Mercuriosities

A poisoner chose arsenic as his weapon to kill his wife, but sadly missed his target and killed his own child and a neighbour. His lawyer had objected to the second trial, on the grounds of double jeaopardy (or ‘autrefois acquit‘), but the Judge did not agree. Since the Criminal Justice Act 2003, double jeopardy has been permitted in England and Wales only in certain (exceptional) circumstances.

“A laborer at Hempnall, named Daynes, was tried on Friday at the Norfolk assizes for murdering his own child, by placing arsenic in the tea-kettle. His wife and another child narrowly escaped, and a woman names Mills died. He was acquitted, from the want of proof, and on the ground that he could have no motive to destroy his family. He was afterwards tried for murdering Mills, his intention being to poison his wife that he might marry a widow named Lloyd, with whom he had illicit intercourse: her evidence brought the crime home to him and he was found guilty. The Judge, in passing sentence, earnestly exhorted him not to indulge the faint hope of mercy. In the evening he made a full confession of his guilt; that he had for months meditated poisoning his wife with arsenic, which he purchased at Norwich, and had twice endeavoured ineffectually to carry his deadly purpose into execution, once by putting the poison in some fried potatoes, and afterwards in pea-soup, but both failed: his third attempt ended in the destruction of two against whom he had no enmity, whilst his intended victim again escaped. Mr. Taylor, for the prisoner, who had objected to the second trial on the ground of autrefois acquit, urged the stay of judgement until the opinion of the 15 Judges had been taken, but Mr. Justice Vaughan declined, adding, however, that he should meet all the Judges on Monday, and would mention the point to them, but he desired the matter should not be mentioned to the prisoner, that he might not calculate on an escape from execution.”

The Stamford Mercury, 19th April, 1839.

The Stamford Institution was founded in 1838 and was seen by many in the town as a force for the education of the ‘lower classes’.  The building described in the article was opened in late 1842, and still stands at the top of St Peter’s Hill.  It is remembered by many people of a certain age as the Stamford base of the YMCA during the mid-20^th century.

“STAMFORD INSTITUTION. –A special meeting of the committee was held on Tuesday last, to receive designs for the new Hall of this Society proposed to be erected on St. Peter’s hill.  Numerous plans and specifications were sent in by Messrs. Browning of Stamford, Glover of Huntingdon, Dain of Leicester, Donthorn of London, and Muffatt of Doncaster, architects.  That of Mr Browning, involving the smallest expenditure, and being considered most suited for the purposes required, was adopted.  He proposes that the building shall comprise an entrance–hall or vestibule (30ft. by 12ft.) in the front, on the right of which there will be an immediate entrance into the reading-room and library (31ft. by 15ft.), and on the left a spacious staircase to the lecture-room above ; immediately behind the staircase, the committee-room (14ft. by 11ft.), and adjoining that, a room (16ft. by 14ft.) to be used as a news-room : the reading and news rooms will have windows looking into a small yard at the back (communicating with the basement, which will comprise laboratory, porter’s living and sleeping rooms, &c.), into which they will also have an outlet.  The first floor will be entirely occupied by the lecture and concert room (50ft. by 30ft., and about 22ft. in height), lighted by dome-shaped sky-lights, and around it will be erected a spacious gallery to be used for the purposes of the museum.  The elevation of the front is exceedingly chaste, of the Grecian style of architecture, and well adapted to display the objects of the edifice.  Had the funds of the Society been more ample, a greater architectural display might perhaps have judiciously been made, but the design selected is sufficiently bold to stamp the appearance of the building with importance, and is eminently characteristic of the purpose to which it will be devoted – the advancement of science and literature.  The estimated cost is 900l., which will be lessened by 100l., the value of the old buildings standing on the site. – During this week, the election by the annual members of three gentlemen to serve on the committee, in the place of the Rev. D.E. Jones, Mr. Henry Cecil Bell, and Mr. Chapman, draper, (who retire, their term of office having expired,) has taken place : Mr. Barber, surgeon, Mr Woodroffe, chemist, and Mr. Samuel  Sharp, have been chosen.  The first meeting of the committee comprising the newly-elected members will take place on Wednesday evening next, for the purpose of electing a vice-president in the room of Mr. Ald. Lowe, who retires in rotation, and to prepare for the receipt of tenders for building.”

The Stamford Mercury, 27^th August, 1841

One of the Grantham policewomen who dealt with these incidents may have been Edith Smith, who in August 1915 was appointed the first woman police constable in England with full power of arrest. 

“GRANTHAM is mentioned in the report for 1915 on Women’s Police Service among the few places where women work under the direction of the chief constable or superintendent of the district and are maintained out of the rates, like policemen.  In our police news we have recorded typical examples of policewomen’s work at Grantham.  Other cases quoted in the report include the following:- A serious fight was taking place between two drunken soldiers who should have been in camp.  The men had taken off their coats to fight.  The policewomen cleared the crowd, separated the fighters, persuaded them to put on their coats, shake hands, and return to camp.  During an East Coast Zeppelin raid policewomen were asked to assist in keeping order in the streets.  An excited little crowd of women and tired children at one street corner could not at first be persuaded to go home when the raid was over, because of a suspicious light which remained in the sky.  The policewomen calmed them, states the report, explained that the light had nothing to do with Zeppelins, but was merely the planet Venus, and sent the crowd quietly home.  The expenses of the service, whose headquarters are at Little George-street, Westminster, are at present paid by voluntary contributions.”

The Stamford Mercury, 28^th January 1916 

If you were caught speeding in 1930 you had to face similar consequences as now; but catching offenders was not straightforward for the police before the advent of the radar gun.  P.c. Trundle was kept busy.

Thomas Alfred Trundle, the constable mentioned in this report, was born in Essex in 1888.  His family moved to the Peterborough area before 1911, and he married at Whittlesey in 1912. Having joined the Police Force after the War, he was later promoted to sergeant, and by the start of World War II he had left the regular force and was serving as a Special Constable in Peterborough.  He appears to have stayed in the area for the rest of his life, and died aged 77 in 1965.

“SPEEDING CASES AT STAMFORD

THREE MOTORISTS FINED

BUS DRIVER’S REMARKABLE STATEMENT

Arising out of speed tests carried out by officers of the Liberty of Peterborough Police near Stamford three cases were heard at St Martin’s Petty Sessions, held at the Town Hall, Stamford on Friday.  Fines amounting in all to £9 were inflicted.

AN OLD LORRY’S HUSTLE

George Burgess, Nottingham, was summoned for driving a heavy motor lorry at a speed exceeding 12 miles per hour at Thornhaugh on February 8^th.  Defendant attended the court and pleaded not guilty.

P.c. Trundle said that he followed defendant’s lorry on his motor cycle, with P.c. Chapman in the side-car, from Sharpley’s Hollow to the Wansford by-pass road.  By means of the speedometer attached to his machine he estimated the speed of defendant’s lorry to be from 25 to 30 miles an hour.

This evidence was corroborated by P.c. Chapman.

Burgess told the Magistrates that ‘it was impossible for the lorry to do that speed.  It was an old type lorry – nearly eleven years old – and was low geared.  His employer had given him permission to let anyone try to get 25 miles an hour out of the lorry, because he knew it was impossible, and the vehicle was capable of a speed of only 12 or 15 miles an hour.’  Defendant also stated that he noticed the Post Office clock as he passed through Stamford, and from the time he was stopped he had travelled five miles in 27 minutes.

A fine of £2 was imposed, and, on defendant’s application, he was allowed a month in which to pay.

21 MILES AN HOUR

Albert Leonard Williams, London, was charged with a similar offence at Wittering.

P.c. Trundle said that defendant travelled at a speed of 21 miles an hour over a section of the Great North Road  near Wittering.

Williams, who did not attend the Court, but from whom a letter was received, was fined £2, including costs.

THE TWO “IF’S”

“If we are caught doing up to 35 miles an hour the firm pay our fines.  If the speed is more we have to pay our own fines, so I hope you will knock a few miles off”.

This was the remark alleged to have been made by Thomas Wilson Seaman, Ebchester, Durham, when he was stopped by P.c. Trundle and told that he had been driving his motor bus at a speed of 40 miles an hour.  The offence was said to have been committed in St Martin’s on February 8^th.

P.c. Trundle told the Magistrates defendant drove 26-seater ‘bus at a speed of 40 miles an hour from the George Farm to Flint’s Hollow.  Upon being stopped Seaman said ‘Will you test your speedometer with mine?’  The constable agreed, and drove his motor cycle beside the lorry for some distance.  When the speedometer on the policeman’s machine registered 20 miles an hour he asked Seaman what the ‘bus’s speedometer registered.  He replied that it showed 17 miles an hour.  He then made the remark quoted above.

Details of seven previous convictions, including two for similar offences (for one of which he was fined £10) were given by Supt. Hamps, of Peterborough.

In a letter to the Magistrates defendant pleaded guilty, and he was fined £5.

The Magistrates were Mr J.H.J.  Phillips, of Stamford (Vice-Chairman) and Mr M. Wolryche-Whitmore, of Ufford Hall.”

The Stamford & Rutland News, 4^th March, 1930

Oliver Cromwell’s head, despite these conclusions of Dr Welldon, is now generally believed to have been this skull, which since 1815 had been in the possession of the Wilkinson family, where it remained until it was secretly buried in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, in 1960. 

“OLIVER CROMWELL’S SKULL 

In connection with the death of Mr. Horace Wilkinson, of Frankfield, Sevenoaks, it has been widely stated that he was the possessor of Oliver Cromwell’s skull.  Bishop Welldon (the Dean of Manchester) has written to the Manchester Guardian an interesting letter, in which he gives the reasons for believing that this is a mistake.  The Bishop says:- ‘Some time ago, when I was living in Westminster Abbey, the thought occurred to me that if the Protector’s head or any part of his remains could be recovered it might still be possible in some sense to undo the act of sacrilege which was perpetrated in the Abbey when his body and the bodies of his mother, his sister, and several of his colleagues, including Ireton, who was his son-in-law, and Bradshaw, were exhumed at the Restoration.  But after careful, and I hope, complete inquiry, not without inspecting, through Mr. Wilkinson’s kindness, the skull in his possession, I satisfied myself that there was no such evidence as would justify the belief in its genuineness’.  Dr. Welldon further refers to an article written by him on the subject for the ‘Nineteenth Century and After’ in June 1905.  In that article he summed up the conclusion at which he arrived after considerable research as follows:- ‘All the evidence which I have collected and compared establishes the belief that the body of Oliver Cromwell was privately buried, not long after his death, in Westminster Abbey; that his body was taken to Tyburn, and there decapitated and buried; that the trunk of his body remained where it was buried beneath the site of the gallows at Tyburn; it has long since mouldered away or has been removed or disturbed in the course of excavation, and it is now irrecoverable; that his head, after being exposed on Westminster Hall for more than twenty years, disappeared; it has never been seen since, and it, too, is now irrecoverable.’” 

The Stamford Mercury, 25^th December 1908 

Road safety owes a debt to those who keep the highway clear of obstructions.  This article reports on a scheme in which two organizations were able to co-operate.

The Roads Beautifying Association, which existed for a few years either side of the Second World War, was an organization whose aims would probably strike a chord with many people today.

“TREES AND ROAD SAFETY

Evidence of the havoc caused to roadside trees by last winter’s gales is apparent to every touring motorist.

Roads throughout the country were obstructed by huge trees across the roadway, and numerous accidents occurred.  So serious was the position that the Road Patrols of the Automobile Association on many occasions remained on duty throughout the night to warn motorists of blocked roads, and to indicate clear routes.  This night road service was supplemented by information issued to members by the Twenty-four Hour Emergency Service, always maintained at A A London Headquarters.

It being obvious that such dangerous conditions may recur, the A.A. suggested to the Road Beautifying Association that a scheme of co-operation might be evolved, which would ensure roadside trees receiving the care of woodmen.

Mr. W.J.Bean, who recently completed forty years’ service on the Kew Gardens staff and is now Horticultural expert to the Road Beautifying Association, is preparing an illustrated brochure for the information of land owners, highway authorities, and motorists.  Copies will in due course be obtainable from the Automobile Association, Fanum House, New Coventry Street, W 1.

It is hoped that as a result of this co-operation between the Roads Beautifying Association and the A.A. road dangers and obstructions will be reduced.”

The Stamford and Rutland News, 24^th June, 1930

“These Dutch fishermen wanted to leave Holland, which thanks to Napoleon was at this time no longer an independent state, but part of the French Empire, and suffering economic troubles as a result of the Continental Blockade. Their motives in wanting to settle in Britain might not have been as honest as this article suggests, as we now know that they were involved in the illicit transport of goods and passengers between this country and theirs.

Upwards of eight hundred Dutch Fishermen have recently made application to the British Government to be taken under its protection, and have solicited to be allowed to settle on some part of the eastern coast of Scotland.  The situation of these poor men is truly pitiable, the unsettled state of the Continent having deprived them, for a long time past, of the means of pursuing their peaceful occupations with either safety or success.  We are glad to learn that Government are now devising measures for procuring a permanent settlement for these useful and industrious people on some part of that coast; and it is understood that the late visit of the Governors of the Merchant Maiden Hospital of Edinburgh to the town of Peterhead was connected with this object.  To any one acquainted with the inoffensive disposition and frugal industrious habits of the Dutch fishermen, it is needless to point out the incalculable advantages which such an acquisition will be to that quarter of the island.  They are infinitely better acquainted with the fishing banks and stations upon the coast than our own fishermen, and the patient labor and economy with which they pursue their occupation, must render them valuable members of any community.  The great body of these fishermen have already arrived at Heligoland, and many others on various parts of the Dutch coast are prepared to follow their example.”

The Stamford Mercury, 16^th August, 1811.

Having just experienced the procession and pomp of King Charles III’s coronation, it is interesting to find out how Stamford celebrated that of his great, great, great grandmother.

“The Queen’s coronation was celebrated yesterday in Stamford with the utmost loyalty, and with the happiest effect. One of the best and most numerous processions ever seen in the town was marshalled by 12 o’clock, when it started from the Town-hall, as follows:-

Two Trumpeters on Horseback – Two Policemen – Purple Flag (given by the Ladies for the occasion) – Tradesmen’s Loyal and Independent Society, with their respective colours and full accompaniments – Loyal and Independent Lodge of Odd Fellows, No. 6, with their respective colours and accompaniments – Boys of the different Charity and Sunday Schools, six abreast – White Flag – Girls of the different Chariy and Sunday Schools, six abreast – White Flag (given by the Ladies for the occasion) – Band – Military – Crier with Staff of Office – Beadle with Bill of Office – Sergeants at Mace (bearing Maces) – The Mayor and his Chaplain – Magistrates – Aldermen – Town Clerk – Town councillors – Clergy in their Gowns – Gentlemen and Inihabitants of the Town, six abreast.

In the delightful weather, amidst the music of the bank and the ringing of bells, the procession passed through all the principal streets of Stamford and St. Martin’s, occasionally halting to give cheers. The procession itself was half a mile long; and every where cheerful countenances indicated the satisfaction that was felt, and the sincereity with which all hailed the great occasion as one calculated to ensure and to perpetuate the liberties and the happiness of the nation. – About two o’clock, 1000 children of the different charity schools sat down to a dinner of roast beef and plum pudding, comfortably set out in the several stalls of the butchery, which were fitted up for the occasion: the scene was one of unalloyed enjoyment. In addition to this, 400 poor men and wqomen, 60 years of age, received each 1s. with which to regale themselves; and 1000 other poor men and women received tickets, entitling each to obtain at the public-houses sixpennyworth of beer. The gentry and tradesmen of the town dined in parties at the different inns, and the whole day passed off with the highest conviviality, and with uninterrupted satisfaction.”

The Stamford Mercury, 28th June, 1838.

This tatooed convict would be easily recognizable if he were caught. His name appears on the Nottingham census in 1851, so maybe he wasn’t!

“A “MARKED” MAN. -The following minute and curious description of an escaped convict appears in the Police Gazette:- “William Mellors, a convict belonging to the Ganymede hulk at Woolwich, escaped on the 5th inst., while at labour in the dock-yard. He was convicted at Nottingham, on the 29th of June, 1838, of stealing a cock-fowl, and sentenced to seven years’ transportation; he has been in the house of correction, and in prison for felony. He is five feet four inches high, dark brown hair, grey eyes, full nose, common mouth, oval visage, stout made, dark complexion, 32 years of age; is single, can read and write, has a scar on the left eye, one on the top of his nose, sundry brawn blotches on the back, tatooed on the right arm – sun, moon, and seven stars, a woman with a skipping-rope and C.B., mermaid, a flower-pot with flowers, gun and carriage, stripe with three shots in it – rings on middle and fore fingers of right hand; tatooed left arm – a woman’s head, two pipes across, a foul anchor wrong side up, J.M., C.B., B.O.L.E.S. † A.N.N., a woman, MELLORS †, daughter O.F. W.M. † ;- rings on middle and fore fingers of left hand; a stag on breast-bone, a man with his hand in his pocket and a glass in his hand, a dog underneath, a woman with parasol and reticule, cat underneath, a gate on of the back, a dog on left side, and scar on right shin bone.”

The Stamford Mercury 16th November, 1838.

Boys are more likely to start fires than girls. In 1863 two young boys playing with matches burnt down two cottages, one of which belonged to them, a clover stack and two strawstacks. Despite two families losing their homes the writer of this article believed that “the damage will not be very considerable”.

On Tuesday afternoon last a fire broke out in a stack-yard belonging to Mr.Waterfield, near the Empingham-road, which ended in the destruction of two straw-stacks, two small thatched cottages, and a portion of a clover stack in an adjoining yard, the property of Mr. W. Scholes. The fire originated, like many others of late, in children playing with matches incautiously left in their way. A little boy, about six years of age, named Hough, whose parents resided in one of the tenements burnt down, during the temporary absence of the person who had charge of the children, took some matches and went with another little fellow into the stack-yard to play : he struck one of the matches, and the flame caught the stacks, which in a very short time were all in a blaze. The conflagration rapidly spread, and communicated with the thatched roof of the cottages and the stack in the adjoining yard. The moment the fire was discovered, the fire-engines were sent for, but when they arrived there was some delay in procuring water. The consequence was that the stacks were consumed and the cottages almost gutted before the engines could be got to work, and all that could be done was to prevent some adjoining houses taking fire from the excessive heat. Had the wind blown from the opposite quarter, a great destruction of property must have been the consequence ; fortunately, as it is, the damage will not be very considerable.’

Stamford Mercury, 27 March, 1863.