Kate Marshall

Kate Marshall, was a very violent woman, who murdered her own sister in a house in Dorset-street in 1898-1899.

WORSHIP-STREET.

SELF-ACCUSED. - Kate Marshall, 35, was charged with feloniously wounding Christopher Hayes by cutting him with a plate. - Police-constable 190 H said that shortly before one on Sunday morning the prisoner accosted him on his beat in Spitalfields, and said, "I want you to take me to the station, for I have murdered my husband." She handed him a portion of a broken dish, marked with blood. Subsequently witness went to No. 3, Dorset-street, where he found Hayes on the floor in a back room, insensible, with several wounds in his head. He was removed to the London hospital, where he remains in a serious condition. - The prisoner, who said Hayes was not her husband, was remanded.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, April 22, 1888, Page 4

UNDER SENTENCE OF DEATH.
Kate Marshall Appeals to the Judges.

In the Queen's Bench Divisional Court today, before Mr. Justice Lawrance and Mr. Justice Channell, Mr. Counsell moved, in the case of "The Queen vs. Kate Marshall," for a writ of certiorari, removing the record into the Queen's Bench Division, so that the conviction for wilful murder might be quashed, as on the finding of the jury the offence was only one of manslaughter. Kate Marshall was tried at the Old Bailey before Mr. Justice Darling and a jury, and found guilty of the murder of her sister. The jury returned the following verdict: - "We find the prisoner guilty, but with a strong recommendation to mercy, on the ground that the blow was struck without pre-meditation, and while the prisoner was in a fit of drunken frenzy," and sentence of death was passed.

NOT A COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.

Mr. Justice Lawrance thought this was an attempt to make that Court a Court of Criminal Appeal.
Counsel contended that he was justified by decided cases in making the present application, as on the findings of the jury on matters of fact the offence was only one of manslaughter.
The Court decided that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application, and counsel intimated that in the circumstances he would only have to apply to the Attorney-General for a writ of error.

Source: The Echo, Tuesday January 24, 1899

This article states that it was Kate Marshall who was murdered in Dorset-street in 1898.

END HORROR.
Woman Murdered and Mutilated.

MYSTERY DEEPENS.
A Supposed Clue.

Within a stone's throw of the house in which Mary Kelly was murdered and mutilated in November, 1888, when the police and public alike were staggered by that extraordinary series of atrocities known as "The Ripper Murders," a tragedy of a somewhat similar character took place in the early hours of Sunday morning.
Dorset-street, Spitalfields, the scene of the murder, is a narrow thoroughfare containing a few dingy shops, and a number of common lodging-houses, frequented by some of the poorest inhabitants of the East End. Almost deserted during the day, the street presents at night an appearance of extraordinary activity, hundreds of men and women of all nationalities availing themselves of the cheap accommodation offered by the lodging-houses, while the penniless denizens of the district sleep undisturbed by the authorities in the gutters and doorways.

THE POLICE BAFFLED.

At present the police are mystified by the peculiar circumstances surrounding the tragedy, and the cosmopolitan character of the population in that neighbourhood only makes their task more difficult. It is clear, however, that on Saturday night a woman named Annie Austin, 28 years of age, occupied with a man whose identity has not yet been established a small cubicle at 35, Dorset-street, and that on

[img][/img]

Sunday morning the woman was found alone suffering from wounds in the lower part of the body - wounds which are of too revolting a character for description, having evidently been inflicted with a sharp instrument.

DIED IN HOSPITAL.

She was at once removed to the London Hospital, but her wounds were of such a character as to render recovery out of the question, and the young woman died early yesterday morning. Curiously enough, the police knew nothing of the occurrence until many hours had elapsed, when the hospital authorities communicated with them. In this way the murderer obtained several hours' start before the work of investigation was commenced, and the proprietor of the lodging-house was unable to assist the officers in charge of the case with a description of the missing man.

CONFUSION.

An "Echo" representative who has been investigating the crime and closely following the movements of the detectives engaged in the case, discovered that the mystery has become complicated by the fact that up to the present the police, despite all their efforts, have failed to find the man who conveyed the woman to the London Hospital.
This is what happened when the crime was first discovered. The big lodging-house was thrown into a state of excitement, somebody went to McCarthy's cabyard, a few doors higher up the street, and got a four-wheeler round to the door. The injured woman was placed in the cab and a man of the labouring class got in with her and drove off to the hospital.

STRANGE DISAPPEARANCE.

At the hospital the woman was taken to the accident ward, where her wounds were examined. In the meantime the porter detained the man who had come with her in the cab, but the porter being called away for a moment or so to attend to a patient, found when he returned that the man had disappeared, leaving the cab standing at the door.
The detectives were at the London Hospital this morning trying to obtain a description of the mysterious stranger, but the staff could only describe him as a man of about 28 years of age, dressed as a bricklayer, and wearing a cap. He told some incoherent rambling story of how the woman had come by her injuries.
The woman soon became insensible, and never regained consciousness. Although the medical staff asked her how she came by her injuries, all she could say before she lapsed into insensibility was, "A man has done it."

STABBED SEVEN TIMES.

An examination of the woman after death showed that she had been stabbed about seven times in the abdomen, some of the wounds being of the most terrible description. One of the wounds was about six inches in length, and penetrated into the stomach.
The lower part of her body was much cut, bearing all the evidence of mutilation. She died from peritonitis and haemorrhage.

THE VICTIM'S LIFE.

The woman Austin was about 28 years of age, and was married to a respectable labourer, who left her some time ago on account of her loose habits.
She has two children, which her husband would not allow her to take with her when they parted. These are now inmates of a home, the father contributing weekly for their support.
The deceased was not a regular frequenter of the lodging-houses of Dorset-street, and consequently she was not well known in that neighbourhood of squalor and dirt. She is described as being dressed rather above the average class of women in Spitalfields, and altogether above the Dorset-street type.

A PREVIOUS MYSTERY.

The crime has recalled to the police the recent death of another woman at a lodging-house in this locality, about which there was a good deal of mystery and which was never satisfactorily cleared up.
Late one Saturday night, a month or two ago, a man and a woman applied for a cubicle for the night. In the morning, some time after the doors had been opened, and a number of the inmates had left the house, the woman was found dead in bed, lying with her face buried in the pillow.
She had been suffocated; yet the man with whom she occupied the room, and who must have known that she was dead, was never found.
The police are inclined to believe that there is some connection between the two mysteries.

NOTORIETY.

Dorset-street, the scene of the murder, has a reputation for crime which is unequalled by any other district in London.
In addition to one of the "Jack the Ripper" crimes, Kate Marshall was murdered in the very same house a little over a year ago, and a policeman was stabbed to death only a few yards away.
The difficulties that confront the police in tracking the murderer of Annie Austin are very great. In the first place they were not informed of the murder until many hours after the discovery of the woman.
Today, however, the district is alive with detectives in various kinds of dress. They are lurking about public-houses and lodging-houses, where it is believed the murderer is concealed.
The docks have been searched, but up to the present no clue has been obtained, and an arrest is very remote.

HANDICAPPED.

The police are greatly handicapped by the fact that they have not been able to get a description of the man who took the room with the woman. Neither the watchman, nor any of the servants seemed to have taken any notice of the couple, and no one recollects having seen the man leave the building.
This fact, coupled with the mysterious disappearance of the man who took Austin to the hospital in the cab, has greatly complicated the mystery.
Some further light will probably be thrown on the crime at the inquest, which is to be held tomorrow afternoon at the London Hospital by Mr. Wynne Baxter.

A CLUE.

A man named Bates has given some useful information to the police. It seems that he followed the woman Austin into the lodging-house on Saturday night. She was then with a short, dark man, about 40 years of age.
Austin's companion asked her to go to the public-house in Dorset-street and have a drink before going to bed.
The man had a silver ring on his left hand; he wore a grey check cap, and had a red and black scarf round his neck.

THE MANAGER'S STORY.

In conversation with a representative of the Press Association early this morning the manager of the lodging-house in question said: -

"We have 72 cubicles here, each one of them being for the accommodation of two people. We are generally full up at night, and as half the lodgers are entire strangers, or casual customers, we never pay particular attention to people's looks as long as they behave themselves properly. On Saturday night I was standing at the door, as usual, and received most of the lodgers. As I don't go to bed throughout the night I should have heard any unusual commotion or screaming upstairs, but I heard nothing whatever.
"Nobody can get out of the house until I unlock the front door at five o'clock, and after that time the house gradually empties. Strange to say, the murderer must have passed me as he went out, for I stood in the passage smoking for a long time after I had opened the door. Nobody showed in his manner, however, that anything was amiss, and the first intimation I had of the trouble upstairs was when one of our regular female lodgers came down and told me that as she passed the second landing she heard deep groans coming from one of the cubicles, the door of which was half open.
"I immediately told my wife, and together they proceeded to the room, where the woman Austin was found in bed partly undressed. She was scarcely capable of speech, and could only say, "I am bad. What can I do? Help me!" As well as they could they got some clothes on her, but it was no easy matter, for she was a big strapping woman, and the pain she was suffering made her most difficult to manage, but somehow or other we got her to the London Hospital."

Source: The Echo, Tuesday May 28, 1901

KATE MARSHALL IN NEWGATE.

Nothing definite was known last night as to what will be the decision of the Home Secretary as to the fate of Kate Marshall, now lying under sentence of death in Newgate for the murder of her married sister, Mrs. Roberts, in Spitalfields. It was anticipated that a reprieve would have been granted before this, having regard to the very strong recommendation to mercy from the jury, who appended to their verdict a rider to the effect that the crime was not premeditated, but committed in a moment of drunken frenzy. The line of defence which was adopted precluded the jury from finding a verdict of manslaughter. Marshall's solicitor paid a visit to Newgate yesterday afternoon in a professional capacity. The convict is in a very depressed state of mind and low condition generally. Her terrible position has had a marked effect upon her. She has not received a visit from any relatives or friends, but has been seen, however, by a lady who is connected with a Catholic mission, and by Father Carey, the Roman Catholic priest of Holloway gaol. The condemned woman is upon what is known as hospital diet. She has made no confession of the crime, the guilt of which, on her trial, she imputed to her brother-in-law, David Roberts, who was the principal witness for the prosecution.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, Sunday January 22, 1899

OLD BAILEY TRIALS.
SPITALFIELDS MURDER.

HOW KATE MARSHALL RECEIVED HER DEATH SENTENCE.

[img][/img]

On Wednesday, before Mr. Justice Darling, Kate Marshall, 44, whip-maker, was indicted for the wilful murder of her married sister, Elizabeth Roberts, on Nov. 26. - Mr. Counsell defended. - Mr. Horace Avery, who prosecuted, said the prisoner and Roberts and her husband lived together in a room on the first floor at 26, Dorset-street, Spitalfields. The case for the prosecution was that on the night of Nov. 26, during a quarrel, the prisoner fatally stabbed her sister with a knife.
David Roberts, the husband, a painter and decorator, deposed to being awakened on the night of Nov. 26 by the return home of the prisoner and the deceased the worse for drink. Before the prisoner rushed at his wife and stabbed her she said, "You thing, I will give you something for this." The deceased said, "Dave, she has stabbed me." He jumped out of bed and seized the prisoner, who "claimed" him by the whiskers.
Corroborative evidence was given as to what happened at 26, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, on the night of the murder by inmates of the house.
Police-constable A. Fry, 317 H, deposed to being called to Dorset-street, Spitalfields, soon after midnight on Nov. 26, and to finding the deceased there in an unconscious state. The prisoner was struggling and screaming on the floor with the husband of the deceased. The husband said that the prisoner had stabbed his wife. The prisoner was under the influence of drink. - Cross-examined: She was very excited, and was screaming and wrestling with the man Roberts, and behaving like a mad woman.
Dr. Hume described the nature of the wound on the body of deceased which caused death.
On Thursday the accused went into the witness-box and gave evidence on her own behalf. She said when they got home on Nov. 26 Roberts and his wife called each other names, and at last the husband rushed out of bed. She saw his hand go towards his wife, who said, "Oh! Jesus," and ran out of the door. The husband rushed after his wife, when she seized him, but he got away. She caught hold of him again, and they struggled on the landing. The man threw her down. She never saw the knife until Roberts gave it to the policeman. The knife produced belonged to her. The last she saw of the knife was early that evening, when she placed it upon a shelf in the room after finishing work. The mark on her (prisoner's) wrist was caused by Roberts's nail in the struggle. She had never had any serious quarrel with her sister, who was a very hard-working woman.
Mr. Avery: Your case is that it was the husband who stabbed the deceased.
- Prisoner: Yes.
The prisoner, in cross-examination, said that in 1879, she was sentenced to eight months' hard labour for wounding. In May 1883, she was again convicted and sentenced to two months' for assault. In October, 1884, she was sentenced to 10 months' hard labour for maliciously wounding with a knife. The prisoner admitted several other convictions, including one of unlawful wounding, for which she underwent five years' penal servitude. There were besides about 20 summary convictions for drunkenness and disorderly conduct. She pleaded guilty to all the offences, most of which were "done in self-defence."
Re-examined, she said in none of the cases had she cast the guilt on another person. She would have pleaded guilty to this charge had she been guilty.
Counsel on both sides addressed the court, and the judge summed up the case.
The jury, after half an hour's consultation in private, returned into court with a verdict of "Guilty," the foreman adding that the jury desired to strongly recommend the prisoner to mercy on the ground of want of premeditation and that the deed was done in a moment of drunken frenzy.
Asked if she had anything to say why sentence of death should not be passed, the prisoner exclaimed, "I say I am guilty of my other crimes, but I have over 20 stabs on myself. I say before the Lord Jesus, the Trinity, and Heaven, that I am innocent of this dreadful charge. God knows, and I call upon Him, my defender, that I am innocent before the whole world of this crime. Do with me what you will; I am innocent."
Mr. Justice Darling, having assumed the black cap, said the prisoner had been found guilty on what, to his mind, was very clear and cogent evidence. She had been found guilty after a trial in which she had imputed, by every possible means, not only her own innocence but the guilt of another of the crime which the jury were satisfied she herself committed. The jury had accompanied their verdict with a recommendation which, he said, he would forward to the proper quarter, and in which, he might say, he should express his own concurrence, because, to his mind, the reason which they gave for that recommendation was one which might fairly influence those in whose power it was to grant that mercy which he had no power to grant himself. His lordship passed sentence of death in the usual form.
Prisoner (wringing her hands): And this is law!
The prisoner was then asked whether she had any reason to urge in stay of execution, upon which she exclaimed, "I don't know what to say. I know I am innocent before the Lord Jesus." As she was being assisted from the dock she shrieked, "Oh! Jesus; this is perfect murder. Oh, my God! Oh, Liz! Oh, Dave Roberts, you killed my sister! Where is God? I call upon Him!"
She was heard shrieking and protesting for some moments after having been removed to the cells.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, January 15, 1899, Page 10

SPITALFIELDS TRAGEDY.
A SISTER'S CRIME.

[img][/img]

As reported in the greater portion of our Special Edition of last week, a dreadful murder was committed at 12:30 a.m., at the identical house in Dorset-street, Spitalfields, where Mary Kelly was butchered by the mysterious Jack the Ripper, on Nov. 9, 1888. The police, being called to the spot, found that a Mrs. Roberts was dying. Only two people were in the room, the woman's sister and her husband. The sister, Kate Marshall, was subsequently charged with murder. David Roberts, the husband, stated on Sunday night that Kate Marshall had been residing with them since she was liberated on ticket-of-leave, having been sentenced to five years' penal servitude for stabbing the man she lived with. Altogether, he said, there were about a dozen convictions against her, and all for stabbing. His wife and her sister were in the habit of quarrelling about business matters, but, so far as he knew, they had never come to blows. They were in the habit of "getting a glass" on Saturday nights. Marshall had threatened to stab him several times.
At Worship-street police court, on Monday, Kate Marshall, 44, was brought up, charged with the wilful murder of Elizabeth Roberts. - Very short evidence was given, it being understood that the Treasury would, in the usual course, be communicated with. It was decided to remand the prisoner on the statement of arrest only. - Constable Fry, 317 H, deposed to proceeding "from information received" the to house, 26, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, on Saturday night, Nov. 26, where, in a room on the first floor, he found the prisoner and the woman Roberts. The latter was bleeding from a wound in the breast, and nearly unconscious. He sent for assistance and a doctor, but the woman died in 10 minutes. The prisoner, when charged at the station, said, "Oh, my God, if it had been anybody but my sister I should not have cared!" - The prisoner, who made no remark, was then removed.

INQUEST AND VERDICT.

Mr. Wynne Baxter opened an inquest, on Tuesday, at Whitechapel, on the body of Eliza Roberts.
David Roberts, of 26, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, painter and decorator, was the first witness. He said the deceased was his wife, and was 36 years of age. She worked at whip-making, doing the work at home. They had lived in the house seven months, and occupied one room on the first floor back. There was a court before the house. His wife's sister had been living in the room with them - Kate Marshall. She had lived with them three months, and laid on the bed, while he and his wife slept on a mattress on the floor. Kate Marshall also worked at whip-making. On Saturday, Nov. 26, he went out at 7:30 in the morning, and came in at 6:30 in the evening. He left his wife and boy of three years of age in the room when he went out; but Kate Marshall was not there when he came home. His wife appeared to have been drinking. His wife went out with her work when he came home about 7:30, to sell what she could. He was then left with the child in the room. At 12 o'clock the same night he next saw his wife, and he went to bed with the child about 10 p.m. About midnight his wife and her sister came into the room. They were both in drink. One of them had a quart can of beer. His wife spoke to him, and gave him a glass of ale. The two then began arguing about their work, as to who got the greatest profit. Each kept what she sold. Kate then rushed at his wife and seized her by her hair. The two came together; they struggled and fought together, and fell against the table, which was overturned, and the crockery on it fell to the floor. He was then in bed, but jumped out and parted the two. They were quiet for a few minutes, and he went back to bed. Kate Marshall turned to his wife and said, "Is that what you mean?" They had been laughing before then. Kate at the same time rushed at his wife and struck her on the right breast. He could not see whether Kate had anything in her hand. There was a light in the room hanging on the wall. His wife turned round and said, "Dave, she has stabbed me." He jumped out of bed and rushed at Kate, seizing her by the wrists. At the time he did not notice whether she had anything in her hand, and struggled with her until he got her into the passage, when he kicked at the partition to alarm the people in the front room, so as to get assistance. He still held Kate until the police came. A lodger, Mr. Amery, came, and he gave him the knife. Kate bought it on the previous Thursday. It was an ordinary shoemaker's knife. When the constable came he handed Kate Marshall over to him. His shirt was torn off in the struggle. The constable asked him whether he knew Kate, and he said she was his sister-in-law. Then witness went into the room and dressed. His wife was lying on the landing outside the door at the time. A second constable and the woman in the front room attended to the deceased. She was taken into the front room after the doctor arrived. When he was struggling with Kate Marshall, his wife got out of the room, fell against him, and got on to the landing. He was present when his wife died, about 10 minutes after she was injured. As a rule, the deceased and Kate had a few words together; but there was never any blow struck before. Kate very often threatened to stab witness.
What was the particular advantage in having Kate there? - Well, she was the only sister my wife had, and flesh and blood liked to be together. On the landing Kate said, "What have I done? let me see her." Nineteen years ago Kate was charged with wounding her father.
The medical evidence attributed death to haemorrhage from the wound in the chest.
The jury returned a verdict of "Wilful murder" against Kate Marshall.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, December 4, 1898, Page 18

THE SPITALFIELDS MURDER.

In the Queen's Bench Divisional Court, on Tuesday, before Mr. Justice Lawrance and Mr. Justice Channell, Mr. Counsell moved, in the case of the Queen v. Kate Marshall, for a writ of certiorari, removing the record into the Queen's Bench Division, so that the conviction for wilful murder might be quashed, as, on the finding of the jury, the offence was only one of manslaughter. Kate Marshall was tried at the Old Bailey, before Mr. Justice Darling and a jury, and found guilty of the murder of her sister. The jury returned the following verdict: "We find the prisoner guilty, but with a strong recommendation to mercy, on the ground that the blow was struck without premeditation, and while the prisoner was in a fit of drunken frenzy." Sentence of death was passed. - Mr. Justice Lawrance thought this was an attempt to make that court a Court of Criminal Appeal. - Counsel contended that he was justified by decided cases in making the present application, as on the findings of the jury on matters of fact the offence was only one of manslaughter. - The Court decided that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application, and counsel intimated that under the circumstances they would have to apply to the Attorney-General for a writ of error.

Source: The Mercury, Saturday January 28, 1899, Page 7