The Cottons
It may be useful at this point to place the Cottons in the picture. Frederick Cotton senior had been born in 1831, into poverty. He and his sister, Margaret, had been abandoned to the workhouse in Wisbech, without their parents. Margaret was born in 1832 and their lives started and ended in tragedy. She would become a good friend to Mary Ann as they entered into the world of domestic service.
Frederick Cotton senior had left the home in Cambridgeshire to search for work. As we saw in the census of 1861 there was a son, Frederick John, aged 13; a daughter, Margaret, aged 2, and another daughter, Adelaide Jane, aged 5 months. By September of 1863, his wife (also called Adelaide) had moved north to Sunderland and given birth to Frederick junior. Naming the child Frederick indicates that the other son from Cambridgeshire had already died. In 1865 another son was born and named Charles Edward. The girl, Margaret, from Cambridgeshire, also died on 9 October, aged 11. Then Frederick suffered another huge loss when his wife, Adelaide, died on 19 December 1869.
Charles Cotton, Frederick’s brother, was a mariner and Mary would claim to have met him in Newcastle and had asked him to take the last Cotton child, who died in West Auckland. The tone of the letters and the absence of any mention of these things throw these claims into doubt. One of these letters was sent to the local newspaper.
112, North Woolwich Road, Victoria Docks, London, E,
9th October 1872
Dear Sir, - In consequence of the many reports which I have read, and which have (as it appears) been brought to light through your vigilance concerning Mary Ann Cotton, I am suspicious of her having had some acquaintance with my brother’s family previous to the deaths of his first wife, two of his children, and also his sister, the latter having left her former service to keep house for my brother, F Cotton, about or soon after the time that the above deaths took place. At that time they resided at No. 5 Devon Row, Walbottle Colliery. I do not know any person who was living in the neighbourhood at this time, or I would write, with a view to obtain such information as might dispel or confirm my suspicions. My sister Margaret Cotton, as I was informed by my brother Frederick, died very suddenly with a severe pain in her stomach, but the other three had a more lingering death.
I am, dear sir, yours truly
Charles Cotton
A reply, written from Stanhope on 15 October 1872, to Charles Cotton, tells us that Frederick’s sister immediately gave up working as a servant at this point and came to look after the dying Adelaide, Frederick and his family.
Stanhope Rectory, Darlington,
15th October 1872
Mr C Cotton
Sir, - I have seen your letter of the 9th instant in the Newcastle Daily Journal of to-day, and I write to say that your late brother Frederick wrote to me about his sister Margaret’s death. She died, he said, after a very short illness. She left our service to keep house for her brother Frederick at Walbottle, as his wife was then in a dying state. I have reason to believe that Margaret had about £60 in the bank when she left us. She used to speak to her fellow servants here of this woman Mowbray. Margaret was an excellent servant to us as laundry maid, and we were sorry to lose her services, and still more sorry to hear of her unexpectedly being taken away. You can make what use you please of this letter.
Yours faithfully
Charles Clayton – Rector of Stanhope
P.S. Your sister came to us in July, 1866, and left us in December 1869
This was in response to the letter Charles Cotton had sent to the police (above) and was published in the newspapers. Charles Cotton also sent a second letter to the police.
Two things are of interest at this point, however; Mary Ann abandoned baby George in December at Sunderland and Margaret Cotton left Stanhope in the same month. Reverend Clayton confirms that Margaret knew Mary Ann and spoke of her in the household. It is not too far-fetched to say that Margaret and Mary Ann may have kept in touch. I believe we can ignore much of the sensationalism of the newspapers at the time of Mary Ann’s trial about this period of her life. These claims involved prostitution and loose living, both of which are unlikely. Mary Ann had many faults but she was always capable of surviving by gaining employment. The separation from James Robinson may have happened in November 1869. We know from the records that in late 1869 she did work at a laundry in a hostel for distressed women in Sunderland, being employed by Edward Backhouse. Backhouse was a County magistrate and banker who lived in the very grand Ashburne House in Sunderland. He died in 1879 and spent around £10,000 per year on charitable causes. He was active in contacting the Home Secretary pleading for Mary Ann’s life after her conviction. Margaret Cotton was a laundry maid at Stanhope. Did she get Mary Ann her laundry job?
It is likely that, with the combination of Margaret Cotton moving to Walbottle, near Newcastle to be with her brother, and Mary Ann on the lookout for another husband, that Margaret invited Mary Ann to come and visit her. She might even have looked to Mary Ann as someone who, as a former nurse, might help with the difficult situation in the Cotton household. This is even more plausible when we discover that, on 29 January 1870, Adelaide Jane, Frederick’s last daughter, died of typhus.
Within three months, on 25 March, Margaret Cotton died from pleuropneumonia. She had savings of £60 at the time of her death, not an inconsequential amount in those days. It may be an uncomfortable thought, but is it likely that the loss of his sister was a devastating blow to an already shattered Fredrick and that the wily Mary Ann knew how to give comfort? Hadn’t James Robinson also been the receiver of such comfort? We know that Mary Ann was delivered of a boy in February 1871, which would indicate conception around April or May 1870. Frederick Cotton accepted responsibility for the baby and therefore we can place Mary Ann in Walbottle around that time.
It may well be that April is the correct month and something happened to cause Mary Ann to move to Spennymoor where she began working for a Dr Hefferman. The census of 1871 tells us that Hefferman resided at number 7, Whitworth Terrace in Spennymoor. Mary went to this address to live and work in April 1870.
We do know that a letter was written by a Mr Gallon which read:
Fred’s wife and daughter died in December 1869. The next daughter died in January 1870 and his sister Margaret died in February or March 1870. Mary Cotton did not come until the July following so she could have nothing to do with the death.
It is probable that Mary Ann was not resident at Walbottle, but simply an overnight visitor. The facts would suggest that Mary Ann did have knowledge of the household, certainly before the death of Margaret and possibly even before the death of Adelaide Jane. This was also what Charles Cotton, Frederick’s brother, thought when he later wrote to Sergeant Hutchinson at West Auckland.
112 North Woolwich Road,
Victoria Docks, London, E,
17th October 1872
Dear Sir,
I herewith send you a copy of a letter which I received yesterday, and which confirms my suspicions as regards the woman Mowbray (now known as Mary Ann Cotton) having had some acquaintance with my brother Frederick’s family previous to the death of my sister Margaret,
Yours truly,
Charles Cotton
Mr Hutchinson, Sergeant of Police.
West Auckland
Of course, when Mary Ann came to public attention, the outcry was that she had done away with the Cottons in order to marry Frederick. However, we need to stand back and see that the deaths were probably due to natural causes. Certainly Margaret’s death could not be confused with poisoning because the cause of death was specifically certified as pleuropneumonia.
We know that pigs were present near the Cotton’s house and these animals were prone to catching a form of pleuropneumonia. The pathogens involved rarely transmit to humans though it can happen. Tales circulated later suggest that the pigs had been poisoned, but it is more likely they died of pleuropneumonia, which also killed Margaret.
We can, therefore, suggest that Mary Ann did visit the Cottons and begin a relationship with Frederick in early 1870. Her move to Spennymoor could have come before Mary Ann had realised she was pregnant. What we do know is that, while at Spennymoor, the light-fingered traits Mary Ann had shown with James Robinson had not gone away. Dr Hefferman would appear to have left much of the activity around the house to his assistant, Dr Brereton, and Mary Ann took full advantage. As Mary Ann became aware of her pregnancy, she would realise that, before too long, she would lose her post. Plans had to be made and it was then that the household began to lose various items, in a similar way to the Robinson household, when Mary Ann lived there. Reports say that the doctor confronted Mary Ann, who of course denied all knowledge of any missing goods. The police were not called in and two people were dismissed: Mary Ann and a groom, who also worked for the doctor. Does this suggest the groom and Mary Ann were in collusion and even in a relationship? We know Mary Ann’s apparent need to have men fall in love with her. It may even be suggested that the groom could have been the father of the child that Frederick Cotton would take as his own. During her time with Dr Hefferman, and with the run of the place, Mary Ann had access to the surgery and clinic, where poisons would have been available.
The records show that in June 1870, Mary Ann left the Spennymoor house and turned up in Walbottle in July. It may be then that she reminded Frederick of their shared passion back in April. She was now carrying a baby – a result of that occasion? Or, as suggested above, Mary Ann could have had a relationship with the groom and was herself unsure as to the father. Either way, if Frederick was willing to accept responsibility, Mary Ann was content. At this point she was made ‘housekeeper’ to Frederick and settled into the domesticity of life at Walbottle. What Fred did not know was that Mary Ann was married to James Robinson and had not obtained a divorce. In this ignorance, he agreed to marry Mary Ann and on 17 September 1870, Frederick and Mary Ann were married at St Andrew’s Church, Newcastle. She signed the register as Mary Ann Mowbray and gave her status as widow. There is no argument here that Mary Ann Robinson did in fact commit the crime of bigamy.
As a side note, the bigamy laws brought into force in the 1600s carried the penalty of hanging on conviction. By the 1800s this would have been a sentence of penal servitude for between two and seven years. Mary Ann was taking a huge risk in ‘marrying’ Frederick Cotton. Furthermore, as the ‘marriage’ was illegal, she would have no right to use the name ‘Cotton’.
Walbottle was not a good place for Mary Ann. She was apparently disliked by neighbours. Stories of poisoning pigs etc. did not arise until after she was arrested in West Auckland, and were a re-interpretation of facts. As explained above, the deaths of the pigs were probably from an earlier time and from natural causes; only after Mary Ann began to get the reputation as poisoner did those with grudges find ammunition for their bad relationships with Mary Ann. On 8 February 1871, Mary Ann gave birth to a boy. She named him after her dead brother, Robert Robson Cotton.
The 1871 Census shows them at Walbottle on 2 April 1871, at Devon Row. People could count, and the birth, a mere five months after her marriage, would set many tongues wagging. No doubt Walbottle became a place of great stress for the family. In the mining industry, miners were bonded annually and this hated practice was not abolished until 1872. The bond was usually signed on 5 April each year. It is likely that Frederick could not leave Walbottle until the close of his bond on 5 April 1871.
Dr Kilburn, who testified at Mary Ann’s trial, gave April 1871 as the date on which Mary Ann arrived in West Auckland and he became the family doctor.