 |
|
| William
Palmer was popular with the poor and with the public generally; for he
had a pleasant manner, was never secretive of sporting news of value,
and always glad to put money in the way of poor men eager for the excitement
sans the risk of betting. He thus obtained considerable influence in
the town and in the sporting circles of the midland and northern counties.
But he was never respected. Although young (about thirty-four), he has
lived apparently an indefatigably mischievous life, and his character
was tolerably well understood as a man who "would not stick at a
trifle." His companions were of a low class, and he only differed
from them in his temperate habits and equable tact of manner. His wife
was greatly beloved as a gentle, amiable, extremely feminine women; and
his notorious unfaithfulness to her, his prolonged absences from her,
and the extreme solitude in which she was left in that hideous house
in that hideous town, induced dislike of him, originating in pity for
her. Now that all the dreadful story is divulged, the daring character
of the man is well understood. His attempt to bribe the postboy to smash
the jars containing the viscera of Cooke, as these jars were being carried
to the station for transmission to London - his taking from the telegraph-office
the copy of the message - his hint to the weak postmaster to open and
read a letter - his reckless misrepresentation to the insurance offices
of the social position of Bates, his stable help - his attempt to seduce
his maid servant the very night of his wife's death - all these facts
are sufficiently suggestive. But stories of that character have been
rife for years about him. The day his wife died it was whispered by two
or three persons in Rugeley that she had not been properly treated by
him. We may infer from Cooke's dying hints that sporting men had "queer"
ideas about the "Doctor;" and when the insurance-offices began
to make inquiries so long ago as September - that is, long before Cooke's
death - they, of course, were influenced by the common talk about Palmer.
If it should be proved in the end that he is one of the greatest of villains,
it will also be ascertained that he was one of clumsiest. There is none
of the heroic finesse of the historical poisoner about him, His utmost
art was to keep out of the way of vulgar arsenic and palpable prussic
acid. If he selected refined agents of murder, his process was of the
coarsest kind. That he attempted and did so much is accepted as proof
of his ability. Of his infamous audacity there can be no question; but
what the case proves is the stupidity and timidity of those around him
in not sooner dragging him to justice. The utmost that he succeeded in,
as a matter of management in his career, was in withholding from the
mass of people in Rugeley and Stafford any ground for believing in "motive"
for crime. No one knew up to the last moment that he was heavily in debt.
When his wife died people said that he must lose money by it, as the
annuity left her by her father died with her. He had a large stud of
horses; and had among his own neighbours the reputation of being a successful
betting man, while it was seen and known that he was not extravagant.
It is now perceived that he was from the first, and continuously, in
difficulties. In physique he presented none of the points of a man of
finesse, either for a "book" for a "poison." He was
clumsily built, with a course red face. This figure and complexion, with
the accompaniments in both cases of thin fair hair and sandy whiskers,
have suggested the statement that "Palmer is the image of Manning."
In strong, selfish, sensual natures there is probably a general resemblance.
But Palmer looks, we are assured, more "gentlemanly" than Manning
did. |
Three
months before the trial 'The Rugeley Number of the Illustrated Times'
dated February 2nd 1856 was feeding the country lurid details in words
and pictures of the case.
Under
the heading THE RUGELEY TRAGEDIES an article started:
If
any readers should think a justification necessary of the course we have
this day adopted in making familiar to the public eye the various scenes
connected with that fearful series of tragedies which, within the past
few weeks, have sent a thrill of horror throughout the land - if they
think we are to blame for having transferred to our columns these speaking
likenesses of that hitherto obscure circle of individuals, whose names
have been on the lips of almost every man, woman and child in the three
kingdoms since intelligence of these tragedies became bruited abroad
- to them we reply, that we conceive in what we have this day done we
have only fulfilled the office that devolves upon us as the conductors
of an illustrated journal. We cannot agree with that squeamishness which
allows long wordy descriptions of places and individuals to be perfectly
admissible and which refuses to tolerate those productions of the pencil,
the skilfully indicated lines of which are more suggestive than columns
and columns of the best written descriptions. Does even one of our readers
believe that "The Times," or any other of the Morning Journals,
would not readily avail themselves of the means which we posses and make
use of were it only possible to adapt them to the exigencies of a daily
newspaper?
The labour that we have been for weeks
engaged in, and the results of which are now before the reader, was not
entered upon with the idea of pandering to a mere vulgar curiosity. Our
object was to lay bare a great social vice, which is gnawing away at
the very core of society, and which every day shows to be rapidly on
the increase - namely, the fearful amount of gambling in human life for
the sake of pecuniary gain. Any one who scans these columns with attention,
will approve the spirit in which we have performed our task. |
There
follows fifteen full pages devoted just to the Palmer case and using such
phrases as 'If public rumour be worthy of credit' , 'Rumour goes on to
say that ..' virtually accuses Palmer of being a mass murderer before he
was even tried for one murder.
In
an earlier edition of The Illustrated London News dated January
19th 1856 we find assumptions of his guilt before a trial:
The
first time that the finger began to be pointed at the house of Wm. Palmer
was four or five years ago, when a man of the name of Bladen, a brewer's
collector, and a defaulter in his accounts (which is significant in a
friend of Palmer's), on a visit to Palmer, fell ill at Rugeley, was treated
by Palmer, and died after a few days sufferings. But no one knew a motive,
and no one spoke above a whisper.
The whisper was again heard on his wife's death ....... |
Later
in the same article it says:
"If one were now to believe all the stories of gentlemen who had drank
their liquor in Palmer's company of late years it would be demonstrated
that he was hankering after murder day and night."
And
later still the article says:
"Yet in the assizes in March, the counsel for the prisoner will
doubtless, as a desperate resource, suggest the insanity of Palmer. "
The
newspapers controlled from London had decided upon his guilt way before
a trial. Were the newspapers politically motivated? Did someone in high
office want Palmer found guilty and did the publicity surrounding the trial
take publicity and attention away from some near rebellious unrest in the
country at the time?
See
also How Trials Differed from Today web page
- the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
|
Introduction
