In the Shadow of the Noose: Mad Earl Ferrers: The Last English Nobleman Hanged for Murder by Dan Alexander Randall Page A
Authors: Dan Alexander Randall
Ads: Link
his conduct was not absurd, but rational and consistent,’ said Mr Yorke. ‘The same crime has been committed in all ages, upon grounds as slight, by men who never thought of setting up the defence of lunacy.’
As to the question of whether Earl Ferrers knew that what he had done was wrong, the Solicitor-General waxed lyrical about how he had sent for a surgeon and immediately asked him whether he thought the servant would live; how he had told Johnson’s daughter that he feared prosecution, and had said that if she did not press charges he would look after her family; how he had insisted that Mr Johnson not be moved for fear that word would get out and he would be seized.
Obviously enjoying his time in the limelight, Mr Yorke said, ‘This is the substance of the evidence which has been offered for the King; and it not only proves the fact, but proves it to be murder. What is the evidence produced by the noble Lord to weaken the force of it? In the first place, there is none which applies to the time of committing the act… no general evidence has been offered which proves his lunacy or insanity at any time.’
Taking each defence witness in turn, he highlighted their inability to prove that the Earl was mad and stated that Ferrers had murdered an old and faithful servant ‘in cold blood’ and in a ‘most deliberate and wilful manner.’
At the end of the Solicitor-General’s summing-up, the Lord High Steward ordered that Lord Ferrers be returned to the Tower – a journey of three miles – and the Lords were invited to leave the Hall.
Indeed, Ferrers was in the Tower when the Lords traipsed back into court, and was no doubt pacing up and down, concerned for his fate, when they delivered their verdicts in absentia .
The youngest baron, George Lord Lyttleton, stood up, removed his wig and was asked, ‘What says your Lordship? Is Laurence, Earl Ferrers, guilty of the felony and murder whereof he stands indicted, or not guilty?’
The most junior member of the House of Lords put his right hand on his breast, bowed his head and said, ‘Guilty, upon my honour.’
Each of the further 35 Lords, five Viscounts, 55 Earls, the Marquis of Rockingham, 15 Dukes, and the Lord Privy Seal, were asked the same question and gave the same reply.
The last to give his verdict was the Lord High Steward, who declared, ‘My Lords, I am of the opinion that Laurence Earl Ferrers is guilty of the felony and murder whereof he stands indicted, upon my honour.’
The verdict was unanimous and it was ordered that Lord Ferrers be returned to Westminster Hall to hear the outcome.
The news was delivered swiftly, the Earl was taken back to the Tower and court was adjourned till the following day.
Chapter 7
THE TRIAL, DAY THREE – THE SENTENCE
LORD FERRERS’ REACTION to the shameful news that his peers believed him a murderer is not recorded – no doubt, the aristocratic stiff upper lip prevented him from showing his feelings – but he was returned to court at 11am on April 18, 1760, to plead for his life.
There was no doubt that he had failed to live up to the Ferrers family motto: Honor Virtutis Praemium (Honour is the reward of virtue), and now faced the consequences.
Several members of the royal family, including the King’s 21-year-old grandson Prince Edward, were at Westminster Hall to watch proceedings.
Blaming his family for persuading him to attempt a defence of insanity, the disgraced nobleman admitted that his only hope now was to avoid the death penalty. He thanked those gathered for ‘the fair and candid trial your Lordships have indulged me with’, and apologised for troubling the peers with ‘a defence I was much averse to… but was prevailed upon by my family to attempt.’
Ironically, by far the highest hurdle for Ferrers during the trial had been his own conduct during the case.
Horace Walpole, who had been in court each day, later described its ‘pomp and awfulness’ in a letter to his
As to the question of whether Earl Ferrers knew that what he had done was wrong, the Solicitor-General waxed lyrical about how he had sent for a surgeon and immediately asked him whether he thought the servant would live; how he had told Johnson’s daughter that he feared prosecution, and had said that if she did not press charges he would look after her family; how he had insisted that Mr Johnson not be moved for fear that word would get out and he would be seized.
Obviously enjoying his time in the limelight, Mr Yorke said, ‘This is the substance of the evidence which has been offered for the King; and it not only proves the fact, but proves it to be murder. What is the evidence produced by the noble Lord to weaken the force of it? In the first place, there is none which applies to the time of committing the act… no general evidence has been offered which proves his lunacy or insanity at any time.’
Taking each defence witness in turn, he highlighted their inability to prove that the Earl was mad and stated that Ferrers had murdered an old and faithful servant ‘in cold blood’ and in a ‘most deliberate and wilful manner.’
At the end of the Solicitor-General’s summing-up, the Lord High Steward ordered that Lord Ferrers be returned to the Tower – a journey of three miles – and the Lords were invited to leave the Hall.
Indeed, Ferrers was in the Tower when the Lords traipsed back into court, and was no doubt pacing up and down, concerned for his fate, when they delivered their verdicts in absentia .
The youngest baron, George Lord Lyttleton, stood up, removed his wig and was asked, ‘What says your Lordship? Is Laurence, Earl Ferrers, guilty of the felony and murder whereof he stands indicted, or not guilty?’
The most junior member of the House of Lords put his right hand on his breast, bowed his head and said, ‘Guilty, upon my honour.’
Each of the further 35 Lords, five Viscounts, 55 Earls, the Marquis of Rockingham, 15 Dukes, and the Lord Privy Seal, were asked the same question and gave the same reply.
The last to give his verdict was the Lord High Steward, who declared, ‘My Lords, I am of the opinion that Laurence Earl Ferrers is guilty of the felony and murder whereof he stands indicted, upon my honour.’
The verdict was unanimous and it was ordered that Lord Ferrers be returned to Westminster Hall to hear the outcome.
The news was delivered swiftly, the Earl was taken back to the Tower and court was adjourned till the following day.
Chapter 7
THE TRIAL, DAY THREE – THE SENTENCE
LORD FERRERS’ REACTION to the shameful news that his peers believed him a murderer is not recorded – no doubt, the aristocratic stiff upper lip prevented him from showing his feelings – but he was returned to court at 11am on April 18, 1760, to plead for his life.
There was no doubt that he had failed to live up to the Ferrers family motto: Honor Virtutis Praemium (Honour is the reward of virtue), and now faced the consequences.
Several members of the royal family, including the King’s 21-year-old grandson Prince Edward, were at Westminster Hall to watch proceedings.
Blaming his family for persuading him to attempt a defence of insanity, the disgraced nobleman admitted that his only hope now was to avoid the death penalty. He thanked those gathered for ‘the fair and candid trial your Lordships have indulged me with’, and apologised for troubling the peers with ‘a defence I was much averse to… but was prevailed upon by my family to attempt.’
Ironically, by far the highest hurdle for Ferrers during the trial had been his own conduct during the case.
Horace Walpole, who had been in court each day, later described its ‘pomp and awfulness’ in a letter to his
Similar Books
