January 28, 1829—William Burke, whose grisly practice of supplying body parts to
Scottish medical schools gave rise to the
classic horror story “The Body Snatcher” by Robert Louis Stevenson (pictured), was
hanged in Edinburgh for the inevitable next step in his business: murders to accommodate the swelling demand for his services. The serial killer, after
an execution witnessed by 25,000 people, ended up with his remains dissected
and his skeleton on display at the University of Edinburgh's Anatomy Museum, an
object of inspection not unlike his victims.
Maybe it’s because Stevenson’s “The Strange Case of
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” has traveled past familiarity into parody
(intentional, as in Jerry Lewis’ The
Nutty Professor, or unintentional, as in Oliver! composer Lionel Bart’s 1973 TV musical adaptation starring
Kirk Douglas), but I have come to prefer the subtler charms of the great
writer’s 1884 horror story of grave robbing to his better-known tale of the
thin line between good and evil.
In a way, “The Body Snatcher” might be more
horrific: while “Dr. Jekyll” is a dystopian warning of what could happen if
science runs amok, “The Body Snatcher” derived from an actual investigation
that, a half-century later, many proper Victorians would have preferred to
forget, if the so-called "West Port murders" hadn’t already affected legislation and entered mainstream pop
culture.
The known crimes (16 murders) of Irish emigrants Burke
and his accomplice William Hare proved the necessity of laws that eliminated
the need for corpses for medical research and teaching.
The grave-robbing spree began in November 1827 with
the death of a fellow tenant in Hare’s building who had owed him money. If
they couldn’t get money from the deceased in life, Hare and Burke figured, they would
capitalize on him in death. Students of Prof. Robert Knox told the duo they
were interested in the remains for his anatomy lessons, but to bring the corpse
back after nightfall.
The actions of Burke, Hare and the students might
have been unethical, but in that time they were not unusual. Prevailing
religious mores had dictated that the only human remains that could be used for
dissections were those of recently executed criminals. At the same time,
growing scientific knowledge had made surgery an increasingly studied subject
at universities. There weren’t enough corpses to meet this growing demand.
For their part, professors who received the
corpses had no incentive to inquire about the sources of these body parts. They
charged fees to the students who attended their lectures. Why upset something that
was working so well? And so, an entire underworld became extremely proficient
at opening up a grave, removing the body in the dead of night,
and restoring the topsoil, leaving nobody the wiser the next day.
From this point on, Burke and Hare decided to nudge
the death process forward. Their next victim had been quite ill when, after
discussing the matter, they concluded it was pointless to wait until the point
of no return, as with the first corpse. So, like any good neighbor, they gave
Joseph the Miller some alcohol, then, when he was powerless to resist, one held his nose and mouth while the other lay across the prone body until he was dead.
It would look, from a quick inspection of the body, that the deceased had
passed away from drunkenness or illness.
The killing spree lasted until the following
Halloween. A chance encounter led an elderly Irishwoman, Mary Docherty, to the rooms
of Burke and his mistress Helen McDougald (who, with Hare’s wife, Margaret
Laird, had been an accessory to the crimes). A couple who had met the Irishwoman
the night before, James and Ann Gray, had returned to Burke’s apartment the next day, only to be
told that after their departure, Helen had thrown Docherty out of the apartment for excessive familiarity with Burke.
The story unraveled after Ann Gray approached a spare
bed to retrieve a sock she had left behind. Burke’s furious warning to get away
from there only fed her curiosity, which she eventually satisfied the first
chance she had when he left the apartment. The Grays’ discovery of Docherty’s
body led them to go to the police. Though the body had been spirited out in the
meantime, an anonymous tip led the authorities to Knox’s examining room, where
they came upon it.
Helen and Margaret, interviewed separately, provided
the police with a 12-hour difference in the time of Docherty’s death that only increased their suspicions. They bore down on the women and their mates. It was still not
an open-and-shut case, but Hare’s agreement to testify against his literal
partner in crime enabled them to indict Burke. His eventual confession, while
providing at least some details about his own crimes, exonerated Professor Knox of any
knowledge of the crimes, though this did not satisfy an Edinburgh community
that turned against the doctor and forced his relocation to London.
The Anatomy Act of 1832, drafted by the Utilitarian philosopher-jurist Jeremy
Bentham (whose will donated his own remains for medical research), was passed
in the wake of the scandal over the murders. But the remedy it supplied for
eliminating the financial incentive for grave robbing—using the unclaimed
bodies from hospitals and workhouses—was, in its way, as egregious as the state
of affairs that had existed before. Now, it was not only disgraced criminals,
but an entire class—the poorest of the poor—who were at risk of being used in
death against their will.
This past week, yet another version of the deaths of
Lizzie Borden’s father and stepmother was aired on a cable station. While that
crime was astounding enough on its own terms to warrant attention, interest has
remained high over the years at least partly because of a memorable, if grisly,
rhyme that arose from it. Something similar happened in the Burke-Hare murders,
with parents keeping children in line with these verses:
Up the close and down the stair,
In the house with Burke and Hare.
Burke’s the butcher, Hare’s the
thief,
Knox, the boy who buys the beef.
Burke and Hare,
Fell down the stair,
With a body in a box,
Going to Dr. Knox.
The
imagination of Stevenson, a poet himself, would surely have been fired by those
rhymes. His fictionalization of the story (with the novel twist that one of the
corpses turns up as a ghost) appeared in, of all things, the Christmas “Extra”
of the Pall Mall Gazette in 1884. The
story was adapted into a fine 1945 film by horror film auteur Val Lewton,
featuring the eighth and last joint onscreen appearance by the stars of Frankenstein and
Dracula, Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi.
Stevenson's “Body Snatcher” is an “envelope story,” a
tale-within-in-a-tale that uses an initial narrator, a friend/acquaintance of a
principal in the story, who can, in effect, vouch for the truth of the horror
revealed and the sanity of the person who witnesses and relates it. (Henry
James would use this same literary device 14 years later in The Turn of the Screw.)
One would like to say that all the horrors of the past have been entombed, but, as we saw with the discovery of the remains of Richard III, crimes and criminals have a manner these days of appearing unexpectedly. And so it is that earlier this month, skeletons turned up of four adults and a child behind a townhouse in central Edinburgh. The number of small holes in the skeletons have led members of the city's Archaeological Service to conclude that they may well have been used for medical research--the kind of anatomy lesson that Dr. Knox, without inquiring much into the handiwork of Burke and Hare, would have done.
One would like to say that all the horrors of the past have been entombed, but, as we saw with the discovery of the remains of Richard III, crimes and criminals have a manner these days of appearing unexpectedly. And so it is that earlier this month, skeletons turned up of four adults and a child behind a townhouse in central Edinburgh. The number of small holes in the skeletons have led members of the city's Archaeological Service to conclude that they may well have been used for medical research--the kind of anatomy lesson that Dr. Knox, without inquiring much into the handiwork of Burke and Hare, would have done.
(The image of Stevenson accompanying this post is by the famed portrait painter John Singer Sargent. The writer's sickly, languid frame would have made him an ideal candidate for eternal dispatch by the shady characters he depicted in his story.)
No comments:
Post a Comment