With MVS, personality and behavioural changes usually manifest several years after a person is first infected with syphilis. In one case reported in the literature, a man suffering from MVS ‘was easily angered and became gradually withdrawn’,32 behaviours that Sarah exhibited for some years before she and John were charged and convicted. MVS usually begins with ‘weeks or months of intermittent headaches, progressive behavioural changes and movement disorders’ as a consequence of meningitis—that is, inflammation of the arteries in the meninges which are the three membranes that cover the brain and spinal cord,33 although symptoms vary from person to person depending on the extent of the damage to the brain.34 Patients who experience MVS also tend to be younger, under the age of 50 years, as Sarah was when she was charged with murder.
One account reveals that Sarah wrote letters about how hard her life was in Bathurst Gaol and that she suffered from paranoid fantasies in which she was chased by the mothers of the dead babies,35 a psychotic symptom that may have been the result of neurosyphilis. After two years there, for some reason Sarah was transferred back to Darlinghurst Gaol on 11 May 189536 where she stayed for three and a half years until 22 November 1898. She was again transferred to Bathurst Gaol where she remained for almost eleven years until 18 August 1909. By 1898, she was one of the ‘long-timers’ of the female inmates in Darlinghurst Gaol, with these prisoners often being assigned more important roles such as house servant to the governor.37 During her second stint in Bathurst Gaol, Sarah had a job as a hospital attendant, perhaps using the skills she had acquired as a ‘ladies’ nurse’.
Not surprisingly, Sarah’s health deteriorated during her imprisonment. Although infections of various types were the commonest cause of death in the gaol system, Sarah was admitted to the Bathurst Gaol hospital in 1905 with an ‘intestinal haemorrhage’. The hospitals at Bathurst and Darlinghurst Gaols were similar in design with spacious wards—60 by 25 feet—and an arcaded walkway on three sides which was secured with iron grilles, where convalescing patients could exercise,38 representing the best conditions in the gaols in terms of space, light and ventilation.
Sarah experienced several intestinal haemorrhages, suggesting she was suffering from bowel cancer or bleeding caused by diverticulosis, which is associated with chronic kidney failure. Alternatively, the haemorrhages may have been a symptom of tertiary syphilis, which can affect any organ of the body, including the production of chronic inflammation in the lining of the stomach and the intestines, also known as colitis.
Florence Makin (now a married woman by the name of Mrs Anderson) and Minnie Helbi became so concerned about their mother’s worsening health that they both took the brave and bold step of writing directly to the Attorney-General. The letters written by Minnie and Florence show the different degrees of literacy of Sarah’s daughters. Minnie’s letter, written from 55 Mary Street, St Peters on 17 March 1907,39 sought the mercy of the Attorney-General in relation to her mother, who was now aged 61 and had been in prison for fifteen years:
I respectfully desire to bring under your notice for your merciful consideration the case of my mother Sarah Makin . . . Her conduct in Gaol has been good throughout; thus entitling her to consideration, while at the time she was convicted the period for a life sentence was, I understand 15 years. Further, my mother has been in delicate health for several years past; and has had several attacks of Hemorrhage, another of which will prove fatal . . . [M]yself and the rest of my family consider the time has now arrived for the Crown . . . to exercise its prerogative of mercy, and release our mother, who . . . has surely satisfied Justice by such a long expiation of her crime . . . All of her children . . . have always been respectable and law abideing [sic], and one of her sons fought in the South African war. We have all felt our mothers position very keenly; and surely, Sir, you would not have our pain and Grief added to by having her die in Gaol, for that, I am certain will take place very shortly if she is not quickly released. Trusting therefore, Sir, that you will take all the above facts into consideration, both for my unfortunate mother and her children.
Florence’s letter, written from 243 Abercrombie Street, Redfern on 20 March 1907,40 uncorrected for errors, begs the Minister of Justice’s mercy:
I beg to bring under your notice the case of my Poor Dear Mother Mrs Sarah Makin . . . She as nearly complied 18 years in Prison. And in all that time her conduct as been of the very best. And now I think it is time that the Crown dun something for her and release her from Prison. For her own Sake and that of her Children She has Shurley surffed for the Crime She has been imprisond for. And there is another reasones why she should be released and that is of her bad health. She as suffered very much of late. I have been to See her this month . . . And she was very bad indeed in bed in the Hospital. And I am very much afrade that if she as another attack of her Sickness. It will prove fattel . . . And I hope and trust with Gods help and yours Sir is the ernest Prayers of her Family that she will soon be released. And Dear Sir I will provide a Home for her and keep her for the rest of her life. I will go scurty for her good behavoure. So Trusting Dear Sir that you will give this your Consideration for my Dear Mothers Sake . . . Hopping this will meet with your approvual and waiting for a favourbel repley.
A report from the Visiting Surgeon to Bathurst Gaol, Dr Bassett, stated that Sarah:
has been continuously ailing in hospital for the last two years. Latterly she has been subject to frequent attacks of Meloua (intestinal Haemorrhage). From a severe attack of this kind she is now slowly rallying—repetitions of the attack may be anticipated—one, as severe as the last, now, would probably prove, in my opinion fatal.41
But it was to be a few more years before Sarah breathed the air of freedom because she had only served fourteen years of her sentence and was not eligible under ‘the remission scale applicable to death commuted sentence’ to petition for her release until 8 March 1913. The Attorney-General, Mr C Wade, wrote in a departmental minute: ‘I am unable to recommend the remission of any portion of this prisoner’s sentence.’ The Governor, Mr Harry Rawson, merely wrote ‘Refused’.42
Two years later, Sarah was removed to the State Reformatory for Women at Long Bay Gaol. This was a separate prison that had been built for women in 1909, with all the female inmates of Darlinghurst Gaol being transferred in August of that year.43 Eighteen months later, Sarah and her family began another campaign for her release on the grounds of her feeble health after a new Attorney-General, Mr Holman, visited Long Bay and gave Sarah permission to petition the government. On 28 February 1911, Sarah wrote the following:44
PRISONER’S APPLICATION OR STATEMENT Subject:- Asking to be released so that she can spend her last days with her family.
The above named prisoner respectfully makes statement . . . that for years past she has been in bad health, though she suffered more during her time in Bathurst Gaol.
She often feels that her life may not be long spared to her, and asks that she may be released to spend her last days with her family.
She also stated that during her eighteen years imprisonment, she has nothing against her conduct and that the same may be taken into consideration.
The government also received another formal letter from Florence to the Minister of Justice.45 This time the letter did not contain the numerous spelling and grammatical errors of Florence’s first letter, suggesting that Florence had asked someone else to write on her behalf.
Although the wheels of bureaucracy creaked slowly, the Attorney-General wrote on 15 March 1911:
In view of the great age and declining health of this prisoner I will recommend her release at the end of April (I do not wish this to be a Coronation date remission). This must be brought up in Cabinet.46
The Coronation was that of George V, who was crowned King on 22 June 1911. Sarah had seen the end of the reign of Queen Victoria, followed by the ascension of the 59-year-old playboy son of Queen Victoria, King Edward VII, to the throne on 22 January 1901 and then his early death i
n 1911.
After considering Sarah’s ‘advanced age and declining health’, the government recommended her release on 26 April 1911.47 More bureaucracy followed—a letter to the State Reformatory for Women at Long Bay which stated she would be released on 29 April 1911. And finally, a letter notifying Florence. After 18 years, Sarah cried at the thought that her time was up as the officer in charge of the gaol reported to the government:
I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of order for the release of prisoner Sarah Makin . . . on 29th April 1911. The prisoner was discharged at 4 PM to the Care of her daughter & Son-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. Anderson . . .
The prisoner when informed of her release was very much affected & asked for a Female officer to accompany her home.
The prisoner had no Complaints of any kind to make & spoke of the Considerate & just manner in which she was treated during her imprisonment.48
Enfolded into the bosom of the family that still cared for her, Sarah left the prison quietly and anonymously, with the public none the wiser about the release of the most infamous murderer of her day. A government official, Mr Moss, observed that Sarah was:
accompanied by a female Warder (Mrs Sparkes) and as the release party preceded me quietly along the road from the Reformatory to the Long Bay tram waiting room nobody atall [sic] could be seen either in the vicinity of the Reformatory or along the way to the tram.49
One can imagine the picture as Sarah and her daughter waited with quiet excitement for the tram and, once on board, Sarah taking in all the extraordinary sights of a city that had expanded and grown in the 18 years since she was arrested, as the tram trundled along what is now called Anzac Parade and then down Cleveland Street to her new home in Abercrombie Street. She had arrived back in Redfern where it had all begun. But the Sarah Makin who left prison at the age of 65 was a very different person to the one who had threatened to ‘ribbon’ Mrs Hill at the first Burren Street inquest 19 years earlier. Time, self-reflection, hardship and a newly found belief in God had softened Sarah Makin, murderer, into a person of gratitude in her letter to the matron of the gaol hospital:
Just a few lines, to express my deep gratitude to you, the Governor and all the staff connected, for the many kindness I received while with you. My life being such a very sad one, you did all you possibly could, to brighten it. May God keep you and every blessing that can be sent to one, who always did her best to brighten the life of others.
Dear Mrs. Braithwaite I shall never forget while it is God’s wish to spare me, to be truly thankful, to the Minister of Justice, and the Controller General, and Deputy Controller for all they have done for me. I have not been very well since, I came home, being very nervous, but with the Lord’s help I will have strength given me to keep a brave heart. Thanking you one and all, kindly remember me to all the officers, and may the good Lord send every blessing to you all.50
Sarah’s final years
Constable James Joyce was still alive when Sarah was released although he was retired. He may not even have known she was free since her release was not reported in the newspapers. Although Sarah outlived him by six and a half years, her life outside prison was not a life of comfortable retirement. A few months after her release she moved in to live with her eldest daughter, Minnie, who was suffering from bowel cancer. At Eva Cottage in Belgrave Street, Petersham, Sarah cared for Minnie until her death on 7 February 1912.51 When Minnie died, the following, strange death notice appeared in the newspaper:
HELBY,—February 7, 1912, at Lewisham Private Hospital, Minnie Josephine, dearly-loved wife of Charles Helby, only daughter of the late Captain Charles Edwards, and granddaughter of Mr. and Mrs. Emanuel Sutcliffe, late of Wollongong and Maitland, in her 45th year. R.I.P.52
There was no mention that Minnie (who had Anglicised her name to Helby) was the eldest daughter of (the infamous) Sarah Makin, indicating that a veil of shame still hung over Sarah’s family, 19 years after her conviction. The year before, Minnie had celebrated her silver wedding anniversary with a proud notice in the newspaper:
SILVER WEDDINGS
HELBY EDWARDS,—March 9, 1886 at St. Luke’s Church, Sydney, by the Rev. T. W. Unwin, Carl Helby, of Germany, to Minnie Josephine, only daughter of the late Captain Charles Edwards, of Dundee, Scotland, and Sarah Jane Edwards, only daughter of the late Emanuel Sutcliffe, Millowner, of West Maitland. Perth and Dundee (Scotland) papers please reply.53
With a little rewriting of history, Minnie had erased the fact that her mother had been Mrs Sarah Makin for nearly 40 years.
Six funeral notices appeared two days after Minnie’s death, inviting the friends of Minnie’s sons, daughter and son-in-law, as well as the friends of Blanche, Clarice, Florence, Daisy and their husbands, to attend Eva Cottage for the funeral procession to Rookwood Cemetery via Petersham train station.54 There was no funeral notice inviting the friends of Mrs Sarah Makin to her daughter’s funeral.
Sarah remained living in Eva Cottage with Carl Helby, who sorely missed his wife.55 When Sarah’s own health worsened, Florence and husband moved in. Sarah lingered for another six years until, at the age of 72, she died on 13 September 1918 at Eva Cottage from senile decay and heart failure. It is possible her decline was due to tertiary syphilis since heart failure and dementia are symptoms of the disease.56 No notice appeared in the newspapers announcing her death.
Buried in Rookwood Cemetery, in death Sarah joined some of the babies who were placed into her not so kindly hands, including Mignonette and Horace. Constable Joyce was also buried there, as was her husband, John. In fact, most of those who were involved in the most notorious baby-farming case of its time—Sarah, John, their children Blanche and Clarice, two of their victims and James Joyce—are all buried in Rookwood Cemetery, as if their final coming together completes a fable from which others may learn.
CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
Was Sarah Makin really an evil, deadly woman?
There was more to Sarah Makin’s story than John’s family’s descriptions of her as ‘a fiend’ and the ‘arch-aggressor’ who would not be wound round the fingers of any man.
Rather than being a wicked woman looking for ways to indulge her ‘fiendish’ temper, baby farming was the desperate dead-end in which Sarah found herself with an unemployable husband and limited employment for the working-classes as the depression of the 1890s loomed. One cannot forget John’s announcement to Mr Hill, the morning after the Makins moved into 25 Burren Street with six babies, that ‘there is a very good thing to be made out of this business’, referring to his wife’s job as a ladies’ nurse. Not so much a fool, as John’s family had claimed, but a man who had found an easier option for earning an income. As the family’s chief negotiator, John’s ability to control his emotions—remaining ‘immobile as marble’ when his death sentence was announced1—along with his easy resort to lies and fantasy, ensured his indifference to the mothers and babies he dealt with.
While it is almost certain that both John and Sarah were involved in serial murder or manslaughter, they were the economic victims of the 1890s depression and the diseases that went hand in hand with Sydney’s underclass. At the same time, the Makins took advantage of a moral climate which shunned unmarried mothers and illegitimate children, and a society which accepted the necessity of infanticide as a solution to illegitimate children. Just who out of the Makin family killed the 13 babies discovered by Constable Joyce and the two drain-layers we will never know. The evidence suggests that all of them—John, Sarah, Blanche, Florence and even Clarice—were involved in the underfeeding, drugging and final despatch of several dozen babies, not just the ones discovered by the police.
A working-class woman of her times, Sarah had married a man who was a bankrupt and petty criminal with an unstable work history. Early in the marriage, when she had six children aged eight days to nine years, she had been left to feed her family when John was imprisoned for theft. When she contracted syphilis, perhaps as a casual prostitute, and continued to produce more c
hildren, she added to the family’s economic decline. This decline was aided and abetted by John who, either because of gambling, alcohol or opium addiction, had a reputation within his Wollongong family as a wastrel who could not be trusted with money.
The economic reality of baby farming meant that, in order to keep costs down, the Makins could not afford to feed the number of babies they adopted, while Godfrey’s Cordial was guaranteed to pacify a hungry infant. So normal was underfeeding in the Makin household that John took Miss Stacey’s hungry and distressed baby to see her, apparently oblivious to a young mother’s reaction. So indifferent were the Makins to a baby’s wellbeing, they starved Baby Mignonette despite receiving ten shillings per week for her upkeep.
Even with John’s monthly inheritance, the Makins were living on the precipice of penury, a step away from debtors’ prison. The economic crisis in the Makin household—through John’s inability to work—increased the burden on Sarah and her daughters.
Sarah’s and John’s crimes were also the crimes of a society that condoned infanticide while, paradoxically, stigmatising unmarried mothers. The legal status of an illegitimate child was described as ‘filius nullius’, child of no-one,2 which sums up the legal and social reality of those times. Since these children had no legal status, it is hardly surprising they had little or no social value. Life was cheap for illegitimate babies. Baby farmers provided an unsavoury but necessary service that filled the vacuum left wide open by government policies, the market economy and the limited assistance available through charitable organisations.
For those who believed that John’s death would serve as an example, their satisfaction was short-lived, since baby farming continued long after the Makins were sentenced. Economic conditions for unmarried mothers, working-class families and deserted women did not improve. It would be another 70 years before reliable contraception became available and then another 10–20 years before a child born outside of marriage became a socially acceptable event.
The Baby Farmers Page 27