A MURDER IN LONDON.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11056, 6 May 1899, Page 2 (Supplement)

A MURDER IN LONDON.

THE VICTIM IDENTIFIED. 'ARREST OF THE FORTUNE-TELLER AND HER LOVER. 'A BECEXT telegram from Berlin said that a baker named Metz and a female companion named Briesnieck had been arrested there on tho charge of being concerned in the murder of a woman in London. Both the prisoners alleged that they came to Berlin because they had performed an illegal operation in London upon the woman, who died from tho effects of the treatment she received. A further despatch from Berlin ran:— The German police believe that the names of Metz and Briesnieck given by the man and the woman who have been arrested here on the charge of having murdered a woman in London are correct. Both are German subjects, and will, therefore, not be extradited, but will be tried in Germany. It was on March 5 that the dead body, which was at first supposed to bo that ot the fortune-teller, Mrs. Briesnieck was found in the bedroom at 8, \\ hitheld-street. Tottenham Court Road, in winch -Mrs liriesiiiivk and he.- supposed husband had lived. A pillow coveted toe face, which was swollen and discolouud. The man had disappeared, and all the efforts of the police since the <!ii>«»vcrv was made were dnected towards finding this missing mail, as the supposed murderer of Mrs. Briesnieck. At the opening of the inquest on March 8. Dr. Jhnfiii'd Thomas, the coroner, said: The facts as reported to me show that the dec-red went under the name of Briesnieck. and w.is apnarentlv about 40 years of age. She went to live at 8. Wlnttield-street, lottenbam Court Road, together with a man —a German— Briesnieck. Medical evidence was taken, and showed that death was due to asphyxia, which could not have been cached naturally, and must have been the act of some person other than the deceased. This was agreed upon bv Dr. C'umniing. a private doctor, and Dt. Lloyd, divisional police surueon. A number of persons were taken to the mortuary to identify the bodv, but they afterwards expressed doubts as to whelbei tho body was that of the fortune-teller 0* anothci woman, the arrests in Berlin proved conclusively that it was not Mrs. Briesnieck who had been murd'Ted. and a Miss Richards, who had seen a photograph of the deceased and some clothing, positively assured the police that the victim was her sister. The inquest on the body of the mysterious deed woman was resumed by Dr. Danford Thorns, on March 22, at St. l'ancras. Mr. Swart, landlord of 6. Whitfield-street, who, oil the previous occasion, identified deceased as the woman Briesnieck. was recalled, and his depositions were read over to him. Repl\ ing to the coroner, he said he expressed a perfectly honest conviction that the woman was his lodger Briesnieck, but lie was now of opinion that he had made a mistake. When ho first saw th» body it was in the evening, and he did not examine it carefully. Ho afterwards saw the bony at the mortuary, and his wife found clothing about the body of the deceased which, so far as she knew, did not belong to Briesnieck. It was further discovered that the body of the deceased was some six inches longer than that of tho woman Briesnieck. Dr. T. D. Gumming was recalled. Replying to questions put by Inspector Richards. he said there were appearances about the body of the deceased that were consistent with an illegal operation having been attempted, but such need not necessarily have been tho case. Dr. Llovd, recalled, said he was now of opinion that the pressure of the pillow over the face might have produced the marks found after death. There were no marks of violent pressure upon the face. Violent convulsions might have resulted in asphyxia. Mr. Thomas Bond, senior surgeon to Westminster Hospital, said tho result of the post-mortem showed no signs of injury upon the body. He quite agreed with Dr. Lloyd that the mark on tho nose might have been caused bv the pressure of the pillow on the face after death. Tho woman died from asphvxia, probably caused by the administration of some drug which led to convulsions. In answer to Inspector Richards, Dr. Bond said he did not think that the deceased had been suffocated by the pressure of a quilt or other article upon tho face. Witness was of opinion that it was a case of unnatural death. Marie Richards, of 38, Charlotte-street-, Fitzroy Square, said sho had not seen the deceased since death, but had seen a photograph of the body, and from this and the clothing she wore, witness was convinced that tho deceased was her sister, Sophie Richards, whe was by nationality a Swiss. She had been in service as a chambermaid, but left her situation with a view to get married. She was 30 years of age, and witness was acquainted with the fact that her sister was enceinte. The deceased, who spoke German, French, and English, mysteriously disappeared on March 2. She had then in her possession, witness believed, a. sum of £8 or £9. Witness had been to the lodgings of the deceased, but found no trace of money, the clothing produced by De-tective-inspector Richards was that which the deceased was wearing on March 2. hlu'ti Weintroub, of Percy Crescent, Tottenham Court Road, also identified the deceased as Sophie Richards, who had lodged at her house. Mrs. Josephine Stein, living at 63, Buck-land-street, New North Road, said that the woman Briesnieck came to her house in January and asked for a room, stating that she had been employed in helping women .during their confinement. After she had engaged a room and taken up residence there she said she was engaged in a different kind of business from that which she had previously stated. The Coroner: What sort of business'.' The Witness: She said she performed operations. 1 warned her of the danger. She proposed that I should join her, but I refused. She was only with me a week. There was a man called Fritz living with her. The woman said she bad left her husband in Berlin, and had come to England

with Fritz, whc used to work as a baker for her husband. Detective-inspector C. Richards gave the ( result of his inquiries, and said he had re- ( ceived a telegram from the Berlin police au- ; thorities statin" that Fritz Metz and Mrs. , Biesnieck had been arrested and brought . before the Public Prosecutor on a charge of : murder. They had said in reply that they ! performed an operation on an unknown • woman. They were now remanded in cus- j tody. The woman's real name was not j Briesnieek, but Augusta Hnieda. ( The jury returned a verdict to the effect that Sophia Richards came to her death from asphyxia, caused by the administration of a drug for an unlawful purpose. They further found that Fritz Metz and the woman Hnieda. otherwise Briesnieek, were guilty of causing her death. HOW THE PRISONERS WERE ARRESTED. Particulars of the two prisoners in Berlin and their history were furnished in a Wednesday's despatch to the Daily Telegraph. The woman, whose real name is Hnieda, is the divorced wife of a baker of that name, under whom her companion, Metz, formerly served. Attc. her divorce Fvau Hnieda came to live with Metz in Berlin. For some time before the beginning ot this year she was suspected and watched by the Berlin police, and, presuming the latter were learning too much of her questionable proceedings, she decided early in January on leaving Berlin with Metz. They started together, via Homburg, for London, where they first took an apartment esomewhere in Whitechapel, afterwards removing to Wbitfield-street, where they passed ac Herr and Frau Briesnieek. Asked why they assumed a false name, they stated in their interrogatory that they had no special reason for doing so, but that they thought it was a common practice for Germans going to London to pass under assumed names, and there being no police check in this respect they did not suppose they would be discovered. Briesnieek, the name they selected, is that of the female prisoner's widowed mother. The Berlin police, acting on the information supplied them from London, arrested Metz at an hotel on the charge of murdering Frau Briesnieck. He was astounded at the accusation, but, being driven into a corner, he disclosed the fact that the woman given out as murdered •was. alive and residing at a bouse in the Jriedrichfelder Strasse, in Berlin, and that ] list real name was, tttueia. It appears that' the two had read an account in the papers, of the supposed murder of Frau Briesnieck, and that the female prisonei contemplated suicide from fear ot being arrested. Metz, however, had calmed her with the assurance that he would not abandon her. Frau Hnieda was arrested and examined. She evidently supposed the police kue\v. the

whole story, for she confessed unasked. The two prisoners said that the woman who died came to Frau Hnieda in consequence of advertisements the latter had put- in some London papers. She did not give her name, but stated that she was of Swiss nationality. She spoke German, and said she was a house- j keeper, and had a lover who had supplied her with money for the purpose of an illegal ■ operation, but- she did not give his name, either. She had paid several visits, and the . last time she came was at eight o clock or the evening of March 1. She took a drug which it was expected would ha\ e the de- ; sired effect. As it did not she repeated the : dose, and expired almost immediately after- j wards in Frau Hnicda's room. I Jletz insisted he was not in the room at! the time, because in this case, as in the esse ! of all others who consulted Frau Hnieda, - he went into an adjoining chamber during the consultations. As the result of the ; c- j tim's death the two resolved to leave London, j which they did on March 'A.