Arrow- The Poisoning Case

Amongst the Ragley Hall papers at Warwick Record Office is a letter (‘CR 114a/744) from the Revd.Beauchamp Stannus of Arrow Rectory to Lord Hertford. This letter of 27 July 1874 finds the reverend gentleman at a very low ebb. He says that he has had many trials the last few months: he had lost his brother: his horse killed another: he had not been in good health before or during his recent absence from Arrow: Mr.Shields had been appointed: he had had typhoid fever: about 50 of his parishioners had been poisoned.

Further research is needed to discover who Shields was and why his appointment caused such anguish. Most of his other trials are not mentioned in details either he says they ‘may seem trifling to mention’ to his Lordship but his most recent trial, the poisoning of his parishioners, is considered to be of interest to the marquess.

The rector writes that eight articles which had been in use the previous Tuesday were being analysed in Birmingham. He continues,’I am still of the opinion that someone worse than a friend threw poison into the teas He concludes the letter with an acceptance of an invitation from the marquess. We are left wondering what took place the previous Tuesday.

The ‘Warwick Advertiser’ of 1. August 1874 reports that the Rector of Arrow gave a treat to mothers of the parish; 50 Or 60 enjoyed the meal but next day about 20 were ill, some very seriously, which caused much excitement. With the rector’s letter at Warwick Record Office is a letter from Dr Alfred Hill of Birmingham:

On July 27 received for chemical analysis with a view to detection of mineral, vegetable and animal poisons and also
a microscopical examination of the following articles:-

1 bottle of infusion of tea;	1 bottle of currant wine;
1 bottle of water;	1 bottle of sediment from boiler;
1 sediment from tea jog;	1 packet of cake;
1 piece of mutton;	1 bottle alvine evacuation (Sorrell);
1 bottle alvine evacuation (Homans)
	Ł52.10.0

The amount was presumably the cost of analysis. There was also a letter from Dr. J.H.Smith of Alcester re. payment of the bill in December 1874. It states that on 27 July Mr.Gander, inspector of nuisances for the Alcester district took the suspected articles to Dr.Hill for analysis. Dr.Hill thought that the case did not involve poisoning ‘as meant in the act’ so he would not start analysis until he received written authorization from Mr.Dunbar, the Alcester Inspector of Police.

On 12 December 1874 the bill had still not been paid. It was considered that the poison was willingly administered but no lives had been lost so the case was not brought before the coroner.

Perhaps it was discovered who spoilt the rector’s treat and why but until further contemporary evidence comes to light it remains an intriguing mystery.