8

2

Nearly a hundred years ago there occurred onthe mountainside below a lonely Rhonddamountain farm a tragedy which for monthsafterwards focused the attention of the outsideworld on the small mining village of Gellidaweland which even today is spoken of in manyRhondda homes as the “Mystery of Tyntila.” The mystery remains unsolved to this day

Tyntila Farm Tyntila Farm is perched high on the steep slope ofPenrhys mountain overlooking the Rhondda Fawr.

The valley below used to be thickly wooded from thebanks of the river to a line well up the mountainside, butin 1862, with industrial development in full motion,houses already sat where trees had been. A remnant ofthe woods still screened the farm from the growingvillage of Gellidawel though.

There were two paths from the farm to the village. Onewas the direct route straight down the mountainside andthrough the woods - a distance of 656 yards.

The other route was more than twice as long, and wasused by wagons. It followed the much gentler slopealong the mountainside to the lane leading from thevalley to Penrhys. Both ways led to the valley road nearthe Star Inn.

The disappearance of Jane LewisIn the mid-afternoon of Sunday, 2nd November1862, Thomas Williams, the Tyntila farmer, setoff with his brother from Penrhys Uchaf to visitBodringallt Farm.

The brothers were visiting the farm, situated further upthe valley, before going to Nebo Chapel for the eveningservice. Maria, Thomas’s wife, stayed behind to lookafter their six children. Three servants also lived at thefarm with the Williams family: 22-year-old Jane Lewis,the niece of Mrs Williams; 26-year-old ThomasEdmunds, and a 15-year-old lad named David Morgan.

Thomas Edmunds and Jane Lewis left later that afternoonfor the same chapel. Jane had promised to meet her

sweetheart (also named Thomas Williams but knownlocally as Tom ‘Screens’) at the evening service. She leftthe farm unaccompanied “shortly before six but justbefore it was dark” according to Mrs Williams, and saidthat Edmunds had left not more than half an hour earlier.

David Morgan did not go to chapel, but played with afriend in one of the farm fields until it was dark.

Thomas Williams returned home, via the longer route,between 8 and 9 o'clock, and told his wife that he hadnot seen Jane at the chapel.

A little later, Jane's sweetheart Tom called at the farm toenquire about Jane. He said that he was worried abouther not having been at the chapel, as it might have meantthat she was “taking up with another sweetheart.”

He had also travelled to the farm on the long route viaPenrhys Lane and went back the same way.

Initially, the farmer and his wife were not unduly worriedabout their niece, because a tea party was being held inthe village and they thought she had probably gone there.

However, they did become anxious later. Having gone tobed at 10pm, Mrs Williams persuaded her husband toget up just after 11pm and search for Jane with a lantern.

The farmer and Edmunds went off together. First theylooked through the outhouses, then went along theshort route to Gellidawel. Just beyond the stile at theend of the first field, 176 yards from the house and 50yards above the point where the path entered the

The Tyntila murderNovember 1862

Tyntila Farm, 1862

3

woods, they found the body of Jane, “lying partiallyacross the footpath about 22 yards from the stile”.

They ran at once to the village to summon help.Someone went for a doctor and returned with MrEvans, assistant to Mr Naunton Davies, surgeon ofCymmer. It was Mr Evans who sent for the constable -PC Richard Wise, stationed at Gellidawel.

PC Wise’s investigationAt the Inquest, PC Wise said:

“She was lying on her right side across thefootpath about 22 yards from the stile at the topof the wood. I found a razor with blood on it 2feet, 7 inches from the body. A brooch untouchedby her blood was 4 feet, 1 inch from the body. Abonnet, ribbon and collar were 5 feet, 6 inchesfrom the body. There was blood on the bonnet andthe ribbon. I noticed that the collar was cut in twoand quite saturated with blood. The string of thebonnet was cut through. I also found a razor caseopen 2 feet from the body and 7 feet, 6 inchesfrom the body on the upper side. No blood was onit. I had a candle and my lamp and examined theplace near where the body lay but failed toperceive any kind of a struggle. I found an imprinton the side of the path close to where the bonnet,ribbon and collar lay and noticed an indication of aperson having been kneeling on one knee. I sawblood and dirt on the right knee of the deceased.The deceased's hair was not at all disarranged.”

At this stage, there is reason to believe that the surgeonentertained the possibility of suicide. He denied this lateron, but whether this was so or not, PC Wise must havefelt that the case was not going to prove a difficult one.

Wise had already succeeded in getting the razoridentified as belonging to Edmunds. It was missing from

the usual place on top of the cupboard at the farm, and itwas almost certain that the razor had been in its properplace that Sunday morning.

This reduced the possible ‘suspects’ to those who couldhave obtained possession of the instrument that day,making it a very short list indeed.

The Post MortemThe Post Mortem was conducted by the localsurgeon Mr Naunton Davies, and introduced apossible motive for both suicide and murder.

Jane had been pregnant for about 10 weeks. In thosedays of Welsh Puritanism, no greater shame could bebrought by any girl on herself, her family or her chapel,than by such undeniable proof of “deadly sin.”

In the absence of any other conclusive evidence, thisfactor would have been a strong pointer towards suicide.However, the possibility of suicide was ruled out by thesurgeon. He was “decidedly of the opinion” that thewounds could not have been self-inflicted, but had beeninflicted with a sharp instrument, such as a razor, andfrom behind.

PC Wise had not waited for the Post Mortem. Within ashort time of leaving the crime scene, he examined everyarticle of clothing belonging to Edmunds and did not finda single trace of blood. Mrs Williams confirmed thatEdmunds had produced all his clothing except a shirtfront. She had a vague idea that Edmunds should haveproduced another jacket as well, but she later admittedthat she was not at all sure about that. There wasevidence to prove that Edmunds had given the missingshirt front to Morgan weeks before.

PC Wise took statements from all at the farm about theirmovements that day. With suicide ruled out and apossible motive for murder established, the enquirycontinued. As far as the weapon was concerned, anyoneat the farm could have taken it, but no one had theopportunity except Tom Screens. There was no evidencethat he had been near the place on Sunday before thecrime though. PC Wise immediately ruled out the farmer,his wife and the boy Morgan from the lost of suspects, asnone of them had a motive or an opportunity. This leftthe farmhand, Edmunds and Tom Screens.

The SuspectsPeople were suspicious of Tom Screens becausehe failed to give a logical explanation as to whyhe took the longer route to and from the farmwhen he was looking for Jane, especially becausehe said he had been in a hurry to find her.

It would have been natural to continue the search alongthe shorter route as he had already covered the other.

The Star Inn around the time of the murder

4

As the girl's sweetheart, he would also be suspectnumber one as far as her condition was concerned.

The police put him at the top of their suspect list, but asthere were many witnesses who proved Tom Screenshad not left the village until after chapel that day, he waseliminated from enquiries. Instead, Edmunds wasarrested and charged with her murder, as he admittedowning the weapon and intimacy with the girl on oneoccasion a month before the crime.

It was accepted that the crime had been committedshortly after the girl had left the farm, at approximately5.45pm. Unfortunately Mrs Williams was vague aboutthe time, putting it as “shortly before six” but definitelysure that it was not dark.

It is probable that Mrs Williams erred on this score.

The service at Nebo, a mile away, started at 6pm thatday. It would certainly have been dark by 5.45pm, so itmust have been nearer to 5.30pm when Jane left thefarm. This would fit in better with Edmund's departurehalf an hour before Jane, as he was almost certainly in thevillage at 5.15pm.

As for the other potential suspects:

Thomas Williams: The farmer left Tyntila at about 3pm,and from that time until he returned after 8pm, he waswith his brother more than half a mile from the scene.

Mrs Williams: No question appears to have arisen of hercomplicity and it seems likely that the children couldprove that she had not left the house. No one else wasthere after Jane left. Tom Screens: Tom may have had amotive and his decision to take the longer route wasconsidered suspicious, but witnesses proved hispresence in the village at the time of the murder.

After tea, at about 5pm, Tom Screens went for a walkalong Pontypridd Road with a friend, then they bothwent to chapel and remained together until 8.00pm.Screens then left his friend to go up to Penrhys Lane tothe farm.

Thomas EdmundsThe case against Edmunds was woefully weak,and it is believed he was arrested not so muchon the evidence against him, but on the lack ofevidence against anyone else.

If the doctors said that it was murder, there must be amurderer, and if no one else could have done it, it musthave been Edmunds. The police must have felt moreand more inclined to doubt the surgeon's opinion as theyprobed each piece of evidence which might haveconvicted their prisoner, only to find that each one failedwhen put to the test.

Ownership of the razor meant little. It was hardlyconceivable that the murderer would leave behind aweapon so easily traceable to himself unless he werepanic stricken, and there was no evidence of panic in hisactions at the time. Edmunds possessed a pistol andammunition; a far more suitable and less risky weaponfor him to use if he intended to commit murder. Thenthere was the absence of bloodstains, which the surgeonsaid the murderer could not have avoided.

The absence of a shirtfront from his wardrobe had alsobeen satisfactorily accounted for. Evidence from KeziahWilliams stated that Edmunds had a scratch on his faceon that Sunday afternoon when he called at her house,and had borrowed a handkerchief to wipe away thedried blood. He said the scratch had been caused by oneof the calves on Sunday afternoon. Morgan, his youngfriend, testified that this was true.

As for motive, there was evidence that far from seekingto deny his relationship with Jane, Edmunds enquiredinto the possibility of obtaining a special licence on thatvery Sunday to marry her the following week.

Edmunds’s alibi was almost as sound as any of theothers. He was with someone in the village just as theafternoon train left Ystrad Station, which would be about5.15pm. According to PC Wise, he was there at least aquarter of an hour before Jane left the farm, if MrsWilliams was right.

According to Keziah Williams, Edmunds called at hercottage at 5.10pm and stayed there for 20 minutesbefore going on to chapel. Before visiting, he had been at“The Star” when the train passed up the valley. The StarInn was 345 yards away from Keziah’s cottage.

Edmunds was certainly at chapel in good time and stayedthroughout the service. The only period unaccountedfor the 5 to 15 minutes between Edmunds leaving TheStar (at 5.15pm) and arriving at Keziah's house between5.20pm and 5.30pm.

It was hardly conceivable that Edmunds could have gone500 yards up a steep hill, commited a murder, andcovered a further 800 yards to Keziah's cottage in thatshort space of time.

The InquestThe police must have respectfully begged leave toquestion the opinion of the surgeon Davies thatthis case was indeed a murder, as Dr Edwardsfrom Cardiff was called to assist on 5th November.

Dr Edwards supported the opinion of his colleague,based on his knowledge and following research in books.However, he confessed under cross-examination that he hadbeen unable to find any case quite analogous to this one.

5

Dr Edwards sought to strengthen his opinion by sayinghe had obtained support by writing to the “celebratedDr Taylor” of London. At the conclusion of the inquest,which lasted five days, the jury astounded both the pressand public by returning a verdict of “Suicide committedunder temporary insanity.”

Scathing attacks were made on the jury by several localpapers in response to this verdict.

One of them said:

“The medical evidence was most clear anddistinct. The only inference from it was that foulplay must have been used, that the injuries werenot caused by the girl but by another. Mr Daviesand Mr Edwards unhesitatingly declared it wasutterly impossible for any person to have inflictedon himself or herself three such mortal cuts aswere observed here. This was fortified by theopinion of the well-known and celebrated DrTaylor, of the faculty in London. Notwithstandingall this, however, 12 of the 14 gentlemenconstituting the jury agreed to differ from thelearned doctors, though all the medical andsurgical evidence, from the days of Aesculapiusdown to their own, might be produced to confirmthe sworn statements of the Cardiff andPontypridd doctors. Yet all was of no avail. Theycould not see and would not be convinced...Wehave often thought but never had more reason tobelieve than now that Welsh Juries must bedifferently constituted from Juries of other parts ofthe British Empire. We have heard a jury inMerioneth return a verdict of sheep stealing in acase of manslaughter, and another Montgomeryjury, in a case of arson, find the accused guilty ofhomocide to the second degree. Now we have thissenseless and unjustifiable finding of the 12jurymen in the Rhondda Valley murder case.”

For 12 weeks after the inquest conclusion wasannounced, letters appeared in the press on this highlycontroversial case. Perhaps the most interesting of themall, are the following from members of the jury.

They reflect the point of view of the majority of the jury,but also provide a good illustration of the fundamentaldifference between a coroner's jury and the commonjury at a trial, with the former expected to apply legalknowledge to their consideration of the case, as well asevidence.

From “A Juror” - 6th December, 1862“Being one of the jury on the inquest on the caseat Ystrad I think it my duty to offer a few remarksin defence against the many and bitter accusations

brought against our verdict by the Star of Gwent. Ihave not the least doubt that Jane Lewiscommitted the awful and horrible deed uponherself. It was proved by the most positive evidencethat the servant man Thomas Edmunds was downon the road in the village when the up-train wentby at 5.09pm. This fact can be attested to by halfthe people in the place while the evidenceproduced before the jury was that the deceasedonly left a little before six. That little was thoughtby the witnesses to be about a quarter of an hour,so that the prisoner was in the village half an hourbefore the deceased left the house, and the manhaving been seen from that time until his return tothe house exonerated the prisoner from anyimplication whatsoever.

“Having shown evidence perfectly exoneratingThomas Edmunds, the prisoner, we can also say thesame thing as to Thomas Williams of Tyntila, thedeceased's uncle, and of Thomas Williams, thedeceased's sweetheart. The evidence clearly showsthat they were not near the house from the timeshe left the house until she was found, so that allwho have been suspected proved to be as innocentas you in Cardiff.

“Now all those who could be thought of having theleast motive, and those that had any chance ofgetting hold of the implement by which the woundsare thought to have been inflicted having beenexonerated, the most natural conclusion is that thedeceased, having easy access to the fatalinstrument and being in the condition she was, notas the papers say no evidence as to despondency, itwas proved in evidence she was crying andcomplaining of feeling unwell and threatened todestroy herself, and if all this and the fact of hernever having been of a very cheerful spirit does notprove despondency, what does?

“Is it not the most natural conclusion that the girlhad determined to put an end to her own life, andhad carried the thought into act in the mostdetermined manner?

“Some readers may say you are going too fast mydear man. What about the doctor's evidence? Wellthat is what I was going to give you, Mr H NDavies of Cymmer was called to examine the bodyon the morning after she was found dead. He didso and took notes I dare say of what he saw afterexamination had been made as minutely aspossible or at least he should have done so, or howcould he know that all was the same when he wentdown there next as he found it the same time.

6

Well, after this examination what did the doctorsay? He told at least a dozen people to myknowledge that the deceased's death had beencaused by her own hand - that is a fact that issubstantiated.

“I believe Dr Davies to be a man of delicatefeelings and further that the odium of thedeceased's miserable end should not darken withsorrow the hearts of her relations, may have hadan effect on so tender a heart as the doctor's, buthowever that may be it is certain that the doctorhas changed his story (I don't say his mind), andsaid it was improbable that the deceased couldhave inflicted such wounds upon herself, which Ipresume to call the greater presumption, and Ithink it impossible for him or any other man to saywhat is possible for a person in such a condition. Ihave heard more than one doctor say that to cutall the soft parts of the throat down to the spinewill not affect power of the arm while blood isrunning from the heart.”

(Signed) A. Juror

From “A Juror” - 13th December, 1862“Concerning the death of Jane Lewis and advertingto the Ystrad Jury, it is curious to note the reactionof the feeling and opinion after some thought anddiscussion on the part of the public in favour of thetruth of the verdict of the wise men of Ystrad, whoit appears were nearly at the time the only wisemen in the country on this subject. As a juror, I amextremely grateful that the subject had been keptfor so long before the public and sifted as it hasbeen done. In the first place the two medical men,Edwards and Davies, were decidedly and of thesame opinion that the three more imperfect cutson the throat of the deceased were each of themmortal, and that after inflicting either the otherscould not have been inflicted by the hand of thedeceased, but now the loud-mouthed science ofone of these gentlemen being as it appears rathera fickle game had brought him right about faceand say that only one of those three cuts wasmortal, only the important cut. So much for theconstancy of medical men.”

The AftermathA few days after the inquest, Edmunds wascommitted to the Assizes. The Grand Jury, on theadvice of the Judge, threw out the bill ofindictment for lack of evidence to be put to thepetty jury.

This ended the story as far as the police wereconcerned, but a Pontypridd journalist, ‘Morien’, appearsto have had the last word four years later.

In an article on what he calls ‘The Dinas Murder’, hewrote:

“The murdered girl was buried on the western sideof Ainon Baptist Chapel, Tonyrefail. A few monthslater, the writer found Tom Williams in lodgings atTonyrefail, within 100 yards of her grave. He waslooked upon as one half broken hearted. He wasstrange in manner in the works, and appeared onthe verge of insanity. He emigrated to some part ofAustralia.”

Now comes a strange story…

Mr Richard Packer, whilst living at Cylch yrHedydd, Treforest, in 1902, made the followingstatement:“A year or two after the Tyntila murder, my fatherand I were residing at a place 20 miles fromBallarat, Australia. One Sunday afternoon, wewere both out in our shirt sleeves, standing outsideour door. We observed, coming along the road, aman behaving strangely. He was picking up stones,and then throwing them at the doors of the housesas he walked along. He stopped opposite to us andsaid, “You are Welshmen.” I replied, "Yes, we are.How come you to think so?" He answered, "Iguessed it by the check of your flannel shirts." Thenhe asked, "From where in Wales?" I replied, "FromLlantrisant, Glamorgan." He then said, "I comefrom the Rhondda Valley. Did you hear of themurder of Jane Lewis of Tyntyla?" I replied in theaffirmative. He then said, "It was I that killed her."We never saw him after nor before, and I have noidea who he was. Tom has never since been heardof.”

The Star Inn as it appears today

7

Notes

South Wales PoliceSouth Wales Police Headquarters

Cowbridge Road, Bridgend CF31 3SU

Email: info@south-wales.pnn.police.ukTelephone: 01656 869291

Visit our website at www.south-wales.police.uk

Designed and Printed by South Wales Police Print Department.