Gloucester

by Jill Evans

  I never thought there were such people in the world. I shall never trust anyone. I have never gone about with boys much, because I am home too much to go about with anyone. But my father is raging mad over it. If he had been near him when the letter came I don’t know what he would have done to him. I am sure my family are all respectable and as for disgracing them I would rather die than disgrace them – I think too much about my home and people.

  Mother says you should get to know a person before you judge them. I can just imagine how hard it would be for you. It must have been awful when you opened the letter. You have no idea how sorry we all are and for the children, but I never wish to see him or hear from him again. I shall never trust another man as long as I live. I think men are all alike – they are best left alone. And I am glad you have let me know so soon, but I am thankful everything is as it is. I have not done anything to be ashamed, only I would not like to think I had upset anyone’s home, because I am sure I would not do it and know about it. I can tell you if I have put anything in this letter you don’t believe, you can always come and see for yourself. Then you can see with looking what we are without asking. Now I will close.

  Miss Crabtree.

  The third letter was from Matthew Rodgers, who was now in a ward at Manchester Infirmary:

  My dear Wife and Children, – Just a few lines in answer to your letter and I am pleased to hear that the children are still keeping in the best of health, as it leaves me the same at present. I have had enough of this sort of letter-writing, and I want a proper answer from you as to what you intend doing, as I am not going to keep wasting money on stamps. So just write and let me know if you are willing to make things up again or not, and if you don’t intend to try to be the same as we were before, just let me know and I will know what to do, as I don’t think I will be in hospital much longer, and I want to know what you intend to do, for if you have been telling all the street about what I have done, well it will be as well for me to keep away and allow you so much a week after your money is stopped, as you will not be getting it much longer now, so you want to be prepared, for as soon as I am discharged from the Army your pay will stop, so I want a proper answer from you.

  Give my best love to Mattie, George and Jack, and take some for yourself, if I am not too low to be thought about. I remain your Husband and Father, Matt. R.

  Old postcard of Manchester Infirmary. (Author’s collection)

  To this letter were added kisses ‘for the children’ and the words, ‘Waiting for your reply and my letters you have.’

  Sergeant Glover continued his evidence, saying he took Mrs Rodgers to the police station and on the way there she was attacked by the woman Smith (‘Hairy Mary’). At the police station, she admitted that she had killed her husband, adding, ‘He said my children were all bastards and that he could go with Hairy Mary when he liked.’ As Gloucester Prison was an all-male institution, the Sergeant took Mrs Rodgers to Horfield Prison in Bristol. On the way there, she said to him,

  When I was in the Park End Hotel my husband came to me and showed me an apple and said, ‘Do you see this apple? It is what my fancy girl gave to me.’ I told him to put it back in his pocket, as it was no credit to him to show me up in front of people. Mrs Rowles heard him say it, and saw him with the apple. He put it back in his pocket.

  Glover confirmed that an apple was found in the pocket of one of the deceased man’s coats.

  Inspector Brotheridge said that the prisoner was left in his charge for a few minutes at the police station. She told him,

  He has always treated me badly ever since we were married, and I have always worked hard and kept respectable. He bets on horses. Tonight he was nursing another woman’s baby and wanted to buy it for a sovereign, and said to me that all my three children were bastards. That did it. I could stand it no more. Look after my three children, Inspector, won’t you.

  The House Surgeon at the Gloucestershire Royal Infirmary stated that when Rodgers was brought in, he was already dead. The whole of his neck had been severed, except for the spinal column.

  Mr Lort-Williams then began his address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner. He stated that the jury had three verdicts to consider: guilty of murder; guilty of manslaughter under great provocation; or not guilty of any crime. Although he did not suggest that the prisoner was not guilty of any crime, he did ask the jury,

  … how could this unfortunate woman against whom no one could say a single word have come to the position of committing a murder? Was not she gradually worked up to such a pitch of mental agony week by week, day by day, culminating on September 13th in a series of acts of mental cruelty? Was not she worked up to such a pitch upon that night that it only required one further small act to make her provoked to such an extent that she could not command the ordinary moral ideas which should have forbidden her to commit such a crime? If so, the jury would have a duty to say that the woman was guilty not of murder but of manslaughter – the killing of a human being upon very great provocation.

  The accused had borne an excellent character as a hard-working woman and a good mother. They all sympathised with the poor creature whose life had been taken; for whatever his misdeeds, death was too great a penalty for him to have paid. It had been shown that Rodgers was a bad husband and, except for a show of affection to his children, he was not a good father either. He was constantly going about with other women and neglecting his home, and he made his conduct infinitely worse by writing to his wife about his episodes with other women. At least he might have had the decency to keep those particulars to himself. It was difficult to come to the conclusion that Mrs Rodgers had the mind of a murderess and Mr Lort-Williams suggested that the jury should find her guilty of manslaughter.

  The Rodgers’ boys, aged eleven, five and seven. Detail from the Cheltenham Chronicle and Gloucestershire Graphic, 20 September 1919. (Gloucestershire Archives)

  The judge began his summing up by explaining to the jury that murder was killing a person on purpose without excuse, but it might be reduced to manslaughter by great provocation. The doctrine of provocation was not a concession to vindictiveness, but to the impulses of human temper. In this case, the bad conduct of the victim was not provocation in law, but those acts of the deceased might have had the result of reducing the prisoner to a state of mind which meant she needed very little further provocation than would otherwise have been the case. The question was, what provocation, if any, took place immediately before the blow was struck?

  Nobody disputed that Elizabeth had killed her husband. She took a razor and applied it to his throat with such determination that, but for the backbone, his head would have been cut off. A great appeal had been made to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, but the jury had a duty to perform which must be done dispassionately.

  As to what happened just before the tragedy, the judge was not satisfied that the jury had heard the whole story: he dared say that the memories of Mr and Mrs Barnes were a little impaired by the shock of what had happened. It was difficult to believe that they had heard the whole story of what happened immediately before the woman went out and fetched the razor. It was an astonishing thing that with nothing happening – merely the deceased dangling the baby on his knees – the prisoner would have suddenly got up, fetched the razor and committed the crime. The judge thought it was possible that Rodgers, going on remarks made by him to his wife in the past, said something intolerable to her. There must have been something said or done which made the prisoner go out and get the razor. He was bound to say that everything pointed to this being an absolutely sudden act, and the court was without any knowledge at all of what it was that precipitated the crisis at that moment.

  Mrs Rodgers, in the Cheltenham Chronicle and Gloucestershire Graphic, 20 September 1919. (Gloucestershire Archives)

  The judge finished by saying that in this case he thought that if the jury could only explain the sudden action of Mrs Rodgers by assuming that something was done by speech or gesture by t
he deceased which was intolerable to Elizabeth, and that she in a moment of passion and without deliberation cut his throat, then the jury would be entitled to return a verdict of manslaughter.

  The jury then retired, and after an absence of about six minutes returned to court with a verdict of guilty of manslaughter under great provocation. Elizabeth Rodgers was then brought up to be sentenced, supported on either side by a female warder. Mr Lort-Williams made an appeal for mercy, adding that the prisoner believed she was pregnant. The judge, in passing sentence, said the jury had taken a very merciful view of the case, which they were only able to take by assuming certain possibilities, in support of which there was no evidence. He could not help thinking that it was a case very near to murder. He was extremely sorry for the prisoner, but he could not treat her with great leniency because she killed her husband with the greatest possible determination. He was sorry to say he must sentence her to penal servitude, but only for five years.

  Elizabeth Rodgers said nothing in response, and was taken down to the cells.

  On the west side of Gloucester Cathedral there is an archway known as St Mary’s Gate, which leads into an area called St Mary’s Square. Houses and buildings surround the ancient church of St Mary de Lode, and between the church and the gate there stands a monument to Bishop Hooper, who was burnt at the stake on that spot in 1555. Most of the houses which once enclosed the church and monument have long since been demolished, and modern buildings have taken their place.

  In 1934, George Wells was the occupant of 48 St Mary’s Square, which was on the corner with Mount Street. He was a larger-than-life man, both in build and character, and was well known in Gloucester and the surrounding villages. Born in Kent, in his youth he had travelled the world, getting work where he could. In 1914, Wells married Matilda Silvester in Taunton, Somerset, and they had two children, Frances Mary and Ronald George. The family moved to Gloucester when Ronald was a baby, but his mother left when he was six years old. Ronald stayed with his father while Frances, who was then eight, went to live with a family in nearby Corse.

  George Wells worked for many years as a slaughter man, and was employed for a long time by Messrs Smith Bros, butchers, who had a shop in Westgate Street. Later, he started up a business as a cheese-hawker and used to travel around in a pony and trap, selling his wares. In May 1934, Wells was involved in an accident, in which a motorcycle collided with his pony and trap. He was thrown from the trap and his collarbone was broken. He had a weakness in his right arm after that, and was due to be paid some compensation money as a result of the accident.

  Sketch of St Mary’s Square in The Century magazine, 1890. (Author’s collection)

  Ronald Wells attended Archdeacon Street School until he was fourteen, then worked at Messrs Smith Bros shop, and helped his father in the slaughterhouse for about nine months. Afterwards, he found employment at various shops, but in October 1930 he was brought before the Gloucester Juvenile Court, charged with attempting to break into a shop where he had previously worked. He was bound over for two years and put on probation. In 1932, when he was seventeen, he was tried at the assizes on charges of shop-breaking, larceny and breach of recognizances, and was sentenced to three years in a borstal.

  In July 1934, Ronald Wells was released on licence and went back to live with his father at 48 St Mary’s Square. He also joined his father in the cheese-selling business. Father and son appeared to get on well together, although there were sometimes arguments about Ronald staying out late at night, drinking. George Wells had put his son in charge of looking after the money from the business, but soon had to bring someone in to show Ronald how to keep accounts properly.

  George Wells in The Citizen, 30 January 1935. (Gloucestershire Archives)

  Towards the end of October 1934, neighbours realised that George Wells had not been seen for some time, although Ronald was observed going in and out of the house. Frederick Williams lived at 2 Mount Street, and his house adjoined 48 St Mary’s Square. George Wells had a bad chest, which meant he would cough frequently. Williams could hear this clearly through his wall, but the last time he noticed the coughing was in the early hours of 21 October. He also heard Wells tell his son that if he continued to stay out late, he would have to find somewhere else to live. A couple of days later, not having heard Wells at all, he asked Ronald where his father was, and he replied that he was lying low for a couple of days, ‘on account of that compensation job’. Williams took this to mean it had something to do with the money Wells was due to receive from his accident. When Williams mentioned that he hadn’t heard Wells coughing for a while, Ronald said that the cough had gone.

  Gilbert Aitcheson, who was friends with both father and son, saw the two of them riding in their pony and trap on the afternoon of 22 October. The following day, Ronald asked Aitcheson to go out with him in the trap. When Aitcheson inquired where his father was, the lad replied that he was ill and was not getting up today. While they were out, they had a slight accident and Aitcheson hurt his knee. Later that day, Ronald went to see him and said his father wanted to know if his knee hurt much. Aitcheson said he would come over in a few minutes to speak to him. Ronald left, but returned shortly after to tell him his father had gone to bed. After that, Aitcheson frequently asked after George Wells, and Ronald would usually reply that he was ‘no better, no worse’. On 30 October, Aitcheson went to a party with Ronald. They met outside no. 48 and, before closing the door, Ronald called upstairs, ‘Goodnight Dad, I shan’t be long.’

  Old postcard of St Mary’s Square. (Author’s collection)

  On 31 October, Ronald’s sister, Frances, arrived at the door and asked how her father was. Ronald replied that he had been ill in bed with bronchitis, but he was now out, ‘up the street’. She did not enter the house.

  When November arrived and there was still no sign of George Wells, Aitcheson asked Ronald if his father was ‘doing time’. Ronald then said that his father was in prison in Cheltenham for a month, because he hadn’t paid a fine for a minor offence, and they had been trying to keep it quiet. Aitcheson told him that the neighbours were talking about breaking into the house, and Ronald told him to say his father was in Cheltenham hospital. Aitcheson noticed that Ronald had his blue suit on, rather than his working clothes, and asked him why. He replied that he was going to see his father. Aitcheson saw Ronald go off on his bicycle later that day, and when the young man had not come back by the next day, Aitcheson called the police.

  At twenty past two on the afternoon of 2 November, Inspector Large and Detective Sergeant Ward arrived at 48 St Mary’s Square and gained entry to the house through a window. All the doors in the living room were closed. Ward opened the door that closed off the stairs and saw the body of George Wells lying halfway up, on the landing, with its back against the wall and the legs hanging down the stairs. The body was covered with an overcoat and the head had a piece of a vest placed over it. His face, head and hands were covered in blood, but he was wearing a clean shirt. Next to the body was a case of butcher’s knives, which were clean and had not been used.

  There was no sign of blood upstairs in the bedroom, but bloodstains were found downstairs in the living room, on the ceiling, pictures, crockery on the dresser and wallpaper. The floor of the living room, unlike the rest of the house, was extremely clean. There was a couch in front of the fireplace with some blankets on it, as if someone had been using it as a makeshift bed.

  * * *

  * * *

  There were some marks of blood on the door of the scullery, and inside the police found a bundle of bloodstained clothes, including the other part of the vest which had been placed over the dead man’s head. Two shirts were hanging on a line in the scullery, apparently belonging to Ronald from their size. Both had bloodstains on them. In the coal cellar, a heavy hammer with a sharp end was found, on which were traces of blood.

  That evening, a police appeal was broadcast by the BBC, asking listeners to look out for Ronald George Wells, who was w
anted in connection with the death of his father, George Wells. He was described as being five feet six inches in height, of medium build, with fair hair and blue eyes, clean shaven but with a prominent cut on his right lip, a large nose which inclined to the right, and he stammered when speaking. He had last been seen at about twenty past two on 1 November, in Gloucester, riding a man’s old bicycle.

  The following evening, Ronald Wells walked into the police station at Woolaston, in the Forest of Dean, and asked for something to eat. He had no money and appeared exhausted. The police constable on duty recognised him from his description and sent a message to Gloucester. Wells was taken to the central police station in Gloucester, where he was charged by Deputy Chief Constable Hopkins with murder. He denied the charge.

  On 5 November, Ronald Wells appeared before a magistrate at Gloucester police station. A crowd of about 100 people waited outside, hoping to see the youth, but he was already in the cells of the building. The hearing was held in the clerk’s office at the police station, before the mayor and other magistrates. Wells seemed calm and stood rigidly to attention throughout the hearing. Deputy Chief Constable Hopkins related how the body had been found on 2 November. Wells was remanded for eight days.