Part 22
Indeed, even before that, and as far back as May, 1788, a Mrs. Smith had been stabbed in the upper part of her thigh by a man in Fleet Street, and was even followed by him to a house in Johnson's Court, to which she was going, and watched by him until she was let in. In May, 1789, a Mrs. Godfrey was similarly stabbed in Boswell Court, Fleet Street; and another lady was left wounded at her door. In March, 1790, a Mrs. Blaney, of Bury Street, was stabbed at her door after she had knocked. Dr. Smith, seeing an account of this outrage in a newspaper, inserted a notice in the _Morning Herald_, and that journal, having made some severe remarks on the matter, public opinion began to be awakened, and numerous letters were written, on the subject, to the newspapers of the day. The thing began to be talked of in the higher circles. A young lady named Porter had been stabbed whilst, in the company of her sisters, returning from the Drawing Room at St. James's, on the 18th of January, the Queen's Birthday; and since that time, several people had been wounded by this miscreant, who, fortunately, always failed in doing serious injury to his victims.
Mr. John Julius Angerstein (whose name will ever be associated with the commencement of our National Gallery) was very active, and inaugurated a subscription at Lloyd's, to which the guineas flowed merrily, for the capture, and conviction of the "Monster." The police began to bestir themselves, and they, too, issued placards. One will serve as a type of all:--
"Public Office, Bow Street, _Thursday, April 29, 1790_.
"One Hundred Pounds Reward.
"Several ladies having, of late, been inhumanly cut, and maimed, by a person answering the following description, whoever will apprehend him, or give such information to Sir Sampson Wright, at the above office, as may be the means of his being apprehended, shall immediately upon his committal to prison, receive fifty pounds from Mr. Angerstein of Pall Mall, and the further sum of fifty pounds upon his conviction. _N.B._--He appears to be about thirty years of age, of a middle size, rather thin make, a little pockmarked, of a pale complexion, large nose; light brown hair, tied in a queue, cut short and frizzed low at the sides; is sometimes dressed in black, and sometimes in a shabby blue coat; sometimes wears straw-coloured breeches, with half boots, laced up before: sometimes wears a cocked hat, and at other times a round hat, with a very high top, and generally carries a Wangee cane in his hand.
"All servants are recommended to take notice that if any man has stayed at home without apparent cause, within these few days, during the daylight. All washerwomen and servants should take notice of any blood on a man's handkerchief, or linen, as the wretch generally fetches blood when he strikes. All servants should examine if any man carries sharp weapons about him, and if there is any blood thereon, particularly tucks; and maid-servants are to be told that a tuck is generally at the head of a stick, which comes out by a sudden jerk. All cutlers are desired to watch if any man answering the above description is desirous of having his weapon of attack very sharp."
All baker's men were asked to give notice at every house they called at, of the above reward, and Mr. Angerstein promised twenty pounds to any man by whose instrumentality the Monster was discovered.
Additional publicity was, moreover, given by other means. The _Morning Herald_ of April 27th says:
"A new musical piece was produced last night at Astley's called The Monster, and being brought forward at a time when the attention of all London was engaged in discovering him, cannot fail of producing full houses. Astley seems to have taken up the matter very seriously, as the piece abounds with much satire against the Monster. The songs also are well adapted: the chorus of one concluding as follows,
'When the Monster is taken in the fact We'll have him tried by the Coventry Act,[16] The Black Act The Coventry Act,'
produced unbounded applause. This piece will certainly be a good acquisition to Astley, who is said to be the author."
[Footnote 16: This Act, against cutting and maiming, owed its name to Sir John Coventry, who, in Charles the Second's time, was favourable to a motion, in the House of Commons, to impose a tax on play-houses, which was opposed by the Court. Sir John Birkenhead having remarked that the players were the King's servants, and a part of his pleasure, Sir J. Coventry asked "Whether the King's pleasure lie among the men, or the women, that acted?" This was neither forgotten nor forgiven, and Sir John was set upon whilst walking home, by some ruffians. He defended himself desperately, and wounded some of his assailants, but was overpowered, and his nose slit to the bone, "for reflecting on the King." This outrage excited great indignation at the time.]
One lady (Mrs. R. Walpole) was fortunate enough to escape being wounded, owing to her having an apple in her pocket: an incident which gave rise to some poetic effusions:
"Eve, for an apple, lost immortal life: From you an apple turn'd the Monster's knife! Can greater proof, since Eve, be given Of diabolic strife, Or interposing Heaven?"
"The apple was, in days of yore, An Agent to the Devil, When Eve was tempted to explore The sense of good and evil; But present chronicles can give An instance quite uncommon, How that which ruined Mother Eve Hath saved a Modern Woman."
The Monster was even made a party to Anti-slavery agitation, for at the Westminster Forum in Panton Street, Haymarket, "by desire of several ladies," was debated the question: "Which is the greater disgrace to humanity, the ruffian who drags the female African from her family, her kindred, and her native country, or the Monster who has lately wounded, or terrified, many ladies in this metropolis?" The result of this discussion is not handed down to posterity.
Still the Monster kept steadily at his work, and almost every day brought its tale of some woman being stabbed: and, one being injured in St. Pancras Parish, a meeting of the inhabitants was called at the Percy Coffee House, on May 7th, and an association was formed "to nightly patrol the streets of the south division of Saint Pancras, from half-an-hour before sunset, till eleven at night, for the public safety, and especially to guard that sex which a Monster, or Monsters, in opposition to the dictates of nature, and humanity, have dared to assault, and wound, with wanton, and savage, cruelty."
The idea that these outrages were not done single-handed, was on the increase, and the indefatigable Mr. Angerstein again issued a placard, and "informs the public, that from information he has received of the person who, since Friday last, has assaulted and wounded several women, there is great reason to fear that more than one of these wretches infests the streets: it is therefore thought necessary to give the following description of one, who, within this week, has committed many acts of cruelty upon women," and gives four descriptions of the man's dress, which would lead to the inference that the Monster was in possession of a very extensive wardrobe.
People were now gradually getting into a state of ferment, and the Monster was the engrossing topic of public interest. Of course, then as now, the wrong people were arrested occasionally. One "Walter Hill, was brought before the Magistrate at Litchfield Street on suspicion of being one of the wretches who have cut several women; he was apprehended in Windmill Street, Tottenham Court Road, near the place where two women were cut, though Miss Porter, and several other ladies, declared the prisoner was not the person who wounded them." Nothing could be proved against him, and, ultimately, he was discharged.
Even the light-fingered fraternity entered into the spirit of the times, for _The World_ of May 11th has--"Public Office, Bow St., before Sir Sampson Wright. Yesterday evening, about half after seven o'clock, a gentleman of family and fortune, was surrounded in Holborn by a number of pickpockets, who, after hustling him, and robbing him of his watch, money, and hat, called out: 'That is the Monster, he has just cut a woman.' A vast number of people immediately pursued the gentleman, some calling 'The Monster!' others, 'Stop thief,' till at length he was knocked down, and surrounded by near a thousand people, by whom he was very ill-treated, and, probably, would not have escaped with life, had he not been, by some gentleman, taken into Gray's Inn Coffee House; from whence he was conveyed to the Brown Bear, in Bow Street, in a hackney-coach; where the mob were so exasperated that they broke the windows of the house, and, could they have got at him, would, no doubt, have massacred him: by stratagem he was, at nine o'clock, brought to this office. When the above facts appeared, Sir Sampson Wright lamented that it was not in his power to punish the perpetrators of this daring, and alarming, assault, but did all he could, by giving that gentleman his protection until the mob dispersed."
Accounts of mock assaults were written to the papers, one of them extremely circumstantial, telling how a courageous lady drew a pistol "from her pocket and discharged it into the wretch's neck, immediately under the ear, who instantly left her, uttering the most dreadful imprecations." This, it is needless to say, was denied, and exposed next morning.
Imposture, of course, took advantage of such a golden opportunity, and we find that "the account which appeared in all the newspapers of Miss B. of Marylebone Street, having been twice wounded by the Monster, proves to be a fabrication, for the purpose of exciting compassion, and money, and has, in some degree, answered the purpose. The above discovery has been made, by an investigation of this business, by the Select Vestry of Marylebone Parish. This is a new kind of Monster!"
The _Oracle_ of May 17th tells the following little story:--"Tuesday, about nine o'clock, as Mr. Heather was crossing Tower Hill, he observed a well-dressed woman upon the ground: when he went to her, she said a very tall man had just wounded her with some sharp instrument, and begged his assistance to get to the Minories to a coach, which he readily complied with, upon observing blood in several places upon her gown and apron. However, the coach had not been gone ten minutes, before he found she had picked his pocket of his watch, and about three guineas."
Although there was now a cessation of real attacks by the Monster, the public feeling rose to very fever height. As one newspaper remarked: "The Monster is now a mischief of more than common magnitude. Inhuman himself, the villainy is visited upon all who are of the same sex: alike the source of apprehension, terror, and flight. It is really distressing to walk our streets towards evening. Every woman we meet regards us with distrust, shrinks sidling from our touch, and expects a poignard to pierce what gallantry, and manhood, consider as sacred. There must be a very criminal supineness somewhere, or these execrable villains would, with greater speed, expiate with their lives, the insulted humanity of being."
As an example of the pitch to which the excitement was wrought, the following case may be taken. A man met a girl, and went with her into a public-house. They sat down, and he showed her an artificial bouquet, or nosegay, as it was then called, which he had in his hand, and begged her to accept it. The girl, in taking hold of it, felt something prick her, and it made her hand bleed. She went away, and told the story to some of her friends, who immediately insisted that it must be the Monster, and that a dagger was certainly concealed in the nosegay. The man was in consequence arrested, and kept all night in the watch-house. On enquiry in the morning, it was found that the girl's hand had only been pricked by the wire used to bind the flowers together, and the poor man was, of course, discharged.
But Nemesis was at hand. One of his victims--that Miss Porter, who was stabbed after the Drawing Room, on the Queen's birthday--was walking with Mr. John Coleman, in St. James's Park, on Sunday, June 13th, and the Monster passed her. She at once recognised him, and, her agitation being remarked by Mr. Coleman, she said, "There is the wretch who wounded me." Mr. Coleman left her in charge of her friends, and followed the man, who walked very fast--evidently feeling he had been noticed, and endeavoured to dodge about from Spring Gardens, to Admiralty Passage, back again to Spring Gardens, and up Cockspur Street, to Pall Mall: thence to St. James's Street, and Bolton Street, where he knocked at the door of a house, and was let in. He stayed there about five minutes, and then went to Piccadilly, and St. James's Street, where he knocked at another house, and asked the servant some question. Leaving there, he went to Bond Street, Mr. Coleman endeavouring to insult him, by walking before and behind him, and staring him in the face. He then went to Oxford Street--then called Oxford Road--and Vere Street, where he knocked at an empty house. Then Mr. Coleman spoke to him, and asked him what was the use of knocking so violently at a house palpably empty; and he replied that he knew the people of the house, named Pearce, and knocked again for three or four minutes. He then crossed to South Molton Street, knocked at a house, and was admitted. Mr. Coleman asked the master of the house, Mr. Smith, for information as to the man, but he refused to give any, unless some reason was assigned. Mr. Coleman replied that the other had insulted some ladies under his protection, and that he demanded satisfaction. The Monster offered to meet him at any coffee-house, and gave his address as Fifty-two Jermyn Street. Mr. Coleman then let him go, but upon second thoughts hurried back, and again met him in St. James's Street; and looking at him, told him he did not think he was what he described himself, and asked him to come with him to Mr. Porter's house, which was not far off. He consented, and on seeing him, two of the Miss Porters immediately fainted, but upon recovery unhesitatingly declared him to be "the wretch." He turned to Mr. Coleman and asked: "Do the ladies suspect me to be the person advertised? Am I suspected?"
He was given into custody, and on the 15th of June, the newspapers gave full accounts of his capture and examination.
He proved to be a native of Wales, named Renwick (or Rhynwick) Williams, aged about twenty-three, who was sent young to London, where he was bound apprentice to Sir John Gallini, with a view to his becoming a dancer on the stage. A misunderstanding, as to the disappearance of a watch, severed this connection, and he then led a very loose life. For some little time, about two months, he was a lawyer's clerk, but this employment being only temporary, he was reduced to difficulties, until he met with Mr. Aimable Michell, of Dover Street, who taught him artificial-flower making, and with whom he remained until his arrest.
He was dressed very respectably, in a blue coat, lined, and edged, with buff, buff waistcoat, and black satin breeches.
He was fully identified by the Misses Porter, Miss Frost, Miss Baughan, and Mrs. Franklin, whilst numerous ladies who had been wounded could not identify him. He was of course, remanded. Royalty, in the person of the Duke of Cumberland (afterwards King of Hanover), was present at his examination, and great difficulty was experienced in preserving the prisoner from the fury of the exasperated mob.
On the 16th of June he was again brought up, was identified by two more ladies, and confronted with others, who could not be sure he was the man who had wounded them. The Dukes of York, and Cumberland, and Prince William of Gloucester, besides several peers, were present.
He was brought before the magistrates once more, when another lady identified him, and he was committed for trial.
Owing to the novelty of the crime, great difficulty was experienced as to his indictment, but it was at last settled that he should be tried under the statute 6th Geo. I. c. 23, s. 11, which made it felony, punishable with transportation, for seven years, to assault any person in the public streets, with intent to tear, spoil, cut, burn, or deface, the garments, or clothes, of such person, or persons, provided the act be done in pursuance of such intention.
On Thursday, the 8th of July, Williams was tried at the Old Bailey, before Mr. Justice Buller, charged with making an assault upon Ann Frost, spinster, on the 9th of November last, in Jermyn Street, St. James's, and wickedly, wilfully, and maliciously, tearing, and spoiling, her garments, to wit, the gown, petticoats, and shift, of the said Ann, against the statute in that case provided.
He was also indicted for the commission of a similar offence in Holborn, on the 5th of May, on Sarah, the wife of John Davis. The same on Sarah, the wife of John Godfrey, on the 13th of May, in St. Marylebone. The 26th of September, on Mary Forster, in Maxwell Street. The 6th of December, on Elizabeth Baughan, in Parliament Street. For a like act, on the same day, in the same street, on Frances Baughan. For a like act, on Ann Porter, on the 18th of January, in St. James's Street.
He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by counsel. The case of Miss Porter was then gone into, and the evidence, as already detailed, was adduced. For the defence, he called his master, Mr. Michell, who swore that he was at work till twelve, on the night of the 18th of January, and did not quit his house till after supper at half-past twelve, which was also substantiated by the witness of his sister, Miss Michell, Catherine, and Molly Harmond, and two of the workwomen, besides a customer: and ten witnesses were called as to character. The judge summed up very favourably for the prisoner, but the jury, without hesitation, found him guilty. The judge said, as this was a new case, and he had some doubts as to the indictment, he would respite judgment until he had laid the case before the twelve judges. So this, and the other indictments, were put off until the December Sessions.
There were many accounts of the trial, and numerous portraits were published of Williams, who was by no means bad-looking, thin and pale, with powdered hair "en queue."
The caricaturists took the matter up, and treated the matter as a joke, recommending ladies to have copper petticoats, &c.
But the most awful picture is that of "The Monster going to take his afternoon luncheon," where he is depicted as a terrible being about to devour a pretty girl--but the caricaturist shows us, kindly, "the Monster disappointed of his afternoon luncheon," in which engraving, he has a double shot--one at the somewhat delicate subject of the "dress improver" of the day, and the other, how this fashion might be utilised to baffle the Monster of his intended meal.
There was the usual newspaper correspondents' wrangle, in which, of course, it was unpopular to advance any argument in favour of the Monster. Indeed, _The World_, of October 16th, says: "Writing a defence of the Monster carries with it more serious consequences than people are at first aware of, because it would appear as if publishing accounts, in the newspapers, or otherwise, could really justify atrocious acts. As Junius has said: 'The people at large are never mistaken in their sentiments, and, if they have formed an opinion, there is no taking them out of it by misrepresentation.'" That there was an opinion in his favour is not only evidenced by this, but at the City Debates, Capel Court, Bartholomew Lane, the question was debated on July 12: "Did the late extraordinary conduct ascribed to Renwick Williams (commonly called the Monster) originate in an unfortunate insanity, a diabolical inclination to injure the fair part of the creation, or the groundless apprehension of some mistaken females?"
But the man kept up the feeling against him, by his own conduct, and could not be quiet in prison. _The Oracle_, of August the 20th, has the following account of "The Monster's Ball":--"The depravity of the times was manifested last week, in an eminent degree, in Newgate. The Monster sent cards of invitation to about twenty couple, among whom were some of his alibi friends, his brother, sisters, several of the prisoners, and others, whom we shall take a future opportunity to notice.
"At four o'clock the party sat to tea; this being over, two violins struck up, accompanied by a flute, and the company proceeded to exercise their limbs. In the merry dance, the cuts, and entrechats, of the Monster were much admired, and his adroitness in that amusement must be interesting, from the school in which he acquired this branch of his accomplishments.
"About eight o'clock the company partook of a cold supper, and a variety of wines, such as would not discredit the most sumptuous gala, and about nine o'clock departed, that being the usual hour for locking the doors of the prison."
Williams gradually faded away from public notice until early in November, when eleven of the judges met in Serjeants' Inn Hall, and consulted on his case, which had been reserved. The questions were: First, whether his having an intention to cut the person of Miss Porter, and, in carrying that intention into execution, cutting the garments of that lady, is an offence within the statute of 6th Geo. I. c. 23, s. 11, on which he was convicted; the jury having, in their verdict, found that in cutting her person he had thereby an intention to cut her garments? Secondly, whether the statute being in the conjunctive, "that if any person shall assault with an intent to cut the garment of such person, then the offender shall be guilty of felony," and the indictment, in stating the intention, not having connected it with the act by inserting the words that he "then and there" did cut her garment, could be supported in point of form?
Nine out of the eleven judges were of opinion that the offence, notwithstanding the finding of the jury, was not within the statute, and that the indictment was bad in point of law.
This decision reduced the Monster's crime to a misdemeanour.
On Monday, December 13th, he was brought to trial at the Sessions House, Clerkenwell Green, and, as a proof of the interest it created, even the names of the jury are recorded. The trial began at ten, A.M., and was inaugurated by the prisoner reading a paper declaring his innocence. He was indicted for assaulting Miss Porter, with intent to kill, and murder her: there was a second count which stated, that he, "holding a knife in his right hand, did wilfully give the said Ann Porter a dreadful wound, of great length and depth on the right thigh and hip; to wit, of the length of nine inches, and the depth of four." A third count charged him with a common assault. The evidence was similar to that in the former trial, and, after a trial, lasting thirteen hours, he was found guilty.
He was afterwards found guilty of other assaults, and was finally sentenced to two years' imprisonment in Newgate, for each assault on Miss Porter, Elizabeth Davis, and Miss E. Baughan, and at the end of the six years, he was to find bail for good behaviour for seven years, himself in the sum of two hundred pounds, and two sureties in one hundred pounds each.