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！
her a distaste for infantile society。 At the age of nineteen and at
Newcastle she married William Mowbray； a collier； and went with him to
live in Cornwall。 Here the couple remained for some years。
It was a fruitful marriage。 Mary bore William five children in
Cornwall； but； unfortunately； four of the children diedsuddenly。 With
the remaining child the pair moved to Mary's native county。 They had
hardly settled down in their new home when the fifth child also died。 It
died； curiously enough； of the ailment which had supposedly carried off
the other four childrengastric fever。
Not long after the death of this daughter the Mowbrays removed to
Hendon； Sunderland； and here a sixth child was born。 It proved to be of
as vulnerable a constitution as its brothers and sisters； for it lasted merely a
year。 Four months later； while suffering from an injured foot； which kept
him at home； William Mowbray fell ill； and died with a suddenness
comparable to that which had characterized the deaths of his progeny。
His widow found a job at the local infirmary； and there she met George
142
… Page 143…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
Ward。 She married Mr Ward； but not for long。 In a few months after
the nuptials George Ward followed his predecessor； Mowbray； from an
illness that in symptoms and speed of fatality closely resembled William's。
We next hear of Mary as housekeeper to a widower named Robinson；
whose wife she soon became。 Robinson had five children by his former
wife。 They all died in the year that followed his marriage with Mary Ann；
and all of ‘gastric fever。' The second Mrs Robinson had two children by
this third husband。 Both of these perished within a few weeks of their
birth。
Mary Ann's mother fell ill； though not seriously。 Mary Ann
volunteered to nurse the old lady。 It must now be evident that Mary Ann
was a ‘carrier' of an obscure sort of intestinal fever； because soon after her
appearance in her mother's place the old lady died of that complaint。
On her return to her own home； or soon after it； Mary was accused by
her husband of robbing him。 She thought it wise to disappear out of
Robinson's life； a deprivation which probably served to prolong it。
Under her old name of Mowbray； and by means of testimonials which
on later investigation proved spurious； Mary Ann got herself a
housekeeping job with a doctor in practice at Spennymore。 Falling into
error regarding what was the doctor's and what was her own； and her
errors being too patent； she was dismissed。
Wallbottle is the scene of Mary Ann's next activities。 Here she made
the acquaintance of a married man with a sick wife。 His name was
Frederick Cotton。 Soon after he had met Mary Ann his wife died。 She
died of consumption； with no more trace of gastric fever than is usual in
her disease。 But two of Cotton's children died of intestinal inflammation
not long after their mother； and their aunt； Cotton's sister； who kept house
for him； was not long in her turn to sicken and die in a like manner。
The marriage which Mary Ann brought off with Frederick Cotton at
Newcastle anticipated the birth of a son by a mere three months。 With
two of Cotton's children by his former marriage； and with the infant son；
the pair went to live at West Auckland。 Here Cotton diedand the three
childrenand a lodger by the curious name of Natrass。
Altogether Mary Ann； in the twenty years during which she had been
143
… Page 144…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
moving in Cornwall and about the northeastern counties； had； as it
ultimately transpired； done away with twenty…four persons。 Nine of these
were the fruit of her own loins。 One of them was the mother who gave
her birth。 Retribution fell upon her through her twenty…fourth victim；
Charles Edward Cotton； her infant child。 His death created suspicion。
The child； it was shown； was an obstacle to the marriage which she was
already contemplatingher fifth marriage； and； most likely； bigamous at
that。 The doctor who had attended the child refused a death certificate。
In post…mortem examination arsenic was found in the child's body。
Cotton was arrested。
She was brought to trial in the early part of 1873 at Durham Assizes。
As said already； she was found guilty and sentenced to death； the sentence
being executed upon her in Durham Gaol in March of that year。 Before
she died she made the following remarkable statement： ‘‘I have been a
poisoner； but not intentionally。''
It is believed that she secured the poison from a vermicide in which
arsenic was mixed with soft soap。 One finds it hard to believe that she
extracted the arsenic from the preparation （as she must have done before
administering it； or otherwise it must have been its own emetic）
unintentionally。
What advantage Mary Ann Cotton derived from her poisonings can
have been but small； almost as small as that gained by Helene Jegado。
Was it for social advancement that she murdered husbands and children？
Was she a ‘climber' in that sphere of society in which she moved？ One
hesitates to think that passion swayed her in being rid of the infant
obstacle to the fifth marriage of her contemplation。 With her ‘‘all o'er…
teeming loins；'' this woman； Hecuba in no other particular； must have been
a very sow were this her motive。
But I have come almost by accident on the word I need to compare
Mary Ann Cotton with Jegado。 The Bretonne； creeping about her native
province leaving death in her track； with her piety； her hypocrisy； her
enjoyment of her own cruelty； is sinister and repellent。 But Mary Ann；
moving from mate to mate and farrowing from each； then savaging both
them and the litter； has a musty sowishness that the Bretonne misses。
144
… Page 145…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
Both foul； yes。 But we needn't； we islanders； do any Jingo business in
setting Mary Ann against Helene。
145
… Page 146…
SHE STANDS ACCUSED
VII： THE MERRY WIDOWS
Twenty years separate the cases of these two women； the length of
France lies between the scenes in which they are placed： Mme Boursier；
Paris； 1823； Mme Lacoste； Riguepeu； a small town in Gascony； 1844。 I
tie their cases together for reasons which cannot be apparent until both
their stories are toldand which may not be so apparent even then。 That
is not to say I claim those reasons to be profound； recondite； or settled in
the deeps of psychology。 The matter is； I would not have you believe
that I join their cases because of similarities that are superficial。 My
hope is that you will find； as I do； a linking which； while neither profound
nor superficial； is curious at least。 As I cannot see that the one case
transcends the other in drama or interest； I take them chronologically； and
begin with the Veuve Boursier：
At the corner of Rue de la Paix and Rue Neuve Saint…Augustine in
1823 there stood a boutique d'epiceries。 It was a flourishing
establishment； typical of the Paris of that time； and its proprietors were
people of decent standing among their neighbours。 More than the
prosperous condition of their business； which was said to yield a profit of
over 11；000 francs per annum； it was the happy and cheerful relationship
existing between les epoux Boursier that made them of such good
consideration in the distr