FDSD Islington

by John Eddleston

  James Christy Fensham told the court what had happened on Saturday 28 December, but he also confirmed that his son had some rather bad health problems. Walter had been receiving treatment for some time, and had been in a number of hospitals.

  Florence Fensham said that she had left Walter and Harriett alone in the kitchen, at around 6.00pm, and had gone upstairs to see Mrs Sutherland. When she came downstairs again she saw that Harriett and Walter were enjoying a glass of beer together. They were still in the kitchen and no sooner had Florence arrived in the room than her brother said ‘Will you go upstairs Florrie?’ Florence thought this was some kind of joke and said: ‘Give me a chance, I have only just come down.’

  At this point, Harriett said: ‘Will you go home Wally?’ Walter was silent for a few moments and then replied: ‘Well, if you don’t want me, I will go home and then stood to leave. Walter did not leave, though, he walked over to where Florence stood and whispered to her: ‘I don’t care if I do get hung for poor father.’ Then, as if to emphasise that he was being serious, he showed Florence a knife he had in his pocket.

  Florence still wasn’t sure if Walter was joking, and told him not to be so foolish. She did not go back upstairs, but watched as Walter sat down next to his step-mother, seized her by the throat and then plunged the knife into her. He then stood, walked calmly to the door, and shouted good night to his father. Florence was shocked into silence for a minute of so but then the horror of what she had just witnessed gave her back her voice and she screamed out for help.

  After Gertrude Sutherland and William Fensham had given their evidence, the prosecution called the medical witnesses. Dr Harbinson spoke of his visit to St James Road, and of seeing a wound some four inches long and an inch and a half wide. Although he ordered that Harriett be taken to the hospital, Dr Harbinson had been convinced at the time that she would not recover from such a wound.

  Dr Wade told of his treating the injured woman, on her arrival at the hospital, and of her death the following morning. He had since examined the knife, which had been found half-open on the kitchen table. It was an old knife, and quite difficult to open out. The blade was very blunt, so it would have required a great deal of force to inflict the wound which Harriett had suffered.

  Details of Walter’s arrest were then given. Sergeant George Osborn had gone to Rowton House with the prisoner’s brother, William. There he found Walter asleep in bed, and having roused him heard Walter say: ‘Is she dead?’ At that time, Harriett was still alive, so Osborn informed Walter that he was wanted on a charge of attempted murder. On the way to the police station Walter observed: ‘I will hang for her; she has ruined my father.’

  Taken to the Caledonian Road police station, Walter was interviewed and charged by Inspector Arthur Neil. In reply to the charge of attempted murder, Walter replied: ‘I was there. I do not know what I did. I will say nothing.’ Later, when the charge was amended to one of murder, Walter said: ‘I did not intend to do it. Do you think I shall get hung for it? I went there last night. She called me a bastard, and said I only came there to get what I could out of the old man. I lost my temper.’

  Walter Fensham stepped into the witness box to give his own version of events.

  He began by saying that he had lived with his father until his remarriage. He went on to say that at the age of twenty-three, he had started working for the London Omnibus Carriage Company, and while with them, he had fallen off a horse. He had injured himself badly, and still had a large lump on the back of his head. Since then he had been in St Bartholomew’s Hospital two or three times, and had been operated on twice. He had also been in Holborn Infirmary at various times from 1903 to 1907, and in the Royal Free Hospital. Walter went on to say that he still had terrible pains in his head, and to relive that pain, had taken laudanum every day.

  Continuing his evidence, Walter said that he had been drinking heavily on the day before he had attacked Harriett. As a result, he felt very bad on the morning of Saturday 28 December. That afternoon, he had enjoyed a single drink with his father, in the Montrose public house and after separating from him, went on to the Pocock Arms, where he had quite a few drinks, before returning to the Montrose. It was from there that he walked to his father’s house.

  Turning to the actual attack, Walter said that he vaguely remembered having something to eat. He remembered his sister, Florence, being in the kitchen with him and Harriett, and might have suggested that she go upstairs to fetch Mrs Sutherland down so that she could join them in a drink. When Florence had left the room, Harriett had jumped up and said something like: ‘You are only a bastard and come here to get what you can out of your father.’ After that, all he could remember was seizing her. He had no recollection of using a knife on her.

  Other witnesses were called to prove some of what Walter had said. Charles Crew had seen him drinking in the Montrose on 28 December, and thought him much the worse for drink.

  James Smith, a chemist, of Gray’s Inn Road, confirmed that Walter had been visiting his shop for some weeks, to purchase laudanum. Finally, Dr William John Guiseppi, a surgeon at the Royal Free Hospital, confirmed the various operations and treatments Walter had received. He had been suffering from tuberculous glands in his neck. These would have caused him a lot of pain, and the effect of the laudanum he was taking to relieve that pain, could well make him less responsible for his actions, especially when he was excited.

  Having heard all the testimony, the jury returned the verdict that Walter was guilty of murder but added a recommendation to mercy on account of his health problems and the stress of his father’s ill-treatment at the hands of Harriett. There could, however, only be one sentence and Walter was sentenced to death.

  Walter Fensham did not hang. The recommendation of the jury was heeded and, in due course, his sentence was commuted to one of life imprisonment.

  Chapter 31

  Arthur Robert Canham

  1924

  There were problems at 22 Mitford Road, and most of them seemed to be due to the efforts, or rather the lack of effort, of the titular head of the household, Arthur Robert Canham.

  Over the last five years, Canham had only worked for some twenty-six weeks in total. He managed to scrape by on a small pension of £8 every couple of months, the household income being supplemented by the wages his wife, Selina, earned as a cleaner to a private house, and what his sixteen-year-old son, also named Arthur, managed to earn. Canham made up any other shortfall by selling articles which belonged to his wife, and this led to numerous arguments between them. So tense had the atmosphere become inside number 22, that Canham slept in one bedroom at the back, whilst his wife and four children shared the other bedroom, at the front of the house.

  On Thursday 6 November 1924, Arthur James Charles Canham, the sixteen year old who was the eldest child, rose around 7.00am and readied himself for work. Selina made Arthur his breakfast, and whilst he was eating it, his father came into the kitchen. For once, there were no cross words between them and, when Arthur left for work at 7.25am, all was well in the house.

  The second child was eleven-year-old Winifred Maud Canham. She got out of bed soon after her brother had left for work, and helped her mother get the two youngest children ready for school. All three children had their breakfast and, by the time they left for school together, at 8.45am, Selina was in the kitchen, tidying the breakfast things away whilst their father, Arthur, was in the front room reading a newspaper.

  At 12.20pm, Winifred and the two youngest children arrived home for lunch. At first, there seemed to be no-one else in the house. Winifred assumed that her mother had gone to her cleaning job, and that her father was out somewhere or other, so she got lunch for herself and the other two children. When the meal was almost ready, Winifred went upstairs to fetch a tablecloth.

  It seemed that Arthur Canham was home after all. His bedroom door was closed, but Winifred could hear him moving about inside and heard him say: ‘Wake up! Wake up! Get to work.’ She then noticed
that something seemed to have been placed against the bottom of the bedroom door, blocking off any light coming from within. Her curiosity aroused, Winifred then returned to the kitchen and noticed, for the first time, that the floor had recently been washed, but there were still smears of what looked like blood, close to the kitchen sink.

  By now, Winifred was certain that something bad had happened in the house. An intelligent girl, she did not wish to alarm the younger children so escorted them back to school, once they had finished eating. Winifred, though, did not go to school. She went to the house where her mother cleaned, confirmed that she had not arrived that day, told the lady of the house what she had seen and heard back at Mitford Road, and asked her to go to the police station with her.

  Winifred went to the Hornsey Road police station, and told her story to the officer on duty. She then handed over her front door key, and waited at the station, whilst officers were sent to investigate.

  It was Constable Frank Parker and Constable Ivey, who were sent to 22 Mitford Road. They arrived at 2.30pm, to find the house securely locked. That was no problem, however, as Winifred had provided the key. The two officers entered the house and began by searching the rooms downstairs.

  There was no sign of either Arthur Canham or Selina, his wife, but the officers did note the apparent smears of blood on parts of the kitchen floor. They then began to look upstairs.

  It was Parker who first heard the low groaning from the back bedroom. The door was locked but Parker kicked it open. Once inside, he and Ivey found Canham lying on his bed. He had attached a rubber tube to the gas tap in the room and placed the other end inside his mouth. The room smelled strongly of gas and it was clear that Canham was trying to kill himself. Constable Ivey opened the bedroom window to let the gas out and some fresh air in, whilst Parker tore the tube from Canham’s mouth, before contacting the police station for reinforcements, and the local doctor.

  Whilst waiting for the doctor to arrive, Constable Parker began a quick search of the bedroom. He noticed that in one corner of the room, there was a cupboard, and its door was bulging open. There seemed to be something blocking it from the inside. Taking a closer look, Parker saw what looked like a human knee. Removing some items of clothing, very carefully, Parker found Selina Canham. She was lying on her back, with her knees tucked up and her head leaning forward. There was a good deal of blood about her head and upper body.

  Dr Fraser was the first medical practitioner on the scene. He confirmed that Selina was dead, and noted a number of circular wounds upon the top of her head. In due course, the Divisional Police Surgeon, Dr Sidney John Rowntree arrived. By this time, Arthur Canham had largely recovered from the gas inhalation, but he still seemed to be rather disorientated at the site of so many police and medical men in his bedroom.

  Taken to the police station for questioning, Canham admitted that he had killed his wife. He claimed that they had argued after he had complained that she had not made him any breakfast. He had then found two hammers and, taking the smaller one, had struck her on the head a number of times. Rather callously, at one stage he remarked; I only used a small hammer. It was lying on top of the dresser.

  Canham appeared at the Old Bailey on 15 December 1924, before Mr Justice Shearman. The case for the prosecution was detailed by Mr Travers Humphreys whilst Canham was defended by Mr Fox-Davies.

  Annie Sarah Truscott lived at 14 Cornwallis Road, also in Islington, and she was the dead woman’s sister. She confirmed that Selina had often complained to her that her husband did not provide enough to maintain the children, but had never complained of violence from her husband.

  Sixteen-year-old Arthur Canham told a different story, though. He had seen many arguments between his mother and father and some of these had come to blows. On 30 October, for example, he had seen his father grab his mother by the throat and try to strangle her. This was because she had objected, after discovering that he had just sold her phonograph. It was with much difficulty that Selina managed to struggle free.

  Further medical evidence was given by Dr Rowntree, who had performed the post-mortem on 9 November. He found five wounds on the top of Selina’s head, all of which had penetrated down to the bone. There was a linear fracture at the base of the skull, and this was the direct cause of death.

  Perhaps the most telling evidence was the statement Canham had made at the police station. In this he admitted to striking Selina on the head, whilst she was in the kitchen. He was surprised that there was only a little blood and he washed this up with a cloth before going upstairs and finding the rubber tube he intended to use to take his own life. Going back downstairs he collected Selina’s body, stuffed it into the cupboard and covered her over with some clothes. He then partly undressed before lying down on his bed, switching on the gas and placing the rubber tube into his mouth. The next things he knew, someone was shaking him awake and the room was full of strange people, some of them in police uniforms.

  After a short deliberation, the jury announced that they had found Canham guilty of murder, and he was sentenced to death. An appeal was heard on 12 January 1925, but the judges ruled that there was nothing in it and the death sentence was confirmed.

  However, before the execution could be carried out, the Home Office announced that they had decided to commute Canham’s sentence to one of life imprisonment.

  Chapter 32

  James Lucas

  1929

  John Francis Warden was a bricklayer and, in October 1929, was working as part of a gang on a premises in Islington. On 12 October, the gang finished work at noon and John, along with one of his fellow workmen, Francis Edward Marden, decided to go for a few drinks.

  Their first port of call was a public house in Amwell Street, where both men had just one pint. From there they walked to a second pub, on the corner of Penton Street, then on to a third establishment in White Lion Street, where they finally finished drinking at around 2.50pm. It was now time to return home, and the two friends started walking towards Godson Street, where Warden lived at number 2.

  It was in Godson Street, close to Warden’s home, where the two men met up with James Lucas, a man who they both knew, though just as an acquaintance. Someone suggested that the three men should play coin tossing for money. The game was duly started, and did not end until around 4.30pm, by which time Lucas had lost almost all of his money.

  A very saddened Lucas announced that he had lost £2 5s and, since Marden seemed to have taken most of this, Lucas suggested that he should, at the very least, buy him a drink now. Marden refused, and then he and Warden started walking towards Chapel Street. At this stage, neither man noticed that Lucas was following them.

  A few feet further on, Lucas announced his presence, by asking Marden for a penny, so that he could pay his fare home. This time Marden agreed and he and Warden then watched, as Lucas walked away from them. The two work colleagues then stood on the street, conversing for a few more minutes.

  At one stage, Warden thought he heard a noise and looked away from his friend. Then, as he had his face turned away from Marden, Warden heard a shuffling noise. He turned back towards Marden and saw, to his horror, that blood was now spurting from his throat. Lucas was behind Marden and walked calmly off as Marden fell to the ground.

  John Warden panicked at the sight of all that blood and ran home to 2 Godson Street to tell his mother what had happened. Warden immediately dashed outside, saw for herself what had happened, and then called for her son to bring out a towel. Once John had done this, she tried her best to staunch the bleeding, and stayed with the injured man, until the police and a doctor were in attendance.

  Constable Harry Edward Merritt was on duty at the corner of White Conduit Street and Chapel Street, when he heard about the attack in Godson Street. He arrived there at around 4.50pm, and then rang for an ambulance from a nearby call box. Once the ambulance arrived, Merritt went in it, with the injured man, to the Royal Free Hospital.

  Dr Margery Edna Roberts was
the doctor on duty in the casualty department of the hospital but by the time Marden arrived there, he was already dead. Dr Roberts noted a deep cut on the right side of Marden’s neck. She also noted that the right carotid artery and the jugular vein were both cut through.

  James Lucas had not got very far. He had merely gone to his brother-in-law’s house, at 15 Church Lane, and it was there that he was arrested by the police, at 6.30pm that same evening. He was escorted to King’s Cross Road police station, where he was formally charged with murder. In reply to the charge he said: ‘I remember nothing.’

  The trial of James Lucas took place on 12 November 1929, before Mr Justice Talbot. The prosecution vase was outlined by Mr H D Roome, assisted by Mr G B McClure. Lucas was defended by Mr H Fearnley-Whittingstall.

  John Henry Lane was Lucas’s brother-in-law, and it was to his house that Lucas had run after the attack. He was rather breathless when he arrived, and seemed to be very excited. He would only say that he had been in some trouble in Chapel Street, adding that there had been a bit of a tiff. He had been there for about forty-five minutes when the police arrived to take him into custody.

  Lane went on to say, however, that Lucas appeared to have some rather severe mental health problems. He had been receiving treatment for epilepsy at St Bartholomew’s Hospital for the past six months. He suffered badly from fits, and on many occasions, whilst he had been involved in a conversation, his eyes would suddenly glaze over and he would end up collapsing onto the floor. When he woke up, he would have no recollection of anything that had happened before the attack.

  Henry Marden was the next person who stepped into the witness box, but only to give basic details about his son. He explained that Francis had been twenty-seven years old when he died. It had been Henry who made the formal identification at the mortuary.