Death at the Priory: Love, Sex, and Murder in Victorian England

by James Ruddick

In 1875 the beautiful widow Florence Ricardo married the handsome and successful young attorney Charles Bravo, hoping to escape the scandals of her past. But Bravo proved to be a brutal and conniving man, and the marriage was far from happy. Then one night he suddenly collapsed, and three days later died an agonizing death. His doctors immediately determined that he had been poisoned. The graphic and sensational details of the case would capture the public imagination of Victorian England as the investigation dominated the press for weeks, and the list of suspects grew to include Florence, her secret lover the eminent doctor James Gully, her longtime companion the housekeeper Mrs. Cox, and the recently dismissed stableman George Griffiths. But ultimately no murderer could be determined, and despite the efforts of numerous historians, criminologists, and other writers since (including Agatha Christie), the case has never been definitively solved. Now James Ruddick retells this gripping story of love, greed, brutality, and betrayal among the elite -- offering an intimate portrait of Victorian culture and of one woman's struggle to live in this repressive society, while unmasking the true murderer for the first time. Simultaneously a murder mystery, colorful social history, and modern-day detective tale, Death at the Priory is a thrilling read and a window into a fascinating time. "An impressively researched retelling ... Death at the Priory reads as a historical intervention, crime novel, and sensational docudrama." -- Zarena Aslami, Chicago Tribune "A suspenseful and stimulating read." -- Merle Rubin, Los Angeles Times "Enjoyable; Ruddick has done much admirable sleuthing." -- Paul Collins, The New York Times Book Review

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, History, Crime, Mystery, Historical, Victorian

224 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2001

Reviews

[Beverly · Rating 4 out of 5]

At about 200 pages this a quick read and is written well. If you like true crime, closed -door mysteries, especially ones set in Victorian England that have never been solved then this is for you. The writer believes he has solved it and I believe it too. He did a tremendous amount of research and traveled all over the world to get it. A tenacious and dogged exploration into, not just the murder, but the subservient role of women in a society that comp!etely bound women to their husbands and fathers, if they were violent, cruel men you really had no escape.

[Hannah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rating Clarification: 4.5 Stars

I haven't been this invigorated by a good ole "husband behaving badly" book since I read Wedlock The True Story of the Disastrous Marriage and Remarkable Divorce of Mary Eleanor Bowes, Countess of Strathmore. If Andrew Stoney was the crowned winner for the "Mr. Shitty Husband of the 18th Century" contest for his sociopathic antics documented in "Wedlock", then the heir apparent for the 19th century must surely pass to Charles Bravo (of this book). Fortunately for Florence his wife, but unfortunately for his digestive tract, Mr. Bravo wasn't able to enjoy the fruits of his reign of terror for very long, as said digestive tract was being burned up from the effects of antimony poisoning. Forgive me for being unsympathetic to his plight, but I've read the book and he doesn't deserve it, IMO.

Ruddick has peened an engrossing true tale of illicit sexual shenanigans with a geriatric lover, abortion, illegal sexual perversions, alcohol abuse, spousal abuse, a grisly poisoning, and an unsolved murder. This book has it all in spades. No wonder Victorian England was riveted - I was too, 150+ years later.

***
On a side note, I picked up this book from the library not realizing it was about the Charles Bravo poisoning. Strangely enough, I had recently Netflixed "A Most Mysterious Murder" (a 5-part TV series produced by Julian Fellowes of "Downton Abbey" fame). Excellent production, and the part of Bravo was played magnificantly by Michael Fassbender. Interestingly enough, Fellowes take on who the murderer differed from writer Ruddick, but I think both men had convincing and compelling evidence that would point to either of their suspects. The downside to all the speculation is that we will probably never know the truth. Like Jack the Ripper, this cold case remains unsolved, but fascinating even into the 21st century.

[Shovelmonkey1 · Rating 3 out of 5]

At first glance you might pick this up and think "ooh some kind of slightly sordid Nun/Vicar love tryst in buttoned up Victorian England which ultimately ends in murder most horrid."

Er, nope sorry you're wrong. This is the coldest of all the Cold Case files well, unless you count those people on National Geographic who are always trying to figure out if certain Egyptian Mummies were murdered and or were related to Tutankhamun but you should probably just ignore those because Egyptology is the most made up of all the "ologies" anyway.

Ruddick revisits the evidence for an unsolved British 19th century murder case. General man-about-town and out and out cad and bounderm Charles Bravo meets an untimely end but who and what was behind the dastardly deed? Personally I think the guy was a bit of shit-bag so I was not unduly disturbed by his untimely demise. His crimes were numerous; abuser, sex pest, gold-digger and bully. So hands up anyone who'd miss this person? No-one? Hmm thought not.

Prime suspect is the missus, Florence, who suffered at his hands up until the time of his death but ultimately was flakier than a caramel wafer so probably would not have sufficient lady balls to stand up and do the deed. Also in the frame are disgruntled home help, Mrs Cox, the spurned OAP lover of wife Florence, one Dr Gully and also the conveniently drunken stable boy who was sacked and returned to the house after one too many sherries to rave and shout and generally make himself look a likely suspect by announcing that he'd get even with Charles Bravo somehow. If this wasn't based on real life events, it'd sound hokier than the set up for a bodice ripping historical fiction but it has all been researched and the facts are presented. Indeed, the fact still remains that Mr Bravo is deceased (as are the rest of the cast now but we can only assume that they went of natural causes).

Not mind blowing but it could probably still teach the writers of CSI a thing or two, if only to stop me shouting "fake science" at the TV during every lab scene.

[Nina · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a must for anyone who enjoys true crime and period books. It is set in the Victorian era, which makes it even more scandalous considering how stringent the rules of decorum were back then. I picked this book up randomly when I was going through a true crime reading phase. I could not put it down! How interesting it is to peek into the lives of this mysterious and scandalous murder from over 100 years ago. Amazing that this mystery is still kept alive. It is further eery by the fact of claims that the ghost of Charles Bravo still haunts the Priory house. It was also nice that the author included pictures of the house and couple and even a detailed floorplan to help understand his theory of the murder. I definitely recommend!

[Elena · Rating 4 out of 5]

Borrowed from Open Library.

In Death at the Priory, James Ruddick presents his theory about what happened to Charles Bravo, who was poisoned and whose murderer was never found. The book is divided into two parts: in the first, the author recounts the events which lead to Bravo's death, while in the second he considers different solutions and suspects of the crime and finally explains what he believes truly happened.

I had heard about this case before but I wasn't very familiar with it, so I found Ruddick's research complete and interesting. The second part was even more compelling. It is true, as some readers have noted, that Ruddick is a little too assertive - he presents his theory as the absolute and uncertain truth, and his tone can be irritating sometimes. However, he makes a valid point and I think his reconstruction is very plausible. It really seems that Florence is the most likely culprit, and Mrs. Cox's strange behaviours could have been so because she was loyal to her mistress and tried to help her. Of course, the opposite could also be true, that Mrs. Cox killed Bravo because he was cruel to her mistress, but Florence's motive was bigger. Anyway, I think it likely that both women knew what had really happened and covered for each other.

A short but compelling read, definitely worth a read.

[Fishface · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is yet another book on the Balham Mystery, but it's an unusually good, readable one. The author examines all the evidence in the Bravo case -- including a great deal of information not covered at the inquest -- and interprets it in a pretty convincing way, with great compassion for not only the victim, but the suspects. This remains true even even when he is pointing the finger at one of them and saying "murderer!" The writing is very good and keeps you turning the pages -- not usually a feature of books about Victorian murder cases. I didn't come away 100% convinced, but the author really made me think.

[Nancy Oakes · Rating 4 out of 5]

To be very honest, I first came across Florence Bravo, wife of murdered Charles Bravo, in the book by Mary S. Hartman called Victorian Murderesses so I had no idea what this book was going to be about before I picked it up and started reading. I have this thing about British murder cases past and present, so this one was right up my alley, offering an inside look into a Victorian home, family & society. It seems that Mr. Charles Bravo was poisoned in a most grueling and painful way at his home and while there were more than a few people with a motive to off the guy, no one was ever arrested in connection with the case. So enter James Ruddick, journalist and author, who decides to tackle Bravo's murder by sifting through the court records (at the inquest), the sources from Scotland Yard, going to the actual scene of the crime, and following leads that he gets in the process. If you consider yourself to be an armchair detective (like me) you will certainly enjoy the trip through the book. I didn't want to stop reading once I finished it.

It ssems that Florence Bravo had married her husband Charles not out of love, but in order to restore her reputation in society. Florence had been married earlier to a Captain Ricardo, who beat her and treated her terribly. I mention this because Florence left home to go back to her family home, and eventually started the separation process. Rather than go back home, her parents convinced her to go spend some time at Malvern, in a sanitarium where hydrotherapy was all the rage, under the guidance of one Dr. Gully, who was physician to the likes of Disraeli and Charles Darwin. He was much older than Florence, but the two fell in love and started a love affair. Well, it just so happens that Florence's husband dies; she and Gully are still going strong and they get caught doing the do while guests of a friend. Word gets out - Gully is a married man and Florence is behaving in ways that women shouldn't. So Florence becomes a social pariah -- so when her companion, the very bizarre Mrs. Cox, sets her up with Charles Bravo. Florence sees a way out of her situation and marries him. But all is not happy in the Bravo household: Charles wants to take over the household, Florence's fortune left to her by her former husband, and Florence herself. Then Charles dies, but no one is ever charged with his murder.

Ruddick sets out to solve the question of who offed Charles & why. It turns out that there are several members of the household with motives to kill Charles along with Dr. Gully, Florence's ex-lover. Ruddick sifts through inquest testimony, visits the scene of the crime, interviews living descendants and works out a solution to the murder which I must say I found incredibly plausible and went along with what I thought the solution was myself. I won't give it away, but if you read very carefully it leaps out at you.

I'd definitely recommend this book to people who enjoy a good murder mystery and to people who enjoy Victorian crime and history. It is well worth every second you put into it.

[Amy H. Sturgis · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a study of the unsolved murder (by poisoning with antimony) of Charles Bravo (1845-1876), a young British barrister. The first half of the book recounts the story of Bravo's wife, her somewhat scandalous life before their marriage, and Bravo's own (mis)behavior until his death. The second half follows the author's new research and attempt to solve the murder (which is, for the most part, largely convincing). Ruddick should be applauded for the three-dimensional, sympathetic, and insightful way in which he draws the characters -- especially the women in their limited spheres of legal power and social self-determination at the time, and Florence Bravo's former lover, Dr. James Gully, a particularly tragic figure. While I would have appreciated more information about the press reports of Bravo's death and the following murder trial, this study on the whole was most informative and fascinating. Anyone interested in the time period and/or the history of forensics, law, and crime should consider this a recommended read.

[Karyl · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting look at an unsolved murder mystery in Victorian England. Florence Bravo, after suffering through an abusive first marriage, finds herself married to yet another abuser who insisted on forcing himself on her to produce an heir, even though she had miscarried two babies in a short span of time. But within five months of their wedding day, Charles Bravo collapsed and dies as a result of antimony poisoning. Who has administered the final dose? Several people close to Bravo have the motive, but it was never determined at the time who was responsible. The author looks at all the evidence gathered from the initial inquiry, and then discovers new information that points the finger to only one person, though it's not quite as simple as it may seem. The book reads more like a novel, which made it a very quick and easy read. It was fascinating to peek into the lives of the Victorian elite and to see why the goings-on behind closed doors was so shocking.

[Hanna (lapetiteboleyn) · Rating 3 out of 5]

The mystery is an old one, and Ruddick's retelling is compelling and his solution is convincing. However, he does also have a very real habit of repeating himself (a couple of quotes were used three separate times throughout the book. And those were just the ones I was keeping track of) and his claims of having solved the case are just that - claims.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

In December of 1875, the beautiful widow Florence Ricardo married a handsome and influential young attorney named Charles Bravo. The dissolution of Florence's first marriage as well as the revelation of her affair with prominent doctor James Gully, had led to her becoming a social pariah. However, her marriage to Charles Bravo was Florence's way of escaping the scandals of her past; and she fervently hoped that such a marriage would reopen certain doors which had formerly been closed to her.

As the newlyweds settled into the Priory, Florence's posh mansion outside London, the couple seemed destined to live a charmed life together. But the marriage was far from happy, as Charles proved to be a brutal, vindictive and conniving man. He abused and tormented his wife and antagonized her servants, ultimately dismissing her housekeeper and loyal companion, Mrs. Cox, despite her years of service.

Then one night while preparing for bed, Charles Bravo suddenly collapsed. Although the greatest English physicians of the era - including the royal physician, Sir William Gull - were summoned to his bedside, they ultimately could do nothing to help him, and three days later Charles died an agonizing death. The doctors were unanimous in their diagnosis of the cause of his death: Charles Bravo had been poisoned.

The graphic and sensational details of the case would eventually capture the public imagination of Victorian England as the investigation dominated the press for weeks, and the list of suspects soon grew to include Florence; her former secret lover, the eminent doctor James Gully; her longtime companion and former housekeeper Mrs. Cox; and a recently dismissed stableman named George Griffiths.

Although press coverage of that era relied heavily on speculation surrounding the details of the case, the subsequent murder investigation was never resolved. No actual motive was ever discovered, and ultimately no murderer could be determined. And despite the efforts of numerous historians, criminologists, and many other esteemed writers since (including Agatha Christie), the case has remained unsolved for over a century.

Now James Ruddick retells this gripping story of love, greed, brutality and betrayal among the elite, offering an intimate portrait of Victorian culture and of one woman's struggle to live in this repressive society. Simultaneously a murder mystery, a colorful social history, and a modern-day detective tale, Death at the Priory is a thrilling read and a window into a fascinating time. As Agatha Christie once claimed: "One of the most mysterious poisoning cases ever recorded."

I really enjoyed reading this book - I found it to be meticulously researched; clearly and precisely written, and I appreciated that James Ruddick's writing was not in any way dry or technical - he had an easy and engaging way of stating the facts of the case. I would be delighted to learn that James Ruddick has written much more, because I thoroughly enjoy his economical writing style. I knew of the Charles Bravo Murder already, as I had read Elizabeth Jenkins' wonderful book, Dr. Gully's Story several years ago.

I give Death at the Priory: Sex, Love, and Murder in Victorian England by James Ruddick a resounding A+! by James Ruddick a resounding A+!

[Cleopatra Pullen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poison was a familiar murder weapon in Victorian England with many a tale abounding of arsenic used to gain a fortune, do away with a rival or an inconvenient spouse.

In this book James Ruddick believes he has uncovered the real truth of the perpetrator of Charles Bravo’s death by poison in 1876. Charles Bravo was a rich man who suffered an agonising death spread over three days. Poison was the culprit and the inquest into his death lasted a lengthy five weeks with journalists sending stories to all corners of England’s vast empire, but no-one was ever convicted of his murder, the problem was there were just too many suspects.

This is a fascinating portrait of the time as well as being a real life murder mystery. Ruddick begins by detailing the facts as they were presented to the inquest; scandalous evidence that included adultery and abortion. Reading between the lines there was also the more prosaic truth of the hardships of a Victorian woman, even if she was rich which Florence Draco was. Her companion Mrs Fox was not, and worse she had three young sons to support. Both women could be considered victims of circumstance and both were suspected, but never charged with, Charles Draco’s murder.

In the second part of the book Ruddick examines the evidence and details his efforts to trace the descendants of all the main parties in an attempt to flush out the truth. Does he succeed? Well some of the discrepancies highlighted in the book I had spotted by reading the evidence in the first part so the sceptical part of me is sure that others had probably spotted these before he did. I’m not entirely convinced about some of the ‘evidence’ that the families provided although one crucial piece does shed a different light on the matter. On balance I agreed with the author in his assessment of the probable perpetrator of the crime.

This was well-written and informative read and was an interesting read which included a fascinating portrait of Victorian Britain.

[Katie Bee · Rating 2 out of 5]

So there are two elements at play in this book: the celebrated Balham Mystery, and Ruddick's belief that he alone has miraculously solved what everyone else has been too dunderheaded to see all along.

Ruddick does a pretty good job of presenting the background and progression of the case in the first half of the book (although his attitude toward Bravo's horrific treatment of Florence is a bit too cavalier). The second half is less successful. Ruddick presents a plausible theory, sure, but in the process of doing so he lauds or ridicules various pieces of evidence based on whether they 'feel' right to him (and coincidentally support his theory), does a heckuva lot of surmising and assuming, and pompously claims his theory is both novel and incontrovertible. Let me tell you, this gets old pretty fast.

While his theory is probably the most likely one, it's certainly not an incontrovertible solution, like he claims. (For one thing, just because the obvious motive for a person is called into question, that doesn't mean they might not have had a different one!) And to top it all off, I learn from other reviews that his theory isn't even new, but has been proposed by other people before! (Unsurprisingly, since it's the common-sense solution.) Argh.

The book isn't badly written (apart from the trivializing way Ruddick treated the rape and domestic violence Florence suffered), and Ruddick's theory is plausible. Just...be prepared for the gratingly self-congratulatory tone and dubiously solid claims.

[Terry · Rating 4 out of 5]

The fatal poisoning of Charles Bravo in 1876 remains a great, unsolved mystery. As James Ruddick shows in this engrossing account, there was no shortage of suspects. Among them were Bravo's wife, Florence, who married the young barrister in part to erase the taint of a recent sexual scandal; Jane Cox, a servant caught spinning a web of lies about what happened the night Bravo died; and James Gully, an esteemed doctor who was also once Florence's lover. Death at the Priory is full of compelling personalities and titillating revelations about what happened behind the closed doors of Victorian England. The author discovered the new evidence which enabled him to expose Charles Bravo's murderer. The author ultimately does not point his finger in a surprising direction, though he has added substantial details to what's known about the case. Fans of true-crime literature will enjoy this book, especially if they're attracted to its historical setting.

[Pat · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was quite a sensational murder in the late 1800s and no one was ever convicted of the murder though there was a lot of suspicion of both the wife, her ex-lover and her companion. This is also an example of a woman (the wife) being pilloried by Victorian society because she lived a non-conventional life (not quite a feminist, but definitely a free spirit in regard to her relationships) that everyone found out about as a result of the murder. The author recreates the murder scene as best he can from evidence at the coroner's inquest as well as from Soctland Yard records. Then he analyzes the data and proposes a murderer based on other information that he turns up from living relations of the people in question. It's plausible, but I'm not totally sure I'm in agreement. I think there are still some holes.

[Chana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well- researched, well written and more entertaining than a game of Clue! On April 18, 1876 someone gave James Bravo a fatal dose of antimony. Was it the housekeeper, the stableman, the wife, the wife's ex-lover, or Colonel Mustard with the candlestick in the billiards room? Or perhaps even Charles himself? The case is true, the characters tragic, the coincidences fabulous. I mean, "Bravo, Gully!"? The mind just boggles. A recommended read.

[Tyler · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great slice of Victorian England focused on what is like to be a woman during the time. Kind of amazing protagonist and story. Agatha Christie couldn't figure it out? That actually doesn't surprise me.

[clocloabricot · Rating 3 out of 5]

Maybe I’m not used to reading non fiction books but the beginning was very romanticized and then it felt like an unacademic research paper with a lot of repetitions, even though the investigation is well led, I felt like the author kept reusing the same ideas and facts over and over, which made me eager to finish this book to be done with it for good 😩

[Lesley Grundy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Favourite topic, you can't beat a bit of true crime!

[April Andruszko · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read but in the end I found the tone a little irritating. Too many reminders that all previous attempts to solve the mystery had failed or were wrong.

[Leia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really well researched! I enjoyed reading the authors thoughts on what happened, and I agree with the conclusion he arrived at.

[Haley Hughes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vibed with every minute of this

[David Carniglia · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting story for the Victorian true crime genre. Florence Campbell had two disastrous marriages; her first husband Alexander Ricardo, an alcoholic, was abusive and neglectful. The second one, Charles Bravo, was arguably even worse. Both died while married to Florence. She was separated from Ricardo when he died in 1871; he basically drank himself to death. Bravo, however, was poisoned under mysterious circumstances in 1876.

More or less in between marriages Dr. Gully became Florence's lover; he had a difficult marriage himself--his elderly wife was confined in an asylum. Florence, at least, was only 'fooling around' for a few months before Ricardo died; Gully remained married the entire time of his involvement with Florence.

He and Florence, at least, were simpatico. Apparently a rather charismatic figure, he had treated Florence for what was undoubtedly depression when she fled Ricardo. Owing to the arcane laws of the time, Gully was able to not only release her from his care, but in effect 'adopt' her, even though she was an adult. So, they had a wide open door to an affair, which was mostly good times for them.

Her pregnancy, and his botched abortion of it, not only meant the end of their affair, but led to subsequent miscarriages. Her extremely devoted lady-companion Jane Cox, a sort of hired wing-man, if I'm deducing Victorian domestic service roles correctly enough, introduced Florence to her late husband's former employer's family, the Bravo's, specifically her contemporary, Charles Bravo.

Jane, by all accounts here, was a very capable, smart person, but was completely wrong in reading Bravo's character. In short, he was a jerk. And though his family had a huge business empire, there were money problems; he sized her up as an attractive piggy-bank. Anyway, having been doubly disgraced already by Ricardo's disgusting behavior, not to mention the revelation of her affair with her former doctor, she had no choice, given the boxed-up mores of the time, but to agree to marry Bravo, if she were to maintain her status as an upper-class woman.

Bravo quickly showed his true colors--haughty, arrogant, dismissive--and that just to the servants. To Florence he was plainly abusive: physically, sexually, and emotionally. Furthermore, he attempted, not completely successfully, to gain control of Florence's fortune (she'd been lucky enough that Ricardo still had considerable wealth, and that he didn't change his will). Even though he had some respect for Jane, as she'd brought Florence to him, he was deeply jealous of their close friendship.

So, what about Bravo's poisoning? It's amazing, that in the space of a few months from New Year's 1876 to Eastertime, Florence had already suffered a lifetime of abuse from Bravo, not to mention two miscarriages. Bravo, meanwhile, had a mysterious, sudden illness--which took care of itself--but it seemed very much like a foreshadowing to the massive poisoning that killed him not long after. It's hardly possible to think of anything more painful than having your intestines, as well just about all your internal organs, burn and shred themselves away.

So, as Ruddick details with scrupulous care, there were five possible suspects who could've given him the more-than-lethal dose of antimony that killed him so cruelly. Griffiths, the coachman Bravo had recently fired, certainly had motive: he was heard by an innkeeper making direct death threats against Bravo--which could nonetheless be dismissed as drunk talk. He also not only knew about the properties and dosage strengths of a antimony, he'd actually bought the stuff. But that was part of his job, which entailed caring for the horses, for which the poison had a legitimate medicinal use. The most important fact in his favor, though, is that he was in another county since being 'given the sack' around Christmas, 1875.

Gully is another convenient suspect. After all, Bravo had, to all intents and purposes, taken Florence away from him. Her affair with Gully was done with by the time Bravo showed up in earnest; Gully was discrete and wise enough to make himself scarce, even though he lived very near her place, the Priory. In any case, his reputation had already suffered once his affair with Florence was exposed, literally, when a guest walked in on them. Besides these facts, Gully never actually met Bravo; it seems impossible he would conspire to kill someone he had heard bad news about, but didn't even know.

So that leaves Florence and Jane. This is the duo that Ruddick claims to have conspired in the murder of Charles Bravo. "I began the biggest historical investigation of the case ever conducted--an investigation that was to reveal the true story of what had really happened to Charles Bravo." (p.3) I've no doubt, given the author's deep and persistent research of the case, both in scholarly and journalistic methodology, that the first part of his statement is true.

But I would rather say, regarding the conclusion that he mentions in the latter part of this statement, that he reveals 'a' story of what 'might have happened' to Bravo, but not necessarily the definitive, open-and-shut case that he claims. Again, I can't argue with the incredible effort that Ruddick undertook in writing Death at the Priory. And it's a well-written, very entertaining work.

Back to Jane. Ruddick documents that since 1874, two years before Bravo's death, she knew that her maternalistic Aunt Margaret, who was already ill, was going to leave Jane her Jamaican estate. In the event, Margaret died in 1879, instantly setting up Jane and her family in comfortable circumstances. Therefore, argues Ruddick, Jane, despite facing dismissal by Bravo, could count on her inheritance to sustain her. In other words, had Bravo lived, Jane would have to rustle up another position immediately. So, as with Griffiths, naturally she would resent the hassle that entailed.

Jane's problem, however, was that she had no idea how long Margaret would live. As it happened, it took five years (1874-1879) from the time she knew of the inheritance until she came into it. After Bravo's death, Florence couldn't afford to keep her anyway, so Jane had to get by for three more years. Suppose Margaret had lived another five or ten years? Every year that went by would be like a fuse burning until she was at the mercy of other relations.

I'm not saying that she would've been over the edge of despair to contemplate committing, or conspiring to commit murder in 1876. In fact, it's incredible to think that she would've had anything to gain by doing so; she would still be out of a job, not to mention the fact that she'd have to dodge a police investigation. Actually, she did dodge that. Not without some speed bumps, as the author points out. One of the weirdest discrepancies in the evidence is that Mary Anne, coming from the ground floor, had to rouse both Jane and Florence, when Bravo was calling out not far from their door.

As Ruddick notes, Florence was too out of it to notice anyway, but apparently Jane was awake. What I do find a bit arbitrary is how Bravo's alleged 'confession' (that he poisoned himself) was an out-and-out lie. Since, as the author's intrepid research made a call at the still-intact Priory, why didn't he photograph Bravo's room, instead of providing a drawing? Sure, maybe that wasn't possible; and it's a very good drawing.

I figure, based on a typical door-frame width (in the U.S.) of c.30," that the room was about 9' wide--and let's say 12' long. Taking the drawing's scale as fairly accurate, it's a very small room. But who is to say that two people, on the far side of the bed, facing the window--which I believe is where Bravo and Jane were when he allegedly whispered to her--could be heard by another (Mary Anne) who was near the door on the other side of the bed?

The whole point of whispering is to exclude someone nearby. Bravo could have told Jane something without Mary Ann hearing. Ok, so much for that possible (non?) incident. Florence, on the other hand, once she had come around, acted firmly and decisively. She was the one who wanted a doctor there right away; as it happened, the local doctor immediately made the correct diagnosis.

Ruddick talks a lot about antimony, laudanum, and other substances that were used for various purposes, some of which were ingenious. To induce vomiting as a method of curbing one's desire to drink was harsh, but obviously effective. I think the author speculates though when he says that "(T)here can be no question, however, that Florence had received advice from her female relatives about method of controlling Alexander's (Ricardo) drinking" (p. 157). He goes to state that she "begin to slip Alexander small doses of antimony" for that purpose. And, regarding Bravo "(P)otassium antimony tartrate had Florence's fingerprints all over it" (p. 157).

Because Florence knew that the poison was used on animals, and she knew that it was on-hand in the stables, means only just that. If she had been suspected of poisoning her first husband, then that lets the horses out of the barn, so to speak. But Ricardo died when they were separated. Bravo didn't drink heavily; his problem was his nasty habit of forcing sex on her. If that's what she was hoping to stop, wouldn't it make more sense to spike his water with laudanum? It suits her purpose to make him drowsy, not kill him.

If we take the author's statements about Florence's knowledge of antimony at face value, then she should've known how much was needed to kill a human. In fact it was enough to kill ten people; and that much was just in what Bravo drank. The amount used was absurdly excessive. That suggests to me that whoever laced the water with antimony didn't know much about it.

The only other suspect is Bravo himself. I completely agree with the author that Charles Bravo was hardly the type to kill himself. I do think it was weird, as Ruddick points out, that in the miserable hours left to Bravo between the poisoning and his death, he didn't say one thing, not one clue or hint, about who was killing him. He didn't even ask who might've done it. My only explanation touches on guilt. Maybe he did realize what a jerk he'd been to his wife, so he wasn't altogether surprised at what had happened to him.

He wasn't so repentant that he would take his own life, but, having been poisoned, perhaps he knew why. That doesn't help explain why he wouldn't give up Florence; maybe he thought it would be impossible to prove that anyway. Which it was.

I did enjoy this book, despite my quibbles with it. I can't resist one other argument: part of Ruddick's narrative of Ricardo concerns his comment (p. 11) on the Crimean War: "(I)t was barely nine years (1856-1864) since Britain had been beaten back in one of the worst military conflicts of the century...casualties had been high; the Light Brigade had been wiped out...at Balaclava."

Correct in so far as the Light Brigade was effectively destroyed; very correct that Crimea was second only to the American Civil War (1861-1865) for deaths and overall casualties in warfare for the period from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to World War I (1815-1914).

But the jist of his statement, that Britain was "beaten" in the Crimean War, is not at all accurate. The Allies (Britain, France, Turkey, and Sardinia) landed in the Crimea in 1854. Battling disease and weather as much as the Russian enemy, the Allies eventually took the strategic fortress of Sebastopol, ending the war. The Russians were the ones to have been "beaten." True, they took what they wanted from the Turks twenty years later.

It could be said that no one 'won' anything. It was a poorly conceived war, and settled nothing. Given hundreds of thousands of casualties, though, the five hundred or so unfortunate troopers of the Light Brigade who were killed would barely be a footnote to the war had the account of that engagement not caught the attention of Tennyson.

I had a lot to comment on because there's a lot of history covered in this book. I recommend Death at the Priory to those with an interest in Victorian-era true crime. See who looks the most guilty, I sure don't know.

[Taron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating! Not only the true crime element but insights into life in Victorian London. Especially as it all happened in my neighbourhood. (It is rather a sad story though.)

[Helen Sews-Knits · Rating 2 out of 5]

Red cover with painting of Florence in front. Teeny tiny text for ants - 1 star for that on a rather mediocre drawn out short story.

[Eavan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I truly hate myself for loving this book so much. I don’t know why I do. I think this should be the blueprint for all historical crime retellings: sober, straightforward, containing new research done by the author, and with just enough speculation as to who they think did it. I was stupidly immersed in this terrible marriage and hellish death.

[Bill reilly · Rating 4 out of 5]

This fairytale begins with the marriage of the headstrong Florence Campbell to a career military man, Alexander Ricardo. Flo convinced Al to give up his uniform and stay at home for a life of gentility. Boredom with his wife’s itinerary caused Ricardo to drink excessively and smack his wife around a bit. This was 1868, when wives were considered property of their husbands. She left Al to live to live at a health resort run by a Dr. James Gully. Although in his 60’s, the two began an affair. Alex drank himself to death and left $40,000 pounds to Florence. She bought an estate, the Priory, and staffed it with 14 servants, including a lady-companion, a spinster named Jane Cannon Cox. Flo and the doc were caught in bed together and she became a scarlet woman. Dr. Gully performed an abortion after impregnating his lady. Florence made her next mistake by marrying Charles Bravo. The wedded bliss lasted for a month until Charley decided that he was in charge of the Priory. He demanded that she cut some of the staff to save money. She refused and all hell broke loose. A few weeks later, Charles began vomiting in his bedroom and then collapsed to the floor. A doctor was summoned, followed by three more physicians. They diagnosed poison as the problem. Charles had rubbed laudanum on his gums for a toothache, but something else was the culprit. Bravo bought the farm four days later. A pathologist found a massive dose of antinomy in the dead man. The caustic metal oxide burns through the digestive system, which results in excruciating pain. An inquest was held with the top three suspects. Jane Cox was about to be sacked by Bravo. Florence was complaining about both physical and emotional abuse and Dr. Gully was a spurned and jealous lover. Ruddick played detective and gave reasons for each suspects guilt or innocence. He narrowed it down to Mrs. Cox and Florence and he gives supporting evidence for his conclusion. We will never know for sure what happened over one hundred years ago in jolly old England, but Death at the Priory makes for a good read.

[Kate · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first half of the book, in which Ruddick mainly fleshes out the historical backdrop, is pretty good. I started the book at 10 o'clock at night and, even though it was a work night and I was in desperate need of a full night of sleep, I couldn't put it down until Bravo finally drew his last breath around 12:30 a.m., my time! (That's pretty late for me. I'm a weenie.)

The second half was disappointing. The author boasts that - despite the attention paid by dozens of historians, academics, and authors to this most notorious murder case over the course of the last 125 years - HE is the first to UNEQUIVOCALLY solve the mystery of Charles Bravo's murder. His theory is compelling, but it is by no means incontrovertible. He persistently prefaces specious arguments with phrases like, "there can be no doubt...," "no one could argue...," "it's obvious that...," etc. But the thing is, most of the time, there COULD BE (and in my mind, IS) still a doubt. So, he bases his "inarguable" conclusion on a framework of dubious assumptions.

Throughout the book, he brags that he is the first to solve the mystery, once and for all. He even chides his predecessors for their inability and unwillingness to put forth the effort that would have "inevitably" lead them to the same "incontestable" conclusion, at which he has finally arrived. But really, his theory is no more or less valid than those that were put forth before it.

Again, his theory of who murdered Charles Bravo is entirely plausible, but he seems to lose sight of the fact that it is still nothing more than a theory.

[Jill H. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is about the coldest of cold cases....the murder of Charles Bravo in 1876 in England. Nobody was ever charged although there were many suspects, including his wife, since Mr. Bravo was not very loveable. The poison antimony was used to kill him which may cause even worse suffering than arsenic and poison was a woman's method of murder in those Victorian days. The book is divided into two parts: first, the actual murder and subsequent hearings; and second, the author's research and conclusions as to the culprit or culprits. The author also gives us a social overview of the treatment of wives during this time period which was, frankly, pretty frightening. If trapped in a loveless marriage which so many of them were, they didn't have many choices and some chose murder as an escape. That does not necessarily mean that in this case, the "wife did it" and you will have to read the book to see if you agree with the author's conclusion as to who murdered Charles Bravo. I recommend this book for its unusual approach and amount of research done by the author as he searched for an answer to the unsolved murder.

[Ngaio · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a fun, quick read. Ruddick neatly summarizes a complex murder case from the 1800s. I had never heard of it before picking up this book, but found it fascinating that a real case played out a bit like a game of clue with a variety of people having access and motive. The Victorian social dynamics also made for an interesting study.

Naturally a case from so long ago, with all its principal characters dead, cannot be conclusively solved given that evidence erodes and no one can be put on trial. Ruddick does put forward a sound theory, however, that seems to account for all the facts.

My only two gripes were his persistent use of "evidence" when he meant "theory" and his need to italize key pieces of information in a seemly unnecessary way. It was irritating, but easily overlooked.

I would recommend this books to fans of true crimes and those interested in Victorian society.