The Supernatural Murders

by Jonathan Goodman

  COMPILED BY JONATHAN GOODMAN

  [COMPILER’S NOTE. I have put together this account of strange goings-on in Hammersmith (which is on the south-western edge of London, partly bounded by the U-shaped stretch of the Thames between Chiswick and Fulham) from criminal-court records at the Public Record Office and press clippings in a folder, marked GHOSTS: LOCAL, at the Hammersmith Public Library. Once or twice, I have altered tenses of press reports; I have put misspellings right, amended some of the punctuation, and whenever there were versions of the name of a person or place, chosen one of them. Chiefly because of the jigsaw nature of the compilation (I have sometimes inserted just a few words from one report in a paragraph from another), I have not cited individual sources; but the clippings I have used are from, among other papers, Bell’s Weekly Messenger, the Star, the Sunday Herald, The Times, and the West London Observer. If anyone really needs to know which bits are from where, I am sure that Christine Bailey, at the Library, will be as helpful to him or her as she has been to me.]

  … In the night, imagining some fear,

  How easy is a bush supposed a bear!

  A Midsummer Night’s Dream (Act V, Scene 1)

  Thursday, 5 January 1804 We have to announce to the public an event which in some of its circumstances is so ludicrous, but in its result so dreadful, that we fear that if the reader should laugh with one side of his mouth, he must of necessity cry with the other.

  The neighbourhood of Hammersmith has of late been kept in a constant state of alarm, in consequence of the nocturnal appearance of what credulity supposed a Ghost. For many weeks past, the church-bell no sooner struck one than a spectre seemed to flit along the fields adjacent to Black Lion Lane, leading to the river. The old and young watched its coming, but preserved an awful distance. Women and children have nearly lost their senses. One poor woman, who was far advanced in her pregnancy of a second child, was so much shocked at this supposed Ghost that she took to her bed, where she still lies. The Ghost so much alarmed a waggoner belonging to Mr Russell, driving a team of eight horses, and with fifteen passengers at the time, that he took to his heels, leaving the waggon and horses so precipitately that the whole were greatly endangered. Neither man, woman nor child could pass that way for some time past; and the report was that it was the Apparition of a man who cut his throat in the neighbourhood above a year ago. Several lay in wait different nights for the Ghost; but there are so many by-lanes and paths leading to this riparian part of Hammersmith that he was always sure of being on that which was unguarded, and every night played his tricks to the terror of the populace.

  So far back as October last, the first rumours of a Ghost were in circulation in the neighbourhood near the church. It was then reported that a mad woman was in the habit of disturbing the neighbours by perambulating the churchyard and other walks, in strange and uncouth dresses – which, after a little time, was discovered by Mr Moody, of the Six Bells, to be nothing more than a youth belonging to Mr Kilberton, a neighbouring butcher, who, by way of frolic and to plague the maid his fellow-servant, had dressed himself in her clothes, in which he frequently appeared in the church-yard and other places. Being reprimanded by Mr Moody and others, and warned of ill consequences which might attend his antics, he desisted from the practice altogether.

  Notwithstanding, another Phantom soon sprang up, and was seen all in white at various places. This Ghost was so clever and nimble in its retreats that they never could be traced – till one evening when one Brazier, a chimneysweep, going through the lower part of Church Lane, and the night being very dark, was alarmed at the appearance of this supposed Spectre; and as he related the story the next morning, it seems that he stood stock-still some moments before he durst proceed. However, having a stick in his hand, he extended it at arm’s length; advancing towards the tree against which he saw the object, he was induced to exclaim: ‘Ghost! or whatever you may be, pray be civil.’ But as he still continued advancing with a slow pace, he, instead of penetrating a body of thin air, found his stick in contact with the clothes of a female, who proved to be a Miss G---, a young lady of Hammersmith, with her male companion.

  After this discovery, nothing of the kind was seen or heard of in this quarter, excepting what has been related by Thomas Groom, a servant to Messrs Burgess and Winter, brewers. He, a stout and able man, asserted for a truth that he was nearly choked by the rude caresses of a Phantom which he met in the church-yard. He did not keep to his bed, as it is reported in some newspapers, but it was several days before he got the better of his fright.

  The next disturber of the peace made its appearance not in the church-yard, but lower down, towards Beaver, Black Lion, and Plough & Harrow Lanes, which served it as a retreat when pursued from the high road. A drummer belonging to the Chiswick Volunteers, an inhabitant of Hammersmith, and a rat-catcher by his profession, was one of the first that was panic-struck by this Spectre. The next was a clerk to Mr Cromwell the brewer, who thought he saw a supernatural appearance about five o’clock one morning in Plough & Harrow Lane, and was considerably alarmed. The pretended Spectre, on Thursday, 29 December, made a more public appearance; for, as William Girdler, the watchman, came out of the house of Mrs Samuel, No 2 Queen’s Place, adjoining Beaver Lane, an apprentice boy belonging to Mr James Graham the shoemaker ran across the road towards him, dreadfully frightened at what he supposed to be a Ghost! In consequence of this, the watchman looked towards the opposite side of the road, on the left hand of the pump, and was witness to an object all in white. Approaching the spot where it stood, he observed some person divest himself of a sheet or table-cloth, he could not distinguish which, wrap it up under his coat, and run away. Being dark, this person was soon out of sight. Girdler thereupon went to the White Hart, and inquired if any strange person was just come in there. While Girdler was going by, the pretended Ghost, it is supposed, hid behind Mr Hill’s house; but leaving the spot in Girdler’s absence, he was seen by some of Mr Hill’s family, who observed a corner of the white cloth hanging below his coat. While he stood near the pump, he was also seen by a Mrs Steward, and her servant, at No 4 Theresa Terrace, who were both much alarmed.

  We come now to the afflicting part of the relation, describing how the Christmas tricks of the Goblin have terminated in a melancholy incident.

  On Tuesday last, a young Officer of Excise named Francis Smith, who is stated to be twenty-nine years of age, having spent part of his evening at the White Hart, left it, perfectly sober, with the purpose of passing the remainder at a private party to which he had been invited; but by some means or other his purpose was changed, and he returned to the White Hart, where a conversation about the Ghost took place; Mr Smith thereupon went next door to his lodgings, at the house of Mr Oakley, to collect his fowling-piece, which he brought back to the White Hart, loaded it there with powder and shot, and said he would act this night, go and try to meet the Ghost, and certainly shoot it. It was just past eleven o’clock. Mr Smith preconcerted with the watchman, William Girdler, to go up one lane while he, Mr Smith, went round by another, the reputed haunt of the Ghost; the two men agreed upon a pass-word, whereby they might distinguish each other, which was – ‘Who comes there?’ ‘A friend.’ ‘Advance, friend.’ They sallied out.

  As Mr Smith came through Cross Lane, at the end of Black Lion Lane, he saw a man dressed in white, whom he challenged, and asked who he was. The person made no answer. The night was very dark. After a minute or two, he challenged him again, and told the person in white that if he did not answer, he would certainly shoot him. The man made no answer, and Mr Smith levelled his piece and shot him through the head.

  The poor man expired on the spot, the ball having entered his mouth and gone out at the back part of his skull. He was subsequently conveyed to the Black Lion, and there recognised as Thomas Milward, who was by trade a plasterer and bricklayer.

  Mr Smith readily surrendered himself to Mr John Lock, a wine merchant in Hammersmith, who was returning home from the Plough & Harro
w. Mr Smith told Mr Lock that he had been in great trepidation when the Ghost, instead of answering when he was called upon, had advanced straight towards him. Mr Lock has said that the event took place between two high hedges, so that it was really difficult to discover the body.

  Meanwhile, William Girdler had heard the gun fired; but he did not take any notice of it, as he had often heard guns firing in the night-time. He himself was armed with a pistol, as was his usual custom. Eventually coming upon Messrs Lock and Smith, he learned of what had transpired, and accompanied them to the White Hart.

  At six o’clock yesterday [Wednesday] evening, Mr Smith was brought in custody of the Bow Street officers from the White Hart, where he had been since the incident, to town, and was committed to Newgate Prison.

  Both parties lived in, and were well known to, the neighbourhood. The deceased, who was twenty-three years of age, was in his working dress, which consisted of white linen trousers and a white waistcoat, the trousers being very long, almost touching the shoes. Ann Milward, the sister of the deceased, said that she lived with her parents, and that betwixt the hours of ten and eleven on the fateful night, her brother (who lived at his father-in-law’s) came to the house and said he had been seeking for his wife, who was at a Mr Smith’s; the sister, as well as her father and mother, were just going to bed. She asked her brother to sit down, which he did, remaining about half an hour; he then bade his parents and his sister good-night and walked out, having heard the watchman calling the hour. The sister, being almost immediately struck with a presentiment that some accident would befall him, accordingly went to the door and stood on some bricks in order to look out for him. She then heard a voice say, ‘D--n you, who are you? Stand, else I’ll shoot you!’ and the report of a gun immediately succeeded. She called out, ‘Thomas!’ and returned to her mother, saying to her, ‘I believe my brother is shot.’ Neither her father nor her mother would believe it. She then went out, and discovered her brother lying perfectly dead. She returned home very much shocked. She had often heard of the Ghost, and it was described in various ways, but was said to be dressed particularly in white, with long horns and glass eyes; she had never thought of cautioning her brother of any danger he might be in from wearing a dress so similar in appearance to that of the Ghost. She knows nothing of any animosity subsisting betwixt the deceased and Mr Smith; and she believes they hardly knew each other but by sight.

  Monday, 9 January 1804 To the satisfaction of most of the inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood of Hammersmith, the real Ghost has at last been discovered in the person of one James Graham.

  The much lamented sacrifice of poor Milward had such a powerful effect that last Thursday evening an information was lodged before Mr Hill, the Magistrate, against a housekeeper in the town of Hammersmith, a boot and shoe-maker, who has a wife and three children, for going out at night wrapped up in a blanket, with a design to represent a Ghost! He was consequently taken into custody and examined before the said Magistrate, who, doubtful how to act without advice in such a case, took bail for his appearance. The people of Hammersmith expected that the Ghost was yesterday to have stood publicly in the Church, wrapped up in a white sheet, by way of penance, and vast numbers were consequently collected to behold such a spectacle!

  Graham, when questioned by the Magistrate as to the cause of his assuming such a disguise, said that he had done it in order to be revenged on the impertinence of his apprentices, who had terrified his children – and, to a lesser degree, his lodger, the one-armed postman – by telling them stories of Ghosts. He expected to check them of this disagreeable bent of their mind to the prejudice of his children by presenting them, as they passed homewards, with a figure of a ghost – which, it seems, he managed very successfully. Had this weak, perhaps wicked, frolic ended here, it is likely that no serious consequences would have ensued.

  This Graham, it is to be noticed, is a constant attendant, and one of the first singers, at Trinity Church, and always bore an excellent character till now. He might think that his singing at the funeral of poor Milward would be some reparation for the folly in which he has been so deeply implicated.

  It would engross too much of the reader’s attention to state minutely the disagreeable results of his different experiments. The report that a lady of Brooke Green, far advanced in pregnancy, had died in consequence of the appearance of the Spectre, we are happy to find is totally unfounded; she, having received her fright from a person in a state of intoxication, soon recovered from a mere feeling of faintness.

  The various reports going around Hammersmith would more than fill a newspaper – some absolutely affirming that they had seen the eyes of the ghost appear like a glow worm – others that he breathed fire and smoke – and others again that he vanished in a moment, and sunk in the earth in their presence! Notwithstanding the discovery and detection, very few will yet venture out after dark, so dreadful has been the impression made on the minds of the inhabitants by Graham, who has been obliged to answer for these wanton and manifold outrages of the public peace by the payment of a fine that by many is considered a paltry price to pay.

  Old Bailey, Friday, 13 January 1804 Francis Smith was indicted for the wilful murder of Thomas Milward, in Hammersmith, on 3 January instant.

  The prisoner was dressed in black, and conducted himself throughout the trial with decent firmness. During the time he remained at the bar, his countenance did not appear to express much agitation, until the jury left the box.

  Counsel for the Crown called four witnesses: Mr John Lock, wine merchant in Hammersmith; William Girdler, a watchman; Ann Milward, a very genteel young woman, sister of the deceased; and Mr Flower, a surgeon, who deposed that he examined the body of the deceased and found that he had received a gun-shot wound in the lower part of the left jaw; it appeared to have been occasioned by a ball of the size of No 4; it had penetrated the vertebra of the neck and had injured the spinal marrow of the brain. He entertained no doubt of the wound having been the real and sole cause of the deceased’s death; it disfigured the jaw, and he observed that the face was all blackened with the powder from the gun, indicating that it had been fired at close range.

  The prisoner, on being called on for his defence, said he would leave it to his counsel; but, on being told by the Judge, the Lord Chief Baron, that counsel could not speak in his behalf, he stated that on the day on which that fatal catastrophe happened, he went out with a good intention, and at the very moment of the affair taking place he did not know what he was doing. He spoke to the person twice, and was so much agitated on receiving no answer that, in his confusion and dread, he was unfortunate enough to commit the rash action; but he solemnly declared to God that he had no malice against the deceased, nor any intention of taking away the life of any individual whatever.

  His counsel then proceeded to call the witnesses on his behalf.

  The first was Mrs Phebe Foulbrook, mother-in-law of the deceased. She stated that she had frequently heard of the Ghost. On the Saturday evening preceding her son-in-law’s death, he had said to her that he had been taken for the Ghost on account of the dress he wore, and that two ladies and a gentleman had been frightened at him on the Terrace. One of them cried as he came near, ‘Here comes the Ghost!’ To which he replied, using a bad oath, ‘I am no more a Ghost than yourself; do you want a punch o’ the head?’ On hearing this, the witness had advised him to put on a great-coat for fear of accidents, and not to frighten any person again.

  A great many other witnesses were then called, one to speak of the supposed Ghost, and the others to speak solely to the prisoner’s character; all of the latter concurred in giving him one of the very best, and proved that he was a young man of a remarkably mild temper, and of a humane, generous and benevolent disposition.

  The Lord Chief Baron then charged the jury. It would, he observed, be necessary for him to state that although, to constitute the crime of murder, it was generally requisite that malice propense should be proved, yet it was not abs
olutely so in all cases. The law did not of necessity imply that where a person met his death from the hands of another, malice, or what was called spite in vulgar speaking, should be proved. The disposition of a person’s mind to kill was sufficient, in the eye of the law, to adjudge him guilty of murder. For instance, if some person should have taken it into his head to fire into the very hall in which the Court was sitting, and kill anyone in the Court, then he would be guilty of murder. So, in another case, if a person should shoot at one man and kill another, he would be equally guilty. The law would consider his disposition of mind, which was evidently to kill, without having legal authority or just provocation, not in self-defence, nor in the absence of his reasoning faculty. His Lordship professed that he could not, in this case, distinguish any one of these features of alleviation or mitigation; therefore, if the prisoner at the bar had taken away the life of another, his offence was murder. If that was not so, no one could be safe; it would be in the power of anyone to say, such and such a one has committed some offence which I think deserves death, and I will go and despatch him. It was fortunate that the law of this country has deemed such an offence to be murder. In the present case, it was sufficient to endeavour to apprehend; but not to kill. If, therefore, the jury entertained no doubt with respect to the fact, he would betray his duty, and injure the public security, if he did not persist in asserting that this was a clear case of murder, if the facts were proved to the jury’s satisfaction. In cases of some involuntary acts, or some sufficiently violent provocation, killing became manslaughter. Not one of those circumstances occurred here. There was here no apparent intention of the prisoner to apprehend this person; instead of that, which would have been the proper step in such a case, he was proved to have taken out a gun in order to shoot him, erroneously imagining he was entitled to do so. If the jury believed the facts presented, they would find the prisoner guilty. His Lordship observed that the character which had been given of the prisoner was of no avail here.