|
There has been a flurry of activity recently regarding the handing in of the alleged skull of Frederick Bailey Deeming. This has led many to speculate over whether the skull is that of Deeming, or of the notorious outlaw, Ned Kelly. The announcement of the skull being handed in has led to several newspapers and online news agencies running stories, and led to a search for relatives of Frederick Bailey Deeming.
Among the newspapers announcing the stories were,
The Herald Sun, dated Dec 29th 2010,
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/dna-tests-to-determine-if-skull-belongs-to-ned-kelly-or-jack-the-ripper/story-e6frf7l6-1225978531486
The Liverpool Echo, dated December 29th 2010
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/12/29/mersey-descendants-hold-key-to-identifying-skull-found-in-australia-100252-27899370/
Liverpool Daily Post, dated December 29th 2010
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2010/12/29/search-for-merseyside-descendants-of-frederick-deeming-to-solve-australian-skull-mystery-92534-27900073/
The Daily Mail/Mail Online, dated December 30th 2010
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1342421/Is-skull-Ned-Kelly-Jack-Ripper-DNA-relative-solve-mystery.html
The Daily Telegraph, dated December 30th 2010
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/kelly-and-the-killer-a-ripper-of-a-tale/story-fn6bm6am-1225979081405
The Leicester Mercury, dated December 30th 2010
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/DNA-appeal-crack-mystery-Kelly-s-skull/article-3048992-detail/article.html
Adelaide Now, dated December 31st 2010
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/ripper-of-a-twist-in-ned-kelly-story/story-fn6bqphm-1225979012601
The Herald Sun, dated December 31st 2010
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/ned-kelly-riddle-fans-a-ripper-yarn/story-fn6bfm6w-1225978913799
The St Helen Star, dated, Thursday 6th January 2011
http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/news/8774760.Does_skull_belong_to_killer_Fred_or_outlaw_Ned_/
Frederick Bailey Deeming was buried on May 24th 1892, the day after his execution, and was buried in Melbourne Gaol. Very few accounts survive of his actual funeral, but luckily the Barrier Miner, an Australian newspaper, carried the following article just two days after the burial of Deeming, and three days after his execution.
The Barrier Miner, May 26th 1892
THE WINDSOR MURDER. Deeming’s Burial.
DISHONORED as Deeming was in life, it was fitting that his mortal remains should have an ignominious burial (says a Melbourne writer on Tuesday). The city clocks had hardly chimed the hour of 6 when three men—two of them bearing a long deal box, the third swinging a lantern—hurried across the courtyard of the Melbourne Gaol. They bent their steps to the western wall, and their actions were those of men who, having an unpleasant task to perform lost no time in getting it over. The box contained the murderer’s corpse. All was quiet in the prison, though the whirl and hum of the city could be plainly heard. The weird procession pressed on. It skirted the western wing, and no word was spoken till a heavy iron gateway was reached. A turnkey stood by. He quietly opened the portal, and the men filed through into a small enclosure, known as the old men’s or lumber yard. The coffin bearers halted beside a shallow hole, and deposited their burden on the edge. A strange burial ground truly. Here, among heaps of rubbish, old cases, and the like, lie the mouldering remains of a generation of murderers. Ned Kelly, Phelan, Wilson, Castillo, Lyndells are a few of those who were laid in this unhallowed earth. Some of them had commanded a certain amount of sympathy, even respect. There was no such feeling last night. Indeed, it was felt that the cowardly assassin’s malignant spirit was present with his degraded remains. No time was lost in covering it. Ten minutes later the ground was deserted. The body had been given over to the caustic effects of quicklime.
Following are three of the “verses” —the last written by Deeming entitled “To Thee I Call,” referred to by our Melbourne correspondent on Monday. They were written, it is believed, on Friday, and given to the Rev. H. Scott, the chaplain :—
Oh come my Bible, faithful thou, While faithless friends, who gives me proves
Something in all my grief thy brow,
I marvel my heart in fancy moves,
To me repentant now.
My heart’s love comes, my spirit parts,
With sins my heart was beguiled,
But now, God looks with tenderness,
And claims me as His child.
Oh, heaven, they joyous hopes.
The door opes—up, perplexed, I start,
Timid, yet confident, I stand.
Begone distrust ; no more apart
Should lovers dwell—I seize his hand,
And nestle next his heart.
(Composed by F. B. Deeming on the day before his execution, May 22, 1892)
It has previously thought that Deeming’s skull was held at either Melbourne or in England at the Black Museum, Scotland Yard. Pictorial evidence held here http://www.casebook.org/suspects/deeming.html at Casebook.org shows what is thought to be Deeming’s skull, the final picture in the photo stream on that page actually shows Deeming’s skull in a closed position with the etched marking stating “DEEMING” on the bottom. So why all the fuss about something we know the location of, and what could DNA do to help with the mystery?
Deeming’s skull has led a life as interesting as Deeming, with several scientists carrying out tests over the years, theories and conflicting results being published, and it was even at the centre of a grave robbing scandal! The earliest mention of Deeming’s skull can be found in 1897, some 5 years after the execution of Deeming, when the Hampshire Advertiser, dated December 15th 1897 featured the following,
The case of the atrocious murderer Deeming, who killed and buried wives under the cemented floors of his houses at Rainhill, near Liverpool, and subsequently in Melbourne, Australia, where he was executed will not be forgotten. A Melbourne scientist sent a cast of Deeming’s skull to Professor Lombroso, whose opinion is published in the latest Melbourne papers. The professor was surprised at the striking resemblance between the head of this heartless murderer and that of the First Napoleon. He describes Deeming’s skull as “Napoleonic and criminal at the same time.”
Professor Lombroso’s correspondence with the Australian Authorities can be read here, http://www.prov.vic.gov.au/deeming/documents/vprs8369-p1-lombrosoresearch.htm
The following report surfaced in 1927, and gives us an insight into the medical officials who wished to study Deeming’s skull and brain. The report, featured in the Canberra Times, dated March 10th 1927 mentions that the skull and brain are possibly still held at a museum attached to a university.
Deeming’s Skull.
The skull of Australia’s most notorious murderer, Deeming, did not corrode in quick lime with the rest of his body when he was executed in Melbourne Gaol in mid-1892. His cranial abnormality was so marked, and various organs of the body so out of the ordinary that several surgeons of that period put in a special request for an independent inspection and examination of the body after it was cut down subsequent to hanging for the prescribed two hours. When the examination was concluded, it was pointed out to authorities that the retention of Deeming’s head would serve a valuable purpose, not only to the medical profession, but to the public and students of criminology in general.
When the skull was measured phrenologically, the brain weighed and balanced, astounding differences were discovered between it and those of the average person post-mortemed, the results being carefully checked, written down, tabulated, and placed in their proper order in the medical and surgical laboratory, which had asked for the head of the assassin. Not only was there a physical hiatus wherever the veneration, benevolence and kindliness should have been, but where the ordinary combativeness and assertiveness should have been seen, there was enough to fill the cells of savagery in a tiger, the destructiveness in a gorilla, and the ferocity of a cannibal. Bravery was absolutely absent; while craven fear was in abundance, philoprogenitiveness was unknown, and in its place was the crowded brain cells of a leopard and the flattened bone of a cobra. The skull and brain are, or were a few years ago, in the museum of a section of a big surgical exhibition attached to a university, and probably they are still there.
Two years later the following story surfaced in the same publication. What is odd this time, is that the piece claims that Deeming’s skull had been buried with the rest of his body. The antecedents mentioned in the following report, dated April 15th 1929, filled column inches in several local, and national newspapers.
MORBID TASTES
Deeming’s Coffin Rifled
MELBOURNE, Sunday.
Several daring boys got into the old gaol yard to-day, and tore the lid off the coffin of Deeming, the notorious murderer. The grave was opened yesterday, but the excavator did not remove the coffin. The boys decamped with Deeming’s bones as mementoes, one lad got away with the skull, and two young ladies were seen taking off two of Deeming’s ribs. The graves of three executed criminals were not interfered with. During the afternoon, hundreds of morbid-minded persons of both sexes visited the old gaol yard to inspect the rifled graves of Ned Kelly and Deeming.
The Brisbane Courier, dated April 15th 1929 featured a similar story,
COFFINS DESECRATED.
DISGUSTING AFFAIR IN MELBOURNE.
MELBOURNE, April 14.
No precautions were taken in the week-end to prevent further desecrations of graves in the yard of the old Melbourne gaol, where excavations are being made for the foundations of extensions to the working men’s college. Throughout the week-end crowds of persons gathered in the yard, and gazed with morbid interest at two shallow coffin-shaped holes, one of which is said to have been the grave of Ned Kelly, the bushranger, and was desecrated by souvenir hunters on Friday. The second grave which has been uncovered may be that of Deeming, the notorious wife murderer. It was raided by small boys this morning. At the bottom of the grave, embedded in the clay, and filled with water, is a coffin in which the boys dug with their hands. One boy was seen to leave the place with the portion of a skull in his pocket. On a rock near the excavation several small bones were left lying by the contractors on Saturday morning, and they were appropriated this afternoon by some women who visited the spot.
In the 1930’s the skull had been found again with Professor Sir Colin Mackenzie, director of the Australian Insitute of Anatomy, discussing the skull with the Argus, an Australian newspaper. The report, dated January 25th 1930 states,
DEEMING: PREHISTORIC MAN: STORY OF A SKULL.
Recent removals of the remains of criminals executed in the Melbourne Gaol afforded an opportunity for a careful examination of the skull of Frederick Bayley Deeming, the murderer, which was made by the director of the Australian Institute of Anatomy (Professor Sir Colin Mackenzie), who was astonished to find that in Deeming, by an extraordinary lapse of nature, a prehistoric man of the earliest primitive type known to science had been born in the nineteenth century. The evidence of the remains proves that Deeming was little less than a dangerous animal. In March, 1892, the body of a woman was found under a hearthstone embedded in cement, in a house in Windsor. The crime was traced to Deeming, who, under the name of Barron Swanson, had fled to Southern Cross (W.A.), where he was arrested and whence he was brought back to Melbourne. In the meantime inquiries instituted by “The Argus” through its London representative brought to light the fact that Deeming had also murdered his wife and four children at Rainhill, near Liverpool, in England. The bodies had been disposed of in a manner similar to that of his victim at Windsor. These disclosures, Deeming’s callous and indifferent behaviour after his arrest, and the brutality of the crimes aroused popular feeling deeply. The murdered woman proved to be Emily Mather with whom Deeming had gone through the ceremony of marriage in England. He had become engaged after the murder to a Miss Rounsevell, and at Southern Cross he had already provided the cement for the disposal of her body.
The Trial. Deeming’s trial, which lasted for five days, was begun before the late Mr. Justice Hodges at the end of April, 1892. The evidence left no possible doubt of his guilt. The only possible hope of procuring a verdict in his favour lay in a plea of insanity, which was not upheld, despite evidence by Dr. J. W. Springthorpe and the late Dr. J. Y. Fishbourne. Deeming was an extraordinary glib liar, and Dr. Springthorpe had the greatest difficulty in arriving at the truth. The vanity of the prisoner was immeasurable and he displayed an utter lack of remorse for his crimes. He pretended that when he changed his name he changed his identity. He admitted that Frederick Williams-the name he had used at Rainhill-had killed the women and children there, also that Frederick Deeming had killed Emily Mather at Windsor, but neither of these crimes, he insisted, could be alleged against Barron Swanson, the name he had assumed in Western Australia, and he vigorously dissociated himself from the acts of Williams and Deeming. Dr. Springthorpe’s summing-up of the life of Deeming was that it had been “an extravaganza broken by lack of funds at intervals.” The Crown kept the medical witnesses for the defence strictly to the terms of what is known as the McNaughton test, namely, whether at the time the crime was committed Deeming was aware of the nature and quality of his actions. This test was laid down by a committee of the House of Lords in 1843, as determining guilt, and in 1891 it had been reaffirmed by the Victorian Full Court. Dr. Springthorpe could not conscientiously swear to the state of Deeming’s mind at the time he committed the crime, in order to overcome the McNaughton test. His persistence in maintaining his own conviction of insanity brought him into conflict with the Court, and Mr. Justice Hodges somewhat abruptly terminated his evidence. The verdict of guilty was a foregone conclusion and Deeming was sentenced to death. The Scientific Viewpoint. The examination of the remains by Sir Colin Mackenzie revealed some very interesting features. When man first assumed the upright posture his head was placed on the spinal column toward the back of the skull, where also was the opening known as the foramen magnum, through which the spinal cord reached the brain. In order to keep the head from sagging forward a broad band of muscle was attached to the back of the skull, where it was anchored to a bony ridge. When the upright posture of man became firmly established the spinal column and the foramen magnum moved forward to the centre of the base of the skull, where the head became balanced, and, their usefulness being passed, the heavy muscles and the bony ridge disappeared. These changes took place slowly over thousands of years. Even in the now extinct palæolithic Tasmanian native the foramen magnum was in the centre of the base as in modern man, and there was no trace of the bony ridge at the back of the skull. It was therefore with no little astonishment that Sir Colin Mackenzie discovered that in Deeming’s skull the opening for the spinal cold was at the back of the base as in the anthropoid. The bony ridge at the back was also clearly in evidence. This, however was not all. Behind each ear there is a small bony projection on the skull known as the mastoid process. In modern man these point directly downward and slightly forward. In the most primitive type of man they sloped backward. In Deeming’s skull the mastoid processes curve backward. The arch of the skull is also distinctly simian. A cast of the oldest human relic known to science, the Java skull, when placed upon Deeming’s fits it like a cap. Deeming had also the characteristic anthropoid heavy bony structure of the brows. The cubic content of the skull is also very low, and there is no frontal development, showing that the brain was of a very low and primitive type. The skeleton of Deeming also revealed two very distinct and typical anthropoid characteristics. The angle at which the thigh bones were set in the hip sockets gave him the shambling ape-like gait that was so noticeable in him, and he also had immensely long arms which reached to his knees. The deductions to be drawn from these extraordinary peculiarities are that Deeming was a dreadful anachronism. He was born thousands of years too late for the biological era to which he belonged, and compared with modern man he was but one step in development from the anthropoid, with a moral and intellectual capacity to match. Like Sir Colin Mackenzie, Dr. Springthorpe, who has also examined the cast made from the skull, is astonished. Deeming must have been totally incapable of appreciating any moral precept. His mind was governed only by his material needs. Whatever he required he acquired by the most direct means. If killing were the easiest method of attainment, he killed. His knowledge of right or wrong was similar to that of a cat or a dog, which has no moral sense, but which realises wrong-doing because of former punishment. Just as an animal detected in theft will use cunning to evade punishment, so Deeming used his higher order of animal cunning. He was not capable of remorse for his crimes, and that factor accounts for his callousness.
If Deeming’s skull had been lost or stolen, how did Professor Sir Colin Mackenzie get his hands on it? The story featured in newspapers locally and nationally and the same day was featured in the Times in the United Kingdom. The story read,
DEEMING’S SKULL
RESEMBLANCE TO THOSE OF APES
(FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT)
MELBOURNE, JAN 24
The recent removal of the remains of executed criminals from the Melbourne Gaol cemetery included the skull of the murderer Deeming. An examination of it led to a discovery which is regarded as of the first importance to medical science and jurisprudence. Professor Sir Colin Mackenzie, director of the Australian Insitute of Anatomy, in a statement to the Argus, says the skill is typical of prehistoric man of the most primitive type known to science. The opening of the base of the skull known as foramen magnum, which in modern skulls is situated in the centre of the base, was found in that of Deeming to be farther back, as in anthropoids. The skull also resembles that of anthropoids in the position of the occipital protuberance. The mastoid processes, the small bony projections behind the ears which in modern man point downwards, curve backwards in Deeming’s case, as in primitives, also the arch of the skull is distinctly Simian, and the cast of the Java skull (Pithecanthropus erectus) fits Deeming’s skull like a cap. Other features are the heavy brow and the low cubic contents of the brain pan, the fore part being undeveloped. Dr. J. W. Springthorpe, whose theory of insanity at Deeming’s trial was held to be untenable, regards the discovery as further proof of the need for abolishing the McNaughton test. He considers that Deeming was incapable of absorbing and retaining moral precepts and was little more than a dangerous animal.
Frederick Bailey Deeming, (Alias Albert Oliver Williams) was executed in May, 1892, in Melbourne for the murder of Emily Mather, whom he married in Liverpool in October, 1891, brought to Australia in December, and murdered at Windsor, near Melbourne, shortly afterwards.
In July, 1891, Deeming, while he was in England, murdered his wife and four children at Rainhill, near Widness. He disposed of the bodies of the victims by burying them in concrete in the cellars of the houses he inhabited.
A week later the West Australian, dated February 1st 1930 featured the following report on Deeming’s skull.
DEEMING’S SKULL. A Man Without Moral Sense.
Recent removals of the remains of criminals executed in the Melbourne Gaol afforded an opportunity for a careful examination of the skull, of Frederick Bayley Deeming, the murderer, which was made by the director of the Australian Institute of Anatomy (Professor Sir Colin Mackenzie), who was astonished to find that in Deeming, by an extraordinary lapse of nature, a prehistoric man of the earliest primitive type known to science had been born in the nineteenth century (says the Melbourne ”Argus”). The evidence of the remains proves that Deeming was little less than a dangerous animal. In March, 1892, the body of a woman was found under a hearthstone, embedded in cement, in a house in Windsor. The rime was traced to Deeming, who, under the name of Barron Swanson, had fled to Southern Cross (W.A.), where he was arrested and whence he was brought back to Melbourne. In the meantime inquiries instituted by “The Argus” through its London representative brought to light the fact that Deeming had also murdered his wife and four children at Rainhill, near Liverpool, in England. The bodies had been disposed of in a manner similar to that of the victim at Windsor. These disclosures, Deeming’s callous and indifferent behaviour after his arrest, and the brutality of the crimes aroused popular feeling deeply. The murdered woman proved to be Emily Mather, with whom Deeming had gone through the ceremony of marriage in England. He had become engaged after the murder to a Miss Rounsevell, and at Southern Cross he had already provided the cement for the disposal of her body. The Trial. Deeming’s trial, which lasted for five days, was begun before the late Mr. Justice Hodges at the end of April, 1892. The evidence left no possible doubt of his guilt. The only possible hope of procuring a verdict in his favour lay in a plea of insanity, which was not upheld, despite evidence by Dr. J. W. Springthorpe and the late Dr. J. Y. Fishbourne. Deeming was an extraordinary glib liar, and Dr. Springthorpe had the greatest difficulty in arriving at the truth. The vanity of the prisoner was immeasurable and he displayed an utter lack of remorse for his crimes. He pretended that when he changed his name he changed his identity. He admitted that Frederick Williams-the name he had used at Rainhill-had killed the women and children there, also that Frederick Deeming had killed Emily Mather at Windsor, but neither of these crimes, he insisted, could be alleged against Barron Swanson, the name he had assumed in Western Australia, and he vigorously dissociated himself from the acts of Williams and Deeming. Dr. Springthorpe’s summing-up of the life of Deeming was that it had been “an extravaganza broken by lack of funds at intervals.” The Crown kept the medical witnesses for the defence strictly to the terms of what is known as the McNaughton test, namely, whether at the time the crime was committed Deeming was aware of the nature and quality of his actions. This test was laid down by a committee of the House of Lords in 1843, as determining guilt, and in 1891 it had been reaffirmed by the Victorian Full Court. Dr. Springthorpe could not conscientiously swear to the state of Deeming’s mind at the time he committed the crime, in order to overcome the McNaughton test. His persistence in maintaining his own conviction of insanity brought him into conflict with the Court, and Mr. Justice Hodges somewhat abruptly terminated his evidence. The verdict of guilty was a foregone conclusion and Deeming was sentenced to death. The Scientific Viewpoint. The examination of the remains by Sir Colin Mackenzie revealed some very interesting features. When man first assumed the upright posture his head was placed on the spinal column toward the back of the skull, where also was the opening known as the foramen magnum, through which the spinal cord reached the brain. In order to keep the head from sagging forward a broad band of muscle was attached to the back of the skull, where it was anchored to a bony ridge. When the upright posture of man became firmly established the spinal column and the foramen magnum moved forward to the centre of the base of the skull, where the head became balanced, and, their usefulness being passed, the heavy muscles and the bony ridge disappeared. These changes took place slowly over thousands of years. Even in the now extinct palæolithic Tasmanian native the foramen magnum was in the centre of the base as in modern man, and there was no trace of the bony ridge at the back of the skull. It was therefore with no little astonishment that Sir Colin Mackenzie discovered that in Deeming’s skull the opening for the spinal cold was at the back of the base as in the anthropoid. The bony ridge at the back was also clearly in evidence. This, however was not all. Behind each ear there is a small bony projection on the skull known as the mastoid process. In modern man these point directly downward and slightly forward. In the most primitive type of man they sloped backward. In Deeming’s skull the mastoid processes curve backward. The arch of the skull is also distinctly simian. A cast of the oldest human relic known to science, the Java skull, when placed upon Deeming’s fits it like a cap. Deeming had also the characteristic anthropoid heavy bony structure of the brows. The cubic content of the skull is also very low, and there is no frontal development, showing that the brain was of a very low and primitive type. The skeleton of Deeming also revealed two very distinct and typical anthropoid characteristics. The angle at which the thigh bones were set in the hip sockets gave him the shambling ape-like gait that was so noticeable in him, and he also had immensely long arms which reached to his knees. The deductions to be drawn from these extraordinary peculiarities are that Deeming was a dreadful anachronism. He was born thousands of years too late for the biological era to which he belonged, and compared with modern man he was but one step in development from the anthropoid, with a moral and intellectual capacity to match. Like Sir Colin Mackenzie, Dr. Springthorpe, who has also examined the cast made from the skull, is astonished. Deeming must have been totally incapable of appreciating any moral precept. His mind was governed only by his material needs. Whatever he required he acquired by the most direct means. If killing were the easiest method of attainment, he killed. His knowledge of right or wrong was similar to that of a cat or a dog, which has no moral sense, but which realises wrong-doing because of former punishment. Just as an animal detected in theft will use cunning to evade punishment, so Deeming used his higher order of animal cunning. He was not capable of remorse for his crimes, and that factor accounts for his callousness.
Within a week the name of another Professor was mentioned in the examination of Deeming’s skull, the report was featured in the Barrier Miner, and dated February 7th 1930
NATIONAL LETHAL CHAMBER FOR MENTAL DERELICTS
A PROFESSOR’S SUGGESTION
London. February 6.
Professor R. J. A. Berry, is dealing with the skull of Deeming, the notorious Australian murderer, said that when the disasters which may attend an undeveloped brain were realised many persons would agree that it would be kind to put some of the more chronic mental derelicts out of their misery, and out of the way of harming others, in a national lethal chamber.
As with every theory there is usually an opposing theory and here is one from Professor Elliott Smith, a professor of anatomy in the University of London. The article appeared in the Argus, dated March 3rd 1930
DEEMING. “Prehistoric Man.” Professor Discounts Theory.
LONDON, March 2.
Melbourne’s controversy upon the question as to whether Frederick Bayley Deeming was a caveman has reached London. Professor Elliott Smith, professor of anatomy in the University of London, is unable to agree with the conclusions of Sir Colin Mackenzie, director of the Australian Institute of Anatomy. He says:-”Deeming was a degenerate and feeble. The development at the front end of his brain would cause the flattening of the forehead, and the purely fortuitous resemblance to the skull of primitive man. The possibility of the survival of a species of man other than homo sapiens is wholly incredible. There is no evidence to suggest such a possibility. The Australian aborigine often possesses a certain superficial resemblance to the Neanderthal man, who is quite recent in comparison before the Piltdown man and the pithecanthropus. Some years ago Professor W. J. Sollas and other anthropologists discussed the possibility of affinity between this most primitive living race and the most recent of the extinct species, but they had to admit that there was no close kinship, and that the Australian aborigines could not be regarded as surviving Neanderthal men, much less can a man of European extraction such as Deeming be assumed to be a reversion to a type of mankind that became extinct hundreds of thousands of years ago.
[An article entitled “Deeming: Prehistoric Man. Story of a Skull,” appeared in the supplement of “The Argus” on January 25.]
The report is quickly picked up on and disseminated, via various press associations, and appears in numerous newspapers across the globe. The following is from the Brisbane Courier, dated March 3rd 1930
NO EVIDENCE.
DEEMING AS CAVE MAN.
BRITISH PROFESSOR’S
CONCLUSIONS.
(.Australian Press Association.)
LONDON, March 2.
Melbourne’s controversy, “Was the murderer Deeming a caveman?” has reached London. Professor Grafton Elliott Smith (Professor of Anatomy m the University of London) is unable to agree with Sir Colin Mackenzie’s conclusions. He says: “Deeming was a degenerate. Feeble development of the front end of the brain would cause a flattening of the forehead and a purely fortuitous resemblance to the skull of primitive man, The possibility of the survival of a species of man other than Homo Sapiens is wholly incredible. There is no evidence to suggest such a possibility. The aboriginal Australian often possesses a certain superficial resemblance to the Neanderthal man who is quite recent in comparison with the Piltdown man and the Pithecanthropus. Some years ago Professor W. J. Soilas and other anthropologists, discussed the possibility of an affinity between the most primitive living race and the most recent of the extinct species, but they had to admit that there was no close kinship. The Australian aboriginals cannot be regarded as surviving Neanderthal men. Much less can a man of Euro ocean extraction such as Deeming be assumed to be a recession to a time of mankind that became extinct hundreds of thousands of years ago.”
Another report surfaced the following day in the Examiner, dated March 3rd 1930
DEEMING CONTROVERSY Was he a Cave Man? Decision of Experts LONDON, March 2 The Melbourne controversy “was the murderer Deeming a cave man?” has reached London. Prof. Elliott Smith is unable to agree with Sir Colin Mackenzie’s conclusions and says: “Deeming wad a degenerate. The feeble development of the front end of the brain would cause a flattening of the forehead and a purely fortuitous resemblance to the skull of the primitive man. The possibility of the survival of a species of man other than ‘homo sapiens’ is wholly incredible. There is no evidence to suggest such a possibility. “The aboriginal Australian often possesses a certain superficial resemblance to the Neanderthal man.” Some years ago Professor W. J. Sollas and other anthropologists discussed the possibility of an amenity between this most primitive living race and the most recent of the extinct species, but they had to admit that there was no close kinship. The Australians could not be regarded as surviving Neanderthal men. Much less can a man of European extraction, such as Deeming, be assumed to be reversion to a type of mankind that became extinct hundreds of thousands of years ago.”
All then goes quiet, at least for four years, when Sir Colin Mackenzie, Director of the Australian Institute of Anatomy at Canberra, speaks before the Anthropological Society of New South Wales and once again discusses Deeming’s brain,
The Sydney Morning Herald, February 21st 1934
FREDERICK DEEMING.
Sir Colin Mackenzie’s Lecture.
Sir Colin Mackenzie, Director of the Australian Institute of Anatomy at Canberra, read before the Anthropological Society of New South Wales, at the Museum last night, an exhaustive paper on the history and psycho- logy of Frederick Bayley Deeming, the notorious wife murderer. The Australian Institute of Anatomy possesses the skull and part of the skeleton of Deeming, who was hanged in Melbourne in 1892; and casts of the skull and thigh bone were used for the purposes of illustration and for comparison with other types. The lecturer said that Deeming was born in England in 1853. Some authorities asserted that he had hard-working, decent parents, but others declared that his father died in an asylum and that he had been in an asylum himself. He was married at the age of 27. He left his wife and came to Sydney, where he went into a plumbing business, and narrowly escaped the law for various offences. From then onward he became a wanderer, often committing crimes to raise money. In South Africa, he engaged in diamond swindles, and, rightly or wrongly, was credited with more than one murder. His marriages with various women were marked by spectacular displays, which were discounted later when he absconded with what he could lay his hands on. It was the murder of his wife, formerly Emily Mathers, and the disposal of her body under the hearthstone of a house at Windsor (Victoria) that ended his career. Sir Colin Mackenzie, dealing with the psychological aspect of the case, quoted a gaol chaplain as having said that Deeming was either the victim of a brain disease or he was an atrocious villain. A comparison of his skull with others, however, showed that he was of a decidedly primitive type, who could not be called sane or be classed as insane. His slouching walk had the anatomical basis of a primitive creature. His was a case of arrested development; and it was yet a question how this type could be dealt with. If in the early stages such types became criminal it was use- less to punish them; they should be segregated. Deeming was an instinctive criminal. A minister had declared him to be the most complex problem he had ever attempted to solve.
The trail then goes cold, with a few exceptions in passing that appear in later years. One such mention occurs in a short snippet in the Courier- Mail, dated May 14th 1936, which claimed, that Deeming’s skull was on display in the Institute of Anatomy at Canberra.
Then many years later when the Sydney Morning Herald, dated December 26th 1953 claimed,
His [Deeming’s] skull is now a curio in the Institute of Anatomy at Canberra.
If Deeming’s skull was analysed by numerous Professors, and was presented at the Institute of Anatomy at Canberra, how can it possibly resurface in the possesion of Tom Baxter?
Wouldn’t it make sense that this was in fact the skull of Ned Kelly, which Deb Withers, a spokeswoman from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine (VIFM) said: “His body [Ned Kelly’s] was exhumed in 1929 when the gaol was re-developed and a skull that was supposed to belong to him was souvenired and eventually went on display at the gaol next to his death mask until the late 1970s when it was stolen.
http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/news/8774760.Does_skull_belong_to_killer_Fred_or_outlaw_Ned_/
Whether the skull proves to belong to Deeming or Ned Kelly falls on the DNA samples that are collected by those involved, but even if it proves or disproves that it belongs to Deeming, there is still no way the DNA can prove that Deeming was Jack the Ripper.
|
Recent Comments