HORRORS OF BABY FARMING.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 27, 1 February 1930, Page 3 (Supplement)

HORRORS OF BABY FARMING.

THE WORLD'S WORST CRIME. WOMEN WHO KILLED FROM LUST FOR GOLD—CALLOUS BUTCHERY OF INFANT LIFE—REMARKABLE CASES RECALLED. (By EDWIN T. M OODHALL, late Scotland Xard.)

in precisely similar fashion. By this time: the policeman's suspicions had practically hardened into certainties. Walters realised that circumstances were implicating her in the opinion of her hosts. Accordingly) she left the house. But it was then too late. She was arrested, as was also Mrs. Sach. The case . against Walters was made blacker by the confused and contradictory statements she volunteered to the police. First she said that she had accidentally rolled on the children and while herself asleep had suffocated them, then . that she had put a little chlorodyne in their milk to keep tliein quiet and, further, that she had dropped them accidentally. Sach first denied that she knew Walters, and then recollecting that others knew of their association and the frequent visits of Walters to the nursing home, admitted that she was acquainted with her and had sometimes employed her. She vowed most firmly that she had never given her any babies and that her work was exclusively connected with adult care. The evidence was overwhelming. Beyond doubt, Sach planned the crimes and Walters acted as the executioner of the doom. In every case Sach was the leader. She would first vividly describe to the mothers who came to her in their distress and shame the difficulties and the humiliation that awaited them if they kept their children with them, and so worked upon their fears that they implored her to take charge of them and get them adopted. Again, Sach would point out the inconveniences and the expense involved. Finally, of course, she would, with some show of unwillingness, -agree that she had said in her advertisements that the babies could remain with her, and after she had screwed out of the duped woman all the money she had and could possibly raise, she Would take over the child. Most Brutal of All. But the most brutal of all baby killers wafc Mrs. Chard Williams. There must have been some dominant streak of cruelty in her nature, for her methods were far worse than those of other women who followed the same profession of child destruction. Like some human tigress she would seize the child by its feet and dash out its brains against a brick wall. The body of one child whose death she had so caused was later found in the Thames elaborately trussed up as if it had been a chicken rather than a baby. She was married to a man with whom she lived in a flat at Battersea. He, undoubtedly, knew nothing of his wife's criminal instincts. He was very fond of her, and throughout the trial, while the evidence every moment more abundantly proved the woman's guilt, would unceas--1 ingly gaze at her with eyes of affection. She, also, was executed. In all the cases of baby farming the motive has been one of financial gain. In order to gratify their desire for money or for what it would purchase, the various women concerned have pursued a ruthless course of murder. In some cases they have soothed their consciences by the thought that the babies whom they so unhesitatingly hurried into eternity were born under a cloud, were unwanted, and from the point of view of any happiness were better out of the way. The fact nevertheless remains that money, the desire for luxury for themselves or others, has been the real reason, for " their crimes.—("Star" and Anglo-American N.S., copyright.)

Of all crimes, the most diabolical is the murder of innocent children for mercenary gain. Worse than the blackmailer who wrings by shameful menaces the heart and purse strings of his victims, worse than the sneak thief who steals from the needy and despairing, is the callous and calculating butcher of infant life. Of this class the most despicable and inhuman is the baby farmer. Fortunately this crime as practised professionally is now practically extinct. While there have been two isolated cases in which men have been concerned, men have never taken the leading part. That has been done by women. Thirty and 40 years ago, baby farming was of no uncommon occurrence. In those days there was opportunity for case-hardened and soulless women to gain money in a way that is no longer possible on anything like the same scale. The best known baby farmer of the last half century is the infamous Mrs. l>yer. She was most ambitious and cunning iu her work. Although she • must have carried out her consistent policy of child murder for years—indeed the fact was established at her trial—her neighbours had not the slightest suspicion that she i\cs anything but what she seemed, an elderly, quiet, refined and apparently highly religious woman, living in one of the better parts of Reading. She might never have been connected with baby farming at all. had she not made en almost incredibly childish mistake. She wrapped the body of one of her hapless little victims in brown paper which had earlier been round a parcel addressed personally to herself at her home. The package containing the body and so addressed, was fished out of the Thames below Reading by some boatmen in April, 1896. The police were informed, and naturally enough they went immediately to Mrs. Dyer. Her profession linked with the discovery of the murdered child and its damning wrapper was enough to condemn her, for she had advertised frequently that she took in nurse children, or as she herself put it, "A comfortable home and a mother's care given." Unwanted and illegitimate children were accordingly brought to her for adoption. She had received sums ranging from £5 to £80 for a child for her part in making the arrangements for its future—in the circumstances, money that was extremely easily earned. No Record of Babies Slain. It will never be ascertained how many children were murdered by this woman. In the nature of things there was practically no record of the babies she had taken over or of the parents or relatives who had answered her advertisements. Her last method of getting rid of the bodies was obviously to throw them into the Thames. Earlier the river had not been 60 accessible, and she had had recourse to burying them in her garden. A dozen little corpses were dug up from the garden of the house she had occupied before going to Reading. Her daughter was arrested with her becai.se it was showii that the last baby had been taken while still alive to the latter's house. The daughter's explanation was that on bringing the baby her' mother Btated that she had taken it with her as Bhe was expecting someone almost immediately who would take charge of it. For some reason or other the daughter left the room and on her return discovered that the baby had gone and that her mother was stowing a carpet bag a'way under' the sofa. On the following day Mrs. Dyer brought a second baby to her daughter's home. The daughter herself took in nurse children, and while putting one of them to sleep that night she heard it screaming. When she went into the sitting room the baby was lying quite quiet and covered with a shawl on the sofa. Her mother said that it had fallen asleep and that she had had a lot of trouble in soothing it because it was ill. She missed the baby the next day and inquired what had happened to it. Mrs. Dyer said that it was all right now. The same night Mrs. Dyer was seen coming up from the river. At her trial Mrs. Dyer exonerated her "daughter, and she, with, her husband, was dismissed from the case. The woman herself waa sentenced to death. During the interval between sentence and execution the religion, which had always been so marked a feature of Mrs. Dyer's life, became very much stronger. She spent most of the time remaining to her in this life in prayer, and even composed a hymn to her Saviour while occupying the con- ■ demned cell. ' Her motive was undoubtedly that of gain. She was not in other ways a cruel or heartless woman. She had looked after and brought up her own children with devoted and unfailing kindness. She lived carefully and had no vices such as drink or drugs, and certainly did not believe that money was an end in itself and should be hoarded. The Hand That Murdered. Annie Walters was very similar to Mrs. Dyer. She also was a baby farmer or, rather, collaborated with another woman in baby farming. Here again the motive was simply and solely that of gain. She was the hand that murdered, the inspiration and direction was supplied by her partner, a woman of an altogether different type. This was Mrs. Amelia Sach, an extremely attractive and clever young woman of 24. The motive in her case Was a perverted craze for giving her own children, of whom she was passionately fond, all kinds of luxuries and comforts. She was a trained, and by all accounts, a very efficient midwife and child nurse. She ran a nursing home in East Finchley, which she advertised in the following terms: iACCOUCHEMENT: Before and during; billed nursing. Home comforts. Baby can remain." The babies, very unfortunately for themselves, often did remain. Mrs. Sach received them apparently with the greatest cordiality and kindness. They were then handed over by her to her accomplice, Mrs. Walters. After the latter had finished with them they vanished iroin human ken, , . Mrs. Sach had not chosen her associa.t wisely, and it was Walters' gross stupidity which led to the arrest and the later execution of the pair.. In the August ot 1902 a young woman in trouble we the nursing home in Fincbley and a baby boy. Mrs. Sach offered to get the baby adopted if the woman pay her £30. This proved, too high; a price, but eventually a compromise arranged, under' which £25 w as pa the supposed adoption. The ™ .v paid over in notes by" the father of jhe child. These .notes were afterwards traced and discovered to *5? and divided up between Sach and W changed by them in variouß shop • child was taken away from the . e Walters who lodged some foolishfrom her partner. With amazing _ ness she was then living wmi ian(jttan's family. She explained to the J* lady that the child was gOl JL. imar(isbrought up by the wife of a coa g ~ man at Kensington. Quite wha .genof a coastguardsman was doing _ tfa . g sington she did not disclose. most unfortunate- reOiaifkr man . aroused the suspicions: of the P landlord. The baby was taken. by the Woman to bed with her and m , j ing it was found to be dead. Jat ,baa led to its death was not kno - remarkable ' coincidence a second OaDg also brought home by the woman, diea