From the Waterford Citizen, 7 September 1888, this gripping account of the circumstances surrounding an Irish Earl’s trial for murder before a jury of his peers in the Irish House of Lords – the last such trial that was ever to take place, not because of any decrease in crime among Irish peers, but because the Irish House of Lords was itself dissolved by the Acts of Union following shortly afterwards.
“THE EARL OF KINGSTON’S TRIAL FOR MURDER.
Few Chapters in family history—the most romantic of all chronicles—are more remarkable than that which tells of the abduction of Mary King, and the events to which it led. From the summer of 1797 to the middle of 1798 the country rang with the story; and during that period events were piled upon events in rapid succession. An abduction, a duel, a murder, a trial at the bar of the Irish House of Lords, were the successive stages of a most amazing history. Public interest in the business was heightened by the rank of the persons concerned, by their near relationship to each other, and by the dramatic circumstances in which the guilty person lost his life. The story is one of the many constantly occurring in real life, in which the events are “too strange not to be true.”
In the summer of 1797, when the recital opens, Lord Kingston had not yet succeeded to the title which had been conferred upon his father, and he was still known as Viscount Kingsborough. He was not much over forty, but he had been married at almost as early an age as if he had been a mediaeval Baron and had a very numerous family. In marrying his cousin Miss Fitzgerald, of Mount Ophaly in county Kildare, he had become possessed of the extensive estates of her family; yet for the sake of his children’s education he lived for the greater part of the year in the neighbourhood of London.
Lady Kingsborough had a nephew, Colonel Fitzgerald, a fine dashing Beau Sabreur, whom he had brought up and educated with almost maternal care. When he entered the army she exerted all the influence she possessed to secure his advancement; and at a time when influence officered the army, even as it officered the navy, nominated the bench of bishops, and controlled Parliamentary elections, young Fitzgerald was rapidly promoted to a colonelcy. His path in life promised to be as pleasant and easy as any man could wish.
Of the several daughters of Lord Kingsborough, one of the youngest, Hon. Mary King, had always been an especial favourite with her cousin. Miss King was not exactly a beauty; but she had a pleasing face, a graceful figure, and great vivacity of manner. She had scarcely left the schoolroom and entered society when it began to be observed that she was constantly in the company of Colonel Fitzgerald, and that when they met at balls, as they frequently did, they were almost inseparable. Lord and Lady Kingsborough paid little heed to this close friendship, the relationship between their daughters and her cousin being apparently a sufficient explanation of it.
Months passed away and Mary King was fast growing to womanhood; when one morning in the summer of 1797 Lord Kingsborough’s household was horrified at discovering that Mary’s room was empty, and that she had left a note upon her dressing-table stating her intention to drown herself in the Thames near by. Her bonnet and shawl were found upon the bank; but although the river was dragged her body was not discovered. Every one save Lord Kingsborough himself, was satisfied that she had committed suicide, although it was impossible to conjecture the reason for so mad an act. Lord Kingsborough set in motion every agency which was in the least likely to procure information of the mysterious fate of his child; and at length he obtained what he could not but regard as a clue. A post-boy stated that he had been engaged to drive a gentleman to London; that before the chase had proceeded far they overtook a young lady, who was walking along the road alone; that the gentleman stopped the carriage, took up the lady, and accompanied her to London. When they reached town the pair walked away arm-in-arm, and the post-boy saw no more of them.
Lord Kingsborough was convinced that the young lady was his daughter, since time, place, and the post-boy’s description of her appearance all tended to that conclusion, it was clear that she had eloped; with whom it was impossible to conjecture. Every effort was made to discover Miss King’s whereabouts. A high reward was offered for information; but week after week passed by, and no further clue was obtained. More than one member of the family, who had observed Colonel Fitzgerald’s demeanour towards his cousin, declared their belief that it was with him she had eloped. Lord Kingsborough at first laughed at the idea, but it gradually took possession of his mind, and he taxed his wife’s nephew with having some acquaintance with the mystery. The colonel was exceedingly indignant at the imputation upon his honour, and joined eagerly in the search, declaring that he “would not rest until Miss King was found, for in no other way could his innocence of the deed be clearly established.” His zeal and activity speedily removed all suspicions. He called daily to inquire if any information had been obtained, and was always ready with some plan for fresh inquiries.
In the meantime the elopement or abduction, whichever it was, caused enormous excitement throughout the country. Everybody discussed it, and conjectures were exhausted. That a nobleman’s daughter should be carried suddenly away, and leave no trace whatever behind her, after her supposed arrival in London, was so mysterious a business that it attracted universal attention.
At length, however, the secret was discovered, and discovered in a most dramatic fashion. A servant-girl called upon Lady Kingsborough, who had been almost distracted by her daughter’s disappearance, and informed her that at about the time when Miss King had left home, a gentleman had brought a lady to the house in Clayton Street, Kennington, at which the girl lived. She was disposed to think that the mysterious lady was Miss King, because she had an extraordinary profusion of long hair, and so had Lord Kingsborough’s daughter. She added that the lady was frequently visited by the gentleman in whose company she had arrived. At this moment Colonel Fitzgerald entered the room, and the girl exclaimed, in astonishment, ‘Why, that’s the very gentleman who visits the strange lady.‘
Colonel Fitzgerald, seeing that he was at length discovered, rushed out of the house.
According to the notions of the time there was only one way of chastising such conduct as this. Fitzgerald was “called out” by Colonel King, the lady’s brother, and although the abductor’s character was so utterly ruined by the exposure that he could not obtain a second, a duel was fought in Hyde Park on the 1st of October, 1797. Seven shots were exchanged without either of the duellists being hit, and the supply of ammunition having run short, the termination of the encounter was postponed until the following day. In the meantime the authorities heard of the matter; both parties were placed under arrest, and no further meeting took place.
Immediately upon the discovery of Miss King’s whereabouts she was removed to the family residence at Mitchelstown in Ireland, to be out of harm’s way. But although Colonel Fitzgerald was disgraced he did not consider that he was beaten; and he contrived plans for again carrying off the young lady, aided by a maid-servant whom he had bribed. The untrustworthiness of the maid was discovered, and she was dismissed but even this check was only temporary. Effectually disguising himself, Fitzgerald took up his quarters at the inn at Mitchelstown, to await his opportunity. Here his own excess of caution betrayed him. The inn-keeper, who was an old retainer of the Kings, observed that his guest never left the house until nightfall. Knowing all that had recently happened, and being a shrewd man, he concluded that something was wrong, and lost no time in warning Lord Kingsborough, who was at Fermoy.
Miss King’s father, concluding that this mysterious person was an agent of Fitzgerald’s, at once returned to Mitchelstown, only to find that the stranger had left that morning in a post-chaise. The postboy who had driven was found, and it was ascertained that he had put up at the hotel at Kilworth. Lord Kingsborough, determined to get to the bottom of the matter, at once went to Kilworth, accompanied by his son, Colonel King. Upon inquiring at the inn they were informed that a strange gentleman had arrived a few hours before, and had just retired for the night. Lord Kingsborough sent up a message that he would be glad to see the gentleman on business. The bedroom door was locked, and Fitzgerald called out that he did not choose to be disturbed. The pursuers who had followed the waiter upstairs at once recognised the voice, and angrily demanded admittance. Fitzgerald refused; whereupon Lord Kingsborough and his son battered in the door.
When they rushed into the room Fitzgerald was cocking his pistols, and to prevent his firing Colonel King rushed upon him, and endeavoured to wrest them from his hands. A determined struggle followed, and Colonel King was being overpowered. Almost beside himself with rage that his son should be in such peril from a scoundrel at whose hands the family had already suffered so much, Lord Kingsborough fired at Fitzgerald, who fell dead upon the spot.
This was on the 13 of November, 1797, and on the 18th of May, following Lord Kingsborough—who had in the meantime succeeded to the earldom of Kingston—was tried by his peers—the members of the Irish House of Lords. Lord Kingston pleaded not guilty, and as no witness appeared for the prosecution he was at once acquitted.
And what of Mary King? There was not even yet an end to her romance. These terrible events would naturally have rendered it exceedingly painful for her to move in her own sphere until her history began to be forgotten. She was, therefore, placed temporarily under the care of a clergyman in Wales, to whom her real name was unknown. With his family she soon became a general favourite. They were charmed by her graces of person and manner, and above all by her remarkable conversational powers. She was exceedingly fond of telling romantic stories to the family circle; and one day she ventured to detail her own adventures, carefully disguising names. Her host’s son was so affected by the story that he burst into tears, and used some strong expressions of horror at the conduct of the abductor.
Strongly moved by this unexpected warmth of sympathy, Mary King exclaimed, “I am the person for whom you express so deep an interest!” The words were scarcely spoken before they were regretted, since she fully expected to be asked to leave the house. But nothing of the kind happened; and not long afterwards the gentleman who possessed so much sensibility married her, and the remainder of her life was as happy as its early years had been adventurous.—Cassell’s Saturday Journal.”
The following more detailed account of Lord Kingsborough’s extremely brief trial before the Irish House of Lords can be found in Donahoe’s Magazine of 1880:
“The trial took place on the 18th of May, 1798. The attendance of peers was unusually large. The Marquises of Waterford and Drogheda, the Earl of Ormond, Lords Kinsale, Muskerry, and Oxmantown—in short, two marquises, twenty-seven earls, fourteen viscounts, three archbishops (Armagh, Cashel, and Tuam), thirteen bishops, and fourteen barons—were present. Never was any procession conducted with more splendor. The House of Commons was once more fitted up for the momentous trial, and the Lord Chancellor, Earl of Clare, presided as Lord High Steward.
After a number of reverences and bowings, the commission appointing Lord Clare Lord High Steward was read. Then the indictment which had been found by the grand jury of the county of Cork, in which countythe fatal occurrence took place, was read.
The former ceremonies concluded, the Earl of Kingston appeared at the entrance, escorted by the constable and deputy constable of Dublin Castle, the latter having an axe, the edge turned from the prisoner. His Lordship bowed to the High Steward and then to the peers. This ceremony over, he knelt at the bar. On being bade to rise, he again bowed to the Lord High Steward, who thus addressed him:—
‘Robert, Earl of Kingston, you are brought here to answer one of the most solemn charges that can be made against any man,—the murder of a fellow-subject. The solemnity and awful appearance of this judicature must naturally discompose and embarrass your Lordship. It may, therefore, not be improper for me to remind your Lordship that you are to be tried by the laws of a free country, formed for the protection of innocence and the punishment of guilt alone: and it must be a great consolation to you to reflect that you are to be tried a trial before the superior judicature of the nation; that you are to be tried by your peers, upon whose unbiased judgment and candor you have the firmest reliance, more particularly as they are to pass judgment upon you under the solemn and inviolable obligation of their honor.
It will also be a consolation to you to know that the benignity of our law has distinguished the crime of homicide into different classes. If it arises from accident, from inevitable necessity, or without malice, it does not fall within the crime of murder; and of these distinctions, warranted by evidence, you will be at liberty to take advantage. Before I conclude, I am commanded by the House to inform your Lordship, and all others who may have occasion to address the Court during the trial, that the address must be to the lords in general, and not to any lord in particular.’
The Lord High Steward having concluded, the indictment was again read, whereupon the clerk of the Crown inquired, “How say you, Robert, Earl of Kingston: are you guilty or not guilty of the murder and felony for which you stand arraigned?” “Not guilty,” said the earl. He was then asked “how he would be tried”; to which he answered, “By God and my peers.” Proclamation was then made by the sergeant-at-arms: “Oyez, oyez, oyez! All manner of persons who will give evidence upon oath before our Sovereign Lord the King, against Robert, Earl of Kingston, the prisoner at the bar, let them come forth and they shall be heard, for he now stands at the bar upon his deliverance.”
There was no evidence forthcoming to sustain the indictment, so the prisoner was pronounced ‘Not guilty.‘
This was the last trial of a peer in Ireland.”
Mary King’s governess had been the feminist Mary Wollstonecraft, mother of Mary Shelley. Debate is still ongoing as to the extent to which principles of free love imbibed from her governess may have influenced Mary King’s daring decision to elope with the married Colonel Fitzgerald.
Mary’s brother Colonel King, was likewise put on trial for the murder of Fitzgerald – as he was not a peer, this trial took place in the more mundane surroundings of the Cork Assizes, but ended in the same result – an acquittal in circumstances where no one came forward to give evidence against him.
The King family were back in the criminal courts again in 1848, when Lord Kingsborough’s grandson the fourth Earl Kingston, was charged with committing an indecent assault on a 20-year-old man he had met in Oxford Street, London, who had unsuccessfully resisted his advances. The case was subsequently dropped after a Grand Jury declined to proceed with the charge.
Lord Kingsborough, his son and his grandson were all notably fortunate in their brushes with criminal justice. Perhaps their aristocratic pedigree and great wealth may have assisted in the collapse of the various prosecutions brought against them?
Leave a Reply