The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-12-04 00:00:00

THE WHITECHAPEL TRAGEDY.

In th,

, -ae Old Court at the Old Bailey, on Satturdeymorn-
mg the 27th ult. (the sixth day), the trial of he brothers
tienry and Thomas Wainwright was resumed before
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn 'he elder prisoner,.lana.
ure
henr3a was described in the calender as a brash m fact; thirty-seven years of age, and the younger
Prisoner, Thomas, was &scribed as an ironmonger, aged
thirty years. Henry Wainwright was charged wnitha
tho wilful murder of Harrier rouisa Lane,oannadaniun-
, .... second imlictment with the murder of .
• • -3,9 lawn ;" and •the charge against- T,li oni‘
" " did aid and abet, and counsel and procure
said
1,17 that
did
kid Hen-
-1 1 LS' Wainwright to do and k commit • fe,(43Y, and that he did also, well now ttilheec.e_aed
•e3e),..nY to have been committed, feloniously receive,
,
-41.'41r, and maintain the said Henry Wainwright."_en
After the evidence of two witnesses had been
_kain:
With reference to the signature of Thomas W
Wlight,
' 4wairiv.l% 13.esley addressed the jury on behalf of Henry
ni,..,..til
of hid
81366e01.1 and the following is a condensed outluio
lie eoin
Colea e. toeneen his speech by the InLalrkefthathtienokmonde,
weleinalay. the principal actors a
ritausrse
anatirieeaViered its sixth
addafy.n No one could envy the
h had six days of mental
e
e°l',:e4a.ncl the result to them was :of the highest
jpos
ury who
had to tryil lee ant existence or non-existence.
rtoted tb the case were not to be . envied, as upon them
Theyw... 6 aele and undivided' responsibility o. f the verdict.
a • , akted hy the clear and practised intellect of
one
laea „a._ Chief
,Tustice, whose duty—no enviableesame
sea. titn'T to assist them, taking care at Ma
11•. ti taga that hothiLg Which might occur to tbte advwn-
iltili trial :.1 the prisoners should
,'.. ltdii,",o'olt at Jeinarkable one, and, the clrcurns. . .
he
escape
his
ehaneoeeices o'l The
.the
Dristeqrs e".? seinalns and the arrest and etarneiteuiedativonnechidtie.
eusaon ~ au at' racted much attention an
bes 4 raa' aullt whatever opinions or comments
from their rainds,
and dire4thetrusted they would dismiss nts might have
18'47.1: siracedfearteteigeomn solely to the evidence Which had
and - the issues they hadtetrz;
coke i;tl',',,as an undoubted disadvantage r prisoners
directed je a illry when so much -public attentionfehad been
against them was
one that Owains the trial The charge
htliase e"ad at all times raised feelings of indignation in
h
n the
bee,e,„reast : but, in coinidering this
special case,
was sepa-
rshre 'nein to recollect that one part of
deals °hi the other.
He would not
boe„!_altogether the evidence as to the cutting up of the
_in
say tthhaet they were to
tletle`a, their minds, but be begged and entreated
an
tne
undue
effect :"on- the fact of a body being cut up to have ' r ZaP9P their
the "etattett Mattered little. Having pointed out _
hee
Mind& What was done with theb poor body
ow greatly
r
l'artted dePended upon circumstantial evid_e, the
of th
ot elarricounsel went on first to deal with it from _ the timeuntil
411elzber, et l'ine leaving her home at Waltham Abbey e
caae 1874. In his general observations on this part
• °keit ,he contended that in the Attorney-General's
n ,
here Land the evidence he . had supported it with,
Was th
ilecaae '" e testimony given as to where Harriet he fathe4qUainted with Henry Wainwright 111 e teii..ret
tellow a r at she left home to go into business with a
as kr„. Vrentice, but after that there was a long gala So far
ell's evidence went it did not show that the pri-
Vise si,-1 Ijrhig with amid ,nder the same root as Harriet
Lo he'r—,„,4 ‘oat he wBl th eholding the relation of a paramour
„,I•ee'ot 7i.,11,5i1e. there sa
Person called upon her who gave the
tiall no t'aite, and it was clear that it was. a pfetrhsoenporethse_er
tilt',
.8 Witness of that name On the side o ' there'n't WM endeavo dt. suggest that from October, 187.3,
loarde",,t a deliberatetlend premeditated plan and scheme
they
conld -,'arriet Lane, and the jury would have to see if titi
of
f1ea.,4011 reconcile that assertion with the conduct
ahlwright. It was said that in February, 1e74,
t.:.sere, atadt
eaensttern. letter sent by
"that prisoner to Harriet
not come here,' but
sli 8 was ho allong the words, e was to, evidence that it was other than a request that
kld ase ''' to call at the premises in the Whitechampela-troad,
the sa„ Station that they might meet elsewhere.
110 r any suggestion that there was any
Was et,e lt affection
faormwtrheghtw'somminand
ithanon
whoseon e obene Lam f
ii"' PrlealiaYlog large suns„t money, so fardass:ahteed
was
ti,,oats 4.2:J:which the witiiess hearing
llat it "„.,7._., Jones, and Robinson name—he reminded nded them
„a toa"„es__Possible to find a name which he
!eutterta:-.corninon in an out of the way Place.
',Retitle' might have
eotitended that although it had beenTbsheoln learnedtha.
tivi: I, 0—!!!. named Frieake had called upon Mrs. King, IS
'leallaci
tt 14—rneated a earthat Thomas .
Paa, • liuttih..9o7l the discrepanciesFbosettewreeaen tthoeteheldednecete
eanoWhieh ti`icen and that of Mrs.
name of Frieake had
atm ; ADoti lir Person giving the
chased the champagne,
lone irlbinitteei Mill and had p
statementurot Mr. Humphreys was
iVe!.,eee tlZ)nl., Patible withethat of Mrs. Foster, to whosweoeuvlid-
eavotirJPrY should rather attach credence.
Is st there to show that there was a fair ground.forHsue.spicwi.on
to4thl'llownwtTh Person other than Thomas Wamigen 'let:leer
aectios"„"lra. Xing by the name of Frieake.
Wa. ''gthe '-'eer by Mrs. king on the 31st August, aenvdcon-
Vlut esirolOgY for her rudeness on the previous erde&
e m
the a na
;beettiZiheelll
el cetett Jangastteicete innetime.ryatWedetifehrewatrihgeMshfoueltdedfir.etcts . eve_ ne 1 ett deliverer was admissahle
settsereseit...„_, , , aud of the address endpostte
rat, sel heirenued that he thought it better. mpoariektitou t bore.o
it ,aerteart ni.e should direct the Jury during their address
'll%ned anewriseantheY Were mute, but he would not do so if
that . Bollssie e nvenience to Mr. Besley.
fitliilie
4.tirtislitetirrebwanYe
ea:
_aide
phree reef ttin itnhvetttewcti e ,p and
._le onto argue
Which it was alleged troicrire''_lo,r_s e took
InSpyadrn
i4t iyn.
1144 as eeeilTY relating to the sale et th
tantial
ende_ the it_ 0 doubt I.[e then
.whatretiii°,hre d of'ct n -
htaaca ~,,a;',..8 serious break in the chaine sou' el
rely'a thee;.,4B, Ilenry Wainwright—thd
1.13kP-os
tau uPeo t4gota were fired. He would - themed time
not
ts at
ev,clence of the Kays and
t the time
aiieva a,, that the
Wiseman, which
shots were being fired a
fla? had atja, at•the door of No. 215 to takestaawhaeye
kkl te'coarredspeall Of an ordinary
trilif the
ve— ',core than twelve months before,goods. which
'ecZerthlag.e9rresPondence of their testimorn.oyrglaoyttietns
tit-
titlqitlee aiZpVeotfl it was clear thatmth y hadineden of it they had
g. b5l beforee;i4negdevwilreencer.e Commenting upon athe
ese!ley iZea letter and the telegrams from
Dev,
glad
eeln seeilatked that, while admitting that the latter
that Ileatae ta.s not prepared to accept the statement
to, , wainwrielit or Thomas Wainwright had sent
tee' -eslo n
, evidenc: had been adduced in support of it.
. c4t br "hen Went •
„.._arriet „Ought
0,,, nto deal with. Mi
l'atotni -Labe se " ln cross-examination,"thWatilsmh°erehsadstsaete-en
the utmost importance, for if she_were
'Me 3`l,ed w °?ewhere about Christmas, 1874.
Pre1..44 heee and that, he
eew eta eelartober she could not have been murdered in the
Oisi:°kiewh4.,. What was more likelythaialncome
thatsheetwhear
(l s
h
Whleit onion, 'a Australia or New Zealand or ,
leoie,, ad
~3:, Perfectly Ignorant of the horrible suspicions
ea, a that '''sea concerning her supposed murder, He
eHvie.
110 Of 110 anY importance was to be attached o
a altY Wat4aers concerning
altogether
ceal„,eque,t Fight and Mrs. King, for it was ogler
_con-
the alleged quarrel between
eitee'rq ny thenivention or else it had been deliberately .
to di. eve" „ Witness when he was first examined, and in
or 'Terme, .:,`' waa most unreliable. He would n_oteendeavour
Pat; acivitrargera by
tie COM-
ttotv,.,kit
he. es
as a
tarnayrerrhfhergeangceehtto
filets
adodurbaml
dramatic
skit'o'l Invited the jury to disbelieve altogentir
er.tehee
solecTrdieft„.. ? altercation and the subsequent sending I
4% Nit, V_letter to Mrs. Wainwright, for there s quite
ttee!Re or
tworth er'oo ger& state ent as iastood with ut the additional
alikepe tae • "4.'larnili noation, to show that the tale was wholly n Y
e re
th, d._'. tesi„ ataelnbling of the court.
as,* 'sa, eoeaaf„Pentinued his address, and with reference to
taa 'de i ", of the to remai x
emd that there was a grave, it
NC, him to n' "
ttTlit4eSiashgeowf `l"iattg
ta , Svhe,, tl_enialte anotherestion.
tveoer -ee was . deny; but that it
Twhaesrethweeegnraovthine of
riatve was prepared, hut there was some-
thow .sve it Joists must have taken some little tim,
must have taken time in preparation.
d
NI. that aa,tte some little noise, but there was no oneB77
all ee 'as, l'a a noise had been heard in September, 1
tee ntlln 4 fact
at
a, rotas enrY W;in • ea
i°n
no indi t' that the grave existed_
°I aetnvirfilitrrtilhaetr bought by Thomas
an
awrreigehiltdheandenreollownegreer possession of the
elhe!tlee MI 4 e was no doubt, but there was not a scintilla
es s' anwre a" Venn/ ever touched them.
litriltY - aieweribis- Ice: lt is in Stokes' evidence that
1/11;Nine' 1-leele,, TRht wiped the axe and put it in paper.
aleell,„ll.er,Aa: ae limit myself for the present to the 10th
'one "eht t ' saY that there is no proof that Henry
lab to be 0 °itched those articles on that day. The (Ma'
nehlllee4ebile;erklead w. ere whether Harriet Lane died -on the.
tet a,e, Jae whether Henry Wainwright caused her
esouniaseicoonnadteifctericommefatible with the latter
__,ac,t4?..
(1,1t;;;11.13'We;
es tei'th hiral against himself b 1 ly
e allowingw id
e e
2°lnftlilaVe—s!", Whitechapel to the Borough; orwsvasou.eld.
At helicveeDmaelytio
olood.Lelit entVt Stokes for the cab? His connuet_
ae
_j-.a
L.Wal Wheau that of a man whose hands were imb (twat)
'4l e°1111)1.0111. arre• 'fed his condu.a was that of a man. hell
satalaaeed d, not by crime but by ruiscondw,t, which
Deli.,,v4bi Do •Lid'o for the Moment in a difficult and
the
Who's, they af.,011; and as to • the offering bribe
Th,
,t,„nct
,tal often heard of that being done' s'ythmen
4sterleonee'lemseives accused of trifling misconduct.
. thirsti„, gentleman then went on to urge that
aoi4a elven or ,
thS remains did not prove that they
It tkoiti °f rfarriet la nd if the jury once accepted
kinks aZtilere was anTlelrin and
the sernj.us offence of which
41104 q tICe'N fienry Wainwrir,ht was guilty. Upon the
tea;' d call ideetity of the remains he intimated that he
thstssfo, jeedical evidence to confute that giveni_by.„.73; i
sio,,t2le re,„`„'B, nrosecution. Were the jury Once '" —^"
4110."46611ai7IZT!were hot those of Harriet Lane, tohmenenthoeny-
tok;
tilt tearytnae orther charge of murdefinwgera w_
e those of a
n4l '4l ileletTewri, tien hebaseter therjunriyauwihat evidence they
et E9t',.eath 'ph
IN lierrqo , the -"e
Prosecution feared that they couhl
identification of the body as that
Netitrode -Lane, and therefore the other count
qact• evired• but if 'Harriet Lane be excluded,
*ad net n"nee wan there that the person unknown
toe the voininitten suicide'? He did not Put for-
al, tat
anionstr
cut ous theory that the woman shot her-
• her throat afterwards He looked upon id .
tile:lN/I eat as an science of mutilation, and that was
we„ evern,, Y Urßond,
atniine
Who said clearly that if he found
t0,.44,(1e.''A.. Portion co
infit,te• aglated blood he would know that
aat it ,etted -a- d during life or immediately after death.
ere iat rio Z
ib blood in the cut. He (Mr. Begley) contended
e f
possl _taals
au or a person committing suicide to
•,,at,. e snot. \iter the first had taken effect a
:e again, because, aceording to
art did not cease to act for about
me Henry Wainwright could b_
Id be proved tote a murder. I
Id find him guilty.
would be glad to know what
te explanation be given, I shall be
' that no man of common sense
.:Ide. If a man dug his own grave
lcide I could understand it
lealt with the charge that Henry
Let Lane from two points of view
Lad been murdered had not been
Secondly that there was no imictln.
committed
Ilarriet Lane had
to tai:
aw m
v
tin hhasiisthste the et
not
,ad made it quite clear that he Was
i of suicide with respect to that
cbooomdnyp teriolelfmel subject.
an
to t
se un
,a
aagine circumstances in which a
in great distress of mind, with
eible and disgrace., would commit
f appalling and punishing the
, her.: He could irue.gtie such a
s body. No doubt it would be
, the police, and say, "There she
iot act Winsly, and therefore such
put away the body. Re had sub-
iplicable to the second count of
70wn left- them without any expla-
ws under which the death had
efenee upon two Minh& which
,that tads •was • not . the . body of
, that nenty Wainwright. was not
He argued it alio en the groum
t
ti
perk% IthlriloWn,itherefore the
'-' "de, and that the' poseessimikc
oeinAl ugh La-deprive-the prisons.:
-,-s, °-tthe defence On thesegronne
Taint; g lain-n. wso ximacii am, ,
. live not taken:lip azaintlii
rdifa a' i'ati'd he was sure t
ish :
t remarks he r
ttentilell- 101 l the shershort'ealdenef
-• tuba quell

4i
44
'

ilo4:olththilve tinie-teAfin
the hea
kherefore, befoi
Irder,it ghoul
J'ho Jury coat
`411._ er Xu,tice : I
Voles Bonn
It it to the!' jury
L.ithe idea of sole'
uunkseit after suit
said he had d
ruttmered Harr!
Yfarriet Lane 1
~Nade out, an,
th
iolld be oblige,
WaS charged ti
10„ then he did
?kilong as he hi
this question
'A Could well Jr
'Nied woinan
-led with trol
:The idea of
414, wronged*
With the
Id, call in
riton did n
Iduced to 1
as ap
the On.
usistanael
td 148 df
ierefore
larder,

thal

'111?g

4" 14 Lo;
'toanivt