Buckingham’s Hitman: Colonel Thomas Blood
Colonel Thomas Blood, is well known for his attempt to steal the crown jewels from the Tower of London. What is less well known is his possible employment as the Duke of Buckingham’s hitman in an assassination attempt on the Duke of Ormond in 1670. The underground criminal life was also something his son, also called Thomas Blood, inherited. Blood Junior went by the alias of Thomas Hunt. He was a professional highwayman and also involved in many of his father’s criminal schemes, including both the attempt on Ormond and the infamous theft of the crown jewels. Their attempted kidnap and murder of the Duke of Ormond would have had much more disastrous consequences, if it had been successful, than the theft of the crown jewels. The event shocked many including members of the court, mainly because of its closeness to St James’ Palace, but also the nonconformists that Blood believed he was a figurehead for.
Thomas Blood was only a self-titled colonel, his actual military service remains contradictory, what is known is that it was either made up or over exaggerated by Blood himself. This is mainly because of there being no firm evidence to back the claims he made during an interview with Charles II, which he made after he had stolen the crown jewels. In this he suggested he had once served under Prince Rupert. Blood’s notoriety became known well before he became involved in the plot against the Duke of Ormond. His involvement in an attempt to seize Dublin Castle and numerous political plots to either overthrow or kill Charles II made him a newspaper’s dream. The reports on his exploits helped to spread his name across most of England, Ireland and Scotland.
On 6th of December 1670, the Duke of Ormond was in his coach on his way home to Clarendon House, after a state function in the City of London, when he was attacked by six or seven men. Three of these men were later identified as Colonel Blood, his son Thomas, and Richard Halliwell. The coachman was told of a dead man in the road ahead and was forced to stop. Once stopped, two riders threatened the coachman and a footman with pistols after the other retainers had run off. Ormond was dragged from the coach and placed on Blood Junior’s horse and tied to the rider. It is believed that the conspirators’ plan was to hang Ormond from the public gallows at Tyburn, so that was the direction they rode off in.
However, despite being aged sixty, Ormonde put up a fight against his kidnappers, managing to knock a firearm out of Blood Junior’s hand, whilst heaving both himself and the rider to the ground. This would have been a hard thing to do whilst riding a horse and showed just how much of a determined man he was! By this time, the coachman had managed to raise the alarm at Clarendon House and Ormond’s household were out looking for him, so the kidnappers, quite literally, cut ties with the Duke in a rather confused getaway that resulted in Junior’s sword and pistol being left at the scene. If the Duke hadn’t have fought his way out of the situation, then the damning evidence of the weapons wouldn’t have been left. The pistol was later identified as belonging to Lieutenant Colonel Moore (a previous associate of Blood’s) and the sword was initialled as T. H., which was Blood Junior’s highwayman alias. These pieces of evidence, as well as an investigation into the incident led by the secretary of state, the Earl of Arlington, helped to identify most of the kidnappers. However, when their homes were later raided, the assailants were long gone and limited resources meant that they couldn’t be tracked further.
In an age when news mostly travelled by word of mouth with rumours of political intrigue at court being “fair game for gossip”, the events of 6th of December 1670 were to be the talk of the country for weeks to come. It was helped that the assassination attempt was done by the ‘Father of all Treasons’. What was even worse was the implication of the Duke of Buckingham. Court rumours circulated that Buckingham had actually hired Blood to assassinate Ormond because of a court rivalry. Whilst no one was ever brought to justice over the incident, it was always believed that this was the case. Buckingham is known to have had connections with radicals, dissidents and republicans because he saw them as “useful for his political ambitions”. Shortly before the attempt on Ormond’s life, Buckingham had spread tales that Ormond’s eldest son had employed men to kill him, but these men were conveniently poisoned before they could be arrested and evidence extracted from them. This same son, after the incident, publicly accused Buckingham of involvement in the assassination attempt by saying “I know well that you areat the bottom of this late attempt of Blood upon my father.” The accusations were believed to be accurate as Buckingham had been responsible for contriving Ormond’s removal from his post as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and continued a feud with him long after that.
Despite Blood, or his possible employer Buckingham, never being brought to justice over the crime, it set the outrageous tone that would continue to define Blood’s criminal finger print. The lack of nonconformist backing after the attempt on Ormond’s life, might have been reason for his later stealing of the crown jewels. Whether or not that is true, what is certain is that Colonel Blood definitely enjoyed doing these outrageous crimes “simply because they are there to be undertaken”.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 2015), p. 91.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 99; Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, The Historical Journal, 32.3 (1989), p. 581.
The Remarks on the Life and Death of the Famed Mr Blood and by R.H. (1680) cited in Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, The Historical Journal, 32.3 (1989), p. 561.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 562.
Jordan, D. and Walsh, M., The King’s Revenge: Charles II and the Greatest Manhunt in British History (London: Abacus, 2013), p. 297; Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. xv.
H.M.C., 8th Report cited in Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 566; Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 100.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 96; House of Lords Record Office, MS HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/352 (0) cited in Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 96.
R.L. Greaves, Enemies Under His Feet: Radicals and Nonconformists in Britain, 1664-77 cited in Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 96.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 97.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 97.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, pp. 97-98.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 98.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 99; Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 566.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 562; Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 113.
Fox, A., ‘Rumour, News and Popular Political Opinion in Elizabethan and Early Stuart England’, The Historical Journal, 40.3 (1997), p. 614.
The National Archives, SP4434/110, F.111, cited in Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. xv.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 565.
Hutchinson, R., The Audacious Crimes of Colonel Thomas Blood, p. 110.
M. Petherick, Restoration Rogues cited in Whitehead, J., Rebellion in the Reign of Charles II (Barnsley: Pen & Sword, 2017), p. 114.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 566; Whitehead, J., Rebellion in the Reign of Charles II, p. 112.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 581.
Marshall, A., ‘Colonel Thomas Blood and the Restoration Political Scene’, p. 582.
Comments