William Garrow

Sir William Garrow,

He was elected to Parliament in 1805 for

For much of the 19th and 20th centuries his work was forgotten by academics, and interest arose only in 1991, with an article by John Beattie titled "Garrow for the Defence" in History Today. Garrow is best known for his criminal defence work, which, through the example he set with his aggressive defence of clients, helped establish the modern adversarial system in use in the United Kingdom, the United States, and other former British colonies. Garrow is also known for his impact on the rules of evidence, leading to the best evidence rule. His work was cited as recently as 1982 in the Supreme Court of Canada and 2006 in the Irish Court of Criminal Appeal. In 2009, BBC One broadcast Garrow's Law, a four-part fictionalised drama of Garrow's beginnings at the Old Bailey; a second series aired in late 2010. BBC One began broadcasting the third series in November 2011.

Garrow's family originally came from

William Garrow was educated at his father's school in Monken Hadley, The Priory,[3] which emphasised preparing students for commercial careers such as in the East India Company. As such, it taught social graces, as well as English, Greek, Latin, French, geography, mathematics and dancing. Studying there Garrow "knew the English language well; had a moderate acquaintance with the Latin and, as an accomplishment, added a considerable proficiency in French".^[4] Garrow attended this school until he was 15, at which point he was articled to Thomas Southouse born Faversham, Kent?,^[5] an attorney in Cheapside, London. Garrow showed potential, being noted as "attentive and diligent in the performance of the technical and practical duties of the office",^[6] and Southouse recommended that he become a solicitor or barrister; as a result, when he was 17, he became a pupil of a Mr. Crompton, a special pleader. As a pupil Garrow studied hard, fastidiously reading Sampson Euer's Doctrina Placitandi, a manual on the Law of Pleading written in legal French.^[7] At the same time he viewed cases at the Old Bailey, forming a friendship with the clerk of arraignment there, William Shelton.^[8]

In the 18th century, speakers perfected the art of oratory through debating societies, one of the most noted of which met at Coachmaker's Hall, London. Although initially shy (during his first debate, the attendees had to force him from his seat and hold him up while he spoke), he swiftly developed a reputation as a speaker, and was referred to in the press as "Counsellor Garrow, the famous orator of Coachmaker's Hall".

Garrow started as a criminal defence barrister at the

During his early years as a practising barrister, Garrow was particularly noted for his aggressive and confrontational style of cross-examination. When James Wingrove was charged with theft and violence in the course of a highway robbery in 1784, Garrow's cross-examination of William Grove (who acted as a witness and the person charging Wingrove) got him to admit that he was perjuring himself in an attempt to get a reward, and that Wingrove had not robbed the two injured parties.^[16] Garrow showed a dislike of most thief-takers, of which Grove was one, although he did not treat the Bow Street Runners and other professionals with contempt. His dislike of such men was highlighted in his defence of three men in 1788 for theft; they were charged with assaulting John Troughton, putting him in fear of his life, and stealing his hat. The issue was whether the assault put him in fear of his life, or whether he was exaggerating to claim a reward, which could not be claimed for simple theft.^[17] Garrow established that Troughton was uncertain about how he lost his hat, despite his attempts to claim that the defendants knocked it off him, and after four witnesses gave character evidence the defendants were found not guilty.^[18]

Garrow made much use of jury nullification to limit the punishment for his convicted clients, in a time when many crimes carried the death penalty (the so-called Bloody Code). In 1784 a pair of women were arrested for stealing fans worth 15 shillings, meaning a conviction would result in the death penalty; Garrow convinced the jury to convict the women of stealing 4 shillings worth of fans, therefore changing the sentence to twelve months of hard labour.^[19]

Garrow soon developed a large practice, working criminal trials at the

As the French Revolution and its perceived threat to the United Kingdom gained momentum, so did Garrow's career; he prosecuted in most of the state trials, and as he increased in experience was left to manage many of them himself, coming up against leading barristers such as Thomas Erskine, James Mingay and James Scarlett. In May 1794 the Government suspended habeas corpus, in 1795 outlawed all public meetings, in 1797 outlawed secret organisations and in 1799 outlawed all societies interested in reforming the way the United Kingdom was run. The Government planned a series of 800 arrests, with 300 execution warrants for high treason made out and signed, making a particular effort to prosecute Thomas Hardy and John Horne Tooke.^[23] Hardy was the first to be tried, with the prosecution arguing that he sought a revolution in England similar to that in France. With Garrow prosecuting and Erskine defending, the trial lasted eight days instead of the normal one, and the foreman of the jury was so tense that he delivered the verdict of "not guilty" in a whisper and then immediately fainted.^[24] Tooke was then prosecuted; again, the jury found him not guilty, with the result that the other 800 trials were abandoned.^[25]

During the period when Garrow worked as a barrister, the slavocracy of the British West Indies held large amounts of power in Parliament, allowing them to maintain a monopoly on the sugar trade in Britain which produced a vast amount of profit. This industry was profitable due to the use of Black slave labour, to which Garrow had long been opposed; when the members of the pro-slavocracy West India Committee offered him a job managing their legal and political affairs, he replied that "[even] if your committee would give me their whole incomes, and all their estates, I would not be seen as the advocate of practices which I abhor, and a system which I detest".^[26] In 1806, Thomas Picton, the governor of Trinidad, was charged with a single count of "causing torture to be unlawfully inflicted" on 14-year old free woman of color Luisa Calderón; he was brought before the Court of King's Bench under Lord Ellenborough. The court records run to 367 pages, and Garrow was deeply involved as prosecuting counsel; indeed, his opening speech on 24 February 1806 is considered by Braby to be one of his best. The case centred on whether or not Spanish law, which allowed torture, was still in effect at the time of the incident. The jury eventually decided that it was not, and Ellenborough found Picton guilty. Picton's counsel requested a retrial, which was granted; the jury in the second trial eventually decided that Picton was innocent.^[27]

Thanks to Garrow's political connections, he was made first

Since 1789, the press had been speculating that Garrow, a

Garrow had an irregular relationship with Sarah Dore, who had previously borne a son, William Arthur Dore Hill, by Arthur Hill, Viscount Fairford in 1778.^[44] Thomas Hague has suggested that Dore was an Irish noblewoman Garrow had seduced, but the only intent of his writings was to disparage Garrow, and there is no evidence to support his claim.^[45] Their first child, David William Garrow, was born on 15 April 1781, and their second, Eliza Sophia Garrow, was born on 18 June 1784. Garrow and Dore finally married on 17 March 1793.^[46] Sarah was noted as particularly elegant, and was actively involved in local matters in Ramsgate, where the family lived.^[47] She died on 30 June 1808 after a long illness,^[48] and was buried at the Church of St Margaret, Darenth.^[49] David William Garrow was educated at Christ Church, Oxford, earning the degree of Doctor of Divinity, and served as one of the Chaplains to the Prince of Wales.^[50] His son, Edward Garrow, was a cricketer and clergyman.^[51] Eliza Sophia Garrow married Samuel Fothergill Lettsom; one of her children, also named William Garrow, served as the Consul-General of Uruguay.^[52]

Garrow's estate was valued at £22,000 after his death near Ramsgate, Kent, including £12,000 in the

Edward Foss described him as "one of the most successful advocates of his day",^[56] something linked more to his "extraordinary talent" at cross-examination than his knowledge of the law;^[57] Garrow once told a witness before a case that "you know a particular fact and wish to conceal it – I'll get it out of you!"^[58] Lord Brougham, who regularly opposed him in court, wrote that "no description can give the reader an adequate idea of this eminent practitioner's powers in thus dealing with a witness".^[59] Lemmings notes Garrow as not only a formidable advocate but also the "first lawyer to establish a reputation as a defence barrister".^[60]

Garrow was largely forgotten; although Robert Louis Stevenson and his wife discovered his work a generation later when reading transcripts of Old Bailey cases,^[28] there was little academic work on him until the late 20th century. In 1991, John Beattie published "Garrow for the Defence" in History Today, followed by "Scales of Justice: Defence Counsel and the English Criminal Law in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries" in Law and History Review. Allyson May, who did her doctoral study under Beattie, further extended the analysis of Garrow's work with The Bar and the Old Bailey: 1750–1850, published in 2003.^[61]

Garrow's work was cited in court as recently as 1982, when the Supreme Court of Canada quoted a passage from The Trial of William Davidson and Richard Tidd for High Treason, where Garrow instructed the jury as to how to interpret testimony, in Vetrovec v The Queen in 1982. In 2006 he was again quoted, when the Irish Court of Criminal Appeal used the same work in their review of the 1982 conviction of Brian Meehan for the murder of Veronica Guerin.^[62]

In 2009, BBC One broadcast Garrow's Law, a four-part fictionalised drama of Garrow's beginnings at the Old Bailey, starring Andrew Buchan as Garrow. A second series, again of four parts, was aired in late 2010, and the third and final four-part series was broadcast in November and December 2011.^[63]

It is indisputable that Garrow massively affected the modern, adversarial court system used in several western nations and the rules of evidence, although he was barely aware of it. Prior to Garrow's time, defendants in felony cases were not allowed to have defence counsel; as a result, every defendant for arson, rape, robbery, murder and most forms of theft was forced to defend themselves.

Garrow also influenced the rules of evidence, which were only just beginning to evolve when he started his career. His insistence that hearsay and copied documents could not be admitted in evidence led to the best evidence rule.^[70][71] He was crucial in insisting on the autonomy of lawyers when adducing evidence, in one case openly arguing with the trial judge to insist that the advocates have independence in submitting it.^[72] During this period, the use of partisan medical experts was particularly problematic. While medical experts were regularly called at the Old Bailey,^[73] the use of partisan experts was resisted, and at the beginning experts were given limited authority.^[74] While this increased towards the end of the 17th century, in line with the judges' increasing desire for certainty and facts,^[75] Garrow is noted as an excellent example of the attitude lawyers took when cross-examining such witnesses. When defending Robert Clark, accused of killing John Delew by kicking him in the stomach, Garrow used a mixture of aggressive cross-examination and medical knowledge to get the prosecution's medical expert to admit that he could not prove how Delew had died.^[76] Garrow and later advocates learned how to effectively "interrogate" such witnesses, strengthening their own arguments (when it was their expert) or demolishing those of others (when it was an expert attached to the other side).^[77]