The Damnation of John Donellan (27 page)

If we take Donellan's evidence and that of William Frost, Donellan first saw Theodosius between 7.50 and 8 a.m. If we take the servants' evidence, Donellan left the room and was in the passageway and garden; he then returned to the house and, according to his
Defence
, was with Theodosius when he died. His absence, to go downstairs, along the passageway and out into the garden, talking to two servants along the way, and to return then upstairs, could not have been less than five minutes. Allowing that he was in Theodosius's room for five minutes first, and that the boy died within five minutes of his return, the death must have occurred at the earliest just after eight – but most probably around 8.10 a.m. Which was confirmed by Francis Amos.

What was Anna Maria doing while Donellan was gone? Her evidence says nothing at all about his absence. Why, in fact, did Donellan leave the room at all if Theodosius seemed on the brink of death? It seems reasonable to say that he would not do so; but both the gardener
and
Donellan and Catharine Amos agree that he was either in the garden, or on his way to the garden after he saw Theodosius was ill. It can only be presumed that there was an interval when it seemed that he was holding his own; struggling, but not obviously dying. Donellan left at this point, by his own account to try to find an age-old remedy; when he came back, Theodosius was very much worse – on the brink of death, in fact.

What had happened in the room during that time? Was Anna Maria with her son the entire time after Donellan had been called? Was she alone with Theodosius, and at what point did his condition so suddenly worsen?

Anna Maria's testimony does not say that Donellan left the room. Why would she leave out this detail, knowing that the servants could verify it?

The only other person who could reliably say who was present,
and what happened during Donellan's absence, was Sarah Blundell. And Sarah Blundell was dead.

There is one other detail of Anna Maria's testimony which does not tally. She said under oath that Theodosius was ‘very near dead' when she was remonstrating with Donellan about his washing out of the bottles, and Sarah Blundell was clearing out the room. But there was hardly time, if Donellan left the room and Theodosius died soon after his return, to argue about bottles. It is far more likely that the conversation took place once Theodosius was dead, and the room was being cleared.

It does cast a much worse light on Donellan, however, and gives more sympathy to Anna Maria's story, if Donellan was trying to conceal the evidence while Theodosius lay dying before him.

Francis Amos made one other statement which was not covered in his court testimony. In the prosecution brief, he said that ‘He saw Captain Donellan in the garden between 6 and 7 o'clock when he [Amos] called for Samuel Frost and Captain Donellan replied that he was coming.'

Was Donellan or was he not in the garden between 6 and 7 p.m. the previous evening? Anna Maria said no; Donellan said that he left the Hall at about ten past six, walked to the mill and was gone until nine o'clock.

Who was right? Amos and Donellan's stories tally (between 6 and 6.10); Anna Maria's does not.

One servant who was not called to give evidence was the footman John Yateman. In the prosecution brief, however, he gave a statement as follows:

In the afternoon preceeding Sir Theodosius's death, from about 3 in the afternoon until near 7 o'clock, he was in and about the Park and grounds near the house and saw nothing of Captain Donellan. Early in the morning on which Sir Theodosius died he was at the river getting out the net which Sir Theodosius had left there the evening before and he happened to look towards the garden when he saw Captain Donellan leaning over a wall in a private place there next to the river
where he had never seen him before, and that as soon as he perceived he was seen he immediately drew back and this witness saw no more of him.

This statement, which came under a section called ‘Evidence', misses out one crucial element from an earlier one Yateman made to the prosecution team. In that, he said that he ‘saw Donellan swing his hand and throw something into the water' at this time.

Why was there a difference in the statements? It seems that the footman had changed his mind in the later one. And it is curious why Yateman was never brought to the stand to reveal what seems to be good evidence of Donellan trying to conceal something small enough to throw – a bottle, perhaps?

Nothing more was heard of Yateman. It is possible that, after his sweetheart's death, he moved away. Later that year, in November, a John Yateman married a Sarah Nixon in St Michael's Church in Coventry. But it is not known if this is the same man.

Now came the testimony of two men who were not servants.

One was William Crofts, who said that at the coroner's court he had seen John Donellan ‘catch [Lady Boughton] by the gown, and give her a twitch' when she mentioned that Donellan had rinsed out the bottles.

Absolutely nothing else was asked of Crofts, nor was he cross-examined; but Donellan explains the incident in his
Defence
:

In the course of Lady Boughton's evidence when she spoke of her daughter's maid, she spoke ‘maid' so low that Mr Donellan did not hear it, and thinking she said ‘her daughter', he pulled her by the sleeve and told her she had made a mistake, where upon Lady Boughton recalled her words, and said she meant her daughter's maid.

The next witness was John Derbyshire, the debtor from Warwick Gaol, who had got to know Donellan well during his imprisonment. Derbyshire testified that Donellan talked of Theodosius's
death hundreds of times; but one conversation in particular formed his evidence now.

A: We were both in one room together; he had a bed in the same room I had for a month or five weeks, I believe … we had a conversation about Sir Theodosius being poisoned; I asked Captain Donellan whether the body was poisoned or not. He said there was no doubt of it … he said, ‘It was done among themselves … himself, Lady Boughton, the footman, and the apothecary.'

Q: Who did he mean by ‘himself'?

A: Sir Theodosius Boughton … I said, ‘Sure, he could not do it himself'; he said, no, he did not think he did … the apothecary would lose a good patient … it was very unnatural to suppose Lady Boughton could do it. He then spoke of Lady Boughton, how covetous she was; he said she received an anonymous letter the day after Sir Theodosius's death, charging her plump with poisoning Sir Theodosius; that she called him and read it to him, and she trembled; he said she desired he would not let his wife know of that letter; and asked him if he would give up his right to the personal estate, and some estates of about two hundred pounds a year belonging to the family.

Donellan knew that Derbyshire would testify against him. They had quarrelled in prison – Donellan claimed it was because he refused to lend Derbyshire money – and soon after Derbyshire had sent for Caldecott, the Boughtons' solicitor, and told him the story. Donellan knew that it would sound bad that he had said he knew that Theodosius had been poisoned; all he could offer by way of explanation was that he had not poisoned Theodosius himself. Donellan's incarceration had hardened him to the fact that poison was going to be the issue of the trial; but he still instructed his lawyers to find any other explanation they could.

The defence tried to blacken Derbyshire's reputation, showing him to be a bankrupt and having been involved in a contentious
case which had previously been tried by Buller. But Derbyshire was a placid, even-handed witness: he readily admitted to his mistakes and added that Donellan had changed his mind several times about the reasons for Theodosius's death. As a result, he left an impression of frankness and honesty; but the dramatic speech about Anna Maria hung ominously in the air.

Sir William Wheler testified next. This was the man who, more than any other, held the key to the trial. He had been Theodosius's guardian: as such, he should have been aware of the boy's medical history, his character, his education and his difficulties at Eton. He knew Anna Maria Boughton well – a woman described as ‘all but a fool', an heiress who was ‘not a very intellectual woman'. No doubt, when Edward – who was his close friend – had died Wheler had advised Anna Maria more than once. That was what he was there for, why he was Theodosius's guardian – as a family friend and mature older man of wealth and title. His own daughter Lucy had married within a few months of Theodosia, and it is hard to believe that the subject of Theodosia's new husband had not come up in conversation with her.

So this was a person who knew Lawford and the family better than any of the doctors, better than Powell, better than the servants. He knew their financial situation, having witnessed several legal documents for Anna Maria and Edward; he knew what drove them, what interested them, what worried them; he also knew their lands and estates, as much of them abutted his own. And it is hard to imagine that he had not visited Lawford at some time during the last three years to see how Lawford was progressing with Donellan acting as its master; as Theodosius's guardian he would have been anxious to know that everything was being conducted responsibly. No record remains of his slightest disapproval or reservations at that time.

And yet this significant opportunity was lost. Wheler was asked to read out the letters that had passed between himself and Donellan between the death and the funeral, and to comment very briefly on Sir Edward Boughton's sudden death. That was all. No answer as to whether Snow had acted on his authority when the order was
given to bury Theodosius; no explanation of why he himself had not visited Lawford after the death or why he had been slow to respond to the news. The defence counsel did not ask him about the most telling fact of all – that he had trusted Donellan to organise Theodosius's funeral, and that not one of his letters held any hint of accusation on his behalf towards Donellan, and nor had Anna Maria expressed any misgivings.

Yet at some point after the autopsy, Sir William Wheler had become convinced that Theodosius had been poisoned. His attendance at the experiments with laurel water that Rattray had so enthusiastically conducted three weeks before the trial had confirmed his opinion that laurel water had been the cause. From that moment on, Anna Maria had been helped to testify against her son-in-law: in the newspapers after Donellan's trial it was mentioned that the Earl of Denbigh sat in court, nodding approval as Anna Maria turned to him before answering questions. Denbigh and Wheler were close associates.

But it was unthinkable, apparently, that anyone of either Denbigh's or Wheler's rank should be questioned as to their friendships, alliances, knowledge or motives.

Wheler left the stand, no doubt with Donellan's eyes upon him. It was obvious now that, no matter how much Donellan had cared for Theodosia, no matter how well he had managed Lawford, no matter how many times he had saved Theodosius from disgracing himself in tavern brawls (which the next two witnesses, Miller and Loggie, independently verified), these counted for nothing now. There was a social abyss between Donellan and his accusers.

If Theodosius had been poisoned, then a perpetrator must be found; and those who wielded power in society – men like Wheler – had closed their ranks against him.

When Wheler stepped down, Donellan's previous deposition to the coroner, written from Lawford Hall on 14 September – the day that Anna Maria so substantially changed her own testimony – was read out.

Then the Clerk of the Arraigns stood to deliver Donellan's statement for his defence, the only statement of his submissible
in court, and which he had had to prepare before the trial began:

My Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury,

Permit me in this unfortunate situation, to submit to your consideration a few particulars and observations relating to this horrid charge which has been brought against me.

Although many false, malevolent, and cruel reports have been circulated in the public prints and throughout the country ever since my confinement, tending to prejudice the minds of the people injurious to my honour and dangerous to my life, I still have confidence that your justice and humanity cannot be misled by them …

Donellan went on to outline the history of his marriage, and his good relationships with the family, Theodosius in particular. He drew the attention of the court to ‘several occasions' when he protected Theodosius against injury. He then addressed the subject of the missed autopsy.

These gentlemen arrived about nine o'clock at night when I produced to them Sir William's letter and desired they would pursue his instructions … [they] returned and … informed the family that the [body] was so putrid it was not only dangerous to approach it but impossible at that time to discover the cause of Sir Theodosius's death.

He stressed that Rattray had undertaken to inform Sir William of what had or had not transpired, but had not done so. He also described how Bucknill arrived unannounced and that ‘he had understood that I wished to have the body of Sir Theodosius opened and I informed him that it was my wish', but that he explained that he could not go against the decision of Rattray and Wilmer without Sir William's permission. He then said that ‘I should nevertheless think myself obliged to him to undertake the matter if he should wait upon Sir William Wheler and obtain his consent to do it.'

Until this statement, Donellan's claim that he had asked Bucknill to approach Wheler had never come to light.

Donellan then went on to describe the day of the funeral and the fact that Bucknill and Snow had missed each other, but that Snow had come to the house and ‘recommended' the burial.

The body was therefore buried that evening, but not by my directions or desire … This, gentlemen, was the undisguised part I took; but such is my misfortune … but the most trifling actions and expressions have been handled to my prejudice; my private letters have been broken open, and many unjustifiable steps have been taken to prejudice the world and imbitter [
sic
] my defence.