‘Burslem’s Molly Leigh was no witch so it’s time to put sad story to bed’
Historian DR RICHARD TALBOT takes a look at the facts surrounding the death of Margaret ‘Molly’ Leigh – who has long been accused of witchcraft – and argues the case for her name to be cleared...
THERE has been much correspondence regarding Margaret (Molly) Leigh, the supposed witch, buried at St John’s church in Burslem April 1, 1748 and the copy of her will dated March 25, 1748 just one week before her death.
The last will and testament published in The Sentinel earlier this year recorded Margaret as a spinster, but in the parish records she is listed as Mr – probably a courtesy title because of her age and not relevant. Her mother Sarah is listed as Booth, suggesting that she, for whatever reason, remarried to a Joseph Booth.
Her mother was taken care of in the terms of the will but Joseph her husband, who she refers to as father-in-law (in reality he was
probably her step-father) she makes it clear that he receives nothing.
Margaret was clearly very well-off with land and property covering a wide area in addition to cash-inhand.
She left £400 to the children of her cousin Ann, a small fortune then, and money to purchase 40 loaves of bread for the poor widows of Sneyd.
Margaret, it would appear, was loved by all her relatives as she identifies many in her will.
How she acquired such wealth we do not know, perhaps she inherited it from her father upon his death. I have tried to trace her father without success.
In addition, after the death of her mother the lands and properties were to be sold and the revenue used to build a hospital in Burslem for the reception and habitation of so many poor women. However, there is no evidence that this was ever done.
On the reverse side of the document and dated 1752, it states that this was a copy of the original last will and testament of Margaret Leigh, which was previously in the hands of a private collector.
Sadly, the will was never proved and therefore it is not listed at the Lichfield Diocesan Record Office.
One of the most interesting references at the bottom of the will – which gives clarity to her status in society – is that Mr Joseph Lovatt of Penkhull was listed as one of the two Executors. For part of my Master’s degree I studied Joseph Lovatt in depth.
He was born in Greenhead House, a large farmhouse in the centre of Penkhullvillage with extensive farmland attached.
The house is now The Greyhound Inn. Joseph was a man of letters, educated in science.
Later in life he became the Estate Manager of Chirk Castle near Wrexham in Wales and was placed in charge of the whole estate and its finances.
At the National Archives for Wales in Aberystwyth there is a large file relating to Joseph Lovatt including his will, his education and a bundle of documents relating to Penkhull. I have copies of them all.
These facts alone of Margaret’s association with him and the status he held immediately destroy any possibility whatsoever of her being a ‘witch’ or of low standing in society.
Some of the notes written on the subject refer to her being deformed or possibly handicapped in some way.
She could even have been scarred by smallpox as a child and as such, children then as today would make up stories and no doubt torment her.
The stories of a blackbird, milking cows and selling the milk in Burslem market to survive and a trial for witchcraft pending, are all bolt-ons to an imaginary story to increase the tale’s value – especially to children.
Regarding her grave being the wrong way around – again there is a simple explanation as graveyards in many cases had no plans and a grave would be dug in any convenient spot.
To establish first if the land was clear, the sexton would knock iron rods into the ground to make sure there was no ‘body’ previously buried there. If that was the case the plot dug out.
But what about the photograph of Margaret’s cottage home? Once more this is a fantasy as photography was not discovered until the 1820s and then remained in its experimental stage for many years. It was not until at least the 1880s or 1890s that it became more widely available.
So, to suggest that after three or even more generations someone remembered where she lived is stretching the imagination too far.
The picture held in Hanley Archives has no date. In all probability it could have been a picture of any cottage anywhere and then once shown to someone who was aware of the story of Molly Leigh replied, ‘that could well be a place where a witch could have lived.’
Since then the photograph has been portrayed as factual evidence, whereas there is no evidence of that being the cottage of Molly Leigh.
In reality, with her wealth and status in society, I would suggest that she would have lived in far more elevated surroundings.
I hope that these comments will finally put to bed the sad story of a lady of society.