THE MANCHESTER FELONY REGISTER PART THREE - More press reports about murder etc, including the murder of Inkermann Wood's mother.

Please read the opening introduction on this page before continuing here. Most of the remarks accompanying the Felony Register entries are based on contemporary newspaper reports and do not reflect my own views.

CRIMINAL ASSAULT

8164. John Hamer. (Bailed on Examination). When Received: Jan 14^th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 26^th Dec 1866 did unlawfully and carnally know + abuse one Elizabeth Ross, a girl under the age of 10 years, to wit of the age of 9 years at Bolton. Sentence: 15 Years Penal Servitude. Age: 49. Ht: 5ft 5 ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Sallow, Grey, Hazel. Trade or Profession: Provisions Dealer. Where Born: Bolton, Lancashire. Last or Usual Address: Beater St, Bolton. Religion: Ch. Education: R + W Imp. Widower + 0 children. English. Wt in: 10 st 9 lbs. Wt out: 10 st 7 lbs. Marks etc: Scar on throat, slightly paralysed left side. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: April 7/67 Removed to Millbank.

As was usual in such cases, Home Office guidelines stipulated that there was very little reported. All that was printed was: John Hamer, 49, was charge with committing a criminal assault at Bolton, on a little girl under the age of 10. He was found guilty and the sentence was deferred.

BRODERICK BOY BIRCHED

8174. James BRODERICK. When Received: Jan 19^th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 15^th Jan 1867 did unlawfully maliciously + feloniously damage with intent to feloniously destroy + render useless a certain machine engine 8888 fixed in the cotton mill of one James Marshall by putting a piece of iron between a cog wheel + a driving wheel doing damage to the value of £6. 0. 0. at Heaton Norris. Sentence: 10 Days Hard Labour + to receive 5 strokes with a birch. Age: Last April 12 9/12. Ht: 4ft 4 ¾ ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Fresh, Brown, Hazel. Trade or Profession: Factory Operative. Where Born: Stockport, Cheshire. Last or Usual Address: Turner St, Stockport. Religion: RC. Education: R + W Imp. Single. Both Parents Living. English. Wt in: 5 st 0 lbs. Wt out: 5 st 3 lbs. Marks etc: Cut on each eyebrow. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: March 18/67.

James Broderick, 12, was indicted for maliciously damaging an engine, the property of his master, Mr James Marshall at Heaton Norris. The prisoner was not defended. On 15^th January, shortly before the dinner hour at Mr Marshall's mill, Broderick showed two of his companions in the room a small iron bar, and expressed his intention to put it in some part of the machinery. Shortly after midday he was seen in the engine room, and immediately upon the machinery being put into motion at one o'clock, the familiar bumping announced an obstacle to the movement of the wheels. The engine was promptly stopped and the iron bar Broderick had shown his companions earlier was found jammed between two of the cogs of a wheel on the upright shaft. The damage was only slight, but that was solely due to the speed the engineer reacted. Broderick told the Court that a boy named Knott had told him to jam the bar in the machine. Knott denied this claim. The Jury found Broderick guilty of putting the iron bar in the machinery, but they believed that there was no malicious intent. The Judge requested that they reconsider their verdict and they then returned a verdict of guilty with a strong recommendation to mercy. Broderick was ordered to be imprisoned for ten days and to receive five strokes with a birch rod. For one reason or another Broderick served considerably longer than the original sentence.

BRUTAL RAPE-NON REPORT

8311. James LIVESEY. When Received: Feb 7th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 4^th Feb 1867 feloniously did make an assault upon one Betty Holt + violently against her will did feloniously ravish + casually know her at Birch Green. Sentence: 10 Years Penal Servitude. Age: 32. Ht: 5ft 5 ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Sallow, Brown, Grey. Trade or Profession: Fuller Miller. Where Born: Mead Hill, Heywood. Last or Usual Address: Birtle Brow, Bamford. Religion: Ch. Education: R + W Imp. Married + 3 children. English. Wt in: 9 st 8 lbs. Wt out: 9 st 5 lbs. Marks etc: 2 moles below left elbow, cut on right wrist, cut over left eyebrow. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: April 11/67 removed to Millbank.

James Livesey, 32 was indicted for a felonious assault upon a young woman at Birtle-cum-Bamford on 4^th February. The prisoner was found guilty and was sentenced to ten years penal servitude.

“SURGEON” ACQUITTED OF MURDER

8439. Alfred Thomas HEAP. When Received: Feb 20^th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: Having feloniously killed and murdered one Phoebe Locke. Sentence: Acquitted. Age: 33. Ht: 5ft 8 ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Fresh, Brown, Hazel. Trade or Profession: Surgeon. Where Born: Besses o’t’ Barn, Prestwich. Last or Usual Address: Gorton Lane, West Gorton. Religion: Ch. Education: R + W Well. Married + 1 child. English. Wt in: 8 st 10 lbs. Wt out: 8 st 10 lbs. Marks etc: Cut on right eyebrow, cut back of right thumb + 4^th finger right hand. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: March 18/67.

Alfred Thomas Heap was charged with the murder of Phoebe Locke at Manchester on February 5th and also charged with the use of a certain instrument to procure a miscarriage. Phoebe Locke was the wife of a chemist and druggist in Ashton Old Road and was the mother of several children. In January she was about four months pregnant. Heap who had been living near the family in the Gorton for some time, where he had been carrying out the profession of a surgeon, although he was not properly qualified. Shortly before dark on 25th January Phoebe left her home and went according to the prosecution to Heap's house. There was no legal evidence to this effect. She was away from her home for about two hours and the prosecution suggested that during this period heap performed an “operation” with a view to causing a miscarriage. Mrs Locke walked home from Heap's house, about a distance of three quarters of a mile. The following day Phoebe became ill and got worse until on Tuesday 29^th January she was delivered of a foetus. Over the next two days her condition improved and she was able to get out of bed. However on 1^st February a relapse occurred and she began to haemorrhage badly. On 5^th February Phoebe died of the haemorrhage with the Prosecution claimed was cased by the operation carried out by Heap.

The body was interred a few days after death but was later exhumed, and heap's committal was the result of the inquest. The main witness for the prosecution was a youth named Richard James who had worked for Heap as a shop boy or assistant for some time. He stated that on 24^th or 25^th January heap had told him that he was going to perform an operation on Phoebe. Later he told James that the operation had been successful, but later after he had called at Phoebe's home he told him that she was very ill. Heap also showed the foetus to James which had been given to him by Phoebe. A witness named Townsend stated that he and Heap had several conversations about the operation he had performed on Phoebe. He showed him how he had carried it out the operation. He showed Townsend the foetus and showed him how he had, “knocked it on its head”.

The Defence stated he would asked is there was not more than one conclusion that could be made from the evidence. If one conclusion was consistent with his guilt, he contended that there were many conclusions possible which would utterly exclude that idea. There was no evidence that Heap had seen Phoebe on any occasion when the offence might have been committed, before the Tuesday when he went to Mrs Locke's house and then he was only in her room for three or four minutes only, which was manifestly an insufficient time for the purpose. It was therefore not proved that Heap ever had the opportunity of using the instrument which had been produced as evidence against him. The prosecution had relied on alleged acts and statements from. The latter came from the young man James, evidently a loose fish, and his statements were that of an extraordinary nature that the Jury could only accept them only if they were convinced of the respectability of the person making them. Would Heap, after committing such a crime confide in James whose levity was not in doubt?

The Defence stated that Phoebe Locke had previously had six miscarriages and two children still-born. Everyone new that after one such occurrence there was an increased liability of a repetition of it. Mrs Locke evidently had some peculiarity in her constitution, in each previous case the misfortune had happened in the fourth or fifth month. It was not all that improbable that she should consult a man, like many a village apothecary, had by experience, acquired some reputation in such matters. That might have been done in the most ordinary and proper course, but putting it in the worst possible way for his client, he may have used the instrument to ascertain the position of the foetus. There was a wide gap between that and the claim that Head had performed an abortion. The post mortem examination seemed to be consistent with a premature birth.

The Judge in summing up stated that it was a felony to use any instrument to procure the miscarriage of a women except in a few cases, to save life. If in the commission of that felony, or as a consequence and effect of it, the woman died, the person committing such an act, was guilty of wilful murder. Upon this Indictment the Jury had no alternative, as they sometime had, between a verdict of guilty and not guilty of murder. But in order to convict Heap, the Jury must be perfectly satisfied that, not only had he committed the felony of attempting, by using an instrument, to procure abortion, but also that he had caused the woman's death. If the Jury had any doubts on either of these points, heap was entitled to an acquittal. There were some strong facts which pointed to Heap's innocence. They were, that according to the evidence, Mrs Locke had five previous miscarriages, at or about the fifth month of pregnancy, and that the most usual indication of pregnancy did not take place until the fifth month; so that if the woman had died, and nothing had been heard of Heap, her death would have seemed a very likely thing to have occurred. Mr Locke had given evidence in favour of Heap and the Judge stated that he believed the Jury would be of the opinion, that there was no case against heap unless they believed the evidence of James and Townsend. The evidence of these two men contained the main fact against Heap and the Jury must give it their best consideration.

After an absence of thirty five minutes the Jury returned with a verdict of Not Guilty of murder. The announcement was greeted with much clapping of hands in the body of the Court. There was then some debate about whether or not the second indictment on a charge of using an instrument to procure an abortion should be heard. At this point, being late on a Friday, the court adjourned until the following Monday. When the Court reconvened the Prosecution said that they wanted to proceed with the second case against Heap for reasons that they did not want to state publicly. The Judge stated that he thought that the case should not proceed. After a lot of discussion the Defence stated that they would not offer any evidence against Heap, therefore the Jury were directed to return of Not Guilty. Heap was then released.

DEATH OF WIFE

8815. Joseph WOOD. When Received: Apr 8^th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 2^nd April feloniously wilfully + with malice aforethought killed + murdered one Elizabeth Ann Wood at Manchester. Sentence: 12 Years Penal Servitude. Age: 36. Ht: 5ft 7 ¼ ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Sallow, Brown, Grey. Trade or Profession: French Polisher. Where Born: Mexbrough, Doncaster. Last or Usual Address: 10 Back Ash St, Manchester. Religion: Ch. Education: R + W Imp. Widower + 3 children. English. Wt in: 9 st 13 lbs. Wt out: 9 st 8 lbs. Marks etc: Scar right of forehead, mole left cheek, scar left thigh. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: Sept 11/67 Removed to Pentonville.

In their wisdom the Grand Jury ignored the bill for murder against Joseph Wood and returned one only for manslaughter. Wood had been in the Army for several years and had served in The Crimean War. After the war he had left the Army, with a pension, moved to Back Ash St, Oldham Rd and became a postman. On 2^nd April Wood and his 10 year old son Inkermann went to the Salford Barracks to draw his pension. When they left the Barracks wood and his son called in several beerhouses. By the time he got home he was very drunk. There he found his wife downstairs who had also been drinking heavily. Apparently this was quite a normal occurrence on Pension day and for a few days afterwards. Soon after they got home Wood told his son to pull down the blind and lock the door. The boy did as he was told and Wood ordered his wife to go upstairs to bed.

One of the neighbours heard a scuffling noise, she then put he ear to the wall and heard Elizabeth shout out, “Oh Joseph, don’t”. Wood replied by saying that he would kill her. The neighbour heard the sound of heavy blows, but failed to go to Elizabeth’s aid. The Judge asked the neighbour why she did not intervene. The woman replied that, “people got no thanks” for going to interfere and she knew that Wood used dangerous weapons.

When Inkermann was called to the Witness Box, Wood was visibly effected by his presence. The boy stated that when his mother had gone upstairs she had got under the bed. He went on:

“My father sent me downstairs for his razor and a knife. He told me that his razor was in the cupboard and the knife was on the table. I got them, and gave them into his hands, and got into the bed and covered myself with clothes. My father was beating my mother with a stick. While I was getting into bed, father began cutting mother with the knife and the razor. After I had been in bed for some time, my mother asked me to cover her with an old black frock. When I got out of bed I found my mother lying on the hearthstone covered in blood. I put a pillow under her head. She said to me ‘Inkermann get up and get me a spoonful of water before I die.’ Some time after I saw my father get up and lift her head up. It fell back upon the pillow.”

On cross examination, Inkermann contradicted himself on several occasions and appeared not to understand the questions.

The court later heard that at about 3 o’clock in the morning Wood went next door to a young married woman and asked her to take a look at his at his (pregnant) wife as he thought that she had gone into labour. The woman went in the house and found Elizabeth lying on the bedroom hearthstone, quite dead. The room was in a dreadful state and Wood had beaten Elizabeth with the handle of a seeping brush. Her head, breast and arms were covered in bruises but death had been the result of a wound on the right wrist. The wound would not have been fatal if she had received medical assistance.

The knife and the razor which Inkermann had given his father were lying on the floor, both were covered with blood. Two other witnesses stated that Wood was a very kind father and a good husband, but they also described the frequent quarrels between him and his wife. The defence stated that Inkermann was a hostile witness and that his testimony was unreliable to the “last degree”. The theory of the defending councillor was Elizabeth had got out of bed and stumbled and fallen on the knife or razor and thereby inflicted the wound on the wrist. He also stated that Wood had no notion how she had come by he injuries.

After this statement the Judge summed and the Jury subsequently found Wood guilty of manslaughter. In passing sentence the Judge stated that Wood had been convicted upon the clearest evidence. He was willing to believe that Wood was not fully conscious of the consequences of using the dangerous weapon which he had took into his hand; but it must not be forgotten that his partial unconsciousness was due to intoxication, and he could not plead that in mitigation of punishment, because it arose from his own voluntary act.

If Wood had been fully conscious of what he had been doing, the Judge stated that in all probability he would have been tried for murder and sentenced to death. As it was, the crime was a most serious one, for he had not merely beat his wife in a most cruel manner, but he has used an instrument which was likely to destroy life, and which he must have known, even in his state of semi-consciousness, ought never to have been used upon a woman. He must be kept in penal servitude for twelve years.

BOLTON MAN TRIES TO KILL WIFE

8852. John MACKEY or MACKIE. When Received: April 13^th 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 5^th April 1867 did wound one Mary Mackey or Mackie with intent to kill + murder her at Bolton. Sentence: 12 Years Penal Servitude. Age: 33. Ht: 5ft 6 ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Sallow, Brown, Blue. Trade or Profession: Forgeman. Where Born: Manchester, Lancashire. Last or Usual Address: Taylor’s fold, bolton. Religion: Ch. Education: N. Married + 2 children. English. Wt in: 8 st 11 lbs. Wt out: 8 st 10 lbs. Marks etc: Cut on right eyebrow, cut on left cheek. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: Oct 4/67 Removed to Millbank.

John Mackey was indicted for attempting to murder his wife Mary Ann Mackey at Bolton. Mackey who was by trade a forgeman had been married to Mary Ann for five years. They had two children, the youngest been born 17 months previously. Shortly after the child had been born Mary left Mackey because of his cruelty towards her. She had managed to look after the one child and herself without any financial aid from Mackey. When they occasionally met they did speak to each other.

On the afternoon of 5^th April Mary was passing a beerhouse in Bolton when she has heard Mackey callout to her. She went in the beerhouse and Mackey asked if he could buy her a drink. Mary refused but invited him to go with her to get some dinner. Mackey refused and slammed the door of the room shut. He then forced her to sit near him and grabbed her by the arms. Mary complained that he was hurting her, but he said this did not matter and he immediately tried to slash her throat with a razor.

Mary managed to fend off the razor with her shawl and tried to grab the weapon. She failed and Mackey inflicted three wounds on he chin and throat, causing a great loss of blood. Several people heard Mary scream and ran into the room in time to see Mackey throwing down the razor.

In Court it was proved that Mackey had repeatedly threatened to murder Mary. Shortly before the attempted murder Mackey had shown a friend the razor stating that he had brought it with him for the purpose of murdering his wife.

The Jury found Mackey guilty of wounding with intent to murder. The Judge remarked that that the crime had seemed premeditated and sentenced to 12 years’ penal servitude.

MAN RAPES DAUGHTER

563. William RIDGWAY. When Received: Oct 2^nd 1867. Offence and Where Committed: On the 21^st Sept 1867 did make an assault upon one Elizabeth Ann Ridgway then + there against her will did ravish + casually know [her] at Ashton Under Lyne. Sentence: 15 Years Penal Servitude. Age: 45. Ht: 5ft 6 ins. Complexion, Hair, Eyes: Sallow, Brown, Blue. Trade or Profession: Labourer. Where Born: Macclesfield, Cheshire. Last or Usual Address: North St, Audenshaw.. Religion: Ch. Education: R. Married + 2 children. English. Wt in: 8 st 6 lbs. Wt out: 8 st 4 lbs. Marks etc: Glides slightly, lost upper front teeth, end of right thumb fractured. When Discharged or Otherwise Disposed: Dec 24/67 Removed to Millbank.

This very nasty case, as was the norm, did not get many column inches in the Press. William Ridgway, 45 was indicted for feloniously assaulting his daughter at Aston under Lyne , on 21^st September. Ridgway pleaded guilty, and persisted in that plea after being warned by the Judge. His Lordship said he had no doubt of the prisoner's guilt, but it might have been more satisfactory to elicit all the facts in a formal way. He was sentenced to penal servitude for 15 years. There was a movement of approbation amongst the audience, some of whom hissed the convict as he was being removed.

This site is CONSTANTLY being updated. In order to keep track of these updates just click on the Google button . This will add this site to your Google home page or Google Reader.

RETURN TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE

CONTACT MFHR AT:

mail@manchester-family-history-research.co.uk

Do Not Reproduce Any Material Without The Prior Permission Of The Author.

Last update: 4th August 2010