A Bargeman is charged with murdering his wife Kate Bell age 21
Harriett of Maidstone Kent, daughter of William Gardner, an engineer at Turkey Mill, which manufactured paper in Maidstone, and Francis Bell, a Mason of Deptford, London were married on May 9, 1847, and settled in Maidstone. 3 months later, on August 5, their first daughter Helen was born, followed by Frank in the last quarter of 1848 and William in September 1850 and finally their youngest Kate Bell was born in the 2nd quarter of 1854
Sadly Kate never met her father he died 2 months before her birth at the age of 31 in February 1854. from Pulmonary Disease, which was a common cause for workers of stone. Her mother also lost son William age 4 in September of the same year, from Diarrhea followed by 45 mins of convulsions before death came. Both her husband and son are buried at St. Stephens Church in Tovil Maidstone.
By 1861 they were living in St Peters Street Bridge Maidstone and her mother was working in the Turkey mill. I suspect that other female family members helped look after the children until they were of school age to prevent them being sent to the workhouse, as they remained with her.
In 1871, when Kate was 17, she got a job as a housemaid with a sea trader in Snaresbrook, Essex, and it is possible that through this connection she met Charles Horace Lewis, an 18-year-old bargeman from Maidstone in Kent, whose family had lived in Camden Street. He was the eighth child of eleven born to Emma Elizabeth. Daughter of Stephen Firth, from Eltham, Kent (now part of London) A mail contractor and John Lewis, from Maidstone, a sailing master in the London docks, who spent most of his time at the docks aboard the vessels, which meant his mother was left at home to bring up their six boys and five girls.
Charles and Kate were married in Maidstone in early 1872. Her mother would have had to consent, as Kate was only 17, but no doubt she thought a husband would give her security and protection in the world.
They were living in a one-bedroom house at 11 Camden Street in Maidstone, located by the Prison
Charles continued his work as a Bargeman and Kate ended up working at Turkey Mill with her mother, who had also moved into Camden Street.
Unfortunately, by all accounts, the marriage was an unhappy one and was to end fatally for her.
On the night of Friday, October 15, 1875, Charles returned from work and they quarrelled as usual.
Shortly afterwards, screams of murder rang out in the house and he was seen to throw her out of the house three times, saying "I can not hurt you with my fists - I can with my boots'
Kate was found with injuries to her body and head. She was sensible, not drunk and stated that her husband had pushed and kicked her three times on the stones.
As time went on, she deteriorated and died on Friday, November 5.
Charles was arrested and brought before the police court on Tuesday, November 16.
He was taken into the dock, where he was questioned by Esquire Mr. C. Ellis, who presided, and Dr. S. Monckton. He was charged with causing the death of his wife by violence.
Mr. T. Goodwin, a solicitor, appeared on behalf of the prisoner.
The first witness was Harriet Bell, the mother of Kate, who appeared in mourning dress, and made the same statement as at the previous inquest, in addition stating that Mr. Hallowes, the surgeon, was the first physician who attended her, which he did for three days. Mr. Oliver also attended her, and then she was turned over to Dr. Meredith until the time of her death.
She complained of pain and bruises and could not sit at her work in the paper mill. When her mother put her to bed on October 23, she became delirious.
Her mother could not say whether she had gone to work on Monday when the offence occurred, but she went to work at her usual time on Tuesday morning, although she was just sitting around and could not work. Her mother stated that she had seen her on Sunday, October 17, after the Friday when the violent crime had taken place, and that she had not looked well and had suggested calling a doctor, but she had not sent for a doctor herself as she felt that Charles her husband should bear the cost for a doctor.
She could not say whether Kate had irritated Charles. She had never done so while she was present and described her daughter as a good girl before she had anything to do with the prisoner
Next was Louisa Larking who was a witness to the incident and repeated her statement as at the inquest that she had fallen three times on the sidewalk and that her head had struck the curb more than once.
Next was Mary Berridge, who lived opposite the prisoner's house, and said she had been alarmed by the noise in the street, and went to check and had seen a woman lying in the gutter. When she went closer, she realised that it was Mrs. Lewis. She said she got up and went back to her door, where her husband pushed her down again. This was repeated a third time and he also kicked at her but he had no boots on, as she could see only his socks or stockings he had on. She didn't hear Kate say anything to her husband during this time. When he had pushed her down the second time, Kate's mother Harriet had come outside and shouted at him, 'Horace, don't you strike her anymore' to which he replied, ''you go home, its time all women were in their homes'
She saw the prisoner the day after his wife's death, and after they had greeted each other with 'Good morning', he said, 'I have got over my trouble', to which she replied, 'Yes, it is a happy release that she is out from her suffering'
Another witness to take the stand was Harry Vass, who also lived opposite in Camden Street. He said he heard the noise in the street and went to see what was the matter, and he heard Mr. Lewis say, ''Out with you, out with you," and saw him push his wife into the street, where she landed partly on the sidewalk and partly on the roadside, and fell heavily on her back
Next to take the stand was the medical team that dealt with her...
Mr A H B Hallowes, the surgeon, said he first saw the deceased on Wednesday, October 27, when he was called by her husband. Kate's mother was present at every visit. She was almost in a state of complete unconsciousness. She showed symptoms of inflammation of the brain or its membrane. She could not speak. He suspected that she had been suffering from this inflammation for some time before he visited her. He found no markings on her abdomen, but he did not examine her head for any markings, but was unable to wake her up to answer questions, and he concluded that she was suffering from some form of brain inflammation. she remained in the same state during his observance of her. she was then passed into the care other medical gentlemen at the Hospital.
Dr. John Edward Meredith was the second doctor to see her. He visited her for the first time on Tuesday, November 2, and then three more times before her death. On his first visit, she was delirious and unable to answer questions. 36 hours later, she showed signs of consciousness and stuck out her tongue when he asked.
She was suffering from some kind of inflammation of the membranes of the brain and spinal cord. She had no convulsions, but her head was contracted.
He examined her for typhoid fever, but found no traces and could find no other constitutional cause. He examined her back and head after her mother told him that she complained of pain in both regions, but could find no signs of violence.
After her death he examined the body with Mr. Fisher, a duly qualified physician, and then gave an opinion to the magistrates as to the state of the brain, from which it appeared that in his opinion the deceased died from inflammation of the brain, probably caused by violence to the back of the head, and that actual violence was the probable cause of death.
When he heard that violence was used before her death, this prompted him to examine the body very carefully. He should have expected to find blood on the brain immediately after death, but not three weeks after receiving the injuries. The inflammation could have been aggravated by alcohol consumption or, in particular, by excitement. He then performed another autopsy with Mr. Furber, which confirmed his suspicions. He also noted that he had never been aware of a case of encephalitis attributable solely to alcohol consumption and he considered it possible, but not likely, that alcohol had caused the inflammation.
Mr. George Henry Furber, surgeon to the police, said he saw the body on Thursday, November 11, and examined the head. He found no marks of violence and no injuries inside the skull. He found the three membranes matted together and evidence of inflammation that had taken up a triangular area three inches long and one inch wide.
Dr. Monckton confirmed that the inflammation tended toward the spinal cord. The inflammation was the result of violence.
The judges there upon retired, and on their return to court remanded the prisoner to stand at the next Assizes.
Kate was buried in Maidstone Cemetery on Tuesday, November 16th
On the same day as her funeral, Charles Horace Lewis was committed to trial at Maidstone Petty Sessions Assize for the murder and killing of his wife.
Charles reserved his defence and the magistrates refused bail. As there were no winter sessions, he was remanded in custody until the following spring
The trial took place on Monday, March 13, 1876, at Maidstone, before Lord Coleridge,
Mr. R. H. B. Marsham and Mr Dean representing the prosecution, and Mr. Lewis remaining undefended.
The facts were clearly proved by the witnesses, and there was no doubt that the prisoner had brutally beaten and kicked his young wife.
The medical evidence left no doubt that the violence had resulted in her death, although the doctor could not swear to this, as no external injuries were found consistent with the internal ones.
Lord Coleridge, in summing up the case, gave a strong and clear instruction to the jury to follow firmly their clear and honest convictions. ''If,'' said his lordship, ''you, as men of conscience and sense, consider the case, and are of opinion that the evidence is such as to justify you in acting upon it, you should act upon it in this, as in every other case, if, in other words, the evidence convinces you that the poor woman died from the violence inflicted upon her by the prisoner, you should say so, It is not because absolute proof may be lacking, which in the nature of human affairs can hardly ever exist, that you should not therefore act upon your own conviction. The belief must necessarily be more or less a matter of opinion, and it must depend upon the effect of the evidence in your mind whether, upon careful and candid reflection, there is evidence of violence which may have caused the death. Did it cause the death? What other cause could have caused it? What other cause was suggested that could have caused it?''
The jury immediately convicted the prisoner, much to the satisfaction of all who had heard the case.
Lord Coleridge pronounced sentence on him. ''You have been convicted of a very brutal crime. Whether you intended the death of your wife or not, you know best yourself. But you caused it by brutal and repeated acts of violence. As long as I sit on this bench, I will endeavour to protect wives and women from such brutal violence. Wives are not Chattels to be used or ill treated by their husbands, as if they had no soul or body of their own. And when I am confronted with cases of this kind, I consider it my duty, in the interest of the public and for the sake of the national character of this country, to replace such violence with as strong a hand as I can. The court sentences you to 10 years' Penal imprisonment, which is an act of slavery for the term of 10 years''.
On April 7, 1876, he was committed to Pentonville Prison which is not located in Pentonville, but further north on Caledonian Road in the Barnsbury area of the London Borough of Islington in North London.
The prisoners had to carry out work such as picking oakum (tarred rope) and weaving. The work lasted from six in the morning until seven in the evening. The food ration consisted of a breakfast of 10 ounces of bread and three-quarters of a quart of cocoa; dinner consisted of a pint of soup (or four ounces of meat), five ounces of bread and a pound of potatoes; dinner consisted of a quart of gruel and five ounces of bread.
The prisoners were forbidden to speak to each other, and when out on exercise would tramp in silent rows and wore brown cloth masks. In the chapel, which they had to visit every day, they sat in cubicles or "coffins", as the prisoners called them, their heads visible to the guards but hidden from the others.
His mother died later the same year he was sentenced, at the age of 66
By 1881 he had been transferred to Portland Prison in Dorset.
Portland Prison was built primarily as a temporary prison to make use convicts for the construction of the breakwaters of Portland Harbour and its various defences. The convicts became a tourist attraction and a number of homeowners decided to open cafes on the upper floors of their houses where tourists could watch the convicts at work.
in 1869, the government announced that the prison was to become a permanent facility. Local residents petitioned against this, but the governor was not deterred and St. Peter's Church was built next door by the convicts.
The conditions in both the prison and the quarries during the 19th century would later contribute to calls for penal reform in the UK, as many prisoners died during quarry construction.
He survived his time in prison and was released in March 1886. His father died in that March at the age of 81
On September 19, 1897, at the age of 45, he married Alice Isobel Gibson, aged 31, in Saint Katharine's Parish, Rotherhithe. Southwark, which has since been demolished. His occupation was labourer, and he also listed his father as a labourer. He also gave himself as a Batchelor, clearly hiding his past from his bride.
He died on 23rd February 1905 at the age of 51 at 54 Mountford Rd Strood. The Inquest ruled accidental death caused by Congestion and Oedema of the lungs after falling from his barge into the water at Surrey Commercial docks around the 5th Jan and was buried in Strood Town Cemetery
Sources
1. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser (1875) ‘ The violent attack on a wife at maidstone’, 20 November , pp. 4 – 4
2. Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald (1876) ‘ Kent Spring Assizes’, 18 March, pp. 3 – 3
3. Tunbridge Wells Journal (1875) ‘Alleged Wife Murder ’, 11 November , pp. 2– 2
4. Kent & Sussex Courier (1875) ‘ Suspected Murder Sheerness Guardian and East Kent Advertiser ’, 13 November , pp. 3 – 3
5. Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald (1875) ‘ Maidstone ’, 27 November , pp. 3 – 3
6. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser (1875) ‘ The violent attack upon a wife’, 20 November, pp. 4 – 4
7. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser (1875) ‘ The violent attack on a wife at maidstone’, 22 November, pp. 9 – 9
8. East Kent Gazette (1875) ‘ Bearsted’, 13 November , pp. 4– 4
9. Bring your backstory to lifeTM (no date) Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & Family History Records. Available at: http://www.ancestry.co.uk/ (Accessed: 09 February 2024).
10. 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/ (Accessed: 11 February 2024).
11. General Register Office (no date) General Register Office - Online Ordering Service - Login. Available at: https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/ (Accessed: 12 February 2024).
Comments