Details on the Murder of Frances Coles

RESUMED INQUEST TODAY.

Today Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, coroner for East London, resumed the inquiry, at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel-road, into the circumstances attending the death of Frances Coles, aged 26, who was found dead under a railway arch at Swallow-gardens, on the 13th inst., at a quarter-past two o'clock in the morning.
Mr. Charles Mathews (instructed by Mr. Frayling) represented the Public Prosecutor, Mr. Lawless (instructed by Messrs. Wilson and Wallis) appeared for the accused man Sadler, and Mr. Superintendent Arnold, Chief Inspector Swanson, and Inspector Moore, watched the case on behalf of the police.

IN AN EATING-HOUSE.

Annie Shuttleworth said she lived at 4, Wentworth-street, Whitechapel - an eating-house. On the 12 inst., about five o'clock, a woman, whom she since knew as Frances Coles, came to the eating-house.
Mr. Mathews - Was she alone, or in the company of anyone? - She was alone, but said she would wait for a man. She waited for about twenty minutes.
And then did a man come in? - Yes, a greyish man, with a goatee beard. He had a pilot coat, dark trousers, and looked like a sailor.
Did they speak to each other? - Yes, as if recognising each other. They spoke as if they knew each other. Before the man arrived, the woman said she had been with the man she expected the night before. They remained in the house about a quarter of an hour. They left at a quarter to six. The man had nothing to drink.
How were they as to drink? - Quite sober.
Did you notice that he had any injury on his face? - No, I did not see any.
In what direction did they go when they left? - Towards Petticoat-lane, Frances said she should come back later on.
The Coroner here pointed out that as the witness had not seen the body she had better go and see if she could identify the deceased.

VISIT TO A PUBLIC-HOUSE.

William Steer stated that he was head barman at the Bell public-house, Middlesex-street, Whitechapel. He said that at about half-past four o'clock on the 12th inst., in the afternoon, a woman whom he knew as Frances came into the house, accompanied by a man who looked like a sailor.
Can you describe him a little more than that? - He had rather a light coat on, and a sailor's black cap with a peak. He had a moustache, rather grey.
Full? - Not a full one. He had a beard about six inches long, which came down to a point.
The witness illustrated the length of the beard by putting his hands to his chin, which the coroner remarked was rather indefinite.
Mr. Mathews - Did they have anything to drink? - They called for a quartern of gin and cloves. They were there for about an hour.
Did they have anything more? - They had two more quarterns of gin and cloves, and after that a half-quartern more. They left about half-past five. The man just left as the barman, whose tea was at half-past five, came back to the bar. The barman went up to his tea at five o'clock.
Mr. Mathews - When they left what was their condition? - They were quite sober.
You saw the man and spoke to him? - Yes, he told me he was a sailor.
By Mr. Lawless - the man's beard came to a point - it was not square.

MRS. SHUTTLEWORTH IDENTIFIES THE BODY.

Mrs. Shuttleworth, having viewed the body, she identified it as that of the woman Frances Coles.
Questioned as to how she knew the time when the man and woman left her place, the witness replied she knew the time because, when the man came in, she said, "He hasn't been long; it's only a quarter-past five now."
By Mr. Lawless - The beard the man wore came to a point, and was about four inches long.
Sarah Treadway, the wife of Charles Treadway, of the Marlborough public-house, Pelham-street, Brick-lane, said that prior to the 12th inst., she had known a man named Thomas Sadler. She knew him as a customer.
As a customer? For how long? - For about a month past. I knew him by name.
Do you remember his coming in on Thursday, the 12th of February? - Yes, he came in between six and seven.
Can you fix it nearer? - It was very light - at the time.
What time do you have tea? - Between six and seven.
Was he alone? - No, with a woman. I identified the body of Frances Cole as the woman he was with.
How long did they remain? - Half an hour.
What did they have in the house? - Gin and peppermint - three quarterns.
Between the two of them? - Yes.
Did they have anything else? - No. They left together, having been in the house about half-an-hour.
What was the condition of Sadler? - He did seem drunk.
That same night did you see the man come back? - I did not; my husband was in the bar after that.
Had you ever seen Sadler with a woman before? - I saw him with his wife about a twelvemonth ago, but I have not seen him since with a woman until he came with deceased.
By Mr. Lawless - It was nearer seven o'clock when they came in.
Mr. Mathews here said that perhaps it would be well if he stated that the prisoner had made a statement, in which he said that he went from the Bell public-house to Mrs. Shuttleworth's, and from there to the Marlborough, with the deceased, and it would be for the jury to attach what credence they considered necessary to the statement given by the accused.

SEEKING FOR THE WOMAN AT THE LODGING-HOUSE.

Sarah Fleming, the deputy at 8, White-lane, stated that the deceased woman had lodged there occasionally. The deceased came into the house on Thursday night. Witness saw her in the kitchen at about half-past ten. A little after eleven o'clock Sadler came in. Witness was then in the office and the accused man asked if Frances was in.
Did you notice the condition of his face then? - It was as if he had fallen in the gravel. It was very "dirtified."
Did you see any blood on it? No. He asked me if he might go into the kitchen, and I said "No."
The witness went on to say that afterwards she saw Sadler sitting by the side of Frances. She saw Frances leaving the house a little after twelve o'clock. She went out without speaking.
Did you ever see her again alive? - No.
She did not return to the house again that night? - No, of that I am quite sure; but it would be possible for a person to get into the kitchen without my seeing them if the office window was open. Guiver, the watchman, keeps the key of the doors leading upstairs, and without Guiver seeing them, no one could go upstairs.
Did Sadler come back about three o'clock? - He came straight through to where I was.
What did he say? - He asked if he might go to the kitchen, and I said "No." He said, "Why won't you?" and I told him, "Because no strangers are allowed in the kitchen." He told me I was a very hard-hearted woman. He told me he had been robbed. He was injured on the right side of the head and under the left eye. I asked him where he had been robbed, and he told me he it had been down the Highway. He added that he had been robbed of his "tackle." I asked him what that was, and he said, "My watch." He also told me he had been knocked down and kicked.
Replying to further questions, the witness said she did not want the man to stop - in fact, she told him that people might think he had been injured by Guiver, the watchman, then told him to go out.

BLOOD ON THE PALM OF HIS HAND.

By the Coroner - Witness noticed there was blood on both of Sadler's cheeks.
Did you notice his hands? When he turned his trousers pockets out, to show me that he had no money, I saw blood on the palm of his hand.
Mr. Mathews - Are you quite sure of that? - Yes.
The Coroner - On both hands? - I only noticed blood on his right hand.
How long had he been in the house then? - He might have been there about twenty minutes.
What was the first thing he said to you when he came back at three o'clock? - "Has the young woman Frances been in?" and I replied, "I have not seen her since she went out a little after twelve."
Was it immediately after that that he asked if he might go into the kitchen? - Yes. He left the house about twenty minutes after three. I next saw him in custody at Leman-street Police-station.
And you picked him out from a number of other men? - Yes; I am quite certain he is the man I saw on the night of the 12th and the morning of the 13th.
Had you ever seen him before he came in on Thursday night? - I had never seen him in my life before.
You did not see him on Wednesday night? - No. On Wednesday night Frances came in and paid me for an "eightpenny bed" - a double bed and I did not see her until Thursday.
May the man you have identified have been there on the Wednesday night? - He may have slept here and I not have seen him.
The Coroner - When he came back at three o'clock was he intoxicated or not? - Yes; he could barely stand.
By Mr. Lawless - The public-houses close at half-past twelve. Sadler could hardly stand at three o'clock. There are about fifty-one beds in the lodging-house.
Are they generally full? - Three-parts of them are full as a rule.
Mr. Lawless - When the man came back, and you saw blood on his cheeks, was it wet? - Yes.
And therefore you did not think it extraordinary that he had blood on the palm of his hand? - I thought he might have rubbed his face.
Had he his hat on? - Yes. When I saw the blood I presumed he had a wound on his head, but could not see it.
The barman Steer, of the Bell, was recalled and said he had now identified the deceased as the woman who was with Sadler.

THE DRUNKEN MAN AT THE DOCK GATE.

Police-constable William Bogan, 222 H, stated that on the morning of the 13th of February, he was at the entrance of the London Docks at about 1:15. He saw a man like a sailor, and who he afterwards saw was drunk, lying down in the pathway of the main entrance. There was a slight abrasion of the left eye. Witness got hold of him by the collar of the coat, and lifted him up. At the time the main gate of the dock was opened by a dock constable. The sailor said, "I want to get to my ship, the Fez, and these dock police won't allow me." Witness told the man he was too drunk to be admitted to the docks.
In reply to further questions, the witness said the man became very abusive. Some dock labourers then came out of the main entrance, and two of them asked what was the matter. One of them offered to pay for his night's lodging. The sailor replied, "I don't want your money, you dock rats." He put his hands to his head and pulled off his cap, and some paper dropped out. Witness picked it up and the man said, "This is my account for 4 pounds 16s." He said he would rather be locked up than go home. Witness then moved him, and said, "I will give you another chance," and walked away, leaving the man in front of the dock gates.
At about what time was that? - At about half-past one. I know that, because the man on "the point" left at one, and it was about a quarter of an hour after that when I found the man.

SEEN AFTERWARDS AT THE MINT-PAVEMENT.

Later that same morning were you at the Mint-pavement? - Yes.
Does it run in front of the Mint? - Yes, and the continuation of Upper East Smithfield.
At what time did you see him there? - The clock struck two. It was the Tower clock, which struck as I got there. I was in company of Sergeant Edwards.
Did you notice anything? - He had a cut over his right eye, and blood on his face. He said he had been assaulted at the London Docks. Witness stated that he saw him down there at the time, between 1:15 to 1:30. He had his right hand on his right side when I saw him at the Mint. He said he had been kicked. Sergeant Edwards asked the sailor if he thought his ribs were broken, if so, he would take him to the London Hospital. The man said he was not sure. Sergeant Edwards examined him, and said his ribs were not broken. Sergeant Edwards, Police-constable 101, and the man walked towards the Minories, and I remained behind. That was the last I saw of the sailor.

Source: The Echo, Friday February 20, 1891, Page 2

THE WHITECHAPEL MYSTERY.
RESUMED INQUEST TODAY.

THE VICTIM AND THE STRANGE MAN.
COLE WARNED BY HER COMPANION.

Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, the coroner for East London, resumed the inquiry today at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, into the circumstances surrounding the death of Frances Coles, aged 26, the victim of the murder committed in Swallow-gardens early on the morning of the 13th inst.
Mr. Charles Mathews (instructed by Mr. Frayling) appeared on behalf of the Public Prosecutor; Mr. Lawless (instructed by Messrs. Wilson and Wallis) watched the case for James Thomas Sadler, materially remanded on suspicion of causing the woman's death; and the police were represented by Mr. Superintendent Arnold, Chief-Inspector Swanson, Inspector H. Moore, and Inspector E. Reid.
The Coroner said that Mr. Wood, one of the jurymen, had sent a note, stating that he was obliged to attend the police-court as a witness in prosecuting a man. He (the Coroner) had sent a policeman to request Mr. Wood's immediate attendance.
After waiting a considerable time, the Coroner said he would proceed with the case in the absence of Mr. Wood, as a witness who would give formal evidence might be examined.
Police-sergeant Bush, who has had experience as a draughtsman, then produced plans which he had taken of various spots mentioned by previous witnesses in connection with the case, together with the distances. The distance from the Dock gates to Mint-pavement was 384 yards; from Mint-pavement to Swallow-gardens, by way of Lower Mint-street, 337 yards; by another route the distance was 411 yards - that was by way of Union-street, from White's-row to Swallow-gardens the distance was 593 yards; it was 332 yards from White's-row to Shuttleworth's coffee-house in Wentworth-street, and from Wentworth-street to where the body was discovered the distance was 998 yards.
Mr. Mathews - I think there are at least five routes of getting away from the archway at Swallow-gardens? - There are eight in all.
A Juryman - Eight ways to escape from Swallow-gardens? - Yes.
Mr. Wood, the absent juryman, then entered the Court, and said he was very sorry.
The Coroner - It is something more than being sorry, Sir; you have kept everybody waiting here for nearly half-an-hour.
Mr. Wood explained that he, as a licensed victualler, was compelled to go to the Police-court, as he had charged a person with theft from his house.

SADLER IN UPPER SMITHFIELD.

John Johnson, deputy at Victoria Chambers Lodging-house, Upper East Smithfield, said that early on the morning of the 12th instant Sadler came to the lodging-house. It was about a quarter-past one o'clock. Sadler asked for a bed, but he had no money, and witness told him if he had ever so much money he could not let him have a bed, as he was drunk. On the left side of the man's face was a scratch, as if he had fallen. Witness did not see any blood on Sadler's face. Then he went away.
Do you know the time he went away from your house? - I cannot tell.
On the following night he came back, I think? - Yes, and I spoke to him as to his conduct on the previous day.
Had he a bag with him? - Yes.
What kind of a bag? - A seaman's or fireman's bag. He took that up to a room. His head was then bandaged. That was at six o'clock in the morning.
Did he say he had been to the hospital? - He stayed at the lodging-house that night and left on Saturday morning.
Did the police afterwards come for the man's bag? - Yes.
Thomas Johnson, an able seaman on board the Mangola, said he was at the Sailors' Home, Wells-street, and knew Duncan Campbell. On Friday morning, the 13th inst., witness was in the hall of the Home, standing by the fire. Duncan Campbell was there. He saw a man leave the house, and afterwards Campbell told him that he had bought a knife, and given a shilling for it.
Did you see the knife? - No.
Replying to further questions, the witness said the police came to him on the Sunday morning, and he went to Leman-street Police-station, where he saw a number of men in a row.
Looking along the row, did you see anyone you recognised? - Yes.
The Coroner - Who was he? - I recognised him as the man I saw in the hall of the Home on Friday morning.
Mr. Mathews - Was the man standing at the end of the row? - He was shifted once.
By the Jury - The man was placed in two positions - two parts of the row.
By Mr. Mathews - I afterwards went to Archer-street Police-station, and there again identified Sadler as the same man I had seen at the Home.
By Mr. Lawless - I first of all recognised him at Leman-street Police-station.
Was Duncan Campbell with you at Leman-street when you identified him? - No.
Replying to other questions from Mr. Lawless, the witness said that while he was at Leman-street Police-station Duncan Campbell came in and picked out Sadler. It was after that that witness picked him out.
A Juror - Had you not seen the man picked out at Leman-street, could you have identified him at the Thames Police-court? - Yes, by the scars on his face.
Florence Davies, barmaid at the Swan tavern, High-street, Whitechapel, said that on the evening of the 11th, a man came into the house with a woman and bought half-a-pint of Irish whiskey, which he took away, and "left twopence on the bottle." On Friday morning the man came back again, and she then identified him as the man who was with the woman on the Wednesday. Witness identified Sadler and the deceased as the man and woman.

WHEN SADLER WAS CHARGED.

Detective-inspector Henry Moore, of New Scotland-yard, said he was at Leman-street on Sunday night, and charged the man Sadler. Witness said, "James Thomas Sadler, since you were brought here yesterday inquiries have been made concerning yourself and your movements, especially on Thursday and Friday last, and as a result of those inquiries I am going to prefer a charge against you of wilfully murdering Frances Coles by cutting her throat with a knife, or some sharp instrument, at Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel, on the 13th instant." Sadler replied in an undertone, "Yes, yes." The charge was then entered and read over to the prisoner. I asked him to pay attention to it. He said, "I don't see the reason. I know the charge. I suppose I shall have to go through the routine." I then searched him, and he said, "The old man has made a mistake as to the knife. He never saw me before." I found on him 2 pounds 17s. 4d. I also found his discharge note wrapped in a piece of newspaper, and some lottery tickets.
What did he say else? - He said, "Make it as light as you can, gentlemen."
Detective-Inspector Edmund Reid said that about ten minutes after three o'clock the body of the deceased was, by his directions, removed from Swallow-gardens to the mortuary. An earring was found in the deceased's pocket.
The Coroner said he wished to say that the man named "Jumbo" - William Friday - who had been spoken of as having seen a woman in Swallow-gardens before the murder, was now present, together with the woman he was with at the time; therefore it did not seem to bear upon the case.

DECEASED SEEN WITH A STRANGE MAN.

Ellen Callana, called by Mr. Lawless, said she knew Frances Coles, and saw Sadler with Coles at midday on Thursday, the 12th. She saw them again together at six o'clock the same evening. She saw Coles at half-past one o'clock on Friday morning, the 13th.
Where? - I met her in Commercial-street, near the Princess Alice. I asked her where she was going. She gave no answer to that, but told me she had just come from Shuttleworth's.
Where did you go? - We walked together down Commercial-street, towards the City.
Before you left her did a man speak to you? - Yes; he was a short man, with a dark moustache and shiny boots, and blue trousers, just like a sailor.
Was he Sadler? - No. I have seen Sadler, and it is not the man. I asked the man where he proposed to take her, and he said, "Come with me and I'll show you," but I refused. He looked at me a long time because I would not go with him.
Was he drunk? - No.
Was Frances Coles there then? - Yes; three or four yards away.
What did he do after that? - He went and spoke to Frances.
Did you say anything to Frances? - I said, "Don't go with that man; I don't like the look of him." but she said, "I will." I told her, "If you are going with that man I shall bid you good night." I then left them, and they went towards the Minories. I saw them turn round and go into the High-street.
When did you hear of a murder having been committed? - On Friday morning at five o'clock.
And did you go to Leman-street Police-station? - Yes. I took a woman with me, and told them what I knew. I was taken to see the dead body, and recognised it as Frances Coles.
By the Coroner - Witness had not said that it was at three o'clock that she saw the woman Frances alive.
Mr. Mathews - Did you say at the police-station that you last saw the deceased woman at three o'clock? - No.
Mr. Mathews (reading from her statement to the police) - "I last saw her alive in Commercial-street about three o'clock? - No.
Did you not make a second statement to the police, when you said, "I made a mistake about the time. It was not three o'clock?" - No.
Mr. Mathews - Then how came you to tell the coroner you never said three o'clock?
The witness replied that she may have said it, but she had been drinking.

TWO PERSONS UNDER THE ARCH.

William Friday, called at the request of Mr. Lawless, said he was a carman in the service of the Great Northern Railway Company. He lived in Cable-street. He was known as "Jumbo," as a nickname. On Friday morning, the 13th, he left home about twelve o'clock.
Where did you go to? - To the Great Northern Station, Mint-street. I remained there for about ten minutes. I was quite sober. I came back along Royal Mint-street, which I entered about a quarter to two.
As you came along there did you notice anyone? - Yes, a man and woman on the opposite side of Mint-street, about forty or fifty yards from Swallow-gardens. Then I went to the station and "booked on," and afterwards returned along Mint-street. It was then ten minutes to two o'clock.
Were they still in the same place? - Yes. I walked right by them.
Did you notice them then? - Yes. The woman was dressed all in black.
At that time did you know Frances Coles? - No, I thought it was a "young lady" I knew.
The Coroner - Who is the "young lady"?
A young woman named McCarthy was called into the Court, and the witness said that was not the young woman he saw, and that was the reason he looked at them. He thought at first it was "Miss McCarthy," and that made him look.
A man named Fownes was brought into Court, and the witness said that man was not the man he saw with the woman. The man he noticed had a dark brown overcoat with a velvet colllar, and a hard hat. He looked like a "working chap." Witness could not see his face. He got back to the station at twenty minutes after two o'clock.
By Mr. Mathews - Witness had made a statement to the police, in which he said he saw a man and woman near a warehouse, standing close together; that it was quite dark, and that he could not see what they were like. All he saw of the woman was her neck and her hat.
The Coroner - Why do you say now they were not M'Carthy and Fownes? - Because I am almost sure.
Were you taken to the Mortuary? - Yes, and I could not identify the woman.
You could not identify her? - No; all I know was the hat.
The Jury - Oh; the hat.
Witness - I could tell the hat because of the beads in front.
Kate M'Carthy said she lived at 42, Royal Mint-street, and worked at a firm of wine merchants. She knew Thomas Fownes. On Thursday night, the 12th, she and Fownes were out together, walking about till a quarter-past one. When they got to witness's home it was a quarter-past. She and Fownes stood talking in the doorway until a quarter-past two.
The Coroner - You were talking, then, for an hour? - Yes. I was dressed the same as now. I had a black hat, without beads.
Replying to further questions, the witness said she saw "Jumbo" pass by on the opposite side of the road. She did not see him again that night.
Mr. Lawless - Have you made a statement that you stood talking at the doorway until a quarter to two? - Yes, but I made a mistake - it was a quarter-past two.
The Coroner - How do you know that? - Because Fownes says so. He looked at his watch, and said it was a quarter-past two.

THE VERDICT.

The Coroner then summed up, and the jury returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown."

Source: The Echo, Friday February 27, 1891, Page 3

The Coroner's Jury returned an open verdict yesterday on the death of Frances Coles, the victim of the latest Whitechapel atrocity; and with such evidence as they had before them they could hardly have done otherwise. That the woman was murdered is beyond all doubt, but that Sadler was her murderer is, to say the least, highly improbable. The penniless prisoner, in his alarm and helplessness, at first expressed a strong apprehension that the police were determined to get up a case against him; he has really had no cause for complaint. Everybody will agree with the opinion expressed by the jury that the police had ample grounds for arresting and detaining Sadler. For the first few days after his arrest the case against him looked black, but apparently he has told the truth about his movements, and his statements have been carefully tested by the police. Some weight must be given to the absence of any motive for the murder, assuming that Sadler was the perpetrator. Of course, absence of any strong motive does not go very far, for persons under the influence of drink often act irrationally; but there is a method in their madness. They slay in fits of furious passion, but the furious passion is first aroused, and thus far in Sadler's case we fail to find any trace of it. He admits that he had been in the murdered woman's company on and off for two days; the length of time, for obvious reasons, is in his favour. He admits that he was in her company late on the night of the murder, but he left the house alone, and the woman remained from some little time afterwards. More than an hour after Sadler had left, the woman turned up at another lodging-house in the neighbourhood, and was turned out because she had no money. In the meantime, Sadler had got into a drunken quarrel at the gate of the London Docks, a quarter of a mile away. A second drunken prostitute swore that just before the murder the deceased, who was in her company, was invited to go off with a strange man, who was not Sadler, and who held half-a-crown in his hand. No great weight can be placed upon the evidence of a woman in such a condition, though, in the main, it may be true. But the chances are a hundred to one against Sadler meeting the victim accidentally, while her attempt to stay at the second lodging-house, and his attempt to reach his ship, go far to show that there was no appointment. The circumstances of the murder make it almost certain that it was committed by a person in the full use of his faculties, able, not only to slay swiftly, but as swiftly to escape, whereas Sadler was in a condition of staggering drunkenness, which was aggravated by the wounds which he had received. The story of the sale of the knife looked ugly at first, but the evidence of Campbell is by no means conclusive. If nothing more can be produced against Sadler, we shall be surprised if he is even put upon his trial.

Source: The Echo, Saturday February 28, 1891, Page 2

ANOTHER EAST-END MURDER.

"JACK THE RIPPER" AGAIN.

Another of the series of terrible crimes which have been connected with East London during late years was committed at an early hour on Friday morning. The revolting features which characterised most of these murders hitherto were happily absent; but the circumstances of the crime, the character of the victim, and the mysterious features by which the deed is environed, undoubtedly place it in the same category. The time chosen by the murderer, the locality, and the precautions taken to escape detection are in all respects similar to those followed on previous occasions. It appears that shortly after 2 o'clock in the morning Constable 240 H, while passing through an archway of the Great Eastern Railway, which leads from Swallow-gardens to Orman-street, two thoroughfares running parallel with the Whitechapel-road, but lying more towards the river, observed a woman extended on her back in the centre of the thoroughfare. He had passed the spot 15 minutes previously, and there was no one there. On approaching and turning his lamp on the prostrate figure, he was horrified to find that the woman lay in a pool of blood, which was flowing from a terrible wound in the throat extending literally from ear to ear. He at once blew his whistle for assistance, and was joined within a few minutes by Police-constable 327 H, whose beat is adjoining. The woman gave no signs of life, but the body was quite warm, and the policeman felt that the pulses were beating faintly. Further assistance was soon brought to the spot by whistling, and a man was despatched to the residence of Dr. Phillips, the surgeon to the division, who resides near at hand. In the meantime, acting in accordance with instructions issued during the panic at the East End, nearly two years ago, the police allowed the body to remain in the position in which it was discovered, and took careful note of the surroundings so as to be in possession of any available clue. The woman appeared to be from 25 to 27 years of age, and lay in the roadway, her feet crossed one over the other and towards the footpath. She was bareheaded, and while one arm was stretched by her side, the other was bent towards the breast. By her side lay a black crape hat, and in the pocket of her dress were several pieces of black lace or crape and a vulcanite earring. Strange to say, a second black crape hat lay partly hidden in the folds of her dress. An old striped stocking and a comb were also found in her pocket. By this time Dr. Phillips had reached the scene, and after a short examination pronounced that the woman, although not quite dead, was expiring fast. As a matter of fact, she expired before preparations could be made to move her on a stretcher, which had been brought from the Leman-street Police-station. When the medical man pronounced life to be extinct the body was conveyed to the Whitechapel Mortuary, where it awaits an inquest. The blood stains were erased by the police, who cut a cross in the woodwork on the side of the arch to mark the exact spot where the body was found.

DESCRIPTION OF THE MURDERED WOMAN.

The following is the official description of the murdered woman, as entered upon the police books: Age, about 25; length, 5ft.; eyes and hair brown, complexion pale. Dress: a black diagonal jacket, black dress, satin bodice, white chemise and drawers, button boots, black ribbon round neck, black vulcanite earrings, and black earring in pocket, black crape hat and ditto found in folds of dress. In pocket three pieces of black crape, one old striped stocking, and a comb. The clothing of the deceased was considerably worn and dirty, and the lobe of the left ear bore a mark as if at some former time an earring had been torn out of it violently. The body was fairly well nourished.

NARROW ESCAPE OF THE MURDERER.

From the statement made by the constable to his superior officer it is evident that the victim could only have been murdered at the most 10 seconds before the policeman arrived. The warm blood was still gushing from the throat with each expiring breath. She rolled her eyes once or twice, and her lips moved slightly, but no sound came from them. She tried to move her arm, but in a few seconds all was still, and when Dr. Phillips, who had been summoned with all haste, arrived on the scene, the woman was dead. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, the police now have little doubt in their minds that the crime was committed by the redoubtable "Jack the Ripper." Evidently the murderer heard the sound of approaching footsteps, and this accounts for the victim not having been mutilated as has been hitherto the case. The medical examination, so far as it has gone, bears out the view that this is a "Jack the Ripper" murder. The cuts on the throat are not so clean as on previous occasions, but the direction is the same.

A CLUE.

A railway man, who saw a woman talking to a man in the archway known as Swallow-gardens at or shortly after half-past 1 o'clock in the morning, has been closely questioned by the police as to the man's appearance. He describes him as over the medium height with somewhat the appearance of a foreigner. He looked like a ship's fireman. From other information which the police have received, and which tends to bear out this man's statement, a search was at once organised among the foreign vessels in the Thames.

THE SCENE OF THE CRIME.

There is no doubt that the murder was deliberately planned. Swallow-gardens and Orman-street are two thoroughfares, narrow, badly lighted, and at that early hour of the morning rarely traversed. The buildings are partly dwelling-houses, partly warehouses or storerooms. The arch, which was the actual scene of the crime, is about 50 yards in length, and while fairly lighted at each end by lamps, the centre remains in deep shade. It was in the centre, where the shadow lies deepest, that the deed was committed. It may be mentioned that one side of the archway is walled up by a hoarding, the space enclosed being used as a builder's store. The place is notorious as a resort of women of the "unfortunate" class, despite the efforts of the police to keep them away. In fact, two women were arrested for loitering at this spot earlier in the night by one of the constables who assisted to remove the body. The deceased was known to the local police as being in the habit of frequenting the locality and had been seen about Leman-street early in the evening. It is surmised that she could not have been long in the company of her murderer, at least in the vicinity of the place where the deed was committed, as one of the Great Northern Railway men employed as a shunter passed through the archway a few minutes past 2 o'clock and saw no one about then. A city detective also passed some minutes later without perceiving anything amiss.

THE THEORY OF THE POLICE.

The theory of the police is that the deceased was lured into the archway and at once murdered, and that the perpetrator of the crime was prevented from committing further outrages on the body by some one approaching. This view is supported by what is known to have occurred in previous cases. It was at first considered singular that no money should have been found upon the body; but this point is cleared up by the fact that in the course of an examination of the arch and its approaches, made by the police after the body was removed, two shillings were found concealed on the ground behind a pipe used for carrying off the rain-water from the railway. No other article was discovered in the neighbourhood which was thought to have any connection with the crime.

IS THE MURDERER LEFT-HANDED?

It is stated that the throat had been cut by a left-handed person. It will be remembered that the appearance of the wounds on the previous victims went to prove that the murderer was left-handed.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE VICTIM.

Detective-sergeants Record and Kuhrd on Saturday night discovered the father of the deceased, James William Cole, in Bermondsey Workhouse, where he has been living for eight years, and Mary Ann Cole, her sister, who lives in Kingsland. The old man, who is very feeble, was taken to the mortuary in a cab, and had no difficulty in identifying the body as that of Frances Cole, his daughter. Another sister, named Selina, is also known to be living at Kingsland. The deceased was at one time engaged as a labeller at a wholesale chemist's factory in the Minories. It has transpired that she left her lodgings in Thrawl-street about five weeks ago, but on Thursday last, between 9 and 10 o'clock, returned and asked her landlady, Mrs. Hague, to let her come back, and promised to pay what she owed. She then went away, but Mrs. Hague subsequently saw her in a public-house at the corner of Montague-street. She was with a man, who was treating her to drink. He was of fair complexion, and had a light moustache. Mrs. Hague also identified the body.

ARREST OF SUSPECTS.

A man named James Sadler was on Saturday arrested on suspicion of being concerned in the murder and detained in custody at the Leman-street Police-station. Sadler had been questioned early in the morning by a police-sergeant, who noticed that his clothes were stained with blood, but, as he gave a plausible account of himself, he was not detained. Later on, when the sergeant received news of the murder, his suspicions were aroused, and he gave information which led to Sadler's arrest. Sadler, who is a ship's fireman, admits having been in the company of the murdered woman, Frances Cole up to a late hour on Friday night; and on Sunday he was formally charged with the murder.
A second arrest was made at 1 o'clock on Saturday by two officers of the M division, in a street leading from Thames-street. He was a short thin man, in very ragged attire, having the appearance of a seafarer. He was taken direct to Leman-street station and examined, but he gave a satisfactory account of himself, and was released at 4 in the afternoon.

Source: The Mercury, Saturday February 21, 1891, Page 6

THE INQUEST.

The inquest on the body of the woman Frances Cole was opened on Saturday by Mr. W.E. Baxter, at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel. The summonses to the jury described the deceased as "a woman unknown."
Police-constable Ernest Thompson deposed that he went on duty at 10 o'clock on Thursday night. His beat was in Chamber-street and Preston-street. He went down one of the passages about 2:15 on Friday morning, opposite the Schools in Chamber-street, and found the deceased lying in the roadway. He had heard footsteps when going up Chamber-street. They were going in the direction of Mansell-street at a walking pace, but he saw no one. He was then 80 yards from the arch. Nobody was going in the opposite direction. He could not say if the person whose footsteps he heard had come from the arch. As soon as the constables came up the doctors were sent for. - Police-constable Frederick Higham deposed that he heard a whistle blown about 2:15 on Friday morning. He was then about 250 yards from the arches. He ran to the spot and saw the last witness with the deceased, who was lying in the centre of the roadway. He went for Dr. Oxley, who came shortly afterwards. Witness subsequently searched the vicinity, but saw no person who was likely to have committed the deed. - Police-constable Elliott deposed that he was on duty in plain clothes on the night in question in Royal Mint-street. Shortly after 2 o'clock he heard a whistle blown, and on going to Swallow-gardens saw a constable with his lamp turned on the body of a woman. Had a cry for help been raised he must have heard it, but everything was very quiet till he heard a whistle. - The case was the adjourned till Tuesday.

Mr. Wynne Baxter on Tuesday morning resumed the inquiry. - Superintendent Arnold watched the proceedings on behalf of the police; Mr. Charles Mathew appeared on behalf of the Public Prosecutor; John Thomas Sadler, who is in custody charged with the wilful murder of Cole, was not represented. Very few people were present during the proceedings.
James William Cole, an inmate of the Bermondsey Workhouse, was the first witness called, and deposed that he went to the mortuary on Saturday night and identified the deceased as his daughter, Frances, aged 26. He last saw her alive on Friday, 6th February, when she came to the workhouse. She said she was living at 32, Richard-street, Commercial-road. He had since found this to be untrue. She worked for a wholesale chemist in the Minories. She had a mark on the ear for three or four years as though it had been torn by an earring. When she went to the workhouse she promised to see him again on the following Sunday.
Mary Ann Cole, single, living at 32, Mare-street, deposed that she went to the mortuary on Saturday last and identified the body as that of her sister. She had last seen her on the Friday after Christmas. At her request witness gave her something to eat and drink. She saw the deceased at the mortuary on Sunday. Some of the underclothing worn by her was given her by witness. The hat was trimmed with black crape, and she wore a black long jacket. She did not know the deceased had left her employment.
Peter Lorenzo Hawkes, assistant to his mother, a milliner in Nottingham-street, Bethnal-green, said that between 7 and 8 o'clock on Thursday a woman came into his mother's shop. He had since, on Friday last, identified the deceased as the woman. She asked to be shown some hats, and witness sold her one, price 1s. 111/2d., which she paid for by a two-shilling piece. After she got outside she went away in company with a man who had been looking in at the window. he had been to the mortuary and identified the hat which he saw there as the one he had sold. On Saturday he went to the Leman-street Police-station, where he saw 20 or more men, and he then picked out Sadler as the man who had looked through the shop window.
Samuel Harris, a fish-curer, said about 8 o'clock on Thursday he arrived at 8, White's-row, Bethnal-green, where he lodged. On going into the kitchen he saw the deceased before the fire with her head leaning on the table, as though asleep. At about 11:30 a man dressed as a sailor came in the kitchen. He looked round, and then sat down on the form beside the woman. He asked her if she had any money for her lodging, and she, waking up, replied "No." He then said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who did it I would do for them." Turning to witness, he said: "Can I go up to bed till tomorrow morning?" and he showed witness a certificate showing that he was entitled to 4 pounds odd. Witness said he had nothing to do with letting the beds. The man then asked witness to mind the certificate till the next morning, and he replied that he could not. They all three remained in the kitchen till half-past 12, when the man left the house. The deceased followed in a few minutes. He saw no more of them that night. He had identified the man as Sadler, and gave information to the police. When he said he would do for those who had assaulted him he had a fresh bleeding wound over the left eye. He did not notice any particular stains of blood on the man's clothing when he was in the kitchen, nor did he when the man was arrested.
After some further evidence, the inquiry was adjourned till Friday.

SADLER IN THE DOCK.

At the Thames Police-court on Monday, before Mr. Mead, James Thomas Sadler, 53, described as a ship's fireman, residing at the Victoria lodging-house, Upper East Smithfield, was charged by Detective-Inspector Moore, of the Criminal Investigation Department, with wilfully causing the death of Frances Cole, by cutting her throat with a knife, or some sharp instrument, at Swallow-gardens, on the 13th inst.
Superintendent T. Arnold and Chief Inspector Swanson watched the case on behalf of the Commissioners of Police.
Samuel Harris was the first witness called, and, in answer to the magistrate's clerk, said: I am a fish-curer, and live at 8 White's-row, Spitalfields. I was in my dwelling-house about half-past 9 on Thursday evening. I had been there about an hour and a half when I saw a woman whom I knew by the name of Frances. She was sitting on a form, with her head resting on the table. That was in the kitchen of the lodging-house. About half-past 11 I saw a man come in. The prisoner is that man. He was alone. He looked round the kitchen, in which there were other men and women, and then he sat down by the side of Frances. I heard him ask her if she had any lodging money. She looked up at him and again laid her head on the table, but made no reply. He then said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who had done it I would do for them." About half-past 12 he went out alone, and the woman still remained in the kitchen. Before he went out he produced a certificate - a money discharge. He asked me to let him go up to bed, and I could take care of the document. I noticed he had to take about 4 pounds odd. About three or four minutes afterwards I saw Frances tuck a black crape hat under her dress. At the time she was wearing another hat. She then walked out.
By the Clerk: The following afternoon the police took me to the mortuary, and I recognised the woman.
The Prisoner: I wish to jog his memory about what he said about the robbery. The girl was with me when I was robbed. Just read that part again, please.
The Clerk having done so, the accused said: I wish him to verify that statement, or to draw it back - that I would do for them.
Witness: You did say that. Prisoner was drunk, and so was the woman. I noticed he had a bruise over the left eye, and blood was coming from the place where we now see the mark.
The Prisoner: I had a lot of blood on this side, too, which he does not seem to have noticed.
Sergeant W. Edwards said: Shortly before 2 o'clock on Friday morning I was on duty on the Mint-pavement. I saw the prisoner, who, in my opinion, was drunk. I could see he was suffering from a cut over the left eye; and he said he had been knocked about by some men at the dock gates. I asked him how it occurred. He replied, "I was going to my ship, which is lying in the dock, and the gatekeeper refused to admit me, as I dare say I was drunk. The gatekeeper told me if it wasn't for one man, a metropolitan constable, who was there, he would give me what I deserved - a good hiding; and if the officer would only turn his back he would do it then. The constable walked away, when a gang of dock labourers came out of the gates, started on me, knocked me down, and kicked me in the ribs. I believe my ribs are broken."
I walked about 30 yards with the prisoner, and I examined his ribs to see if they were broken. I was not satisfied, and offered to take him to the hospital. Constable Hyde came up, and he also examined his ribs, and we then thought he was all right. Prisoner said: "I believe I am not so much hurt as I thought I was," and then he walked towards the Minories. At 2:45 I was informed that the body of a woman had been found. When I saw the prisoner I was about 500 yards from Swallow-gardens. In my opinion, he was certainly drunk. I saw nothing of the woman previously.
The Prisoner: I think he is pretty near the mark. I was drunk and thought I was going the other way.
William Fewell said: I am night porter in the receiving-room of the London Hospital. A little before 5 on Friday morning I was on duty in the receiving-room when the man in the dock came in with a lacerated scalp and a small cut over the eye. I trimmed the hair from the scalp wound, which was on the right side, and also washed his face. I asked him how he came by it, and he replied, "The truth of it is, I have been with a woman and she has done me." I asked him whether it was for much. He replied, "Only for 7s. or 8s. and a watch. I shouldn't have minded that, but they knocked me about." Prisoner was trembling very much, and I asked him why he trembled so. He said, "I am so cold. I have been walking about. Can you give me something to warm me?" I told him I had nothing to give him, and persuaded him to go on to his lodgings. He said, "Unfortunately, I have got none. I have only been on shore one night, and have not secured any." He also told me his ship was lying in the London Dock. I saw there was blood on his hands, and asked him if they were cut. It was some few seconds before he answered, and before doing so he put up his hands and looked at them. He then said, "Yes, my finger is cut. He (or they) had a knife." I looked at the finger and saw that it was only a slight cut. I then said, "All the blood cannot come from that little cut." He replied: "Well, if it didn't come from that it came from my head." I asked him where it happened, and he said, "In Ratcliff-highway, near Leman-street." He also added that he had been into one or two places to get a few half-pence, so that he could buy refreshments, but they chucked him out. If he could borrow a little he would be willing to pay treble for it, as he had 5 pounds to draw. The receiving-room nurse then dressed his wound, as it was too slight for the doctor to be called. As he seemed so queer I let him lie on a sofa, and he went to sleep. He slept for an hour and a-half. Then I woke him up, and told him he would have to go, as I was soon going off duty. I gave him a penny, and he seemed grateful for it, and went away.
Mr. Mead: Do you want to ask the witness any questions?
The Prisoner: There are two or three little things, but I am not in good trim to cross-examine. I am thoroughly hungry and cold. I have had nothing since tea-time last night, and I don't feel fit to take an interest in the proceedings. I have been shifted from one cold cell to another, and my clothes have been taken off me at the will and option of the police and doctors. I have not anything to ask now. I am not fit to do it. There are one or two things wrong in what he says; but I can't ask anything now. I am really too hungry.
Mr. Mead: Now, let us have some evidence about the finding of the body.
Superintendent Arnold said: Shortly after 3 o'clock on the morning of the 13th I went to Swallow-gardens. I there saw the body of the female, with a cut in her throat. She was dead. That is the body which Harris afterwards saw. I now ask for a remand.
Mr. Mead: Have you any questions to ask?
The Prisoner: I should like something to eat.
Superintendent Arnold: You shall have something.
The Prisoner: It's about time.
Mr. Mead: You are remanded until next Tuesday.

Source: The Mercury, Saturday February 21, 1891, Page 6

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

Again a verdict is returned of wilful murder "against some person or persons unknown," as the result of the inquiry into the death of the woman Frances Coles, the tenth unfortunate woman of that most unfortunate class of outcasts who have been slaughtered in the streets of the East End in a comparatively short space of time.
At the time of the discovery of the deed public indignation reaches fever-heat, and the outburst of reprobation which is heard throughout the country is natural and justifiable. That such popular excitement is based on a sentiment which is not potent for any lasting good, or calculated to bring any real help to the solution of the cause of these hideous assassinations, the conduct of the nation at large, after the tenth and latest verdict, will, if we mistake not, assuredly prove.
As soon as a murder is found out, what is the chief point of interest to society apart from the morbid sentiments and curiosity which are stimulated by circumstances of peculiar horror? To find the murderer, that justice may be vindicated by the arm of the law, and that the outraged feelings of less guilty masses of mankind may revenge themselves on one of their fellows, who has, by one fell act, exceeded the limitation of inhuman licence. If the murderer is found the law takes its course the populace is satisfied, and a wide-spread feeling of relief permeates each stratum of society. If the murderer is not found, what happens? When the efforts of the police have been unavailing; when the skill and ingenuity of detective talent have found no clue; when prayers at the grave of the unhappy woman for the discovery of the miscreant have received no answer; when the last hope of bringing home the crime to a man caught red-handed and under suspicious circumstances has to be abandoned; and when the verdict of murder against a person unknown is returned what happens then we ask? Disappointment is felt that justice is defeated - the murderer cannot be hanged. Excitement succumbs to a stolid reaction of indifference as to the fact that there are thousands of women liable to be murdered in the same way today, in our midst, and in spite of our virtuous outcry. All that permanently remains is the absolute unwillingness of most women, and many men, to realise that it is the state of public opinion on questions of morality which is chiefly responsible for the death of Frances Coles.
As long as pure women deliberately ignore, shun, or shut up in penitentiaries - with the best by most mistaken intentions - fallen women, while at the same time they willingly marry and tacitly recognise fallen, and constantly falling, men as the pillars of society, so long will many women like Frances Cole be driven to the choice of the tortures of exposure and starvation, or the risk of a dreadful death in the lonely, inhospitable streets. Thousands more will die daily and endure more pangs than the assassin's knife can inflict.
The continuation of unjust and unfair treatment of our unfortunate sisters, be they those who have gone astray from imprudent trust, from innate depravity, or from the cravings of hunger and the utter hopelessness of London poverty, will increase the horrors of their situation and the recklessness of their careers. Does society, English society, know? Do women who go to church, and say their prayers, and have houses to shelter them, food to eat, clothes to wear, and people to be kind to them - do such women understand what others have to bear? who have nightly to carry their lives in their hands, so to speak, for the sake of a bed on which to rest their weary frame, a bite for their empty stomach, a dram for their maddened brain. No, it is not realised. What are the arguments which are accepted as convincing to prove that the social evil is unavoidable, when sometimes, with bated breath and averted eye, a tender-hearted woman asks the question, "Can nothing more be done for them?" She is told that concupiscence is a human instinct, as natural as the appetite for food, or the necessity for sleep; that the force of the passion in man renders inevitable the existence of a class whom the calm and liberal historian Lecky designates "the eternal priestesses of humanity blasted for the sins of the people." That as such is the case, it will always be so; that women know nothing about men, their feelings, and their necessities. Therefore, though women may bring about amelioration of the evil by their ministrations, by homes and hospitals for those whom men have wounded to death, and though they may soften the hardships to be endured by the idiot and incurable offspring of parents besotted with disease by ever increasing the number of institutions and draining the public purse, no cure can be effected, for men are men not angels. Oh, women! the answer to this sophistry lies in the chief point of the argument used. If women know nothing about men, it is a fair analogy that men know nothing about women. Therein lies the solution of the problem. Men can protect themselves and understand themselves. So far, so good. Too long have they attempted to protect us, whom they do not understand. By their laws, their institutions, their social, legal, and theological sanctions they try to convince us that God left one half of the human race with the possibility that each individual of that half might in herself (given certain conditions of accidental circumstances) become "blasted" for the sins of the other half. We may not longer allow men with their codes of honour, their modes of thought, their "necessities" for action, which are said to be so different to our own, to be our only teachers on this awful subject. We are afraid of "soiling our wings." We are afraid that if we protect our unfortunate sisters we shall become defiled from touching pitch. We want to preserve our ignorance, or innocence, and respectability. We have been slaves so long that we have still in our blood the taint of abject cowardice, which is the natural heritage of bonds. It is not the execution of the murderer of these awful Whitechapel crimes which would advance human justice in one single point. It is women, and women alone, who, by their combined and out-spoken efforts, shall protect their sex and vindicate the sorrows of the slain. When that day shall come, women, my sisters judge ye!

LAURA E. MORGAN-BROWN

Source: The Woman's Herald, March 14, 1891, Page 324

MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.
"JACK THE RIPPER" AGAIN AT WORK.

ESCAPE OF THE MURDERER.
AN IMPORTANT ARREST.

The Whitechapel district of London was again thrown into a state of alarm on Friday by the news that another woman had been murdered in that locality. A police-constable passing at a quarter-past two in the morning through an archway of the Great Eastern Railway leading from a slum called Swallow-gardens to Orman-street, saw a body lying in the middle of the thoroughfare; and, on examining the prostrate figure, discovered it to be that of a woman, the upper portion of whose body was covered with blood flowing from a terrible wound in the throat, which had almost completely severed the windpipe. In conjunction with another officer, who came at the summons of the whistle, a slight examination was made of the body, which was quite warm, and from which, as a faint beating of the pulse denoted, life had not quite departed. Further assistance was at once summoned, and a messenger was dispatched for Mr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon, who resides in the vicinity, and who was on the spot in a very brief time. The surgeon found that life was on the point of extinction, and the unfortunate woman, in fact, expired before she could be placed upon the stretcher which had been brought to convey her to the Leman-street Police-station. She gave not the slightest sign of consciousness during the quarter of an hour or twenty minutes which elapsed between her discovery and her death, and all, of course, that could be done at the moment was to take note of the appearance of the victim and her surroundings. As far as could be judged, the murdered woman was of the age of 25 or 27. She lay with her feet crossed, and with one arm straight by her side, and the other partially covering her breast. At her side lay a black crape hat, much the worse for wear. On further examination at the mortuary, she was found to be clothed in a braided black jacket, a black skirt and bodice, brown petticoat, grey corset, striped cotton stockings and buttoned boots, and black velvet band fitted closely to the neck. In the pocket of the dress was a black vulcanite earring, corresponding to one worn in the left ear, besides three pieces of crape, an old striped stocking, and a comb. Considering that people of her class - she was no doubt an unfortunate - usually carry about them all the clothing they possess, it is not by any means inexplicable, though still a little remarkable, that she should have had a second crape hat with her, this article hanging half out of the pocket, as if it had been casually thrust there.
As soon as the alarm was given, a number of higher police officials were quickly on the spot. A searching examination was made of the vicinity, without adding much to the knowledge already gained beyond the discovery of a florin, which was found behind a horizontal rain-water pipe, and which may or may not have belonged to the murdered woman, but which is hardly likely, as has been suggested, to have been concealed there by her. When the examination was concluded, a portion of the blood-stained earth was taken, and the rest of the blood washed away before the archway was opened for traffic.
The scene of the murder is almost in the centre of a network of slums lying on the right of the Whitechapel-road. It has been said to be a special resort of women of the lowest class, but there is really no tangible evidence that such is the case. The buildings in the vicinity consist of a number of large warehouses and store-rooms, and some twenty or thirty tenements of the poorest kind. The archway is about fifty feet in length, lighted at both ends, but very dark in the middle; not, however, so dark as to have prevented the constable who first discovered the body from seeing it even before he used his lantern. One side of the arch is used as a builder's store, and is boarded up, and the other side forms the passage from Swallow-gardens to Royal Mint-street. The place, dark as it is, is hardly one where the commission of a premeditated crime might have been expected, for a constable had passed there less than a quarter of an hour before, and, as part of his duty, had to patrol the "gardens" about every 15 minutes. The constable did so that morning, so that it is to be assumed that the murder was perpetrated in the brief interval which elapsed between his recurrent visits. The whole locality is a perfect network of alleys and passages, badly lighted or not lighted at all, and it is, therefore, by no means surprising that the murderer should have been able to effect an easy escape, even if the alarm had been given earlier. Which may turn out to be an important piece of evidence is the statement of a railway man, who alleges that he saw a woman answering to the description of the victim talking to a man in the archway at 1:30 or thereabouts. The man appears to have taken some notice of the couple, but his description of the man amounts to no more than that he was of medium height and appeared to be a foreigner, so that the chances of a positive identification on his part scarcely seem hopeful. Another statement which has reached the police came from a man who called at the Leman-street Station and alleged that he had seen a man and woman talking just before two o'clock in Royal Mint-street, within five minutes' walk of the spot where the murder was committed. In the opinion of this witness, the man looked like a ship's stoker or fireman, but he saw nothing foreign in his appearance. Acting on this and other information, vague as it was, the police during the day instituted a systematic search amongst the shipping in the docks and the river, paying special attention to foreign vessels. They have, in addition, undertaken a thorough search of all the lodging-houses in Whitechapel, Spitalfields, and the Minories, but without result, as might be expected, considering the migratory habits of the classes which frequent these shelters.
As soon as the murder became known the locality was crowded by an excited, but, it must be said, a somewhat callous crowd, the burden of whose remarks was that the famous "Jack the Ripper" had reappeared in their midst. That may be the case, but the circumstances do not necessarily point to this as another in the series of ghastly crimes which began in Whitechapel in Christmas week, 1887, and, terrible as the murder is, it may yet prove to be one prompted by jealousy or revenge, and not by a mere lust for blood. It has been assumed that the body was not mutilated because the murderer was disturbed by the approach of the constable, but there is really as yet no evidence to show that he was near at the time, and certainly he heard no cry, if any were uttered.
An extraordinary coincidence, however, which the police fail to comprehend, is the discovery of the money wrapped in paper near the scene of the murder. Along the arch a waterpipe extends the length of the brickwork, but by the gaslight it is scarcely perceptible. Close to the bottom of the pipe is a small aperture leading into the wall, and in this recess two separate shillings were found enclosed in paper, the latter projecting slightly from the hole. It is strongly surmised that the victim was in the habit of "planting" her money in this opening during the evening, and removing it later on. Although this is simply conjecture, it appears most improbable that it could have fallen accidentally in the place in which it was discovered.
The theory held by the police and surgical experts in regard to the crime is that the woman willingly accompanied the murderer to Swallow-gardens, and as they walked under the archway the man suddenly stepped back, placing his right hand over the woman's mouth, pulled her head back on to his breast, and thus, with the weapon held in his left hand, inflicted the fatal wound. The throat of the victim bears two wounds - the first a slight cut, not even dangerous; the second and principal wound was a wonderfully clean cut, made by a firm hand wielding the keenest and strongest of knives, penetrated to the cervical vertebrae. The victim could not have uttered a sob after that pitiless stroke.

THE VICTIM IDENTIFIED.

The deceased has been positively identified as Frances Cole, a young woman who lived in lodging-houses in the district and earned a miserable livelihood after the same manner as most of the previous victims. Her father, James William Cole, is in Bermondsey Workhouse, where he has been living for eight years, and a sister, Mary Ann Cole, lives in Kingsland. The old man, who is very feeble, was brought to the mortuary in a cab, and had no difficulty in identifying the body. Another sister named Selina, is also known to be living at Kingsland. The deceased was at one time engaged as a labeller at a wholesale chemist's factory in the Minories. The deceased occasionally took her meals at Shuttleworth's Coffee House, in Wentworth-street. Miss Shuttleworth says she knew her well, but only as a customer. She was a simple poor girl, very inoffensive, and as timid as a baby. She did not know her real name, and generally called her Georgina, but she was mostly called Frances. Strange to say, it was only a few days ago that she was talking about "Jack the Ripper," of whom she seemed dreadfully afraid. Unfortunately she used to drink very heavily, and she met with a fall one night when she was drunk. I believe, added Miss Shuttleworth, she had a sister living at 12, Ware-street, Kingsland-road. It was she who gave her the black satin bodice she was wearing when she met her death. She was in mourning for her brother, who died recently.

AN IMPORTANT ARREST.

Almost every day since the discovery of the murder numbers of persons have been taken into custody by the police on suspicion, but in each case the person apprehended was speedily liberated. On Saturday, however, an arrest was made which at first seemed likely to lead to something of importance. It appears that about half-past two on the morning of the murder, before the news had spread, a man whose clothes were stained with blood, was seen by a police sergeant on Tower-hill, and from facts which were afterwards gleaned, tending in the opinion of the police to associate him with the murder, he was traced and arrested. His name is James Thomas Sadler, and he is described as a ship's fireman. The police detained him at Leman-street Station, but did not take him technically into custody, no charge being preferred against him. When asked to explain his movements he readily agreed to do so. He said that he was a fireman on board the steamer Fez in the St. Katharine Docks, and had known the deceased for some time. He met her on Wednesday and after they had been about drinking during the day, the went to what is known as a "double" lodging-house in Dorset-street, Spitalfields, where they passed the night. On Thursday he was about with her a good deal and they undoubtedly had too much to drink, consisting principally of gin and cloves. She asked him for some money in order to buy a hat, and he, after telling her that he thought she might better spend her money in buying some underclothing, gave her half-a-crown. She bought the hat, which came to about two shillings. The two in the course of their wanderings about the district came late in the evening to Thrawl-street, where the man wanted her to stay with him for the night. They went to a common lodging-house, and stayed only a little while, as the woman wished to go back to Dorset-street. In Thrawl-street they had some argument, in the midst of which, as alleged by Sadler, a woman came up and struck him on the head with some instrument, which caused him to faint. In corroboration of this, he drew the attention of the police officers to his head, upon which was a nasty wound, from which blood had apparently freely flowed on to his clothing. Some other people, he asserted, came up, and further ill treated him. When he came to again, these people had gone, and only the woman who had been his companion remained. He upbraided her for not having attempted to defend him, and charged her with being the cause of the assault. They quarrelled and he left her. This was between ten and eleven o'clock at night. He made his way to the docks with the intention of going to his ship, but when he got there the gate-keepers refused to admit him because of his intoxicated state. For some time he lingered around the gate, abusing the officials. In the midst of this some dockers came along, and he at once fell foul of them, and in all probability would have been roughly handled by them but for the presence of a police-sergeant and constable. His next move was towards the Victoria Home for Sailors, with the intention of seeking shelter for the night. In this he was also unsuccessful on account of his drunken state, and after pouring out some more abuse upon the porter he went away in the direction of Tower-hill, where he met the police-officer who accosted him. It appears that at about three o'clock in the morning the man returned to the lodging-house in Thrawl-street, and asked whether Frances had come in again. Mrs. Fleming, the deputy, continuing the narrative, replied, "I have not seen her since she went out, a little after twelve." He said, "Well, I have no money, and all my tackle and half my chain is gone; for I have been robbed. Can I go in the kitchen? I said, "No, we don't allow any strangers here, and no one is allowed to stop in the kitchen. There would be a 5 pound penalty against us for everyone that did." He said, "Look at me; I am all over blood. Look at my head!" which I noticed was cut over the eyebrow. I saw that the palms of his hands were very wet with blood. I asked him how he got into that state, and he replied, "I have been knocked down and kicked in the Highway." The man was very reluctant to go, and hung about the folding-doors. Then, as he would not go, the watchman put him out. Before this happened, he showed us a draft on the ship for about 4 pounds, which he said he could not get cashed on Saturday morning, and he offered to leave that with us as security if we would allow him to stay the night. We refused, and he eventually went away." The prisoner then seems to have made his way to the London Hospital, where he had his wounds dressed, explaining that he had had a row with a woman. One important circumstance tending in some way to prove Sadler's innocence is that when arrested he was wearing heavy boots, calculated to occasion noisy footsteps. When taken to the mortuary and shown the body of the deceased he at once recognised it as that of the woman in whose company he had been. On Sunday afternoon Sadler's sailor's bag containing his effects were brought from the steamer Fez to the police station, and examined. Nothing of importance was, however, found in the bag.
A change, however, took place in the complexion of things on Monday, the police having come to the decision to definitely charge Sadler with the murder. Since Sunday night the suspicions entertained against the man had been materially strengthened from an unexpected quarter. The history of the man's arrest has been a remarkable one. At first it seemed that there were sufficient grounds for at once charging the prisoner with the crime. He had been seen quarrelling with the deceased woman shortly before the murder was committed, and shortly after it was committed he was seen walking across Tower Hill with stains of blood about him. Undoubtedly if, when questioned by the police, he had failed to account for the stains, he would have been forthwith charged; but what was the fact? Without faltering, and without betraying any emotion, he explained that he had been in a "row" with two men, who had assaulted and tried to rob him at the dock gates. In the next place he was asked whether he was in the deceased woman's company on Thursday evening. Of course had his answer been in the negative the denial would of itself have been an exceedingly suspicious circumstance. But the man candidly admitted having been in the woman's company up to within an hour or two of the murder. In reply to further questions, he emphatically denied any knowledge of the crime, and met the suggestion by setting up what amounted to an alibi. He gave a full account of his movements from the time he left the woman to the time he encountered the sergeant on Tower Hill; and so plausible and consistent was his story that the police felt they had no alternative but to test it before taking the decisive step of charging him with the crime. A batch of detectives were told off for the work, and as the hours went by the results of their labours were gradually reported at Leman-street station. Those who had visited the London Hospital reported that Sadler had undoubtedly been there at the time he himself had specified; those who had been to the Sailors' Home told the same story; and so on with the other places mentioned. In a word, so far from confuting, the detectives one and all confirmed Sadler's statement. That was the position of affairs late on Sunday night. The arrest seemed to be rapidly losing its importance; gradually the conviction was gaining ground in police circles that the clue which had been so eagerly pursued was a worthless one; and the liberation of the prisoner was felt to be only a question of time. During the night, however, an important fact was discovered. A man named Duncan Campbell, staying at the Sailors' Home, went to Leman-street Station, and made a communication. He explained that on Friday morning at about 11 o'clock he was standing beside the fire-place in the entrance hall of the Home, when a man, whom he did not remember previously to have seen, entered the institution and got into conversation with him, remarking that he had been out all night; that he didn't feel at all well; and that he wanted a drink. "As he spoke," Campbell proceeded, "he produced a valuable looking knife, and offered to sell it to me. I said to him, "That isn't an English knife, is it?" He replied, "No; I bought it in America." After some further conversation, I agreed to buy it from him, and I gave him a shilling for it." Campbell went on to say that since effecting the purchase he had washed the knife and resold it; and he added that the water in which he washed it became discoloured, as though by blood. The police lost no time in bringing Campbell into the presence of Sadler, whom he promptly recognised as the man who had sold him the knife. It was in consequence of this fresh evidence in the case that the police formally charged Sadler with the murder of Frances Cole. The charge was read over to him shortly before midnight on Sunday by Inspector Moore, of the Criminal Investigation Department, and the prisoner betrayed considerable emotion at the time. He was subsequently conveyed in a cab to Arbor-square police station, where he was placed in a cell. He was taken before the magistrate at Thames Police-court on Monday afternoon, when, after some important evidence had been given, he was remanded until Tuesday next. A report of the proceedings is given below.
The knife purchased by Campbell at the Sailors' Home is a peculiar one. The blade, which is about five inches long, is curved, and has a sharp point. It is a clasp knife, and the handle is a heavy metal one. Campbell informed the police that he had sold it to a store dealer named Robinson, who lived in Dock-street. Two detectives proceeded to the address indicated, and took possession of the knife. It is stated that Campbell did not wholly dispose of it to the dealer, but retained the right to buy it back. Robinson has stated that the knife was blunt when brought to him, and that he put an edge on it. "In fact," he said, "I cut my dinner up with it yesterday." A woman who was in the shop added: "Yes, and he cut his toffee up with it also. He always has a bit of toffee on Sunday afternoons." It is stated that Sadler has denied ever having had the knife in his possession, and on this point, it is believed, independent evidence is forthcoming. The weapon has been shown to Mr. Phillips, the division surgeon, who made a post-mortem examination of the deceased.
The evidence against Sadler is distinctly accumulating, and if some of the clues now in the hands of the police should bear investigation, he will have a very difficult charge to answer. At the same time, the police are decidedly of opinion that, whether guilty of this crime or not, he is not the "Jack the Ripper" for whom they have been so long seeking.

PRISONER BEFORE THE MAGISTRATES.

Sadler was brought up at the Thames Police-court on Monday and charged with the murder. Prisoner, whose age was given as 53, was described as a ship's fireman. Superintendent T. Arnold and Chief Inspector Swanson watched the case for the Commissioners of Police. The accused when placed in the dock presented a strange appearance. Both eyes were blackened, and there were also other marks of injuries about the face. He appeared to be still suffering from the effects of drink. During the evidence he listened attentively, and frequently interrupted. It was stated by Superintendent Arnold that he had been in communication with the Public Prosecutor, who instructed him to take only sufficient evidence to justify a remand.
Samuel Harris said he was a fish-curer, and lived at 8, White's-row, Spitalfields. He was in the house about half-past 9 on Thursday evening last. He there saw a woman whom he knew by the name of Frances. She was sitting on a form, with her head resting on the table in the kitchen of the lodging-house. About half-past eleven the prisoner came in. He looked round the kitchen, in which there were other men and women, and then he sat down by the side of Frances. Witness heard him ask her if she had any lodging money. She looked up at him, and again laid her head on the table, but made no reply. He then said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who had done it I would do for them."
Prisoner (to witness): Be careful.
Witness (continuing) said: About half-past twelve he went out alone, and the woman still remained in the kitchen. About three or four minutes afterwards he saw Frances put a black crepe hat under her dress. At the time she was wearing another hat. She then walked out.
Prisoner: I wish to jog his memory about what he said about the robbery. The girl was with me when I was robbed. Just read that part again, please.
The Clerk having done so, the accused said: I wish him to verify that statement or to draw it back - that I would do for them.
Witness: You did say that. Prisoner was drunk, and so was the woman. I noticed he had a bruise over the left eye, and blood was coming from the place where I now see the mark.
Prisoner: I had a lot of blood on this side, too, which he does not seem to have noticed.
Police-sergeant W. Edwards then spoke to seeing the prisoner on the Mint pavement. He was drunk, and witness could see he was suffering from a cut over his left eye, and he said he had been knocked about by some men at the dock gates.
Prisoner: Where? Oh, at the dock gates. It is quite right.
Witness (resuming) said the prisoner also told him that he had been knocked down by a gang of dock labourers, and kicked in the ribs. Prisoner then walked towards the Minories. At a quarter to 3 witness was informed that the body of a woman had been found. When he saw the prisoner he was about 500 yards from Swallow-gardens.
Prisoner: I think he is pretty near the mark. I was drunk, and thought I was going the other way.
William Fewell, night porter at the London Hospital, said a little before 5 on Friday morning the man in the dock came in with a lacerated scalp and a small cut over the eye. Witness asked him how he came by it, and he replied "The truth of it is I have been with a woman, and she has done me." I asked him whether it was for much? He replied, "Only for 7s. or 8s., and a watch. I shouldn't have minded that, but they knocked me about." Prisoner was trembling very much, and I asked him why he trembled so. He said, "I am so cold. I have been walking about. Can you give me something to warm me?" I told him I had nothing to give him, and persuaded him to go on to his lodgings. He said, "Unfortunately I have got none. I have only been on shore one night, and haven't secured any. I saw there was blood on his hands, and asked him if they were cut. It was some few seconds before he answered, and before doing so he put up his hands and looked at them. He then said, "Yes, my finger is cut. He (or they) had a knife." I looked at the finger, and saw that it was only a slight cut. I then said, "All the blood cannot come from that little cut." He replied, "Well, if it didn't come from that, it came from my head." The receiving-room nurse then dressed his wound, as it was too slight for the doctor to be called. As he seemed so queer I let him lie on a sofa, and he went to sleep. He slept for an hour and a half. Then I woke him up, and told him he would have to go as I was soon going off duty. I gave him a penny and he seemed grateful for it, and went away.
Mr. Mead: Do you want to ask the witness any questions?
Prisoner: There are two or three little things, but I am not in good trim to cross-examine. I am thoroughly hungry and cold. I have had nothing since tea time last night, and I don't feel fit to take an interest in the proceedings. I have been shifted from one cell to another, and my clothes have been taken off me at the will and option of the police and doctors. I have not anything to ask now. I am not fit to do it. There are one or two things wrong in what he says, but I can't ask anything now, I am really too hungry.
Evidence having been given of the finding of the body, the prisoner, who again asked that he might have something to eat, was remanded till Friday next.

SADLER'S ANTECEDENTS.

The antecedents of the accused man, Sadler, have now been ascertained to as far back as March 1887, and from this information it is indisputably show that with half of the series of crimes attributed to the East-end miscreant he could have had absolutely nothing to do. It appears that on March 24, 1887, he joined the Georgian at Newport, and remained with her until May 5 following, when he left her in London. From this latter date until August he was in England, and presumably in the metropolis. It was during this period that the murders commenced, an unknown woman being found during Christmas week near Osborne and Wentworth-streets, and Martha Turner being stabbed in 39 places on Aug. 7, 1888, in some model dwellings in Commercial-street, Spitalfields. It must be said that certainly the occurrence of these two crimes during the man's stay on land lends colour to the original suspicions; but the times of the happening of the succeeding crimes, on the other hand, supply a good answer to the suggestion. Sadler went away to sea again on Aug. 17, 1888, in the Winestead, and did not reach London until the evening of Oct. 1 following. During his absence no less than four murders were committed, two of them, strange to say, being on the morning of the day immediately preceding his arrival in the Thames. These murders were discovered on Aug. 31, in Buck's-row; on Sept. 7, in Hanbury-street, and on Sept. 30, in Mitre-square and Berner-street. In order to see if it were possible for Sadler to have left his ship so as to be in London on Sept. 30, the log-book was inspected, and this clearly showed that such a thing would have been impossible, as the vessel did not arrive until 8 o'clock on the evening of Oct. 1. During his stay after this voyage the peculiarly atrocious murder of Mary Kelly, on Nov. 9, occurred, the victim being done to death in her own room, and mutilated in a way far exceeding in complete ferocity the foregoing crimes. On May 8, 1889, having been in England for over seven months, Sadler went on another voyage, his ship this time being the Bilbao. His absence lasted until July 7. Ten days after his return the murder of Alice Mackenzie, in Castle-yard, took place, this being the last of the Whitechapel horrors preceding the one now absorbing attention. Summing up these facts, therefore, and carefully comparing dates, it is seen that Sadler was in this country when four murders took place, and that he was absent when a similar number were perpetrated. If the widespread supposition that the crimes have a common origin is accepted, then it is self-evident that Sadler cannot be regarded as responsible for these in the slightest degree. Following his movements from the time of his leaving the Bilbao, it should be stated that on July 19, 1889, he joined the Loch Katrine, upon which he remained until Oct. 1. On the last day of the same month he was accepted as a fireman on board the Alford, leaving her on May 27 of the succeeding year at Barry, near Cardiff. His next trip was to Norway, in a similar capacity, on the Chimborazo, which, leaving London on June 16 last, returned a month later. Sadler, on Aug. 22, was engaged for the City of Amsterdam; then, on Sept. 15, for the Churton; and, finally, on Dec. 24, for the Fez, this being the vessel upon which he remained until her return to London last week.

THE INQUEST.

The inquest was opened on Saturday afternoon by Mr. Wynne Baxter, the coroner for the Eastern Division of the County of London, and police officers gave evidence as to the finding of the body, but nothing of importance transpired. The inquiry was adjourned till Tuesday.

The inquiry was resumed on Tuesday. The father and sister of the deceased having given evidence, Peter Lorenzo Hawkes, assistant to his mother, who is a milliner in Bethnal-green, spoke to the deceased coming to their shop on Thursday evening and buying a black crape hat for 1s. 11 1/2d. She was then in company with a man who remained outside. This witness had identified Sadler as that man. Samuel Harris, the fish curer, repeated the evidence he gave at the Magistrate's court; and Charles Quiver, night watchman at the lodging-house in White's-row, spoke to the man Sadler and the deceased both being in that house on Thursday. The inquiry was again adjourned till Friday morning.

Source: The Middlesex Courier, February 20, 1891, Page 2

RESUMED INQUEST TODAY.

AN IMPORTANT WITNESS.
THE MAN WHO BOUGHT THE KNIFE.

Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, coroner for East London, resumed the inquiry today at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel-road, concerning the death of the young woman Frances Coles, who was found near a railway arch in Swallow-gardens, Chamber-street, early on the morning of Friday, the 13th inst., by Police-constable Thompson. James Thomas Sadler, a ship's fireman, is now under magisterial remand, charged on suspicion of having murdered the deceased.
Mr. Charles Mathews (instructed by Mr. Frayling) represented the Treasury authorities. Mr. Lawless (instructed by Messrs. Wilson and Wallis) represented the man Sadler. The police were represented by Mr. Superintendent Arnold, Chief-inspector Swanson, and Inspectors Moore, Reid, and Flanagan, of the Criminal Investigation Department.

A WAITER'S OBSERVATION.

Charles Littlewood stated that he was a waiter in the employ of Mr. Stephen Longhurst, at a coffee-tavern in Whitechapel-road. At about half-past six o'clock on Friday morning, the 13th, a man came in and asked for some cocoa, with which he was served.
Mr. Mathews - Did you notice he rested his left arm on the counter? - Yes; and on looking at his left wrist I noticed some blood stains.
I think he then went and sat at the table? - Yes; and whilst sitting there he asked for another cup of cocoa, and remarked, "My ribs hurt me."
I think you did not serve him with a second cup? - I did not, because he was drunk. I noticed he had a very peculiar smell about him.
What was it like? - It was like a doctor's shop. (A laugh.) Soon after that my master (Mr. Longhurst) came down, and he spoke to him. The man left about half-past seven o'clock.
I think he employed the latter part of his time in reading a newspaper? - Yes.
Did you notice any blood except on his wrist? - No. I noticed a scar over his eye.
How did he seem as to drink? - He walked straight away then.

THE MANAGER'S STORY.

Mr. Stephen Longhurst, manager of the coffee-tavern alluded to, said he came down to the shop at half-past seven o'clock on Friday morning, and saw a man there, whom he has since identified as Sadler.
The man was the person alluded to by the last witness.
Did you see any blood on him? - I did not notice any.
He seemed to have been drinking, did he? - Yes.
What time did he leave? - Between eight and nine.
But your assistant puts it at half-past seven? He is wrong there; it was about half-past eight - between that and nine.

THE EVIDENCE OF THE NEW WITNESS.

Frederick Smith, examined by Mr. Mathews, said he was a waiter at Lockhart's Coffee Tavern, Tower-hill, and lived at Osborn-street, Whitechapel. On Friday morning he was cleaning the urns in the bar. He came in about half-past one that morning.
As you were doing this do you remember hearing a man groan? - Yes. It caused me to look through the shop window, which faces the Tower. I saw a man within two or three yards of the shop, and coming from the Mint-pavement. He was groaning and holding his ribs.
Can you fix the time? - It was as near as possible five minutes to two - within a few minutes of two.
Why do you say that? - Because I was just finishing the second urn, and I generally finish it at two o'clock.
Did you see two constables there? - Yes, and this man complained to them of having been knocked about.
How long did the man stand there? - About five minutes, and then went towards the Minories.
Can you or can you not fix the time of that? - I cannot, but I am sure he was not there more than five minutes.
The Coroner - Did he walk or run? - Walked. I could not see him then, but I could hear his footsteps.
A Juror: And could you hear what passed when you were inside the shop? - Yes.
By Mr. Lawless: I knew the policemen. One of them was a sergeant. I did not see a third constable come up.
When the man went away did the constables remain? - No, Sir; they went in the opposite direction - towards Upper East Smithfield.
How many urns have you to clean? - Three.
And does it take you an hour to clean them? - I had something else to do as well.

FRANCES SEEN AT TWO O'CLOCK.

Joseph Haswell, a fish porter, said he lived at 91, Wentworth-street, Spitalfields. He was working for Mrs. Shuttleworth at the early part of this month, and left there last Monday. He knew the woman called Frances, and had identified her.
Do you remember when you last saw her alive? - At half-past one o'clock on Friday morning, the 13th.
Did she ask for anything to eat? - Yes; three-ha porth of mutton and bread. (A laugh.)
The Coroner - Three-ha porth of what? - Mutton and bread.
Mr. Mathews - She was served with it, was she? - Yes; and she paid with a penny and two halfpence, three half-pence for the mutton and a halfpenny for the bread.
The witness went on to say that the deceased left the shop at two o'clock, and went in the direction of Brick-lane. Witness had to take her by the arm and put her out.
At what time was that? - At half-past one she came in, and at two o'clock I turned her out.
What was your closing time? - Half-past one, the ordinary time, but we had a lot of customers and could not attend on them.
By Mr. Lawless - The deceased left alone. The customers in the shop were all women. The deceased carried the halfpence in her hand when she came in.
The Coroner - How was she as to drink? - Tipsy.
A Juror - Did she know what she was about? - Oh, yes; she was very "wide."
"Wide?" - Yes.
A voice - Wideawake - tricky.
The Coroner - Oh, yes.
Mr. Lawless - About the time. Did you set the clock? - Yes.
When did you last set the clock? - Last Tuesday; it had then lost a quarter of an hour.
Are you there now, then? - I am lodging there.
A Juror - If the clock was a quarter of an hour slow, it was two o'clock when she left? I went to a public house opposite on the Thursday night (the 12th) and it was right by that then.

EVIDENCE OF THE MAN CAMPBELL.

Duncan Campbell deposed: - I am a sailor, and am staying now at 55, Leman-street. On Friday, the 13th inst., I was staying at the Sailors' Home in Wells-street.
On the morning of that day, between 10:30 and 11, were you in the hall of the Home? - About a quarter past ten I came down from my bedroom to the hall of the Home, and stood by the fire.
Whilst you were standing there do you remember a man coming into the hall? - Just as I got to the fire he came in and sat on the seat by the fire.
Did he speak to you? - Yes. He said, "I'm nearly dead. I've been out all night, and I've got robbed."
Go on? - "And I'm dying for a drink."
Yes? - He produced a knife.
Mr. Mathews (producing a peculiar knife, with a long blade) - Is that the knife? - Yes; that is the knife.

DECLARES HE BOUGHT THE KNIFE.

What did he say? - He said, "Will you buy it?"
I pitied the poor fellow, as he was shaking so, and gave him a shilling - all he asked - and a piece of tobacco for it.
Where did he take the knife from? - From a pocket on his right hand side.
Mr. Mathews - Did you take the knife in your hands? - Yes; I opened the big blade and said, "This is not an English knife." The man said, "No, I bought it abroad." I asked him where, and he replied "In America."
Did you ask him what he wanted for it? - No, he said he would sell it for a shilling.
And you kept the knife? - Yes. I put it in my pocket.
Did he stay there? - No. He went out - straight to Leman-street. I saw him go out of the hall door. There are two doors, one leading to Dock-street, and the other to Leman-street.
When did he leave? - Immediately after. He was with me about five or six minutes. The conversation took place at about a quarter-past ten.
Just before dinner did you hear of this woman having been murdered? - It was about eleven o'clock.
Did you here where? - In the neighbourhood.
After hearing that what did you do? - I went into the lavatory of the Sailors' Home and looked at it.
Did you open it? - Yes, the big blade.
What did you notice upon it? - No blood nor nothing.
Did you feel the blade? - Yes.
What was it like? - It felt "clammy" - that was the feeling that came over me. I washed it in a basin about half full of clean water.
Then did what with the knife? - I wiped it with a dirty towel.
How long was the knife in the water? - About a minute. I rubbed it with my fingers.
Did you look at the water after you had taken the knife out? - I did.
Did you see anything about it? - It was slightly coloured - salmon.
Salmon colour - that is what you would describe it? - Yes, I then put the knife in my pocket, and went up to bed. I slept till half-past three.
You kept the knife until the next afternoon, I think? - Yes, and I was short of money then. When "my friend" went to the bank on Saturday afternoon he could not get any money, it was too late.
What bank? - The bank of the Sailors' Home.
What did you do then? - I went to Mr. Thomas Robinson, in Dock-street, and asked him to lend me something on it.

"THAT HAS CUT MANY A MODEL."

Did you ask him for a loan of sixpence? - He said he would buy it for sixpence, and sell it me back on the Monday or Monday week for ninepence. The man who sold me the knife said to me, "That has cut many a model" - ship's model he meant.
Mr. Mathews - We will go back to that. When the man sold the knife he said something? - Yes, referring to the knife, he said, "This has cut many a model" - ship's model.
Did he say, "ship's model"? - No, but that is what I thought he meant.
On the Sunday, the next day, were you in the Home with other sailors? - Yes. I told them about the knife. In consequence of what they said to me I went to the Leman-street Police-station at about half-past ten.
And you saw some police officers? - Yes, Police-sergeant Record and Detective Moore. I then gave a description of the man I had seen in the hall of the Sailors' Home. I remained there some time, and two sergeants went with me to Robinson's. Robinson immediately produced the knife.
The witness went on to say that afterwards he proceeded to the Leman-street Police-station, where he saw fifteen or sixteen men, mostly seamen.
And were you told to pick the man out? - Yes. I looked round. He was at the extreme corner. I walked up to him, lifted his cap, and saw a scar, and that it was Sadler.
The Coroner: He was the last man you looked out? - Yes.
Mr. Mathews: About the scar? Had you seen such a scar on the man you saw at the Home on Friday? - Yes, sir.
Had you any doubt that he was the man? - I had no doubt.

THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF CAMPBELL.

By Mr. Lawless - It was dark in the hall where I saw this man first at the Sailors' Home.
Had he a hat or a cap on? - A cap.
Did he keep his cap on? - Yes.
Further questioned by Mr. Lawless, the witness said that when he went to the police he told them that the man had a scar on his head.
How were the men standing in the room at the police station in Leman-street? Were they opposite you? - No, they were facing me - on the starboard end.
Was the light bad? - My sight is not very good.
Was there anyone else in the circle dressed in the same way? - I don't know.
Was there anyone with a peak cap? - Yes, plenty.
With a glazed peak? - This man had not a glazed peak; it was a cloth peak.
In answer to other questions, the witness said that until he lifted the man's cap he had doubts as to whether he was the man. The man did not lift his cap in the Sailors' Home, but witness saw the scar under the cap. He had not been told there was a scar before he went to the police-station.
You say that in the evening a curious feeling came over you, and you then washed the knife? - Yes.
Was the knife a little dirty? - I did not see any dirt on it.
You did not think at the time the colour of the water was remarkable? - Well, no.
Did you think it was like yellowish mud? - Well, yes, of reddish tinge.
Reddish tinge. Somebody must be colour blind.
(Pointing to a juryman's red tie) - Was it the colour of that? - Oh, no.
Did it excite your suspicions? - I did not think anything of it then.
Although you knew a murder had been committed? - Yes.
By the Jury - I sold the knife after I heard of the murder.
By the Coroner - It did not excite my suspicions, or I should not have sold the knife. I sold it to raise money.

MAN WHO BOUGHT THE KNIFE FROM CAMPBELL.

Thomas Robinson, a marine store dealer, of Dock-street, Whitechapel, deposed to purchasing the knife from the last witness on the 14th inst. The knife "looked like a Jack the Ripper knife."
The Coroner - Then you have seen Jack the Ripper's knife.
The witness went on to say that he sharpened the knife, and used it to cut his Sunday's dinner.
By Mr. Lawless: The knife was very blunt.

BLOOD ON THE ADVANCE-NOTE.

Edward Gerard Delaforce, the deputy-superintendent at the shipping-office, Tower-hill, said that on Friday morning Sadler came at about half-past ten, and presented an account. There was on the account, "T. Sadler, ship Fez." It was a wages-note for the payment of 4 pounds 15s 1d.
Did you notice the condition of the paper? - There was some blood on it - at the back of it.
Did you ask him about it? - Yes, He told me he had been robbed and knocked about by some old hags. He said he had lost a watch valued at 2 pounds 10s.
Anything more? - That's all he said.
Was the man paid? - Yes.

SADLER AT THE POLICE-STATION.

Chief-inspector Donald Swanson, of Scotland-yard, stated that on the afternoon of Saturday, the 14th inst., he was at Leman-street Police-station, at noon, when a man named Sadler was brought in by Police-sergeant Don.
Did you speak to the prisoner? - Yes. One of the officers said, "This is the man Sadler, who was with the woman at the lodging-house." I asked him to be seated.
What did he say? - "Am I arrested for it?"
For "it"? - Yes.
What did you say? - No, certainly not, but it is necessary to take a statement from you to help us to throw some light on the matter. He said, "Very well." I took his statement down in writing as well as I was able.
Where was it taken? - In a room at Leman-street Station.
Do you here produce the statement as he made it to you? - Yes.
Did you read it over to him? - Yes, I read it over, believing he had finished; but he desired a correction, saying that the lodging-house he had described as in Dorset-street was, in fact, in White's-row. I made that correction by way of an addition to his statement.
Did you read it more than once to him? - Yes, the portion I had to make the correction in I had read over to him, and then having done that, I read over the whole statement again.
Did you say anything as to inaccuracies? - Yes. I begged him to stop me, in reading it over, if there was anything incorrect or that required an explanation.
Did he say anything? - Yes, after the statement had been read a second time he returned - from going downstairs to another room - and said, "they had had some food at Shuttleworth's." I told him that that was already in the statement.
Did he make any other remark? - Yes, when the statement was read over he said, "That is correct." I asked him to wait until some inquiry was made, and he made no objection to that. When he was first brought in he seemed as if recovering from the effects of drink.

PRISONER'S STATEMENT.

Chief-Inspector Swanson went on to say that he had a copy of the original statement (produced). The statemetn was to the effect that Sadler had known Frances Coles eighteen months ago. He first met her in the Whitechapel-road, and went with her to a lodging-house in Thrawl-street. He then took a ship, the name of which he did not remember; and did not see her again until he saw her in the bar of the Princess Alice, near the Victoria Home, on the 11th inst. They left the Princess Alice, and went to several public-houses, among which was on the corner of Dorset-street, where another woman named Annie Lawrence joined them. Frances (said Sadler) would not let him treat that woman, and he then went to the lodging-house in White's-row, where, on the 11th, he and the deceased had a bed. The statement next went on to detail the various visits on the 12th inst. of the deceased and the accused man to the Bell, Middlesex-street, and other places, amongst them the bonnet-shop, where he gave Frances 2s. 6d. to pay for the hat. After leaving the Marlborough Head Tavern, Sadler said he arranged to meet the deceased at another public-house, but he had forgotten the name. He had an appointment to see a man named Nichols in Spital street on the evening of the 12th. When they went down Thrawl-street a woman with a red shawl struck him (Sadler) on the head, and he fell down, and when down was kicked by some men. He was then penniless, and had a row with Frances, for he thought she might have helped him when he was lying down, and was being kicked. He left her, he said, at the corner of Thrawl-street, and proceeded to the London Docks and applied for admission, but was refused. He could not remember what hour that was as he was dazed with drink. Sadler then detailed in his statement the manner in which he was assaulted at the dock gates, and referred to his visit to the London Hospital and the other incidents already mentioned in the evidence. After giving a list of his discharges, Sadler concluded: - "The last I had seen of the woman Frances was when I left her in the lodging-house when I was turned out. The clothes that I am now wearing are the only clothes I have. They are the clothes I was discharged in, and I have worn them ever since. My wife resides in the country, but I would prefer not to mention it. The lodging-house I refer to is in White's-row, not Dorset-street."
Detective-sergeant Don and Detective Ward then gave evidence as to the arrest of the accused.

Source: The Echo, Monday February 23, 1891, Page 3

The inquest on the body of Frances Coles, who was found dead in Whitechapel on the 13th ult., was resumed before Mr. Wynne E. Baxter at the Working Lads' Institute on Thursday, and the jury returned a verdict of wilful murder against some person or persons unknown. On Monday the Treasury formally intimated that they would offer no further evidence before the magistrate against the sailor, Sadler, who has been in custody on suspicion of being the murderer, and he was discharged yesterday.

Source: The Guardian, March 4, 1891, Page 351

STILL A MYSTERY.

SADLER SET FREE.

As was generally expected, the Treasury on Tuesday abandoned the prosecution of Sadler on the charge of murdering Frances Coles at Swallow-gardens. A huge crowd awaited his arrival outside Thames Police-court, and a cheer was raised as he drove away in a four-wheeler. Of course, Sadler has been "interviewed." He declares Duncan Campbell to be mistaken about the knife, and says these horrible crimes, like the Bible, baffle the keenest study.

Source: The Central Times, Saturday March 7, 1891

AWFUL MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.
WOMAN FOUND WITH HER THROAT CUT.

ARREST OF A SEAMAN.
HIS ANTECEDENTS.

OPENING OF THE INQUEST.

Another of the series of terrible crimes which have been connected with East London since 1888 was committed at an early hour on Friday morning. Very shortly after two Constable Thompson, 240 H, while passing through an archway of the Great Eastern railway, which leads from Swallow-gardens to Orman-street, observed a woman lying on her back in the centre of the thoroughfare. He had passed the spot 15 minutes previously, and there was no one there. On turning his lamp on the prostrate figure, he was horrified to find that the woman lay in a pool of blood, which was flowing from a terrible wound in the throat, exceeding literally from ear to ear. He at once blew his whistle for assistance, and was joined within a few minutes by Constable 327 H, whose beat is adjoining. The woman gave no signs of life, but the body was quite warm, and the policeman felt that the pulses were beating faintly. Further assistance was soon brought to the spot by whistling, and a man was despatched to the residence of Dr. Phillips, the surgeon to the division, who resides near at hand. In the meantime, acting in accordance with instructions issued during the panic at the East-end nearly two years ago, the police allowed the body to remain in the position in which it was discovered, and took careful note of the surroundings, so as to be in possession of any available clue. The woman appeared to be from 25 to 27 years of age, and lay in the roadway, her feet crossed one over the other, and towards the footpath. She was bareheaded, and while one arm was stretched by her side, the other was bent towards the breast. By her side lay a black crepe hat, and in the pocket of her dress were several pieces of black lace, or crepe, and a vulcanite earring. Strange to say, a second black crepe hat lay partly hidden in the folds of her dress. An old striped stocking and a comb were also found in her pocket.
By this time Dr. Phillips had reached the scene, and pronounced that the woman, although not quite dead, was expiring fast. As a matter of fact, she died before preparations could be made to move her on a stretcher, which had been brought from the Leman-street police-station. When the medical man pronounced life to be extinct the body was conveyed to the Whitechapel mortuary.
The intelligence of the murder was telegraphed to the adjacent police-station as soon as the body was found, and within a comparatively short time Superintendent Arnold, Inspector Reid, and a number of detectives and police were on the scene investigating the crime.
Shortly before five o'clock, Chief-inspector Swanson, of Scotland-yard, arrived, and with other inspectors made a searching examination of the spot where the body was found and the ground adjoining, as well as the walls of the railway arch and the wooden hoarding. In previous crimes of this nature, writings have been found on walls in the vicinity, but in the present case no marks of any kind were observed. By the direction of Mr. Swanson the pool of blood in the roadway was washed away after a portion had been collected and preserved, probably for analysis. The archway was then open for traffic.

OFFICIAL DESCRIPTION.

The body was first discovered at a quarter past two o'clock. At three a.m. the code message: "Another murder in Whitechapel," was flashed all over London, putting each division on the alert. Five minutes later the intelligence was telegraphed: "Woman found in Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel, with her throat cut. The supposed work of Jack the Ripper." At half-past three o'clock a rough description was circulated: "Found dead with her throat cut, a woman, aged 25; height about five feet; hair and eyes light brown; left ear torn with earring; enlargement of third knuckle of right hand; black jet earring, black clothes, and crepe hat; light button boots, striped stockings." Three hours later, at half-past six a.m., the following official amended description was issued: -

"A woman aged about 25; length, 5ft.; hair and eyes, brown; complexion, pale; dressed in black skirt and satin bodice, brown petticoat, grey stays, black diagonal jacket trimmed with braid, white chemise and drawers, striped stockings, buttoned boots. She wore a black ribbon round her neck. In her left ear was a black vulcanite earring, the fellow to which was in her pocket. She wore a black crepe hat, and carried another similar hat in the folds of her dress. In the pocket of her dress were found three pieces of black crepe, an old striped stocking, and a comb." The lobe of the left ear has been torn as if by an earring, but not recently. All the clothing is old and dirty."

SCENE OF THE CRIME.

Swallow-gardens and Orman-street are two thoroughfares - narrow, badly-lighted and, at that early hour of the morning, rarely traversed. The buildings are partly dwelling-houses, partly warehouses and store-rooms. The arch, which was the actual theatre of the crime, is about 50 yards in length, and, while fairly lighted at each end by lamps, the centre remains in deep shade. It was in the centre, where the shadow lies deepest, that the deed was committed. It may be mentioned that one side of the archway is blocked up by a hoarding, the space enclosed being used as a builder's store. The place is notorious as a resort of women of the "unfortunate" class - in fact, two women were arrested for loitering at this spot earlier in the night by one of the constables who assisted to remove the body.
In Royal Mint-street, within full view of the entrance to the archway, is the Royal Mint refinery, of which Mr. Alfred de Rothschild is the principal. Here a plain-clothes officer is kept on watch all night. He was there at his post on Friday morning, but he and the others saw nothing at all. The building opposite to the Chamber-street entrance is a Catholic schoolroom, and this place, where no one resides, is the only building which commands a view of the actual scene of the murder. The risks of detection must have been enormously great, for the archway is largely used by railway employees, carters, and others engaged at the Midland and Great Eastern Goods depots on their way to work. It forms, indeed, a sort of back entrance to the depot. All night long men are coming and going, and within a few minutes of the discovery two of the railway men did pass through. No one was there then. When the body had been removed and the blood washed away people were again permitted to pass through the gardens, all there was for them to see being a rough mark of a cross cut by a policeman on the wooden hoarding, against which the deed was done.

A DETECTIVE'S STATEMENT.

"This is the narrowest escape Jack-the-Ripper has ever had," said one of the local detectives to a reporter on Friday. "He was interrupted right in the middle of his work, and the constable who found the dying woman - he is a young fellow who has only been in the force six weeks - heard his footsteps as he entered the arch in the middle of which he found the body. But, with his devilish cunning, as usual, the murderer had chosen a place open at each end, so that from whichever end he heard anyone approaching he could escape out in the opposite direction. She is a much younger woman, this time between 25 and 30 - a short, more decent sort of body than most of the other victims. Oh, yes, there is no doubt that she is of the unfortunate class. I have seen her about myself. The murder is not such a professional sort of crime as usual, if - you understand what I mean. The cut is a jagged, clumsy one. It looks as if he had several attempts at it before inflicting the particular injury which was fatal. It could not have been so sharp a weapon as usual, either. In fact, it looks to me like the cut of a decidedly blunt knife. Whether that florin which was found wrapped up in a piece of paper has anything to do with the crime or not can't be decided yet, but certainly this is not a district where money can be found lying about without giving cause for conjecture of one sort or another. No, the precautions taken after the other murders by the police have not been relaxed in the slightest degree, and Whitechapel is the best district in London in respect of the way in which it is covered by the police. The injury seems to have been done from behind as in the former cases."
According to one reporter a most remarkable fact is that the throat has been cut by a left-handed person. It will be remembered that the appearance of the wounds on the previous victims went to prove they were likewise inflicted by a left-handed individual.
Another correspondent says: - Two important details of this crime seem rather to disconnect it with the former series. The first is that the victim is a young, and not bad-looking, woman, of quite different appearance from the subjects of the "Ripper's" former attentions. The second is the method of the murder. The gashes in the throat of the unfortunate woman are rough and hacked. "Jack" always used to do this part of the business with one clean, sweeping cut. This time the wound looks as though the murderer had hurriedly made several attempts or had used a jagged-edged knife. But in all the surroundings of the crime, its cunning choice of opportune moment, and, in the mysterious vanishing of the assailant, the whole story is repeated.

THE SUPPOSED MURDERER SEEN.

William Friday, known by the nickname of "Jumbo," one of the carmen leaving the yard of the Great Northern Railway company about two o'clock on Friday morning, stated to the police that as he was passing near Swallow-gardens, he saw a woman, answering to the description of the deceased, talking to a man attired in a long coat.
The next carman to pass that way was Frederick Clarke, who left with a load of fish for Billingsgate, and on going under the arches of Swallow-gardens he saw Police-constable Thompson, who had just arrived. That was a quarter-past two o'clock. Clarke asked the officer whether he had got a drunken woman, and when he replied that she was dead, the carman went for help.
The man and woman at the Great Northern station in Royal Mint-street, it transpired later, were seen by four other men besides William Friday. It seems that it was in Blind-alley, close to the station, that the pair were seen only some 15 or 20 yards from the spot where the murder was committed. The five men all passed the end of the alley together, and as they passed, some of them made jocular remarks such as, "There's two over there," and "They're very loving, ain't they." The woman wore, as has been already stated, a black crepe hat, and appeared to be a little over five feet in height. She was standing with her back against the end of the alley, while the man was standing with his face towards her. Under these circumstances the appearance of the man could not be made out very plainly, but all the carmen agree that he was a little over five feet six inches in height, wore what seemed to be a dark brown overcoat and a round black felt hat. Some ten minutes later some of the carmen emerged from the station yard with their wagons, and were about to go through the archway when they were stopped by the policeman shouting that there was a body of a woman lying in darkness under the archway. Then the sight met their gaze of a body lying length-ways on its side in the middle of the narrow roadway, running with and surrounded with blood. On the first doctor arriving the policeman was asked, "Have you moved the head?" and he replied "Yes, I moved it," after which the doctor began to probe the wound in the throat with his fingers. The carmen, hardly as they are, were sickened by the sight. "I don't want," said one of them on Friday afternoon to a reporter, "to see the like again, I tell you."

CURIOUS SUPERSTITION.

A number of women went to the mortuary on hearing of the crime to endeavour to identify the body. It was not without a great mental struggle, says one authority, that they braced themselves up for the ordeal, so great was their horror of these crimes, which they feel may any night have themselves for victims. Indeed, a reporter saw one woman persuaded not to go to the death chamber. She had expressed the belief that she knew the victim - for an acquaintance of hers who was in mourning had not been seen by her since the previous night - but with tears in her eyes another middle-aged woman influenced her not to go. "You know that them as goes to see his bodies are always his next victims," she said; and this superstition effectually decided the first woman to forego her visit to the mortuary.

THE VICTIM'S IDENTITY.

During Friday morning several women professed to identify the deceased as a character known as "Carrotty Annie." One, a young girl, said she knew her as having frequently slept at the Salvation Army shelter in Whitechapel-road.
A Midland railway man, with whom a representative had an interview, declared the victim was not, as was first supposed, "Carrotty Annie," but a married woman of the name of Hawkins, living in Cadiz-street, Whitechapel-road. Hawkins had recently been an "unfortunate" well known in the vicinity of Tower-hill.
About two on Friday afternoon, however, a poorly-dressed woman went to Leman-street station, and stated that a married woman who lived with her, known as Frances, at Thrawl-street, Spitalfields, had not returned since Thursday evening. On being questioned she gave a minute description corresponding exactly with that of the murdered woman, stating, among other details, that one of the ears was torn as if by an earring which at some time or other had been pulled out violently. The inspector sent a constable with the woman to the mortuary, and there she identified the body as that of her lodger. She stated that she was quiet and inobtrusive in habits, and was separated from her husband. She left home on Thursday about 8 p.m. to go on some errands, and did not return.
After the opening of the inquest, when

[img][/img]

the coroner preferred to call the deceased a "woman unknown," the body was identified by her father and sister, and then it came out that her name was Frances Coles, not Colman. Mr. Coles has been for some seven or eight years an inmate of Bermondsey workhouse. He is a man of advanced age and a cripple. On being taken to the mortuary he at once recognised the body as that of his daughter. He was quite overcome by the sight. She was, he said, one of the best of his children, and had held one situation as a packer in a warehouse nine years. Her brother dropped down dead two years ago, and her mother had been dead a few years. Mr. Coles, who is a shoemaker by trade, has twice carried on business on his own account, but was unfortunate.
A woman named Ellen Callaron has come forward to state that she was in the company of the deceased as late as two o'clock on Friday morning, and to a representative of the Press association she said: - On Thursday night we were walking up Commercial-street about half-past 12, having come out of the White Hart, George-yard, when we met a man dressed in a sailor suit, with pea-jacket and cheesecutter hat. He accosted me and offered me half-a-crown. I refused, not liking his looks. He caught hold of me, tore my jacket, and struck me in the face, giving me a black eye. He made the same offer to Frances, and I left, after advising her not to go with him. I saw them walk down Commercial-street in the direction of Leman-street. The next thing I heard was this morning, at five o'clock, when someone told me a woman had been murdered near Leman-street. I said at once, "I believe that's Frances." After that I went to the police, and told them the same as I am telling you now. They took me to the mortuary, and I identified her at once as Frances.
The identity was so vague in the evening that the coroner's officer decided to describe the woman as "unknown."

A DEPUTY'S STATEMENT.

Mrs. Sarah Fleming, who also attended at Lloyd's office on Saturday, said: I am the deputy lodging-house keeper, and have known Frances for a long time. I don't know for certain her surname. Some one came to the house on Friday and said it was Coleman, and her father lived at Bermondsey, but on inquiry being made there by some persons, Mr. Coleman said he never had a daughter. She has been a casual lodger for some time. She is rather dark, very fair skin, and wore a black satin body, black crepe hat, and was rather a slender person. She wore a black dress, which was rather old; and she was a very quiet kind of woman, though she would take a little beer sometimes. On Thursday evening she was in and out drinking, and about half-past 11 o'clock I noticed she was a little intoxicated. Shortly before 12 a dark, stout man came in, who had the appearance of a sailor, and he asked me whether there was a young woman in the kitchen named Frances. I said, "I don't think she is." He said, "Can I go in and see if she is there?" I said "No." I went for something and I afterwards found he had passed through of his own accord. A little after 12 I noticed Frances go out; she was then getting round from the drink; and I did not see her again alive. About three o'clock in the morning the same man came back, and he then asked whether Frances was in again. I said, "I have not seen her since she went out, a little after 12." He said, "Well, I have no money, and all my tackle and half my chain is gone; for I have been robbed. Can I go in the kitchen?" I said, "No; we don't allow any strangers here, and no one is allowed to stop in the kitchen. There would be a 5 pound penalty against us for everyone that did." He said, "Look at me; I am all over blood. Look at my head!" which I noticed was cut over the eyebrow. I then noticed that the palms of his hands were very wet with blood. I asked him how he got into that state, and he said, "I have been knocked down and kicked in the Highway." I then said, "Well, I can't help it, you must go out of here." He then said, "Well, you are a very hard-hearted woman." I said, "I can't help that; I must do my duty, and you must go out." He did not seem inclined to go out, so I called the watchman to put him out. The man was very reluctant to go, and hung about the folding doors. Then as he would not go the watchman put him out. Before going away he showed us a draft on the ship for about 4 pounds, which he said he could get cashed on Saturday morning, and he would leave that with us as security if we would allow him to stay the night. We refused, and he eventually went away. I have heard it stated that the man arrested today had nearly 4 pounds upon him.

Florence Monk, a young woman residing at the same address, said in Lloyd's office on Saturday: -
I have known Frances for some time by sight, and as coming to the house, but never made her acquaintance till last week. On Thursday afternoon one of the women - Mrs. King - fell down the stairs, and thought she would have to go to the London hospital again. Frances then said to her, "Why, I was there once for five weeks with my left ear, when I had a piece pulled out." The woman at the mortuary has a piece out of her left ear. Frances then washed herself and went out, and she was not seen again till about half-past 11 at night, when she came in much intoxicated. She sat resting her head on the kitchen table, and while I was standing in front of the fire a man came in who looked like a sea-faring man. He asked for Frances, and then saw her sitting with her head on the table. He said something else quietly to her which I could not hear, and she nodded her head, and then he walked out. She then got up, and three or four minutes after that she followed out, and I did not see her again alive.

THE DOORKEEPER'S STORY.

From the doorkeeper of the lodging-house a Lloyd's reporter on Saturday learnt "Frances has lived here three or four weeks on and off - when she had any money. She was a quiet, inoffensive sort of woman - of course she was "an unfortunate," but for her class she was tolerably decent. She very rarely got drunk, very rarely went into the kitchen, and in

[img][/img]

the morning went off quietly. She and the man now detained slept here on Wednesday night, and went off together about 11 o'clock on Thursday morning. She came back about 10:30, very drunk, with a new black hat on. The old one she took from under her dress, and threw it upon the fire. A woman plucked it off and stamped upon it, to extinguish the fire, and I then put it upon a rail. Soon after 11 the man in question came in. He also was intoxicated, and evidently in a row had been thrown down, for he had the "gravel rash," and his face was covered over with blood and dirt. He said he had been in a row in Thrawl-street, and had lost all his money - 3s. 6d. I took him into the back yard to wash himself. He was very noisy and pulled out his papers, showing his discharge and a sailor's note for (I think) 1 pound 12s. 6d., and 1s. 3d. for stores, which he wanted some one to lend him 2s. on promising to pay 4s. the next day. He said he had given Frances 1s. to pay for the lodging, but she must have spent it on drink after she left him in the row. She was too far gone to recognise him when he tried to rouse her, but she said she had no money. He got very argumentative, and I had to get him out about midnight. Some time after I tried to rouse Frances, and to get her to freshen herself up with a wash, but it was no good. I think a woman wiped her face over with a wet cloth. Between half-past one and a quarter to two she got up, and without saying a word to anybody walked out of the place. I did not see her take her hat, but afterwards I noticed it was gone from the rail.
Shortly after three o'clock the man again presented himself at the door. This time blood was streaming from a wound in his head. He said he had been down in the Highway, and they had been knocking him about. He was now very drunk, and wanted the deputy to let him go into the kitchen to sit down. She refused to allow him to pass the door, and he said she was a very cruel woman. I advised him to go at once to the London hospital, and about half-past three he went off in that direction.

JUMBO'S EVIDENCE.

In consequence of the importance which the detectives attached to the evidence of the young man Friday, known as Jumbo, we on Saturday morning secured his attendance at Lloyd's office, when he made the following statement: -

I have been engaged at the G.N. Railway Goods depot about 11 years. They used to call me "Fourfoot," and another boy there they called "Sixfoot," but when we got bigger they called me Jumbo, and it has stuck to me ever since; in fact, I am better known by that name than I am by my right name, William Friday. My work calls me out early in the morning. We have to meet the fish trains, and the first one that gets there gets the best job. I generally get to the yard early, but that night I had been to the Foresters' music-hall, so I did not go home to bed. I went round to the goods yard, and I went through the archway home (83, Chamber-street), and I called up my two pals, John and Joe Knapton. It was about half-past 12 then. We all walked along to the station, and finding the gates were not open we thought we'd have a little walk, so we went down the Minories, along Aldgate, and into the Whitechapel-road. When we got to the corner of Great Garden-street we found there was a row going on between a gentleman and a chap, and the gentleman wanted to lock the man up. I went across the road and stopped to listen, but my pals went back, and I missed them, so I walked back to the station by myself. I went back through Union-street, across Commercial-road, into Backchurch-lane, along Cable street, and down Royal Mint-street. As I was passing the Seven Stars public-house, in Royal Mint-street (some people call it Rosemary-lane), I noticed a man and a young woman standing near a street-door just a little way off the public-house. It must have been just about a quarter to two o'clock. I did not take much notice, because a lot of young chaps and girls stand there, and I thought it was a young fellow bidding his young woman "Good-bye." I was on the opposite side of the way to them, and I went straight on up Mint-street into the yard, and looked on. After this I walked on the same side of the Seven Stars, and the same side as they were. They were still standing there; in fact, just the same - they hadn't shifted a bit. When I got close up to them I caught sight of her face, and I thought I knew her. She was dressed in black; the man's back was to me, and they were talking, but, of course, I could not hear what they said. As I passed the woman bent her head down. It was then between ten minutes and five minutes to two, or it might have been a little more. I only saw the man's back. He was taller than the girl, and looked down a little at her. He wasn't standing right in front of her; he was just a little on the left side of her. When she bent her head I saw she had a black crepe hat on, and some black beads in front of it; they were sticking out in front. She was dressed in black. I then looked at the man. He was taller than me, and had a brown overcoat on, with a velvet collar. He had a muffler or scarf round his neck. I can't say if it was a silk or a woollen one. I know it was a plaid or a check. His hat was at the back of his head, but not right at the back, and what made me notice him more was his ears - they came out, like. I should know him if I saw his back and he had the same coat on. I spotted his ears in a moment, and what made me notice them more was the brim of his hat, which was broader than mine. He was dark, and I just caught sight as I passed of enough of the side of his face to see he did not have a beard. I went on to the stable and harnessed my horses; but when I came by then they were gone. It must have been about five minutes past two - it could not have been more. I took the horses into the yard, and stood talking for some time - I should think a good 20 minutes to half an hour - perhaps more; and as I went to the gate I saw a policeman run. My pal Joe came up then, and said to me, "Jumbo, have you seen the woman what's under the arch with her throat cut?" I said, "No," and asked him what sort of woman she was. He said, "A young woman, not an old 'un." So I said then "Was she dressed in black?" When he said, "Yes." I said, "Well, I'll bet a wager it's the young woman I saw speaking to a man when I went along to get my horses." So I ran up to the archway, but a policeman stopped me and told me I couldn't have a look at her. I told him I thought I knew her, and so he says, "Well, go to the mortuary." By this time there was a lot of gentlemen up the archway, doctors and policemen and detectives. While I stood there several came up in cabs. I heard the inspector say she had a black hat with crepe on it, and I said to him: "Well, if that's so I can bet any money it's the one I saw near the pub, talking to a man." Then the inspector asked me what she was like, and I told him; and then he put a lot of questions to me about the man, and after I had told him, he said, "Jumbo, it's a pity you didn't have a better look at him," and I said, "Yes, I wish I had." I went back to the yard and done two loads of fish to Billingsgate, and then I went home, and feeling a bit tired I fell asleep. Joe comes up to me and says, "Wake up, here's a policeman wants you"; and then I was taken to Leman-street, and I told them just what I have told you. They asked me how the girl was dressed, and I told them she was in deep black, and had a light black jacket on. They asked me how tall the man was, and I said about three inches taller than I am, so they put me in the dock and measured me against the rule on the wall; they said I was 5ft. 5in., and then I said the man must have been 5ft. 8in., or at any rate half a head taller than I am. I told them I could recognise the hat she had on, so the inspector says: "There you are, then, there's two hats over there; which one did she have on?" I picked it out. Then the inspector picked the other one up, and said: "Didn't she have this one on?" and I said, "No," and he said, "Yes, that's quite right; that's the hat she had on." I think it was someone from Scotland-yard who said to me, "It's a pity you did not have a better look at him, you would not have had to have done any work for a little while." I was then taken to the mortuary, and shown the body. It was a sight, and I don't want to see it any more; the great big gash in her throat makes you feel awful. Well, I never eat any dinner or tea. Yes, it was the same woman I saw speaking to the man; if I hadn't seen her face I could have told her by her clothes. She was lying on a table, and while I was there one of the big people from Scotland-yard lifted her head up with a stick, and then parted the hair away from the back of her head, and he said, "They can say what they like - that's a clean cut, and must have been done with the same knife. It was never done with the fall." Then he said to someone, "If she fell on the back of her head how is it the side of her face is all bruises?" And then they both looked at the cut and said it must have been done with the knife. I was very glad to get out of the place - I can tell you it looks a bit horrible. I don't think her face has changed much; she ain't good-looking, but the cut made her look horrible. The cut starts just under her left ear and goes right round her neck. How far is it from where I saw them standing to the archway where she was found? Why, not more than 40 yards, and, what's more, I know very well that they did not go into the archway when I passed with my horses, because one of our chaps came through the arch about 10 minutes past two with two horses, and if she had been there he would have seen her. It is impossible for two persons to stand against the fence while two horses and a man pass.

OPENING OF THE INQUEST.

Mr. Wynne Baxter on Saturday opened an inquiry at the Working Lads' institute, respecting the death of Frances Coles, aged 26 years, who was found, with her throat cut from ear to ear, in an archway leading from Royal Mint-street, to Chamber-street, Whitechapel, early on Friday morning. Superintendent Arnold, of the H division, watched the case on behalf of the police authorities.
Some little difficulty arose in forming a jury, owing to a few substitutes attending. These the coroner rejected, including Mr. Backert, the chairman of the Whitechapel Vigilance committee. Mr. Backert asked why he was refused, and the coroner said, "Because I decline to allow you to serve."
Mr. Backert: You know I will inquire into the case; that's why you refuse me. I am a ratepayer and pay my rates.
The Coroner: Why should you be so anxious to serve? I decline to accept you. After the jury had viewed the body, which lay in a shell in the so-called mortuary in the parish dust-yard, they returned, and when the inquiry was about to commence Mr. Backert again inquired on what grounds the coroner refused his services.
The Coroner: You be quiet, sir; if you are not I shall have you ejected.
A Juryman: That settles his little game.
Mr. Baxter has received the following letter addressed to the Coroner, Working Lads' institute, Whitechapel-road: -

"Honoured Sir, - The inclosed is Mr. Backert's letter to the Daily Chronicle. You can see what he says, and what he intends to do. He is to the front again in this case. May I suggest that he be a little more truthful than he was in the last "Ripper" scare, I being the woman he so cruelly belied, and set the whole neighbourhood in alarm. - Signed, THE WOMAN HE SO CRUELLY BELIED." There, however, was no inclosure.

Police-constable Ernest Thompson, 240 H, was the first witness called, and he deposed that he went on duty at 10 o'clock on Thursday night, and had to patrol Chamber and Preston streets. He went round, coming through Mansell-street into Leman-street, and then down Chamber-street. There were three arches between the streets. He found the body about two a.m. as he was passing through the arch down Chamber-street. He had since been informed that the name of the place was Swallow-gardens. The roadway under the arch had been boarded up from the centre of the arch to the ground. What remains is a roadway, which only allows of one cart passing at a time, and a narrow pavement. There was no light under the arch, but there was one at the end. The arch was about 40 yards long. The nearest lamp was at the corner of Chamber-street, and threw a light under the arch. He could see right through the arch from end to end. It was easier to see through at night time, on account of the light afforded by the lamp. The archway was used a great deal, the Great Northern Railway company having stables near the spot. When he found the body of the woman he came up Chamber-street, and noticed the clock on the Tower which gave the time as 2:15 a.m. He walked quietly into the arch to see that all was right. He met no one from Leman-street to the arch, but as soon as he turned into the arch he noticed a woman lying there in the roadway. He turned his lamp on and then saw blood. He blew his whistle and two constables - 161 and 275 H - arrived. When he first saw the woman she opened and shut one eye. The two constables arrived from Royal Mint-street, the opposite direction to that he entered by. He heard footsteps when he was going towards Mansell-street, but did not see anybody. The person appeared to be walking. He was unable to say whether the sound proceeded from the archway or not. When the other constables arrived a doctor was sent for, and Dr. Oxley, from 1, Dock-street, soon arrived. The railway men used the arch all the night through. Just before two o'clock he went through the arch and back again round his beat. He did not then see anybody. The nearest men at work at the time were the men in the stables.
The Jury: How long would it take you to do your beat?
Witness: About 15 or 20 minutes. None of the railway men arrived until after the constables arrived.
Police-constable Frederick Hyde, 161 H, deposed that his beat was on Royal Mint-street, Cartwright-street and Trinity-square. He saw nothing unusual until the whistle was blown. He was then in Royal Mint-street, about 250 yards away from the arch. He found Police-constable 240 H standing by the body of a woman. He turned his lamp on and then saw that her throat was cut. Witness ran for Dr. Oxley, who returned with him. Witness then searched the vicinity, but could find no trace of the person who committed the deed. He had not seen a man and woman together half an hour before. The archway was thoroughly searched.
By the Jury: Dr. Oxley arrived in about 10 minutes from the time he was called. Witness did not think he would be able to see a person lying in the middle of the arch from the Royal Mint-street end. He heard no cries for assistance during the previous half-hour. The body was lying half on its left side, with the feet to Royal Mint-street, and the head towards Chamber-street. As soon as he saw the gash in the woman's throat he ran for the doctor. The body was not disturbed till the doctor arrived.
Police-constable George Elliott, 275 H, stated that he was on duty in plain clothes on Thursday evening and Friday morning. He went on duty at 10 p.m. He was in front of Baron Rothschild's refinery about 2:15 a.m., when he heard the whistle blown. He went in the direction of the sound, and when he got to the entrance of Swallow-gardens he saw the constable's lamp, and heard the whistle again. After witness had seen the body he had a look round, and then ran to Leman-street police-station. There are plenty of men and women about there until half-past 12, but he saw nobody who attracted his attention. He did not recollect seeing anybody after 12:30. If there had been a cry for help from the arch he must have heard it.
By the Jury: He was about 250 yards off when the whistle was blown. He was patrolling the streets in ordinary boots. Witness did not hear till the morning that the other constables had heard footsteps.
The coroner said that was all the evidence he proposed taking then, and the inquiry was adjourned. A juryman wished to know whether the evidence of identification was going to be taken, and the coroner replied that he thought it best to postpone that, as he had so much trouble on the last occasion, owing to the woman being mistaken for someone else.

ARRESTS ON SUSPICION.

About nine o'clock on Friday morning a short dark man, aged about 40, was arrested on suspicion and taken to Leman-street police-station. Although his dress was ragged, his appearance was superior to that of a labourer, inasmuch as his features have a refined, agreeable, and almost gentlemanly appearance; he has closely cropped black hair and a long dark moustache. When placed in the dock at the police-station he was ordered to divest himself of his clothes, and these were carefully inspected by Inspector Swanson and others. No blood, however, was found on them, but the prisoner was detained for inquiries. At a later period of the day the charge was withdrawn against the man, but he was detained as a suspected person.
Other arrests were made during Friday, but the men, who were for the most part of the tramp class, were after a short confinement released.

ARREST OF SADLER.

About noon, on Saturday Serjeants Don and Gill arrested, at the Phoenix public-house, Upper East Smithfield, James Thomas Sadler, fireman on the Fez steamship, then lying in the St. Katharine's dock, on suspicion of the murder. He was conveyed to Leman-street police-station, and there identified as having been with the girl. This, indeed, he admits, and also that he bought her the new hat. He had a quarrel with her during the evening because he had been knocked about by some fellows, as he thought through her. His face was bruised and scratched.

A KNIFE DISCOVERED.

After much hesitation the police authorities on Sunday reversed their previous decision, which had only awaited the confirmation of Mr. MacNaghten, of New Scotland-yard, by formally charging Sadler with the murder of Frances Coles. Sadler was not actually accused of the crime until nearly midnight on Sunday, and the circumstance which finally determined his arrest was the discovery of a knife, which is alleged to have been traced to his possession. The value of publicity in the tracking of crime was again exemplified, for it was the reports in the papers which led Duncan Campbell, an inmate of the Sailors' home, to come forward and say that on Friday he was standing in the hall when the accused came in to get a rest, remarking that he had been out all night - that he had been sick, and wanted a drink. He offered a knife for sale, and said it was one which he had got in America. Campbell bought the knife of him for a shilling, and as it was "clammy" he washed it in water, which became discoloured. Campbell had his suspicions aroused by what he read, and communicated with the police. In the meantime he had sold the knife for six-pence to a marine store dealer, Mr. Robinson, in Dock-street, who, it appears, used it to cut up his Sunday dinner. Mr. Robinson even now attaches no importance to the knife. It is described as one of a kind not usually carried by sailors. It has a brass haft, with a pattern upon it, and the blade is about four inches in length, broad, and curving to a sharp point. The edge was blunt when Robinson bought the knife, but he sharpened it and rubbed it up. The knife was taken possession of by the police, and Campbell identified the prisoner as the man who sold him the weapon. Sadler denied that the knife was ever his. When charged with the crime he also reiterated his innocence. Amongst the other effects belonging to Sadler and found upon him at the time of the arrest were tobacco, pipe, an advance note, a postal order for 2 pounds, several cards and memoranda. The most noticeable article was a large metal clasp-knife. In the kit removed from the Steamship Fez there was nothing except the usual clothing.

HOW PRISONER WAS TRACED.

Samuel Harris, fish-curer, attended at Lloyd's office on Saturday night and made the following statement: -

I work for Mr. Abrahams, 50, Virginia-road, Shoreditch; and having been lodging at this lodging house for about six months. On Thursday night I was there and saw a dark complexioned, stout man come in and look round the kitchen, where there were a number of men and women. He spoke to a young woman whom I knew by the name of Frances, sat down by the side of her, and asked her if she had any lodging-money. She replied, "No." He then said to her, "Well, I have been robbed; and if I only knew who had done it I would do for them." Frances, who was intoxicated, looked at him, but made no reply, and laid her head on the table again. The man then said to me, thinking that I was the governor, that he had no money and he afterwards asked me whether I would let him go up and have a bed if he allowed me to mind his certificate for some money which he had to receive. I looked at the certificate, which was for 4 pounds odd. I did not notice where it was to be drawn from. I said to him, "I am not the governor, and have nothing to do with the letting of the beds." He then went out of the house by himself. About three or four minutes after that I noticed Frances fold a black hat under her dress and then go out. I did not see her again alive. I went to work about half past eight in the morning, and about half past two on Friday afternoon I read in the papers that a murder had been committed. When I noticed that a second hat was found on her under the folds of her dress I thought it was Frances and I then ran home and asked all the people if they had seen her. They all said, "No." I then said, "I think it is her that is murdered. Mrs. Fleming, the deputy, and Florence Monk then said, "Let us go and see if it is her." Then we went to Leman-street police-station, and were taken by the detective to the mortuary; and we all identified Frances, both by her features and her clothing. I gave a description of the man whom I had seen with her on the Thursday night, and they asked me if I thought I could recognise him. I said, "Yes, I am sure I can." I gave a full description of him at Leman-street, and described him, as I thought, something on board ship. I told them he wore a cheesecutter cap, with a bright, shiny peak, a short blue reefing jacket, black silk handkerchief, and serge blue trowsers and lace-up boots. The detectives then engaged me to go about with them to try and find him. I went with two detectives first up the Whitechapel-road; then round Commercial-road; then home; but could get no trace. At nine o'clock this (Saturday) morning we resumed the search, and went to many places. We went to the Victorian home, and round the docks and other places. On going round the Minories we went into the various beerhouses, and on proceeding to a beershop outside the London docks the detectives asked me to look in there. I went in, and there saw a man. I would not say anything then, lest he might bolt; but being sure he was the man I came out and told them the man was in there. The detectives called him out, and asked him to accompany them, and he did so to Leman-street police-station. I was asked to go into the station again and have a good look at him, and I then said for certain that he was the man.
While I was standing there the man said, "Well, I have been drinking with her, and I gave her half-a-crown to buy a new hat which she had paid a shilling on. I went with her to get it; but, as it was not quite finished, we went and had another drink while they put the elastic on."
Harris, in reply to other questions, said when he was at the police-station identifying the prisoner, he heard that 4 pounds was found upon him, which he said he had got by cashing a draft on his ship.

SADLER'S ANTECEDENTS.

A reporter says: Sadler's antecedents disclose a remarkable coincidence which demands further investigation. The facts are these, and they can be verified by reference to the Board of Trade records, which comprise the original articles of agreement which are signed by the crews of outgoing vessels. It is to be noted that the signature of "T. Sadler" in no way corresponds with the handwriting of the "Ripper" literature, and does not resemble the handwriting of the sentence chalked upon the wall of the Goulston-street model lodging-house on the morning of the Mitre-square murder, and which was effaced before it was photographed. Sadler, as a fireman, signed the articles of the Fez, outward bound from London, on Dec. 24, 1890, and previous to that he had been a fireman on board the Churton, of Sunderland, which he joined in London on Sept. 18, 1890, and was discharged at Cardiff on Dec. 1 last. Before he joined the Churton he had a short voyage on the City of Amsterdam, which left London on Aug. 22, 1890. When Sadler was discharged is not known, but his record recommences with his round trip on the Chimborazo, as a donkeyman, this vessel leaving London on June 14 and returning on July 15 last year. Sadler had been discharged at Cardiff, on May 27, from the Alford, on board which he had shipped as a fireman on Oct. 31, 1889, in London. It will be seen that all these trips were short ones. The vital question is, Was he in London in the month of July? - for it was on July 17, 1889, that Alice Mackenzie had her throat cut and body mutilated in Castle-alley, and this was the last of the series of Whitechapel murders. The significant answer to the question is in the affirmative, for the official records show that the prisoner was not only in the metropolis during July of that year, but on the 19th of that very month - two days after the Castle-alley murder - he sailed in the Loch Katrine, a Dundee boat, sailing between London and the Mediterranean, which did not return to London until Oct. 10, 1889. It is a singular thing that here the record stops, for the reason that Sadler gave, when he joined the Loch Katrine, the name of the Bilbao as his previous vessel from which he had taken his discharge; but the articles of the Bilbao do not contain his name.

SADLER AT THE POLICE COURT.

Sadler was brought up at the Thames police-court, before Mr. Mead, on Monday afternoon. There was a crowd outside the building, but the court itself was kept free of the public, and the spectators were few in number. The charge-sheet, signed by Inspector Moore, of New Scotland-yard, described the prisoner as James Thomas Sadler, a marine fireman, 53 years of age, living at the Victoria lodging-house, Upper East Smithfield, and he was charged with "The wilful causing of the death of Frances Coles, by cutting her throat with a knife, or other sharp instrument, at Swallow-gardens, on Feb. 13." At the next hearing the Treasury will be represented, but on Monday Superintendent Arnold acted as prosecutor, and with him were Chief-inspector Swanson and Inspector Moore.
The prisoner, as he entered the dock, answered the magistrate's clerk that his name was as given. He is a man of about 5 ft. 5in. in height, thick set, and looks what he represents himself to be - a ship's fireman, but not of the better class. He stated, in the course of the proceedings, that his clothes had been changed, but those which he wore appeared to be his own. He had an unbuttoned greasy blue serge fireman's jacket, a soiled tweed waistcoat, dirty brown, and a shabby pair of trowsers of a nondescript colour. Around his neck was a grimy black-and-white plaid scarf. Sadler's age does not appear to be understated, and from his look his life must have been a hard one. His hair is grizzled and unkempt, and his greyish "goatee" and straggling thick moustache are alike untidy. His features are strongly marked; the nose is large and prominent; the peculiar eyes are bleared, and with a habit of half-closing as he listens. The man's ears stick out noticeably from the side of the head. The prisoner had a bruise under the left eye, and on the right side of the head a circular bare patch showed where the hair had been cut away. His complexion is dark and sunburned. The behaviour of the prisoner in the dock was not that of a sullen, morose, or insane man. He seemed alive to the nature of the charge against him, and was ready with his questions, put in a sailor-like way, but in rough, grating tones. At first he stood with his hands in his pockets, and then leaned forward over the rail. Finally he gave up his cross-examination of the witnesses, complaining of being cold and hungry. It was remarked that the prisoner occasionally used a rather cultured vocabulary in his interrogation.
Superintendent Arnold, addressing the magistrate, said: I have been in communication with the Public prosecutor, and he had directed me to request you to grant a remand after taking the evidence of the arrest.
The Magistrate: I must hear some evidence. I cannot tell until I hear what it is whether it is sufficient to justify a remand. Put before me what evidence you please.
The first witness called was Samuel Harris, a fishcurer, who deposed: I live at 8, White's row, Spitalfields. I had been there for about an hour last Thursday night, when I saw the deceased woman, Frances, in the lodging-house kitchen, sitting on a form, with her head on the table. This was about 10:30. At half-past 11 a man came in.
Was it that man in the dock? - Yes.
Was he alone? - Yes; he looked round the kitchen. There were other people in the place. He sat by the side of Frances. She looked up at him, and then laid her head on the table again. Prisoner asked her, "Have you any lodging-money?" She made no reply. He said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who had done it I would do for them."
Prisoner: Be careful.
Witness (resuming): About half-past 12 the man, who had remained in the kitchen, went out alone, the woman stopping behind. They had no further conversation.
Superintendent Arnold: Would you allow me to ask him if he went to the mortuary?
The Magistrate: The case must be brought into court in the ordinary way. It is an indictable offence. No prosecutor has a right to conduct the case except through a solicitor or counsel.
Examination continued: Before the man went out he showed me a certificate for wages.
Prisoner: Account of wages.
Witness: He thought I was the governor, and said, "Let me go up to bed, and you take charge of this till I get my money."
The Magistrate: He showed you a document?
Witness: Yes. I told him I had nothing to do with letting the beds. I noticed he had 4 pounds to take. Prisoner went out. About three or four minutes afterwards I saw Frances put a black crepe hat under her dress. I did not see where she got it from.
It was not the one she was wearing? - No; she had another one on her head.
Have you seen the woman since? - Yes. When I went to the mortuary on Friday afternoon. I was taken there by the police. I saw the deceased woman then, and I have no doubt she was Frances.
The Magistrate (to prisoner): Have you any questions to ask?
Prisoner: I do wish to jog his memory as to the early part of his statement. He said that I stated I would "do" for those who had robbed me.
The Magistrate: Put to him anything that you wish to suggest.
Prisoner: I say that the girl was with me at the time I was robbed. She knew I was robbed.
The Magistrate: The witness was not there; he could not tell that.
Prisoner: No, perhaps not. Just read that part of his statement again.
The clerk complied, and the magistrate said to the prisoner: Do you wish to say anything else.
Prisoner: I wish him to verify that statement or else draw it back - that I would do for them.
Witness: You said so.



Prisoner: I said so?
Witness: Yes.
Prisoner: Oh, very well.
The Magistrate: Anything else?
Prisoner: No, sir; the rest I believe was correct.
The Magistrate's Clerk: Was he sober?
Witness: No; he was intoxicated - both of them.
Prisoner: I should like to know as to the disfigurement. If he says I was intoxicated - which I was - I should like to know what bruises he saw about me.
Witness: I noticed he had a bruise on his left eye, and he was bleeding.
The Clerk: There was blood in the place where you see the mark?
Witness: Yes.
Prisoner: Did you notice blood on the

[img][/img]

right side from the cut in the head?
Witness: I did not notice that.
Prisoner: I had a lot of blood on this (right) side as well, which he did not seem to have noticed.
The Magistrate: Anything further?
Prisoner: No, sir.
Westley Edwards, 7 H, said: On the morning of the murder, shortly before two o'clock, I was on duty on the Mint Pavement. I saw the prisoner, who was very madly drunk. I could see the cut over his left eye. He was standing on the pavement. Prisoner said he had been knocked about at the dock gates.
Prisoner: Where?
The Clerk: At the dock gates.
Prisoner: Quite right. I thought he said Dockhead.
Witness continued: I asked him how it occurred. He said his ship was lying in the docks, and he went to the gate in order to get admittance to go on board. The gatekeeper refused to admit him in consequence of his being drunk. Prisoner said, "I dare say I said something to him when he told me if it was not for one man he would give me what I deserved - a good hiding." By the "one man" was meant a police-constable. Prisoner further said, "The constable then walked away, and a gang of dock labourers came out of the gates, started on me, struck me, knocked me down, kicked me in the ribs. I believe my ribs are broken." I (witness) walked with the prisoner for about 30 yards. I examined his ribs to ascertain if they were broken. I scarcely satisfied myself. I offered to take him to the hospital. Another constable came - Police-constable 161, Hey. We examined his ribs, and satisfied ourselves that they were not broken. Prisoner said, "I suppose I am not hurt much after all," and walked away in the direction of the Minories. I left him and patrolled the section. At a quarter to three I was informed of the murder. When I first saw him he was about 400 yards from Swallow-gardens.
How long were you with him? - It struck two immediately after I had left him.
Was he going towards Swallow-gardens? You say he was going towards the Minories? - That would bring him nearer to Swallow-gardens.
Had you formed any idea of his condition? - In my opinion he was drunk.
You saw nothing of the woman? - I saw her dead, but not alive.
The Magistrate (to prisoner): Any questions?
Prisoner: I think he's pretty right. I was so drunk that I did not know which way I turned. I thought that when I left the constable I turned into Leman-street, on my way to the London hospital. If he said I was going towards the Minories I won't contradict him. I suppose you will have the other policeman in (141) connected with him.
William Fewell, night-porter in the receiving-room of the London hospital, deposed: A little before five on Friday morning I was on duty in the receiving-room, and the prisoner came in with lacerated scalp and a small cut over the eye. I trimmed the hair from the scalp wound on the right side and washed his face. I asked him how he came by it, and he said the truth of it was he had been with a woman, and she had done it.
Prisoner: Be careful what you say.
Witness: I will tell the truth.
Cross-examination resumed: I asked him whether it was for much. He replied, "Only 7s. or 8s. and a watch." He said he should not have minded that; but they had knocked him about. Prisoner was trembling very much. I asked him why he trembled so. He answered because he was so cold; he had been walking about. Could I give him something to warm him? I told him I had nothing to give him, and persuaded him to go home to his lodgings. He said unfortunately he had got none, and had only been ashore one night, and he had not secured any. He told me his ship was lying in the London dock. I thought he said it was the Fly. He said he thought one of his ribs was hurt. I saw blood on his hands, and I asked him, "Are your hands cut?" It was some few seconds before he answered me. He put up his hands and looked at them. He said, "My finger is cut." I can't say positively whether he said "he," "she," or "they" had a knife - I am not certain. I looked at the finger. It was slightly cut on the skin. I said, "All the blood couldn't come from that little cut." He replied, "If it did not come from that it came from my head." I asked him where the affair happened. He told me in a small street at the bottom of Leman-street, and near the Highway. He said he had been in one or two places to get a few halfpence to get some refreshment but they had "chucked" him out. He added if he could borrow a trifle he would double the interest of it, as he had 5 pounds to draw. The scalp wound was then dressed by the receiving-room nurse. The cut was so slight that the doctor was not called up. Prisoner did not want to go. As he seemed so shaky we put him on a sofa near the gas-stove for an hour-and-a-half. I then woke him up and told him that I was going off duty and that he had better go. I gave him a penny. He seemed thankful, and left.
Prisoner (in reply to the magistrate): I am not in good trim to cross-examine him. I am thoroughly hungry and cold, having had nothing since tea-time last night. This morning I have been shifted from one cold cell to another, and changed my clothes at the will and option of the police and doctors, and I have had nothing but a pint of what they call ------
The Magistrate: Do you want to ask any questions now?
Prisoner: I don't feel fit to do it - another time, please. I have objections to his statement, but I am not fit to make them now.
Superintendent Arnold stated: Shortly after three o'clock on the morning of the 13th I went to Swallow-gardens, and there saw the body of a woman with the throat cut. The witness Harris afterwards saw the deceased at the mortuary and identified her.
The Magistrate to the prisoner: Do you want to ask him any questions now? No doubt he will be called again.
Prisoner: I hope he will see that I have some refreshment.
Superintendent Arnold: You shall have some.
Prisoner: It's about time.
The hearing was then adjourned until Tuesday next.

RESUMED INQUEST.

At the resumption of the inquest on Tuesday Mr. C. Mathews said he was instructed by Mr. Pollard, of the Treasury, to appear on behalf of the Director of Public prosecutions. He was to place himself at the disposal of the coroner throughout the inquiry.
James William Coles, an inmate of the Bermondsey workhouse, examined by Mr. Mathews, deposed: I went to the Whitechapel mortuary on Saturday night, and there saw the dead body of a woman, whom I identified as my youngest daughter, Frances. She was, I think, 26 years of age. I last saw her alive on Friday, Feb. 6. Ever since I have been in the workhouse she has been in the habit of coming to see me every Friday. She said she lived at 42, Pritchard-street, Whitechapel. I thought she was working at Mr. Hoare's, a wholesale chemist in the Minories. Deceased had a mark on one of her ears as though she had it torn by an earring. There were lumps of hard skin on her left hand caused by her work as a labeller. When I saw her on the 6th she promised to come on Sunday, the 8th. She used generally to come on Sundays and go to church with me.
Mary Ann Coles, single woman, of 32, Ware-street, Kingsland-road, also identified the body as that of her sister, and added: I had not seen her since the Friday after Christmas. She was then in good health, but very poor indeed, and she looked very dirty. She said she lived with an old lady and her daughter in Pritchard-street, and was employed in the Minories. I noticed the lobe of her left ear was injured, and that her hand was enlarged. I did not know that she had left Mr. Hoare's employ. She said she did not have much work in winter. She said she earned from 6s. 2d. to 7s. a week.
Peter Lorenzo Hawkes, assistant to his mother, a milliner, at 25, Nottingham-street, Bethnal-green, said: Between seven and eight o'clock on the evening of Thursday last the deceased woman came into our shop. She asked to be shown some hats. She selected one, a black crepe hat, the price of which was 1s. 11-1/2d. After I told her the price she went outside the shop. She went away in the company of a man, who was looking in the left-hand corner of the window. She returned in about two minutes. I noticed the man. After she walked away she returned to the shop. She gave me 2s., and I gave her a half-penny change. She was wearing a black crepe hat. At the mortuary I identified the hat I sold to her. I saw the second hat there. On Sunday I went to the Leman-street police-station, and I there identified Sadler as the man I saw with the deceased on Thursday night.
Samuel Harris said: I am a fish curer, employed by William Abrahams, at 50, Virginia-road, Bethnal green. I live at 8, White's-row. Last Thursday night I arrived there about half-past nine. On going into the kitchen I saw Frances seated by the fire. She was lying with her head on the table as if asleep. A little time after a man, dressed as a sailor, came into the kitchen. That would be about half-past 11. He looked round the kitchen, and then sat down beside Frances. He asked her if she had money for the lodging, and she said, "No." He woke her up when he sat down beside her. He said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who'd done it I would "do" for them." He remained on in the kitchen till about half-past 12, when he went out. Frances went out three or four minutes afterwards. Before she left she put a black crepe hat under her dress. I had not seen that hat before. She was wearing a hat as well as the one she put under her dress. I went to bed at a quarter to two, and I saw no more of either the man or the woman that night. The next I saw of the woman was in the mortuary, where I identified her dead body.
Mr. Mathews: When did you next see the man? - When I caught him on Saturday between half-past 11 or 12 o'clock, at the Phoenix public-house, opposite the docks in Upper East Smithfield. He was drinking alone. I was looking for him. I was alone when I went into the public-house, but had been accompanied by two officers, I having given information to the police. I went and told the officers what I had seen, and one of them went and called him out. He went with the detectives and me to the Leman-street police-station.
When he came in and said he had been robbed, and if he knew who had done it he would do for them, did you notice any injury on his face or head? - Yes, sir; a scar near his left eye. It was bleeding. When I saw him in the Phoenix on Saturday morning, I noticed that as well as the bruise he had two black eyes. He had a cut on the right side of his head. I did not particularly notice any bloodstains on his clothing when he was in the kitchen. I had never seen him before Thursday night either at the lodging-house or anywhere else. He was intoxicated on Thursday night, and on Saturday morning in the Phoenix he was half and half.
Charles Quiver, night watchman at the common lodging-house, 8, White's-row, Spitalfields, deposed: I have lived at the lodging-house four years. For the last three years I have known a woman who went by the name of Frances. She was a casual lodger, staying a night at a time, and sometimes twice a week, and then not coming for a time. She used to bring different men to the lodging-house to sleep with her. I remember Frances coming to the lodging-house between half-past 10 and 11 o'clock on Wednesday night with Sadler. I showed them upstairs to bed. Sadler asked me to call him at seven. I did call him, but could not rouse him. I went again at nine, but they were still in bed. I saw no more of them that day till the evening, , about 10 o'clock, when I saw Frances in the kitchen alone. She was very drunk. She was asleep with her head on the table. It was whilst she was in that position that I saw Sadler come into the kitchen. He was the worse for drink, and I asked him if he was looking for the young woman he stopped with last night. He said, "Yes, I want Frances." I said, "There she is asleep, with her head on the table." He tried to rouse her, but she was too far gone. He told me he had been robbed of 3s. 6d. in Thrawl-street. His face was bleeding, and I advised him to go into the yard and wash it. As near as I can recollect it was on the left side of the face. His clothes were also dirty. He looked as though he had been in a fight. I did not notice any blood on his clothes. When he had washed himself he returned to the kitchen. Frances was still asleep. He got wrangling with the lodgers, and kicked up a disturbance. I advised him to go to bed. When I came downstairs he was still wrangling in the kitchen, and I said, "Come on, old chap, you had better get out; you are only getting into trouble," and I led him out. He went out very quietly. This was before 12 o'clock. Frances went out about half-past one. It might have been between that and a quarter to two.
Mr. Mathews: In giving us the times, what are you going by? - There is a clock in the office. I am positive it was after one o'clock when she left.
The Coroner: Are you quite sure there was an interval of an hour or so between Sadler going out and Frances going out? - Yes.
The Coroner: It is a very important point, but you are fully alive to it. You are quite certain? - I am positive. Just before she went out she seemed to have recovered a little. She had a hat on whilst sitting in the kitchen. When she first came into the house she had two hats. I saw her throw one of them into the fire, and one of the women there took it off. It was just beginning to catch fire when the woman took it off, threw it on the floor, and stamped on it. When she went out, after one o'clock, I never saw her again until today. She never returned to the house. She could not have returned to the house without my knowing it. Later on in the early morning of the 13th Sadler came back to the lodging-house. It was just after three o'clock. I know the time, because I was just going to call one of the chaps at three o'clock. Blood was running down his face, and he said he felt faint. I can't say which side of his face the blood was running down. i said, "What, have you been at it again?" and he said he had been knocked down and robbed in the highway. I said, "I thought you told me you was robbed of 3s. 6d. in Thrawl-street, and that was all you had?" He replied, "Well, they thought I'd got some money about me, but I had none on me." He asked Mrs. Fleming to allow him to go into the kitchen as he felt so faint. She said she could not allow him to go in there or she would get into trouble. I advised him to go to the London hospital. There was not much blood about him. It was trickling down his head. I did not notice a cut on his hand. His clothes looked as if he had been on the ground. I walked into the kitchen to finish my work, leaving him leaning against the partition opposite the office door. I did not go back to him till she called me to turn him out a minute or so afterwards. When I went towards him he walked out himself. That was about half-past three. I next saw him on Sunday morning, between 11 and 12, amongst other seamen at Leman-street police-station.
By the Jury: He did not ask for Frances when he came back at three o'clock. After the hat was taken off the fire it was hung on the hat rail. I did not see Frances take the hat from the rail when she left.
At this stage Mr. Mathews suggested that it would be advisable to adjourn, so that they might sift and so arrange the evidence that it might be given in order.
The inquiry was accordingly adjourned till 10 on Friday morning.

REMARKABLE STATEMENT BY MRS. SADLER.

Mrs. Sarah Sadler, wife of the prisoner, was interviewed on Wednesday in the country town of Kent in which she has been living for rather more than two years. She is a pleasant-faced, comely, and hard-working woman, considerably younger than her husband, of whom she spoke freely, but naturally she did not wish to prejudice Sadler's interests, only she said she felt that the truth must be told. Mrs. Sadler now resides with her aged mother and earns what she can by doing mangling to support herself and two children at home, Daisy, aged 11, and another little girl six years old. A third child living, Ruth, a girl of 14, is in service. Two boys make up the family of the accused, but both are dead. Mrs. Sadler's story, told as nearly as possible in her own words, is as follows: -

She has lived in Kent for 20 years, and 15 years ago she met the man Sadler, who was her senior. She married him, and they settled in London at Walworth, in the neighbourhood where their now lives the aged mother of Sadler. His father died when his son was less than three years old, and he was in a respectable position as a lawyer. Sadler seems to have taken to the sea in very early life, and in the intervals of his voyages to have worked ashore, conscientiously and punctually. It is a fact that when abroad he served in the Hong Kong police, and he told his wife of it. From Walworth the couple moved to Whitechapel, and for a while Sadler was employed at a factory in Buck's-row, a place since rendered notorious by the murder of the woman Nicholls, on Aug. 31, 1888. Then later the Sadlers went to Poplar - this was 13 years ago - and for six or seven months the prisoner was engaged as a tram conductor on the line between Poplar and Commercial-road. Subsequently he and his wife kept a greengrocer's shop in Lower Kensington, and thence they returned to Walworth for a couple of years, and at this time Sadler was working at the tea warehouses in Cutler-street. He used to come home late at night, and he insisted upon their removal once more to the East-end. Bethnal-green was chosen. Mrs. Sadler's recollection of the dates of the various changed of address is not quite clear, but she is certain that in August, 1888, they were living in a street off the Commercial-road; but about August 5 her husband left her, and she being unable to pay the heavy rents demanded, and feeling that she could get on better in Kent where she was known, resolved to come back to the country town in which she has since dwelt.
"I never saw him," she says, "until seven months afterwards. I have it clear in my mind that it was seven months; and yet I feel sure that it was in the month of June, 1889, when he wrote to me, and I met him by appointment in Fenchurch-street. It was a Saturday night. I did not ask him what he was doing, but I took it as a matter of course. On the Sunday he had work to do, and he asked me to meet him after it was done - about four o'clock, and he added, "If you don't see me, wait until six." I went to the place and waited, and for an hour I watched a man who, whenever I looked at him, turned his back and shrugged his shoulders. In fact, he disguised himself in such a way that I could not recognise him, until he said to me, "Well, how much longer are you going to stand there?" I said to him, "Well, if you could see me, how much longer were you going to keep me waiting?" It was not until he spoke to me that I new him to be my husband. I don't know why he did it. He asked me, "Do you mean to say you didn't know me?" I replied that I did not, although I had seen him several times during that hour. I was with him that night from five o'clock until past 11, and we went to two coffee shops for a bed; but I had been crying and the people thought we should quarrel, so they would not let us have one. He blamed me for being the cause, and I told him I had not complained to him of his treatment of me, and added, "I will tell you what we will do. You go your way and I will go mine. I will never live with you any more." Then I took to my heels and I ran up Backchurch-lane by the side of Whitechapel church, and we were met by a policeman. Sadler caught me, and said, "Now, Sally, what do you mean? You are not afraid of me? I told him I could do for myself. Whilst we were talking we met the policeman again. We went to a stewed eel shop, and whilst there a woman came in and said to my husband "Halloa, Tom; how are you? I walked away, to show that there was no connection, and his face crimsoned, but he said, "I am all right." The woman then said to him, "That party you were with the other night has gone to Manchester." I never opened my mouth, but the woman said, with an oath, "Who are you looking at?" That night I slept with some friends, and returned home on the Monday. During the evening my husband had said to me, "I can take you up a place and show you where such and such a person was murdered." I said, "Oh, no! It does not interest me at all." He continued, "Don't you think he must have been artful. I wonder where the bobby must have been to let such a thing occur so near a shop." It made me shudder. I don't know where the place was. Isn't there a broker's shop at the corner?
"I did not see my husband again after that night until Dec. 23 last, when he came to this house unexpectedly. He sailed on Christmas Eve. He sent me an advance note for his wages, but I get very little from him as a rule, and not enough to keep me and my children. When he came I was surprised to find he had grown a beard, which altered his appearance. He used to wear a sandy moustache only. I do not know what voyages he took, and have not seen his discharges. I was in ignorance of his whereabouts. The first that I heard of his present position was when I read the account in the papers."
Mrs. Sadler was reluctant to let the world know the full extent of her domestic unhappiness, which she said she began to realise early. On the Thursday she had married. On the Sunday she knew that she had made a mistake. Asked about Sadler's temperament, she described him as a very peculiar man.
"He flies into a passion in a moment," she said, "and for nothing at all. In his fits of rage he is very violent. I would not live with him again. When he was in a rage he was best left alone. I humoured him, but I have known him behave like a maniac. When in drink he is best left to himself, but he could get sober very soon. Many a time he has got up a row in cold blood. He can drink and he can let alone. I never knew him to lose five minutes at his work, however drunk he might have been over-night. I have had fears of him more than once, but God alone has protected me. One Sunday morning, when we were living in Jubilee-street, Mile-end-road, he, quite unusually, got my breakfast, and then went out at about 12 o'clock to the Radical club. At 20 past four he came home, and my little girl cried, "There's papa; he's tight." I told Ruth not to notice, but say to him, "Shall I get your slippers?" and coax him - you see; but the little girl said, "Oh, mother, I cannot," and ran away. I had prepared a nice dinner; but I thought to myself, "It is all for nothing. I have got a drunkard's home." My husband sat down to table, and he hardly knew how to hold a knife and fork. Two knocks were given at the door. I got half downstairs when I thought I saw my niece standing there, and I felt, "How can I ask her up?" I returned to Sadler, and said to him, "This is a nice place to ask my friends into - it is nothing but a drunkard's home!" Then he got up and threw the dinner into the fireplace, and overturned the table. I went downstairs and found that the visitor was a Sunday-school teacher to ask after my little girl. My husband, in his fit, took a hammer and smashed the mantel glass, a pair of lustres, and eight pictures on the walls, but the chest of drawers and the washhand-stand were too much for him."
When sober his wife described him as not an ignorant man, but "well up in education," accustomed to read the newspapers, and fond of the theatres. She volunteered the statement that her husband could write "beautifully when he liked." Asked if her husband had a knife, Mrs. Sadler replied that once she had had occasion to "put away" from him a strange-looking clasp-knife, with brass about it, and a long dagger-blade. In reply to the question whether Sadler had ever been in prison, she said that when they were living at Poplar he was on the point of being removed to Holloway gaol, but she paid the fine. But what offence she never knew. Mrs. Sadler declared, in conclusion, that her husband knew "every nook and corner in London."

SALVATIONISTS AS DETECTIVES.

It is understood that the responsible heads of the Salvation Army social and rescue work in the East-end have under consideration the advisability of doing something through their organisation towards tracing the terrible "Jack the Ripper." The notion is that it might be possible, through the Salvationist organisation, which gets so thoroughly into the nooks and by-ways and recesses of East-end life, to obtain some club which might lead to the discovery of the miscreant. The slum sisters who go about among the very poorest dwellers in the East-end, the rescue girls who endeavour to seek out and reclaim fallen women, the prison-gate brigade, those three agencies of the Salvation Army, it is felt, might go a fair way towards getting on the track of "The Ripper." A scrap of rumour may be picked up here by a slum sister, a point of information somewhere else by a rescue sister, or there might be carried to the knowledge of the Salvationist workers information which a wretched man or woman, in terror of self-apprehension, would not dare to convey to the police. In this way it is conceivable that something might be achieved for the ends of justice, only the Salvationists are slow to take any step which could give provocation for the charge that they were going outside their province.

THE EAST-END MURDERS.

This is the ninth of the series of inhuman outrages on women in Whitechapel. The last took place in Castle-alley, off Whitechapel High-street, on the morning of July 17, 1889, almost 18 months ago. In that case the victim was an unfortunate woman named Alice M'Kenzie. The scene of the present outrage is within a couple of hundred yards of Castle-alley, where the woman M'Kenzie was found murdered. Indeed, all the crimes have been perpetrated within a very small area.
The following are particulars of the first eight murders of the series attributed to the notorious "Jack the Ripper": -

1. Emma Elizabeth Smith, aged 45, was found dead on Easter Tuesday, near Osborne-street, having been killed by a stake or iron instrument being thrust through her body.

2. Martha Tabram or Turner, aged 35, was found in a passage in George-yard-buildings, Commercial-street. She had been stabbed in 39 different places upon the body. Aug. 7, 1888.

3. Mary Ann Nicholls, living apart from her husband, was found dead early in the morning in Buck's-row. Her throat was cut to such an extent that she was nearly decapitated, and the abdomen was ripped open by a knife. Aug. 31, 1888.

4. Annie Chapman, aged 47, was found shortly after daybreak in a back yard behind Hanbury-street. Her throat had been cut, an attempt made to cut off the head, the body eviscerated, and stabbed several times on each side. Certain parts had been removed, and were missing. Sept. 7, 1888.

5. Elizabeth Stride, whose husband was drowned in the Princess Alice disaster, was found with her throat cut inside the gateway of a yard in Berner-street, Whitechapel, leading to a club. The murderer was supposed to have been disturbed. Sept. 30, 1888.

6. Catherine Eddowes, aged 44, was found on the same night with her throat cut, and body mutilated in Mitre-square, shortly after midnight. The body lay in a corner of the square. It was disembowelled, and in addition one kidney and other portions were taken away. The face was terribly cut. A portion of her apron, on which the murderer had wiped his hands, was found in Goulston-street, and half a kidney was subsequently sent by post to the chairman of the Vigilance committee. Sept. 30, 1888.

7. Mary Jane Kelly, aged 24, was found murdered and mutilated in the room she occupied in a court off Dorset-street on Lord Mayor's day. Her throat was cut, her breasts and entrails had been pulled out and put upon the table in the room, her face was scored on each side, the nose was slit, and the ears were almost lopped off. The flesh had also been removed from the top part of the legs and thighs, exposing the bones. Nov. 9, 1888.

8. Alice M'Kenzie, otherwise Bryant, murdered in Castle-alley. July 17, 1889.

Some include, and thus bring the total of "the Ripper's victims" up to 10, the trunk of a woman discovered under the arches in Pinchin-street, E., Sept. 10, 1889.

REMARKABLE FICTION.

There is a West of England member, who in private (wrote the London correspondent of the Nottingham Guardian a day or two ago) declares that he has solved the mystery of "Jack the Ripper." His theory - and he repeats it with so much emphasis that it might almost be called his doctrine - is that "Jack the Ripper" committed suicide on the night of his last murder. I cannot give details, but the story is so circumstantial that a good many people believe it. He states that a man with bloodstained clothes committed suicide on the night of the last murder, and he asserts that the man was the son of a father who suffered from homicidal mania. I do not know what the police think of the story, but I believe that before long a clean breast will be made, and that the accusation will be sifted thoroughly.

A man who was seen crossing London-bridge at three o'clock on the morning of the murder was arrested on Saturday on the south side of the Thames, but after inquiry was liberated.
Police-constable Thompson, who found the body, is not the same man who was prominent in a previous Whitechapel murder discovery, although, curiously enough, he has taken the identical number - 240 H.
The juveniles of Whitechapel on Friday did a "roaring trade." Taking advantage of the intricate and labyrinthine character of the neighbourhood, they became guides to strangers, and for a small money consideration conducted them to the "very spot." These lads were very busy all day. The competition among them, in fact, was quite severe.
Every day since the tragedy there have been many visitors to the now ill-famed arch under which the body was found. On Sunday crowds of spectators from distant parts of London flocked to the neighbourhood. It was a "show Sunday" of a ghastly kind.
Mr. W.L. Sugden writes: It is said "the bloodhounds ran away from London to their home in the country." Mr. Brough took them away from London - or his agent did - because the police proposed to experiment with them in tracking burglars, who would certainly have got them poisoned, and declined to give any indemnity for the dogs' safety.
J.H. O'Shea enters a strong protest against the description of the locality of the murder as the "haunt of vice, poverty, crime, and degradation." He says: - It is untrue that the population consists chiefly of foreign sailors, or that "the women of the place are sweated "Jewesses" and "sailors' prostitutes." When I lived in Chamber-street, which was until a few months ago, there were only four out of every 200 families who were Jewish, and as I knew every one in the street, I can vouch for the untruth of the latter phrase.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, February 22, 1891, Page 4

A JURY LOCKED UP.

Mr. Wynne Baxter held an inquest at the London hospital, on Monday, on the body of James Evans, lately living at a common lodging-house in Spitalfields. He had suddenly been taken ill at the lodging-house, and on being taken to the hospital died there next day. There were no bruises on the body, and the medical evidence showed that death resulted from cerebral hemorrhage. On Mr. Backert, one of the jury, making some improper remarks, he was called to order by the coroner, whereupon he retorted, "You were very nasty with me on Saturday, and I have got a nasty name through it."
The Coroner: I don't know you. I never heard your name till Saturday.
Mr. Backert: Why would you not let me serve on Saturday?
The Coroner: Simply because you were not summoned. I did not know you were the same man. I have no feeling against you.
Mr. Backert: Thank you; I am much obliged for your remarks.
All the witnesses were recalled, but nothing fresh was elicited. While the jury were considering their verdict, Mr. Backert was writing on a piece of paper, and the coroner said: I don't know what you are doing.
Mr. Backert: I do. We are just getting the verdict ready.
The Coroner: I cannot imagine you have any difficulty. If you cannot agree I shall adjourn the case to the Central Criminal court, and take the judge's opinion on it. A show of hands was taken, and out of 14 jurymen eight were for a verdict of natural death, Mr. Backert remarking that he wanted an open verdict.
The Coroner: Unless 12 of the jurymen agree I must adjourn the inquiry. I must ask you to remain here till the end of my inquests today, to try and come to a decision.
Mr. Backert: We can go out?
The Coroner: Certainly not.
A juryman said that he thought they all ought not to be punished for the sake of one or two.
The Coroner said he was sorry, but he had no option in the matter.
Eventually the jury were locked up, the coroner informing them that he would return later to see if they had agreed. In the meantime they would have nothing to eat or drink. Two constables were left in charge of the jury. After being locked up for two hours and a half, the jury agreed upon the following verdict: - "That the deceased was found dead, and that the evidence was insufficient to show under what circumstances he came by his death."
They were then discharged.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, February 22, 1891, Page 4

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.
STATEMENT BY THE PRISONER SADLER.

The inquest on Frances Coles, who was murdered in Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel, was resumed on February 23, when a long statement made to the police by the accused man Sadler was read by Mr. Matthews. The prisoner's statement was as follows:
"I am a fireman, and am generally known as Tom Sadler. I was discharged at seven p.m. on the 11th inst. from the steamship Fez. I think I had a drink of Holland's gin at Williams' Brothers, at the corner of Goulston-street. I then went at 8:30 to the Victoria Home. I then left the Home and went into the Princess Alice, opposite, and had something to drink.
I had no person with me. While in the Princess Alice between 8:30 and 9 p.m. I saw a woman (whom I had previously known) named Frances. I had known her for 18 months. I first met her in the Whitechapel-road, and went with her to Thrawl-street to a lodging-house and stayed with her all night, having paid for a double bed at the lodging-house. I don't remember the name
of the lodging-house where I then stayed with her. I think I then took a ship, the name of which I do not remember. I did not see this woman again until I saw her in another bar of the Princess Alice, and recognising her, I beckoned her over to me. There was nobody with her. She asked me to leave the public-house, as when she had got a little money the customers in the public-house
expected her to spend it amonsgst them. We left the Princess Alice and went round drinking at other public-houses. Amongst other houses I went into a house at the corner of Dorset-street, where there was another woman. Frances stopped me from treating this woman, and we then went to White's-row Chambers. I paid for a double bed, and we stayed the night there. She had a bottle of whisky (half pint)
which I had bought at Davis's, White Swan, Whitechapel. I took the bottle back yesterday morning, and the young woman (barmaid) gave me twopennyworth of drink for it. Frances and I left White's-row Chambers between 11 and 12 noon, and we went into a number of public-houses, one of which was the Bell, Middlesex-street. We stayed there for about two hours drinking and laughing. When in the Bell, she spoke
to me about a hat which she had paid a shilling for a month previously. We then went on the way to the bonnet shop, drinking at the public-houses on the way. The shop is in White's-row or Baker's-row, and I gave her half-a-crown which was due for a hat and she went into the shop. She came out again and said that her hat was not ready, adding, "The woman is putting some elastic on." We then went into a public-house
in White's or Baker's-row, and we had some more drinks. Then she went for her hat and got it, and brought it to me at the public-house, and I made her try it on. I wanted her to throw the old one away, but she declined, and I pinned it on to her dress. Then we went to the Marlborough Head public-house in Brick-lane and had some more drink. I was then getting into drink, and the landlady rather objected to Frances and me
being in the house. I can't remember what the landlady said now. I treated some men in the house. I can't say their names. I had met them previously in the same house. From there I had an appointment to see a man Nicols in Spitalfields-street, and I left her there to see Nicols, arranging to meet her again at a public-house, where I cannot say now, and I have forgotten it. We came down Thrawl-street, and while going down
a woman, in a red shawl, struck me on the head and I fell down, and when down I was kicked by some men around me. The men ran into the lodging-house, and on getting up I found my money and my watch gone. I was then penniless, and I then had a row with Frances, for I thought she might have helped me when I was down. I then left her at the corner of Thrawl-street, without making any appointment that I can remember. I was down-hearted
at the loss of my money, because I could not pay for my bed. I then went to the London Docks and applied for admission, as I wanted to go aboard the steamship Fez. There was a stout sergeant inside the gate and a constable. They refused me admission, as I was too intoxicated. I cannot remember what hour this was, as I was dazed and drunk. There was a metropolitan police officer near the gate - a young man. I abused the sergeant and constable
because they refused me admission. There were some dock labourers coming out, and they said something to me, and I replied abusively, and one of the labourers took it up, saying, "If the (metropolitan) policeman would turn his back I would give you a d____ good hiding." The policeman walked across the road, across Nightingale-lane, towards the Tower way, and as soon as he had done so, the labourers made a dead set at me, especially the one
who took my abuse. This one knocked me down and kicked me, and eventually another labourer stopped him. I then turned down Nightingale-lane and the labourers went up Smithfield way. I remained in Nightingale-lane for about a quarter of an hour feeling my injuries. I then went to the Victoria Lodging House in East Smithfield, and applied for a bed, but was refused (as I was drunk) by the night porter, a stout, fat man. I begged and prayed him
to let me have a bed, but he refused. To the best of my belief I told him I had been knocked about. He refused to give me a bed, and I left and wandered about. I can't say what the time was. I went towards Dorset-street. I cannot say which way, but possibly Leman-street way. When I got to Dorset-street I went into the lodging-house where I had stopped with Frances on the previous night, and found her in the kitchen, sitting with her head on her
arms. I spoke to Frances about her hat. She appeared half dazed from drink. I asked her if she had enough money to pay the double bed with. She said she had no money, and I told her I had not a farthing, but I had 4 pounds 15s. coming to me. I asked her if she could get trust, but she said she couldn't. I then went to the deputy, and asked for a night's lodging on the strength of the money I was to lift the next day, but I was refused.
I was eventually turned out by a man, and left Frances behind in the house. I then went, to the best of my belief, towards the London Hospital, and about the middle of the Whitechapel-road a young policeman stopped me and asked where I was going, as I looked in a pretty pickle. I said that I had had two doings last night - one in Spitalfields and one at the docks. I said I had been cut or hacked about with a knife or a bottle. Immediately I mentioned
the word "knife" he said "Oh, have you a knife about you?" and then searched me. I told him I did not carry a knife. My shipmates, one Mat Curley, and another named Bowen, know that I have not carried a knife for years. The policeman helped me across the road towards the hospital gate. I spoke to the porter, but he hummed and hawed about it, and I began to abuse him. However, he did let me in, and I went to the accident ward and had the cut in my head dressed.
The porter asked me if I had any place to go to, and I said "No," and he let me lie down on a couch in the room where the first accidents are brought in. I can give no idea of the time I had called at the hospital. When he let me out, somewhere between six and eight in the morning, I went straight to the Victoria Home, and begged for a few halfpence, but I did not succeed. I then went to the shipping office, where I was paid 4 pounds 15s. 3d. Having got my money,
I went to the Victoria, Upper East Smithfield, and stayed there all day, as I was miserable. The farthest I went out was the Phoenix, about twelve doors off. I spent the night there, and I was there this morning. I had gone to the Phoenix this morning to have a drink, and I was beckoned out, asked to come here (Leman-street), and I came. As far as I can think it was between five and six that I was assaulted in Thrawl-street. At any rate it was getting dark, and it was
some hours after that that I went to the London Docks. I forgot to mention that Frances and I had some food at Mr. Shuttleworth's in Wentworth-street. My discharges are as follows: Last discharge 11-2-90 in London ship Fez; next discharge 6-9-90, London; next 15-7-90, London; next 27-5-90, Barry; next 1-10-89 London; next 2-10-88 London; next engaged, 17-8-86; next, 5-5-87; engaged, 24-3-87, London. The last I had seen of the woman Frances was when I left her in the lodging-house
when I was turned out. The lodging-house deputy can give you the name. The clothes that I am now wearing are the only clothes I have. They are the clothes I was discharged in, and I have worn them ever since. My wife resides in the country, but I would prefer not to mention it. The lodging-house I refer to is White's-row, not Dorset-street. It has a large lamp over it. Passing a little huckster's shop at the corner of Brick-lane and Brown's-lane I purchased a pair of earrings, or rather
I gave her the money and she bought them. I think she gave a penny for them." This statement was read over to Sadler, who said it was correct as far as he could recollect.

(Signed) DONALD S. SWANSON, Chief Inspector
T. ARNOLD, Superintendent.

Other evidence of considerable importance was given. Duncan Campbell, a sailor, deposed that the prisoner Sadler sold him a knife for a shilling on the morning after the murder, and that, having his suspicions aroused, he put the knife in water, which then became salmon-coloured. A marine-store dealer to whom Campbell had in turn sold the knife stated that he sharpened the big blade and at his supper with it. On the other hand Sadler, whose statement to the police was put in, stoutly protested
that he did not sell the knife and that he never had one to sell. Dr. George Phillips and Dr. Oxley concurred in thinking that death was caused by three distinct passings of a knife across the woman's throat, and that her assailant cut her throat with his right hand, while he held her chin with his left. It was not a sharp knife that was used, and one such as that produced would have inflicted the injuries. The inquiry was adjourned till Feb. 27.

Source: Aberdare Times, 28 February 1891, Page 2

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

At the Thames Police Court on Tuesday afternoon (before Mr. Mead) James Thomas Sadler was brought up on remand charged with the wilful murder of Frances Coles, in Swallow-gardens, on February 13. Mr. Charles Mathews appeared for the Treasury, and Mr. Lawler for Saddler.
An enormous crowd collected outside the police-station. Mr. Mathews said the Attorney General had carefully considered the evidence before the coroner and the coroner's summary, and he did not propose to proceed further in the prosecution. Mr. Mead concurred, and discharged Sadler.

Source: Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser, 6 March 1891, Page 4

THE MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.

Whitechapel was on Friday again thrown into a state of alarm by the news that another woman had been murdered in that locality. At a quarter-past two in the morning a constable, on passing through a railway arch leading from Swallow-gardens to Royal Mint-street, found a woman in a dying state, with her throat severely cut.
Death ensued before the woman could be placed on a stretcher, and the body was removed to the mortuary. In the afternoon the remains were identified as those of Frances Coleman, a woman of the unfortunate class, who had stayed for the past month at a lodging-house in White's-row, Spitalfields, and who was at her lodgings two
hours before the murder. Three men were arrested on suspicion, but they were afterwards liberated.
Pursuing their investigations with regard to the movements of the man named Thomas Sadler, who was placed under arrest on Saturday, on suspicion of being the murderer of Frances Coles, whose dead body was found under a railway arch in Swallow Gardens, Whitechapel, early on Friday morning, the police on Sunday made discoveries of so
important a character as to cause them to detain him in custody at Leman-street Police-station. By midnight on Sunday the information in their possession was deemed sufficiently conclusive to warrant Inspector Moore preferring a direct charge of murder against Saddler. Early on Monday morning he was taken from the charge-room, where
he had been under the surveillance of two constables since his arrest, and was formally charged with "having wilfully caused the death of Frances Coles by cutting her throat with a knife, or some sharp instrument, at Swallow Gardens, on the 13th instant." Sadler was greatly agitated, but made no reply to the accusation. He was then removed
to a cell, and a few hours later was conveyed to the Police-station attached to the Thames Police Court in Arbour Street, Whitechapel, preparatory to his being remanded whilst the police complete their inquiries.
The reason of the police taking this decisive action is to be found in the fact that they have had placed in their possession a knife which is proved to have belonged to the prisoner, and with which it is alleged he committed the murder. The knife, it appears, was sold by Sadler, to a seaman named Duncan Campbell. After leaving the London Hospital,
where the injuries he alleged that he received in a "fracas" at the Dock Gates were attended to, Sadler seems to have made his way to the Sailors' Home in Wells Street, arriving there about eleven o'clock on Friday morning. When he left the hospital, some six hours previously, he had only a penny in his possession, and this was given him by the hall
porter at the institution, from whom the Prisoner had solicited help. At the Sailors' Home he saw Campbell, to whom he said he had called to have a rest, as he had been out all night, and had been very sick. He further said that he wanted some drink, and for the purpose of raising the money necessary to procure it, he offered to sell Campbell a knife.
The knife, a white-handled one, was of peculiar shape, having a curved blade, similar in appearance to that of a scimitar. Campbell told him that it was not of English make, and Sadler said he knew it was not, and that he had bought it in America. Campbell gave him a shilling for it. It was dirty, and he afterwards put it into water to cleanse it, with
the result that the water became tinged with red.
Campbell does not appear to have thought any more of the transaction till he read of the murder, when his suspicions were aroused. He then placed himself in communication with the police. In the meantime, he had parted with the weapon, having sold it to a marine store dealer named Robinson, in Dock Street. Campbell gave a description of the man from
whom he had originally purchased the knife to Detectives Record and Ward, who afterwards recovered it from Mr. Robinson. At Leman Street Police Station, Campbell was given an opportunity to identify the prisoner. Sadler was placed amongst a lot of other men; but, not withstanding, he was at once pointed out by Campbell as the man who had sold him the knife.
It was this proceeding that decided Inspector Moore's action. The knife is one of those ordinarily used by sailors, with a blade about five inches in length, having a very sharp point and a heavy metal handle. That there was no blood upon it when Mr. Robinson purchased it is accounted for by the fact that Campbell had previously washed it. Mr. Robinson says
the edge was blunt when he took it, and he sharpened it and rubbed it up, adding that he had cut his dinner up with it the previous day. A woman in the shop supplemented this remark by saying, "Yes, and cut his toffee up, too; he always has a bit of toffee on Sunday afternoon."
During the day the knife was seen by several medical men engaged in the case, and experiments were made with it. It is not certain that the knife is the one with which the fatal wound was inflicted; but there is every reason to believe that such a wound as that in the victim's throat could have been caused by a weapon like the one now in the hands of the police.
It is only right to state that Sadler denies that the knife belonged to him. On the other hand, it is stated that two people have identified it as his property. On Sunday afternoon the police fetched Sadler's bag containing his belongings from the steam-ship Fez, on which he was engaged as a fireman, but there was nothing in it to throw any light on the crime. The police
are leaving no stone unturned in their endeavours to complete the chain of evidence, and hope to conclude their labours in time to present still stronger evidence when Sadler comes before the Thames Street Stipendiary next Tuesday.
The inquest on the body, opened on Saturday. The police officers observe the greatest reticence about the matter; but not a few entertain strong suspicions as to the guilt of the accused. Direct evidence, however, is still wanting; but this may be furnished in the course of a day or two, for the police, so far, have received very ready assistance from people who have seen Sadler
and the deceased woman together. Reasons other than the finding of the knife have led to Sadler being charged with the capital offence; but the police declined to give the least information respecting them.
A News Agency states that there is no foundation for the assertion that for eighteen months previous to the murder Sadler had not been in London. It has been ascertained that he was in London in June, August, September, and December of last year, and made several voyages to foreign ports. On Christmas eve last he started on his voyage in the Fez to Madeira, and returned to England
on Wednesday last.
With regard to Sadler, inquiries were still being prosecuted, but little further had been ascertained.
At two o'clock Sadler was brought before Mr. Mead, at the Thames Police Court, the charge (preferred by Detective-Inspector Moore) against him being that "he wilfully caused the death of Frances Coles, by cutting her throat with a knife, or some sharp instrument, at Swallow Gardens, on the 13th inst." The prisoner, whose real name is John Thomas Sadler, was described on the charge-sheet
as a marine fireman, 53 years of age, living at the Victoria Lodging House, Upper East Smithfield. He is a man with strongly marked features, and grizzled hair, beard, and moustache. His dress consisted of dark tweed vest and trousers and a blue serge jacket. The prisoner has a somewhat severe bruise under the right eye, and another just below the left temple. A third mark appears on the forehead,
and there are several scratches on the hands. In the dock he appeared perfectly self-possessed, and seemed indeed to treat the matter as one of indifference, smiling frequently as the evidence was being given.
Outside the Court a great crowd of persons had congregated, evidently anxious for any news connected with the case. Inside, the Court was densely crowded.
On the case being called, Superintendent Arnold said he had been in communication with the Public Prosecutor, who had directed him to request his Worship to grant a remand after taking evidence as to the arrest of the prisoner.
Mr. Mead said he must hear some evidence, as he could not tell until he heard the evidence whether he was justified in granting a remand.
The first witness called was
Samuel Harris, fish curer, 8, White's Row, Spitalfields, who said - I was in the house last Thursday night, about half-past nine. I had been there about an hour when I saw a woman named Frances. She was sitting on a form, leaning her head on the table. She was in the kitchen. About half-past eleven I saw the prisoner come in. He was alone. He looked round the kitchen, and then sat himself by the side of
Frances. He asked her if she had any lodging money. She made no reply. He then said, "I've been robbed, and if I knew who did it I would "do" for them."
Prisoner (to witness). - Be careful.
Witness, resuming, said: - About half-past twelve prisoner went out alone, Frances still remaining in the kitchen. Before he went out he showed me a document.
Prisoner. - A kind of wages sheet.
Witness (continuing). - He thought I was the governor. He said "Will you let me go up to bed, and you take charge of this till I get my money?" I told him I was not the governor. About three or four minutes after I saw Frances put a black crape hat under her dress. At that time she was wearing another hat. She then went out, and I never saw her again till I went to the mortuary on Friday afternoon.
Mr. Mead (to prisoner). - Have you any questions to ask?
Prisoner. - I only wish to jog his memory as to the early part of his statement as to what I said I would do to those who robbed me, because I was with the girl at the time I was robbed. She was with me and knew well I was robbed.
Mr. Mead. - He would not know that.
Prisoner. - No, perhaps not.
Mr. Mead. - Do you wish to ask about anything else?
Prisoner. - I wish him to verify that statement else draw it back, that I should "do" for them.
Witness. - You said so.
Prisoner. - I said so.
Witness. - Yes, sir.
Prisoner. - Oh, very well.
Mr. Mead. - Anything else.
Prisoner. - No sir; the rest I believe is correct.
The Magistrate's Clerk: Was he sober at the time?
Witness: No, sir, he was intoxicated - both of them.
Prisoner: I should like to know as to the difigurement. If he says I was intoxicated - which I was - I should like to know what bruises he noticed upon me?
Witness: He had a bruise on his left eye when he came in.
Prisoner: Did you notice blood on the right side too?
Prisoner: Still, it might have been there. I had a lot of blood on this (the right) side as well, which he does not seem to have noticed, your Worship.
Mr. Mead: Anything further.
Prisoner: No, sir.
Police-constable Westley Edwards, H 7, said: On the morning of the murder, about a quarter to two, I saw the Prisoner very drunk in the Mint Pavement. I could see he was suffering from bruises, and he said he had been knocked about by men at the dock-gates.
Prisoner: Where? Oh, at the dock gates. It is quite right.
Witness: I asked him how it occurred, and he said his ship was lying in dock, and he went to the gate in order to get admittance and go on board. He was refused admittance in consequence of his being drunk. I daresay I said something to him, and he told me if it was not for one man, pointing to a constable, he would give me what I deserved, "a good hiding." He added "A gang of labourers came out of the gate,
started on me, knocked me down, and kicked me. I believe my ribs are broken." I examined his ribs, but could not satisfy myself, and therefore offered to take him to the hospital. Another constable, however, came up, and we satisfied ourselves that his ribs were not broken. At about a quarter to three I heard of the murder, which took place about five hundred yards from where I left the Prisoner. The direction he
took was towards Swallow-Gardens.
Mr. Mead: You are sure he was drunk? - In my opinion he was. I had not seen the woman previously.
Asked if he had any question to put, Prisoner said, "No; I believe he is right. I was so drunk that I don't know what I did."
William Fewell, night porter at the receiving room, London Hospital, said: A little before five on Friday morning I was on duty when the Prisoner came in with a lacerated wound of the scalp and a cut over the eye. I trimmed the hair and washed his face. I asked him how he came by the wounds, and he said the truth was that he had been robbed with a woman and she had done him - robbed him. [Prisoner: be careful.]
I asked him of how much, and he said a few shillings and a watch. He added that he should not have minded that, but he had been knocked about. I asked why he trembled so, and he said because he was cold, and asked if I could give him something to warm him. I said I had nothing to give him and persuaded him to go home to his lodgings. He said that unfortunately he had got none, and had only been one night on shore, not
having, therefore, had time to secure any. He said his ship was lying in the London Docks. I asked if he felt any further injuries, and he said one of his ribs was hurt. I saw blood on his hands, and asked if he had cut them. He hesitated a little, and then looked at his hands, and said, "Yes, my finger is cut." He added either "She had a knife, or "They had a knife" - I do not know which. I said that so much blood could
not come from so slight a cut, and he rejoined that it must have come from his head. I then asked him where it happened, and he said in a small street at the bottom of Leman Street. He said also that he had been at one or two places to try and get some refreshments and they had "chucked" him out. If, he added, he could borrow a trifle he would pay double or treble interest for it, as he had 5 pounds to draw. His scalp would was
then dressed by the nurse, and as he still seemed so shaky I let him lie on the sofa, and he went to sleep for about an hour and a half when I woke him and told him he must go. I gave him a penny for which he seemed very grateful and he went away.
The Magistrate: Do you wish to ask any questions?
Prisoner: There are two or three things; but I am not in good trim to cross-examine. I am thoroughly hungry and cold. I have had nothing since tea time last night, and I don't feel fit to take an interest in the proceedings. I have been shifted from one cold cell to another, and my clothes have been taken off me at the will and option of the police and doctors. I have nothing to ask now. I am not fit to do it. I will leave it
to another time. I have two or three little objections to take; but I cannot do it now. I am really too hungry.
Superintendent Thomas Arnold said: Shortly after three o'clock on the morning of the 13th I went to Swallow Gardens. I there saw the body of a female with a cut in her throat. She was dead. I saw the body taken to the mortuary. It was the body which Harris identified.
Mr. Mead: You ask for a remand.
Superintendent Arnold: If you please, sir.
Mr. Mead: Do you want to ask the inspector any questions? No doubt he will be called again.
Prisoner: I hope the inspector will see that I have some refreshments.
Superintendent Arnold: You shall have some.
Prisoner: It's about time.
The case was then adjourned till the 24th inst., at two o'clock.

Source: Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser, 20 February 1891, Page 3

The Coroner's inquest held in connection with the death of Frances Coles, who was found murdered under an archway at Whitechapel, has resulted in the jury returning an open verdict and acquitting Sadler of having perpetrated the deed, though they appended a rider, justifying the action of the police,
owing to certain suspicious circumstances, in having arrested the fireman, who had been seen in the company of the murdered woman on the night when her body was discovered. The Magisterial Court, acting somewhat uncommonly, had suspended its sittings until the coroner's inquiry came to a close. Sadler
may congratulate himself, so far as the result of the inquest goes, that he was humanely represented by a solicitor and counsel.

Source: Aberdare Times, 7 March 1891, Page 2

London was horrified on Friday morning by the discovery of another terrible murder in Whitechapel, the scene of so many mysterious tragedies in 1887, 1888, and 1889, and the victim, a woman that went under the name of Frances Coles, is one of the class of unfortunates against whom the well-remembered series was directed.
The miserable creature met her death in a thoroughfare which is no more than a lane covered by a railway arch. Indeed there is a perfect nest of alleys just there, none of them bright even at midday. But they are all open at the ends, and an assassin who knew their relation to each other and to the wider streets would have no
difficulty in escaping if not secured at the moment of the criminal act. The constable who discovered the woman with a terrible gash extending from ear to ear across the throat found that she had not quite ceased to breathe, and he concluded that the man who assailed her had fled but a few moments before. It is premature to assume,
as people are apt to do, that the inhuman individual stigmatising himself "Jack the Ripper" has been at work in the latest horror - the surgeons find that the wounds have been more clumsily effected, and that the knife must have been comparatively blunt - but more light will probably be thrown on the matter as the case is developed in
the police and coroner's courts. A marine fireman named John Thomas Sadler, whose hands and clothes were besmeared with blood, and who had been seen in the company of the murdered woman that night, was arrested on Saturday, taken before the Thames Police Court stipendiary, and remanded.

Source: Llangollen Advertiser, Denbighshire, Merionethshire, and North Wales Journal, 20 February 1891, Page 2

ANOTHER WHITECHAPEL HORROR.
THE INQUEST.

On the afternoon of the 14th inst. at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel-road, Mr. Wynne Baxter, the coroner for the district, opened an inquest into the cause of death, the body being described as a "woman, unknown." Representing the police, Superintendent Arnold was present, with Inspector Flannagan, the latter having been on station duty when the murder was discovered on Friday morning.
It was known that the coroner had received a letter relating to a person who seemed very desirous to serve upon the jury, and hence the usual preliminary formalities were watched with unusual interest. Upon the names having been called over some gentlemen answered for others, who were absent, and when this fact was made clear the coroner said that no substitutes would be permitted. It was then ascertained
that only eight out of the 24 jurymen summoned had attended personally, whereupon Mr. Baxter agreed to accept certain of those who had come as representatives. One individual, who has been active in his researches in connection with the Whitechapel murders from time to time, offered himself as the substitute of a juryman who was unable to appear. The coroner declined to accept him. He was asked why, and his
answer was, "Because you have nothing to do with it." The would-be juryman exclaimed, "It is simply because I happen to be the chairman of the Vigilance Committee, and you think I am going to investigate the case." The coroner retorted, "You are not a representative, as are the others that I have accepted. I decline to take you, sir; you are not concerned." The Vigilance man reiterated, "Why? It is because you think
I shall inquire into the case," and added, as he left the jury-seats, "You shall hear more of this." The jury were, after this incident, still under the strength which the coroner considered necessary, and the officer was sent into the neighbourhood to find another juryman. After a time he succeeded, and the jury then went to the mortuary to view the body. It was lying in a shell. The woman has dark hair and a plump and
not unpleasant face. In addition to the jagged gash across the throat there was a noticeable cut about an inch in length just under the chin. On the return of the jury the Vigilance chairman - as he styled himself - again demanded: "May I ask upon what grounds you refused me this afternoon?" The Coroner answered: "Sir, if you are not quiet I shall have you ejected." "Very well," replied the man, and one of the jury exclaimed,
"I think that settles your little game."
The first witness sworn was
Police-constable Ernest Thompson, 240 H, who deposed: I went on duty at ten o'clock on Thursday night on the beat leading through Chamber-street and Prescot-street. I started up Chamber-street, into Mansell-street, round Prescot-street, and a part of Leman-street, into Chamber-street again. There are three arches leading from Chamber-street into Royal Mint-street. A railway runs over each of these passages. About 2:15 a.m. I passed
from Chamber-street under the arch opposite to the Catholic schools. It is called Swallow-gardens. The space under this arch is partially taken away and boarded up from the crown to the ground. What remains is a roadway, enabling one cart to pass at a time, and a narrow foot pavement. There is no lamp under the arch. A lamp-post is in Chamber-street, close to the entrance to the passage, and it throws a light down the archway. At the other
end there is another lamp. If I were standing at the Chamber-street entrance, I should be able to see someone in the centre of the arch. You can see right through it at night; in the daytime it is not very light.
Is this archway much used? - Yes; by the Great Northern Railway carmen and horses, the company's stables being in Chamber-street, about 30 yards from the arch.
A juryman explained that it was seldom carts went through, as they were kept at the depot in Royal Mint-street.
Examination continued: At 2:15, as I came up Chamber-street from Leman-street, I looked at the clock on the tower of the Co-operative Stores in Leman-street and noted the time. I walked direct down the street to the passage at the ordinary rate, and then turned down the arch with the intention of going as far as Royal Mint-street, and returning by the same route to Chamber-street.
From Leman-street to the arch did you see anyone? - No. As soon as I turned into the arch I saw something lying in the roadway.
Was it about midway? - Yes. I went up to it and turned my lamp on the object, and saw that it was a woman. I then noticed blood. I saw her open and shut one eye. I blew my whistle at once three times. Police-constable 161 H and Police-constable 275 H came to me in three or four minutes from Royal Mint-street. Police-constable 161 H arrived first.
Had you heard footsteps? - Yes, when I was going up Chamber-street towards Mansell-street.
Could you see anything? - No.
Were they hurried footsteps? - No; the sound was of a person walking.
How far were you from the arch then? - About 80 yards.
You heard of no one going through the arch in the direction of Royal Mint-street? - No.
Could you say whether the person whose footsteps you heard came out of the arch? - No; I did not hear them until I was 80 yards off. After the policemen came police-constable 161 H went to the doctor's in Dock-street, and the other police-constable, 275 H, went to the Leman-street Police-station. Mr. Oxley, the doctor, arrived and examined the body. Other police-officers came.
When was the last time you saw anyone about? - I saw railway men only. They are going through this arch all night long, taking horses.
When had you been there previously? - Just before two a.m. I passed through the arch into Royal Mint-street and back again on my beat. On that round I saw no one.
Was any railway man near the spot at the time? - No; not in the arch. They would be at work in the stables, but not nearer to the arch than that.
By the Jury: I took from 15 to 20 minutes to do my beat. I passed through all the arches each time I came up to Chamber-street. No railway men answered to my whistle until after the constables had appeared.
Police-constable Frederick Hinton, 161 H, stated: My beat is a part of Royal Mint-street, Cartwright-street, Upper East Smithfield, and Trinity-square. At 2:15 a.m. I heard the whistle sound. I was then in Royal Mint-street, about 250 yards east of the arch. I went to Swallow-gardens, and saw the last witness standing by the body of the woman, who was lying in the centre of the roadway. I turned my light on, examined the body, and saw that the throat
was cut. I then ran for Mr. Oxley, of Dock-street, who came as soon as possible. I searched the neighbourhood, and found no trace of any person who was likely to have done the deed. I could see the constable immediately I turned round into Royal Mint-street. I saw his lamp, but I could have seen him without it. There is a lamp in Swallow-gardens, about 20 yards from Royal Mint-street.
Practically, the place is lighter at night than in the daytime? - Yes, in the centre of the arch.
Within half an hour of the occurrence had you seen any man or woman there? - No.
Is the place deserted at this hour? - Yes; after one a.m.
I suppose the arch was thoroughly searched? - Yes.
A juryman asked how long it was before the doctor arrived on the scene, and the witness replied that he did so within 10 minutes of his having been called. Standing at the end of the arch he did not think he could have distinguished a person lying in the roadway at the centre of the arch from the Royal Mint-street end of the Swallow-gardens.
By the Coroner: I heard no cries for assistance in the previous half-hour.
By a Juryman: The body was lying with the feet towards Royal Mint-street and the head towards Chamber-street, partly on the left side. I did not feel the pulse. As soon as I saw the gash in the throat I ran for the doctor. The body was not disturbed.
Police-constable George Elliot, 275 H, said: I was on duty in plain clothes on Thursday evening and Friday morning. I was in front of the refinery of Baron Rothschild, in Royal Mint-street, until 2:15 a.m., when I heard a whistle, and going in the direction of the sound I saw a constable's lamp turned on in Swallow-gardens. I went to the policeman and found him under the arch close to the body of a woman. I went to Leman-street station at once.
Had any man or woman attracted your attention during the evening? - Not after half-past twelve. There were plenty of them until that hour. I do not recollect seeing anyone after that time.
If there had been a cry for help from the archway would you have heard it? - Yes; I must have done so. I was 250 yards from Swallow-gardens, and was patrolling the street in ordinary boots.
The Coroner: I think we might leave it there, gentleman.
A juryman wished to know whether evidence of identification would be added.
The Coroner: We had better postpone that. On the last occasion we took evidence of identification which was all wrong. The deceased is not properly identified yet.
The inquiry was adjourned.

THE ACCUSED IN THE DOCK.

At the Thames Police-court, on Feb. 16, before Mr. Mead, James Thomas Sadler, described as a ship's fireman, residing at the Victoria Lodging-house, Upper East Smithfield, was charged by Detective-inspector Moore, of the Criminal Investigation Department, with wilfully causing the death of Frances Coles, by cutting her throat with a knife or some sharp instrument, at Swallow-gardens, on the 13th inst.
Superintendent Arnold, Chief-inspector Swanson, and Detective-inspector Moore represented the police. The prisoner bore several marks of violence about the face, and was said to be suffering from a fractured rib.
Superintendent Arnold said he was in communication with the Public Prosecutor, and he was desired to ask for a remand.
After evidence had been given as to the prisoner's arrest,
Mr. Mead said he must hear enough evidence to justify the prisoner's detention.
Samuel Harris, a labourer, of 8, White's-road, Spitalfields, then said: I was in my dwelling-house about 9:30 on Thursday evening, and was there about an hour when I saw a woman I knew by the name of Frances. She was sitting on a form with her head resting on the table. That was in the kitchen of the lodging-house. About half-past eleven I saw a man come in. The prisoner is that man. He was alone. He looked round the kitchen, in which were other men and women,
and sat by the side of Frances. He asked her if she had any lodging-money. She looked up and laid her head on the table again, but made no reply. He then said, "I have been robbed, and if I knew who had done it I would do for them."
The Prisoner: Be careful.
The witness, continuing, said: About half-past twelve he went out alone, and the woman still remained in the kitchen.
Superintendent Arnold: Can I ask him a question?
Mr. Mead: Certainly not.
Witness: Before he went out he showed me a certificate - a money discharge.
Prisoner: An account of wages.
Witness (continuing): He asked me to let him go up to bed, and I could take the document. I noticed by the document he had to take about 4 pounds odd. About three or four minutes afterwards I saw Frances tuck a black crape hat under her dress. At the time she was wearing another hat. She then walked out.
By Mr. Williams: The following afternoon the police took me to the mortuary and I recognised the woman.
The Prisoner: I wish to jog his memory as to what he said about the robbery. The girl was with me when I was robbed. Just read that part again, please.
The Clerk did so.
The Prisoner: I wish him to verify that statement or draw it back - that I would do for them.
The Witness: You did say that. The prisoner was drunk and so was the woman. I noticed he had a bruise over the left eye, and blood was coming from a place where I now see the mark.
The Prisoner: I had a lot of blood on this side, too, which he does not seem to have noticed.
Sergeant W. Edwards, 7 H, said: Shortly before two o'clock on Friday morning I was on duty on the Mint Pavement. I saw the prisoner, who, in my opinion, was drunk. I could see he was suffering from a cut over the left side; and he said he had been knocked about by some men at the dock gates.
The Prisoner: Where? Oh, at the dock gates. It is quite right.
The Witness: I asked him how it occurred, and he said that he was going to his ship, which was lying in the dock, and the gatekeeper refused to admit him in consequence of his being drunk. The gatekeeper told him if it wasn't for one man, a constable, he would give him what he deserved, a good hiding, and if the officer would only turn his back he would do it then. He further said that the constable walked away, when a gang of dock labourers came out of the gates,
started on him, knocked him down, and kicked him in the ribs. He added that he believed his ribs were broken. I walked about 30 yards with the prisoner, and I examined his ribs to see if they were broken. I was not satisfied, and offered to take him to the hospital. Constable Hyde came up and examined his ribs, and we thought he was all right.
The prisoner said he believed he was not much hurt, and walked away towards the Minories. At 2:45 I was informed that the body of a woman had been found. When I saw him I was about 500 yards from Swallow-gardens. It was then about two o'clock, and the direction he took was towards Swallow-gardens. In my opinion he was drunk. I saw nothing of the woman previously.
The Prisoner: I think he is pretty near the mark. I was drunk, and thought I was going the other way.
William Fewell said: I am night porter in the receiving-room of the London Hospital. A little before five o'clock on Friday morning I was on duty in the receiving-room when the man in the dock came in with a lacerated scalp and a small cut over the eye. I trimmed the hair from the scalp wound, which was on the right side, and washed his face. I asked him how he came by it. He said a woman did it.
The Prisoner: Be careful.
Witness: I asked him whether it was for much. He replied, "Only for 7s. or 8s. and a watch. I shouldn't have minded that, but they knocked me about." He was trembling very much, and I asked him why he trembled so. He said, "I am so cold. I have been walking about. Can you give me something to warm me?" I told him I had nothing to give him, and persuaded him to go to his lodgings. He said, "Unfortunately I have got none; I have only been on shore one night, and haven't secured any."
He also told me his ship was lying in the London Dock. I asked him if his hands were cut, as I saw blood on them. It was some few seconds before he answered, and put up his hands and looked at them. He then said, "Yes, my finger is cut. They had a knife." I looked at the finger, and saw that it was only a slight cut. I then said, "All that blood could not come from that little cut." He said, "Well, if it didn't come from that, it came from my head." I asked him where it happened, and he
answered, "In the highway, near Leman-street." He also said he had been in one or two places to get a few halfpence to buy refreshments, but they "chucked" him out. If he could borrow a little he would pay treble for it, as he had 5 pounds to draw. The receiving-room nurse then dressed his wound. As he seemed so queer I let him lie on the sofa, and he went to sleep. He slept for an hour and a half, when I woke him up and told him he would have to go. I gave him a penny, and he seemed grateful
for it and went away.
Mr. Mead: Do you want to ask him any questions?
The Prisoner: There are two or three little things, but I am not in good trim to cross-examine. I am thoroughly hungry and cold. I have had nothing since tea-time last night, and I don't feel fit to take an interest in the proceedings. I have been shifted from one cold cell to another, and my clothes have been taken off me at the will and option of the police and doctors. I have nothing to ask now, I am really too hungry.
Superintendent Arnold said: Shortly after three o'clock on the morning of the 13th I went to Swallow-gardens. I there saw the body of a female with a cut in her throat. She was dead. That is the body which Harris afterwards saw. I now ask for a remand.
The Prisoner: I should like something to eat.
Superintendent Arnold: You shall have something.
The Prisoner: It's about time.
Mr. Mead remanded the prisoner.

Source: Aberdare Times, 21 February 1891, Page 2

SECOND EDITION.
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

Resumed Inquest.

Yesterday Mr. Baxter resumed the inquest concerning the murder of Frances Coles, the last Whitechapel victim, at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel,
- Mr. Matthews appeared on behalf of the Treasury, whilst Mr. Lawless represented the accused man Sadler.
Detective-Sergeant George Butcher, of the Criminal Investigation Department, produced plans of the locality affecting the case. He said there were eight modes of getting away from the archway where the body of the murdered woman was found.
John Johnston, deputy at Victoria Lodging-house, Upper East Smithfield, said that about a quarter-past one on the morning of Friday, the 13th inst., Sadler came to the house and wanted a bed. Witness refused, as he was drunk. After abusing him Sadler went away. There was a scratch on his face. He returned in the evening, and his head had then been bandaged.
Thomas Johnson, seaman, stated that he had been taken to Leman street police-station, and there identified Sadler as the man he had seen leaving the Sailors' Home, Well-street, after having sold a knife to a man named Duncan Campbell on the Friday morning.
In reply to Mr. Lawless, witness said that he saw other men pick out Sadler before he identified him. On another day witness was taken to the Thames Police-court and there saw Sadler. When he saw Sadler at the Sailors' Home he was going out.
Detective-inspector Moore deposed that when formally charged on Sunday, the 15th inst., Sadler said, "The man has made a mistake about the knife. I never saw him before." When being removed to the cells he added, "Make it as light as you can, gentlemen."
Ellen Calloran said that at about half-past one on Friday morning she and deceased, Frances Cole, met a man in Commercial-street. He spoke to witness. He was a short man with a moustache. It was not Sadler whom witness had seen earlier that day. Witness refused to go with the man, and he then spoke to deceased, who consented to go with him, and walked away with him towards the Minories. Witness advised her not to go with the man, but Coles said she should.
Answering Mr. Matthews, witness denied she had said this happened at three o'clock.
William Friday, carman, said that at about ten minutes to two on the Friday morning he saw a man and woman together in Royal Mint-street, about fifty yards from Swallow-gardens. He was going to speak to the woman, as he thought she was Kate McCarthy, but found it was someone else. The woman was dressed in black and had a crape hat.
Kate McCarthy, who was called, said she was named Fowles, at the time referred to being the last witness. She saw Friday pass by. Thomas Fowles corroborated the witness.
This concluded the evidence and, after an adjournment for luncheon,
The Coroner proceeded to sum up. After narrating the circumstances connected with the discovery of the murder, and the connection between the deceased and the accused man Sadler, the Coroner asked the question whether Sadler was guilty. He pointed out that the statement made by Sadler, although it inverted the order of some events, was corroborated by witnesses, and bore the impress of truth so far as a drunken man could remember. The condition in which the man was seen after the event, with blood on his face and hands, carried with it some suspicion that he might have been engaged in the commission of a murderous attack. But the wounds which he was known to have sustained earlier in the evening sufficiently disposed of that. With regard to the alleged sale of the knife to Campbell, the coroner said that it had not been proved that there were blood stains on the knife. It might be added that Campbell appeared to have been rather imaginative, not to say mystical. In favour of Sadler's innocence it was noteworthy that Sadler and the deceased had not been proved to have been together since about midnight, or half-an-hour later. At considerable length the evidence for and against Sadler was carefully sifted, it being pointed out that if Dr. Oxley's opinion was sound Sadler at the time of the murder was physically incapable of committing the crime even if he had desired to do so.
The jury returned a verdict of murder against some person or persons unknown.
The jury added that the police had done their duty in detaining Sadler.

Source: Cardiff Times, 28 February 1891, Page 4

THE WHITECHAPEL TRAGEDY.
Resumed Inquest and Verdict.

At the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, on Friday Mr. Wynne Baxter continued his inquiry into the circumstances of the death of Frances Coles, who was found dead, with her throat cut, in Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel, early on the morning of the 13th inst., and with regard to which James Saddler is now in custody charged with the wilful murder of the deceased. - The Coroner proceeded to take formal evidence relating to plans of the places connected with the murder.
Thomas Johnson, sailor, deposed that Duncan Campbell spoke to him about buying a knife from a man he had noticed leaving the Sailors' Home. He identified Saddler as the man.
By a Juryman: He recognised Saddler only by a scar and his beard.
Further police evidence was that when Saddler was charged with the murder he said "Well, well I suppose I shall have to go through the routine."
Ellen Calland, examined by Mr. Lawless for Saddler, said she had known Frances Coles for five years. On the 12th inst. she saw her drinking with Saddler. At half-past one the following morning she met Frances in Commercial-road. She was positive of the time. They walked together some distance. Then a man spoke to witness. He tore her jacket because she refused to go with him, saying, "Come with me and I'll show you." He then spoke to Frances, who went away with him. Witness asked her not to go, because she did not like the looks of the man. Witness swore positively the man was not Saddler. He was a short man, with a dark moustache, dressed like a sailor.
By Mr. Matthews: Witness denied saying at the police-court that it was three o'clock.
By the Coroner: She reached her lodgings at two o'clock in the morning.
Some evidence of a directly contradictory nature was then given. William Friday, employed at the Great Northern Railway Depot, Swallow-gardens, deposed that at about 1:50 a.m., on the 13th inst., he saw a man and woman standing talking about forty yards from the scene of the murder. He did not see their faces, but recognised the hat of the deceased, Frances Coles, as that the woman was wearing. He was sure Kate M'Carthy and Thomas Fowler, friends of his, were not the people he saw.
Kate M'Carthy and Thomas Fowler were then called, and swore they were at the place mentioned from 12:45 to nearly 2:15 a.m. on the 13th inst. They did not see the last witness pass.
This concluded the evidence.
Mr. Baxter commenced summing up at half-past two, and after detailing the circumstances of the deceased, and the manner in which the body was found, he dealt with the question of Saddler's guilt or innocence. There were many suspicious points of evidence against him, but he (the coroner) suggested that no sufficient motive for the crime was shown. The most damaging evidence against him was that of Duncan Campbell, but Campbell appeared to have been rather imaginative and mystical. Saddler had accounted for his movements up to after two o'clock on the morning of the murder. No light was thrown on his movements after that for an hour, but Saddler was drunk, and they had to consider whether it was possible for him to have travelled the necessary distance, found the woman, and committed the deed in the time at his disposal. Concluding, he pointed out that if Dr. Oxley's opinion was sound, Saddler at the time of the murder was physically incapable of committing the crime even if he had desired to do so.
The jury retired at ten minutes to three and were absent a quarter of an hour, at the end of which time they returned into court, having found a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person unknown," and adding that the police were justified in detaining Saddler.

Source: Weekly Mail, 7 March 1891, Page 12

In the following inquest data, I would like to highlight a few interesting facts:
- Frances Coles was murdered on Friday the 13th, 1891 and I wish to note at this time, its remarkable connection to the arrest of the Knights Templars on Friday the 13th, 1307.

The Whitechapel Murder.
RESUMED INQUEST.

The inquiry into the circumstances attending the death of Frances Coles, who was found with her throat cut in Whitechapel, on the morning of the 13th inst., was resumed on Monday at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, before Mr. Wynne Baxter, coroner. Mr. Chas. Mathews represented the Treasury, and Mr. Lawless appeared for the man Sadler, who is charged with the crime.
Charles Littlewood and Stephen Longhurst said that at half past six on the morning of Friday, the 13th, a man came into their coffee shop, 173, Whitechapel-road, and had some coffee. There was blood on his wrists. They identified Sadler as the man.
Frederick Smith, employed at Longhurst's coffee house on Tower Hill, said that about five minutes to two - he could not be quite certain about the time - on the Friday morning he saw a man coming from Mint-pavement. He heard the man complain that he had been knocked about, and saw him walk away in the direction of the Minories.
Joseph Haswell, fish porter, said he knew the deceased as a customer of Mr. Shuttleworth. He last saw her alive at half-past one on the morning of the 13th, when she went into the shop alone and asked for three-ha'porth of mutton and some bread. She stayed a quarter of an hour. Witness said to her: "Do you mind getting out of the shop, as we want to shut the doors." He had to say this two or three times. She said to him, "Mind your own ------ business." He had to put her out. There were several customers in the shop.
By Mr. Lawless: They were all women, and deceased left the shop alone. She had had something to drink.
Duncan Campbell, sailor, said on Friday, the 13th of February, he was staying at the Sailors' Home in Wells-street. He was in the hall of the home at a quarter-past 10 o'clock, and he saw Sadler. Sadler said he had been robbed, and was dying for a drink. He pulled out a pocket-knife (produced) and said to witness, "Will you buy it?" Witness gave him a shilling for it and a bit of tobacco. Witness added, "I said to him, 'This is not an English knife.' He said, 'No, I bought it in America.'" He did not stay, but went straight out into Leman-street. Witness continued: "At eleven o'clock I heard that a murder had been committed. I went into the lavatory of the Sailors' Home and examined the knife. I washed it in clean water, which was afterwards of a salmon colour. When Sadler sold me the knife, he said, "It has cut many a model." On Sunday I gave a description of the man, and I took the police officers to the shop where I had sold the knife. I picked out Sadler from a number of others at the police station."
By Mr. Lawless: Sadler, when witness identified him, was wearing a cap with a cloth peak. [Several witnesses have already sworn that Sadler wore a cap with a glazed peak.] He was not certain that Sadler was the man who sold him the knife until he saw the scar on his forehead. He did not think at the time that the water was stained with blood, and his suspicions were not aroused by it.
Thomas Robinson, marine store dealer, said he bought the knife from Campbell for sixpence. Witness said to Campbell that the knife looked like "Jack the Ripper's" knife. Campbell said it had cut out many a model. Witness sharpened the knife, and ate his supper that night and dinner on the Sunday with it.
By Mr. Lawless: The knife was very blunt when he bought it, and he had to sharpen it before he could cut his meat and bread.
Eyraud Delafosse, deputy-superintendent at the shipping offices, Tower-hill, deposed to Sadler presenting a wages account for 4 pounds, 15s., 1d. The paper had blood upon it, and Sadler accounted for that by saying that he had been knocked about and robbed of a watch.
Chief Inspector Swanson, of the Criminal Investigation Department, said when Sadler was taken to the station, he asked, "Am I arrested for it?" Witness said, "Certainly not, but it is necessary to take a statement from you to help us to throw some light upon the matter." Sadler then made a statement which was taken down in writing.
The Court then adjourned for luncheon.
On the Court resuming at half-past two o'clock, Mr. Matthews proceeded to read the statement in which Sadler said he was discharged from his ship, the Fez, on the 11th. On the same day he met a woman, whom he had known for eighteen months, in Princess Alice public-house, Whitechapel. Her name was Frances. He slept with her on that night. On the following day he went with the deceased to buy a new bonnet. During the day he was knocked down by a woman, and was at once surrounded by some men, who kicked him severely. He had a row with the woman Frances, because he thought she might have helped him. He was downhearted because he had no money to pay for a bed, all he had having been stolen. The man then went on to say how he tried to get to his ship, and the remainder of the statement was practically borne out by the evidence already given. He denied ever having carried a knife, and said after he failed to get into the docks he wandered about all night in a drunken condition.
Detective-sergeant Dodd, who arrested Sadler in the Phoenix public-house, read a statement made by the accused at the time, in which Sadler said that he had had a row with Frances, as he believed it was through her he had been assaulted.
The Coroner remarked that the medical evidence was of more importance than that now being given.
Mr. Matthews said he had no feelings in the matter, but
Mr. Lawless said if the jury thought proper he would rather have all the evidence that could be obtained.
Sergeant Record having given corroborative evidence,
Dr. Oxley, who was called to see the body, said it was quite warm, but dead. All the large vessels of the neck were divided. The clothing seemed to be in perfect order. There was blood upon it. There was no doubt in his mind that the woman had been murdered, and that it was not a case of suicide.
Dr. Phillips, who also saw the body, gave confirmative evidence. He added that there was no sign of the woman having fallen in a struggle. The largest clot of blood would have escaped in a few seconds. In his opinion there must have been three distinct passings of the knife across the throat, and the abrasions on the chin were caused by pressure of the left hand of the murderer. He found no trace of alcohol in the stomach, nor any chronic effects of alcohol. Death was almost instantaneous. The woman was on the ground when her throat was cut. He had seen throats which had been fatally cut with a blunter knife than that produced. He had examined Sadler and his clothes, and the marks of blood on the clothes were consistent with having come from the two wounds on Sadler's head.
The Court then adjourned.

Police-court Proceedings.

The man, James Thomas Sadler, was brought up on remand at the Thames police-court, London, on Tuesday, charged with the murder of Frances Coles, at Swallow-gardens, Whitechapel, early on the morning of February 13th. Mr. Charles Matthews appeared for the Treasury, and Mr. Lawless represented Sadler. Great interest was again manifested in the case, and among those in court were some of the jurymen who have been in attendance at the inquest being held concerning Coles's death. A large crowd of people were kept outside unable to obtain admission. On Sadler being placed in the dock, Mr. Mathews asked Mr. Mead, the magistrate, if it would be convenient and right to demand the prisoner until the evidence before the Coroner's jury, whose enquiry it was imagined would terminate on Friday, was completed. He asked for a remand until Tuesday next. He was happy to say his friend, Mr. Lawless, joined in the application.
Mr. Mead said that under the circumstances he should certainly grant the remand.
The prisoner was remanded accordingly.

Source: Cardiff Times, 28 February 1891, Page 6