Thomas William John Corrigan

218

Dianne Jones on 9th January 2022

FOOTNOTE 2: DEATH SENTENCE COMMUTED From 'The Daily News', February 25, 1856, p5: CORRIGAN REPRIEVED This wretched criminal, who was to have been executed today for the murder of his wife, was reprieved at a late hour on Saturday. It was known that petitions had been sent to the government from a portion of the jury who tried the case, and also from the prisoner himself, and some of the relatives of the deceased woman, praying for a commutation of the sentence, but no notice was taken of them, and it was generally considered from the nature of the case and the circumstances under which the crime was committed, that they were not likely to have any effect. Every preparation was consequently made for carrying out the sentence, and the workmen were employed during the whole of Saturday in fixing the usual barriers for the prevention of accidents from the pressure of the crowd. The most extraordinary part of the proceedings is the suddenness with which the execution has been countermanded by Sir G. Grey, and the unusual character of the proceeding. The feelings of the wretched prisoner had been wound up to an extreme pitch. On Thursday and Friday he had taken, as he thought, a last farewell of his children and some other relatives. On Saturday morning even, he had been visited by some remaining members of his family, and had repeatedly acknowledged the justice of his sentence. The authorities received no intimation from the Secretary of State for the Home Department of any intention on the part of the government to interfere with the course of the law until late in the afternoon, when the sheriffs received the usual formal notice that the execution of the prisoner was respited during her Majesty’s pleasure. At this time the whole of the outside preliminaries had been completed, and it was too late to take any steps to remove the barriers that had been prepared, and yesterday being Sunday they of course remained during the whole of the day. Crowds of persons consequently assembled, and the general impression among them was that the story of the reprieve was a hoax, and the preparations that had been made for the execution confirmed this opinion. The wretched prisoner was in a calm and resigned state; but, when the news of the reprieve was communicated to him, he at first nearly fainted, and a considerable time elapsed before he recovered his consciousness. A similar instance of a reprieve being sent so shortly before the day of execution, except under particular circumstances and where there was a doubt as to the guilt of the party, has never before occurred." (http://www.perthdps.com/convicts/w4720.htm)

218

Dianne Jones on 9th January 2022

FOOTNOTE 1: REPORT OF HIS TRIAL FOR MURDER From: 'The Daily News', February 7, 1856: Central Criminal Court MURDER IN THE MINORIES Thomas William John Corrigan, 29, was indicted for the wilful murder of Louisa Corrigan. Mr. Payne conducted the prosecution; Mr. Ballantine and Mr. F.H. Lewis were counsel for the prisoner. Mr. Payne, in opening the case, said that the charge against the prisoner was that of wilful murder committed upon the person of his wife, and the facts were very short and extremely clear, and no doubt could be entertained that the prisoner had destroyed the life of the unfortunate deceased. He then gave a brief outline of the circumstances under which the crime was committed, and he concluded by stating that he believed the only question that would be raised on behalf of the prisoner was with regard to the state of his mind at the time the act took place. The following evidence was then adduced: Mrs. Elizabeth Fearon said - On Christmas-day last I was at Mr. Burton’s house in the Minories, with my husband. The prisoner, the deceased, and two persons named Mahoney, were also there. The whole party remained there all night. The women went to bed about half-past 12, but the men continued sitting up. We had been playing cards and drinking spirits during the evening. I got up about 9 o’clock the next morning, and I then saw the prisoner go to his employment, which was at the East India Warehouse, in Leadenhall-street. The prisoner and his wife lived at Bethnal-green. Two of their children were at my house and I and the deceased went there and took the children to her own house. The prisoner came there, and appeared very cross, and asked whey she had not been to the baby. The deceased made some reply, and the prisoner said she might have gone home to the baby. Witness then said that the baby was all right, and the prisoner was asked to have some tea, and he said he could have tea at home. She asked him to have tea at Mr. Burton’s, and after making some objection, he consented, and they all went out together. It began to rain, and the prisoner called a cab, and on the way he appeared cheerful, until they got over to Mr. Burton’s house. The horse shied, and nearly overturned the cab, and the prisoner made no effort to save them, and he afterwards appeared very strange in his manner. They got to Mr. Burton’s about four o’clock, and witness and deceased went into the bedroom, to take their wet clothes off, leaving the prisoner and Mr. and Mrs. Burton, and the two Mahoneys, in the sitting room. The two rooms were quite close together. They had not been in the bedroom more than a minute, when she saw the prisoner in the passage between the two rooms, and from the sound she heard she thought he was opening a gate that was on the stair head. The deceased called out “Who is that?” but no answer was given, and witness said, “Is that you, Tom?” The prisoner made no answer, but walked at once into the bedroom in a hasty manner, and laid hold of his wife and threw her towards the bed. Witness asked him what he was about, and he then threw the deceased upon the child’s bed, and commenced striking her. She rushed towards him and tried to separate them, but could not do so. The prisoner had his back towards her, and when she put up her hand she felt a pain in her arm, but did not notice at the moment that she was wounded. The prisoner appeared to be striking his wife all this time, and she screamed for assistance, and then, observing that there was blood on her hand, she rushed out of the room. The deceased was screaming all this time. She was lying on the bed with her face uppermost, and the prisoner appeared to be striking her about the body. She did not observe that the prisoner had anything in his hand. After she left the room, the two Mahonys and Mr. and Mr. Burton went in, and she heard the deceased call out, “Betsy, Betsy,” Witness looked round, and saw the deceased behind her, and she then appeared in a fainting state, and she fell down on the steps of her door. Witness was at the time going to the shop of Mr. Cook, the doctor, and in a short time the deceased was also brought there, carried by four men. The prisoner had been drinking all the previous night, but in the morning he had washed himself, and appeared somewhat refreshed, and quite to know what he was about. When they got into the cab the prisoner appeared to be under the influence of drink. Witness had known the prisoner and his wife for seven years. By the Court - On this morning the prisoner looked very wild about the eyes, which he generally did after he had been drinking. Examination continued. - She did not think the prisoner and his wife lived very happily together. Cross-examined. - The deceased was unusually violent, but so far as witness ever saw, the prisoner always behaved very kindly to her. He appeared to be more given to drink during the last six months than he was formerly. She had heard that he had suffered from delirium tremens, and the deceased told her that she had been obliged to sit up all night with him on account of his fancying that something was hanging about the bed. She was not aware that the prisoner was jealous of his wife. He had been drinking for a week before the occurrence took place, and his eyes looked very wild. A short time before this, the prisoner, when he was walking in the Park, struck a young man whom he had never seen before, and who gave him no provocation, and it took a good deal of trouble to pacify him. He had evidently been drinking after he left Mr. Burton’s house, and his eyes were swollen and bloodshot, and he looked quarrelsome and cross. He appeared quite unconcerned when the cab was nearly overturned. Upon one occasion she saw the deceased scratch the prisoner’s face, and he merely held her hands and made no attempt to strike her. By Mr. Payne - That occurred two years ago. She believed the prisoner attended regularly to his work. He was engaged from nine in the morning till three or four in the afternoon. Anne Burton deposed that she lived with her husband, in Church-street, Minories. The last witness was her sister. On the day in question the prisoner and his wife were at her house and she observed that when the prisoner came first he appeared in good spirits and very happy. They drank gin-and-water and brandy-and-water during Christmas day, and when witness and Mrs. Fearon went to bed they left the men drinking. About 11 o’clock at night she observed that the prisoner looked very dull. She saw him again the following morning. He was then dressed and ready for business, and he drank two cups of cocoa hastily and left the house, and he said before he went that he did not feel very well. She saw him again at her house about half-past two o’clock, and he was then very much intoxicated. He went upstairs and returned in about a minute, and he then left the house. About four o’clock in the afternoon he came again, accompanied by her sister and the deceased, and they appeared to be talking cheerfully together. In a very short time witness heard a faint shriek and afterwards very violent cries from the bedroom, and she rant there, and some one passed her hurriedly. When she got into the bedroom she saw the prisoner lying on her child’s bed with an open knife in his hand. She ran to him and laid hold of the knife, and he struggled violently with her and threw her from him and she screamed for help and asked the prisoner if he wished to do her any harm, and he made no answer. She said to him, “What have you done?” and he looked wildly round and made no answer. Her husband and Mr. Mahony then came to her assistance and took the knife from the prisoner, and she locked it up. She had heard that the prisoner and his wife lived unhappily, but she knew nothing about it herself. By Mr. Ballantine - The prisoner was a very quiet, harmless man. She never saw him out of temper. When she saw him first in the bed-room he appeared dreadfully wild and excited. Edward Burton, the husband of the last witness, said that after the women had gone to bed, the prisoner, himself and two Mahonys remained in the sitting room, but they did not drink very much during the night, and the prisoner, in the morning, did not appear intoxicated. He did not consider he was intoxicated at any time, but he looked very strange after his wife had left the room. About half past two o’clock on 26th December the prisoner came to his house again, and asked for his “Missus,” and witness told him she was in the next room. She was not there at that time. About four o’clock the prisoner, the deceased, and Mr. Fearon came again, and after the two women had gone into the bed room the prisoner followed them, and immediately afterwards he heard screaming, and rushed into the bed room, and saw his wife there, holding the prisoner upon the bed. No one else was in the room at this time, and he did not know what had become of Me. Fearon or the deceased. He could not say whether the prisoner was intoxicated at this time, but he never saw him in such a state as he was on this day. By Mr. Ballantine - His appearance was totally different to that he presented when he was intoxicated. He appeared in a frantic state; his eyes glared, and there was a thick perspiration on his face. When he first came into the room he noticed there was something peculiar about his appearance at that time. During the night they were sitting up the prisoner appeared quite lost, and not to know what he was about. This did not certainly arise from the drink he had taken. Witness was sorry to say the deceased frequently provoked the prisoner, but he never attempted to strike her or use any violence. He had seen the deceased strike the prisoner. After the occurrence the prisoner was quite passive; he stood fixed and witness led him downstairs and gave him into custody. Nearly all this time his eyes rolled wildly, and he did not speak a word. He was aware that seven or eight years ago the prisoner received an injury in his head, but he knew nothing of the circumstances. Mr. Cook, a surgeon, was then examined. He proved that he was called in to see the unfortunate deceased, and that he found her quite dead, with several wounds upon her breast, one of which had penetrated her heart, and according to his opinion must have caused almost immediate death. Upon being cross-examined, this gentleman said that in all cases where a person had been attacked by delirium tremens he was always subject to a recurrence of the malady, and it might come on very suddenly, but generally something occurred some hours before to give notice of its approach. He also said that any one under the influence of delirium tremens was at the same time undoubtedly insane. Swollen eyelids and thick perspiration on the face were some of the symptoms of the disorder. If a person were subject to the malady, very little additional excitement would be calculated to produce it, and when under the influence of the disorder, the party was subject to all kinds of delusions, in short, it was a kind of temporary madness. A man would commit the most extravagant and violent actions and not be the least aware afterwards what he had been doing. By Mr. Payne - Some persons under the influence of ordinary intoxication would exhibit many of the appearances of suffering from delirium tremens. Where any one was given to habits of intoxication want of sleep might tend to produce the disorder. By the Court - He knew nothing whatever of the prisoner’s habits, and he never saw him until this transaction. Mr. Gercon, inspector of the metropolitan police proved that the prisoner was placed in his charge in the afternoon of the 26th December, and from information he received he went to the place where the deceased had been taken, and found that she was dead. The prisoner appeared a little excited when he first saw him, but when he returned he was calm. He asked the prisoner whether he knew what he had done, and he replied, “Yes, I have stabbed my wife.” Witness told him that she was dead, and that the charge against him would be that of wilful murder. The prisoner upon hearing this appeared much affected, and burst into tears. On the following day he asked if he could see his wife, and witness told him he could not. The prisoner then said, “All I can recollect is that I gave her one stab, so -“ and at the same time made a motion with his hand, and he then burst into tears. The witness added that two letters written by the prisoner were subsequently placed in his possession, and they were produced. These letters were addressed by the prisoner to some members of his family, and they were put in and read. The following is a copy of them. “House of Detention, Friday Afternoon. “Dear Betsy, - With a broken heart I write you to take all care you can of my poor dear children till I can make some arrangements with my friends. Do not pay any rent out of that trifle I left you. Please God they will be able to get up a benefit for me at the theatre, or some place, and I expect there will be six pounds allowed for the funeral. You must get it done as cheap as possible, but do not slight the remains of my poor murdered wife. Oh, Betsy, save me a lock of my poor Jessie’s hair, not that she is gone I would give anything to undo what I have done. Be kind to my poor helpless children, and the great God that I trust to for mercy on my crime, will reward you. When you come with my shirt bring my blue waistcoat and take the one I have got on away with you. You must get the most you can upon it for the children; also a collar or two and my thick neck tie. If you can carry baby I shall be glad to see her. Oh Betsy, - forgive me for what I have done, and beg of your father to do so too. None of your feelings, bad as they are, can be like mine, as I am the cause of all. If you cannot come tomorrow, you cannot come till Monday, when if you bring a little butter with you I should be glad. Give my love to my poor father and sisters, and accept the same yourself. - From your heart-broken, wretched brother-in-law, T. CORRIGAN. You must try and come at twelve o’clock.” `”House of Detention, Friday night. “My dear Mrs. Fearon. - In the midst of my dreary solitude, I write to you to beg you to forgive me for the injustice I inflicted on you in my rashness of Wednesday, though I earnestly feel most assured you believe they were accidental. But, my God, if I had wounded you in a vital part as well as my wife, what would have been my torture to know that I had committed two murders. Let me beg you to forgive me for the horrors of body and mind I have caused you, and also Anne and your sister. Tell them I hope their fate will be happier than mine; give my kindest and best respects them both; ask them not to hate me. Tell them that I would not deliberately hurt a mouse, either drunk or sober, much less go so bloodthirsty to work as to buy the knife in cold blood to murder a woman; little did I think when I bought it what would become of it, but it is done and may God have mercy upon me for it. Give my respects to Tom and Dan and all who inquire after me, and thank them for their interest in my behalf. If you have an opportunity can you see Jack and ask him to exert himself about a counsel for me as soon as possible. I have written to Ben Rose. I have never been very backward in assisting others, and amongst them all something may be done, but do not have _______; have somebody better than him - have a counsel for criminal cases, and send him to me before Thursday, so that he may watch the case at Arbour-square on Thursday morning if possible. I will endeavour to collect my energies together, and pray to God to give me strength to go through it all. Pray for me to all of you, for we none of us know what is over our heads. Who would have thought on Christmas night that I should have been here now. Good-bye. God bless you, and Tom and Anne and Lucy and Dan, and all of you. That God may take you all into his good keeping is the earnest and heartfelt prayer of your faithful and true fried, “T. CORRIGAN” This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr. Ballantine then made a forcible address to the jury for the defence. He said he felt it was quite unnecessary for him to bespeak their anxious attention to the melancholy case they were called upon to dispose of, because he was sure they would bestow it, and he did hope that upon the evidence for the prosecution they would come to the merciful conclusion that the prisoner was not guilty of the crime of which he was accused, which was that he had of his malice aforethought murdered his unfortunate wife. He submitted that it was clear, from the evidence, that the prisoner was on good terms with his wife almost up to the moment of the unhappy occurrence, and that the act of destruction had been committed under some uncontrollable impulse, and could only be accounted for by the supposition that the prisoner was not in his right senses at the time the act was committed. He then referred to the evidence as to the prisoner having been given to habits of intoxication, and to his condition at the time the affair happened, and he urged the extreme probability that the crime was committed by the prisoner while under the influence of a sudden attack of delirium tremens, which rendered him unable to know the consequences or the effect of his acts., The learned counsel also urged that if the jury should not be satisfied upon this point they would still be at liberty to say the prisoner was not guilty of murder, but that he was guilty of manslaughter only, if they should be of opinion that his mind was so disturbed by the liquor he had taken that he was unable to reason or to form any definite intention at the time he attacked his wife. Mr. Justice Wightman then summed up, and in the course of his observations to the jury, he said it appeared to him that upon the evidence before them it would be impossible for them to find the prisoner guilty of manslaughter, and that if they should consider him a reasonable being, they could find no other verdict than one of wilful murder. The only question then was whether he was in such a state of mind as would render him responsible for his actions; and this certainly was a most important question to be considered. It was his duty to tell them, that before they could come to the conclusion that the prisoner was not responsible on the ground of insanity, they must be satisfied that at the time the act was committed the prisoner was labouring under such a defect of reason as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was committing and also that he was not aware he was doing wrong; and it appeared to him that there was no evidence in this case that would justify the jury in coming to either of these conclusions. The prisoner appeared to have acted in a perfectly rational manner up to the very moment of the fatal occurrence, and although tit was extremely probable that the act was committed under some sudden feeling of excitement; possibly aggravated by the drink he had taken, it would be calculated to lead to very dangerous consequences indeed if a man under such circumstances was not to be held responsible for his acts. The jury retired at half past three o’clock, and returned into court in about a quarter of an hour, when they gave their verdict, finding the prisoner guilty of wilful murder. Mr Harker, the principal usher of the court, them made the usual proclamation for silence, and the prisoner was at once called up for judgment. Mr. Justice Wightman, having put on the black cap, addressed the prisoner, and said that the jury, after a most careful investigation of his case, had come to the conclusion that he was guilty of having, in a paroxysm of anger for no adequate or appreciable cause, but which was very probably aggravated by his state of intoxication, caused his acts. As to h

218

Dianne Jones on 5th December 2021

IN WA: From his Fremantle jail record: CORRIGAN, Thomas William John: #4720, arrived 1 Jan 1858 per Nile Date of Birth: 1826 Marital Status: Widower 4 children Occupation: Clerk Literacy: Literate Sentence Place: London, London, England Crime: Murder Sentence Period: Life, commuted to penal servitude Ticket of Leave Date: 27 May 1861 Conditional Pardon Date: 7 Mar 1868 Comments: Clerk, self-employed, 1866-1867. To New South Wales, 10 Feb 1869, to Victoria, 23 Mar 1898, returned to Western Australia, 28 Jul 1900 (https://fremantleprison.com.au/). --00--

218

Dianne Jones on 5th December 2021

IN JAIL contd: 25 June, 1856: He was transferred to Pentonville prison, also in London. By the 1850s, Pentonville and Millbank were places for all male convicts to serve “their probationary term (now reduced to 9 months), after which they would be transported or sent to a public works prison. This function continued more or less (notable exceptions including the reception of military prisoners in the 1860s…) until the decision to remove it from the convict prison system in 1885” (https://www.prisonhistory.org). 6 April, 1865: Thomas CORRIGAN was transferred to Portland prison in Dorset (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951; Portland Prison; Prison Records to 1875). Opened in November 1848 as the first male convict public works prison, it received prisoners who had already undergone periods of separate confinement at Millbank, Pentonville and specially contracted local prisons (https://www.prisonhistory.org/prison/portland-prison/). At Portland, he was listed as prisoner #6943, 29 years old, Protestant, a widower with 4 children, able to read and write well and a labourer. By this time, he had spent more than 11 months in separate/solitary confinement — 1 month and 21 days at Newgate, 1 month and 12 days at Millbank and 9 months and 11 days at Pentonville. His character references from the previous jails and Portland were “good”. His next of kin was Mr Corrigan, 2 Shadwell Street, Bethnal Green. He had no previous convictions (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951; Portland Prison; Prison Records to 1875). --0-- 10 September, 1857: Thomas CORRIGAN was sent from Portland for transportation to WA per the Nile (Western Australia, Australia, Convict Records, 1846-1930; Convict Department, Registers; Convicts Transported Per Nile (R32)). --00--

218

Dianne Jones on 5th December 2021

IN JAIL IN ENGLAND: 3 January, 1856: Thomas William John CORRIGAN, listed as a 29 year old labourer, was taken into custody. He was committed for trial for the wilful murder of Louisa Corrigan by E Yardley Esq of the Thames Police and W Payne Esq, Coroner (UK, After-Trial Calendar of Prisoners, 1855-1931; 1856). --0-- 29 February, 1856: Thomas CORRIGAN was at Newgate prison in London before and following his conviction by Justice Wightman (UK, After-Trial Calendar of Prisoners, 1855-1931; 1856). --0-- 13 May, 1856: He was transferred to Millbank, at Westminster in London, which served as a holding facility for convicted prisoners before they were transported to Australia. --0--

218

Dianne Jones on 5th December 2021

TRIAL #242 -- 4 February, 1856: Old Bailey, London As per the above link to the full trial, Thomas William John Corrigan was indicted for the wilful murder of Louisa Corrigan; he was also charged upon the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence. He was originally sentenced to death but this was commuted to transportation for life (21 years). --00--

4

Jasmin Leuthold-Roberts on 23rd March 2015

1st marriage 24.12.1848 to Louisa Stripling. 2nd marriage 26.4.1863 to Mary Pearse.

7

Julian Raynor on 2nd December 2013

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t18560204-242-verdict-1&div=t18560204-242