she stands accused(她是被告)-第2部分
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
ultimately an excellent wife and mother； given to piety and good works；
used in her earlier years as a political instrument by father and brother； and
these two no worse than masterful and ambitious men employing the
5
… Page 6…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
political technique common to their day and age。
％ II
Messalina； Locusta； Lucretia； Theodora； they step aside in this
particular review of peccant women。 Cleopatra； supposed to have
poisoned slaves in the spirit of scientific research； or perhaps as
punishment for having handed her the wrong lipstick； also is set aside。 It
were supererogatory to attempt dealing with the ladies mentioned in the
Bible and the Apocrypha； such as Jael； who drove the nail into the head of
Sisera； or Judith； who cut off the head of Holofernes。 Their stories are
plainly and excellently told in the Scriptural manner； and the adding of
detail would be mere fictional exercise。 Something； perhaps； might be
done for them by way of deducing their characters and physical
shortcomings through examination of their deeds and motivesbut this
may be left to psychiatrists。 There is room here merely for a soupcon of
psychologyjust as much； in fact； as may afford the writer an easy turn
from one plain narrative to another。 You will have no more of it than
amounts； say； to the pinch of fennel that should go into the sauce for
mackerel。
Toffana； who in Italy supplied poison to wives aweary of their
husbands and to ladies beginning to find their lovers inconvenient； and
who thus at second hand murdered some six hundred persons； has her
attractions for the criminological writer。 The bother is that so many of
them have found it out。 The scanty material regarding her has been
turned over so often that it has become somewhat tattered； and has worn
rather thin for refashioning。 The same may be said for Hieronyma Spara；
a direct poisoner and Toffana's contemporary。
The fashion they set passed to the Marquise de Brinvilliers； and she；
with La Vigoureux and La Voisin； has been written up so often that the
task of finding something new to say of her and her associates looks far
too formidable for a man as lethargic as myself。
In the abundance of material that criminal history provides about
women choice becomes difficult。 There is； for example； a plethora of
women poisoners。 Wherever a woman alone turns to murder it is a
6
… Page 7…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
hundred to one that she will select poison as a medium。 This at first sight
may seem a curious fact； but there is for it a perfectly logical explanation；
upon which I hope later to touch briefly。 The concern of this book；
however； is not purely with murder by women； though murder will bulk
largely。 Swindling will be dealt with； and casual allusion made to other
crimes。
But take for the moment the women accused or convicted of poisoning。
What an array they make！ What monsters of iniquity many of them
appear！ Perhaps the record； apart from those set up by Toffana and the
Brinvilliers contingent； is held by the Van der Linden woman of Leyden；
who between 1869 and 1885 attempted to dispose of 102 persons；
succeeded with no less than twenty…seven； and rendered at least forty…five
seriously ill。 Then comes Helene Jegado； of France； who； according to
one account； with two more working years （eighteen instead of sixteen）；
contrived to envenom twenty…six people； and attempted the lives of twelve
more。 On this calculation she fails by one to reach the der Linden record；
but； even reckoning the two extra years she had to work in； since she made
only a third of the other's essays； her bowling average may be said to be
incomparably better。
Our own Mary Ann Cotton； at work between 1852 and 1873； comes in
third； with twenty…four deaths； at least known； as her bag。 Mary Ann
operated on a system of her own； and many of her victims were her own
children。 She is well worth the lengthier consideration which will be
given her in later pages。
Anna Zwanziger； the earlier ‘monster' of Bavaria； arrested in 1809；
was an amateur compared with those three。
Mrs Susannah Holroyd； of Ashton…under…Lyne； charged in September
of 1816 at the Lancashire Assizes with the murder by poison of her
husband； her own son； and the infant child of Anna Newton； a lodger of
hers； was nurse to illegitimate children。 She was generally suspected of
having murdered several of her charges； but no evidence； as far as I can
learn； was brought forward to give weight to the suspicion at her trial。
Then there were Mesdames Flanagan and Higgins； found guilty； at
Liverpool Assizes in February 1884； of poisoning Thomas Higgins；
7
… Page 8…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
husband of the latter of the accused； by the administration of arsenic。
The ladies were sisters； living together in Liverpool。 With them in the
house in Skirvington Street were Flanagan's son John； Thomas Higgins
and his daughter Mary； 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； and in the year following Mary Higgins； his daughter； died。 Her
stepmother drew the insurance money。 The year after that Margaret
Jennings； daughter of the lodger； died。 Once again insurance money was
drawn； 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； as having died of dysentery due to alcoholism； 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； upon which
discovery the bodies of John Flanagan； Mary Higgins； and Margaret
Jennings were exhumed for autopsy； 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； these are two cases which； if only minor in the wholesale
poisoning line when compared with the Van der Linden； Jegado； and
Cotton envenomings； 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： Mrs Holroyd of husband and
son； with lodger's daughter as makeweight； the Liverpool pair of nephew；
husband； stepdaughter （or son； brother…in…law； and stepniece； according to
how you look at it）； 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； 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；
author of By Misadventure and Further Evidence。
