PAST CRIMESThe magistrates were informed straight away and began an investigation.
Suspicion fell upon Mr Chennel’s son, also George, who was arrested at his
home a little distance away on suspicion of being involved in the crime. He
claimed to have been drinking in a nearby public house that night, although he
had disappeared for a short period between nine and ten o’clock. He was said
to have been a dissolute character whose habits had greatly distressed his
father. The coroner’s inquest the next day found that the murders had been
committed by‘a person or persons unknown’.
Suspicion also began to fall on a man called Chalcraft, who had been
employed by the elder Mr Chennel as a carrier, was a known associate of the
younger Mr Chennel, and who also had a bad reputation. The magistrates
worked to put together sufficient evidence to arraign Chalcraft and the son, until
eventually they were brought to trial in 1818 at Guildford Assizes. The two men
were charged with both murders, their motive being the not inconsiderable
property owned by Mr Chennel senior. The evidence against Chalcraft rested on
the fact that, on going to Mr Chennel’s house the morning after the murder as
would be usual, he apparently failed to notice the dead housekeeper, although he
would have had to step over her body, and that he told the neighbours that Mr
Chennel was murdered upstairs before his body was found. A search of the
younger Chennel’s goods found two onepound banknotes, one with bloodstains
on it. The son claimed they had been a gift from his father the previous morning,
but witness said that in the evening of the same day he was unable to pay a bill
of a few pennies. However, after ten o’clock in the evening he went back into the
pub and spent profusely. Witnesses had seen both men in the street together at
half past nine, despite their claims that they had not seen each other that evening.
Much further evidence was produced, including bloodspots on clothing, remarks
made by the accused, their characters, their finances and their associates.
The trial was lengthy–a very full account of it can be found in the pages of
the Newgate Calendar. The jury brought in a unanimous verdict of guilty,
although both men continued to protest their innocence; Chennel in particular
was noted for his apparent indifference towards the crime and to the sentence.
On the day of execution, they were taken from Guildford to Godalming,
through immense crowds who had gathered along the roads, and hanged on a
gallows set up in a field north of the town. After an hour, their bodies were cut
down and handed to two surgeons for dissection. The procession set off
through Godalming and stopped at the house of the victims, where the bodies
of the hanged men were brought inside. The surgeons opened the bodies for
dissection there, in the kitchen, on the spot where the housekeeper’s corpse
had been found.‘Thousands’of people rushed in to see the event. Later,