Chapter I: The Mystery of Lawford Hall—the Strange Case of Elizabeth Fenning

In the spring of the year 1780, the quiet hamlet of Little Lawford in Warwickshire, situated about three miles from Rugby, was the scene of a tragedy which aroused great interest not only in the immediate locality, but throughout the country.

At that time there lived at Lawford Hall Sir Theodosius Boughton, a young baronet who had not yet attained his majority, together with his mother, his only sister and her husband, Captain Donellan, a half-pay officer.

The career of the latter gentleman, who plays an important part in the story, had been an eventful one. In 1757 he was gazetted as a subaltern in the 39th Regiment, then stationed in Madras on foreign service. There he entered the East India Company’s service and joined in an expedition against Masulipatam in 1758, and was wounded in action after the taking of that place. Trouble, however, arose over the question of certain loot that had been taken from the merchants; Donellan was court-martialled, sentenced to be discharged from the service, and returned to England.

On his return his ambition was to shine as a beau in society. Dress and gaming are said to have occupied his whole attention, and he eventually became Master of the Ceremonies at the Pantheon, in Oxford Street, London, then a fashionable resort for dancing much frequented by Society.

Here, it is probable, he met and wooed Miss Boughton, whom he married, and a year after the couple came to live at Lawford Hall with Lady Boughton. At this time young Sir Theodosius was finishing his education. After leaving Eton he had lived for a couple of years with a tutor, and then came home to Lawford to settle down with his family.

He was a young fellow of high spirits and fond of outdoor sports, but like other young men of his class at that time he was inclined to live a fast life, and this had told more or less upon his health.

From the time of his residence at home, for some reason or other, he did not get on well with his brother-in-law, Captain Donellan, and the latter appears to have adopted a patronizing attitude towards the young man while living in his house. According to his father’s will Sir Theodosius did not come into his property, which was worth about £2,000 a year, until he was twenty-one, and meanwhile he was under the guardianship of Sir Edmund Wheeler, an old friend who lived eight miles away from Lawford. According to the will, should he die before attaining his majority, his sister, Mrs. Donellan, was to benefit largely from the estate.

Matters had gone thus for nearly two years when Sir Theodosius, as the result of his former gay life, became unwell and placed himself under the care of an apothecary in Rugby.

Donellan, who became aware of this, talked a good deal to various friends, remarking that the young man was ruining his health, that his life was not worth a year’s purchase, and that he could not possibly live if he did not take more care.

The young baronet, however, appeared in good health and spirits, but the conditions of life became so unpleasant at the Hall that he at length decided to go and stay with a friend in Northampton until he came of age.

About five o’clock on a Tuesday afternoon, August 29, 1780, Sir Theodosius, accompanied by several of his menservants, set off down to the river on a fishing expedition. During his absence a dose of medicine in the form of a draught was delivered at the Hall from Mr. Powell, the apothecary, which was to be taken by the young man the first thing on the following morning. The bottle was taken upstairs and placed on a shelf in his bedroom. Soon after Sir Theodosius had set out, his mother, Lady Boughton, and Mrs. Donellan went into the grounds to take the air and remained in the garden some hours. About seven o’clock they were joined in their walk by Captain Donellan, who remarked that he had been fishing with Sir Theodosius, and that he was afraid if he stayed out so long in the damp he would take cold. Sir Theodosius, however, returned home all right, somewhat later and, after having supper, retired to bed.

At six in the morning a servant called him, and he got out of bed and spoke to him. An hour later his mother went into his bedroom to remind him about taking his medicine. He asked her to give it to him, and she, taking it from the shelf, poured the contents into a cup and gave it to him. He swallowed about half and complained that it tasted so nauseous he would be unable to retain it. He handed the cup back to his mother who smelt it and was struck with the powerful smell of bitter almonds, but gave it back to him again. Sir Theodosius then swallowed the remainder and lay down, but in a few minutes he was taken very ill with vomiting. On his becoming more composed Lady Boughton left him for about ten minutes, thinking he would sleep. On returning to his room she found him collapsed and foaming at the mouth. Struck with alarm at his condition she sent a servant for the apothecary and to call Captain Donellan. The latter came in a few minutes, and on his entering the room Lady Boughton exclaimed: “Here is a terrible affair, I have given my son something that was wrong instead of what the apothecary sent. I am sure it would have killed a dog.” Donellan replied, “Why the devil did Mr. Powell send such a medicine? Where is the bottle?” Lady Boughton pointed to it on the mantelpiece and Donellan at once took it up, poured some water into it, shook and rinsed it and emptied the contents into a basin of dirty water standing near.

Astonished at his action Lady Boughton said, “Good God, what are you doing? Let everything remain just in the same place until Mr. Powell the apothecary arrives.” Donellan made no reply, but took an empty phial which had contained a previous draught which was also standing on the same shelf and rinsed that out in the same way, then, calling a servant, ordered her to take the basin away, in spite of Lady Boughton’s remonstrance.

Meanwhile Sir Theodosius lay dying, and expired in about thirty minutes.

Some time elapsed before Mr. Powell arrived, and he was taken up to the room by Donellan, who explained to him that Sir Theodosius had been out late fishing the previous night, and had no doubt taken cold, which had caused his death. He made no mention of the effect of the draught, but told him the young man had died in convulsions. The apothecary apparently offered no solution as to the cause of death and left the house.

The same morning that Sir Theodosius died Donellan wrote to Sir William Wheeler, his guardian, informing him of his death, and stating that he had been under the care of Mr. Powell, of Rugby, for a similar complaint to that which he had had at Eton. Within a day or two, however, rumours of foul play became current and Sir William Wheeler communicated these to Donellan and insisted that to allay public suspicion a post-mortem examination should be made. He named a Dr. Rattray and two surgeons, Messrs. Wilmer and Snow, whom he desired to conduct the examination. These gentlemen were accordingly sent for and arrived at Lawford Hall on Monday evening, September 4. They were received by Captain Donellan, who, after some conversation, showed them to the room. The body of the unfortunate young man being in an advanced state of decomposition, the doctors showed reluctance to proceed with the autopsy, and after a cursory examination they left the Hall without coming to any satisfactory conclusion, nothing having been said to them by Donellan of any suspicion of foul play.

Donellan then wrote to Sir William Wheeler stating that the doctors had fully satisfied the family, but Sir William was still dissatisfied, and on hearing that no actual post-mortem had been made, insisted that two other surgeons, viz. Messrs. Bucknell and Snow, should examine the remains. On their arrival, however, Donellan again circumvented their intentions and the body was duly interred. This increased the rumours instead of dispelling them, and eventually the coroner of the district was informed of the case and he decided to hold an inquiry.

The inquest lasted three days, and on the last day Donellan addressed a letter to the coroner in which he stated that Sir Theodosius used to procure arsenic to kill rats, and frequently bought as much as a pound at a time, also that he used to make large quantities of Goulard Water.

This was to account for the suspicion of poisoning which was now rife. After hearing the evidence the coroner ordered that the body should be exhumed. On Saturday morning, September 9, the body was removed from the vault and placed in the churchyard. About five hundred people had collected to witness the gruesome sight, which in those days was conducted in public. When all was ready a Mr. Bucknill, a young surgeon, put on a wagoner’s smock frock that had been dipped in vinegar, and with a napkin that had been soaked in vinegar tied over his mouth and nose, opened the body, which was duly inspected by the doctors present and reinterred.

As a result of the inquest Captain Donellan was arrested and charged with the wilful murder of his brother-in-law by poisoning him with arsenic.

The trial, which excited intense interest throughout the country on account of the social position of the persons involved, took place at the Warwick Assizes on March 30, 1781, before Mr. Justice Buller.

Six counsel, headed by Mr. Howarth, appeared for the Crown, and the prisoner was represented by Mr. Newnham and two juniors. The case mainly depended on the medical evidence, a review of which forms an interesting picture of the state of medicine and toxicology of the time.

The first witness was Mr. Powell, the apothecary, of Rugby, who was treating Sir Theodosius at the time of his death. He swore that the draught he sent the baronet was quite harmless and consisted of rhubarb and jalap, spirit of lavender, nutmeg water and simple syrup.

Dr. Rattray, of Coventry, the next medical witness, described the visit he paid to Lawford Hall at the wish of Sir William Wheeler with the other surgeons. The reason they did not proceed with the post-mortem, he stated, was that they thought it too late, and that so long after death nothing could be discovered. He was present when the body was opened in the churchyard, and from its appearance he was now of the opinion that poison was the cause of death.

Mr. Wilmer, a surgeon, described some experiments he had made with laurel water. He gave an ounce to a young greyhound and to his great surprise it died immediately. He next gave a pint and a half to a mare and in a few moments she went into convulsions and died in fifteen minutes. He believed that an ounce of laurel water was enough to kill a strong man. Dr. Ash, a physician of Birmingham, next gave his opinion that the young man had died from the effects of poison.

Further medical evidence was given by Dr. Parsons, Professor of Anatomy at Oxford University. He stated he believed that Sir Theodosius had been poisoned by laurel water which had been given to him instead of the purgative draught.

Important evidence was given by a female servant named Mary Lines, who stated that Captain Donellan had a still, which he kept in his own room and which he used for distilling rose water.

A gardener at the Hall, named Amos, who was next called, said Captain Donellan brought the still to him two or three days after Sir Theodosius died. It was full of wet lime at the time and he asked him to clean it for him. He mentioned that the lime was used for killing fleas.

For the defence Mr. John Hunter, the famous surgeon, of London, was called to give evidence and said he had dissected some thousands of subjects. The symptoms he had heard described were not conclusive that the baronet had taken poison. He had never known in his practice of laurel water being given to a human being. From the description he had heard of the appearance of the body, he should not have drawn the inference that death had resulted from poison. Apoplexy or epilepsy would produce similar symptoms to those he had heard described, but he would not swear that the deceased man died a natural death.

The judge in summing up commented on the doubt Mr. Hunter seemed to have in giving evidence, and the failure of counsel to get from him a conclusive opinion. On the other hand five medical men were agreed that death had been due to the draught, and that the draught had been laurel water. How did the poison get into the medicine bottle? Why also did the prisoner rinse out the empty bottles and see they were taken away and destroyed in the face of the suspicious circumstances attending the death? The evidence concerning the still was also important, as it proved the prisoner had a knowledge of its use and he often used it for distilling rose and lavender waters. The deceptive way in which the prisoner had acted was also likely to arouse suspicions as well as his endeavour to prevent an examination of the body.

The jury after a few minutes’ consideration found the prisoner “Guilty,” and the judge pronounced sentence of death. The prisoner’s body afterwards to be delivered to the surgeons and be dissected and anatomized. “The prisoner,” says a contemporary writer, “neatly dressed in black, was driven in a coach to the gallows and was hanged.”

Thus ended the brilliant Captain Donellan, the much envied beau of London Society in George the Third’s time.

A strange case that happened early in the nineteenth century was that of Elizabeth Fenning.

On April 11, 1815, this girl, who was engaged as cook to a law stationer in Chancery Lane, was tried at the Old Bailey before the Recorder on a charge of having poisoned her employer, Mr. Olebar Turner, his wife and his father, Robert Gregson Turner. The girl, who was only twenty years of age, had been employed as cook in Mr. Turner’s house for six weeks, and on March 21 had made some yeast dumplings for dinner.

The dumplings were brought to the table and partaken of by the three persons. A few minutes after eating a portion of one, Mrs. Turner was taken ill with violent pains and vomiting, and shortly afterwards the two men, who had also eaten of the dumplings, were seized with pains in the same manner. Mr. Marshall, a surgeon, was sent for several hours afterwards, and all three persons, after some time, recovered. The girl herself and a young apprentice in the house had also eaten of the dumplings and were affected in the same way.

Mr. Turner said he suspected arsenic had been put in the food and made a search next morning. In the kitchen he found a brown dish in which the dumplings had been mixed, with what appeared to be some remnants of the food still adhering to it. He put some water into the dish and stirred it, and found in a few minutes a white powder or sediment fell to the bottom, which he kept and handed to the surgeon.

He knew that arsenic was kept in a drawer in his office in two wrappers labelled “Arsenick, Deadly Poison” and was used for killing mice. The drawer was always unlocked. He had last seen the packet of arsenic in the drawer on March 7, and it was now missing. He had noticed that the knives they had used to cut the dumplings had turned black.

He had charged the girl with putting something in the dumplings, and she had replied it was not in the dumplings but in the milk that was used to make them which had been brought to her by Sarah Peer, a fellow-servant. Mr. John Marshall, the surgeon who was called in, said he found the family suffering from symptoms that would be produced by arsenic, and the prisoner was also ill in the same way. He had examined the remnants found in the dish by Mr. Turner and washed them with a tea-kettle of warm water and then decanted it. He found half a teaspoonful of white powder left. After washing it a second time he found it was arsenic. Arsenic would turn the knives black. He had examined the remains of the yeast used and the flour employed in making the dumplings, but found no trace of arsenic.

The girl, in her defence, swore she was quite innocent of the whole charge.

The jury found her guilty and she was sentenced to death.

The result of the trial excited public interest in London, and caused an outburst of popular feeling, the general opinion being that the evidence was insufficient to prove the girl guilty. The Prince Regent was petitioned, also the Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State, and several meetings of influential persons were held, agitating for a remission of the sentence. The girl, however, was executed at Newgate on July 26, 1815, exclaiming, “I die innocent, but God will convince you by a circumstance this day.” In 1834 the man Turner died in the workhouse, but confessed before his death that he had put the arsenic into the dumplings and falsely sworn away the girl’s life.