The investigation continued and diligent police work soon determined that not only had Mrs Thomas taken in many more children, but also that she had done so under a number of other names. Further, her real name was Amelia Dyer and she had now moved to Kensington Road. A check on her history at Bristol raised a number of concerns. Dyer had a history of mental instability and had been confined to asylums on more than one occasion. It was believed that should she come to think that she was being investigated by the police, Dyer would simply move on yet again. For that reason, a young woman was used as a decoy and arranged a meeting at Dyer’s home, ostensibly to discuss placing yet another child in her charge. However, when Mrs Dyer opened the door to her new potential client, at the appointed hour, she was faced instead with two police detectives who said they wanted to interview her about missing children.
The house was searched and much evidence gathered. There were piles of baby clothes in the house and, in addition, officers found letters and telegrams detailing the apparent adoption of dozens of children and babies. However, though the evidence indicated that she should have many children living with her, only two babies were found in the house. Dyer could give no account of what might have happened to all the others and that was enough for the police to arrest her and, on 4 April, she was formally charged with murder.
Since the body of Helena Fry had been found in the river, it was reasonable to assume that if there were any further victims, they too might have been disposed of in the same manner. As a result, officers and others began a systematic dragging of the river.
On 8 April, the decomposed body of a baby boy was recovered. He was never identified. Two days later, another baby boy was found. He too was never identified. That same day, 10 April, a carpet bag was fished out of the Thames. When this was opened, it was found to contain two bodies: a girl, later identified as Doris Marmon and a little boy, identified as Harry Simmons.
Almost two weeks later, on 23 April, a baby identified by a Miss Golding, was recovered from the river. Exactly one week later, on 30 April, yet another unidentified baby boy was found. The body count now stood at seven.
Even before this, the police investigation seemed to indicate that others might have been involved in this awful trade in human life. Dyer’s daughter, Mary Ann Palmer and her husband, Arthur, were arrested and may well have faced similar charges to Amelia Dyer, but during the inquests on the various bodies, Dyer wrote a confession, dated 16 April. It read:
Sir, will you kindly grant me the favour of presenting this to the magistrates on Saturday the 18th instant? I have made this statement out, for I may not have the opportunity then. I must relieve my mind. I do know and feel my days are numbered on this earth but I do feel it is an awful thing drawing innocent people into trouble.
I do know I shall have to answer before my Maker in Heaven as on earth, neither my daughter Mary Ann Palmer nor her husband Arthur Ernest Palmer, I do most solemnly declare, neither of them had any thing to do with it. They never knew I contemplated doing such a wicked thing until it was too late. I am speaking the truth and nothing but the truth as I hope to be forgiven. I myself and I alone must stand before my Maker in Heaven, to give an answer for it all.
Witness my hand.
Amelia Dyer.
That letter undoubtedly saved Mary Ann and Arthur Palmer from further investigation on a possible murder charge and the inquest decided that they had not been diectly involved in any of the deaths. However, it was decided to charge Mary Ann Palmer with being an accessory and she was timetabled to face her trial on that charge in June. Dyer, meanwhile, was sent to face her trial on the capital charge.
The confession, written by Amelia Dyer to the authorities, stating that she alone was responsible for killing the children whose bodies had been recovered from the river. The National Archives
In British courts, it is usual to proceed on a single charge of murder, no matter how many actual victims there might have been. Dyer had now been linked directly to seven deaths but it was decided to proceed against her on only one, the murder of Doris Marmon, a child which letters and other evidence could clearly place in Dyer’s care. Dyer’s trial, on that single charge, opened at the Old Bailey, before Mr Justice Hawkins, on 21 May 1896. During the two days of the proceedings, Dyer was defended by Mr Kapadia and Mr Linford. The case for the Crown rested in the hands of Mr AT Lawrence and Mr Horace Avory. Dyer pleaded guilty to the charge, but claimed that she was insane at the time she committed the crime. That would now be for the jury to decide.
The first witness was Evalina Edith Marmon, the mother of the dead infant. She confirmed that she lived in Cheltenham, had given birth to a baby girl in January and, in March 1896, had seen an advertisement in a newspaper in Bristol. It read: ‘Couple with no child, want care of or would adopt one: terms £10. Care of Ship Exchange, Bristol.’ Evalina replied to the advertisement and received a letter back, from 45 Kensington Road, Reading. The letter began:
Dear Madam,
In reference to your letter of adoption of a child, I beg to say I shall be happy to have a little baby girl, one that I can bring up and call my own.
First I must tell you, we are plain, homely people, in fairly good circumstances. We live in our own house, and have a good and comfortable home. We are out in the country, and sometimes I am alone a great deal. I don’t want the child for money’s sake, but for company and home comfort.
Myself and husband are dearly fond of children. None of 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.
I would not mind the mother or any friend coming to see the child at any time and know the child is going on all right. I only hope we may come to terms. I should like to have the baby as soon as you can arrange it. If I can come for her, I don’t mind paying for one way. I could break my journey at Gloucester; I have a friend in the asylum there I should be so glad to call and see. If you will let me have an early reply I can give you some references.
The letter was signed Mary Harding.
The letter reassured Evalina who replied, saying that she wished to take up the kind offer. On 22 March, she received another letter from Mrs Harding. This began:
Many thanks for your letter of this morning. I shall not answer anyone else till I hear from you again. I assure you I will do my duty to the dear child. I will be a mother as far as possible in my power. If you like to come and stay a few days, or a week, later on, I shall be pleased to make you welcome. It is just lovely here in the summer. There is an orchard opposite our front door. I think Doris a very pretty name; I am sure she ought to be a pretty child.
Other letters were exchanged and final arrangements were made. On Tuesday 31 March, Mrs Harding, who was of course Amelia Dyer, called at Evalina’s to pick up the child. An agreement had been drawn up by Evalina which read:
I, Ann Harding, of 45 Kensington Road, Oxford Road, Reading, in consideration of £10 paid to me by E E Marmon, agree to adopt the child and to bring the same up as my own, without any compensation over and above the £10.
Dyer signed that paper and her signature was witnessed by Martha Pockett, Evalina’s landlady.
Dyer had promised that she would write to Evalina again just as soon as she arrived back home. A short letter was indeed sent, on 2 April, giving an address in Kensal Rise, in which Dyer claimed that she had been called away to London as her sister had been taken dangerously ill. The child, however, was well and thriving and a much longer letter would follow, once things were back to normal. In fact, no such letter was ever received and Evalina never heard again from Dyer, alias Ann Harding. On 7 April, the police called on Evalina to tell her that they believed her child had been killed. She went up to Reading and formally identified the body on 11 April.
Dyer had not returned to Reading on 31 March after picking up Doris. Mary Ann Beattie testified that at some time after 10.00pm on the night of 31 March, she had been on a bus when she saw Dyer with a large carpet
bag and a child. Dyer and Mary Ann alighted from the bus at the same stop on the corner of Mayo Road. Mary Ann noticed Dyer particularly as she appeared to be lost. Mary Ann offered her help and asked Dyer what address she was trying to find. Dyer told her that she was looking for number 76, whereupon Mary Ann not only walked on with her but offered to carry the carpet bag for her.
The next witness was Mary Ann Palmer, Dyer’s married daughter. She testified that she lived at 76 Mayo Road, with her husband, and confirmed that Dyer had arrived at her house at around 10.30pm on 31 March. She had a baby girl with her, which was obviously Doris Marmon. Mary had adopted a child herself and, later that night, was putting her baby to bed. At the time, Doris was crying bitterly and Dyer undressed the child in order to quieten it. Some time after this, Mary Ann went up to check on her own child and when she returned, the baby Dyer had with her was lying on the couch, muffled in a shawl and apparently asleep. However, Dyer would not let her daughter go anywhere near the child. The following morning there was no trace of Doris and some tape had disappeared from Mary’s workbox.
The suggestion was that Doris Marmon had been murdered by Dyer that very night. One of the ways that all the murders could be linked back to Dyer was the use of tape tied tightly around their throats. Indeed, at one stage, when she was being interviewed by the police, Dyer had replied that it would be easy to tell which ones she had killed by the tape around their necks.
Doris Marmon’s body was eventually discovered, along with that of Harry Simmons, on 10 April. Thus far, the prosecution had indicated that Doris had been killed very soon after Dyer had taken the child from her mother. John Toller, it seems, had come very close to catching Dyer in the very act of disposing of the two bodies.
On the night of Thursday, 2 April, Toller, who worked at the prison at Reading, was walking home after his shift. It was five or perhaps ten minutes to eleven and as he passed the railway arch by the Rising Sun public house, he saw a woman approaching him from underneath the arch. That woman was Amelia Dyer and she was walking from the direction of the river.
Henry Smithwaite testified that he had been working with other men, dragging the river on 10 April, when he found a carpet bag near the footbridge at Caversham. The bag was sunk into some twelve feet of water. He managed to hook the bag and drag it to the surface. Knowing full well what it might contain, Smithwaite took the bag to Sergeant Harry James and the two men then opened it together, inside the lock-house.
The bag was tied with string at the top but it still gaped open some three inches or so. The string was cut by Sergeant James and inside the two men saw a piece of brown paper, which covered the rest of the contents. The paper was removed and there lay the body of a female child: Doris Marmon. Sergeant James then reached in and brought out a heavy brick and beneath this lay the body of a male child. The bag was taken to the police station for further investigations.
Doctor William James Morris had examined both bodies in the mortuary at Reading. He noticed that there was a double mark around the neck of the female child, as if a ligature had been tied there quite tightly. The subsequent post-mortem showed that the cause of death had been strangulation. In his opinion, the child had been dead around ten days or so.
Turning to the male child, Dr Morris found a tape ligature still in place. It had been tied twice around the neck, in a bow. Again the cause of death was strangulation and again, the child had been dead for approximately ten days. As for the tape only being found around one of the children’s throats, Dyer had since explained that she had simply re-used the one she had killed Doris with.
The time came to raise the subject of the confession Dyer had written for the magistrates. Ellen Gibbs was a matron at Reading prison and had been in charge of Dyer when she penned it. After it was completed, Dyer announced that she had now eased her mind. That same day, Dyer had written a second letter, to her son-in-law, apologising for getting him into trouble and confirming that she had now made a complete confession.
The only hope for Dyer was her plea of insanity and a number of medical men were now called to give their expert opinions on the matter. The first of these witnesses was Dr Frederick Thomas Bishop Logan, who had a practice in Bristol. On Christmas Eve 1893, Dr Logan had been called to examine Dyer at her then home, 114 Wells Road, but she had rushed at him with a poker and threatened to break his skull. She told him that she had heard voices telling her to kill herself. Dr Logan believed that she was of unsound mind and had written out a certificate to that effect, which committed her to an asylum.
Dr J Lacy Firth was in charge of Dyer at the Bristol General Hospital. On 26 April 1894, Dyer had been brought to the hospital after she had apparently tried to drown herself. She stayed in his care for thirteen days during which time she was questioned about a missing child. Dr Firth was unable to recall any other details of the case.
Doctor William Frederick Bailey Eden was a surgeon, and on 14 December 1894, he had been called to examine Dyer in Fishponds. She offered him violence, but he allowed her to talk on and came to the conclusion that she was of unsound mind. Once again, Dyer was sent to an asylum, but was discharged in January 1895.
Doctor Forbes Winslow had examined Dyer in Holloway prison on 15 May 1896, just a few days before the trial began. He had specifically asked her about the two children whose bodies had been found together in the river. Dyer’s answers were vague and she seemed to have little or no recollection of names, dates, times and places. In Dr Winslow’s opinion too, Dyer was of unsound mind.
So far, all the medical evidence had appeared to confirm the plea of insanity, but other testimony now negated this. Doctor James Scott was the medical officer at Holloway and he had been observing Dyer since her admission there on 7 May. In his opinion, she was perfectly sane.
Doctor Henry Savage testified that he had seventeen years of medical experience in treating various forms of lunacy. He had examined Dyer, for one hour only, at Holloway, and concluded that she was not mentally unsound.
The final witness of all was not a medical expert. James Hobley was Dyer’s brother and he made it clear that he wanted nothing to do with the case. In reply to the first question put to him he replied: ‘I wish my name not to be mentioned in public. I shall be a pensioner. I am the prisoner’s brother. My mother was never insane. There was never a case of insanity in our family.’ Finally, in response to a question from Mr Kapadia for the defence, Hobley said: ‘I have not seen the prisoner for thirty-five or thirty-six years. She is a total stranger to me.’
Having heard all the evidence, the jury took just six minutes to decide that Amelia Dyer was guilty as charged, perfectly sane and so responsible for her actions. She was then sentenced to death and moved to the condemned cell at Newgate to await her appointment with the hangman.
An interesting point of law was then raised. It was still the intention of the authorities to prosecute Dyer’s daughter, Mary Ann Palmer, for being an accessory. Her trial was due to open on 16 June and, of course, the chief witness against her would have been her own mother, Amelia Dyer.
The notice of execution from Newgate prison. The National Archives
Attempts were made to serve a subpoena on Dyer, inside her cell, but the prison authorities refused to accept it and notified the Home Office of the event. Documents preserved in The National Archives at Kew show that it was decided that no subpoena could circumnavigate or delay a sentence of death and the prison was right in refusing to accept it. Since, by the time Mary Ann’s case would come to court, the chief witness against her would be dead, no further action was taken against Dyer’s daughter.
Newgate prison where Amelia Dyer was executed. Author’s Collection
What followed was a very busy time for the authorities at Newgate with four executions within two days. On 9 June, three men, Henry Fowler, Albert Milsom and William Seaman, had all been hanged there. The following day, 10 June, they were followed to the gallows by fifty-seven-year-old Amelia Elizabeth Dyer. She was hanged for
the murder of Doris Marmon, with six more deaths directly attributed to her; but in reality, the police had come to believe that many more infant deaths, over a long period of time, might have been due to the crimes of the Reading baby-farmer.
CHAPTER 3
Executions at Reading
Since the year 1800, there have been a total of thirty-five executions at Reading. Twenty-seven of these took place in public, with the remaining eight taking place in private within the precincts of the prison.
Public Executions
Given below are the basic details of the twenty-seven public executions:
John Holt – Hanged 6 March 1800, for murder
James Durner – Hanged 19 July 1801, for murder
Edward Painter – Hanged 29 March 1802, for cattle theft
John Ryan – Hanged 30 July 1802, for murder
Dennis Daley – Hanged 19 March 1803, for forgery
Thomas Cox – Hanged 23 March 1811, for bestiality
Charles White – Hanged 26 March 1814, for horse theft
John Newbank – Hanged 25 March 1815, for uttering a forged document
James Castle – Hanged 2 August 1817, for sheep theft
Thomas Ayres – Hanged 10 August 1818, for burglary
Edward Tooley – Hanged 7 August 1819, for burglary
David Patience – Also hanged 7 August 1819, for burglary
Foul Deeds and Suspicious Deaths in Reading Page 2
