• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

1 THREE MOLLIES THE ACCOUNTS of GABRIEL LAURENCE, WILLIAM GRIFFIN, & THOMAS WRIGHT who were HANGED in TYBURN on MONDAY the MAY 9TH of 1726 for SODOMY Taylor Mansmann Literatures of 18C Crime & Criminality Professor Ashley Cohen November 13, 2014 2 INTRODUCTION Originally coined as a term for lower­class female prostitutes, the slang 1 appellation of “Molly” was adopted in the early 18th Century by homosexual subgroups of London’s working class. Preferable to the condemning labels of “sodomite” or 2 “bugger,” and perhaps most closely approximated to modern­day “gay” or “queen,” the term allowed for greater resonance in “issues of social rather than specifically sexual 3 behavior.” The 1720’s brought about the peak of molly culture, which manifested in secret socio­sexual havens called molly houses, wherein men of homosexual or 4 cross­dressing persuasions might meet to socialize and pursue or solicit sexual partners. 5 Headed by the Society for the Reformation of Manners, upwards of twenty such houses 6 were raided in 1726, including the infamous Mother (or Margaret) Clap’s molly house. From the February raid of Margaret Clap’s house alone—which had been under surveillance for almost two years—around forty men were rounded up and sent to Newgate Prison to await trial for sodomy or assault with sodomitical intent. Of those forty men, three—Gabriel Laurence, William Griffin, and Thomas Wright—were 7 convicted and hanged in Tyburn on May 9, 1776 under indictment of sodomy. From 1676 to 1772 the Ordinary of Newgate possessed the right to print and sell criminal biographies of the men and women under his care: a publication aptly titled “The Ordinary of Newgate's Account of the Behaviour, Confession and Dying Words of the Condemned Criminals... Executed at Tyburn.” Minister James Guthrie, the Ordinary of Newgate at the time of the 1726 executions, thus recorded the following accounts of Laurence, Griffin, and Wright; along with the other eleven men and two women who 8 were sentenced to capital punishment for different crimes in the same “Sessions. ” Ordinary Accounts are often known to digress and dedicate multiple pages towards the life and crimes of a single prisoner of public intrigue. And yet for investigatory purposes, the accounts provided for the three “sodomites” in question are unfortunately brief. Guthrie’s brevity on the subject can perhaps be illuminated by his introduction to the account, wherein he makes special mention of two crimes pertinent to the account and implied to be comparable in depravity. The first crime (or “Sin”) he mentions is “a Wife’s murdering her Husband,” for which—the husband being the “superiour Person in Power and Honour”—one Catherine Hayes of Birmingham was 1 In other predating forms: “moll.” (OED) 2 Although “molly” soon gained a more widespread pejorative usage aimed at the effeminate man. (OED) 3 (Norton, 9) 4 While “molly houses” also refer to female brothels, those that catered towards men often held greater social implications and were rarely run as monetary businesses, despite the frequent occurrence of male prostitution. (Norton, 56) 5 Founded in 1691 with the espoused aim to uphold the divine law and rid London’s streets of such detestable sins as prostitution, sodomy, and profanity. (Norton, 44) 6 Her actual name. (Cassidy, 99) 7 An offense considered by law of the Bugger Act of 1533 to be worthy of death by hanging. (Haggerty) 8 A series of seasonal trials and executions. (Old Bailey) 3 9 subjected to the “severer Punishment” of burning at the stake . Despite his condemnation of the crime, Guthrie commits over half of the account to indulging in and detailing the grotesqueness of Catherine’s violent murder and dismemberment of her husband. The comparable crime, however—of which Laurence, Griffin, and Wright were guilty—Guthrie refuses to name, instead alluding to sodomy with euphemistic disgust and devolving into a religious tirade: I likewise insisted upon the Villany and Uncleanness of unnatural Sins, which ought not to be nam'd among People who have any remainders of Civility lest, much less among Christians who profess the true Religion, teaching us to deny all Ungodliness and Worldly Lusts &c especially the Lusts of the Flesh, &c. I show'd 'em the Evil of this Sin from God's visible Judgments inflicted on Sodom and Gomorrah, and the neighbouring Cities, in raining Fire and Brimstone from Heaven upon them, and consuming them as in a Moment, &c, And in the Apostle St Paul, Rom. 1. and St. Jude in his Epistle, inveighing so much against these most impious and notorious Sinners, &c. With Guthrie’s blatant disinclination even to give such an “Evil” a name, it is not at all shocking that one—especially one with such religious fervor—would partially neglect his criminal accounts in defiance of the act. The extent of his invocation to the “Fire and Brimstone” that consumed Sodom and Gomorrah leaves little room for hope of the sinners’ repentance or salvation. It is worth noting, however, that his condemnation or persecution is directed towards the “unnatural Sin” itself—and thus by extension the 10 perpetrator of that sin—and not towards a perceived “other ” that is predisposed to the inclination. In English Sexualities 1700­1800, Tim Hitchcock speculates that prior to the molly subculture of the 18th Century, homosexual practices could exist side by side with a masculine identity, sodomy being a carnal temptation that could afflict any individual sinner. It was only through the abundant raids of molly houses and the subsequent exposing—through widespread publication of pertinent trials and accounts—of the culture that continued to persist within these dens, that the public began to perceive and 11 mock the “other,” he being typically “effeminate, cowardly, and weak.” The accounts of Gabriel Laurence, William Griffin, and Thomas Wright, although brief, bear certain striking similarities. For instance, all three belonged to the working 12 class; Laurence being a milkman, Griffin an upholsterer, and Wright a “Wooll­Comber .” With the intense urbanization of English peasantry in the 18th Century, the population in London skyrocketed to 750,000 by 1725. Such an influx in population, especially within the working class, facilitated the formation of subgroups that could not have coalesced or remained anonymous within smaller communities. Barring the possibility that elite members paid for their protection from trial after the raiding of London’s molly houses, it appears evident that these particular communities, at least until the turn on the 9 Hayes rose to even greater infamy when her executioner failed to strangle her prior to burning and she was burned alive over the course of an hour to the horror of spectators. (Norton, 64) 10 In resemblance to the modern homosexual 11 (Hitchcock, 63) 12 One who combs or cards wool. (OED) 4 19th Century, were primarily frequented by members of the working class, although that is not to say elite and servile classes did not have their own outlets for homosexual 13 activity. Additional to their shared working class status, Each of the tried was obviously convicted for the same crime of sodomy, but interestingly they were all convicted for having sex with the same man: Thomas Newton; aged thirty. After the infiltration of the molly houses by an agent of the Society for the Reformation of Manners—an intrusion 14 abetted by embittered molly P— after the betrayal of a male lover—Newton was taken into custody while posting bail for the imprisoned Margaret Clap. A known hustler that frequented many of the prominent molly houses, Newton, it appears, agreed to testify against his former lovers to guarantee his own freedom. Such a testimony was key for 15 their indictment. Sodomy had warranted the death penalty in England for two centuries, but few convicts were unlucky enough to meet that fate due to strict judicial parameters in proving the act had actually transpired. More specifically, the court required two witnesses to corroborate that both anal penetration and ejaculation had occurred. In same­sex rape cases, these requirements were occasionally met for a successful conviction. But in these cases of consensual sex, wherein either participant would typically be in equal peril of conviction or at least public shaming, Newton provided a rare missing piece in the trials, testifying alongside molly house infiltrators from the 16 17 Society for the Reformation of Manners . In light of the curtness with which the Ordinary handled these accounts, the testimonies by Newton and the infiltrators are particularly insightful. Newton is more blunt in his testimony, addressing his relationship with each man and a particular instance of their sodomizing him. On July 20, 1725, for instance, Laurence along with one Peter 18 Bavidge, “who is not yet taken ,” brought him to one of Mother Clap’s forty bedrooms, wherein they had sex. Despite subsequent advances by Laurence, Newton “refus'd, 19 though they buss'd me, and stroked me over the Face, and said I was a very pretty Fellow.” Newton provides similar testimony for Griffin, describing him as a two­year lodger of Mother Clap’s house with whom he had sex on May 20, 1725. His testimony against Wright is perhaps a bit more personal, describing Wright’s role of providing ale for mollies until opening a house of his own on Beech­lane where he would often fetch Newton to “oblige company in that way.” His claim of intercourse with Wright on January 10, 1725 spurs the impassioned defendant to confront Newton: “Will you swear 20 that I —— in ——?” 13 (Norton, 11) 14 His name was censored as part of the terms of his informing, but he is speculated to be Mark Patridge, his ex­lover to be —Hammington.

Load more

  10

Copy Link