梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
given her in later pages。
Anna Zwanziger�察 �the earlier `monster' of Bavaria�察 �arrested in 1809�察�
was an amateur compared with those three。
Mrs Susannah Holroyd�察�of Ashton´under´Lyne�察�charged in September
of 1816 at the Lancashire Assizes with the murder by poison of her
husband�察�her own son�察�and the infant child of Anna Newton�察�a lodger of
hers�察�was nurse to illegitimate children。 She was generally suspected of
having murdered several of her charges�察�but no evidence�察�as far as I can
learn�察 �was brought forward to give weight to the suspicion at her trial。
Then there were Mesdames Flanagan and Higgins�察 �found guilty�察 �at
Liverpool Assizes in February 1884�察 �of poisoning Thomas Higgins�察�
7
´ Page 8´
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
husband of the latter of the accused�察 �by the administration of arsenic。
The ladies were sisters�察�living together in Liverpool。 With them in the
house in Skirvington Street were Flanagan's son John�察 �Thomas Higgins
and his daughter Mary�察�Patrick Jennings and his daughter Margaret。
John Flanagan died in December 1880。 His mother drew the
insurance money。 Next year Thomas Higgins married the younger of the
sisters�察�and in the year following Mary Higgins�察�his daughter�察�died。 Her
stepmother drew the insurance money。 The year after that Margaret
Jennings�察�daughter of the lodger�察�died。 Once again insurance money was
drawn�察�this time by both sisters。
Thomas Higgins passed away that same year in a house to which what
remained of the menage had removed。 He was on the point of being
buried�察�as having died of dysentery due to alcoholism�察�when the suspicions
of his brother led the coroner to stop the funeral。 The brother had heard
word of insurance on the life of Thomas。 A post´mortem revealed the
fact that Thomas had actually died of arsenic poisoning�察 �upon which
discovery the bodies of John Flanagan�察 �Mary Higgins�察 �and Margaret
Jennings were exhumed for autopsy�察�which revealed arsenic poisoning in
each case。 The prisoners alone had attended the deceased in the last
illnesses。 Theory went that the poison had been obtained by soaking fly´
papers。 Mesdames Flanagan and Higgins were executed at Kirkdale
Gaol in March of 1884。
Now�察 �these are two cases which�察 �if only minor in the wholesale
poisoning line when compared with the Van der Linden�察 �Jegado�察 �and
Cotton envenomings�察�yet have their points of interest。 In both cases the
guilty were so far able to banish ``all trivial fond records'' as to dispose of
kindred who might have been dear to them�此 �Mrs Holroyd of husband and
son�察�with lodger's daughter as makeweight�察�the Liverpool pair of nephew�察�
husband�察�stepdaughter ��or son�察�brother´in´law�察�and stepniece�察�according to
how you look at it���察 �with again the unfortunate daughter of a lodger
thrown in。 If they ``do things better on the Continent''speaking
generally and ignoring our own Mary Annthere is yet temptation to
examine the lesser native products at length�察�but space and the scheme of
this book prevent。 In the matter of the Liverpool Locustas there is an
8
´ Page 9´
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
engaging speculation。 It was brought to my notice by Mr Alan Brock�察�
author of By Misadventure and Further Evidence。 Just how far did the
use of flypapers by Flanagan and Higgins for the obtaining of arsenic
serve as an example to Mrs Maybrick�察 �convicted of the murder of her
husband in the same city five years later�拭�
The list of women poisoners in England alone would stretch
interminably。 If one were to confine oneself merely to those employing
arsenic the list would still be formidable。 Mary Blandy�察 �who callously
slew her father with arsenic supplied her by her lover at Henley´on´
Thames in 1751�察 �has been a subject for many criminological essayists。
That she has attracted so much attention is probably due to the double fact
that she was a girl in a very comfortable way of life�察�heiress to a fortune of
L10��000�察 �and that contemporary records are full and accessible。 But
there is nothing essentially interesting about her case to make it stand out
from others that have attracted less notice in a literary way。 Another
Mary�察�of a later date�察�Edith Mary Carew�察�who in 1892 was found guilty by
the Consular Court�察�Yokohama�察�of the murder of her husband with arsenic
and sugar of lead�察 �was an Englishwoman who might have given Mary
Blandy points in several directions。
When we leave the arsenical´minded and seek for cases where other
poisons were employed there is still no lack of material。 There is�察 �for
example�察�the case of Sarah Pearson and the woman Black�察�who were tried
at Armagh in June 1905 for the murder of the old mother of the latter。
The old woman�察�Alice Pearson ��Sarah was her daughter´in´law���察 �was in
possession of small savings�察 �some forty pounds�察 �which aroused the
cupidity of the younger women。 Their first attempt at murder was with
metallic mercury。 It rather failed�察�and the trick was turned by means of
three´pennyworth of strychnine�察�bought by Sarah and mixed with the old
lady's food。 The murder might not have been discovered but for the fact
that Sarah�察�who had gone to Canada�察�was arrested in Montreal for some
other offence�察�and made a confession which implicated her husband and
Black。 A notable point about the case is the amount of metallic mercury
found in the old woman's body�此�296 grainsa record。
Having regard to the condition of life in which these Irishwomen lived�察�
9
´ Page 10´
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
there is nothing�察 �to my mind�察 �in the fact that they murdered for forty
pounds to make their crime more sordid than that of Mary Blandy。
Take�察 �again�察 �the case of Mary Ansel