A century before Jack the Ripper, women in London were being terrorised by another misogynistic maniac dubbed: the London Monster. He attacked more than fifty women, disfiguring several. The fact he didn’t kill any of his victims has meant his crimes have been eclipsed by Jack the Ripper’s later murders. But his attacks caused immense trauma and life changing injuries to those involved.
His modus operandi involved attaching knives to his knees and slashing at random women in the street. The attacks occurred between 1788 and 1790 and had the same impact as the Whitechapel murders of 1888. The newspapers stoked the widespread fear while women felt incredibly vulnerable. Many took to wearing pots, pans, and other metal protection under their dresses just in case.
DISCOVER: Jack the Ripper unmasked – new evidence from TV historian Tony McMahon
A former violinist and ballet dancer, Rhynwick Williams, was arrested. He was positively identified by Anne Porter who implored a fishmonger, John Coleman, to restrain Williams and turn him over to the authorities.
The court proceedings stated:
RENWICK WILLIAMS (sic) , was indicted, for that he, on the 18th of January last, with force and arms, at the parish of St. James, Westminster, in the king’s highway, in a certain public street there, called St. James’s-street , unlawfully, wilfully, maliciously, and feloniously, did make an assault on Ann Porter , spinster , with an intent to tear, spoil, cut, and deface her garments and clothes; and on the same day, with force and arms, in the same public street, wilfully, maliciously, and feloniously, did tear, spoil, cut, and deface her garments: to wit, one silk gown, value 20 s. a pair of stays, value 5 s. a silk petticoat, value 5 s. one other petticoat, value 5 s. a linen petticoat, value 5 s. and a shift, value 5 s. her property, part of her apparel which she had on her person, against the form of the statute, and against the king’s peace, &c.
Here’s the opening comments from the trial (source: Old Bailey online):
It is an unpleasant task to call your minds to a scene so new in the annals of mankind; a scene so unaccountable: a scene so unnatural to the honour of human nature, that it could not have been believed ever to have existed, unless it had been demonstrated by that proof which the senses cannot resist: but while we are trying the prisoner at the bar, for this unnatural, unaccountable, and until now, unknown offence, we should not forget that he is our fellow being, and give him an attentive hearing.
The attacks, the prosecution railed, had been against women who were “the most beautiful! the most innocent! the most lovely!” His attack on Ann Porter had occurred as she returned from a ball in St James’s, Westminster. Unfortunately for Williams, having torn at her clothes, he then paused to stare at her. As a result, his face was etched on her mind. A little later, she spotted Williams in St James’s Park leading to his capture and trial.
Williams was sentenced to six years in prison. By the standards of the time, this was an unusually lenient punishment. Many crimes – such as theft and counterfeiting – still carried the death penalty. So why did Williams receive a custodial sentence? Aside from the sexism of the time, another reason offered is that there was a glimmer of doubt over Williams’ guilt. Although I have found an 1890 article in The Pall Mall Gazette alleging that Williams had “some powerful friends” who got the charge reduced to a misdemeanour.
