Mysterious bell-ringing at Falkirk.
Remarkable conduct of a domestic servant.
At the Falkirk Police Court yesterday, Elizabeth Cameron, aged 18, a servant in the employment of Mr David Murdoch, druggist, Falkirk, was charged before Sheriff Bell with maliciously breaking a pane of glass in the pantry on his premises, a window in the cellar, and with ringing the front door bell on the evenings of 31st January and the 2d inst., all to the alarm and annoyance of Mr Murdoch and his family. The house in which Mr Murdoch lives is known by the name of Arnotfield, a short distance west from Falkirk. The house was recently built, and Mr Murdoch and his wife has since its erection lived without annoyance till within the last five or six weeks, when alarm and fear were frequently occasioned by the ringing of the front-door bell during the dead hours of night, and despite the strictest watching the executant could not be discovered.
This continued for more than a week, the performance being gone through several times each consecutive evening; and though the police were apprised of the facts, and they did everything possible to find out the perpetrator, they completely failed.
An interregnum of fully three weeks occurred in the proceedings, and Mr Murdoch and his family lived in quietness; but last Tuesday evening the mysterious operation was again resumed. The bell was rung violently two or three times. The whole household was on the alert, and a policeman took stock at the front door, but notwithstanding the combination of detectives the bell was repeatedly rung, and nobody could discover who did it.
About four o’clock next morning, Cameron, the servant girl, went to her mistress’s bedroom and informed her that somebody had thrown a stone through the window into her (the servant’s) room, and that she believed the depredator was an old clothes man, whom she stated she had seen in the back court that morning. True enough, the window was found broken, and the wooden covering of a cellar had in addition been removed sometime during the night by apparently a mysterious hand.
If alarm existed before, these circumstances did not tend to allay it, but, on the contrary, made it more intense. The fact of a policeman being on the watch in conjunction with the family, and these acts occurring and escaping their vigilance, conduced to render the matter more unaccountable and alarming.
On Wednesday and Thursday nights no ringing occurred, but on Friday night it was resumed about eight o’clock, and the police were communicated with. The Superintendent called at the house, and while seated with two gentlemen and a company of ladies in one of the rooms the bell was rung violently; and so great was the haste to discover the perpetrator of the mysterious plot, that one of the gentlemen got overturned in the lobby, and went sprawling out on his fours at the front door. Every direction was instantly searched, but no trace of a human being could be discovered. The rain was pouring in torrents at the time, and all that the pursuers of the wondrous object got was a thorough soaking.
At half-past ten o’clock two policemen were put on special duty in front of the house. Still the bell was rung – the handle vibrated – but no living thing was to be seen in communication with it. In the course of the evening, too, a pane of glass in the cellar window was broken to pieces, and even this escaped the attention of the lynx-eyed detectives. The constables remained on duty till half-past-six the following morning without observing any circumstance which could assist in solving the mystery.
There was a pause on Saturday night. On Sunday evening the police were again, however, on duty. The Superintendent was also there, and soundings of the bell were taken from the front door and by pulling the spring in the kitchen, and, from a careful observation of these, a difference was remarked in the sound and a similarity detected between that produced from ringing it in the kitchen and the sound which emanated from the mysterious ringing of the preceding evening. The conclusion was consequentely arrived at that the whole thing was done in the kitchen.
The servant girl in the meantime was on leave to Laurieston, and, on coming to Falkirk, the Superintendent of Police met her and put some uestions to her in regard to the affair, and stated that constables would be sent out if the ringing was again begun – two, however, being all the while stationed beside the house.
In a few minutes after the girl arrived in the house the bell was rung violently, and Mr Murdoch at once called the girl before him and charged her with being the perpetrator of the whole plot. Ultimately the girl confessed that she was; told how she rang the bell from the kitchen, how she broke the panes of glass, and told where the cellar lid was to be got, and also that she could give no motive or reason fro her extraordinary conduct.
She was apprehended and brought to Falkirk, and as stated previously, was brought up at the Police Court yesterday. On being asked whether she pleaded guilty or not guilty, she answered “Guilty.”
The Sheriff – How did you come to do this – was it just a love of mischief? On his Lordship receiving no answer, he said – Do you know what you are pleading guilty to? Still there was no answer, and his Lordship then said that he had some difficulty in dealing with the case, which he regarded as one of a very aggravated kind, involving, as it did, acts extending over a considerable period.
He had no doubt, from the tenor of the whole charge, that the prisoner did not intend injury to her master, but to alarm and annoy him and his family. The ringing of a bell was a trivial matter, but committed under such circumstances, and during the dead hours of night, gave the matter a serious aspect.
Seeing, however, that it was the prisoner’s first offence, and that she was apparently penitent, his Lordship thought he could consistently with his duty give her the alternative of paying a fine. He then sentenced her to pay a fine of 40s, or forty days’ imprisonment.
Glasgow Herald, 4th February 1868.