Murdoch Grant - "The Fatal Stabbing Case at Wick"

 

Murdoch Grant was charged with murder at the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh on Monday 28th June 1886. He was born and brought up near Olrig, a few miles from Thurso in Caithness. His father, also named Murdoch, was a tailor, and the family home was a property named Fenars Houses where Murdoch jnr. is to be found on the 1871 census aged just 3. At that point in time he had an older brother, Alexander and a younger sister, Isabella. The family evidently had enough money to employ a domestic servant, Jamesina Sutherland, who was from Longhope in Orkney. By the time of the 1881 census, Murdoch has two more siblings, James and Robert. 

The case was reported the length and breadth of the country. Murdoch would have been very familiar with his local newspaper, The John O'Groat Journal, which reported proceedings under the headline "The Fatal Stabbing Case At Wick":

"Murdoch Grant...was charged with the crime of murder in so far as on the 25th of May last, while on board the smack "Isabel" of Wick in Pulteney Harbour, Wick, he wickedly attacked Benjamin Williamson, sometime known as Benjamin Sinclair, a cooper, and stabbed him in the neck with the result that Sinclair was mortally injured and died. The prisoner pleaded guilty to the alternative charge of culpable homicide. The Crown Counsel accepted this plea, and Mr. Wilson for the prisoner said he believed the reasons which had justified the Crown in accepting that plea were, firstly, that there was an entire absence of motive; secondly that the accused was under strong provocation at the time when the deed was done, although that provocation was not on the part of the poor lad who was killed; and thirdly, that at the time of the occurrence, the accused was in a state of intoxication, and having a weak brain, was in a state of complete unconsciousness of the act, and was in that respect not responsible for it".

  Caithness-shire Sheet XXV (includes: Wick) Date revised: 1905, Publication date: 1907

Reproduced by kind permission of the National Library of Scotland

https://maps.nls.uk/

The report goes on to describe how Murdoch was drunk on board the vessel so the master had detained him against his will. On being released he flew into a rage which is when the stabbing occurred. Further details about Murdoch and his family background are revealed in a later passage within the report:

"It did appear, and counsel thought this material to the case, that the accused belonged to a family naturally weak-minded, a brother of his being an imbecile. It was also the case, although the accused's conduct was generally sober and quiet, and he was well known in Wick, that when he took drink he was apt to get exceptionally excited; that on this occasion he was completely dazed and quite unconscious of what had taken place; and that when he became conscious of what had happened, his grief was deep and genuine. Several certificates were read testifying to the general sobriety and good character of the prisoner, who had been in the naval reserve...Grant was sentenced to ten year's penal servitude. In passing sentence, Lord MacLaren said that if the case had gone to trial, the charge would have been murder, and Grant would be justly condemned to death. In consideration, however, of his youth, the briefest term of punishment was given". 

I was hoping to be able to find Murdoch as an inmate, most probably at the General Prison at Perth, on the 1891 census. Frustratingly, however, he has proved elusive. However, from the Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen (see below), we do know that when he was discharged on licence in February 1894 he lived at a number of addresses in Aberdeen including 91a Chapel Street and 61 and 65 Rosemount Viaduct. A brief note in the register records that he appeared before the Police Court in Fraserburgh on the 31st October 1895 when he was convicted of theft, although this does not appear to have been reported in the local newspapers. The final address listed is 40 Skene Row where he was living in July 1896. After that date, he proves elusive once more.

John Audsley - "A Serious Charge Against A Late Sergeant of the Montrose Volunteers"

 

John Audsley's story is an intriguing one. For the majority of his life he seems to have been a respectable, hard working and even upstanding member of his community in Montrose where he was a member of the golf club and even a sergeant in the Montrose Volunteers. However, in 1883 he lost his wife which appears to have precipitated a number of desperate and rash decisions which ultimately saw him incarcerated in Peterhead Prison: his mugshot that you can see at the top of this page was taken on the 21st December 1893. 

Born in the "Old Town" district of Keith in 1835, his father, Joseph, was a "wool miller". Come the 1861 census and John is to be found lodging at an address on Ramsay Street in Montrose where his occupation is given as a "railway porter". Around eighteen months after the census, on 5th November 1862, John marries a domestic servant by the name of Margaret Clark at Ferry Street in Montrose. On the marriage certificate John's occupation is given as a "wood yard labourer".

It doesn't appear that John and Margaret had any children: on the 1871 and 1881 census returns the couple are noted as living at 14 Ferry Street and then at 20 India Street, Montrose. By the time of the 1891 census, John is widowed and a prisoner in Peterhead Prison which had then been open for around two years. 

The story of how he started on the path that led to prison is revealed in a report carried by the Dundee Courier of the 23rd June 1885 under the headline "An Old Man Yielding to Temptation", 

"John Audsley was charged with the crime of falsehood, fraud, and wilful imposition, and also of forgery and uttering".

According to the report, John had ordered a number of mahogany chairs, cabinets and other furniture from three cabinet makers in Montrose and asked for them to be delivered to Dundee where, he said, they were to be a wedding gift for his niece "who had kept house for him for some time". However, far from being a gift, John had instructed the furniture to be sold at auction in Dundee and he subsequently pocketed the proceeds. The defence makes much of John's previous good character, but he was still sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment.

Further evidence of John's fall from grace is next to be found in the Aberdeen Free Press of the 1st June 1888, 

"John Audsley, labourer, Montrose, was charged with having, on the term day, broken open three lock-fast trunks in the men's sleeping apartment on the farm of Ulaw in the parish of Ellon, occupied by Peter Craib, and attempted to steal therefrom. He pleaded not guilty but was was convicted on evidence".

For this crime John was sentenced to 60 days' imprisonment. His next conviction in April 1890 carried a much more severe sentence of five years' penal servitude and is the one that sees him incarcerated at Peterhead. The Dundee Advertiser carried a report of the charges against John under the title, "A Serious Charge Against a Late Sergeant of the Montrose Volunteers", 

"John Grant Audsley, a native of Keith, who resided for many years in Montrose, and has recently been living in Huntly, emitted a declaration before Sheriff Brown at Aberdeen on Saturday, on a charge of having, in the men's sleeping apartment at the farm of Muirton of Barra, in the parish of Bourtie, broken open three lock-fast trunks and stolen £3 1s.; and also of having broken open another lock-fast trunk with intent to steal. Audsley was well known in Montrose where he was a sergeant of the volunteers. He was some years ago convicted of fraudulently obtaining furniture from dealers there and having it disposed of in Dundee". 

John served just under four years of the sentence in Peterhead before being released on license on the 2nd February 1894. His entry in the Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen (see below) reveals that over the following fourteen months he stayed at various addresses in the city including 204 George Street, 14 Castle Terrace, 41 Blackfriars Street and 86 Gerrard Street. 

Come the 1901 census, John, then aged 66, was lodging at 7 Black's Buildings near Woolmanhill, his occupation listed as a "labourer in store". John died from heart failure at the Oldmill Poorhouse in Aberdeen on the 26th November 1907.

Many thanks to Dr. Dee Hoole (University of Aberdeen) for the following additional information: 

Following his death at the Oldmill Poorhouse, John's body was not claimed by any relatives and was sent to the funoratory in Henderson's Court adjacent to Marischal College. Subsequently, on 29th November 1907 his body was lawfully sent to the medical school at Marischal College and dissected by the anatomist Dr Robert Reid. He was interred (probably in the poor area at Nellfield cemetery) on 10th July 1908. By that date,  John's remains had been kept, worked on and used as teaching material by the medical school for over seven months.

John Proctor - A Criminal Record Stretching From Belhelvie to Dover

John Proctor was a Belhelvie lad, or "loon", as they say in the north east of Scotland. The parish of Belhelvie is situated less than ten miles north of Aberdeen and it was at the farm of Dykenook that John was born on the 15th August 1868. His father was a farm servant, also called John, while his mother was Elizabeth Proctor (née Emslie).

Come the 1881 census, John is to be found working as a farm servant, aged 13, on his uncle William's farm of Hillbrae, just a few miles away from his birthplace, in the parish of Udny. The farm was 165 acres in total, 150 of which was noted as arable. 

Reproduced by kind permission of the National Library of Scotland

https://maps.nls.uk/

Ordnance Survey sheet LVI, Aberdeenshire, includes Belhelvie, Foveran, New Machar, Udny

Survey date 1866, publication date 1870

John evidently knew his way around a farm from a young age. Indeed, it was for the crime of cattle stealing that he ended up in the newly opened Peterhead Prison in 1889. He was tried at the High Court in Edinburgh on the 30th August that year, with the Aberdeen Evening Express containing a brief report of the trial as follows:

"John Proctor (22) was to-day sentenced at the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh to five years' penal servitude for having stolen, on the 15th inst., four cattle from a grass field in the parish of Belhelvie, occupied by Mr. Sheriffs, Kannahar".

A report of John's arrest in The Scotsman two weeks prior to his trial reveals that he had driven the cattle into Aberdeen and had tried to "dispose of them at Mr. Duncan's mart" after giving a fictitious story about their ownership. Another interesting nugget of information in the report is that, 

"Proctor only came from Dublin on Saturday last after having obtained his discharge from the army on account of ill health"

John served just over four years of his five year sentence: he appears as an inmate of Peterhead Prison on the 1891 census, which is where his mugshot was taken on the 4th September 1893. The Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen (see image at the foot of this page) records that he was discharged from prison just over a month later, on the 6th October. 

For a short while he lived at 204 George Street, Aberdeen, where his landlady was a Mrs. Adams. However, after his release he failed to report to the police. The next note in the register, dated July 1894, states that he was "apprehended at Dover on charges of theft" and subsequently tried at the Dover Quarter Sessions. The Dover Express of 3rd August 1894 carried a report of the trial under the headline, "The Robbery at the Castle", which reveals that John had not only been a servant in the army to a Lieutenant Davies, but that he was also using a pseudonym:

"James Reed, otherwise James [sic] Proctor was indicted with feloniously stealing one gold watch and chain, with a charm attached, one silver cigarette case, one oxidized watch guard, two pairs of scissors, one silk scarf, one metal box etc...The prisoner pleaded guilty...Lieutenant Davies said that the prisoner entered the army in the February of this year under the name of James Reed. He had been his servant for a fortnight previous to the robbery. His character in the army had been exemplary. They, of course, knew nothing of the prisoner's previous career...An officer who attended from Scotland proved the previous convictions...The Recorder ordered the prisoner to be kept in hard labour for 15 calendar months on each charge, the sentences to run concurrently".

Criminal Portraits - A Closer Look @ Granite Noir, 21st February

 

We are delighted that Criminal Portraits will be making an appearance at the Granite Noir crime writing festival on Sunday 21st February.  Our webinar will take a closer look at the lives and times of a number of the convicts that have featured in the blog. The event is free, although donations are welcome, and can be booked through this link.

Neil McPherson - A Prisoner at Perth, Pentonville and Peterhead

 

Neil McPherson was born on the 5th January, 1858, on Millbank Lane, off George Street, in Aberdeen. He was the son of Neil McPherson, a butcher, and Elizabeth McPherson (née Kennedy) who were both originally from Perth. Indeed, by the time of the 1861 census, with Neil jnr. aged 3 and his siblings Alexander and Jane aged 8 and 5 respectively, the family were living at an address on Guard Vennel, just off the High Street in Perth. Neil's father's occupation was noted as a "saw miller".

Neil McPherson snr. evidently died at some point prior to the next census in 1871 when the family are to be found living at 35 Brown Street, Dundee. Neil McPherson jnr. was then aged 13 with his occupation noted as a "mill worker". His mother, Elizabeth, was recorded as a widow with her occupation given as a "factory worker".

Come the 1881 census, which was conducted on 3rd April, Neil McPherson was an inmate at Pentonville Prison, London. Under the headline of "The Upperkirkgate Housebreaking Case", the Aberdeen Evening Express of 1st February 1881 provides the reason as to how he ended up there:

"In the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh yesterday, Neil McPherson, from the prison of Aberdeen, was charged with theft by housebreaking, in so far as on the 2nd or 3rd September 1880, he did wickedly and feloniously, break into and enter the shop or premises in or near Upperkirkgate of Aberdeen, then and now or lately occupied by Benjamin Duffus, watchmaker or jeweller there...by mounting upon a wooden frame and raising the lower sash of one of the windows situated at the back of the said shop or premises and entering thereby, and did steal 9 or thereby silver English lever watches, 2 ladies' gold English lever watches, 8 or thereby gold Geneva watches, 44 or thereby silver Geneva watches, 18 or thereby gold albert chains....", etc.

The list of items stolen is comically long and ends, 

"The prisoner was also charged with being a habit and repute thief". 

Neil McPherson denied even being in Aberdeen on the night of the crime, although witnesses testified that he had in fact stayed at the Crown Inn on Shore Brae on the day that the crime was committed. This, coupled with the fact that he pawned a chain in Perth which was part of the haul was enough to convince the jury of his guilt. He was sentenced to five years' penal servitude.

At that time, all male convicts sentenced to penal servitude in Scotland were usually detained during their probation period at the General Prison in Perth and were subsequently removed to the public works prisons in England to undertake a period of labour. When Neil McPherson was sentenced on the 31st January 1881 there was significant pressure on space at Perth due in part to the closure of many local prisons across Scotland. It would appear that he spent little time at Perth before being transferred to Pentonville at a point prior to the 3rd April, the date when the 1881 census was conducted. 

An isometric drawing of Pentonville prison, from an 1844 report by Joshua Jebb, Royal Engineers

Following his stretch inside Pentonville, Neil McPherson would have entered the final phase of his sentence and would have been released on license, an early form of the current parole system. It was at this stage that he returned to Scotland, probably in 1885 or 1886.  However, it didn't take too long before he was back in court: the Dundee Courier of the 2nd May 1888 reports that he was tried at the Circuit Court of Justiciary in Dundee on the 1st May 1888 for the "daring burglary" of a safe and its contents which included £20 and several documents. In his summing up, the judge, Lord MacLaren expressed his disappointment that Neil McPherson had only recently completed a period of penal servitude. On this occasion he was sentenced to seven years.

Peterhead Prison opened in 1888 and it is there that Neil McPherson is to be found as an inmate on the 1891 census. He remained there until his discharge on 23rd September 1893 when he moved to Aberdeen and his details were recorded in the Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen (see image below). He lived at a number of addresses in the city between 1893 and 1895 including 68 Broad Street, 128 Chapel Street, 2 Cuparstone Lane and Kepplestone Cottages in Rubislaw.

 

 

Catherine Anderson - Tried Twice for Child Murder - Part 2

At the end of part one of this blog, Catherine Anderson had been found guilty of the culpable homicide of her infant daughter on the 26th June 1883. A brief notice in the Aberdeen Evening Express recorded that she was transferred to HM General Prison, Perth, on the morning of 4th July 1883 to begin a five year stretch.

Catherine served just over three years of this sentence. A report of her second trial in 1890 mentions that she had been released from prison in October 1886. Following correspondence with a descendant of Catherine who contacted me after the publication of the previous blog post, I now know that Catherine had another daughter, Helen, on 1st September 1888. Helen's birth certificate records that she was illegitimate, with Catherine's occupation given as a "bleachfield worker". The place of birth was noted as Catherine's parent's address of 16 Rosebank Place, Aberdeen, which they had moved to from their previous address on the Hardgate at some point in the mid 1880s. From my correspondence with Catherine's descendant, I understand that Helen was cared for and grew up with a relative of the family.

Catherine's parents were still living at 16 Rosebank Place at the time of the 1891 census. As for Catherine,  she was recorded as an inmate at HM General Prison, Perth, when the census was conducted on the 5th April 1891. Her occupation was given as that of a "millworker jute spinner". How did she end up back inside? The Aberdeen Journal of the 22nd January 1890 reported the case:

“The first case called was that of alleged murder or concealment of pregnancy in which an Aberdeen millworker was concerned. The charge was that “Catherine Anderson, prisoner in the prison of Aberdeen, having between the 26th and 31st October 1889, in the house in Stevenson Street, Aberdeen, then occupied by you, been delivered of a female child, you did then and there either press the mouth and throat of your said child and did murder her; or, otherwise, time and place above libelled, you were delivered of a child now dead or amissing, and you did conceal your pregnancy and did not call for or use assistance at the birth, contrary to the Act 49 George III., cap.14 and you have been previously convicted of a crime inferring personal violence” 

Lord McLaren – Catherine Anderson, you are accused of murder, or alternatively with concealment of pregnancy. Are you guilty or not guilty? 

Prisoner – Guilty of culpable homicide 

Mr J.C. Wilson, counsel for the prisoner, said he should like to say a few words on behalf of the prisoner at the bar. As his Lordship was aware, she had had a somewhat bad career, and was released from her last period of confinement in October 1886. She was then cast off by her parents, and in consequence found it exceedingly difficult to get any work or get any situation and was very often reduced to the sorest straits. Some months before the birth of this child she was engaged as an outworker at Pitfodels, but owing to her condition had to leave her work. Her neighbours at the time of the birth of the child all bore testimony that she was in a state almost of starvation, and then detectives who searched the house said that they found no food in the house at all, that the bed clothing and the clothing of the accused was of the most meagre and scantiest description. It also appeared that the father of the child, when he came to be informed of the of the condition of the prisoner, deserted her. Indeed in the most wretched circumstances – without food, without clothing, and without the means of procuring them, and altogether alone and in her misery, her child was born, and this child unfortunately met its death. He urged his Lordship to take these circumstances into consideration in passing sentence… 

…Lord McLaren then passed sentence. Catherine Anderson, he said, it is unfortunately true that you have been previously convicted and sentenced on a charge precisely similar to the one which is now brought against you and to which you have pleaded…I am afraid, considering your previous history that there is very little use in attempting to offer you advice or to express hopes of amendment. I can consider the circumstances of your case with all that has been so forcibly and feelingly stated by your counsel, and giving all weight to these considerations, the least sentence that I can pass upon you is that which you have already experienced. The sentence of the Court is that you suffer penal servitude for five years” .

The description of Catherine's living conditions at the address on Stevenson Street, located in the Denburn area of Aberdeen, make it clear that she was below the bread-line and conveys just how precarious life could be at the time for a single woman without a support network.

The apparent rift with her parents mentioned in the newspaper report must have been at least partially bridged by the time that Catherine was released from prison in 1893 after serving roughly three-and-a-half year of her sentence. The Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen (see image below) records the address at which she was living immediately after her discharge as 16 Rosebank Place, her parent's house.

Identification of Catherine on the 1901 census has not been possible with any degree of certainty. She does, however, appear on the 1911 census, aged 45, single and occupying a room at 88 Maberley Street, Aberdeen, with her occupation listed as a "charwoman".

Catherine Anderson - Tried Twice for Child Murder - Part 1

 

The case of Catherine Anderson is an incredibly poignant one which shines a light on the treatment of women by the late nineteenth century criminal justice system. Her crimes were reported in significant detail by the newspapers of the time which has made it possible to construct a vivid picture of her life from the contemporary reports and other sources. Rather than compress everything into one blog post, her story is divided into two parts, the first of which focusses on her early life up to her first conviction in 1883.

The image of Catherine at the top of this page is the first mugshot in the Register of Returned Convicts for Aberdeen to feature an innovation where a mirror, placed at an angle of 45⁰, has been used to show the person's profile and to assist with identification. Her hands are also placed on her chest to ensure any distinguishing marks would be captured by the camera.

The photograph was taken at HM General Prison, Perth, on the 7th April 1893, just over a month before Catherine's discharge on license on 22nd May that year. She had been sentenced to five years' imprisonment on 21st January 1890 for the culpable homicide of her infant daughter. This was in fact the second time she had been incarcerated for such a crime - as already mentioned, her first conviction occurred in 1883.

A native of Aberdeen, Catherine was born in 1865 and grew up at 102 Hardgate. She appears there on the 1871 census aged 6, along with her father, James L. Anderson, an "engine smith", her mother, Ann Anderson, and her sister, Margaret, aged 4. Almost exactly ten years later, on 8th March 1881 at the age of 16, Catherine gave birth to a son named Samuel at her parent's house. Samuel's birth certificate records that he was illegitimate and that the father was a Samuel Montgomery. Both he and Catherine are described as "linen bleachfield workers" on the certificate. While we can't be absolutely certain, additional research on the 1881 census suggests that Samuel snr. was an Irish immigrant boarding at an address in the Rubislaw area of the city and described on the census as a "cloth worker". It is evident from subsequent census returns that Samuel jnr. grew up with and was cared for by Catherine's parents. Indeed, while he is named as "Samuel Montgomery" on the birth certificate, the child evidently took the family surname of Anderson and is noted as such on the census returns.

That Catherine's parents had to care for her son was a situation that arose out of necessity rather than choice: two years after the birth of Samuel, Catherine had given birth for a second time on the 5th or 6th April 1883. She appeared in court on 26th June that year charged with the murder of her baby. The newspaper report in the Aberdeen Weekly Journal of 30th June carried a detailed report of the proceedings, including a description of Catherine:

"The prisoner took her seat in the dock a few minutes before 12 o'clock. She is a girl of 18, of medium height, of rather stout build, with full broad face, and rather prominent cheek bones. Her complexion is rather pale and, as she took her place at the bar, she appeared to manifest considerable anxiety, and glanced nervously around. She was respectably attired in a black dress, a black jacket hanging over her left arm, a white straw hat with some flowers, and a neat scarf around her neck".

Catherine's anxiety is understandable: given the nature of the crime for which she was on trial, the already intimidating nature of the courtroom must have been further compounded for her by the fact that the jury was all-male. Catherine's mother who was also "much affected" according to the newspaper report, gave evidence:

"...the prisoner is my daughter. She is 18 past on the 14th January. She has all her life been with me. She was latterly working in a bleachfield. She had a child on the 8th March 1881, when she lived with me. Sometime before I removed into 100 Hardgate, I thought my daughter was with child again, and I spoke to her about it. She said she would get someone to keep it. The other child, a boy, was living with me at the time. He is two years past in March. When I removed on the 29th March I thought her time was near, but I did not speak to her at the time. Three months before that time I engaged a doctor and a midwife. The midwife is Mrs. Stewart, Dee Street. My daughter knew that I had a doctor and midwife engaged, though I did not tell her".

Catherine's mother describes the domestic events at the house during the evening of the 5th/6th April including having to leave the house at around 10:00pm to run an errand. On returning a little later, she met Catherine who was leaving the house to visit the water closet to the rear of the property. After half-an-hour or so, Catherine's mother went out to look for her but Catherine only returned to the house at 1:00am. On asking where she had been Catherine replied that she had been at the house of a friend called Maggie Gray. The report goes on,

"She [Catherine] went and washed her hands and arms in a basin...She then took off her boots and sat down at the kitchen fire. She afterwards went into her own bedroom. I then heard some moaning coming from the bedroom. I thought she was in labour and went into the room. I was satisfied that the child had been born and I asked Catherine where it was. She replied that the child was at the bleachfield. The latter is about a mile from the house. I asked her where the child was born and she said at the back of the water closet door...I asked her why she had not brought it into the house and she said it was dead before she could lift it. Once or twice I proposed to send for a doctor, but she would not allow me. She pleaded with me not to send. Catherine remained in bed on Thursday and sat up in her bed on Friday...On Monday night I remember my husband reading an account in the papers about the finding of a body on the seashore at Torry, and a description of the articles about it. Catherine got into a state and said "That's it"".

The trial went on to hear that Catherine left Aberdeen for Dundee, where she had friends, soon after this revelation and that the next time her mother saw her was when she was in the custody of the police. Catherine's mother also testified that she recognised the pieces of cloth in which the child's body had been wrapped when it was discovered on the shore at Torry together with the knitted boots that it was wearing, as being from her house.

Dr. Garden of Golden Square, who carried out the autopsy, provided evidence to the court that the body was that of a female child who had been alive at birth but who had subsequently died of a head injury. There is significant debate in court about exactly how and when the baby had died, although no definite conclusion is arrived at.

Catherine entered the courtroom charged with murder, but at the end of her trial, and partly because of the uncertainty regarding the manner of the child's death, she is sentenced to five years' imprisonment for the lesser crime of culpable homicide. In his summing-up the presiding judge, Lord Deas, said:

"You were in your father's and mother's house kindly treated and they were willing to provide you with what was necessary. It was not the least surprising in these circumstances that you are indicted on the charge of murder. But luckily for you that is not the verdict...You are treated very leniently and humanely from beginning to end, and on that footing I shall limit your sentence to the shortest possible period in my power, and that is five years".

A small notice in the Aberdeen Evening Express of 4th July 1883 records that Catherine was transferred to HM General Prison, Perth, that morning.

The next part of this blog will look at the circumstances around how Catherine ended up back inside Perth prison for a second time, appearing there as an inmate on the 1891 census.