‘She had no remedy whatever to get rid of her enemies but by being burnt in the flames’: A Case of Arson and Criminal Insanity in Early Nineteenth-Century England by Samantha Lennon

The trial of Jane Cook, a servant found insane for setting fire to the house of her master, John Campbell, exhibits themes of loneliness, class and femininity which are significant within the verdict of a nineteenth-century insanity trial.

Within the trial, Cook’s loneliness is considered significant as her lack of friends and ill-treatment by her husband are emphasised as causing her weak mental state. A witness, George Wilkinson, asked her why she committed the crime, to which she replied, ‘her friends had all turned their backs on her … her character was blasted, and she had no remedy whatever to get rid of her enemies but by being burnt in the flames.’[i] This depicted to the jury a lonely and desperate woman acting out of fear and isolation rather than with intent to cause destruction or injury to others. Her weak mental state is further noted by Wilkinson as he stated that she had taken laudanum and also noticed ‘three or four scratches on her throat, as if she had attempted to make away with herself.’[ii] Her suicide attempts highlight the extent to which her sabotaged reputation affected her, leading her towards opiate use and extreme violent actions which was likely to have aroused sympathy from the jury. Mr. John North, a surgeon and one of three medical men who spoke at the trial, claimed Cook was ‘ill-treated by her husband’,[iii] which significantly impacted upon her mental state. This treatment would have likely provoked sympathy from the jury due to changing attitudes surrounding domestic violence in the period. Vicky Holmes considers how middle-class coroners and juries reacted to domestic abuse and concludes that they believed working-class men should ‘refrain from unreasonable levels of violence against their wives’.[iv] Parallels can be drawn between this and Cook’s trial, highlighting a sympathetic attitude of the jury towards her as an abused wife which accounted for her violent actions.

Class divide can further be seen in the trial through targeting her master’s house rather than her own. Alongside arson, Francis Stow, who had known Cook for ten months and paid her wages, stated in the trial that she also admitted to stealing some items from the house and managed to find ‘a cream-pot, a bible, and a pair of sugar tongs’ at one of the shops she pawned items to.[v] Cook is depicted as holding a lack of respect towards Campbell through stealing unimportant items from his house and destroying his property, whilst simultaneously highlighting her financial struggles and weak mental state to the jury which was likely to have impacted upon their verdict. Alongside this, medical men and laymen would have likely swayed the jury’s perception of Cook as they emphasised her unfortunate situation. Despite her destructive and immoral actions, her intention to take her own life presented a woman in need of help rather than punishment. However, historian Joel Eigen argues that medical witnesses actually played an insignificant role in trials before 1830 due to ‘legal insistence on total madness’ and ‘their testimony was practically indistinguishable from the layman’s’.[vi] This can be considered in Cook’s trial as the medical witnesses offer no specific diagnosis, although they did add a level of medical authority to the case which potentially influenced the verdict. In light of this observation, it can be viewed that the laymen influenced the jury to a greater degree through improving understanding of Cook’s situation which ultimately led to an insanity verdict.

The Old Bailey. Source: Design for a New Sessions House, Old Bailey, [London] E.C.. John Belcher. 1901. Source: Academy Architecture and Architectural Review, http://www.victorianweb.org/art/architecture/belcher/2.html

 The events described in the trial highlight the strains placed upon working-class women in the period which could have a detrimental impact on mental health. Due to economic difficulties, it was necessary for working-class women to have paid work whilst being a good wife and mother, however, Cook was in an abusive marriage and appeared to have no children. Therefore, through no fault of her own, she was failing to uphold Victorian ideals of femininity which likely affected her mental wellbeing. Wilkinson’s recollection of her weeping and admitting guilt to a woman she knew after committing the act displays an aspect of emotional femininity,[vii] implying vulnerability and regret for her actions, further illustrating the idea that statements by laymen had a greater impact on the jury’s verdict. However, her vulnerability and femininity are contrasted by medical witnesses. Describing a conversation with Cook, an apothecary, William Frederick Goodyer, described an ‘apathy’ to a conversation he had with her and she ‘said she set fire to the house.’[viii] This illustrates a lack of emotion and regret for her actions, therefore reacting in an unfeminine manner. Their testimonies further contrast as Wilkinson described her as talking ‘rational’ when he found her, whilst the medical witnesses emphasised her unintelligible language.[ix] Wilkinson humanised Cook, depicting her as a woman who, although aware of her actions, displayed a sense of remorse and desperation, whereas medical descriptions emphasised her pure state of insanity. Conversely, Cook’s insanity acquittal can be understood in terms of gender differences in the period, as Jill Newton Ainsley argues that, ‘it allowed Victorian society to avoid the discomforting prospect of acknowledging women’s agency when confronted with physical proof of their capacity for anger, power, and violence.’[x]It can be perceived that the level of destruction Cook showed women to be capable of led the jury to attribute her apparent masculine capabilities with madness, whilst disregarding social issues within Victorian society.

 Cook’s trial shows how juries’ verdicts could be influenced by both laymen and medical witnesses. However, it is apparent that statements by laymen had a greater impact on the jury’s verdict through humanising her, portraying desperate actions of a lonely, poor woman who was the victim of domestic abuse. Significance of gender in insanity trials is also highlighted as Cook’s lack of femininity can be viewed as resulting in her insanity acquittal to disregard sane women as having the potential for masculine violence.

 

[i] Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 10 November 2019), October 1819, trial of JANE COOK (t18191027-39).

[ii] Jane Cook Trial.

[iii] Jane Cook Trial.

[iv] Vicky Holmes, In Bed with the Victorians: The Life-Cycle of Working-Class Marriage (London, 2017), 57.

[v] Jane Cook Trial.

[vi] Joel Eigen, ‘’I Answer as a Physician’: Opinion as Fact in Pre-McNaughtan Insanity Trials’, in Michael Clark and Catherine Crawford (eds.), Legal History in Medicine (Cambridge, 1994), 167-199 (171).

[vii] Jane Cook Trial.

[viii] Jane Cook Trial.

[ix] Jane Cook Trial.

[x] Ainsley, Jill Newton. ‘”Some Mysterious Agency”: Women, Violent Crime, and the Insanity Acquittal in the Victorian Courtroom’, Canadian Journal of History 35 (2000), 37-55 (40).