THE LEIGH PERROTS AND BATH
1799-1800
Mrs. Austen's brother, James Leigh Perrot, and his wife had for many
years led a prosperous and uneventful life at Scarlets, enjoying the
respect and friendship of a large circle of acquaintances. Scarlets was
a small property on the Bath road, about thirty miles from London,
adjoining the hamlet of Hare Hatch, where (as was often the case on a
great highroad) a number of gentlemen's places of moderate size were
congregated within easy reach of each other. Among those who sooner or
later were neighbours of the Leigh Perrots were Maria Edgeworth's father
Richard Lovell Edgeworth (who speaks of the help he received from Mr.
Perrot in his experiments of telegraphing from Hare Hatch to Nettlebed
by means of windmills), and Thomas Day, the author of _Sandford and
Merton_. The house at Scarlets in its then existing shape was the work
of Mr. Leigh Perrot, and was of a suitable size for a childless couple
in easy circumstances. Its owner had abilities which might have stood
him in good stead in any profession, had he adopted one; and he was of a
kind and affectionate disposition, combining an easy temper with ready
wit, and much resolution of character. His wife was hardly formed for
popularity, but she was highly respected. She was not exactly
open-handed, but she had a great idea of the claims of family ties, and
a keen sense of justice as between herself and others. The couple were
unusually devoted to each other. The only crook in their lot appeared to
be the constant gout attacks from which the husband suffered, and the
necessity for frequent visits to Bath: visits, by the way, which had
helped to give to their niece, Jane Austen, such good opportunities for
studying the Bath varieties of human nature.
The journey, however, of the Austens to Bath in the spring of 1799
(described in our next letters) was independent of the Leigh Perrots.
Edward Austen had been suffering, like his uncle, from gout, and
determined to try the waters of Bath; his mother and Jane accompanying
his family party thither. But the Perrots were already settled in
Paragon Buildings[99] when the Austens arrived, and the two families
would be constantly meeting.
The Austens took up their quarters in Queen Square, which Jane seems to
have liked much better than she made her Miss Musgroves like it when she
wrote _Persuasion_, sixteen years later.
13 Queen Square: Friday [May 17, 1799].
MY DEAREST CASSANDRA,--Our journey yesterday went
off exceedingly well; nothing occurred to alarm or
delay us. We found the roads in excellent order,
had very good horses all the way, and reached
Devizes with ease by four o'clock. I suppose John
has told you in what manner we were divided when
we left Andover, and no alteration was afterwards
made. At Devizes we had comfortable rooms and a
good dinner, to which we sat down about five;
amongst other things we had asparagus and a
lobster, which made me wish for you, and some
cheesecakes, on which the children[100] made so
delightful a supper as to endear the town of
Devizes to them for a long time.
Well, here we are at Bath; we got here about one
o'clock, and have been arrived just long enough to
go over the house, fix on our rooms, and be very
well pleased with the whole of it. Poor Elizabeth
has had a dismal ride of it from Devizes, for it
has rained almost all the way, and our first view
of Bath has been just as gloomy as it was last
November twelvemonth.
I have got so many things to say, so many things
equally important, that I know not on which to
decide at present, and shall therefore go and eat
with the children.
We stopped in Paragon as we came along, but as it
was too wet and dirty for us to get out, we could
only see Frank, who told us that his master was
very indifferent, but had had a better night last
night than usual.
* * * * *
We are exceedingly pleased with the house; the
rooms are quite as large as we expected. Mrs.
Bromley is a fat woman in mourning, and a little
black kitten runs about the staircase. Elizabeth
has the apartment within the drawing-room; she
wanted my mother to have it, but as there was no
bed in the inner one, and the stairs are so much
easier of ascent, or my mother so much stronger
than in Paragon as not to regard the double
flight, it is settled for us to be above, where we
have two very nice-sized rooms, with dirty quilts
and everything comfortable. I have the outward and
larger apartment, as I ought to have; which is
quite as large as our bed-room at home, and my
mother's is not materially less. The beds are
both as large as any at Steventon, and I have a
very nice chest of drawers and a closet full of
shelves--so full indeed that there is nothing else
in it, and it should therefore be called a
cupboard rather than a closet, I suppose.
* * * * *
There was a very long list of arrivals here in the
newspaper yesterday, so that we need not
immediately dread absolute solitude; and there is
a public breakfast in Sydney Gardens every
morning, so that we shall not be wholly starved.
Yours very affectionately,
JANE.
13 Queen Square: Sunday [June 2, 1799].
Flowers are very much worn, and fruit is still
more the thing. Elizabeth has a bunch of
strawberries, and I have seen grapes, cherries,
plums, and apricots. There are likewise almonds
and raisins, French plums, and tamarinds at the
grocers', but I have never seen any of them in
hats. A plum or greengage would cost three
shillings; cherries and grapes about five, I
believe, but this is at some of the dearest shops.
My aunt has told me of a very cheap one, near
Walcot Church, to which I shall go in quest of
something for you. I have never seen an old woman
at the pump-room.
* * * * *
I spent Friday evening with the Mapletons, and was
obliged to submit to being pleased in spite of my
inclination. We took a very charming walk from six
to eight up Beacon Hill, and across some fields,
to the village of Charlecombe, which is sweetly
situated in a little green valley, as a village
with such a name ought to be. Marianne is sensible
and intelligent, and even Jane, considering how
fair she is, is not unpleasant. We had a Miss
North and a Mr. Gould of our party; the latter
walked home with me after tea. He is a very young
man, just entered Oxford, wears spectacles, and
has heard that _Evelina_ was written by Dr.
Johnson.
* * * * *
There is to be a grand gala on Tuesday
evening[101] in Sydney Gardens, a concert, with
illuminations and fireworks. To the latter
Elizabeth and I look forward with pleasure, and
even the concert will have more than its usual
charm for me, as the gardens are large enough for
me to get pretty well beyond the reach of its
sound. In the morning Lady Willoughby is to
present the colours to some corps, or Yeomanry, or
other, in the Crescent.
13 Queen Square: Tuesday [June 11, 1799].
I would not let Martha read _First Impressions_
again upon any account, and am very glad that I
did not leave it in your power. She is very
cunning, but I saw through her design; she means
to publish it from memory, and one more perusal
must enable her to do it. As for _Fitz-Albini_,
when I get home she shall have it, as soon as ever
she will own that Mr. Elliott is handsomer than
Mr. Lance, that fair men are preferable to black;
for I mean to take every opportunity of rooting
out her prejudices.
I am very glad you liked my lace, and so are you,
and so is Martha, and we are all glad together. I
have got your cloak home, which is quite
delightful--as delightful at least as half the
circumstances which are called so.
I do not know what is the matter with me to-day,
but I cannot write quietly; I am always wandering
away into some exclamation or other. Fortunately I
have nothing very particular to say.
* * * * *
Fanny desires her love to you, her love to
grandpapa, her love to Anna, and her love to
Hannah; the latter is particularly to be
remembered. Edward desires his love to you, to
grandpapa, to Anna, to little Edward, to Aunt
James and Uncle James, and he hopes all your
turkeys and ducks, and chicken and guinea fowls
are very well; and he wishes you very much to send
him a printed letter, and so does Fanny--and they
both rather think they shall answer it.
13 Queen Square: Wednesday [June 19, 1799].
Last Sunday we all drank tea in Paragon; my uncle
is still in his flannels, but is getting better
again.
* * * * *
Last night we were in Sydney Gardens again, as
there was a repetition of the gala which went off
so ill on the 4th. We did not go till nine, and
then were in very good time for the fireworks,
which were really beautiful, and surpassing my
expectation; the illuminations too were very
pretty. The weather was as favourable as it was
otherwise a fortnight ago. The play on Saturday
is, _I hope_, to conclude our gaieties here, for
nothing but a lengthened stay will make it
otherwise. We go with Mrs. Fellowes.
The Austens quitted Bath on Wednesday, June 26, reaching Steventon on
the following day, and leaving the Leigh Perrots to an unexpected
fate--which they had done nothing whatever to deserve.[102]
On Thursday, August 8, Mrs. Leigh Perrot went into a milliner's shop at
the corner of Bath and Stall Streets, kept by a certain Mrs. Gregory
(but known as Smith's), and bought a piece of _black_ lace. She paid for
it, and took it away wrapped up in a piece of paper. After leaving the
shop, Mrs. Perrot met her husband and strolled about with him. As they
re-passed the same shop a quarter of an hour later, Mrs. Gregory rushed
out and accused Mrs. Perrot of having in her possession a piece of
_white_ lace. Mrs. Perrot replied that if so it must have been put up
in her parcel by mistake. She then handed her parcel to Mrs. Gregory to
examine, when a piece of _white_ lace was found therein as well as a
piece of _black_. Mrs. Gregory at once accused Mrs. Perrot of having
stolen it, and, refusing to listen to any protest, made off with the
incriminating piece of lace. A little later, as the Perrots were turning
the corner of the Abbey Churchyard, Charles Filby, the shop assistant
who had actually sold the black lace, came up and asked Mr. Perrot his
name. Mr. Perrot replied that he lived at No. 1 Paragon Buildings, and
that his name was on the door.
On the same day, Mrs. Gregory and Filby went to the town hall to lay
information before the magistrates; but found them so busily engaged in
dealing with the excesses of the soldiers who were at that time passing
through Bath, that the information could not be taken before August 14.
Meanwhile, the piece of _white_ lace was lodged--at any rate, for the
night of August 8--at the house of a certain printer named Gye.
The result of the magistrates' inquiry may be discovered in _The Times_
of August 20, where we read:--
The Lady of a Gentleman of Bath, possessed of a
good fortune, and respected by a numerous circle
of acquaintance, was committed on Thursday by G.
Chapman, Esq., the Mayor, to the County Gaol at
Ilchester, on a charge of privately stealing a
card of lace from a haberdasher's shop.
As Mrs. Perrot did not come up for trial until the end of the following
March, she had to undergo a long and trying confinement. It appears that
she was not lodged actually in the gaol, but in some neighbouring
house, kept by a man of the name of Scadding.
The charge was a monstrous one; the accused had ample means to indulge
every wish, and nothing short of lunacy (of which she never showed the
slightest sign) could have induced her to commit so petty a theft. Her
high character and the absence of motive combined to render it
incredible, and, had she been capable of such a deed, she would not have
courted detection by walking quietly past the shop, a quarter of an hour
later, with the parcel in her hand. There were also strong reasons for
thinking that the accusation was the result of a deep-laid plot. Gye,
the printer, who lived in the market-place, was believed to be the chief
instigator. His character was indifferent, and he had money invested in
Gregory's shop; and the business was in so bad a way that there was a
temptation to seek for some large haul by way of blackmail. Mrs. Leigh
Perrot was selected as the victim, people thought, because her husband
was so extremely devoted to her that he would be sure to do anything to
save her from the least vexation. If so, the conspirators were mistaken
in their man. Mr. Perrot resolved to see the matter through, and, taking
no notice of the many suggestions as to hush-money that were apparently
circulated, engaged the best counsel possible, secured his most
influential acquaintance as witnesses to his wife's character, and spent
the terrible intervening period in confinement with her at Ilchester. He
was well aware that the criminal law of England, as it then existed,
made the lot of untried prisoners as hard, and the difficulty of proving
their innocence as great, as possible; he knew also that in the seething
disquiet of men's minds, brought about by the French Revolution, it was
quite possible they might encounter a jury anxious to cast discredit on
the well-to-do classes. He was therefore prepared for a failure of
justice; and, we are told, had arranged that in case of an adverse
verdict, followed by transportation, he would sell his property and
accompany his wife across the seas.
Among the warmest supporters of the Leigh Perrots was Mr. Morris--a
lawyer of eminence, well used to dealing with evidence, but now living
as an invalid at Bath. He was a total stranger to the accused, but
maintained most energetically that, apart from her well-known character,
the nature of the evidence adduced against her would have been
sufficient to prove her innocence.
The amazement and indignation of the Steventon party may be imagined.
They were too sensible to believe that so mean and objectless a crime
should really have been committed by a respectable woman--a near
relation of their own, whom they knew intimately; but it was not easy to
determine how to show their sympathy. Mr. and Mrs. Austen seem at last
to have come (no doubt with their daughters' good-will) to the momentous
decision mentioned in the following letter, which was addressed to Mrs.
Leigh Perrot on January 11, 1800, by her cousin, Montague
Cholmeley.[103]
You tell me that your good sister Austen has
offered you one or both of her daughters to
continue with you during your stay in that vile
place, but you decline the kind offer, as you
cannot procure them accommodation in the house
with you, and you cannot let those elegant young
women be your inmates in a prison, nor be
subjected to the inconveniences which you are
obliged to put up with.
So Cassandra and Jane just escaped a residence in gaol and contact with
criminals.
Another letter written about this time must have given much pleasure to
the Leigh Perrots:--
White Hart, Bath. [No date.]
HONORED SIR,--You may have forgot your old
postillon Ben Dunford but I shall never forget
yours and my mistresses great goodness to me when
I was taken with the small pox in your sarvice.
You sent me very careful to mothers, and paid a
nurse and my doctor, and my board for a long time
as I was bad, and when I was too bad with biles
all over my head so as I could not go to sarvice
for a many weeks you maintained me. the famaly as
I lives with be a going thro' Bath into Devonshire
and we stops two days at the Inn and there I heard
of the bad trick as those bad shopkeepers has
sarved my mistress and I took the libarty of going
to your house to enquire how you both do and the
housekeeper said she sent a pasel to you every
week and if I had anything to say she could send a
letter. I hope Honored Sir you will forgive my
taking such a libarty to write but I wish anybody
could tell me how to do you and mistress any good.
I would travel night and day to serve you both. I
be at all times with my humble duty to mistress
and you Honored Sir your dutifull sarvant
BEN DUNFORD.
James Leigh Perrot Esq.
The trial took place at Taunton on Saturday, March 29. The old Castle
Hall--where Judge Jeffreys once sat on his 'Bloody Assizes'--said to be
capable of containing 2000 persons, was filled at an early hour. So
urgent was the curiosity, even of the Bar, that the 'Nisi Prius' Court,
which stood at the opposite end of the hall, was not opened for business
that morning--all the counsel on the circuit surrounding the table of
the Crown Bar; while the rest of the hall was thronged with anxious
spectators, many hundreds of whom could not possibly have heard a word
that was said, and were almost crushed to death and suffocated with
heat. Between seven and eight o'clock, Mrs. Leigh Perrot, who had been
conveyed from Ilchester, appeared in the dock, attended by Mr. Leigh
Perrot and three ladies, and the proceedings commenced.
After the evidence for the prosecution was closed, the prisoner was
invited by the judge to make her defence.
She attempted to address the Court; but, after speaking a few sentences,
became so much agitated that her voice failed her; whereupon Mr. Jekyll,
one of her counsel, was requested to repeat to the Court what she wished
to address to them. She then dictated as follows:--
MY LORD AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY,--
I am informed by my counsel, that they cannot be
permitted to offer any observations to you on my
case.[104] The circumstances of it do not render
it necessary to detain you long. I shall therefore
take this opportunity of troubling you with a few
words.
Placed in a situation the most eligible that any
woman could desire, with supplies so ample that I
was left rich after every wish was gratified;
blessed in the affections of the most generous man
as a husband, what could induce me to commit such
a crime? Depraved indeed must that mind be that
under such circumstances could be so culpable.
You will hear from my noble and truly respectable
friends what has been my conduct and character for
a long series of years; you will hear what has
been, and what is now, their opinion of me. Can
you suppose that disposition so totally altered,
as to lose all recollection of the situation I
held in society--to hazard for this meanness my
character and reputation, or to endanger the
health and peace of mind of a husband whom I would
die for?
Here her voice faltered; she seemed to be on the point of fainting, and
Mr. Leigh Perrot, who had sustained all this trying scene with wonderful
resolution, put his handkerchief to his face and wept in agony; many
persons in Court, even amongst the counsel, participating in his
emotion.
The prisoner continued:--
You have heard their evidence against me. I shall
make no comment upon it--I shall leave that task
where I am certain it will be executed with
justice and mercy. I know my own oath in this case
is inadmissible, but I call upon that God whom we
all adore to attest that I am innocent of this
charge, and may He reward or punish me as I speak
true or false in denying it. I call that God to
witness that I did not know that I had the lace in
my possession, nor did I know it when Mrs. Gregory
accosted me in the street. I have nothing more to
add.
Then followed the evidence for the prisoner, which was chiefly evidence
to character, and came from persons occupying prominent positions who
knew her well, either at her Berkshire home or at Bath.
The judge's summing up occupied nearly an hour. In it he said that it
was impossible that any person should have a higher character than the
prisoner; but if the jury were satisfied with the evidence for the
prosecution and believed it, that character ought not to avail her. If,
however, upon taking all the circumstances of the case into
consideration, the jury should see any reason to disbelieve the
witnesses for the prosecution, or which led them to doubt of the
prisoner's guilt, they should recollect the very excellent character
which had been given her, and in that case it ought to bear great weight
with them towards an acquittal. He also alluded to the conduct of the
accused after leaving the shop as not being that of a guilty person, and
commented on the ease with which she could have secreted the parcel
before it was discovered.
The jury evidently saw great reason to disbelieve the witnesses for the
prosecution, and, after only fifteen[105] minutes, returned a verdict of
'Not Guilty.'
The _Star_ tells us that 'the trial lasted seven hours, and the scene of
the acquittal was extremely affecting; the agitation and embraces of Mr.
and Mrs. Perrot may be more easily conceived than described. The Court
was crowded with elegantly dressed women.'
Throughout the long months over which the affair extended, the Leigh
Perrots had acted as persons convinced of the baselessness of the
charge, and determined to confront the accusers, and, as far as the
existing state of the law allowed, to establish the innocence of the
accused.
Among the quantity of congratulatory letters received by Mr. Leigh
Perrot, we must content ourselves with quoting the following from Mr. R.
L. Edgeworth:--
Edgeworthstown, Ireland: [April 7, 1800.]
MY DEAR SIR,--I do not think that I ever felt so
much astonishment or indignation as at the
abominable transaction which was related in the
_Star_ of March 31st.
Among my numerous friends and acquaintance, if
there was a couple whom I could have selected as
the farthest removed from being the objects of
such a villainous attack it would have been
yourselves! But I too well know, that neither
perfect innocence nor consummate prudence are
sufficient shields against conspiracy and folly,
and that bankrupt fortune and bankrupt character
prepare men for the most desperate attempts.
I trouble you, my Dear Sir, with a few lines to
express the deep sense that I have of regard and
esteem for you and the amiable partner of your
happiness; for so many as thirty-four years we
have been acquainted, and during that time I do
not think that I have met any man of such
singularly nice feelings of honour and justice.
I am sensible that there is some impropriety in
this address--but you must excuse it as I snatched
this piece of paper the moment I had read the
paragraph I allude to--and with tears of
indignation in my eyes--aye Sir!--with actual, not
sentimental, tears in my eyes I sat down to write
to you.
Perhaps, after all, you are not the objects of
this transaction!
Even if that should be the fact you will pardon me
for renewing my claim to your remembrance and for
assuring you that you possess my esteem and
affection.
Yours sincerely,
RICHD LOVELL EDGEWORTH.
James Leigh Perrot, Esq., Bath, England.
This strange and painful episode in the life of the family was thus
brought to a satisfactory ending. An accusation of petty and
purposeless theft had been made against a woman whose uprightness was
known to all those around her; a wife who enjoyed (then and always) the
absolute confidence of an upright husband. It had been found baseless by
a jury after only a few minutes' deliberation; and the Leigh Perrots had
the pleasure of seeing the high estimation in which they were held by
their neighbours exhibited in a strong light. This estimation was to be
theirs for the remainder of their lives, extending in his case over
seventeen, and in hers over thirty-five years.[106] For our particular
purpose the story seems worth narrating, because it shows that the
peaceful and well-ordered progress of Jane Austen's life was not beyond
the reach of tragic possibilities. Indeed, at or near this time there
were three particular occurrences which, when taken together, might well
disturb the serenity and cheerfulness of her mind, and indispose her for
writing--especially writing of a humorous character. One of these
events, which has already been recorded, was her love story in the West;
another was Mrs. Leigh Perrot's trouble; and the third--the loss of her
old home--will form part of the subject of the next two chapters.
FOOTNOTES:
[99] Paragon Buildings are well placed in a convenient part of Bath,
between York House Hotel and Walcot Church. From the back of the houses
there is a fine view to the south.
[100] Fanny (Lady Knatchbull) and Edward (Knight).
[101] I.e. on the King's Birthday (June 4).
[102] Mr. Leigh Perrot was at this time sixty-three and his wife
fifty-four years old.
[103] Created a baronet in 1806.
[104] Before the passing of the Prisoners' Counsel Act of 1836, counsel
were not allowed to address the Court on behalf of prisoners tried for
felony.
[105] Seven minutes, according to another account.
[106] If this story were not specially well authenticated, it would be
incredible; but we must remember that this all happened before the
reforms of Sir Samuel Romilly, when the law was in a chaotic state, and
when offences against property were very severely dealt with. Any
larceny above the value of a 1_s._ was a felony, punishable--nominally
by death, and actually by seven years' transportation; though the
transportation may frequently have been commuted to a sentence of
imprisonment. Magistrates had no power of bailing a person committed for
a felony, if the stolen article were found in his possession.