Buckinghamshire Murders E-Book

Dr Jonathan Oates

• Herausgeber: The History Press
• Kategorie: Sachliteratur, Reportagen, Biografien
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Beschreibung

This chilling volume brings together more murderous tales that shocked not only the county but made headline news throughout the nation. Covering the length and breadth of Buckinghamshire, the featured cases include the brutal slaying of a family of seven in Denham in 1870, the killing of a butcher's wife in Victorian Slough for which no one was ever found guilty, a double shooting at Little Kimble and a killing near Haddenham in 1828, in which a letter written a year later sealed the killers' fate, and the doctor who disappeared in 1933 and whose decomposed corpse was found in Buckinghamshire woods the following year. This well-illustrated and enthralling text will appeal to everyone interested in true-crime history and the shadier side of Buckinghamshire's past.

Leseprobe

I would like to dedicate this book to my son, Benjamin.

CONTENTS

Title Page

Dedication

Acknowledgements

Introduction

1. The Toll House Murders

Aston Clinton, 1822

2. Accident or Murder?

Tingewick, 1822

3. Justice Delayed

Aylesbury, 1828–1830

4. Dreadful Murder at Dorney

Dorney, 1853

5. Massacre at Denham

Denham, 1870

6. A Domestic Murder

Olney, 1873

7. Dreadful Murder at Slough

Slough, 1881

8. Lucky Escape?

Bledlow, 1893

9. Child Murder at Colnbrook

Colnbrook, 1900

10. The Second Slough Murder

Slough, 1910

11. An Eton Murder

Eton, 1912

12. A Double Murder

Little Kimble, 1914

13. ‘I have been a source of worry and trouble’

Little Marlow, 1921

14. A Pub Shooting

High Wycombe, 1937

Afterword

Bibliography

Copyright

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As always, I have to thank several people for their help in the production of this book. Paul Lang, for his assistance and helpful suggestions while proof reading, and for his generous lending of a number of postcards from his vast collection. Thanks to Michael Shaw, historian of the county police force, for the biographical information provided about a number of the officers who appear within these pages, and to both Ken Pearce and Jean Smith, each for supplying a picture to use in the book. And finally, to my wife, who accompanied me on a number of visits to parts of the county in order to take some of the photographs that appear in the book.

INTRODUCTION

It seems that fictional murders in Buckinghamshire are better known than real-life murders, as the many testimonies to the hugely popular television series Midsomer Murders show. However, there are some well-known criminals and crimes that are associated with the county. In 1933, for example, a man was arrested for the theft of a car in Twyford; it was two decades later that he was revealed to be the infamous John Reginald Halliday Christie, serial killer of 10 Rillington Place. It was in Buckinghamshire that, in 1963, clues to help apprehend the robbers of the Great Train Robbery were found, and it is where James Hanratty first accosted John Gregsten and Valerie Storrie, resulting in Gregsten’s murder and Hanratty’s execution in 1961. The corpse of Dennis Blakely, unfaithful lover of Ruth Ellis (the last woman to be hanged in England in 1955), and who was shot dead by her in Hampstead, was buried in Penn, Buckinghamshire. Florence Maybrick, who poisoned her husband (suspected by some as being Jack the Ripper) in 1889, was once incarcerated at Aylesbury Prison. Finally, it was in a hospital in Slough that the once feared London gangster, Ronnie Kray, died in 1995.

This collection, however, brings together only the most notorious of crimes; that of murder, and those which occurred in the county – including Slough, which, until the 1970s, was a part of Buckinghamshire. Focusing on the period between 1822 and 1937, fourteen capital crimes have been selected throughout these decades, though this is by no means a complete catalogue of the county’s murders within these dates.

Hughenden Manor House. (Courtesy of Paul Lang)

The county is the eighth smallest of the thirty-nine English counties. In 1831, it had a population of 130,982, and in 1911 this had grown to 229,551. Some of this population growth may have been due to the introduction of the railway lines in the 1830s and ’40s. These included the Great Western line to the south of the county, the North Western line, and the Great Western and Great Central Joint Railway (employees of which were involved in the murder related in chapter 12). In the nineteenth century, Buckinghamshire was, primarily, an agricultural county with very few industries; claiming wheat, barley, clover, pigs, sheep and cows as its main products. The few industries it did have, however, included lace, straw plaiting, paper mills and a shoe industry. There were few large towns, aside from Aylesbury and High Wycombe, and later, Slough, and the county was chiefly rural. There were a number of country houses, such as Hughenden Manor, once home to Victorian Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, and West Wycombe Park, home of the Dashwoods.

There was no county-wide police force in Buckinghamshire until 1857. Prior to that, there were two chief forces employed to deal with crime. Firstly there were the parish constables, men selected every year from among their fellow parishioners. They were called upon to arrest criminals and escort them to the gaol and courts, but also dealt with other parish business, such as the implementation of the Poor Law. The second force was the Bow Street Runner. Founded in the eighteenth century, they were initially a very small force of paid thief takers in London, overseen by Henry Fielding and his blind half-brother, John. Their numbers and scope increased as time went by, so that by the early nineteenth century they were composed of both foot and horse patrols, and their remit extended for miles outside the metropolis.

The old gaol, Buckingham. (Courtesy of Paul Lang)

By 1829, the Metropolitan Police had been formed, and although they were at first restricted to London, by 1839 their jurisdiction had spread to adjoining counties. The 1839 Police Act enabled counties and boroughs to establish their own police forces, consisting of blue-uniformed civilians, who were to act as a visible deterrent to crime as well as to apprehend criminals. These were unpopular at first, suspected as being detrimental to civil liberty and a drain on taxes. The 1839 Act was not compulsory, however, and some counties decided not to implement it; Buckinghamshire being one.

However, the County and Borough Police Act of 1856 made the establishment of police forces obligatory throughout England, and it was in 1857 that the Buckinghamshire constabulary was first established. It was made up of a chief constable, seven superintendents (one of whom was the deputy chief constable), seven inspectors, twenty-nine sergeants and 184 constables. There were ninety-two police stations in the county in total, most of which were run by a single constable.

The county police were initially under the control of the county quarter sessions of magistrates, but following the formation of the county council in 1888, a standing joint committee of both councillors and magistrates was formed in order to oversee police policy and activity. There was also a separate High Wycombe constabulary who operated in tandem to the county force, with both forces having a police station in the same town. In 1968 the force came to an end, being merged with the Berkshire and Oxfordshire forces to form the Thames Valley Police Force, of which the fictional character Inspector Morse is a well-known member.

The sources used for this book are primarily newspapers, both national, such as The Times and the Morning Chronicle, and local, such as the Slough Express and various other Buckinghamshire newspapers. I have also used sources well-known to the genealogist, such as census returns, civil registration records, directories, wills, and army records in order to flesh out the characters who appear within the pages of the book.

The author was born in Buckinghamshire; Amersham to be exact. This is his tenth book about true crime, chiefly from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Dr Jonathan Oates, 2012

1

THE TOLL HOUSE MURDERS

Aston Clinton, 1822

During the eighteenth century, the introduction of turnpike trusts ensured the improvement of the roads in Britain. Work was financed by payments levied on horse-drawn traffic, and these monies were collected by toll-house keepers, who were accommodated in houses by the sides of roads. Initially, these new tolls were met with hostility, and on occasion toll-house keepers and their houses were attacked. By the nineteenth century they had become less novel and were more accepted by travellers. Yet, for one couple who collected tolls in Buckinghamshire, there was another danger – not irate travellers or angry mobs, but a more universal and deadly foe – itinerant thieves who were prepared to use violence in the pursuit of what they wanted. Toll houses were very attractive for thieves, as, quite often, they were isolated from other dwellings and contained substantial amounts of money which had been collected from travellers. Theft and murder were both punishable by death at this time, and, more often than not, the thieves would kill anyone who might be able to identify them.

On Tuesday, 19 November 1822, an aged couple, Rachel and Edward Needle, were killed at their toll house at Aston Clinton, a couple of miles outside of Aylesbury. Little is known about the couple, but they were rumoured to have amassed some considerable savings. They had been quite well earlier on in the day, for Mrs Fanny Norris had had tea with them between three and five o’clock that afternoon, and later, Charles White recalled conversing with Mr Needle. Joseph Davies was the first to discover the crime. At just before quarter past six the following morning, he was on his way to fetch his master’s horse, which was in the field adjoining the toll house. He passed the gate and saw that the door was open. He thought this was odd, because he passed the door every day and usually saw Mr Needle there. He took a quick look in and saw Rachel’s body lying in the first room. Shocked and scared, he raised the alarm immediately. The first person he saw was the proprietor of the Aylesbury coach, James Wyatt, who was stopping by the toll gate. Wyatt went into the house and found Rachel’s body on the floor of the sitting room and her husband’s body in their bed, covered with a sheet.

William Hayward, an Aylesbury surgeon, was summoned to the scene. He arrived between nine and ten that morning, along with John Blissett, his assistant. Rachel’s body was bruised and bloody. He thought that she and her husband, who was unclothed, had been killed by the edge of a blunt instrument or bludgeon, as they had both suffered severe injuries to the head. In detail, Mr Needle had a fracture on the right side of his skull, and over his right eye a wound that was an inch long and half-an-inch deep. His right ear was lacerated and torn and there were marks on his right hand, as though he had tried to ward off the blows. In both cases, the blows to the head had been the likely cause of death. Joseph Hill, an Aylesbury shoemaker, arrived not long after Joseph Davies, and raised the alarm, and located the bludgeons used to commit the murder – one of which was under the bed. They were bloody and one was almost broken in the middle.

The day after the bodies were discovered, the Magistrates’ Marylebone Office received details of the murders. The principal investigator was a Mr Minshull, a Bow Street Runner who lived in Aylesbury. On being told of the murders, he went to the crime scene accompanied by many countrymen, who he had sworn in as special constables. They were sent in all directions from the murder scene, with instructions to apprehend any suspicious person they might meet. Minshull also sent messages to all resident magistrates in the neighbourhood, asking for their co-operation. These included the Earl of Bridgewater, whose seat was near Berkhamsted, and because he was absent, the message arrived in the hands of his secretary, Mr Atty, who went to the nearest village, Gaddesden, to inform the residents of the contents of the message.

Meanwhile, at about eight in the evening, some of the men despatched by Minshull arrived at the Bridgewater Arms in Little Gaddesden, around the same time as those summoned by Atty. Mr Bennett, the publican, upon being told the cause of alarm, said that there were three strangers in his tap room – two men and a woman – whom he believed were acting suspiciously. Joseph Impey, an ostler at the pub, noted that they were exhausted on arrival. They then ate beef steaks, recently purchased from a butcher in the village, which they had paid for with half pennies. They also carried bundles with them and on being observed, the woman retired to the toilets. The three were apprehended and detained by William Clarke and William Martin, the two constables for Tring. It was now half past nine at night.

The Bridgewater Arms, Little Gaddesden.

They found bloodstains on the elbow and cuffs of one of the men’s jackets, which was wet and dirty, as if attempts had been recently made to wash the blood off. Clay and dirt had been used to try and conceal other incriminating marks. There was also blood on a handkerchief and one of the bags they had with them.

Unbeknown to the constables, the first man arrested on suspicion of the crime was James Richards, described as a stout athletic countryman, and who had been detained on the day after the murder. Earlier that day he had been in The Sign of the Lord Thorley pub, in London, when a man was reading an account of the murders. Richards’ face blanched and he appeared agitated. In a very hurried manner he asked where the crime had been committed, and soon afterwards asked directions to Fleet Street. Another customer in the pub thought that his behaviour was suspicious and reported it to the magistrates, with the result that Richards was taken into custody and questioned.

Richards said that he was from Oxfordshire. He had travelled from North Wales to Salisbury, then to Southampton and to Guildford, and then arrived in London. He claimed ignorance of the murders prior to hearing about them being read aloud in the pub. He added that he had two brothers living in London, but had not seen them since last spring and did not know where they lived. He was then detained until further enquiries into the case were made, but, presumably, was released as soon as news came from Minshull.

Meanwhile, the rector of Little Gaddesden, Revd James Horseman, the Earl of Bridgewater and Revd Mr Robert Jenks of Berkhamsted, all of whom were magistrates, arrived in Little Gaddesden. They examined the prisoners separately. Their suspicions surrounding the murder were confirmed when all three of the prisoners’ stories contradicted the others. Proclaiming his innocence, the first prisoner told them that he was a shoemaker from Leicester who had been traipsing the country for work, and that he had only just met his companion on that very day. However, when the keeper of the county gaol at Aylesbury, James Sheriff, arrived, he said that he recognised the three prisoners after he had seen them lurking around the locality for some days. This led to the magistrates’ suspicions being lent additional weight.

The prisoners gave their names as James Croker, Thomas Randall and Martha Barnacle. Their bundles were examined and found to contain items which had been stolen from the toll house, including a pair of worsted stockings, a pair of leather braces, a large clasp knife, a pair of leather gloves, a pair of shoes, a tobacco stopper, 12s 6d in silver and four pence. There had been little physical evidence left in the toll house, but some nails, which matched those on the prisoners’ boots, were found there.

The following day, Martha was questioned alone. She said that she had known Thomas Randall for about a year but had only known the other for only a short while. On the night of the murder, all three had been together at Berkhamsted. The men left at eight that night, telling her that they were going to do a job which would fetch a hundred pounds. She claimed that she then exhorted them to not commit murder, before arranging to meet the next day at an appointed place, before stating to the magistrates that she had been told not ‘to tell all she knew, lest she be murdered herself,’ so she said no more.

Further investigations continued on the Friday following the murder, at the King’s Arms at Berkhamsted. At four that afternoon, the prisoners were taken to Aylesbury. En route they stopped at the toll house where the murders had been committed. The two men were taken separately into the rooms where the bodies had been found; Croker was first to enter and once they were both inside they were shown the corpses, which were in their coffins. Croker patently did not want to view them and remained silent. Randall, however, did look and said that it was a dreadful spectacle, before thanking God that he had had no hand in their deaths. From their reactions, the investigators believed that it had been Croker who had inflicted the fatal wounds.

The King’s Arms, Berkhamsted.

Aylesbury Convict Prison. (Courtesy of Paul Lang)

It was later discovered that a horse had been taken from an adjoining field and brought to the gate. Mrs Needle, believing this was a traveller arriving at the gate, went to the door of the toll house and then went into the road. Although her body had been found inside the house, the amount of mud attached to her clothes suggested that she had been killed outside and dragged inside afterwards, to delay the discovery of the crime.

Earlier that day, the inquest had been opened at The White Hart in Aylesbury, before John Chersley, the county coroner. Reverend Messrs Ashfield and Revd Thomas Archer, vicar of Whitchurch (both of whom were magistrates) were present, and the jury was composed of a dozen respectable farmers and inhabitants of the town of Aylesbury.

After Hayward gave evidence regarding the method of the murders, and hearing Davies’ evidence of finding the bodies, Charles Finch gave a rather more lengthy statement. He was a labourer who lived in Aston Clinton, and at 10.30 on the Monday night he was working near to the Aston turnpike. He saw two men on the road nearby (later identified as Croker and Randall). One was a short, thick man carrying a bundle under his arm. He was wearing a light-coloured, drab cloth coat, with light, worsted cord breeches which came over the calves of his legs, and a single-breasted coat. He said that the man had had a pale face. The other was a tall, slightly lame man who was wearing a light-coloured fustian frock coat and carrying a black thorn stick. He wore ankle boots and was dark-looking. Finch thought they were behaving oddly as they left the road and moved through a field towards the toll house. At five o’clock the next morning he saw the two men again, and once more that night, at about half past ten. On the second occasion they were wearing the same clothes as before, and this time they had a woman with them. Finch thought that they looked like ruffians and said to his companion, ‘I should not like to meet them on a dark night.’ They were walking towards Aston Clinton at this time.

Mrs Norris, a friend of the Needles, was shown items which had been found on the three suspects. This included a pipe-stopper, which was made of copper and plated with silver. Mrs Norris was convinced that this had belonged to the Needles. There were shoes and stockings among the stolen items, which she believed may have been owned by the elderly couple, but she could not be entirely sure about those. The inquest was adjourned until Saturday evening.

William Wood of Aston Clinton, a cobbler and an old friend of the Needles, was examined next. He was shown the shoes that the prisoners claimed belonged to them, but Wood was convinced that they had belonged to his late friend and stated that he had examined the shoes on the Sunday before the murders. Thomas Wyatt, a Tring constable, recalled meeting the prisoners on the road, walking rapidly towards Tring in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

The coroner summed up the proceedings with great perspicuity. At half past nine he concluded, and the jury only took a short time to decide their verdict. They declared that Thomas Randall and James Croker were guilty of wilful murder, and that they were to stand trial at the next assizes.

In the meantime, the Needles were buried at St Michael’s Church, with the funeral expenses being met by their former employers, the trustees of the turnpike.

Later that month, a man named Rowe, who lived near Tring, was examined by the magistrates. He claimed that he had seen the three prisoners together on the evening of the murder. According to him, Croker had said that they had a job to do, and were afraid they would be too late, before leaving the pub. On the Thursday following the crime, Rowe had found two bundles under a hedge on the road from Tring to Little Gaddesden. In these were a pistol – identified as belonging to Mr Needle – some of Mrs Needle’s clothing, two silver spoons and other items belonging to the murdered couple. Some suspected Rowe of being involved with the murders, as he had been drinking with the accused prior to the crime. He was questioned regarding his movements on the fatal night, and how it was that he had made the discovery of the bundles – fortunately for him, he was able to satisfactorily defend himself against both accusations and was discharged.

St Michael’s churchyard, Aston Clinton, where Mr and Mrs Needle are buried.

Randall and Croker stood trial at the Spring Assizes, held at Aylesbury on 4 March 1823. Such was the interest in the case, that people started gathering at half past eight in the morning and, by nine o’clock, the courtroom was crowded. Randall pleaded not guilty, whereas Croker pleaded guilty. Croker was told by the judge that he should withdraw his plea and change it to that of his associate; otherwise he would not receive a trial but an automatic verdict of guilty. Croker did not change his mind and only Randall was tried, with Croker sitting through it.