John Hudson Read – Driver of the Royal Train

The re-imagined story …

Father spread the newspaper across the kitchen table. It took him some time to find the report he sought as Mr Morris had seen fit to hide it on the fifth page of his periodical. The attempt on the Queen’s life had happened two days previously and was old news by then.

Father cleared his throat before speaking. In his melodious Welsh voice he announced – ‘An attempt to shoot the Queen was made on Thursday evening at Windsor station.’

Father had a magnificent voice. I loved to hear him sing in the Baptist Chapel in Cambria Place where we attended every Sunday. Mind he had some keen competition, lot of good Welsh voices there were there.

Mother was less enthusiastic. ‘Likes to hear the sound of his own voice,” she said, which I thought was a compliment – until I grew older.

That evening he read to us the report of the attempt on the Queen’s life. In his rich tenor voice he presented the scene – the poorly clad, starving clerk and the brave Eton schoolboy who belted him round the head, the crowds, the police – it was like something out of a Penny Dreadful!

We later learnt that the Royal Train on which the royal party travelled that day was driven by a Mr. John Hudson Read. And then would you believe it, two years later he moved into the house next door to us. There’s famous he was. I used to tell the story to my children but they were less impressed. I suppose it was old news by then.

The facts …

Attempt to shoot the Queen

An attempt to shoot the Queen was made on Thursday evening at Windsor station. The name of the miscreant is said to be Robert Maclean, who was poorly clad, and who states that he is a clerk out of employment.

The particulars of the foolhardy act are as follow :- The Queen, who had been spending a couple of days at Buckingham Palace, left London in the afternoon for Windsor Castle. The Royal train arrived at Windsor about half past five o’clock, a large crowd having assembled to witness the arrival of the Sovereign. On alighting from the train her Majesty at once entered a carriage which was in waiting to convey her to the Castle, when just as she was about to drive oft a man who had been standing with others at the entrance to the station yard suddenly fired a revolver at the Royal carriage, but happily the shot did not take effect.

The fellow was about to fire a second time, when the pistol was wrenched from his grasp by a bystander, and he was at once seized by the police, who, however, had some difficulty in preventing him being lynched by the crowd. It is stated that at the moment the pistol was fired the crowd was cheering the Queen, who, it is thought, did not hear the report; but of course her Majesty was quickly apprised of the attempt which had been made upon her life, and, with her usual solicitude for others, she at once caused inquiries to be made as to whether any one had been struck by the pistol-charge.

Some doubt exists as to whether a bullet was really fired or not, as no trace of one has been found. The pistol, which was a six chambered one, was found to be loaded with two blank cartridges and two containing bullets. Several other cartridges were found on the person of the would be assassin. Maclean is thought to be of unsound mind.

This is the sixth outrage which has been perpetrated on the person of the Sovereign. The first occurred in June, 1840, when the Queen was fired at by Oxford. The next was in May, 1842, the would be assassin being John Francis. Two months later a man named Beau presented a pistol at her, but without firing it. In June, 1850, her Majesty was struck in the face by a fellow named Pate as she was walking out; and in 1872 a lad named Arthur O’Connor presented an unloaded pistol at her as she was entering Buckingham Palace.

The Prisoner Before the Magistrates,

Windsor, Friday afternoon.

The prisoner was driven to the Town-hall in an open fly at half-past one to-day, in charge of Supt. Hayes and a plain clothes official. He has a very wretched look, and is a man very much of the Lefroy type. He looks unclean and unshaven, and has a slight black moustache. He was immediately taken before the bench of magistrates, the Mayor of Windsor presiding Mr Stevens, solicitor to the Treasury prosecuted on behalf of the Public Prosecutor. Amongst the magistrates present were Alderman Chamberlain, and Mr G. Poole.

In reply to the Mayor, the prisoner said in a most off-handed manner and in a firm voice that his name was “Maclean-Roderic Maclean.” Supt. Hayes was then sworn. – Mr Stevenson said he was instructed to prosecute by the Secretary of State.- Supt. Hayes that her Majesty arrived at the station at 5-25 yesterday. She was accompanied by the Princess Beatrice, and Mr Brown was sitting behind the carriage. As the carriage started and had got half way to the gate he heard a report, and looked to the left, when he saw the prisoner. Prisoner here asked whether he was allowed to ask any questions. The Mayor said certainly he would, presently.

Examination continued: He looked to the left and saw the prisoner in the act of presenting a pistol at her Majesty. He did not hear more than one shot fired. The prisoner was about 150 yards from the carriage where the shot was fired when he first saw the prisoner. He was holding the pistol straight out in the direction of the carriage. He immediately sprung on him, and collared him by the collar and neck. He stopped to take the pistol from him when a young man named James Burnside subsequently got possession of the pistol, and handed it over to him. He produced the pistol, which had been in his possession ever since; he put it in his pocked immediately he put prisoner against the wall, assisted by Inspector Fraser and others. Prisoner said, “Don’t hurt me, I will go quietly.”

A little Eton boy came up and gave him a blow on his head, and he then took prisoner to the police station, and when there he asked him his name and address. He gave his name and address, and said he had been in Windsor about a week. On the way to the Police-station in the cab prisoner said, “I was starving, or I should not have done this.” At the station when charged he said, “Oh, the Queen!”

He examined the pistol. It was a German pin-fire revolver; it had two empty cartridge cases in it, that was to say exploded cartridges. Three were full whole cartridges, and two chambers empty. He drew the cartridges, and produced them. He searched the prisoner, and on him found 14 other cartridges of the same make. They were in a piece of rag. He found other articles of no value, including a pocket book, a knife, etc. Amongst other things a letter was found. It was taken from him by Inspector Fraser. The letter was then read, in which prisoner stated that he would not have dared the crime had the sum of 10s been given to him instead of 5s being offered the insultingly small sum of 6s. He was compelled to commit this crime against the bloated aristocrat, headed by that old lady “Mrs Vic.”

Witness further said that at 10.30 this morning prisoner said he wished to make a further statement, “I have a complete answer to the charge.” He then wrote a letter which was now put in and read, in which prisoner said he was not guilty of shooting at the Queen with intent to do grievous bodily harm, his object was only to cause the public alarm, with the result of having his grievances redressed. Such was the pecuniary strait in which he was.

All the circumstances tended to prove this statement. Had he cared to have injured the Queen he would have fired at her when she was getting out of the carriage. As it was he shot at the wheels but the pistol kicked and the bullet might have hit the carriage door. The only consolation he could offer the Queen was this statement, and he offered it if the charge of intent to do the Queen grievous bodily harm was withdrawn, and a charge of attempting to intimidate others substituted he would do all in his power to elucidate the mystery, and to bring the matter to a speed issue. At the end of the letter prisoner said that was the whole truth. The prisoner was remanded.

The Swindon Advertiser, Saturday March 4, 1882.

John Page Smith and the Swindon tragedy

What you will read published below is a shocking story told in brutal and stark language. This is a newspaper report unlike anything we would read today. Yet it might sound a very modern story, violent and tragic, and at the heart of it a little girl, much loved by both parents.

The Swindon Tragedy

The Inquest

Eyewitnesses Stories

Verdict of Felo de Se

On Saturday, the Deputy Coroner (Mr J. W. Pridham) held an inquest in the Boardroom at the Stratton Workhouse on the body of John Page Smith, who died at the Workhouse Infirmary on Friday morning, as the result of a shot wound self-inflicted, after shooting his wife, in Bridge Street on Thursday afternoon, as already reported in our columns.

Mr W.H. Kinneir was present to watch the proceedings on behalf of Mrs Smith and her relations.

Mr G.M. Butterworth was present representing the police and members of the deceased’s family.

Mr H. Scotton, of Highworth, brother of Mrs Smith, Dr. Du Cane, and Dr. Muir, were present, and Supt. Robinson and Inspector Miller also attended the enquiry.

Mr Charles W. Barnes was the foreman of the jury, who viewed the body, which was lying in the mortuary.

The Coroner’s Statement

The Coroner, in opening the inquiry, briefly and lucidly explained the facts of the case. He said the deceased man was a solicitor’s clerk, and was formerly employed in Swindon. He was married to the young woman who was now lying in the Victoria Hospital, Swindon, seven years ago, and there was one child of the marriage. For some time past the couple had lived apart, he at Bristol and his wife in the neighbourhood of Swindon. Deceased had recently had the custody of the child. He (the Coroner) understood that Smith returned to Swindon from Bristol for the Easter Holidays. On Thursday afternoon last, Smith and his wife and child were seen outside the GWR Station, Swindon, about four o’clock. They walked along Station Road to the corner of Bridge Street, and were heard to be quarrelling. At the corner of Bridge Street, the man left his wife, but quickly returned, fired at her with a revolver, and then fired upon himself. These were briefly the facts.

old image of Bridge Street

Evidence of Identification

The first witness called was Wm. Hodges Smith, of 56 North Street Swindon, builder’s assistant. He was very much affected.

The Coroner: You had the bringing up of the deceased? – Yes.

What was his age? – Thirty-two.

He has been living at Bristol? – Yes.

At what address? – Small Street Court.

When did he come to see you last? – On Friday.

Were you aware that he had any firearms or weapons in his possession? – I had not the least idea.

How long had he been living apart from his wife? – I could not say. It might be three years, it might be four years.

A Juror: Did he often come and see you at Swindon? – Not very often.

The Coroner: Did he have the custody of the child? – During the past fortnight. The child was much attached to him.

Medical Evidence

Dr. Du Cane was next called. He said on Thursday afternoon at four o’clock I went to the Great Western Station at Swindon. I passed the deceased, his wife, and the little child, on Bullen’s Bridge, Station Road. The man was speaking in an excited manner to his wife. The child was crying. I returned within five minutes, and saw that deceased had his wife by the arm. On seeing me he let go. I went to my house, which was within a few hundred yards, and told my wife I was going again up the street as I was certain something serious was going to happen. I saw from my window the wife leave her husband and go round the corner into Bridge Street. The child then left her father, and went round the corner after her mother. The deceased immediately after also followed. I at once followed and the next moment four or five shots rang out. I ran quickly up the street and found deceased lying on his back bleeding from a wound in the right temple. I judged from his condition that he was beyond medical skill. I then gave my attention to the wife, and conveyed her to the Victoria Hospital. The woman was shot in the neck, and the left temple. After attending to Mrs Smith, I attended the deceased at Stratton Infirmary. There was a wound above the right temple penetrating at least four inches into the brain. Blood and brain matter were coming out of the wound. I attended to the wound and requested Inspector Miller to have pen and paper in readiness in case the man should recover consciousness and make a statement. I attended the man up to his death on Friday morning.

A juror: Did you see the shot fired? – No.

old image of Bullen’s Bridge

Evidence of Eyewitnesses of the Tragedy

Florence Tegg, 78 Bridge Street, Swindon, domestic servant in the employ of Mr Vincent, Bridge Street, was the next witness called. She said I was dusting the shelf in the kitchen on Thursday afternoon. My companion Louisa Hawkins was with me. I saw a man and a woman and a child outside, and I thought they were quarrelling.

What made you think they were quarrelling? – She wanted to go one way and he wanted her to go another. He put his arm round her and pushed her up against the window at No. 2 Bridge Street.

What next did you see? – I saw him hit her about three times with his fist. He struck her in the chest.

What else? I was getting from one chair to another to get a better view when I saw the man pull the woman’s head towards him and then I heard a shot, though I did not see the pistol. I heard four reports, and I saw the man fall down. I did not see any more as I was told to get down.

Louisa Hawkins, another servant in Mr. Vincent’s employ, gave corroborative evidence. She was with Tegg in the kitchen and saw the man and woman quarrelling.

She added: I saw the man fire at the woman with a revolver, and then turn the revolver upon himself. I didn’t stop to see any more from the kitchen but ran into the street. The man was then lying down.

The Deputy Coroner: How many reports did you hear altogether? Four.

A juror: Did you hear deceased threaten his wife in any way? – No.

Police Inspector’s Evidence

Inspector Geo. Miller next gave evidence. He said: On Thursday afternoon last just before 4 p.m., I received information and went into Bridge Street. I found the deceased lying on his back on the pavement opposite No. 2 Bridge Street. He was bleeding very much from a wound in the right temple. Between his legs and near his right hand was a revolver, which I took possession of, and produce. I found five empty cartridges. I got a horse and trap, under Dr. Du Cane’s instructions, and took the deceased to the Victoria Hospital, and then to Stratton. On searching deceased’s clothing I found a packed of oxalic acid and a number of cartridges in his right hand pocket. The cartridges were similar to the empty ones found. I also found a letter written on foolscap and addressed to Mr. Scotton. It had been returned unopened and unread.

The Coroner: Does the jury want the letter read?

The Foreman: No, I think not.

A juror: Does it supply a motive for the crime?

The Coroner: In my opinion it does, but we are here only to ascertain the cause of death.

It was decided that it was not necessary for the letter to be read.

Inspector Miller continuing said: There was also on him a gun license dated 15th April, 1905, taken out at Bristol.

The Coroner: It would be necessary for him to take out a gun licence in order to enable him to carry a revolver.

Mr. Butterworth: It would be, under the new Act.

Inspector Miller added that he found 13 5d in money on deceased. He added that deceased never recovered consciousness, but his wife did.

A juror: Did you hear either of them speak? – I only heard the woman speak.

Dr. David Muir, of Stratton, Medical Officer at the Workhouse, was the next witness. He said: I called at the Infirmary on Thursday night and saw deceased. He was suffering from a gun-shot wound in the right temple. He was in a moribund condition. He died on Friday morning at two o’clock. He never regained consciousness.

The Summing Up

This was all the evidence, and the Coroner briefly summed up. He said it was shown in the evidence that deceased and his wife had been living apart for some little time. On Thursday afternoon about four o’clock they met outside the GWR Station, and, according to Dr. Du Cane’s evidence, they were quarrelling. This was continued in Bridge Street according to the evidence of the witnesses Tegg and Hawkins. It was also clear that Smith shot at his wife two or three times, and then turned the revolver upon himself.

Without further remarks, the Deputy Coroner asked the jury to consider their verdict.

The Verdict

After a minute’s consultation the jury returned a verdict: That the deceased met his death as the result of a self inflicted wound and also found the deceased wilfully and maliciously shot himself. This, of course, is a verdict of felo de se.

The Deputy Coroner in reading the formal verdict, described the deceased as a solicitor’s clerk.

Mr G.M. Butterworth intimated that the deceased had been erroneously described as a solicitor’s clerk. He had for years been acting as a general agent.

The Deputy Coroner accordingly altered the description.

Before the Court closed Supt. Robinson addressing the Coroner said: Perhaps you will allow me to make a statement. When the Inspector took the deceased to the Victoria Hospital, he was told the man could not be admitted. It appeared in one of the local papers that there had been some unpleasantness between the police and the Hospital officials and that that was the reason the man was not admitted. I wish to say that that has no reference to myself whatever. The most amicable relations exist between myself and the Hospital officials.

Mr W.H. Kinneir: I may say on Supt. Robinson’s behalf, that the matter in question a matter that occurred some time ago – happened before Supt. Robinson came to Swindon.

We may point out that the statement complained of as appearing in a local paper was not made in the “Swindon Advertiser.”

With regard to the verdict returned by the jury we might point out that in criminal law, to constitute a felo de se – that is, a felon as regards one’s self, the suicide must be of years of discretion and in his right senses.

Funeral of Smith

The funeral of deceased took place on Tuesday in Swindon Cemetery. The utmost secrecy had been kept regarding the hour of interment, but, of course, it became known to a few, particularly those resident near the Cemetery, and a crowd of some 100 or 150 persons, chiefly women, assembled. Superintendent Robinson was present, together with Detective Sergt. Moore, P.S. Buchanan, and a few Constables, and perfect order was maintained.

The coffin was conveyed from the Stratton Infirmary between nine and ten o’clock, reaching the Cemetery at half-past ten. The mourners were a few of deceased’s relatives. The special service was conducted at the graveside by the Rev. Arthur T. Tasker, curate at St. Paul’s Church, Swindon.

The coffin, on which was placed a few wreaths, was of polished elm, with massive registered fittings. The inscription on the breastplate was as follows:- “John Page Smith, died April 28th, 1905, aged 32 years.” Immediately after the service, the grave was covered in, and the crowd quietly dispersed.

The funeral arrangements were satisfactorily carried out by Mr Fred J. Williams, acting for his father, Mr Joseph Williams, of Bath Road.

Mrs Smith Progressing Favourably

On enquiry at the Victoria Hospital at three o’clock this afternoon, our representative was informed that Mrs Smith has made excellent progress, and there is little doubt that she will completely recover. She is able to take plenty of nourishment.

It is stated that Mrs Smith has repeatedly enquired as to her little daughter, and has been informed that she is well and cared for. Mrs Smith has also been deemed sufficiently recovered to be informed of her husband’s death.

Swindon Advertiser, Friday, May 5, 1905

John Page Smith died on April 28 and was buried in Radnor Street Cemetery on May 2 in grave plot B1689. He is buried with four others in a public plot.