The Man Who Was Jekyll and Hyde (16 page)

2. To James Donaldson, I freely bequeath my sobriety and good breeding, which may save him from being kicked out of company on occasion of his petulance and ill-manners, as was lately the case at Archers’ Hall.

3. My charity and good deeds I humbly bequeath to the ministers of the Gospel, in Scotland, with this injunction, that they do not retail them among their hearers, but put them in practice amongst themselves.

4. To the Magistrates of Edinburgh, present and to come, I leave and bequeath all my knowledge of the law, which may prevent their being under the necessity in future of borrowing from any of their Jameos [their clerks], who are as ignorant as themselves.

5. To my late landlord, William Charles Little of Liberton, Esq., I leave my whole stock of economy, pride, and self-conceit, knowing he has very little of his own.

6. To William Creech, bookseller, who has favoured the public with an account of my trial, I give and bequeath my honour and generosity, referring the world to the note prefixed to Mr Morrison’s appendix.

7. To Hamilton, the chimney sweep, I leave and bequeath my dexterity in cards and dice, which may enable him to refund himself of the five guineas, two half-guineas, and six shillings which he prosecuted me for, when he meets a pigeon, which I advertise him he is not likely to do either at Clerk’s or Michael Henderson’s.

8. To my good friends and old companions, Brown and Ainslie, I freely bequeath all my bad qualities, not doubting, however, but their own will secure them a rope at last.

My neck now being about to embrace the halter, I would recommend it to all rogues, sharpers, thieves, and gamblers, whether in high or low station, to take care of theirs, by leaving-off their wicked practices, and becoming good members of Society in future.

Written with my own hand, and dated Sept. 26, 1788.

WILLM BRODIE

It had to be remarkable, did it not, that this unusual character could still employ his impish sense of humour when about to pay his debts to an aggrieved society? Why would his imminent confrontation with the Grim Reaper be anything for him or his relatives to laugh about? But there were, as we know, a good few dubious sides to William Brodie, and one of them was his innate inability to pay his debts on time.

Theirs had been the worst of evil crimes. The calculated targeting and befriending of unsuspecting victims who would be persuaded to join in convivial drink marathons, then, when totally befuddled or asleep, end up being ‘burked’ – smothered and compressed about the chest until they realised (perhaps) that they were drawing their last, wide-eyed, silent-screaming breath. A series of sixteen such murders for money made the bodysnatcher-killers William Burke and William Hare the most notorious criminals in the annals of Edinburgh’s history – thoroughly deserving of the death penalty, though the latter even managed to avoid it by turning Crown’s evidence against his partner-in-crime.

But did William Brodie and George Smith deserve to be hanged after their trial exactly forty years before? However reprehensible their crimes, they were merely burglars and had not killed, nor even physically hurt, anyone. Certainly, a batch of loaded pistols had accompanied them on their most ambitious job – the robbing of Scotland’s General Excise Office – and it could therefore be argued that there was a readiness, if not an intention, to shoot anyone getting in their way. But the weapons may have been there for romantic effect and, in the event, were not used. Indeed, the job itself was something of a damp discharge, yielding a lot less money than expected (see page 71) but was it, ultimately, the how-dare-they audaciousness of it that seeded the seriousness of the sentencing?

And despite the allegations of at least ten break-ins, the focus of their trial was constantly on that particular incident that had indelibly insinuated itself into the outraged minds of Edinburgh’s citizenry, and particularly its legal establishment; all classes seemed utterly transfixed by the sharpness of the social and character contrasts displayed by Brodie: respectable town councillor by day, sleazy burglar by night. There was definitely a large school of resentment in all camps’ thinking: not just theft but betrayal of class. Many thought: why shouldn’t he pay the ultimate price for that?

It couldn’t happen today, of course, no matter how shocked society might be by a crime short of murder; even back then – in the absence of a not-proven verdict or appeals procedures – there was the option of transportation to the Colonies, which was apparently never considered. But chief among the five judges on the bench was the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Braxfield, a bulldog of a man with widely acknowledged common sense – being the grandson of an earl’s gardener – but a fearsome reputation; indeed, he was often called ‘The Hanging Judge’. And having been a friend of Brodie’s father, he was not beyond passing his influence and opinion – that the son was guilty of disgracing the memory of the father – to his fellow judges: Lords Hailes, Eskgrove, Swinton and Stonefield.

And another move that would be seen as irregular today was Braxfield’s choosing of the jury’s fifteen male members, including William Creech, the bookseller and publisher who had been a resentful enemy of Brodie on the city council and who was to write and publish his own version of the trial only a few days after it ended.

Outside and in, the Court of Justiciary was overwhelmed by an excited public whose appetite for the trial had been whetted by the double-life tales and escape and capture of the main man, who was now being transported by sedan chair across Parliament Close from the Tolbooth prison; likewise, his co-accused. But neither of them could be seen, escorted as they were by ‘sentinels of the City Guard on the right and left, with naked bayonets, and a sergeant’s guard behind, with muskets and fixed bayonets’ – responsible for keeping the parties apart. From the castle, a detachment of the 7th Regiment of Foot lined Parliament Square to ease the passage to court of lawyers and jurymen and help calm the great crowds.

What the public within the court eventually saw was a well-dressed, confident-looking Brodie emerge from the sedan chair to take his seat alongside a dejected-looking Smith. ‘Mr Brodie was genteelly dressed in a new dark-blue coat, a fashionable fancy waistcoat, black satin breeches, and white silk stockings, a cocked hat, and had his hair fully dressed and powdered’, according to a contemporary report, ‘while Smith was poorly clothed, having had no money since his confinement, which had already lasted six months’.

The open-air crowds, meanwhile, took in the spectacle of the arrival of the scarlet-robed and full-wigged Braxfield, who had walked from his elegant home in George’s Square to reach Parliament House in good time for the 9 a.m. start of the trial on the grey morning of Wednesday 27 August 1788. Inside the court, at the appointed hour and preceded by a macer bearing the Justiciary Mace, he led the five judges to their seats and nodded a greeting to the other main legal players in the drama: Ilay Campbell, the King’s Advocate, leading for the prosecution, assisted by Solicitor General Dundas, a nephew of Henry Dundas (who had helped Braxfield to become Lord Justice Clerk) and advocates William Tait and James Wolfe Murray; for Smith’s defence, advocates John Clerk and Robert Hamilton; and for Brodie’s defence, the Dean of Faculty, Henry Erskine, along with advocates Alexander Wight and Charles Hay. There would be extra tension in court as these officers were divided by more than points of law: the defence team were all Whigs, while the prosecution and judges were Tories.

Was it the backing of Henry Erskine that had made Brodie so perky? The services of this ‘chief ornament of the Scottish bar’ had been, apparently secured by his friends and – as an enthusiast for fighting cocks – he is said to have commented, ‘So now we’ve got the best cock that ever fought.’ And according to the
Edinburgh Advertiser
, Brodie never lost his cool confidence: ‘His behaviour during the whole trial was perfectly collected. He was respectful to the court, and when anything ludicrous occurred in the evidence he smiled as if he had been an indifferent spectator.’

The trial began with a reading of the charges against the two men:

WILLIAM BRODIE, sometime Wright and Cabinetmaker in Edinburgh, and GEORGE SMITH, sometime Grocer there, both prisoners in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, You are indicted and accused at the instance of Ilay Campbell, Esq., His Majesty’s Advocate, for His Majesty’s interest: THAT ALBEIT, by the laws of this, and of every well-governed realm, THEFT, more especially when attended with house-breaking, and when committed by breaking into a house used or kept as an Excise Office, or other public office, under cloud of night, and from thence abstracting and stealing money, is a crime of an heinous nature, and severely punishable: YET TRUE IT IS, AND OF VERITY, That You, the said William Brodie, and George Smith, are both, and each, or one or other of You, guilty actors, or art and part, of the said crime, aggravated as aforesaid: IN SO FAR AS, upon the night of the 5th day of March, last, in this present year of our Lord 1788, or upon one or other of the days or nights of that month, or of February immediately preceding, or of April immediately following. You, the said William Brodie, and George Smith, did, by means of false keys, or other instruments, wickedly and feloniously break into the house in which the General Excise Office for Scotland was then kept, in Chessels’s buildings, on the south side of the High-street of Canongate of Edinburgh, within the royalty or liberties of the city of Edinburgh, and county of Edinburgh, and did thence feloniously abstract and steal money, to the amount of Sixteen pounds Sterling, or thereby, consisting partly of banknotes, and partly of silver and halfpence. And You, the said George Smith, having been afterwards apprehended, and brought before Archibald Cockburn, Esq., Sheriff-depute of the county of Edinburgh, did, in his presence, emit three several declarations; the first of date the 8th day of March, the second of date the 10th day of March, and the third of date the 19th day of March, all in this present year of our Lord 1788: And having afterwards been brought before John Stewart, Esq., Sheriff-substitute of the said county, You did, in his presence, emit a fourth declaration, of date the 17th day of July, likewise in this present year 1788: The first of which declarations was signed by the said Archibald Cockburn, the second and third by you, the said George Smith, and the said Archibald Cockburn, and the fourth by you, the said George Smith, and the said John Stewart.

AND FURTHER, You, the said William Brodie, having, in the month of March last, when the said George Smith was committed to prison, left Edinburgh, and fled from this country; and having afterwards been brought back, and taken into custody, did, upon the l7th day of July, in this present year 1788, in presence of the said Archibald Cockburn, Esq., emit a declaration, which was signed by you, the said William Brodie, and the said Archibald Cockburn; the whole of which declarations, together with a letter written by You, the said William Brodie, and signed John Dixon, dated at Flushing, Tuesday, 8th April, 1788, twelve o’clock forenoon, and addressed to Mr Matthew Sheriff, upholsterer, Edinburgh; another letter, or two letters, on one sheet of paper, written by You the said William Brodie, and signed with your initials, dated Thursday, 10th April, 1788, and addressed to Mr Michael Henderson, Grassmarket, stabler, Edinburgh; an unsigned scroll, or copy of a letter, in the hand-writing of You, the said William Brodie, marked No. 1 without date or address; another unsigned scroll, or copy of a letter, in the hand-writing of You, the said William Brodie, marked No. 2 without date or address; an account, or state, in the hand-writing of You, the said William Brodie, entitled, “A state of my affairs, as near as I can make out at present from memory, having no other assistance”; a letter, dated London, 1st May, 1788, signed Lee, Strachan, and Co. and addressed to Mess. Eml. Walker and Co., merchants, Philadelphia; a gold watch, with a chain, seal, and key; a chest, or trunk, containing various articles; a five-pound banknote; an iron coulter of a plough; two iron wedges; an iron crow; a pair of curling irons or toupee tongs; a spur; a dark lanthorn; a pair of pistols; several false keys and picklocks; and two spring-saws; are all to be used in evidence against You the said William Brodie and George Smith; and, for that purpose, will be lodged in the hands of the clerk of the High Court of Justiciary, before which You are to be tried, in order that You may have an opportunity of seeing the same: AT LEAST, time and place foresaid, the said house in which the General Excise Office for Scotland was then kept as aforesaid, was feloniously broke and entered into, and a sum of money feloniously and theftuously taken and stolen therefrom as aforesaid; and You the said William Brodie, and George Smith, above complained upon, are both, and each, or one or other of You, guilty thereof, actor or actors, or art and part. ALL WHICH, or part thereof, being found proven by the verdict of an assize, before the Lord Justice-General, Lord Justice-Clerk, and Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, You, the said William Brodie, and George Smith, OUGHT to be punished with the pains of law, to deter others from committing the like crimes in all time coming.

ILAY CAMPBELL

(His Majesty’s Advocate, for His Majesty’s interest)

The prisoners were signalled to stand while Lord Braxfield asked: ‘William Brodie, you have heard the indictment raised against you by His Majesty’s Advocate – are you guilty of the crime therein charged, or not guilty?’

Brodie replied: ‘My Lord, I am not guilty.’

‘George Smith – are you guilty of the crime therein charged, or not guilty?’

Smith replied: ‘Not guilty, my Lord.’

The judge then swore in the fifteen jury members five at a time, repeating: ‘You swear by Almighty God, and as you shall answer to God at the great day of judgment, that you will truth say, and no truth conceal, so far as you are to pass upon this assize.’

The fifteen were: Robert Forrester, banker; Robert Allan, banker; Henry Jamieson, banker; John Hay, banker; William Creech, bookseller; James Carfrae, merchant; John Kinnear, banker; William Fettes, merchant; John Milne, founder; Dunbar Pringle, tanner; Thomas Campbell, merchant; Francis Sharp, merchant; James Donaldson, printer; John Hutton, stationer; and Thomas Cleghom, coachmaker.