Henry Fielding – Tom Jones

1 (Mis)leading evidence / (mis)leading conclusion

The aftermath of the Tom–Blifil–Thwackum fight discussed above contains an example of the first situation. When Sophia faints Tom rushes to her assistance. Sophia is “restored to life” just as the others arrive, and Tom releases his hold:²⁰⁶

… but [he gives] her at the same instant a tender caress, which, had her senses been then perfectly restored, could not have escaped her observation. As she expressed, therefore, no displeasure at this freedom, we suppose she was not sufficiently recovered from her swoon at the time.

Here, the reader can justifiably reject the narrator’s deliberately narrow interpretation. The reader knows that Sophia does not object because she welcomes Tom’s caress, but absent the knowledge that Tom and Sophia love one another, the narrator’s explanation is quite plausible. It fits all (other) facts then available to the others present, but those facts tell only half the story. In this way, Fielding reinforces the importance of considering all the evidence, in context. The narrator (Fielding) shows the importance of strategic management of circumstantial evidence at the conclusion of Partridge’s “trial for Incontinency”.

Partridge, accused of fathering Tom, vehemently maintains his innocence. However, Mrs Partridge’s evidence concerning her husband’s “relationship” with Jenny²⁰⁷ and his “confession” satisfies Allworthy of Partridge’s guilt.²⁰⁸ After assuring the reader that this evidence is “more than sufficient to convict him”, the narrator casts doubt on both the conviction and the accuracy of Mrs Partridge’s evidence by revealing the “possibility that [Partridge] was entirely innocent.”²⁰⁹ There is cogent circumstantial evidence in the form “of a lad near eighteen” living

²⁰⁶ Tom Jones, above n 6, 213 (emphasis added).

²⁰⁷ For details of Mrs Partridge’s suspicions see Tom Jones, above n 6, 64–66, 68, 71.
²⁰⁸ Tom Jones, above n 6, 78. Partridge asserts the confession was made under duress (“she would never leave tormenting him”), and with the added inducement of Mrs Partridge’s promise never to again mention his “affair” with Jenny: “[T]ho’ he was innocent … he believed he should have confest to a murder from the same motive” (Tom Jones, 76).
²⁰⁹ Ibid, 79.
in the same house as Jenny around the time Tom is conceived and “between whom, and Jenny there had subsisted a sufficient intimacy to found a reasonable suspicion; and yet, so blind is jealousy, [it] never once entered into the head of the estranged wife.”²¹⁰

It is not until Fielding reveals the truth of Tom’s parentage that the reader learns this “lad” is a red herring. When this fact speaks it misleads. It is not false evidence (Fielding is a gentleman barrister; he would not suborn perjury), but Fielding is doing what all advocates do, that is, manage what evidence he presents and in what order before making his final submission. He does not want the reader as judge (or juror) to leap to a premature conclusion. As the narrator later observes: “[I]t is not our custom to unfold at any time more than is necessary for the occasion.”²¹¹ Fielding’s use of the narrator to convey evidence that he does not want the reader to question is significant. The narrator is a character in his own right,²¹² but because he appears both neutral and wise the reader is more likely to accept his pronouncements at face value. Few of the other characters in Tom Jones enjoy that level of credibility.

2.