The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-01-17 00:00:00

raldwriting. (Letter pot in.) It was dated "Bridge
Hone°, Worieder," and was a bires•ed to Mn,.
William Smith, F.•st Haab., Northampton, and the
post mark WA- 'Dec. 5, 1573" Th-re was no d. e
o the letter, (The letter was read.) It stated that on
•driug through the wen of the deceased she found
o her astonishment another will, dated the 26th
ember, 1872 ; but whether it was genuine or not she
could not till. The letter went on "she used to
tell me that she had co wronged Alfred from his child-
hood, that she would do as much as she oonldto remedy
the wrong." tea iei-tscr'pt she said Not awo d
to a soul on earth exe,pt Walter. It is useless. It is
well net to tell thew of our disappointment." About
three years ago nithool signed • paper at the requeet
,d Mrs. Watere. Jane Underwood had signed the
paper before her. She did not see Mrs. Gulliver's
name on it.

Mr. William Watts, brother to the deceased and an
executor under her will, and Mr. William \Vette,
ttephe w to the deceased, proved that on Thuraday,
Nov. 20, the day on which Mrs. Waters came to Crick,
they were with Nile,. Gulliver, who exprermed her an-
noyance at the intended visit of Mrs. Water.. She
complained that she hod not paid her interest instead
of c ,ming. Mr. Waters had borrowed about £4OO on
reeurity of his reversionary interest under M.r. Gul-
liver's will.
This was the whole of the evidence to be adduced.
The Coroner brit fly addreesed the jury, pointing out
their duty.
The joy, at ter a short retirement, returned a nautili.
moue verdict that the deceaiad di I not die a natural
death, but that her death was caused by poison, but
lty whom a huinistered there was nut sufficient evidence
for them to determine.

Mr. Becke at terwards applied to Lord Henley (a
i-itrate of the county) for a warrant to take Mrs.
Waters iu custody, and as. information having been
sworn, his lor Iship signed a warrant for that purpose.
Meanwhile Mrs. Waters had been taken very ill,
and shortly afterwards the doctors in attendance pia
flounced her dead. On being oommimicsted with by
Mr. Waters and his attorney in another room during
the is quiry, she became south excited, and was seized
with what appeared to be an epileptic attack, to which
silo succumbed in less than an hoar. This tragic event
caused, as may be supposed, considerable excitement in
the neighbourhood. The proceedings lasted nome
Mr. Walker, the surgeon who attended the deceased,
deposed, it will be remembered, that alter the death of
Mrs. Gulliver Mrs. Waters expressed to him her re-
gret that the should have been present at her aunt's
death, because rho " had made a will in favour of
her (Mrs. Waters') husband, and the other family
knew nothing about it." It appears now, from a
notice pu'ilisheil in the previous Saturday's Nor-
thamptonshire papers that Mrs. Gulliver's will was
prove i in the district registry at Northampton on
the 15th December by "Thomas Watts, of Naseby,
farmer; Thomas Watts, of Roads, butcher; and
Thomas Cuttell, of Nreby, farmer, the executors
therein named." This will, it in believed, was made
in 1871, and it is said that there is another will in
' existence made eubsequont to Ihl. By the will of
! 1871 the testatrrix, after devising a few small
! legacies, divides the residue among her nephews and
nieces, some 12 or 13 in number, in certain pro-
portion.. Mrs. Waters was not a niece of the ter
tatrix, but was more distantly related to her.