Willson 1
The Gardner at the Gallows: For Buggerie Laid to his Charge (London, 1667)
A Critical Introduction and Annotated Edition
by Kendall Willson, University of British Columbia-Okanagan
The criminal pamphlet detailing the accusation, trial and near-hanging of a Mr. Thomas Rivers, gardener,contains a unique set of circumstances. Rivers was accused of engaging in the act of sodomy with his 15 year old apprentice, a boy by the name of Henry Wells. It was the boy himself who brought the accusation against his master.The boy was questioned many times, both by religious authorities and officers of the court, always giving the same story. On the day of the execution, the boy attended with his mother. As his master was being led up to the gallows, Henry Wells finally surrendered to his conscience and admitted to having committed perjury. Thomas Rivers was taken down from the gallows, and the execution was halted; everyone waited until one of the sheriff’s officers returned with a pardon from the king, and then Thomas Rivers was taken to a tavern, where he recounted a dream he had had beforehand, which prophesized his pardon from the gallows.
Virtually all of the information that is known about these two individuals, Thomas Rivers and Henry Wells, is contained within the following edited text. This being the case, it is difficult to get a complete understanding of what happened leading up to and following the events described in the document. It is very tempting to create one’s own narrative surrounding the text. For example, it is clear that Henry Wells committed perjury, but the pamphlet doesn’t tell us whether or not he was charged with this offence.Instead of speculating on such matters, I have researched the nature of master-apprentice relationships at the end of the seventeenth-century in order to look at how this relationship could have been perceived as one wherein a charge of sodomy might be believed. Unfortunately, unless some other document or information about these two people arises in the future, there is no way to ascertain the true nature of the relationship between these individuals, Rivers and Wells.
The Master-Apprentice Relationship in Late Seventeenth-Century England
There are a number of factors that make this particular criminal pamphlet unique. Those dealing with the pamphlet’s narrator, his shaping of events and characters, as well as his style will be dealt with later. The most striking difference between this pamphlet and most sixteenth- and seventeenth-century criminal pamphlets lies in its narrative climax. The majority of criminal pamphlets, especially those very few that focus on sodomy, detail the accused’s trial and death. However, The Gardner at the Gallows does not offer the conventional sequence of events found in most of these works: judicial condemnation, followed by the convicted’s deep repentance, and finally his/her remorseful, Christian death. Before Rivers can be hanged, it is revealed that his accuser has been lying, and therefore he is released at the very moment when, the noose about his neck, he is about to be ‘turned off’ the gallows’ ladder.Although accusations, indictments and successful prosecutions for sodomy were rare in this period, those convicted of this crime never escaped the death penalty. What makes Rivers’ situation even more unique is that the truth comes out at the last possible moment, giving the text a sensationalistic, almost surreal, quality.
Although at first glance The Gardner at the Gallowsappears to be largely about sodomy or “buggerie,” its title is actually quite misleading. In fact, the relationship between master and apprentice and the anxieties that accompany it are actually the main focus of the pamphlet, with sodomy being absorbed into a larger set of issues concerning the intimacy of this relationship.The relationship that existed between masters and apprentices,[1]as well as masters and servants, was quite different than it is today. In contemporary North American society, only the truly wealthy can afford to employ servants. In addition, today it is unlikely to see a strong personal relationship develop between the apprentice or servant and his/her master, not to mention that the apprenticeship system has undergone a sharp decline (Scott 445) and is now all but extinct. Scott observes that the institution of apprenticeship began to lose much of its power due to the changing social and economic conditions of the seventeenth and into the eighteenth centuries (446). Although it does not apply to this particular case, since as gardening did not require the use of industrial machinery, or occur in the conditions commonly found in industrial settings, for historical and contextual purposes, it will be noted here that one of the major factors in the decline of the effectiveness of the apprenticeship system were the beginnings ofindustrialization and later the Industrial Revolution (Scott 448).
Lack of proper supervision and regulation by the now defunct gild system was another major element in this decline. As there were no gilds to monitor the actions of a mastertowards an apprentice, maltreatment could occur without punishment (Scott 448). Henry Wells seems to have taken this concept and inverted it. It is possible that he used this lack of supervision to his advantage. Just as there was no supervision available to report misbehavior, this lack of supervision also could have allowed for individuals to report maltreatment, when nothing of the kind had actually taken place. ThomasRiver’s denial would be essentially meaningless, as it would not be expected that the perpetrator of sodomy would freely admit to his crime. With sodomy being so severely looked down upon and condemned, it was almost certain that Rivers would have hanged, if his apprentice had not admitted to perjury at the very foot of the gallows.
Perhaps most importantly for an understanding of The Gardner at the Gallows, in contrast to contemporary North American society, that of seventeenth-century England had developed a close, even familial, master-apprentice relationship. Rather than be treated merely as the hired help, servants, apprentices and employees were given the same treatment as the master’s immediate family, with the master often becoming like a surrogate father figure to his young charges (Smith 449).However, while the above description is true, it is also quite idealistic. In reality, the working relationship between master and apprentice was not always so idyllic.The Gardner at the Gallows showcases one of the greatest fears held by masters, or those in similar positions during this time. Specifically, masters feared the threat posed by the level of intimacy and familiarity that existed between themselves and their subordinates. The servile class of society was one that essentially had access to potentially important information about sensitive personal, domestic or business matters, like the master’s religious or political opinions. Moreover, this relationship was not so close as to stop servants and apprentices from practicing extortion, by using some of this information for personal gain, even though they might alsoexperience a sense of remorse for their betrayal of their masters (Dolan 67).
Construction of the Text
The narrator is an interesting aspect of this text. It is stated at the very beginning of the document that he was an “eye and ear witness.” To emphasize this point, there are many instances in the text of direct speech or recounted direct speech; these instances are signaled by italics, indicating that the content is word for word, or at least a close approximation of what actually was said. The use of this device is obviously designed to gain the reader’s trust.
In addition, the narrator has clearly intended to shape the narrative voice in a way that all but takes the concept of law and criminal justice out of the equation.Much emphasis is placed on just how convincing the witness is.The focus here is not on the fact that this young boy has committed the crime of perjury, but on how convincing a witness he has been. The processes of law and order are all placed in the background. In short, the processes of the judicidal system in relation to Rivers’ prosecution for sodomy do not seem to be of particular importance to this narrator. For example, Wells disappears very abruptly from the text once he has confessed, and there is an odd hole left in the text. The reader has absolutely no indication of the fate of this boy, whether or not he was brought to justice for his actions, or even whether or not he and the wrongly accused ever had any subsequent contact. It is almost as if he is used as a device to further the plot, and once the situation has reached its climax, he has served his purpose. It can be frustrating for the reader to have one of the key individuals in the text all but disappear more than half way though the text, and it is difficult not to have a solid, nicely delineated ending.
The pamphlet portrays Thomas Rivers very idealistically in his role as the good, kind-hearted master wronged by a thoughtless, perhaps vengeful, subordinate.This image is perpetuated further by the quasi-religious language that Rivers and the narrator often use in the text, language that does not often quote from Scripture but that does use its imagery. In this case, what the language ends up achieving is presenting Rivers as a good and honest man. The effect of this kind of language is most evident at the end of the text, in the recounting of the dream that foretold Rivers’ pardoning from execution, where Christianarchetypes and symbols, such as the harvest, help represent Rivers’sspiritual purity. However, even though Rivers is clearly idealized, it does not appear that the narrator is being unreliable in anyway. Events are depicted in a logical, chronological manner, and there does not seem to be any attempt to mislead the reader in any way. On the contrary, the narrator seems to have simply placed some of his own feelings into the text, but not so much so as to make the reader doubt the reliability of the pamphlet’s facts.
A Note on the Text
In preparing this edition, I have not modernized the original’s spelling or punctuation, although I have modernized some aspects of the typeface. The character [ʃ]which was used sometimes interchangeably with the letter [s] has been replaced with the modern “s”. The reader will notice that many words in the document are capitalized or in italics. Capitalization of nouns was common during this period, as was the italicization of words, phrases, and whole sentences; the latter was used in the place of quotation marks. By leaving these two aspects of the text as they appear originally, I hope that the modern reader will have a more authentic reading experience.The layout of the title page, as well as the woodcut on the frontispiece, is formatted as closely as possible to that of the actual document.The paragraph alignment and structure is it appears in the original text.
All definitions are from Oxford Reference Online, unless otherwise noted.
All definitions marked with an asterisk (*) are taken from the Online Oxford English Dictionary.
The
Gardner[2] at the Gallows:
For
Buggerie[3]
Laid to his Charge.
Being a True Narrative of a Strange and Admirable Passage of Gods Providence in the Reprieve of Thomas RiversGardner, living at St. Giles in Southampton Buildings; who being Indicted for Buggering his Apprentice Henry Wells, a Lad about 15 years of age, was condemned on Friday the 13. of this instant December, at the Old-Bayly Sessions,[4] and drawn to Tyburn[5]the Wednesday following, about 10 a clock; where being tied up, the Lad and his Mother being present, they declare the wrong they had done him; who thereupon was Reprieved.
Also the passages between the Master and Servant when brought back.
Written by one who was an Eye and Ear Witness.[6]
Innocency[7] Reprieved,
Or
The Gardener at the Gallows, for Buggery laid to his charge.
I cannot stand to make[8] any preface to the ensuing Narrative, in regard I am confined in my time, and to one sheet of paper; I shall therefore apply my self to inform the Reader of what I had from his own mouth, who is the Subject of this ensuing Discourse. Thomas Rivers Gardner, aged about 27 years, dwelling inSouth-hampton buildings in Vine-Street took an Apprentice or Servant, whose name isHenry Wells, a Lad about 15 years old; the said Rivers having married a Wife above Two years before, and brought her out of Ireland; which is a woman of an honest and simple behavior. This boy ran away from his Master about 3 Months ago, and being a Lad of a prompt wit and confidence, spent much of his time about Birds; which Mr. Rivers wife also delighted in, and occasioned her, when he was with them, to allow him something for the keeping of them: and would range up and down the fields to take his pleasure. But the said Rivers about two months after this Lad ran away, understanding he was with his Mother, obtained two Warrants to apprehend him, and bring him home again; the last whereof he served upon him with his own hands, about three weeks or a month ago, and had the Boy before a Justice; where being come, he swore, That the occasion of his running away from his said Master, was, because he had several times Bugger’d[9] him. Upon which Oath the said Rivers was committed to the Gatehouse,[10] where he remained about 16 days, and when the last Sessions[11] was in the Old Bayly, December 11, 1667 he was brought from thence to Newgate,[12]and from thence to his trial at the Old Bayly. There came this Lad and swore against him, That his said Master Thomas Rivers, did one time when his Mistress was forth, invite him the said Henry Wells into bed to him, and asked if he were cold, which he said he was, and then and there he Bugger’d him, and Entered his body; and that after that he took him in the Cellar, and tied him up by the two wrists, and there abused him; and also that upon a Sunday after, the said Master took him out into the fields, and did the like unto him after he had bound him.
There came in behalf of Mr. Rivers the Gardener, two or three Witnesses, viz. the Constable, the Beadle,[13] and a Neighbor; the two former did assert, That they were present when the Master apprehended the Boy, and had him before the Justice, and that then the Boy swore, He had Bugger’d him eight times. The other spake to his conversation and living, which, he said, was harmless and innocent; the said Rivers being of a very softly disposition and nature. But all this took not away the Boy’s Evidence, which he declared with so much confidence and answering all Objections, that the said Thomas Rivers was brought in Guilty on Friday the 13 day of this instant December, 1667. and accordingly was condemned to be hanged atTyburn, (the common place of Execution) for the said Fact.[14] Between the Sentence and the Execution, the Minister of the place, Mr. Welden, was often with him, and after many serious Exhortations, did persuade him to confess his Fact, and thereby give Glory to God, whose Justice had brought him to that signal[15] Punishment. But Mr.Rivers still persisted on his Innocency, and the burden of all still was, That he was as Innocent from the Fact as the Child unborn. And notwithstanding his remorse and Repentance, which was kindly and good, for all his former sins; but observing that this had no Impression at all upon him: put Mr. Welden, the Minister, (whose prudent Industry in this thing is much to be commended) upon a more strict Examination of the Boy; which accordingly he did, having sent for him on Sunday, and at other times, found the Boy still in the same Story: Some of the Keepers[16] also taking the Lad to task, yet could not find him vary one word from what he had sworn at the Court.
And now the Fatal day of Mr. Rivers Execution is come, which was on Wednesday the 18. day of this instant December, 1667. He being prepared to die, was put into the Cart that Morning, about 10 of the clock, and so guarded away to Tyburn. But still God was pleased to put it upon the heart of Mr. Welden, the Minister of Newgate, to send one of the Keepers again for this Boy, who was brought accordingly, and carried to theWhite-Hart Tavern in Smithfield,[17]and there again examined and exhorted in the Fear of God, That if he had sworn falsely against his Master, that he would then and there declare it. But still the Boy persisted in his report; and whereas it was observed before by the Minister and the Keeper, that the Boys Mother, whose name is Wells, and also others of his Kindred did use to whisper to him, either before or after they had examined him; Mr. Welden singles him out from them, and takes him into a Coach with himself and Keeper, and so he accompanied his Master to the Gallows; yet all this while he did not discover the least remorse of heart. Being all come to the place of Execution, Mr. Rivers is Tyed up to the Gallows, and here having made his last Speech and Prayer, he now waited for the Fatal Turn[18] that should turn him into Eternity; and now was the last time that this Lad had to confess his Error, which accordingly he did, being in the same Cart where the Prisoner was to be Turned Over. The Minister told him, that now was the last time he had to Declare his Conscience, and the truth of the Fact: The Lad seeing his Master now upon the brink of Death, and his Cap ready to be pulled down over his Eyes; cried out that he had wronged his Master, and sworn falsly against him; the Minister hearing that, bid him direct his Speech to the People, which accordingly he did, and declared to them that were Spectators that he was Forsworn, which the Boys Mother also did at the place of Execution; upon which, the Ordinary[19] (having Order before, if the Boy did Deny it) taking notice, presently dispatched one of the Sheriff, Officers, with one of the Keepers to “the King’s Majesty; who immediately Riding to White-hall, found his Majesty at Dinner; they Declared to his Majesty the whole Business, whereupon his Majesty was graciously pleased to Order them forthwith to return back with all hast, and Reprieve the Prisoner and not stay for methodizing it,[20] least it should be too late. And now the Messenger of Life being come to the Place which is to the Prisoner as a Resurrection from the Dead, where he was untied from the Gallows, and brought back again on Horse-back behind one of the Officers, with the Halter about his Neck, the Officer having the end of it in his Halbeard-hand,[21] they alighted at theTavern, with the Guard, where came in to him again the Boy and his Friend, who again asked him Forgiveness, to whom he meekly, said the Lord forgive you, for I do, and being desired to drink a Glass of Wine, he took only one Glass, and then reflected again upon some passages of his own Life, repeating what he thought had been amiss in himself; he could not call to mind any pleasure he had been else[22] addicted to, unless it were Ringing; which being still with the Rope about his Neck, and the Noose under his Ear, as it was put by the Executioner, some of the Company thought that might put him more than ordinary in mind of it.