The Hampton Rocks Mystery.
Conclusion of the Inquest.
Verdict.
At the George Inn, Bathampton, yesterday Mr Craddock, County Coroner, concluded the inquest touching the death of Elizabeth Luke alias Wilkie, whose remains were found in a cave at Hampton Rocks on the 22nd September last. The inquiry was continued at the George in consequence of the Parochial Hall not being available as it was undergoing repairs. The room was densely packed, and much inconvenience was experienced by those having business at the inquest.
Mr. Henry Mitchell, who daily notes the weather and rainfall as recorded at the Royal Institution, Bath, stated on Sunday, August 2nd, 1891, there were frequent showers, and the quantity of the rain which fell was just over the quarter of an inch, and on Monday, August 3rd, there was but .065 of an inch of rain. which fell between 9 and 10 a.m. simply a passing shower.
Ex-P.C. Stone repeated the evidence he gave before the magistrates that though on duty near the gate at the Liberal fete, Larkhall, on July 29, 1891, he saw no disturbance.
By Mr. Titley: Things might happen which a policeman did not see.
By Supt. Rutherford: The ground was wet, and if a man had fallen down his clothes would have been muddy.
Mr. Mitchell recalled, said on the 27th of July there was very little moisture.
William Targett, storekeeper and rangekeeper of the 1st Somerset Volunteers, said he employed Dill as assistant marker at the Hampton Down butts when they were busy. Dill went with the regiment to the camp at Devizes, and remained there the whole week, from Aug. 1st to 8th; he slept in the same tent as witness.
By Superintendent Rutherford: Dill could not have been absent from the camp for a day without witness's knowledge.
The Coroner remarked that it was ony fair to Dill that this evidence shoud be brought forward after the statement made by the witness Blick at the previous hearing.
A Juror (Mr. Norris): Did you see him with any female acquaintances at the camp?
Witness: No. He's not a man of that sort; he is not a man given to female society at all. He is not a young man, entirely different.
By Mr Titley: Dill was at dinner in camp on Monday - the Bank Holiday.
Lucy Isaacs stated that she was the wife of Fredk Isaacs, French polisher, of 86 Colborne-street, Cardiff. She knew the deceased for two or three years, becoming acquainted with her when she was in service at Mr. Dyke's in Norfolk Crescent. She last saw Wilkie alive in the week before August Bank Holiday, 1891. Deceased came to witness's house, 4 Bryant's-terrace, Calton-road, Bath. She came up to fetch a photograph of herself, and said she was going away to get married. She was in good health and spirits. She said she was going to be married to Arthur Coombs, but she had said it so many times. She said she was going away on Bank Holiday, but did not say where she was going. Wilkie had often told her the same thing before and they had found her out in so many liees that witness did not believe it.
Witness had seen Coombs with deceased, but had not seen them together since January, 1891. They were then at witness's house. When she last saw Wilkie she did not appear to be enceinte, and she had never told witness she was in that condition.
By a Juror: Wilkie was lodging on Kingsmead-terrace on the day she came to witness's house; she told witness so.
By the Coroner: She stated that she did not want her "missus" to see her as she had told her she was going away to London for a holiday but she had remained in Bath. Witness had no collection of what day of the week it was when she came to see witness.
By a Juror: She was quite sure it was the week before Bank Holiday. The dress Wilkie was wearing was something like the pattern produced (the pattern was produced by D.S. Smith).
By Mr. Titley: Had deceased been in the condition mentioned, witness would have noticed it. She reckoned witness as her friend and Wilkie would have been sure to have told her.
By Superintendent Rutherford: She never had a quarrel with the deceased.
The Coroner asked if that was the whole of the evidence?
Superintendent Rutherford said he coud produce a witness to state something which was audible to the reporters.
Mr. Titley: - You could prove that against anyone, against me, or against the Coroner.
Superintendent Rutherford: I was speaking to the Coroner, Mr Titley, not to you.
Mr. Titley: I think it is my duty to object to such evidence and I shall do so.
Superintendent Rutherford: I think it is my duty to tender such evidence.
The Coroner: Really, I must ask you to keep quiet Mr. Titley, otherwise I shall not allow you to put questions. I have given you a great deal of liberty but you must allow me to conduct my own inquiry.
The Coroner commenced his summing up at ten minutes past twelve. He described the position of the body when it was discovered and said that it was evident under no circumstances could she have placed herself there. The body was little more than a skeleton, and on a surgical examination it was seen that the skull had been fractured. It must have been a blow of considerable foce which caused the injury, and he thought it was inflicted by an instrument with a surface which was not very large. There could be little doubt in the minds of the jury that deceased met with her death by foul play - in fact, that a horrible murder had been committed.
During the inquiry a great deal of evidence had been taken to sho motive with regard to one individual - Arthur Coombs. He appealed to the jury to dispel from their minds any preconceived suspicion they might have formed with regard to Coombs. He could easily understand that they must be more than mortals if after what had taken place in another court they had not some suspicion with regard to him. The police had very rightly endeavoured to find out whether any motive could exist in the mind of Coombs which would lead him to murder her. Motive itself was not evidence, all it could do was to accentuate a charge which might be formulate against any individual.
Having briefly reminded the jury of the deceased's history, he added that they might fairly assume that she met her end on or about August 3rd, 1891, so that a clear interval of two years had elapsed. The Coroner next said he should give the jury a brief history of the deceased girl and refresh their memories by reading Coombs's evidence. He said he was sorry to say he could not altogether place much reliance upon the evidence of Mrs. Hayman as she made one egregious mistake in her statement which she afterwards contradicted, with regard to the mission outing to Conkwell. That mistake discounted the remaining portion of her evidence.
The Coroner was about to read Coombs's disposition when Mr Titley interrupted with a remark which was inaudible. The Coroner: Leave the matter in my hands Mr. Titley if you please. I shall not do any injustice to Coombs or to anybody else. Mr. Craddock then read Coombs's depositions. Coombs told them he was not engaged to the deceased, but simply kept company with her, and that he dropped that connection because he found that she had told him in fact a pack of lies from beginning to end.
He also told them that he never went out with Wilkie after January, 1891, and it was for the jury to reconcile that statement with the evidence of the young men, Clare and Phillips, that they saw Coombs walking with Wilkie through the wood leading to Hampton Down. He could hardly disbelieve their evidence, when they both distinctly swore they saw Coombs and Wilkie walking together through the wood. But granting they did, it did not bear very much on the case; at the most it simply proved that at that particular time Coombs was carrying on an intrigue with the deceased girl at the same time he was absolutely engaged to Miss Sheppard. The next time they were seen together was by Mrs. Hayman, who said she saw them talking to one another on Kingsmead-terrace on Sunday the 2nd of August. But Mrs. Hayman's evidence was not of the absolutely reliable character to which they could pay much attention.
Those were the facts. So far as Coombs was concerned the only evidence was that he was seen with the deceased on these two dates. He need not tell them that if these statements were true, the evidence did not bring Arthur Coombs near enough for them to record a charge of murder against him. They might have very strong suspicions, but he need scarcely say that suspicion in an Assize Court would never hang a man, as in that Court they wanted something more than mere suspicion to establish a prima facie case. Referring to the letters of character put in by Mr. Titley, the Coroner remarked that if there had been strong evidence against Coombs they would not have been of much importance.
The statements of Coombs as to his whereabouts on the Bank Holiday was not refuted at all. He made certain statements, it had been for the police to refute them: they had failed to do so and he need not say any more on that score.
There was that "will-o'-the-wisp," the man who was seen clothed in such light garb, merely a shirt and his stockings. He did not think they need pay much attention to him; it must have been a delusion, at any rate it was curious that if such a thing occurred nothing more was heard with regard to it. he regretted exceedingly that the police had been baulked in the way they had. No doubt a good deal of it was caused by the lapse of time; then they had had much contradictory evidence, and he very much feared that there had been a great deal of what in legal language was termed suppressio veri. But the most important baulking in the history of the case was the action of Mr. Dill Words failed him to denounce his conduct as he should.
Had Mr. Dill at the time when he picked up the watch and chain, the blood-stained handkerchief and cuffs handed those articles, which were onot his property, to the police and told them the circumstances under which he had found them, he (the Coroner) had no doubt suspicions would have been aroused at once in the minds of the police. The finding of the watch and chain and the blood-stained linen clearly proved that had Mr. Dill done his duty at the time the murderer of this poor girl would have been discovered (applause). He kept the watch and chain for some months; it was not until the following February or March that he got rid of the watch and when he did raffle it he told a lie , saying that the watch had been given to him by his sister. If he had told the police then there might have been a chance. He felt deeply on the point that had Dill done his duty, not only as a man but as an Englishman, the culprit would have come to light. He could hardly think there were many men in Bath who would have acted as Mr. Dill had done.
Referring to the letters Wilkie left behind her in the box at Cheriton-house, the Coroner said he did not disbelieve the evidence of Mrs. Kerry, he could ony say that she had belied the chief characteristic always attaching to woman - that of curiosity. It seemed to him marvellous that Mrs. Kerry, notwithstanding her evidence, should see those letters and not ascertain their contents. Very likely if these letters had been opened and read extra light would have been thrown on that case (applause).
A long chain of obstacles had presented itself in the case. He had been Coroner of this district for 27 years, and he had never met with similar difficulties in conducting an investigation. In conclusion, the Coroner said it was simply for him to leave the matter in their hands. They had a problem to solve, and he was afraid they would find it incapable of solution. They would naturally turn to him if they were unable to form a specific verdict and say "What are we to do?". Failing a specific verdict there was but one course open to them - to return an open verdict that the deceased met by her death at the hands of some person or persons unknown by being cruelly murdered, - for as he had said earlier in his remarkes, it was as clear as noon-day that the deceased was foully murdered. That was the only alternative verdict they could return.
After the jury had deliberated for about fifteen minutes the Court was again opened, and the Coroner announced that the jury had arrived at an open verdict of murder against some person or persons unknown.
The Coroner then asked if Kate Bullock was present. She came before him, and, addressing her, Mr. Craddock said he was sorry he was obliged to fine her. He would let her off as lightly as possible because she was a servant, but she did not attend the Court on one occasion at the time stated on the subpoena, and this was contempt of court. He should fine her 3s. 6d.
Mrs. Dillon was next called up. Addressing her the Coroner said she was aware Kate Bullock had told them she had tried to tamper with her (Kate Bullock's ) evidence. She tried also to do the same thing with another witness named Maber. Both him and Kate Bullock said Mrs. Dillon cautioned them not to tell the Coroner and the jury all they knew, that she herself knew a great deal more than she told them, that it was the duty of the police to find it out; they were paid to do so. In the first place, with regard to trying to tamper with witnesses, he felt she ought to be prosecuted, and with regard to the second case of treating himself and the jury with contempt by saying she knew more than she told them, that was an insult to the Court, and it was within his rights to have given an order at once for her committal to prison. He felt, however, that it was possible she might have made those remarks through a good deal of bounce; she wished to make herself appear of greater importance than she really was, and, looking at the issue of the case, he thought a caution might be enough. If ever she did that again, she might depend upon it this would be brought up against her, and she would not get off so lightly. She had ben in attendance several times, though she had failed to put in an appearance until an hour and forty minutes late on one occasion, and he should fine her 5s. and should not allow any expenses.
Mrs. Dillon: I have never mentioned your name.
The Coroner: But you mentioned the Court and the jury which would amount to the same. The winesses gave their evidence quite independently, and it is corroborative one of the other.
Mrs. Dillon: May I call someone who was with me? I never spoke to Maber the whole day.
The Coroner: No.
William Henry Dill was the next to stand before the coroner, at the latter's request. Mr. Craddock said the jury had requested him to express their opinion of his action in regard to this case. They felt if he had only done his duty the murderer would have been found out. He kept to himself the watch and the chain - (Dill: Certainly) - and the blood-stained cuffs he found on the Down. - Dill: Quite right. And he never told anybody he found that watch and chain - the watch and chain which he parted with under really false pretences at the Exeter Inn some months ago. (Dill: I beg pardon.) He admitted it in evidence that he said the watch was his sister's. (Dill: Very well. All right.) He (the Coroner) was afraid he was not in a mental condition to recieve the remarks he was making - he could see then that he was the worse for liquor. He could only feel that he was in an impecunious position, and it was Lord Justice Denman, he thought, who made the remark that it was a most difficult thing for a man with an empty purse to stand upright. He had nothing more to say. Dill said "Thank you," and left the Court smiling.
The Coroner said before they went he really must thank the jury for their kind attention to the case. As he predicted, it had been a long and tedious one. He must thank them for the patient hearing and attention they had given, and congratulate them on the fact that every one of them (15 in number) had been able to respond to the roll call each time. Mr. Norris, one of the jurymen, expressed their thanks to Mr. Craddock.
The Coroner said the police had worked uncommonly hard, Sergt. Edwards having left no stone unturned, and he had been ably assisted by the city police, especially D.S. Smith.
No comments:
Post a Comment