Norwich bulletin., 1914-06-05
FAMOUS TRIALS
TRIAL. OF MRS. MAVERICK.

No trial of a woman attracted more attention in the nineteenth century than that of Mrs. Florence Maybrick, the American girl who was accused of having poisoned her English hus- band. Mrs. Maybrick was born in Mobile, Ala. on Sept. 3, 1862, and at the age of IS she married James May church, Piccadiily, London. Return ing to America, they made their home at Norfolk, Va For business reasoas they later settled in the suburbs of Liverpool England Then came the tragic death of the husband and the accusation against his wife
 The indictment sagainst Mrs. May brick was as follows
 That James Maybrick, on the 11sh of May, 1889. in the township of Gar ston, died from the effects of an ir- I-itant poison supposed to have been administered to him by Florence May brick''
 Mrs. Maybrick was arrested on suspicion the following day by the superintendent of police At the time generally understood that the relation of the Maybricks was somewhat strained, but Mrs. Maybrick always affirmed that it had been patched up before her husbands death for the children's sake. there. being a son and daughter.
 On Saturday May IS, a hearing was held in the bedroom of Mrs Maybrick. Superintendent Bryning made the charge against the wife. and she was hurried off to Walton jail, in the sub urbs of Liverpool, not being allowed the privilege of bidding goddbye to her mother. Here she was shown to a cell, where she remained three, days, when her lawyer arranged that she should have a modest room on the n2vn1ant of x1 95 a uaaE
 The coroner's jury at the inquest made the charge that the said Flor ence Elizabeth Maybrick did willfully, feloniously and of malicious aforc- James Maybrick.' The medical spec ialists disagreed as to the poisoning of Mr. Maybrick. Dr. Humphreys as- serting that no arsenic had been found by the analyst in the stomach, but a small quantity, not sufficient to cause death, was found in the liver. Dr. Carter agreed with Humphreys, but Dr. Barron contended that he found both arsenic and traces" of arsenic in some bottles and things which had As to where they came from, or who put them there, no one had any knowledge Upon this evidence Mrs. Maybrick was committed. A true bill was found and she was brought to trial on the 31st of<July.
 The trial was held in St. Georges hall, Liverpool. During all the days of the trial, Liverpool society fought for tickets. Women, it is said, at tired as if for a matinee; some brought their luncheons and most of them carried opera glasses. The English press had for two months supplied nourishment in the form of the most sensational stories about the prisoner to feed the morbid appetite of the public.
 When the trial began there was a strong feeling against Mrs. Maybrick. but as it proceeded and the fact was made clear that MT. Maybrick had long been addicted to taking large quantities of arsenic, coupled with the evidence. to quote Sir Charles Russell, CD that there was no proof of arsenic poisoning; CD that there was no proof that arsenic was adminis tered to him by his wife. the preju- dice gradually changed until. at the close of the trial, there was a com plete reyulsion of sentiment and the prisoner confidently expected her ac- Quittal. @
 !. The jury was out thirty eight min utes and they found the prisoner guilty Mrs Maybrick. when asked by the court if she had anything to say, with a firm voice said: My lord, everything has been against me; I am not guilty of this crime"
 Mrs Maybrick was removed from the courtroom to Walton jail. there to