Murder & Crime Leeds

by Margaret Drinkall

  Noakes and Hobson were taken in front of the magistrates on Thursday morning, where they were remanded to give the police more time to investigate the case. Later that day, both appeared before the adjourned inquest. The first witness was Mrs Elizabeth Simpson, who stated that she was employed as a cleaner at Mrs Hobson’s shop on Vernon Road, ‘for some time past now’. She generally cleaned all the rooms upstairs and down, but from Tuesday 5 December to Monday 11 December, Mrs Hobson had told her that she had a guest staying and she was not to enter a particular bedroom and small sitting room during her stay. Mrs Simpson told the inquest that she had often heard a young woman speaking from inside the room but, as instructed, she had not seen or spoken to the young woman herself. She confirmed seeing Dr Noakes attending the patient several times during her stay. Mrs Simpson then told the jury that, after Mrs Hobson had attended the previous adjourned inquest, held on 13 December, she told her that the young lady who had been staying with her had died. Mrs Hobson instructed Mrs Simpson that if anyone should ask, she was to say that the young lady came on Saturday 9 December. One member of the jury asked if Dr Noakes was present when this conversation took place, but Mrs Simpson said that he wasn’t. A Leeds cab driver gave evidence that on 11 December he was in Briggate, Leeds, when Dr Noakes instructed him to be at the shop belonging to Mrs Hobson at 4 p.m. that afternoon. He told the court that when he arrived at the shop, Dr Noakes had led a young woman out of the shop leaning on his arm. The woman, who he later knew to be Miss Laidler, looked pale and extremely ill, and it was obvious that her clothes had been put on over her nightgown. He dropped the couple off at Central Station and had observed a porter assisting Dr Noakes to help the young lady into a carriage.

  Dr Robert Hollings, a surgeon, gave evidence that he had first seen the deceased at the Globe Tea Company’s shop on Tuesday 12 December. Dr Wade, the police surgeon, was also there and it was agreed that they would both jointly undertake the post-mortem. Dr Hollings told the coroner that there was some congestion in the deceased woman’s lung and the right oracle of the heart was dilated, although the rest of the heart was healthy. But then he delivered news which stunned the inquest. He stated that both doctors had found the uterus to be very inflamed, which he believed was a condition he had seen before. In previous cases, the irritated state of the uterus had followed the delivery of a child, which in this case he believed to be ‘unnatural and brought on with much force’.

  At this point in the inquest, Mrs Hobson told the court that she wished to change her statement. She admitted that Miss Nesbitt had gone to her house the previous Tuesday, in the company of Dr Noakes, although she had been expecting her on the Monday. Mrs Hobson said that Dr Noakes had gone to see her a week before Miss Nesbitt came to her house, and asked her if she would have a lodger for a few days. In actual fact, she claimed that Miss Nesbitt had stayed from 5 December to 11 December, and that during that time she didn’t go out of the house, except for a few hours during her stay. When asked by the coroner why she had told the previous inquest that the young woman had gone to her house on the Saturday, she replied that Dr Noakes had told her to lie as he was afraid of his wife knowing there was a young lady at her house. Mrs Hobson also told the jury that the doctor had continued to attend every day since the young woman had left, as she herself had not been well.

  In another sensational twist to this case, another witness, Mr John Elleker of Bradford, gave evidence that he had been a regular correspondent of Miss Laidler, who he knew as Miss Scott. He had received a telegram on the night of her death and immediately went to Wakefield, where he saw the body at the Globe Tea Company. Miss Hardisty had handed him a bunch of letters that Miss Laidler/Scott had received from him, which he had later destroyed. In reply to the magistrate, he said that he was not in the habit of visiting her very often, but he had visited a few times ‘in a friendly way’, explaining that he was a happily married man. Dr Noakes then gave evidence and told the inquest he had attended Miss Laidler for many years and, as a result, she had become an intimate friend to him and his wife. He described her as a very delicate girl, saying he had often been over to Wakefield to see her. Dr Noakes then reported that Miss Laidler had also been attended by Dr Stranger of Wakefield, for a cut over her eye which she received when the shutter fell on her head. He had apparently consulted Dr Stranger about the eye injury, and when he received a letter from Miss Laidler stating that Dr Stranger wanted to operate on the eye using chloroform, he had objected to it. Dr Noakes explained that he advised Dr Stranger not to perform the operation, as Miss Laidler had suffered for many years with a weak heart.

  Detective Inspector Henry Burton told the inquest about the first statement he had taken from Dr Noakes. He said that on Saturday 26 November, the doctor claimed to have visited Miss Laidler with his wife, and Miss Laidler had informed them that she was going away for a few days’ rest. Dr Noakes advised her that if she wanted to go away, she should seek permission from Dr Stranger before she went. The doctor told Detective Inspector Burton that he had received another letter from Miss Laidler, dated 6 December, stating that she was staying with friends. He was surprised to receive another, dated Friday 8 December, wanting him to meet her at Ilkley as she was very ill. Dr Noakes said he had met her on the station at Ilkley and had commented on her weak appearance. Miss Laidler told him that she had caught a cold and he gave her a 1 gram opium pill, which he carried around with him in his pocket ‘as doctors usually do’. He asked her where she was staying, but she refused to tell him and, as there was a train in the station about to leave for Leeds, he left her after only ten or fifteen minutes’ conversation, telling her to write and let him know how she was.

  In his statement, Dr Noakes had told Inspector Burton that he had received a further letter from her on Sunday 10 December, stating that she was staying at the house of one of his old patients, a Mrs Hobson. Once again, Miss Laidler begged him to attend to her, stating that she was determined to travel back to Wakefield as soon as possible. He went to see her at Mrs Hobson’s house at 4 p.m. on Monday, and tried to convince her not to go back to Wakefield that day, but she insisted that he order a cab to take her to the station. In his statement he said that when he heard Miss Laidler was dead, he went over to Wakefield to consult with Dr Stranger, who asked him what he had treated her for in the past. Dr Noakes had told him that she had suffered from pleurisy and hysteria, as well as a weakness of the valvular organs of the heart. Allegedly, Dr Stranger asked him what he thought had caused her death and Dr Noakes replied that it was undoubtedly the heart condition. This was written on the death certificate and both men signed it accordingly.

  This evidence concluded the inquest and the coroner summed up for the jury. It took just thirty minutes for them to find both Dr Noakes and Mrs Hobson guilty of wilful murder. The inquest had lasted for over seven hours and it was reported that Dr Noakes looked stunned as he left.

  Both Hobson and Noakes appeared before the Bench on Friday 29 December. Before the trial started, the prosecution gave an outline of the case to the magistrates, informing them that the police had stated that Mrs Hobson’s residence was a ‘house of ill-fame’. He claimed that Dr Noakes knew very well that the girl was dying and that Mrs Hobson was insisting that she be removed from her house. He went on to say that the prisoner, Noakes, had made several inconsistent statements, including one that he had treated Miss Laidler at Ilkley, which was untrue, as at the time he had been seen visiting her at Hobson’s house. During the inquest, there had been many lies told, including that of a witness called John Elleker, whose actual name was Storr. He had given a false name as he was frightened that his wife might find out that he was involved in the case. It seems that he had admitted to being intimately involved with the girl and confessed that, on at least one occasion, he had spent the night with her at Ilkley. Dr Wade then gave evidence, saying, ‘The physical state of the girl could not have been caused by a miscarriage and the facts point irresistibly to the conclusion that an abortion
was caused by unnatural means, or such that might have been exercised by the deceased herself.’ That concluded the case for the prosecution and the court was adjourned for a week, when they would hear the defence. Dr Noakes stated that he intended to call several medical witnesses.

  The following week, Noakes read out a statement that he claimed he would have given to the coroner if he hadn’t been arrested before he was able to do so. Dr Noakes admitted telling several untruths, because he was trying to screen the character of the deceased woman. He said that she had asked him to write a false statement about where she had been staying and where he had visited her. He admitted to not having the moral courage to tell the police the truth. Dr Noakes said in his statement that he first became acquainted with Miss Laidler when she was living at a Mrs Taylor’s house at Crossgate, Leeds, where he attended her professionally. She became intimate with his family and often visited his house. He had occasionally visited her at the Globe Tea Company shop in Wakefield, and it was on one of these visits that she told him about her condition. Miss Laidler contacted him at the end of November, asking if he could find rooms for her in Leeds in order that ‘it might not be known in Wakefield’. When he met her off the train on Tuesday 5 December, he wanted to take her to Mrs Taylor’s, where he knew she would be cared for, but she begged him not to ‘for her character’s sake’. So he took her to Mrs Hobson’s house, where he ordered that she keep quiet and warm. He visited her on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, and during this stay she had suffered a natural miscarriage. Miss Laidler told him that she wanted to go home on the Sunday, but he told her ‘decidedly not’. She appeared to be very exited and insistent, but he agreed to meet her on the Monday, in order to keep her in Leeds another day. He insisted that his relationship with the girl was honourable and he had done nothing towards any abortion. He stated:

  The symptoms of the case seem to be natural and the construction on the case by Mr Wade who made the post-mortem examination was not justified. I have yielded to the deceased’s entreaties to screen her character in order for her to keep her situation, but I am not guilty of the charge made against me.

  He then produced several witnesses who stated that the symptoms described by the prosecution were not incompatible with a natural miscarriage, and there were no indications of force being used. The prosecution disagreed, stating that if the medical gentlemen had been at the post-mortem, they would have seen clear signs that the abortion had been brought on by artificial means. The two prisoners were then sent to the Assizes to take their trial. Dr Noakes was further charged with having made a false entry on the certificate of death.

  Noakes and Hobson appeared at the Leeds Assizes on Tuesday, 6 February 1883, in front of Mr Justice Day, where Mr Fenwick and Mr Gane appeared for Dr Noakes and Mr Tindal Atkinson appeared for Mrs Hobson. As a medical man, the doctor would not have enjoyed his stay in the cells during the Assizes, as hygiene was incredibly basic.

  The prosecution, Mr Barker, opened the case and told the jury that anyone who unlawfully administered or used an instrument in a case of abortion was guilty of murder. He pointed out that judging by the letters written by Dr Noakes, he was a man of little intelligence, but presumably he had sufficient medical experience to commit such an offence. He stated, ‘There is little evidence that there was any immoral connection between the doctor and the deceased, but there is little doubt that he was very intimate with her.’

  Laidler would have communicated her condition to him and on 5 December she travelled to Leeds, where he met her and took her to the ‘house of ill-fame’ on Vernon Road, owned by Mrs Hobson. Miss Laidler returned back to Wakefield on 11 December, and Dr Noakes accompanied her to the station and managed to get her onto the train. When she arrived in Wakefield, she was met by a friend, a Mrs Dixon, who Dr Noakes had asked to meet the train. Miss Laidler told her, ‘Jenny I have come home to die.’ The surgeon, Dr Stranger, was called to attend her, but within ten minutes of his arrival she had died. The prosecution, Mr Barker, told the jury that Noakes and Hobson were anxious to get her out of the house and that they packed off ‘a woman who Noakes must have known was dying’. On her death, Stranger sent for Noakes and the two men discussed the reasons for Miss Laidler’s death. Noakes managed to convince Stranger that she had died of a long-standing heart disease, and he wrote on the death certificate that she had ‘died of valvular disease of the heart’. When a post-mortem was held, it was obvious that she had died from the effects of an abortion. In the words of the prosecution:

  If everything had been above board, once Dr Noakes removed Laidler from Mrs Hudson’s house, he would have no need to communicate with Mrs Hudson again, but instead he went to see her several times between the 11th and 15th December. That was not because Hobson was ill, but rather so they could ensure that they both told the same pack of lies.

  When Noakes realised that a post-mortem would be held, the pair concocted a story that Mrs Hobson had found her very ill at the station on 9 December, and that, out of the goodness of her heart, she had taken the girl to her own house.

  Mrs Jane Dixon, a married woman who had known the deceased, since she herself had a similar tea shop in Wakefield, testified to receiving a letter from Dr Noakes asking her to meet the train with a cab for Miss Laidler, who was ill. She reported that when she arrived off the train Miss Laidler was indeed helpless but conscious.

  The groom to Dr Noakes, named William Shaw, gave evidence that he had taken his master to the house on Vernon Road on several occasions between 5 and 11 December. Alexander Wallace, the proprietor of the tea shop, told the jury that Dr Noakes had made arrangements for the funeral of the deceased, and had told him that Miss Laidler’s illness had been greatly aggravated by the cold weather. PC Richard McGrath gave evidence as to the nature of Mrs Hobson’s house, although he admitted there were no convictions against her. The inquest coroner, Mr Thomas Taylor, spoke about the first statement that he had taken from Mrs Hobson and he told the judge that he thought she was intoxicated and ‘not in a fit state to be examined’. The judge asked him incredulously, ‘What? And despite this you still took her evidence?’ He replied that she was not exactly drunk, just ‘in a very excitable state’. The judge asked him, ‘Did she seem to understand what she was saying?’ and the coroner replied that she did, although he admitted that she had been unable to sign the statement.

  Dr Stranger then took the stand and Mr Gane asked him about the shutter which had fallen on Miss Laidler. He asked, ‘Was it a severe injury?’ and Dr Stranger replied that it was. He was then asked if it was sufficient to cause a miscarriage, and Dr Stranger said that it was possible. William Swift Wade, the police surgeon, told the court that he had held the post-mortem on 13 December and found the organs tolerably healthy in appearance. The body was well nourished, but the right auricle of the heart was diseased. He gave his opinion, once again, that the cause of death had been an abortion, which ‘was probably artificial’. The judge asked him if he had formed an opinion as to when the abortion had taken place, and was informed that four or five days before the post-mortem was probable. He also admitted, under questions from Mr Gane, that there were symptoms in the condition of the body that were ‘common to natural miscarriages as well as artificial’.

  Noakes’ statement was read out, in which it was repeated that he had told untruths whilst trying to defend the deceased woman’s honour, and that he ‘deeply regretted’ his conduct. He told the judge that she had been ill when she arrived in Leeds, and when he urged her to go to Mrs Taylor’s, she replied, ‘No, for my character’s sake, do take me somewhere else.’ She told him her symptoms and he began treating her and visiting her daily. On the Friday she complained of having a great deal of pain in the night, but expressed a determination to go home the following day. He told her he could not allow that, and she persuaded him to write a letter to her employer, saying that she was at Ilkley. On the Sunday he found her ‘excited’ and insisting upon returning home. Noakes said he was unable to dissuade
her and then stated, ‘I am not guilty of doing anything to bring on an abortion and the construction put on the case by Dr Wade is simply not justified.’

  The following day the case for the defence was heard. Mr Gane brought in medical evidence that the deceased’s symptoms were not only compatible with but actually frequently found in cases of miscarriage. A passenger at Leeds station, who saw Dr Noakes and the woman alighting from a cab, heard him insist that she ought to go back, to which she shook her head from side to side. Four surgeons followed in rapid succession, all stating that the deceased’s symptoms indicated a spontaneous abortion. Four more witnesses, who had known Dr Noakes for several years, affirmed his respectability and good character. Mr Atkinson, acting on behalf of Mrs Hobson, commented that unless the jury found the doctor guilty, then Mrs Hobson could not be charged with anything except ‘aiding and abetting’. Mr Gane said that Miss Laidler knew very well that she was suffering from the effects of a miscarriage, and that she had gone to Leeds because she was known in Wakefield. Why else would she lie and tell people that she was going to Ilkley – the story she maintained almost to her dying breath?

  The judge summed up the evidence, stating that if the jury found that Dr Noakes and Mrs Hobson had conspired to bring on an abortion, then they must be found guilty. But if the jury felt that Mrs Hobson was unaware of what had happened, then they must find her not guilty. At 4.10 p.m. the jury rose to consider their verdict and returned an hour and a half later. The two prisoners, who had been seated for most of the trial, stood up and Dr Noakes clung to the rail in front of the dock as they faced the magistrate. The judge asked the foreman for the verdict on Dr Noakes and he said, ‘Not guilty.’ The same verdict was given for Mrs Hobson, who began to sob and was led away by a female wardress. It was noted that Dr Noakes’ lips moved as if in silent prayer. Applause broke out and the doctor was smiling as he joyfully left the court.