The Scandalous Story of Jane Blanks’ Bigamous Marriage & two Illegitimate
Children
Jane Blanks was the daughter of Lazarus Blanks and his wife Sarah.
Jane came from a very large and
respectable family who lived and worked in the small rural village of Little
Baddow in Essex. To have one child out of wedlock in the 19th
Century was considered scandalous, but to have two illegitimate children AND
marry a bigamist, is very unusual indeed. The following story is based on
information gained from a variety of newspaper articles, Old Bailey Trial
Records, Parish Records, 30 years of family History research and other online
resources.
Jane’s father Lazarus Blanks was not only the Little Baddow Village
Blacksmith – he was also the Parish Clerk at St Mary the Virgin Church – a post he held for a number of years. The job of Parish clerk
required him to be able to read and write - skills which would have only added
to his respectability and his status within the community. He received £1 a
year for carrying out these Parish Clerk duties, and he was in office from 1788
until 1839. He also contributed financially to repair work & restoration on
the church steeple. The Church is
adjacent to The Forge, where Lazarus and his family lived and worked. Both
buildings still remain to this day, although the original house has been added
to over the years by subsequent owners.
THE FORGE, LITTLE BADDOW, ESSEX
Jane was baptized by her parents on 8th September
1799 in Little Baddow. Lazarus was already 47 years old when she was born and
Jane was one of his youngest children.
Jane had at least 12 other brothers and sisters who all lived and worked
in Little Baddow or the surrounding area.
In late 1818, at the age of 19, unmarried Jane gave birth to
an illegitimate baby boy named Charles Thomas Blanks.
Following the birth of any illegitimate child, several things
usually happened within a Parish:
Firstly Jane would be required to name the father. Secondly, The Churchwardens would encourage
the father to marry the mother in order to make the child legitimate, thereby
reducing any potential costs to the parish. If the father was unable or
unwilling to marry the mother then the Parish would determine the level of
financial support that the father was required to pay to the mother. Although
Jane may have faced charges from her church of being a “lewd woman” she and her
son always remained a very close part of the Blanks family and were not
disowned or banished from the community.
When Charles Blanks later married Amelia Brewster of Maldon in
1845 he stated on the marriage certificate that his father was Charles Palmer -
a Policeman but I have found no other records so far for Charles’s birth that
identify who his real father actually was, so this could be either truth or
fiction on his part.
3 years later on 14th June 1821 Jane
Blanks finally did get married in Little Baddow Church, to a man from London,
called John Mackiah Collins. However Collins was a serial bigamist and so
therefore the marriage was never legalized. This was Jane's only marriage and
the experience must have been a terrible ordeal for both her and her family.
It is not clear how Jane found out that her husband was
still married to his previous wife, or how many weeks or moths passed before before the truth was uncovered, but the following year in 1822, Jane and her
father both bore witness against Collins at his trial in the Old Bailey for
Bigamy. We must presume that Jane and her father went straight to the
authorities once they knew the truth about Collins, because they both wanted to see
him punished for his deception.
Collins was being held in Chelmsford Prison for Debt when he
first met Lazarus Blanks. He had been admitted to jail on the 12th December
1820 at 11am. According to The London Gazette he had been living at 15 Ashford
Street, Hoxton, and his occupation had been listed as a Bookseller. Lazarus Blanks could have possibly been doing
charitable work in his role as Parish Clerk by visiting the prisoners at
Chelmsford.
Collins told Lazarus that he had been married, but that his wayward
wife, Elizabeth Mason, had run off to London to live with other men. He said he was now divorced and had £17,000 to
his name. He must have told Lazarus a very tall tale to enable himself to get
out of prison and marry Jane. If he really was that wealthy then why was he in
prison for debt? My guess is that Collins saw a fantastic opportunity to escape
his dire situation, and that Lazarus probably paid off his debts in order to
get Collins released. Collins probably promised to reimburse Lazarus once he
was a married man and could “get to his money”.
Before he finally let Collins marry his daughter, it appears
that Lazarus Blanks & his son went to great lengths to check out the story
that Collins had told them. Jane’s brother had even accompanied Collins to
London on Lazarus’s instructions – just to make sure he was telling them the
truth about his situation. The deviously minded Collins had persuaded Jane’s brother that everything was as he said, and Lazarus accepted
the judgement of his son. Lazarus did
know Collins was divorced rather than widowed, but it appears that he did not
want to tell his daughter that Collins had lied about this to her. Some may say he may have been tempted to
overlook the lie because Collins
appeared to be wealthy and have money, but I think Lazarus was far too
upstanding and honest for that. Collins must have been very good at telling
lies because I imagine it would take a lot of clever deception to fool a
respectable sharp-witted 70 year old man such as Lazarus Blanks.
It is certainly true that Collins knew exactly how to charm
young women and seduce them. Collins wove an exotic and tragically romantic
tale that sounds just like the plot of a fashionable novel, In order to capture
poor Jane’s heart; he told her that his wife was a “black woman who had died in
his arms”.
Perhaps Jane - already
feeling the social stigma of being the mother of a young illegitimate child -
saw a golden opportunity to gain some respectability back by marrying. Perhaps Lazarus was also keen to see his daughter
married and for his grandson to have a legal step- father. Jane states she had only known Collins for
about 3 months before they married, so there was certainly no lengthy courtship
involved – but that could have easily been due to Collins’ very persuasive ways
and his dire need to access more money, in order to escape the debtor’s prison.
The Bigamy trial was held at Worship Street Court, in the
Old Bailey in London on 17th April 1822 and was presided over by Magistrate William
Bennett Esquire. Lawyers Mr. Alley and Mr
Andrews conducted the case for the prosecution. Collins was described by The
Examiner Newspaper as being “a squalid-looking fellow”. He had obviously spent some time in prison
before the trial, as one of the witnesses was a police man or a prison officer.
Before he married Jane Blanks, John Mackiah Collins had
married another young woman called Elizabeth Mason at St Matthews Church in
Bethnal Green, on 22nd December 1818. She had around £600 at the
time of the marriage, which under the law would automatically become his “property”
once they wed. Unbeknown to poor Elizabeth Mason and her family, Collins was
already married to another woman in the South West of England, whose name we do not know.
Elizabeth Mason was there at the courthouse to give evidence
against Collins although she does not appear to speak against him in the
transcripts. She is described by the newspapers as being “a very handsome young
woman” who was “much affected” during the proceedings. She bore Collins a son -,
William Mackiah Collins - who was described as “beautiful” and aged about 18
months to 2 years old at the time of his father’s trial. As Collins was already married, William would also be considered by society and the law as illegitimate.
We know from the records that John Collins had married at least two other women besides Jane Blanks – but some
newspapers sensationally reported that he had wed at up to 7 different women. This may be an exaggeration, as I have found no other records so far of any
other wives bar the three mentioned here. Bigamy trials were generally
considered really “shocking” news in the 19th century and the
scandal-hungry public wanted to know all the juicy details.
The process of
deciding the guilt or innocence of criminals became an increasingly public one
in the 19th Century, thanks to the growing intervention of the
press. This intervention grew alongside the accelerated expansion of the press and
the fact that more people from the working classes could now read. As the press became a larger part of national
life, its more popular and local segments carved out for themselves a new and
ever more prominent role as major participants in the public discourse over
justice for such crimes.
All the former wives of John Mackiah Collins were still
alive and each one attended the trial. His very 1st marriage had taken place in
Exeter in 1808 and it appears from reports in The Times Newspaper that Collins
1st and only legal wife was also present at the trial, and was ready to
give evidence against him if she was called. It is clear from the transcripts
that Jane was the only “wife” to actually speak out against him at the trial,
which says something about her courage and her own individual need for justice
and the truth.
When Jane Blanks gave her evidence she firmly insisted several times that
she thought Collins to be a widower at the time of their marriage.
She said Collins had never talked about his “dead wife” or discussed Elizabeth
Mason with her at any time. Collin
contradicted this in his defense statement and claimed that Jane openly knew
that Mason was still alive when she married him and that she had even met with
her in the Fleet prison. I very much doubt this is true. I believe Collins was
just trying to discredit Jane and her father and was clutching at straws now
his game was finally up.
Before delivering the verdict, the jury deliberated for a
few minutes, but when they were told that Collins actually had other
indictments for similar offenses, they found the 35 year old bigamist guilty as
charged and he was sentenced to be transported for 7 years.
The Recorder
described Collins as “a vile fellow, who seduced respectable young women for
their money, thereby ruining their prospects forever”. The recorder also stated
that Collins had “been guilty of the vilest perjury and it was not fit that he remained
in this country”.
What follows is a copy of the Old Bailey court transcripts:
TRANCRIPT OF COURT
PROCEEDINGS
The Proceedings of the
Old Bailey, London's Central Criminal Court, 1674 to 1913
JOHN MACKIAH COLLINS,
Sexual Offences > bigamy, 17th April 1822.
JOHN MACKIAH COLLINS
was indicted for bigamy .
MESSRS. ALLEY and
ANDREWS conducted the prosecution.
JOHN
BROOMFIELD: I am a tailor, and live
in Bartholemew Terrace, City
Road.
I know the prisoner; his proper name is John Mackiah Collins. I
was
present on the 22nd of December, 1818, at St. Matthew, Bethnal
Green,
when he married Elizabeth Mason. I had known her for six
months
previous. She was single - I saw her in Court today - she had
500
or 600 pounds. They had one child, which is now about eighteen months
old.
My signature is to the register.
Cross-examined
by Mr. PHILLIPS. Q. Are you sure she was single before -
A.
She passed as such.
ELIZA
CARTER. I am sextoness of St. Matthew, Bethnal-green. I have
the
care of the register, as the sexton is dead. I produce the register
of
the prisoner's marriage on the 22nd of December, 1818, to Elizabeth
Mason.
The prisoner is described as a bachelor.
JANE
BLANKS . I was married to the prisoner on the 14th of June, 1821
at Little Baddow Church, Essex , by licence. He
represented himself
to
me as a widower, of property; he said he had married a black woman,
and
she died in his arms. My father is a blacksmith, at Little Baddow. I
was
acquainted with him about three months.
Cross-examined.
Q. Before your marriage had you any conversation with
him
about Mason - A. No.
LAZARUS
BLANKS. I live at Baddow. I produce the register of the
prisoner's
marriage to my daughter, which I received from the Minister
of
the parish. I saw the ceremony performed. I am clerk of the
church.
JOHN
WALTER . I am an officer. The prisoner was given into my charge
in
Willow Walk, Middlesex.
Prisoner's
Defence. Blank's father knew I was not a widower; he was
acquainted
with me in Chelmsford prison, where I was a debtor; he knew
Mason
had absconded from me, and cohabited with other people in London -
Blanks
herself saw her, and spoke to her, in the Fleet prison.
LAZARUS
BLANKS. He said his wife had absconded, and he was divorced from
her,
and that he had £17,000.
Cross-examined.
Q. He was a prisoner, and yet you believed him worth
£17,000?
- A. Yes; I made all the enquiry I could about Mason, and sent
my
son to town with him to enquire, and how he blinded my son's eyes I
do
not know.
JANE
BLANKS . He never told me he was divorced, but that his wife was
dead;
I told my father this before our marriage - he made himself very
bad,
and made his will, all to deceive me.
GUILTY
. Aged 35.
There
were two other indictments of a similar nature against the prisoner.
Transported
for Seven Years .
Second Middlesex Jury,
before Mr. Recorder
John Mackiah Collins was subsequently taken to Woolwich and
became a prisoner on HMS Retribution. Retribution was a prison hulk ship
originally launched in 1779 as the 74-gun Third-rate HMS Edgar. It was
converted into a prison hulk in 1813, renamed Retribution in 1814 and was finally
broken up in 1835.
Prison hulks were decommissioned ships that authorities used
as floating prisons in the 18th and 19th centuries. The term "prison
hulk" is not synonymous with the related term, convict ship. A hulk is a
ship that is afloat, but incapable of going to sea, whereas convict ships are
seaworthy vessels whose purpose was to transport convicted felons from their
place of conviction to their place of banishment.
Another prisoner, James Hardy Vaux had previously described
the terrible conditions on the Retribution:
“There were confined in this floating dungeon nearly 600
men, most of them double ironed; and the reader may conceive the horrible
effects arising from the continual rattling of chains, the filth and vermin
naturally produced by such a crowd of miserable inhabitants, the oaths and
execrations constantly heard amongst them, On arriving on board, we were all immediately stripped and
washed in two large tubs of water, then, after putting on each a suit of coarse
slop clothing, we were ironed and sent below; our own clothes being taken from
us. I soon met many of my old criminal acquaintances, who were
all eager to offer me their friendship and services, that is, with a view to
rob me of what little I had; for in this place there is no other motive or
subject for ingenuity. All former friendships are dissolved, and a man here
will rob his best benefactor, or even messmate, of an article worth one
halfpenny.”
There is no actual record that I have found so far of John
Mackiah Collins ever being transported to Australia or arriving there. In the records
for the Prison Hulk it declares that he was pardoned on 12 August 1827. He may
well gave spent all of the previous 5 years of his sentence on board the
Retribution and then been released. What happened to him after 1827 is unknown.
A year after the bigamy trial, Elizabeth Mason’s mother, Mrs
Louisa Hands, gave a sworn statement which is recorded in the Poor Law Removal
and Settlement Records of that year. These Records were generated from The Act
of Settlement and Removal (1662) which established the need to prove
entitlement to poor relief by the issuing of Settlement Certificates. The
certificates proved which parish a family or person belonged to and therefore
which parish had the legal responsibility to provide poor relief if needed.
Louisa Hands said that her daughter Elizabeth Mason had
married Collins on 22nd December 1818 at the parish church of St Matthew in
Bethnal Green. She stated that around the time of the marriage, Collins rented
an unfurnished apartment at No.5 Kings Row, Dogs Row, Bethnal Green consisting
of two rooms and a kitchen, at the yearly rent of £16. Mrs Hands said that
Collins resided there and paid the rent for 5 months or thereabouts, and then
left her daughter and the property in August 1819.
William Mackiah Collins was
born in 1820 which is at least 5 months after his father had deserted
Elizabeth. Elizabeth took her son
William to the bigamy trial in 1822 as we know, but by 1823 three year old
William was living with his maternal grandparents Louisa and William Hands and
they were applying for poor relief for him to the Parish of St Leonard
Shoreditch because their daughter Elizabeth had not been seen for 6 weeks. Louisa Hands did not know
where her daughter was living and William’s father was currently on trial and
imprisoned so they were applying to the Parish for financial help. It is clear that the experiences that Elizabeth Mason went through destroyed her life and led directly to her disappearance. Little William Mackiah Collins was an unfortunate victim of his father’s crimes too.
He died a year later, aged just 4 years old and nothing more is known about his mother from this date.
7 years after giving evidence at the sensational bigamy
trial, Jane Blanks found herself back in court all over again and this time her
sexual behaviour was held up to even more scrutiny by the church and the law. Thirty
year old Jane now had a second illegitimate child named George Blanks, whom she
had given birth to in the early months of 1829.
On 23rd June 1829 Jane, who was now living in the parish of
St Peter in Maldon, applied to the Overseer of the Poor for support for herself
and her new-born child but she was refused help. Justices Richard Butley and
William Bugg issued an order to remove Jane back to Little Baddow.
On 30th June 1829 at Little Baddow, Jane named a man called
Jonathan Beckett as the father of her child and requested a “Bastardy Warrant”
be issued by The Overseer of Little Baddow to make Beckett pay financial support.
An affidavit was issued and Jonathan Beckett was informed of his requirement to
attend a hearing.
On 28th August 1829 the parish officers of Little Baddow
were still unable to resolve the issue of Jane's illegitimate child, so, it was
referred to the Lord of Little Baddow Manor, General Strutt, who in turn
referred the matter to the higher court in Chelmsford.
On October 9th 1829 Jane Blanks was brought up by
the parish officers of Little Baddow, to attend the Chelmsford Petty Sessions
Court. She was there to finally tell the real truth about her son George’s
paternity. She had since changed her story and had named another Maldon man as
his father. This court case would determine which man took financial
responsibility for fathering and supporting George. According to Newspapers the case had “been
several times before the Bench” before this particular hearing, proving that it
was a particularly unusual & difficult one to come to an agreement on.
At the time, the case was described by The London Morning
Chronicle as being “not only of a very immoral, but a most extraordinary
nature”. Jane is described as being “a
rather good-looking woman” but the fact that she already had one illegitimate
child, and had previously been involved
in a Bigamy Trial at The Old Bailey, seven years ago, was well documented by
the press and marked her out as woman already heavily associated with scandal.
There is no hard evidence, but it appears to me that the
previous Bigamy case and already having one child out of wedlock really did
blight Jane’s life and affected how society behaved towards her and viewed her.
The Essex Herald reported that Jane “has run a long course of immorality. This
is the second affair of the above nature which she has brought upon the parish
of Little Baddow, in addition to which she has been married to a man, who, it
afterwards appeared, already had two wives.”
We do not know the exact circumstances of how Jane got pregnant
for a second time. Maybe she was involved in some kind of relationship with
George’s father or perhaps she was taken advantage of against her will - we really
do not know all the facts - but the court case does shed some light on matters
and also raises some important questions.
Before George was born, Jane had claimed that the father of
her 2nd child was a young man called Jonathan Becket, who lived in
Maldon. At first, Becket fully admitted fathering
George. However once the baby was born in early 1829, Jane retracted her
original statement and claimed the real father of the child was actually George
Herbert, who was an officer at the Custom House in Maldon.
Herbert denied that he was the father, and he
and his Solicitor attended a court hearing, where Herbert claimed that Jonathan
Beckett had written to Jane Blanks and that “some inducement might have been
held out to her to make this change in her declaration” – in other words,
George Herbert was denying all responsibility and saying that Beckett had given
Jane money or bribed her so that she would change her mind and name Herbert
instead.
Jane solemnly denied
George Herbert’s statement and told the court that she had only lied and said
the child was Becket's at first, because Herbert had been threatening her and
told her he would denounce her claims’ in a court of law and brand her a liar
if she named him . She said she had felt “compelled to swear it to Becket the
first time” in consequence of threats held out by Herbert; “threats of
prosecution for perjury”.
George Herbert had found out Jane was pregnant and then
threatened her that he would take her to court if she dared to publicly name
him as the father. Jane had been forced to say that Jonathan Becket was the
father because she was scared of what Herbert would do. This suggests that
Herbert was either a bully who shirked his fatherly duties, or that he may have
been married already. Maybe Beckett was
a good friend of Jane’s who had agreed to take on the responsibility of the
child in order to try and protect Jane and her baby from anymore scandal – or perhaps
Becket and Jane had also been in a physical relationship whilst she was also
seeing Herbert and there was some real actual doubt between all three parties
about the true paternity of the child – we will never really know the truth. The significant fact is that despite George
Herbert’s crude attempts to threaten and scare her, Jane did change her mind
about naming the father, and she did decide to take the matter to court and
tell the truth once her baby was born. Perhaps her upstanding father Lazarus
persuaded her to be honest or the actual birth of her baby had convinced Jane
to do what was morally right. Whatever the reason, it was a very risky step for
a young woman like Jane to take – but she didn’t have much of a reputation to
lose at that point by standing up to George Herbert and someone had to support
the child financially. I firmly believe by naming her baby George - Jane was making a very bold & obvious statement
about who the biological father really was.
The court really could not decide what to do about this
highly unusual situation – but one thing WAS clear. It was “desired by all hands that Jane Blanks
should meet some form of punishment for her immoral conduct”. The Court wanted to “commit her to jail: but
they could not do that unless the child already "chargeable to the parish;”
In order for the court to be able to incarcerate and punish
Jane Blanks for her actions, her child had to remain illegitimate. The moment the
Child’s real father was affiliated, recognized and named, the child would cease
to be illegitimate, and they could not imprison his mother. If they sent her to prison, before making a
decision on which man was the father, the child would remain illegitimate, but it
would be the Parish’s responsibility to financially maintain the child until
such time as his mother was released.
After much discussion upon this point, and a private hearing
and consultation, the Magistrates agreed to sign the order upon Herbert,
therefore legally recognizing him as George’s father which was accordingly
done, and “a sum of 2s.6d. a week was fixed upon”.
Jonathan Beckett, who was present at the hearing, then made
an application for a certificate of the affiliation, in order to prevent his
being proceeded against any further, upon his recognizance’s, at the Quarter
Sessions. This was duly granted.
Jane narrowly escaped being incarcerated because the Parish
wanted to save money more than it wanted to punish her. She had again been
branded as “immoral” for her actions, whilst the fathers’ sexual promiscuity
was never questioned. George Herbert did have to legally and financially
recognize his son, which must have frustrated him no end, and Jonathan Beckett
was absolved of any further involvement in the matter.
None of the sexual scandals seemed to affect Jane’s very
close relationship with her father Lazarus or some of her other family members
and friends. After her mother and at least 2 of her older brothers had died,
Jane moved back home in 1841 and was living at The Forge with her elderly father
and her unmarried older brother Arthur, who was also a blacksmith by trade. Her
eldest son Charles, who was aged 20 also lived with her and had served his
apprenticeship as a Blacksmith too – probably with his grandfather Lazarus
& his Uncle Arthur teaching him all that they knew. George Blanks was now
10 years old and would have been attending school. There was also a 35 year old
woman called Sarah Smith and her 9 year old son, Josiah Smith lodging with the
family. Sarah must have been a very good friend of Jane’s because the two women
remained living together for the next 20 years.
The following year, on 8th August 1842 Lazarus died at the
grand old age of 90 years old – which was some feat in the 19th
Century. The Chelmsford Chronicle announced his passing and his burial on 12th
August 1842 and stated that he had been “upward of 60 years a resident of
Little Baddow”. This indicates that Lazarus may not have been born in the
Village, but that he had settled here from elsewhere whilst in his late
twenties or early thirties – possibly after getting married and obtaining work
once he had completed his apprenticeship as a Blacksmith. Lazarus is buried in
the churchyard at St Marys, along with his wife Sarah and 4 of their children.
Their Graves are listed in Church records but are unmarked as far as I know.
ST MARY THE VIRGIN CHURCH & GRAVEYARD, LITTLE BADDOW.
Sadly just a year later in October 1843 Jane’s 2nd son
George died in Little Baddow at the tender age of 14. She must have been
devastated to lose her youngest son and her father within 14 months of one
another. In 1845 her oldest son Charles got married.
By 1851, 52 year old Jane had moved out of The Forge. She
was still living with her unmarried older brother Arthur. Sarah Smith (45)
Josiah Smith (20) and John Gowlett (20) were all lodging at the same address.
It seems that Jane was more than able to financially support herself during
this decade because she was employed as a "Tailoress" and more than
likely did most of this work from home.
In 1861 62 year old Jane was now living alone with her
friend Sarah Smith. Her occupation was listed as “Nurse" and her marital
state was listed as "Widow". Her brother Arthur doesn’t appear on any
census records after the 1850’s so it is very possible that he too could have
passed away sometime in the late 1850’s. Sarah Smith was employed as a Charwoman
but she could also have been Jane's "Patient".
The Parish Poor Return of 1869 lists 68 year old Jane as
being “disabled” and in receipt of financial support from the Parish – although
she was still living independently in a normal dwelling and not yet residing in
the parish poor house. We do not know the nature of her disability.
In December 1870, Jane finally died aged 72 years old. She
is buried in Little Baddow.
Our forebears placed great emphasis on the bonds of
marriage, and those women like Jane who deviated from this social norm usually
faced great condemnation from their families and the community – yet it appears
that Jane who had given birth to two sons from two different men was not openly ostracized for her behavior by either her family or by the villagers of Little
Baddow. Such was the shame surrounding
illegitimacy that families often went to great lengths to keep their guilty
secret under wraps – but with Jane’s scandalous marriage to a serial bigamist
hitting all the newspapers too, I suspect the Blanks family banded together to
support Jane through her ordeal.
Before 1834 it was the sole responsibility of the local
parish to pay upkeep for an illegitimate child so they would naturally go after
the father to seek maintenance, which in Jane’s 2nd son’s case
created enough research material and documentation about who he actually was. Bastardy
examinations were the first step in this process.
Illegitimacy was a classless phenomenon; and children were
born to unmarried people from all walks of life – not just the poor or the
working classes. We don't tend to think twice about illegitimacy now but the
shame was once so awful that some women would kill themselves – and / or their
babies – just to avoid the stigma.
Personally I do not see Jane as just another fallen
“Victim”. I agree that her choice of men was really poor and her personal
judgement as to the supposed good character of both John Mackiah Collins and
George Herbert was severely lacking at the time – but coming from a small Essex
Village, any previous experiences she would have had of men’s behaviour would
have been highly influenced by her own male family members. With this in mind
you can see why she may have been slightly naïve in her choices as a younger
woman. She never married in later life, so I do think this affected her
greatly.
The fact that on 2 separate occasions she was fully prepared
to stand up in court and tell the truth about what Collins and Herbert did, says a
lot about the strength of her character and her defiant nature. I prefer to
think of Jane Blanks as a strong, honest woman who wanted the truth to be told,
even though her sins were chastised by the church and laid bare in the press
for all to read about.
The fact that her
family stood firmly by her and supported her throughout each scandal was
probably a huge factor in her being able to name the men who impregnated her
and to successfully imprison the man who conned her into a bigamous marriage.
I am proud to call both Jane - and her father Lazurus - my
ancestors.
For more local history items on Little Baddow visit
LITTLE BADDOW HISTORY CENTRE
For more local history items on Little Baddow visit
LITTLE BADDOW HISTORY CENTRE
No comments:
Post a Comment