Cock Lane ghost

The Cock Lane ghost was a purported haunting that attracted mass public attention in 1762. The event centred on three people: William Kent, a usurer from Norfolk, Richard Parsons, a parish clerk, and Parsons’ daughter Elizabeth. The ghost appeared to claim that Fanny had been poisoned with arsenic and Kent was publicly suspected of being her murderer. But a commission whose members included Samuel Johnson concluded that the supposed haunting was a fraud.

About Cock Lane ghost in brief

Summary Cock Lane ghostThe Cock Lane ghost was a purported haunting that attracted mass public attention in 1762. The event centred on three people: William Kent, a usurer from Norfolk, Richard Parsons, a parish clerk, and Parsons’ daughter Elizabeth. Following the death during childbirth of Kent’s wife, Elizabeth Lynes, he became romantically involved with her sister, Fanny. Canon law prevented the couple from marrying, but they nevertheless moved to London and lodged at the property in Cock Lane. Several accounts of strange knocking sounds and ghostly apparitions were reported. The ghost appeared to claim that Fanny had been poisoned with arsenic and Kent was publicly suspected of being her murderer. But a commission whose members included Samuel Johnson concluded that the supposed haunting was a fraud. Those responsible were prosecuted and found guilty; Richard Parsons was pilloried and sentenced to two years in prison. Charles Dickens is one of several Victorian authors whose work alluded to the story and the pictorial satirist William Hogarth referenced the ghost in two of his prints. The Cock Laneghost became a focus of controversy between the Methodist and Anglican churches and is referenced frequently in contemporary literature. It was while Kent was away at a wedding in the country that the first reports of strange noises began to be heard in the Cock Lane area of central London’s streets. It is believed that the ghost haunted a house in Smithfield, a short road adjacent to London’s Smithfield market and a few minutes’ walk from St Paul’s Cathedral.

The house was a three-storey house in a declining but declining area and comprised a single room on each floor, connected by a winding staircase. Shortly after Mr and Mrs Kent moved in, Mr Kent and Fanny moved to lodgings near the Mansion House, but their landlord there may have learnt of their relationship from Fanny’s family, expressing his contempt by refusing to repay a sum of money Kent loaned him. In response, Kent had him arrested. While attending early morning prayers at the church of St Sepulchre-without-Newgate, William Kent andFanny met Richard Parsons. Although he was generally considered respectable, Parsons was known locally as a drunk and was struggling to provide for his family. He listened to the couple’s plight and was sympathetic, offering them use in his home to the north of St. SepulChre’s. He had a wife and two daughters; Elizabeth was described as a little artful girl, a girl who was a guineainea per month and described as ‘little artful’ Kent borrowed Parsons 12 guineas to be repaid at a rate of 12 guinea per room, to be paid in guinea-a-guineas per month. The couple decided to live together as man and wife, making wills in each other’s favour and hoping to remain discreet. In this, however, they did not reckon on Fanny’s relations. The two soon began a relationship, but canon law appeared to rule out marriage; when Kent travelled to London to seek advice he was told that as Elizabeth had borne him a living son, a union with Fanny was impossible.