights on to her character generally, I
reproduce two of them :
" Holloway, January 26, 1903.
" DEAR , I received your kind letter with
a broken heart, I have been here since November,
196 WOMAN AND CRIME
and never received any letters or visits till last week.
You know my unhappy fate. You know it was not
given to kill the dear, but, dear, I am not afraid to
go. I shall meet my old darling ; don't think, dear,
he is forgotten. He is ever present with me ; I am
only longing to see him. (She probably is here
referring to her deceased husband.)
" I have got permission to see you and Sarah. One
had better come one day and the other the other day,
not but what I should like to see you all. I asked to
see my two nieces. I will tell you when I see you
what good you all could have done me before the
trial. I cannot write any more, as I am feeling very
geadey (giddy, I suppose) and down. You won't
know me.
" Don't bring any of the children, dear, and you
must not bring any thing whatever. Love to all of
you. Kiss to all the dear children.
" You wonder why I have taken the name of
Walters. I did not want to disgrace our dear's own
name. Love to you all. I remain, your broken-
hearted aunt,
" ANNIE WALTERS."
" Holloway, January 30, 1903.
" DEAR , It is with a sad heart I answer your
welcome letter. I am not feeling well to-day, and,
dear, it's awful to be in here, although everyone is
kindness itself, and the chaplain is such a dear, good
man ; he sees me every day. I long for the time to
come to see him.
" Know, dear, I thank you for all you did for me,
and tell dear C. and B. how I thank them for their
kind offer to come and see me. I feel it would be
BABY-FARMERS 197
too much. I am not as strong and healthy as they
last saw me. It was a great strain to see you both
and part from you the other day. I wish it had been
otherwise ; but God wills it so, bless His holy name.
" I was very sorry to hear of Mary H.'s death.
She has only gone first. It would have been better
if the dear baby had gone first with her, but God will
find a dear loving friend for her little James. God
bless them all ; I know she is at rest. She was
always a good girl.
" No, dear children, I am not afraid to die ; I am
only longing for the time to be at rest. I have
nothing on my mind to trouble me. I shall miss you
and all the dear ones on the last day. He has said
though my sins be as scarlet they shall be as white
as snow. Dear, rest assured Aimer and Charley,
I have no fear. Jesus is the way, the truth, and life.
Let not your hearts be troubled. Dear Aimer, I
have nothing on my conscience only this dear baby
I gave the two drops of stuff to. I did not give it
to hurt it. It was an awful moment when I turned
in bed and it was dead.
" That I have told the Chaplain. As for doing
any other I have not. My blessed Lord knows that
I am talking right. I have made my peace, and long
to be at rest. If it will ease your mind, dear, I am
going to take the Sacrament on I do not know
where it is on Sunday, or after. But, my dear, once
more good-bye till we meet again.
" I am longing to see my dear ones. My dear
husband is ever near. I can say the same as he did
when he went; he said, ' My darling, I long to be
at rest.'
" I have sent this, dear ones, to you all. Love
198 WOMAN AND CRIME
and kisses to the little lambs. Love to you too, and
love to C. and B. You can answer this if you like.
I remain good-bye, broken-hearted
" ANNIE WALTERS."
The influence of the Chaplain may be traced in the
above. There is over-much of religion in it of a
somewhat turgid kind, reminiscent of Mrs Dyer.
Her reference to the murdered baby and the chloro-
dyne is peculiar. It illustrates the singular frame of
mind into which the woman had got. She denies
that she killed the child, although its death is on her
mind. She also states that this is the only thing
which is troubling her, in spite of the fact that
ample evidence had been produced of her having
despatched several other infants. There may have
been many, there probably were, for the business
had been going on for some time. She was either
making a feeble attempt to deceive others, or she
had developed so peculiar a condition of mind that
she was deceiving herself.
Both women were executed on the morning of
February 3, 1903. It was the first double execu-
tion of women in the United Kingdom since March
3, 1884, and the first execution to take place at
Holloway. The officials at the prison were hoping
that the women would be reprieved, for they looked
forward with dread and misgiving to the grim
business. However, it was deemed advisable to
allow the law to take its course, and so the double
execution accordingly took place.
BABY FARMERS 199
I recall the trial of another notorious baby-farmer,
namely, that of Mrs Chard Williams. It occupied
the court of the Old Bailey for two days. It did not
attract much attention at the time as it occurred during
the first stages of the war in South Africa, by which it
was dwarfed in importance. During the first day of
the trial news of the relief of Kimberley arrived and
caused some excitement in court. Mrs Williams'
husband was also charged with her. The case was
interesting from the respective personalities of the two
prisoners. Mrs Williams was a slim, small-featured,
pale-faced woman, some years younger than her hus-
band. The latter was a well-educated man, M.A.,
I believe, of Cambridge, and socially and intellec-
tually considerably above his wife. It was said that
he was a near relation of the late Judge Williams.
It was made quite clear that he was completely
under the control of his wife. This became apparent
as they sat in the dock. Mrs Williams, although
looking so modest and demure, was in fact a woman
of invincible will-power and irresistible resolution.
She was also extremely callous and cruel. This was
indicated by her thin and firmly-compressed lips.
She sat facing the jury, whom it was obvious she
had set herself the task of favourably impressing.
She had designedly assumed an air of demureness
and inoffensiveness for that purpose. She had so
placed her chair in the dock as to bring her face
to face with the jurymen, because in the ordinary
course of things a prisoner faces the bench, the dock
being at right-angles to the jury-box.
200 WOMAN AND CRIME
Mrs Williams was one of those women who
exercise great influence over men, and who are
thoroughly alive to the extent of their power. As
she had ruled her husband through the medium of
this same influence, so she set herself to win over
the jury by similar means. I shall presently deal
with a case of another woman of the kind who did
actually succeed in so winning over a jury and secur-
ing her acquittal in face of the most convincing
evidence of her guilt. A woman may use such in-
fluence for good or evil: when she uses it for the
latter it is disastrous for the man. A woman of such
force of character may be either a blessing or a curse.
She is never likely to do anything by halves she
is thorough in whatever she does. Mrs Williams,
instead of being a brutal baby-slayer, might very
well have been an indomitable saint and benefac-
tress she had the requisite force of character. A
certain prominent female philanthropist, who for
years has been engaged in good work, and who is
endowed with this same force of character, one day
confessed to me that when young she had a most re-
bellious nature, and that it was quite possible for her
then to have launched into a life of evil. The fact
that her work has been done among men, upon whom
she has brought her influence to bear, shows how for-
tunate it was that she did not take the wrong turning.
But to return to Mrs Williams.
She occupied this same position throughout the
trial, scarcely budging from it. She was perfectly
composed, or, rather, appeared to be, but now and
BABY FARMERS 201
again one got a subtle hint of the inward struggle
which was in progress. Now and again she would
raise her handkerchief to her clammy lips and wipe
them. Occasionally she sighed wearily. But always
she kept her caressing and appealing eyes upon the
jury-box, her glance travelling from man to man, up
and down the box. From my point of vantage I was
able to watch her very closely without being seen
by her. So that she was unaware of the espionage.
By which means I have from time to time obtained
good impressions of many criminals. Williams sat
almost with his back to the jury, and facing his wife,
towards whom he continually directed glances of
dog-like devotion. The latter seemed to be scarcely
conscious of these attentions, or accepted them as a
matter of course. He spoke to her several times,
but she either replied briefly or not at all. She was
engrossed with her task with the jury. He had a few
slips of paper in his hand, on which he occasionally
made notes. But all through the trial she sat in that
same position, her hands in her lap, scarcely moving,
and heeding little else but the jury, upon whom her
whole attention was concentrated. She was playing
her last card with the jury, upon which she placed her
sole reliance. If that failed her she knew she was
doomed. It was moving to watch her as the case pro-
gressed, to see the alternations of hope, fear, depres-
sion, and doubt, which she with all her stoicism was
unable to quite prevent being depicted upon her
countenance.
The two were charged with the murder of a child
202 WOMAN AND CRIME
named Jones, which the female prisoner received as
a " nurse child/' The mother was a general servant.
Mrs Williams was then living at Battersea. The
body was found in the Thames, tied up in a piece of
paper. It was made clear by medical evidence that
the child had been killed by being taken by the feet
and its head dashed against a wall. The body was
then practically " trussed " like a fowl it was so
described in court done up in paper and dropped
in the Thames. A " dummy " copy of the body was
made and produced in court. Mrs Williams and her
husband afterwards left Battersea and went to live in
the north of London. The mother of the child would
appear to have become suspicious and gone to view
the body, which, by a peculiar mark on the abdomen,
she was able to identify as hers. The police then
went to Battersea and found that the baby-farmer
and her husband had disappeared. A reward was
promptly offered for their apprehension.
Again we have to record an injudicious act being
performed by a criminal and leading to her arrest.
The hue-and-cry which was out after Williams and
his wife would appear to have been too much for the
latter's mental equilibrium. Whether she became
possessed with fear, or endeavoured to anticipate her
defence, cannot be said, but she foolishly wrote a
letter to the police in defence of the " wanted"
persons, and making use of the significant words,
" innocent people have been hanged before now."
This letter put the police on her track, and she and
her husband were soon after taken.
BABY FARMERS 203
An important piece of evidence was the finding in
the house at Battersea which had been occupied by
Mrs Williams and her husband of some cord identical
with that found on the body. There were also some
peculiar knots known as a " fisherman's bend " in the
cord on the body, and the same kind of knots in the
cord found in the house. There was likewise the fact
that the child Jones, which its mother had handed
over to Mrs Williams, had disappeared and had not
since been seen or heard of. There was in addition
the peculiarity on the stomach of the corpse which was
known to be present on the stomach of the child
Jones. In the end Mrs Williams was convicted and
her husband acquitted. It was made manifest that
Williams had had no part in the actual murder, that he
probably knew nothing of how the children were
disposed of, that he had upon occasions protected the
children and tended them in the absence of his wife.
He was, however, afterwards re-arrested and charged
with a minor offence, of some kind of fraud, con-
victed and sentenced to imprisonment.
The true character of Mrs Williams asserted itself
after she was convicted and when she knew that
dissimulation would no longer avail her. When she
was brought back to the dock to hear the verdict she
was looking extremely pallid and was much agitated.
The verdict having been given, she was asked
whether she had anything to say. She was so
agitated, however, that she was unable to speak.
The sentence was then pronounced. She was again
asked whether she wished to say anything, and
204 WOMAN AND CRIME
having by a supreme effort obtained partial control
over herself, she said in a studied voice of bravado,
' Thank you, my lord." As this was scarcely the
kind of thing she was being offered an opportunity to
say, she was for the third time asked if she had
anything more to say, and in a voice that was now
subdued almost to a whisper she replied in the
negative. She was then conducted from the dock,
being closely attended by several wardresses. As
she was descending the steps she suddenly struck out
at the attendants, at the same time shrieking out,
" Let me alone, or it'll be the worse for you ! " It
was the savage side of her nature asserting itself.
Mrs Williams was duly executed, and her body
committed to a rude sepulchre beneath the flagstones
of " Dead Man's Walk," as the burial place at old
Newgate was known as. Her final resting-place
was indicated by the one letter " W " engraved upon
the wall facing it.
In spite of the fact that her conduct must have
been known in all its enormity to her husband, it
does not seem to have shaken the latter's affection
for her. I heard afterwards that he was terribly
upset at her fate, and could in no way be resigned
to the loss of her. After his release from prison, I
was told, he went about in a dazed manner scarcely
realising his bereavement. The worthiest of wives
could hardly inspire a more steadfast devotion than
this.
The miserable fate which most " nurse children "
meet with was made clear by a case which came to
BABY-FARMERS 205
light in November, 1908. It appears that the child
in question was taken by its mother to a woman at
Broadstairs in August of that year. The next day
the child was passed on to a woman who had a
" home " at Ramsgate. That is a kind of " sub-
letting " system. Suppose, for instance, A receives
a child for, say, 10. She may then pass it on to B,
who takes it for $ or ^4, the balance being clear
profit to A, who also gets rid of the child. B may
pass the child on to C, who may take it for still less,
B thus making a profit and getting rid of the child.
During such transactions the treatment received by
the child is not likely to be very beneficial to it; in
fact it usually gets into such a deplorable state that
death puts a period to its sufferings.
Well, in the above-mentioned case, the child
having been installed in the Ramsgate " home," re-
mained there only a few days, when it was removed
to a " Farm " at Ongar, near Epping. The child,
a girl of two years, remained there until the " Farm "
was broken up, when on October 25th she, with
several other children, passed into the possession of
the wife of a " farm foreman." On the 7th of the
ensuing month she was taken to the Queen's
Hospital, where the poor child was found to be dirty,
undersized, and wasted. There were also abscesses
on arms and legs, and it shortly after died from
blood-poisoning as a result of the abscesses. In the
opinion of the resident medical officer the condition
of the child was brought about by improper treat-
ment and neglect. The mother never saw the child
206 WOMAN AND CRIME
again after she parted with it at Broadstairs. It
transpired at the inquest that in addition to the above
foster mothers, the child had had yet another at Hemel
Hempstead, who, it was stated, had grossly neglected
it. It was also proved that the " Farm " at Ongar
had no drains, and was therefore in a very insanitary
condition. The Ramsgate Home was licensed by
the Isle of Thanet Union for twenty-five children
under five years of age. But this place also was in
an insanitary condition in consequence of the pres-
ence of a disused cesspool. Many of the children
were down with enteric fever, and six died in six
weeks. In consequence of this state of things the
survivors were scattered. As a result of the inquiry
several persons were blamed by the jury, although
nobody appears to have been held legally culpable.
Another form of cruelty to children for which
women are mainly answerable, is where they are
taken into the service of, or adopted by, private
families. Such waifs are occasionally treated very
brutally, and now and again cases of the kind come
into court. Not infrequently such families are those
of clergymen. In January, 1909, a case of the kind
was heard at the Dolgelly Assizes. A vicar and his
wife were charged with cruelty towards a girl aged
ten. It appeared that the child was the daughter of
a charwoman who had done work for the defendants,
the female of whom had asked that the child might
remain with them as a companion to their daughter.
To this the mother agreed. Subsequently the child
was treated with great cruelty, being beaten, kept
BABY FARMERS 207
short of food, and made to sleep on a mattress in
the attic.
About the same time there was another case at
Long Ashton, near Bristol, where a rector and his
wife were charged with ill-treating an orphan boy
whom they had in their service. He was made to do
all the menial work of the ho use, was kept short of
food, occasionally given bad food, and was repeatedly
severely beaten with a stick by the woman. Both
were fined.
There is yet another form of cruelty to children on
the part of women which is altogether inexplicable.
That is the ill-treatment of their own offspring.
In this connection we recall the case of Mrs
Penruddock. For a woman and a mother to be cruel
to any child is an unnatural proceeding, but for a
mother to be cruel to her own children constitutes
a positive outrage on nature. One must suppose
that there must be something wrong with such
women, that the maternal instinct must be dormant
in them. But we know that when women take to
being cruel they are so to a superlative degree. In
the subsequent chapter we shall deal with a phase of
their cruelty which holds the record for inflicting
suffering, namely, that of vitriol-throwing.
CHAPTER XI
THE VITRIOL-THROWERS
THE act of throwing vitriol may very well be brack-
eted with secret and slow poisoning as an example of
extreme cruelty in women. Vitriol-throwing is rarely
resorted to by men, being almost exclusively
confined to females. The latter as we have already
pointed out are also largely in the majority among
poisoners. It is just as inexplicable as is the inhuman-
ity of women towards little children, and why such
savagery should find a home in the bosoms of those
who are universally supposed to be inspired by
instincts of sympathy and tenderness it is fruitless to
try and discover. But it makes one thing quite clear,
namely, that the orthodox opinions held by most men
concerning women are not strictly accurate.
I recall the case of the Frenchwoman, Madame
Emilie Foucault, who was indicted at the Old Bailey
for throwing upon Andre Jacques Delombre a
corrosive fluid, with intent to disfigure him or do
him grievous bodily harm. I have already given an
account of this case in another work of mine,* but
*"The Story of Crime," T. Werner Laurie.
208
VITRIOL-THROWERS 209
think it as well to include it here, as in many respects
it is a remarkable case of its kind.
Sir Charles Mathews, who conducted the pro-
secution, referred to it as a " drama," and drama
of a most sensational kind it certainly was. The
story that preceded the act for which the woman was
indicted might very well have been fiction
written by a novelist in the habit of turning out
" risky " works. The prisoner and the prosecutor
first became acquainted in the year 1898, the man
then being seventeen years of age and the woman
twenty. They met in the streets, and their
acquaintance at first was merely of a casual kind.
But it was soon to become more cordial, for the
woman was very pretty and the young man suscep-
tible. Their respective social positions were widely
asunder, he being the son of an ex-Cabinet Minister
of France, and she the daughter of a tradesman.
This difference in caste was destined in due course
to lead to a tragedy.
In March, 1899, th e prisoner married her first
husband, a man named Foucault, who died in
January, 1901. Directly after this marriage took
place an improper intimacy began between Madame
Foucault and the young fellow, Delombre. It
endured through Foucault's life and survived his
death. In May of 1903 Madame Foucault married
again, this time a literary man in a good position.
But she still continued the improper intimacy with
Delombre. The husband soon became suspicious,
discovered how matters stood, at once sued for and
o
210 WOMAN AND CRIME
obtained a divorce. The divorced wife intermittently
continued the intimacy with Delombre. It is quite
clear that she now entertained the notion and formed
the resolution that the young fellow should marry
her. He would seem to have still been somewhat
infatuated with her and to be willing to become her
lawful husband. But here the social disparity
between them became an obstacle, and Delombre's
parents would not entertain the proposed alliance.
This opposition enraged Madame Foucault, who
armed herself with a loaded revolver and threatened
to shoot the young man's parents. His mother was
most firmly opposed to the match, and upon her
death-bed she made her son promise that he would
not marry the woman.
In the course of 1906 Madame Foucault fell in
the family way, and subsequently she asked
Delombre if he would acknowledge the child. This
he refused to do, in consequence of which some
unpleasant scenes ensued. Upon one occasion
Delombre forcibly took a loaded revolver from her.
Apparently in consequence of the annoyance she
gave him, Delombre decided in October, 1906, to
come to England. He did so, taking up his resi-
dence in Lindley Road, Tottenham, where he pursued
his studies. He was an agricultural engineer, and
held a degree of the University of Paris. On
November i7th, Madame Foucault followed
Delombre to England, bringing with her a loaded
revolver, a box of cartridges, and a large bottle of
sulphuric acid, or vitriol. The latter she had had
VITRIOL-THROWERS 2 1 1
coloured to the hue of coffee. The reason for this
will appear presently. Having discovered where
Delombre was lodging, she went there and asked him
for an explanation. That was a Saturday evening,
and it was arranged that the interview should be
postponed till the next day, a lodging for the night
being found for Madame Foucault. The next day
she said to a friend of Delombre's who lodged near
him : " I am expecting a child in January, and
Delombre has abandoned me. After I have had an
explanation I will return to Paris and make as much
scandal as possible. I will have birth cards printed,
and send them to his friends." (In France birth cards
are sent round as marriage cards are sent round in
this country.) At the Old Bailey Delombre stoutly
denied that the child referred to was his, and that he
was not the " only one."
Later in the day Delombre went with Madame
Foucault to a hotel in the City, where he engaged
a room in the name of Foucault. They had dinner
there in the public room, afterwards retiring to the
room they had engaged, where they would be by
themselves. While seated at the dinner-table
Delombre asked Madame Foucault what explanation
she required, and the lady replied that she would
wait for it until they had retired to their room. In
the light of subsequent events this was significant.
Well, when the woman found herself alone with her
companion she said, " The explanation I have to ask
you is this : Either you shall marry me or you must
kill yourself, if you are not a coward, or I will kill
212 WOMAN AND CRIME
you." That was the first time, said Delombre, that
she had made any mention of marriage. He replied
" Marry ! No ; never. Why, you don't love me.
You hate me, and I don't love you." Then the
woman said, " I shan't be troublesome. We shan't
live together, but I want my child to bear your name."
He replied " No." Madame, who all through this
was perfectly calm, said " Then you must kill your-
self, or I will kill you." It is difficult to understand
why she should wish him to die, or how his death
could benefit her in any way. But the fact that she
was so calm through it all proves that it was mere idle
talk and that she was temporising. It is a pity that he
did not do the same thing. A man, however, is never
equal to a woman in cunning and dissimulation.
It seems clear, however, that Delombre had be-
come apprehensive, for he suggested that they should
go for a walk. At the same time he went to the bed
and took up his coat, which he proceeded to put on.
Foolishly he turned his back upon her for a few
moments. When he turned to her again she walked
up to him and deliberately threw a cup of vitriol in
his face. The premeditation was made apparent
by the fact that she had contrived, unseen by her
companion, to lock the door. He discovered this
when, writhing in agony, he endeavoured to quit the
room. His cries brought assistance, and he was
conveyed to the hospital. The woman was taken into
custody and while in prison awaiting trial she gave
birth to a child.
Delombre permanently lost the sight of one eye
VITRIOL-THROWERS 2 1 3
and was otherwise disfigured for life. Most outrages
committed by women are cowardly, and this one was
particularly so. It was sheer vindictiveness, and no
amount of provocation could mitigate its enormity.
Her defence was that she intended to commit suicide
in his presence, and that the vitriol and revolver were
for that purpose. She further stated in the witness-
box that it was while in the act of drinking the vitriol
herself that Delombre, while endeavouring to prevent
her, splashed the vitriol over himself. This rather
feeble contention could scarcely hold good in the
face of the fact that the vitriol had been thrown or
dashed at the prosecutor, as shown by the nature
of the injuries. The prosecutor declared that her
original intention was that he should drink the acid,
and that is why she had it made the colour of coffee.
Her explanation of this discolouration was that it was
caused by being poured into the bottle through a
pewter funnel, and that it was the action of the latter
on trie acid that caused it to change colour. As a
matter of fact pewter would not do anything of the
kind, so that falls to the ground. The prosecutor
explained that her intention was to cause him to drink
the acid by " ringing the changes " on the cups.
After they had had dinner he asked her if she would
have coffee, and she declined. He, however, had a
cup, and this evidently upset her arrangement, for
her idea was to have the coffee upstairs, when she
would have effected the change. She did in fact alter
her mind when she got upstairs and had a cup brought
up. And this served a purpose, although not the
2i 4 WOMAN AND CRIME
one originally intended. Having emptied the cup
of coffee she substituted vitriol, which looked like
coffee. So that she was able to get to close quarters
with Delombre without arousing his suspicion as to
the nature of the contents of the cup. If the vitriol
had in any way failed she unquestionably intended
to make use of the revolver.
The above facts would appear to be pretty con-
clusive evidence of guilt, and there can be no doubt
that the jury would have returned a verdict of
" Guilty " had it not been for the introduction into
the case by counsel for the defence of a number of
letters which had been written to the prisoner from
time to time by the prosecutor. These put the latter
in a very odious light and seriously prejudiced the
case for the prosecution. The letters were allowed
to be read by the judge, although when counsel for
the prosecution attempted to read some which had
been sent by the prisoner to the prosecutor his
lordship put his veto on it. He should of course
have put his veto on the others, as they had nothing
to do with the charge before the court, most of them
having been written years before the visit to the City
hotel took place.
The case occupied four days. The prisoner, a
dark young woman of strikingly handsome appear-
ance and neatly attired, was one of those females
whom I have already referred to as possessing force
of character and invincible will-power. The latter
in combination with her personal attractions was
destined to be destructive to men. Her complexion
VITRIOL-THROWERS 2 1 5
was pale, and she had what the French call the
" fatal eyes." They were in fact very remarkable
eyes, very dark and wonderfully expressive. They
had a velvety softness, and at times could be most
alluring. She also contrived to get into them a
remarkable number of varied expressions. When
it was her purpose to enlist sympathy her eyes were
irresistibly soft and caressing. But now and again
when the lady was heckled in cross-examination,
there flashed from her eyes something resembling
forked lightning, which gave one an uncomfortable
notion of what she was capable. I have already
referred to a case where a female prisoner succeeded
in winning over a jury. I then referred to Madame
Foucault, who, in spite of the conclusive evidence
I have detailed above, was acquitted. This I
attribute to her personal influence on the jury, com-
bined with the reading of the letters mentioned. It
was a verdict, not of justice based on fact, but of
sympathy in the face of truth. The conduct of both
prior to the events of November i8th at the City
hotel was deserving of measureless reprobation, and
the letters should not have aroused sympathy for
either. What can be said for a woman who readily
gives herself over to a paramour immediately after
she has been wedded to another? Can she be
" wronged " in any way ? Delombre worked her no
mischief; those whom he wronged were the
husbands. There can be no doubt that the first
marriage was entered into so that the husband might
be utilised as a safeguard to the intrigue. I suppose
216 WOMAN AND CRIME
a husband could hardly be put to a worse purpose
than this, or a marriage contracted under more
odious conditions. And nobody who saw the two
young people in the flesh can doubt that the woman
was the leading spirit in the intrigue, and that she
influenced Delombre by her " fatal eyes " and her
other attractions as she influenced the jury at her
trial. A woman who cares twopence for her chastity
does not give way with the readiness with which
Madame Foucault did.
Just as I have already described how Mrs Chard
Williams set herself to seduce the jury from the
straight line of their duty by directing her gaze full
at them and keeping it so throughout the hearing,
so did Madame Foucault, and with more success.
She directed her " fatal eyes " towards the jurymen,
each one of whom she took in turn, lavishing upon
them the most bewitching and ravishing glances. I
sat beneath the jury-box and quite close to the dock.
I closely watched her, and upon one occasion she,
noticing my scrutiny and thinking perhaps that I
might be an official and worth including, she turned
her gaze full upon me and favoured me with a most
entrancing optical caress. I felt a trifle " shivery "
over it, like one might feel while being grinned at
by a tigress, and was not sorry to avert my eyes.
After her acquittal she stated to an interviewer that
at a certain stage of the proceedings she knew she
had so many of the jury on her side. There can be
no doubt that she did. Women like Madame
Foucault know the weak points of men like they know
VITRIOL THRO WERS 2 1 7
their A. B. C. When counsel was describing the
injuries of Delombre she appeared to be moved, but
that it was humbug was proved by the fact that after
the verdict was returned she pointed down trium-
phantly at the injured man and jeered at him. No
doubt that what the man himself had told her,
namely, that she hated him, was true. She
subsequently endeavoured to fix the paternity of her
child upon him, and a summons was served at the
place in London where he had been staying. He
had, however, gone back to Paris, but in spite of this
fact an order was made against him by a magistrate.
It seems a very easy matter to get a bastardy order
against a man. In this case the magistrate took the
bare word of the solicitor that the summons was duly
served, when as a matter of fact it was not.
Delombre took the matter to the High Court, where
the judges set the order aside.
Vitriol-throwing is altogether a most ugly crime,
for it is always committed in a spirit of extreme
vindictiveness. Sometimes, too, it is done to avenge
a wholly imaginary wrong, as in the case of the
woman who, ironically enough, was named Mabel
Truelove. The crime was committed in May, 1908.
The woman Truelove was a habitual criminal, who
had previously been confined in Reading gaol. She
had conceived a great hatred of the matron, Miss
Elizabeth Rogerson, who, she declared, had treated
her harshly and cruelly. As a matter of fact Miss
Rogerson was a most humane woman and had
always dealt leniently with Truelove. However,
218 WOMAN AND CRIME
the latter determined to do the matron a mischief,
and she accomplished it in a truly fiendish manner.
On a Sunday evening, while Miss Rogerson sat in
St James's Roman Catholic Church with a friend
named Mrs Emily Cushan, Truelove came down the
church and seated herself beside Miss Rogerson. In
her teeth she was holding a shawl. She said to Miss
Rogerson, " Well, how are you ? " To which Miss
Rogerson replied, u Oh, all right." Truelove then
drew a large cup of vitriol from under her
shawl and flung the contents in the face of Miss
Rogerson.
Miss Rogerson called out " Vitriol ! " and fell in a
faint. She was unable to see, and after she had
been attended to by a nurse and a doctor she was
conveyed to the Royal Berks Hospital. She was
very seriously injured, being likely to lose the sight
of one eye. Her friend, Mrs Cushan, was 'ajlso
seriously injured, the acid having splashed on to
her. Also Truelove herself was very badly burnt,
for the liquid also splashed back on her, which was
a recoil of her vengeance peculiarly appropriate.
If all vitriol-throwers also injured themselves in this
manner, there might be less of the dastardly crime
committed. When Truelove appeared in the dock
of the Reading Police Court next morning her face
presented a most repulsive appearance, the features
being quite unrecognisable. Her lips were dis-
tended, her eyes invisible, and her cheeks scarred and
wounded. She had to be assisted into the dock,
and was hardly able to remain seated on the form.
VITRIOL THROWERS 219
Would that all would-be vitriol-throwers could have
witnessed this spectacle! She was remanded and
afterwards removed to that prison upon the matron
of which she had committed such a gross outrage.
The prisoner had had a most remarkable career
She came of a family which was said to be well-
connected and respected. She was an accomplished
pianist, and some years ago had been a teacher of
music. She was a pupil teacher at a Board School,
but failing to pass a certain examination her
scholastic career came to an end. She would then
appear to have gone into service, acting as governess
to several well-known families, but her temper was
of such a violent character that nobody would keep
her very long, and so she was constantly going from
situation to situation. Her friends also gradually tired
of assisting her, and so she sank lower and lower.
Eventually she found herself without a roof " on
the road " in which condition she remained some
years, sleeping in various places, such, for instance,
as doss-houses, churchyards, outhouses, or any place
where she could find shelter. During this period
she committed innumerable offences, prisons being
among the places wherein she periodically slept. She
resorted to all kinds of tricks to evade the police,
on one occasion exchanging her dress for male garb
while in a railway carriage. But as she left her own
clothes behind, the police were enabled to soon get
upon her track.
During her career she had been in several prisons
of which Miss Rogerson had been matron, including
220 WOMAN AND CRIME
that at Reading. Two years prior to the outrage at
Reading, Truelove committed an assault on Miss
Rogerson, for which she was bound over for six
months. She then said to Detective-Sergeant
Clarke, " The time won't be long passing ; I will
leave the town and have something ready for her
(meaning Miss Rogerson) when I come back."
After she had committed the assault on Miss
Rogerson at Reading, she said, " I don't care what
I have to put up with myself ; I have got my revenge,
and revenge is sweet." When asked by Detective-
Sergeant Clarke where she obtained the vitriol, she
said, " Never mind ; I know where to get it, and
how to use it. I did not get it here. I should like
to serve one or two more like it. I did not intend to
hurt the other woman (Mrs Cushan). It serves
her right though, if she mixes up with a - - like
that." She was known in nearly every prison in the
country, having been convicted no fewer than 127
times for various offences. In whatever prison she
was located she created disturbances and put fear
into the minds of the wardresses. She had followed
wardresses about, molesting and threatening them,
sometimes to throw vitriol over them. In conse-
quence the wardresses went in fear of her. A
wardress named Pemberdy told how on one occasion
she saw Truelove carrying a jug without a handle,
and that she told her, Miss Pemberdy, that she would
like to spoil her face. Upon one occasion, while
following Miss Rogerson and Miss Pemberdy, she
said to the former, " You have played your ace, and
VITRIOL-THROWERS 221
it is my turn to play trumps now." She had also
waited for days outside Reading Prison, in con-
sequence of which the wardresses had remained
indoors rather than go out and be insulted.
Another wardress named Miss Bingham wrote
from Hull Prison to say that Truelove had followed
her to church and waited outside until the service
was over. Subsequently discovering that her home
was at Lancaster, she gave a great deal of annoyance
by calling at the house of her parents and waiting
outside. She afterwards sent a postcard to Miss
Bingham at the address of her relatives, worded, " I
am coming. (Signed) Jack the Ripper." Upon
two occasions she had been sentenced to imprison-
ment for assaulting female officials. During the
hearing of her case at the Berkshire Assizes the
prisoner continually interrupted the proceedings
When reference was being made to Miss Rogerson's
injuries, and counsel was describing the condition
of " one of the lady's eyes," the prisoner interrupted
with, " You don't call that thing a lady, do you ? "
It was inevitable that an effort would be made
to establish a theory of insanity, and certainly the
extravagance and pertinacity of her wrongdoing
would seem to suggest that she was not altogether
in her right mind. However, her counsel, Mr
Nash, was proceeding to say that she had been suffer-
ing from delusions for two years, when she interposed
with, " You are no doctor. It's no use proving that
I am mad, because I am not. I never suffered from
delusions." The jury having found her guilty, the
222 WOMAN AND CRIME
judge, Mr Justice Darling, sentenced her to five
years' penal servitude.
Whether sane or insane, one thing is quite clear,
Mabel Truelove has never been dealt with properly
by the law. She ought never to have been allowed to
carry on her career for so long a time, to have been
constantly committing offences and continually going
in and out of prison. She ought to have been dealt
with more severely long ago. She is a fit subject for
an indeterminate sentence. It is clear that it is
dangerous for such a woman to be at large, and during
the whole of her career she has never once exhibited
any intention or desire to reform. She was most
persistent and determined in her wrongdoing from
first to last. Probably her lawlessness and rebellious
behaviour generally is traceable to her early years,
when she may have been without any restraining
influence. Over-indulgent parents may be the source
of as much mischief to their offspring as negligent
ones. The seeds which are sown in childhood's days
bear fruit years hence. The ironically-named Mabel
Truelove seems to be a pretty hopeless case.
About the same time another case of vitriol-
throwing occurred at Hull, where a middle-aged
woman named Selina Spencer threw acid over three
persons, namely, Annie Roberts, a widow, Eliza
Precious, her married daughter, and a little girl
named Lily Dunelly. It appeared that Spencer had
had a business transaction with Mrs Roberts and
had called her a rogue. In consequence of this
Spencer was ejected from the Alexandra Hotel. A
VITRIOL THROWERS 223
few minutes later Mrs Roberts and her daughter
left the hotel. They had not gone far, however, when
they became aware that Spencer was following them.
Eventually the latter came up with them and dashed
the contents of a bottle in the face of Mrs Roberts,
at the same time exclaiming " Take that ! " Upon
Mrs Precious interfering she also was served in
the same way, being so badly burned that she lost
the sight of one eye. Some of the acid also splashed
on to the little girl. Spencer was then overpowered
and prevented doing any further mischief. When
taken into custody she had the effrontery to deny the
charge, in spite of the evidence of eye-witnesses and
the fact that her own hands were burned by the acid.
She was duly convicted and punished.
A case which bore a striking resemblance to that
of Madame Foucault, already dealt with, occurred
at the end of April, 1907. It was generally believed
in fact that the woman in this case had been reading
the newspaper reports of the Foucault case, and
had practically copied the Frenchwoman's methods.
And the fact that the latter was acquitted doubtless
acted as a strong incentive to her to venture on
a similar course of conduct.
The woman's name was Lilian Sarah Woodcock.
She was 27 years of age and was tried at the Old
Bailey. She was charged with throwing a corrosive
fluid hydrochloric acid over Mr John James
Avery, a photographer, of Sandringham Road, Dal-
ston. It appeared that she had been employed as
manageress at a shop kept by a son of Mr Avery, in
224 WOMAN AND CRIME
the East India Dock Road. The relations between
Miss Woodcock and her employer, as admitted by the
latter in the witness-box, were rather more cordial
than those of master and servant. Mr Avery, senior,
was the freeholder of the premises in East India
Dock Road. Miss Woodcock claimed the premises
as her own, as she said they had been given to her
by Mr Avery's son. The latter, however, stoutly
denied this. Well, the woman went so far as to
obtain an injunction in the High Court to restrain
Mr Avery, senior, from entering the place. How-
ever, other proceedings followed, and the injuction
was at length quashed.
On the afternoon of the same day Woodcock
called at the house of Mr Avery, senior, and asked
to see the latter. Mr Avery accordingly came to
the door, but thinking it unwise to discuss matters
with his visitor was about to close the door when the
woman exclaimed, " Take that ! " Although he
saw nothing he felt a burning sensation about the
face. He was removed to the German Hospital,
where it was found that the acid had entered both
eyes and burnt the right side of the forehead and the
right cheek.
The defence put forward by the woman was that
she had intended committing suicide, and that in
knocking the vessel containing the acid from her
hand Mr Avery received some of the contents on
his face. It will be remembered that that was pre-
cisely the story told by Madame Foucault. In this
case it was just as feeble as it was in that of the
VITRIOL-THROWERS 225
Frenchwoman, for the wall at the back of where Mr
Avery stood was marked with the acid, which made
it clear that the latter was thrown. Fortunately Mr
Avery's sight was not affected, although the acid used
is of a very corrosive nature, and if not promptly
attended to will destroy sight.
Fortunately in this case there were no letters, and
the woman was convicted and sentenced to a year's
imprisonment.
I have thus given the particulars of a few
representative cases of vitriol-throwing, a crime al-
most exclusively committed by women. It is a crime
of vindictiveness alone, expressed by the invariable
cry of " Take that ! " and represents woman in one of
her most repugnant aspects.
CHAPTER XII
THE FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS
THE financial frauds either actually perpetrated
or unsuccessfully attempted by women are both
colossal and varied. In the commission of such
crimes women are extensively aided by the natural
influence of their sex. In this direction they are
able to carry out schemes well-nigh impossible to
men. A woman merely by her sex inspires con-
fidence at once. A man who would readily trust a
woman might be very sceptical with a man under
similar circumstances. He would also subsequently
be less inclined to doubt a woman's than a man's
bond fides. Chivalry is not by any means dead
nowadays, in spite of what mutinous women may
say to the contrary. It would be better, perhaps,
if men were upon occasions a little less deferential
to women and less willing to be deceived by them.
It would also be better if men forbade themselves
surrendering so meekly as they occasionally do to
the mere sensual attractions of women, when such
attractions are held out to them as an anaesthetic to
their common sense.
226
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 227
At the same time there can be no doubt that certain
women wield as as I have before pointed out, hypnotic
influence over men, subduing the will of the latter to
such an extent that they are able to manipulate them
at their own sovereign pleasure. Yet in spite of that
fact a man must voluntarily allow himself in the first
instance to be attracted by the woman, because it is a
well-known fact in hypnotics that in order that the in-
fluence may be successfully applied the subject must
be a willing one. On the contrary, however, if the
will of the subject is raised in hostile attitude the
hypnotist will fail in his purpose. Therefore the
woman possessing hypnotic influence over men must
first attract the latter to her by her person before she
can bring her hypnotic influence to bear. And that
is not difficult, because her person is a natural
attraction. But a man ought to have sufficient in-
tuition to know when such attraction is being held
out for a good or for an evil purpose.
Although I maintain generally that criminals are
" made " and not " born," I am quite prepared to
admit that there are exceptions to the rule. And one
of the most remarkable exceptions to be found upon
the records is that of Madame Humbert, whose case I
shall now briefly recall. Madame Humbert told one
of the greatest lies that ever was believed by human
beings. Many suffered in consequence, including
herself and her own kith and kin. The success of
a lie depends not so much on what it consists of as the
way in which it is told. If it is well and truly told it
will probably be taken for granted, human credulity
228 WOMAN AND CRIME
being so invincible and widespread. The latter fact
is amply proved by the continued success of the
confidence trick. Madame Humbert's achievement
consisted of the confidence trick on a colossal scale.
The failure of a lie in the telling is due to the
prickings of conscience of the liar. The reason why
Madame Humbert was so successful with her lie
was because she was totally devoid of conscience.
In addition to which she possessed irresistible per-
sonal influence over men. I have never met the
" divine Therese," but I have no doubt that she
exhibited that singularly subtle fascination which is
characteristic of most female criminals in the " higher
grades " of wrong-doing. Also I have no doubt she
had the " fatal eyes." A good deal of her success
may likewise be attributed to the fact that she carried
on her operations in a country where the men are
imbued with a kind of knock-kneed and addle-
headed deference to the female sex, where the
" eternal feminine " is the eternal consideration.
Wherever you find women thus in ascendancy you
will find them also in rebellion.
I have said that Madame Humbert is an exception
to the rule that criminals are " made " and not
" born," and in order to make this clear I shall go
back to the days and circumstances prior to her
birth. About sixty years ago, then, there came to a
remote village in the south of France, where the
peasantry were mostly ignorant and superstitious, a
shabby old man, who obtained employment as sacris-
tan at the parish church. In addition to this he also
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 229
established himself as a kind of magician at Aussonne
the name of the village in question playing upon
the credulity of the simple-minded inhabitants, and
among other things professing to be able, through
the medium of spells and incantations, to drive the
blight from the vine or secure the affections to women
of the men of their choice. The old charlatan also
put in circulation in a subtle manner that he was
well related and would one day inherit w r ealth. He
altered his story somewhat, at one time hinting that
he was the unacknowledged son of a titled lady of
wealth, and at another gave it out that he w T as the
son of a Portuguese priest of great wealth.
Quite near him there lived a poor farmer named
Capella, whose wife was the mistress of the village
usurer, Pere Duluc. By him the farmer's wife had
three girls, to whom it was believed Duluc would
leave his money. One of the girls married the old
sacristan, whose name was Daurignac. Duluc,
however, left his wealth to somebody else. To
Daurignac and his wife, who lived a hand-to-mouth
existence, there was eventually born a girl. She
was christened Therese, and was subsequently
known to the world as Madame Humbert. So that
it will be seen that Madame Humbert's birth was
most sinister, and her eventual career of crime but
the natural development of the traits inherited from
her charlatan father.
It is not at all suprising to hear that as a child
she was both a liar and a thief. At the yet early
age of seventeen she took the first practical step on
2 3 o WOMAN AND CRIME
her career of crime. She victimised the tradesmen
of Toulouse by obtaining much expensive clothing
and many costly ornaments on the strength of a
story to the effect that she was about to be married
to the son of a wealthy shipowner, who of course,
was then some distance off. As a consequence her
father was sold up and her family reduced to penury.
The success of this transaction the ruin of her
family was a mere detail, and doubtless worried her
not at all encouraged her to enter into others of a
more profitable kind still. There happened to be
living near Toulouse a family of the name of
Humbert, M. Gustave Humbert being a poor pro-
fessor of law, a man of irreproachable character, a
Republican, and a very learned man. When the
Empire fell he was elected to the Chamber of
Deputies, made one of the seventy-five Life Sena-
tors, and eventually rose to be Minister of Justice.
The Humberts had a son, Frederic Humbert, who
was away studying for the Bar. At the age of
nineteen he returned home and came under the
notice of Therese Daurignac. The latter evidently
made up her mind to secure him as a husband, and
in spite of the fact that she was herself a mere
peasant girl, ignorant and coarse, she succeeded in
winning over the boy's mother by telling her a story
of a mythical fortune, which she said was to come
to her and which would help Frederic in his law
career. On the very day of the marriage the lie was
discovered, but too late, for the ceremony had
already been performed. Theresa had conquered,
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 231
and was now allied to a family of repute and con-
sideration. She rudely swept aside all obstacles in
her path, did this female Napoleon of crime. When
she secured young Humbert she was already looking
well ahead, and knew how useful he would be to her.
Madame Humbert, with her distinguished lieu-
tenant, now marched on Paris, which she intended
to make the scene of her greatest victories. Inas-
much as her father-in-law's name was one to conjure
with, she made free use of it. Her first victim in the
capital was a neighbour named Madame Delattre,
whose confidence she secured, and whom she de-
frauded of a sum of money in connection with some
shares. She next launched into a course of reckless
borrowing, which enabled her to live in a most
luxurious manner. It at length became necessary,
however, that she should furnish some sort of justi-
fication for her extensive financial transactions, and
so it came about that vague rumours began to float
about concerning a vast sum of money which was
somehow to come to Madame Humbert. It was
first whispered that the money had been left her by
a Portuguese gentleman, who had been taken ill in
the street, and whom she had succoured. It will be
remembered that Portugal was the country her
father had mentioned in connection with one of his
Munchausen yarns.
Subsequently the vague personality of the bene-
ficent stranger was changed, first becoming an
Englishman and afterwards an American. At this
stage more precise details were forthcoming, and the
232 WOMAN AND CRIME
American was said to be a millionaire named Robert
Henry Crawford. But instead of being taken ill in
the street, it was now rumoured that the poor old
gentleman had been sorely stricken in a train. For-
tunately Theresa was present in the carriage and
saved his life. What exactly was the matter with the
gentleman, and how the lady saved his life, did not
transpire. However, whatever happened, the gentle-
man's gratitude was very deep indeed, for he left her
no less a sum than ^4,000,000. Not a bad " tip " for
a service rendered in a railway train ! To be sure it
is a well-known fact that American millionaires are
in the habit of giving away their millions in a reckless
manner ; it is a weakness of theirs. It is really
amazing that such a feeble and foolish story should
ever have gained general credence. But that it did
is yet another instance of the incurable credulity of
human nature.
In order to " stiffen " the story, as it were, it was
delicately hinted that Madame's benefactor had at
one time been a " friend " of Madame's mother.
Eventually it was rumoured that the gentleman
had died at Nice. Evidently he must have died of
enlargement of the heart. This story having been
worked for all it was worth, it became necessary
that further developments should take place, so, hey,
presto! enter two more Crawfords, named respec-
tively Henry and Robert. These two individuals
produced a will, which was said to have been made
the same day as the will leaving Madame the
,4,000,000, and which bequest it upset somewhat,
DISGUISED HANDWRITING OF FEMALE TRADE SWINDLER.
DISGUISED HANDWRITING OF FEMALE TRADE SWINDLER.
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 233
purporting to leave a third to Marie Dauignac,
sister to Therese, and reducing the latter's inheritance
to a paltry ,11,000 a year. This led to legal pro-
ceedings being instituted, which enabled Madame
to continue borrowing " until the action was con-
cluded." By this time Madame Humbert had got a
goodly array of creditors about her, but they all
believed her fabulous story and were content to wait.
Thence ensued what was perhaps one of the most
remarkable actions-at-law ever fought, in which the
law itself played scarcely a creditable part. The
action was fought by imaginary suitors (the Craw-
fords) and without an original document of any kind
being produced. The law simply took the suitors
for granted, and the word of Madame as gospel, as
conveyed through the medium of her fraudulent
solicitor. So that a considerable portion of the
plunder went into the pockets of the lawyers no
new thing in the world's history. The first thing
agreed to by the suitors was that the securities
representing the ,4,000,000 should be deposited in
an iron safe, and there kept sealed up until the
action had been decided. By this time Madame had
entered into possession of a splendid mansion in the
Avenue de la Grand Armee, and therein was fitted
the safe containing the " securities," the safe being
locked and double-locked and covered with im-
portant-looking seals. The mansion had been pur-
chased from a Count, who was going abroad
purchased but never paid for. The mansion
Madame filled with costly art treasures and price-
234 WOMAN AND CRIME
less furniture, " developing " in other ways by having
an expensive box at the Opera and a castle on the
Seine, the Chateau of the Living Waters, where the
cream of Parisian society was received. Among
Madame's guests were senators, judges, the greatest
officers of the Republic, even two Presidents of
France.
The confidence now reposed in Madame Humbert
was complete and widespread, and she continued to
borrow freely and obtain credit from bankers,
Jewish financiers, jewellers and furnishers, her in-
debtedness to whom at length reached the enormous
sum of four million pounds! To such a height of
mendacity had the little peasant of Gascony mounted
with her Lie! All kinds of devices had been re-
sorted to in order to stave off the inevitable exposure
and gain time. Madame had a " dummy " telephone
fixed up and carried on conversations in the presence
of others with " M. le President," or " M. le Car-
dinal," which never went beyond the transmitter. It
also seemed that the legal proceedings, the action
" Crawford versus Humbert," was to be another
" Jarndyce and Jarndyce." All the while the great
iron safe stood locked and sealed in the mansion of
the Avenue de la Grand Armee, containing the
" treasure " over which the legal war was waging. In
consequence of the delay some of the creditors com-
mitted suicide out of sheer despair.
But now Madame Napoleon was fast approaching
her " Waterloo." At last the Courts made an order
for the safe to be opened. Maitre Du Buit,
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 235
Madame's lawyer, all unsuspicious, cordially agreed,
yea, even welcomed the order, as it would put an
end to the vexatious litigation and place his fair
client, as he thought, in a position that should
be beyond further dispute. But Madame herself
knew that it would be quite otherwise with her, and
on the evening prior to the day on which the safe
was to be opened, she, accompanied by her relations,
took a little trip. The party consisted of herself,
her husband, Mile. Marie Daurignac, her sister,
M. Romain Daurignac and M. Emile Daurignac,
her brothers, and Mile. Eve Humbert, her daughter.
Having thanked her lawyer, and furnished herself
with money and jewels, Madame and her confederate
brood and her innocent daughter disappeared from
the scene of her triumphs. Duly the safe was opened
and the " treasure " revealed a few envelopes and
a metal button!
The iridescent bubble was burst ! Paris may be
said to have gasped, and there was much weeping
and wailing and bitter cursing. Of course the police
at once went in search of the fugitives, but many
months were to pass ere Justice should come by her
own. It was not until December, 1902, that the whole
party were taken at Madrid, at a flat, 33 Calle Ferraz,
where they had been living all the time. The reason
they had contrived to retain their liberty so long was
considered to be in consequence of their having
arrived in Madrid during the King's Coronation,
their visit being unnoticed as there were many
foreigners then in the place. It appeared that
236 WOMAN AND CRIME
Detective-Inspector Caro at length became suspici-
ous of the occupants of the flat in Calle Ferraz, in
consequence of which he made inquiries and had the
place watched. Finally the Chief of the Spanish
Detective Department went to the flat under the
pretence that he wished to learn English and made
some inquiries of the portress. Whereupon the latter
said, " Oh ! they are not English, but French. And
very reserved they are, too ; they never receive any
visits. One of them, a tall girl Eve, they call her
is unwell. 3 '
This decided the police, warrants at once being
issued and handed to Inspector Caro to execute.
The arrests were made at one o'clock in the morning,
the house being surrounded by police and gendarmes.
Caro rang loudly at the bell and called out in
Spanish, " Open, in the name of the law." The
police at the back saw a stout lady Madame's good
living had made her obese come to a window arid
draw up the blind. But on observing the presence of
the officers she suddenly drew down the blind again.
No doubt she was meditating escape by the back
way, but the police had made too sure of her for that.
They were all trapped. About twenty minutes
afterwards a door was opened by Romain Daurignac,
who said, " I am the man you want." But he soon
found that he was only one of those who were wanted,
for all were taken into custody. In due course they
were returned to France, and, except the daughter
Eve, who was released, put upon their trial. The
latter, however, did not take place until August, 1903,
FINANCIAL DEFRATJDERS 237
when they were all convicted, but, astonishing to
relate, were allowed " extenuating circumstances,"
which prevented the judge inflicting such long
sentences as he might otherwise have done. This
clearly shows the dominating influence women have
over the minds of men in France, for if ever there
was a case tried in a criminal court which was devoid
of the smallest tittle of justification for leniency it
was surely this case. In addition to her borrowings
and credit transactions, Madame Humbert had
started the " Rente Viagere," an insurance office
something after the style of the Prudential, or per-
haps more like the late Balfour Building Society,
because it was mixed up with religion, and invited you
to save your money and your soul at the same time.
By this means Madame drew large sums of money
from the poor, whom she thus defrauded as well as
the rich. Surely a fitting subject for " extenuating
circumstances !"
The sentences were five years' solitary confine-
ment each for Madame and her husband, three years
for Romain Daurignac, and two for Emile. Thus
the " divine Therese " and her confederates passed
into an ignominious oblivion.
There have been many minor Madame Humberts,
but perhaps the nearest approach in magnitude to
her case was that of the American woman, Mrs
Leroy Chad wick. Her defalcations amounted to
something like a million pounds. The case came
to light in December, 1904, the year following the
sentence of the Humberts. The methods of Mrs
238 WOMAN AND CRIME
Chadwick were so similar to those of Madame
Humbert's that one naturally supposes that she took
a leaf out of the Frenchwoman's " manual of instruc-
tion." Mrs Chadwick obtained large sums of money
as loans on securities that had no more real existence
than Madame Humbert's " millions." She also kept
the imaginary securities in a safe. She was the wife of
Dr Leroy Chadwick, a man well-known in Cleveland.
She is described as both beautiful and fascinating,
and, judging from the photograph I have before me,
she had the " fatal eyes." That she had a persuasive
and plausible tongue was proved by her achieve-
ments. She, like Madame Humbert, lived most
extravagantly, making large purchases of costly
things and indulging in every possible luxury. On
one occasion she bought eight grand pianos and
presented them all to her friends. She raised a
loan amounting to nearly ,50,000 from the president
of a bank at Oberlin, Ohio, on the security of two
notes totalling 150,000. The notes purported to
be signed by Mr Andrew Carnegie, but were proved
to be forgeries. Mr Carnegie denied having signed
the notes, or that he had ever seen or heard of Mrs
Chadwick. The president of the bank, who, with
the cashier, was arrested for violating the Federal
Laws by excessive loans to Mrs Chadwick, declared
that she swore that she saw Mr Carnegie sign the
notes ,and produced an alleged Carnegie lawyer from
New York who confirmed her statement.
Mrs Chadwick also obtained a loan of ,40,000
from Mr Herbert Newton, a Massachusetts million-
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 239
aire, by representing that she had securities for a
million pounds in a safe at the Wade Park National
Bank in Cleveland. When the safe came to be
opened there were certainly found a number of
papers, but they were all worthless. She was arrested
at midnight on the 7th December, 1904, at the Hotel
Breslin, the detectives invading her bedroom for that
purpose. At the time she was wearing a belt which
was estimated to contain from ^5000 to ; 10,000.
In the dock she appeared to feel her position very
much and fainted. This was probably mere acting,
as she turned out to be a most notorious woman. She
had led a most detestable life. One of her practices
was to bring together financiers and young girls,
whom she would well dine and wine. Having thus
compromised the former, she would obtain loans from
the men under threats of exposure.
But the most remarkable part of the case was the
discovery which was subsequently made that this
woman who had got herself married to Dr Chadwick,
and had moved in the best circles of society, was
none other than a notorious criminal named Lydia de
Vere. A witness from San Francisco first discovered
the identity ; Mrs Chadwick was known to be skilled
in clairvoyance and a hypnotist; so was Lydia de
Vere. The facial resemblance between the two was
seen to be remarkable. Mrs Chadwick refused to
account for her past career. Finally the police were
able to confirm the suspicion and place it beyond doubt
that the two women were one and the same person.
The woman had had a remarkable career. She
240 WOMAN AND CRIME
was born in humble circumstances at Strathroy,
near Woodstock, Ontario, in 1859. Her name then
was Lydia Bigley, and at the age of sixteen she was
arrested for forgery. She was, however, acquitted
on the ground of insanity. It is, however, not at all
likely that she ever was insane. She then went to
the United States, where, under a number of aliases,
she followed a career of extensive swindling. At
Toledo, Ohio, she assumed the name of " de Vere 1J
and practised clairvoyance. In 1890, in order to
extricate herself from the position of financial em-
barrassment into which her extravagance had landed
her, she forged a bill for ^8000. The forgery was
detected, she was arrested, tried, convicted and
sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. Having
served three-and-a-half years she was released.
Why, does not appear. Three years later she con-
trived to get herself married to Dr Chadwick and
once more found herself in a state of affluence.
Mrs Chadwick's extravagant habits found vent in
various ways. She bought heaps of jewellery, took
many girl friends to Europe, had her house re-
decorated while she was at the theatre, presented
her cook with a sealskin mantle and bought a score
of clocks, one of them having solid gold works.
However, her career was brought to a close for the
time being by a conviction and a long term of
imprisonment. It is to be hoped that the authorities
will not be foolish enough to prematurely release
her again.
One of the most remarkable cases ever heard in a
FINANCIAL DEFRATJDERS 241
court of law was that of Mrs Sophia Annie Watson,
an ex-convict, who was charged at the Old Bailey
with having committed perjury in an action for
breach of promise which she had brought against
Major-General H. Terrick Fitz-Hugh, of Hassocks,
Brighton. The latter was a visiting justice, and
made the acquaintance of Mrs Watson while visiting
Aylesbury Prison, where the latter was serving a
term of three years' penal servitude for fraud. The
breach of promise action was heard before Mr
Justice Grantham in the High Court on i5th January,
1904, and ended in a verdict for the defendant. The
plaintiff, who appealed for the modest sum of
; 1 0,000 with which to salve her wounded feelings,
was present in charge of a wardress, Aylesbury at
the time being her residence. It appeared that she
had been released on ticket-of-leave, that she had
then entered the action against the General, and then
had gone to Paris. Afterwards she returned to
London, and, having failed to " report " herself, she
was arrested and taken back to Aylesbury. Hence
the presence of the wardress.
Mrs Watson in the civil action applied for an
adjournment, as she said she was not prepared to go
on with the case. She further stated that when she
was arrested the police took possession of all her
belongings, and would not allow her access to her
papers. Without these, she declared, she was unable
to proceed with the case. The judge, however,
refused to adjourn the hearing, and as Mrs Watson
objected to go into the witness-box, the defence were
Q
242 WOMAN AND CRIME
allowed to give evidence. General Fitz-Hugh went
into the box and gave a categorical denial of every-
thing. During the hearing of the case it transpired
that Mrs Watson had, so far as was then known, been
convicted and imprisoned five times for fraud and
false pretences, the dates and terms being as
follows: 1890, two months (Chesterton); 1895,
twelve months (North London Sessions); 1896,
eighteen months (Brighton); 1899 sixteen months
(Brighton); and 1901, three years' penal servitude
(Lewes). She alleged that the promise was made
while the two were in a train together going from
Hassocks to Brighton. It was admitted by the
defence that the General did travel alone with Mrs
Watson in a first-class carriage from Hassocks to
Brighton, and that he had been with her on various
other occasions. The plaintiff also stated that the
defendant had written many letters to her, but the
latter insisted that he had only written to her on one
occasion, namely, when he wrote requesting her not
to send him any more letters. She said that the
letters he had written her were in the box which the
police seized when they arrested her, and that they
had refused to give them up. One of the jurymen
asked the defendant what became of the letters
which it was admitted the plaintiff had written him,
and he said that he had burnt them. Another jury-
man remarked, " There must have been some friend-
ship between them." Therefore, although they gave
a verdict for the defendant, they would appear to
have entertained some doubt in the matter.
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 243
In the following July Mrs Watson was tried at the
Old Bailey for perjury, the judge being Sir Forrest
Fulton, the Recorder. Mrs Watson conducted her
own defence in a very adroit and clever manner.
She cross-examined the witnesses from the dock.
She was attired in a black dress with a deep white
lace collar. She had with her several sheets of paper
and a lead pencil. But these, it appeared she produced
to be merely for show, because she made but few
notes, using the pencil mostly to punctuate her
observations. She was a short woman and decidedly
plain. She had, however, a very nice voice, and her
manner generally indicated that she had at one time
been in a good position. She cross-examined the
witnesses sharply and generally regarded the proceed-
ings with an air of lofty disdain. Now and again
she would condescendingly agree with observations
made by the judge. General Fitz-Hugh having
repeated the denials he gave in the High Court
action, the prisoner subjected him to a merciless cross-
examination which must have been very trying to
him. She put such questions as, " Did you not ask
me to marry you ? " " Don't you love me any
more ? " " Then you never did love me ? " " Did
you ever intend to marry me ? " and " Did you ever
give me any money ? " To all of which the witness
gave a direct " No."
The prisoner was keen and to the point in her
observations. For instance, while she was referring
to the letters which had been taken from her the
judge remarked : " I'm continually receiving letters,
244 WOMAN AND CRIME
some from people of unsound mind, but I always
put them in the waste-paper basket." To which the
prisoner replied, " But I don't suffer from unsound
mind." She made a very good speech for the
defence, in which she said, " Had you (the jury) been
in the railway carriage, where the General made his
proposal, it would not have taken you long to make
up your minds on the question. I am a persecuted
woman. (Bursting into tears.) The board of magis-
trates at the prison knew the General had proposed
to me, and they told him to make it up with me when
I got out. It is for you, gentlemen, to decide
whether I am such an awful liar, such an awful in-
ventor, as the General tries to make me out." The
speech would appear to have had some weight with
the jury, for having been away three hours they
were unable to agree. The judge then said, " Have
you considered that by your failure to agree you are
imputing perjury, not only to the Major-General,
but to the governor of the gaol?" :< We have,"
replied the foreman, " but we cannot agree." ' Then
I discharge you," said the judge, " with regret, and
this case will be tried again on Thursday before
another jury." Whereupon the prisoner said,
" Thank you, gentlemen, they have committed
perjury."
The case was tried a second time and ended in a
conviction, the prisoner being sentenced to four
years' penal servitude, which certainly did not err
on the side of leniency. The prisoner burst into
tears and exclaimed, " I'll end my life before I'll do
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 245
it; it is a cruel, wicked thing. I'll hang myself
before I'll do it."
After the General had given his evidence he sat
down beside me, and I took the opportunity of
having a chat with him in order to get an impression.
All the time he was talking there was an amused
twinkle in his eye, which gave one the impression
that there was something at the back of his head
which he had not revealed. It seemed clear to me
that something had happened between him and Mrs
Watson. It might have been a practical joke which
developed, as practical jokes have a habit of doing,
on serious lines. It is inconceivable that General
Fitz-Hugh could have meant anything seriously.
She, however, took it so. The General died a little
while ago. The last heard of Mrs Watson was in
July, 1907, when she was again charged with failing
to notify her address. She had not lost her keenness
of repartee. A witness she had summoned to appear
on her behalf had not turned up, when the judge
remarked, " No one likes to come here." To this
she replied, " No, but they like to send other people
here." She was put back till the next sessions, when
she was sent back to prison.
The case of the Charlesworths will be well
remembered. These women, mother and daughter,
like Madame Humbert and Mrs Chadwick, per-
formed an elaborate " confidence trick." Again there
was the mythical fortune and the dupes who believed
the story. Also the younger woman had personal
attractions and was able to manipulate men. It will
246 WOMAN AND CRIME
be recalled that the young woman, while motoring
with her sister and her chauffeur in Wales, was sup-
posed to have met with an accident and been cast
into the sea and drowned. It was alleged to have
occurred at Penmaenbach Point, twenty miles from
her home at Boderw, St Asaph. The car was found
by the cliff-edge with the wind-screen smashed and
the sister and the chaffeur on the rocks more or less
injured. The other lady, Miss Violet Charlesworth,
was missing. At first the story of the accident was
believed, but when it came to be examined closely
it was found to be full of mysterious features. Very
little could be got out of the two survivors, who
appeared to be too shaken up to enter into details.
The path or road where the accident was supposed
to have happened ran beside the sea. The car had
apparently come into collision with the low wall
skirting the rocks. Miss Charlesworth herself was
driving at the time, and she, it was stated by the
survivors, was hurled through the wind-screen into
the sea and lost. However, the following peculiar
features of the incident soon led to doubt being cast
upon the truth of the story: The steering-wheel
was in no way injured ; although, as it was said, the
missing woman had been hurled through a large
sheet of glass she had not been cut at all, for there
was not the slightest trace of blood anywhere ; she
must also have rolled down the cliff, a gentle descent
of about twenty feet, into quite shallow water;
although somebody was on the scene a few minutes
after the accident, the body of the missing lady was
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 247
nowhere to be seen; the chaffeur, who had been
sitting on the side of the car next to the sea-wall, had
been hurled on to a rock full of jagged points which
had not in any way injured him, for he had neither
bruise not scratch; and the missing lady's hat was
found at the bottom of the rocks quite dry.
The sister, whose name was Lilian, although she
had passed through such an unnerving experience,
was peculiarly calm. In fact the nurse at the home
to which the two were afterwards taken said, " I never
saw a woman so calm after such a terrible accident in
my life." It was soon made clear that the accident was
a " fake," that Miss Violet Charlesworth had good
reasons for disappearing, for the tradespeople in the
neighbourhood where she lived were pressing for pay-
ment of their many overdue accounts. One tradesman
in fact had obtained judgment and proceeded to
execution, when he found that the furniture at the
house did not belong to the lady, and so he had to re-
tire discomfited. Another account was that of 28 for
petrol. Further investigation revealed the fact that
Miss Charlesworth had for some considerable time
been carrying on an extensive system of fraud,
obtaining goods and money under false pretences.
She had given out that she was engaged to an army
officer named Gordon, who had gone out to South
Africa and died on his way home, leaving her a large
fortune. The latter was always coming but never
arrived. It was just as elusive as Madame Hum-
bert's " treasure " or' Mrs Chadwick's " securities."
In order to lend a little realism to the story Miss
248 WOMAN AND CRIME
Charlesworth declared that she was going to take
ship to the Bay of Biscay, where her lover and bene-
factor had lost his life, and drop a wreath in the
water. Which touching act of devotion must have
brought tears to the eyes of her creditors. By tell-
ing this story Miss Charlesworth succeeded in obtain-
ing every penny of the savings of a trusting old
woman of her acquaintance amounting to some
hundreds of pounds, as a consequence of which the
woman was left destitute. This, perhaps, was the
worst incident in the whole affair. Miss Charles-
worth used very smart stationery, adorned with a
crest consisting of a cock's head issuing from a
coronet, with the motto : " Mors Potius Macula "
(" Death rather than a stain "). This is a familiar
device of those who make a practice of defrauding
tradesmen, and is of course adopted to inspire
confidence. u Appearances " are everything.
The " accident " occurred early in January, 1909,
and Miss Charlesworth was missing for about a fort-
night. She was then found by a journalist at
Macpherson's Palace Temperance Hotel, Oban,
where she was staying under the name of Margaret
Cameron M'Leod. For a little while she kept up
the farce of denying her own identity, but at length
admitted that she was indeed the missing Miss
Charlesworth. The case then developed on remark-
able lines. Miss Charlesworth became the best
advertised woman in England. She was made a kind
of heroine of by foolish and uftscruplous people. She
was given a lucrative engagement to appear on the
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 249
music-hall stage, where she did nothing but stand to
be gazed at. This was too much even for the British
public, and her reception was in consequence
" mixed." She was also paid a large sum of money to
write her " life," which was perhaps the most arrant
twaddle that was ever dignified with type. And when
one reflects that there are many able and experienced
journalists drifting about Fleet Street who find it
difficult to make a bare living, this sort of thing does
not inspire one with respect for certain features of the
Fourth Estate.
Bankruptcy proceedings were instituted against
Miss Charlesworth and eventually both she and her
mother were criminally prosecuted. They were both
convicted and sent to prison, the young lady thus find-
ing herself committed to an " engagement " different
from either that of the music-halls or the army officer.
It was made clear at the trial that the whole system
of fraud had been conceived and developed by the
mother, who for years had practically been training
her daughter in the deception. That being so one
cannot help but feel somewhat sorry for the daughter
who, by virtue of her personal attractions and
accomplishments (other than those which she
employed in her frauds), deserved a better fate. At
one time she was engaged to a doctor, who for some
reason or other would appear to have put an end to
the connection.
In all these cases of what one may term the " minor
Humberts " we find much the same methods adopted.
A very remarkable case was that of a young English-
250 WOMAN AND CRIME
woman of humble birth who posed as the daughter
of the Earl of Ilchester and called herself the " Hon.
Eva Fox-Strangways." Being a woman of some
education and pleasant of speech, she inspired
confidence and committed many clever swindles in
Europe and America. She seems to have been very
successful in the latter country, being accepted by the
members of the coterie known as the " four hundred "
as a representative high-born British lady. She was
neither beautiful nor accomplished, except in the arts
of deception. She for some time lived in fine style
until at length she reached the end of her tether and
was arrested at Toronto. She was conveyed to New
York and did not at all like it when she was taken to
the " rogues' gallery " to be photographed, measured,
and have her finger prints taken. She protested to
Commissioner Woods that she was forced to live a
life of deceit by the New York " wealthy parvenus,
little nobody s, v who just took me to their bosoms when
they heard that I was an earl's daughter. I simply
had to live extravagantly," she explained, " and as
I was passionately fond of good society, I could not
avoid acting as I did. Why, when I showed my
acquaintances my name in " Burke's Peerage," and
the " Almanach de Gotha," they went into ecstasies of
delight and overpowered me with attentions."
In Canada she had lived as Louise St Clair,
although she signed the police register " Eva Fox-
Strangways." When arrested she was hiding under
the name of Margaret Sinclair. Eventually she
confessed that she was the daughter of an English
FINANCIAL DEFRAUDERS 251
coastguard. At one time she was living at Montreal
as the fiancee of an Australian millionaire, who it was
said allowed her ^500 a month. Rather liberal,
even for a millionaire. It is not surprising to learn
that this allowance " came to an end." For years
this remarkable young woman had lived a life of
fraud, and her success may be gauged by the fact
that among her effects were found visiting cards and
letters of introduction from many most distinguished
persons. She told many different stories about her-
self, most of them being fiction. At one time shie
stated that she was travelling for the firm of George
Newnes, Limited, and among her papers were found
several manuscripts, one being entitled, " Fate's
Rendering, or the Strange Adventures of a Woman
Searching for Happiness." Certainly a strange way
of looking for it.
The woman had defrauded many persons by pass-
ing worthless cheques. She had in her possession
cheque books on the Bank of England, the National
Provincial Bank of England, and the Capital and
Counties Bank. She was originally a governess or
school teacher, but this life was much too slow for
her. Her true name was Strangways. By prefixing it
with " Fox " she gave herself the family name of the
Earl of Ilchester, who owns large estates around her
native place. The " Hon. Eva " was a further
addition she made. Having thus conferred social
distinction upon herself, it only remained for her to
" tell the tale." This she did, as we have seen, most
successfully. For years she lived in fine style on the
252 WOMAN AND CRIME
Continent and in America. She of course had to
vary the tale to suit the company in which she
happened to find herself. Thus at one time she
owned, she said, parts of Achill Island, and at
another 32,000 acres of land off County Mayo,
Ireland. It was quite true, as she declared upon
another occasion, that she was travelling for pleasure,
but hardly true, as she further stated, that she was
also travelling " to do good to the poor." This must
have been material intended for Messrs. Newnes
probably for the Wide World Magazine.
I never met the " Hon. Eva," but I learn that she
is a striking brunette, although not beautiful, and
that she has " alluring eyes." No doubt the " fatal
eyes " again, of the French. No doubt Eva lulled
suspicion in her victims by the anaesthetics of her
personality, the glibness and imperturbability of her
mendacity, the power of her " alluring eyes " and the
invincibility of her will-power. She is described as
having a " determined manner."
From the foregoing it will be seen the class of
crime usually committed by the " financial defrauder,"
and the various methods of committing it.
PART III
THE AIDERS AND ABETTORS OF
CRIME
CHAPTER XIII
THE STAUNTON CASE MRS MCLACHLAN
WE now have to consider a few cases in which women
have figured as aiders and abettors to crime. A
woman may aid and abet either directly or indirectly.
A person who renders active assistance to another
in the perpetration of a crime is a direct aider and abet-
tor. A person who is present during, and witnesses
the perpetration of, a crime by another, or possesses
knowledge that a crime is being committed or is
going to be committed by another, and who takes no
steps to prevent it, is an indirect aider and abettor. In
this respect women may be equally guilty with men,
although force or influence employed by the latter
may be taken into consideration as a mitigating
circumstance. But the mere fact of her being a
woman does not reduce the degree of her guilt.
Even a woman who is herself a victim may be an in-
direct aider and abettor in the crime of which she is
a victim; that is to say, morally so. If a woman
behaves towards a man in such a manner that she
goads him on to the commission of a crime, of which
either she herself or somebody else is the victim, she
is morally and indirectly answerable for that crime.
255
256 WOMAN AND CRIME
And if she uses the natural influence of her sex to
impel a man to the commission of a crime she is
also morally answerable. And it is in this manner
that women enter far more extensively into crime
than is shown, or can be shown, in statistics. She is
answerable for much crime in men.
We shall now proceed to consider our cases, be-
ginning with that of the Stauntons, known as the
" Penge Mystery."
Briefly the facts were as follow : A young fellow
named Louis Staunton married a woman named
Harriet Butterfield, who would appear to have been
of somewhat feeble intellect. It was clear that the
only attraction she possessed for Staunton was the
fact that she was heiress to a considerable sum of
money. Her mother, prompted by her maternal
affection and her own good sense, strongly opposed
the marriage. Her daughter, however, was deter-
mined to have Staunton, for whom she seemed to
have conceived some kind of slavish preference. It
may be that he had taken captive her feeble mind.
Be that as it may, they were duly married and set
up house in Camberwell. Staunton had a brother
named Patrick, who was a kind of an artist. Mrs
Patrick Staunton had a young sister named Alice
Rhodes, to whom it was quite clear Louis Staunton,
even before his marriage to Butterfield, had pledged
his affections. That was the ugly situation which
was created by the ill-fated marriage of Harriet
Butterfield. All were concerned in depriving the
latter lady of her worldly possessions. By marrying
THE STATJNTON CASE 257
her Louis obtained control of her affairs. The next
thing to do was to lay hands on her money. Un-
happily a child was born of the marriage and shared
the hapless fate of its mother.
It was never made clear precisely when the guilty
intimacy which was subsequently known to exist
between Louis and Alice Rhodes began, but probably
the first act of adultery was committed while he and
his wife were living at Camberwell. They were
living in the Loughborough Park Road. During
the illness of Louis's wife Alice Rhodes was con-
stantly in attendance. There was also a servant
named Clara Brown there, a girl of fifteen who sub-
sequently played an important part in the case.
Patrick and his wife were also near neighbours.
Prior to this Mrs Butterfield had been forbidden the
house at Camberwell for no discoverable reason.
This was an indication that the first stage of the crime
had been entered upon. It had been decided that
mother and daughter must not meet again.
The next step was the removal of the whole party
from Camberwell, from which they disappeared,
leaving no trace behind. Patrick and his wife went
down to a place called Cudham, in Kent, where they
occupied a cottage, " The Woodlands," also called
' Frith Cottage." The former, however, was the name
it was mostly known by. It was a very small house,
situated in a remote and little-frequented part of the
country, standing well back from the road, and
hedged in at the back by a plantation. The place
was well chosen for the commission of a crime, being
R
258 WOMAN AND CRIME
so effectually shut off from observation. From
Camberwell Louis and his wife went to live at Gipsy
Hill, Norwood. But they did not stop there very
long. The next move was a decisive one for Harriet
Staunton. With her child she was passed on to
Patrick and his wife and installed in the lonely cot-
tage at Cudham. Louis took a small farm in the
neighbouring village of Little Grays. He had with
him Alice Rhodes, who lived with him as his wife.
He allowed his brother Patrick i a week to look
after his wife. He had already got possession of a
considerable portion of his wife's property. Shortly
after, he caused her to go with him to her solicitor
and sign over the remainder.
Louis was now living in adultery with Alice
Rhodes on the money forcibly obtained from his wife.
The latter and her child were subsequently subjected
to a course of cruelty and neglect that culminated in
the death of both. The child, while in extremis, was
taken to a hospital in London, where it soon expired.
The mother, also almost at her last grasp, was hastily
removed to a house in the Forbes Road, Penge,
where a few hours later she succumbed. Hence the
case came to be known as the " Penge Mystery," al-
though the mystery was not long in being cleared up.
And so this odious crime was fully consummated.
In the meantime Mrs Butterfield was searching
high and low for her daughter, concerning whose fate
she entertained the liveliest misgivings. She had
good reasons for doing so. She had in various places
and at various times seen and questioned iall (the
THE STAUNTON CASE 259
members of what one may call the " gang," all of whom
had lied to her, the two men even threatening her with
violence. The truth came to light in a curious manner.
Louis Staunton was inquiring of a shopkeeper in the
neighbourhood of Penge as to where he could register
a death, some particulars of which he gave, when he
was overheard by a relation of Mrs Butterfield's
named Mr Casabianca, who happened to be in the
shop. Mr Casabianca, who knew all the circumstances
of the missing Harriet Staunton, at once ; becam,e
suspicious. The name of the doctor who had attended
the deceased having been mentioned, he, Mr
Casabianca, called upon him and communicated to
him the facts connected with Harriet Staunton's dis-
appearance. In consequence of this the doctor with-
drew his certificate and advised the coroner. Mrs
Butterfield was summoned, identified her daughter,
and the murder was out.
It is safe to say that no more brutal murder was
ever committed by a set of callous wretches than that
of Harriet Staunton by her husband and his relations.
We have, however, here, only to consider the conduct
of the females in the case. As is generally known
all four were subsequently at the Old Bailey sen-
tenced to death by Mr Justice Hawkins, all
afterwards being reprieved, three sent to penal
servitude and one, Alice Rhodes, released. To
what extent were the women responsible and guilty?
It is quite clear that from the very first both of them
knew perfectly well what it was intended to do with
Harriet Butterfield. It is also clear that they were
260 WOMAN AND CRIME
well acquainted with the progress that was being
made with the crime, to which they gave their coun-
tenance and assistance. Morally they were fully as
guilty as the men. It was, however, held that Alice
Rhodes was riot legally responsible. Hence her
release. But is it conceivable that she was not aware
what was being done with Harriet Staunton while she
was living in adultery with the husband? By the
mere fact of her living as she was doing made her an
aider and abettor in the crime. It was in order to
bring about this situation that Harriet Staunton was
treated as she was. In order to be free of the crime
she would have had to have refused to live with Louis
Staunton under those conditions. She was actually
participating in the plunder which had been extracted
from the victim. She must have known that this
condition of things could not continue indefinitely
and that it was the intention to bring about the death
of Harriet Staunton. When she was met by Mrs
Butterfield and asked as to the whereabouts of
Harriet, which she knew, she lied about it. That
alone made her a confederate. However, she was,
although convicted, held to have no legal respon-
sibility in regard to the life of Harriet Staunton. It
seems to have been a very fine line to draw, and may
have been done out of deference to public opinion,
which was very strong against the sentences.
Mrs Patrick Staunton was clearly a participant in
the crime. It was testified to by the servant already
mentioned, namely, Clara Brown, that she had wit-
nessed acts of cruelty on the part of Mrs Patrick
MRS McLACHLAN 261
towards Harriet. It must be admitted that the
evidence of this witness was not to be relied upon
too implicitly, as at the inquest she had given evi-
dence wholly in favour of the accused. She after-
wards explained that she was influenced to do so by
the male prisoners, who had actually told her what
to say. It is quite possible that that was so. When
she was removed from their influence she altered her
story. Mrs Patrick Staunton not only assisted her
husband in committing acts of violence on Harriet,
but she herself also behaved brutally towards her.
In the way of neglect she was even more guilty than
her husband, for it was more her province than her
husband's to look after her. Harriet was kept con-
fined in a kind of loft, or attic, which was very dirty,
and from which she was never allowed to emerge
until she was taken, more dead than alive, to Penge
to end her miserable existence. Her body was in
a shocking condition, being emaciated and verminous.
There was, of course, the usual conflict of medical
opinion, but there can be no doubt that the poor
woman died from exhaustion resulting from starva-
tion. To see women engaged in such a crime as
this, is to view them in hideous guise.
A curious case was that of Mrs McLachlan.
Although she alone was charged and convicted, I
think the evidence makes it clear that she was at worst
but an accessory after the fact. The case was a
peculiar one and at the time aroused considerable
controversy. Briefly stated, the facts were as
follows :
262 WOMAN AND CRIME
In the year 1862 there lived at 17 Sandyford Place,
Glasgow, a Mr John Fleming, an accountant. His
domestic establishment consisted of his sister, two
daughters, his son John, a lad of twenty, his father,
James Fleming, an old man, and his servants.
Among the latter was a young woman named Jessie
M'Pherson. In addition to his house at Sandyford
Place, Mr Fleming also had a country residence on
the Clyde coast, known as Avondale Lodge, which
was situated between Innellan and Dunoon. Thither
it was his custom to repair with his family to spend
the week-ends.
On the morning of Friday, the 4th of July, Mr
Fleming, with his son, went as usual to his office,
leaving at the house at Sandyford Place, his aged
father, James Fleming, and the servant, Jessie
MTherson. All the others were staying at Avondale
Lodge. Later in the day Mr Fleming and his son
left Glasgow to spend their usual week-end in the
country, without returning to Sandyford Place. On
the following Monday, the ;th, they returned to
Glasgow, going straight to the office. At 4 o'clock
that same afternoon young Fleming returned home
to the house in Sandyford Place, the door being
opened by his grandfather. He therefore naturally
asked what had become of the servant, M'Pherson,
when old Fleming told him that she had gone away
and that he had not seen her since the previous
Friday. At this juncture the lad's father arrived
upon the scene and was at once acquainted with the
disappearance of the servant. He went straight to
MRS McLACHLAN 263
the latter's bedroom and found the door locked. The
room was situated in the basement next to the pantry.
The key of the latter was tried in the lock of the bed-
room and found to fit it. The door being thus opened
the Flemings entered the room. Upon the floor in
the middle of the room lay the body of Jessie
MTherson, who had been most brutally murdered.
Dr Watson was summoned and made an examina-
tion of the body. He found no fewer than over forty
wounds on head, face, neck and wrists. The police
were also summoned, Constable Cameron and Dr
Joseph Fleming, police surgeon, arriving at the house
about 4.30. Upon the premises being examined
bloodstains were found in various places, including
in a room used by old Fleming. There was also
blood on some clothing belonging to him. The
weapon which had been used by the murderer was
found in the scullery and consisted of a cleaver.
Other bloodstains also made it clear that the body
had been dragged from the kitchen to the room where
it was found. Some silver was found to be missing,
also clothing belonging to the deceased.
Who had committed this terrible deed and what
was the motive? Suspicion at once fixed upon the
old man. From the nature of the wounds it was made
clear that the crime was probably committed either
by a woman or an old man, because they were not
the blows of a strong person. That at least was the
conclusion arrived at by the doctors. But although
it turned out to be correct in this case, it would not
be safe to always draw the same inference under
264 WOMAN AND CRIME
similar circumstances, as either a woman or an old
man might be capable of delivering very severe blows.
However, there were other facts which directed the
finger of suspicion towards old Fleming. In spite of
the fact that he was well-known to be of a most
inquisitive nature, particularly in regard to the doings
of the servants, he had not made a single inquiry of
the many persons he had spoken to since the previous
Friday as to the whereabouts of the missing servant,
nor in any way referred to her disappearence. On
the Saturday morning he had himself opened the
door when the milkboy called and said no milk was
required a thing never known to have happened
before. It was also discovered that some portions
of the kitchen and bedroom floors had been recently
washed. The old man stated that on the previous
Friday night, while in bed, he heard screams, but
took no notice as he thought they emanated from
some unruly persons in the street. He varied this
story, however, on another occasion by saying that
he thought perhaps Jessie had some friends with
her.
The first practical step taken by the police was to
arrest old Fleming, who was held for examination.
It is, however, pretty clear that in consequence of
certain information having been conveyed to them
that they at the same time were making investigations
in another direction. As an outcome of these old
Fleming was at length released and a Mr and Mrs
McLachlan arrested. This Mrs McLachlan, it should
be explained, was a friend of the deceased woman
MRS McLACHLAN 265
and had formerly been a fellow servant in the
Fleming household. Her husband was a seaman,
and it being subsequently proved that at the time of
the crime he was away, he was released. What was
the evidence against Mrs McLachlan? Well, she
was found to have pawned the missing silver, to be
in possession of the missing clothing of the deceased,
and to have clothing of her own which was blood-
stained. She was also known to have visited the
house in Sandyford Place on the day of the crime.
After she was taken into custody she emitted a
declaration, in accordance with Scotch criminal law,
the contents of which was kept secret by her counsel
till after the trial. He did so from the best of motives,
although it was considered by some to have been
an unwise thing to have done.
We now have two persons closely concerned in
this murder, one in custody and charged with having
committed it, the other at liberty, but under a heavy
cloud of suspicion. The remarkable part of this case
is the extremely flimsy motive for it. Let us examine
the motives which either or both these persons might
have had. Take the case of the woman first.
Robbery was the only possible motive she could have
had. She was known to be poor and many pawn-
tickets were found in her possession. But this brings
us face to face with a somewhat incredible state of
things. It seems scarcely conceivable that a woman
would so brutually do to death a close friend, such
as the deceased woman was, for the mere sake of
robbery. It is only a very desperate character
266 WOMAN AND CRIME
usually a habitual criminal who deliberately com-
mits murder for mere robbery, and Mrs McLachlan
was neither one nor the other. On the contrary, she
was known to be a woman of a very kindly disposition,
and moreover was in a bad state of health. Again
if robbery was the only motive why so many wounds ?
It was not necessary to mutilate the body in that
fashion for the sake of mere robbery. Another
argument against this theory is the fact that Mrs
McLachlan must have known that old Fleming was
in the house, that she would have to silence him as
well as the girl, and that it was futile to deal with
one without also dealing with the other. It is incon-
ceivable that she imagined that she could commit the
double crime of murder and robbery while the old
man was in the house without attracting his attention.
Why, the mere fact of her calling there, which she
was in the habit of doing as a friend of the dead girl's,
would be sure to draw his attention towards her.
Thus this motive almost entirely disappears. But
robbery was committed, and we shall presently see
pretty plainly under what circumstances.
Now for the motive which old Fleming may have
had. In the first place he was known to be, old as
he was, a man of lascivious habits. Subsequently
it transpired that he had a short time before been
" carpeted " by the committee of a religious body of
which he was a member for having had an illegimate
child by a woman not named. As he appeared very
contrite, and made a clean breast of everything, he
was pardoned. In effect the celestials said, " We
MRS McLACHLAN 267
forgive you this one, but please have no more." The
incident was recorded in the minute book, from which
obscurity it was subsequently lifted in defence of
the hapless woman, McLachlan. The old Don Juan
was also known to have been in the habit of paying
unwelcome attentions to the female servants of
the Fleming household, particularly so " favouring "
Jessie MTherson. The latter had more than once
complained to her friends of the conduct of " that old
devil," appearing considerably distressed at the treat-
ment she was receiving at his hands.
So here we have a motive, which, instead of
weakening the more it is looked into, as in the case of
that of the woman McLachlan, becomes stronger
and more convincing. In the declaration made by
McLachlan and already referred to, she stated that
when she arrived at the house she went to the kitchen
where old Fleming was. All three had drink.
During the conversation which ensued Jessie said
something to the effect that if she liked to open her
mouth she could say something that would do a certain
person no good, the allusion of course being to old
Fleming. McLachlan was then asked to go out and
fetch more drink, which she accordingly did. When
she got back she heard groans and found Fleming
standing with a cleaver in his hand, over the prostrate
form of her friend, whom he had already severely
wounded. Later on, when she, McLachlan, was
about to go for a doctor the old man attacked the girl
again and finished her off.
What happened at the house in Sandyford Place
268 WOMAN AND CRIME
while McLachlan was gone for the drink? It seems
to me that old Fleming must have made some attempt
to accomplish his purpose with the girl, that an alter-
cation took place, and that the girl expressed her
determination to inform Mr John Fleming of every-
thing upon his return. She probably also threatened
to expose him publicly. Something of the kind must
have happened, when he attacked her with the
cleaver. It would have been a serious matter, not
only for him, but also for his son and his son's family,
for such an exposure to have been made. What with
the drink, the girl's resistance and threats, no doubt
the old man became infuriated and attacked her with
the weapon which was ready to hand. The first few
blows were probably so struck, and he subsequently
deemed it expedient to silence her altogether.
Thus McLachlan became involved in the affair
and could not help herself. No doubt the old man
used threats towards her if she did not consent to
remain silent, giving her the silver and the garments
as an inducement for her not to inform against him.
In her declaration she explained that the silver was
given to her by old Fleming to pawn, and I believe
these were the circumstances under which he did so.
McLachlan, realising that in any event she was in-
volved, and being poor, took the bribe. She ex-
plained the presence of bloodstains on her own
clothing by stating that she had tended the deceased
girl before she had been attacked a second time, her
clothing thus coming in contact with the blood from
Jessie's wounds.
MRS McLACHLAN 269
The case created tremendous excitement and
engendered feelings of partizanship, there being the
" McLachlanites " and the " Flemingites." The
judge who tried the case, Lord Deas, was grossly
partial to Fleming, treating the unhappy prisoner in
a hostile manner throughout the trial. His summing-
up was a masterpiece of partiality and confused fact.
It was, therefore, not surprising that the jury should
have returned their verdict with positively indecent
promptitude, taking only a quarter of an hour to
deliberate. The verdict was " Guilty " and the
prisoner was sentenced to death. The sentence was
subsequently commuted to penal servitude for life.
The feeling against old Fleming was so strong that
he was hooted and hounded from place to place.
On the 5th October, 1877, Mrs McLachlan was
released on ticket-of-leave from Perth General
Prison. She had ^30 which she had earned
while in prison. Her husband was dead. She
afterwards went to America, where she was joined by
her son. She married again and settled down in the
new world. On the i4th February, 1899, she died
of heart disease at Port Huron, Michigan.
Old Fleming had been gathered to his forebears
long before Mrs McLachlan was released. Thus all
the principal characters that figured in the " Sandy-
ford Mystery" have been summoned to that great
Assize where alone the full truth of it shall be
revealed.
CHAPTER XIV
MME. MURAVIOVA THE FEMALE SPY PERJURY AND
DIVORCE MADAME GUERIN
IN a previous work of mine,* published a few years
ago, in writing of the poisoner I made use of the
following words : " The poisoner of the future will
not resort to any of the old blundering methods in-
cluded in Schedule A, he will eschew alkaloids
altogether, he will never be discovered through the
medium of the tests of March, Reinsch, and others,
he will even defy the law of circumstantial evidence,
for his weapons will be microbes. Every infectious
disease has its particular bacilli typhoid fever,
pneumonia, cholera, enteritis, and so forth."
Only three years later these words were verified
by the case of Count Buturlin, who was poisoned by
the administration of disease germs. Count Buturlin
was an employe of the Ministry of the Interior at
St Petersburg. He died after a week's illness. It
appears that Count Patrick O'Brien de Lacy, a
Russian of Irish descent, who, curiously enough,
was a cousin of the notorious Countess Tarnovski,
whose case I have already dealt with,t plotted to kill
*"The Story of Crime" (1908), T. Werner Laurie,
t Page 164.
270
MME. MURAVIOVA 271
off a number of his wife's relations so that she might
thus inherit certain property. This connection
between Count de Lacy and Countess Tarnovski is
another instance of crime running in families. At
the time of the poisoning of Count Buturlin Countess
Tarnovski was in prison in Italy. Count de Lacy
offered to give a Dr Panchenko ,2,000 if he would
"remove" his brother-in-law, ,10,000 if he would
deal similarly with his father-in-law, and ,50,000
for the disposal of his mother-in-law, who was the
richest of all. Dr Panchenko had a mistress named
Madame Muraviova, who was charged with the
other tw r o, and it is concerning the part she played in
the crime alone that we have here to deal with. Dr
Panchenko, who was apparently a comparatively
poor man, was keeping Madame Muraviova in con-
siderable luxury. Evidently he was obtaining
money in divers discreditable ways, being encour-
aged and assisted so to do by his mistress. He thus
became a ready hireling ever on the look out for any
kind of means to " raise the wind." He became
acquainted with Count de Lacy, in whom he found
an enterprising and lucrative patron. Suspicion
first became aroused by a young man, who occupied
a flat adjoining that of Panchenko's, overhearing a
conversation between the doctor and his mistress.
During this the latter asked, " Did you do it
properly?" To which the doctor replied, "Well, I
squirted two full doses, although one would have
been enough."
The young fellow reported the matter to the
272 WOMAN AND CRIME
police, who, having made inquiries, promptly
arrested Count de Lacy, Dr Panchenko, and
Madame Muraviova. In accordance with criminal
law in Russia, the accused were subjected to fre-
quent and searching examinations in prison, an
ordeal which is similar to the magisterial interroga-
tory which prevails in France, and the ordeal which
accused persons in America are sometimes subjected
to, and which is known as the " third degree." Such
a proceeding would not do in this country, where
an accused person is not called upon to incriminate
himself. The nearest approach to it is the perfunc-
tory examination which a suspected person may be
called upon to undergo on the part of the police,
when he is asked to account for his movements on
a certain date. If he could do so he would at once
be released ; if not, he would be held for further in-
quiries to be made. But he would not under any
circumstances be called upon to admit that he had
committed any crime. It would be for the police to
prove that he had.
Such methods, repugnant as they may appear to
us, do occasionally succeed in extorting a confession
from a guilty person and so paving the way to the
administration of justice. It was so indeed in the
case under notice. Dr Panchenko owned up at
length that he had brought about the death of Count
Buturlin, having been bribed so to do by Count de
Lacy. He, however, declared that Madame Mura-
viova was innocent, that she knew nothing about it.
But this was clearly not the case, for there was ample
MME. MTJRAVIOVA 273
evidence to prove that she knew perfectly well how
the large sums of money which the doctor was
receiving were procured, and from whom they came.
She had made injudicious statements, as many other
criminals have done before and will doubtless do
again, concerning the money she and the doctor
expected shortly to come into.
The way in which the crime was carried out was
described by Dr Panchenko, and forms somewhat
grim reading. It appeared at the time that cholera
was very prevalent in St Petersburg, and it was at
first contemplated to bring about the death by in-
jecting or administering the germs of cholera by
placing them on bread buttered and covered with
caviare. But this was afterwards abandoned, why
does not appear clear. It was afterwards decided to
inject diphtheria toxin. The doctor was introduced
to Buturlin, whom he got interested in a certain
drug, which was supposed to be very beneficial to
the system. After a while Buturlin became a patient
of Panchenko's, and after a good deal of persuasion
allowed him to inject, as was supposed, some of the
drug by way of experiment. The injection was made
in the thigh. Instead, however, of the drug being
administered, it was the diphtheria toxin which was
injected.
The germs were obtained from a chemist, who
believed the doctor's story that they were required
for experiments on rabbits. Two injections were
made, and soon after Buturlin fell ill. Before he
died he said, " Three months long they were at me
s
274 WOMAN AND CRIME
to have the injections, but I refused as though I had
a presentiment of what was coming." The father
of the deceased man, General Buturlin, demanded a
post-mortem, which was readily agreed to by
de Lacy, who did not believe that anything in-
criminating could be discovered. Nor did the
doctor. Nor would anything incriminating have
been discovered, it seems pretty clear, had it not
been for the injudicious utterances of Madame
Muraviova and the conversation between her and
the doctor, which was overheard by the young fellow
in the adjoining flat as already explained. All were
convicted.
The part of a spy is ever a despicable one; not
infrequently it leads to crime and loss of life. There-
fore, in considering the female criminal, we must
include the part she plays as a spy.
It seems to me that one of the lowest uses to
which a woman can put her personal attractions and
influence of her sex is that of discovering or extort-
ing information from men for the purpose of using
it to their destruction. Every man's hand, be he
criminal or public benefactor, must be against such
women. To voluntarily prostitute the gifts of
nature to base treachery for the purposes of gain is
to earn the detestation of every person with an atom
of decency in their composition. Yet we have
women constantly so engaged. Now and again they
come to a deservedly untimely end, as in the case of
the woman known as " Marie Derval," who committed
suicide in a London hotel in the early part of 1906.
THE FEMALE SPY 275
The methods of the ordinary female political spy
are compounded of treachery and deceit. Being
young and attractive no others would be any good
for the part she easily wins her way into the con-
fidence of youthful military officers, whom she
induces to betray State secrets. Sometimes they
are discovered. A few years ago a young and beau-
tiful woman named Peterson was arrested at Kiel
in Germany on suspicion of being a French spy.
Posing as a teacher of languages she had entered
into a love affair with a non-commissioned officer
named Dietrich, of the Explosives Department, for
the purpose of inducing him to reveal important
German naval secrets. She had, by the exercise of
her arts of fascination, attained complete ascendancy
over the young fellow, who was found to be supply-
ing her with the formula for the manufacture of
German smokeless powder, and the situation of port
mines. The attention of the authorities was first
drawn to her by the ample funds she always seemed
to have at her disposal, and her disinclination to
report to the police her frequent changes of address.
A notorious Russian female spy was Madame
Joutchenko, whose methods were somewhat similar
to those of " Marie Derval." She joined the
Terrorists, whose plans she betrayed to the authori-
ties. For this she was paid a handsome monthly
salary. She began her career as a spy at the early
age of twenty-three, her first and biggest act of
betrayal being that of the Raspontine plot against the
Czar in 1895. She was the cause of many persons
276 WOMAN AND CRIME
losing their lives and of many others being sent
into exile. She even went to big German cities,
where exiled Russians were located, whom she
fraternised and plotted with, only to basely betray
them afterwards to the authorities. In order to avoid
suspicion she would herself be taken, but would con-
trive, by arrangement with the authorities of course,
to escape while on the way to exile. Through
her instrumentality a young girl named Frania
Froumkin was sent to the gallows in connection with
a plot to kill the Prefect of Moscow. This con-
temptible woman would also work her way into the
confidence of families, and then betray them to the
Government, as a consequence of which many per-
sons found themselves on their way to Siberia. No
work was too dirty for this handsome traitress to do
in pursuit of her blood-money.
Sometimes women are indirectly the cause of
young soldiers betraying the secrets of their own
country. A case in point was that of the notorious
French beauty known as La Belle Lison. A young
naval officer named Lieutenant Ullmo was deeply
fascinated with her, and was ready to gratify her
most costly whim. As is usually the case with such
women her tastes were extremely expensive, as a
consequence of which young Ullmo found himself in
pressing need of funds. He obtained them by
selling some of his country's secrets to a foreign
Power. He was, however, discovered, and put on
trial. An important witness against him was the
woman who had ruined him, who had robbed him of
PERJURY AND DIVORCE 277
his honour and outraged his principles. She had
the boldness to testify that she had threatened to
leave the infatuated youth unless he continued 'to
supply her with all she required in the way of
" jewels and soft, clinging silk robes." She also
confessed that they spent days together lying on the
floor of a beautiful villa, inhaling the fumes of
opium. In the end the young man was publicly
degraded and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
Nothing appears to have been done with the woman,
although it seems clear that she ought to have been
held guilty as an accessory. But in such cases
Justice rarely comes fully by her own.
Another instance of a woman having aided and
abetted in a crime without being convicted of it was
in connection with a certain divorce case. A man
brought an action for divorce against his wife,
making a relation of his co-respondent, from whom
he claimed damages. In the end the divorce was
granted and damages awarded to a considerable sum.
The co-respondent knew that perjured evidence had
been given by an important witness for the petitioner,
so he set himself to unmask this individual. In the
meantime he had to pay the damages into court,
where they would remain pending the result of his
investigations. Fortunately, it was not long before
evidence of the perjury was forthcoming, the witness
in question being arrested and charged with the
offence. This created a peculiar situation. If the
man in question were acquitted the divorce would
stand and the money become payable to the peti-
278 WOMAN AND CRIME
tioner. If, however, the prisoner were convicted,
the divorce would be dismissed and the money
returned to the co-respondent. At the trial the wife
who had been divorced voluntarily came forward as
a witness for the defence in order, as she put it, that
" the innocent might not suffer." She had no sort
of interest whatever in the prisoner himself, but the
woman who had been convicted, as it were, of
having committed adultery with a relation of her
husband's, suddenly arose as a kind of guardian
angel of the wronged and persecuted to stay the hand
of injustice.
However, counsel for the prosecution held quite
a different opinion as to her motive, and completely
unmasked her. Never did a " guardian angel " cut
such a sorry figure in this sinful world. It was quite
painful to behold her floundering about in a kind
of quagmire of mendacity. It was a grievous thing
to see a young, handsome, and refined-looking
woman in such a position, being compelled as she
was to go through all the obscene details of an
alleged filthy liaison. Her cross-examination lasted
for about two or three hours, and it was nearly as
much of an ordeal to me to witness it as it must have
been to her to endure it. I feel sure that if she could
have been enlightened beforehand as to what was in
store for her she would have hesitated before coming
forward in the interests of the " innocent." One
derives a little comfort from this reflection, in spite
of the fact that I afterwards saw her walking non-
chalantly along the street, apparently indifferent to
MADAME GTJERIN 279
her recent uncomfortable experience. But I think
such women are not so indifferent as they profess to
be. To be sure they are shallow-minded, and I
suppose a little braggadocio acts as a kind of emul-
sion to their lacerated feelings.
Well, in the end, the prisoner was convicted and
sent to penal servitude. So the " innocent " had to
suffer, the divorce fell to the ground, and the
damages were returned to the co-respondent.
This is, of course, no isolated case in regard to
the perjury which was proved to have been com-
mitted in the divorce court, there being more
perjury committed there than in any other court in
the Kingdom. Therein female perjurers have
committed crimes innumerable, for which they have
never been punished, nor of course been given
statistical credit. It is not often, as in the above
case, that mendacity in the divorce court has a sequel
in a criminal court. It would be far better if it were
so. Who can estimate or describe the punishment
visited upon the innocent by such perjury? Yet
scarcely anything is done to check or minimise it.
I pass on to another form of aiding and abetting,
taking the case of Madame Guerin. It has been
many times proved that matrimonial agencies some-
times lead to crime. We have recently had several
cases of men having systematically duped women
through the medium of matrimonial agencies. We
have seen how the portentous criminal, Mrs Bell
Gunness, lured her victims to their doom through
the agency of specious matrimonial advertisements-
280 WOMAN AND CRIME
We know that the notorious criminal, Dougal,
secured several of his victims through matrimonial
agencies. In fact, all kinds of crimes, up to the
most serious one of murder, have been traceable to
the aid rendered the criminal by a matrimonial
agency. This state of things seems to call for some
interference on the part of the Legislature.
Madame Guerin appears to have made contem-
plated matrimony a kind of handmaiden to system-
atic crime. She had as a companion in her dealings
a man known as M. Cesbron. They ran a bogus
matrimonial agency at Versailles. All their trans-
actions were of a fraudulent nature, as they never
at any time intended to complete any of them. They
employed two young women known as Miss Smith
and Miss Northcliff , who posed as " heiresses," and
to whom many applicants were introduced with the
ultimate object of marriage. But so soon as certain
payments had been procured from the ardent swains
the " heiresses " mysteriously disappeared, leaving
behind not a trace of their going. Thus, whatever
may have been the " intentions " of the male appli-
cants, those of the females concerned in the business
were only too painfully obvious. Many men were so
duped, including an attache at the French Ministry
of Fine Arts.
Another victim of Madame Guerin's was a M.
Lalere, who lost 35,000 francs over his matrimonial
negotiations. Madame had offered him the pick of
a whole bevy of " wealthy heiresses." While at the
Opera at Covent Garden on one occasion she pointed
MADAME GUERIN 281
to three ladies in a private-box and told Lalere that
he might take his choice. He selected one who
happened to be Miss Northcliffe, because, said he,
she was the youngest and prettiest. Finally, as
usual, the ladies mysteriously disappeared.
While in London Madame Guerin and Cesbron
became acquainted with a Dr Hebert, a London
physician, to whom they came with an invention for
a new process for the sterilization of milk. In due
course the lady introduced the subject of her matri-
monial agency, trotting out her " wealthy " though
elusive " heiresses." As in the case of Lalere she
offered the doctor the " pick of the bunch," and the
latter's choice fell upon Miss Smith. In this case
the intentions of the woman and her confederate
were far graver than those in any of their other nego-
tiations. Dr Hebert was possessed of a considerable
sum of money which lay with the Credit Lyonnais.
Guerin and Cesbron determined to secure this money
by any means whatsoever. Representing, as usual,
that Miss Smith was wealthy, they also declared
that she was in love with Dr Hebert. In fact, they
told the story so well that the doctor quite believed
them, making serious preparations for marrying the
lady.
They further represented that Miss Smith had
much money in a certain bank in Paris, and endea-
voured to induce Dr Hebert to transfer his account
to that bank. In fact to join his account with that
of Miss Smith's. In view of subsequent events this
was a sinister move. However, it did not succeed,
282 WOMAN AND CRIME
although this did not deter them from carrying out
their other plans. It was quite clear that the two had
now resolved to murder Dr Hebert and so obtain
possession of his property. So they worked the
" heiress " trick for all it was worth. In the mean-
time they had taken a lonely villa at Bois le Roi,
where they induced Dr Hebert to visit them and
remain for a few days prior to his marriage with Miss
Smith. They had already had a large trunk brought
to the villa. Dr Hebert had not the slightest
suspicion that the Cesbrons there can be no doubt
that the two were man and wife were entertaining
any mischief towards him. They all laughed and
joked together, and appeared to be the best of
friends. One incident, however, was significant,
viewed in the light of subsequent events. Cesbron
had a bout with the doctor as a test of strength, which
served to demonstrate that the latter was much the
stronger of the two. This was doubtless purposely
introduced by Cesbron in order that he might ascer-
tain this fact.
On the evening of the day that this took place Dr
Hebert was sitting in a room by himself, writing.
Suddenly there was an explosion behind him and
a bullet passed into his neck behind the left ear,
cutting through the tongue and soft palate and
breaking several teeth. Dr Hebert turned round
and beheld Cesbron standing near him with a
smoking pistol in his hand. The doctor at once
rushed at his assailant, who, however, doubtless
remembering the contest of strength which had taken
MADAME GUERIN 283
place a few hours before, fled before him. Dr
Hebert now endeavoured to make good his escape.
Finding himself in the garden he made for the gate.
It was locked. This was doubtless one of the many
precautions which had already been taken to prevent
his escape. Dr Hebert's position was now indeed
a perilous one. He climbed to the top of the wall,
his head thus becoming a target against the sky. A
second shot was fired which hit Hebert, who fell
back into the garden. Fortunately for him the night
was dark. He crawled into some bushes, and by
this means contrived to get away from the
house.
This occurred on the evening of Qth November,
1906. Dr Hebert, who does not appear to have
been pursued by his assailants with any degree of
determination, staggered or crawled along until he
arrived, bleeding profusely and in a half -fainting
condition, at the police office at Fontainebleau.
Here he was able to furnish the police with details of
his negotiations with the Cesbrons, who, it appeared,
were already known to them, and of the attack upon
him at the villa at Bois le Roi. For some time after-
wards Dr Hebert lay in hospital. The woman was
arrested soon after at Versailles. In consequence
of a number of charges she made against the doctor
the latter was detained by the police for some time.
It was at length, however, made clear that the woman
was lying, an art in which she had become a past-
mistress, so Dr Hebert was released and produced
as a witness against Madame Guerin, or Mrs
284 WOMAN AND CRIME
Cesbron, as she unquestionably was. She was also
known to the police as " Madame Cent Kilos."
Mrs Cesbron was not convicted until July 1907,
when she was sentenced to three years' imprison-
ment. In the meantime every effort h?d been made
to discover the whereabouts of Cesbron, but without
success. He has not, so far as I have been able to
ascertain, yet been taken. But he has been sen-
tenced in default to two years' imprisonment.
Neither of these sentences, taking into considera-
tion the gravity of the crime, errs on the side of
severity. They are in fact altogether inadequate. It
was only by a fluke that they did not succeed in
accomplishing what they undoubtedly intended
doing, namely, murdering Dr Hebert. We re-
peatedly find the criminal law in France being
strangely administered. Here we have the man who
actually committed the deed being given a lighter
sentence than the woman, who, prima facie, was
merely an accomplice. It is quite inexplicable. If
this case had occurred in England it is safe to say
that the sentences would have been long terms of
penal servitude, if they had not been actually for life.
And such sentences would certainly have been nearer
justice than the trivial sentences passed in France.
Apparently, the French authorities, in giving the
woman the heavier sentence, regarded her as the
organiser of the crime, but there was certainly no
evidence of this. It is unusual for the French criminal
courts to deal harshly with female offenders, as we
have already seen in many cases. The Cesbron case
MADAME GUERIN 285
appears to be an exception. Unfortunately, in addi-
tion to the police failing to take Cesbron, they also
failed to trace the whereabouts of the two decoys,
the women who passed as " Miss Smith " and " Miss
Northcliffe." The identities of these two women,
who of course were clearly confederates, were never
made known. The names they were known by were
of course fictitious. They must have been women
of fairly good education, with an appearance of
refinement and personally attractive, to have de-
ceived the men they did. An attache of the French
Ministry of Fine Arts is scarcely likely to be quite a
fool, nor could Dr Hebert, a London physician, be
so described. Yet these two men were completely
deceived and victimised. Dr Hebert has admitted
that he quite believed what was said concerning
Miss Smith being in love with him. These two
women must have played their parts exceedingly
well, in addition to being equipped by nature for so
doing. It is a great pity that the true identities of
women who lent themselves to such odious work
were not made known. Admitted their comings and
goings were very mysterious, still they were seen
frequently and openly, and ought to have been
traced.
Altogether the conduct of this case does not reflect
creditably upon the French police.
CHAPTER XV
PROVOCATION AND MURDER THE " UNWRITTEN LAW "
THE THAW CASE A SEDUCER OF MEN
A FEW years ago there occurred a peculiar case a
tragic case which displayed a phase of the female
character which has a distinct bearing on crime.
Although the woman was a victim, she was also, in a
way and indirectly, an aider and abettor in the crime of
which she was a victim. This fact was taken into con-
sideration by the authorities, who, although the man
concerned was convicted of murder most deliberate
and premeditated, refrained from executing him.
The case was the outcome of what is euphemis-
tically termed a " love affair." It terminated in the
man killing " the thing he loved." There can be no
doubt that when he did so he was suffering from a
certain form of mental derangement which neither
the medical profession nor the law would seem to
have yet quite decided to recognise. The latter did,
however, in the present case, as I have already
pointed out, admit it to their consideration as a miti-
gating circumstance. There have been other cases
of the kind, notably the case of George Victor
Townley, in 1863, over whose state of mind there
286
PROVOCATION AND MURDER 287
was waged for some time a perfect war of words.
The medical profession were as usual divided about
it I wonder if the time will ever come when doctors
will agree about anything appertaining to their pro-
fession? and the law officers did not appear to
know quite what to do. Finally, they would seem
to have decided to compound with their consciences
by condemning the man to penal servitude for life.
However, the man himself definitely decided matters
by committing suicide in prison. He threw himself
from an upper gallery to the floor below. I believe
it was this suicide which led to the introduction of the
wire screens which now stretch from gallery to gallery
in all our prisons.
The case of Victor Townley is so strikingly similar
to the one I have opened this chapter with that I
shall briefly deal with both, as being parallel cases,
identical in all their salient features, although they
are divided in time by half a century of years. The
comparison is the more interesting from the fact that
it serves to prove that the relations between the
sexes is in no way affected by time, and that man is
still occasionally called upon to endure at the hands
of fickle woman suffering too acute for his mental
stamina.
This Victor Townley, then, a man somewhat
richly endowed intellectually although poor indeed
in worldly wealth, fell deeply in love with a young
woman named Bessie Goodwin, the granddaughter
of Captain Goodwin, of Wigwell Grange, Derby-
shire. Her guardian would not, however, hear of
288 WOMAN AND CRIME
the match, as he not unnaturally regarded it as
scarcely likely to prove advantageous to his grand-
daughter. Townley, however, although poor, came
of a respectable family. He was living at Hendham
Vale, near Manchester, where he earned a precari-
ous livelihood by teaching languages and music. At
first and for some time Bessie Goodwin appeared
to fully reciprocate the affection of her admirer,
although, in the light of subsequent events, the sin-
cerity of her reciprocity must have been more
apparent than real. There was, however, no doubt
about the sincerity of Townley's affection, which was
destined to be a serious matter for both.
In view of the opposition to the match on the part
of Captain Goodwin, the courtship of the couple had
to be carried on clandestinely. This went on for
some time, when suddenly the conduct of Miss
Goodwin towards Townley underwent a change.
Her ardour cooled many degrees, and she prevari-
cated over her appointments. This caused Townley
some anxiety, which was in no way lessened when
he learned that his fiancee had become " interested "
in a young clergyman who lived near the Grange.
Thenceforth for some time she would appear to have
played with Townley in much the same manner as a
cat does with a mouse. Finally she announced her
intention of breaking off the match between them
altogether. In the meantime Townley had been
suffering agonies of mind, which was testified to by
his mother and a gentleman friend. In fact his
mother had become so alarmed at the state of his
PROVOCATION AND MURDER 289
mind that she had called in the friend referred to,
and asked him to sit up one night with Townley.
She evidently had an idea~nat he was likely to do
himself some mischief.
Townley seemed to accept his dismissal with
resignation, although he wrote to Miss Goodwin
stating that he wished to see her once more in order
to say good-bye. She first agreed to meet him, and
then, prompted by her evidently fickle nature,
refused to do so. However, he did not intend to
give her up without a final interview, so went over to
the Grange in spite of her refusal to see him. The
two met and sat in the grounds for some time, when
they went together into a lane close by, where they
walked up and down for an hour or two. Suddenly
it was supposed at the moment of parting Townley
fell upon the unfortunate girl with a knife, with
which he hacked her unmercifully about the head
and face.
Miss Goodwin fell to the ground bleeding from
many wounds. Townley assisted in carrying her
back to the Grange. On the way he exclaimed,
" Poor Bessie ! you should not have proved false to
me." Arrived at the Grange, he confessed he did it,
and made no effort to escape. Shortly after the girl
expired. Townley was tried, convicted, and sen-
tenced to death. He was afterwards reprieved under
the circumstances already described.
The other case occurred only a few years ago. A
young fellow fell deeply in love with a girl many
years younger than himself. Up to that time he did
T
290 WOMAN AND CRIME
not appear to have been troubled much with the
" tender passion," having lived a kind of hum-drum
existence of irreproachable respectability. How-
ever, his life became exciting enough after he met
the girl in question. She accepted his addresses, and
the two were looked upon as formally engaged, he
having presented her with the customary engage-
ment ring. For a time, as in the case of Townley,
the course of true love went smoothly enough. Then
the fickle nature of the young woman asserted itself,
and she proceeded to treat the young fellow in such
a manner as can only be described as fiendish. What
it is in a woman that prompts her to deal with the
man who is devoted to her in a brutal manner it is
difficult to surmise. The whole thing is a mystery.
If she derives any satisfaction from it it is of a very
ungodly kind. It is also very dangerous, as these
two cases prove.
Evidently this young fellow's mind became un-
hinged for the time being by the mental torture he
was subjected to by the object of his affections. It
seemed that nothing he could say or do would induce
her to treat him in a fair and straightforward manner.
She did nothing but play with him. There is a limit
to human endurance, and she at length arrived
at the limit of his. In a desperate moment he
decided to put an end to the torture in a sum-
mary and effectual manner. For this purpose he
purchased a revolver, which he loaded in all its
chambers. About this time the young lady had been
treating him rather worse than usual She was, in
PROVOCATION AND MURDER 291
fact, although she knew it not, preparing her own
shroud. The man would appear to have determined
to give her one more chance before making use of
the revolver. What occurred at this final interview,
what conversation passed between the two, can no
more be said than as to what transpired at the fatal
interview between the young woman Byron and her
victim. But it must have been something decisive,
something which precipitated the deed of violence
with which the interview culminated. In the former
case the young man fired twice at the girl, killing
her on the spot.
I saw the man subsequently when he was put on
trial, and his appearance and manner were certainly
those of a man whose mind was not in its normal con-
dition. There was a peculiar detached look in his
eyes, and he gazed about him in a dazed manner.
There was nothing whatever in his personal appear-
ance to indicate that he could be guilty of a deed of
violence. Altogether he presented a most pathetic
aspect. The letters which he had written to the dead
girl, and which were read out in court, made it clear
that he had, up to the time of the commission of the
deed, behaved in a perfectly honourable manner
towards her. They were the letters of a man protest-
ing against the most inexcusable illusage, w r hich he
in no way deserved. Well, the case ended as I have
described, which, however, did not elucidate the
mystery of why a woman should behave in such a
manner towards the man who shows her only the
greatest consideration and devotion.
292 WOMAN AND CRIME
We find that what is called the " unwritten law "
is resorted to mostly by females, or by men inspired
so to do by women. It is altogether a cowardly and
uncouth form of taking vengeance, which happily
does not often occur in this country. It is most pre-
valent in America and on the Continent. The case
of Madame Foucault, already dealt with, is a speci-
men of it, but it was only by a fluke that it occurred
in this country. Most of the sordid story was worked
out in France, the culminating act of cowardice and
cruelty only occurring in this country, in consequence
of the young man having sought asylum here from
the attentions of his violent and obnoxious paramour.
It is said that in connection with the " unwritten
law " there exist certain unwritten rules, such for
instance as, " The man who seeks deadly vengeance
must do it immediately on the discovery of the
injury," and " If he is unable to meet his enemy forth-
with he must serve notice on him of his intentions,
so that the man may have an opportunity to prove his
innocence and defend himself." Which is pretty
good twaddle. A few years ago a woman named Mrs
Annie Bradley killed her lover, Senator Brown, by
whom she had had several children, and because he
had failed to marry her and so legitimise the children.
It was altogether a repugnant business, for Brown
was a married man, the promise having been made
while his wife was still alive. He promised to marry
Mrs Bradley when his wife died. Presumably his
wife did die, but he failed to keep his promise. She
followed him from her home in Utah to Washington,
' UNWRITTEN LAW ' 293
where she shot him in his hotel. She was tried and
acquitted. Judge Loving of Virginia shot a man
named Estes, who was supposed to have wronged
his, Loving's, daughter. In spite of the fact that the
offence Estes was supposed to have committed was
not proved, the murderer, Loving, was acquitted.
There are many other cases in America where men
have been murdered for similar supposed offences
and the murderers acquitted. Which is a pretty bad
state of things for any country calling itself civilised.
Perhaps one of the most remarkable cases of the
" unwritten law " ever recorded was that of the man
Thaw. Thaw was essentially a type of the degenerate
which may be found somewhat plentifully in America
at the present day. They are the outcome of the mad
and foolish money worship which prevails there, the
incessant frantic rush to " get rich quick." That sort
of thing breeds unstable minds and robs life of most
of its health and grace. But in this place we have
more to consider the character of Mrs Thaw than
that of her degenerate and homicidal husband.
Nearly all the principal characters in this wretched
and sordid story are beneath contempt, but at one
time it was thought that at least the tender,
dainty, delicately beautiful, innocent and wronged
" Evelyn " was beyond reproach. Was this supposi-
tion justified by after events ? I venture to think not.
Was her past that of an innocent and pure woman?
Was it not rather that of an adventuress? Also, was
her mother any better than she was herself, or worse ?
She discreetly kept in the background. It was made
294 WOMAN AND CRIME
abundantly clear that this gentle little Evelyn, the
poor scotched butterfly, had for years been living on
her wits and her personal attractions.
And what part did she play in the actual crime
itself ? I say she had played the part of an aider and
abettor. She unquestionably incited her morbid-
minded and vicious-natured husband to the commis-
sion of the deed as an act of vengeance on the man
White, towards whom she undoubtedly bore feelings
of animosity. That she cared nothing for her mad-
brained husband was afterwards made clear by her
practically deserting him, dissociating herself from
him altogether, the man who was supposed to have
taken the life of another man, and placed his own in
jeopardy in the defence of her " honour." Though
where the defence was called for it is difficult to dis-
cover. Of course such women as her never have
any sincere affection for anybody or anything but
themselves, and then it is only a gross affection.
Thaw, as I have said, is a distinct specimen of a
certain kind of degenerate, and his wife of the class
of women who prey upon such degenerates. It was
but fitting that he should be placed in an asylum,
though had his life been taken the world would hare
been well rid of him.
There can be no sort of doubt, however unpleasant
it may be to recognise the fact, that there exists a
certain class of women, possessed of certain personal
attractions, who regard men as their natural prey,
and to the victimising of whom they devote their
whole lives and energies. Their conduct invariably,
A SEDUCER OF MEN 295
sooner or later, leads to the commission of some
deed or deeds of crime. But they are altogether
callous of consequences, mindful only of their own
personal gratification. They figure in drama as the
"adventuress," a character much truer to life than
the orthodox heroine. She is invariably either on
the borderline of crime or actually engaged in
criminal enterprises, taking care, however, to shield
herself behind her male associates.
I recall a case of the kind, the case of a woman
who might correctly be described as a seducer of
men, who for years lived in the lap of luxury by
cozening men, but whose career was brought to an
abrupt conclusion in a tragic manner.
The case occurred in 1901. The woman, whom
we will call Norah Hope, possessed personal attrac-
tions which were irresistible to a certain class of
men. She was the daughter of a publican, who died
while she was yet a child. At the age of sixteen she
became a waitress and otherwise distinguished her-
self by saving a child from drowning. Later she
married a dentist, who however died. She then pro-
cured a situation as a lady's-maid, afterwards married
a merchant, with whom she went out to Jamaica.
A few years later she was back in London without
her husband. She met a certain gentleman of
means, who appears to have become deeply in-
fatuated with her. She became his mistress, and he
kept her on luxurious lines. But this did not seem
to satisfy her, so she picked up with another man
who was younger, and whom she met clandestinely.
296 WOMAN AND CRIME
Her husband was still alive and was likely to be
coming back to England shortly. Still, that was a
mere detail.
The older man, who was still showering his
wealth on Norah, became suspicious concerning the
younger man, with the result that he kept vigilant
watch, and soon confirmed his suspicions. There-
upon Norah disappeared with the younger man. But
the other, whose infatuation seemed to be in no way
diminished, had no intention of losing her in this
fashion, so by means of a ruse he discovered her
whereabouts, and entreated her to rejoin him. She
at length consented, but if she could have had the
slightest peep into her lover's mind, and there read
his true intentions towards her, she would have fled
from him with the utmost speed.
He took a nice little villa for her in a retired
suburb of London, which he furnished in a comfort-
able manner. In this elegant cage, thought he, he
would keep his handsome bird. He had formerly
been keeping her in a flat in London. The treachery
of this woman may be gauged from the fact that she
had eloped with the younger man with money she
had obtained from the other under the plea that
she wanted to pay her eldest daughter's school fees.
It is not surprising that the man became enraged,
and determined that she should play him false no
more. He went down to the villa one week-end and
there accomplished his purpose. He shot both
her and himself, their dead bodies being found days
afterwards in the lonely house.
A SEDUCER OF MEN 297
Thus tragically ended the life-story of Norah
Hope, who had applied the attractions with which
nature had endowed her to a sorry use. It was pretty
clear that she had had other lovers besides these two
men. The last heard of the inmates of the villa was
the playing of a pianola, and it was surmised that the
woman was shot while in the act of playing and from
behind. The man's body was found in the bathroom.
Attention was drawn to the woman's body by the
howling of a little dog.
PART IV
THE ACQUITTALS
CHAPTER XVI
MADELEINE SMITH MME. STEINHEIL
IN our task of endeavouring to discover the full
extent to which women, directly and indirectly, are
concerned in crime, it will be necessary to examine
a few cases where they have been charged with
crimes but acquitted. In these the reader will be
called upon to himself estimate the degree of respon-
sibility resting upon the shoulders of the accused, if
any, and to himself decide whether the verdict of
acquittal was justified by the evidence, and was a fit
and proper one in the interests of truth and justice.
It may be, even in the case of innocence of the actual
crime charged, the conduct of the accused may be
open to severe censure, and may have had some-
thing to do, directly or indirectly, with the com-
mission of the crime. All these points must be taken
into consideration if we are to get anything like an
accurate and comprehensive view of the true part
played by women in the criminal drama of the
world.
The first case we shall take will be that of the
notorious Madeleine Smith. Although the details of
301
302 WOMAN AND CRIME
the crime are familiar to most students of crime, I
shall just briefly recall them:
Madeleine Hamilton Smith, then, was the daugh-
ter of Mr James Smith, an architect of Glasgow.
She was the eldest of a family of three daughters
and two sons. She was a very attractive looking
girl, as most women are who have been guilty of
crimes of passion, accomplished and popular in the
social circle wherein she moved. In April, 1855,
she made the acquaintance of a young Frenchman
named Pierre Emile L'Angelier, a clerk in the ware-
house of Huggins & Co., merchants, Glasgow. She
was introduced to him by a mutual acquaintance, a
young man named Baird. It was a fateful introduc-
tion for both. L'Angelier became deeply enamoured
of the handsome young lady, but as the social posi-
tion of the latter was much above his no open
engagement could be entered into between them.
So the acquaintance was kept up in a clandestine
manner through the medium of secret meetings and
correspondence.
By the end of 1856, when the Smiths were living
at 7 Blythswood Square, Madeleine had completely
committed herself to L'Angelier, who regarded her,
according to Scotch law, as his wife. I here quote a
letter written by Miss Smith to her lover, which
shows the state of her feelings towards him at the
time:
" BELOVED EMILE, I hope you will have this
to-night. Accept it with my best, my kindest love.
MADELEINE SMITH 303
A kiss, sweet darling I don't know if you shall
have a letter from me again before Monday, but I
shall try I was at the concert, M - was with me.
Jack and B . I have put up this likeness in a
(sic) Old Book, so that it may not be felt to be glass.
I am just going out. Adieu, dearest love, a kiss, a
fond embrace. Ever thine, thy own fond wife, Thy
Mimi. 12 o'c. Thursday."
This is one of the shortest of the innumerable
letters which the passionate young woman wrote to
her, as we must call him, paramour. Many of the
letters were simply disgusting, so much so indeed
as to be altogether unprintable so low. had the
young woman descended in her immorality. I have
already referred to the letters which figured in the
Foucault case ; in this connection we have history
repeating itself. I am afraid these horrible epistolary
emanations are invariably a feature of such degrading
intrigues. In the Smith case, as in the Foucault case,
the letters were destined to play an important part in
the crime and the trial which succeeded it.
In February, 1857, we find Madeleine's ardour
for young L'Angelier slowly on the wane. There
was a twofold reason for this. She was in the first
place undoubtedly tiring of him, passion of that kind
being bound sooner or later to burn itself out, and
there being no real love about it, nature asserted
itself and created a reaction. There had also ap-
peared upon the scene a gentleman name Minnoch,
a Glasgow merchant, of good position, who had
304 WOMAN AND CRIME
offered her clean, honest marriage which had been
approved of by her parents. Altogether this match
was one highly desirable to the young lady, and she
had no hesitation in accepting the offer. But, as the
old proverb warns us, it is well to be off with the old
love ere you take on with the new. Madeleine had
not followed this excellent advice, with the result that
she found herself in a very awkward predicament.
She had intimated to L'Angelier that she proposed
to put an end to their secret and guilty acquaintance,
but the young Frenchman had no intention of falling
in with this arrangement. Unfortunately for her
and for him also for that matter he was in posses-
sion of many of her extremely improper letters, which
he threatened to hand over to her father if she carried
out her expressed intention of dropping him. That
threat sealed his fate. Madeleine Smith was a
woman of resolution, and was prepared to go to any
lengths to avert the disgrace which threatened to
descend upon her at the hands of L'Angelier. But
before taking any extreme step she first tried per-
suasion, so wrote the young Frenchman the follow-
ing letter, which all, I think, will agree is a very
pathetic epistle :
" Monday Night. Emile, I have just had your
note. Emile, for the love you once had for me do
nothing till I see you for God's sake do not bring
your once loved Mimi to an open shame. Emile, I
have deceived you. I have deceived my mother.
God knows she did not boast of any thing I had said
MADELEINE SMITH 305
of you for she, poor woman, thought I had broken
off with you last winter. I deceived you by telling
you she still knew of our engagement. She did not.
This I now confess and as for wishing for any
engagement with another, I do not fancy she ever
thought of it. Emile, write to no one, to papa or
any other. Oh, do not till I see you on Wednesday
night be at the Hamiltons at 12, and I shall
open my shutter, and then you come to the area
gate, I shall see you. It would break my mother's
heart. Oh, Emile, be not harsh to me. I am the
most guilty miserable wretch on the face of the earth.
Emile, do not drive me to death. When I ceased to
love you, believe me, it was not to love another. I
am free from all engagement at present. (She was
already engaged to Mr Minnoch.) Emile, for God's
sake do not send my letters to papa. It will be an
open rupture. I will leave the house. I will die.
Emile, do nothing till I see you. One word to-
morrow night at my window to tell me, or I shall
go mad. Emile, you did love me. I did fondly,
truly love you too. Oh, dear Emile, be not so harsh
to me. Will you not but I cannot ask forgiveness,
I am too guilty for that. I have deceived it was
love for you at the time made me say mama knew of
our engagement. To-morrow one word and on
Wednesday we meet. I would not again ask you to
love me, for I know you could not. But oh, Emile,
do not make me go mad. I will tell you that only
myself and C. H. knew of my engagement to you.
Mama did not know since last winter. Pray for me
u
3o6 WOMAN AND CRIME
for a guilty wretch, but do nothing. Oh, Emile, do
nothing. Ten o'clock to-morrow night one line,
for the love of God."
" Tuesday morning. I am ill. God knows what
I have suffered. My punishment is more than I can
bear. Do nothing till I see you, for the love of
heaven do nothing. I am mad, I am ill."
This was succeeded by another and longer letter,
even more entreating and despairing. But they had
no effect upon L'Angelier, who persisted in his
determination to hand the letters over to her father.
Then the young woman turned upon him in all her
wrath and set about encompassing his death. She
made purchases of arsenic, and with astonishing dissi-
mulation made it appear to him that she had thought
better of ending their acquaintance by renewing her
former expressions of ardent devotion. By this
means she induced him to come to the house where
she lived clandestinely, their interviews being held at
the window of a basement room, which looked out
upon the street. At the first of these interviews she
handed him a cup of cocoa or coffee, which he drank.
On his way home he was seized with illness, and was
queer for some days after. The symptoms of his
illness were abdominal pains and vomiting.
Having recovered he went away for a short
holiday to regain his strength, but was soon back
again in answer to a letter from Madeleine, which
MADELEINE SMITH
307
summoned him to another secret meeting at the
basement window. Again he received a cup of coffee
or cocoa from the hand of his " Mimi," sweetened
with honeyed words from her lips, which he drank.
He was again taken seriously ill on his way home,
the symptoms being similar to those of the last
attack. He was so bad this time that he was unable
to get into the house without assistance. The land-
lady found him prostrate on the doorstep. He was
assisted in reaching his bedroom and was put to bed.
He gradually grew worse, and a doctor was sent for.
The latter administered morphia and said he thought
time and quiet would bring about recovery. They
did, however, do nothing of the kind. Some time
later the landlady looked at him, and, thinking he was
asleep, left him. When the doctor came again he
was told that the patient was asleep. He went to the
bed and examined him. It is true {hat he was asleep,
but it was the sleep from which there is no awaken-
ing. " Draw the curtain ; the man is dead," said the
doctor.
Thus the man had paid the penalty for the part
he had played in that odious intrigue. What of the
woman? Upon hearing of the death she sought
refuge in flight. The facts becoming known, she was
pursued and brought back. She was formally taken
into custody and charged with the crime. The ex-
posure which ensued was, of course, a terrible one for
her family. Unfortunately for the prosecution they
were unable to produce evidence to prove that the
prisoner saw and spoke with the deceased upon the
308 WOMAN AND CRIME
night when the fatal dose of poison was undoubtedly
given. At least they could not produce it in time,
although it was forthcoming at a stage in the pro-
ceedings when, according to Scotch criminal law, it
could not be introduced. As a result of this unfor-
tunate state of things the jury were compelled to
return a verdict of Not Guilty on the first count of the
indictment, and Not Proven on the other two, so that
the obviously guilty woman was allowed to go free.
A fact that scarcely increases one's respect for the
law.
It is not good for justice and law and order that
the guilty should go free any more than it is for the
innocent to be made to suffer. Such miscarriages of
justice as the above and that of Madame Foucault
are therefore much to be deplored. Every such case
acts as an incentive to other would-be wrongdoers.
Some means ought to be devised for avoiding the
possibility of such serious legal mishaps. There is
no end to the folly of the injudicious and the shallow-
minded, and as the acquittal of Madame Foucault
was applauded and the woman herself made a kind
of heroine of by such individuals, so in the case of
Madeleine Smith many foolish and indelicate men
offered marriage to the gross adultress and relentless
homicide. I understand she did, eventually, become
married in another country, but whether to a man
acquainted with her past or not I am unable to
say.
The remarkable part about Madeleine Smith is the
thoroughness with which she accomplished her
MADAME STEINHEIL 309
wrongdoing. In her immorality she went to the
utmost lengths. In accomplishing the destruction of
L'Angelier nothing could stay her hand. But she
does not appear in statistics.
The next case we shall consider is that of the
Frenchwoman, Madame Steinheil.
On the night of May 30, or the morning of May 3 1 ,
1908, Adolphe Steinheil and his mother-in-law,
Madame Japy, were murdered at their house in the
Impasse Ronsin, Paris. The former was found
strangled in a room adjoining that in which the latter
was found bound, gagged and also strangled. When,
by what means and by whom had the double murder
been committed ? That is a question which, so far, the
authorities have failed to adequately answer. At the
top of the house slept the valet, who stated that he
had heard nothing during the night to arouse his
suspicions. Madame Steinheil herself had also
apparently been attacked, being found bound and
gagged on her bed. According to her own account
she saw the assailants very clearly, and was able to
describe them with a wealth of detail which was
rather remrakable. She said they consisted of a red-
haired woman and two men, one of whom had a long,
fair beard and wonderfully piercing eyes. All three
wore robes like the Russian Pope's gown. According
to Madame Steinheil herself she had a conversation
with the red-haired woman, during which the latter
indulged freely in slang which puzzled the French
police a good deal. They had never heard such slang
before.
310 WOMAN AND CRIME
Both jewellery and money were supposed to have
been stolen. The police could make nothing of the
crime, the information afforded them by Madame
Steinheil rather mystifying than helping them.
Nothing was done for some time, when Madame
Steinheil, who had apparently been chafing at the
supposed inactivity of the police, bestirred herself,
and volunteered to find the assassin or assassins
herself. The result of her investigations were
peculiar, not to say disastrous. First of all, the valet,
Remy Couillard, was accused by her. of having com-
mitted the crime. One of the missing jewels, a pearl,
was found in his pocket-book. The man indignantly
denied all knowledge of either the crime or the pearl.
Couillard was proved to have had no hand in the
crime, and Madame Steinheil afterwards confessed
that she had put the pearl in his pocket-book. Asked
why she did this, she explained that feeling con-
vinced that the valet was guilty she put the pearl in
his pocket-book in order to create evidence of his
guilt. Which was not quite in accordance with the
methods of Sherlock Holmes. She next accused the
son of her cook, Mariette Wolff, expressing herself
equally as confident of his guilt as she had done of
Couillard's. Again she was curiously mistaken, for
the innocence of Alexandre Wolff was as readily
provable as was that of the valet. She made quite a
detailed statement concerning Wolff's supposed
guilt. She said, when asked who the actual mur-
derer was : " It is Alexandre Wolff, son of my cook.
His object was robbery. He entered the house,
MADAME STEINHEIL 311
thinking we were still at Bellevue. (Their country
house.) He came into my room. I awoke and
screamed for help. My husband rushed into the
room, and Alexandre killed him. All the time I
kept screaming. My mother heard me and called
out, ' What is the matter?' Alexandre then rushed
into the other room and finished off poor mother.
When he returned to my room he rushed at me,
threw me on the bed, gagged and bound me, and
said, ' I spare your life because of your daughter,
but if you reveal to the police what has happened I
shall charge you with being my accomplice, and say
you instigated the crime ! ' Then I fainted and
remember no more. As I had no witnesses I was
afraid to tell the truth to the police, fearing I would
be charged as an accomplice, so the day after I took
and hid the jewellery in order to simulate a burglary.
No! I swear Wolff has never been my lover. The
cook knew nothing of the crime, but some time ago
I told her the whole story."
The discrepancies in the above story are obvious.
The valet declared that he had not been disturbed
by any noise during the night. It is inconceivable
that he should not have heard Madame Steinheil, if,
as she declared, she " kept screaming." As Steinheil
was found in or near the bathroom he could not have
been killed by Wolff in the manner stated by Madame
Steinheil. The whole statement is clearly an inven-
tion. When confronted by Wolff in the presence of
the magistrate, Wolff in a perfect fury said :
" Miserable, wretched woman, how can you make
312 WOMAN AND CRIME
such an accusation ! You know that I had nothing to
do with the crime."
c Yes, you are the murderer," persisted Madame
Steinheil.
"No! No! No!" reiterated Wolff emphatically;
" you lie. You are telling a monstrous, infamous
lie."
" I tell the truth," the woman insisted.
" It is a lie and you know it," said Wolff. " I shall
be able to prove that you are attempting with me
the game you played with Remy Couillard. I am
innocent, and I can prove that I was elsewhere on
the night of the crime." Then looking straight and
sternly at Madame Steinheil, he added, " You are
either mad or a liar, or you are both. You are try-
ing to shield someone else; but you will be found
out."
Madame Steinheil here became faint and stag-
gered, and to the astonishment of those present said,
" If it was not Alexandre Wolff who killed my
husband, it was someone who is very much like him."
" Will you never tell us the truth ? " despairingly
asked the magistrate. " Do you intend to retract,
and now say you have falsely charged Wolff, as you
charged Remy Couillard ? "
" I might have made a mistake," said the prevari-
cating lady, " but I won't say anything more till I
see my lawyer."
She afterwards confessed that she was herself
guilty, but subsequently this she also denied. I
should imagine there never was a bigger liar than
MADAME STEINHEIL 313
Madame Steinheil. She seemed quite incapable of
telling the truth, except inadvertantly. Asked why,
when everything had quieted down, she herself
revived the matter, she replied:
" Because I wished to justify myself in the eyes of
someone who is very dear to me, whose love I had
lost, and whom, alas ! I must now try to forget."
If we examine somewhat closely the salient facts in
the tragedy itself I do not think we shall find much
mystery about it. On the night it occurred four per-
sons were sleeping in the house in the Impasse
Ronsin. They were M. and Mme. Steinheil, Mme.
Japy, Madame Steinheil's mother, and the valet,
Remy Couillard. The last-named was sleeping
at the top of the house. All the others were
sleeping below on the same floor, although in separ-
ate rooms. Couillard was the first to discover the
crime upon his descent the following morning. He
found Steinheil near or in the bathroom, strangled.
By the position of the body it was clear that he had
been attacked from behind and strangled with a cloth
of some kind. Madame Japy was found bound,
gagged, and strangled on her own bed. Madame
Steinheil was also found on her bed bound and
gagged. There were several significant facts in
connection with the occurrence which are important
in arriving at the truth. For instance, the g-g in the
case of JMadame Steinheil was a trivial affair, which
could not have caused her much inconvenience. Her
bonds were also almost loose, which made it clear
that the binding was mere make-believe.
314 WOMAN AND CRIME
The strangest part of all was the fact that although
the police closely examined the house from top to
bottom, inside and out, not a trace could they dis-
cover of how the supposed burglars effected an
entrance. Therefore it was not an ordinary burglary.
That is quite certain. No burglar ever yet entered a
building without leaving behind evidence of how he
got in. Even if he entered by means of a chimney
he would leave behind traces of his method of in-
gress. This brings us face to face with two theories.
Either the murders were committed by someone
already in the house, or the assassins entered in the
ordinary way by means of a key. And it is important
in this connection to note that the front door was in
fact left unfastened. This must have been done in-
tentionally, because an ordinary burglar or burglars
would not have known of this omission, and would
have forced an entry in the usual manner. Another
peculiar feature of the affair was the fact that the
clock in the hall had been stopped by somebody. No
ordinary burglar would trouble to do that. This was
probably done by the same individual who gave the
assassins the key, so that the police might be de-
ceived as to the exact time the murders were com-
mitted, and so help the assassins to avoid detection.
Still another peculiar feature of the affair was the
killing of Madame Japy. My impression is that this
was unpremeditated and rendered expedient by un-
toward circumstances. I should say that Madame
Japy being roused and becoming aware 'of the pres-
ence of the assassins, the latter killed her in order
MADAME STEINHEIL 315
to secure their own safety and on the principle that
" dead men tell no tales." It seems clear that Stein-
heil, hearing a noise, went to see the cause of it, and
was then attacked. Was the noise purposely made?
It may have been that Madame Japy was killed else-
where, and her body put on the bed where it was
found.
What was the motive of the crime ? At the outset
Madame Steinheil stated that both money and
jewellery were missing. She afterwards denied that
any jewellery was missing. As a matter of fact, it
was proved that she herself had disposed of it. In
regard to the money, there was no proof that it was
missing beyond the word of Madame Steinheil.
Can that be relied upon ? It is therefore pretty safe
to say that robbery was not the motive, nor was any
burglary committed. Madame Japy's death being
brought about, as it were, by misadventure, does not
enter into the question of motive. We have there-
fore only the death of Steinheil to consider. Who
would benefit by his death? He was not killed for
robbery. It was not done by an outsider out of
revenge, for the assassin would have had the same
difficulty in getting into the house as a burglar would.
We have made it clear that if anybody from outside
did the deed they must have been assisted in getting
into the house by somebody already inside. At this
juncture it is as well to record the fact that on the
night of the crime, Madame Steinheil's daughter,
Martha, and the cook, Wolff, happened to be away,
staying at a friend's house.
/
WOMAN AND CRIME
I repeat, who benefited by the death of Steinheil?
Madame Steinheil confessed that there was another
man who was " very dear " to her, and for whose
sake she tried in the frantic manner we have seen to
lift the cloud of suspicion which f naturally hung over
her. She also confessed that she detested her hus-
band, although she denied having killed him. It may
very well be that she did not kill him with her own
hands, but She was altogether a most sinister
woman a woman " with a past " with a vengeance.
For years she had " dealt " in men, as it were. She
had the usual irrestible attraction to a certain class of
men and the " fatal eyes." She took the fullest pos-
sible advantage of the accident of her sex. Her hus-
band was a poor artist I mean poor in a financial
sense but Madame always had plenty of money
and kept up a fine establishment, where she received,
as in the case ol Madame Humbert, some of the
highest in the land. It was known that there were
many wealthy men who were in receipt and enjoy-
ment of her " favours." Among her " clients " was
even the President himself Felix Faure. He had
met her in the Alps; doubtless while he was in a state
of mental exaltation, and at once been attracted to
her. The acquaintance ripened until it became a cus-
tomary thing for Madame Steinheil to.call upon the
President about twice a week. Presumably she did
not call to play draughts with him. One fatal day,
while she was in his presence, the President was
seized with apoplexy and died within the hour. The
lady was bundled into a cab and driven away, the
MADAME STEINHEIL 31?
affair being for a time hushed up. The truth, how-
ever, came out at length.
After Madame Steinheil became friendly with the
President commissions for pictures poured in upon
her husband, who was also decorated with the Legion
of Honour. There is no evidence that M. Steinheil
was aware of the life his wife was leading. She
probably furnished some plausible story to account
for her affluence. We have seen that she was a ready
and resourceful liar. And Steinheil was obviously
a jelly-fish of a husband, whom it would not be diffi-
cult for a woman like Madame Steinheil to cajole
and humbug. It is curious that women of that class
invariably have fools for husbands. It may be that
they select them so purposely as being the easier to
victimise. Such women are good readers of male
character. They usually know every inch of a man,
for it is by playing on his weaknesses that they attain
an ascendancy over him.
As is generally known the police failed to prove
their case against Madame Steinheil, who was accord-
ingly released. The trial was characterised by the
usual dramatic scenes which invariably attend French
criminal cases. Nobody else has since been charged
with the crime, which remains unpunished to the
present day. The reader must form his own ideas
as to where guilt lay and why Steinheil was killed.
It does not seem to me to be even vague. It is
similar to many of the " unsolved mysteries " which
have occurred in this country, which are no mysteries
at all to the police.
318 WOMAN AND CRIME
It was reported quite recently that the daughter
of Madame Steinheil was married to Signer Raphael
del Perugia, a young Italian artist.
Such women as Madame Steinheil do not get into
criminal statistics.
CHAPTER XVII
" NAN " PATTERSON MRS HASKELL ADELAIDE
BARTLETT COUNTESS KWILECKY
IN the case of Mrs " Nan " Randolph Patterson we
have the miserable, sordid Thaw story practically
repeated a story which seems to be typical of a cer-
tain phase of American life. It appears to exhibit
life at about its lowest moral standard. Again we
have the reckless profligate, and the woman, young
and of attractive appearance, who preys upon him.
A man is certainly a fool who marries a woman merely
for her good looks. It is the good-looking women
who cause most of the trouble in the world. A man
had better be contented with a good homely face and
plenty of humdrum virtues.
Mrs Patterson had been on the stage as a chorus-
girl in Floradora. She was one day seen by Mr
" Caesar " Young, an Englishman resident in
America, a bookmaker, rancher, and racehorse-
owner, who at once became infatuated with her.
Having plenty of money, and the lady being one who
had no fixed principles, Mr Young was enabled to
gratify his disorderly predilection. The fact that
there existed a Mr Patterson and a Mrs Young did
319
320 WOMAN AND CRIME
not seem to count for much, for the two practically
lived as man and wife. Young spent his money
pretty freely, not only upon his mistress, but also,
apparently, upon her sister and her sister's husband
In fact, he was bled copiously by all three, and at one
time it was contemplated to prosecute the sister and
her husband for blackmail. They have some des-
perately bad men and women in America, and Young,
loose as was his own mode of life, fell among some
who were bad indeed. One feels sorry for people
like Mr Patterson, who did not appear on the scene
at all, and Mrs Young, who in vain endeavoured to
save her husband from the consequences of his own
indiscretion.
There can be no doubt that Young made a reso-
lute effort to free himself from the woman Patterson
and her harpy relations, but found it a very difficult
matter to do so. At one time, while in the heat of his
infatuation, he went away with Patterson, but Mrs
Young found them at Los Angeles, and induced her
husband to return to her. The wretched woman,
Patterson, however, followed him up, and would not
let him be. Then Mrs Young decided to take her
husband away from America and return to England.
This precipitated the tragedy. Everything was
arranged, and the day of departure arrived. Mrs
Young waited on the quay for her husband, who had
gone to bid his mistress farewell. It was not made
clear whether he voluntarily sought out Patterson to
say good-bye, or she went to him to endeavour to
dissuade him from departing. Under all the circum-
"NAN' PATTERSON 321
stances the latter seems to be the more probable
theory. At all events the two unfortunately met that
day, and it was while they were driving in a cab to
the docks that the tragedy happened.
Young was shot in the side and expired soon after.
The question which had to be decided was as to
whether he shot himself or was shot by his com-
panion. Patterson said he shot himself during a fit
of depression produced by the prospect of parting
with her. This seems to be contradicted by nearly
all the known and admitted facts. There can be no
doubt that Young had practically tired of her, and
was not in any way coerced into leaving America.
The nature of the wound also made suicide highly
improbable. The woman said she heard a muffled
report, and saw the revolver fall to the ground, which
inferred that he had shot himself while holding the
weapon in his pocket. She further said she picked up
the weapon and put it in his pocket, where it was
found. An examination of the man's clothing proved
this to be incorrect, nor was there any indication on
the man's fingers that he had handled the weapon
in any way.
There were also these additional and significant
facts : Young was never known to carry a revolver.
The one with which the deed was accomplished was
proved to have been sold by a dealer named
Schneider over the counter in the Broadway, New
York, in November, 1898. At that time Young was
known to have been in San Francisco. The theory
of the prosecution was that the weapon was sold to
x
322 WOMAN AND CRIME
Patterson's brother-in-law, and that she obtained it
in that way. Unfortunately, they were unable to
prove this, the dealer failing to identify the brother-
in-law as the man who made the purchase. It was
made quite clear that the wound could not have been
self-inflicted. It was on the man's left side. He was
sitting on the right of Patterson in the cab. He had
not shot himself from the inside of his pocket, and
he could not possibly have shot himself from the out-
side, and then have put the weapon in his pocket
afterwards. Such a thing would have been quite
impossible. If you add to these facts the circum-
stances that two women were practically in conflict
for the possession of the man, and that one of them,
the lawful wife, was on the eve of victory, anybody
with only a small amount of knowledge of female
human nature will have no difficulty in arriving at a
definite conclusion in the matter.
However, in spite of the above significant facts,
three American juries were unable to agree about it,
for the woman was tried three times without a verdict
being returned. No doubt the woman's youth and
personal appearance had a good deal to do with this
indecision, for it seems that the average man is in-
capable of dissociating sentiment from his judgment
of the actions of women. So the woman was neither
convicted nor acquitted, for the prosecution entered
a nolle prosequi, and she was allowed to go free ; a
most unsatisfactory state of things for all parties
concerned. Juries certainly do seem to be com-
pounded of extremely poor material.
MRS ADELAIDE BARTLETT 323
When once a jury disagrees it is not easy to obtain
a verdict, however plain the facts may be. There
have been cases, however, where a verdict has been
returned, either one way or the other, after a dis-
agreement. In Ireland a few years ago a man was
convicted of murder after two disagreements, and in
the case of Mrs Haskel, which will doubtless be fresh
in the minds of my readers, the prisoner was acquitted
after one disagreement.
The case of Mrs Adelaide Bartlett will be remem-
bered by most people. It bore a striking resem-
blance to the Maybrick case. Mrs Bartlett was the
wife of a member of the firm of Baxter & Bartlett,
grocers and provision merchants. She was many
years younger than her husband, and had formed a
close attachment to a young clergyman named
Dyson. Her husband, who certainly entertained
peculiar notions regarding marriage, had injudi-
ciously countenanced this acquaintance. The two
had lived somewhat unhappily for some time, Barlett
having latterly been in indifferent health. He was
found dead one morning under somewhat suspicious
circumstances. He had died after having partaken
of a dose of medicine. His wife was the only person
who was with him at the time. At first, both she and
Dyson were charged with the crime, as it transpired
that he had made several purchases of poison for her.
He, however, was afterwards released and accepted
as a Crown witness.
The evidence against the prisoner was, as is usually
the case in such crimes, purely circumstantial. There
324 WOMAN AND CRIME
was, however, no question about the purchase or
purchases of poison, Dyson giving evidence to this
effect in the witness-box. He, however, in his own
defence, declared that he thought Mrs Bartlett
wanted it for an innocent purpose, which was scarcely
in keeping with the fact that he made purchases at
several different places and afterwards threw the
bottles away surreptitiously. If the poison was in-
tended for an innocent purpose, why should there
have been so much secrecy about its purpose? Also,
what did he suppose Mrs Bartlett wanted so much
deadly poison for? The case against Mrs Bartlett
rested upon the question of administration. The
defence set up was that the deceased man took the
poison himself, with his own hand, during a fit of
depression. It was true that he had been in a
depressed state lately, but on the night of his death
he was rather cheerful than otherwise, and exhibited
no signs of suicidal tendency. However, the jury
had to decide whether the poison was administered
by the prisoner or whether he, the deceased, took it
with his own hands, intentionally or by misad-
venture. They adopted the latter theory, and
acquitted the prisoner. The verdict was received
with the usual indelicate demonstration of approval
by the rowdy crowd assembled in and about the
Old Bailey.
Mrs Bartlett was defended by Mr (now Sir)
Edward Clark, who afterwards declared that the case
nearly doubled his business. Certainly, it was an
achievement to procure an acquittal in face of the
COUNTESS KWILECKY 325
evidence that was forthcoming for the prosecution.
Of course, when the prisoner is a woman, there is
always a good chance of working on the sympathies
of a jury and so dimming or obscuring facts. It is
not so easy to do that when the prisoner is a man,
even when the evidence for the prosecution is open to
doubt. Many an impassioned appeal has been made
by counsel on behalf of male prisoners, but they have
nearly all failed with the jury. No matter how
obvious . vovivn's ^iOt m:iy be, there is always a
chance o, :g her if or dealt with leniently by
arousing syi v athy on oehalf of her sex. It is im-
possible to get a just and logical view of facts when
they become mixed up with sentiment. It is, of
course, no defence to a crime that it was committed
by a woman ; on the contrary, if it was a crime of
cruelty, it rather exaggerates the enormity of it. But
jurymen are rarely logical and clear-minded, and
may nearly always be safely appealed to on a point
of sentiment.
A rather remarkable case was that of the Countess
Kwilecky, the story of which reads like a novel or
drama. With her husband she was charged with
having passed off the child of another woman as her
own son in order to defraud another branch of her
family of certain property, which they would other-
wise have inherited as next-of-kin. The case was
tried in Berlin in November, 1903, the prisoners
having been in custody for nearly a year. Besides
the Count and Countess there were also three other
women of the lower classes in the dock, they being
326 WOMAN AND CRIME
charged as accessories. It appeared that the boy in
question had been born sixteen years after the
Countess's last child and when she herself was about
fifty years of age. It was also known that she had
for some time been estranged from her husband, the
two not having been living together. It was, there-
fore, maintained by the prosecutors that it was not
possible that the child could be hers. If the charge
were proved the prisoners could be given ten years'
imprisonment, and the little boy would be condemned
to live in poor circumstances with low-class people.
So it was a fateful trial.
For the defence it was made clear that the Countess
was indeed confined of a child, that cohabitation
between her and her husband had been resumed,
and that the child in question bore a striking facial
resemblance to her. It was also proved by medical
witnesses that a woman of her age could have a child,
and that it was quite possible for sixteen years to
elapse between the birth of two children. The story
of the prosecution was that the boy was bought for
;8 from a certain low-class woman and introduced
into the Countess's room where she was supposed to
be confined but. was not. But persons who were
present in the room at the time testified that the lady
was indeed confined, and that the little boy in ques-
tion was the child which was brought into the world.
The jury accepted this version and returned an
acquittal. The likeness alone was convincing evi-
dence of the child's legitimacy. But the lapse of
time and the circumstances under which the child
COUNTESS KWILECKY 327
was born were certainly peculiar. The motive and
energy of the prosecution is understood when it is
known that all the other children of the Countess
were girls, and that the birth of the boy diverted the
entail.
CHAPTER XVIII
CONCLUSION
I THINK from th'e foregoing that it is clear that women
play a much more important part in crime than
appears upon the surface. That she is answerable
for a large amount of crime in men I maintain that
I have made obvious. That she is frequently an
aider and abettor in crime cannot be denied. Take
the crime of abortion, for instance, for which men,
doctors, are invariably convicted. The law in this
instance is grossly one-sided. A woman, desiring to
avoid the ordeal of confinement and the responsibility
of maternity, goes voluntarily to a medical man and
asks him to perform an illegal operation upon her,
for which she is prepared to pay him liberally. He
does so, is found out and severely punished. But
the woman is allowed to go free, although she has
actually been the instigator of the crime, and in
addition is also committing a grave offence against
the State in seeking to elude her natural responsi-
bilities of maternity. True, she sometimes pays the
penalty with her life, but that is scarcely a defence to
the offence.
328
CONCLUSION 329
' f i
As a bigamist I do not think a woman plays a very (-*ji
serious part. In this she is more often sinned against
than sinning. Her offences in this respect being so
venial do not call for much comment here.
Women are also culpable through the medium of
their own offspring. The woman who either neglects
her children or inculcates injurious notions into them
is indirectly answerable for any crimes those children
may subsequently commit. And she daily becomes
more guilty in this respect. Mr Morrison, in his
" Crime and Its Causes," says: " One thing at least
is certain, that crime will never permanently decrease fasup
till the material conditions of existence are such that
women will not be called upon to fight the battle of
life as men are, but will be able to concentrate their ^
influence on the nurture and education of the young,
after having themselves been educated mainly with a
view to that great end. European society at the
present moment is moving away from this ideal of
woman's functions in the world ; she is getting to be
regarded in the light of a mere intellectual or indus-
trial unit ; and the flower of womankind is being more
and more drafted into commercial and other enter-
prises ... it is unquestionably opposed to the moral
interests of the community. These interests demand
that women should not be debased, as criminal
statistics prove that they are, by active participation
in modern industrialism ; they demand that the all-
important duties of motherhood should be in the
hands of persons capable of fulfilling them worthily,
and not in the hands of persons whose previous
330 WOMAN AND CRIME
occupations have often rendered them unfit for being
a centre of grace and purity in the home. It cannot
be too emphatically insisted on that the home is the
great school for the formation of character among the
young, and it is on character that conduct depends."
Some years ago at the International Conference
for the regulation of labour, which was held at
Berlin, M. Jules Simon made the following remarks :
' You will pardon me for concluding my observa-
tions with a personal remark, which is perhaps
authorised by a past entirely consecrated to a defence
of the cause which brings us here. The object we
are aiming at is moral as well as material; it is not
only in the physical interests of the human race that
we are endeavouring to rescue children, youths, and
women from excessive toil ; we are also labouring to
restore woman to the home, the child to its mother,
for it is from her only that those lessons of affection
and respect which make the good citizen can be
learned. We wish td call a halt in the path of de-
moralisation down which the loosening of the family
tie is leading the human mind."
Those words are even truer now than they were
then. The situation has continued to grow worse.
Women have continued, and do still continue, to
drift farther and farther from the important and re-
sponsible duties of maternity, to embark in the, to her,
demoralising activities of the prominent and sordid
affairs of the world. As a result she is becoming,
either directly or indirectly, more and more con-
cerned in crime. We find the most extensive and
CONCLUSION 331
daring frauds which are perpetrated by women are
so perpetrated in countries where women are para-
mount, as witness the frauds of Madame Humbert
in France and Mrs Chad wick in America. Both
these women had dedicated their lives to the cozening
of men, because they realised that the men of their
nation entertained countless delusions about them,
and were, therefore, likely to be easy victims.
The law itself encourages women to commit crime
by the misplaced leniency with which it treats them.
One does not ask for vengeful punishments to be
visited upon female offenders, but it is in the interests
of the community at large that the punishments
should be adequate and just. There must be justice
for women as well as men. If, as we are given to un-
derstand, women are situated on a higher moral plane
than men, then when they fall their descent must be
the greater and more reprehensible. The graver
the responsibility the graver the wrongdoing.
There can be no doubt that the more a woman's
maternal instinct becomes blunted the more sensual
she becomes and the more prone to commit crime.
She grows callous and indifferent to the sufferings of
others. A callous woman is in the way of being an
outrage on human nature. A married woman who
lives only for her own personal gratification is a peril
to her husband. I make bold to say that there is far
more secret poisoning of husbands by their wives
than is generally known. If only half what the police
know in this connection were made public there
would be consternation among the married men of
332 WOMAN AND CRIME
this nation. There are other ways, of course, by
which evil wives may and do rid themselves of their
husbands. The writer of these lines knows several
women who encompassed the deaths of their husbands
against whom no steps were taken, because no steps
could be taken. Our law could not touch them ; they
are saved for that Great Assize where the souls of all
human beings shall be bared before the Omnipotent.
' There is but one Judge Who is just."
Finally, let it be said that women are gravely
responsible for a large amount of crime through the
medium of their intemperate habits. A female
habitual drunkard is a very dangerous criminal, yea,
a portentous one. In most poor neighbourhoods you
may see women drinking in low public-houses with
their little ones waiting outside about the doors.
Before the recent law was introduced, which prohibits
young children being taken upon licensed premises,
the children used to be inside with them, I have
seen women with babies at the breast, which they
were giving gin. It is very truly said that there is
scarcely an Act of Parliament through which a coach-
and-four could not be driven, and the way in which
drunken mothers, aided and abetted by publicans,
have got round this last enactment is instructive.
They simply leave them just outside, or in a corridor,
and bring drink out to them. The scene outside
public-houses in the suburbs on Saturday and Sunday
nights constitutes one of the gravest indictments
against the women of this country that could be
framed.
CONCLUSION 333
So when we come to take a comprehensive survey
of the subject of the criminal responsibility of women
we find it is widespread, vast, and constantly in-
creasing. Crime generally, we know, is on the
increase, and it is both feeble and foolish to shut one's
eyes to the fact that women are extensively answer-
able for this. As women can make saints she can
also make sinners, and when she ceases to make so
many of the latter it will be better for mankind. It is,
of course, a worthy thing to " gently scan our brother
man," likewise " still gentler sister woman," but there
is no escaping the unpleasant fact that the latter have
not of late years been behaving in such a manner as
to be deserving the unsparing gratitude of man.
INDEX
ACQUITTALS, The, 301
Addison, Mr, 83
Aiders and Abettors of Crime,
The, 255
Ansell, Mary, Case of, 68
BABY-FARMERS, The, 176
Ballantyne, Sergeant, 66, 138
Bartlett, Mrs Adelaide, Case
of, 323
Benedict, Crime Investigator,
25
Bertillon, M., 26
Bodkin, Mr A. H., 189
Bompard, Gabrielle, Case of,
147
Bonmartini, Countess, Case
of, 149
"Born" Criminal, The, 7
Bradley, Mrs Annie, Case of,
292
Broadstairs Baby-Farm Case,
The, 205
Byron, "Kitty," Case of, 157
CAREW, MRS, Case of, 104
Caro, Detective-Inspector, 236
Chadwick, Mrs Leroy, Case
of, 237, 331
Chantrelle, Eugene, Case of,
Charlesworth, Miss, Case of,
241 5
"Chicago May," Case of, 167
Clark, Sir Edward, 324
Corday, (Charlotte, Case of, 25
Cresswell, Mr Justice, 138
Crippen, Case of, 51
Cruelty of Female Criminals,
17
DANILOFF, JEANNE, Case of,
113
Darling, Mr Justice, 158, 168,
189, 221
Deas, Lord, 269
" Derval, Marie," Case of, 274
Dickens, M. H. F., K.C., 158
Dyer, Mrs, Case of, 182
EDMUNDS, CHRISTINA, Case
of, 59
FEMALE " APACHES," 169
Criminals and Statistics,
Influence over Men, 10
Irresponsibility, 17
Spy, The, 274
Financial Defrauders, The,
226
Fitz-Hugh, Major-General, 241
Fornasari, Crime Investigator,
23
Foucault, Madame, Case of,
208
" Fox-Strangways, Hon. Eva,"
Case of, 250
GIRIAT, MADAME, Case of, 171
Goold, Mrs, Case of, 139
Gottfried, Madame, Case of,
88
Grantham, Mr Justice,
vjri ciuiutmi, -LVJ.I j UMH_C, ^.41
Guerin, Madame, Case of, 279
Gunness, Mrs Belle, Case of,
159, 279
335
336
INDEX
HALL, MR CLARK, 71
Hawkins, Mr Justice, 259
Holmes, Mr Thomas, 30
"Hope, Norah," Case of, 295
Howard Association, The, 30
Humbert, Madame, Case of,
227, 33i
JEANNERET, MARIE, Case of,
97
KWILECKY, COUNTESS, Case
of, 325
LACHLAN, MRS, Case .of, 261
Leycester, Mr, 189
Lombroso, Prof., 20, 25, 26
Lowder, Mr, 109
MCCONNELL, MR, 83
Manning, Mrs, Case of 134
Marat, 25
Marrp, Crime Investigator, 24
Martin, Mr Baron, 66
Massot, Madame, Case of, 129
Mathew, Mr Justice, 71
Mathews ; Sir Charles, 158,
189, 209
Maybrick, Florence, Case of,
76
Measurements of Criminals,
26
Mercier, Dr Charles, 31
Morrison, Mr Wm., 33, 329
Muraviova, Madame, Case of,
270
ORGANISERS OF CRIME, The
59
PARRY, SERJEANT, 66
Patterson, "Nan," Case of,
319
Perjury and Divorce, 277
Physical Conformation and
Crime, 20
Poisoners, The, 59
Poisons, 44
Poland, Mr, 66
Prostitute, The, 34
Provocation and Murder, 286
RAWLINSON, M. J. P., Q.C.,
71
SACK, AMELIA, Case of, 189
St Giles's Mission, 30
" Sexual Mania," 29
Slough Poisoning Case, The,
5?
Smith, Madeleine, Case of,
301
Spencer, Selina, Case of, 222
" Standish, Nell," Case of, 36
Staunton, Mrs Patrick, Case
of, 256
Steinheil, Madame, Case of,
309
Stephenson, Mr Guy, 189
Straight, Mr, 66
Suffragette, The, 16
TARNOVSKI, COUNTESS, 164
Tarno\vski Madame, 21
Thaw Case, The, 293
Topinard, Crime Investigator,
25
Townley, George Victor, Case
of, 286
Truelove, Mabel, Case of, 217
UNPUNISHABLE CRIMES, 9
" Unwritten Law, The," 292
VITRIOL- THROWERS, The, 208
WALTERS, ANNIE, Case of,
189
Watson, Mrs Sophia, Case of,
241
Weiss, Madame, Case of, 114
Wheatley, Mr Wm., 30
Wilkins, Serjeant, 138
Williams, Mrs Chard, Case of,
199, 216
"Wilts Well Mystery, The,"
Case of, 176
Woman as a Criminal, 3
, her Offspring, 329
and Intemperance, 332
Woman's Devotion, 5
Extravagance, 332
Woodcock, Lilian Sarah, Case
of, 223
Worsley, Mr, 66
PRINTED AT THE NORTHUMBERLAND PRESS, THORNTON STREET, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE
POPULAR DRUGS
By SIDNEY HILLIER, M.D.
Crown Svo. 33. 6d. net.
Amongst the general public there is much ignorance
in regard to causes, symptoms, and treatment of the drug
habit. Alcohol, opium, tobacco, and veronal, to mention
some of those most frequently indulged in, are often
a cause of serious danger and trouble, not only to the
individuals addicted to excessive use of them, but also
to their friends. It is the object of this book to give in
popular form some account of the legitimate sphere of this
class of drugs, to show the dangers of excess, to point
out some of the preventive measures against excess, and
the b^st and most modern methods of treatment.
The Origins of Popular Superstitions,
Customs, and Ceremonies
By T. SHARPER KNOWLSON.
Author of "The Education of the WilL"
Crown Svo. 6s. net.
We meet people every day who are superstitous, but
who can give no intelligent account of the origin of those
beliefs that it is dangerous, for instance, to sit thirteen at
a table, or to break a looking-^lass. To trace a habit
of thinking, and of action, to its source is frequently to
dispel an illusion at any rate, the interest of the search
for origins has a charm all its own ; and Mr Sharper
Knowlson, working on the basis of old authorities, has
brought forth a mass of attractive exposition respecting
popular beliefs and customs which cannot fail to secure the
reader's attention.
Dreams: Scientific and Practical
Interpretations
H. MILLER.
Crown Svo. 6s. net.
By G.
600 pages.
This book, written on a scientific principle by a well-
known expert, gives a practical interpretation of nearly
3,000 classes of dreams. It contains an elaborate and
interesting introduction and preface to the subject.
BOOKS ON PSYCHICAL RESEARCH, Etc.
Spirit and Matter Before the Bar of
Modern Science
By ISAAC W. HEYSINGER, M.A., M.D.
Demy 8vo. 153. net.
This book, written at the end of a. lifetime of scientific research,
proves conclusively the existence of the spiritual world and that
spiritualism is the basis of all true religion. As evidence the
author brings forward the testimony of all the great scientists and
leaders of modern thought, every one of whom, differ as they may
on other points, is forced to the conclusion that in the spiritual world
only the key to the mystery of the universe is to be found. Instances
of extraordinary psychic phenomena have their place in the work,
and the intense vigour and lucidity of its style help to make it one
of absorbing interest.
Eusapia Palladino and Her Phenomena
By Here ward Carrington. Fully Illustrated. Net
los. 6d.
Psychical Science and Christianity
By E. Catherine Bates. 6s.
The Coming Science
By Hereward Carrington. Net 75. 6d.
The Physical Phenomena of Spiritualism
By Hereward Carrington. Net los. 6d.
Proofs of Life after Death
By R. J. Thompson. Net 75. 6d.
Occultism and Common-Sense
By Beckles Willson. Net 6s.
Do the Dead Depart ? B 7 Katharine Bates. Net 6s.
Practical Hypnotism
By Comte C. de Saint Germain. Net 6s.
New Ideals in Healing
By Ray Stannard Baker. Net 2s. 6d.
Horoscopes and How to Cast Them : A Book of
Practical Astrology
By Comte C. de Saint Germain. Net 6s.
The Education of the Will
By T. Sharper Knowlson. Net 6s.
Dreams : Scientific and Practical Interpretations
By G. H. Miller. 600 pp., crown 8vo. Net 6s.
Religions and Philosophies of the East
By J. M. KENNEDY.
Author of " The Quintessence of Nietisch*."
Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
"All wisdom came from the East," and all the wisdom
of the East is bound up in its religions and philosophies,
the earliest forms of which can be traced back 3,000 years
B.C. Mr J. M. Kennedy has now aimed at giving in a
single volume a concise history of the religions and philos-
ophies which have influenced the thought of the great
eastern nations, special emphasis, of course, being laid upon
the different religions which have swayed the vast empire
of India. A feature of the book is a section dealing with
the influence of the philosophies of the East upon those of
the West, so far as materials are now available for our
guidance in this respect. It may be remembered, for
example, that Schopenhauer was greatly influenced by
Indian thought, and that he exercised much influence on
Nietzsche, who, in his turn, as shown in Mr Kennedy's
"Quintessence of Nietzsche," has not only swayed modern
thought, but is in addition likely to affect the whole trend
of philosophy for many generations to come.
Logic for the Million
Edited by T. SHARPER KNOWLSON.
Author of " The Education ol the Will."
Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
In the year 1860 Mr J. W. Gilbart, F.R.S., wrote the
preface to the sixth edition of his " Logic for the Million."
It seems difficult to understand why a book which has
proved its worth should not have been reissued from time
to time, especially a book on a subject like logic, which
is regarded as dry, formal, and uninteresting. Mr Gilbart,
however, made the art of reasoning both easy and attrac-
tive ; and his illustrations were chosen freely from all
sources : the Bible, " Punch," and John Stuart Mill, were
equally to his tastft. It was to be expected that a certain
amount of revision work was necessary in bringing " Logic
for the Million " up to date, and this has been done by
Mr T. Sharper Knowlson, author of the M Art ot Thinking,"
who has added new sections and appendices.
T. WERNER LAURIE'S
CATHEDRAL SERIES
(All very fully illustrated)
The Cathedrals of England and Wales
By T Francis Bumpus. With manv Plates and minor
decorations, with specially designed heads and tail-
pieces to each chapter. Three vols. 6s. net each.
The Cathedrals of Northern Germany and the
Rhine
By T. Francis Bumpus. With many Plates. 6s. net.
The Cathedrals of Northern Spain
By Charles Rudy. Many Illustrations. 6s. net.
The Cathedrals and Churches of Northern Italy
By T. P>ancis Bumpus. With 80 Plates, may of
them in colour, and a coloured Frontispiece by F. L.
Griggs, 9 by 6 ins. i6s. net.
London Churches Ancient and Modern
By T. Francis Bumpus. 2 vols. 6s. net each.
The Abbeys of Great Britain
By H. Claiborne Dixon. 6s. net
The English Castles
By Edmund B. D'Auvergne. 6s. net.
A History of English Cathedral Music
By John S. Bumpus. Two vols. 6s. net each.
The Cathedrals of Norway, Sweden and
Denmark
By T. Francis Bumpus. 9 by 6 ins. 40 Illustrations
in colour and tone. i6s. net.
Old English Towns B Y William Andrews. 6s. net
The Cathedrals and Churches of Belgium
By T. Francis Bumpus. 6s. net.
APR 1 1992.'
/
TVNews
OpenLibrary