James Cook (Jail)

James Cook was convicted of the manslaughter of Dorothy May Cook 6 and Hilda Cook 18 months in 1906. In 1898 he had also been convicted of the manslaughter of another child, Ethel Grace Cook.

James Cook was a member of the Peculiar People which was a sect.

They all died after becoming ill and not receiving medical attention.

Ethel Cook

On 5 November 1898 James Cook had been convicted of the manslaughter of his child Ethel Cook who died after not receiving medical attention after becoming ill. For that he was discharged with his wife on their recognisances to come up for judgment if called upon.

Dorothy Cook and Hilda Cook

Dorothy Cook died of bronchitis in the beginning of May 1906. At the time the Coroner warned James Cook that if there was a recurrence of his conduct severe trouble would overtake him. However, a few days later Hilda Cook also became ill and died.

The post-mortem on the body of Hilda Cook stated that she had died from pneumonia and bronchitis and concluded that with proper medical attention there was a reasonable prospect of the her recovery.

The doctor said that he found that the lower lobes of both her lungs were solid from pneumonia, and that the bronchial tubes of both lungs were full of mucous and the upper lobes of the lung showed numerous airless patches in consequence of the collapse of the lung substance. He also said that the lymph glands in the chest and the neck were swollen and her mouth and throat were covered by a greyish stinking, smeary secretion. He said he came to the conclusion that the cause of death was pneumonia and bronchitis and was of the opinion that the pneumonia could have been relieved by medical attendance and her life prolonged, and that there was a reasonable prospect of her recovery.

In court James Cook said 'That is the foundation of my Faith, my lord, and by that I stand or fall. I have proved God for myself. I was afflicted for five months with muscular rheumatism, so that I could not move hand or foot, but I and my brethren pleaded earnestly with the Lord according to His Book, and God has answered our prayers, and that today is the foundation of my Faith, and I am glad to say today that I am a believer in the Book that you now ask me to kiss. That is my Rule and Guide, and I feel it a great honour, my lord, to attend and stand before you to declare such a truth. I have a clear conscience before God and man that I have really done my best to do my duty to my wife and to my children. For 20 years I have belonged to these people, and God has done some wonderful things on their behalf through the prayers of his people. He has told us to lay on hands in the name of the Lord. He has told us to call elders, and that I have done, and had He told me to call a doctor I should have called one, for I today am obedient to that Word, and it is on that, Word I stand. If I have broken the law I hope you will be merciful, as God is merciful. He is merciful, else I should not have been here, and that is all I have to say.'.

When he was found guilty of the manslaughter of Dorothy Cook and Hilda Cook the judge said 'On November 5, 1898, in this Court, when both he and his wife were together indicted for the manslaughter of Ethel Grace Cook. The nature of the charge was the same as that which was laid against the prisoner today, which the jury by their verdict had found to be true. Prisoner on that occasion put forward exactly the same justification which he had attempted to put forward on this occasion. He was found guilty, but taking into consideration the circumstances of the case he discharged prisoner and his wife on their recognisances to come up for judgment if called upon. On that occasion, therefore, prisoner received no punishment at all, but received a warning which he no doubt hoped at that time he would take into consideration and amend his way by availing himself of the assistance which science has put reach in order to prevent misfortunes such as that which overtook his children in the case now before him. Prisoner had not taken that warning, but had obstinately persisted in the course which he mistakenly thought was the right course. He could not, therefore, now, notwithstanding the recommendation of the jury, again allow the prisoner to escape the punishment which in his opinion he merited, but he must go to prison for nine calendar months.'