by P. D. James
The mystery which has so long concealed the perpetrators of these crimes, seems now, ere long, likely to be removed. A trend of important circumstances have been discovered within the last eight and forty hours. In the course of yesterday morning, information was received at Shadwell Police Office, from Marlborough in Wiltshire, that a man of very remarkable appearance was detained in custody by the Magistrates of that town, under strong circumstances of suspicion. The description given of him was that he was remarkably tall, and answered precisely the appearance of the man who was seen to run up Gravel Lane, along with a shorter man, just after the alarm of murder was given. His apparel had been examined and upon one of the shirts were found a considerable number of blood stains, and the shirt itself was very much torn about the breast and neck. Other circumstances have transpired which tend still further to clear up every doubt of his identity. A private correspondence has been discovered between him and the man already in custody, which clearly connects them with the shocking transactions. The Magistrates despatched Willans and Hewitt down to Marlborough from whence they are expected to return this evening with their prisoner.
The magistrates’ patience must have been severely tested while they waited for this next villain – for here, beyond doubt surely, must be the tall man seen running up New Gravel Lane towards Ratcliffe Highway just after the murder of the Williamsons. Every suspicious circumstance pointed to it: his build, appearance, the bloody and torn shirt, above all, the ‘private correspondence’ with the prisoner. Meanwhile routine examinations must proceed. The police officers who searched the Pear Tree had picked up yet another suspect who lodged there. Was this the result of yet another tip-off from Vermilloe?
John Frederick Richter, a young foreign seaman, who resided at the Pear Tree Public House, where also John Williams lodged, was brought in custody to the Office by Butler and Holbrook.
The circumstances of suspicion lodged against him were in consequence of a pair of blue trousers having been found under his bed, in a damp state, with the appearance of mud having been imperfectly washed away from the knees downwards. The prisoner, when called upon to explain this circumstance, said that the trousers in question were left behind at the Pear Tree public house, by a man who had gone to sea. As nobody claimed them, he appropriated them to his own use. He knew of no mud upon them. None had touched them while in his possession; and although he acknowledged having brushed, he denied ever having washed them. He was then strictly examined with respect to his knowledge of Williams. He said he had known Williams about twelve weeks, but not intimately. He never drank with him out of the house, and only now and then held intercourse with him in the Pear Tree Public House. There was a chest of tools in the house belonging to a foreigner named John Peterson. There were several mauls amongst other tools, none of which he had seen in the last three weeks. He was then shown the maul which was found in Mr Marr’s house, which he said was exactly like the one he had seen amongst Peterson’s tools. Peterson had marked his tools with the initials J.P., and upon looking at the same initials about this instrument, he verily believed it was the same he had seen at the Pear Tree. He did not know that Williams was an Irishman from his conversation but he had heard other persons say so. He remembered that Williams had large whiskers three or four days before he was taken up, but when he saw him last he did not take particular notice of any alteration in his face. On the night of the murder of Mr Williamson and his family,3 he heard a knock at the door a little before one o’clock, and he was afterwards told it was Williams. He never heard Williams ask his landlady for a loan of sixpence. He did not think Williams was a mariner from his appearance, but he had heard that he was employed on board the Roxburgh Castle, Indiaman. He had also heard that the Captain of that vessel had observed, that if Williams ever went on shore again, he would surely be hanged. This was in allusion to his bad character on board the ship.
The witness seemed, through the whole of his examination, to answer the questions put to him with great unwillingness, and appeared as if he wished to hold back information within his knowledge. The Magistrates cautioned him to be careful about what he said, and encouraged him not to be at all afraid of speaking the truth from any apprehension of the consequences. He still, however, proceeded in his taciturnity upon some interrogatories tendered to him.
The Morning Chronicle brought out other points from Richter’s evidence:
On being minutely questioned respecting his knowledge of two persons – a carpenter and a joiner (whose names, though known at the Office, were for obvious reasons suppressed) as acquaintances of Williams, he said that about three or four weeks ago he saw them drinking at the Pear Tree public house with Williams, and since that time had seen them there without Williams. On the night of the murder of the Marr family, a few minutes before Williams came home, there was a knock on the door, and he (the examinant) went down to open it, when he found the key had been taken from the inside of the lock. He called to the mother of Mrs Vermilloe, the landlady, to come down and open the door. Hearing her coming down he went up to his own room; and when there, heard her in conversation with a man whose voice he thinks was that of one of the two men before mentioned. A few minutes afterwards Williams himself came in. This was almost half-past one o’clock.
About eleven o’clock on the day after the murder of the Marr family the examinant went from curiosity to examine the premises, which he entered and saw the dead bodies. From thence he returned to the Pear Tree, where he found Williams in the back yard, washing out his stockings, but he did not tell Williams where he had been. On being asked by the magistrate why he did not tell Williams, the examinant answered – ‘he did not know, he could not tell’.
Richter was remanded in custody, being unable to account for the mud on his trousers, and their damp condition. Next:
Cornelius Hart and Jeremiah Fitzpatrick, two Irishmen, the carpenter and joiner alluded to by the last witness (and suspected to have been concerned with Williams in the murders) were then put to the bar. Hart said that he had known Williams only about a fortnight; and never drank any beer with him, and only two glasses of gin. The magistrates asked the witness what was the reason for calling on Williams at the Pear Tree a few nights before Marr’s murder, and was answered that the witness had been out drinking, and had spent all his money, and his wife would not open the door for him, and he came to Williams in consequence.
Richter was called back to contradict Hart in his statement, that he had never drunk any beer with Williams, but he said that it might perhaps be gin. Richter added that he had seen Hart, Fitzpatrick and Williams in company on the Sunday following the murder of Mr Marr. One of them afterwards called again to enquire after Williams, but he did not desire that his calling should be concealed. Williams was in the habit of keeping very bad hours.
Fitzpatrick said that he had become acquainted with Williams about three weeks since, when they drank some beer together. This was the first time witness had anything to do with the set. Being asked what he intended by the word set, he said he meant Williams. Some time afterwards, he, Williams and another man, went to the Union, in New Gravel Lane (two or three doors from Williamson’s) where they had some Sampson, or strong gin. The witness owned that he had called upon Williams between the murders of Marr and Williamson, but denied that he had ever expressed a wish that it should be concealed. On the night of Mr Marr’s murder the witness went to bed at half-past eleven.
The magistrates adjourned for tea, then resumed their examination in the evening. The Times reported:
John Cuthperson, a fellow lodger of Williams, touched on a point of material importance. He stated that on the morning after the murder of Mr Williamson, when he got up, he saw a pair of his own stockings lying behind his chest, very much dirtied with fresh mud. He took them downstairs into the tap-room, where he found Williams. He asked him who had dirtied his stockings in that manner? Williams said: ‘Why, are they yours?’ ‘They are mine,’ the witness replied. Some little dispute
then ensured as to their right ownership, when Williams took them into the back yard, and after washing the dirt off, returned them to the witness.
A woman of the town attended, and advised that two or three evenings after the murder of Mr Williamson, she was standing in Shadwell, and overheard one man say to another as they passed, ‘damn Turner, we will soon do for him, for if it had not been for him the murder would not have been found out.’
According to The Times the magistrates treated this woman’s evidence ‘very lightly’; but during the day’s examinations evidence came to light which reflected on the standard of veracity of one of their earlier witnesses:
Cornelius Hart, who was examined in the morning, and disclaimed all acquaintance with Williams, and denied positively that he had called on him the day he was apprehended; and desired that it might not be said he (Hart) had called, was contradicted indirectly. It appears that although he did not call himself, he sent his wife to enquire whether Williams had not been taken up on suspicion of the murder; and told her to impose silence on the landlady of the public house, with respect to the enquiry on his (Hart’s) part.
It was growing late when the last witnesses were called. The man from Marlborough had not yet arrived, so there was time to hear Mrs Orr. This woman, the London Chronicle reported, kept a chandler’s shop near Sir William Warren’s Square, next door but one to Pear Tree Court and actually adjoining the Pear Tree.
Mrs Orr stated that on the Saturday before Marr’s murder, about half-past one in the morning, she was getting up linen when she heard a noise about the house, as if a man was attempting to break into the house. She was frightened, and asked – ‘Who is there?’ A voice answered which she knew to be Williams’s, ‘I am a robber!’ She answered, ‘Whether you are a robber or not I will let you in, and I am glad to see you.’ Williams entered, and seated himself down until the watchman was calling the hour past two o’clock. Williams got up from his chair and asked the lady whether she would have a glass. She assented, but as he would not go out for it she went to the Pear Tree public house, but could gain no admittance. She returned, when Williams enquired how many rooms there were in her house, and the situation of her back premises? She replied that there were three rooms, and that her yard joined Mrs Vermilloe’s house. The watchman came into her house, which Williams resisted for some time. The watchman told Mrs Orr that he had picked up a chisel by the side of her window. Williams ran out unobserved at this information. Soon afterwards he returned. The watchman was going, when Williams stopped him and desired him to go to the Pear Tree and get some liquor. The house was then open. While the watchman was gone for the liquor Williams took up the chisel and said, ‘Damn my eyes, where did you get this chisel?’ Mrs Orr did not part with it, and retained the instrument till Monday last. Hearing that Williams was examined, she went to Mrs Vermilloe’s and showed her the chisel. Mrs Vermilloe looked at it and compared it with the tools in Peterson’s chest, when it was found to bear the same marks. She declared it was taken out of her house. Mrs Orr instantly delivered the chisel to the magistrates of Shadwell Office, as being a further clue to the villainy.
Mrs Orr says she knew Williams for eleven weeks. He frequently nursed her child and used to joke with her daughter. He once asked her whether she would be frightened if he came in the dead of night to her bedside? The daughter replied, ‘No, if it was you Mr Williams I should not.’ Both the mother and the daughter thought Williams an agreeable young man, and of a most insinuating address, and never thought he could be the man who would attempt to rob or murder.
Finally Sylvester Driscoll was brought up from Coldbath Fields Prison. The magistrates told him that they were now satisfied with his account of the spirits found in his possession, but until he could give an adequate explanation of the blood on his trousers he would have to remain in custody. Driscoll was accordingly committed until the following Tuesday.
That concluded the examination on Boxing Day. And what, at this stage, did the case against the prisoner amount to?
Williams lodged at the Pear Tree, and for several weeks he had had free access to the tools in John Peterson’s chest. One of these tools, the maul, had come from that chest; and it had been identified as the weapon with which the Marrs were murdered. There was evidence that Williams had not arrived home until after midnight on the night of Marr’s murder. Richter put it as late as half past one. He had frequently been seen drinking at the King’s Arms, and admitted to having been there on the night the Williamsons were murdered. That night he arrived home at midnight or later, and desired one of his room-mates to put his candle out. Next morning he had washed out a pair of muddy stockings, evidently borrowed from Cuthperson. It was said that he had been so hard up before the murder of Williamson that he had to borrow sixpence from Mrs Vermilloe and had needed to pawn his shoes; afterwards he had a pound in his pocket, together with some silver. Mrs Rice had washed his torn and bloody shirts. Mrs Orr had come along with an extraordinary story linking Williams with yet a third ripping chisel.
After considering the evidence, the three Shadwell magistrates sent a brief note to the Home Secretary:
You will have perceived from the papers the examinations of Williams, which have taken place at this Office; they are pretty accurately given, and as such we think it unnecessary to give it now in detail. A further examination will be had tomorrow, and tho’ many circumstances arise against him we are not yet certain that he will prove the Man – being so fully employed, you must excuse this short Note.
This letter is interesting. It confirms that the newspaper reports of the proceedings were correct; an important point since the actual depositions have been destroyed. And it clearly states that, by the close of Boxing Day, the case was still far from proved. As they talked over the evidence together, the magistrates must have been struck by its weakness and inconsistencies. They had questioned John Williams and had studied his demeanour in the dock. We are not told how he struck them, but it is significant that, at the close of his final examination, they were far from convinced that he was their man. But tomorrow was another day; another examination. And they awaited with confident hope, the arrival of the man from Marlborough.
That night the magistrates settled fresh tactics. They arranged to assemble at the Shadwell Public Office at ten o’clock on the following morning. Mallett, the Clerk, was instructed to see that the maul and all three ripping chisels were available. John Williams and Richter were to be brought from their cells in Coldbath Fields Prison, the former probably for the last time before his committal for trial. And now virtually everybody concerned in the case was warned to attend for the next day’s hearing. Mrs Vermilloe was summoned from the Pear Tree, this time with two of her lodgers – Harrison and Cuthperson. Inquiries had established the names of Williams’s favourite public houses, and the landlords of two of them were requested to present themselves. One, Robert Lawrence, of the Ship and Royal Oak, would be able to speak about the fight that Williams claimed had resulted in one of his bloody shirts. The other, Mr Lee, landlord of the Black Horse, New Gravel Lane, lived opposite Williamson, had seen Turner’s descent, and had been among the party that broke into the King’s Arms and found the bodies; and it was at the Black Horse that Unwin had conducted the second inquest. Finally, two men who were believed to be friends of Williams were summoned to attend: Jeremiah Fitzpatrick was called again, together with a new witness – John Cobbett, a coal-heaver.
It is apparent that, at this stage, the magistrates were devoting all their attention to John Williams. They probably felt that it would be more profitable to concentrate on their prime suspect rather than to complicate the public inquiry by introducing others against whom suspicion was less strong. Some of these were in custody – as was Sylvester Driscoll; nothing would be risked by delay. Besides, they still awaited the man from Marlborough. It would be expedient to defer the examination of all the possible accomplices until he had been brought to town. And if the proceedings on the morrow went as
expected there was every hope that Williams would assist them by betraying his confederates, either at his committal or during his subsequent confinement. In a case of gang murder, to catch one was invariably to catch all. The important task at the moment was to deal with Williams.
There were two men, in particular, who must have been grateful that the magistrates’ attention was so firmly fixed elsewhere. One was the carpenter, Cornelius Hart, who had worked for Pugh and carried out the alterations to Marr’s shop window. He had denied any familiarity with Williams, but was afterwards proved to have sent his wife on a surreptitious errand to the Pear Tree to inquire whether Williams had been arrested. Another, who was the subject of much gossip in the neighbourhood, was a tall, stout man, who was said to be lame. So far there had been no mention of him in the newspapers, but in Wapping he was known as Long Billy. In the House of Commons, more than a month later, the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary both named him: William Ablass.
1 The River Fencibles comprised a sort of Home Guard to man the Martello Towers in case of invasion. Service was popular as a means of avoiding regular service in the Navy.
2 Alias Bailey – p. 106.
3 This appears to be a reporter’s error in confusing the two cases. The Morning Chronicle, in the passage next quoted, leaves no doubt that the reference is to the night of the murder of the Marrs, and this seems inherently more probable.
