Great Train Crimes: Murder and Robbery on the Railways

by Oates, Jonathan

  It was not to be. At the train’s first stop, which was at Eastleigh, a well-built young man entered the compartment. Mrs King was impressed by his smart appearance, as he was so well dressed and tall. He had dark brown hair and grey/hazel eyes. They said few words to one another. The man was George Henry Parker, born on 8 November 1877 (and so now aged 23) at Studley, Warwickshire, and he was a former Royal Marine. Had Mrs King been very observant she might have noticed a tattoo on the back of his hand – a heart and anchor, with clasped hands.

  The train made its next stop at Winchester at noon. William Pearson who appeared to be, as indeed he was, a prosperous middle-aged farmer (aged 45), then joined the other two. He sat opposite Mrs King, facing the engine. He lived at Christchurch Road, Winchester, and was married with two children. Well-known in local agricultural circles, he farmed Winnal Manor Farm, near Winchester. His brother was the vice chairman of Winchester Rural District Council. Pearson was travelling to London to cash a large cheque at a London bank.

  None of the three knew each other. There was little conversation,either. However, Parker did ask Pearson for some money, but the latter refused him. Pearson read his newspaper and then began to doze. It was when the train was nearing its destination that the crisis of the day was to erupt. Mrs King later recalled:

  After passing Surbiton station, I turned my back to … [Parker] … to look out of the window, I had moved my seat to face the engine. About the time the train passed Surbiton … [Parker] … entered the lavatory chamber. I was standing up … just after he came out of the lavatory. Then I heard a ‘bang’ like a fog signal. I remember hearing two reports, and then I felt blood rushing down my face. Then I begged … [Parker] … not to do it again.

  Parker had just shot both Pearson and Mrs King.

  She exclaimed to Parker, ‘My God! What have you done? Why did you do it?’ ‘I did it for money. I want some money. Do you have any?’ Looking in her purse, she found a shilling and gave it to him. He took it and put it in his pocket.

  It was only then that she looked at the other occupant of the compartment. Pearson was doubled up in the corner, and there was an ominous mark on his forehead. He had been shot dead. Parker held a smoking revolver. He then rifled through the dead man’s clothes, taking his watch and chain, together with any money he could find, counting it and putting it away. Mrs King could stand no more of the unfolding horror. She screamed. Parker then turned towards her and threatened her with death unless she quietened down. He then threw a coin at her and said, ‘Here is a sovereign; stop your noise.’

  She said that it was of no use to her and she did not want it. Parker then said to her, ‘I am sorry I shot you. I didn’t mean to hurt you.’ ‘Why did you do it?’ she answered. ‘Well I wanted money. I was wicked, I know, but I couldn’t help it. I am going to Liverpool tonight to start for South Africa and I wanted money.’

  Parker must have put the gun down, for he then said, ‘What have I done with that damned thing? I must not keep it about me. I have got a mind to put it in his hand and then they will think he did it himself.’ ‘If I were you, I would throw it out of the window.’

  He looked out of the window, but saw some workmen there and they would see the act. Mrs King suggested, ‘Wait till you get a little further on.’

  He did so as the train was now beginning to slow down as it began to pull into Vauxhall. Flinging the revolver out of the window (it landed on the metals near Nine Elms Goods Yard – when it was found four of the six chambers were still loaded), Parker pushed Pearson’s corpse to one side and opened the door of the compartment before the train had come to a stop. Before then, he had elicited a promise from Mrs King that she would not speak against him.

  Once on platform 2, he moved quickly. He gave his ticket to Alfred Gibbons, the ticket collector. It was actually Pearson’s. Doubtless to his distress, he heard Mrs King’s voice behind him. She shouted, ‘Stop that man – he has murdered someone in that carriage.’ Meanwhile, Parker bolted down the stairs, followed by several porters. He managed to escape from the railway station and headed towards Vauxhall Bridge. Unfortunately for him, there was a police constable there on traffic control duty (PC Thomas Fuller). He joined in the chase. Parker realizing the bridge was blocked, ran towards the Southern Metropolitan Gas Works, over a small bridge over a creek in the yard and hid in a coke truck in the retort shed. His pursuers surrounded the shed. Fifteen minutes later, Parker could not stand the heat any longer and gave himself up. He was taken in a cab to Larkhall Lane Police Station, Clapham.

  He was subsequently taken to Holloway prison; en route the crowd booed and yelled at him. When he was searched, he was found to have a purse with £5 in gold, a game licence and a leather cigar case, both of which had been stolen from Pearson. Apart from that, his belongings included a gun licence, dice, a pawnbroker’s ticket for a watch and a soldier’s discharge papers. He was charged with both murder and attempted murder.

  More information was found out about Parker. He was the eldest of eight children, but aged 14 he had been sent to a reformatory. Later his parents split up, with his mother going to Birmingham to work in a cycle shop. He was a clerk until he joined the Royal Marine Artillery in London on 12 March 1896, perhaps because his brother was in the Royal Engineers. For the first three years in the service, both his character and ability were rated ‘Good’ or ‘Very Good’. His conduct and his proficiency with weaponry was also highly rated. Yet in 1900 he was ‘discharged with ignominy’, due to his being caught stealing. Enlisting again, later that year at Gosport, under the surname of Hill, his character was stated as ‘Bad’ and it was noticed that letters had been going missingfrom the barracks. It was found that Parker was the thief, trying to find money in his comrades’ letters. He was arrested, discharged at the end of the year, and spent 21 days in prison. He then went to London, returning to Portsmouth with some jewellery and looking prosperous. He was suspected of having been involved in a jewellery theft at the Lyceum Theatre. He then disappeared. Apparently he had written to his father, saying he had a job as a barman.

  He now wrote a letter to his father, trying to explain his actions: ‘I do not know what I did it for. I must have been mad. I had no cause.’ He explained that his father broke up the family home while his son was serving in the army and this had contributed to his son’s current difficulties. Parker had other problems; he had spent £9 in Eastleigh and Southampton with a young woman from Portsmouth, who he now thought might kill herself. He wrote, ‘But there is one girl in Portsmouth whom I love better than gold and she is not good looking. But I love her dearly and she does me. I promised that I would fetch her away from home next week and she is not happy there.’

  The girl in question was Mrs Elizabeth Sarah Rowland, wife to a private soldier. Parker claimed to not know of her marital status. In the days prior to Parker’s journey to London, the two went around together, spending money and going to the theatre. This resulted in Parker being left almost penniless. They said their farewells in Eastleigh on 17 January.

  He also wrote to Mrs Pearson, expressing his regret and sorrow at his shooting her husband:

  I am really truly sorry and I feel for you and your husband’s brother. I am truly sorry and repentant for having in an evil moment allowed myself to be carried away into committing the offence which I am now being charged … I had no intention of shooting your husband. No, none whatever. I purchased the revolver at Southampton with the intention of shooting the girl whom I have been going out with and myself. She was unhappy at home, and so was I. I shot your husband on the spur of the moment.

  He denied ever asking Pearson for any money and said that Mrs King lied when she said otherwise. After begging her forgiveness, and God’s, he went on to state that he deserved to die. He signed it ‘The Wretched Murderer of your husband’.

  Mrs King, meanwhile, was sent to the Beatrice Ward in St Thomas’s Hospital. Her son, a quartermaster sergeant in the Royal Artillery based at Woolwich, later visited h
er. He was doubtless pleased to learn that she was making good progress. When her husband, a prominent freemason, heard that she had been shot, he had fainted at the news. The bullet had entered her left cheek and broke the jaw bone. However, it would not be a permanent injury and she later made a full recovery.

  The inquest into Pearson’s death began on 21 January at Lambeth Coroner’s Court, presided over by Mr A Braxton Hicks. There was a crowd of 200–300 people outside the court, but Parker was not intimidated. Quite the reverse. He entered the court with head held high and a swinging gait. Sympathy was extended to the family of the deceased and to Mrs King. Due to her injury she could not be present at the hearing. James Pearson, one of the deceased’s brothers, had identified the corpse at the mortuary. He had last seen his brother on 15 January. The court was adjourned until all the witnesses could be present. In the mean time, all the jurors were bound over for £40 to attend it. Pearson was buried at Winchester on the same day.

  On 11 February the inquest was concluded. Parker briefly attended the court, though he did not wish to. Few people were aware of his being there, so he was not shouted at by anyone on his arrival or departure. There was important new evidence given. William Cox worked in a gunsmith’s shop in Southampton. Between 10 and 11 on 17 January, he had sold a cheap revolver and ten cartridges for 7s 5d. A young man had bought them and Cox identified him as Parker by his photograph, but did not recognize the man himself when he arrived. He did not explain why he wanted the gun.

  Dr Simpson of South Lambeth Road reported his findings from the post mortem. Death was due to the laceration of the brain, where the bullet had been found. The shot had been fired at very close range. The killer had fired on his victim whilst the former was standing and the latter was seated. Reference was made to the prisoner’s letters which indicated his guilt. The jury concluded that this was murder and Parker was responsible. He was committed to trial at the Old Bailey by coroner’s warrant. There he was found guilty and sentenced to hang. Parker was resigned to his fate.

  Parker was hanged at 9 am on 19 March at Wandsworth Prison. The executioners were James and Thomas Billington. As Revd Phipps the prison chaplain said, Parker maintained to the end that the shooting was an accident carried out when he was drunk.

  Alfred Bowker from Winchester had his own ideas about what should be done to prevent such outrages in future. He wrote to The Times with his ideas. He was particularly concerned because he had travelled on the same train as Pearson. The fact that the compartments were partitioned from each other isolated passengers from one another. Therefore:

  we might at least take a leaf from our Continental friends, for in France and many other places we almost invariably find, when their railway coaches are divided by partitions into several compartments, each compartment has a means of communication by a sliding glass panel, which is inserted in the partitions slightly above the heads of passengers when seated.

  People could then speak to others in other compartments and also see what was happening there. This would deter crime, because people in another compartment could see what was happening and then ring the communication cord. It would also reassure nervous passengers. It does not seem that this suggestion found favour.

  This murder was hardly original. As with Muller in 1864 and Mapleton in 1881, Parker was a desperate young man in need of money. Selecting as his victim, a prosperous-looking man, he killed him for his money, but was subsequently arrested, tried and hanged; just as his predecessors had been. However, unlike them, he had accelerated the progress of his discovery and arrest by committing his crime in the presence of another, and this was a fatal error. Had he been even more ruthless than he was, he could have shot her dead as well, and this would certainly have delayed his apprehension; whether he would have escaped justice as other train killers in the future were to do is a moot point. Perhaps he would have done.

  The Mystery of Merstham Tunnel, 1905

  ‘I can’t let you have it, I am going to meet a particular “Tart” tomorrow.’

  On Sunday evening of 24 September 1905, the body of a young woman was found on the railway line in Merstham tunnel. At first it seemed that this was either a case of accident or suicide. The body was conveyed to the stables of the nearby Feathers Hotel. PC Burt and PC Carr were the first two policemen on the scene. On closer examination it appeared that this was a case of murder. This was because a scarf was found in her mouth; it was about ten inches within, though fairly loose, but was difficult to pull out. Furthermore, both her purse and her ticket were missing. Superintendent Brice of Surrey Police was in charge of the investigation.

  Most of the public facts of the case were disclosed at the two hearings of the inquest, both held at the coffee room of the Feathers Hotel. The inquest was concluded on 2 October. Mr Nightingale, coroner of East Surrey, presided and Brice and Captain Sant of the Surrey Constabulary were also present.

  The first fact to emerge was the identity of the victim. She was Miss Mary Sophia Money, born in 1882 in Watford. In 1901 she was employed as a book-keeper in a dairy and then lived in Harrow Wealdstone. By 1905, she was the book-keeper at Henry Bridger’s dairy on Lavender Hill, Battersea. The dairy was actually managed by his brother, Arthur, who did not, unlike the rest of his staff, sleep on the premises. Her wage was 8s per week, plus board and lodging. She had taken the place of Miss Lane, who had been employed there for four years, but who had to leave to look after her sick sister. Her savings amounted to £50 on death. Miss Money’s wages were raised from 6s to 8s a week before her death, because the nature of her duties changed. She was apparently a good worker and the accounts were in order.

  Her injuries were horrific. The top of the head and forehead were broken, with the brains being partially torn and out and smashed. Her nose bones were broken. There were other fractures to the skull. Only the lower part of the face was unaffected. There were also bruises around her mouth and on the rest of her body, together with a number of scratches.

  Many of these injuries could have been, and undoubtedly were, the result of leaving the train suddenly and then been run over by it. However, there were some which had probably not been inflicted in that way. Dr Wilcox stated:

  There were several bruises on the left arm of a livid colour – deep crimson. One ran along the forearm. It was so red that it looked as if it had been stamped on. There were also other bruises above the elbow. On the left hand I found a small crimson bruise on the back of the little finger, this being the only mark on the left hand. On the upper extremity of the right arm I found several dark crimson bruises very clearly defined. Over the front of the bend of the right elbow was a pale blue bruise of a different colour. Another light blue bruise was also found.

  The coroner pressed the doctor for his conclusions. He replied, ‘I think they were produced in quite a different way from the others. The others were the result of very considerable violence.’ He thought that she had been alive on leaving the train, and that the bruises on the arm and hand were produced by someone’s grip. They might have been caused by a struggle. If she was defending herself, then it was probable that she would have used her right arm in order to do so (Miss Money was right-handed according to her brother). Some of the other bruises might have been caused by her body being thrust through the compartment door or window.

  Emma Hone, a colleague of the victim, gave her evidence. She had helped Miss Money to dress on the evening of 24 September. She had worn a wide white silk scarf around her neck. Although Miss Money had told her she would be back by 9 pm, she had not returned home that night by 11 pm. Their employer, Mr Bridger, came down from the dining room and asked Miss Hone if she could wait up for Miss Money. She agreed and went up to her colleague’s room. Although her latchkeywas in her bag in the room, she herself was not there. Miss Hone waited there for two hours, but to no avail. At 1 am she went to bed.

  Relatively little was known about Miss Money’s last movements. In the afternoon, she had been studying railway timetable
s, according to a colleague. A railway journey was evidently being planned, and one that was not simple. Her planned route, though, was kept secret. She spoke with her manager that morning. Early in the evening she had gone to Miss Frances Golding’s shop near Clapham Junction. Here she bought a box of chocolates after being in the shop for about 5–7 minutes. She was alone. It was then about 7 pm and she told Miss Golding that she was going to Victoria (a very short trip from Clapham Junction). She was next seen at Clapham Junction station. Here, though, the evidence varies. Edward Parker, a ticket collector at the station, said that when the 7.21 train left that evening, he saw a young woman, whom he later identified as Miss Money, standing on the platform. He asked her where she was going and she said Victoria. She was alone. However, David Morris, a tailor of Hampton, said he saw a young woman, whom he believed was Miss Money, at Victoria at about 7.20 pm. He had been waiting there for the arrival of his son. When shown a photograph of her, he thought that the woman he saw was very similar. Clearly both witnesses could not be correct, but as to which was correct was impossible to discern.

  Another witness claimed they saw her at Victoria. Mrs Macilroy, a schoolmistress at a boarding school, recalled that, at 7.30 pm, at Victoria: