In
the summer of 1845 Robert Porrett Collier was a fiercely ambitious 28 year old
junior barrister on the Western Circuit, desperately searching for a big case
that would show the world what he could do and set him up in his career. His
marriage the previous year to Isabella and the birth in the spring of their
first child, a son named Robert after his father, only added to his
determination to prove himself. His own father, who ran a flourishing business
in Plymouth, had been generous in helping him set up home with his new bride
and even more liberal on the birth of his first grandson. But Robert was
determined to make his own way in the world and his father’s open-handedness
was yet another spur driving him on. The brief he was offered in early July
didn’t immediately look like it had the makings of a great case, not least
because it seemed so open and shut; the trial of a dozen Brazilians who had
been taken prisoner by the West Africa Squadron of the Royal Navy on one of
their routine anti-slavery patrols off the coast of Nigeria. They were accused
of piracy and murder; having taken control of the ship in which they were being
detained they murdered the British crew before trying to make their escape back
to Brazil. Senior colleagues had already
taken on the cases of those accused where the evidence admitted to at least
some doubt as to their culpability. Probably because no one else wanted them,
Robert had been left with the four, Janus Majaval, Francisco Ferreira de Santo
Serva, Manuel José Alves, and Sebastião de Santos, whose guilt seemed most well
established and almost certain to lead them to the gallows. Not only did the
case seem virtually unwinnable but it was also morally distasteful; Robert had
been brought up a Quaker and an abolitionist and he could not quite suppress
his repugnance for the cut throat, slave trading foreigners who were accused of
killing 10 members of the Royal Navy.
The trial commenced on Thursday 24th July at Exeter Assizes. “At an early hour the Court was besieged with eager crowds,” said the Exeter & Plymouth Gazette “anxious to gain admittance to the interior, so as to witness the proceedings.” At 9.00am prompt the judge, Mr Baron Platt, took his seat and ordered the prisoners to be placed in the dock. The indictments were then read out; 22 year old Janus Majaval was accused of the murder of Thomas Palmer “on the 2nd day of March on the high seas, on board a vessel called the Felicidade, by striking him with a knife upon the belly, giving him a mortal wound of which he died...” or “by throwing the said Thomas Palmer out of the vessel, and drowning him.” The other prisoners were indicted for being feloniously present and with aiding and abetting Majaval. The next thirty minutes were taken up by legal arguments by Sargeant Manning, one of Robert’s senior colleagues, with interjections from Robert (who had drafted the argument in the first place). The eager crowd who had besieged the courtroom for a place early that morning must have grown restive as the two lawyers and the judge argued the form of the indictment and whether it should have been set out contra formam statuti. The Judge asked what statute makes murder on the high seas a felony? The 28th of Henry VIII said Sargeant Manning. “But that only altered the mode of trial to that of the common law,” the Judge observed. Sargeant Manning tried to explain but Robert interrupted to explain that the common law jurisdiction arose out of an offence committed in some county of the realm but this offence not having been committed in any county but on the high seas, was not cognisable in a common law Court. The two lawyers wanted the trial transferred to the Court of Admiralty but Judge Platt was having none of it and ordered the trial to start. The interpreter was sworn in and Robert interrupted again to object that the interpreter was speaking Spanish and his clients were Brazilian and spoke Portuguese. The interpreter told the judge that the accused understood everything he said and ordered them all to stand up. When they did this was considered sufficient evidence of the interpreters fluency. The jury unusually, de medietate linguae, half English and half foreigners, were sworn in and to the relief of the public the trial proper started. Mr Godson, Queens Counsel, began by addressing the jury and explaining the events that had led up to the murder of Midshipman Palmer and his shipmates and had brought the twelve accused to Exeter to stand trial for their lives.
The trial commenced on Thursday 24th July at Exeter Assizes. “At an early hour the Court was besieged with eager crowds,” said the Exeter & Plymouth Gazette “anxious to gain admittance to the interior, so as to witness the proceedings.” At 9.00am prompt the judge, Mr Baron Platt, took his seat and ordered the prisoners to be placed in the dock. The indictments were then read out; 22 year old Janus Majaval was accused of the murder of Thomas Palmer “on the 2nd day of March on the high seas, on board a vessel called the Felicidade, by striking him with a knife upon the belly, giving him a mortal wound of which he died...” or “by throwing the said Thomas Palmer out of the vessel, and drowning him.” The other prisoners were indicted for being feloniously present and with aiding and abetting Majaval. The next thirty minutes were taken up by legal arguments by Sargeant Manning, one of Robert’s senior colleagues, with interjections from Robert (who had drafted the argument in the first place). The eager crowd who had besieged the courtroom for a place early that morning must have grown restive as the two lawyers and the judge argued the form of the indictment and whether it should have been set out contra formam statuti. The Judge asked what statute makes murder on the high seas a felony? The 28th of Henry VIII said Sargeant Manning. “But that only altered the mode of trial to that of the common law,” the Judge observed. Sargeant Manning tried to explain but Robert interrupted to explain that the common law jurisdiction arose out of an offence committed in some county of the realm but this offence not having been committed in any county but on the high seas, was not cognisable in a common law Court. The two lawyers wanted the trial transferred to the Court of Admiralty but Judge Platt was having none of it and ordered the trial to start. The interpreter was sworn in and Robert interrupted again to object that the interpreter was speaking Spanish and his clients were Brazilian and spoke Portuguese. The interpreter told the judge that the accused understood everything he said and ordered them all to stand up. When they did this was considered sufficient evidence of the interpreters fluency. The jury unusually, de medietate linguae, half English and half foreigners, were sworn in and to the relief of the public the trial proper started. Mr Godson, Queens Counsel, began by addressing the jury and explaining the events that had led up to the murder of Midshipman Palmer and his shipmates and had brought the twelve accused to Exeter to stand trial for their lives.
The Portuguese salve ship Dignidade captured by the navy in 1834 |
In
January that year (1845) a vessel called the Felicidade (Happiness!) was fitted
out at Salvador de Bahia in Brazil for a slave trading mission to the west
coast of Africa under the captaincy of Joaquim Antonio Cerqueira. It was not
the first slaving mission for either the ship or the captain; Capitão Cerqueira was well aware that he had
to avoid the coastal patrols of the British navy as he made his way through the
lagoons and sandbanks of the treacherous West African coast en route to Angola but on this journey he ran out of luck and found himself taken by HMS
Wasp not far from Lagos. He didn’t have any slaves on board at the time but the
manacles, fetters and chains that were everywhere you turned on the schooner
made it pretty clear what his business was. The crew of the Felicidade were
transferred as prisoners to the Wasp leaving just Cerqueira and his cook, 22
year old Janus Majaval, on board ship, their places taken by 16 ordinary
British seaman, a midshipman called Thomas Palmer and Lieutenant Stupart. The
Lieutenant’s orders were to take the Felicidade to Freetown in Sierra Leone
where the Prize commissioners would adjudicate on her (as a slaver she would be
sold and the proceeds divided up amongst the navy personnel who had taken her).
On the morning of 1st March another slaver was spotted by the men aboard the
Felicidade. Lieutenant Stupart gave the command to pursue the other ship, a
much bigger Brazilian slaver, a 70 ton brigantine called the Echo. It took a
couple of days to catch up with her and discover that she had a human cargo of
430 sequestered Africans on board, destined for a life of slavery in the sugar
and coffee plantations of Bahia. Lieutenant Stupart was faced with a dilemma;
he and his crew of 17 now had control of two ships, 30 Brazilian slave traders,
and 430 African abductees. Stupart’s solution was to split up the Brazilians –
he transferred half of the crew of the Echo into the Felicidade, locking some
of them into the hold and putting some of them into a small boat which was
towed behind the ship. With 7 of his own men he went into the Echo leaving
midshipman Palmer, 9 other ranks and 2 native sailors, Kroomen, in the
Felicidade.
A sketch of Janus Majaval made at the trial |
Serva's slave Sobrinho de Costa who gave evidence at the trial |
The
story did not end there. In November all seven accused were tried again in
absentia in front of 13 judges at the Court of Exchequer . According to the
D.N.B after the trial, unhappy with the outcome and with Judge Platt’s refusal
to accept the arguments about the legality of the seizure of the two Brazilian
ships “Collier hurried to London and laid the matter before the home secretary
(Sir James Graham) and Sir Robert Peel. Both ministers appear to have been
convinced by Collier's argument, and on 5 Aug. it was announced in both houses
of parliament that Baron Platt had yielded.” The matter still had to go before
the courts however, the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister not having powers
to overturn a decision of the Exeter Assizes. The Brazilians were not required
to attend as this was to be a trial of legalities. The murder of Midshipman
Palmer and his crew mates were not the issue. What mattered was the right of
the Royal Navy to seize a foreign ship for the offence of slaving when there
were no slaves on board. The 13 judges listened to Sargeant Manning’s
exposition of naval law back to 1570, his analysis of the various treatises
with Brazil, Portugal and Spain, and his argument that all this made the
seizure of the Felicidade and the Echo illegal. He won the argument and
the 10 accused were all acquitted, much to the consternation of the country.
The Examiner commented acidly “The point
or quibble of law by which they [the accused] have been enabled to escape is
one thing, the effect that will be produced on the slave coast and in Brazil is
another. Hitherto the British officers and seamen who captured slavers and who
remained very often in small numbers to guard and conduct to trial a much more
numerous crew, as was the case with the Felicidade, relied upon the rights by
which they boarded and seized, on the respect and awe excited by the British
name, and on the certainty of vengeance overtaking those who sought to set
British authority at nought. The result of the acquittal or escape of those tried
at Exeter will be first of all to acquaint foreigners engaged in the slave
trade that they may resist, rise upon and murder with impunity, the British
seamen and officers who have captured them.”
Robert Porrett Collier, 1st Lord Monkswell, in later life. |
The
trial and subsequent controversy did no harm to Robert Collier’s career; “On
his next visit to Exeter he had nineteen briefs,” says the D.N.B. He went on to
become a very successful trial lawyer and eventually Recorder of Plymouth, then
counsel to the admiralty and fleet. He also became an MP, a member of the Privy
Council and eventually the attorney general. He was made a peer in 1885. The
D.N.B’s summary of his private life was “He
married in 1844 a daughter of Mr. William Rose of Woolston Heath, near Rugby,
and her sudden death in April 1886 shook him severely. In failing health he
went to the Riviera, and died at Grasse, near Cannes, on 27 Oct. 1886, and was
buried in London on 3 Nov. He was highly versatile and accomplished. He was a good
billiard-player, an excellent scholar, and wrote some very pretty verses both
in Latin and English. His memory was most retentive. But it was chiefly in
painting, of which he was passionately fond, that he was distinguished. As a
young man he drew very clever caricatures in the H.B. manner. When
solicitor-general he painted in St. James's Park, and he exhibited frequently
at the Royal Academy and Grosvenor Gallery, especially pictures of the
neighbourhood of Rosenlaui, Switzerland, where he spent many vacations.” He
had three children, the eldest, Robert, followed him into the law, John became
a professional artist and his daughter Margaret was a writer, author of “Prince
Peerless, an original fairy tale” and “Our Home by the Adriatic.”
No comments:
Post a Comment