Assuredly there never was murder more foul and more unnatural'? Poisoning, Women and Murder in 19th Century Australia
| Author | David Plater and Sue Milne |
| Position | BA/LLB, LLM, PhD, Senior Lecturer, School of Law, University of Adelaide; Deputy Director, South Australian Law Reform Institute; Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania/BA, LLB, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, School of Law, University of South Australia |
| Pages | 53-94 |
53
“ASSUREDLY THERE NEVER WAS MURDER MORE FOUL
AND MORE UNNATURAL”? POISONING, WOMEN AND
MURDER IN 19TH CENTURY AUSTRA LIA
D P* S M**
A
is article examines crimes commit ted by women involving the use of poison,
notably upon their husbands, in 19th century colonial Australia. It draws on the
extensive press archives of the period to determine if the historical and British
perceptions and experiences of femal e poisoners of the 19th century we re translated
to 19th century Australia. e notion of the supposedly devoted wife stealthily
poisoning her unsuspecting husband aroused parti cular revulsion and was viewed
as a threat to social order and as the ultimate betrayal of the female role. Women
accused of poisoning their husbands might therefore expect an uphill task within
the male dominated criminal justice system of the period in escaping conviction
and, if convicted, were unlikely to be regarded with sympathy and as worthy of a
grant of mercy. However, this article sug gests that the reality in colonial Australia
was subtler and more complex than the hostile and often exaggerated perception
of female poisoners might indicate. Women accused of capital crimes (including
murder) involving poison upon their husbands had every expectation of acquittal
and, even if convicted, su ch oenders were still often regarded with sympathy and
might even be spared the “ last extremity of the law”.
I. I
e enormity of the crime is very great. For a wife …
to deliberately administer poison to her husband day by
day till he sank into death before her eyes, while all the
time she professed aection for him, is the renement
of horror. Against an enemy … such a means of death
would be suciently horrible; but hiding the endish
* David Plater BA/ LLB, LLM, PhD, Senior Lectu rer, School of Law, Universit y of Adelaide;
Deputy Director, South A ustralian Law Refor m Institute; Adjunct Senior Lec turer, Faculty
of Law, University of Tasmania .
** Sue Milne BA, LL B, PhD Candid ate and Lectu rer, School of Law, University of South
Austral ia. e authors are g rateful for the a ssistanc e to this art icle of Associate Pr ofessor
Penny Crofts, Universit y of Technology Sydney and Deb orah Bowrin g, previous Law
Librarian, Univ ersity of Tasmania. Any v iews expressed in th is article are tho se of the authors
alone. e authors are a lso grateful for the assist ance of a Visiting S cholar Grant from t he
University of Tasmania f or 2019.
54 Canterbury Law Re view [Vol 25, 2019]
purpose behind the sanctity of wedlock, and dealing out
slow and torturing agonies to one who believes the hand
that is giving him poison is tr ying to preserve his life,
belongs to a species of crime for which death punishment
hardly seems retribution enough. Such crimes strike at
the root of our social system. If a man’s life is not safe in
the hands of one who has sworn to love and cherish him,
where shall there be safety? Crimes of the kind are not
easily discovered. Suspicion does not readily rest upon a
wife for the murder of her husband … e sacredness of
the marriage tie disarms suspicions.1
ese comments were oered in 1888 by the editor of the Sydney Morning
Herald following the conviction of Louisa Collins at an unprecedented third
trial for the murder of her second husband, by arsenic poisoning.2 Such
comments reect the strong views long held about the use of poison by
women to murder. ough such views about the “gentle art of poisoning”
date back to antiquity,3 it was in the 19th century that these fears re-emerged
as a source of major and recurring concern in both Brita in and Australia. e
notion of the supposedly devoted wife fatally poisoning her unsuspecting
husband constituted a “species of crime” of stealth and betrayal t hat attracted
particular revulsion. Viewed as a threat to social order and the ultimate
betrayal of the female role, it struck a deep chord in 19th century society.4
1 “e Bot any Murder” e Sydney Morning He rald (Sydney, 10 December 1888) at 11.
2 See fur ther Carol Baxter Black Wido w: the True Stor y of Australia’s First Female Seria l Killer
(Allen & Unwin, Sydne y, 2015); Nancy Cu shing “Woman as Murd erer: e Defence of
Louisa Coll ins” (1996) 1 Journal of Interd isciplinary Gen der Studies 147; Wendy Kukulies-
Smith and Susa n Priest “No Hope of Mercy for the Borg ia of Botany Bay, Louisa May C ollins,
the Last Woman Exe cuted in NSW, 1889” (2010) 10 Canb LR 144; Caroline Overing ton
Last Woman Hanged (Ha rperCollins, New York, 2014).
3 “e Fema le Poisoners” e Freeman’s Journal (Sydney, 9 May 1885) at 13; and “e Gentle
Art of Poisoning” e Daily News (Pert h, Australia, 31 December 1898) at 8. As e arly as 311
BC, a large numb er of Roman women were said to have conspired to p oison their husbands
and 170 were executed. See “Poisoni ng Manias” e Ma itland Mercur y (Austra lia, 27
December 1887) at 3.
4 See, for ex ample, “e Poisonings” e Sydn ey Morning Herald (Sydney, 10 December 1849)
at 3. “Poisoning is one of the cri mes of the more serious kind to wh ich women are particu larly
prone. It may be said, indee d, that poisonin g is the favourite fem ale murderer’s homicidal
method. Poisoning is s ubtle, sly, secret. It does not requ ire physical st rength and br ute
courage to ad minister poison . It may be done in the perform ance of the ordina ry domestic
duties. Poisoning may be m ade dicult of detect ion, if skilfully u sed. It is clean in operat ion.
ere is no shedding of bloo d about it … poisoning is a characte ristically femini ne criminal
method … It is not a comfort ing reection for t hose who are fond of boa sting about the
blessedness of mo dern civilisation, and who bel ieve in the inherent softnes s and goodness of
woman!”: “Poisoners in Petticoat s” e Australian Star (Sydney, 22 October 1894) at 3. See
also “Women who have been Ex ecuted: Female Poisoners: an E nglish Marth a Needle” Weekl y
Times (Melbour ne, 20 October 1894) at 12.
“Assuredly there never was murder more foul and more unnatural”? 55
Poisoning, Women and Murder in 19th Centur y Australia
As one columnist declared of such crimes: “assuredly there never was murder
more foul and more unnatural”.5
Poisoning by women in Britain in the 1800s has been the subject of
much academic study,6 but the topic has largely escaped academic scrutiny
with respect to colonial Austra lia. is article seeks to redress this decit
by drawing on the extensive press archives of the period to examine if, and
to what extent, the historical British perceptions and experiences of female
poisoners were translated to 19th century colonial Australia. It might be
thought that women accused of poisoning their husbands could expect
an uphill task within the male dominated crimina l justice system of the
period in escaping conviction and, if convicted, unlikely to be regarded
with sympathy and as worthy of the grant of mercy. However, it appears
that the reality in colonial Australia, a s in Britain, was more nuanced than
the hostile and often exaggerated perception of female poisoners might
indicate. Women accused of capital crimes involving poison upon their
husbands had every expectation of acquittal and, even if convicted,7 such
oenders were still often regarded with sympathy and as deserving of mercy.
II. “T G A P”: P H
Of all of the many means of murder, “every age and every country has,
at some time or another, been plagued with the secret poisoner”.8 Fear of the
poisoner dates back to antiquity.9 is fear portrays poison as “the meanest
and cruellest weapon which can possibly be applied to the nefarious purpose
5 “e Late Exe cution” e Freeman’s Journal (Sydney, 12 January 1889) at 3. See also GBB,
“Sex and Crime: t he Great Oyer of Poisoning” Evening News (Sydney, 12 October 1895) at 3.
6 See, for ex ample, Helen Barrell Poison Panic: Ars enic Deaths in 1840s Essex (Pen and Sword,
Barnsley, UK, 2016); Judith Fla nders e Invention of Murder : How the Victorians Reveale d in
Death and Dete ction and Created Modern Cr ime (HarperPress, New York, 2011) at 223–319;
Randa Hele ld, “Female Poisoners of the Nine teenth Centur y: A Study of Gender Bia s in
the Application of t he Law” (1990) 28(1) Osgoode Hal l LJ 53; Victoria Nagy “Narratives i n
the Courtro om: Female Poisoners in Mid-nineteent h Century Engla nd” (2014) 11 Europea n
Journal of Crim inology 213; Victoria Nag y Nineteenth-Century Female Poisoners: ree
English Women Who Used Ars enic to Kill (Palgrave Macm illan, London, 2015); George Robb
“Crime in Crinoline : Domestic Poisonings in Vic torian Engla nd” (1997) 22 Journal of Family
History 176; Linda Strat tmann e Secre t Poisoner: a Century of Poi son (Yale University Press,
New Haven, USA, 2016); and Kat herine Watson Poisoned Lives: English Poisoner s and eir
Victims (Hambledon, London, 2007).
7 It is often far f rom easy to determine the reliabi lity of these g uilty verdict s due to a lack of
rigorous modern med ical or scienti c evidence as to t he cause of death . See John Archer
“Mysterious and Suspic ious Deaths: Mi ssing Homicides in N W England (1850–1900)”
(2008) 12 Crime and His tory in Societies 45.
8 “Some Fema le Poisoners” e Advertiser (Adelaide, 24 September 1889) at 7.
9 One of the most notoriou s poisoners of antiquity was Loc usta, the murderess of the Roma n
Emperor Claudius a nd Britannicu s. See “e Gentle A rt of Poisoning” e Daily News
(Perth, Austr alia, 31December 1898) at 8.
To continue reading
Request your trial