Adjourned Inquest at Borth

Home    Search    Print    Login    Add Bookmark

• Title	Adjourned Inquest at Borth
  Short Title	Adjourned Inquest at Borth
  Source ID	S149
  Text	ADJOURNED INQUEST AT BORTH Yesterday morning, John Evans, Esq., opened the adjourned inquest into the death of Mrs Mary Davies, of London row, who is alleged to have been murdered on the might of the 20th September. The jury were the Rev. J. M. Griffiths, the Rev. J. D. Timothy, the Rev. J. Llewelyn, Picton terrace; Messrs. W. T. Lewis, London House; John Ellis, White Lion; Abraham Davies, Glanywern; John Lewis, Glanrhyd; Hugh Hughes, Liverpool House; Evan Griffiths, Cambridge place; John Jenkins, Florence place; Hugh James, Glover House; David Williams, Picton terrace; and William Hughes, Ardwyn Villa. Mr A.J. Hughes, Aberystwyth, appeared for the Public Prosecutor. The Prisoner was unrepresented. There was a large number of the people of Borth present in the Assembly Rooms, where the inquest was held. Ann Rees was the first witness. She said, I live at Acorn House, Borth. “Thomas Richards, mariner, was the man who chiefly built the back kitchen of No. 1, London place. The deceased wore a thick ring similar to the one produced. Margaret Davies, Railway Crossing also said Richards built the back premises and that deceased wore a ring like the one produced, but she was not sure it was that one. Mary Williams, Railway Crossing, said between four and five on Saturday, the 22nd September, she was sent to lay out the body of the deceased. Margaret Williams, Ocean Wave, and many others were in the room. She (Margaret Williams) was a cousin of the deceased. The body was then lying across the bed. The head was towards the wall, her back towards the post of the bed, her legs doubled up under her, lying on her left side. Was there anything over her head? - I saw nothing, sir. What cloths had she on? - Only a night dress and a chemise. A flannel vest, chemise, and night dress were produced and identified. The night dress and chemise were old, patched, and ragged, and one of the garments was ripped up down the entire front. This, however, appears to have been done to get it off. The Coroner – Before washing the body did you notice anything? - I noticed that her face was back, and I noticed a little mark on her hip. I thing it was the right [sic], but I am not sure. Can you tell us the position her hands were in? - Her left arm and hand were rather under her. The right hand was extended from her body. Did you remove the bolster and pillow or sheets? - No. Did you notice anything? - No, sir. There was a little blood on the bolster, but I did notice any on her clothing or sheet. Did you notice her left hand, whether the wedding ring was missing? - That was the first thing I noticed sir. I was well acquainted with Mary Davies, but had not noticed her ring. Margaret Williams, Ocean Wave, cousin of Mary Davies, the deceased, said she was present in the bedroom at London place when Mary Williams went there. Her description of the position and condition of the body was quite accurate. She head Mrs Williams say that there was no ring on the finer of deceased. Did not look herself. Did not know the ring. The garments and bed clothes were taken from London-place by P.C. Lewis Davies on Tuesday last. By a Juryman – The deceased was in the habit of wearing two rings when she went out. P.C. Lewis, stationed at Borth, said that about four o’clock on Saturday, September 23rd, he went upstairs at London-place, and saw deceased lying across the bed with her head towards the back of the bed, and her feet outwards, facing towards the top of the bed. She was in her night garments. He took back the clothes in order to see the position in which she was lying and found her lower limbs bended; found that the left hand, which was underneath, was quite cold and that the face was rather dark. The bed clothes were behind her back and the bolster and pillow in front of her. Examined the bedroom and observed on the dressing table close by the bed, some fumigating medicated paper and a saucer, and asked Mrs Margaret Davies what it was. Asked Mrs Davies if she had seen any bottles or anything. Did not observe anything else. The Coroner – Do you produce a bunch of keys? - Yes. Where did you get them? - From Mrs Margaret Davies, No. 2, London-place. I got them on Tuesday. Do you produce a gimlet? - Yes. (Produced). Where did you get this? - From Mr Richard Hughes, mariner, Upper Borth, at his house on Tuesday, the 25th. Do you also produce a letter signed James Davies? - Yes. Where did you get this letter? – From Mrs Margaret Davies on Tuesday morning. She opened it in my presence on Saturday evening. She asked me if she should do so, and I said she could in order to get the husband’s address. (The letter was headed “Swansea, Thursday,” addressed to deceased, and bearing post mark “The Docks, Swansea, September 20th, 1894.”) Where did you first see this? - At deceased’s house on September 22nd, when it was opened in my presence by Mrs Margaret Davies. I received it from Mrs Davies at her own house on September 25th., Do you recognise deposit receipt? (produced) – Yes, and the envelope now produced, addressed “Mrs Davies, No 1, London-place, Borth,” bearing post mark Aberystwyth, September 21st, 1894. Where did you first see the envelope? With Mrs Margaret Davies at her house on the 22nd. The envelope was not opened. Received it open on the 25th from her and examined the contents. It was a deposit receipt for £200. The £5 Bank of England note produced was first seen in the possession of Mrs Catherine Richards, at No. 2, London-place, Borth, the wife of Thomas Richards, on Tuesday, the 25th, and took possession of it. Have you examined the back door of the kitchen? – Yes, on Wednesday, the 26th, and found a gimlet hole opposite the centre of the bolt filled up by dirt. It was a fresh hole. The wooden bolt produced was the one he was speaing about. On the 27th, went to deceased’s house in company with P.C. Phillips, and opened the door by slipping back the bolt by putting a penknife through the hole. John Richards, Sandon Villa, a lad between 11 and 12, son of accused, said he got up on Friday between six and seven o’clock, and when going to his work at Dr. Jones’s noticed a paper under the door, and placed it on the kitchen table. Had never seen a bank note before and did not know what it was. Elizabeth Prosser, Board School House, said she was called into Sandon Villa by Mrs Catherine Williams who showed the bank note and asked what it was. She said it was a £5 Bank of England note. Richard Hughes, Upper Borth, mariner, said he lived next door to Sandon Villa and first saw the gimlet on the window sill of Mrs Richard’s back window which looked and out into his garden. That was on Friday morning between seven and eight. Took it into his own house and the following Sunday evening about five o’clock and handed it to the police on Tuesday. Did you the night previous to Friday notice any noise about your house? – Yes, between one and two in the night I heard nose of walking right round two houses which make one block both in front and back I did not get up and did not see anyone. P.S. Davies, Aberystwyth, produced a small cigar box which he received on the 25th from David Hughes Richards, son of accused, at the house of Morgan Hughes, Borth. It contained an envelope addressed to Mrs Catherine Davies, Sandon Villa, with the Aberystwyth post mar, September 21st. It also contained the brown paper and 40 sovereigns in gold. Witness also produced a ball of string from Miss Ellis at the Skinner’s Arms on the 25th September, which corresponds with the string around the box. Chief Constable Howell Evans, next gave evidence to the same effect as that given at the Police Station on Saturday found in the report of the trial. He said the confession was made between Neath and Llanelley and not between Neath and Swansea. On the 1st October, he added, the prisoner sent for him (witness) and said “I want to tell you-“ stopped him and said “You had better not tell me unless you want me to tell the magistrates.” He said, “I wish to tell the magistrates that I found the ring on top of the chest of draws in the parlour where I found the keys, and took it from there and did not tae it from Mary Davies’s finger.” On the 3rd (Wednesday) he had Richards placed among four, and took James Phillips to the yard who at once ploked him out as being the man he had seen at the Royal Oak. By the Rev Mr Timothy – The prisoner stated that he got in through the window. Is it possible for anyone to get in through the window? - Not I do not think it is. Captain Hugh Hughes – In what condition was he in at Neath when you saw him? Did he appear to be drunk-droway? - No he appeared to be quite sober. He looked brighter before he was charged with murder. He was down east and did not look so bright afterwards. He had only been charged with robbery at Neath. By the Rev. J.M. Griffiths – So far as I known the people called in for indentification [sic] purposes were not known to the witness. Dr Abraham Thomas, surgeon, Aberystwyth, said on Tuesday the 25th, in company with Dr Jones, of the body of Mary Davies, then lying at London-place. The body was laid out in a shroud, with a twisted linen band round the waist, and a clod of earth on the stomach. On the removal of the linen the body presented marked changes of decomposition such as extensive greenish discolouration over sternum, abdomen, both groins and more especially the face and neck. A ruddy froth issued from the nostrils. The lips were swollen and of a purplish black colour, cheeks puffed out, the finger and more especially the nails of a purplish black tint. Around left nipple were marks of old eczema and a short distance below a bruise about an inch long and three-quarters semi circular rows of what he considered to be bruises in size and position similar to impressions produced by fingers. The innermost circle were of pinkish colour, the outer of greenish tint. Those were all the external appearances he thought it necessary to mention. Was there something different in the rows to the other marks? - The bruise on the nipple and on the thigh were different in character to other discolourations he had referred to. The other discolourations were uniform patches. Those were isolated spots. The bruises were not great in extent, nor were they deep. Then will you go on to describe internal appearance? – The lungs were large and bulky, not congested. The windpipe was stained a dark red colour due to post-mortem change. No pus in the tubes. If there had been an acute recent attack of asthma, would you expect the tubs congested and the presence of pus? – Not necessarily. Asthma is a spasmodic disease. It is simply the action of the tubes. Medical men never yet had an opportunity of seeing a case of asthma die. Asthmatical patients lived however bad they were from asthma. Have you ever known a case of a person dying from asthma? – No. If a person died from asthma I should expect symptoms of asphyxia. Were those symptoms present of absent? – The post-mortem decomposition prevents my answering that question. The heart, continued Dr Abraham Thomas, was placid and empty with some natural fat around it. The brain was healthy as were also the internal organs of abdomen. Found no evidence of outrage, though the washing of the body and five days decomposition might have done away with such evidence. The valves of the heart were healthy. Did you find any evidence of any disease which would account of the death. – No. Having made these observations and heard the position in which the body was found and the statement of Thomas Richards what inference do you draw? – The only inference I can draw is that suffocation may have been the cause of death. Did you find any signs which would be inconsistent with that? – No signs which would be inconsistent. I beg to qualify that expression – no signs inconsistent – not marked enough to say that it was due to suffocation. Did you find any signs which you would expect to find in a case of suffocation? – Yes. Did you find any signs absolutely inconsistent? – No signs inconsistent with that inference, but the signs cannot give positive evidence that death was due to suffocation. Did you find some signs which you would expect to be present in a case of death from suffocation? – Yes. Dr Thomas then went on to describe discolourations on garments and bed clothes, and said there was a large ruddish brown pathch on the bolster. Dr John Jones, Borth, agreed with what Dr Thomas had said in his evidence. The Coroner – Have you arrived at any conclusion as to the cause of death? – No, I am not prepared to state the cause of death. Did you see any evidence of any disease which would account for death? – No; it is quite consistent with suffocation. Your observations are quite consistent with death from suffocation? – The post mortem appearances are quite consistent with death from suffocation. Having made a post-mortem examination, and heard the evidence given to-day, what form of death do you say it was? – Well, suffocation, but there were no positive indications of death from suffocation. May those evidences have been removed by post-mortem changes? – Yes some of them. The absence of that evidence might have been due to post-mortem changes? – It would make it very difficult to decide some of them such as finding the trachea of a brownish-red colour, and it is found after post-mortem. Then post-mortem changes make it very difficult to speak positively? – Yes. I wish to leave the bare statement that death was due to suffocation. That is most consistent with what I saw and with the evidence I have heard today. You say that the whole circumstances are more consistent with death from suffocation than with any other form of death, but there is no positive indication of death from suffocation? – Yes. Can you suggest any other cause of death which would be consistent with all circumstances that suffocation? – No. The Court then adjourned until two o’clock The Jury found that deceased died from an assault by Richards, and returned a verdict of Wilful Murder.

  
  

This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 England & Wales License.

This site is hosted by LIQUID WEB and powered by The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding ©, written by Darrin Lythgoe 2001-2010.