Books




Face of Winifred May Davies
Latest topics
» Why Jesus Is Not God
Wed 22 Mar 2017 - 19:34 by Karen

» Allah, The Real Serpent of the Garden
Tue 7 Mar 2017 - 11:45 by Karen

» THE INNOCENCE OF JEWS
Sat 4 Mar 2017 - 12:06 by Karen

» Hillary Clinton (Hillroy Was Here)
Fri 28 Oct 2016 - 17:38 by Karen

» Alien on the Moon
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 21:57 by Karen

» Martian Nonsense Repeats Itself
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 18:43 by Karen

» Enlil and Enki
Fri 7 Oct 2016 - 17:11 by Karen

» Israel Shoots Down Drone - Peter Kucznir's Threat
Wed 24 Aug 2016 - 22:55 by Karen

» Rome is Babylon
Sun 24 Jul 2016 - 21:27 by Karen

» Barak Obama
Sat 2 Jul 2016 - 10:47 by Karen

Links












Gallery



Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Karen on Sat 21 Sep 2013 - 12:02

In the following, please note the mysterious date of Friday the 13th and its significance as the date in which the Templars were arrested for heinous crimes.

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.
Discharge of Sadler.

James Thomas Sadler was charged on remand at the Thames police-court on Tuesday - before Mr. Mead - with the murder of the woman Frances Coles on the 13th February at Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel. Although it had been announced that the Treasury would ask for the prisoner's release, much interest was manifested in the proceedings, and a large crowd assembled outside the court. On Sadler taking his place in the dock Mr. Mathews, for the Treasury, said that having had the advantage of a consultation with the Attorney-General, who had evidently considered the evidence before the coroner as well as the able summing up of the coroner to the jury, and having regard to the verdict of the jury after a patient and exhaustive hearing, he did not propose with the matters before him to proceed further with the case. If that should meet with the satisfaction of the magistrate, it would have both the sanction of the Attorney-General, and the Treasury authorities, and no further evidence should now be offered against the accused.
Mr. Lawless (for Sadler) said he should offer no objection.
Mr. Mead: Of course, I acquiesce in that application. You are discharged.
Sadler immediately left the dock.

Source: Cardiff Times, 7 March 1891, Page 4

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4899

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Karen on Fri 27 Sep 2013 - 18:31

"Jack the Ripper" Again.
A WOMAN ATROCIOUSLY MURDERED.

In the early hours of Friday morning another terrible and daring murder came to light in Whitechapel, and there is little doubt that it is one more of that fearful series which sent such a thrill of horror through the community in 1888 and 1889, and baffled the utmost skill of the detective force to elucidate.

Arrest of the Supposed Murderer.

It now appears that despite the utmost vigilance on the part of the police authorities they have discovered but little to throw any definite light upon the authorship of the latest Whitechapel tragedy. On Saturday they effected an arrest, which at one time seemed to be of an important character, but careful enquiries it must be said tended to support in the most material particulars the genuineness of the man's protestations of innocence. Up to a late hour, however, the man had not been released, although no charge had been formally preferred against him. The chief reason for this was that the investigations concerning him had not been completely concluded, and therefore the officials did not think themselves warranted in allowing him to go free, and the next reason evidently was that his mere detention without a formal charge being made against him permitted of his being questioned concerning his movements and antecedents. The circumstances which led to his detention are peculiar. Soon after two o'clock on Friday morning Sergeant Edwards was on duty at Tower-hill when a man passed him whose appearance excited suspicion. He stopped him and saw that his clothes were bloodstained. The man explained that he had been ill-treated by some men, and, as his general appearance bore out his statement, the officer let him go on his way. A short time after, the news spread about, that another murder had been committed, and the sergeant at once had his suspicions aroused about the man he had seen only a short time before. He reported what had come to his notice, and a description of the man was circulated. It was found that about an hour later the man had called at a coffee house in the neighbourhood, and when having a meal told the same story to the proprietor. From that point there was some difficulty in tracing his movements, but eventually about noon on Saturday Sergeant Gill, of the Criminal Investigation Department, proceeded to the Phoenix Inn, Upper East, Smithfield, and there found a man named Thomas Saddler, who was subsequently identified by Sergeant Edwards as the man he had met early on Friday morning.

Startling Development.

The police officers who are investigating the latest Whitechapel murder have made discoveries which induce them to believe that they know the author of the crime. The man upon whom their suspicion falls is already in their custody. He is none other than the ship's fireman, James Thomas Saddler, who on Sunday seemed to be explaining away to everybody's satisfaction the remarkable circumstances of his orgie with the murdered woman, Frances Cole. Although Saddler was "detained" by the police on Saturday, he was not technically under arrest; the man was simply kept within narrow limits until such time as the enquiries set on foot as to his movements should establish innocence or yield sufficient prima facie evidence to justify a formal charge of murder before a magistrate. The police were busily engaged on Sunday in sifting the information vouchsafed by Saddler, and in searching for independent corroboration of it. These proceedings were naturally connected with as much privacy as possible, but certain information was allowed to reach the public, and on Sunday afternoon the first excitement was certainly favourable to a theory that Saddler had left the woman before the murder, of which he was innocent, and that the suspicious bloodstains found upon him were really the result of a drunken brawl. It is not unreasonable to believe that at one time the police themselves shared this view. In the course of inquiries, however, facts came to their knowledge which led them to look upon Saddler with something more than vague suspicion - in a word, their investigations made such a distinct advance in a sense adverse to the suspect that about midnight the representatives of the law found themselves justified in making Saddler a real prisoner, and, at the same time, preferring a charge of murder against him. The bag containing his belongings had been removed from the steamer Fez in the course of the day, and had been carefully searched at Leman-street police-station. We do not profess to know the precise bearing which this search had upon the arrest, but we are in a position to state that a large knife (just such a weapon as might have caused the deaths of Frances Cole and the other Whitechapel victims) has been traced to Sadler's possession. The discovery of this knife does not stand alone. There are other circumstances which impelled the police to make the arrest - circumstances which it would be imprudent to divulge at the present moment. It was Inspector Moore, of the Criminal Investigation Department, who took Saddler into complete custody and charged him with the murder. That was about midnight at Leman-street police-station. There were also present at the time Chief-constable Macnaghten, District Superintendent Arnold, and Chief Inspector Swanson, of New Scotland Yard. The prisoner was conveyed by the inspector and two other chief officers in a four-wheeled cab to Arbour-square police-station at two o'clock on Sunday morning and placed in a cell. It is now understood that the prisoner's visit to the London Hospital, which visit was at once juncture thought to tend in favour of his innocence, will be found to have a most important bearing upon the crime. On being charged Saddler - then, of course, perfectly sober - betrayed considerable emotion.

The Accused in the Dock.

At the Thames-street police-court, on Monday afternoon - before Mr. Mead - John Thomas Saddler (55), marine fireman, Victoria lodging-houses, Upper East Smithfield, was charged with wifully causing the death of Frances Coles by cutting her throat with a knife or some sharp instrument at Swallow-gardens on the 13th of this month. The fact that the prisoner was to be brought up having become generally known, the Court-house was surrounded by a large crowd eager to catch a glimpse of him. Owing to defective cell accommodation at Leman-street, the prisoner was brought to the Thames-street police-station shortly after midnight, the formal charge having then been made. The prisoner was placed in the dock at 2:20. He was wearing a blue serge jacket and dark trousers. His face was very dirty, and there was still indications of old scratches on his cheeks. He wears a dark beard and moustache. On being conducted into the dock prisoner assumed a careless attitude and stood with his hands in his pockets.



Inspector Arnold, addressing the magistrates, said: I have been engaged with the Public Prosecutor, who directed me to request you to grant a remand after taking evidence of the arrest.
The Magistrate: I must hear some evidence. I cannot tell until I hear the evidence whether it is sufficient to justify a remand. You may put before me what evidence you please.
Samuel Harris, a young man, deposed: I am a fish-curer, and live at 8, White's-row, Spitalfields. I was in a lodging-house on Thursday night at 9:30. I had been there about an hour when I saw a woman I knew as Frances. She was sitting on a form, and had her head upon the table. It was in the kitchen of the lodging-house where she sat. I remained in the kitchen till 11:30, and prisoner at that time came in. He was alone, and looked round on entering. The prisoner at once sat down beside Frances, and asked her, "Have you any lodging money?" She looked up, but made no reply. Prisoner then said, "I've been robbed, and if I knew who did it I would do for them."
Prisoner (to witness): Be careful.
Harris, continuing his evidence, stated that at 12:30 prisoner went out, but the woman remained in the kitchen. Before going away prisoner showed him a discharge document.
Prisoner (again interrupting): A kind of wages sheet.
Harris (resuming): Prisoner, thinking I was the governor, showed me the document and asked me to let him go to bed, and he would pay when he got his money. I did not permit him, and he went away. About three or four minutes afterwards I saw Frances put a black crape hat under her dress and leave the house. I did not see her again alive, but have identified her body at the mortuary.
The Clerk asked the prisoner if he had any questions to put to witness.
Prisoner: I wish to jog his memory as to the early part of his statement that I said I would do for those who robbed me.
The Clerk: Well, put it to him.
Prisoner: I was with the girl at the time I was robbed; she knew well that I was robbed.
The Magistrate: He would not know that.
Prisoner: Let him repeat the early part of his statement again.
The Clerk read the part of the evidence referred to.
The prisoner: You need not read further. I wish him to verify that statement or else draw it back.
Witness: You did say so.
The Clerk: Have you anything else to ask him?
Prisoner: No, sir; the rest I believe is correct.
The Magistrate (to witness): Was prisoner sober? - He was intoxicated.
The Magistrates' Clerk: Is there anything else you wish to ask the witness?
Prisoner: I should like to know - as to the disfigurement - as to what bruise he found upon me.
Witness: I know you had bruises on your left eye when you came in.
The Magistrate: On the eye or over it? - There is a scar over the eye.
Now, is that where you noticed it? - Yes. There was blood coming from the place where I now see the mark.
Prisoner (to witness): Did you notice blood on the right side coming from the back of my head? - No.
The Prisoner: I had a lot of blood on that side as well, which you don't seem to have noticed.
P.C. Westley (7 H) said: On Friday morning, the 13th instant, I was on duty on Mint pavement shortly before two o'clock, when I saw the prisoner. He was then, in my opinion, drunk. I could see he was suffering from a cut over his left eye. He was standing on the pavement, holding his side. He said he had been knocked about by some men at the dock-gates.
Prisoner (interposing): Quite correct, sir.
Witness (continuing): I asked him how it occurred, and he said that his ship was lying in the docks, and he went to the dock gates in order to go on board. The gate-keeper refused to admit him, he said, because he was drunk. Prisoner then went on, "I daresay I said something to the gatekeeper when he told me that if it was not for one man he would give me what I deserved - a good hiding, and if that one man would only turn his back he would do it now." The jobkeeper also said, "I have plenty of others to do it besides me." The constable (to whom the jobkeeper referred) then walked away, and a gang of dock labourers came out of the gates and started on me. They struck me, knocked me down, and kicked me in the ribs. I believe my ribs are broken." This, said witness, ended the prisoner's statement. I walked a distance of about 30 yards with the prisoner, and I examined his ribs to ascertain if they were broken. I was scarcely satisfied myself. I offered to take him to the hospital, when another constable came on the scene and also examined his ribs. Having examined prisoner's ribs, he found they were not broken, and prisoner said, "I daresay I was not much hurt after all," and walked away in the direction of the Minories. I left the prisoner and patrolled my section. When first I saw him it was but 400 or 500 yards to Swallow-gardens. The Tower clock struck two just before I left prisoner. When I left him he was going towards the Minories. That would bring him nearer to Swallow-gardens. In my opinion he was drunk.
The Magistrate: Have you any questions to put to witness?
Prisoner: No, he is very near the mark. I was so drunk that I did not know which way I turned. I thought I turned Leman-street way, towards the London Hospital, but if he says I turned towards the Minories I would not contradict him.
Wm. Fewell, night porter in the receiving-room of the London Hospital, deposed: A little before five o'clock on Friday morning prisoner came in with a lacerated scalp and a small cut over the eye. While washing his face I asked him how he came by the injuries. Prisoner replied "I've been with a woman, and she's done me."
Prisoner: Be careful.
Witness: I asked him how much it was for. He said, "Only 7s or 8s and a watch. I should not have minded that if they had not knocked me about." He trembled, and on my asking him why, the prisoner replied, "I'm cold. I've been walking about; unfortunately, I've got no lodgings. This is the first time I've been ashore, and I haven't secured any lodgings." Prisoner further said that he thougth one of his ribs was broken. I noticed blood on his hands, and the prisoner said his fingers were cut. I said, "That would not cause all the blood." Prisoner answered that "they" or "she" had a knife, and that if the blood did not come from the fingers it must have come from his head. On my asking where it happened, prisoner said, "In a small street down the highway near the bottom of Leman-street. I have been to one or two places to get a few halfpence for refreshment."
The Magistrate (to prisoner): Have you any questions to ask?
Prisoner: One or two little things, but I'm not in good trim to cross-examine him, being thoroughly knocked up and cold, and I haven't had anything to eat since tea time last night. I don't feel fit to take any interest in the proceedings. I have been kept by direction of the inspectors and doctors changing my clothes.
The Magistrate: Have you any questions to put?
The prisoner: No; I'll do it another time. I want something to eat, your worship.
Inspector Arnold, who was the last witness called, said: Shortly after three o'clock on the 13th I went to Swallow-gardens. I there saw the body of a female with a cut in her throat. I saw it at the mortuary. It is the body which Harris identified as Frances Cole.
The Magistrate (to prisoner): Do you want to ask Inspector Arnold any questions? No doubt he will be called again.
The Prisoner: I hope the inspector will see that I have some refreshment.
Inspector Arnold: You shall have some.
The Prisoner: It is about time.
The question of remand arising, the Magistrates' Clerk asked whether Sir Augustus Stephenson had wished for any particular date. A reply being given in the negative, the magistrate appointed Tuesday of next week at two o'clock for the resumption of the hearing, and the prisoner was formally remanded till that day.

The Resumed Inquest.

On Tuesday, at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, coroner for East London, resumed the inquest upon the body of Frances Coles (25), the woman who was found with her throat cut in Chambers-street, on Friday morning last, and for whose murder a man named James Thomas Sadler is in custody. Amongst the officials of the police present were Superintendent Arnold, Chief Inspector Swanson, and Inspector Moore.
The Coroner, in discussing the question of further arrangements with the jury was afraid that they had a protracted time before them, and that they were likely to have a lot of minute evidence. He also thought they would have the assistance of the Treasury in the matter, which was very unusual, but very desirable.
At this stage Mr. Charles Matthews, barrister, entered, and on behalf of the Public Prosecutor placed himself at the disposal of the Coroner to render any assistance.
It was decided that Mr. Matthews should examine the witnesses.
James William Coles said: I am an inmate of Bermondsey Workhouse. I went to the mortuary at Whitechapel between 10 and 11 on Saturday night. I then saw the dead body of a woman. I identified the body as that of my youngest daughter Frances. As near as I can say her age was about 26. I last saw her alive on Friday, the 6th of February. She was at the workhouse on that day. She was in the habit of visiting me on Friday. She deceived me as to where she was living. She told me it was 42, Richard-street, Commercial-road, but I found that was wrong. I did not know but that she was working for her living in the Minories at a wholesale chemist's. She had a sister, Mary Anne, living at 32, Wear-street, Kingsland-road. My daughter had a mark in the left ear. It looked to me as if it was torn by the earring. I had noticed that mark for three or four years. The knuckles of her hands were peculiar. There were great lumps of hard flesh on them, which she told me had come from doing hard work. When I saw her on Friday, the 6th, she told me she would come on Sunday. She came on most Sundays to go to church with me.
The Coroner said that an offer had been received from the Common Lodging-house Mission to bury the deceased.
Witness said he would like to accept the offer.
Mary Anne Coles said: I am single, living at 32, Wear-street, Kingsland-road. I have been to Whitechapel mortuary. I went on Sunday. I there saw the body of a woman which I identify as that of my sister Frances. I last saw her on the Friday after Christmas. That would be the 26th December. She was then in good health, but very poor; indeed, she looked very dirty. I gave her some tea and bread and butter. She told me she lived in Richard-street, Commercial-road, and had buried a child three years ago. She also said that she worked in the Minories. I had noticed during her life that the lobe of the left ear was torn, and she said it was done by the little girl. I also noticed the lumps on her knuckles, which she said was done by her work, and she said that they were very painful. I recognised the clothing at the mortuary; I had given her some of it, and had noticed her wearing a black satin bodice, a hat trimmed with crape, and a long black jacket. The name of the chemist she worked for was Hoare. She said she had left because there was not much work there in the winter. She said she had earned from 6s. to 7s. a week. I occasionally noticed that she smelt of drink. I did not know any of my sister's friends, and I never visited her.
Peter Lorenzo Hawkes said: I am an assistant to my mother, a milliner, at 25, Nottingham-street, Bethnal Green. Between seven and eight o'clock on the evening of Thursday last a woman came into my mother's shop. Last Friday I went to the mortuary and saw the dead body of the woman. When she came to the shop at her request I showed her several hats, and she bought one for 1s. 11-1/2d. After I told her the price of it she went outside of the shop and went away a short distance with a man who had been looking into the window. I noticed the man and that is all. I could only see his face through the bonnets in the window. After walking away with the man, she returned into the shop alone and tendered two shillings. I gave her the hat and one halfpenny change. At the time she was wearing a black crape hat. The list which I showed her I put into a bag with my mother's name on it. When at the mortuary on Friday, I saw and identified the hat which I sold her, and also saw there a hat similar to the one which she wore when she visited the shop. On Sunday, the 15th, I went to Leman-street police-station, Whitechapel. I was there shown 20 men or more. I identified amongst them and picked out the man who had looked through my mother's shop window on Thursday evening. By the newspapers I learn that he has given the name of James Sadler.
By the Coroner: I was able to identify the hat for it was one of our own manufacture.
A Juryman: Was she sober when she came to the shop? - She was what I should call "three sheets in the wind." (Laughter.)
By the Coroner: I identified the man at once.
Charles Gyver said: I am a night watchman at a common lodging-house, 8, White's-row, Spitalfields. I have lived there for the last four years. For the past year I have known a woman who has gone by the name of Frances. She came to the house as a casual lodger, staying there a night at a time. She would sometimes come twice a week and then not come for a time. She was a prostitute. She used to bring different men to sleep with her at the house.
Samuel Harris said: I am a fish curer employed by Mr. William Abrahams, 50, Virginia-road, Bethnal-green. Last Thursday evening I was lodging at 8, White's-row, Spitalfields. About half-past nine on that night I arrived home, and on going into the kitchen saw a woman I knew by the name of Frances sitting by the fire with her head on the table as if asleep. About half-past 11, while we were both there, a man dressed as a sailor came into the kitchen and looked round. He then sat down by the side of Frances on a form. He asked her if she had any money for the lodging, to which she - who had become awake - replied, "No." He then said, "I have been robbed. If I knew who had done it I would do for them." He asked me if I would let him go up to bed till tomorrow morning, thinking I was the governor of the house. He showed me a certificate showing that he was entitled to 4 pounds odd. I told him I had nothing to do with the letting of beds. He then asked me to mind the certificate till the following morning, and I told him I could not do it. About half-past twelve this man left the house. Three or four minutes afterwards I saw Frances go out after putting a black crape hat under her dress. She also wore a hat. I went to bed about a quarter to two, and saw nothing more that night of the man or the woman. The next I saw of her was at the mortuary, when I identified her dead body on the afternoon of Friday, the 13th.
When did you next see the man? - When I caught him. (Sensation.) That was about half-past 11 o'clock on Saturday morning, in the Phoenix public, Upper East Smithfield. He was drinking in the house alone, and I was accompanied to the Phoenix by two police-constables, to whom I had given information. Previously I went inside the house alone, and identified the man at once. I then went outside and spoke to the constables. One of them went into the house, and I remained outside with the other some distance off. The man came out with the constable, and the man and the two constables proceeded to Leman-street Station; I walking behind. I went into the station. The officer questioned the man in my hearing, and he answered him. When I left at half-past three the man remained behind. I am positive this was the man whom I saw in the kitchen of the lodging-house as described. When he came into the kitchen and said he had been robbed I noticed a scar over the left eye. It was bleeding, and appeared to be a fresh one. When I saw him in the Phoenix on Saturday he had, in addition to this mark, two black eyes and a cut on his head, which cut, I think, was on the right-hand side. I did not notice stains of blood on the man's clothes before he left the lodging-house, neither did I notice any blood on his clothes on Saturday morning. He did not on that occasion show any signs of recognising me. I had never seen the man before the occasion in the kitchen. He was then intoxicated, and when I saw him in the Phoenix on Saturday he looked "half-and-half."
By the Jury: I had known Frances as an occasional lodger at the house for eighteen months.
The witness Gyver (recalled) said: I have now seen a body and clothes which I identify as those of a woman whom I knew as Frances for three years. I remember Frances coming to the house about 10 to 10:30 on the night of Wednesday the 11th. She was with the man whose name I now know to be Saddler. She stood by the office window (where they pay) and he stood by the staircase door. I cannot say which paid for the bed. After this I took them upstairs, and they slept there that night. He asked me to call him at seven o'clock on Thursday morning, the 12th. I did so, but could not get him up. I went again about nine o'clock, and they were still in bed. I then went to bed myself, and did not see them again till Thursday evening. Frances came into the kitchen about 10 o'clock that night alone, when she was very drunk. She went and sat on the form, and fell asleep with her head on the table. While she was there in that position Saddler came into the kitchen, and he, too, was the worse for drink. I asked him if he was looking for the young woman he was stopping with last night. He replied, "Yes, I want Frances." I said, "There she is asleep." Sadler tried to rouse her, but she was too drowsy. Sadler told me he had been robbed in Thrawl-street of 3s. 6d. His face was bleeding, and I told him to go in the yard and wash the blood off. I went into the yard with him, and washed the blood off his face. He looked as if he had been thrown down, for he had got gravel on the cheek-bone. There was not particularly much blood - just a little running down his face. His clothes were smothered with dust, as if he had been in a fight. I did not notice any blood on his clothes. After washing himself in the backyard he returned to the kitchen and kicked up a disturbance, wrangling with the other lodgers. I advised him to go to bed.

To be continued.........................


Last edited by Karen on Mon 30 Sep 2013 - 6:27; edited 1 time in total

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4899

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Karen on Sat 28 Sep 2013 - 14:25

He said he had given Frances a shilling to pay for the bed. The deputy said she had not paid him. I went upstairs backwards and forwards, and when I came down again he was still wrangling. I then led him out. He was not violent at all. This was a little before twelve o'clock. Frances remained till about half-past one or a quarter to two. I am positive she remained till after one o'clock. At any rate there was a clock in the office which I went by; besides I know the time by the amount of work I had got through. I am sure there was an interval of quite an hour between the time of Saddler going out and deceased leaving. Just before she went out she was sitting on the floor nursing a kitten. As I wanted to clean this kitchen up she went away to another one. She was getting more sober then. When she first came into the house at 10 o'clock she had two hats. I saw her throw one of them - a crape hat - into the fire, and it was just beginning to burn when a woman took it off and trampled on it. It was then hung up on one of the hat rails. I did not see this hat in her possession again. The one she wore was a different one. She never returned to the house after leaving it on this occasion. It was just after three o'clock on Friday morning when I was going to call a man up when Sadler came back to the house. The door was open, and he came into the passage. He asked me to let him come into the kitchen. I said it was more than I dared do - that he had better ask the deputy (Mrs. Fleming). Blood was running down his face, and he said he felt faint. I said, "What have you been at?" and he replied, "I have been robbed in the Highway" - meaning Ratcliffe-highway. I said, "I thought you told me you had been robbed of 3s. 6d. in Thrawl-street, and that was all you had." He replied, "They thought I had got some money about me, but I did not have none." The deputy asked him what he wanted, and he asked to be allowed to go in the kitchen as he felt so faint, but she declined. The man continued to lean against the wall, and again asked me to let him go into the kitchen, but I said I could not. I advised him to go to the London Hospital, as blood was running down his forehead and face. His clothes looked as if he had been on the ground again. I walked into the kitchen to finish my tea, and I left him with his head against the partition. In a minute or two Mrs. Fleming called me to turn him out. As I approached him to do so he walked out himself. It was then close on half-past three. I never saw him again till Sunday morning, the 15th, between 11 and 12, at Leman-street police-station. He was then amongst a number of other seamen, and I identified him. I next saw him at Thames police-court. I have no doubt that he is the man whom I saw at the lodging-house under the circumstances described by the jury. When he returned to the lodging-house at 3 a.m. he said nothing about Frances. The slightly burnt hat which was thrown on the fire is now in the mortuary. I saw it this morning there. When he came back at three his clothes were not only dirty but disarranged.
Mr. Matthews thought this would be a convenient stage to adjourn, as they wished to sift and arrange the other evidence.
The inquiry was then adjourned till ten o'clock on Friday.

The Coroner's inquiry into the circumstances attending the death of Frances Coles, who was murdered in Whitechapel a week ago, was resumed yesterday at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, before Mr. Wynne Baxter, coroner for East London. Mr. Chas. Mathews appeared for the Treasury, and Mr. Lawless now represented the man Sadler, who is at present detained in Holloway Gaol charged with the murder.
The first witness was Mrs. Anne Shuttleworth, an eating-house keeper, living at No. 4, Belper-street. Replying to Mr. Mathews, she said she had not seen the body, but a woman whom she knew as Frances went to her shop on the day before the murder and said she would wait for a man. The man soon followed, and the woman spoke to him. The two left about a quarter to six, and she saw no more of them. They were quite sober. She did not notice any injury to the man's face.
The Coroner said he should now like to connect the deceased with the woman Frances, and witness was sent to the mortuary to see the body.
Steer, the barman at the Bell public-house, Middlesex-street, Whitechapel, was in the meantime examined. He said he remembered the deceased drinking with a man in his house on the afternoon of the 12th. He added that the man told him he was a sailor, and was intimate with the neighbourhood.
The witness's evidence was very indefinite, and he, too, was sent to see the body.
On the return of Mrs. Shuttleworth, she said the body was that of Frances Coles, and added that the man wore a peak cap, pilot coat, and looked like a sailor.
Sarah Treadway, wife of the proprietor of the Marlborough Head public-house, said that prior to Thursday, the 12th, she had known a man named Thomas Sadler, who was a customer. On that night Thomas Sadler was in the house with a woman whom witness had identified as the deceased.
Mr. Mathews at this point said: I may say that the prisoner has made a statement. He says he went to the Bell public-house in the course of that afternoon, from the Bell to Mrs. Shuttleworth's, from Mrs. Shuttleworth's to Mrs. Treadway's - that he had been to these three houses in which he was with this unhappy woman on this afternoon. With the desire, where it is possible, to corroborate that statement I am calling these witnesses so that you may be able to judge what amount of credence you can give to his statement.
The Coroner: I should tell you, Mr. Mathews, we have no prisoner here.
Mr. Mathews: Well, I will say the accused man - the man who is at the present moment accused of the crime.
Mrs. Fleming, deputy of the lodging-house, 8, White's-row, Spitalfields, said deceased and accused slept there together on the Wednesday night. She did not see Sadler on the Thursday night, but Frances left shortly after twelve o'clock, and Sadler came in at three in the morning. He had blood on his face and hands, and complained of having been robbed.
Mr. Mathews: Did he say anything about the deceased? - Yes. The first thing he said to me when he came to the house was, "Has the young woman, Frances, been in?"
The Coroner: That is very important. What did you say? - I said I had not seen her since she went out a little after twelve.
The Coroner: Did he say anything more about her? - No; he never mentioned her again. He was drunk and could not stand or speak.
Constable Bogan said that at 1:15 on the morning of February 13th he saw a sailor-like man at the entrance to the London Docks. The man was lying in the gateway. Witness roused him and he said, "I want to get to my ship, the Fez." Witness told him he was too drunk to go into the docks. Some dock labourers came out and enquired what was the matter, and offered to pay the man's lodgings. The man said, "I don't want your money, you dock rats." At two o'clock the same morning witness saw the man in Mint-street, and he then said he had been assaulted at the docks. He had his hand on his right ribs, and said he had been kicked. Witness, continuing, said it would take a man four or five minutes to walk from where he saw Sadler at ten or twelve minutes past two to Swallow-gardens. [It will be remembered that the woman was found lying here at a quarter past two.]
Replying to Mr. Lawless witness said when he saw Sadler there were several dock labourers about.
The inquiry was again adjourned.

Sadler's Antecedents.

The value of publicity in the tracking of crime has been exemplified in the case of the most recent of the Whitechapel atrocities, for it was the reports in the papers which led Duncan Campbell, an inmate of the Sailors' Home, to come forward and say that on Friday he was standing in the hall when the accused came in to get a rest, remarking that he had been out all night - that he had been sick, and wanted a drink. He offered a knife for sale, and said it was one which he had got in America. Campbell bought the knife of him for a shilling, and as it was "clammy" he washed it in water, which became discoloured. Campbell had his suspicions aroused by what he read, and communicated with the police. In the meantime he had sold the knife for sixpence to a marine-store dealer, Mr. Robinson, in Dock-street, who, it appears, used to cut up his Sunday dinner. Mr. Robinson even now attaches no importance to the knife. It is described as one of a kind not usually carried by sailors. It has a brass haft, with a pattern upon it, and the blade is about four inches in length, broad, and curving to a sharp point. The edge was blunt when Robinson bought the knife, but he sharpened it and rubbed it up. The knife is now in possession of the police, and Campbell has identified the prisoner as the man who sold him the weapon. It is stated that the knife has been found to correspond with the wound in the woman's throat. Sadler denies that the knife is his. When charged with the crime he also reiterated his innocence. Amongst the other effects belonging to Sadler and found upon him at the time of the arrest were tobacco, pipe, an advance note, a postal order for 2 pounds, several cards and memoranda. The most noticeable article was a large metal clasp-knife. In the kit removed from the steamship Fez there was nothing except the usual clothing. The question is now asked, could the accused also have been concerned in the previous murders? It is by no means clear that he ought to be charged with the last, and the police are not disposed to attach too much weight to purely circumstantial evidence.
His antecedents have now been ascertained as far back as March, 1887, and from this information it is indisputably shown that with half the series of crimes attributed to the East End miscreant he could have had absolutely nothing to do. It appears that on the 24th March, 1887, he joined the Georgian at Newport, and remained with her until the 5th May following, when he left her in London. From this latter date until August he was in England, and presumably in the metropolis. It was during this period that the murders commenced, an unknown woman being found during Christmas week near Osborne and Wentworth-streets, and Martha Turner, being stabbed in 39 places on August 7th, 1888, in some model dwellings in Commercial-street, Spitalfields. It must be said that certainly the occurrence of these two crimes during the man's stay on land lends colour to the original suspicion, but the times of happening of the succeeding crimes, on the other hand, supply a good answer to the suggestion. Sadler went away to sea again on the 17th August, 1888, in the Winestead, and did not reach London until the evening of the 1st October following. During his absence, no fewer than four murders were committed, two of them, strange to say, being on the morning of the day immediately preceding his arrival in the Thames. These murders were discovered on the 31st August in Buck's-row, and the 7th September in Hanbury-street, and on the 30th September in Mitre-square and Berner-street. In order to see if it was possible for Sadler to have left his ship so as to be in London on September 30th, the log book was inspected, and this clearly showed that such a thing would have been impossible, as the vessel did not arrive until eight o'clock in the evening of the 1st October. During his stay after this voyage the peculiarly atrocious murder of Mary Janet Kelly on November 9th occurred, the victim being done to death in her own room, and mutilated in a way far exceeding in complete ferocity the preceding crimes. On the 8th May, 1889, having been in England for over seven months, Sadler went on another voyage, his ship this time being the Bilbao. His absence lasted until the 7th July. Ten days after his return the murder of Alice Mackenzie in Castle Alley took place, this being the last of the Whitechapel horrors preceding the one now absorbing attention. Summing up these facts therefore, and carefully comparing dates, it is seen that Sadler was in this country when four murders took place, and that he was absent when a similar number were perpetrated. If the widespread supposition that the crimes be of common origin is accepted then, it is self-evident that Sadler could not be regarded as responsible for them in the slightest degree.

To be continued..........................

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4899

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Karen on Mon 30 Sep 2013 - 6:25

It has been reported that the Treasury authorities attach the greatest importance to the arrest of the ship's fireman, Sadler, who is in custody for the murder of Frances Coles, in Swallow-gardens, on Friday morning last. At the resumed inquest Mr. C. Mathews, instructed by Mr. Pollard, was present to examine the witnesses, with the permission of the Coroner, Mr. Wynne Baxter, who, whilst assenting to the arrangement, seemed impressed with its unprecedented character. Further, it is certain that the police are not neglecting the facts which came to light in connection with the previous murders. Probably the only trustworthy description of the assassin was that given by a gentleman who, on the night of the Mitre-square murder, noticed in Duke-street, Aldgate, a couple standing under the lamp at the corner of the passage leading to Mitre-square. The woman was identified as one victim of that night, Sept. 30, the other having been killed half an hour previously in Berner-street. The man was described as "aged from thirty to thirty-five; height, 5ft. 7in., with brown hair and big moustache; dressed respectably. Wore pea jacket, muffler, and a cloth cap with a peak of the same material." The witness has confronted Sadler and has failed to identify him.
Further inquiry into Sadler's antecedents reveals that he has a wife at Chatham, and he is believed to have been in the Hong Kong police, and also in the intervals of his voyages acted as a tram driver and conductor in the East of London. It has been proved (says the Daily Telegraph) that he was in London on July 17, 1890 - the date of the Castle-alley murder, and left two days later in the Loch Katrine for the Mediterranean. His earlier movements have since been traced, for it appears that he gave rightly the Bilbao as the ship in which he had sailed; but there are two vessels of that name on the register. On searching the records of the Spanish steamer Bilbao it was discovered that Sadler had coasted in it between Goole and London from May 8th, 1889, to July 7th, 1889. The appended table supplies a record of Sadler's voyages in 1887, 1888, 1889, and 1890 - the period covered by the murders, which, rightly or wrongly, are ascribed to one hand: -


The names of the vessels were respectively as follows: - Georgian, Winestead, Bilbao, Loch Katrine, Alford, Chimborazo, City of Amsterdam, Churton, Fez.

A study of this tabular statement supplies extraordinary coincidences. It is prepared from the records stored at the Registry-General for Seamen, a department of the Board of Trade in Lower Thames-street. Whenever a ship sails duplicates of the articles of agreement signed by the crew are lodged at this office, and when the men are paid off their signatures are attached to the original document, which is retained as a permanent record. The dates in the table may be compared with the dates of the Whitechapel murders, from the list of which the discovery of a dismembered trunk of a woman in Pinchin-street, on September 10, 1889, is excluded, as it undoubtedly did not belong to the same series. Also it may be noted that murders 1 and 2 are not generally believed to have been done by the perpetrator of murders 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, whilst murder 8 is, by some, separated from the rest also and classified as an "imitation" of the preceding atrocities.

1. April 3, 1888. - Emma Elizabeth Smith, 45, had a stake or iron instrument thrust through her body, near Osborne-street, Whitechapel.
2. Aug. 7, 1888. - Martha Tabram, 35, stabbed in thirty-nine places, George-yard-buildings, Commercial-street, Spitalfields.
3. Aug. 31, 1888. - Mary Ann Nicholls, 47, throat cut and body mutilated, in Buck's-row, Whitechapel.
4. Sept. 8, 1888. - Annie Chapman, 47, throat cut and body mutilated, Hanbury-street, Spitalfields.
5. Sept. 30, 1888. - Elizabeth Stride, throat cut, Berner-street, Whitechapel.
6. Sept. 30, 1888. - Catherine Eddowes, 45, throat cut and body mutilated, Mitre-square, Aldgate.
7. Nov. 9, 1888. - Mary Jane Kelly, throat cut and body mutilated, in Miller's-court, Dorset-street.
8. July 17, 1889. - Woman, supposed to be Alice M'Kenzie, from Peterborough, throat cut and body mutilated, in Castle-alley, Whitechapel.
9. Feb. 13, 1891. - Frances Coles, throat cut, Swallow-gardens, Royal Mint-street.

A comparison of dates will demonstrate what appears to be an alibi in favour of Sadler in respect to the murder of Nicholls, in Buck's-row, on August 31st, 1888, and also Annie Chapman, in Hanbury-street, on September 8, 1888, and of the double murders on the morning of Sunday, September 30, 1888, in Berner-street and Mitre-square. There were mutilations in three out of these four. On the other hand, Sadler was not at sea at the time of murders one and two and of the dreadful atrocity in Dorset-street on November 9, 1888, and likewise of the Castle-alley murder, as already stated. These conclusions are based upon the records, which show that Sadler was on board the Winestead from August 17 to October 1, 1888, or in other words the period covering four of the Whitechapel murders. He was seemingly in London, however, from May 5, 1887, to August 17, 1888, and he was ashore, too, from October 1, 1888, until May 8, 1889, the Dorset-street murder having occurred on Lord Mayor's Day, 1888, in the interval. He returned to London ten days before the Castle-alley murder on July 17, 1889.
The vital voyage of the whole series is that on board the Winestead, for if Sadler was in that ship when it left Gravesend on August 17th, 1888, he would have been a day's steam from Venice on August 31st, when the Buck's-row murder happened. It will be noted as an extraordinary coincidence that this ship, which left Trieste on September 10th, is returned as arriving in London on October 1st, and the log clearly shows that it did not come to port until eight o'clock that (Monday) night, that is to say, nearly two days in actual time later than the commission of the Berner-street and Mitre-square crimes, which took place on the Sunday morning, before one o'clock. But there is a singular point about this matter. Messrs. Bailey and Leetham, who were the agents, through their clerks, say that it is a most unusual thing for the crew to be paid off on the day of their arrival in port. It is only possible when the vessel arrives at Gravesend early in the day, allowing the captain to bring the necessary papers to town by rail. The ordinary course would be to allow one day to elapse, and the inference is that a ship whose crew "signed off" on October 1st must have entered port on September 30th or earlier. The evidence of the log, however, is indisputable.
What proof is there that Sadler was actually on board? The answer to this question is furnished by the following: -


No. 1. Signature of Sadler when he signed on the Winestead, Aug. 17, 1888, at Gravesend.
No. 2. Ditto when he signed off the Winestead at London on Oct. 1, 1888.
No. 3. Ditto when he signed on the Loch Katrine, July 19, 1889, at London.
No. 4. Ditto when he signed off the Loch Katrine at London, Oct. 1, 1889.

The first signature is not, however, a positive proof that Sadler sailed on board the Winestead, for it frequently happens that a man may sign and yet be an absentee. Still, here the articles were signed at Gravesend, which would make it less likely that he played the truant. The crucial test of the whole thing is: Is the signature No. 2 genuine? If not, for some unknown reason some other man - a substitute - must have answered to and forged Sadler's name when he was paid off. It may be mentioned that the final "r" of Sadler's signature is characteristic, and that the "r" in signature No. 2 is of a different formation. If signature No. 2 is not a forgery, then Sadler must have sailed in the Winestead, have gone to the Mediterranean during August and September, 1888, and could not have returned until October 1, 1889, and thus he will be able to prove his entire innocence of four at least of the Whitechapel crimes, should these at any time hereafter be imputed to his charge.

A "JACK THE RIPPER" IN LONDON TWO CENTURIES AGO.

The Daily Chronicle says: - Jack the Ripper, it appears, was not unknown in the seventeenth century. At the British Museum is a copy of a black-letter ballad, with two woodcuts, printed for Fran. Grove, on Snow Hill, about 1655, giving the "Strange and wonderful news of a woman which Lived near unto the Famous City of London, who had her head torn off from her Body by the Divell, and her lymbs rent in pieces and scattered about in the room, where the mischief was done, which may serve to forewarn all proud and disloyall men and women to have a care how they behave themselves while they live in this sinfull world, that they fall not into the like temptations. The manner how shee made her bargain with the Divel she confest to some of her Neighbors before her death." The only difference between the old and the new Ripper seems to be that while the latter is popularly supposed to carry a black bag, the former "appear'd i'th' likenesse of a tall black man." The crime was evidently a mysterious one, for there is no allusion to the capture of the perpetrator; and no doubt the ballad gives the prevalent opinion that it was all the work of the devil, and not of  a human being.

Source: Cardiff Times, 21 February 1891, Page 5

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4899

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Karen on Mon 30 Sep 2013 - 23:02

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

At the resumed inquest on Friday on the body of Frances Coles, the victim of the Whitechapel murder, a quantity of fresh evidence was brought forward, including that of Ellen Callana, a woman who stated that at half-past one o'clock on the morning of the crime she was with Coles in Commercial-street. A short man whom she described, and whom she could not identify as Sadler, accosted them there, and finally walked away with the deceased towards the Minories. Some inconsistencies were pointed out in the witness's further evidence. The coroner summed up at considerable length, treating unfavourably the supposition that Sadler was guilty of the murder; and the jury, after a quarter of an hour's deliberation, returned an open verdict, adding a rider to the effect that in their opinion the police did their duty in detaining the prisoner.

Source: Cambrian News and Merionethshire Standard, 6 March 1891, Page 1

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4899

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

Post by Guest on Tue 6 Jan 2015 - 21:43

The December Ripperologist found a Salvation Army connection with Frances in a newspaper dated Feb. 14, 1891.
Two or three women asserted that in the features of the deceased they could recognize a young woman whom the Salvation Army had endeavored to reclaim, 
and who had recently been an inmate of one of the Army shelters. One woman 
asserted that she knew the deceased, who some time ago lived in Thrawl 
Street by the name of Francis or Frances 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum