Clement-Jones family v2/21 - Person Sheet
Clement-Jones family v2/21 - Person Sheet
NameEdgar Swinton HOLLAND , 11594
FatherCharles HOLLAND , 11582 (1799-1870)
MotherElizabeth GASKELL , 11585 (1811-1892)
Notes for Edgar Swinton HOLLAND
Murdered by a former lover/fiancee


This is a two-part story told by newspapers at the time of the murder of Edgar Swinton Holland, a notable gentleman of Wallasey. A brief biography of the main antagonists are outlined as well as the defence barrister..
Edgar Swinton Holland was born in 1847 and was the son of Elizabeth Gaskell and Charles Holland, a well known Liverpool merchant who resided at Liscard Vale House, Vale Park. Edgar lived at 11 Penkett Road and in 1884, with Henry Gardiner, a local building contractor, began the horse-drawn bus service, 'Magazines, New Brighton and Direct Omnibus and Carriage Company', running between Seacombe and Molyneux Drive. Earlier Edgar employed Henry to build various properties in Wallasey including Menzies Terrace which was at the bottom of Holland Road, facing the River Mersey, and Beech Grove on Beech Grove, off Holland Road. Edgar was also Director of Santa Barbara Gold Mining Company, and the Pitangui Gold Mining Company.
Catherine Kempshall was a London singer in the music halls. She was to spend 56 years in Broadmoor where she died.
William Henry Quilliam, the defence barrister, is worthy of note. William was born in 1856 in Liverpool and would later change his name to Abdullah Quilliam as well as finding England's first mosque and Islamic centre.

In the Queen’s Bench Division yesterday the hearing of the case Kempshall v. Holland was resumed. This was an action for breach of promise brought by Miss Catherin Kempshall, formerly a singer, against the defendant, a Liverpool gentleman of independent means. At a former hearing in January an agreement was arrived at whereby judgement was entered for the defendant, who was to pay the plaintiff £1,000 and costs. This agreement Miss Kempshall subsequently repudiated on the ground that she did not sanction it. Since then she had fired a pistol at Mr. Holland’s sister in order, as she stated, to draw public attention to her case. For this offence she was now awaiting her trial. Her claim was for £10,000. – Defendant denied the promise in marriage. – Plaintiff, who was brought up in charge of a female warder, said the promise was made in 1885, and renewed twice in 1887, all being verbal. Defendant agreed to settle £10,000 on her. In cross examination by Sir Edward Clarke, plaintiff admitted that since relations were broken off between her and defendant in 1892 down to the end of 1893 she could not point to any letter written either by defendant or herself in which there was any reference to a promise of marriage. Asked what she was doing before she met defendant in 1885, witness said she admitted that had friends who were rich men and she had engagements as a singer at Her Majesty’s, but she could point to no engagement for three years previous to meeting defendant. – Witness pressed by Sir Edward Clarke on the subject of certain letters, said she should decline to answer questions if he kept harping upon the same one. – At the end of plaintiff’s case judgement was given for defendant. Then ensued a scene. Plaintiff immediately attempted to jump over the counsels’ bench to get at defendant. She was seized by the female warder who had accompanied her throughout, but her struggle were so violent that it was necessary for the officer of the Court to come to the warder’s assistance. Plaintiff screamed and kicked calling out “Beast, beast!” She was carried downstairs screaming and kicking all the way. – The plaintiff (says one who witnessed the scene) plays Portia {Merchant of Venice] to perfection. She looks the part. She has a pale well-chiselled face, surrounded by a fair rompish wilful hair, and admirably set off by a plain dark dress. Her pose and manner when she addresses the Court is that of the skilful actress, but there is added to it the earnestness and energy of a litigant. Her voice rings through the court like a bell, and never fails to command attention.
Charged With Attempted Murder
Later in the day the plaintiff was brought up at the Central Criminal Court and indicted for attempting to discharge a loaded revolver at Emily Lucy Carlisle with intent to murder. – For the prosecution it was stated that pending the hearing of the breach of promise the accused sent a number of insulting and threatening letters to Mr Holland, the defendant in the breach of promise case, and continued this course of conduct towards other persons. The prosecutor was a sister of Mr Holland, and resided with her husband at Putney. On June 21, while driving from the house, prisoner rushed up behind, caught hold of the back of the carriage with one hand, while with the other she discharged a revolver. Mrs Carlisle heard the whiz if a bullet past her head. On being taken into custody prisoner said she had no intention to murder, but intended to frighten Mrs Carlisle but intended to frighten Mrs Carlisle in order to bring her grievances before the public. – The jury acquitted the prisoner of an intent to murder. She was indicted next for a common assault, and the jury, after some deliberation, acquitted the prisoner on this charge also. – The Judge, in directing the discharge of the prisoner, mentioned that, had she been convicted of the major charge, she would have been liable to penal servitude for life. He cautioned her not to allow her supposed grievances to influence her temper in the future, or else she might be led into excesses from the consequences of which she might find it most difficult to escape. – The prisoner, who said she had been very cruelly used, then left the dock.

Liverpool Mercury
14th November, 1895
Miss Catherine Kempshall, the plaintiff in the breach of promise action of “Kempshall v. Holland”, applied for a new trial on the ground that the learned Judge (Baron Pollock) had refused to receive defendant’s letters in evidence in corroboration of plaintiff’s statement as to the promise of marriage, and also on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. When the case first came on for trial, it was settled out of Court for £1,000 and costs. The plaintiff subsequently obtained a new trial from the Court of Appeal on the ground that she had not assented to the settlement of the case. At the trial before Baron Pollock the Jury stopped the case and found a verdict for defendant. The plaintiff now appealed on the grounds stated but the Court dismissed the appeal.
Liverpool Mercury
24th December, 1895
Miss Catherine Kempshall, the lady whose breach of promise action has been brought so repeatedly under the notice of various of the Supreme Court, yesterday added to her already experience of our legal tribunals by appearing before the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion House Justice Room, to answer a charge of assault. There can be no doubt that the fickle goddess who presides over the fate of litigations treated Miss Kempshall somewhat harshly. She sued a gentleman named Holland for breach of promise of marriage. The action came on for hearing last January, and it was settled in her favour for one thousand pounds. Miss Kempshall was not content with this compromise, and persuaded the Court of Appeal to grant her a new trial. The fresh hearing took place in July, and terminated in verdict for Mr Holland. Notwithstanding their victory, Mr Holland’s solicitors offered the Plaintiff three hundred pounds down and one hundred a year for life, if she would cease from troubling their client with her litigious attentions. Once again she let the golden moment slip. She wanted, it seems, a thousand pounds down and an annuity of a hundred and fifty pounds, and moved the Court of Appeal for another new trial. The Lord Justices dismissed her application, and she was left to endure the spretae injuria formae without the pecuniary solatium which had been on more than one occasion within her grasp. It is natural that Miss Kempshall should feel considerably mortified at the result of her ventures into the devious and certain paths of litigation, and no one would blame her very severely if she had yielded for the moment to an evidently excitable nature. But when she proceeds (as she did some days ago) to avenge her fancied wrongs, by striking a clerk of her opponents solicitors in the face, it is necessary that she should be gently yet firmly reminded that there are lengths to which even disappointed suitors cannot be permitted to go. The Lord Mayor impressed this fact on Miss Kempshall yesterday, by requiring her to find a surety in fifty pounds to keep the peace for six months, or go to prison for a fortnight.

An outrage, the sequel to some sensational litigation, took place yesterday in one of the busiest parts of Liverpool. Soon after four o’clock a lady named Miss Kempshall, with her solicitor, walked up Water Street and entered the offices of Mr Edgar Holland, in Drury Buildings. Mr Holland is a merchant, and managing director of Santa Barbara Gold Mining Company Limited and Pitangui Gold Mining Company Limited and resides at Liscard, Cheshire. Miss Catherine Kempshall, who is a lady of fair complexion and about thirty years of age, asked for Mr Holland. She was shown to his office, and when seated at the table raised a revolver and fired at him thrice, exclaiming in an excited manner that she had two more to serve in the same way. She was at once arrested and conveyed to the Central Bridewell, and Mr Holland meanwhile was taken on an ambulance to the Northern Hospital, where he was found to be very weak from loss of blood. All three shots had taken effect, a bullet having lodged in the chest, and wounds being inflicted in the right thigh and wrist. Miss Kempshall was formerly an actress, and whilst performing at a Liverpool theatre she made the acquaintance of Mr Holland. About twelve months since she brought an action against him for breach of promise, claiming £10,000. The case was tried in London, and her counsel, on her behalf, compromised the suit by accepting £1,000. This the plaintiff subsequently repudiated, and another suit resulted in favour of the defendant Holland. For some time the latter had been pursued by Miss Kempshall, and a short time since she was charged with threatening him, and bound over to keep the peace. She had been observed for a day or two in the vicinity of Water Street. The four-chambered revolver found on her had three cartridges discharged.

Magisterial Proceedings

Prisoner was charged before the Liverpool Stipendiary to-day with attempting to murder Mr Holland. Prisoner was neatly dressed in black, and seemed to be very much depressed. She was not represented by counsel. – A police constable said that yesterday afternoon he was called to Mr Holland’s office, where he found the prisoner, who was being held by Mr Alsop, a solicitor. She was clutching a dagger tightly in one hand, and a revolver lay at her feet. Mr Holland said, “That woman shot.” The prisoner was taken in charge, and witness afterwards went to her lodgings and found a package containing nineteen revolver cartridges. The revolver which he picked up in Mr Holland’s office contained five cartridges, four of which had been discharged. Mr Alsop also handed witness a bullet. When prisoner was charged with attempting to murder Mr Holland, she said, “Anything I say may be used in evidence against me. I had better reserve my defence.” Prisoner was remanded for eight days. Mr Holland’s condition is said to be slightly better this morning, but he is by no means out of danger. One of the bullets penetrated his lungs, and as he has suffered from a weak chest the wound is regarded as additionally serious.

Liverpool Mercury
2nd November, 1896
The Liverpool Shooting Case

Although Mr. Edgar S. Holland, the Liverpool merchant, who was shot in his office on Thursday afternoon by Miss Catherine Kempshall, still lies at the Northern Hospital in a critical condition, the belief is entertained by the doctors in attendance that he will ultimately recover. In accordance with an order made by the Magistrates, on the application of Mr. W. H. Quilliam, her solicitor, Miss Kempshall has undergone a medical examination as to her mental condition. Dr. A. E. Davis attended on behalf of the Accused, and Dr. G. Whittle represented the police, the Prisoner’s solicitor and Detective-Sergeant Robertson being also present. The doctors remained with Miss Kempshall for about three hours, and she was put through various tests, with the view of ascertaining her condition mentally. It is stated that the examination furnished conclusive evidence that the lady suffers from delusions. She complains of having long suffered from insomnia, and it is believed that the conclusion arrived at by the medical gentlemen was that the Prisoner was suffering from what is known as hysteria-monomania. Since her arrest Miss Kempshall has written a letter to her sister, who is a married lady residing in the South of England. As the letter contained the writer’s account of what took place in Mr. Holland’s office when the shooting took place, the police deemed it advisable, in the interests of justice, to retain the original, but a copy of the document has been furnished to the Prisoner’s solicitor, to be forwarded to her sister. Miss Kempshall was again brought before the Stipendiary Magistrate on Saturday morning, and was formally remanded for a week. The prisoner looked haggard and ill. The proceedings in Court occupied only a few minutes, and as they took place shortly before the usual hour of opening, a number of people who arrived at ten o’clock, anxious to have a look at the Prisoner, were disappointed. After being removed to the cells below the Court, Miss Kempshall had a prolonged interview with her solicitor. Later in the day she was removed to Walton Gaol.

Liverpool Mercury
7th November, 1896
Liverpool Shooting Case

Catherine Kempshall was again brought before the stipendiary magistrate at Liverpool on Saturday, when she was represented by Mr. Quiiiam, solicitor. She presented a very haggard appearance, and seemed to be suffering keen mental anxiety. Inspector Robertson stated that, though Mr. Holland was going on favourably, it would be some time before he was able to appear, and therefore he asked for a further remand for a week. This course was assented to by the solicitor, and the prisoner was remanded. It is understood that as the result of the medical examination of the prisoner at the Bridewell last week she was found to be suffering from hysteria monomania in an active form. Before making any report to the magistrates the medical men will have another examination a week hence.

Liverpool Mercury
9th November, 1896
The Liverpool Shooting Case
Grave Condition Of Mr. Holland

Catherine Kempshall was further remanded at Liverpool on Saturday, charged with attempting to murder Edgar Holland, a merchant, by shooting him. Mr. Holland passed a bad night and his condition is now grave.

Liverpool Mercury
14th November, 1896
The Liverpool Shooting Case
Death of Mr. Holland

Mr. E.S. Holland, who was shot on the 29th ult. in his offices, Drury Buildings, Liverpool, by Miss Catherine Kempshall, under remarkable circumstances, succumbed to his injuries at the Liverpool Northern Hospital at ten minutes to seven on Wednesday evening. Throughout the day it was evident that patient was in extremis, and Drs. Barr and Pusey, the honorary medical officers of the institution, who have had deceased under their care, held two consultations, as a consequence of which all hopes of recovery were absolutely abandoned. At intervals during the afternoon Mr. Holland regained consciousness, but this was only momentarily, and at the time of death he was insensible to all around him. At the beside as he passed away were gathered his brothers – Walter, Charles (London), and Frederick (Gresford); his sister, Mrs. Carlisle, and her husband (who had come down from London). And Miss Holland, together with Dr. Home, the resident medical officer, and the nurses. Throughout his illness the deceased made no allusion to the affray, and every care was taken by the medical staff that he should be asked no questions on the subject for fear of upsetting him in view of his critical condition. Mr. Holland was a man of splendid physique, and to this fact is attributed the success with which he at first combated the effects of his injuries, notwithstanding that he had been subject to asthma. In fact, it is more than likely that had it not been for the attack of pneumonia which supervened he would have ultimately recovered. This great reserve of strength is pointed out as being sufficient proof that the deceased was a man of regular habits and healthy living. When brought to the hospital immediately after the occurrence it was discovered that the pericardium had been penetrated and was full of blood, but despite this fact the heart gave no indications of failure until Wednesday. The left lung had also collapsed as a result of the bullet wound. The other bullets were found to have lodged in the middle third of the right thigh and in the wrist of the left hand, from which it was assumed that Mr. Holland had at the critical moment raised his hand to protect his face. The operation of extracting the bullet from the left lung was made on the 30th ult., and they seemed thoroughly satisfactory. The patient seemed to improve after the operation, and strong hopes were entertained that he would recover; but shortly afterwards he began to ramble, and this indicated a change for the worse. A state of coma supervened, and the patient gradually sank. The deceased, Edgar Swinton Holland, was forty years of age, and, as has already been stated, was well known in commercial circles both in Liverpool and London. From what could be ascertained it would seem that he was chiefly engaged in looking after his investments in a number of mining companies, in some of which he was a director, notably the Santa Barbara Gold Mining Company, and the Pitangui Gold Mining Company, of which two concerns he was managing director. His father was at one time a leading citizen in Liverpool, and he was brother to Mr. Walter Holland, at present of the firm of Lamport and Holt, one of the foremost Liverpool shipowners. Deceased was a bachelor, and was possessed of considerable means, is being estimated that he was worth a quarter of a million sterling. He is said to be free with is money. Throughout the greater part of Wednesday Miss Kempshall remained in custody at the Main Bridewell in case her presence might be required at the hospital, but as evening came on and it because evident that the patient would pass away unconsciously she was taken back to Walton Gaol in a cab. At the time of her departure for Walton, the death of Mr. Holland had, of course, not taken place. It is rumoured that since her last appearance in court Miss Kempshall has undergone a change for the worse, and she has grown exceedingly haggard. At Walton Gaol she has been provided with superior fare to that id the ordinary prisoners, and as an inmate of the hospital ward she has been allowed what food and nourishment is deemed advisable.

16th November, 1896
Glasgow Herald
Crimes and Charges
The Liverpool Shooting Tragedy

The woman Catherine Kempshall, who is in custody for having fatally wounded with a revolver Mr. Edgar Holland, a Liverpool merchant, was brought before the Liverpool Stipendiary on Saturday and remanded on a charge of wilful murder. The court room was crowded by people anxious to get a glimpse of the prisoner, who looked pale and haggard. Mr. Cripps, the prosecuting solicitor, intimated that they would be unable to bring on the case for trial at the present Assizes, which open to-day (Monday). The funeral of Mr. Holland took place on Saturday afternoon.

23rd November, 1896
The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle
The Liverpool Shooting Case
Miss Kempshall’s Condition

At Liverpool Police Court, on Saturday, Catherine Kempshall was brought up on a charge of having murdered Edgar Swinton Holland, a Liverpool merchant, by shooting him with a revolver on October 29th. Miss. Kempshall, who was assisted up the steps by a female warder, looked very pale and ill. The proceedings were very brief and formal. The Stipendiary, having ascertained both parties wished for a remand made the order accordingly, and prisoner was put back for seven days. Prior to the public proceedings a certificate signed by Dr. Glynn Whittle, the Bridewell surgeon, was handed to the stipendiary. The certificate stated that Miss Kempshall had been examined that morning and the effects of insomnia, and recommending that she be not detained in court longer than was absolutely necessary.

28th November, 1898
Berrow’s Worcester Journal

The Coroner’s inquiry into the death of Edgar Swinton Holland, a merchant who was fatally shot in his office by Catherine Kempshall, was resumed before Mr. Sampson, on Wednesday.
Mr. Alsop, solicitor, who was present at the fatal interview and who gave evidence at the opening of the inquiry, was cross-examined at great length by Mr. Quillam, on behalf of the accused woman. During the interview he said she got very excited and spoke in a loud voice. She fired the four shots very rapidly, and when witness seized her was about to fire a fifth.
A number of extraordinary letters from Miss Kempshall to Mr. Holland were read by the Coroner, in which she upbraided him for neglecting her, and finally said she had gone to Liverpool and would stay there until Mr. Holland settled with her. Another letter, written by Miss Kempshall in goal on October 30 and addressed to her sister, was also read. In it she said Mr. Holland had tried to persuade her to commit perjury, and that she remonstrated with him for his heartlessness, and shot him in the legs. She continued, “Don’t grieve about me, dear, and try and keep it from mother if possible. Hope sincerely I have injured him for his cruel treatment if you and others from me.”
Mrs. Matthews, deceased’s housekeeper, deposed to seeing Miss Kempshall at his residence on several dates. On one occasion she spoke of her grievances against Mr. Holland, and said, “This sort of thing leads to murder and he had better beware.” On another occasion she said. “if he does not do what I want I shall have to bring a revolver.”
Maud Park, with whom Miss Kempshall lodged after coming to Liverpool, said the accused woman was accustomed to talk volubly and excitably over her grievances, and would continue to do so when left alone.
Another witness deposed to conversing with Miss Kempshall and hearing her threaten to shoot a gentleman in the city who had defrauded her of £20,000. She said she would shoot him on French ground, whilst he was on his holidays, as a French jury would acquit her when they knew what provocation she had endured.
Medical and other evidence having been given, the jury returned a verdict of “wilful murder against Catherine Kempshall.”

Liverpool Mercury
20th March, 1897
Murder Trial At Liverpool

At the Liverpool Assizes yesterday, before Mr. Justice Collins, Catherine Kempshall, aged 32, was placed upon her trial for the wilful murder, on October 29 last, of Mr. Edgar Swinton Holland, merchant, at his offices in Liverpool. The Court was crowded, and great interest was excited in the case. When the prisoner entered the dock, accompanied by a female warder, it was apparent that she was in a very excited state.
The Clerk of the Assizes formally charged the prisoner with murder, whereupon Miss Kempshall in a loud voice replied, “I am not guilty,” and in spite of an appeal by her counsel proceeded to make a statement in most excited tones. She declared that the counsel who had defended her in the Civil Court should have protected her. The case was one of conspiracy, and the Judge who ought to have heard it tried should not have rejected evidence improperly. She could (the prisoner said) prove conspiracy long ago. The prisoner said, “I did not kill him. He rushed at me to take the revolver away and it went off in the struggle. Alsop is a liar, and it would not be his profession if he wasn’t. That is my experience, and I speak of things as I find them.”
While the jurymen were being sworn Mr. Madden had a conversation with the prisoner, whose excitement could with difficulty be suppressed. Among other angry outbursts she described counsel who had previously defended her as “Judas,” and said she hoped they would never see daylight again. Ultimately she was prevailed upon to be quiet, and she was provided with a chair.
For the defence witnesses were called to depose that the prisoner suffered from delusions.
During the hearing of the medical evidence the prisoner’s sister, who was present to give evidence, fainted. Shortly afterwards she walked towards the witness-box, when the prisoner, standing up, called to her sister excitedly. “Don’t do it; don’t do it. Do what I tell you. They can’t make you; they won’t believe the truth. Let them go.”
Witness then declined to go into the box.
In summing up the case for the defence counsel alluded to the prisoner’s delusions, whereupon she interjected excitedly, “They are not delusions, they are true.” Counsel proceeded to argue that the prisoner did not appreciate the nature and gravity of the act she had committed, when the prisoner again jumped to her feet and indignantly remarked, “I am not a maniac; I am quite sane”. It is true what I say.” The female warder succeeded in pacifying the prisoner, who resumed her seat and listened to counsel.
Counsel for the prosecution followed, and his lordship summed up without interruption.
The Jury retired, and after an absence of an hour and 35 minutes returned into Court with a verdict of guilty, and a strong recommendation to mercy.
Before sentence was passed the prisoner made a long statement as to her wrongs, and what passed at the fatal interview. She said the revolver went off in the struggle, and she did not know where the shots went. She had been deceived, and was told that she had no legal claim on Holland.
Sentence of death was then passed in the usual form.

The Dundee Courier & Argus
Monday, 22nd March, 1897
The Liverpool Murderess
Movement For A Reprieve

On Saturday afternoon Mr. Arthur Kempshall, of Portsmouth, and Mrs. Galton, of Horsham, Sussex, brother and sister of the condemned woman, Catherine Kempshall, had an interview with her at Walton Gaol. They were met at the prison gate by the Rev. D. Morris, Protestant chaplain, who informed them that the prisoner was more collected than at the trial. At the interview, which took place in the customary apartment in the presence of warders, she showed considerable firmness, and when her brother and sister were overcome with emotion she told them to bear up, that she was content to die. She further said that any English girl who had been treated as she had been by Holland would have done as she had done. She arranged that her letters and other property should be handed over to her brother. Mr. Quillam, solicitor for the defence at the trail, is preparing a petition for signature in favour of reprieve.

Glasgow Herald
Thursday, 25th March, 1897
Crimes And Charges

The Condemned Woman At Liverpool
A strong effort is being put forth to obtain a reprieve for Catherine Kempshall, who last week was sentenced to death at Liverpool Assizes for the murder of Edgar S. Holland, a prominent Liverpool merchant. A petition on behalf of the unfortunate woman is being largely signed, and representations will be laid before the Home Secretary with the view of showing that at the time of the tragedy she was not responsible for her actions. It is said that Miss Kempshall has now become quieter in her demeanour, and that she regards her terrible sentence with indifference.

Liverpool Mercury
Friday, 26th March, 1897
The petition for the respite of the sentence on the condemned woman Catherine Kempshall has received about six thousand signatures. Mr. Quillam, Miss. Kempshall’s solicitor, yesterday, on the invitation of Mr. Walter Holland, elder brother of the murdered man, had an interview with that gentleman, and received from him an assurance that the leading members of the family of the deceased will support the efforts of the petitioners in securing a commutation of the sentence. Among the signatories are twenty-four members of a local theatrical company and several ministers, one of whom had offered to hold a meeting to ask the public to sign a petition.
Liverpool Mercury
Friday, 2nd April, 1897
The Home Secretary’s Decision
The authorities at Walton Gaol have received intimation from the Home Office that a respite has been granted in the case of Catherine Kempshall, who was condemned to death at the recent Liverpool Assizes for the murder of Mr. Edgar Swinton Holland, a merchant, in his office in Water Street, Liverpool, on the 29th October last. Yesterday, Mr. Quillam, solicitor for the condemned woman, received the following letter from the Home Office:-
Whitehall, 31st March, 1897
Sir, - With reference to your application on behalf of Catherine Kempshall, now in prison at Liverpool under sentence of death, I am directed by the Secretary of State to inform you that, after medical inquiry into the medical condition of the prisoner, he has advised her Majesty to respite the capital sentence with a view to the immediate removal of the convict to the Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum. – I am, sir, your obedient servant. KENELM E. DIGBY.
When Miss Kempshall was informed of the respite she seemed to be little concerned, and maintained her attitude of indifference as to her fate. The instructions of the Home Secretary as to the removal of the convict were quickly carried out, Miss Kempshall being conveyed from Walton Jail on Thursday morning to the Woodside Railway Station, Birkenhead, where she left by the forenoon train to Broadmoor. During the journey she was allowed to wear her own clothes. She was in charge of a male and female warder, and maintained a quiet demeanour throughout.
To The Editors Of The Liverpool Mercury
Gentlemen, - Now that the Home Secretary has given his decision in this matter, which fully justifies the defence raised at the assize trial herein, permit me not only to thank the 17,796 persons who affixed their names to the memorial asking for a commutation of the sentence of capital punishment passed upon the prisoner, but also the hundreds of persons who have written to me and interested themselves about the case; also Mr. J.W. Alsop and Mr Walter Holland for their kindness in supporting the petition, and the detective force, particularly Superintendent-Detective Strettel and Detective-Sergeant Duckworth, for the mode in which they and the prosecuting solicitor, Mr. Cripps, gave such information and assistance to me as it was possible for them within the limits of their duty to render, both the counsel who appeared at the trial, and last, but not certainly least, Dr. Albert E. Davies, whose professional assistance and medical knowledge were practically invaluable to the defence. “All’s well that ends well.”
15, Manchester Street, Liverpool, April 1, 1897.
Last Modified 28 Dec 2012Created 11 Feb 2021 using Reunion for Macintosh