A Solution to the ‘Perfect Murder’? P. D. James and the Case of Julia Wallace

A Solution to the ‘Perfect Murder’? P. D. James and the Case of Julia Wallace


At the end of last month, The Sunday Times proclaimed that the crime novelist P. D. James had found a solution to the murder of Julia Wallace, an unsolved case from early 1931 that has sometimes been dubbed the ‘perfect murder’.  James herself was rather more modest, admitting that her interpretation of events can never be proved to be the definitive one, and noting that she was following in the footsteps of a number of eminent commentators, including the detective novelist Dorothy L. Sayers.


I’m currently writing a book about fictional and factual crime writing in interwar Britain, and have studied a good deal of the contemporary commentary on the case, including Sayers’s two essays, one published in the Evening Standard newspaper in 1934, the other, much longer and more detailed, which appeared in The Anatomy of Murder (1936), a collection of essays on true crimes by detective novelists. As James notes in her article, part of what drew both her and Sayers to the Wallace case is that the sequence of events that emerged seemed like something that might happen in a detective novel. Indeed, reporting on the case shortly after the discovery of Julia Wallace’s body in the front parlour of 29 Wolverton Street, Anfield, the local evening paper, the Liverpool Echo, made the same comparison: ‘The facts, such as they are, when assembled might be the fanciful conjectures of one of those writers of detective fiction.’


Julia was the wife of William Wallace, a door-to-door insurance salesman. The evening before her death, he had travelled into Liverpool city centre to attend his chess club, and when he arrived, a message was waiting for him: a Mr R. M. Qualtrough had phoned, asking Wallace to come and visit him the next evening at his home in Menlove Gardens East, to discuss the possible purchase of a policy. Having debated with his chess club friends whether to keep this odd appointment – he was unsure where Menlove Gardens East might be –  the next evening Wallace set off from home, heading by tram towards Queen’s Drive, hoping to find Mr Qualtrough’s street somewhere near Menlove Avenue. But, after asking the way several times, Wallace was eventually forced to return home, having discovered that although there were roads called Menlove Gardens North, South and West, Menlove Gardens East was a fiction.


Arriving back at Wolverton Street, Wallace was in alleyway that ran along the back of the houses when he met his neighbours, who were on their way out, and told them that he was worried because he was unable to get into the house. They went into the yard with him, and this time, he was able to open the back door; entering the property, he found his wife’s body; she had been beaten about the head.


Before long, Wallace was arrested and charged with his wife’s murder. At the trial, in April 1931, he was found guilty, only to be released on appeal. He moved away from Liverpool and died two years later.  The calm demeanour that he had maintained from the discovery of the body and throughout the trial told against him; as Dorothy L. Sayers noted, he did not behave in the way that bereaved husbands were expected to behave.


Writing shortly after Wallace’s death, Sayers, like P. D. James after her, focused on the unusual nature of Wallace’s alibi. Wallace claimed to have been tricked out of the house by the phone message from Qualtrough, leaving the way clear for Qualtrough to commit the murder. (The Liverpool police identified and questioned a number of people with the surname ‘Qualtrough’ but were unable to connect any of them to the crime.) The phone call to the chess club was traced to a public box near enough to the Wallace’s house for Wallace to have placed the call himself on his way to the club, thus providing his own alibi, although the man who took the message at the club was sure that the voice he heard was not Wallace’s. Another theory was that Wallace and Qualtrough were in league with each other, with Qualtrough making the call in order to provide an alibi for Wallace. But as Sayers points out, no satisfactory motive for Wallace or indeed anyone else killing Julia was ever uncovered.


Sayers considers how the case might be approached by a detective novelist, suggesting, for instance, that a phone call with such contrary possible interpretations is the sort of narrative device a detective novelist might use, but also noting that particular pieces of information that the novelist might think of as crucially important, were missing or not available. Two witnesses who apparently saw Julia after her husband had left the house that evening, the boy who delivered the milk and the paper girl, were both deemed unreliable, and Sayers wryly comments that witnesses in fiction can almost always remember the time and other details with complete accuracy when necessary. James is also interested in this aspect of Wallace’s alibi, and suggests that rather than handing the milk over to Julia, the delivery boy might have been tricked, and that the person the boy thought was Julia could in fact have been Wallace himself, disguised as his wife.


This novel, if, I have to say, not especially convincing suggestion, is one element of a reading of the crime in which James uncouples the two key elements: the phone call that got Wallace out of the house and the murder itself.  Rather than seeing the phone call as a planned pretext for the murder, James suggests that the phone call was intended as a practical joke, and that it was only after receiving the message from Qualtrough that Wallace decided to use it as an alibi. I think it’s James thinking like a detective writer, rather than any hard evidence, that leads her to this conclusion, although in her article, she goes on to suggest that it fits with what is known about Richard Gordon Parry, who, in the early 1980s was identified by Liverpool journalist Roger Wilkes as the most likely suspect for both the phone call and the murder.


Sayers, meanwhile, refrained from drawing any definitive conclusions about the case, although she indicated that she believed Wallace to be innocent.  As James points out, several other authors, since Sayers, have presented their own interpretations of the case, and James’s article is very unlikely to be the final word. Gaps in the narrative will always remain; motives and feelings can only be guessed at and remain opaque. The murder of Julia Wallace might on the surface seem ‘like something out of a novel’, but as the writings of  Sayers, James and others have shown, brute reality refuses to abide by the reassuring pattern of cause, effect and solution that detective fiction promises.

Share this page:

Share this page:

Victoria Stewart

About Victoria Stewart

Victoria Stewart is Reader in Modern and Contemporary Literature in the School of English.

View more posts by Victoria Stewart

Subscribe to Victoria Stewart's posts

10 responses to “A Solution to the ‘Perfect Murder’? P. D. James and the Case of Julia Wallace”

  1. James


    I solved the Wallace case 15 years ago. Take a look http://www.amazon.co.uk/Murder-Julia-Wallace-James-Murphy/dp/1872568815

  2. Victoria Stewart

    Thanks James – it’s a fascinating case.


    R M Qaultrough,Whoever had this name on their mind seems to me to be a person of a decent education,maybe if we could find any evidence of any link to this name in the Anfield area before the crime it may lead to a interesting conclusion.

  4. Alan Hamilton

    James Murphy’s claim (16/11/13) to have ‘solved’ the Wallace case is no more credible than P D James’s. What makes this case celebrated is that there is no ‘solution’. Anyone who has trawled the Merseyside Police file on the case realises very quickly that any solution there may once have been has been obliterated by the removal of much of what one would have expected to be in the file as well as its removal from public scrutiny for 70 years.
    Murphy doesn’t seem to have recognised that Parry’s statement as to his whereabouts on the night before the murder is contradicted by the ones made by his girlfriend and her mother. Baroness James didn’t realise that Parry did not lose his job with the Pru as a result of Wallace reporting him for misappropriation of funds. Wallace never told the company about this and Parry left the company of his own accord over a year later. Wallace only discovered that Parry had a ‘reputation’ with the Pru when told by his supervisor, Crewe.
    I have written a novel based on the case, to be published later this summer, called Stalemate. It is a ‘what might have happened’ not a solution.

  5. Mark

    Hi James

    Your book is the definitive book on the case and I concur with you. As a recognised authority on this case (I have accessed everything with regards to it) I can vouch that your book does indeed prove that there can be no other conclusion with regards to who committed the murder. I have completed my book on the case by the way.

  6. Martin Badger

    Anyone who reads James Murphy’s book cannot be left in any doubt of Wallace’s guilt. It amazes me, frankly, that some people still do doubt it.
    Wallace, incidentally, called often at the house of my aunt to collect Prudential money. Neither she nor my father ever doubted he did it.

  7. Chinese On Wikipedia

    Thiis site definitely has aall the information I needed about this subject and
    didn’t know who to ask.

  8. steve delacourt

    I met Sydney Scoffield Allen on a few occasions. He was an MP and a colleague of my father’s , Charles Smith who was also an MP in 1945. Scoffield Allen was the junior counsel of Wallace. He (Allen) often told the story that he was summoned to the dying Wallace. Wallace’s last words to Allen were along the lines of “well we won sonny, didn’t we” Allen, for the rest of his life thought that these were very strange words for a man if he had been innocent.

  9. Helen Thomas

    My Gt Grandfather was Richard Qualtrough, I have only recently found out about this crime story after being put in contact with John Gannon who wrote a book about the case – sadly my mother passed away 3 weeks ago and would have been very intrigued. As far as I know none of the family ever knew about this.

  10. Ian Williams

    My grandfather met Richard Gordon Parry when he was in army in the 1930’s he was upset when Parry was named by Roger Wilkes as the murderer in the 1980’s

Leave a Reply

Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer