The Murders of the Lawson Family

 You have often heard me state how I love hearing stories from the early 1900's and prior. But, you have also heard me state they prove difficult to research because it is hard to distinguish between fact, rumor, and just a story that becomes a legend disguised as a fact. This is just such a case. There often are just not enough facts known to make a decent story out of things and so things become “fillers” so to speak. I am not saying that I do not do the same sometimes, however, I do not state things as facts if I cannot prove them to be so, if there is conflicting information, or as in this case there is really not enough information in my opinion to know exactly what happened and in what order.

I will start with the facts that we do know. We know that on December 25, 1929 in Germantown North Carolina forty-three (some say forty-two) year old Charles “Charlie” Lawson murdered his wife and six of their seven living children on their farm. Several hours later he would commit suicide. His only surviving child was James “Arthur” who was sixteen at the time and had been sent on an errand prior to the crime being committed. The entire family was buried together and a tombstone, with three sides were erected showing all of the family members, except for Arthur, but including a son, William who died in 1920 of pneumonia at the age of six.

Now, if you search out this story you will hear a narrative of what happened when, and how. But, keep in mind that there were no eye witnesses to this crime so to know exactly what happened and when cannot possibly be known for certain. It does not mean that the narrative given is not true, it just means that it was likely the best theory had and had been repeated so much in the almost 100 years that it has become thought of as fact.

Some reports say that earlier in the day on December 25^th Charlie had taken the family to a town nearly fifteen miles away where they had a “shopping spree” and after buying new clothes wore them for a family portrait. Other reports say that this shopping trip happened a few days or weeks prior. In my opinion the latter was probably more likely. I know that in modern times we are used to many, if not most places being closed on Christmas Day and I feel as if that would have even more true back in 1929. Some saw this act as showing that Charles had premeditated the crimes; some reports stated that the family did not have the means to be spending the money they had; yet still other reports stated he was prosperous and “well off” indicating he did in fact have the money to spend. There is a picture available of the entire family including the baby, Mary Lou who was four months old when the crime occurred on Christmas.

The story goes that some time that day Charles sent his oldest son, sixteen year old Arthur, “on an errand.” Some stories will say that it was to a relatives home; others say that Charles and Arthur had been out hunting and allegedly ran out of ammo and sent Arthur to get more. Of course there are theories abound about why he sent Arthur away. Was it because he was the oldest son and at sixteen may have been able to resist Charles the most as opposed to the rest of the family? Was it because by leaving his oldest son alive his son could carry on his name? No one will ever know.

And then comes the theory of how each of the remaining members of his family died, and how. It is believed that Charlie hid out by the tobacco barn, basically lying in wait, as two of his daughters, twelve year old Carrie and seven year old Maybell was within his range as they headed to go visit an aunt and uncle that lived nearby. It is said that they were each shot by Charlie and his 12 gauge shotgun and then were “bludgeoned” to ensure they were dead. Their bodies were found inside the barn.

It is then believed that Charlie moved his way to the house where Fannie was on the porch. Reports say that seventeen year old Marie, who was inside the home screamed, but again, how can anyone know this? Everyone at that home were either already dead when the crime was discovered or soon would be without ever speaking to anyone or telling the details of what happened. It is believed that Charlie then went into the house and shot Marie. It has also been theorized that after Fannie was shot that four year old James William (yes, he had the same first name as Arthur and his middle name was the first name of Charlie and Fannie's child who died in 1920, a common thing in those days) and two year old Raymond had found a place to hide and that after finding them Charlie also shot them. From there it is believed that four month old Mary Lou was “bludgeoned” to death.

It is not clear whether the bodies were moved at all or just simply staged. It was said that Carrie and Maybell were still in the barn but it was not clear whether Fannie had been moved from the porch. But, the bodies were all laid out to the point in which their arms were crossed. Some reports say there were rocks under all of their heads while others say that only the girls in the barn had rocks and the others had pillows placed under their heads. It is also not completely clear who found the bodies. Some reports say that it was Arthur when he returned from his “errand” and other reports say it was other family members. Apparently the authorities were called and they, along with Arthur, and apparently many others who had heard about the crimes and gone to the home were all outside “several hours” after the murders were committed when they all heard a gunshot from within the nearby woods. Charlie was found dead near a tree from an obvious self inflicted gunshot wound. It was said that there were footprints circling the tree as if he had paced around for those hours before actually shooting himself. Most reports say there were letters to his parents on crumbled paper nearby. One report stated that one of them said “Blame nobody but I.”

Friends, family and neighbors all began looking for a reason. The first theory was that several months earlier Charlie had suffered from a head injury. Reports were that he had accidentally hit himself in the forehead with an ax. Many said that he had a personality change after this incident and the ongoing theory is that this head injury had caused him to go “mad.” But, it was said that after the crime, or at some point later, Charlie's skull was examined by professionals a Johns Hopkins Hospital “found no abnormalities.” Despite this it seems it became the prevailing theory as to motive, at least until several decades later.

In 1990 a book was being published on the case and Charlie's niece, Stella had been interviewed. Stella was the daughter of Charles' brother Marion and around the time of the writing of the book would have been in her seventies. Things were a little unclear on how things went down but it appears that “an anonymous source” had heard a rumor during one of the tours (I will get into this in a bit) of the Lawson home after the murders. The rumor was a claim that Charlie had sexually abused seventeen year old Marie. It appears that Stella had already been interviewed and the book, White Christmas, Bloody Christmas was set to be published soon when she contacted the author again. She relayed a story that she claimed she had overheard Fannie's sister in laws, her aunts, including Stella's mother, discussing the fact that Fannie had “confided” in them that she was concerned that there was something going on between Charlie and Marie. Stella's mother, Jettie, died in May of 1928 so if true, then this was said long before the murders in December of 1929.

In 2006 the same author released another book on the case called The Meaning of our Tears and by then apparently they had dug deeper into the sexual allegations. It was said that a friend of Marie's claimed that a few weeks before the murders Marie had told her that she was pregnant and that the child belong to her father. The friend, Ella May, stated that according to Marie both of her parents knew of the situation.

It is unclear whether Arthur, Charlie and Fannie's only surviving child, ever stated or made a comment about this issue or even what his theory may have been about a motive. He apparently did not remain on the farm, or at least living in the house because it was said that Charlie's brother, Marion, opened up the house for tour at .25 a piece. A cake that Marie had made earlier in the day was on the table. It was said that people who toured the home began taking raisins from the cake a basically “souvenirs” and that eventually a glass cover was placed over the cake. It is not clear how long the “tours” lasted but they eventually did stop and the home was demolished at some point.

As far as Arthur goes, he was killed in an automobile accident in 1945 at the age of thirty-one. It was said that he left a wife and four children. I do want to point out that if you visit the website Findagrave.com you will find Arthur (listed as James Arthur). His tombstone says the years 1911-1944 but a contributor says that is wrong and his birth date was August 18, 1913 and his death date was May 5, 1945. I believe the contributor is correct for several reasons. First, several areas stated that Charlie and Fannie were married in 1911. Every story about this case indicates that Marie was seventeen at the time of the murders and the oldest child. Her tombstone states she was born in April of 1912. It seemed unreasonable to believe that Arthur was born in 1911, the same year they were married and yet be their second child, especially in that era.