The Brancaster Verdict
On Wednesday March 26th, 1834, Joseph Newman Reeve, son-in-law of the Lord
of the Manor of Brancaster, stood trial at Norwich assizes for crimes allegedly committed
six months earlier, when the 'Earl of Wemyss' had been wrecked at Brancaster.
He had been remanded in custody (as we would say today) and as far as I can determine (the
prison records have been lost) had spent that winter imprisoned in Norwich Castle facing a
possible death sentence.
The 'scaups' or 'scurves' off Brancaster,
the remains of an ancient forest, where 'The Earl of Wemyss' was stranded on August 31st,
1833
|
Reeve had been charged with stealing the property of two women, drowned with nine
others during the wreck: Mrs. Pyne and Miss Roche. The Grand Jury (the
equivalent of a modern magistrates court) had decided that there was no case to answer on
the charges but that the Pyne case deserved a hearing.
Newman Reeve was represented by the most successful advocate in England, Sir James
Scarlett, MP for Norwich, who has ' had a longer series of successes than has ever fallen
to the lot of any other man in the law."
Scarlett's biographer wrote 'Some of his extraordinary success as a verdict-getter was
undoubtedly due to abundance of clever artifice'. In other words, he was a tricky
customer - well illustrated that morning in Norwich when at ten o'clock sharp the trial
began.
At least, it would have begun if there had been any prosecuting counsel present.
In fact, the prosecution had agreed to an adjournment until noon - at Scarlett's
request. "Nonsense", said Scarlett in his finely modulated voice.
"No such arrangement has been made. The trial must proceed".
The judge, Baron Vaughan, agreed. A barrister was appointed for the
prosecution. He asked for an hour to study the facts of the case. This was
refused by the judge who commented: "I am surprised that no counsel should be
ready for the prosecution. The case must go on".
The unfortunate newcomer, a Mr. Gunning opened the case, commenting that Reeve had not
only a counsel against him without instruction but had as his advocate the highest talent
which the bar of England could present.
The first witness was a Brancaster seaman, Charles Large. Mr. Gunning led him
though the damning deposition he had made during the hearing at Docking in October.
Large was then cross examined by Sir James Scarlett who tore his evidence to shreds,
reducing the witness to stammering, "I can't recollect".
Scarlett made short work of the other Brancaster witnesses: John Large, James
Claxton, John Carman, Mr. S. Sharpe and William Mingay.
Scarlett then protested about some of Reeve's letters which had been held by the
prosecution. The judge arbitrated: "When so much excitement has been
created, and the honour and charater of a gentleman has been severely attacked, I think he
should have every opportunity of defending himself and I should not be inclined to be
bound by the very strictest form to prevent his doing so".
The case continued. The Rev. Henry Holloway, (who, it was revealed, was a distant
relative by marriage of Mrs. Pyne) gave his evidence as did George Ruthven, a Bow Street
Runner who had searched Brancaster Hall and found several hundred pounds in gold.
Scarlett pointed out that the search warrant specified goods, not money. Ruthven
agreed. He should not have found the money. In any case, he had been told that
the gold had been given to the Reeve children as a present.
At this point Mr. Gunning gave up, not bothering to question his last witness.
Sir James Scarlett did not relent. The case for the prosecution was demolished.
Next Page
Pages One Two Three Four Five Six
Return to 'Annals of Crime'
|
