whose laughter-moving qualities were purely involuntary, was doomed even
at "the last scene of all," to raise the mirth of the spectators of his
fate. He was in due form taken from his cell, and the ordinary of the
jail attending him, he was conducted to the press-room to be bound,
preparatory to his going out to the scaffold. His irons were removed,
and his arms confined with cords in the customary manner, but the
willing compliance exhibited by the wretched convict in the proceedings
which had hitherto taken place, to assist the executioner in performing
his office, suddenly ceased. He sat down on a bench, and in spite of the
calls of Jack Ketch, and of the sheriffs to accompany them in procession
to the scaffold, he remained sullenly on the bench, where he had first
taken up his position. "Come," at last urged Jack Ketch, "the time is
arrived;" but his coaxing words and tone were unavailing. "The officers
are waiting for you," said the sheriffs; "can anything be done for you
before you quit this world?" No answer was returned. At length, said
Jack Ketch, grown surly at the long delay and the silence of the
prisoner, "If you won't go, you know I must carry you." "Then you may,"
said the prisoner, "for I'll not walk." "Why not?" inquired the sheriff.
"I'll not be instrumental to my own death," hesitated the prisoner.
"What do you mean?" asked the ordinary. "What do I mane?" answered the
unfortunate man. "I'll not walk to my own destruction;" and in this
determination he remained, and Jack Ketch and his assistants were
eventually absolutely compelled to carry him to the scaffold, where he
was turned off, continuing in his refusal to do anything which might be
construed into "his being a party to his own death."
END OF VOL. I.
PRINTED BY J. S. VIRTUE AND CO., LIMITED, CITY ROAD, LONDON.
* * * * *
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Different countries have different modes of inflicting capital
punishments. Beheading was military punishment among the Romans,
known by the name of _decollatio_. Among them the head was laid on a
_cippus_, or block, placed in a pit dug for the purpose; in the army,
without the _vallum_; in the city, without the walls, at a place near
the _porta decumana_. Preparatory to the stroke, the criminal was tied
to a stake, and whipped with rods. In the early ages the blow was
given with an axe; but in after-times with a sword, which was thought
the more reputable manner of dying. The execution was but clumsily
performed in the first times; but afterwards they grew more expert,
and took the head off clean, with one circular stroke.
In England, beheading is the punishment of nobles; being reputed not
to derogate from nobility, as hanging does. In France, during the
revolutionary government, the practice of beheading by means of an
instrument called a _guillotine_ (so denominated from the name of its
inventor) was exceedingly general. It resembles a kind of instrument
long since used for the same purpose in Scotland, and called a
_maiden_.
It is universally known, that, at the execution of King Charles the
First, a man in a vizor performed the office of executioner. This
circumstance has given rise to a variety of conjectures and accounts;
in some of which, one William Walker is said to be the executioner; in
others, it is supposed to be a Richard Brandon, of whom a long account
was published in an Exeter newspaper of 1784. But William Lilly, in
his "History of his Life and Times," has the following remarkable
passage. "Many have curiously inquired who it was that cut off his
(the king's) head: I have no permission to speak of such things; only
this much I say, he that did it, is as valiant and resolute a man
as lives, and one of a competent fortune." When examined before the
parliament of Charles II., he states, "That the next Sunday but one
after Charles the First was beheaded, Robert Spavin, secretary to
Lieutenant-General Cromwell at that time, invited himself to dine with
me, and brought Anthony Pierson and several others along with him to
dinner. That their principal discourse all dinner time was only who
it was that beheaded the king. One said it was the common hangman;
another, Hugh Peters; others also were nominated, but none concluded.
Robert Spavin, so soon as dinner was done, took me by the hand and
carried me to the south window: saith he, 'These are all mistaken;
they have not named the man that did the fact; it was Lieut. Colonel
Joice. I was in the room when he fitted himself for the work; stood
behind him when he did it; when done, went in with him again. There is
no man knows this but my master, (viz. Cromwell,) Commissary Ireton,
and myself.'--'Doth not Mr. Rushworth know it?' saith I.--'No, he doth
not know it,' saith Spavin. The same thing Spavin hath often related
to me when we were alone."
The following description of the Maiden, by Mr. Pennant, may not prove
uninteresting:--"This machine of death is now destroyed; but I saw one
of the same kind in a room under the Parliament-house in Edinburgh,
where it was introduced by the Regent Morton, who took a model of it
as he passed through Halifax, and at length suffered by it himself.
It is in form of a painter's easel, and about ten feet high; at four
feet from the bottom is the cross bar on which the felon lays his
head, which is kept down by another placed above. In the inner edges
of the frame are grooves; in these is placed a sharp axe, with a vast
weight of lead, supported at the very summit with a peg: to that peg
is fastened a cord, which the executioner cutting, the axe falls, and
does the affair effectually, without suffering the unhappy criminal to
undergo a repetition of strokes, as has been the case in the common
method. I must add, that if the sufferer is condemned for stealing
a horse or cow, the string is tied to the beast, which, on being
whipped, pulls out the peg, and becomes the executioner."
[2] This celebrated painter, whilst decorating the dome of St. Paul's
Cathedral, nearly fell a victim to his zeal in that undertaking. One
day, when pursuing his task on the scaffold erected round the dome
for that purpose, he kept walking backwards, surveying the effect of
his work, until he had nearly approached the edge, from which another
step would have precipitated him. At this instant his servant, who
perceived the danger his master was in, with a wonderful presence of
mind seized a pot of colour, and threw it over the painting. This
caused Sir James to rush forward for the preservation of his work, and
he was thus saved from being dashed to pieces, which, but for this
timely intervention, must have been his fate. This eminent man painted
the whole of the cupola of St. Paul's, and also the halls of Greenwich
Hospital and Blenheim. He was born in 1675, and was originally a
house-painter, but afterwards applied himself to historical subjects,
and equalled the best painters of his time. In 1719 he was appointed
Historical Painter to George I., and shortly afterwards was created
a knight. He was employed in several extensive works, for which he
was in general very inadequately paid; and, at times, even found it
difficult to obtain the stipulated price. His demands were contested
at Greenwich Hospital, although he only received 25s. a square yard;
about the same time a foreigner, for doing less work at Montague
House, received 2000_l._ for his work, besides 600_l._ for his diet.
For St. Paul's he received 40_s._ a square yard. He also decorated
More Park, but was obliged to sue Mr. Styles for it; he, however,
not only recovered 3,500_l._ the sum agreed to be paid him, but
500_l._ more for decorations about the house. Notwithstanding these
difficulties, he acquired a considerable fortune, and was several
years in parliament; he was also a Fellow of the Royal Society.
His genius was equally happy in history, allegory, landscape, and
architecture; he even practised the last science as a man of business,
and built several houses. He died in 1734, in the same place where he
was born. He left a son, who followed his father's profession; and a
daughter, who married the celebrated Hogarth.
[3] It may not be uninteresting to the reader to know that Murphy was
executed on the 27th of March, 1728, for stealing plate.
[4] It was formerly customary to oblige persons suspected of murder to
touch the murdered body, for the discovery of their guilt or innocence.
This way of finding murderers was practised in Denmark by King
Christianus II., and permitted over all his kingdom; the occasion
whereof was this:--Certain gentlemen being on an evening together in
a stove, or tavern, fell out among themselves, and from words came to
blows, (the candles being out,) insomuch that one of them was stabbed
with a poniard. Now the murderer was unknown, by reason of the number,
although the person stabbed accused pursuivant of the king's, who was
one of the company.
The king, to find out the homicide, caused them all to come together
in the stove, and, standing round the corpse, he commanded that
they should, one after another, lay their right hand on the slain
gentleman's naked breast, swearing that they had not killed him. The
gentlemen did so, and no sign appeared against them; the pursuivant
only remained, who, condemned before in his own conscience, went,
first of all, and kissed the dead man's feet; but, as soon as he had
laid his hand upon his breast, the blood gushed forth in abundance,
both out of his wound and his nostrils; so that, urged by this evident
accusation, he confessed the murder, and was, by the king's own
sentence, immediately beheaded. Such was the origin of this practice,
which was so common in many of the countries in Europe, for finding
out unknown murderers.
[5] Until the thirtieth year of the reign of King George III.
this punishment was inflicted on women convicted of murdering
their husbands, which crime was denominated petit-treason. It has
frequently, from some accident happening in strangling the malefactor,
produced the horrid effects above related. In the reign of Mary
(the cruel) this death was commonly practised upon the objects of
her vengeance; and many bishops, rather than deny their religious
opinions, were burnt even without previous strangulation. It was
high time this part of the sentence the type of barbarism, should be
dispensed with. The punishment now inflicted for this most unnatural
and abhorred crime is hanging.
[6] It has been a very ancient practice, on the night preceding the
execution of condemned criminals, for the bellman of the parish of
St. Sepulchre to go under Newgate, and, ringing his bell, to repeat
the following verses, as a piece of friendly advice, to the unhappy
wretches under sentence of death:--
All you that in the condemn'd hole do lie,
Prepare you, for to-morrow you shall die.
Watch all, and pray, the hour is drawing near,
That you before the Almighty must appear;
Examine well yourselves, in time repent,
That you may not t' eternal flames be sent,
And when St. Sepulchre's bell to-morrow tolls,
The Lord above have mercy on your souls!
Past twelve o'clock!
The following extract from Stow's Survey of London, page 125 of the
quarto edition, printed in 1618, will prove that the above verses
ought to be repeated by a clergyman, instead of a bellman:--"Robert
Doue, citizen and merchant taylor, of London, gave to the parish
church of St. Sepulchres the somme of 50_l._ That after the several
sessions of London, when the prisoners remain in the gaole, as
condemned men to death, expecting execution on the morrow following;
the clarke (that is, the parson) of the church shoold come in the
night time, and likewise early in the morning, to the window of
the prison where they lye, and there ringing certain toles with a
hand-bell, appointed for the purpose, he doth afterwards (in most
Christian manner) put them in mind of their present condition, and
ensuing execution, desiring them to be prepared therefore as they
ought to be. When they are in the cart and brought before the wall
of the church, there he standeth ready with the same bell, and after
certain toles rehearseth an appointed praier, desiring all the people
there present to pray for them. The beadle also of Merchant Taylors'
Hall hath an honest stipend allowed to see that this is duely done."
[7] In Mr. Ainsworth's Romance of "Rookwood," Turpin is one of the
most striking characters.
[8] The officers' half-pikes.
[9] "On Saturday last a Fleet parson was convicted before Sir Ric.
Brocas of forty-three oaths, (on the information of a plyer for
weddings there,) for which a warrant was granted to levy 4_l._ 6s. on
the goods of the said parson; but, upon application to his Worship, he
was pleased to remit 1s. per oath; upon which the plyer swore he would
swear no more against any man upon the like occasion, finding he could
get nothing by it."--_Grub-Street Journal, 20 July, 1732._
[10] In a letter to George Montagu, Esq. dated July 17, 1753, Horace
Walpole says:--
"Lady Anne Paulett's daughter is eloped with a country clergyman. The
Duchess of Argyle harangues against the Marriage Bill not taking place
immediately, and is persuaded that all the girls will go off before
next Lady-day."
[11] In a letter to George Montagu, Esq. from Horace Walpole, is the
following notice of Keith:--
"Strawberry Hill, 11th June 1753.
"I shall only tell you a _bon mot_ of Keith's, the marriage-broker,
and conclude:
"'G--d d--n the Bishops!' said he, (I beg Miss Montagu's pardon.) 'so
they will hinder my marrying. Well, let 'em, but I'll be revenged:
I'll buy two or three acres of ground, and by G--d I'll under-bury
them all.'"
[12] The "Essay on Woman" was a parody on Pope's sublime work, called
"An Essay on Man."
A learned divine, the Rev. Mr. Kidgell, thus writes on the works of
Wilkes:--
"On the title-page is an obscene print, with a Greek inscription,
signifying 'The Saviour of the world.' We shall, the poison of the
publication being long eradicated, merely quote a commentator on the
subject:
"In this work ('An Essay on Woman') the lewdest thoughts are expressed
in terms of the greatest obscenity; the most horrid impurity is
minutely represented; the sex is vilified and insulted; and the whole
is scurrilous, impudent, and impious, to an incredible degree. In
the variations and notes the inspired writings are perverted into
the gross ideas of a libidinous blasphemer, with an invention new,
wonderful, and horrid. The most solemn and important passages of the
Gospel are tortured into the oblique obscenity of double meanings,
worthy only of him who is at once the enemy of God and man."
[13] The paper entitled "The North Briton" was ordered to be burnt by
the common executioner at the Royal Exchange. Mr. Alderman Harley, one
of the sheriffs of London, attending in his official capacity to see
this carried into execution, was assaulted and wounded by the mob. A
man of the name of John Franklin was seized as one of the offenders,
and committed to Newgate. On the day of the conviction of Wilkes he
was tried for this outrage at the Old Bailey, and found guilty.
When the trial was ended, the worthy alderman addressed the Court in
behalf of the prisoner. He said that, for his part, he had forgiven
the affront offered to his own person; that justice required a
prosecution: it had been, by the conviction of the offender, in
part satisfied, and therefore he hoped the Court would mitigate his
punishment. The Court complied with the prosecutor's humane request,
and sentenced the prisoner to a short imprisonment, to pay a fine
of six shillings and eight pence, and to find security for his good
behaviour for one year.
[14] "It was done in the passage leading to the chapel, by order of
Mr. Akerman, the keeper, to prevent his being gazed at; to whom he
desired I would return his sincere thanks for all his civilities to
him, even to the last."
[15] Dr. H. More's Continuation of Glanvil's Collection of Relations
in proof of Witchcraft.
* * * * *
Typographical errors corrected by the etext transcriber:
with what had occcured=> with what had occured {pg 36}
acertain the cause=> ascertain the cause {pg 72}
continuing the daugerous=> continuing the dangerous {pg 164}
indicted as accessaries=> indicted as accessories {pg 243}
he make a speech=> he made a speech {pg 295}
She answerered=> She answered {pg 304}
which was propoeed=> which was proposed {pg 391}
four oclock precisely=> four o'clock precisely {pg 402}
On Saturday, Septemer 17=> On Saturday, September 17 {pg 412}
here utterred an expression=> here uttered an expression {pg 435}
who, I I understand=> who, I understand {pg 440}
a full desciption of=> a full description of {pg 205}
and extraordinay manner=> and extraordinary manner {pg 507}
In the hopes of averting=> in the hopes of averting {pg 529}
unsconscious of the fate=> unconscious of the fate {pg 550}
as far as he was permited=> as far as he was permitted {pg 562}