The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-06-19 00:00:00

THE HARLEY-STREET MYSTERY.

On Monday Dr. Hardwicke resumed the inquiry at
the "Buffalo Head," Marylebone-road, London,
touching the death of a woman, aged between 40 and
50, whose remains were found by a butler in a cellar
at 139, Harley-street, the residence of Mr. Jacob Q.
Henriques, on Thursday, the 3rd of June. Chief
Inspector Lucas and Serjeant King watched the case
on 13ehalf of the police, who were also represented by
Mr. St. John Wontner.—We take the following re-
port of the proceedings from The 7imes of Tuesday :
Dr. Spurgin, surgeon to the D division of police recalled,
said : I have examined the body further and more par-
ticularly to ascertain the immediate cause of death. I hAve
no doubt death was caused in this case by a stab in the left
breast between the fourth and fifth ribs. There was no ap-
pearance of injury to the heart, and as the lungs had en-
tirely disappeared the injury to that could not be traced ;
but the evidence of effusion of blood in the region of the
stab was abundantly clear, while the right side was free
from any such indications. Since the last sitting of
this Court casts of the mouth and teeth have
been taken, and I now present them .to the jury (The casts
were handed to the jury) I have also formed an opinion as
to the manner in which the body had been treated before
being placed in the cask. It was either buried in chloride of
lime or had chloride of lime sprinkled over it before it was
put into the cask. I arrive at this conclusion from the fact
that the whole of the body Was covered with the chloride of
lime, while there was none in the cask itself or in the
interstices or cracks. Moreover, the action of the chloride
of lime was equally distributed over the body.
A juror: Were there any stains of blood in the cask?
Witness: Yes, there were stains which answer to the
chemical tests for blood, but these might have come from the
mouth or nose after death. It is important that I should in-
form you that there were in the cask patches or smears of
the lime, as if caused by the body thus covered being placed
In the cask. Among the other things found in the cellar
immediately about the cask were this table-knife, two old
pokers, afid a quantity of ordinary cording rope (all pro-
duced). The knife is covered with rust, but I do not think
any conclusion can be drawn from that. The linen found
on the body—or rather the remnants Of what was linen—
showed that the garments were not only of coarse materials,
but were coarsely made.
In reply to the jury: There was literally no lung left in
the body. The curvature of the spine, I have no doubt, was
made by the body having been forced into the cask. There
has been a negative result in the examination of the knife
for traces of blood, but after a time these might be lost.
That knife would make such a wound as that seen in the
body.
_ .

.young man in a soldier's uniform was then brought
forward as a witness. He deposed: My name is Henry
Smith, and I am in the 3rd Surrey (whether the Line or
Militia was not stated). lam a married man, and was mar-
ried when I was in Mr. Henriques's service as butler. Ido
no not know when that was, but it is about three years
explanation of this mystery ,ago. (It is in evidence that he left in November, 1878.)
of the cask with the body
I was there about eighteen months. I cannot give any
under the cistern in the inner cellar. I seldom went
there. I was discharged by Mr. Henriques for being
found the worse for drink. I used to sleep in the
servants' hall. A footman named Tinapp was there while I
was butler„ and he used to sleep in the pantry. My wife is
alive now, 'but Ido not live With her. I knew of no one
being brought to the house of a night—no supper parties
there, I knew of a case of disorderly conduct on the part
of a footman while I was there—his coming home intoxi-
cated. He used to stop out of a night, and have let him
in. The area gate was supposed to be closed of a night, and
I was responsible for the closing of it I have known•it not
to have been closed. The footman who used to come home
drunk has not brought any one home with him.
In reply to Mr. Wontner, the witness said : I was re-
sponsible for locking the gate at night, but it used to be
lea unlocked three or four times a week. I used to be
out at night About thros growl a relt—l wncl po to be out
_ . . _

for some months. The footman, when I was thus away,
was the only servant in that part of the house. I was dis-
charged for allowing the footman to be out at night.
Mr. Wontner : You see that cask; when did you first see
that in the cellar?
- • --

Witness: I do not remember seeing it at all.
, Mr. Wontner : Now, do you not know something about
an attempt to dig a hole in the cellar?
Witness: Well, I did have a man to dig a hole in one of
the cellars.

Mr. Wontner : When?
Witness: Well, this was. about three months before I left
about the autumn or Auguit of 1878.
Mr. Wontner : What was your purpose in having a hole
dug in the cellar?
Witness: I had a great accumulation of stale bread at the
time, and I thought I should get into trouble, so I thought
I would have a hole dug to bury it.
Mr. Wontner : Was the hole dug?

Witness: No; the man, who was an old stableman, named
Green, came upon some concrete under the bricks, and he
replaced the bricks. The man was an "odd man" aboa I
am certain I never saw the tub before.
The next witness was this "odd man," John Green, of
16, Weymouth-mews, who deposed : I am living as jobbing
man or coachman. lam 73 years of age, and have lived 40
years in Marylebone. I knew 139, Ifarley-street, and I
knew Smith, formerly butler to Mr. Henriques. One day
he asked me if I was a paviour, as he had seen me laying
some stones in the stable. About three years ago--I cannot
remember the date exactly—l went to the house, 139, on
being asked by Smith, the butler, and I saw bricks in the
cellar all taken up, the hole being about a yard across.
I did not dig any hole. I relaid the bricks. I did not ask
Smith what he took them up for. The hole I had to fill
was in the middle cellar, next to the one where the rubbish
was—in one of the coal cellars as now used. The next morn-
ing Smith said to me," Come and tidy up a cellar," and I
went down to the outer cellar, -leading to that in which the
cask was found. I tidied up the outer cellar, and put what
I cleared into the dust-bin. Another day Smith asked me
to carry mould out of the back of the house, and I told him
I was not strong enough to carry it away and that I had
nowhere to take it—that he had better get therscavengers to
do it. I never went beyond the pantry of the house.

By Mr. Wontner : I did not dig the hole; I only put the
bricks down. Smith never said he wanted to bury bread. I
thought some one had been digging for a drain. I had to
level the stuff about the hole. I hinted to Smith to pay me;
but he only gave me a glass of ale, and said he would make
it "all right" with me. I made the inner cellar clean.
There were no broken pokers there, nor this knife; but there
were packing cases. I made a clean sweep of the cellar, but
I did not sweep under the cistern. [There was some con-
fusion as to the various cellars, and the Coroner suggested
that the witness should go to the house and point out the
spots indicated to Inspector King, who accordingly went
with the witness.]

William Tinapp, German, deposed: I went into Mr.
Henriques's service as footman, at 139, Harley-street, in
August, 1878. Smith was the butler there then, and I be-
lieve the barrel was in the cellar when I first went. I re-
member the bad smell when I first went. When I first went
the bricks in the middle cellar had been removed and re-
placed. This had been done just before I went, for Green
told me soon after I went into the service that Smith had had
him early one morning to replace the bricks. The dusthole
was emptied by the butler's order. The refuse of the kitchen
was thrown into the dusthole. I never saw any large quan-
tity of waste bread in the house.
The present butler, Spindlove, was recalled, anthsaid that
there never was any such waste of bread in the house as to
render it necessary for a man to try and bury it under the
bricks in the cellar.

Mrs. Jewry, who was cook in Mr. Henriques's service from
1874 to 1879, and knew Smith as butler there, said she was
not aware of his sleeping away from the house for a period,
and with regard to the alleged accumulation of waste bread,
she denied that there was ever any waste bread, and in the
most emphatic terms denied that it could have been neces-
sary for Smith to have had holes dug to bury it. Moreover,
if there had been a waste the dustman would gladly have
taken it. With regard to the mould which Green stated
that Smith had desired him to take away, she said that as there
was no garden to the house there could be no mould. The
only mould there could be would be under paved stones in
the yard between the back of the house and the stables,
except a small quantity in boxes, in which some ivy grew.
George Campbell, servant at 134, Harley-street, who had
lived for five months in Mr. Henriques's service in 1876-77,
deposed that there was no cask in the cellar when he lived
at 139, and. there was no smell in the place at the time.

John Bortharn, a butler, in service at Eccleston-square,
and George Minton, footman, at Queen's-gate, were called to
depose that when they were in Mr. Henriques's service up to
1877 there was no cask in the cellar, and no bad smell.

The witness Green, recalled said :—lt was in the middle
cellar where I put down the bricks. I now remember
there was a heavy box, a packing box, in the inner cellar,
and some old chairs. I never saw the mould Smith spoke
about my moving.

Inspector Lucas remarked that the workmen had been
found who had stood on the heavy box, which was a cham-
pagne case, in order to repair the cistern.
Inspector King, who went with Green, said the place Green
had pointed out as the spot where the attempt to dig the
hole had been made had been opened, and'it was found that
two stones had been let in to cover the place where a cess-
pool had formerly been.
Mr. Woodroffee, who was the caretaker of the house, de-
posed: For the last six years I have taken care of Mr.
Henriques's house in the autumn, and my wife and son with
me. In the autumn of 1878 I went into the cellar to hunt
out a rat, and saw the barrel, for I knocked a stick against
it. Bottles were on it. Smith was butler at file time, but
was with the family in the country. I always kept the area
gate locked to prevent hawkers coining down. I saw that
bricks had been moved in the cellar.

Henry Charles Goatley, plumber, of Kentish-town, deposed
to having done work to the cistern in the second cellar in
July, 1878 (his time-sheet giving the date), and to having
stood on a champagne-case, which had blocked up the
aperture under the cistern where the barrel stood. Witness
never noticed any smells—" they were so common." Witness
had taken up the bricks which had been moved, and had
found that a cesspool still existed under the floor of the
cellar.

Inspector King also gave evidence showing that after
Smith left the fact of his having the bricks up had been talked
of, and as there was a valuable piece of jewelry missing the
bricks were again taken up to see whether it was concealed
there. The barrel, with its contents, was pushed under the
cistern at that time, and the way to it was blocked up bra
champagne-case. There were marks of burning on the wall,
accounted for by the footman Tinapp burning some paper
to overcome the stench.
Dr. Pepper was recalled, and deposed that he had proved
beyond all doubt that the stain-marks on the remnants of
the chemise found on the deceased were blood-stains. He
substantiated the evidence of Dr. Spurgin that there was
blood in the cavity of the chest on the left side. The knife
produced (that found in the cellar) would cause death.

The coroner then asked the jury whether they
would adjourn or return their verdict at once. He
did not think they would get any further evidence,
and the inquiries of the police would be carried on
more thoroughly if they agreed to their verdict then.

The jury, after a short consultation, returned a ver-
dict of "Wilful murder against some person or
persons unknown."