The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1879-09-20 00:00:00

,
-tot,
- ' "...`"--......,_.%‘3,7....--,*---
,
-
• t .
_ _ - ___ —_„..___—,.—________- -- - _ _--_,-....._ -- . _
,------- , ............ - • -
... . : . ' . . -
. .
'
- • - - .-....' '..4
- .... _ .. , , . ~ . • . -, .
•

THE CHINGFORD MURDER.

Jonathan Geydon, who was charged, on his own
confession, with the murder of Miss Mary White, at
Chingford Hatch, 22 years ago (on the 21st of June,
1857) was brought up on Tuesday on remand at the
Wattharu Abbey Petty Sessions, before Sir T. Fowell
Buxton, and Messrs. Alcock, Colvin, Parnell, and
Bury, county magistrates for Essex.
Mr. Robert Martin, solicitor, who represented the
family of the deceased, said there was very little more evi-
dence to offer.. He should produce the coroner, who would
hand in the depositions of the witnesses who had died since
- the inquest. Those depositions would include the evidence
of the surgeon who was called in, and who made a post-
mortem of the body. The verdict of the jury, be wished
to say, was that of wilful murder against some person
or persons unknown. The prisoner was there on his
own confession, bat there was now sufficient testimony
besides that to justify him in asking for a committal. It
had already been stated that the prisoner had, previously
to the murder, worked for Mr. Small, in whose house the
deceased was murdere,l. The prisoner must have known the
habits of his employer, so that when he went to the house
on the-fatal Sunday morning, he must have presumed that
Mr. Small aid his family were all at church. The proba-
bility was, therefore, that he went for the purpose of
robbery, and evidence in that direction would be given.
The house was an old-fashioned farm residence. The kitchen
in which the murder took place was it the back, and
out of it was a large room in which all sorts of things
were .stored. The body of the deceased was found
between these two rooms. The murder bong committed,
the body must have been dragged 911. or 10ft, to the place
where it was discovered, and an old hearthrng had been
found to have been hroan over the pool of blood by the
kitchen sink. The evidence he intended now to bring for-
ward would complete the links before indicated of the pri-
soner having been on the spot. There would be some re-
markable evidence with reference to a clasp knife, which
would be proved as the property of the prisoner.
Charles C. Lewis, of Brentwood, was the first witness
called. Lie said: I was Coroner for the county of Essex, and
on June 22, 1847, I opened an inquest at Chingford on the
body of a women named Mary White. It was adjourned
until the 29th, and the inquest was completed on the 3rd of
July. The verdict was wiitul murder against some person or
persons unknown. I•produee the inquisition. Deceased
was 70 years of age and single I viewed the body in
company with the jury. Her throat was cut. There
were other marks of violence, but I cannot now describe
them.

Some conversation took place as to whether the deposi-
tions could be put in evidence, as they were not taken in
the presence of the prisoner. The Bench eventually agreed
to receive the evidence of the witnesses deceased.
Mr. Lewis then read the evidence of Wm. Henry Cirey,
surgeon, deceased, describing the wounds inflicted upon the
deceased. Thera was a large incised wound on the left
temple, and a smaller one on the sight. The throat was cut
from the left ear nearly to the right. The wound was not
jagged, and the quantity of hemorrhage showed that it must
have been inflicted during life —The depositions were also
put in of James Suttle, who saw prisoner at ten o'clock on
the morning of the murder near Small's house, and after-
wards between eleven and twelve o'clock, leaning over the
gate of the meadow leading down to the house; of Charles
Tribbett, a police-constable, who gave a knife found near
the murdered woman to Charles Turner; and of Henry
James, a warder in Essex County Gaol, who gave the knife in
question to Jonathan Geyden a few days before, on his dis- ,
charge from gaol—The evidence of Mrs. Emma Small,
niece of deceased, who first discovered that the murder had
been committed, was also allowed to be put in, she having
emigrated and not been heard of for ten years. It
was as follows :—I live at No 28, Great Bath-street,
Clerkenwell, London. Deceased was my husband's aunt's
sister. On Sunday last (June 21st, 1857) I came down to
Chingford to see her. She did not expect me down. I
arrived at nearly twelve o'clock, by myself. I came to the
front door, and knocked three times. Not receiving any
answer, I went to the back door, which I found partly open.
I went in. I found no one in the kitchen, and was going to
proceed upstairs when I came upon the deceased. Mee was
lying at the toot of the stairs; her head and shoulders were
in the kitchen. I was frightened, and immediately ran out
for assistance. The deceased was raised. We then saw
that her face was covered with blood. I afterwards noticed
that she had a wound in the throat. Neither of her hands
was bloody. The body was undressed, and then I noticed a
wound on the left temple, which appeared to have bled. I
sent for Mr. and Mrs. Small, who were at the time of the
discovery at church.
George Hunter, Walthamstow, was then examined. He
said : In 1857 I was a uneatable, stationed at Walthamstow.
I remember the day of the murder of Miss White. About eight
o'clock I was on duty In plain clothes at Church-hill, Wal-
thamstow. It was June the 21st, 1857. I saw a man.
named Jonathan Geyden. He was coming from the direc-
tion of London. I knew him well, and had done so for
sixteen or seventeen years. I had him in my charge twice, once
for stealing a cow from his father, and the second time for
robbing his father of a quantity of hay. He was acquitted
on the first charge, and convicted of the latter. He
nodded to me, and I nodded to him as we passed, but
neither spoke. The direction he was taking would lead
to Mr. Small's house. He had on a light coat with stripes,
dark trousers, and a cap. I saw Jonathan Geyden this
morning in the railway carriage coming from London, and
-recognized him. I did not notice that he was in castedy. I
had not seen him before since the murder. I attended the
inquest, and remembered a knife being. produced -by a core-
stanie named Tribbett. It was a small, single-bladed clasp-
knife,Jelth a horn handle. The knife now produced is
similar but I should not like to swearto it. I swear the
prisoner is the same man that I knew previous to 1857 as
Jonathan Geyden.
Henry Ruggles, a sawyer, said he saw Geydon on the
morning of toe murder near the Napier Arms. On leaving
he said witness had no occasion to take any notice of having
seen him. Witness could not recognize the prisoner as
Jonathan Gey don.
Selina Saliford, widow, of Chingford-lane, examined: I
knew Miss Mary White quite well. She lived at Mr.
Small's. I lived near. My back garden j Aned their
back premises. I remember the murder. Mrs. Emma
Small came to me at about ten minutes to twelve,
and asked me to go into Mr. John Small's house. I
did not know Mrs. Emma Small at that time. I
ting-room into the kitchen. I there saw Miss White lying
between the kitchen door and the foot of the stairs. I first
thought she was in a fit, and went to lift her up. I raised
her by the shoulders, and had no sooner done so than her
head fell back on my breast as if it would fall off, and I saw
her throat was cut. There was very little blood where she
was lying, but by the sink, some two or three yards from the
body, there was a great deal on the floor. It was covered over
with an old heartlerug. I then went and fetched my husband,
and he went to the church,and a great number of persons came.
I was there when Dr. Carey came. There was a bowl of
water on the sink, and I was going to use it. When I put
my hand into the bowl, I found an open pocket knife in it.
Charles Turner took charge of the knife. When deceased
was undressed I saw a severe bruise en the left hip and a
wound on the left temple. I had been at home all the
morning, and had not seen any strange person about, nor
had I heard any ;screams. There was biood on her dress,
her chemise, her stockings, and boots I examined the
house that day. It had the appearance of having been ran-
sacked, particularly deceased's own room. I knew Jonathan
Geyden 40 years ago. Ido not recognise the prisoner.
Charles Turner, labourer, of Chingford Hatch ; I saw the
last witness find the knife. She handed it t me, and I took
it into the room where Mr. Small and the other people were,
but no one owned it. When before the coroner I identified
It. I picked it out of three. The one produced is like it,
but I could not swear to it.

Thomas Holden, letter carrier, but at the time of the
murder a policeman stationed at Chingford, proved the
Identity of the prisoner. He had, he said, apprehended him
for horse-stealing, to which the prisoner pleaded "Guilty,"
and was sent from the Old Bailey to Chelmsford Gaol for the
offence.
George Locke, of Ashford, near Staines, a pensioner police-
sergeant, said the knife which had been identified remained
in his possession till 1859, when he left Waltham.
Charles Elooper Nicholas, deputy governor of Chelmsford
Gaol, said: I was appointed to that office in 1853, and hays
laid it ever since. We bad a man named Jonathan Geyden
confined in the gaol for horse stealing. He was brought on
the 24th December, 1855, and was discharged on the 16th
June, 1857. I believe the prisoner to be the man, but I
would r.tther not swear to him. I remember an officer going
down to the gaol about a knife. James identified the knife
shown to him and the knife now produced is the same.
The Magistrates then retired and on their return Mr.
Gough, the magistrate's clerk, read to the prisoner the usual
caution, and inquired if he had anything to say in his
defence? riiv.ts,non b.„,a

Prisoner Nothing. - •
Sir T. F. Buxton said: Jonathan Geyden, the Magistrates
have gone fatly into this case, and we have come to the con-
clusion, without any doubt, that our only course is to cora•
mu t you for trial on this charge.
The depositions were then signed by the witnesses, and the
prisoner was committed for trial at the next sitttng of the
Central Criminal Court.
The court was crowded, but although it was marketrday
very little outside interest was exhibited.