Knox Speaks Out
In an 1870 biography of Knox's life by his former student Henry Lonsdale called A Sketch of the Life and Writings of Robert Knox, the Anatomist, Lonsdale published a letter written by Knox to the editor of the Caledonian Mercury. The Caledonian Mercury was a literary newspaper in Scotland with forays into the political from time to time, and it contemporaneously covered the Burke and Hare murder trials as they were ongoing and suspicions surrounding Knox’s involvement erupted. The letter bears a forced humility and subtle impatience; there is a clear insinuation that Knox would like the newspaper’s cooperation in clearing his name. Extinguishing all doubt in regards to his intentions, Knox attached a copy of the committee report that declared his innocence of any wrongdoing in connection to the Burke and Hare murders only days before. Additionally, this would break his conspicuous silence after months of ongoing investigations, this would be Knox's first public statement regarding his involvement in the Burke and Hare murders.
The annotated copy of Knox’s letter featured on this site refutes much of Knox's claims line by line, deconstructing his proposed narrative of irreproachability to illuminate places where Knox omits critical information or elides the truth altogether. It also serves to dismantle Lonsdale’s implicit defense of Knox, in the deliberate misrepresentation of both the validity of the committee report and the original newspaper’s printing of the paired documents Knox submitted for review.
Knox’s Statement on the Burke and Hare Murders
Communication from Dr Knox
To the Editor of the ‘Caledonian Mercury.'¹
Sir,—I regret troubling either you or the public with anything personal, but I cannot
be insensible of the feelings of my friends, or of the character of the profession
to which I have the honour of belonging. Had I alone been concerned, I should never
have thought of obtruding on the public by this communication.
I have a class of above 400 pupils.² No person can be at the head of such an establishment without necessarily running
the risk of being imposed upon by those who furnish the material of their science
to anatomical teachers; and, accordingly, there is hardly any such person who has
not occasionally incurred odium or suspicion from his supposed accession to those
violations of the law, without which anatomy can scarcely now be practised.³ That I should have become an object of popular prejudice, therefore, since mine happened
to be the establishment with which Burke and Hare chiefly dealt, was nothing more
than what I had to expect. But if means had not been purposely taken, and most keenly
persevered in, to misrepresent facts and to inflame the public mind, that prejudice
would at least have stood on right ground, and would ultimately have passed away⁴, by its being seen that I had been exposed to a mere misfortune which would almost
certainly have occurred to anybody else who had been in my situation.⁵
But every effort has been employed to convert my misfortune into positive and intended
personal guilt of the most dreadful character. Scarcely any individual has ever been
the object of more systematic or atrocious attacks than I have been. Nobody acquainted
with this place requires to be told from what quarter these have proceeded.⁶
I allowed them to go on for months without taking the slightest notice of them⁷; and I was inclined to adhere to this system, especially as the public authorities
by never charging me with any offence, gave the only attestation they could that they
had nothing to charge me with. But my friends interfered for me. Without consulting me, they directed an agent to institute the most rigid and unsparing examination into
the facts. I was totally unacquainted with this gentleman; but I understood that
in naming Mr. Ellis they named a person whose character is a sufficient pledge for
the propriety of his proceedings.
The result of his inquiries was laid before the Dean of Faculty and another Counsel,
who were asked what ought to be done. These gentlemen gave it as their opinion that
the evidence was completely satisfactory, and that there was no want of actionable
matter, but that there was one ground on which it was my duty to resist the temptation
of going into a court of law. This was, that the disclosures of the most innocent
proceedings even of the best-conducted dissecting-room must always shock the public
and be hurtful to science. But they recommended that a few persons of undoubted weight
and character should be asked to investigate the matter, in order that, if I deserved
it, an attestation might be given to me which would be more satisfactory to my friends
than any mere statements of mine could be expected to be. This led to the formation
of a Committee, which was never meant by me to be anything but private. But the fact
of its sitting soon got into the newspapers, and hence the necessity under which I
am placed of explaining how that proceeding, in which the public has been made to
take an interest, has terminated.
I have been on habits of friendship with some of the Committee; with others of them
I have been acquainted; and some of them I don’t even yet know by sight. I took no
charge whatever of their proceedings. In order that there might be no pretence for
saying that truth was obstructed from fear, I gave a written protection to every person
to say what he chose about or against me. The extent to which this was in some instances
taken advantage of will probably not be soon forgotten by those who witnessed it.
After a severe and laborious investigation of about six weeks, the result is contained
in the following report, which was put into my hands last night. It is signed by every
member of the Committee except one, who ceased to act long before the evidence was
completed.
I cannot be supposed to be a candid judge of my own case⁸, and therefore it is extremely probable that any opinion of mine on the last view
adopted by the Committee is incorrect, and theirs right. If it be so, I most willingly
submit to the censure they have inflicted, and shall hold it my duty to profit from
it by due care hereafter. My consolation is, that I have at least not been obstinate
in my errors,⁹ and that no sanction has ever been given in any fair quarter to the more serious
imputations by which it has been the interest of certain persons to assail me. Candid
men will judge of me according to the situation in which I was placed at the time¹⁰, and not according to the wisdom which has unexpectedly been acquired since.
This is the very first time that I have ever made any statement to the public in my
own vindication, and it shall be the last. It would be unjust to the authors of the
former calumnies to suppose that they would not renew them now. I can only assure
them that, in so far as I am concerned, they will renew them in vain.
I have the honour to be, &c. &c.
R. Knox.
Edinburgh,
10, Surgeon's Square
17th, March 1829
Editorial Notes
Note 1: The Caledonian Mercury was a Scottish newspaper most known for its literary criticism
with forays into the political, which contemporaneously covered the proceedings of
the Burke and Hare murder trials as they were ongoing in 1828. ⮐
Note 2: Several sources corroborate the sheer numbers if not the admiration Knox received
from his students as a capable anatomy instructor, not the least of which includes
Henry Lonsdale--who collected and published Knox’s writings in an attempt to exonerate
his teacher. While Lonsdale’s attempt is a well-meaning one, it is poorly contextualized
and bereft of nuance at best (Lonsdale 82-88).⮐
Note 3: There is a certain distinction to be made here, in that Knox is both correct and incorrect
about what he posits to be true. Many surgeons and anatomists alike complained of
the nonexistent legal avenues by which cadavers could be procured for dissection;
there were hospitals and hanged men, but the numbers simply were not enough to supply
training materials for all aspiring medical professionals. However, this did not mean
that all doctors/anatomists took in corpses without a single thought as to their origins;
Christison noted as much during the Burke and Hare police investigation when he asked
Knox how the most recent body delivered by the two men was in such pristine and untouched
condition--bereft of all the usual signs of acquisition via body snatching (Richardson
141).⮐
Note 4: It is incredibly unlikely that public sentiment would have ever pivoted in his favor:
“failure of the law to investigate Knox’s role in the multiple murders had provoked
widespread resentment and disbelief” (Richardson 137). The working class had not failed
to notice the double standard in the current legal system, in which impoverished people
were persecuted on the smallest infractions--or the fact that Burke and Hare’s victims
had all been vulnerable poor people as well.⮐
Note 5: The implication that Knox was a passive party in the Burke and Hare murders is genuinely
false. He was, in fact, central to the outcome of the proceedings. Most know that
Hare was able to escape the death sentence because he “turned King’s evidence, convicting
his confederate [Burke], who was hanged and publicly dissected” (Richardson 133).
However, this was only possible because the prosecution could only offer Hare immunity
on the basis of Knox’s destruction--and therefore lack--of evidence. “Burke and his
wife Nelly stood trial for the death of the last victim, Mary Docherty, only” because
her remains were found and immediately reported to the police. In addition, as indicated
several times in the explanatory essay above, many people had already caught on to
Knox’s misconduct, and condemned him outright; to say nothing of the countless enemies
he made of his colleagues.⮐
Note 6: Knox was hardly the only target of such criticism; public displeasure with body-snatching
and the existence of resurrection men was commonplace and frequently directed at medical
personnel and adjacent professions. Much of public outrage stemmed from his clear
complicity in this very public and egregious case, his general indifference to human
life, and the lack of justice in the wake of his clear complicity. If anything, his
public exoneration was likely a significant impetus for what would be a string of
riots and vicious attacks on doctors as soon as the murder trials ended in 1829 (Dittmer
and Raine 114-116). Furthermore, this outrage was not consigned to the poor alone;
many other doctors also disavowed Knox’s crimes (Richardson 137).⮐
Note 7: In the wake of the illegitimate investigation into Knox’s culpability in regards to
the Burke and Hare murders, the entirety of Edinburgh was in an uproar--not what one
might be able to call hardly noticeable. There was an effigy gathering, and not only
that, they forewent burning the effigy explicitly created to look like Knox in favor
of symbolically dismembering it in front of his house. There can be no doubt the implication
inherent in this choice, as the public had been clamoring for proper justice--that
they wanted him and Hare to be “hanged and publicly dissected” just as Burke was (Richardson
133, 138). There is also something to be said of his rhetoric here in “I allowed them
to go on,” conflating a rightfully angry public with a misbehaving child; suggesting
Knox’s real incapacity or unwillingness to consider the seriousness of what he had
enabled.⮐
Note 8: This self-diminishing and harmless tone adds insult to injury in the face of his known
deeds. Furthermore, the book in which it was first published--with the intent to herald
Knox’s greatness--was published fifty years after the Burke and Hare murder trials
had ended in 1870. While it is likely many people knew this false presentation of
Knox’s innocence for what it was, the lack of contextualization does run the risk
of younger readers taking in Knox’s words based on surface level information. Furthermore,
this letter is immediately followed by the official documentation of the Committee’s
decision to absolve Knox of any charges. While there is enough dissonance to suggest
more digging is necessary to determine what happened, I do think it invites readers
to believe in Lonsdale’s claims in accordance with general reliance on the trustworthiness
of court-approved documents.⮐
Note 9: His refusal to contribute anything to the proceedings of the murder trials and earnestly
address public discontent suggest otherwise. There is no point within the vicissitudes
of his dismantled career or active disgust from his peers/the public that he admits
to being at the very least negligent about his responsibilities in vetting acquired
corpses, much less any acceptance of partial guilt in the murder of innocent people.⮐
Note 10: Interestingly, removal from the situation over time has created a few attempts to
redeem Knox, each one on the basis of his importance to science. There is Henry Lonsdale’s
entire book dedicated to his life and writings, in which a persistent rallying to
the defense of his teacher runs throughout its pages. Additionally, one such author
in 2010 attempted to redeem him on the basis of his foresight into the process of
rapid evolution and related anatomical/naturalist insight. That being said, one must
notice the refusal to engage with the fear and distress his actions--no matter if
they were a degree removed from murder by his own hands--contributed to the landscape
of medical immorality. Furthermore, his indirect incitement of the Anatomy Act of
1832 and the New Poor Law of 1834 would only antagonize the working class to an explosion
of fear.⮐