was it a love affair or unwelcomed affection that turned to murder by Samuel Seager?
Stephen Giles was born in Wichling Kent in 1799. He became a rat catcher and would travel about the area. on 23rd April 1823, he married Hannah Hughes from Lenham, Kent and they eventually settled in Ottermen Kent.
They had 4 children Elizabeth born in 1824 in Lenham, Kent. Stephen born in 1828 in Ottermen, James 1831 in Ottermen and finally George born in 1836 in Ottermen.
His wife would keep herself busy, while her husband was away, doing needlework and repairing shoes for the locals when required but it would seem she was also occupied with someone else.
Samuel Seager was born in 1809 in Stalisfield, Kent. On 23rd May 1831 age 22, he married Mary Wellar age 24 from Murston Kent at the Murston Parish Church and they had 2 children William born in 1831 and John born in 1833. Mary died in 1834, cause unknown, which left Samuel a widow at 25 years old. he moved back in with his parents and had a shop at the side of the house, where he worked as a shoemaker.
Samuel had been seen going in and out of the cottage where Hannah Giles lived, mostly while her husband was away, It was said that Samuel had worked for Hannah when needed but suspicions were there was an affair going on.
On Saturday 2nd February 1839, shock spread around Otterden and surrounding areas, when Hannah Giles, who was supposed to be looking after a neighbour's children, was found dead and burnt on the road.
The horror of this cruel, and unnatural murder had excited in the minds of the inhabitants of the quiet district. The female part particularly, who had feared to leave the doors of their cottages since.
The unfortunate victim was described as an industrious, inoffensive woman, against whom no suspicion of wrong had ever been excited except in the rumour of improper intimacy between her and her supposed murderer, Samuel Seager.
On Tuesday 5th February, an inquest was held on the body of Hannah Giles, before Mr Hinde, the Coroner.
Although the rain had fallen and a quantity of snow had thawed since the murder, the blood of the murdered woman was still visible on the road.
The inquest was held at the area where the body was lying.
Mr. Hinde, the Coroner had arrived from Faversham, accompanied by his son.
The following were sworn in as the Jury Mr John Dull (foreman) Mr Jesse Whitehead Mr Thomas G Clinch, Mr James Clinch, Mr William Brenchley, Mr Jacob Croucher, Mr Thomas Bensted, Mr Alexander Tosh, Mr James Purtis. Thomas Clinch, Charles Whitehead, and John Luckhurst.
The Rev J A Ross, the Vicar Westwell, and some other gentlemen of the district were also present.
The Jury having been duly sworn in, the Coroner informed them that where one person willfully killed another, the crime was murder, so to enable them to conclude that a murder had been committed, they must first be satisfied that another person had inflicted the wound and whether the person died by the wound inflicted, He directed them to dismiss from their minds, every rumour or report, that might have reached them respecting the unfortunate occurrence, but to form their conclusion, strictly from the evidence that would come before them. They then proceeded from Hall Place, in one of the rooms, that was then occupied by a school room.
Mr J. G. Shepherd, the clerk to the Faversham bench of magistrates, had assisted the investigation and suggested several very important topics of the inquiry
The body had been placed in a small bakehouse at the end of the three cottages, one of which the unfortunate deceased had occupied, and to which the attention of strangers was then directed.
Here a distressing scene presented itself. The three healthy, clean-looking children of the deceased occupied the doorway, scarcely conscious of the dreadful nature of their loss, and probably wondering, in the simplicity of childhood, why so many persons came to look at their poor mother.
The bereaved husband who was said to have the character of a civil, inoffensive demeanor, dressed in a clean white frock, was leaning against the wall with a handkerchief to his face, apparently overcome with grief.
At a short distance from the Coroner and the Jury, stood a group of women, neighbours of the deceased, bearing an expression of the deepest grief and anxiety in their swollen eyes and pale appearance, and wearing, in respect to her memory, every piece of black which kind hearted poverty could scrape and stitch together.
The door of the bakehouse had been unlocked and was entered first by Mr. C. Wilkes, the surgeon of Charing. He found the deceased in such a state, that he suggested that some of the women, might prepare her for the viewing of the Jury.
The Jury was then admitted two or three at a time, and a horrifying spectacle met their gaze. The stiffened and blackened corpse of the unfortunate victim, scorched and disfigured, the flames that had burned nearly every particle of clothes from her person, which it had been necessary to cover for the sake of decency; the lower limbs are drawn convulsively; both arms held up before the throat as if struggling in self-defence. The head was thrown violently back, exhibiting the dreadful wound that extended from the front part of the throat down the right side of the spinal bone. The ghastly appearance of the open eyelids and the rigid expression of horror-convulsed features, all conspired to impress on the beholder a degree of painful emotion, a memory which I'm sure would have been hard to forget.
The Jury then returned to Hall Place, and the following witnesses were examined:
Henry Jenkins was sworn in first —
'' I will be thirteen next birthday. My father is a Wood Reeve and small farmer. Saturday night father and mother were out, and Hannah Giles was to come and mind us children. She was to come soon as it was dusk after she had put her children to bed. She was sleeping at our house. When she did not come, we got uneasy, and at about ten minutes to eight, I told my sister, who is older than me, that I should go and see where she was. I went up the road towards Mrs. Giles’s house. At about four rods from Thomas Luckhurst cottage. I saw something black on the left side of the road, near the hedge. I went within half a rod of it and thought it some Christian. I thought it was a man, and went near enough to see that it was burning in the bosom. I saw something that I thought was a rush basket, but it turned out to be a striped shawl. When I saw something burning in the bosom I thought it was a man trying to frighten me. I thought I would pass on the waste ground under the other hedge, then the fire blazed up again and I was frightened and ran home. I told my sister what I had seen. At about half-past six, I had heard the report of a gun, when I was indoors. I thought somebody had fired at our dog, which barked. and I called him in. I heard at the same time someone scream out, but I could not tell whether it was a man or woman, as I did not hear very plainly. Afterwards, my sister said she smelled something terrible queer and went upstairs to see if anything was burning about the house. When I opened the door to let the dog in, I smelled something burning. Father came home at about half past one. I had not gone to bed, as I was so frightened. When my father and mother came home, I told them what I had seen. They both went up the road and afterwards, I went too and saw a bonnet, that's when I first knew it was a woman. The clothes were nearly burned off from her body. The moon was not up, and it was dark when I first went. When I went up at last, it was moonlight. The Scream I heard was after the shot.
His father Mr Henry Jenkins was sworn in—
'' I live in Otterden and am the father of the last witness. My wife and I went out Saturday evening last, having arranged for Mrs. Giles to come and take care of the children. We returned at about half-past one o'clock. after what my son had told me, I went up the road, and my wife followed me. I found the body woman lying dead on the road. She had been dead for some hours. The spot was about thirty rods from her own house, rather more than halfway on the road to my house. I went to the row of cottages where she lived and alarmed my brother, who lived in one of them. He had been out with me and came down with me to the body. After coming to the place again, my brother lifted the body a little and saw a pistol lying on the side of her. I picked up the largest part of a razor case lying near her feet, which I gave to Mr. Giles. I got a light, and one of the children picked up the other part. When my brother and I came back and recognized the body be that of Hannah Giles, the wife of Stephen Giles, a rat-catcher, I then went to her cottage and was told by her eldest boy, aged about twelve years, that nobody except themselves, was at home. We went towards Charing and met Mr Giles coming home, a short distance from his house. We told him that had found his wife lying in the road, and asked him if he kept a pistol in his house. said '' No.” and we all went into his house to look at the razor case. He found his razors were all right. then got some cloth to cover the body with, and we removed it into the bakehouse, which is used in common for all the three cottages.
I know a man named Samuel Seager and saw him about one o’clock on that day coming out of the garden, in front of Giles’s cottage, but I do not know from which cottage he had come. I have known him for many years. He lives in Stalisfield (the adjoining parish), about half a mile off. He had a fustian jacket on. I spoke to him on that day. He spoke rationally as any man could do, and there was nothing unusual in his manner and was going towards his home. He's about twenty-nine years of age. I had heard it reported, that Seager had a criminal connection with Giles’s wife. He used to be frequently to and fro from the house when Mr Giles was away from home, but she used to bind shoes for him.
I believe the pistol produced to be the same that was found, but cannot state it positively. The hammer of the pistol was down as if had been recently discharged.
William Jenkins, a labourer, was sworn—
'' I am the brother of the last witness. I live next door but one to the deceased. I parted from my brother on Saturday night and went the nearest way home to my cottage. When alarmed by my brother I went down the road and afterwards did as he had described. The body was lying in the road with the head nearest the hedge. It was lying on the right side. Her arms were doubled under her body, and the pistol was found under her body, inside one of her arms.
I know Samuel Seager. I believe he has run away.
Stephen Giles was then sworn in —
'' I am the husband of the deceased. I am a rat-catcher and reside at Otterden. On Saturday morning I left home at about eight o’clock and did not return till early Sunday morning''.
He then spoke about going with the two Jenkins brothers, to the body of his wife, Her clothes were so burned with oil that he could put his hand right around the body. He also identified the pistol and razor case, as being the same that was found. He Had found a pair of scissors near her, which were hers. The scissors’ case was burned cinder.
Next was James Bensted a blacksmith, who lived in Stalisfield. -
''I know the pistol produced. I sold it to Seager eight months ago. I had it in possession about eight months before that. He saw it hanging in my shop and paid five shillings for it. part of the pistol did not work. The pistol produced appeared to have been an old cavalry piece, with brass bound slock; and the barrel, which was of large bore, strapped the slock a band brass. The old lock had been superseded by a percussion lock. The ramrod was also missing.''
Next was Ann Harris —
'' I am fifteen years old. I live with my mother in Stalisfield. I know Seager. Our house is near where he lives. I saw him at home at two o’clock on Saturday. I saw him cast a bullet. It was as large as a marble. I am frequently at Seager’s father’s house, where Seager lives. When I last saw him, he was making a bullet. He was melting lead into a spoon at the time. He made a hole in a potato and poured the lead into it. The potato was not cut in two but was scooped out, into a round hole. He only made one bullet. I do not know what he did with the bullet, because his mother went in and disturbed him. His mother begged him to give her the pistol and he would not. I was there all afternoon. He went out directly after he had made the bullet. He went along the road in the direction of Charing. I remained till six o’clock. I did not see him come home. I have not seen him since, and believe he has not been home since. I had been in the habit of going there for about twelve months and had never known him to go away before.
Before he left the house his mother told him if he did not give up the pistol, she would have him taken up. She said that he was almost like a madman, thinking of doing such things as making bullets. His mother went down to her knees. His mother and I both held the door because he should not go out, we thought he was going to kill himself. he pushed us away and rushed out. Why I thought he was going shoot himself was, because he had seemed to be miserable for the last fortnight, when his mother first mentioned it to me. He seemed to be in good health but very miserable''.
Next was Stephen Giles Jr, having been examined, as to his knowledge of the nature of an oath, was sworn in and stated that he was the son of Hannah Giles, age eleven years old.
''On Saturday last, me and my brother, who is seven years old, went to Stalisfield Green at about four o’clock, to buy some shop things. We left my mother at home and returned home at a little past six, I then heard a gun fired, just as we got into the road by my father’s house. The report seemed to come from the direction of Mr. Luckhurst. I heard somebody scream twice, directly after the gun had been fired, the scream was not like a person attempting to say anything, but cry out. I did not know whose scream it was. I went home and found the door unfastened and Mother was not there''.
''She had told us to make haste home, and when we got home to go to bed, so we went to bed, all three of us — my two brothers and myself.
I saw old Mrs. Roberts but did not mention anything about hearing the shot that night. I did not hear what had happened, till my father came home, and told us''.
''I saw Samuel Seager there at about noon on Saturday. He often came when our father was out. I used to stop in the room when he was there. At noon on Saturday, I went out and left him there. My little brother was there then. My mother used to tell us not to go out of the room when father was out, whenever he came. She had often told us, that he used to stand up and talk, and not sit down.''
''When I saw the flash I did not see any man, and when I heard the scream, l did not hear any man’s voice. have never seen Seager lay hold of, or kiss Mother.''
The brother of the last witness, James Giles, aged eight years, was then questioned and generally confirmed his brother's statement, adding that his mother had several times, told Seager to go away when he was there on Saturday, to which he always answered that he was ''going in a minute''. Mother had talked about cutting out a pair of trousers, which she was to make for him.
Next was Henry Chapman —
''I live at the Bowl public house, Stalisficld, farm servant to my grandfather. Seager had told me that he had a pistol, and so I was going to buy it from him, he said I might try it first if I liked it. I went to his mother’s house on Wednesday when he was not at home, he had told me to go in and take it, and I took it from his shop. I had it on Wednesday and kept it till Friday. On that day, he sent his eldest boy four times for it. The pistol produced is the one that I had. I do not doubt it. The boy who fetched it is about six years old. When I had the pistol, it was loaded with a ball. When I returned it, it was not loaded. He sent a message to me, that if I would not surrender it, he would come up himself for it.
Mr. Charles Wilkes, the Surgeon, from Charing, was then sworn —
''I knew Hannah Giles. and have attended her professionally. I have examined her body and found her throat cut. The wind-pipe, gullett, and all the blood vessels were separated on the right side of the neck, down to the spine, very much burned about the breast and arms. There was a gunshot wound on the upper part of the left thigh and another wound lower on the inner part of the same thigh. Another gunshot was the inner middle part of the right thigh, and another on the outer and lower part of the same thigh. All these wounds had the appearance of a ball having passed through both thighs, in a slanting direction downwards''.
''One finger on each hand was cut, as if in resistance. The wound in the throat was sufficient to cause death. I think the wound from the ball was not sufficient to have caused immediate death. The wound in the throat was about five inches long, and an inch and a half deep, and appeared to have been inflicted by some sharp instrument. The other wound had been caused by a large ball. I do not doubt that her clothes look like fire from the discharged gun or pistol. I think from the nature of the throat wound that it had been inflicted by some person behind her at the time. The gunshot wound was inflicted first, it would have been impossible for her to have screamed after her throat was cut. It was a very clean incised wound, and could only have been inflicted by a razor very sharp knife. I do not think it possible that she could have cut her own throat in that way''.
The Coroner then briefly addressed the Jury, who retired for a few minutes into another room and returned the verdict of Wilful Murder against Samuel Seager
The different witnesses were then bound over to appear when called on. It appears that Seager had been living with his father and mother, who farm a few acres of ground, he had lost his wife and was said to be of a sickly and consumptive, nervous habit.
He has not yet been discovered, and it is supposed that he has committed suicide. cannot help thinking, however, that in such an atrocious case, the Home Secretary, requested that it would offer a reward for Seager’s apprehension. Some efforts are due to public safety in such cases, and to allay the public excitement, every means should be taken to search the ponds and woods, where he is likely to be found, or, if he still lived, to bring him to justice!
Whether any criminal intimacy existed between them or not will now in all probability never be known, none of the witnesses at the inquest could state any fact, beyond Seager’s constant loitering about the place in the husband’s absence, which would warrant such suspicion.
This, however, certain, that whether improperly acquainted with him or not, the unfortunate woman was desirous of breaking off the connection, and had frequently told her children never to leave the house when he came, and had also desired him to leave the place, several times on the very day before the murder.
Whether guilty or not, these symptoms of honesty and repentance cannot but render her an object of the deepest sympathy, particularly when reflecting on the fearful and truly appalling manner of her end.
The spot where the crime took place, was a narrow lane, with coppice on one side and a meadow on the other within the call of two houses, the one occupied by Mr. Jenkins, where she was going, and another still nearer.
The three cottages (one of them her own), which she had just left, were also near as to render a murder attempt an act only to an attempted maniac, or one decidedly careless of detection. The spot was also within some fifty or sixty yards of footpath in the adjoining field and the lime Kilns (between six and seven o’clock) would render it extremely probable that persons might return to their homes and this was the case with the two sons of Hannah, who were within yards of the spot (in their return from the shop Stalisfield Green) when they saw the flash and heard the report of the pistol, and also a person screaming. It was probable from the evidence that the pistol was presented to the head or body of the deceased, who perhaps directed it downwards, and thus altered the direction of the ball, which was found to have passed through both thighs. After the shot, it would seem that the murderer, with the most horrid deliberation, pulled off the two parts of the razor sheath, which were found in different places, opened the razor, and completely cut her throat that she must have died in few seconds.
All these preparations for using the razor must have taken so much time, that it is highly probable that if the poor boy, who had heard the shot and the scream, had the mind to immediately shout murder, and alarm the neighbours in any other way, they might have prevented the murderer from completing his dreadful deed.
On Monday 8th March the Kent Lent Assizes commenced at the Court House. Maidstone. The Honorable Sir Joseph Littledale, accompanied by David Salomons, Esq. opened the Commission, The Honorable Sir Joseph Littledale, Knight, one of the Judges of the Queen’s Bench, presided over the Criminal Court. , Tuesday morning, the usual forms having been gone through, the undermentioned gentlemen were sworn in
Hon. J'..W. King (foreman) Right Hon. S. R Lushington, Sir T. M. Wilson, Sir J. K. Shaw. Sir H. W. Bridges, Mr J- Herens Esq., Mr W. Deedes, Esq., Mr J. W. Stratford, Esq., Mr P. H. Dykes, Esq., Mr Isaac Minett, Esq. Mr T. P. Alchin, Esq., Mr G. Gipps, Esq., Mr J. D S. Douglas, Esq., Mr M. D. D. Dalison, Esq., Mr J. C. Wykeham Martin, Esq., Mr T. H. Best, Esq., Mr T. A.Donce Esq., Mr C.T. Pattison, Esq., Mr J. Jacobson, Esq., Mr J. A. Wigan, Esq., Mr C Milner, Esq., Mr A. Potts, Esq.
Sir Joseph Littledale addressed the Grand Jury and expressed his gratification at the general lightness calendar, although regretted to say that it also contained some serious offences. He was happy to find that amidst a great number of petty larcenies, there was only one case of poaching. There were, however, two or three cases that required their very serious consideration; namely, no less than ten persons charged with the murder of Robert Ross, a marine, at Chatham.
Three men were now charged with his murder, and seven more with assisting, aiding, and abetting, in the second degree. (another blog for the future)
There was also another case of murder, the murder of Hannah Giles. The Grand Jury would judge whether the evidence was sufficient to substantiate this charge. After these brief observations, which lasted only three minutes, his Lordship dismissed the Grand Jury to do their duty.
The Trial and conviction of Samuel Seager was fixed to take place on Thursday morning, 11th March. the court areas were crowded to excess and contained a very great number of females, who seemed to take the deepest interest in this dreadful case.
On the prisoner being brought up, It was observed that he appeared much altered for the worse in personal appearance. His eyes had become more sunken, his cheeks more pale, and his lips, which he frequently moistened with his tongue, were parched.
Throughout the trial Samuel Seagar was said to have betrayed very little emotion, preserving a petulant and grievous expression of countenance, which was scarcely altered to the moment of his leaving the dock, and which was assumed to indicate anxiety than fear.
The indictment was read. It charged him with the wilful murder of Hannah Giles, cutting her throat with a razor, which was also charged in the coroner’s inquisition.
He pleaded Not Guilty” in a firm and audible voice.
Mr Bodkin and Mr Eapinasse appeared for the prosecution, and a solicitor, Mr Shephed from Faversham, and Mr Deedes appeared for the defence of the prisoner.
Mr Bodkin stated the case to the Jury after approving the witnesses and sought the Jury to dismiss from their minds, as much possible, all recollection of whatever rumours might have reached them, in which the detestation of the crime might have been in extent, attached to the prisoner.
The learned counsel then called the following witnesses
Henry Jenkins, the elder, was sworn in—
''I am a small farmer and live on the Otterden road. I knew Hannah Giles well. Her husband's cottage is a short distance from my house. She had been three or four times in as many years to our house, whilst I and wife were absent. On the day of the murder she was meant to take care of the children in our absence, we were going to my father's house. Six in the evening was the time agreed and She was to have slept there. My wife left home between twelve and one in the afternoon and I went after her. When I was passing the Giles house, I saw the prisoner coming out of the common garden gate for the four cottages, into the road. I spoke to him as I passed, I had seen him there before in the garden near the cottage.
Me and my wife returned home at about one o'clock. Upon hearing something from my son, I proceeded towards Mr Giles’s cottage and found her lying dead in the road, about twelve rods from Luckhurst cottage. She seemed to have been dead for some hours. I went for my brother and removed the body with him and others.
Cross-examined - The prisoner's house is about half a mile from the Giles cottage, He is a widower with two small children, living with his Otterden Village is a parish adjoining Charing, the prisoner's house is near the main road from Charing to Faversham, over Stalisfield Green. The road where the body was found branches out from the main road. I cannot say which is nearest to Charing, the prisoner's or the deceased house.
When we moved the body we found a pistol underneath it''
William Clinch produced the pistol for the Jury to look over, which he said was given to him by the Coroner. The pistol was an old one, with a percussion lock
Stephen Giles was then called. He stated that he had picked up the pistol and also part of the razor case found near the body and the the other part was found and given to him. He had kept them and produced them at the inquest and they were taken by the constable as evidence. He said he had known the prisoner a long time but never said anything about being at his house. He had frequently seen him there.
Cross-examined - The prisoner was a shoemaker who had worked for his wife and she had bound some shoes for him, several times in the past. ''My wife would have been 42 next birthday''. On Sunday, he also found a pair of scissors, near where the body had laid, which belonged to his wife.
Re-examined by Mr Eapinasse (prosecution) ''I also found a piece of work, which I assume she took with her, to occupy herself with at the Jenkins''
Next to be examined was Charles Wilkes —
''I am a surgeon at Charing and knew Hannah Giles. I examined her body after death. Her throat was cut about five inches long and down the vertebrae, the windpipe, gullet, carotid artery, and all the other vessels, muscles, and nerves on the right side of the neck, were divided. Her body was much burned; the burnt part extending upwards from the thighs, abdomen, breast, and arm. I observed a gunshot wound on the front of the left thigh, and another similar wound lower and on the inner part of the same limb. There was a similar wound on the right thigh opposite to that on the left. The shot seemed to have passed through both thighs. A finger on each hand was cut. One finger on the left hand cut to the joint. The wound on the throat was sufficient to cause instantaneous death. I do not think that the gunshot wound was sufficient to have caused death.
examined the clothes of the deceased, which had been burned. They seemed to have been ignited from the pistol shot. The wound on the throat appeared to be done by a sharp cutting instrument, such a razor would have been a likely cause, the cut was very little jagged. The cut must have been given from behind the deceased''.
Cross-examined— '' In judgment, the gunshot wound was given first. A sharp knife might also have produced the throat wound''.
Elisabeth Roberts was next to stand —
''l live in a cottage very near Hannah Giles. One of the windows overlooks the door of it. I know the prisoner. He is very often in the habit of going there. The deceased's husband, who is a rat-catcher, is much out. The prisoner came when he was out. I remember the Saturday of the murder. The prisoner came to my house and stayed about three-quarters an hour. He asked if they were home at the other house (meaning Giles’s). I said I had heard them about. He said that he thought that he had tracked Giles out in the snow. He said something about the woman, and I said ''You are one queer fellow, Sam.” He warmed himself by my fire, then went to the window that overlooked the Gile's door several times. After he had left nearly an hour, I went to the Giles’s house. I went to the door and met the woman coming out the front door, Samuel Seager then made his appearance, together with one of the deceased’s children, about eight years old. I said 'What, aren't you gone, Sami” and he replied ''No, I am going directly'' and I saw him walk away''.
Cross-examined —'' Mr. Giles is very much employed and keeps several dogs and ferrets. He often goes out to some distance and is out a great deal, sometimes all day and a good part of the night. I never saw Seager there at night''.
Next was young Ann Harris was sworn in —
''I live near the prisoner’s residence. On the morning of 2nd February, I was at the house. At about one o’clock on that day, I watched him melt some lead in an iron spoon, and cast bullet potatoes, about the size of large marble. He was in his shop. His mother was in the kitchen. I heard his mother ask him to give her the pistol. He said he wanted it. She asked him for it three times, and each time said he wanted it. She went down on her knees and begged and preyed on him to give it to her. This was in his shop. We pressed the door so that he could not go out. He, however, pulled the door and we gave up and he went out. That was about two o’clock. He went up the road towards Charing. went past the haystack without stopping''.
Cross-examined—''l stood beside the door when the bullet was made. The door was open. The shop adjoins the house. His boys, one five and one seven years old. were also in the shop at the time. I was in the habit of seeing the prisoner frequently, several times a week. Lately, before that day, he had seemed very miserable and very low. His manner had particularly attracted my attention and on that account, I and his mother tried to prevent him from going out, with the pistol, we thought he was going to do himself in.
Next to the stand was Stephen Russell —
''I live on Charing Hill, about a mile and a half from the prisoner’s house. I saw him on the afternoon of the 2nd February at my house, he came at about half past three. He had some tea, and at first, he asked to give him some water. He only stayed about a minute or two, before going away in the direction of Charing, The Shire road is nearly a quarter of a mile from my house. I could see him take that road. He was then dressed as he is now and had an apron on. I saw that one pocket stuck out''.
Cross-examined— ''I did not know him particularly well and did not see him very often''.
Next to follow was a young girl called Mary Ford—
''I live on Charing-Hill. As I was going home on Saturday afternoon. I met Seager in the meadow near our house, which is across one from the Shire road. He was going towards the stone-style, He said ''Well my little maiden” I said ''I will stand you snow-balling''He said ''No, it is almost too cold. I want the sun to shine.” and he went on his way. He had Something like a pair of shoes stuck out in his right band pocket''.
Cross-examined— ''There is a path through the meadow''.
Next to be examined was a little boy named Samuel Kirby -
''He stated he was at the Stone Style with another boy named Roberts on Saturday. He saw the prisoner pass them, in the direction of the road to Warren-street and the old Lime Kilns. He did not know which way he went when he got into the road. Young Kirby was close at home, and when I got there I heard his father, who had been out, say that it was about twenty minutes past four''.
Charles Roberts, another boy, was sworn in and confirmed the evidence of the last witness. Seager went in the direction of the old Lime Kiln.
A man named Henry Vant was sworn in —
''On Saturday, February 2nd, I was at work near the old lime kiln. There is a lane from there straight into the Ottorden road, which is not a far distant, perhaps a little better than a quarter of a mile. Whilst I was at work I saw the prisoner, who spoke to me when he was right opposite to me I asked him what Sawden had been taken for, and he said that he had not heard of it. I said Old Harriot had said that he went with his cuffs (handcuffs) on and again said that he had not heard anything about it. He then went on across the field. He went in the opposite direction that led to Luckhurst’s. Its public path where he went, which would lead him through a small wood, and led directly to Rigshill field, which is about a quarter of a mile from Giles’s house. This was at near five o'clock.
Next was Henry Bushell—
''On the 3rd of February Giles came for me. and I went with him to his house. we went past the limekilns and saw footmarks in the snow where some person had come across the field leading into the road that goes to Luckhurst’s house. I saw them for about twenty rods. They appeared to come from the back part of Giles's house across the fields. We tracked it along the road, from near the limekilns, the main road leading to Luckhurst’s house''.
James Giles, the son of Hannah was brought forward. having been examined to his knowledge of the nature of an oath was sworn in —
'' I remember the Saturday of the murder. I was at home when Seeger came. My mother and little brother were also there. Seager stayed there for about three hours, and I was there all the time. When my mother left home I had gone to shop with my brother Stephen. We were coming home on the footpath, at about half past six o'clock, saw a flash and heard the report pistol, and some person screams twice, in the direction of Mr Luckhurst’s''.
Cross-examined - He said did not know whether it was a gunshot or a pistol, they made their minds up when they got home.
Stephen Giles, elder brother of James stood and corroborated what James had said
Henry Jenkins Jr, age 13 was next to be examined -
''I live with my father at Otterden. My parents went out that day and the children waited in for tea from Mrs Giles until eight o'clock. We heard a gun or pistol noise and a holla. We opened the door and saw nothing and called the dog. There was a smell of something burning. I eventually went out to go to Mrs Giles's house, it was dark outside and there was snow on the ground. After passing the Luckhurst house, I saw something in the road and went within half a rod of it. it appeared to be a man and had fire on his bosom. I got frightened and ran back home. I then accompanied his father to the spot later and we had moonlight by then''.
Henry Jenkins Sr was recalled and he explained that the row of houses was occupied by Mrs Roberts, Stephen Giles, Jacob Spillett and William Jenkins (his Brother) He lived about 70 rods from the cottages and Luckhurst Cottage was midway between them.
Next was Richard Bensted, the blacksmith, of Stalisfield—
''I know the prisoner. He had put in his shoes, three weeks and two days before the murder, for specks and nails. He brought them himself, but I cannot say whether or not he took them away. I heard of the murder and went to the spot the next afternoon, I saw some footmarks in the snow. I traced them about two and a half rods towards Luckhurst, starting from the spot where the woman was found. I followed those footmarks, for about two miles and a half when they came into the high road, along which we went for about a quarter of a mile. When it was nearly dark, we did not pursue it any further. In the final meadow, we traced them, there is a little shaw, that goes two-and-a-half miles across the fields, out of the way of all paths. The footmarks appeared to have been those of a person running. On the snowfield, about a mile along the tracks, we saw the left hand of a person printed with marks of blood on the snow, as if a person had fallen there. I believed, from their crookedness, that the footmarks had been made by the shoes that I had specked for Seager. They bore no particular mark except their crookedness''.
Cross-examined— ''I never saw any spots that crooked before. I told Chapman that I thought that they were like the shoes, I had to specked for the prisoner. All the footsteps I saw led away from where the body was''.
Richards Brother James Bensted also a Blacksmith of Stalisfield was called—
''The prisoner had some shoes specked at my shop. Richard was in the shop when he brought them in. They were rather more crooked than shoes generally are''.
He also stated he sold Seager the Pistol about eight months ago.
Henry Chapman then gave his evidence again, regarding his looking into buying the pistol and having taken it with permission from Seagers Mother but Seager took it back.
Next was Thomas Chandler—
''I live in the parish of Otterden, near Gore's field, between that and the meadow, The Shaw is about twenty rods from Luckhurst's house. I found a razor in the Shaw.
John Ely produced the razor Chandler had found. It was rusty.
Samuel Bartlett an optician living in Maidstone was in the habit of making minute examinations on small objects with powerful glasses and he had minutely examined the razor and made an accurate Fac Simile of the markings upon the handle.
Mr Deedes then objected to the production of the Fac Simile of the markings
Mr Bodkins said a forgery case had recently been decided before Mr Justice Parkes and another learned judge in the central court, in which the dissimilarity in the notes, as shown and the powerful lenses was admitted.
Samuel Bartlett took the stand —
''I am an optician living in Maidstone, and frequently make examinations, with powerful glasses of minute objects. I have examined the razor produced with a powerful magnifying glass and observed some marks. The marks on the paper now shown are facsimiles of those found on the razor. The first mark discovered was not distinct, but the second mark was the letter S, which was very plain; the next was like the letter O; the next was a G, detached from the down stroke; the next was the letter U more distinct than any other; the next which I believe was intended to represent the letter R. They were detached from each Other, but at regular distance. The next mark appears to be a T, but not longer than the following letter, which appears to be an E. I believe the letter T had been originally longer, but an attempt had been made to obliterate the whole of the letters. After is the letter R. The next I believe had been intended for the letter D, but the upper part appeared to have been struck through. Then an E or I. The last letter was N. The first letters appeared to form the word ''SOGUR'' - ''TERDEN”. There is no trace of any letter before the T but there is a vacancy for another letter.''
Cross-examined—'' I made the examination last night. Mr. Shspherd and Ely brought me the razor. I had heard of the murder. I knew, when I looked at the razor, that it was connected with that occurrence. I knew the name of the prisoner before I looked at it, and also where the murder had been committed. The razor was an old one''.
John Ely— '' The razor produced was received from Chandler and it has been in my possession ever since''.
Cross-examined—'' The prisoner lives in Stalisfield. The razor was rusty''.
His Lordship examined the razor very minutely, and also the fac Simile of the mark on it. The Jury also examined it with the glass from Mr Bartlett.
Next to be examined was Charles Edward Shuttleworth —
''I live in Coleshill, Warwickshire, which is about one hundred miles from London. I saw the prisoner in Coleshill on the 10th of February, and he asked me where the railroad was and said he wanted to get some work on it and had not had any food for a day or two. The Prisoner said after I had taken him into custody, that his name was William Rogers. I had on that day seen a description of the person. The constable who assisted in taking him was named Richard Peach. I found the prisoner on the Turnpike Road.
On Sunday night I saw him at the lockup house when he was told that he was apprehended on suspicion of murder. I asked him if he had bought the pistol of the blacksmith. The prisoner said that he did. I then asked him if he had made any bullets and he replied that he had. The prisoner said that he left his home. After he had some words with his mother because he had not paid for the board of his two children. He said that his name was Seager. He also once attempted to escape from the constable.
Cross-examined—l not a constable, but a timber merchant. I first saw the prisoner about twenty minutes before one o’clock, and it was about four o’clock when I saw him the second time. I considered I was not justified in taking the prisoner, without having the grounds to do so, and so put the questions to him''.
Re-examined— ''I did not give him reason to believe that I suspected him the first time I saw him. I had not then seen any account of his crime at that time. I read them in the 'Hue and Cry' at around two that afternoon and suspected it was him from the description''.
Richard Peach, the constable corroborated the evidence of the last witness and stated that he went on the following Tuesday to the lock-up house.
''When I got to the door, I heard him make coughing noises. I could not open the door and called a person named Ferris who then broke it open. On forcing open the door, the prisoner fell on his face, and we discovered a piece of string end his boot laces around his neck. He was insensible when we found him''.
Cross-examined— ''I never heard Shuttleworth ask him any questions''.
Next to stand was Benjamin Bigg —
''I live at Milton Sittingbourne, and my father is the constable and he brought the prisoner to this gaol, and on coming along the road, I said to him. ''It an awful thing murder, how did you come to do it'', he replied ''I know nothing about it'' Harris asked him what he bought the pistol for, and the prisoner replied ''To shoot birds''.
I asked how he came to cast the bullets in the potato. He said. ''To shoot at some boards,” and said he had given two or three to a person named Johnson to shoot with. He said he knocked up a piece of lead that would not fit the muzzle. he said he did not know how his pistol came to be found at the side of the woman. He had been at Giles's two hours on the day of the murder, and one of the children touched his pocket and asked what he had got there. He told the child it was a ferret, but in fact, it was a shoemaker’s gun. He left Giles’s at twelve and went home. He said he knew Mrs. Giles was going to Jenkins’s that evening''.
Cross-examined. ''I Had known the prisoner previously and put the questions harmlessly.''
Lord Viscount Marsham was next to be examined.—
'' I am one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the county, and a visiting Justice the gaol. On the 9th of the present month, I saw the prisoner in the course of my visiting duties. When I first saw him nothing was said by him. Over the day, again I saw him. and in consequence of information from the chaplain and governor, asked him if he wished to make any statement to him. Not answering immediately, I left the prisoner, saying, if he wished to speak to me, to send word. I left the gaol and called in about two hours later, I was told by the Chaplain the prisoner had asked for me. The prisoner was conveyed into the house''.
On the suggestion of the Counsel for the defence, the Chaplain was called, to state what had taken place previously in his interview with Lord Marsham.
Rev. John Winter. —
'' I delivered a message to the Lord from the prisoner, of his desire to see his Lordship. Lord Marsham, a visiting Justice, had asked him if he had any statement to make. The prisoner hesitated, and his Lordship said if he had, he could send for him and he was to deliberate well before he made any statement. I had gone to the prisoner in the regular course of duty. Before leaving him, he said it was a serious matter, and asked if had weighed well his mind the subject he had conversed upon with Lord Marsham. He said he wished to communicate to his Lordship what he knew about it''.
Lord Marsham re-called.—
''The Clerk of the Justices was in the room writing at the table when the prisoner had the interview. Seager looked at his Lordship, and before anyone had spoken, said, '' I did the sad deed.” He was cautioned that what he said would taken down, and brought against him. He then made a statement which was taken in writing. It was read over him. He was asked if he would sign it; he said '* Yes,” and did so''.
The deposition was then read by the Clerk of the Court as follows:
''The voluntary confession of Samuel Seager, a prisoner confined in the Gaol at Maidstone, in and for the county of Kent, for the wilful murder of Hannah Giles, of Otterden, in the same county, on the 9th of February last made and attested before Charles Marshum, Esq. commonly called Lord Viscount Marsham, one of her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace and for the same county. I wish to say I did the crime. I did it, and wish it to be known. We had a few words, and that was the occasion of it. I voluntarily make this statement''.
Signed
Samuel Seager.
Made before me.
Marsham.
This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Deedes rose, and very ably commented upon the evidence adduced.
He commenced with a clear exposition of what the law regarded as murder, and in what way it distinguished between malicious murder and the offence designated as manslaughter. He argued that the evidence throughout, the confession of the prisoner, amounted only to the guilt of manslaughter.
Mr. Deedes then called Jenkins the elder, Ely, and other persons, who had known the prisoner for some considerable time, who gave him an excellent character for meekness of disposition, and honesty and sobriety of habits.
Sir Joseph Liittledale then summed up the case with great clarity and care, and the Jury, after being locked up for nearly an hour, returned a verdict of Guilty of Murder.
The Clerk of the Court then inquired in the usual form, of the prisoner why the sentence of death should not pasted upon him.
His lordship then put on his black cap and said, “Samuel Seager, you have been found guilty by a jury of your country, the most clear and satisfactory evidence, of the wilful murder of Hannah Giles. The penalty attached to this is death. There are no circumstances in your case which can detract from your guilt. I must inform you that there is hope whatever for you, no hope in this world. But an Almighty Being is willing to extend mercy to those who sincerely ask him for it. You have latterly appeared as if you have begun already to seek after a state of repentance. I would earnestly advise you to do so, and I hope you will attain it before you depart from this world''.
''I do order and adjudge that you, Samuel Scager, be taken to the place from whence you came, and thence to the place of execution, there to be hanged the neck till you are dead. Your body is to be buried within the precincts of the prison''.
He was then removed from the bar and taken to Maidstone Gaol
His was ordered for execution on Thursday, 28th March.
The scaffold was erected in front of the Porters Lodge, outside Maidstone Prison and there was said to have been a large concourse of people surrounding the area.
At around a minute to twelve, the unhappy Samuel Seager was brought to the scaffold, accompanied by the Rev John Winter, the Undersheriff, two Sheriff officers, and lastly the Executioner. He walked with a firm step to the underneath of the gallows and upon looking around, he spat on the front of the erected wooden frame.
The Tolling of the funeral bell had ceased and a white night cap was drawn over his head. His hands and arms were already pinioned before he came into the public's view. All that was left was to put the noose around his neck and attach it to the gallows. This was quickly completed and the drop was loosened. After a little struggle, Samuel Seager was dead. his body was left to hang for an hour and then buried in the prison cemetery.
He did not say anything to the spectators, no reasons, defence, or repentance for the crime, except for his brief confession, read in the court, we will never know the truth. did they have an affair? or was he an obsessed stalker? that is left for the reader to decide. Let me know what you think in the comment section.
Life After
Daughter Elizabeth was 15 years old when her mother was murdered. She passed away at home on 2nd April 1844 aged 20, from Typhoid Fever, she was buried at Ottermen Parish Church on 7th April
Husband Stephen remarried in July 1851 at Maidstone, Kent, to a recent widow Hannah Morgan, she had her youngest daughter Rebecca 19-year-old living with them. His wife Hannah died in 1869 at age 76, Stephen remained single, living alone with a young housekeeper, and died aged 88 in July 1887 and was buried in Charing Kent.
Son Stephen was 10 years old. He became an agricultural labourer and married his stepmother's daughter Rebecca Morgan on 3 Apr 1852 at Charing, Kent and they had 7 children. Elizabeth (died at 2 months from Pneumonia), Hannah Maria, Stephen, Mary Ann, George,(died at 4 months from Bronchitis) Pamela Jane, and Eliza Alexandra.
Daughter Pamela Jane died in 1893 aged 21 from Nephritis (aka glomerulonephritis)
Stephen died in 1897 at age 69, from Senile Decay and prostate issues, and their Daughter Eliza died aged 31 in Jan 1905 from Phthisis Cardiac Asthenia, this was followed by Rebecca being admitted to St Augustine's Asylum Chartham on 29th June, she died there on 18th August 1905 aged 73, cause unknown for admittance and death.
Son James was 8 years old. He never married, he worked as an agricultural Labourer. he lived with his sister in Law Rebeccas' widowed sister Pamela Jane in 1861, in 1871, he was head of the house, with Pamela as his housekeeper and he was working as the local Mole catcher. they then parted ways, Pamela became a shop owner, selling toys and he lived the last of his life alone with another housekeeper until he died on 6th Dec 1900, in a London Hospital, aged 69. He had an Epithelioma of the tongue, but he died from operation exhaustion.
Son George was only 3 years old. He married Mary Anne Boorman in 1856. they had 3 children George, James, and Elizabeth. George started as an Agricultural Labourer but by 1891, they settled in Stalisfield Kent at the Bowl Inn, He worked as a licensed Victualler, his wife died in 1901 aged 61 from Tonsillitis, jaundice, and exhaustion and by 1911 he had retired from the pub trade and was living alone with his housekeeper at Stone Stile Cottage in Charing and he died in 1919 aged 83, in a cottage hospital in Hollinbourne Kent
Children of Samuel and Mary
These are more difficult to trace. Samuel's parents were already in their 70s when he was hung. Sarah the grandmother passed away in 1849 aged 79 and the Grandfather John in 1857 aged 88
They were both living with their grandparents in the 1841 census.
In the 1851 census Grandfather John aged 83, has a couple living there Charles Horsland is down as an ''inmate'' Bricklayer and his wife Elizabeth Horsland, and William Weller age 20 as AP, which I'm assuming means apprentice, possibly to the bricklayer, who was in prison at the time.
John was still living with his grandfather but William was missing.
Unfortunately, William and John was a popular name within the Seager family, and several routes I've gone down, have turned out to be other families, so what I have found is just a guess and may not be correct.
William Seager - I have followed a trail, that he may have gone down the criminal path. several criminal records for William Seager, Kent, for Laceny. There is a William Seager who was in Prison for two years, in 1865 aged 34, for stealing a lamb. Then there was admittance into Chartham Asylum on 8th May 1869 and by 29th May 1872, he hadn't improved and was transferred to a Sussex Asylum on that day and died there on 10th July 1873. So is this William? Maybe his father was heading down this route, had he not been hanged, he may have ended up in one, maybe he was at the start of it when he murdered Hannah. As we have seen in other murder-by-insanity cases I've blogged about, insanity does run in families.
John Seager - I have found two criminal records a newspaper report says the age is 43, and John would have been 40, so unclear if it's him. but I have found the ranges between 2-3 years of errors on records but back then with no calendars, it was difficult to keep up with ages, especially between the lower classes. the trial was dated 9 Apr 1873 John Seager was in prison for Maliciously afflicting GBH on his wife Martha He was waiting for the summer Assizes. I was unable to find a marriage for John and Martha, which happened in Strood Kent (according to the newspaper report) so could have just been cohabitating, as many poor did back then. The second record states that he died in the Goal while awaiting trial on 21 Jul 1873. the same month and year as his brother William.
Alternatively, I have found a John Seager in Greenwich who seemed to be in and out of the workhouses and died in 1921. after his grandfather died, he may have been evicted from the home, as many homes came with the job, so people would move towards the cities to find work.
SOURCES
Archive, T.B.N. (no date) History’s colourful stories in black and white, Home | Search the archive | British Newspaper Archive. Available at: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/
(1839, February 12). Murder at Otterden. South Eastern Gazette, pg3.
(1839, February 12). Inquest- arrest of Seager. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg3.
(1839, March 19). Kent Lent Assizes. Kentish Gazette, pg2-3.
(1839, March 30). EXECUTION OF SAMUEL SEAGEL. Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, pg8.
Bring your backstory to lifeTM (no date) Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & Family History Records. Available at: https://www.ancestry.co.uk/ (Accessed: 15 MAY 2024).
General Register Office (no date) General Register Office - Online Ordering Service - Login. Available at: https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/ (Accessed: 16 MAY 2024).
Pictures and historical info from Wikipedia https://www.wikipedia.org/
Comments