SHE STANDS ACCUSED(她是被告)

VIP免费

2024-12-26 0 0 713.92KB 189 页 5.9玖币

侵权投诉

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

SHE STANDS

ACCUSED

BY VICTOR MacCLURE

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

Being a Series of Accounts of the Lives and Deeds of Notorious

Women, Murderesses, Cheats, Cozeners, on whom Justice was Executed,

and of others who, Accused of Crimes, were Acquitted at least in Law;

Drawn from Authenticated Sources

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

I.INTRODUCTORY:

I had a thought to call this book Pale Hands or Fair Hands Imbrued--so

easy it is to fall into the ghastly error of facetiousness.

Apart, however, from the desire to avoid pedant or puerile humour, re-

examination of my material showed me how near I had been to crashing

into a pitfall of another sort. Of the ladies with whose encounters with

the law I propose to deal several were assoiled of the charges against them.

Their hands, then--unless the present ruddying of female fingernails is the

revival of an old fashion--were not pink-tipped, save, perhaps, in the way

of health; nor imbrued, except in soapsuds. My proposed facetiousness

put me in peril of libel.

Interest in the criminous doings of women is so alive and avid among

criminological writers that it is hard indeed to find material which has not

been dealt with to the point of exhaustion. Does one pick up in a

secondhand bookshop a pamphlet giving a verbatim report of a trial in

which a woman is the central figure, and does one flatter oneself that the

find is unique, and therefore providing of fresh fields, it is almost

inevitable that one will discover, or rediscover, that the case has already

been put to bed by Mr Roughead in his inimitable manner. What a nose

the man has! What noses all these rechauffeurs of crime possess! To

use a figure perhaps something unmannerly, the pigs of Perigord, which,

one hears, are trained to hunt truffles, have snouts no keener.

Suppose, again, that one proposes to deal with the peccancy of women

from the earliest times, it is hard to find a lady, even one whose name has

hitherto gleamed lurid in history, to whom some modern writer has not

contrived by chapter and verse to apply a coat of whitewash.

Locusta, the poisoner whom Agrippina, wanting to kill the Emperor

Claudius by slow degrees, called into service, and whose technique Nero

admired so much that he was fain to put her on his pension list, barely

escapes the deodorant. Messalina comes up in memory. And then one

finds M. Paul Moinet, in his historical essays En Marge de l'histoire,

gracefully pleading for the lady as Messaline la calomniee--yes, and

making out a good case for her. The Empress Theodora under the pen of

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

a psychological expert becomes nothing more dire than a clever little

whore disguised in imperial purple.

On the mention of poison Lucretia Borgia springs to mind. This is

the lady of whom Gibbon writes with the following ponderous falsity:

In the next generation the house of Este was sullied by a sanguinary

and incestuous race in the nuptials of Alfonso I with Lucretia, a bastard of

Alexander VI, the Tiberius of Christian Rome. This modern Lucretia

might have assumed with more propriety the name of Messalina, since the

woman who can be guilty, who can even be accused, of a criminal

intercourse with a father and two brothers must be abandoned to all the

licentiousness of a venal love.

That, if the phrase may be pardoned, is swatting a butterfly with a

sledge-hammer! Poor little Lucretia, described by the excellent M.

Moinet as a ``bon petit coeur,'' is enveloped in the political ordure slung by

venal pamphleteers at the masterful men of her race. My friend Rafael

Sabatini, than whom no man living has dug deeper into Borgia history,

explains the calumniation of Lucretia in this fashion: Adultery and

promiscuous intercourse were the fashion in Rome at the time of

Alexander VI. Nobody thought anything of them. And to have accused

the Borgia girl, or her relatives, of such inconsiderable lapses would have

been to evoke mere shrugging. But incest, of course, was horrible. The

writers paid by the party antagonistic to the Borgia growth in power

therefore slung the more scurrile accusation. But there is, in truth, just

about as much foundation for the charge as there is for the other, that

Lucretia was a poisoner. The answer to the latter accusation, says my

same authority, may take the form of a question: WHOM DID

LUCRETIA POISON? As far as history goes, even that written by the

Borgia enemies, the reply is, NOBODY!

Were one content, like Gibbon, to take one's history like snuff there

would be to hand a mass of caliginous detail with which to cause

shuddering in the unsuspecting reader. But in mere honesty, if in nothing

else, it behoves the conscientious writer to examine the sources of his

information. The sources may be--they too frequently are--contaminated

by political rancour and bias, and calumnious accusation against historical

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

figures too often is founded on mere envy. And then the rechauffeurs,

especially where rechauffage is made from one language to another, have

been apt (with a mercenary desire to give their readers as strong a brew as

possible) to attach the darkest meanings to the words they translate. In

this regard, and still apropos the Borgias, I draw once again on Rafael

Sabatini for an example of what I mean. Touching the festivities

celebrating Lucretia's wedding in the Vatican, the one eyewitness whose

writing remains, Gianandrea Boccaccio, Ferrarese ambassador, in a letter

to his master says that amid singing and dancing, as an interlude, a

``worthy'' comedy was performed. The diarist Infessura, who was not

there, takes it upon himself to describe the comedy as ``lascivious.''

Lascivious the comedies of the time commonly were, but later writers,

instead of drawing their ideas from the eyewitness, prefer the dark hints of

Infessura, and are persuaded that the comedy, the whole festivity, was

``obscene.'' Hence arises the notion, so popular, that the second Borgia

Pope delighted in shows which anticipated those of the Folies Bergere, or

which surpassed the danse du ventre in lust-excitation.

A statue was made by Guglielmo della Porta of Julia Farnese,

Alexander's beautiful second mistress. It was placed on the tomb of her

brother Alessandro (Pope Paul III). A Pope at a later date provided the

lady, portrayed in `a state of nature,' with a silver robe--because, say the

gossips, the statue was indecent. Not at all: it was to prevent recurrence

of an incident in which the sculptured Julia took a static part with a

German student afflicted with sex-mania.

I become, however, a trifle excursive, I think. If I do the blame lies

on those partisan writers to whom I have alluded. They have a way of

leading their incautious latter-day brethren up the garden. They hint at

flesh-eating lilies by the pond at the path's end, and you find nothing more

prone to sarcophagy than harmless primulas. In other words, the beetle-

browed Lucretia, with the handy poison-ring, whom they promise you

turns out to be a blue-eyed, fair-haired, rather yielding little darling,

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

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 motives--but this

may be left to psychiatrists. There is room here merely for a soupcon of

psychology--just 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

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,

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 Ann--there 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

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

engaging speculation. It was brought to my notice by Mr Alan Brock,

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, convicted of the murder of her

husband in the same city five years later?

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, who callously

slew her father with arsenic supplied her by her lover at Henley-on-

Thames in 1751, 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, heiress to a fortune of

L10,000, 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, of a later date, Edith Mary Carew, who in 1892 was found guilty by

the Consular Court, Yokohama, of the murder of her husband with arsenic

and sugar of lead, 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, for

example, the case of Sarah Pearson and the woman Black, who were tried

at Armagh in June 1905 for the murder of the old mother of the latter.

The old woman, Alice Pearson (Sarah was her daughter-in-law), was in

possession of small savings, some forty pounds, which aroused the

cupidity of the younger women. Their first attempt at murder was with

metallic mercury. It rather failed, and the trick was turned by means of

three-pennyworth of strychnine, bought by Sarah and mixed with the old

lady's food. The murder might not have been discovered but for the fact

that Sarah, who had gone to Canada, was arrested in Montreal for some

other offence, 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: 296 grains--a record.

Having regard to the condition of life in which these Irishwomen lived,

SHE STANDS ACCUSED

there is nothing, to my mind, in the fact that they murdered for forty

pounds to make their crime more sordid than that of Mary Blandy.

Take, again, the case of Mary Ansell, the domestic servant, who, at

Hertford Assizes in June 1899, was found guilty of the murder of her sister,

Caroline, by the administration of phosphorus contained in a cake. Here

the motive for the murder was the insurance made by Ansell upon the life

of her sister, a young woman of weak intellect confined in Leavesden

Asylum, Watford. The sum assured was only L22 10s. If Mary Blandy

poisoned her father in order to be at liberty to marry her lover, Cranstoun,

and to secure the fortune Cranstoun wanted with her, wherein does she

shine above Mary Ansell, a murderess who not only poisoned her sister,

but nearly murdered several of her sister's fellow-inmates of the asylum,

and all for twenty odd pounds? Certainly not in being less sordid,

certainly not in being more `romantic.'

There is, at root, no case of murder proved and accepted as such which

does not contain its points of interest for the criminological writer. There

is, indeed, many a case, not only of murder but of lesser crime, that has

failed to attract a lot of attention, but that yet, in affording matter for the

student of crime and criminal psychology, surpasses others which, very

often because there has been nothing of greater public moment at the time,

were boomed by the Press into the prominence of causes celebres.

There is no need then, after all, for any crime writer who wants to fry a

modest basket of fish to mourn because Mr Roughead, Mr. Beaufroy

Barry, Mr Guy Logan, Miss Tennyson Jesse, Mr Leonard R. Gribble, and

others of his estimable fellows seem to have swiped all the sole and

salmon. It may be a matter for envy that Mr Roughead, with his uncanny

skill and his gift in piquant sauces, can turn out the haddock and hake with

all the delectability of sole a la Normande. The sigh of envy will merge

into an exhalation of joy over the artistry of it. And one may turn,

wholeheartedly and inspired, to see what can be made of one's own catch

of gudgeon.

% III

``More deadly than the male.''

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

5.9 玖币 0人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

SHESTANDSACCUSED1SHESTANDSACCUSEDBYVICTORMacCLURESHESTANDSACCUSED2BeingaSeriesofAccountsoftheLivesandDeedsofNotoriousWomen,Murderesses,Cheats,Cozeners,onwhomJusticewasExecuted,andofotherswho,AccusedofCrimes,wereAcquittedatleastinLaw;DrawnfromAuthenticatedSourcesSHESTANDSACCUSED3I.INTRODUCTORY:Ihadat...

展开>> 收起<<

SHE STANDS ACCUSED(她是被告).pdf

共189页,预览38页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

声明：本站为文档C2C交易模式，即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载，本站只是中间服务平台，本站所有文档下载所得的收益归上传人(含作者)所有。玖贝云文库仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。若文档所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私，请立即通知玖贝云文库，我们立即给予删除！

SHE STANDS ACCUSED(她是被告)

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

热门标签

举报选择: