|
[murder – women defendants in crime]
R.
v. Wapshaw
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Dowling C.J., Willis and Stephen JJ, 1 August 1840
Source: Australian, 4 August 1840
Catherine Wapshaw was indicted
for the wilful murder of Catherine Phillips, at Singleton, by thrusting
her into a fire, on the fifth day of April last, whereby she was
burned in various parts of her body: from the effects of which she
lingered until the 18th of the same month, and then died. The prisoner
pleaded not guilty.
Dowling C.J., Willis and Stephen JJ, 15 August 1840
Source: Australian, 18 August 1840
Catherine Wapshaw, charged
with putting another woman on the fire with the intent to burn her
to death, was discharged on bail of one surety in £100.
Dowling C.J., 3 November 1840
Source: Sydney
Herald, 4 November 1840[1]
Catharine Wapshaw, late of Patrick’s Plains, was indicted
for having, on the 5th of April last, at Patrick’s Plains, been
guilty of killing and slaying one Catharine Phillips.
From the evidence given
in this case, it appeared that the deceased was a convict per Ann
and Amelia, assigned to her husband; that on Sunday the 5th
of April, the deceased, the prisoner, and the prisoner’s husband,
had been drinking, when the prisoner struck one of the deceased’s
children which was crying, on which the deceased ran into the room
and struck the prisoner, who immediately seized the deceased Catharine
Phillips by the clothes and pushed her on to the fire, by which
the clothes of the deceased caught fire, and when she endeavoured
to get up, the prisoner, who was in liquor, again thrust her back
into the fire. She afterwards got out of the fire-place and rushed,
with her clothes on fire, to a water cask and plunged into it; in
her agony she rushed out to go to a neighbouring house to obtain
help; she was that evening conveyed to her husband’s residence,
where she lingered for twelve days and died from the effects of
the burning.
From
the testimony of Mr. Glennie, the surgeon who attended the deceased
while alive, it appeared that she was a woman of intemperate habits,
and the mother of three children. The whole of her body, from the
pit of the stomach downwards, was one burned mass, the cuticle being
actually charred; there were also superficial burnings on the arms,
face, chest, back, and shoulders; and Mr. Glennie was of opinion
that so extensive was the burning that no human being could have
survived it, and said it was matter of surprise to him that she
had lingered so long. Two days after the burning the deceased was
waited on by the police magistrate of the district and made a deposition
of the facts of the case, which was given in evidence. From the
testimony of the husband of the deceased, it appeared that on the
evening of the day charged in the indictment, the prisoner’s husband
come to this witness and told him that the deceased had got herself
burned, when he immediately went in search of her and found her
sitting under a bush about twenty or thirty rod from the prisoner’s
residence in a state of nudity; when she told him that the prisoner
had pushed her into the fire, and that she had then turned her out
of doors; he also stated that she had left her home on the preceding
day.
Mr. Purefoy for the defence,
lamented the prevalence[?] of drunkenness, and argued that there
was no evidence of intent, nor was it proved that the defendant
had done more than pushed the deceased towards the fire, and contended
that the deceased met her death by accidentally falling into the
fire.
His Honor, in putting the
case to the Jury, laid down the law respecting manslaughter, and
stated that even if in consequence of the pushing the deceased had
fallen into the fire and been burned so as to cause death, still
the crime amounted to manslaughter.
The Jury retired for about
ten minutes, and returned a verdict of guilty. Remanded.
Dowling
C.J., 7 November 1840
Source: Sydney
Herald, 9 November 1840[2]
At the opening of the Court the prisoners convicted
before the Chief Justice, and re-remanded during the week, were
brought up for judgment, when his Honor addressed them as follows:-
Catherine Wapshot,
you have been found guilty of feloniously destroying the life of
one Catherine Philips, by casting her into a fire.
The bare mention of such
a death when arising merely from accident, fills the mind with anguish;
but, when it is the result of criminal design, the heart sickens
with horror. It may be that you possess the form and feature of
woman – but no more! The soul that dictated such an act,
could never have been intended for so chosen a vessel. Nothing
but the Tempter of Hell could prompt your mind to such enormity.
Again and again, has this Evil One appeared in the palpable shape
of Rum to vanguish and overcome the humanity of his followers.
Is this country never to purged from the stain of drunkenness?
Session after session, the calendar teems with tales of blood from
this cause only. In vain does the rigour of the law put forth its
denunciations – in vain does public scorn mark the sinner for contempt
– in vain are efforts made by society to rouse the drunkard to consciousness
of the awful peril which awaits his direful prospensity. I fear
that this generation must pass away before any hope can be entertained
that the degrading and brutalizing habit will be eradicated from
the land. In the auspicious dawn which now opens upon the country,
we may indulge the persuasion that whilst the country is emancipated
from its penal character, the latent dispositions to good in the
human heart, and the diffusion of religious feeling, will effect
a moral regeneration, and New South Wales shall no longer be held
up to the world in odious colours. Degraded woman! there is this
aggravation in your offence – that it was committed on the Sabbath:
a day, when even the heart of the vicious is, if not amenable to
its religious impulses, at least open to repose from the rugged
cares and excitements of this life. Finding no mitigating circumstances
in your case, the Court is constrained to award the severest punishment
which the law now ordains in the case of female criminals: which
is, that you, Catherine Wapshot, be imprisoned and kept to hard
labour in the female factory[3]
at Parramatta, for three years.
Notes
|