Row in Miller's Court

[Joshua Rogan]

I came across this piece of evidence in Sarah Lewis' testimony at the Kelly inquest that I don't remember reading before, in the Daily News 13th Nov.


"I sat awake until nearly four, when I heard a female voice shout "Murder!" It seemed like a young woman's voice. There was only one scream. I did not take any notice, especially as a short time before there had been a row in the court."

Is this reported in other papers? Did other witnesses mention it? If not, does this indicate that it didn't actually happen, or that such rows were so common they didn't seem worth mentioning?

[DJA]

In the Inquest.

[Joshua Rogan]

Ok. Is the actual official inquest report available online, or only the various press reports?

[DJA]

The latter.

[Joshua Rogan]

That's what I thought...

Is Sarah's mention of a row reported in any of the press versions of the inquest, other than the Daily News? None of the other witnesses mention hearing an argument, not even Cox who claims she didn't sleep a wink.....perhaps the sound of singing covered it up.

[DJA]

http://www.casebook.org/official_documents/inquests/inquest_kelly.html

You also have Elizabeth Prater.

Not aware of any argument.Perhaps "row" refers to the loud cry of "murder".

[Joshua Rogan]

I don't think so....she says she didn't take anynotice of the cry of murder, as there had been a row a short time before. So presumably thought the cry was a continuation of that argument.
But the line from Lewes about the row doesn't appear in the Daily Telegraph report that you posted, and I haven't seen it in any other papers either. I haven't made an exhaustive search though, so wondered if anyone else had seen it, and what their thoughts about it were.

[DJA]

3.24am here in Oz.

Do you have a link?
Sounds interesting.

[Joshua Rogan]

I posted the relevant quote in the OP, but here is the full article from the press section of casebook;

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/daily_news/18881113.html

There's some other interesting bits in it too, such as comparing Maria Harvey to the Dickensian character Mrs Gamp.

[DJA]

Thought I'd accessed the wrong article.

Can't see the bit about the argument.

[Joshua Rogan]

The first half does seem to be all about Warren's resignation. But eventually it does get to the inquest, headed "The inquest - revelations of slum life"

It also has a summarised version, titled "The Spitalfields Murder - Inquest and Verdict".

"Sarah Lewes, 24, Great Pearl-street, a laundress, said-I know a Mrs. Keiller, in Miller's-court, and went to see her on Friday morning at 2.30 o'clock by Spitalfields Church clock. In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one. I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court. I stopped that night at Mrs. Keiller's because I had had a few words at home. I slept in a chair and woke up about half-past three. I sat awake until nearly four, when I heard a female voice shout "Murder!" It seemed like a young woman's voice. There was only one scream. I did not take any notice, especially as a short time before there had been a row in the court."

If Lewes had arrived at the Keyler's house before 1am, the row might have been Kelly's singing! But I think it's more likely to have been a domestic from one of the other cottages.

[DJA]

OKI Wong. Chinese restaurant in suburban Melbourne wanted a plug

THE SPITALFIELDS MURDER.

INQUEST AND VERDICT.

The inquest into the death of Marie Janet Kelly opened somewhat stormily yesterday morning at Shoreditch Town Hall, before Dr. Macdonald, M.P. The murder had been committed in Whitechapel, and some of the jurymen who were empanelled for Shoreditch appeared to think it unfair that they should be called upon to do duty for Whitechapel. The body, however, had been removed to Shoreditch mortuary, and, as the coroner explained, jurisdiction arises where the body lies. Not until Dr. Macdonald had given expression to something very like a threat did the recalcitrant jurymen settle down to business. They of course went to view the body, and afterwards inspected the room in which it had been found, and then returned to the Town Hall and began to hear what the witnesses had to say.

The first was Joseph Barnet. He had lived with the deceased for a year and eight months, and appeared to be in pretty full possession of all the main facts in the unhappy woman's history. A very deplorable history it proved to be. She had been married at 16 to a Welsh collier, who was killed in an explosion. She had then gone to Cardiff with a cousin, who, the witness said, had been the cause of her downfall, and from there had come to London, to a Madam somebody in the West-end. A gentleman had then taken her to France, and from France, after a short time, she came over to Ratcliff Highway. Subsequently she had lived with two men in succession, to the latter of whom she had been greatly attached. He (the witness) had met her casually in Whitechapel, they had drink together, and arranged the compact which seems to have held good till the 30th of last month, when, out of compassion, she had taken into her room an immoral woman, and over this they quarreled and parted. The main interest of this man's story runs in the gruesome light it threw on a profligate career of eight short years. It did nothing to elucidate the mystery of her death, nor indeed did any of the evidence given. Through the phantasmagoria of the Coroner's Court there did indeed flit figures, probably more or less apocryphal, of men who might have done the deed. One doleful-looking little body, with a negress-type of features, told how she and another had been frightened by a mysterious stranger who had tried to lure them by the offer of money into a retired spot; but they both took to their heels and ran away. Not much importance was to be attached to this testimony, probably, nor to that of one or two others who had seen men under suspicious circumstances. Perhaps the most sensational bit of evidence tendered was that of a garrulous young woman who, with some dramatic force, imitated by voice and action a sort of nightmare cry of "Oh! murder!" which she declared she had heard just after she had been woke up by her kitten rubbing its nose against her face about half-past three or four o'clock on the morning of the murder. It was a faintish cry, she said, as though somebody had woke up with the nightmare, and though the evidence must be taken with the reserve that should attach to all such testimony, the time at which she believes she heard the cry would tally very well with all the circumstances of the case, and it is not impossible that that really was the death gasp of the poor woman in the clutches of her murderer. Some confirmation is added to this supposition by the evidence of another witness, Sarah Lewis, who lived a short distance off, but had had some falling out at home, and went to stay the night with a friend in Miller's-court, where she sat and dozed in a chair. She woke up about 3.30 by Spitalfields church clock, and a little before four o'clock-agreeing in this with the other witness-she also heard one cry of "Murder!" She, however, says it was a loud shout, whereas another witness, who was awake the whole night, and who believed she must have heard any such cry if it had been made, swore that she heard not a sound. As to the evidence of the woman Caroline Maxwell, who swore that she saw the deceased at eight or nine o'clock on Friday morning, that is regarded by the police as merely an error of date. No doubt she did see the woman, and spoke to her as she stated, but on Thursday morning instead of Friday. Nothing was said yesterday as to the probable time of the murder, but we have reason to believe that the conclusion arrived at by several medical men who were on the spot shortly after the discovery of the body was that the deed had been done certainly not later than six or seven on Friday morning, and it might have been a good deal earlier.

In Maria Harvey, the woman who had been compassionately taken in by Kelly, the Court had its one amusing witness. She was the Mrs. Gamp of the day, and when she and the Coroner got at loggerheads over the question as to whether certain articles of apparel were two shirts belonging to one man or one man's two shirts, there was general laughter at Mrs. Harvey's decisive dogmatism of manner. Inspector Abberline, of the Scotland-yard detectives, confirmed the statement made in Saturday's Daily News as to the telegram about the bloodhounds, and in reply to questions as to the probable reason of certain articles of clothing having been burnt in Kelly's grate, he expressed his belief that they had been burnt to light the murderer in his ghastly work. Dr. Phillips's evidence was conclusive as to the cause of death. It had resulted from the severance of the right carotid artery; and after the throat had been cut, the body, said the doctor, must have been removed from one side of the bed to the other. As to the mutilation of the body, no evidence was given beyond that of the death wound; and, as Dr. Phillips's evidence was absolutely conclusive as to the cause of death, and the police had no testimony to produce indicating the criminal, Dr. Macdonald put it to the jury whether it was necessary to go any further. He did not wish unduly to influence them, but all they had to do was to determine the cause of the woman's death, and if they thought that had been sufficiently proved, there would be no occasion for adjournment. After a brief deliberation the jury came unanimously to the conclusion that they had carried the inquiry far enough, and that the matter might now be left in the hands of the police. They accordingly returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown."

Bit tired and must have missed it.

Bit OT,however there was controversy over the body and Inquest being in Shoreditch.

Which pathologist was a member of St Leonard's Vestry Board within whose boundaries the mortuary resided.

[Joshua Rogan]

Yes, some of the jurors were a little put out that the inquest wasn't held in Spitalfields, where the body was found - I think I would be too if it meant I had to view poor Mary's remains - but....

"as the coroner explained, jurisdiction arises where the body lies. Not until Dr. Macdonald had given expression to something very like a threat did the recalcitrant jurymen settle down to business."

In another paper (which I sadly forgot to make a note of) a journalist gives an account of the trip to view the remains at the mortuary, and to room 13. Which was interesting, I shall have to track it down again. However, I don't think Sutton was one of the doctors who attended Miller's Court, so don't know how he would have arranged for the body to be taken to Shoreditch.


I found this bit interesting too;

"As to the evidence of the woman Caroline Maxwell, who swore that she saw the deceased at eight or nine o'clock on Friday morning, that is regarded by the police as merely an error of date. No doubt she did see the woman, and spoke to her as she stated, but on Thursday morning instead of Friday. "

[DJA]

Mary Kelly's landlord used to donate money to Sutton's employer.
He and a son attended Abberline's farewell.
There is an enormous amount of circumstantial evidence.
Just look at Hip Lip Lizzie's bottom lip. Cachous would control that.Now who was a the expert in that field.
Not even warmed up yet

[Joshua Rogan]

Iris Times 13t Nov;

"During the adjournment.
The Coroner's officer reported to the Coroner that an official of the Shoreditch Vestry had been persuading the jury that they ought not to have been summoned to this inquest at all."

Sounds a bit fishy....