Some Distinguished Victims of the Scaffold. Bleackley Horace

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ Row, and C. Sympson at the Bible Warehouse, Chancery Lane. 1753. Price one shilling. Brit. Mus.

      20. Capt. Cranstoun’s Account of the poisoning of the Late Mr. Francis Blandy. London. Printed for R. Richards, the Corner of Bernard’s-Inn, near the Black Swan, Holborn. Brit. Mus. (March 1–3, 1753.)

      21. Memories of the life and most remarkable transactions of Capt. William Henry Cranstoun. Containing an account of his conduct in his younger years. His letter to his wife to persuade her to disown him as her husband. His trial in Scotland, and the Court’s decree thereto. His courtship of Miss Blandy; his success therein, and the tragical issue of that affair. His voluntary exile abroad with the several accidents that befel him from his flight to his death. His reconciliation to the Church of Rome, with the Conversation he had with a Rev. Father of the Church at the time of his conversion. His miserable death, and pompous funeral. Printed for M. Cooper in Paternoster Row; W. Reeve in Fleet Street; and C. Sympson in Chancery Lane. Price 6d. With a curious print of Capt. Cranstoun. Brit. Mus. (March 10–13, 1753. As the title-page of this pamphlet is torn out of the copy in the Brit. Mus., it is given in full. From pp. 3–21 the tract is identical with “The Genuine Lives,” also published by M. Cooper.)

      22. Parricides! The trial of Philip Stansfield, Gt, for the murder of his father in Scotland, 1688. Also the trial of Miss Mary Blandy, for the murder of her Father, at Oxford 1752. London (1810). Printed by J. Dean, 57 Wardour St, Soho for T. Brown, 154 Drury Lane and W. Evans, 14 Market St, St. James’s. Brit. Mus.

      23. The Female Parricide, or the History of Mary-Margaret d’Aubray, Marchioness of Brinvillier. … In which a parallel is drawn between the Marchioness and Miss Blandy. C. Micklewright, Reading. Sold by J. Newbery. Price 1/. (March 5, 1752.)

      Lowndes mentions also:—

      24. An Impartial Inquiry into the Case of Miss Blandy. With reflections on her Trial, Defence, Repentance, Denial, Death. 1753. 8vo.

      25. The Female Parricide. A Tragedy, by Edward Crane, of Manchester. 1761. 8vo.

      26. A Letter from a Gentleman to Miss Blandy with her answer thereto. 1752. 8vo. (Possibly the same as “A Letter from a Clergyman.”)

      The two following are advertised in the newspapers of the day:—

      27. Case of Miss Blandy and Miss Jeffreys fairly stated, and compared. … R. Robinson, Golden Lion, Ludgate Street. (March 26, 1752.)

      28. Genuine Letters between Miss Blandy and Miss Jeffries before and after their Conviction. J. Scott Exchange Alley; W. Owen, Temple Bar; G. Woodfall, Charing Cross. (April 21, 1752.)

      29. Broadside. Execution of Miss Blandy. Pitts, Printer, Toy and Marble Warehouse, 6 Great St. Andrew’s St. Seven Dials. Brit. Mus.

      30. The Addl. MSS., 15930. Manuscript Department in the Brit. Mus.

      II. Contemporary Newspapers and Magazines

      1. Read’s Weekly Journal, March and April (1752), February 3 (1753).

      2. The General Advertiser, August-November (1751), March and April (1752).

      3. The London Evening Post, March and April (1752).

      4. The Covent Garden Journal (Sir Alexander Drawcansir), February, March, and April (1752).

      5. The London Morning Penny Post, August and September (1751).

      6. Gentleman’s Magazine, pp. 376, 486–88 (1751), pp. 108–17, 152, 188, 195 (1752), pp. 47, 151 (1753), p. 803, pt. II. (1783).

      7. Universal Magazine, pp. 114–124, 187, 281 (1752).

      8. London Magazine, pp. 379, 475, 512(1751), pp. 127, 180, 189(1752), p. 89 (1753).

      Notes

      Note I.—In recent years the guilt of Cranstoun has been questioned. Yet a supposition that does not explain two damning circumstances must be baseless:

      (a) In the first place, one of his letters to Miss Blandy, dated July 18, 1751, was read by Bathurst in his opening speech. Although the reports of the trial do not tell us that the note was produced in court, or that the handwriting was verified, it cannot be presumed that the Crown lawyers were guilty of wilful fabrication. However strange it may appear that this letter alone escaped destruction, it is improbable that Miss Blandy invented it. Had she done so its contents would have been more consistent with her defence. As it stands it is most unfavourable to her. Therefore, in the absence of further evidence, we must conclude that the letter is genuine, and if genuine Cranstoun was an accomplice.

      (b) In the second place, the paper containing the poison which was rescued from the fire, is said by the prosecution to have borne the inscription in Cranstoun’s handwriting, ‘Powder to clean the pebbles’ If this had been counterfeit, Miss Blandy would have had no object in destroying it, but would have kept it for her purpose.

      At any cost Lord Cranstoun must have been anxious to remove the black stain from his scutcheon. That this was impossible the fact that it was not done seems to prove. Indeed, if Captain Cranstoun had been ignorant of the crime, he could have proved his innocence as soon as Miss Blandy was arrested by producing her letters, which, granting this hypothesis, would have contained no reference that would have incriminated him. That she had written a great deal to him was shown in evidence at the trial by the clerk Lyttleton.

      For these reasons it is impossible to accept the conclusion of the writer of Cranstoun’s life in the Dic. Nat. Biog. (who has adopted the assertion in Anderson’s Scottish Nation, vol. i. p. 698), that “apart from Miss Blandy’s statement there is nothing to convict him of the murder.”

      Note II.—Anderson’s statement that “there does not appear to be any grounds for supposing that Captain Cranstoun was in any way accessory to the murder,” shows that he had not a complete knowledge of the facts at his disposal, or that he did not weigh them with precision. Miss Blandy’s intercepted letter to her lover affords a strong presumption of his connivance, and her destruction of his correspondence suggests that it contained incriminating details. That these two actions were subtle devices to cast suspicion upon Cranstoun cannot be maintained with any show of plausibility, for in this case Miss Blandy, if dexterous enough to weave such a crafty plot, must have foreseen its exposure, and with such exposure her own inevitable ruin, when to prove that he was not an accomplice her lover had produced the letters she had written to him. Thus to support such an assumption it must be shown that Cranstoun had previously destroyed every particle of her handwriting, and that she was aware of the fact. Of such an improbable circumstance there is, of course, no evidence.

      Note III.—“Old Benchers of the Middle Temple,” Essays of Elia. The relative of Miss Blandy, with whom Mr. Samuel Salt was dining when he made the unfortunate remark which Lamb repeats, may have been Mr. Serjeant Henry Stephens of Doctors’ Commons, who was her maternal uncle.

      Note IV.—The date of Miss Blandy’s birth is not given in the Dic. Nat. Biog. From the register of Henley Parish Church it appears that she was baptized on July 15, 1720.

      Mess. Robert and Daniel

       СКАЧАТЬ