Strange Freaks of a Servant Girl.
A servant girl employed by Mr James Wood, of Lurley Tiverton, builder, has been committing a series of foolish freaks at her master’s expense. Early one morning of last week the girl drew Mr Wood’s attention to a large rent in a shirt, and as the morning advanced she produced to her employer other garments that had as she represented been mysteriously torn. In every room in the house something was found damaged, and the greatest concern prevailed as to the author of the depradations. After considerable enquiry among the neighbours someone threw out the idea that the mischief was the work of supernatural agency – and point was lent to the suggestion by a recital of the famous Sampford Peverell ghost story. This extraordinary conclusion got possession of the heads of many, insomuch that it was not until the police had investigated and exposed the trickery that confidence was restored amongst the credulous villagers.
P.C.Rhodes was the constable entrusted with the case. He went to work cautiously and cleverly. Having ascertained that while the clothes of every member of Mr Wood’s family were torn, not a single garmet of the girl’s was inured, he at once questioned the girl, who is a raw country lass of 14.
Eventually partly through the presence of the constable and partly through seeing the awe-stricken inhabitants about the place, she confessed to having played the part of the supposed ghost. She assigned no reason for her conduct, nor can her friends divine a reason. She was taken to the police station by P.C. Rhodes and subsequently sent home.
Western Times, 22nd December 1886.
The Lurley Ghost Scare.
At the Tiverton Police-court, yesterday, Ellen Cook, of Little Hayden, Washfield, was charged with damaging a quantity of wearing apparel, the property of Mr James Wood, builder, of Lurley, on the 17th inst. Defendent pleaded not guilty. Prosecutor, a builder, said the defendant was in his employ from July to December 17th. On Friday morning, about half-past seven o’clock, his wife called his attention to some clothing which was torn. The defendant was in the room at the time, and said “Missus, look at master’s shirt, I think the crickets have been eating it.”
Mr Fraser: The crickets on the hearth. I suppose they come about Christmas-time. — Witness said the shirt was torn. The girl called his attention to some stockings that were torn, one of them being torn across. The coat was broken down the back, and the waistcoat and trousers of two suits of clothes, his property, were torn in a similar manner. A number of other articles of wearing apparel, belonging to his wife and child, were damaged. An umbrella was produced, the covering of which was split. Mr Fraser: That might be done by the wind. Witness said the checked suit of clothes was worn by him on Tuesday, and, so far as he knew, they were sound on the previous night.
He and his brother were looking to see what was damaged, when they heard someone moving upstairs. He was going to see what was wrong, when the girl came out with an armful of clothes, and said, “All master’s clothes are torn as well.” The clothes which defendant had in her arms had been taken from the wardrobe in his bedroom. Defendant afterwards brought some of his wife’s clothes out also torn. He then communicated with Superintendent Crabbe.
Mr Fraser: Did you think there was something extraordinary about? Did you think the devil was at work? – Witness: He did not know what to think. The defendeant and his servant-man were in th ehouse, as well as himself, his wife, and children. When he returned from Exeter in the evening he sent for defendant’s mother. She said to defendant did you do it; defendant said, “Yes, mother,” and her mother then said “I think the very devil must be in you.” Mr Fraser: Did you believe there was witchcraft about? – Witness: No, sir.
Defendant’s mother was asked if she had any question to ask, and she said, “I have nothing to ask, except Mr Wood said there was some witchcraft going on, and he went to Exeter to have it stopped.”
Mrs Frances Wood said on the morning in question defendant called her attention to the state of the clothes on the line. The clothes were not torn on the previous night. She said to defendant. “Do you know anything about this,” and the girl said she did not. Prosecutor went to examine the things upstairs and on his coming down again she missed defendant. A few minutes afterwards defendant came down with an armful of clothes, and said they were all torn. She brushed the clothes in the wardrobe on Monday and Wednesday, and they were all right then. Defendant was not sent upstairs at all. Defendant then went into the parlour, and said the corner of the sofa, and the articles in the cradle were torn, as also was a shawl. All the clothes seemed to be torn in one way.
There was some flour in dairy, and after the clothes were discovered, this was scattered about. Defendant admitted to her she damaged the property but she would not assign any reason. The girl was not under notice to leave and witness could not assign a reason for the girl’s conduct. She could not trust the girl in the house, as she was not truthful, and was deceitful.
Cross-examined: He eldest child, aged six years, went up with defendant. In answer to witness, the child said she saw the defendant coming out of the bedroom. Mr Fraser: Is the little girl a mischievous one? – Witness. No. Defendant: She is sometimes. Mr Fraser: No doubt you will say that.
George Northcote said he lived with Mr Wood. He slept in the house on the Thursday night. He came down just after six, and shortly afterwards he saw the defendant come out of the parlour with a lamp in her hand. She said, “Look, George, how master’s shirt is torn.” He said “How did that come about?” She said, “The crickets have done it.” He said, “How did the crickets get there?” She said, “Oh, they fly about.” He then went to work and did not return to the house until breakfast time. He did not tear the clothes and did not know how they were damaged.
Mary Wood, sister of prosecutor, said she went to the house where the damage was done. Defendant had the baby in her arms, and she said the baby’s frock is torn. Witness told the girl to go to Mrs Frank Woods, and on arriving there the dress was still further torn. She took it off the baby and sent it home. Mr Fraser: Did you lay it down to witchcraft? – Witness: I know nothing about it. Mr Fraser: Or about the devil being there? – Witness: No. Mr Fraser: Did you hear anything about the Lord’s Prayer being written out. – Witness: No, I did not hear of it. Mr Fraser: Not even pinned to a shirt? – Witness: I heard of some paper being torn in the diary. Mr Fraser (to the reporters): You are not going to have your witchcraft case made out.
Samuel Wood, a brother of the prosecutor, gave corroborative evidence. Witness heard something “cracking,” like clothes being torn, and he noticed that the noise came from the place where defendant was sitting. Defendant said this was not so, as there was a sheet hanging on a chair at the other end of the room, which was torn up before their very eyes.
P.C. Rhodes said he went to Lurley, and kept a look-out, but no clothes were torn then. Defendant asked him to go home to tell her mother the truth. He told her to speak to Mrs Wood. Afterwards Mrs Wood came out, and the girl asked if she would be kept on if she told the truth, and Mrs Wood declined to promise. The girl then said, “Oh, Missus, I did it all except the stockings.” Witness then took a list of the damaged articles, and defendant again denied having torn the articles. In the evening defendant’s mother came to the house, and the girl said something to her mother. The mother then said, “Why did you do it; the very Devil must have been in you.” Defendant then said, “I did it.” Witness then took her into custody. Defendant said she had nothing to say, only she did not do it. Mrs Cook said she had nothing to say, as she did not know anything about it.
Defendant said she only knew that when she got down in the morning she saw some holes in the shirt. She said to the apprentice that the crickets did it. Mr Fraser: Is there nothing on the hearth for them to do? The Magistrates’ Clerk: They must have a good appetite. Defendant: They fly about. Mr Fraser: A good flannel shirt is something to feed upon.
Sentenced to two months, with hard labour.
Express and Echo, 24th December 1886.
A “Ghost” Sent to Prison.
A ghost story which has lately agitated the minds of the country folks of Lurley, a Devonshire village, had its end on Thursday, when Ellen Cook, servant, was charged, at Tiverton police court, with damaging wearing apparel to the value of £5. On the night of the 17th December clothes were torn at the house of Mr James Wood, damage to the extent of £20 being caused. The occurrence was attributed for a time to supernatural agency, and wise men and tablets were consulted. At length a policeman traced the offence to Cook, who has been sentenced to two months’ hard labour.
Western Daily Press, 27th December 1886.