about Research, in an interview, said that the battering-ram. Ian Hay contributes a lively THE principal article of the Genealogist's searches for wills. THE Cornhill for October contains an article on Deerstalkers: Professional and Amateur, by Mr. Gilford Hartley, based largely on a book by an unnamed writer, 'Days on the Hill,' and filled with stories, not only from that source, and information, and rapid character-sketches. There is note of a chapter in the book entitled Hummels.' A hummel is a hornless stag, who, so far from being at a disadvantage by reason of his lack, is an object of fear to his fellows, for his hornless head will drive at them like a From The LONDON JOURNAL. SATURDAY, September 30, 1727. Her Majefty having taken the Care of the Princeffes, her Children, into her own Hands, the Countefs of Portland and he Lady Colladon, have been difcharged from any farther Attendance on their Highneffes, and are to take their Leaves in a few Days; and in regard to their great Care and Prudence in the Education of their Highneffes, Penfions will be fettled on both thofe Ladies. On Thurfday was burnt at the Tobacco Ground in Cupid's Gardens, Thirty Eight Chefts of damag'd Tea, and Five Bags of damag'd Coffee, in the Prefence of feveral Officers belonging to East-India Company, Cuftoms and Inland Duties. On Sunday laft, about Midnight, Col. Lee of the Second Regiment of Foot Guards, was attack'd near Leicefter-Fields, in his way home, by fome Ruffians who knock'd him down, and wounded him in feveral Places, leaving him for dead; but being interrupted by the coming of the Watch, they only carried off his Hat and Wig. Literary and Historical tion of the evidence is, that the witness was speaking of the door-window close to the Notes. CHARLES I AND THE BANQUETING HOUSE, WHITEHALL. (See clii. 117, 173, 210, 247, 282, 299, 320, 336; cliii. 201, 219). UNTIL one recognized the position and the significance of the breaking down of the wall at the north end of the Hall, certain statements deposed to at the trials of the regicides were obscure. In this connexion some evidence given at one of these trials may be here mentioned. After the Restoration, Captain-Lieutenant William Hulet was indicted at the Old Bailey, on Oct. 15, 1660, on the charge of high treason, it being alleged against him that he had beheaded the King in 1649, or that he was the second man in disguise on the scaffold, who had assisted the executioner. Richard Gittens was a witness for the prosecution, both he and Hulet having been sergeants in Colonel Hewson's regiment of foot at the time of the King's death. The evidence given by Gittens incriminated the accused, Gittens alleging that he had recognized him at the execution as one of the disguised men on the scaffold. In the course of his evidence Gittens stated that " Capt. Webb kept the guard, with his halbert in his hand, by the scaffold." The accused man, Hulet, questioned this witness as follows:Hulet. I desire to know of him how he comes to know that I was there at that time. Gittens. By your voice. Hulet. Where were you at that time when the act was done? Hulet. Was you on the scaffold, or no, Sir? Gittens. I was on the scaffold end. At first sight this evidence was puzzling, as all the north doors of the Banqueting House were inside the annexe, and nothing taking place on the scaffold could have been seen from any of them, and yet the witness states that he was at the door of the Banqueting-house," and at the same time standing on the scaffold end, and observing the occurrences upon the scaffold. The explana north-west corner of the Banqueting House, as the door of that House, and there it was that he was standing on the scaffold end, with Captain Webb, Colonel Tomlinson, and others. He would naturally speak of this outlet as "the door of the Banqueting House," it being "it a large opening reaching down to the landing level, and situated in that building at the north end, which was incorporated with the House, and described here as an annexe. This door-window was the exit by which the King and those with him passed out to the scaffold, and was, as prepared for the occasion, a temporary door. It is noticeable that Herbert writes of the and says nothing of a portion of the opening King as having passed through a broken wall He possibly regarded the broken wall as the more having been formed by a window. important feature, and so referred to it alone. Ludlow and others, on the contrary, only mention the window, making no direct reference to a broken down wall. Neither description was complete, and between their various statements, these writers puzzled posterity. of as Something must be said concerning the scaffold and its situation, about which there has been a diversity of opinion. In the first place it is necessary to remember that only part of the scaffold platform, which was erected at the north end of the western front of the Banqueting House, was usually spoken the scaffold," being that part of the platform which was furthest from the northwest corner, or angle of the House. This was the part of the structure that was draped and had its floor covered with black. The other portion of the platform, namely that which was at, and close to the north-west corner of the House, was known as the scaffold-end. Strictly speaking, both the scaffold-end and the scaffold proper formed but one continuous structure, but the slight difference between them has to be remembered. It is clear that the portion of the scaffold platform on which the block was placed and where the King died, called here the scaffold proper, cannot have been far from the northwest corner of the House, as those standing on the scaffold-end by the door-window in the wall of the annexe, at this corner, could hear, as the evidence at the trials of the regicides shows, the speech of those who were immediately about the King, when he was upon the scaffold. Benjamin Francis was a witness for the prosecution, at the trial for high treason of Colonel Hacker, on 15 Oct., 1660. Hacker! was the senior of the three officers, the other two being Colonel Huncks and Lieut.-Col. Phaire, whose names were entered on the death warrant, instructing them to see the sentence of death carried out upon the King. Some of the evidence given by Francis was as follows Counsel. Mr. Francis, did you see col. Hacker at the time of the execution upon the scaffold? Francis. Yes, I did see him as a principal commander there; I was coming out of Westminster into London, about half an hour before the king came upon the scaffold; coming near the scaffold, as soon as I was engaged in the throng, (when I had passed about eight or ten yards,) I could not pass backward nor forward; I was inforced to stand there: during that time I saw the scaffold, and the ax, and the block, taken up by divers people. Counsel. Did you see Hacker? Did you see him upon the scaffold when the king came on? Francis. 1 did see him, he was there; his majesty came to the side of the scaffold, next to St. James's; he looked that way and smiled; after a while the block and ax laying down about the middle of the scaffold, there was a black cloth hung about the rails of the scaffold. Another witness at Col. Hacker's trial was Col. Matthew Tomlinson, an officer in the Parliamentary Army, in whose custody the King had been during the last five weeks of his life, and who conducted his Majesty from St. James's to Whitehall on the morning of the execution. Tomlinson's charge did not come to an end until Col. Hacker, accompanied by Col. Huncks and Lt.-Col. Phaire, the guard of Halberdiers, to which these three officers belonged, being in attendance, went to the King's chamber at Whitehall to conduct him through the Banqueting House to the scaffold. At the King's special request Col. Tomlinson also went with him, and stood close by until the end. Giving evidence at the trial of Hacker, in 1660, Tomlinson stated: So col. Hacker led him forth, the bishop of London followed him, and I followed the bishop of London: the guards were prepared without, and they went on to the scaffold; when we came to the scaffold I went so far as to the entrance upon it; the king was upon it, and had looked a little while about it, and was thinking to have spoken over, but he turned about to me, and began to direct his the king said, for I cannot remember it: speech to me. I cannot trouble you with what but that col. Hacker was there in prosecution of that warrant, and upon that warrant our orders were at an end, I do aver. he The speaking over "Tomlinson mentions, refers to the King's intention to have addressed the assembled multitude, but finding that the troops in Whitehall had pressed the people so far back from the scaffold that his words would have been inaudible, turned and directed his remarks to those about him, and chiefly to Col. Tomlinson. The latter was evidently standing on that part of the scaffold platform known as the scaffold-end, from which the scaffold proper was distinguished by having its rails draped and its floor covered with black "bays.' In The Moderate Intelligencer of 30 Jan., 1648/9, we find it stated of the King, after his entry on the scaffold, At his first coming he lookt upon the people, who were numerous, as also the Souldiers. He presently turned to them about him, who were about 15 persons, and spake to this effect, etc. have included those who were standing on The fifteen persons here mentioned must both the scaffold-end and the scaffold proper. A Perfect Diurnall of the same date records, There were divers companies of Foot and multitudes of people that came to be SpecHorse, on every side of the Scaffold, and the tators very great. The King making a Passe upon the Scaffold look'd very earnestly on the Block and asked Col. Hacker if there were no higher; and then spake thus, directing his speech to the gentlemen upon the Scaffold, etc. Reference has already been made to Vertue's note on Terasson's engraving of the Banqueting House, dated 1713. Vertue was born in London in 1684, and must have known some who were living at the time of the King's execution. He died in 1756, and in his lifetime the old north annexe through which the King passed to the scaffold, still existed. In his entry on the engraving he states, as we have seen, that the window frame was taken out " to make the passage on to the Scaffold which is equal to the landing place of the Hall within side." It is clear that the landing within side referred to, was the landing in the annexe outside the north-west doorway in the north wall of the Hall, that doorway which is now built up at the back, and forms a cupboard. We do not know the length of that portion of the scaffold platform which was called the scaffold-end, but, as already mentioned, it must have reached some feet north of the north-west corner of the Banqueting House, possibly six feet, in order to receive the planks laid down from the opening broken in the wall beneath the annexe window facing Whitehall Street. If we add another five feet to this portion of the scaffold-end as being its continuation along the west front of the House, there would then be left about six feet for the commencement of the scaffold proper before the glazed margin of the first west window along the front of the House was reached. Starting at six feet north of this window, the scaffold proper, were it sixteen feet in length, would have reached to nearly midway between the sashes of the first and second windows of the middle row, on the west front, and were it twenty feet long it would have ended close to the nearest margin of the second window. It is improbable that the scaffold proper was more than fifteen or sixteen feet long. A structure of that length, if eight or nine feet wide, would have been of quite sufficient_size. Some measurements I made in connection with the Banqueting House may be here referred to. The distance outside, from the north-west corner of the House to the projecting portion of the west front which contains the third, fourth and fifth windows of the three rows on that front, is 35 ft., and the distance from the same corner to the nearest margin of the first window in the middle row, is 11 ft. The width of the stonework separating the first and second windows of this middle row is about 10 ft., and the width of each window, including the sashes, is 5 ft. 4 ins. Along the north wall of the House, the distance from the north-west corner to the nearest side of the large central doorway in the north end of the Hall, is 29 ft., and the distance from the front, or west wall of the House, at its outside, to the nearest margin of the north-west doorway in the north wall of the Hall, now the entrance from the Hall to a cupboard, is 10 ft. This doorway is 4 ft. wide, and there would have been ample space for a landing of 15 ft. or more in length to have been in the annexe outside this door. What can be stated definitely is: 1. It is certain that a portion of the scaffold platform, viz., the structure formed partly of scaffold-end and partly of scaffold north end of the Banqueting House, in the proper, was under the first window from the middle row, on the western front. 2. It is practically certain that some of the scaffold proper was under this first window, and most probably the centre of the scaffold was in that position. scaffold reached as far as the second window 3. It is very unlikely that any of the on the west front, from the north end of the House. A point that may be noted in connexion with the north-west doorway situated in the north wall of the Banqueting Hall, the doorway that has been long built up at the back and forms a cupboard in the wall, is, that if the back of the cupboard were now broken through, the doorway would open into the outside air, whereas formerly it opened into the old annexe at the north end of the Hall. This results from the west wall of the present annexe being set back further from Whitehall Street than was the west wall of the old annexe, the latter wall, it will be remembered, being that in which was situated the door-window through which the King passed out to the scaffold. The proof that this north-west doorway in the Hall would now open into space and not into the present annexe, if the back of the cupboard were removed, is found in the fact that the distance, measured inside the Hall, between the west side of the central north door, and the nearest margin of the northwest doorway, opening now into a cupboard, is 15 ft., whereas the distance between the west side of the central north door and the west wall of the present annexe, measured outside the Hall, but inside the annexe, where the staircase now ascends to this central north door, is only about 12 ft. 4 ins. The thickness of the west wall of the present annexe, facing Whitehall Street, being 2 ft., it is clear that if the back of the cupboard in the northwest doorway in the north wall of the Hall were cut out, the thus opened up doorway passage would be outside the present annexe, namely, the whole width of this north-west doorway would open into space, about 8 ins. (the difference between 15ft. and 14 ft. 4 ins.) in front of the west wall of the present annexe, which faces Whitehall Street, as did the west wall of the old annexe. The old annexe west wall having been nearer to Whitehall Street than is the west wall of the present annexe, was attached to the north end of the Banqueting House on the Whitehall Street side of the north-west doorway in the north end of the Hall, consequently the old annexe received this north-west doorway, which then, therefore opened on to the landing in the annexe. There can be no doubt that this north-west door in the north wall of the Hall, the door which has been built up at the back for more than 130 years, was the door through which King Charles passed from the Hall into the north annexe on his way to the scaffold. It is too long to enter here into the question of how the King was brought from his chamber at Whitehall, into the Banqueting Hall, on the day of his execution. The manner of his entry has been greatly misunderstood, and will be dealt with later in the work I hope to publish. A few remarks may be made concerning the plate now fixed under the centre window, in the middle row, on the west side of the Banqueting House. On this plate is an 'inscription stating that the scaffold on which King Charles I. was executed was "erected in front of this spot. In a recent communication to N. & Q' (clii. 299) a writer states that he had read somewhere, but could not find the reference, that when the workman arrived to fix the existing tablet, no one could tell him under which window it should go, so it was decided for appearance' sake to put it under the centre one! I learnt particulars of the fixing of this plate from one who took an active part in connexion with the matter, and who has for many years been employed at the Banqueting House. The details are as follows: In 1897, the Banqueting House being then, as it is now, in the possession of the Royal United Service Institution, it was decided to have a plate fixed under the first window from the north end, in the middle row, on the western front of the House, to indicate the place where the scaffold stood on which Charles I was executed. A former Secretary of the United Service Institution, now deceased, sent my informant, an old soldier, previously a sergeant in the Black Watch, with the inscribed plate, to the Clerk of the Works for Whitehall, requesting him to send a workman to fix the plate, the directions being that the man sent was first to see the Secretary at the Banqueting House, and receive instructions where the plate was to be attached. receiving this message the Clerk sent informant to the foreman, to whom the same message was given and the plate delivered. as to On my The foreman sent a workman to the Banqueting House, who, without seeing the Secretary, fixed the plate under the centre window on the west side. When the mistake was discovered, my informant was again sent by the Secretary to the Clerk of the Works, who, as on the first occasion, directed him to see the foreman. The latter said that it was immaterial where the plate was put, as no one knew where the King was executed, and he declined to incur the further expense of removing the plate and fixing it elsewhere. Nothing more was done, and under the centre window this plate has remained for thirty years, telling its erroneous tale to all who happen to read the inscription. The Clerk of the Works and the foreman in question are now both deceased. The Office of Works has charge of the fabric of the Banqueting House, and the attachment of any fixture to the building comes under the supervision of that Office. The above is the account of the transaction I was given. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the details, but I questioned my informant very carefully, and have no reason for doubting his statement. There can be no question that the correct position for the plate to be fixed is under the first window from the north end of the House, in the middle row. In front of that place was erected the scaffold platform on which the King died. CHARLES HERBERT THOMPSON. |