top of page
Search

Blog 45 1857 Canterbury, Kent The murder of Mary Ann Hadley

  • Writer: Sarah  Warren
    Sarah Warren
  • Sep 26
  • 22 min read

Mary Ann rejected Stephen Fox after 18 months of courting, but Stephen wasn't happy!


Stephen Fox was born in Ramsgate Kent on 15th June 1834, to parents John Fox, a farm labourer from Margate Kent and Amelia Harlow from Ramsgate. He was the second of six children. During his childhood, his family moved to Canterbury Kent. Still, they could not afford much schooling, which left him lacking in education.


He began working at the age of eight. By the age of twelve, he was an apprentice to a cabinetmaker, a trade he eventually left to become a plane maker, in which profession he excelled.

ree

As a boy, he was described as lively and affectionate, enjoying the company of other children. However, he sometimes gave in to the temptation of theft when the opportunity arose.


In 1841, his eldest sibling, William, was 16 years old and attending a boarding school in Wingham, Kent.

In 1842, the youngest sibling, Sampson, tragically died at the age of 3.

Then, in 1851, his older sister, Mary Frances, passed away at the age of 18, when he was 17.


As he grew older, he developed a fondness for socialising. He was known for being vain and extravagant, often visiting places of public amusement. Despite his indulgent lifestyle, he never fell into the trap of excessive drinking. His friends were primarily young people who, while focused on enjoyment, were not considered to be of ill repute.


At eighteen, he became interested in women, particularly one young lady. After considering his advances for several months, she ultimately rejected him, leading to a series of brief courtships that similarly ended without anything serious. Around this time, he attempted to take his own life by drowning.

A young woman, whom Stephen had previously pursued, became a domestic servant in his mother's home. This situation led to an inappropriate relationship between them, which resulted in the birth of an illegitimate child. Eventually, the young woman left his mother's service, and their relationship ended.

Following this, Stephen began courting a girl named Mary Ann Hadley.


Mary was born in 1831 in Northgate, Canterbury, the third of nine children born to Edward Hadley, a bricklayer from Canterbury, and Harriet (née Woodhams) from Rye, Sussex.


Stephen's interactions with Mary were always respectful and proper. However, after his mother passed away in March 1857, he believed he had found in Mary someone who could fill the emotional void left by his loss. Eager to prepare for their marriage, he was devastated when Mary abruptly ended the relationship upon discovering that he was financially supporting his illegitimate child. She wrote him a letter to explain her decision.

Despite Stephen's repeated attempts to speak with Mary, she firmly believed they had no future together. This sudden rejection plunged him into deep sorrow and despair. In this state of mind, he conceived and committed a crime that would ultimately cost him his life.

At approximately 7 a.m. on Thursday, 14th May, 1857, Mary Ann Hadley was shot in front of the Cavalry Barracks in Canterbury.

ree

An inquest was held later the same day at the Cambridge Arms before the Coroner, Mr T.T. Delasaux.

Edward Gurney testified:

"I reside on Northgate Street in this city and work as a gardener. I have known the deceased for 20 years. She used to work as a laundress for Mrs Carter at Vauxhall. She had been acquainted with Stephen Fox for the past two years, during which he consistently paid his addresses to her. I have frequently seen them together during that time—almost daily, I might add.

Last night, I saw Fox at about a quarter past eight near the Queen's Arms, close to my residence. I asked him what was wrong. He replied, 'I am deceived, Gurney.' I asked him what he meant, and he answered, 'In Miss Hadley,' referring to the deceased. He then asked me, upon my oath, if I could keep it a secret. I said, 'Yes.'

He then took a pistol from his right-hand pocket—it was loaded, with a cap on it. It was a small pocket pistol, a single-barrel model, like the one presented in court. He said, 'There, it is loaded with bullets.' At the same time, he retrieved a small bag from his pocket that contained four small bullets (which were then produced in court). He mentioned that these were the remainder and added, 'If this won't do for Miss Hadley, the other four shall before I go to bed tonight.'

I urged him, 'Don't do that; come home with me, and I will wash.' He agreed and followed me."

I told him we would come to the Cambridge Arms. While at the house, I instructed my wife to inform Mrs Hadley about what had happened. Fox and I then came to this room and had some refreshments. Fox had a bottle of ginger beer, and I had a pint of porter. While we were drinking, I mentioned to him, "What a shocking thing it would be for you to take the young woman's life; you would surely be hanged for it." He replied, "I don't care about being hanged on a scaffold any more than I would have cared about shooting her."

Mrs Hadley and her aunt arrived, and I went to the door to tell Mrs Hadley that he had two pistols, at which point she left.


Shortly afterwards, Fox and I left the room, and he began walking back and forth in front of Hadley's house for about ten minutes. He also climbed over the back gate leading to their property. Mrs Hadley came to her front window and tapped on it, and Fox then entered the house to let her in. She asked him, "What, Steven, why are you here?"

Later, I saw him walking around the streets between eleven and twelve o'clock. Mrs Hadley went to the station house to have the police take him into custody. Around half-past ten, Inspector Barker and the officer on duty arrived. Fox ran away, but I saw him again afterwards.


Mary stayed with my wife last night due to Fox's actions. I went to bed at about midnight. This morning, I woke up around five o'clock. I walked around but couldn't find any trace of Fox. At about seven o'clock, I accompanied Mary towards Vauxhall, where she was going to work. Just as we reached the last gate of the cavalry barracks, Fox rushed out of a nearby lane, brandishing two pistols—one aimed at me and the other at Mary. He shouted, "You, Gurney, take one more step and I'll blow your brains out."

I stood still, but Mary approached the hedge to get past him. He was standing in the centre of the road. He chased after her and fired both pistols at her. After doing that, he attempted to flee, but I followed him. I managed to take the pistols from him, and with some help, I brought him to the station house.

I saw Mary fall, and I witnessed the men carry her away. While going to the station house, Fox remarked, "I only regret that I didn't have more of these or a revolver. Then you wouldn't have gotten away. I didn't mean to be caught." I handed the pistols to Police Constable Epps when I delivered Fox into his custody.


Harriet Hadley, the mother of the deceased, was next examined. She testified:

"The deceased is my daughter, who was 25 years old. Stephen Fox had been dating her for the last 18 months. He used to visit our home every night. He came to my house at nine o'clock yesterday morning and stayed until a quarter past twelve, when he left to go home for dinner. At that time, Mary was not home.

While he was at our house, he expressed a desire to see Mary Ann again that night, and I told him, 'No, Stephen, you are mistaken; she does not intend to have anything more to do with you. Although I had nothing to do with ending this relationship, you know that I have never liked you, and neither did my family, as we disapproved of your behaviour and character. She has heard enough to make her willing to cut ties with you.'

My daughter returned home at about six that evening and remained until she left to stay at Mr Gurney's around seven. Fox came by the house and asked if Mary was home. When I told him she did not want to see him, I told a white lie and said she wasn't there. He left immediately.

Later, I visited the Cambridge Arms and saw Fox in Gurney's company. I spoke to him, but I cannot recall precisely what I said.


Around nine o'clock, or shortly after, I saw Fox again near Gurney's house. I told him, 'You can't see Mary Ann, and it's no use waiting.' He replied, 'I will see her by fair means or foul.' I said, 'If you will, you must go to the other end of town to find her.'

I later spoke with the duty police officer, who advised me to go to the station and inform Mr Clements about the situation. I went to the station and told him that I believed my daughter's life was in danger. I informed him that Fox had pistols with him and shared my concerns about his behaviour. Mr Clements then sent officers with me shortly after ten.


On Broad Street, we encountered another policeman who accompanied us between New Ruttington Lane and Union Street, where we found Fox. I asked him, 'Now, do you want two more words with Mary Ann, yes or no? If you allow these policemen to search you, you shall see her.' He responded, 'No, I will come in the morning.' I insisted, 'You shall not come in the morning; you shall not come home again.' He replied, 'Very well. I will not.'

One of the policemen queried, 'What do you have here?' Fox replied, 'It's a cigar case,' while pulling something out of his pocket. The policeman stated, 'I cannot take him unless you give me a charge.' I then said, 'Then I do give him a charge.' Fox exclaimed, 'What have I been doing?' The policeman said, 'Leave, and if you are here again, we will take you.' Fox then departed, and so did the police.


On Tuesday, Mary Ann sent a letter to Fox and shared its contents with me. The letter was later found in Stephen Fox's pocket when he was arrested.

It was read aloud to the Jury:

'Sir,

Your recent conduct has been anything but appropriate for a young man who considers himself engaged. You have consistently denied having any connections with Miss B___. Still, I regret to inform you that I have become convinced this past week that your statement is false and that you have responsibilities to fulfil. Therefore, I think it would be best to break off the engagement immediately.'"

Mary Ann Hadley

Tuesday evening, 12th May

P.S. You can have your clothes and things at my house next Saturday.


Mrs Hadley confirmed that her daughter had signed the letter.

Inspector Epps and the surgeon then provided their testimonies.

After the Coroner summarised the evidence, the Jury took a moment to deliberate and returned a verdict of wilful murder against Stephen Fox.


Stephen was brought before the magistrates' court on the afternoon of Thursday, 14th May. The evidence presented was similar to that given at the inquest. When the proceedings concluded, Fox was asked to respond to the charge. He replied in a clear, calm voice:

"Of course, I did it because she deceived me. I had been promised marriage, and she consented. I went to her house on Monday, but she was not home, so I left at nine. On Tuesday at six, I returned, but she still wasn't home. I stayed there until a quarter past ten, and when she finally returned, I asked her why she was upset. She said it was her fault. I told her, 'Give me a definite answer, yes or no, and I will leave forever.' She replied, 'No, Stephen, I will meet you tomorrow (Wednesday evening) at precisely 8 pm' However, she did not attend. On Thursday morning, I saw her again. She said, 'Stephen Fox, forgive me.' I replied, 'No, I can't.' I had been in a relationship with her for two years, and we had never quarrelled until the previous Tuesday evening."


He was then fully committed for trial at the next Assizes.


On Sunday, 17th May, the body of Mary Ann Hadley was laid to rest at St. Gregory's Cemetery, located in the district where her parents lived. Hundreds of people from various communities attended the solemn ceremony, which resulted in a crowded church and an overflow of mourners gathered around the cemetery.

Rev. J. Pearson and Rev. E. Woodall officiated the service. Rev. Woodall read the traditional portions of the service, offering comforting words to those grieving while providing a special warning to the youth about similar circumstances. Deep sympathy was expressed for the unfortunate girl and her grieving family, and the service was followed with respectful attention.


In the evening, during the Sunday service, Mr Kymer, the minister of the Wesleyan chapel, delivered an insightful sermon filled with warnings and advice. Mary Ann was a regular attendee at this chapel, often going with Fox, and she had visited twice on the Sunday just before her tragic death.


Since his committal, Stephen Fox has shown indifference when discussing his crime, treating the matter lightly and appearing inwardly satisfied with his actions. During a visit from the Wesleyan minister, he expressed no regret for what he had done; he merely stated his hope that the deceased was in heaven and that he hoped to join her soon. He claimed he would face his fate like a man.

Despite this callousness, there is hope that he will eventually demonstrate signs of religious introspection. His father visited him and seemed more affected by the situation than Fox himself.


After a lengthy investigation, the magistrates suspended the two policemen who failed to take Fox into custody the night before, despite Mrs Hadley's complaint that he had firearms and that she felt her daughter's life was in danger. PC Parker was suspended for six months, while PC Elvy received a one-month suspension.


At the assizes, on Monday, 27th July, Stephen Fox was referred to the Crown Court, where he stood before Justice Willes.

ree

The following jurors were sworn in:

Nathaniel Dorrell - Mile Town - Market Gardener (Foreman), William Barnes - Cliffe - Farmer, William Bowes - Milton - Bricklayer, William Coveney - Minster - Farmer, Isaac Coody - Blue Town - Victualler,

William Elgar - Great Chart - Farmer, Charles Fox - Minster - Bootmaker,

George Ferrell - Minster - Farmer, J.T. French - Sheerness - Baker,

Isaac Gardler - Minster - Wheelwright, Joseph Gammon - Milton - Bricklayer, Henry Gilbert - Tunbridge Wells - Ironmonger


Mr Deedes and Mr Denman represented the prosecution. Stephen Fox, who was without legal counsel, had Mr Ribton assigned to defend him.


Mr Deedes opened the case:

"Gentlemen, you have heard that the charge against the prisoner is one of wilful murder. This fact alone is enough—without any further remark from me—to ensure your utmost attention.

The prisoner is charged with the wilful murder of Mary Ann Hadley in Canterbury on 14th May. Evidence will show that the prisoner and the deceased had been acquainted for some time and were engaged to be married. In any case, they had been in a relationship for nearly two years.

The deceased was a young woman of exemplary character. She lived with her working-class parents at Cold Harbour Lane in Canterbury. Each morning, she left her mother's home to work as a laundress for Mrs Carter in another part of the city. The prisoner was a journeyman plane-maker who had been working in Canterbury.

It will be shown that on Tuesday, 12th May, he received a letter from her. That afternoon, he visited Mrs Hadley to inquire about Mary Ann. She was not home, but he returned later and saw her alone in a small parlour. The door was partly open, and her mother could hear everything said. During their conversation, the deceased informed the prisoner that there was no reason for him to come to their house anymore, as she had nothing more to say to him.

Despite this, the prisoner pressed to see her again. After some conversation, she agreed to meet him the following day. He came early on Wednesday morning to see her, but she had already left for Mrs Carter's. He returned around eleven o'clock on Wednesday evening and spoke with her mother again while Mary Ann was still out.

The prisoner was seen around the Hadley house that evening until about nine o'clock, when he finally spoke with Mrs Hadley. Denied access to Mary Ann again, he stated, "I must have one more word with Polly," claiming he had treated her "like a man" and that "revenge was sweet." At this point, Mrs Hadley noticed his hand in his pocket, prompting her to go to the police station. She also observed that he covered something with a white handkerchief as he approached their yard.

Living opposite the Hadleys was Mr Gurney, who knew all the parties involved. He saw the prisoner on Wednesday, and their conversation revolved around Mary Ann. Concerned about the prisoner's demeanour and his ominous comments suggesting that Mary Ann would meet her doom that night, Gurney invited him to a public house to divert his attention. They had a drink together. Knowing the Hadleys well, Gurney relayed his concerns to them, and as a result, Mary Ann went to his house to sleep that night.

Earlier that day, between four and five o'clock, the prisoner visited a gunsmith and borrowed a pair of pistols, pretending they were for amateur theatricals in Canterbury. He also borrowed powder, caps, and instructions on the proper powder charge. He did not obtain any bullets at that time.

Gurney will testify that on the morning of 14th May, he and the deceased left his house for Mrs Carter's at about ten minutes to seven o'clock. On their way, they passed the barracks and saw the prisoner emerge from a passage with a pistol in each hand. He threatened Gurney, stating that if he offered any resistance, he would shoot him. Almost immediately afterwards, he discharged both pistols. One of the shots struck Mary Ann fatally in the thigh, severing the femoral artery and causing such a loss of blood that she died within minutes after being carried into Mrs Carter's house.

The prisoner was secured, and both the pistol and four bullets were found in his possession. He made several statements that witnesses will detail. I will only add that a man named Baker, working near the scene of this tragic event, observed the prisoner lurking about early that morning, before six o'clock, and witnessed him (albeit from a distance) firing the pistols.

There can be no doubt that the deceased's death resulted from the discharge of that pistol by the hand of the prisoner. Though tragic, the circumstances are clear so that I will refrain from further comment. The prisoner has the assistance of Mr Ribton. Under the direction of his lordship, you will have no difficulty reaching an accurate and proper conclusion."


Mr Denman examined Harriet Hadley, Mary Ann's mother. She explained everything that had happened as she had at the inquest.


Next was Mr James Mills.

"I am a gunsmith running my business in Canterbury. On 13th May, the prisoner came to my shop around half-past four in the afternoon. He looked at a pair of small pistols displayed in my window, and I showed them to him. These are the identical pistols now presented as evidence. He inspected them and said he did not wish to purchase them; he only wanted to borrow them for one night. He was attending an amateur theatre performance and needed them for that purpose. The prisoner was a stranger to me, so I asked his name. He told me his name was Stephen Fox, stating that he was a plane-maker and mentioned the name of the person who employed him.

I wondered why he had come to the far end of town to rent pistols when he could have gotten them from another gunmaker named Gudgen, who was closer to his workplace. The prisoner explained that he did not like Gudgen because he had rented a pair of pistols from him the previous Christmas for a masquerade and, unfortunately, lost one. When he returned to pay for it, he felt overcharged.

The prisoner then offered to pay half a crown to borrow the pistols, a few caps and a small amount of powder, promising to return them the following morning. I agreed to his terms and gave him ten to twenty caps and one ounce of gunpowder, which I placed in a small flask. The prisoner then asked how much powder would be needed for a pistol charge, and I told him to fill the top of the flask. He then paid me two and sixpence, thanked me, and took the pistols, powder, and caps."


He was then cross-examined:

"The prisoner was clean and well-dressed, wearing a clean shirt, and appeared calm and collected. I assumed he was part of a group of amateur performers. The pistols were brand new, and I am certain they were not loaded when I handed them to him, as I had cleaned and oiled them shortly before. I had gun and pistol bullets in my house. Still, I would not have sold any to the prisoner if he had asked, as I considered them unnecessary for theatrical purposes. I have seen the powder flask since, but I cannot confirm whether it now contains the same quantity of powder as I provided to the prisoner."


Next was the neighbour Edward Gurney, who gave his testimony again.


The next witness for the prosecution was Police Constable James Epps from Canterbury. He stated:

"I was at the police station on the morning of 14th May when the prisoner was brought in, along with the last witness and another man. He was placed in my custody for the shooting of Mary Ann Hadley. I took him into the office and received the pistols from Gurney. I then searched the prisoner and found a purse containing four bullets. The bullets matched the pistols. Gurney commented that it was a bad job, to which the prisoner replied, 'There were six; now there are only four, and I hope the others went through her.' 

I also found two letters, which I am now presenting as evidence. Additionally, the prisoner had a shilling, half a penny, a key, a powder flask, and ten percussion caps on his person. The prisoner was subsequently locked up."

Soon afterwards, Dr Andrews arrived and said, in the presence of the prisoner, "The poor girl is dead." The prisoner responded, "I don't think she suffered much." Before this, I had asked the prisoner if he wanted any water, to which he replied, "No, I am happy, comfortable, and ready to meet my fate. She brought it all on herself. I went with her to the Wesleyan Chapel twice on Sunday. She promised to meet me on Monday, but I could not see her when I went. The Tuesday I saw her was very difficult because everything was arranged, and I had never had a cross word with her when we were together." 

The prisoner added that she had deceived him once, and he did not intend to be deceived again. He mentioned that it was a good thing the police had not interfered with him, as he would have shot them or anyone else. He did not mention the second pistol. When I asked him if she fell with the first shot, he said no, explaining that had she fallen, the other one would have been for him.


Stephen Baker, a labourer living in Northgate, was the next witness to take the stand.

At a quarter to six on the morning of 14th May, he said he was standing near the barracks when he saw the prisoner in an alley between the new barracks and the cavalry barracks. About an hour later, he noticed the prisoner in the same place and observed him crossing the road in front of the barracks.

''I did not notice if he had anything in his hands then, but shortly afterwards, I saw a pistol in each hand. I then saw the witness Gurney and the deceased approaching him. The deceased went up to the prisoner. He showed her the pistols, and I heard them both discharge at the exact moment. The deceased was standing directly in front of him when he fired.''

After the shots were fired, he heard the deceased cry out, 'Oh dear young man, do hold me up.' She asked him to place his hand on her wound to stop the bleeding. She bled profusely, and his hands and clothes were covered in blood.


Baker assisted in carrying Mary Ann to Mrs Carter's house and stayed with her until she died about three-quarters of an hour later. Before she passed, he said she called out softly, "Mother."

The witness also noted a mark on the left hand of the deceased, which appeared to have been made by a bullet, and mentioned that a second bullet seemed to have passed through the lower portion of her clothing.


Anne Scrivens produced the mantle worn by the deceased and pointed out the place the bullet had passed through.


Mr Thomas Andrews, a surgeon from Canterbury, testified:

I was called to attend to the deceased at Mrs Carter's around half-past seven in the morning. I found the deceased lying in the washhouse in a dying state, and her clothing saturated with blood. Blood was oozing from the upper and inner part of her thigh. After her death, I examined the wound, and to the best of my knowledge, the femoral artery was severed, which was the cause of death. I did not find anything in the wound, but it was consistent with an injury that would be caused by a bullet, similar to those now presented. The probe passed entirely through the thigh. There was a minor injury to the left hand, though the bullet had grazed it.


The letter Mary Ann wrote to Fox was then read to the court, followed by Fox's statement from the Magistrate's court.

That was the case for the prosecution.


Mr Ribton, representing the defence, stood up..

He appealed to the Jury for their understanding. He explained that he was called upon to undertake the defence at a moment's notice and had no witnesses to present.

He emphasised that the issue at hand was of the utmost importance—life and death depended upon the Jury's verdict. In every murder case, the responsibility resting on the Jury is immense, as their decision could lead to the unfortunate prisoner facing a painful and disgraceful death. This reality should weigh heavily on their minds and encourage them to consider the case with the utmost seriousness from start to finish.


Mr Ribton acknowledged that the prisoner's actions were directly responsible for the death of the deceased. Yet, he urged the Jury to consider all circumstances and the history between the two individuals involved. He asked whether, if they were serving as a coroner's Jury, and instead of shooting Mary Ann Hadley, the prisoner had rushed out with a pistol in each hand and shot himself, they wouldn't have returned a verdict of 'temporary insanity.' Why was that? Because, among the many passions that can lead to irrational behaviour, none is more disruptive than the pain of unrequited love, which can often lead to tragic consequences.


After thoroughly explaining the law regarding insanity, Mr Ribton reviewed the case details.

The prisoner was Mary Ann Hadley's declared suitor, visiting her three or four times weekly, including dining at her home.

On the Sunday before the murder, everything appeared to be normal; he dined with her family and was seen in the garden with her father, suggesting her feelings remained unchanged. However, she rejected him the following Monday, abruptly crushing his hopes for happiness. This rejection led to an extraordinary state of agitation. As the poet observes, "Anger is a short madness." In this case, however, his frustration continued to build until he reached a frenzied state, clearly affecting his mindset and behaviour.


In conclusion, Mr Ribton urged the Jury to consider a not guilty verdict on the grounds of insanity. Although this would result in a lengthy imprisonment, it would spare the prisoner from the fate of the scaffold.


In summing up, the Learned Judge ruled that "uncontrollable impulse" was not the answer to a charge of murder. No such defence was consistent with common sense or with the laws of England. The only evidence of this sort accepted was where a person committed a crime from that insanity, which was a disease and not from irresistible impulses," arising from the promptings of evil passions or neglect of the duty restraining such passions.

The learned Judge then carefully reviewed the evidence, showing that the prisoner's statement before the magistrates on the day the deed was done was perfectly lucid, coherent, and consistent with all the facts of the case, and therefore utterly irreconcilable with any theory of insanity.


The Jury only took a few minutes to deliberate on their verdict and pass the judgment of GUILTY.


The learned Judge then assumed the black cap of doom and passed the sentence of death amidst the silence of the crowded court:

"Stephen Fox, you have been convicted of the wilful murder of Mary Ann Hadley. One who has listened to the evidence can entertain the slightest doubt of your guilt. Apparently, you were rejected by that unhappy young woman from her letter because of misconduct against her. She ought not to aggravate the feelings of a man so far from his grave. Your days on earth are numbered. I implore you, with the assistance you will have, to direct your thoughts to the next world, and endeavour sincere repentance to make amends for the awful crime you have committed. The sentence of the court is that you be taken from the place where you now stand to the prison from whence you came, and from thence to a place of public execution, there to be hanged by the neck until you are dead and when dead that your body be buried in the precincts of the gaol in which you have been oonflned—and may God have mercy upon your soul!"


The prisoner seemed much impressed by the solemnity and feeling of the Judge's address, closed his hands together convulsively, and his face flushed. He walked away from the dock, where he had stood during the whole trial, with much firmness, but with his head upon his breast, evidently suffering great mental anguish.

However, just before the trial, he told one of the prison officers that he had made his peace with God and was fully reconciled to his fate.


Rev. King, the chaplain, diligently worked to provide religious consolation to the two young men awaiting death. His efforts were not in vain with Fox, who eventually expressed deep remorse for his crime.


Shortly after his condemnation, Fox wrote to Mary Ann's parents, sincerely expressing his remorse and earnestly seeking their forgiveness, which they granted.


On Wednesday, 19th August, Fox met with his sister and her husband. The meeting was profoundly moving, with the convict appearing nearly overcome with grief. He also had a brother who was said to be living in India. Fox expressed a desire to see his father, but his father declined to meet with him again.


The weather was quite dull on the early morning of 20th August, 1857, and heavy mist lingered from five o'clock until the afternoon. Stephen Fox was to be hanged alongside George Kibble Edwards. Blog 29

The scaffold had been erected outside the porter's office; its other victims were Dedea Redanies - Blog 31, George Bave - Blog 49 (to come), and Thomas Mansell - Blog 47 (to come)

The weather didn't stop the crowd from gathering; it was as big as when Redanies faced his last day.

 

Shortly before noon, Mr Wildes, the undersheriff of Kent, along with several officers, went to the jail. Soon after, the condemned Fox and Edwards were brought into the room where Calcraft, the executioner, began the process of pinioning them.

ree

Before this was done, the two men shook hands with each other. Fox appeared calm and composed. The usual procession was then formed, and the group proceeded to the place of execution, which was a considerable distance from the cell where they had been confined.

As they walked, Fox sang a congressional hymn, 'When I Can Read My Title Clear'

He mounted the scaffold first and finished singing as he was positioned under the fatal beam. The drop fell, and the execution was completed; death was almost instantaneous.

Their bodies hung for an hour, the formalities of the inquest were completed, and the bodies were buried among the others slain by the rope within the prison grounds.



Life After for the Hadley Family

Mary Ann's parents, Edward and Harriet, had lost several children over the years. Their second-born child, Edward, died in 1831, aged 5. Then, in January 1833, they had a girl, Hannah Elizabeth Ann, who died in July, aged just under 7 months old. Then, in 1834, they had Edward. Still, he died aged 3 months.

These deaths never prepared Harriet for the loss of her daughter in such a brutal way, and it seems her grief robbed her of life. She died suddenly from apoplexy, just seven months later, on 4th January 1858, aged 54, at Cold Harbour Lane, Northgate, and was buried in Canterbury on 10th January.

She never got to see her daughters, Emily and Harriet, marry in 1858 or meet the 18 children they had between them.


Edward would then find himself burying their youngest daughter, 21-year-old Eliza Hannah, when she died at their home in 15 Notley Street, Northgate, on 3rd February 1863 from typhoid fever.


In 1874, the remaining Children, William, age 49, Emily, age 37 and Harriet, age 36, buried their father, who died on 26th October aged 73 at the Longport Street General Hospital in Canterbury.


SOURCES

1. (1857, May 16). Murder at Canterbury. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 5.

2. (1857, May 23). Canterbury. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 6.

3. (1857, August 1). Crown Court. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 2- 3.

4. (1857, August 22). Execution of Fox & Edwards. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 5.

5. Bring your backstory to lifeTM Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & History Records. Available at: https://www.ancestry.co.uk/

6. General Register Office - Online Ordering Service - Login. Available at: https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/

7. Archive, T.B.N. History’s colourful stories in black and white, Home | Search the archive | British Newspaper Archive. Available at: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/

 
 
 

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating

© 2024 by SJW Powered and secured by Wix

bottom of page