Welcome back to our series of blogs on the murder at Bigges Main in January 1919. Last time we heard how John Thomas Bianchi died as the result of an operation to remove a bullet, which had been fired by an unknown man. How his cousin, Elizabeth Phillipson, was assaulted by the same man and, the initial investigations by the police.

This time we are going to look at some of the police theories and see if they provide any clue as to who the murderer was, and his motive.

In the police file we have two interesting pieces of paper regarding the police’s lines of enquiry. Firstly, a statement by Sergeant Russell who, on the 31^st of January 1919, whilst making enquiries at Walkergate Hospital (the place where Elizabeth Philipson worked) speaks to the matron. The matron recalls a complaint that she dealt with concerning a woman who complained that her husband, was “carrying on” with one of the nurses that worked in the laundry. The nurse was interviewed, and denied the affair, but implicated another woman, also employed in the laundry and with the first name of Elizabeth (surname Moore). Russell reports that the matron had spoken to the women concerned and had reprimanded them at the time of the complaint.

Elizabeth Moore was called in for questioning by Sergeant Russell, she explained that a Robert Leightley had been a patient in the sanatorium and whilst there they had argued twice. On the last occasion, he had struck her on the face and told her that if he got the chance, he would…

“Do for her”.

She also said that he had been involved with another nurse, Maggie Nash, and that they had been writing to each other. Maggie Nash, when interviewed says a letter was sent to Leightley’s wife to tell her of his affairs and that he came to see her on the 10^th of January, just over two weeks before the shooting. Sergeant Russell then writes in his report what he calls a true copy of the letter, it reads…

“Dear May, Just a little line to tell you I must see you this afternoon about 3 o’clock beside the bridge you will understand where I mean so come off duty to meet me. Perhaps you will know what this is about if not I’ve lots to tell you I looked all over for you yesterday until 10 o’clock last night, send word back if you are coming just say alright I am asking Blagton (Gate Porter) to bring this to you so don’t forget to come as it is important, From yours Bob. P.S Try Dear and get down to the gate at Dinner time, I will wait there, if not come at 3 to meet me. Bob.”

PC Russell asks if she was threatened by Robert Leightley and she says not. He then goes to speak with five men who claim to have been with Robert Leightley on the night of the shooting. They give him an alibi for the night of the murder from 8pm to midnight. Saying that he never left North Seaton and Ashington. No statements from the men appear in the file and it would appear that their word is accepted without challenge. Even more shockingly no statement from Robert Leightley appears in the file. Was he ever interviewed?

It seems significant that we have reports of a violent man arranging to meet a laundry hospital worker, near the bridge where the murder was committed, after having assaulted another laundry worker with the first name of Elizabeth, same first name as the woman assaulted. Remember John was accompanying his cousin because there had been reports of a man harassing workers from the hospital. Perhaps the letter written to Leightley’s wife revealing his affairs was sufficient to push an already violent man to more desperate actions!? No description of Robert Leightley exists in the file, nor any investigation into his background, naval or otherwise, could he have gained access to a gun? So, we have a suspect and motive and perhaps an explanation as to why John and Elizabeth were targeted, because they were mistaken for someone else. But this is where we have to guess at what the evidence presents as this murder was never solved.

After more than a year had passed since John’s murder and the brutal assault on Elizabeth, the police continued investigating the case and continued to talk to the Bianchi family.

Let’s look at the next interesting piece of information in the police file.

On the 10^th of March 1920, Sergeant Russell writes in another statement to the Chief Constable that he had spoken to Margaret Bianchi, John’s mother, who had told him about a quarrelsome couple, that lived nearby at the time of the murder. The man, a Mr Smith, was in the military police and she claims his wife looked like and sounded like Elizabeth Phillipson. Elizabeth originally came from the Blackpool area, so presumably had a Lancashire accent.

Could the killer have been listening for a Lancashire accent on that night in January the previous year? Would he have been seeking to harm Mr or Mrs Smith rather than John or Elizabeth? The sergeant makes some inquiries and discovers that Mrs Smith had subsequently moved to Nottingham.

So, on the 13^th of March 1920 the Superintendent at Wallsend Police writes to the Chief Constable at Nottingham Police, asking him to make discreet enquiries of Mrs Kate Smith, giving the address at which, she was living in Nottingham. He asks for her to tell them the whereabouts of her husband on the night of the murder and whether…

“She had any fear that her husband would do her any bodily harm?”

The response comes back from Nottingham City Police seven days later. They tell us that having spoken to Mrs Smith she informs them that whilst her and her husband are now separated, she did not fear him, she remembers the murder and that her husband…

“Was on duty at the time it was committed.”

The Chief Constable of Northumberland writes to the Assistant Provost Marshall, A. Area, Northern Command, Jesmond (the person in charge of the military police). The Chief gives a brief history of the case and says that investigations have produced the name of a Walter Frederick Smith, a member of the Military Foot Police in Jesmond at the time of the murder. He asks,

“Will you please inform me whether this man was on duty and where, or off duty and if his whereabouts at the time of the murder were known, and any other information respecting his movements.”

The Assistant Provost Marshall replies…

“To the best of my belief L/C Smith was at the date you mentioned stationed at Tynemouth, but it is impossible for me to state definitely if he was on duty at the hour specified”.

 he goes on to explain that…

“All the personnel who were with me at that time have now gone.”

He offers to get in touch with the NCO in charge at Tynemouth at the time, presumably to further check Mr Smith’s alibi.

The file does not record if this offer was taken up or not and so this line of enquiry simply peters out. However, as mentioned in the previous blog on this case, the 1999 police review of the case gives us a little bit more information as to Smith’s whereabouts on the night of the murder. They state that the Assistant Provost Marshall says that

“L/Cpl Smith was thought to have been on “Cook House duty at Tynemouth Castle at day and time in question”.

But as we know this line of enquiry was dropped and we have to wait until the next year before the file continues.

So, we move to 1921, with a letter from the Chief Constable to police stations and ports around the country, and Northern Ireland enquiring into the whereabouts of the crew of the E40.

Like the G6 mentioned in the first blog the E40 was a submarine, although this one was in the Tyne on the night of the murder, so much nearer to the place of the shooting than the river Blyth. The investigations switch to this submarine on information received by the police from the Armament Supply Officer (Admiralty). The Chief explains that the gun used in the shooting has now been traced to having been issued to the E40 in 1917, some two years before the murder. He says that after some considerable delay he has now received a list of the personnel aboard the E40 on the 1^st to the 26^th of January 1919 and asks the various police and ports to make enquiries of the men named, regarding their whereabouts and whether they know of a “William Stewart, native of Wick” from the Ship the “Kildagan” based on Gosport. Or a Gunner “H C Tucker” who served on the E40. And if so whether they know of Tucker’s address.

We have the list of personnel of the E40, see photo below.

Two days later the Chief Constable sends a memo to Wallsend police explaining that the receipt for the pistol used in the murder was signed for by a H.C. Tucker on the 4^th of June 1917.

He also mentions showing the list of submariners names to someone called Nancy Boyd, nee Bell,

“And to others who may have known submarine crews, whilst in the river at this particular time.”

So, who was Nancy Boyd? Again, this lead goes cold, and we are left to speculate about her possible link to the submarine crews.

Join us next time for our third blog in this series, where we will hear evidence from some of the witnesses who saw a man standing in the dark lane on the night of the shooting and we will examine the route the shooter took when fleeing the scene.

Please note that the file about the murder and assault at Bigges Main is currently uncatalogued so is not yet available to the public in the Study Centre.

This is the first in a series of blogs, about a tragic tale of a young man, literally shot down in his prime.
John may still have family living in the region and for that reason we must warn you that this post
contains descriptions of assault, murder and features some images that you may find upsetting.

Our story begins over one hundred years ago, just after the end of World War one. Bigges Main village,
near Wallsend, is the scene of the crime, the village no longer exists but its name may still stir
memories for some…

A file of an unsolved murder was deposited with us at Northumberland Archives a while ago by Northumbria Police. In it we discover a contemporary review of the case by the police, which runs to thirteen pages. Their conclusion reads…

“Whilst there are no new lines of enquiry it is hoped that a similar event in the present time with so many eye witnesses would culminate in a more successful outcome.”

So, lets look at the evidence and perhaps in doing so you will reach your own conclusions about what happened on that fateful day, the 26th of January 1919?

It was late evening, cold and dark, when Elizabeth Phillipson and her cousin John Thomas Bianchi set out to walk from his house in Chapel Row, Bigges Main to her place of work at Walkergate Hospital. John was in the habit of accompanying his cousin to her work, because there had been reports of an unknown man harassing workers from the hospital. They hadn’t gone far on their journey when they noticed a man in a dark overcoat and light cap standing by the side of the lane. Later, witness statements will describe the man as being between 5ft 8” and 5ft 10”. Between 26 and 36 years old, having broad shoulders, being clean shaven, with a thin face.

We can turn to the file of police reports and the written transcript of a telephone message received the next morning at 10:30 am from Superintendent Metcalf of Wallsend police to the Chief Constable at Morpeth.

“About 9:45 last night Elizabeth Phillipson, Laundry Maid, Walkergate Hospital and John Thomas Bianchi, Chapel Row, Bigges Main, apprentice driller-cousins-were proceeding from Bigges Main to Walkergate Hospital when about 200 yards west of Bigges Main a man fired a shot… the bullet penetrated Bianchi’s stomach and the man then assaulted the young woman and ran over the fields.”

Remarkably John survived the shooting but sadly died later, as the result of cardiac failure, whilst undergoing an operation to remove the bullet. The surgeon’s report tells us that the bullet had caused little damage to John’s internal organs. We can only wonder if the bullet had been left where it was, whether John may have gone on to live a normal life. John sadly died at 12.45pm on the 27th of January 1919, the day after the shooting.

As the result of John’s passing the police were no longer looking for a violent attacker, they were looking for a murderer.

Their investigations take them back to the scene of the shooting where they find revolver cartridges and a gun.

This picture is of a catalogue found in the police file showing the make and model of gun used in the murder. It was provided by the manufacturers in response to the police enquiry. The manufacturer replies to the police stating that the serial numbers on the gun indicate that the pistol was issued to the

“Army Inspection Department March 1917 under contract for Admiralty”

they go on to say that the letter “N” in the serial number

“indicates that it was supplied to the Navy”.

As a result, they advise the police to write to the Naval Ordnance Officer at Portsmouth,

“who will no doubt be able to say the unit or ship to which the pistol was issued.”

One of the police officers, PC John Craghill drafts a memo to Wallsend police station on the 31st January 1919 stating that he took the weapon to

“Mr Pape’s shop in Collingwood Street, Newcastle…Mr Pape who examined the revolver and was of the opinion that it had recently been used.”

We believe this Mr Pape to be Victor Pape who had taken over the gun selling business from his father, William Rochester Pape.

The Illustrated Chronicle, a contemporary local newspaper, reporting on the crime amazingly print a photograph of what they claim is the actual gun used in the shooting_¹.

Returning to the police investigation, the file has no linear explanation of how the investigation ran and there are many gaps in the information. Leaving us to guess at how some leads were initiated and concluded. The initial activity in early 1919 centres on trying to locate the ship to which the gun was issued and then who might have had access to that gun. There are 176 pages of information spanning two years investigating the murder including the modern review in 1999, which gives a good summary of the file. There is one piece of information in the modern review that does not appear in the file we received and that concerns a man called Smith, who we will meet in the next blog. But for now, let us return to the investigation and the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

P.C James Sweeney’s statement received at Northumberland Constabulary Headquarters, Morpeth on the 31st January 1919 reads

“On the 28th January 1919 I went on duty at 8am …went to Blyth Docks, where I had the revolver produced, identified by the Captain of the G6 to be Government property and stolen from the G6 between the 14th and 22nd January 1919.”

Also received on that day is a statement by William J Carlew, Able Rating of Submarine G.6. and he states that

“The pistol produced belongs to the G.6. submarine. I missed it on the 22nd January 1919, I think I last saw it on the 18th January 1919 but I would not swear to that date, I am certain I saw it on the 14th January 1919, when we were painting because it fell down from the rack on that date.”

Carlew states that he reported the missing gun to Lieutenant Davis. Subsequent reports from Superintendent James Irving states that no statement was taken from any of the officers, Captain Downie, or Lieutenants Davis and Boyd, but he states he was verbally able to take account of their whereabouts.

From other police reports regarding the gun, we know that it had part of the black composition of the handle broken off, which may have happened either when Elizabeth Phillipson was assaulted or when it fell from the rack.

The police also enquire into the personnel of HMS Titania. HMS Titania was the depot ship for the submarines at Blyth at that time. A depot ship was used as a base for submarines, or other small ships for storing maintenance equipment, dining, berthing and relaxation.

So, it follows that the police would have been interested in speaking with the crew of the Titania to rule them out of the investigation. In the file we have statements by the crew and sometimes in absence of their own statement we have statements by their wives, girlfriends, or other family members. Curiously the statements from those close to the service men seem to be all that is required to rule a person out of their enquiry.

Join us next time for the next in this series of blogs where we will investigate the link with a patient at Walkergate Hospital, Gunner Smith and the E40.

Please note that the file about the murder and assault at Bigges Main is currently uncatalogued so is not yet available to the public in the Study Centre.

1. Photograph of The Illustrated Chronicle courtesy of Newcastle Libraries. https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/services/libraries-culture/libraries-newcastle/city-library

One of the aims of the Northumberland Archives Charitable Trust is to improve and promote access to documents held within Northumberland Archives.  Projects have been funded to list collections as well as adding descriptive content to existing collections.  This additional information is added to our catalogue making the content available and searchable via the Online Catalogue on the Northumberland Archives website either at home or in the search rooms.  The current cataloguing project focuses on a collection of deeds relating to lands owned by members of the Clayton family in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. 

John Clayton, Town Clerk and namesake of Newcastle’s Clayton Street, was an instrumental part of how we see Hadrian’s Wall today.  The obituary read by his long-term friend and fellow Wall enthusiast and author Rev. J. Collingwood Bruce at a meeting of The Society of Antiquaries Newcastle upon Tyne (SANT) sums up many of his achievements as well as providing some more personal anecdotes.  It appears in the Society’s publication ‘Archaeologia Aeliana’. 

Clayton’s first published article for SANT was published in 1844 and it was an account of the excavation of chambers near the station of Cilurnum (Chesters Roman Fort).  A later article covered the excavation at the mile-castle at Cawfields which was held in high esteem by Bruce.  It was Clayton’s work that showed that the gateways opened north, “showing that [the Wall] was not a mere fence to exclude the Caledonians, but was a line of military works for the better managing their assaults upon them”.  An excavation at the mile-castle at Housesteads lead to enlightening information, it was during this dig that “fragments of the inscriptions [were found] bearing the names of Hadrian and his legate Aulus Platorius Nepos – inscriptions which bear strongly upon the question, ‘Who was the builder of the Wall?’”.   Clayton wrote many articles for SANT’s ‘Archaeologia Aeliana’ between 1843 and 1889, mostly about archaeology and descriptions of his excavations.   

Reading the obituary, it is clear that Clayton and Bruce have been lifelong friends, he specifically states that he is not going to detail Clayton’s many other non-archaeological achievements.  We learn that at school, Clayton enjoyed reading the Classics and gave up his play time to continue reading, he later tutored his sister when she wished to learn Latin.  He enjoyed fishing but not shooting.  The one occasion he did actually shoot a bird Clayton then realised that he did not have the appropriate license and hurried to buy one the following day, realising that it would not look good if the Town Clerk of Newcastle was found to be shooting without the correct paperwork! 

John Clayton’s obituary in ‘Archaeologia Aeliana’, 2nd series, Volume 15, 1892, pp90-95, and ‘The Handbook to the Roman Wall’ by [Rev.] J. Collingwood Bruce are both available at Northumberland Archive’s Woodhorn site.  The documents and deeds relating to the Clayton family that have been the subject of the Northumberland Archives Charitable Trust’s funded listing project can be found on the electronic catalogue using Ref.No ZCY* and are also available to view at the Woodhorn search room. 

On completion of the initial papers another smaller collection was listed relating specifically to a property called Lincoln Hill on the Chesters Estate owned by John Clayton.  The documents date from 1689 to 1955 and provide details of the owners of the property and land prior to the Clayton family connection, Ref. No NRO 12643.

The Clayton cataloguing project has now come to an end.  Details of the next project will be available soon!