As will be seen DR ALLEN himself was sometimes the victim
April 1881 An inquest was held at the Joddrell Arms into the death of a child whose decomposed body was found in Toddbrook Reservoir. Dr Allen had made the postmortem examination and found that the baby had lived a day or two. He was unable to say whether the child had suffocated or died from neglect. There was a bruise to the
head but this had not caused death. The body 20 inches in length had been placed in a biscuit tin measuring only 9.5inches by 8.5 inches..The police were trying to detect the perpetrator, guilty of either murder or neglect.
November 1886 A skeleton was discovered by workers at Taxal Edge Stone Quarry. The skull and bones were now in the posession of DR ALLEN who had established that they had been there for at least 100 years.
November 1886 Mrs Pennington was pitched from her trap when the horse bolted and was very badly hurt. She was taken to the residence of DR ALLEN where she now lay.
June 1887 Charles Bagshaw was badly injured in an accident at the Buxton Lime Company's colliery. A hand was smashed, his head was badly cut and an ear nearly severed. DR ALLEN ordered his immediate removal to Stockport Infirmary where he lies in a critical condition
August 1887 Edmund Kirk, a grocers assistant admitted savagely assaulting a little boy Hoprace Wooley. On the 29th the Wooley family, one of whom was a member of the Salvation Army, in their turn attacked Kirk. He was knocked down and kicked, had two teeth knocked out, both eyes made up and his whiskers pulled out. He lost a deal of blood and later DR ALLEN had to attend to him.
February 1888 A mysterious death. George Sawyer of New Mills left home on Tuesday to go in search of work. He was seen just before midnight on Thursday at Horwich End and was drunk. At 2 am he was heard in a brook and some time later found unconscious in a yard behind The Navigation. He was lying in a pool of blood and had severe wounds to his head, elbow and knee. DR ALLEN dressed his wound but alas, he died on Sunday.
October 1889 An explosion at Hall Brother's bleachworks fatally injured a youth, George Goddard. He was assisting in removing the top of a boiler filled with boiling pulp when the vessel expolded. He was hurled some distance and was severely scalded and burned. DR ALLEN attended to him at home but he died early next day.
November 1889 DR ALLEN was walking towards Stoneheads at 8.30pm to visit a patient. It was a dark night and he carried a lantern. Whilst walking along a path across a field a gun shot rang out about 20 yards away. Thinking of poachers he walked on only to hear another shot. From the flash he calculated that it was fired at him. A third shot struck the wall at his side. Alarmed, he retraced his steps are returned to safety. It was assumed
that he was mistaked for the constable who had recently had several local people before the magistrates.
March 1892 DR ALLEN was appointed Medical Officer Of Health for Whaley Bridge at a salary of £20 per annum. At the same time John Kirk was appointed Inspector Of Nuisances
August 1892 The annual horse show was held at Buxton. The grandstand which seated 700 people collapsed without warning apart from mometary creaking. The occupants were pitched backwards amidst a mass of planking. Theinjured were conveyed to The Devonshire Hospital. The most seerious injury was to DR ALLEN who sustained broken
legs.
November 1892 Two boys, one 12 years old fought during their breakfast break at Botany Bleach Works where they were employed. One of the bys suffered knife wounds and was attended to by DR ALLEN who said that the injury would have been fatal if a little higher.
March 1893 DR ALLEN is caring for two men named Phillipson and Ether injured in an explosion at the Gunpowder Works.
May 1895 At a property auction at The Railway Hotel, DR ALLEN purchased two semi detatched villas and a cottage at Horwich End for £590.
June 1896 Edith Proctor the 12 year old daughter of blacksmith Thomas Proctor died suddenly after becoming paralysed. It was thought to be caused by sunstroke but DR ALLEN who gave no hope of recovery certified death from convulsions.
March 1898 Two joiners were seriously hurt when part of the Joddrell Arms collapsed. The front portion was being rebuit and enlarged and was supported by girders and pillars. A number of men were buried under a mass of stone and iron.. DR ALLEN attended to the injured.
December 1898 John Cotton was sentanced to death for the murder of his wife aboard a canal boat moored at Bugsworth. Mrs Cotton had been severely beaten about the head with a poker. When DR ALLEN examined her she was unconscious and suffering from a number of wounds, was concussed and had a clot of blood on the brain and a fracture to the skull. He considered the case to be hopeless and she died that afternoon.
---------------------------------
Hector Allan MB CM MRCS born in 1847 in Scotland. His wife Sarah Ann Allan was from Kenilworth and was a very keen and competent Photographer.
The houses he bought as refered to above, would probably be Springbank on Reservoir Rd which is where he lived and had his surgery.
He held a number of important posts locally: Medical Officer of Health to the Urban District Council, Certifying Factory Surgeon and Medical Officer and Public Vaccinator, Whaley District and Macclesfield Union.
The houses he bought as refered to above, would probably be Springbank on Reservoir Rd which is where he lived and had his surgery.
He held a number of important posts locally: Medical Officer of Health to the Urban District Council, Certifying Factory Surgeon and Medical Officer and Public Vaccinator, Whaley District and Macclesfield Union.
------------------------------------
 | ||||||||
| Dr Hector Allan Relaxing by Toddbrook Reservoir. Photograph taken by his wife. |
 |
| Dr Allen's House, Reservoir Road, Whaley Bridge. |
---------------------------------
The following stories about Dr Allen are provided by Tony Beswick:
Below is a brief Buxton Advertiser report concerning Doctor Hector Allan and his work with the St John’s Ambulance Society.
Buxton Advertiser
23 Feb 1889
St. John's Ambulance Society.
The local branch of this society (Manchester centre), which was established on November 10th last, has made rapid progress. The members 25 in number have been instructed by Dr Allan at the Mechanics' Institute on successive Saturday nights, the course of instruction being limited to five lectures.
Last Saturday the members met at the Mechanics' Institute when Dr Allan presented the certificates in the order following: Messrs John Andrew, James Arnfield, John Henry Arnfield, John Ashton, John Ault, G. Bennett, Elijah G. Bridge, George Burdekin, John Bradley, John Collinson, Henry Drinkwater, Richard Goddard, Levi J. Hall, Elijah Hall, Thomas Hadfield, Peter Hill, Martin Hunt (Police-constable), Joseph Kirk, ditto., Oswald Kirk, Edward E. Stamper, John Ward, Geo. Wood, Albert Williamson, and Edward Taylor.
After the certificates had been presented, Mr Ault, on behalf of the newly-formed class, presented Dr Allan with a handsome aneroid barometer, by Armstrong. He said how much they were indebted to the doctor for his kindness in giving his services free of all cost, and remarked that the members of the class had most cheerfully subscribed towards the purchase of the barometer, which they hoped would be of use to him, and serve as a mark of their appreciation of his services. Dr Allan, in response, thanked the members for their good feeling, and expressed a hope that they would be of benefit to those who might meet with accidents.
Any praise they had to bestow, however, was really more due to Mr Levi Holt, of the Wharf Colliery, who had been instrumental in getting the class formed.
A vote of thanks was passed in the most cordial manner to Mr Hall for his services, and also to the trustees of the Mechanics' Institute, for kindly lending the building for the holding of classes free of cost.
A cordial vote of thanks was also accorded Mr Stamper for his valued services a secretary. Afterwards the members sat down to an excellent knife and fork tea, at Mr Wm Lees' (Railway Hotel.) Mr John Ault presided, and brief speeches were made, the remainder of the evening being agreeably whiled away with songs by Messrs George Bennett, John Ward, H. Stamper, and friends. Recitations were given by Messrs Thomas Hadfield and James Arnfield.
23 Feb 1889
St. John's Ambulance Society.
The local branch of this society (Manchester centre), which was established on November 10th last, has made rapid progress. The members 25 in number have been instructed by Dr Allan at the Mechanics' Institute on successive Saturday nights, the course of instruction being limited to five lectures.
Last Saturday the members met at the Mechanics' Institute when Dr Allan presented the certificates in the order following: Messrs John Andrew, James Arnfield, John Henry Arnfield, John Ashton, John Ault, G. Bennett, Elijah G. Bridge, George Burdekin, John Bradley, John Collinson, Henry Drinkwater, Richard Goddard, Levi J. Hall, Elijah Hall, Thomas Hadfield, Peter Hill, Martin Hunt (Police-constable), Joseph Kirk, ditto., Oswald Kirk, Edward E. Stamper, John Ward, Geo. Wood, Albert Williamson, and Edward Taylor.
After the certificates had been presented, Mr Ault, on behalf of the newly-formed class, presented Dr Allan with a handsome aneroid barometer, by Armstrong. He said how much they were indebted to the doctor for his kindness in giving his services free of all cost, and remarked that the members of the class had most cheerfully subscribed towards the purchase of the barometer, which they hoped would be of use to him, and serve as a mark of their appreciation of his services. Dr Allan, in response, thanked the members for their good feeling, and expressed a hope that they would be of benefit to those who might meet with accidents.
Any praise they had to bestow, however, was really more due to Mr Levi Holt, of the Wharf Colliery, who had been instrumental in getting the class formed.
A vote of thanks was passed in the most cordial manner to Mr Hall for his services, and also to the trustees of the Mechanics' Institute, for kindly lending the building for the holding of classes free of cost.
A cordial vote of thanks was also accorded Mr Stamper for his valued services a secretary. Afterwards the members sat down to an excellent knife and fork tea, at Mr Wm Lees' (Railway Hotel.) Mr John Ault presided, and brief speeches were made, the remainder of the evening being agreeably whiled away with songs by Messrs George Bennett, John Ward, H. Stamper, and friends. Recitations were given by Messrs Thomas Hadfield and James Arnfield.
--------------------------------------------
We have come across Dr Allan on many occasions and no doubt he carried out his duties as best he could to varying degrees of success.
Let’s not forget we usually hear of him attending to people in mines which have collapsed or explosions at Chilworth Powder Mills. These were headline news and the Doc was working in terrible conditions.
There is one story about Dr Allan, however, that caused massive publicity and I have the facts in document form.
Let’s not forget we usually hear of him attending to people in mines which have collapsed or explosions at Chilworth Powder Mills. These were headline news and the Doc was working in terrible conditions.
There is one story about Dr Allan, however, that caused massive publicity and I have the facts in document form.
This is a sad tale indeed even more so when you consider what some people are moaning about these present days.
I will start with the opening of the inquest held at The Shepherd’s Arms. Then I will break the inquest evidence down into 3 or 4 sections as it is naturally a long inquest considering the nature and circumstances of the death.
Then there are some follow up letters in local papers from the main characters and from interested outsiders.
I will start with the opening of the inquest held at The Shepherd’s Arms. Then I will break the inquest evidence down into 3 or 4 sections as it is naturally a long inquest considering the nature and circumstances of the death.
Then there are some follow up letters in local papers from the main characters and from interested outsiders.
High Peak News
3 March 1888
WHALEY BRIDGE
Sudden death of a woman
strange conduct of a doctor
On Thursday afternoon Mr. R.G. Megginson, deputy-coroner, held an inquest at the Shepherd’s Arms Inn, Whaley Bridge, touching the death of Anne Jane Jodrell, aged 27 years, wife of Jonathan Jodrell, labourer, Horwich End, who died on Wednesday during confinement.
The Coroner said they had met to inquire into the cause of the death of Ann Jane Jodrell, who for some time past had been expecting her confinement, and for that reason she had secured the services of a midwife living in the neighbourhood.
Nature took its course sooner than was expected, and the midwife had not arrived, so they were obliged to run for a medical man.
They went to Dr Allan, and they succeeded in awakening him. He came either to the door or the window, and, being told the circumstances of the case and what was required, said: “Have you got a sovereign?”
The poor man (the husband) replied that he had not, and the doctor said: “I refuse to attend.” He did not attend, and the woman died.
They would hear the evidence as to these facts which he had opened to them and which he believed to be true.
------------------------------------------------------------
The first witness at the inquest at The Shepherd’s Arms was Jonathan Jodrell.
Jonathan Jodrell, husband of the deceased, deposed that he was a labourer, living at Horwich End. His wife died about ten minutes to four on Wednesday morning. She was 27 years of age last May. They had been married eight years, and there was a family of three. His wife had enjoyed very good health, and had always got over her confinements with out difficulty and without the assistance of a medical man; a midwife had been employed on such occasions. Rebecca Southern was the midwife’s name. Up to the time of being ill on this occasion his wife was in good health and strength, and no danger was apprehended. The child was not expected to be born until the first week in April, and the midwife had not been given instructions to attend. Witness came home at ten minutes past eleven on Tuesday night, and found his wife at home apparently well. No one was with her. She said “I had given you up,” as he was so late. After asking him if he would have some supper she said she would go to bed, as she had not felt very well during the day. They went to bed together about 11.30, but had not been there long before she said “I think you had better go and see Mrs Southern,” and he went at once. He found the midwife in bed and unable to attend through illness. He returned home, and upon his arrival there found the child born. He then ran to Horwich End for his mother and sister-in-law.
By the Coroner: The deceased said “the child was born all right.”
He afterwards fetched Mrs Holmes. He asked his wife how she was going on, and she replied “very well.”
By the Coroner: The child was alive. At twenty minutes past one he went to lie down, seeing that all was going on well.
The Coroner: “How long did you lie ?”
“They came and awakened me, and said “my Missis was worse, and I had better go and fetch Dr Allan.”
The Coroner: “Who awoke you ?”
“My sister-in-law, Catharine Jodrell.”
The Coroner: “Did you see the midwife first?”
“Yes; she came downstairs along with my sister-in-law. My sister-in-law told me I had better tell the Doctor to come at once, as the case was dangerous.” The Coroner: “You went at once?”
“Yes, sir, I ran for him to his house.
The Coroner: “Did you see him?”
“Yes, I was knocking about 30 minutes before he came.”
The Coroner: “What did you say to him?”
“There is a place in the door where they put the letters in, and he put his face there and said, “What is your errand?” I said, “My wife has been confined; I want you to come as quick as you can, as there is danger.”
The Coroner: “You gave him distinctly to understand that it was a dangerous case?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He did not open the door?”
“No, sir.”
The Coroner: “You told him your name?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He put his mouth to the letter box?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “What did he say to that?”
“He said he could not come without I had one guinea to give him before he went out of his own house.”
The Coroner: “Give me the words.”
He said, “Have you had Mrs. Southern?” (midwife) and I said “No, she is ill in bed, and we could get no one only a neighbour.” “Well,” he said, “In a case of this sort, I pretend to have notice, and before I go I have a guinea put down.” I said, “It is not in my power to lay a guinea down, I have not got it.” He said, “Well, I shan’t go without, neither for you nor anybody else. I’ll tell you what to do: You apply to the Workhouse, Chapel-en-le-Frith, they employ doctors for such men as you there.”
[Sensation, and a Voice, “That is hard lines.”]
The Coroner: “You did not see him at all?”
Witness: “I could just see his face; it was moonlight.”
The Coroner: “Just saw him through the hole?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “You told him you had not a sovereign?”
“I told him I had not a guinea.”
The Coroner: “You had none in the house, I suppose?”
“No.”
The Coroner: “Did you say “Do come?”
“I did; I begged of him hard to come.”
The Coroner: Did you say you would see that he was paid?”
“I did; I told him I would pay him to-night (Thursday), as it was my pay night at the railway.”
The Coroner: “He knew you?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “What did he say after that?”
“He said very little; he said it was no use me trying to persuade him to come, as he did not go until he had received the money.”
The Coroner: “Is he a married man?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “Did you tell him the child had been born?”
“I did, sir.”
The Coroner: “He positively refused and told you to go to Chapel-en-le-Frith Workhouse, where they kept a doctor for such men as you?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “And that it was no use you stopping there?”
“Yes sir; he closed the shutter (letter box) before I left the door.”
The Coroner: “Was he cross?”
“No, sir.”
The Coroner: “You are quite sure you gave him to understand the exigencies of the case?”
“I told him straight that the child had been born so long, and that we wanted him to come as soon as possible, as she was dangerously ill.”
The Coroner: “You told him she was dangerously ill?”
“Yes. As I was going down the road I met my sister-in-law, and she said, “Go and try to get him to come, as she is in a fit or something.” I went a second time and knocked about 20 minutes. He came to the door and I said, “I want you to come doctor, as my missis is there in a fit or something. I will see that you are paid this week.” He said, “I shan’t go a yard; it is no use you coming here unless you have it.” I said, “It is impossible for me to give it. I have a wife and family to keep, and have not got it. It is not all labouring men who have a guinea in a case of this sort, especially as it has come five weeks earlier.” He said, “That does not matter. You will have to go to Chapel-en-le-Frith and have a doctor there. I shan’t go.”
So I came up and told my mother. My missis was unconscious then. I told my mother and the woman who was in the room with her. My mother put her hand in her pocket and gave me the cupboard keys, and said “run over and fetch it, if a guinea will save her life, we will have him here.”
The Coroner: “Did you go to the doctor again?”
“No, sir. I went as quick as ever I could to fetch the money, but when I returned to my own house to give my mother her keys, my wife was dead.” The Coroner: “Have you known Mr. Allan during the time you have lived here?”
“Oh yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “And spoken to him?”
“Yes, sir. He has attended me once.”
The Coroner: “Have you paid him?”
“Yes, sir, he is my club doctor. I was never under his care but one fortnight, about seven years since.”
The Coroner: “He knew you so intimately as to be acquainted with your usual habits?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “You are a sober man--you look like it?”
“Yes, sir; I never hardly take drink.”
The Coroner: “What are your wages?”
“18s. a week and they take 2d. off for insurance.”
The Coroner: “You never have had a misunderstanding with this doctor?” “No, sir; I’ll tell you what he did. I was taken ill with inflammation, and had to go home, and we sent six times for the doctor before we could get him to come.”
The Coroner: “Although he was your club doctor?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “You say you are quite sure your wife was in perfect health before?”
“Yes, sir; she was.”
The Coroner: “She had had no injury or fall or anything?”
“No, sir; I don’t think she has cost me 5s. in physic since we were married. I never had a doctor’s bill for her or the children.”
The Coroner: “Would any gentleman of the jury like to put a question?
I have kept him a long time, and it is a painful ordeal he must have gone through.
The jury did not ask the witness any questions.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The same day and the second witness is called:
Edna Holmes, a charwoman, was next called.
She said the last witness called her up to go to his wife.
The deceased died about twenty minutes past four.
The Coroner: “Are you of opinion that if a medical man had come to attend to that poor woman she would have got over it?”
“No, I don’t think that she would. I told Mr Jodrell that there was something wrong, and that he must go to the doctor.”
The Coroner: “What induced him to go to the doctor?”
“She had changed colour. She was not her own colour. When there is no pain there must be something wrong.”
The Coroner: “You felt at a loss how to act?”
“I bandaged her up as tight as I could.”
The Coroner: “You don’t think the doctor would have been of any assistance?” “Well, I can’t say; I think not. It surprised me that the child was living, for it was quite cold. I could not say that he would have saved her life, but it would have been more satisfaction if he had attended her.”
The Coroner: “Does Mr Allan usually attend confinements?”
“Yes, if they are very particular, but he must have the money in his hand before he goes, or he won’t go.”
The Coroner: “Is that his invariable rule?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “You have known him do that before?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “What sort of people are they that he attends; does he attend poor people?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He will have a difficulty if he confines his services to the rich. He is the parish doctor.”
The Coroner: “You can’t say the attendance of a medical man would have saved the life of the patient, though it might have done?”
“It might have done.”
The Coroner: “You have known these people?”
“Yes, they are decent, respectable people, and have always lived very comfortably.”
“She had complained of a pain in her side?”
The Coroner: “People generally do when they are like her.”
-------------------------------------------------------------
The summing-up by The Coroner:
The Coroner, in summing up, said it had been a long time since he heard a more pitiful story than that which had been unveiled by the man Jodrell. He had no doubt he was known to everyone of them, and he (the Coroner) was very much deceived if he had formed an erroneous opinion that a better, or more decent and thoroughly honest man could have existed. He appeared to have been in the regular employ of a good railway company, and where his wages were sure. Well, he and his wife had lived together happily for eight years, and during that time, he told them, she had not cost him a farthing for doctors. He had had three or four children, and the whole of them had been born without any mishap whatever.
When he returned home on Tuesday night, at eleven o’clock, he found his wife sitting up for him. She had been expecting him all day, and had given him up, thinking he was not coming. They went to bed together, she saying she did not feel very well. Pains came upon her, and the man runs off for a midwife. They had heard the evidence, and were quite capable of forming an opinion. If the man was not a truthful, honest and decent man, he was grievously mistaken. When he found he could not get one person he came back home. He found that the child was born.
Then he goes back for the medical man, and after knocking for half-an-hour he aroused him from his bed. He does not take the trouble to open the door, but talks to him through the slit in the letter box. He is there told the circumstances of the case, that the woman has been prematurely confined, that she is lying there a death’s door; he is earnestly implored to come to their assistance.
He says, “I never come without a guinea.” He had a perfect right to say that. The man says, “You know who I am, you are my club doctor. I shall have my wages on Thursday, and I will pledge you my word that I’ll pay it.” He goes again with the same result, and he turns him off and says, “Go to the Workhouse at Chapel-en-le-Frith, they have medical men there for such cases as yours. I won’t come. I never do come without my guinea.”
In consequence of that the poor man is driven almost to distraction; he goes back to his mother and gets his coveted guinea from her. Whilst the grass is growing the horse starves; the poor woman is dead; she is beyond recall. The Jury could for their own opinion of these hard, stern facts.
He (the Coroner) did not like to express an opinion. As he had said, any medical man had a right to charge what he chose, but he (the Coroner) could not see how it was to be reconciled with the ordinary principles of humanity. The man could do as he chose. Medical men attended with scrupulous nicety to almost every case; he never knew a case where a medical man declined to go in a case of emergency.
It was a hard life, that of a country surgeon, an extremely hard life, and he knew, professionally, that a worse paid class of men didn’t exist. They had of course to give that their consideration. But the woman died, and the verdict would be that she died in childbirth. They could express their sympathy with the poor man under his bereavement. He did not see that they could come to any other conclusion.
Mr George Pearson, foreman of the jury, after a couple of minutes’ deliberation, said they were unanimously of opinion that the deceased died in childbirth.
The conduct of the doctor was referred to in strong terms by the jury, it being considered a cruel thing to tell the man he might go to the Workhouse.
Deep sympathy is felt for the bereaved husband throughout the village.
Now you might think one person was absent from the enquiry and indeed the good Doctor Allan did not attend.
But this is just the start of a battle in the newspapers as to whether the Doctor behaved in a respectable manner.
We shall hear from the Doctor and also Mr Jodrell.
3 March 1888
WHALEY BRIDGE
Sudden death of a woman
strange conduct of a doctor
On Thursday afternoon Mr. R.G. Megginson, deputy-coroner, held an inquest at the Shepherd’s Arms Inn, Whaley Bridge, touching the death of Anne Jane Jodrell, aged 27 years, wife of Jonathan Jodrell, labourer, Horwich End, who died on Wednesday during confinement.
The Coroner said they had met to inquire into the cause of the death of Ann Jane Jodrell, who for some time past had been expecting her confinement, and for that reason she had secured the services of a midwife living in the neighbourhood.
Nature took its course sooner than was expected, and the midwife had not arrived, so they were obliged to run for a medical man.
They went to Dr Allan, and they succeeded in awakening him. He came either to the door or the window, and, being told the circumstances of the case and what was required, said: “Have you got a sovereign?”
The poor man (the husband) replied that he had not, and the doctor said: “I refuse to attend.” He did not attend, and the woman died.
They would hear the evidence as to these facts which he had opened to them and which he believed to be true.
------------------------------------------------------------
The first witness at the inquest at The Shepherd’s Arms was Jonathan Jodrell.
Jonathan Jodrell, husband of the deceased, deposed that he was a labourer, living at Horwich End. His wife died about ten minutes to four on Wednesday morning. She was 27 years of age last May. They had been married eight years, and there was a family of three. His wife had enjoyed very good health, and had always got over her confinements with out difficulty and without the assistance of a medical man; a midwife had been employed on such occasions. Rebecca Southern was the midwife’s name. Up to the time of being ill on this occasion his wife was in good health and strength, and no danger was apprehended. The child was not expected to be born until the first week in April, and the midwife had not been given instructions to attend. Witness came home at ten minutes past eleven on Tuesday night, and found his wife at home apparently well. No one was with her. She said “I had given you up,” as he was so late. After asking him if he would have some supper she said she would go to bed, as she had not felt very well during the day. They went to bed together about 11.30, but had not been there long before she said “I think you had better go and see Mrs Southern,” and he went at once. He found the midwife in bed and unable to attend through illness. He returned home, and upon his arrival there found the child born. He then ran to Horwich End for his mother and sister-in-law.
By the Coroner: The deceased said “the child was born all right.”
He afterwards fetched Mrs Holmes. He asked his wife how she was going on, and she replied “very well.”
By the Coroner: The child was alive. At twenty minutes past one he went to lie down, seeing that all was going on well.
The Coroner: “How long did you lie ?”
“They came and awakened me, and said “my Missis was worse, and I had better go and fetch Dr Allan.”
The Coroner: “Who awoke you ?”
“My sister-in-law, Catharine Jodrell.”
The Coroner: “Did you see the midwife first?”
“Yes; she came downstairs along with my sister-in-law. My sister-in-law told me I had better tell the Doctor to come at once, as the case was dangerous.” The Coroner: “You went at once?”
“Yes, sir, I ran for him to his house.
The Coroner: “Did you see him?”
“Yes, I was knocking about 30 minutes before he came.”
The Coroner: “What did you say to him?”
“There is a place in the door where they put the letters in, and he put his face there and said, “What is your errand?” I said, “My wife has been confined; I want you to come as quick as you can, as there is danger.”
The Coroner: “You gave him distinctly to understand that it was a dangerous case?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He did not open the door?”
“No, sir.”
The Coroner: “You told him your name?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He put his mouth to the letter box?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “What did he say to that?”
“He said he could not come without I had one guinea to give him before he went out of his own house.”
The Coroner: “Give me the words.”
He said, “Have you had Mrs. Southern?” (midwife) and I said “No, she is ill in bed, and we could get no one only a neighbour.” “Well,” he said, “In a case of this sort, I pretend to have notice, and before I go I have a guinea put down.” I said, “It is not in my power to lay a guinea down, I have not got it.” He said, “Well, I shan’t go without, neither for you nor anybody else. I’ll tell you what to do: You apply to the Workhouse, Chapel-en-le-Frith, they employ doctors for such men as you there.”
[Sensation, and a Voice, “That is hard lines.”]
The Coroner: “You did not see him at all?”
Witness: “I could just see his face; it was moonlight.”
The Coroner: “Just saw him through the hole?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “You told him you had not a sovereign?”
“I told him I had not a guinea.”
The Coroner: “You had none in the house, I suppose?”
“No.”
The Coroner: “Did you say “Do come?”
“I did; I begged of him hard to come.”
The Coroner: Did you say you would see that he was paid?”
“I did; I told him I would pay him to-night (Thursday), as it was my pay night at the railway.”
The Coroner: “He knew you?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “What did he say after that?”
“He said very little; he said it was no use me trying to persuade him to come, as he did not go until he had received the money.”
The Coroner: “Is he a married man?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “Did you tell him the child had been born?”
“I did, sir.”
The Coroner: “He positively refused and told you to go to Chapel-en-le-Frith Workhouse, where they kept a doctor for such men as you?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “And that it was no use you stopping there?”
“Yes sir; he closed the shutter (letter box) before I left the door.”
The Coroner: “Was he cross?”
“No, sir.”
The Coroner: “You are quite sure you gave him to understand the exigencies of the case?”
“I told him straight that the child had been born so long, and that we wanted him to come as soon as possible, as she was dangerously ill.”
The Coroner: “You told him she was dangerously ill?”
“Yes. As I was going down the road I met my sister-in-law, and she said, “Go and try to get him to come, as she is in a fit or something.” I went a second time and knocked about 20 minutes. He came to the door and I said, “I want you to come doctor, as my missis is there in a fit or something. I will see that you are paid this week.” He said, “I shan’t go a yard; it is no use you coming here unless you have it.” I said, “It is impossible for me to give it. I have a wife and family to keep, and have not got it. It is not all labouring men who have a guinea in a case of this sort, especially as it has come five weeks earlier.” He said, “That does not matter. You will have to go to Chapel-en-le-Frith and have a doctor there. I shan’t go.”
So I came up and told my mother. My missis was unconscious then. I told my mother and the woman who was in the room with her. My mother put her hand in her pocket and gave me the cupboard keys, and said “run over and fetch it, if a guinea will save her life, we will have him here.”
The Coroner: “Did you go to the doctor again?”
“No, sir. I went as quick as ever I could to fetch the money, but when I returned to my own house to give my mother her keys, my wife was dead.” The Coroner: “Have you known Mr. Allan during the time you have lived here?”
“Oh yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “And spoken to him?”
“Yes, sir. He has attended me once.”
The Coroner: “Have you paid him?”
“Yes, sir, he is my club doctor. I was never under his care but one fortnight, about seven years since.”
The Coroner: “He knew you so intimately as to be acquainted with your usual habits?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “You are a sober man--you look like it?”
“Yes, sir; I never hardly take drink.”
The Coroner: “What are your wages?”
“18s. a week and they take 2d. off for insurance.”
The Coroner: “You never have had a misunderstanding with this doctor?” “No, sir; I’ll tell you what he did. I was taken ill with inflammation, and had to go home, and we sent six times for the doctor before we could get him to come.”
The Coroner: “Although he was your club doctor?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “You say you are quite sure your wife was in perfect health before?”
“Yes, sir; she was.”
The Coroner: “She had had no injury or fall or anything?”
“No, sir; I don’t think she has cost me 5s. in physic since we were married. I never had a doctor’s bill for her or the children.”
The Coroner: “Would any gentleman of the jury like to put a question?
I have kept him a long time, and it is a painful ordeal he must have gone through.
The jury did not ask the witness any questions.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The same day and the second witness is called:
Edna Holmes, a charwoman, was next called.
She said the last witness called her up to go to his wife.
The deceased died about twenty minutes past four.
The Coroner: “Are you of opinion that if a medical man had come to attend to that poor woman she would have got over it?”
“No, I don’t think that she would. I told Mr Jodrell that there was something wrong, and that he must go to the doctor.”
The Coroner: “What induced him to go to the doctor?”
“She had changed colour. She was not her own colour. When there is no pain there must be something wrong.”
The Coroner: “You felt at a loss how to act?”
“I bandaged her up as tight as I could.”
The Coroner: “You don’t think the doctor would have been of any assistance?” “Well, I can’t say; I think not. It surprised me that the child was living, for it was quite cold. I could not say that he would have saved her life, but it would have been more satisfaction if he had attended her.”
The Coroner: “Does Mr Allan usually attend confinements?”
“Yes, if they are very particular, but he must have the money in his hand before he goes, or he won’t go.”
The Coroner: “Is that his invariable rule?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “You have known him do that before?”
“Yes.”
The Coroner: “What sort of people are they that he attends; does he attend poor people?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Coroner: “He will have a difficulty if he confines his services to the rich. He is the parish doctor.”
The Coroner: “You can’t say the attendance of a medical man would have saved the life of the patient, though it might have done?”
“It might have done.”
The Coroner: “You have known these people?”
“Yes, they are decent, respectable people, and have always lived very comfortably.”
“She had complained of a pain in her side?”
The Coroner: “People generally do when they are like her.”
-------------------------------------------------------------
The summing-up by The Coroner:
The Coroner, in summing up, said it had been a long time since he heard a more pitiful story than that which had been unveiled by the man Jodrell. He had no doubt he was known to everyone of them, and he (the Coroner) was very much deceived if he had formed an erroneous opinion that a better, or more decent and thoroughly honest man could have existed. He appeared to have been in the regular employ of a good railway company, and where his wages were sure. Well, he and his wife had lived together happily for eight years, and during that time, he told them, she had not cost him a farthing for doctors. He had had three or four children, and the whole of them had been born without any mishap whatever.
When he returned home on Tuesday night, at eleven o’clock, he found his wife sitting up for him. She had been expecting him all day, and had given him up, thinking he was not coming. They went to bed together, she saying she did not feel very well. Pains came upon her, and the man runs off for a midwife. They had heard the evidence, and were quite capable of forming an opinion. If the man was not a truthful, honest and decent man, he was grievously mistaken. When he found he could not get one person he came back home. He found that the child was born.
Then he goes back for the medical man, and after knocking for half-an-hour he aroused him from his bed. He does not take the trouble to open the door, but talks to him through the slit in the letter box. He is there told the circumstances of the case, that the woman has been prematurely confined, that she is lying there a death’s door; he is earnestly implored to come to their assistance.
He says, “I never come without a guinea.” He had a perfect right to say that. The man says, “You know who I am, you are my club doctor. I shall have my wages on Thursday, and I will pledge you my word that I’ll pay it.” He goes again with the same result, and he turns him off and says, “Go to the Workhouse at Chapel-en-le-Frith, they have medical men there for such cases as yours. I won’t come. I never do come without my guinea.”
In consequence of that the poor man is driven almost to distraction; he goes back to his mother and gets his coveted guinea from her. Whilst the grass is growing the horse starves; the poor woman is dead; she is beyond recall. The Jury could for their own opinion of these hard, stern facts.
He (the Coroner) did not like to express an opinion. As he had said, any medical man had a right to charge what he chose, but he (the Coroner) could not see how it was to be reconciled with the ordinary principles of humanity. The man could do as he chose. Medical men attended with scrupulous nicety to almost every case; he never knew a case where a medical man declined to go in a case of emergency.
It was a hard life, that of a country surgeon, an extremely hard life, and he knew, professionally, that a worse paid class of men didn’t exist. They had of course to give that their consideration. But the woman died, and the verdict would be that she died in childbirth. They could express their sympathy with the poor man under his bereavement. He did not see that they could come to any other conclusion.
Mr George Pearson, foreman of the jury, after a couple of minutes’ deliberation, said they were unanimously of opinion that the deceased died in childbirth.
The conduct of the doctor was referred to in strong terms by the jury, it being considered a cruel thing to tell the man he might go to the Workhouse.
Deep sympathy is felt for the bereaved husband throughout the village.
Now you might think one person was absent from the enquiry and indeed the good Doctor Allan did not attend.
But this is just the start of a battle in the newspapers as to whether the Doctor behaved in a respectable manner.
We shall hear from the Doctor and also Mr Jodrell.
--------------------------------------
After the inquest the repercussions begin and to begin with they are confined to the newspapers:
High Peak News
10 March 1888
The sudden death of a woman at Whaley Bridge
To the Editor
Sir,
I trust I may be allowed to express an opinion on the subject placed before the readers of your valuable paper last Saturday under the above title.
Being one of those persons who take some little interest in the conditions of life which surround the working classes of this and other countries, my travels in search of information and statistics have led me to witness many horrible and distressing scenes both in England and in Ireland, but I do not think that I ever saw, heard or read of anything more inhuman than the conduct of Dr Allan of Whaley Bridge, on the morning of Wednesday, the 29th February, in refusing to attend Mrs Jodrell simply because her husband could not place the fee (one guinea) in his hand before he stepped out of his house.
From the summing up of the Coroner it appears that Mr Jodrell was an honest hardworking man, and from the evidence it is clear that the doctor knew the husband of the deceased well enough to be acquainted with his usual habits, having spoken to him at times, and attended him once as his club doctor. Yet in spite of all this he had the callousness to refuse to attend the dying woman.
Had he not known the people, or even had he been certain that he would never have received his fee, he could scarcely have been justified in refusing to attend when life was in danger, and it passes any comprehension how the jury could come to the unanimity of opinion that they did.
Just below the report of the above case you have a short paragraph which states a Buxtonian is to be prosecuted for cruelty to animals for allowing three horses to be in a field on the Buxton Road during the late storm, without food. Are horses, in the opinion of the people of Whaley Bridge, of more consequence than the lives of human beings?
Surely someone will have the courage to take this matter in hand, and with the support of the inhabitants, bring the doctor to task; because it is an exceptionally hard case, and the treatment meted out to the fervent supplicant on that unhappy morning deserves to be punished.
Trusting that someone connected with the district will take the matter in hand.
Yours &c
Archibald Vicar
Prestwich, near Manchester
5th March 1888.
High Peak News
10 March 1888
The sudden death of a woman at Whaley Bridge
To the Editor
Sir,
I trust I may be allowed to express an opinion on the subject placed before the readers of your valuable paper last Saturday under the above title.
Being one of those persons who take some little interest in the conditions of life which surround the working classes of this and other countries, my travels in search of information and statistics have led me to witness many horrible and distressing scenes both in England and in Ireland, but I do not think that I ever saw, heard or read of anything more inhuman than the conduct of Dr Allan of Whaley Bridge, on the morning of Wednesday, the 29th February, in refusing to attend Mrs Jodrell simply because her husband could not place the fee (one guinea) in his hand before he stepped out of his house.
From the summing up of the Coroner it appears that Mr Jodrell was an honest hardworking man, and from the evidence it is clear that the doctor knew the husband of the deceased well enough to be acquainted with his usual habits, having spoken to him at times, and attended him once as his club doctor. Yet in spite of all this he had the callousness to refuse to attend the dying woman.
Had he not known the people, or even had he been certain that he would never have received his fee, he could scarcely have been justified in refusing to attend when life was in danger, and it passes any comprehension how the jury could come to the unanimity of opinion that they did.
Just below the report of the above case you have a short paragraph which states a Buxtonian is to be prosecuted for cruelty to animals for allowing three horses to be in a field on the Buxton Road during the late storm, without food. Are horses, in the opinion of the people of Whaley Bridge, of more consequence than the lives of human beings?
Surely someone will have the courage to take this matter in hand, and with the support of the inhabitants, bring the doctor to task; because it is an exceptionally hard case, and the treatment meted out to the fervent supplicant on that unhappy morning deserves to be punished.
Trusting that someone connected with the district will take the matter in hand.
Yours &c
Archibald Vicar
Prestwich, near Manchester
5th March 1888.
--------------------------------------
At last our local doctor finally has his say:
To the Editor
Sir,
A report has appeared in your paper dated March 3rd of an inquest held at Whaley Bridge, on a woman who died after childbirth, and whom I refused to attend.
The remarks made upon that occasion are so extraordinary, so uncalled for, and so calculated to do me professional harm, that I feel bound not to pass them over in the silence which they deserve.
It is surely a monstrous thing that without giving me any intimation of the inquest, which was held without my knowledge, the Coroner, whose office above all others requires a judicial weighing of facts and evidence, should accept the statements of an angry and interested person without being aware of what I had to say on the subject.
Not merely so, but he commences his remark to the jury by a serious statement, which shows a carelessness rather more important, but of the same kind, displayed all through the case.
He is made in your report to say that I was called in directly after the birth of the child, whereas the fact is that I was sent for four hours after that occurrence; four hours during which the unfortunate woman was being manipulated by a charwoman, during which it was the duty of the husband to have gone for Dr Anderson if he could not pay me, during which medical assistance might very well have been obtained, and at the end of which the woman was in a dying condition and beyond my skill.
It is surely a singular thing that the Coroner should have allowed himself to make remarks calculated to damage my professional standing, and should have failed to ascertain exactly the cause of death, and therefore where the responsibility lay.
Although I hope I should not fail to attend to the claims of humanity, yet I do not recognize that the public have any right to expect from me gratuitous services, and I claim the right to refuse attendance where I please.
Especially do I consider myself entitled to refuse attending in a case of child-birth which has been four hours unnecessarily treated by a charwoman.
I do not see that it is any necessary part of the duties of a medical man to remove by his mere presence the responsibilities naturally attaching to others.
Had the Coroner, instead of expressing a maudlin sympathy with the husband, informed himself as to the actual events of the case and reprimanded him for not securing medical assistance in the ample time at his disposal, it seems to me that his observations would have been more to the purpose.
Much of the conversation reported in your paper was between Jodrell and myself is so obviously imaginary, under the circumstances, that it is not worth discussing.
But his statement about calling six times on me to attend him for inflammation as his club doctor is an absolute falsehood, and, in fact, would be equivalent to my dismissal as medical attendant to the club, and he knows that.
It is curious that this should only come up after seven years, during which I have maintained very good relations with the club.
Yours &c.,
Whaley Bridge, March 7th 1888.
H. Allan, MB
A little strange one might think that the village doctor was not even aware that an inquest was taking place in the village where he lived and which concerned a case that he featured so prominently in.
To the Editor
Sir,
A report has appeared in your paper dated March 3rd of an inquest held at Whaley Bridge, on a woman who died after childbirth, and whom I refused to attend.
The remarks made upon that occasion are so extraordinary, so uncalled for, and so calculated to do me professional harm, that I feel bound not to pass them over in the silence which they deserve.
It is surely a monstrous thing that without giving me any intimation of the inquest, which was held without my knowledge, the Coroner, whose office above all others requires a judicial weighing of facts and evidence, should accept the statements of an angry and interested person without being aware of what I had to say on the subject.
Not merely so, but he commences his remark to the jury by a serious statement, which shows a carelessness rather more important, but of the same kind, displayed all through the case.
He is made in your report to say that I was called in directly after the birth of the child, whereas the fact is that I was sent for four hours after that occurrence; four hours during which the unfortunate woman was being manipulated by a charwoman, during which it was the duty of the husband to have gone for Dr Anderson if he could not pay me, during which medical assistance might very well have been obtained, and at the end of which the woman was in a dying condition and beyond my skill.
It is surely a singular thing that the Coroner should have allowed himself to make remarks calculated to damage my professional standing, and should have failed to ascertain exactly the cause of death, and therefore where the responsibility lay.
Although I hope I should not fail to attend to the claims of humanity, yet I do not recognize that the public have any right to expect from me gratuitous services, and I claim the right to refuse attendance where I please.
Especially do I consider myself entitled to refuse attending in a case of child-birth which has been four hours unnecessarily treated by a charwoman.
I do not see that it is any necessary part of the duties of a medical man to remove by his mere presence the responsibilities naturally attaching to others.
Had the Coroner, instead of expressing a maudlin sympathy with the husband, informed himself as to the actual events of the case and reprimanded him for not securing medical assistance in the ample time at his disposal, it seems to me that his observations would have been more to the purpose.
Much of the conversation reported in your paper was between Jodrell and myself is so obviously imaginary, under the circumstances, that it is not worth discussing.
But his statement about calling six times on me to attend him for inflammation as his club doctor is an absolute falsehood, and, in fact, would be equivalent to my dismissal as medical attendant to the club, and he knows that.
It is curious that this should only come up after seven years, during which I have maintained very good relations with the club.
Yours &c.,
Whaley Bridge, March 7th 1888.
H. Allan, MB
A little strange one might think that the village doctor was not even aware that an inquest was taking place in the village where he lived and which concerned a case that he featured so prominently in.
----------------------------------
Next up; a reply from Mr. Jodrell. It was almost unheard of in those days that a working class man should write a letter to a newspaper.
Next up; a reply from Mr. Jodrell. It was almost unheard of in those days that a working class man should write a letter to a newspaper.
High Peak News
17 March 1888
The sudden death of a woman at Whaley Bridge
To the Editor
Sir,
May I be allowed to give an answer to the letter sent to you by Dr Allan, of Whaley Bridge, dated March 7th, respecting the death of and inquest on my wife?
The inquest, he says, was held without his knowledge; but if he had had his ears and eyes open he would both have seen and heard what was going on, as the sad occurrence was the whole village gossip.
In his letter he says that my wife was “manipulated for four hours by a charwoman.” I am prepared to state as truth that the charwoman never “manipulated” her at all, except to bandage her, which, I believe, was necessary in the case. As your readers will remember, I stated at the inquest that the child was born at ten minutes past twelve o’clock, and I was running about the village for assistance about one hour and twenty minutes. When I had got assistance at my wife’s request I went to lie down, as to all appearance everything was going on well.
I had been laid down about an hour when my sister-in-law and the charwoman came downstairs and told me I had better go for Dr Allan, as the case was dangerous, which I did.
I got to his door about twenty minutes to three o’clock, and was knocking there for thirty-five minutes before I could raise him from his bed. But had I been aware that I should have met with such an inhuman reception I should most certainly have gone for Dr Anderson, of Chapel-en-le-Frith, or Dr Nall, of Disley, either of whom I might have got while I was knocking at Dr Allan’s door, and without applying for the parish to pay the fee for me.
The next time I went I was knocking at his door about twenty minutes, and I am sure that he could not have had time to have gone to sleep again, as I was only away from his door about five minutes.
If Dr Allan thinks it would do him any good I am quite willing that my wife should be taken from her grave and a post-mortem examination made of her body, to show the country at large in what way the charwoman had “manipulated” her. Had I not done my duty as far as I could to secure medical aid the Coroner and his jury might have brought in a verdict of manslaughter against me, which would only have been my just reward; and I think that, instead of the doctor chastising the Coroner for what he said at the inquest he ought to be very thankful he did not speak in stronger words.
In his letter the doctor does not seem satisfied with the great loss that I have had to bear in the death of my wife, but he also wishes to rob me of my character, as he says my statement is untrue.
Every word that I spoke at the inquest I am fully prepared to repeat either before a Coroner and his jury or in a court of justice.
He also speaks of his good relationship with the club and the other clubs in the village.
Perhaps the reason is there are no other doctors resident in Whaley Bridge at present, and “Any port is acceptable in a storm.”
Yours, &c.,
Jonathan Jodrell
Whaley Bridge, March 12th, 1888.
----------------------------------------
During the following few weeks, there was many reader's letters published by the local press, particularly from Mr Vicars and a Mr Colles. These have been omitteed from this article as they continue at great length. Ed.
-------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment