'Sir,
'I am much obliged by your ready insertion of my letter of yesterday, as well as by your reference to, and observations upon it, in your own portion of the paper; in respect to which last I will beg leave to add a few lines in explanation of some parts of what I have already written.
'1. By suicides were intended only those against whom verdicts of felo de se may have been given, and they were introduced not as likely to furnish many subjects, but as something towards the demand, and as a cause which might operate with some towards the preservation of their lives.
'2. The appropriation of the proceeds of the sales to the benefit of the county, was to remove, as much as possible, all temptation to act with harshness to persons not claiming the bodies of their relatives within the exactly stipulated period.
'3. The sale of bodies may be made with equal convenience after having been examined and marked as before.
'4. The bodies being admitted both by the sellers and purchasers to be fresh at the end of forty-eight hours, will allow abundant time for the proposed course to be taken with them.
'5. The want of bodies, by the professors and students at hospitals, going, as is shown in the late case, beyond their own means of supply, a permission to dissect such as may die in them, without examination and the subsequent marks, would leave open a dangerous door for dealers in murder to continue their most abominable traffic.
'With a repetition of my acknowledgments, both on my own part and on that of the poorer part of the public, I have the honour to be, Sir, your very humble servant,
'J. Sewell.'
'21, Cumberland-street, Portman-square, Dec. 10.'
The atrocities of Bishop and Williams appeared to endanger the peace of every family, and the public became naturally anxious that measures should be adopted for the purpose of supplying subjects for anatomical lectures, in a manner that might abolish the disgusting, unhallowed, and illegal trade of the resurrectionist, and remove for ever all temptation to the commission of that new and most horrible species of murder called burking. We may boast of the excellence of our legislative enactments,—and in the plenitude of our conceit, we may fancy that we are far superior to all other nations in the construction of our legislative code,—but in what other country than this, professing to be enlightened by civilization, was the crime of burking ever known?—and yet science has advanced as rapidly in those countries where it was never exemplified, as in that where it has been carried to an extent actually appalling to our nature, and disgraceful to the nation in which it has been practised. It is well known that many of the medical students of this country repair to the schools of France, on account of the greater facility which is there offered of perfecting themselves in anatomical science, by the readiness with which subjects are procured, without, at the same time, outraging the feelings of the living, or having recourse to the horrid crime of murder. We merely throw out the hint, whether an establishment like that of La Morgue in Paris would not in itself furnish a regular and ample supply of subjects for all the anatomical schools of the metropolis? The suggestion of Sir John Sewell comes very near to the establishment of an institution like that of La Morgue, and it cannot be a matter of doubt that the same beneficial results would accrue to the interests of science in this country as have been so conspicuously displayed in the schools of France.
It is admitted on all sides that medical students must practise, or, at least, witness, repeated dissections of the human body, in order to obtain a competent knowledge of their profession; there can be, therefore, no question of the propriety of braving the absurd prejudices of weak-minded individuals, rather than permit the present deplorable system of violating the sepulchre, and even of murdering, for subjects to be continued. The choice of two evils is before us,—we cannot but choose the least of them. We have already described the means that have been proposed by several enlightened individuals for legally supplying lecture-rooms with subjects; but suffice it to say, in our estimation their most objectionable features are infinitely preferable to a continuance of the mode, now generally adopted, of obtaining dead bodies by the plunder of the churchyard; because the existence amongst us of gangs of degraded wretches, living by the infraction of the law, is of itself a monstrous evil, even putting the crime of burking altogether out of the question. Poaching and smuggling have long been notorious for their destructive influence on the morals of our provincial population. An indulgence in those comparatively trivial offences, together with the difficulty of obtaining honest employment when known as a smuggler or a poacher, too often lead to crimes of a deeper dye. How much more mischievous then must be the influence of the disgusting avocation of the resurrectionist upon those who are tempted by the high price given for subjects to steal the clay-cold corpse from the grave, at the dead of night? Accordingly we find, that among this class of men are some of the most desperate thieves and burglars of the metropolis. The life of a resurrectionist would be no mean acquisition to the knowledge of the human character in its most depraved and degenerate dispositions; for it may be affirmed, that no man ever took to the horrible avocation of exhuming the putrid corpse until his heart had been previously seared and cauterised by almost every species of crime incidental to humanity. Let us, however, be so far candid as to state, that such is not the case with regard to all those persons from whom our anatomical schools obtain their subjects, for we could point to an individual, who now apparently moves in a respected station of society, who followed the horrible trade of the resurrectionist for a number of years, and having gained a sufficient competency to support him during the remainder of his life, retired from the profession to enjoy his otium cum dignitate. This, however, we must confess, may be an isolated case; but when we consider that, taking the calculation of Bishop, if his statement is to be credited, during the few years in which he followed his disgusting avocation, he disposed of nearly one thousand bodies, and that each body, upon an average, brought him ten pounds, we have here the almost incredible sum of ten thousand pounds realised by an individual in a few years, by an illegal and a horrid traffic, and which is in itself sufficient to show, that so long as such a temptation is held forth of acquiring such a property, the trade of the resurrectionist will be assiduously carried on, although the recent disclosures may, by putting the purchasers of the dead bodies more upon their guard, effectually stop the commission of murder. When, however, to the mischievous effects of holding out an inducement to a class of men to commit actions forbidden by the law—excusing the error on the plea that good may be derived from it, yet knowing, as we do, that one crime ever draws on another—we take into consideration the harrowing fact, that murder is actually committed for the purpose of obtaining the ten or twelve guineas given for a subject, the public have a right to demand the interference of the legislature, for the legal supply of the lecture-room, and the effectual suppression of the horrid trade of the resurrectionist.
It is impossible to read the confessions of the homicidal miscreants, Bishop and Williams, without feelings of the deepest detestation. We enter not at present upon the truth or falsity of those statements, for we shall advert hereafter to the anomaly which their confessions presented, of a partial credibility being attached to one portion of them, whilst every exertion was made to invalidate the truth of the other. We have at this moment only to do with the character of the men, and the influence of their crimes on the general interests of society; and it must be confessed, that the cold-blooded and calculating atrocity with which they sought their victims among the destitute, and friendless, and houseless wanderers in the public streets, and tempting them at midnight by promises of shelter and refreshment, to go to that den from which they never were to emerge with life, is only to be equalled by the vampyre horrors that superstitious fancy has invented. Then followed the drugged drink—the retirement and carousal of the ruffians, till the potion had taken full effect. The deep slumber, the short bubbling in the water, and all was over. The cruel and cowardly task was done—the human carcase was prepared for sale! We will not ascribe to accident, the almost miraculous discovery by which these detestable butchers were brought to justice. The deep secresy of their proceedings—the extraordinary precautions which they appear to have taken, might well have promised a long career of impunity. But let us indulge the belief that an all-seeing eye was upon them. The circumstances of the discovery were indeed of an extraordinary nature; the bruise in the back of the neck of their last victim, combined with the freshness of the body generated suspicion, and although the medical witnesses appear to have been in error as to the cause of death—nay, although the identity of the corpse is yet doubtful, the fact of Bishop and Williams having committed murder, was brought home to them by a long chain of evidence as extraordinary, taken altogether, as it was conclusive. Had the wretches been less eager after the price of their crime, had they retained the corpse another day or two in their possession, and preserved it from being bruised after death, they would have escaped detection, and they might in that case have been engaged, at the very moment we are now writing, in the preparation of another human being for their next day's sale. But murder will out sooner or later,—'Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.' In spite of all their infernal cunning and midnight secresy, justice has overtaken these monsters, and never again may the annals of any age or nation be stained with such revolting criminality.
We were far from being sorry to hear that the exit of the miscreants from a world to which they were a disgrace, was marked by shouts of execration from the assembled thousands. It was an honest feeling that prompted men to rejoice in the destruction of beings, from the deep damnation of whose iniquity even a Thurtell might have shrunk appalled. The most profligate among the lower orders of the English people abhor the crime of murder,—even the daring gangs of thieves by whom the metropolis is infested, though they live by daily robberies, invariably refrain from destroying life. Ours is not a blood-thirsty population; theft is unfortunately of common occurrence, and peculations of almost every description are continually practised amongst us; but happily murder is, comparatively, of very rare occurrence, and we have no doubt that all who witnessed the execution of these human boas rejoiced in their punishment. Nor ought mistaken pity nor affected sentiment to silence the expression of indignation to which we have referred. No man will say that the punishment of hanging was commensurate with the offences committed, according to their own confessions alone, by Bishop and Williams; but whilst we would not subject even such creatures to bodily torture, we cannot regret that the mental agony of their last moments was increased by the unequivocal tokens of detestation that assailed their ears on the scaffold. The great end of all punishment is example, to deter others; and surely the death of these cowardly murderers, signalized by the audibly-expressed hatred of all men, both good and bad, must operate as the most effectual warning that could possibly be devised, to prevent any other human being from imitating these atrocities, to die like them amid shouts of detestation, and to purchase an immortality of infamy.
We shall now proceed to the investigation of another part of this most horrid transaction, and we particularly allude to the acquittal of May, or, more properly speaking, to his being respited during his Majesty's pleasure. Connected, however, with this part of our subject, we will previously insert a sketch of the speech made by the Duke of Sussex to the Lord Mayor at the close of the trial,—which, although in some respects conferring high honour upon him, is not wholly borne out in its sentiments, by the result which afterwards took place.
After the trial had concluded, and the judges, nobility, and other visitors had retired to a private room, the Duke of Sussex (who had remained in Court the whole day, paying the most marked attention to the evidence) took occasion to express the gratification he had experienced at the manner in which the prosecution had been arranged and conducted. 'I have,' said his Royal Highness, addressing himself to the Lord Mayor, 'always made it a point of attending every trial of national interest that has occurred in the metropolis, and I have done so, not only from a desire to become acquainted, as far as I could, with the laws of my country and their practical application, but because in the station I fill, I feel it to be a sacred duty to take a personal interest in everything calculated to affect the character or the security of the people of this country. I have never, my Lord Mayor, been present at such inquiries without increasing the admiration with which I regard the criminal jurisprudence of England;—the most perfect, the most intelligent, and the most humane system that human ingenuity or wisdom ever devised. Upon the present occasion, whatever pain I may have felt at the sad necessity for taking away the lives of the wretched persons whose crimes have excited so powerfully the indignation of the public, I cannot help feeling proud of being the native of a country where such a sentiment of indignation has been universally evinced, and where such disinterested exertions have been made to expose and bring to justice the perpetrators of crimes happily, I trust, rare amongst us. In what other part of the world, indeed, could such a scene be witnessed as that which we have this day contemplated? The judges of our land, the learned in our law, nobility, magistrates, merchants, medical professors, and individuals of every rank in society, anxiously devoting themselves, and co-operating in the one common object of redressing, as far as human power can do so, an injury inflicted upon a pauper child, wandering friendless and unknown in a foreign land. Seeing this, I am indeed proud of being an Englishman, and prouder still to be a prince in such a country and of such a people.'
In the first place, however, taking the respite of May into our consideration, some very serious reflections present themselves to our mind, and we are induced to give publicity to them, with the sole view of preserving the purity of our courts of law, and, by pointing out their existing errors and defects, remove that stigma, which certain persons are too prone to attach to them. We dispute not the integrity or the principles of the jury who pronounced the verdict of guilty upon May, but having ourselves paid the closest attention to the evidence during the whole of the trial, we were always led to draw the conclusion, that neither the commission of the crime, nor any participation in it, was actually so definitely brought home to him, as to render his life a sacrifice to the laws. We never could discover the reason of the distrust of the testimony as given by two females, who clearly proved an alibi on the part of May, on the very night in which the murder, as stated in the indictment, was supposed to be committed. Their questionable mode of life might have had some influence in throwing discredit over their testimony in the opinion of the court; but we enter our protest decidedly against the deduction, that, because a female has been driven to prostitution for her support, her testimony is not to be believed on her oath. In some respects, indeed, the principle appears to be acted upon, that certain parts of the evidence of such witnesses may be received, whilst other parts are to be wholly rejected.
The stains of blood on the jacket of May, which was found in the lodgings of one of these women, was brought forward as corroborative of the participation of May in the act of murder, and it cannot be denied that it was a circumstance which had its weight in influencing the minds of the jury respecting the guilt of May. This woman in her evidence states the hours when May came to her lodgings, and which, if credited, would have gone a great way towards his entire exculpation; it was, however, impugned on the ground of her profession: and we cannot here conceal our censure at the manner in which these females were examined by Mr. Adolphus, who seemed to think that if he could extract from their own lips the confession that they lived by prostitution, it would follow as a natural conclusion that their evidence was unworthy of belief. It however, happened, that one of these women proved, and to the satisfaction of the court, the manner in which the blood came upon the jacket of May, which happened to issue from the wounded leg of a jackdaw; and Mr. Thomas himself mounted the witness-box, after the woman had given her evidence, and declared his belief, that in that particular the woman spoke the truth, for he was satisfied that the blood was too fresh to have been cast upon it previously to the committal of May. Thus one link in the chain of the evidence against May was broken; but our chief objection was upon the principle, that if credibility is to be attached to one part of the evidence of a witness, it should not be optional in the opposite party to reject any other part which is confirmatory of the innocence of the accused. We see no more cogent reason why the evidence of the woman respecting the cause of the stains of the blood should be believed, and if we may be allowed a mercantile expression, placed to the credit of May, than that her evidence ought not also to have been received touching the alibi. The question of immaculacy of character has little to do in the witness-box, for were that principle to be acted upon, we suspect that many witnesses, who are believed upon their oath, would never be put into it at all. It is a very probable case, that a poor unfortunate girl, whose only crime perhaps is her prostitution, may in her mind be impressed with the solemn obligations of an oath, and the consequences which would result to her, morally and religiously, from the infraction of it; but it by no means follows, that because a blustering counsel has extracted from her the confession of the mode of life by which she gains her livelihood, that her testimony is to be wholly rejected or only partially received, especially when the life of a human being is dependent upon it. Station in life ought not to form any distinction in the exercise of these principles; but we could allude to many instances in which the evidence of titled demireps has been received, without the smallest disposition being shown to call into question its truth and credibility. It happened, however, in the case of the evidence of these women,—that from the confession of both Bishop and Williams, and on which the highest authority of the nation was called upon to act, such evidence was in fact substantially true, and that May was not in the company of those two sanguinary wretches when the murder was committed. With great truth might May write the following doggrel rhymes, which were penned on the Sunday morning previously to the arrival of the respite:—
'James May is doomed to die,