case. From the verdict returned by the jury, there ought to exist no
doubt of the innocence of the persons charged of the offence imputed to
them; but although Lord Baltimore and his companions were acquitted of
the charge of rape, there can be little doubt that the ruin of the
unfortunate girl Woodcock--even if what was admitted by his lordship
were only true--was the effect of a vile conspiracy among the prisoners
to sacrifice her to the libertine passions of his lordship.
JOHN WILKES, ESQ.
CONVICTED OF SEDITION AND BLASPHEMY.
The year 1768 will ever be memorable in the annals of English history on
account of the murders and mischief committed by a deluded mob,
stimulated by the writings and opposition to the government of John
Wilkes, Esq. an alderman of London, and member of parliament for
Aylesbury.
The most scandalous and offensive of his writings were in a periodical
publication called the "North Briton," No. 45; and a pamphlet entitled
"An Essay on Woman[12]." The "North Briton" was of a political nature;
the other a piece of obscenity: the one calculated to set the people
against the government; the other to corrupt their morals.
Amongst the ministers who found themselves more personally attacked in
the "North Briton" was Samuel Martin, Esq. member for Camelford. This
gentleman found his character, as secretary to the Treasury, so
vilified, that he called the writer to the field. He had before been
engaged in a duel with Lord Talbot, and had then escaped unhurt, but Mr.
Martin shot him; and the wound proved so dangerous that he lay uncertain
of recovering during several days, and was confined to his house for
some weeks.
His sufferings, however, did not end here, for the attorney-general
filed informations against him as author of "The North Briton," No.
45[13], and the pamphlet entitled "An Essay on Woman." On these charges
he was apprehended; and his papers having been seized and inspected, he
was committed prisoner to the Tower, but was soon admitted to bail.
Before his trial came on, Mr. Wilkes fled to France, under the pretext
of restoring his health, which had suffered from his wound, and the
harassing measures taken against him by the secretaries of state, Lord
Egremont and Lord Halifax; and no sooner was he out of the kingdom, than
the ministers proceeded to outlawry, dismissed him from his command as
colonel of the Buckinghamshire militia, and expelled him from his seat
in parliament.
While in Paris, he was challenged to fight by a Captain Forbes, on
account of the reflections which he had cast upon the birthplace of the
gallant captain, Scotland; but he declined the invitation, alleging that
he had still an affair to settle with Lord Egremont before he could
venture to take any other duel upon his hands. The death of that noble
lord, however, left him free to fight; but on his writing to accept the
challenge, his antagonist was not to be found. Mr. Wilkes subsequently
returned to London, and gave notice that he should appear to answer the
charges preferred against him on a certain day; and then having appeared
in his place, as an alderman, in Guildhall, on his return, the mob took
the horses from his carriage and dragged it to his house, crying "Wilkes
and liberty!" On the 21st of February 1764, the trial of Mr. Wilkes,
upon the accusations alleged against him, came on before Lord Mansfield,
and he was found guilty on both charges, subject to arguments upon
certain points as to the validity of his apprehension, the seizure of
his papers, and the judgment of outlawry which had been obtained against
him. The discussions preliminary to these arguments occupied the courts
at various times during a space of two years; and in the mean time, the
popularity of Mr. Wilkes and the outrages of the mob increased daily.
At length, on the 27th of April 1768, Mr. Wilkes having been served with
a writ of _Capias utlagatum_, was brought to the floor of the Court of
King's Bench in the custody of the proper officer, in order that the
question of his being admitted to bail might be considered. A long
argument took place, but it terminated in favour of the crown, and Mr.
Wilkes was conveyed to the King's Bench prison. On his way thither the
mob seized the coach in which he was carried, and taking the horses from
it, dragged him to a public-house in Spitalfields, where they permitted
him to alight; but at about eleven o'clock at night he effected his
escape from his over-zealous friends, and proceeding to the prison,
immediately surrendered himself into lawful custody. On the following
day he was visited by many of his friends; and a vast mob having
collected outside the prison, it was feared that some outrage would be
committed. All remained quiet, however, until night, when the rails by
which the prison wall was surrounded were pulled up and burned as a
bonfire, and the inhabitants of Southwark were compelled to illuminate
their houses; but upon the arrival of a captain's guard of soldiers, the
crowd dispersed without doing any further mischief.
On the 28th of April the case of outlawry was determined; and Mr.
Serjeant Glynn having appeared on the part of Mr. Wilkes, and the
Attorney-General for the crown, a learned and lengthy argument was
heard, the result of which was a unanimous expression on the part of the
court that the outlawry must be reversed. The general warrant on which
the accused had been apprehended was next considered and declared
illegal; but the counsel for the crown then immediately moved that
judgment might be passed upon Mr. Wilkes upon the several convictions
which had taken place. This was answered by a motion on his part in
arrest of judgment, and the following Thursday was fixed upon for
hearing the point argued.
In the mean time a mob had remained assembled round the prison whom no
efforts of the civil force could disperse; but at length the justices
appeared, followed by a troop of soldiers, determined at once to put an
end to the alarming nuisance which had so long existed. All attempts to
procure the separation of the crowd by fair means having failed, the
Riot Act was read; and this also having no effect, the soldiers were
ordered to fire. The command was instantly obeyed, and many persons were
killed and dangerously wounded, some of whom were passing at a distance
from the scene of confusion.
At length the day arrived on which the last effort was to be made to get
rid of the charges against Mr. Wilkes; but the arguments for an arrest
of judgment, though carried on with great ingenuity, would not hold, and
he was found to have been legally convicted of writing the libels. For
that in the "North Briton" he was fined five hundred pounds, and
sentenced to two years' imprisonment in the King's Bench prison; and for
the "Essay on Woman" five hundred pounds more, a further imprisonment of
twelve months, and to find security for his good behaviour for seven
years.
Previously to his imprisonment Mr. Wilkes had been elected member of
parliament for Middlesex, when the address which he published to his
constituents contained the following passages:--"In the whole progress
of ministerial vengeance against me for several years, I have shown, to
the conviction of all mankind, that my enemies have trampled on the
laws, and have been actuated by the spirit of tyranny and arbitrary
power.
"The _general warrant_ under which I was first apprehended has been
adjudged illegal. The _seizure_ of my papers was condemned judicially
[Illustration: _Wilkes' Riots._]
The _outlawry_, so long the topic of violent abuse, is at last declared
to have been contrary to law; and on the ground first taken by my
friend, Mr. Serjeant Glynn, is formally reversed."
The mob after the election proceeded to the commission of the most
violent outrages. They broke the windows of Lord Bute, the prime
minister, and of the Mansion House, including even those of the lady
mayoress's bedchamber, and forced the inhabitants of the metropolis to
illuminate their houses, crying out "Wilkes and liberty!" and all who
refused to echo it back were knocked down.
A stone was thrown by this daring mob at the Polish Count Rawotski,
which he dexterously caught in his hand, the windows of his carriage in
which he sat being fortunately down; and his lordship looking out and
smiling, he received no other violence.
The outrages of the populace were too many to be enumerated; several
innocent people were killed, and vast numbers wounded. They broke
windows without number, destroyed furniture, and even insulted royalty
itself.
These disgraceful tumults were not confined to the metropolis; and the
lenity, or, as some did not hesitate to assert, the timidity of the
government, spread disaffection into all classes of mechanics, who,
thinking the time at hand when they might exact what wages they pleased,
perhaps even beyond their masters' profits, struck work.
The sailors, following the example of the landsmen, went in a body of
many thousands, with drums beating and colours flying, to St. James's
Palace, and presented a petition to the king, praying a "Relief of
Grievances." Two days afterwards they assembled in much greater numbers,
and proceeded as far as Palace Yard, in order to petition Parliament for
an increase of wages; when they were addressed by two gentlemen standing
on the top of a hackney-coach, who told them that their petition could
not be immediately attended to, but that it would be considered and
answered in due time; whereupon the tars gave three cheers, and for a
while dispersed. A short time afterwards, however, they re-assembled at
Limehouse, and boarding several outward-bound vessels, seized their
crews, pretending that they would not suffer any ships to sail until
their wages were increased. The watermen, the Spitalfields weavers, the
sawyers, the hatters, and the labouring classes in the country, all
combined in the attempt to procure their wages to be raised; but while
in London the confusion was nearly universal, in the country its effects
were confined to a few districts, where some interested persons managed
to excite the peaceably-disposed people to acts of outrage.
They soon discovered the error into which they had fallen, however; and
a few of them having suffered execution, and others some severe
imprisonments, they returned to their duty.
The folly of popular commotion was never better exemplified than in the
case of Wilkes, whose patriotism was accidental and mercenary; for his
letters to his daughter clearly show the contempt with which he regarded
the enthusiasm in his favour, and the object he had in view in exciting
hatred against the government. Many of the deluded people who shouted
"Wilkes and liberty!" were severely injured in the riots; and others
were subsequently punished by the outraged laws of the country. In a
short time the commotion subsided, and the author of them sunk into
comparative obscurity, in which he continued until his death in 1797, at
the age of seventy years.
MUNGO CAMPBELL.
CONVICTED OF THE MURDER OF THE EARL OF EGLINTON.
This melancholy case arose out of the existing system of game-laws.
The lamented Mr. Campbell was descended from the noble family of Argyle,
and was born at Ayr in Scotland. His father was an eminent merchant--had
been mayor of the town, and a justice of the peace; but having no less
than twenty-four children, and meeting with many losses in his
commercial transactions, it was impossible for him to make any adequate
provision for his family; so that on his death, the relations took care
of the children, and educated them in the liberal manner which is
customary in Scotland. The unhappy subject of this narrative was
protected by an uncle, who gave him a learned education; but this
generous friend dying when the youth was about eighteen years of age,
left him sixty pounds a year, and earnestly recommended him to the care
of his other relations.
The young man was a finished scholar, but seemed averse to make choice
of any of the learned professions. His attachment appeared to be to the
military life, in which many of his ancestors had distinguished
themselves. He soon followed the bent of his inclinations, and entered
as a cadet in the royal regiment of Scots Greys, then commanded by his
relation, General Campbell, and served during two campaigns, at his own
expense. Being disappointed in obtaining promotion, however, he returned
to Scotland in the year 1745, and Lord Loudon, to whom he was distantly
related, having the command of the loyal Highlanders, who exhibited so
much bravery in their opposition to the rebellion, Mr. Campbell joined
that regiment, and his exertions were equally creditable to his loyalty
and his courage.
After the battle of Culloden he was appointed, through the
instrumentality of Lord Loudon, to fill the situation of an officer of
excise, in Ayrshire; and notwithstanding the unpleasant nature of his
employment, he succeeded, by his courtesy, in obtaining the good-will of
all his neighbours, all of whom, with the exception of the Earl of
Eglinton, gave him permission to kill game on their estates. It was his
misfortune to live immediately adjoining the property of his lordship;
and it would appear that the noble earl having once detected him in
killing a hare, warned him not to commit a similar offence again. Mr.
Campbell apologised for the trespass of which he had been guilty, and
excused himself by stating that he was in search of smugglers, and that
having suddenly started the hare, he was surprised, and without
thinking, he shot it. The ill-will which was raised in his lordship's
mind by this circumstance, was in nowise removed by some proceedings
which Mr. Campbell was compelled to take against Bartleymore, one of his
servants, for smuggling; and it appears that his lordship's death was
eventually attributable to the steps which he took at the instigation of
this very person.
About ten in the morning of the 24th of October 1769, Campbell took his
gun, and went out with another officer, with a view to detect smugglers.
Mr. Campbell took with him a licence for shooting, which had been given
him by Dr. Hunter, though they had no particular design of killing any
game, but intended to shoot a woodcock if they should see one.
They crossed a small part of Lord Eglinton's estate, in order to reach
the sea-shore, where they intended to walk; but when they arrived at
this spot it was near noon, and Lord Eglinton came up in his coach,
attended by Mr. Wilson, a carpenter, who was working for him, and
followed by four servants on horseback. On approaching the coast his
lordship met Bartleymore, who told him that there were some poachers at
a distance. Mr. Wilson would have endeavoured to draw off his lordship's
notice from such a business; but Bartleymore saying that Campbell was
among the poachers, Lord Eglinton quitted his coach, and mounting a led
horse, rode to the spot, where he saw Campbell and the other officer,
whose name was Brown. His lordship said, "Mr. Campbell, I did not expect
to have found you so soon again on my grounds, after your promise when
you shot the hare. I must desire that you will give me your gun." Mr.
Campbell refused to deliver up his property, because he said that he was
not employing it in an unlawful manner, on which Lord Eglinton rode
towards him, apparently with the intention of taking it from him. Mr.
Campbell on this raised his gun, and retreating, presented it at his
lordship's body; but the latter still followed him, and smiling, asked
him if he meant to shoot him. He said that he would if he did not keep
off, and then Lord Eglinton desired that his gun should be brought to
him from the carriage. In the interim, his lordship dismounted, and
going close to Mr. Campbell, again required that he should deliver up
the weapon which he carried, but the latter declared that he had a right
to carry it, and that he would deliver it to no man, and repeated that
his lordship must therefore keep off, unless he wished to be shot.
Bartleymore now interfered; and Mr. Campbell stumbling against a stone,
fell, and Lord Eglinton then advanced as if to seize him. In a moment,
however, Mr. Campbell raised himself on his elbow, and lodged the
contents of his piece in the noble earl's left breast. His lordship
directly cried out that he was killed, and Mr. Campbell was seized; but
his lordship desired that no violence should be used towards him.
Lord Eglinton's seat was about three miles from the place where this
fatal event happened; and his servants put him into the carriage to
convey him home. In the mean time Campbell's hands were tied behind him;
and he was conducted to the town of Saltcoats, the place of his former
station as an exciseman.
His lordship, after languishing for ten hours, died; and Mr. Campbell
was then committed to the jail of Ayr to await his trial.
Upon his being arraigned upon the indictment preferred against him,
various arguments were urged in his favour. It was said--"That the gun
went off by accident, and therefore it could be no more than casual
homicide.
"Secondly--That, supposing it had been fired with an intention to kill,
yet the act was altogether justifiable, because of the violent
provocation he had received; and he was doing no more than defending his
life and property.
"Thirdly--It could not be murder, because it could not be supposed that
Mr. Campbell had any malice against his lordship, and the action itself
was too sudden to admit of deliberation."
The counsel for the prosecution urged in answer, in the first place,
"That it was certain malice was implied, in consequence of Campbell's
presenting the gun to his lordship, and telling him that, unless he kept
off, he would shoot him.
"Secondly--That there was no provocation given by the earl besides
words, and words could not be construed a provocation in law.
"Thirdly--The earl had a right to seize his gun, in virtue of several
acts of parliament, which were the established laws of the land, to
which every subject is obliged to be obedient."
After repeated debates between the lawyers of Scotland, a day was at
length appointed for the trial, which commenced on the 27th of February
1770, before the High Court of Justiciary; and, the jury having found
Mr. Campbell guilty, he was sentenced to die.
The Lord Justice Clerk, before he pronounced the solemn sentence,
addressed himself to the convict, advising him to make the most devout
preparation for death, as all hopes of pardon would be precluded, from
the nature of his offence.
The prisoner conducted himself throughout the whole proceedings with the
utmost calmness, and took leave of his friends in the evening with great
apparent cheerfulness; and, retiring to his apartment, he begged the
favour of a visit from them on the following day. In the morning of the
28th of February 1770, however, he was found dead, hanging to the end of
a form which he had set upright, and a silk handkerchief fastened round
his neck.
The following lines were found upon the floor, close to the body:--
"Farewell, vain world! I've had enough of thee,
And now am careless what thou say'st of me:
Thy smiles I court not, nor thy frowns I fear:
My cares are past; my heart lies easy here.
What faults they find in me take care, to shun;
And look at home--enough is to be done."
JAMES ATTAWAY AND RICHARD BAILEY.
EXECUTED FOR BURGLARY.
The crime for which these men so justly suffered was committed in a
manner most artful and daring.
About nine o'clock in the evening they went to the house of Thomas Le
Merr, Esq. in Bedford-row, London, a public and genteel street. They had
received information that Mr. Le Merr was in the country, and on their
knocking at the door, it was opened by a footman, who was alone in the
house, to whom Bailey delivered a letter, saying it was for his master.
Before the servant could answer, they rushed in, shut the street door,
and stabbed him in the belly with a dagger. They then drew cords from
their pockets, tied the bleeding man's hands behind his back, and
dragged him down stairs into the kitchen, and there bringing the rope
about his neck, and across his face, in such a manner that it went
through his mouth, which it kept open, and making it fast behind, thus
bound, they forced him into a cellar, and bolted him in. In a few
minutes one of the villains returned, asking if he was fast; and being
answered, as well as the poor man could speak, that he was secure
enough, they broke open the pantry, where the plate-chest was kept,
forced the lock, and deliberately packed up its contents. In the mean
time, however, the wounded man gnawed the rope in his mouth, and soon
liberated himself. He then forced open the door which confined him, and
got into the area, over which was a skylight, and, apprehensive that he
was bleeding to death, he made an effort, by climbing up a pipe, to get
through it, and give an alarm. In effecting this he stuck by the middle,
and near his wound, a considerable time, but was not heard by the
thieves, who were busily employed in securing their plunder. Making a
last exertion, he succeeded in raising himself up, and, dragging the
rope after him, he got to the stables behind the house, and called for
help as loud as his almost exhausted strength would permit. Five or six
grooms immediately came to his assistance; and, learning the cause of
his alarm, they seized the robbers as they were coming out of the house;
thus fortunately saving the poor fellow's life and Mr. Le Merr's
property.
On this evidence the prisoners were subsequently found guilty, the
wounded man being able to appear in court against them, and were
executed at Tyburn, July 4, 1770.
LEVI WEIL, ASHER WEIL, JACOB LAZARUS, AND SOLOMON PORTER.
EXECUTED FOR THE MURDER OF JOHN SLOW.
This daring violation of the law, which long roused the public
indignation against the whole Jewish people, happened in the house of
Mrs. Hutchings, in the King's-road, Chelsea, who was a farmer's widow,
left by her husband in good circumstances, and with three children, two
boys and a girl.
On a Saturday evening, just as the Jewish Sabbath was ended, a numerous
gang of Jews assembled in Chelsea Fields; and having lurked about there
until ten o'clock, at that hour went to the house of Mrs. Hutchings, and
demanded admittance. The family had all retired to rest, with the
exception of Mrs. Hutchings and her two female servants, and being
alarmed by the unseasonable request of the applicants, they proceeded in
a body to know their business. The door was no sooner opened, however,
than a number of fellows,--all of whom had the appearance of
Jews,--rushed in, and seizing the terrified females, threatened them
with instant death in the event of their offering any resistance. Mrs.
Hutchings, being a woman of considerable muscular strength, for a time
opposed them; but her antagonists having soon overpowered her, they tied
her petticoats over her head, and proceeded to secure the servants. The
girls having been tied back to back, five of the fellows proceeded to
ransack the house, while the remainder of the gang remained below to
guard the prisoners. Having visited the rooms occupied by the children
of Mrs. Hutchings in turn, the ruffians proceeded to the apartment in
which two men, employed as labourers on the farm, named John Slow and
William Stone, were lying undisturbed by the outcry which had been
raised below. It was soon determined that these men were likely to prove
mischievous, and that they must be murdered; and Levi Weil, a Jewish
physician, who was one of the party, and was the most sanguinary villain
of his gang, aimed a blow at the breast of Stone, intended for his
death, but which only stunned him. Slow started up, and the villains
cried "Shoot him! shoot him!" and a pistol was instantly fired at him,
and he fell, exclaiming, "Lord have mercy on me! I am murdered!"