Burrows' trial at Derby Assizes for the murder of Hannah Calladine and their son.

Glossop Advertiser 6 July 1923

DEATH SENTENCE ON BURROWS !!
MR. JUSTICE SHEARMAN'S LUCID AND CLEVER SUMMING UP.
EXCLUSIVE REPORT OF MEMORABLE ASSIZE COURT TRIAL.
PRISONER'S DRAMATIC STATEMENT: “I loved those Children and the Woman, too.”
NOT AFRAID OF DEATH.
Passionate Declaration of His Innocence.
“NOT SLIGHTEST HOPE OF MERCY.’’
Suicide Defence Rejected : Two other Charges to Stand Over.
WHAT DEFENDING COUNSEL SAID : “If Burrows is a Murderer, he is a Very Callous and Fiendish Murderer.”
JURY RETURN “GUILTY” VERDICT AFTER 13 MINUTES CONSIDERATION.
(BY OUR OWN REPORTERS).

For the past three months Glossop has filled the eye of the civilised world! The Burrows case stands unparalleled in history in so far as some of the details are concerned, and the Press of the universe, Indian, American, and that of the continent of Europe have devoted thousands of columns to a sensational story which has been unfolded — first, at the Glossop Coroner‘s Court and the Glossop Borough Police Court, and afterwards at the Derbyshire Assize Court.
This story of a four-fold murder has been told in many forms, and the retailing thereof has caused the name of Glossop to be known as it was never known before and given it a doubtful fame which will live for ever in the annals of crime.
Monday morning of this week saw a big number of Glossop men and women called as witnesses depart from the town in two large charas en route for the County town.
Here, amidst all mediaeval pomp and pageantry, one of England's foremost Judges, Mr. Justice Shearman, attended tor the purpose of conducting the last stages of this memorable crime.

Addressing the Grand Jury on Monday, the Judge said there was an extraordinary amount of crime — and most of it was not ordinary crime.
Dealing with the Glossop case, his Lordship said that on Sunday, March 4th, Burrows took Tommy Wood for a walk and was seen to give him an apple. A number of witnesses traced him near to the pit where the body was found.
Afterwards Burrows was found in hiding near by, and evidence would be put before them that Burrows said “I don't know what made me do it.”
The other case was more remarkable. Burrows had been living with Calladine and her two children, and after a summons for maintenance had been taken out against him by his wife, all three disappeared.
That was three and a half years ago.
Eventually all three bodies were found in the same pit from which the body of Tommy Wood had been recovered.
There was evidence that Burrows disposed of various clothing. That he told stories that the woman and the two children were well provided for, and that to one woman he said, “They won’t be seen in Glossop again” — a strange remark, commented his Lordship.
The Judge added that he thought it would be the duty of the Grand Jury to return a true bill in each case.

Following the foregoing words of Mr. Justice Shearman, it came as no surprise that the Grand Jury should return a true bill against Albert Edward Burrows, a labourer, stated to be 62 years of age, and resident at Kershaw Street, Glossop, on an indictment for the murder of Hannah Calladine (32) and Albert Edward Burrows (15 months) on January 11th, 1920. This practically closed Monday's proceedings at the Assizes and the case was fixed by the learned Judge to be opened in the following morning at 10-30.

Thronging round the Assize Courts long before the case was called on were immense crowds of people anxious to obtain a glimpse of the man whose name will ever be associated with the Dinting Pit.
Amongst this crowd were a large number of fashionably attired ladies, and most of these found seats in the altogether inadequate Court room where the trial impressively opened.
Burrows, the cynosure of all eyes, as he came up from the cells below, entered the prisoner's dock, and, escorted by three warders, maintained the calm demeanour which has characterised him throughout these long weeks of suspense and anxiety. To us who have had the opportunity of watching him fairly closely throughout the various phases since first he was captured on the Chunal hills, he appeared rather paler than usual; his eyes, hitherto keen and alert, had lost much of their brightness; indeed, he had a somewhat careworn and haggard expression altogether foreign to his wonted jauntiness, coolness, and defiant manner. Even so, he stood forward without a tremor as the Clerk to the Assize, in legal phraseology, read over to him the indictment for which he was to be tried by twelve of his countrymen and women, for the special Jury which had been empanelled for the case, included three ladies.
A remarkable feature was the fact that a lady Barrister, Miss Cobb, was acting as Junior Counsel in defence of Burrows, the leading Counsel for the defence being Mr. T. Norman Winning, K.C.
We understand this is the first time a lady Barrister has appeared in a murder trial.
Prosecuting on behalf of the Crown were Sir Henry Maddocks, K.C., M.P., Mr. Norman Birkett, and Mr. Loseby.

As the Clerk of Assize read over and counted the names of the Jury, neither Burrows nor his Counsel challenged any of these; and then when arraigned on the charge, the prisoner, betraying no emotion, answered in a firm voice, “Not Guilty, sir.”

Sir Henry Maddocks addressing the Jury, explained how the bodies of Hannah Calladine and her two children were found at the bottom of the colliery shaft on the moor near Simmondley, just outside Glossop, where prisoner resided at Back Kershaw Street. He said prisoner was a general labourer, who had been in Glossop for about twenty-four years. He had given his age as 62, but he was probably a little younger. Prisoner was a married man with one daughter.
Hannah Calladine, continued Counsel, was a single woman who lived with her sister and parents at Royals Wood, Nantwich, Cheshire, on June 17th. 1919.
She had two illegitimate children, a girl, Elsie Large, born in June, 1916, and the boy in October, 1918, prisoner being the father of the latter.
Prisoner apparently made the acquaintance of Calladine some time in 1917, when they were working on munitions near Northwich.
Alter the birth of the boy, Calladine obtained an affiliation order against the prisoner, and in December, 1919, as he was in arrears, she obtained a committal order, on which he was sent to prison for 21 days.
Some time after Burrows came out of prison Miss Calladine and her two children left Nantwich and arrived at Glossop.
Mrs. Burrows, the lawful wife of the prisoner, was at home when Calladine arrived with the children; but, along with her daughter, she immediately left and went to reside with a friend.
From December 17th, for a period of three weeks, Hannah Calladine, who was called Nance, lived in Burrows’s house, and was introduced to a number of people there.
Counsel described how Burrows wrote to Calladine's home for her clothes, which were sent to her on January 15th. Miss Calladine had taken with her from home a quantity of clothes, and these formed an important part of the case in connection with the identification of the bodies which were taken from the pit shaft.

Counsel described how Mrs. Burrows, about December 30, applied for a maintenance order against her husband. That summons was returnable on January 12th, and, said Counsel, the prisoner was now placed in a dilemma. He had no money, he had Calladine and the two children at the house, and if they left he had once more to face the fact that she could enforce her affiliation order of 10s. a week, and unless the money was paid he could be sent to prison.
The other alternative was that his wife would enforce the maintenance order she was seeking, and if he failed to pay under that he would be sent to prison.
On January 11th, Mrs Hammond saw Miss Calladine at the door of her house, dressed in dark clothes, without a hat, but apparently ready for going out. That was the last time she and her baby, Albert Edward, were seen. On the following morning, January 12th, between 6-30 and a quarter to seven, Mrs. Hammond saw the prisoner walking in the direction of the moors, where the pit shaft was, holding the little girl, Elsie Large, by the hand. He returned about 8 o clock in the morning without the girl, and carrying a little stick in his hand.
Mrs, Hammond said, “You have been taking your walk early this morning.” Burrows replied. “Yes. I have been taking Elsie to her mother”.
She said, “Where have they gone,” ans Burrows replied, “That is a secret. We had made it up not to tell. No one will know where she is gone. She has got a good home, and it has been made up between us that it shall be a secret”.
On the same day Burrows asked a man named Dale to use his influence with his (Burrows') wife to get her to withdraw the summons which she had taken for maintenance. Burrows told him Nance had gone housekeeping for a widower and he wanted his wife to come back home.
At Burrows’ request, Dale delivered the message to Mrs. Burrows but she said she was going on with the case, and on January 12th the Glossop magistrates made an order for him to pay her £1 a week maintenance.
About, four days later, just before Burrows' wife returned to him, the prisoner told a Mrs. Street that Nance was in a bacon shop at Stretford. Mrs. Street asked “What about the children,” and Burrows replied, “ She will never trouble us any more. She will never come to Glossop any more. It is a secret where she is gone.”
“And it was a secret” said Sir Henry Maddocks, with dramatic emphasis. “My submission is that the prisoner kept that secret until May of 1923.”

Burrows' wife returned to him on January 16th. Then things began to happen which one would expect to happen if he had done away with this woman Calladine. The prisoner disposed of a perambulator, a wedding ring, and articles of clothing, which, it was alleged, were similar to the clothing worm by Hannah Calladine and her children. Afterwards he told two women in Glossop that Hannah Calladine was working in Stretford, and had had twins. “It will be shown to you,” added Counsel, “that she was not working there at all, and never did work there, and that Burrows' statement was a lie.”
In October, 1920, Burrows wrote a letter to Mrs. Calladine, the mother of the deceased, at Nantwich, in which he said, “Neither me nor the children can help what Nance does. She won’t write.”
Being a man of intelligence, proceeded Counsel, prisoner might have thought it necessary to send word to Nantwich lest they should make inquiries about Hannah Calladine, and these were the people he had to fear.
In a later message to Mrs. Calladine, the prisoner wrote: “It will soon be two years since Nance came here.” He enclosed a Photograph which was that of a son of a relative, but Burrows represented it as the photograph “of your grandson.”
Later Burrows wrote that the children were in Chinley Hospital suffering from diphtheria and asked for copies of the birth certificates of the two children, as he had them both in a burial club.
The children, said counsel, were not in Chinley Hospital. That letter was written by a man in order to allay any suspicion that might arise in regard to Hannah Calladine and her children.
In a letter from Strangeways Prison on May 12, 1923, to Mrs. Calladine, Burrows gave a long explanation of the disappearance of Tommy Wood, and said he was with Hannah Calladine on that day. He added that if Hannah Calladine had come forward at first he would never have been sent to prison on this serious charge.
“Nobody” proceeded the letter. “has done any harm to the boy at all.”
That, commented counsel, would be an extraordinary letter but for one fact — and that was that when the letter was written the prisoner knew that for certain reasons the Dinting air shaft had been searched, and the bodies of Hannah Calladine and Albert Burrows had not been found.

The pit kept its secret at that time, and Burrows knew that, so he felt on very safe ground in thinking that no one would ever search that air shaft again, as it had once been searched. Accordingly he wrote a letter and said he was with Hannah Calladine near there.
“I suggest,” added counsel, “that Burrows knew quite well when he wrote that letter that Hannah Calladine was at the bottom of that pit shaft.
“Early in March, Inspector Chadwick went on the moors to the Dinting air-shaft, round which was a wall. On looking through a hole about 3ft. 6in. from the floor his suspicion was aroused by certain marks there.
“A search was made, and it was decided in May of this year that a large quantity of debris, rubbish, etc., that had accumulated in the air-shaft should be removed, with view to searching for the bodies of Hannah Calladine and her two children. It took a fortnight to clean that rubbish out of the pit, under the direction of Police-constable Roe, a very skilful officer.
Then they came to a place where there was a layer of old tin, and immediately below that tin was found the remains of a woman and two children.

Concluding, counsel said if the jury came to the conclusion that the remains found were those of Hannah Calladine and her children the next question was whether they thought prisoner was responsible for their being where they were found.
“No one saw them put into the shaft, but perhaps the jury will look at the facts which surround this case, the untrue explanations given by the prisoner about the missing woman and children, and the fact that they have never been seen since leaving his home on this date.
They would also have to bear in mind that the prisoner had a motive for getting rid of these people, and he (counsel) suggested it would be their duty to find that prisoner was responsible for their deaths.

P.C. S. Roe was the first witness called into the box and there was a crowded Court as he briskly stepped up to give his evidence. He was examined by Mr. Birkett, to whom he replied with great coolness and deliberation, and described the operations at the Dinting air-shaft and the recovery of articles of clothing and human remains. He explained how debris was removed, how afterwards there was an inflow of water, which was eventually successfully coped with, and how they came across some layers of old tin and the human remains were found underneath.
The exhibits comprising remnants of clothing, a pair of small clogs, and a pair of boots etc., were, as they were identified by the witness, placed on the main table down the centre of the Court, in front of the legal gentlemen on the one side and the jury on the other.
The exhibits made a gruesome array, which caused the Judge to remark “I am sorry that we have to have them placed down there and am rather afraid we shall have to make use of eau-de-cologne, but it you have any trouble with these evil smelling exhibits I will lend you my bouquet.” (Laughter.) (A bowl of beautiful sweet peas stood on the desk to the right of his Lordship.)
Mr. Winning (cross-examining P.C. Roe): Have you known the prisoner well?
P.C. Roe: Yes.
Is it not a fact that the Dinting air-shaft is only a few yards from the highway? — I should say it is about fifty yards.
And the road stands a considerable height above the pit? — Yes.
On the other side of the road, still higher up, there is another pit shaft? — Yes.
With no wall round it? — There is a wooden fence round it.
How large was the hole in the side of the wall round the lower pit? — I should say about 2ft. 5in.
Would it be large enough for a stout woman to go through it? — Certainly not.
Or to be pushed through? — No.
Do you know where Cranmer's farm is? — Yes.
How far is it away? — About a quarter of a mile.
Is it not about 200 or 300 yards? — l should say it is further than that.
Do you know that hay loft there? — No.
Now the air-shaft is not only overlooked by the road, but by Hargate Hill Farm? — Yes.
About 100 yards away? — Yes.
It would be difficult to hide there if there were any people about? — Well — yes, it would be.
The Judge: If anybody was looking down the shaft, could they see what was lying at the bottom?
P.C. Roe: No.
The Judge: There is no other entrance to the pit shaft except from the top?
P.C. Roe: No.
Mr. Winning: It is a depository for all sorts of rubbish?
Witness: Yes.
The Judge: Were there animal bones down there, too? — Yes.
Mr. Winning: A very considerable number of animal bones?
Witness: Yes.
Much of the stuff you removed was that of animals? — Yes.
And had been thrown down from a neighbouring farm.
One of the windows of Cloud Farm also overlooks that pit? — I could not say that.
On the other side of Cloud Farm there is a white house? — Yes.
Is this road much frequented? — No, I don’t think it is frequented much.
On the south side there are a number of hills and ridges from which the air-shaft may be seen? — Yes.
So that it is in full view of these? — Yes.
Is it a much frequented road on Sunday evenings? — I could not say that.
You are not on duty up there? — No, I am not.
Is the Hare and Hounds a popular resort?
They would be about about 7 o’clock in the evening, so that between 6 and 7 people might be enjoying a walk to that public-house and would be on that road? — They might be.
The Judge: It might be pitch dark between 6 and 7.
Mr. Winning: But people might be going for a drink there in any case.
Sir H. Maddocks (handing photographs up to witness): Do these give an idea of the country in which the air-shaft is situated? — Yes.

The next witness called was James Hilton, Mining Deputy, of Oldham, who corroborated P.C. Roe as to the operations at the pit. Only a few questions were put to him, and his stay in the box was very brief.

Dr. James Henry Dible, senior assistant in the department of Pathology at the Manchester University next gave evidence of a very important character considering the human flesh which, after such stupendous efforts, the police and mining experts had brought up from the bowels of the famous pit shaft at Dinting. He described in detail what he had already stated before, and which has been fully reported in these columns, making the important distinction that the flesh was undoubtedly belonging to the female skeleton since constructed from the bones recovered from the air-shaft by Professor Stopford. He also made the significant remark, in answer to counsel for the prosecution, that the flesh was what is known as “goose flesh”.
Mr Justice Shearman: What do you exactly mean by that? I am not quite sure what you intend to convey by that remark.
Witness: The flesh was covered with little marks, which shows that the body had entered the water either before death or shortly after death.
Mr. Winning (cross-examining): Will you say the bodies entered the water whilst they were still alive?
Witness: What I say is either alive or shortly after death.
Mr Winning: How long after death?
Witness: A few minutes.
Mr Winning: And do I understand you to be of opinion that they have been in the water six months or longer?
Witness: Yes.

Mr. John Sebastian Bach Stopford, Professor of Anatomy at Manchester University, next described very minutely the female adult bones and what he technically described as the immature bones of the younger set.
At this point a photograph of a skeleton was put in by the prosecution and to this Mr. Winning promptly raised an objection on the ground that the photograph was not one of the actual bones recovered.
The Judge: Yes, at least that is my impression.
Sir H. Maddocks: No, my Lord, it as not a photograph of the actual bones. It is one of bones similar to those found in the pit and which have been built up to make a skeleton.
Mr. Justice Shearman: Then, Mr. Maddocks, I don't think I should put the photograph in.
Sir H. Maddocks: I accept your ruling, sir, and withdraw that exhibit.
Mr. Winning (cross-examining Professor Stopford): asked if there was an injury to the skull.
Witness: I found none.
Mr Winning: Anything to indicate a violent death, or was it impossible for you to say how the woman met her death?
Witness: Quite impossible.

Mr. Ernest Battey, photographer, Glossop, gave evidence as to photographs of the skull and view of the scene of the tragic discovery.

Phillip George Robinson, a master clogger of Nantwich. said the Calladine family had traded with him for 17 years, and he made the child’s clogs produced, and which had been recovered from the pit shaft at Dinting. He knew Hannah Calladine, who was a short, stout, and apparently strong woman, and though he remembered the Calladines as customers, he could not recall the actual selling of this particular pair of clogs. He then proceeded to explain features in the make of the clogs (details previously given), which undoubtedly stamped them as being of his own manufacture.
Mr. Justice Shearman: I wish to ask you a question here, Mr. Robinson. Do you make clogs for other people to sell, or only for sale in your own shop?
Witness: I only make for sale in my own shop!

Mary Elizabeth Calladine sister of the deceased, of Royals Wood, Aston, Nantwich, called by the prosecution, was stated by Mr. Birkett to have been ill, and so it would be a convenience if she could be provided with a seat.
Justice Shearman: Of course she may have a seat, as may other witnesses who ask for one.
Replying to questions by Mr Birkett, Miss Calladine stated that the child Albert Edward Burrows was born 26th October, 1918, and her sister had another child who was born on the 7th June, 1916. When her sister left Nantwich for Glossop in December, 1919, she had with her a little boy in a push-cart, and the little girl Elsie. Witness's sister had gone away on previous occasions but whenever she did go she wrote home frequently so that they were surprised at her never writing at all, after leaving her home in 1919. She knew prisoner Burrows before 17th December, 1919, since which time she had received letters and postcards from him. Her father was 67 years of age. and her mother 63, and she opened and read all correspondence that came to them.
Miss Calladine identified some pieces of wearing apparel, which she said had been, worn by and belonged to her sister Hannah.
Mr. Justice Shearman said he should like to know what there was about some of the material which enabled witness to identify it as belonging to her sister. So far as he (the Judge) could see, it was just a little bit of black material, with nothing he could discern which would enable the witness to definitely say it was the lining of her sister's black coat.
Mr. Maddocks: What witness doubtless means is that it is similar to the lining of her sister's coat.
The Judge: It is just a bit of black stuff without any pattern, and I must say that rags do not seem very strong evidence of identification. It may be possible to identify the clogs, but wearing material that has been in water about eight months, well —
Mr. Birkett: With regard to a piece of embroidery recovered from the pit, is this of a definite pattern such as enables you to identify it as having belonged to your sister? — Yes.
Why are you so positive that this embroidery belonged to your sister? — Because I had seen it on my sister’s wedding blouse.
The Judge: I thought your sister was a single woman?
Witness: Yes. she was.
The Judge: How then could this embroidery have been on her wedding blouse?
Witness: I did not mean on Hannah's wedding blouse, but the wedding blouse of another sister. It was certainly very similar to some embroidery which another sister of hers had on a blouse.
At this point Mr. Birkett asked if exhibit No. 11 — a piece of rubber — had yet been found, and receiving a reply in the negative said it was most extraordinary.
Again replying to Mr Birkett, Miss Calladine stated that the little boy Albert Edward Burrows was unfortunately ruptured and had to wear a truss. Witness had seen that truss, which was made of red rubber.
By Mr. Winning: She had been informed that a piece of red rubber had been found in the Dinting pit.
By Mr Birkett: She had seen some red rubber in the possession of the police.
Mr Winning: Now about this blue material of which much has been said Miss Calladine? Can you tell me whether this blue material was taken to Glossop by your sister. or was it sent on to Glossop by you?
Witness: I sent it to Glossop in a tin box.
Mr Winning: So, if that be a fact, and the tin box did not reach Glossop until January 15th of 1920, this particular material would not have reached Glossop until after the supposed death of Miss Calladine?
Witness: If I sent it in the tin box it would arrive after my sister’s disappearance, and I believe the blue woollen thing was in the tin box.
Mr Winning: Was your sister a well built, strong woman? — Yes.
And she would be able to put up a fierce resistance even against a man? — Yes.
Was she a very heavy woman, say about 12 stones? — She would be about 11 stones.
So that it would take a very strong man to have put your sister over the six foot wall which surrounded the Dinting pit? — Yes.
Was your sister very much annoyed about having been let in with Burrows? — I don't know that she was.
Did she want to go to Burrows at Glossop on December 17th? — Yes.
Did your parents try to restrain your sister Hannah from going to Burrows? — Yes.
And were your parents bitter against the man Burrows? — Yes.
Don't you think that if it came about that your sister had to leave Burrows, the home of your parents would the last place she would think of going to? — No.
Your sister had previously left home? — Yes.
She was inclined to ramble? — Yes.
Had she any source of income beyond what her parents allowed her? — No.
So that when left home who would not have a big stock of money? — No.
Was your sister a girl who was easily depressed? — Yes.
Very easily? — Yes.
Was she quite a normal woman? — Yes.
Did she worry a good deal about her position in life? — She did.
By Mr Maddocks: It was a few days after her sister had left for Glossop that she got a wire telling her that Burrows was living with his real wife, and her sister.

Mrs. Eliza Hammond, 94, Back Kershaw Street, Glossop, widow, deposed: My house door is exactly opposite 94b, Back Kershaw Street, Glossop, where the prisoner lives. There is only one door to each house, and there is a distance of about 3½ yards from our door to Burrows' door. I was friendly with Burrows and the people in his house. I remember December, 1919, when Mrs. Burrows summoned her husband, and I also remember Mrs. Burrows leaving home — she left on a Friday, and it would perhaps be about the 19th of December. Before Mrs. Burrows left home Hannah Calladine and two children arrived at the house. One child was aged between 3 and 4 years, and the other about fourteen months. On the Sunday afternoon after they arrived I spoke to Burrows. I called at his house and he introduced the woman as “Nance” and the youngest child as “Albert Edward.” He did not say anything about the other child. I afterwards saw the woman and the two children several times while they were there, and the last time was on a Sunday night on the day before he was up at Court on the Monday. It would be about 6 o'clock or five minutes past. She was standing at the door of Burrows' house, and was dressed in dark clothes. I don't remember seeing the two children that day. I next saw Burrows the next day, on the Monday morning, about 8 o’clock. I was then in my house, and saw him through the window, and he was going into the house and was alone. He had a stick in his hand. In a few minutes he came out again. I also saw him again during some part of the day, and he was coming up the back yard. I remarked to him that “he had been having his walks early that morning.” and he said he had been taking Elsie to her mother. I asked him where she was. and he said “he was not telling anyone — they had made it up not to tell anyone. They had made it up to keep a secret.” Since that date she had asked him several times where they were and if they were doing all right and he always said “they had a good home.” He stated she was working in a bacon shop down Stretford way. I asked him for the address, but he said it was a secret. Shortly after Burrows' wife left him he went to work down Manchester way and while he was working there I got a post card (which I have since burned) and it was signed “Nance.” and as far as I remember it said that Albert Edward was getting a fine boy like his father, and Elsie was all right. When Burrows came back he said to me “Did you get your post card?” and I said “Yes, but I think you sent it too.”
Replying to Sir H. Maddocks, witness said she told prisoner she guessed he had sent it by his countenance.
Mr. Winning: Are you sure you said you could tell by his countenance? — Yes.
Mr. Winning: You did not say that in the Coroner’s Court. What you said was that he laughed.
Witness: I think I said I could tell by his countenance.
Mr. Justice Shearman: What you said at the Coroner’s Court was that he laughed, and did not deny having sent it.
Mr. Winning: When did you come to remember this particular conversation? — I cannot tell you.
But I want you to try and think when it was. You thought of everything my friend asked you, and you might try to think for me now. Did you remember all this after the shouting, and attempts to assault and almost lynch Burrows at Glossop?
Mr. Justice Shearman: Did you know anyone to attack Burrows on his way to the Police Station? — No.
Mr. Winning: Do you mean to say you did not know of Burrows having to be protected on his way to the Police Court at Glossop? — Oh I did know about that.
His Lordship: Was it after Burrows had been at the Police Court that you were asked to recall this conversation? — It is only a few weeks ago.
Mr. Winning: And at a time when yourself and the neighbours had very bitter feelings against Burrows. Had you bitter feelings against Burrows?
Mrs. Hammond did not answer this question.
Mr. Winning: Was there a lot of bitterness displayed against Burrows by certain people?
Witness: I don't bother with other people.
Mr. Winning: I think you bother a good deal, Mrs. Hammond. You were anxious to talk about the woman and children, were you not?
At this stage Mrs. Hammond was given a glass of water as she appeared distressed, and this caused Mr. Winning to say: Just another question or two, and I will leave you, Mrs. Hammond. Have you had a letter from someone indicating who was responsible for the murder?
Mr. Maddocks was understood to say “Be careful, Mr. Winning!”
Mr. Winning: Where is that letter?
Mrs. Hammond: I gave it to Inspector Chadwick.

Florrie Hammond, 104, Kershaw Street, Glossop, stated that the last witness was her mother-in-law. She had known prisoner for about four years, and lived not far from him. I remember, said witness, Hannah Calladine and her two children coming to Burrows' house. It was just before Christmas in 1919, but I do not know the exact date. She remained there about three weeks, and after that I did not see her again. During the three weeks that she was there I saw her frequently and the children also, and I spoke to her on several occasions. I remember a certain Monday, January 12th, 1920, when I was washing in my mother-in-law's washhouse and prisoner came in and spoke to me. He said Florrie, Nance went back last night. Prisoner went away, and stayed away some little time. I did not know where he had gone but after he had been away he came back — it would be about March, 1920 — and he said to me “Nance wishes to be remembered to you and sends her love.” He said the was working at Stretford. I asked him where she was working, and he replied “She's at Stretford working at Seymour Mead's bacon shop”. I said to him “I thought you had given over bothering about Nance now Mrs. Burrows has come back to you” and he said “I suppose you don't know that Nance has had twins since she left Glossop, and they are both dead”
Mr. Winning: On what date did he tell you about Seymour Mead's bacon shop?
Witness: It was in March some time.
How is it you remember that the previous conversation in January was January 12th and cannot give me the other date? — Well, Mrs. Burrows was having him up at Court that day.
Have you looked at the calendar to see what day January 12th was? — No Sir. I know it was January 12th, 1920, when she was having him up.
Do you know the last witness had had post card from “Nance”? — My husband told me. He just told me there had been a post card from “Nance” I cannot remember that it was stated where it had come from.
Have you been shown or seen a letter received recently? — Witness was understood to reply in the negative.

Evidence of much of a similar character to that at the Glossop Police Court was afterwards given by Margaret Ann Streets, George Dale, W. Bruce Hadfield, A. Dearnaley, William P. Leach, Mary Hibbert, John Wm. Wellburn, William Cartwright, Nancy Cartwright, Mrs. Mellor, Edith Ellen Hallsworth, A. C. Smith, Minnie Newton, and Martha Williams.

Mr. Lemuel Bowden, St. Mary’s Road, Glossop, gave evidence to the effect that he was the owner of the house No. 94b, Back Kershaw Street, occupied by the prisoner. In January of 1920 he was paying 2s. 8d. per week, and at the beginning of the month the rent was in arrears £6 13s 3d.
Mr Winning; Do you suggest that because people are in arrears with their rent it might tempt them to do away with their wives?
Witness: I don’t think so. (Laughter).
Mr Winning: That seems to be the attitude of the crowd to-day.

Harold Garside, 39, High Street West, Glossop, deposed that he assisted his uncle in his business as a jeweller and silversmith. On February 23rd, 1920, prisoner came into the shop, and stated that he had a wedding ring to sell, and it was purchased from him for 30s.
Mr. Winning: Did Burrows tell you the ring had been in pawn some time?
Witness: No, he did not talk much about it.

John Thomas Rodgers said he occupied the next bed to prisoner Burrows in the prison hospital, and had a certain conversation with Burrows.
Mr. Birkett: When it was almost time for you to leave the hospital, did Burrows say something to you about writing a letter? — Yes.
What did he say? — He asked me to write a letter stating “I and the children are all right, and hope to see you soon.”
Anything else? To sign at the bottom, “H. Calladine." and put some crosses.
The Judge: Did Burrows say “Put Hannah Calladine at the bottom?” — Yes, sir.
Mr. Birkett: Was anything else said? — Yes, Burrows said “For God’s sake don't tell anyone else what I have asked you to do.”
What did you say? — I said “All right,” but had no intention of doing it. As I was coming out of hospital Burrows said “Don't forget that, theer, and send a newspaper in.”
Mr. Winning: How many beds would there be in your particular ward? — Ten.
Was the bed on the other side of Burrows occupied? — A few times.
Was there a warder present when this alleged conversation took place? — Yes.
Would he not hear it? — He was walking about seeing to the sick persons, and could not see through the whole ward at once.
Did you tell Burrows you had helped a prisoner once before by committing perjury, and had got him off? — No, sir!
What was you in for? — What has that got to do with it?
What was your offence? — Stealing.
Had you got hold of the name of Hannah Calladine from a letter Burrows let drop? — No!
Did you see a letter Burrows dropped? — I know he did drop a letter, which I did not see the contents of. Someone else picked up the letter and took it to the warder.
Did you get any remission of your sentence for giving this information? — No. sir!
You had no special remission for this evidence? — No, sir!

Wednesday brought the great and impressive climax in a trial which will remain memorable in history. Overnight the Court, had adjourned prior to the calling of Inspector J. E. Chadwick, the last witness for the prosecution, and it was stated he would be called immediately the Court resumed on Wednesday morning. A warm, sultry day broke over the County town, and in the somewhat small Court Room there was an air of keen expectancy and suppressed excitement, for Counsel had the previous night hinted that the case would be terminated by noon, so far as the evidence and speeches were concerned, and at the close of these the Jury, amongst whom were three ladies, would be called upon to give the momentous decision which meant life or death to the man arraigned on the charge or murder.
Burrows, it may be stated, was brought by road from Nottingham by a different route from that traversed the previous day, so as to avoid any repetition of hostile scenes which were witnessed at Glossop and Manchester. When he arrived at, the Court about nine o’clock, there was a large crowd waiting outside to catch a brief glimpse of him.
At 10-30, when Mr. Justice Shearman again took his seat, the Jury, Barrister and Solicitors, and a small army of Pressmen, had filed into Court and taken their usual seats, and the body of the somewhat small, yet dignified and impressive looking, Court was crowded, whilst in the gallery were as many of the public as the limited accommodation could find room for, including a goodly sprinkling of well-dressed ladies.
Mr. Justice Shearman has evidently a partiality for flowers, for a bowl of beautiful carnations stood on the desk almost before him, and this afforded the one bright spot in the sombre Court Room, and contracted sharply with the gruesome and evil-smelling relics that were laid out on the central table in the well of the Court.
Sir H. Maddocks K.C., M.P., Mr. Loseby, and Mr. Norman Birkett conducted the case for the Crown,and the prisoner was defended by Mr. T. Norman Winning and Miss Geikie Cobb, who is the first lady barrister to appear in a murder trial.
Burrows, as on the preceding day, stepped smartly up from below, and to the seat in front of the dock, and although looking a trifle more worried, his gaze travelling repeatedly from Counsel to witness whilst Inspector Chadwick was under cross-examination, he continued to take the keenest interest in the whole proceedings.

Inspector J.E. Chadwick was immediately called, and examined by Mr. Birkett, said: I am an Inspector in the Glossop Police force, and I know the prisoner well.
Mr Birkett: Have you seen the prisoner write?
Witness: Yes.
And you know his writing well? — I do.
Will you please look at exhibit No. 36 — in whose handwriting is that? — In the handwriting of the prisoner.
That is the exhibit spoken of by Martha Williams, on page 16 of the depositions. It is in the handwriting of the prisoner? — Yes.
Is there any date on the letter? — No sir.
After the reading of the letter (which has been previously published) Mr. Birkett said: On the 30th of December 1919 did you serve exhibit No. 3, a summons, personally on the prisoner? — I did, sir.
Is that the actual summons served by you? — Yes.
When you served that summons personally upon the prisoner, was there anybody else at the house? — Yes, there was a woman and two children and the prisoner.
Did prisoner make any reference to those present? — He introduced the woman to me as Nance Calladine, and the young baby she was nursing as Albert Edward, his son.
On the 7th of March this year did you see prisoner at the Police Station? — I did.
You spoke to him? — Yes.
What did you ask him? — I asked him what had become of Nance Calladine.
What reply did he make? — He said she was down in Manchester district doing well in a good situation.
I think on the 23rd of May this year you were present at the Dinting air shaft, and on various subsequent dates, when Police Constable Roe and Deputy James Hilton recovered certain articles of clothing? — I was.
They were handed to you by P.C. Roe? — Yes.
And did you convey them to the Police Mortuary? — I did.

Counsel next asked witness to look at exhibit No. 11, to which, he stated, reference was made the previous day, and which could not be found or produced for the time being.
“Does that exhibit comprise certain pieces of red rubber?” asked Counsel, and witness replied “It does.”
Were those pieces of red rubber handed to you by Roe? — Yes.
His Lordship: They had better be handed to the Jury — they are little ordinary pieces of red rubber.
Inspector Chadwick, replying to another question, stated that they were handed to him by P.C. Roe, and were amongst other debris that Roe sent to the top. On a subsequent date he showed them to Miss Calladine and she identified them as pieces of rubber similar to a truss the baby was wearing. When first found they were in a much better condition than at present, and the round solid piece was whole, and had been broken since, and the other piece was more flexible.
On Saturday, the 9th of June, this year, he went to 94b, Back Kershaw Street, Glossop, and there saw two tin trunks and took possession of them.
Counsel: On the 12tn of June this year did you see the prisoner and formally charge him with the charge with which he has been indicted here to-day? — I did.
What reply did he make? — He made no reply.
In reply to his Lordship, the Inspector stated that the pit shaft was about two miles from Burrows' residence.
The Inspector was cross-examined at considerable length by Mr. Winning, who, after a few preliminary questions, said: When you saw prisoner and Hannah Calladine and the children they were to all appearances living happily together.
The Inspector: Yes.
And you had no reason to suspect there was any hostility on the part of prisoner towards Hannah Calladine? — No.
The hostility, if any, would be towards his wife, Amelia Burrows — was he upset through being summoned? — He did not appear to be.
I suppose you cannot suggest any reason why that summons should be brought in as a motive to murder the other woman? — No reply.
Is that road above the air-shaft a fairly well frequented road? — No, sir, just the opposite.
P.C. Roe told us it was a main road and was used by people at night.
Mr. Justice Shearman: A moor is much more used in the daylight than in the dark.
Mr. Winning: The pit shaft is within 50 yards of the road.
Inspector Chadwick: Between 50 and 60 yards.
If there was anybody on that road, would it not have been very difficult for them not to have heard a struggle if a struggle did take place at the shaft? — Oh no.
Do you mean that at Glossop they cannot hear sounds 50 yards away? — The position of the shaft is both out of sight and out of hearing of the road.
Do you suggest that anybody speaking even in a low voice could not be heard from the road? — No, they would not.
Bring your mind back to times in the day when people have been looking at the pit shaft and you have been standing on the road? — Yes.
Wasn’t it quite clear that you could hear people talking at the shaft? — No, you cannot hear people talking.
I suggest that one Sunday morning when you yourself was on the road you could hear people at the pit shaft talking to each other. I suggest you could hear the solicitor who instructs me talking to the Chief Constable when we were at the pit and you were on the road? — They could hear you if you were talking very loudly.
Do you know Cranmer's farm? — Yes, sir, well.
And the hay loft? — Yes.
ls that a convenient place for people to hide in? — I have never heard of that before.
How far is it from the pit shaft? — About quarter of a mile.
Further questioned, the Inspector stated that he had assisted witnesses in finding the date January 11th, 1920, and they remembered it because it was the day before Burrows' wife was having him up at the Glossop Court.
There was a very bitter feeling against Burrows before Tommy Wood’s body was found? — I don’t think so.
At any rate after the finding of Tommy Wood’s body there was an extremely bitter feeling against Burrows in Glossop? — Yes.
After the man hunt on the moor you had to hurry him to the Station to avoid the vengeance of the people? — Yes, afterwards.
Would you have been surprised if anybody had voluntarily come forward at that time to speak in Burrows’ favour? — I should have been surprised if anyone had come forward with that object.
Do you think anyone dared have come forward? — I think it was impossible for anyone to do so.
Counsel: I know you have it in your mind that Burrows murdered this woman, but we are trying that.
Answering further questions witness said a letter sent to Burrows from Ireland while he was in prison had been re-addressed and posted to him. Witness did not know what was in the letter.
The Judge asked counsel if he wanted the letter to be produced, and Sir H. Maddocks said he was quite prepared to put it in if it was called for. The Judge said if Mr. Winning made any complaint about it he must ask for the letter to be produced.
Mr. Winning then said if the letter were produced it would mean that several more witnesses would have to be called, and he would leave it alone.
Inspector Chadwick, under further cross-examination, agreed that Hannah Calladine was a strong, healthy woman, who could put up a resistance against this man if she desired.
Mr. Winning: It would have been impossible for her to have been pushed through that hole in the wall?
Witness: No, because I have been through.
At any rate, if a woman intended to commit suicide, it would have been quite possible, by means of that hole, to climb up to the top of the wall? — Yes.
This concluded the case for the Crown, and Mr. Winning said: I call no evidence, my Lord.

Sir Henry Maddocks, K.C., M.P., at once proceeded to review the case in the light of the evidence that had been called.
Everything, counsel said, that he had claimed for the prosecution had been borne out by the witnesses he had called. When did this woman go to the air-shaft, asked Sir Henry. No one saw her go there. No one saw her leave the prisoner’s house to go there. As far as we know she did not know Glossop or the way to the Dinting Air Shaft on the moor, but prisoner knew, and circumstances point to him as the man who perpetrated this deed.
Counsel went on to deal with the prisoner’s statement to acquaintances after the woman and children were missed.
Burrows had said Hannah Calladine was in Stretford in a bacon shop there, but she was never in a bacon shop there.
The Judge: Well, she was never in the bacon shop that Burrows named.
That is what I mean the Jury to understand, my lord, said Sir Henry. There was also the prisoner's story, counsel proceeded, that the children had been in Chinley Hospital suffering from diphtheria. These children were never in hospital at Chinley, said Sir Henry.
All these things that had been said and done by Burrows had been said and done only to allay suspicion while the woman and her children were at the bottom of the shaft.
If it were a case of suicide they could hardly have expected to find that Hannah Calladine’s wedding-ring had been pawned.
‘‘Under what circumstances,” Sir Henry Maddocks repeated impressively, “under what circumstances was that wedding ring taken from her finger?”

Mr. Winning began in a very deliberate manner, his address to the Jury for the defence.
It would be idle for me to say that the evidence brought by the Crown does not throw very grave suspicion upon the prisoner, but you cannot convict a man merely by grave suspicion upon him.
It has to be shown that this woman was murdered. It is quite clear that the theory of the Crown is that the woman was murdered on the night of January 11, and therefore I am a little surprised that my learned friend for the prosecution has not referred to the one fact which, tends to prove that she was alive on January 15.
The prosecution's own witness identified the blue costume that arrived from Nantwich on that day. Part of that costume, said Mr. Winning, was found down the pit shaft.
Unless you can conceive that this man made a special journey on to the moor to drop the skirt down the shaft, it is perfectly certain that Hannah Calladine was alive four or five days after the Crown stated she was murdered.
The evidence of murder is so weak that no jury could convict upon it. The smallest motives only for it have been put forward by the prosecution. Shortage of small sums of money, summonses for maintenance, and so forth.
Hannah Calladine made up her mind to leave Burrows' house on that night of January 11, a night when she had every reason for leaving it, proceeded Mr. Winning, for the reason that on the following morning a summons was returnable against Burrows taken out by his lawful wife, it might be expected that she would return to her home at Nantwich.
Not so. Although on the morrow all the local world of Glossop would be against her through their sympathy with the lawful wife and their antagonism to her as the bigamous wife, her own little world at Nantwich was very bitter against her too. Her family, in particular, were against her.
They had not forgiven her for her bigamous marriage with Burrows, nor for the fact that she had allied herself with him after being already, an unmarried woman, the mother of two illegitimate children.
Compare the motives in Hannah Calladine’s mind. Which do they fit best murder or suicide?
Think of her position, a strange woman in the house of a local householder; the mother of illegitimate children, and Mrs. Burrows on the spot pleading in the court for justice.

There is an explanation at least of her possible suicide. Easily depressed as you have heard from her sister in the box, Hannah Calladine found herself saddled with a man to whom she was falsely married. I suggest that the position she found herself in on the night of her disappearance was one that gave her every possible motive for doing away with herself.
Counsel described how Hannah Calladine might have used the hole in the wall that used to be round the pit. The wall was 6ft. 6in. high. She could easily have climbed it, putting her foot in the hole which was too small to get through, and dropped the child over and followed afterwards herself.
If Burrows be a murder, continued Mr. Winning, he is a very callous and fiendish murderer. If you find him guilty he will surely be hanged. If you find him innocent he will still have to face charges of as serious a nature. I do ask you, members of the Jury, in your retiring room, to consider in great detail the evidence, and unless you feel the utmost certainty to acquit him.

The Judge then addressed the Jury.
Mr. Justice Shearman said that it was remarkable if Hannah Calladine was alive that no friends had come forward to say she was seen. He remarked upon the fact that prisoner had not gone into the witness-box.
The Judge dealt with the question of identity. The protrusion of the dead woman's eye tooth was a remarkable point of significance, and a further feature of the case was Burrows's practice throughout the police inquiries of perpetually telling lies.
As to the theory of suicide, one of the letters written by Burrows and purporting to come from Hannah Calladine to a friend, in which Burrows himself made it appear that Hannah Calladine said she had the best husband in the world, indicated that, the theory of suicide was improbable. There was also the important point, the Judge said, which Mr. Winning had attempted to show, that Hannah Calladine was alive on January 15.
The Judge pointed out that the material identified by Elizabeth Calladine might not have been the stuff she thought it was. Moreover, if a man is shown not to have killed a man on the 11th day of the month that is no defence for the prisoner to say I did not kill him on that day but four days later.

It was 12-26 when the Jury retired to consider their verdict, and immediately afterwards the Judge left his seat, and Burrows left the dock. There was a babel of voices for a brief period, and then the stern command of “Silence!” indicated the return of the Jury. A hush fell on the assembled multitude as the three woman and nine men took their seats, and two minutes later Mr. Justice Shearman again took his seat.
At 12-41 the Clerk of Assize called over the names of the jurors, all answering, and then came the words, “Members of the Jury, are you agreed on your verdict?” “ We are, sir,” said the foreman. Then came the challenge, “Do you find the prisoner, Albert Edward Burrows, guilty or not guilty?”
It was a tense moment! On a deadly stillness came the foreman's answer. “Guilty sir!”
"That is the verdict of you all?’ asked the Clerk to Assize.
The Foreman: Yes, sir!
Burrows, who stood to the front of the dock, slightly blanched, but still retained his composure with eyes fixed on the Clerk. The latter said,
“Prisoner at the bar, you are arraigned on a charge of murder, and have placed yourself on your country. That country has now found you guilty. Have you anything to say why judgement of death should not be passed upon you according to law?”
A July sun, a weak machine sort of sun for such a month, tried to dispel a little of the gloom of that room wherein Albert Edward Burrows stood as the central figure in a memorable scene. All eyes were diverted upon the powerful, well-preserved man who stood there surrounded by four warders, and all waited with baited breath to hear his answer to that awful question. In a clear, resonant voice, without the semblance of a tremor the accused man head erect, and eyes to the front, said —
“I am not afraid of death but I am not guilty. I loved those children, and the woman too, As true as I hope to meet my God, I am innocent.”
The words ran through the Court; it was a dramatic incident in a case notorious for such happenings, and the silence was impressive.

The Judge placed upon his head the black cap, and a shudder ran through the onlookers.
In an impressive tone, Mr. Justice Shearman uttered the death sentence, concluding with the words, “And may the Lord have mercy on your soul.”
Amen!
The voice of the Chaplain uttered that one word. The condemned man never flinched, and, as a warder touched him on the shoulder. Burrows turned smartly towards the steps leading out of the dock. What was misconstrued by many as a little unsteadiness on the part of the prisoner, was occasioned by his walking in advance of the warders to the top of the steps, where he was checked until a warder walked in front of him. Then with upright bearing, he trod firmly the steps which took him from sight.

Sir H. Maddocks, addressing his Lordship, said there was one matter he should like to mention, and that was the wonderful fortitude displayed by P.C. Roe in the dangerous work necessary in order to get out the debris from the bottom of the pit. Whilst this work was proceeding, stones were constantly falling and he worked in a frightful atmosphere. On one occasion the tackle broke. P.C. Roe being suspended part way down the shaft, and being in great danger of his life. He (the speaker) desired to state how well P.C. Roe had fulfilled his duties.
Mr Justice Shearman: “Having heard from you, Mr Maddocks, what P.C. Roe has done, I desire to express my approval of it”.

Sir H. Maddocks explained to the Judge that a sum of £263 had been spent in clearing the air-shaft, and he applied for his Lordship to make an order that it be paid.
Mr. Justice Shearman said he would make an order if he had the power to do so.
Sir H. Maddocks quoted the clause under which the order was sought, and The Judge replied he would make an order, but not for any definite sum. He thought that would be best.
Sir H. Maddocks: As your Lordship pleases!

Mr. Justice Shearman said he thought the best way to deal with the other charges against Burrows would be to allow them to stand over until the next Assizes and to this Counsel for the prosecution assented.
Unless the sentence on Burrows be respited he will, of course have gone to his doom before the next Assizes.
Outside the court, the sun shone; it was a balmy Summer afternoon, and it was in the sunshine that the little army of witnesses and officials in this remarkable case, left Derby for Glossop, the while Burrows was being conveyed back to that place from whence he had come to face his trial!

Return to Dinting Pit Air-shaft Murders Page.
Last updated: 29 September 2023