Julie Wallace

[apricot]

Hi Louisa,

Thanks for clearing that up for me, that's one less thing for me to wonder about!

Do you think Parry is a viable suspect? I used to but now have my doubts, would be interested in your opinion.

KR Angie

[louisa]

The money in the bedroom jar was smeared with blood because Wallace had removed it himself in the presence of a policeman. He had remembered that some money was kept in the jar and wanted to see if it was all still there. Wallace had already touched Julia's body by this time, hence the blood on his hands.

Yes I agree that a frenzied attack is usually perpetrated by somebody with pent up feelings of aggression. Who knows what lay under the calm exterior of William Herbert Wallace?

[apricot]

Hi Louisa,

It's also odd that the money in the jar in the bedroom wasn't taken although it was smeared with blood and all the gaslights were out so would a burglar seach for loot in the dark? But mainly the pure savagery of the attack makes it seem like pent up hatred so therefore very personal!

KR Angie

[louisa]

Hi Apricot - your tuppence worth is appreciated. Good to see you.

The robbery (and possibly the murder) was pre-meditated and have taken some planning. A knowledge of the Wallace's routine (and household layout) must have been known to the murderer. If the murderer was Parry then he knew all about the Wallaces and their habits and went to the Wallace house that evening with robbery - and possibly murder - in mind. The murderer knew enough to know where the money was kept and even replaced the money box back on it's high shelf, with it's lid replaced. This detail makes one think that Wallace was the culprit, replacing the money box out of habit.

It's these little details that are so perplexing - the whys and wherefors - and make this case so fascinating.

[apricot]

Evenin' All,

I have always wanted to believe in Wallace's innocence, but the thing I can never quite get my head round is, if the reason for the 'phone call was to make sure Wallace was out the way so he could rob the house, what was the motive in the murderous attack on Julia? If he knew so much about Wallace's life and hobbies etc, surely he would have known he was married and his wife was likely to be at home, also I think it's generally excepted that if a burglar is disturbed they do a runner, perhaps a shove out the way but not a sustained attack, why would they risk the rope?

Just my tuppence worth!

[louisa]

Thanks for that, Phil, a very interesting post.

[Phil H]

louisa

"Titles" (such as Mr, Mrs, Miss etc) had a relevance, even into my day, that they no longer possess.

There were distinctions in the far past as to when Mr or esq were used (they are mutually exclusive).

Look at Jane Austen (say Pride and Prejudice) where even wives refer to husbands as MR Bennett or MR Collins.

For woman, the wife of Mr Thomas Smith was Mrs Thomas Smith - using her husbands first and surnames. as a widow she was properly, Mrs Ida Smith (revertting to her own forename). Thus her status and position were clear to all.

The eldest daughter was always, Miss Bennett, Miss Smith etc. That proclaimed her position and birthright. I had a second cousin called Joan (a generation older) who was a spinster - even in the 1990s she told an acquaintance who knew her well, and called her Joan: "I have a title, I am MISS Bowes!".

The other daughters were Miss Elizabeth; Miss Bennett etc.

Status remained important between the wars, and middle class/professional people or those aspiring to be such or be associated with them would want to observe the proprieties.

Don't forget also that legitimacy remained an important matter - being in wedlock, having legitimate offspring meant a lot in legal and social terms. (TE Lawrence's family is an interesting case example. He and his briothers were bastards, but his mother lived as her husband;s wife and used the term Mrs, though I believe never referred to her husband as such - always as Tom.)

Today the conventions are different, but in some ways the past was "another country" - and these rules, like manners more widely - were enforced to ensure as few people as possible were embarrassed.

Phil

[louisa]

I suppose it was a sign of the times that everybody called eachother 'Mr' (or Miss or Mrs).

I don't know how long those members of the chess club had known eachother but nobody was on first name terms.


I noticed - on Amazon - that there was another book about the murder by an author called Murphy. The book seems very expensive at around £35.

[Marko]

Today marks the 133rd birthday of WHW

[Marko]

Thanks Marko,
I have visited your web site and read what you have written on the case.Quite impressive.One fact that puzzles me is why the club captain should answer the call.I would probably,in his situation,have advised the waitress?barmaid,to tell the caller that Wallace was not there but expected shortly,and to call back,or if urgent for the waitress/barmaid to take a message.

Thank you Harry.

Yes, waitress Gladys Harley took the call. As it was with regards to the Chess Club, Harley said she would notify Beattie, therefore he came to the phone and took the message.

[Marko]

Thanks Marko. As usual, you are in full command of the facts.

Thanks Stan - I try!!

[harry]

Thanks Marko,
I have visited your web site and read what you have written on the case.Quite impressive.One fact that puzzles me is why the club captain should answer the call.I would probably,in his situation,have advised the waitress?barmaid,to tell the caller that Wallace was not there but expected shortly,and to call back,or if urgent for the waitress/barmaid to take a message.

[sdreid]

Thanks Marko. As usual, you are in full command of the facts.

[Marko]

At least three people heard the voice. How did Harley and the phone operator describe the voice in detail? I believe Ms. Harley described it as elderly. Do we know the name of the phone operator?

Harley said that the person calling spoke with a deep voice.
Two operators spoke to Qualtrough - Louisa Alfreds and Lilian Martha Kelly. Both said the voice was ordinary and that the caller appeared used to using telephones.

[sdreid]

Since I believe Wallace did it, I suspect the motive was to get rid of his wife without having to give up half his property and then possibly pay maintenance. Her life insurance would just be icing on the cake.

Wallace certainly had the greatest motive to disguise his voice. I doubt that anyone at the chess club knew what Parry or whoever it was sounded like.