The one other defence witness was the matron of the Cheshire hospital to which Mrs Morrell had first been taken after her stroke. The patient, she said, had been “irritable and restless”. As an illustration of what she meant by that phrase, the matron recalled that Mrs Morrell had thrown a reading lamp at one of the nurses.
In his summing up, Mr Justice Devlin said that not infrequently he had heard a case presented by the prosecution that seemed to him to be manifestly a strong one and sometimes he had felt it his duty to tell the jury so. He did not think he should hesitate in this case to tell them that here the case for the defence seemed to be manifestly strong.
He concluded: “It is the same question in the end, always the same. Is the case for the Crown strong enough to carry conviction in your minds? It is your question, you have to answer it. It will lie always with you, the jury, always with you.”
The jury retired for forty-three minutes and then returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The judge then mentioned the further indictment charging Dr Adams with the murder of Mrs Hullett.
The Attorney-General said that he had given the most anxious consideration to the course the Crown should pursue in that matter. He went on:
“One of the considerations I have felt it my duty to consider is that the publicity which has attended this trial would make it even more difficult to secure a fair trial on this further indictment. I have also taken into account the length of this trial, the ordeal which Dr Adams has already undergone, and the fact that the case for the prosecution on this further indictment is based on evidence given before the Eastbourne magistrates, and depends in parts on the evidence of Dr Ashby and very greatly on evidence not supported, as in Mrs Morrell’s case, by the admission of the administration of drugs. Having given the matter the best consideration I can, I have reached the conclusion that in all the circumstances the public interest does not require that Dr Adams should undergo the ordeal of a further trial on a charge of murder …”
The trial had lasted over three weeks. For the last two, few of those present in court throughout the trial had considered a verdict of Guilty conceivable.
Of the few, I remember one in particular. He was an Old Hand with a knowing grin and, he assured us, access to inside information. Right up until the last day, this genial expert was firmly convinced that the Crown would win hands down; and he had a ten shilling bet on to back his judgment. Wasn’t it obvious?
He was one of the policemen on the door of the courtroom.
Postscript
At Lewes Assizes in July of that year, Dr Adams pleaded guilty to certain of the offences under the Forgery and Cremation Acts with which he had originally been charged. The court considered that there had been mitigating circumstances, and a fine rather than a prison sentence was imposed. In view of the conviction, however, the General Medical Council considered it proper to strike his name from the medical register.
In November 1961, following an application by Dr Adams to the Disciplinary Committee of the Council, his name was restored to the register. At the hearing, it was stated that he intended to return to practice in Eastbourne, as an anaesthetist.
A SORT OF GENIUS
(Rev. Hall and Mrs Mills, 1922)
James Thurber
The Hall–Mills double murder of 1922 horrified and then mystified the American nation. But it was, as the Daily News in New York remarked, “a nice, clean crime”. It was also one of the first to be reported using modern transmission methods. The backstage star of the case was the world’s biggest portable electric switchboard, property of the Western Union, which could handle 20,000 words an hour. Two hundred reporters covered the trial, including sixteen correspondents from the Daily News, plus fifty photographers. Ten of these were posted in the courtroom at Somerville, New Jersey; an eleventh fell through the skylight on the day the defence called Mrs Hall. At the end of eleven days, a total of 5 million words had been telegraphed from Somerville. At the end of eighteen days the total was 9 million. By the twenty-fourth day, it was 12 million, enough to fill a shelf of novels twenty-two feet long. The American humorist James Thurber (1894–1961) was a journalist in the 1920s when the Hall–Mills case broke. By the time he composed this account, in 1936, he was a full-time writer. This elegant essay from the creator of Walter Mitty reminds us of Thurber’s extraordinary versatility, and his talents as (his widow’s words) “the analyser and the rememberer”.
On the morning of Saturday, 16 September 1922, a boy named Raymond Schneider and a girl named Pearl Bahmer, walking down a lonely lane on the outskirts of New Brunswick, New Jersey, came upon something that made them rush to the nearest house in Easton Avenue, around the corner, shouting. In that house an excited woman named Grace Edwards listened to them wide-eyed and then telephoned the police. The police came on the run and examined the young people’s discovery: the bodies of a man and a woman. They had been shot to death and the woman’s throat was cut. Leaning against one of the man’s shoes was his calling card, not as if it had fallen there but as if it had been placed there. It bore the name Rev. Edward W. Hall. He had been the rector of the Protestant Episcopal Church of St John the Evangelist in New Brunswick. The woman was identified as Mrs Eleanor R. Mills, wife of the sexton of that church. Raymond Schneider and Pearl Bahmer had stumbled upon what was to go down finally in the annals of our crime as perhaps the country’s most remarkable mystery. Nobody was ever found guilty of the murders. Before the case was officially closed, a 150 persons had had their day in court and on the front pages of the newspapers. The names of two must already have sprung to your mind: Mrs Jane Gibson, called by the avid press “the pig woman”, and William Carpender Stevens, once known to a hundred million people simply as “Willie”. The pig woman died eleven years ago, but Willie Stevens is alive. He still lives in the house that he lived in fourteen years ago with Mr and Mrs Hall, at 23 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick.
It was from that house that the Rev. Mr Hall walked at around seven-thirty o’clock on the night of Thursday, 14 September 1922, to his peculiar doom. With the activities in that house after Mr Hall’s departure the State of New Jersey was to be vitally concerned. No. 23 Nichol Avenue was to share with De Russey’s Lane, in which the bodies were found, the morbid interest of a whole nation four years later, when the case was finally brought to trial. What actually happened in De Russey’s Lane on the night of 14 September? What actually happened at 23 Nichol Avenue the same night? For the researcher, it is a matter of an involved and voluminous court record, colourful and exciting in places, confused and repetitious in others. Two things, however, stand out as sharply now as they did on the day of their telling: the pig woman’s story of the people she saw in De Russey’s Lane that night, and Willie Stevens’s story of what went on in the house in Nichol Avenue. Willie’s story, brought out in cross-examination by a prosecutor whose name you may have forgotten (it was Alexander Simpson), lacked all the gaudy melodrama of the pig woman’s tale, but in it, and in the way he told it on the stand, was the real drama of the Hall–Mills trial. When the State failed miserably in its confident purpose of breaking Willie Stevens down, the verdict was already written on the wall. The rest of the trial was anticlimax. The jury that acquitted Willie, and his sister, Mrs Frances Stevens Hall, and his brother, Henry Stevens, was out only five hours.
A detailed recital of all the fantastic events and circumstances of the Hall–Mills case would fill a large volume. If the story is vague in your mind, it is partly because its edges, even under the harsh glare of investigation, remained curiously obscure and fuzzy. Everyone remembers, of course, that the minister was deeply involved with Mrs Mills, who sang in his choir; their affair had been for some time the gossip of their circle. He was forty-one, she was in her early thirties; Mrs Hall was nearing fifty. On 14 September, Mr Hall had dinner at home with his wife, Willie Stevens, and a little niece of Mrs Hall’s. After dinner, he said, according to his wife and his brother-in-law, that he was going to call on Mrs Mills. There was somethin
g about a payment on a doctor’s bill. Mrs Mills had had an operation and the Halls had paid for it (Mrs Hall had inherited considerable wealth from her parents). He left the house at about the same time, it came out later, that Mrs Mills left her house, and the two were found murdered, under a crab apple tree in De Russey’s Lane, on the edge of town, some forty hours later. Around the bodies were scattered love letters which the choir singer had written to the minister. No weapons were found, but there were several cartridge shells from an automatic pistol.
The investigation that followed—marked, said one New Jersey lawyer, by “bungling stupidity”—resulted in the failure of the grand jury to indict anyone. Willie Stevens was questioned for hours, and so was Mrs Hall. The pig woman told her extraordinary story of what she saw and heard in the lane that night, but she failed to impress the grand jurors. Four years went by, and the Hall–Mills case was almost forgotten by people outside of New Brunswick when, in a New Jersey court, one Arthur Riehl brought suit against his wife, the former Louise Geist, for annulment of their marriage. Louise Geist had been, at the time of the murders, a maid in the Hall household. Riehl said in the course of his testimony that his wife had told him “she knew all about the case but had been given $5,000 to hold her tongue”. This was all that Mr Philip Payne, managing editor of the Daily Mirror, nosing around for a big scandal of some sort, needed. His newspaper “played up” the story until finally, under its goading, Governor Moore of New Jersey appointed Alexander Simpson special prosecutor with orders to reopen the case. Mrs Hall and Willie Stevens were arrested and so was their brother, Henry Stevens, and a cousin, Henry de la Bruyere Carpender.
At a preliminary hearing in Somerville the pig woman, with eager stridency, told her story again. About 9 o’clock on the night of 14 September, she heard a wagon going along Hamilton Road near the farm on which she raised her pigs. Thieves had been stealing her corn and she thought maybe they were at it again. So she saddled her mule, Jenny (soon to become the most famous quadruped in the country), and set off in grotesque pursuit. In the glare of an automobile’s headlights in De Russey’s Lane, she saw a woman with white hair who was wearing a tan coat, and a man with a heavy moustache, who looked like a coloured man. These figures she identified as Mrs Hall and Willie Stevens. Tying her mule to a cedar tree, she started toward the scene on foot and heard voices raised in quarrel: “Somebody said something about letters.” She now saw three persons (later on she increased this to four), and a flashlight held by one of them illumined the face of a man she identified first as Henry Carpender, later as Henry Stevens, and it “glittered on something” in the man’s hand. Suddenly there was a shot, and as she turned and ran for her mule, there were three more shots; a woman’s voice screamed, “Oh, my! Oh, my! Oh, my!” and the voice of another woman moaned, “Oh, Henry!” The pig woman rode wildly home on her mule, without investigating further. But she had lost one of her moccasins in her flight, and some three hours later, at one o’clock, she rode her mule back again to see if she could find it. This time, by the light of the moon, she saw Mrs Hall, she said, kneeling in the lane, weeping. There was no one else there. The pig woman did not see any bodies.
Mrs Jane Gibson became, because of her remarkable story, the chief witness for the State, as Willie Stevens was to become the chief witness for the defence. If he and his sister were not in De Russey’s Lane, as the pig woman had shrilly insisted, it remained for them to tell the detailed story of their whereabouts and their actions that night after Mr Hall left the house. The grand jury this time indicted all four persons implicated by the pig woman, and the trial began on 3 November 1926.
The first persons Alexander Simpson called to the stand were “surprise witnesses”. They were a Mr and Mrs John S. Dixon, who lived in North Plainfield, New Jersey, about twelve miles from New Brunswick. It soon became apparent that they were to form part of a net that Simpson was preparing to draw around Willie Stevens. They testified that at about eight-thirty on the night of the murders Willie had appeared at their house, wearing a loose-fitting suit, a derby, a wing collar with bow tie, and, across his vest, a heavy gold chain to which was attached a gold watch. He had said that his sister had let him out there from her automobile and that he was trying to find the Parker Home for the Aged, which was at Bound Brook. He stuttered and he told them that he was an epileptic. They directed him to a trolley car and he went stumbling away. When Mrs Dixon identified Willie as her visitor, she walked over to him and took his right hand and shook it vigorously, as if to wring recognition out of him. Willie stared at her, said nothing. When she returned to the stand, he grinned widely. That was one of many bizarre incidents which marked the progress of the famous murder trial. It deepened the mystery that hung about the strange figure of Willie Stevens. People could hardly wait for him to take the stand.
William Carpender Stevens had sat in court for sixteen days before he was called to the witness chair, on 23 November 1926. On that day the trial of Albert B. Fall and Edward L. Doheny, defendants in the notorious Teapot Dome scandal, opened in Washington, but the nation had eyes only for a small, crowded courtroom in Somerville, New Jersey. Willie Stevens, after all these weeks, after all these years, was to speak out in public for the first time. As the New York Times said, “He had been pictured as ‘Crazy Willie’, as a town character, as an oddity, as a butt for all manner of jokes. He had been compared inferentially to an animal, and the hint of an alien racial strain in his parentage had been thrown at him.” Moreover, it had been prophesied that Willie would “blow up” on the stand, that he would be trapped into contradictions by the “wily” and “crafty” Alexander Simpson, that he would be tricked finally into blurting out his guilt. No wonder there was no sound in the courtroom except the heavy tread of Willie Stevens’s feet as he walked briskly to the witness stand.
Willie Stevens was an ungainly, rather lumpish man, about five feet ten inches tall. Although he looked flabby, this was only because of his loose-fitting clothes and the way he wore them; despite his fifty-four years, he was a man of great physical strength. He had a large head and a face that would be hard to forget. His head was covered with a thatch of thick, bushy hair, and his heavy black eyebrows seemed always to be arched, giving him an expression of perpetual surprise. This expression was strikingly accentuated by large, prominent eyes which, seen through the thick lenses of the spectacles he always wore, seemed to bulge unnaturally. He had a heavy, drooping, walrus moustache, and his complexion was dark. His glare was sudden and fierce; his smile, which came just as quickly, lighted up his whole face and gave him the wide, beaming look of an enormously pleased child. Born in Aiken, South Carolina, Willie Stevens had been brought to New Brunswick when he was two years old. When his wealthy parents died, a comfortable trust fund was left to Willie. The other children, Frances and Henry, had inherited their money directly. Once, when Mrs Hall was asked if it was not true that Willie was “regarded as essential to be taken care of in certain things,” she replied, “In certain aspects.” The quality of Willie’s mentality, the extent of his eccentricity, were matters the prosecution strove to establish on several occasions. Dr Laurence Runyon, called by the defence to testify that Willie was not an epileptic and had never stuttered, was cross-examined by Simpson. Said the doctor, “He may not be absolutely normal mentally, but he is able to take care of himself perfectly well. He is brighter than the average person, although he has never advanced as far in school learning as some others. He reads books that are above the average and makes a good many people look like fools.” “A sort of genius, in a way, I suppose?” said Simpson. To which the doctor quietly replied, “Yes, that is just what I mean.”
There were all sorts of stories about Willie. One of them was that he had once started a fire in his back yard and then, putting on a fireman’s helmet, had doused it gleefully with a pail of water. It was known that for years he had spent most of every day at the firehouse of Engine Company No. 3 in Dennis Street, New Brunswick. He played cards with
the firemen, ran errands for them, argued and joked with them, and was a general favourite. Sometimes he went out and bought a steak, or a chicken, and it was prepared and eaten in the firehouse by the firemen and Willie. In the days when the engine company had been a volunteer organization, Willie was an honorary member and always carried, in the firemen’s parades, a flag he had bought and presented to the firehouse, an elaborate banner costing sixty or seventy dollars. He had also bought the black-and-white bunting with which the front of the firehouse was draped whenever a member of the company died.
After his arrest, he had whiled away the time in his cell reading books on metallurgy. There was a story that when his sister-in-law, Mrs Henry Stevens, once twitted him on his heavy reading, he said, “Oh, that is merely the bread and butter of my literary repast.” The night before the trial opened, Willie’s chief concern was about a new blue suit that had been ordered for him and that did not fit him to his satisfaction. He had also lost a collar button, and that worried him; Mrs Henry Stevens hurried to the jail before the court convened and brought him another one, and he was happy. At the preliminary hearing weeks before, Simpson had declared with brutal directness that Willie Stevens did indeed look like a coloured man, as the pig woman had said. At this Willie had half risen from his chair and bared his teeth, as if about to leap on the prosecutor. But he had quickly subsided. Willie Stevens all through the trial had sat quietly, staring. He had been enormously interested when the pig woman, attended by a doctor and a nurse, was brought in on a stretcher to give her testimony. This was the man who now, on trial for his life, climbed into the witness chair in the courtroom at Somerville.
There was an immense stir. Justice Charles W. Parker rapped with his gavel. Mrs Hall’s face was strained and white; this was an ordeal she and her family had been dreading for weeks. Willie’s left hand gripped his chair tightly, his right hand held a yellow pencil with which he had fiddled all during the trial. He faced the roomful of eyes tensely. His own lawyer, Senator Clarence E. Case, took the witness first. Willie started badly by understating his age ten years. He said he was forty-four. “Isn’t it fifty-four?” asked Case. Willie gave the room his great, beaming smile. “Yes,” he chortled, boyishly, as if amused by his slip. The spectators smiled. It didn’t take Willie long to dispose of the Dixons, the couple who had sworn he stumbled into their house the night of the murder. He answered half a dozen questions on this point with strong emphasis, speaking slowly and clearly: he had never worn a derby, he had never had epilepsy, he had never stuttered, he had never had a gold watch and chain. Mr Case held up Willie’s old silver watch and chain for the jury to see. When he handed them back, Willie, with fine nonchalance, compared his watch with the clock on the courtroom wall, gave his sister a large, reassuring smile, and turned to his questioner with respectful attention. He described, with technical accuracy, an old revolver of his (the murders had been done with an automatic pistol, not a revolver, but a weapon of the same calibre as Willie’s). He said he used to fire off the gun on the Fourth of July; remembering these old holidays, his eyes lighted up with childish glee. From this mood he veered suddenly into indignation and anger. “When was the last time you saw the revolver?” was what set him off. “The last time I saw it was in this courthouse!” Willie almost shouted. “I think it was in October 1922, when I was taken and put through a very severe grilling by—I cannot mention every person’s name, but I remember Mr Toolan, Mr Lamb, and Detective David, and they did everything but strike me. They cursed me frightfully.” The officers had got him into an automobile “by a subterfuge,” he charged. “Mr David said he simply wanted me to go out in the country, to ask me a very few questions, that I would not be very long.” It transpired later that on this trip Willie himself had had a question to ask Detective David: would the detective, if they passed De Russey’s Lane, be kind enough to point it out to him? Willie had never seen the place, he told the detective, in his life. He said that Mr David showed him where it was.
The Mammoth Book of Unsolved Crimes Page 31