Benjidog Historical Research Resources:
The Merchant Navy Memorial
Punishment Executions and Martyrs
Introduction
Great Tower Hill and Little Tower Hill were used as places of public punishment for a very long period and this page recounts the darker
side of the history of both places.
Centuries before any memorials were built, Great Tower Hill was used for the execution of important people. The approximate location of the scaffold
is shown on various old maps and plans on the Tower Hill History page HERE.
The manner of execution depended on the status of the victim. Beheading, considered the least brutal method of execution, was reserved for the
rich and famous - though there are several accounts of botched executions. Crimes considered the most heinous were dealt with by the even more
appalling method of "hanging, drawing and quartering". Lesser people were simply hanged.
Executions at Great Tower Hill were mostly reserved for members of the nobility, usually after imprisonment in The Tower of London, but there
were exceptions. In London most commoners were hanged at Tyburn, or later Newgate, though there were many other locations for hangings across the
country. Executions were a public event and supposed to have a deterrent effect - though possibly only on those who had been executed. Members of
Royalty, such as Henry VIII's redundant queens, were executed in private within the boundaries of The Tower on Tower Green.
On many occasions, Tower Hill seems to have been the place to dispose of those who had become "inconvenient" to the rulers of the country rather
than genuine traitors. I have included information about two of these as examples: Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford, and William Laud,
Archbishop of Canterbury.
The following account of the history of execution at Tower Hill comes from the works of the Victorian Antiquarian Walter Thornbury
[15]. Thornbury's work makes fascinating reading as it conjures up the spirit of the past rather than
being "dry-as-dust" academic writing. His work is considered to be generally well-researched and rather opinionated, but that does not detract
from it as source material.
Chapter X. The Neighbourhood of the Tower
Of Tower Hill, that historical and blood-stained ground to the north-west of the Tower, old Stow says:—"Tower Hill, sometime a large plot of
ground, now greatly straitened by encroachments (unlawfully made and suffered) for gardens and houses. Upon this hill is always readily prepared, at the charges
of the City, a large scaffold and gallows of timber, for the execution of such traitors or transgressors as are delivered out of the Tower, or otherwise, to the
Sheriffs of London, by writ, there to be executed."
Hatton, in 1708 (Queen Anne) mentions Tower Hill as "a spacious place extending round the west and north parts of the Tower, where there are
many good new buildings, mostly inhabited by gentry and merchants." The tide of fashion and wealth had not yet set in strongly westward. An old plan of the Tower
in 1563 shows us the posts of the scaffold for state criminals, a good deal north of Tower Street and a little northward of Legge Mount, the great north-west
corner of the Tower fortifications. In the reign of Edward IV. the scaffold was erected at the charge of the king's officers, and many controversies arose at
various times, about the respective boundaries, between the City and the Lieutenant of the Tower.
On the Tower Hill scaffold perished nearly all the prisoners whose wrongs and sorrows and crimes we have glanced at in a previous chapter;
the great Sir Thomas More, the wise servant of a corrupt king; the unhappy old Countess of Salisbury, who was chopped down here as she ran bleeding round the
scaffold; Bishop Fisher, a staunch adherent to the old faith; that great subverter of the monks, Cromwell, Earl of Essex; and the poet Earl of Surrey—all victims
of the same bad monarch.
Then in the reigns of Edward VI. and Mary, in ghastly procession after the masked headsman, paced Lord Seymour; in due course followed the
brother who put him to death, the proud Protector Somerset; then that poor weak young noble, Lady Jane Grey's husband, Lord Guildford Dudley; and Sir Thomas
Wyatt, the rash objector to a Spanish marriage.
The victims of Charles's folly followed in due time—the dark and arrogant Strafford, who came like a crowned conqueror to his death; then
his sworn ally, the narrow-browed, fanatical Laud. The Restoration Cavaliers took their vengeance next, and to Tower Hill passed those true patriots, Stafford,
insisting on his innocence to the very last, and Algernon Sydney. The unlucky Duke of Monmouth was the next to lay his misguided head on the block.
Blood ceased to flow on Tower Hill after this execution till the Pretender's fruitless rebellions of 1715 and 1745 brought Derwentwater,
"the pride of the North," Kilmarnock, Balmerino, and wily old Lovat to the same ghastly bourne. In 1746 Mr. Radcliffe (Lord Derwentwater's brother) was executed
here. He had been a prisoner in the Tower for his share in the rebellion of 1715, but succeeded in escaping. He was identified by the barber, who thirty-one
years before had shaved him when in prison.
Chamberlain Clarke, who died in 1831, aged ninety-two (a worthy old City authority, who has been mentioned by us in a previous chapter),
well remembered (says Mr. Timbs), as a child, seeing the executioner's axe flash in the sunshine as it fell upon the neck of Mr. Radcliffe. At the last execution
which took place on Tower Hill, that of Lord Lovat, April 9, 1747, a scaffolding, built near Barking Alley, fell, with nearly 1,000 persons on it, and twelve
of them were killed. Lovat, in spite of his awful situation, seemed to enjoy the downfall of so many Whigs.
There is a passage in Henry VIII — a play considered by many persons to be not Shakespeare's writing at all, and by some others only partly
his work—that has much puzzled those wise persons, the commentators. The author of the play, which is certainly not quite in the best Shakespearian manner, makes
a door-porter say, talking of a mob, "These are the youths that thunder at a play-house and fight for bitten apples: that no audience but the tribulation of
Tower Hill or the limbs of Limehouse are able to endure." This passage seems to imply that there were low theatres in Shakespeare's time near Tower Hill and
Limehouse, or did he refer to the crowd at a Tower Hill execution, and to the mob of sailors at the second locality?
Although most of the executions recorded for Tower Hill were beheadings, this was not the only way of dispatching the condemned that was employed there.
It is recorded that Richard Wyche was burned at the stake for converting to Lollardism in 1440, and that John Goose suffered the same fate for the same reason
in 1475. William Collingbourne was "hanged drawn and quartered" in 1484 for "favouring the cause of Henry Tudor", likewise three unnamed persons in 1532 for
"coining" - the old term for making counterfeit coins which was a treasonable offence. Sir Thomas Wyatt was both beheaded and quartered in 1554, and
"five unruly youths" - unnamed - were "hanged and boweled" for causing a disturbance on Tower Hill in 1595.
Executions Commemorated at Tower Hill
The table below lists the executions at Tower Hill that are commemorated on the memorial covered in the next section below. A more comprehensive list is
provided in Richard Clark's website Capital Punishment UK [20].
Date
Name
1381
Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury
1381
Sir Robert Hales
1388
Sir Simon de Burley
1397
Richard Fitzalan, 11th Earl of Arundel
1440
Rev. Richard Wyche, Vicar of Deptford
1462
John de Vere, 13th Earl of Oxford
1470
John Tiptoft, 1st Earl of Worcester
1495
Sir William Stanley
1497
James Tuchet, a commander of the Cornish Rebellion of 1497
1499
Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick
1510
Edmund Dudley
1510
Sir Richard Empson
1521
Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham
1535
John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester
1535
Sir Thomas More, ex-Lord Chancellor
1536
George Boleyn, brother of Anne Boleyn
1537
Thomas Darcy, 1st Baron Darcy de Darcy
1538
Henry Courtenay, Earl of Devon
1540
Thomas Cromwell, Earl of Essex
1547
Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey
1552
Sir Ralph Vane
1552
Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset
1554
Sir Thomas Wyatt
1554
Lord Guildford Dudley
1572
Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk
1615
Sir Gervase Helwys
1631
Mervyn Tuchet, 2nd Earl of Castlehaven
1641
Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford
1645
William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury
1662
Sir Henry Vane
1683
Col. Algernon Sidney
1685
James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth
1716
James Radclyffe, 3rd Earl of Derwentwater
1746
William Boyd, 4th Earl of Kilmarnock
1747
Simon Fraser, 11th Lord Lovat
Execution of Thomas Wentworth - 1st Earl of Strafford
Sir Thomas Wentworth (1593-1641) was a major political figure and supporter of King Charles 1 who earned a reputation for harshness as Lord
Deputy of Ireland just before the start of the English Civil War. He was recalled to England to become advisor to the King who created him Earl of
Strafford in 1640.
He advocated taking a very strong line with the Scottish Covenanters and, after a complex series of events, was impeached for treason by both
Houses of Parliament and taken to The Tower. Strafford undertook his own defence and ultimately there was not enough evidence to support the charge
against him. Not to be thwarted, the House of Commons passed a "Bill of Attainder" meaning that Strafford could be executed regardless of any crime.
Charles gave his assent on 10 May 1641 in what with hindsight proved to be a vain attempt to preserve the monarchy and Strafford's
fate was sealed.
Strafford's trial and execution seems to have been a popular topic for artists over the years and there are various drawings and paintings on
the subject. I have included just some of them here. How realistic they are is anybody's guess. Puzzled by his title 'Earl of Strafford', I eventually
tracked down that the name was a corruption of Strafforth - 'Strafforth and Tickhill' was a wapentake in the West Riding of Yorkshire where the
Wentworth family seat of Wentworth Woodhouse was located.
The trial of Strafford from an engraving by Wenceslas Hollar.
[56]
According to Historical Collections of Private Passages of State: Volume 8 1640-1641 [18],
the night before the execution, Strafford asked to see the Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud but this was denied him. He then asked the
Primate of Ireland to send a message to Laud (who was also imprisoned in the Tower) as follows: "You shall desire the Arch-Bishop to lend me his
Prayers this night, and to give me his Blessing when I go abroad to-morrow, and to be in his window, that by my last Farewell, I may give him
Thanks for this, and all other his former Favours."
The account in this document proceeds as follows:
My Lord Primate having delivered the Message without delay, the Arch-Bishop reply'd, That in Conscience he was bound for the first, and in
Duty and Obligation to the second; but he feared his Weakness and Passion would not lend him Eyes to behold his last departure.
The next Morning, at his coming forth, he drew near to the Arch-Bishop's Lodgings, and said to the Lieutenant, Tho' I do not see the Arch-Bishop,
give me leave, I pray you, to do my last observance towards his Rooms. In the mean time, the Arch-Bishop, advertised of his approach, came out to
the Window; then the Earl, bowing himself to the ground, My Lord, (said he) Your Prayers, and your Blessing. The Arch-Bishop lift up his Hands,
and bestowed both; but overcome with Grief, fell to the ground in Animi deliquio. The Earl proceeding a little farther, bowed the second
time, saying, Farewell, my Lord; God protect your Innocency.
Painting by Paul Delaroche showing Strafford being blessed by Laud.
[47]
This Noble Earl was in Person of a tall Stature, something inclining to stooping in his Shoulders, his Hair black and thick, which he wore short,
his Countenance of a grave well-composed symetry, and good Features, only in his Forehead he express'd more Severity than Affability yet a very
courteous Person.
And as he went from the Tower to the Scaffold, his Countenance was in a Mild posture, between dejection in contrition for Sin, and a high
Courage, without perceiving the least affectation of disguise in him.
He saluted the People as he walked on foot from the Tower to the Scaffold, often putting off his Hat unto them, sometimes to the right, and
sometimes to the left hand, being apparelled in a Black Cloth Suit, having White Gloves on his Hands.
And tho' at this time there were gathered together on the great open place on Tower-Hill, where the Scaffold stood, a numerous croud of People,
standing as thick as they could one by another, over all that great Hill, insomuch as, by modest computation, they could not be esteemed to be
less than 100000 People; yet as he went to the Scaffold, they uttered no reproachful or reflecting language upon him.
An illustration of Strafford on his way to execution from Harper's School History 1856.
[55]
An etching by Wenceslaus Hollar of the execution of Strafford.
[47]
A contemporary account said:
The Earl walked firmly to Tower Hill and "his step and air were those of a general marching at the head of an army to breathe victory, rather than
those of a condemned man to undergo the sentence of death". Huge multitudes had assembled to witness his execution, and in the evening the
greatest demonstrations of joy were made, and those who had come from a distance returned crying to all the met, "His head is off! His head is off!".
A drawing of the scaffold with Strafford just beheaded.
[47]
A 17th Century engraving of the execution from the Ashmolean.
[57]
Laud followed Strafford to the scaffold within a few years.
Execution of William Laud - Archbishop of Canterbury
William Laud (1573-1645) was born in Reading to a cloth merchant and after studying at St John's College Oxford was ordained in 1601. He was
strongly opposed to Puritanism and had a reputation for intellectual and organisational brilliance and strong "High Church" leanings. He rose
steadily through the ranks until being appointed Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633; he also became Chancellor of Oxford University
Given Laud's preaching that King Charles ruled by Divine Right, and his opposition to reform of the church, it is hardly surprising that he
made an enemy of the Puritans. Matters were made worse by Laud arranging the arrest of three Puritans who wrote pamphlets criticising his beliefs
resulting in them having their ears cut and them being branded on the cheeks with the letters S L (for seditious libel). Laud used his position to
force the church in the direction he wanted it to take while Charles ruled during the suspension of Parliament. His insistence that the Presbyterians
in Scotland used the English Prayer Book for services resulted in an army crossing the border and invading the North-East of England and occupying
coal fields near Newcastle.
According to Historical Collections of Private Passages of State Vol 3 1639-1640 [19], much like
Strafford, Laud was impeached for High Treason by the Commons and the case presented to The Lords on 26 February 1640 by John Pym with ten detailed
accusations against him with this preamble:
1. That he hath traiterously endeavoured to subvert the Fundamental Laws and Government of this Kingdom of England, and instead thereof, to
introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical Government against Law; and to that end hath wickedly and traiterously advised his Majesty, that he
might, at his own Will and Pleasure, levy and take Money of his Subjects, without their Consent in Parliament: and this he affirmed was
warrantable by the Law of God.
2. He hath, for the better accomplishment of that his traiterous Design, advised and procured Sermons, and other Discourses, to be preached,
printed and published, in which the Authority of Parliaments, and the Force of the Laws of this Kingdom have been denied, and absolute and
unlimited power over the Persons and Estates of his Majesty's Subjects maintained and defended, not only in the King, but in himself, and
other Bishops, against the Law; and he hath been a great protector, favourer, and promoter of the publishers of such false and pernicious Opinions.
From Wenceslaus Holler's etching of the trial of William Laud.
[47]
Like Strafford, Laud replied to the charges, but he was imprisoned in the Tower until Spring 1644, then put on trial in the House of Lords.
He stoutly defended himself and his actions and, after 21 days, the trial was adjourned without issuing a verdict. The matter was settled by the
issue of a Bill of Attainder leading to his execution despite him having been given a pardon by the King in 1643. His submission of the pardon was
rejected and a further petition to be executed by an axe rather than the usual punishment for traitors was eventually granted.
Whereas William Archbishop of Canterbury stands adjudged attainted of High Treason, by Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament, and is thereby
to suffer the Pains of Death, as a Person attainted of High Treason should or ought to do: It is now Ordained, by the Lords and Commons
assembled in Parliament, That as touching his Corporal Punishment, the Head only of the said Archbishop shall be cut off, at the Tower
Hill, at the accustomed Place there used for such Purpose; and that afterwards his Head and Body shall be delivered unto his Servants, or some
of them, to be by their Care buried: And it is hereby further Ordained, That the Lieutenant of the Tower of London shall, on Friday the Tenth
of January, 1644, deliver the Body of the said Archbishop to the Sheriffs of London, at Tower Hill, in the accustomed Place; and that the said
Sheriffs of London shall the same Day receive and execute the said Archbishop, at the accustomed Place at Tower Hill aforesaid, in such Sort,
Manner, and Form only, as by this Ordinance is appointed and declared: And this present Ordinance shall be a sufficient Warrant and Discharge
to the said Lieutenant of the Tower and Sheriffs of London, and every of them, in that Behalf; any Thing in the said former Ordinance, or any other
Ordinance or Order of both or either House of Parliament, or any other Matter or Thing Whatsoever, to the contrary notwithstanding.
Laud protested his innocence until his death and in his last sermon said he was "innocent of any offence known to the law" and repudiated charges of
"popery" saying he had always lived in the Protestant Church of England. Initially buried in All Hallows, Barking, his body was moved to the chapel
of St John's College Oxford in 1663.
Memorial to those Executed at Tower Hill
There is a simple memorial to those who were executed at Tower Hill with a number of panels. It is located to the West of the WW2 memorial
to Merchant Seamen. Nobody seems to know when it first appeared, but it was certainly there in a different form in 1947 before the construction of
the WW2 memorial as it appears in this photo from 'A London Inheritance' [58]. Most of the buildings
shown are no longer there and the site of the three-storey one behind the hut is now occupied by the Citizen Hotel.
Executions Memorial in 1947
[58]
Plate set into the ground at the centre of the memorial to those that died on the scaffold.
[54]
Plate set into the ground in memory of the Earl of Kilmarnock and Lord Balmerino
[54]
Plates showing the names of some of those that are known to have died on the scaffold at Tower Hill
[54]
Punishments at Little Tower Hill
Whilst investigating documents related to the Tower Hill area, I discovered that Little Tower Hill, otherwise known as East Smithfield, was
also used as a place for punishment - both executions and relatively lesser punishments such as the Pillory - so I have included a taste of what
I found.
Executions
Richard Clark's website [20] contains a list of those executed at the Tower of London
(which includes Tower Hill). This list records the execution by hanging of three people at East Smithfield on 19 July 1700 for the murder of Mr. Oliver
Norris.
The Old Bailey Proceedings [21] has the following account of
an execution at Little Tower Hill:
On Friday the 19th of July, Michael Van Bergen, Katherine Truerniet, and Gerhardt Dromelius, were convey'd to the Place of Execution, where they
behav'd themselves with that Meekness and Devotion as became Dying People; Praying unto God, and begging the Prayers of their own Country Ministers,
the Ordinary and the rest of the Ministers that were with them. Gerhardt Dromelius being ask'd about the Barbarous Murder for which he suffer'd,
persisted in the same Confession as before, and with that turn'd unto the People, and beg'd of them To take Example by him, and avoid Uncleanness,
and all wicked Courses, especially violent. Passion, which had brought him to this untimely end. Katherine Truerniet and Michael Van Bergen,
were prest severally to Confess the Crime for which they suffer'd Death, but there was no moving them to such an Acknowledgment, tho' they were
told it was Swore against them, that he for his part, was seen to come from the Common-shore that very Morning, and that there was some Blood
found behind their Door, it was all one, for they wou'd Confess no more, than that they knew of it after it was done. The Woman seem'd to be
concern'd for her Reputation after Death; I desir'd her rather to be concern'd for her Soul, for that was the only valuable Consideration, to
a Person in her Circumstances. The Man seem'd to be under a Dejection of Spirit, but upon Advice it was the Will of God he should thus suffer for
his Wickedness, he took Courage, and gave him the Glory. After suitable Discourses, a Penitential Psalm and Fervent Prayers, their Souls were committed
unto God.
After they had been hung, the bodies of the men were hung in chains between Bow and Mile End but Katherine Truerniet was buried.
The Pillory
The purpose of the Pillory was public humiliation. It consisted of an upright framework with a means of securing the hands and head. By comparison
Stocks were designed to secure the person being punished by the feet. In both cases, those being punished were subjected to more or less any kind of
abuse by the populace - including potentially verbal abuse, spitting, kicking or throwing various unpleasant objects such as decaying fruit and
vegetables or even faeces.
The pillory was a more dangerous punishment than the stocks and used for more serious offences. It was designed so that the offender was unable
to protect their head and other sensitive parts. There seems to have been no limitation to throwing stones which could result in blinding or even
death. Normally people would be put in the pillory for only a few hours; presumably this was considered more than enough. The treatment of the
offender would vary according to the crime committed - a notice would often be placed to show what this was. The pillory could also be used as
a whipping post to provide additional punishment if the sentence so provided.
Photo of the pillory at Nantwich in Cheshire which has been preserved.
[54]
Here are some specific examples of people sentenced to be put in the pillory at Little Tower Hill from Sessions Book 645 - January 1707
[17].
Jonathan Easden, convicted for cheating Francis Fieldhouse and Thomas Boswell, is fined £10 upon each indictment, and is to be put in and upon
the pillory on Little Tower Hill, near the Victualling Office, for two hours, between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m., with a paper fixed over his head,
describing his offences; he is to find sureties for his good behaviour for twelve months. He is remanded to Newgate until he pay the fines,
undergo the punishment, then to be delivered, paying his fees, 35/- (p. 47)
The Weekly Journal 23 January 1725
On Tuesday Night last the Sessions ended at the Old Bailey. The two Persons found Guilty of a Misdemeaner [sic] for threatning to swear an Attempt
to commit Sodomy, against a young Man, Apprentice to a Linnen-Draper, and thereby extorting Money from him, were sentenc’d to pay a Fine of 20l. a-piece, to stand
twice in the Pillory, once on Tower-Hill, and once at Cheapside-Conduit, and to suffer six Months Imprisonment.
The London Journal 20 February 1725
On Saturday last Goddard and Rustead, who were convicted at the late Sessions at the Old Bailey, of conspiring to charge falsely, a young
Gentleman, with an intention to commit Sodomy, (from whom they extorted a Diamond Ring and several Sums of Money) suffer’d one part of their Sentence, by standing
in the Pillory at Cheapside Conduit. The Populace shewed a just Detestation of such infamous Practices, for they were most severely pelted; and no doubt but
they will meet with the same Treatment on Tower Hill, where they are also to wear the wooden Ruff; after which they are to suffer Six Months Imprisonment,
in pursuance of the Sentence pass’d on them at the said Sessions.
Old Bailey Proceedings 1 September 1697
Christopher Dickenson was indicted for a Misdemeanor, for forging a Bill of Sale and Letter of Attorney, in the name of one Amon Anderson ,
Mariner, belonging to His Majesty's Ship the Newcastle . There was Evidence that proved he did confess the same, the Jury thereupon found him guilty.
Fined 5 Nobles, and to stand in the Pillory at Tower-hill, and at Charingcross.
The London Chronicle 22-24 April 1762
Mary Kite, for wilful and corrupt perjory, committed by her last session at Guildhall, upon the trial of Mr. David William a Custom-house
officer, whom she had unjustly prosecuted for an apprehended assault with intent to commit a rape upon her; and the being now convicted of having been guilty
of that perjury upon the clearest evidence, was sentenced to stand on the pillory upon Tower Hill and to be imprisoned in the gaol of Newgate for one year.
The two cases of "intention to commit sodomy" are interesting. Such accusations appear to have been a 'nice little earner' for local criminals by
which they would threaten a victim with making an accusation of sodomy (then a capital offence) if they did not hand over money, property or whatever. There are
real parallels with the blackmailing of gay men in the 20th Century with "outing" unless they paid money.
The pillory has not been used in the United Kingdom since 1830 - though I can see some merit in its return for use with lying politicians......