<p> Smee 1</p><p>A True Narrative of the Proceedings at the Sessions-House in the Old Baily (London, 1677)</p><p>A Critical Introduction and Annotated Edition by Holly Smee, University of British Columbia-Okanagan</p><p>POPULAR LITERATURE IN RENAISSANCE ENGLAND: A TRUE NARRATIVE IN THE POPULAR PRINT MARKET</p><p>Criminal pamphlets and ballads were England’s popular literature of the 1600s; they were literature written for the common man. Pamphlets were published, printed and sold in London “soon after the condemned’s execution” (Dolan 6) to exploit and capitalize on the interest in sensational crimes. The texts were “short, unbound work[s] in either prose or verse” (Marshburn and Velie 13), selling relatively cheaply at two pence a piece (Dolan 7); hence they were considered “an occasionally affordable luxury” (Dolan</p><p>12). As a result, many have survived as testament to their popularity, wide-distribution and mass-production (Dolan 12). Renaissance popular literature was also in direct opposition to the period’s scholarly writing or courtly literature. The canonical English</p><p>Renaissance writers that we know and cherish today wrote specifically for the elite in courtly circles and not for the common man, while other authors wrote pamphlets and ballads for the general English reading public (Marshburn and Velie 11). </p><p>A BOOMING BUSINESS</p><p>During this time, the sale and production of pamphlets and ballads was a booming industry. There were three reasons for this new phenomenon: Caxton’s previous Smee 2 introduction of the printing press to England, the spread of education and literacy, and also the rise of the middle class (Marshburn and Velie 11-12). Pamphlets were purchased by “craftsmen, tradesmen and merchants . . . who had attained moderate levels of both literacy and disposable income” (Dolan 8). They could then be retold or read to illiterate members of the public. An integral part in this process was the role of inns and alehouses; these were “important areas for the reading [and retelling] of popular texts” (Dolan 9).</p><p>The texts would also have been passed between people or affixed to walls and doors for others to enjoy (Dolan 12). </p><p>However, as Frances Dolan goes on to note, popular literature was not read solely by the lower and middle classes. Some members of the elite were not disdainful of delving into the disgraceful domestic crimes of London. There is evidence that some criminal pamphlets “attempt[ed] to cater to the learned with scraps of Latin and classical allusions” (Dolan 9). These nods to more learned tastes clearly show that there must have been some interest in the scandalous pamphlet among the higher classes and the British elite. However, although they may have occasionally been read by the upper classes, there is no evidence to show that they were produced by members of the elite. Moreover,</p><p>“the authors of the most cheaply produced and widely disseminated representations of domestic crime never identified themselves, so I can say little about their social status, education or gender (Dolan 9-10). This fact is apparent in A True Narrative of the</p><p>Proceedings at the Sessions-House in the Old Baily. Although the title page refers to the work’s publisher (D.M.), it does not give us the name of the author. </p><p>We do know that because there were no magazines or trashy tabloids during this time period, criminal pamphlets filled a very marketable void (Marshburn and Velie 13). Smee 3</p><p>The texts were made exclusively for profit and popular taste and their purpose was specifically to titillate, shock and intrigue: “Nearly all of the [period’s murder] pamphlets concentrate on a particularly bizarre, bloody and grotesque killing. The quotient of both sex and violence to be found in them is very high” (Lake 259). As a result, criminal pamphlets chose to focus on the most sensational crimes with unforgettable gory details</p><p>(Lake 259-62). This fact is illustrated with A True Narrative of the Proceedings at the</p><p>Sessions-House in the Old Baily. The pamphlet opens with a synopsis of what is claimed to be the most talked-of trial at the sessions, and then directly and graphically describes a case of bestiality between a woman and a dog. However, the text differs slightly from other criminal pamphlets in that it is not merely a text which solely recounts the most gory, violent and shocking crimes of London. The pamphlet is in fact a more literal and compendious recounting of all of the crimes which appeared in that particular session at the Old Bailey. The pamphlet also gives space to more mundane crimes, such as manslaughter (albeit by an 11 year old boy), horse-stealing, petty theft and even behavioural accounts of two Quakers in court – which were probably included in the criminal pamphlet for satirical purposes. Contemporary readers would have understood the nuances involved with the Quakers’ behaviour. </p><p>MORAL DIATRIBES AND ETHICAL SUPERIORITY IN CRIMINAL PAMPHLETS</p><p>A True Narrative is, nevertheless, similar to the period’s other criminal pamphlets in that its introduction includes a moral warning against sin. Most criminal pamphlets of the day came replete with heavy moral diatribes at the beginning of the text. Such diatribes often included somber warnings about what happens to man when he commits Smee 4 sin and the progression down the slippery slope of sin that will ensue as a result. Partly, such moral addresses served a particular rhetorical purpose, since they allowed the writer to include graphic instances of what happens to people when they fall into sin. As a result, the reader is provided with examples of extreme violence, sexual licentiousness and disgusting crimes; presumably they warn the reader to avoid similar temptations and sins, but in actual fact they shock, excite and titillate the reader (Lake 269-71). </p><p>The real motivation behind these pamphlets’ representations of vice and sin was to “engender that frisson of horror laced with disapproval which allows both pleasure and excitement at the enormities described to be combined with a reconfirmed sense of the reader’s own moral superiority” (Lake 262). Part of this moral superiority came from knowing that it was not just the lower classes who succumbed to sin. There were also criminal pamphlets which involved members of the upper class and their tragic fall from power and privilege (Lake 259-61). Nevertheless, most of these pamphlets dealt specifically with the common folk and the crimes that they committed, including bestiality, buggery, poisoning of husbands, and murdering of family members. These crimes were claimed to be “prompted by the most commonplace and obvious of motives</p><p>--- lust, greed, adultery, envy, revenge” (Lake 261). </p><p>SEXUAL CRIMES AND THE PORTRAYAL OF HUMANITY</p><p>Another interesting fact about the criminal pamphlets is the way in which the genders are represented. Women are more often than not depicted as the lesser or weaker sex; they are the gender that leads men unknowingly into vice and sin. Women are projected into “the negative, sinful, fleshly aspects of human nature; a tendency . . . Smee 5 confirmed by the elements of sadomasochistic misogyny in the more pornographic sections of the pamphlets” (Lake 265). The male analogues in criminal pamphlets are those young men who start on a downward trajectory of drunkenness and sleazy sexual behaviour and end up as murderers, paying for the total cost of their sins and vices upon execution (Lake 265-66). In many ways, most of these pamphlets can be interpreted as having an “implicit critique of a whole variety of behaviour patterns and abuses which in the wrong circumstances could lead to disaster” (Lake 267).</p><p>THE OMNIPOTENT GOD AND OMNIPRESENT DEVIL</p><p>Another common feature which relates to this trajectory is the devil. The devil features prominently in criminal pamphlets. He is rampant in the world and works through a hierarchy of sins and vices; one leads to the next as the sinner moves down the slope to eternal damnation and hell-fire (Lake 268). This is a fact which is made right and just by the admonitory tone of the pamphlets and the fact that justice is restored through the work of God. God’s providence is made apparent through miraculous events, coincidental occurrences and the internal workings of the sinner’s conscience and repentance (Lake 271-72), all of which act to bring a previously-hidden crime to light. In this context, it appears that “humans . . . are mere playthings of the divine will” (Lake</p><p>274) or simple pawn pieces in a divine game of chess between God and Satan. </p><p>BESTIALITY AND THE MANIFESTATION OF SIN</p><p>One of the most common vices that the devil works through is human sexual desire. Furthermore, one of the most horrendous and sinful of sexual crimes was Smee 6 bestiality (a crime which figures twice in A True Narrative of the Proceedings at the</p><p>Sessions-House in the Old Baily). Since the Statute of 1533, “bestiality had been a felony without benefit of clergy and anyone convicted of the offence would ‘suffer such pains of death and losses and penalties of their goods, chattels, debtors, lands and tenements’”</p><p>(Fudge 21). Moreover, “the statue present[s] the offence as ‘that detestable and abominable vice’ and use[s] the term ‘buggery’ to describe it” (Fudge 21). However, in</p><p>1548 an additional clause was added; it stated that no person who would directly benefit from the conviction and execution of the accused could testify or provide evidence. This change was important, because it protected the accused against accusations made for the possibility of personal financial gain (Fudge 21). </p><p>However, an accusation of bestiality was not just dangerous because it contained the impending threat of execution for the accused; buggery was a crime which entailed more than just committing an individual, illegal act. The term ‘buggery’ was used synonymously with “vice, crime, and sin,” because it was believed to be an act “against </p><p>‘God, nature and law’” (The Country Justice [London, 1618], qtd. in Fudge 21). By engaging in bestiality, the offenders broke “the law of the land,” and more importantly, </p><p>“the law of the natural order” (Fudge 21). </p><p>However, we know historically that committing the crime of buggery had not always been viewed as so horrendous; Renaissance views on bestiality were harsher than in the past. In the 2nd century, there are a numerous recorded examples of animal-human relationships (Fudge 21). Later, early Christians turned against the practice and “to biblical injunctions” against bestiality (Fudge 21). The Bible claims that it is a sin to lie with any beast. Nevertheless, “in the earliest [Christian] penitential manuals . . . the Smee 7 punishment for buggery was remarkable light (Fudge 21). So, why was there a change in attitudes? </p><p>THE EFFECTS OF COLONIALISM AND CROSSBREEDING ON RENAISSANCE CONCEPTS OF BESTIALITY</p><p>The dramatic shift in attitude came directly from events which occurred in 16th and 17th century England. This was “a time when many of the previously held assumptions about humanity were coming under threat. Colonialists were bringing back stories of monstrous races which appeared to confirm medieval ideas and which upset many of the established perceptions about the final work of the Creation” (Fudge 22).</p><p>The Reformation had further caused an investigation of the self and what it meant to be human. New scientific practices examined human bodies in a new way – “a way that compromised the distinction between humans and animals” (Fudge 22). Therefore,</p><p>“beasts became a threat” to humans; animals were now believed to be closer to humans than was previously the case, and this closing of the gap between animal and human threatened humanity’s place on the great chain of being (Fudge 22). In her research on bestiality, Fudge asserts that from this point on, humans were ‘animalized.’ Colonialists were returning to England with tales of “New World [peoples who] differ[ed] very little from beasts” (Robert Gray, 1610, qtd. in Fudge 22); these races of people were described as barely human. Colonialists used this information to justify their practices: if the natives were not fully human, then how could they own the land or even be entitled to it?</p><p>BLURRING THE LINES OF DISTINCTION: HUMANS AND ANIMALS IN THE RENAISSANCE IMAGINATION</p><p>However, more popular than the accounts of humans behaving like beasts were the accounts of beast-like humans. One such example is the “‘pig-faced’ woman from Smee 8</p><p>Holland who was put on display in early 17th century London” (Fudge 22). By all contemporary reports, her head resembled a swine’s. This was said to be due to all of the bacon that she ate – she became the very thing that she over-indulged in. There are other examples from this time period which further illustrate this fear that humans could literally degenerate into animals. However, the main point is that they believed humanity was coming under threat. Due to this threat, “bestiality came to be perceived as a</p><p>[serious] danger” to natural order and man’s hierarchal place on earth – it was a threat that had to be dealt with sternly and severely (Fudge 22). </p><p>The biggest threat to humans which bestiality posed was the mistaken idea that buggery “pollut[ed]” humankind as a “species”: “This pollution was not merely due to illicit sexual contact, but rested on the belief in the possibility of reproduction across species boundaries” (Fudge 22). During this time period, the mule was a recognized byproduct of sexual relations between a horse and a donkey: “Animal crossbreeding [as a phenomenon] was [therefore] already a clearly recognized occurrence” (Fudge 22). There was also a well-known record of a dog being born from a mastiff and a bear. Apparently this occurred in Bear Garden, London’s baiting arena (Fudge 22). Therefore, it was not a huge assumption for them to make that human-animal hybrids could also be possible. </p><p>As a result, the Statute of 1533 represents an alteration in the way that</p><p>Renaissance individuals perceived the boundary between animals and humans. Writers began to document known or believed examples of human-animal crossbreeds. There were “monstrous births . . . recorded in ballads, broadsides, religious tracts and medical treatises [which] held both popular and learned attention” (Fudge 4). These births were interpreted as dire warnings from God; he created the animalistic oddity to caution Smee 9 humankind against bestiality and sexual sin. They ultimately “‘do proceed of the justice, chastisement and curse of God” for committing sin (Edward Fenton, 1569, qtd. in Fudge</p><p>23); mothers and fathers bore this cross as testament of their vice and corruption (Fudge</p><p>23). </p><p>Renaissance literature is replete with illustrations of these monstrous creatures, all complete with warnings against the evil acts which created them. The way that</p><p>Renaissance individuals interpreted the message was clear: God was warning humans to end their wicked ways. These deformed creatures were construed as representing humanity’s fall into total corruption, sin and condemnation (Fudge 24). However, while the first fall saw Adam expelled out of Eden, this fall would cause “humanity to lose its superior human status altogether” (Fudge 24). God was showing his omnipotent power through these miraculous events. There was no alternative explanation in this time period as unnatural events were only explained by the supernatural power of God’s influence</p><p>(Fudge 24). </p><p>PENETRATION, COPULATION AND CONDEMNATION: BESTIALITY IN SOCIETY AND THE COURT</p><p>Nevertheless, monstrous births would not be possible without copulation. For this reason, conviction and execution for bestiality rested upon the necessity of penetration or</p><p>‘spilling of seed.’ Furthermore, this is one reason why legal depositions are so interested in the dirty details of the bestial sex act; there must be penetration, since it is this specific aspect of the sexual act which threatens the natural order – crossbreeding relies on it. In criminal pamphlets, this legal requirement resulted in accounts of the witnesses looking Smee 10 specifically for penetration; this testimony was indispensable to a conviction for buggery.</p><p>Indeed, execution could only proceed if witnesses were certain about this fact (Fudge 25).</p><p>In A True Narrative of the Proceedings at the Sessions-House in the Old Baily, this qualifier is apparent. The man who was accused of buggery with the horses was acquitted because the ‘direct and positive proof which the law exacts’ could not be offered (in other words, penetration could not be seen from 60 feet away). Likewise, the woman who committed buggery with a dog was included in the pamphlet not just because her crime was sensational and scandalous, but because three witnesses testified to the copulation that they saw performed. For her foolish, irresponsible and sinful actions, she was executed. Not only did the woman not fear God, she did not fear the fragile order of nature either. </p><p>A NOTE ON THE TEXT</p><p>The accompanying text has been only partially modernized. I approached the text in this way because I wanted to ensure that the pamphlet’s original feel and character were not lost; the annotated and transcribed copy below aims to interfere as little as possible with the original. As a result, I have not modernized spelling. Punctuation, however, needed a bit more work. I decided I would only modernize the parts of the text that would be difficult to understand otherwise. In the original text, sections were difficult to comprehend due to a lack of punctuation, often resulting in run-on sentences that would continue for nearly a whole page. Those were punctuated into more manageable pieces. I also decided to keep capitalization and italicization intact. More often than not, it seemed that words which directly related to the crime, the criminal justice system or to nouns of importance had been capitalized. Months of the year, districts in London, a Smee 11 proverb and points of emphasis were all italicized as well. These too were retained to ensure that the transcription’s appearance stayed as close as possible to the original.</p><p>Original page numbers of the original appear in the transcription in square brackets: [ ]. Smee 12</p><p>A True </p><p>Narrative </p><p> of the </p><p>Proceedings at the Sessions-House </p><p> in the </p><p>Old-Baily1:</p><p>Beginning on the 11th of this instant July, 1677.</p><p>Wherein is contained the Tryal of the Woman for committing that odious sin of Buggery </p><p> with a Dog; And likewise of the Man for Buggering of two Mares. </p><p>With the Tryal of the young Maid that poisoned her Mother, a Maid, and two </p><p>Gentlewomen, and all the rest of the most remarkable Tryals there. With an </p><p>Account how many are condemned to die, how many Burn’d in the hand, to be </p><p>Whip’d and Transported. </p><p>With Permission, </p><p>London, Printed for D.M. 1677.</p><p>1 Old Baily: the principal Crown Court for Central London, usually known from its address as the Old Bailey (Oxford Reference Online, 15 March 2007 [hereafter abbrev. as ORO). Smee 13</p><p>The perfect Narrative of all Proceedings at the Sessions for London and </p><p>Middlesex, begun on Wednesday the 11th of July, 1677.</p><p>One of the first and most talkt of Tryals at this Sessions, was for such an abominable Crime, attended with such odious Circumstances, as ’tis thought scarce any</p><p>Story can parallel it (especially in this our more modest and chaster Climate), hitherto a stranger to such unnatural wickedness; and we hope the Justice executed on this wretched</p><p>Criminal will deter all others from any the like detestable inclinations for the future. </p><p>A married woman lately living without Cripplegate,1 that appeared to be between</p><p>30 and 40 years of age, was arrigned. For that she having not the fear of God before her eyes, nor regarding the order of Nature, on the 23 of June last, to the disgrace of all womankind, did commit Buggery with a certain Mungril Dog, and wickedly, divellishly, and against nature had venerial and Carnal copulation with him, etc. It was proved that the Prisoner was a person of a lewd conversation, and lodging in a Room unto which there were several holes to look in at from the next house, they had often seen her in the very act of uncleanness with Villains that followed her. But one day, one of the Witnesses</p><p>(a young woman) happening to cast her [end p. 1] eye in, saw her use such actions with a</p><p>Dog as are not fit here to be recited. At which being amazed, she called up another woman, and after that a man, who all saw her several times practicing this beastliness, and fully evidenced the same in Court, where the Dog was likewise brought, and being set on the Bar before the Prisoner, owned her by wagging his tail, and making motions as it were to kiss her (which ’twas sworn she did do when she made that horrid use of him).</p><p>For her self she had nothing to say, but denying the fact, alleadging it was mallice in the</p><p>1 Cripplegate: an area of London where the Fortune Playhouse and the Globe were built (Oxford Dictionary of the Renaissance, online, 15 March 2007). Smee 14</p><p>Witnesses, which her Husband, who appeared in her behalf likewise suggested, but could not make out any quarrel or occasion of any such malice in the least. Whereupon, after full consideration of all circumstances, she was brought in Guilty. </p><p>Yet cannot the Bearded Sex,1 though pretending to a stronger reason, justle2 on this unhappy President3 upbraid4 the Weaker Vessels,5 or tax them with this dishonour, for the very next Arraignment was of a fellow for Buggery of a Mare.6 The Evidence against him testified that they saw him in the fields beyond Shoreditch7 on Sunday the 17th of</p><p>June, amongst the Brick-kilns8 drive a white Mare to a small Heap of Bricks, which he had laid together, and there use most unnatural and bruitish Endeavours several times, and after that to another Bay Mare. But being near Threescore9 yards distant, they could not make that direct and positive10 Proof which the Law exacts. For that he was acquitted11 on that Indictment.12 At the Bar he behaved himself as one Insensible scarbe13 speaking a word for himself, Save only that he did no harm. He confessed he lately came out of Kent, To seek as he said for work, and within 3 or 4 days [end p. 2] after his coming up was apprehended in this beastly Action. </p><p>1 Bearded Sex: men. 2 justle: quarrel with (OED, online, 15 March 2007); it may be that ‘justle’ is a printer’s error for the adverb ‘justly,’ modifying ‘upbraid.’ 3 President: obs. form of ‘precedent’ (OED, online, 10 May 2007). 4 upbraid: reproach or reproof (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 5 Weaker Vessels: women. 6 I.e., men cannot use this example to reproach women and their very nature, as the next example of bestiality involves a man. 7 Shoreditch: an area of north-east London (ORO, online, 15 March 2007). According to contemporaries, it was the haunt of prostitutes and criminals; two of the earliest London theatres were erected there. 8 Brick-kiln: a kiln or furnace for burning bricks; presumably this location would be on or around Bricklane, London (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 9 Threescore: sixty (OED, online, 15 March 2007) 10 “Direct and positive proof”: because they could not see actual penetration, he was acquitted. 11 Acquitted: exonerated (OED, online, March 15 2007). 12 Indictment: formal accusation (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 13 Scarbe: a printer’s error for ‘scarce.’ Smee 15</p><p>The last Sessions an Antiant1 man keeping a Victualling2 house was Arraigned for stealing a black Mare. The Case was somewhat strange. On the 9th of May last between 4 and 5 in the Morning, a person leading this Mare ties her to the Pales3 of this House and goes in to drink, and after one Pot4 goes away, pretending to come again presently. The</p><p>Mare stood there till 4 a Clock in the afternoon.5 Then the Victualer takes care of her, gets her Cry’d,6 puts her to grass, and shortly after is taken7 on her back by the owner who thereupon Indicted him last Sessions.8 Two men who saw the person that brought her thither9 attending then to give Evidence on behalf of the Victualler, happened to see and seize one in the Sessions-House Yard (between the time of his arraignment and trial) whom they said was the man that brought the mare.10 Whereupon, the Court being ready to break up, the Victualler’s Tryal was put off, and this person taken in to Custody. The</p><p>Witnesses now spoke home11 that he was the man, but he absolutely denying it, endeavoring to prove where he was that night, and several people of fashion 12 attesting his former good Conversation, Credit, and Estate, and it not being improbable but the</p><p>Witnesses might mistake one they never saw but once, and then only transciently without any occasion to take particular notice of him, the Jury thought fit to bring him Not Guilty;</p><p>1 Antiant: a printer’s error; it should read ‘ancient,’ as in reference to an older man. 2 Victualling: a business establishment providing food or drink (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 3 Pales: stake or fence (OED, online, 27 March 2007). 4 Pot: a deep vessel used to hold drinking liquids (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 5 “Pretending….afternoon”: The person who brought the horse to the inn intended to come back later, so he left his horse tied to the pales for the time being. 6 Gets her cry’d: attends to her needs for attention, food, water, etc. (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 7 taken: discovered, usually with the sense of being discovered doing something shameful or illegal 8 In other words, the man who originally rode the horse to the inn was not its rightful owner, but a thief. When the owner happened along and saw the victualler riding the horse, he assumed that the victualler was the thief. The two men in the Session-House yard, however, happen to see the man who originally rode the horse to the inn (the real thief) and apprehend him. 9 Thither: to go to and fro (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 10 The two men in the Session House yard have come to testify on behalf of the victualler. While in the yard they happen upon the man who originally rode the horse to the inn (the real thief) and they apprehend him. 11 spoke home: spoke forcefully, directly 12 people of fashion: people of high social standing Smee 16 as likewise they did the said Victualler, but (according to the Proverb) The man has his mare again1 and all is well. [end p. 3 (misnumbered p. 5 in the original text)]. </p><p>A Carman2 who unhappily runs his Carr over a Childe in Bush-Lane,3 was indicted for Murder; but it appearing to be by the Child’s accidental falling from a bench just as he was passing. Without his seeing of it, or any default in him, he was acquitted. </p><p>A young wench was Convicted for stealing four small Gold plates off a Silver</p><p>Smiths stall, whereof one was taken upon her. </p><p>A boy not above eleven years old being sent by a Gentle man in his Masters house up stairs to fetch a pair of Pistols, not suspecting them to be loaded, and thinking to frighten the servant maid, with flashing4 a little powder which was in the pan, discharged it, and thereby unhappily killed her, for which he was brought in guilty of Manslaughter.5 </p><p>A Fellow being Indicted for stealing a piece of Cloath out of a Shop in Cheap- side,6 one of the witnesses was a Porter,7 who could not directly prove the Felony. The</p><p>[only] other that could have done it, was a young man who out of a foolish Bigotry8 refused to take an oath.9 And after the Court had long endeavoured from Scripture and reason to answer all his erroneous scruples,10 find him still obstinate, committed him to </p><p>1 “The man has his mare again”: balance and justice have been restored. 2 Carman: a man who drives a cart or wagon; a carrier (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 3 Bush Lane: no reference for Bush Lane; presumably it could be an area around Shepherd’s Bush, London. 4 Flashing: sending forth of flame or light (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 5 Similar in theory to a child firing off a loaded gun which he/she believed to be full of blanks; the child only wished to startle the maid, but unintentionally killed her when the loaded gun discharged. 6 Cheapside: an area in East London. 7 Porter: here, a door-keeper or gate-keeper (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 8 Bigotry: obstinate and unenlightened attachment to a particular creed, opinion, system, or party (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 9 This young man would have been a Quaker. This religious group was known for refusing to take oaths on the Bible. 10 Reason…scruples: i.e., they tried to persuade him to change his mind. Smee 17</p><p> the Bail-Dock1 to be proceeded against and fined according to the Statute in that case provided. And his Master who was bound to prosecute being sent for, he affronting the</p><p>Court by putting on his Hat and the like insolent Carriage,2 was committed to keep his man company till he should find sureties for his good behaviour; but in the meantime</p><p>[end p. 4, misnumbered p. 6] the Felon escaped, and wishes all the Town of this silly</p><p>Religion.3 </p><p>An old notorious Offender indicted for breaking a house and stealing a flitch4 of</p><p>Bacon and other things, for want of exact proof escaped thereupon. But it appeared he was lately transported on a conditional Pardon, and had come over within the time5 to practice his Roguries6 afresh, whereby his life was legally forfeited. </p><p>An Apprentice was indicted for stealing 80l7 from his Master; but it appearing that satisfaction had been already accepted, and that the sum imbezilled was far less, he was brought in only guilty to the value of 10d.8</p><p>1 Bail-Dock: at the Old Bailey, London. Formerly, a ‘bail-dock’ was a small room taken from one of the corners of the court, and left open at the top, in which, during the trials, are put some of the malefactors. (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 2 Master…carriage: his master was also a Quaker. Quakers refused to take their hats off in certain circumstances and social situations, esp. to acknowledge another person’s higher social rank. 3 “and wishes . . . Religion”: A satirical comment. The two Quakers were held in jail, while the felon escaped. The felon wished that the whole country was composed of Quakers as it would make it hard for anyone to be sent to jail. 4 flitch: a side or piece (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 5 lately transported . . . within the time: the individual in question had been granted a pardon, but with the condition attached that he would agree to be transported to the colonies for a certain specified time period. He had, however, violated the conditions of his pardon by returning before the agreed time had expired, and thus the original penalty for his crime (which must have been death) was reapplied. 6 Rogueries: practices, procedures, or actions characteristic of knaves, rascals (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 7 l.: British pounds 8 d.: pence. Smee 18</p><p>A young man that occasioned1 the death of a man near Bow Church,2 in</p><p>Cheapside in last Whitson Holy-days,3 took a tryal for the same. A woman that was in company with the person kill’d, swore that the Prisoner gave the first affront,4 by pushing by the other as they met. But three others witnessed that the deceased first quarreled with and beat the Prisoner, and being like to choke him with pulling his Cravat.5 After several intreaties to be quiet, the prisoner drew his sword, and without making any Pass,6 as they were struggling together, the Man unhappily received a mortal wound. Which was brought in Manslaughter, and the Prisoner burn’d in the hand for the same. [end p. 5, misnumbered p. 7]</p><p>There succeeded a long and remarkable Tryal of a young Girl for murdering her own Mother by poyson. The Prosecution was grounded wholly upon her own voluntary</p><p>Confession, and several worthy persons proved that she had acknowledged it to them.</p><p>And also that she for several times had endeavoured to poyson a Lady with whom she lived, though through mercy she had recovered and was in health again. But that not immediately concerning the present Case, and the Girl denying the poisoning of her</p><p>Mother now at the Bar, as likewise for that it did not appear that her Mother was at all poisoned, or any suspicion raised thereon, she was brought in not Guilty. </p><p>There were in all Ten burnt in the hand this Sessions. Two Men and five Women received sentence of Death, amongst whom that Monster who prostituted her self to a</p><p>1 Occasioned: caused (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 2 Bow Church: the church of St Mary-le-Bow (St. Maria de Arcubus) in Cheapside, London (ORO, 15 March 2007). 3 Whitsun Holy Days: the seventh Sunday after Easter, observed as a festival of the Christian Church in commemoration of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 4 Affront: to insult (a person or thing personified) to his face, to treat with avowed or open indignity (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 5 Cravat: an article of dress worn round the neck, chiefly by men (OED, online, 15 March 2007). 6 Pass: in fencing, a lunge or thrust (OED, online, 15 March 2007). Smee 19</p><p>Dog was one; the rest Incorrigible Thieves and Three for petty crimes ordered to be</p><p>Whipt. [end p. 6, misnumbered p.8]</p><p>Finis. Smee 20</p><p>Works Cited</p><p>Dolan, Francis. Dangerous Familiars: Representations of Domestic Crime in England, </p><p>1550-1700. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1994. </p><p>Fudge, Erica. “Monstrous Acts.” History Today 50.8 (2000): 20-25. Historical Abstracts. </p><p>U of British Columbia Library, 28 Jan 2007.</p><p>Lake, Peter. “Deeds against Nature: Cheap Print, Protestantism and Murder in Early </p><p>Seventeenth-Century England.” Culture and Politics in Early Stuart England. </p><p>Eds. Kevin Sharpe and Peter Lake. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1993. 257-283. </p><p>Marshburn, Joseph H., Velie, Alan R. Introduction. Blood and Knavery: A Collection of </p><p>English Renaissance Pamphlets and Ballads of Crime and Sin. Cranbury, NJ: </p><p>Associated UP, 1973. 11-16.</p>