Cochrane (36 page)

On the morning of
21
February he repeated his request to be taken on board the
Tonnant.
Cochrane explained that he could join her at Portsmouth. Berenger seemed desperate for some form of immediate military employment, so Cochrane advised him to approach friends who had already assisted him, including Lord Yarmouth.

Berenger's rather surprising answer was to say that he could not go to Lord Yarmouth in the clothes he was wearing, which included a grey greatcoat and what soon appeared to be a sharpshooter's green uniform underneath. He asked Cochrane to lend him a civilian hat and great coat. There was another reason for this, as Berenger explained. He was one of the debtors who enjoyed the privilege of being allowed out of the King's Bench prison but if he was seen coming and going in uniform, the warden or his servants would suspect that he was planning to abscond and the privilege would be withdrawn. It was an entirely reasonable supposition.

Cochrane fetched a hat and coat, while Berenger wrapped up his own in a towel. It was logical to suppose that Cochrane's compliance with the request was as much out of a desire to get rid of this visitor and return to his own affairs as out of any great concern for Berenger.

At that point, the whole affair might have ended. It was entirely true that Cochrane was one of those who made money out of Omnium that day. He had bought at
28
with orders to his broker that the stock should be sold on a
1
per cent rise. In fact, it was sold that morning at
29
.
An astute speculator would have done rather better by selling at
32.
In Cochrane's case, all his money was in Omnium, remaining there until the eventual
1
per cent rise took place, at which point he would collect a modest
3
or
4
per cent return on his outlay.

On the discovery of the great Stock Exchange fraud there was consternation and outrage in the city and the press. It was
The Times
which led the demands for discovery and retribution.

Great exertions will, no doubt, be made by the frequenters of the Stock Exchange to detect the criminal.
...
If his person should be recognised he will probably be willing to save himself from the whipping-post by consigning his employers to the pillory, an exaltation which they richly merit.
⁴⁰

The Stock Exchange had at once set up a committee to examine witnesses and investigate the transactions carried out on
21
February. By no means all the evidence was reliable. Fearn, the broker employed by Cochrane-Johnstone and Butt, swore that Cochrane himself was at the Exchange at
10
a.m. on
21
February. Since there were innumerable witnesses to account for his presence elsewhere during the entire morning, this evidence was later withdrawn. Then, on
4
March, the investigators asked all brokers who had done business on
21
February for Cochrane, Cochrane-Johnstone, Butt, and three other men, Holloway, Sandom, and M'Rae, to "favour the Committee with an interview". The last three men, who had gambled hard and unsuccessfully on the Exchange, were identified as the "French officers" who drove through the city at mid-day on
21
February. Cochrane-Johnstone and Butt had sold Omnium totalling
£410,000
and
£224,000
respectively, and Consols to a value of
£100,000
and
£168,000.
They had not owned such amounts, having bought on credit to resell at a
20
per cent gain before settling day.
⁴¹

Cochrane was not yet finally implicated. To clear his name, he swore an affidavit, detailing his movements on
21
February, admitting that Berenger visited him in the green sharpshooter's uniform, and that Cochrane lent him the coat and hat asked for. English law did not allow a defendant to give evidence at his trial, so the preliminary affidavit was Cochrane's only means of self-justification, and his one chance to swear that he had had no reason to suppose Berenger was involved in any crime.
⁴²

On
8
April, Berenger was arrested at Leith under the Aliens Act. His patron, Lord Yarmouth, had already been warned off by a private letter from the Prince Regent. "The Bow Street officers are now after him," wrote the Prince, referring to Cochrane and the others as "the scoundrels with whom he is connected." Yarmouth should beware of what these men "might from pique, resentment & disappointment induce him or persuade him to invent against you". Papers in Berenger's possession connected him with Cochrane-Johnstone and Butt. He held bank notes which originated from Cochrane. Soon he was identified as "Du Bourg", a truth he later confessed in order to incriminate Cochrane. Why had Cochrane described Berenger's uniform as green, unless to conceal that he recognised the red staff coat as part of a fraud, which he none the less aided? On
23
March, a bundle was raised from the Thames river bed. It held a red uniform, such as "Du Bourg" had worn, cut into pieces.
⁴³

There was no longer any question of Cochrane being allowed to sail with the
Tonnant.
On
27
April
1814,
he was indicted by the Grand Jury of the city of London, at the
Old Bailey, as one of the ring
leaders of the most ingenious swindle of the age.

Whatever malpractices were subsequently proved or alleged against his enemies, it has to be admitted that Cochrane was a difficult man to defend in such circumstances. He had no doubt that his innocence would be clear to the eyes of any jury, and so he left the conduct of his defence entirely to his solicitors and counsel, not even electing to appear at the trial nor to attend the consultation with his advocate.
⁴⁴

There was some justification for his optimism. After all, it was his voluntary affidavit which revealed that Berenger had visited him on the morning of
21
February and that Cochrane had lent him a hat and greatcoat to disguise his uniform. Was it likely that a man who was party to a deep-laid fraud would come forward and offer the prosecution the very evidence which they needed to build their case? Again, if Cochrane had been a party to the conspiracy, why had he not altered his instructions to his brokers in order to profit by it ? As it was, he had merely left them with the standing arrangement whereby they were to sell his Omnium stock when it moved up
1
per cent. That might have happened anyway in a week or two, without the fraud or hoax.

It was true that Berenger was found to have bank notes in his possession which were traced back to Cochrane-Johnstone, Butt, and Cochrane himself. These were alleged to be payment to Berenger for his part in the conspiracy. Yet Cochrane's notes had not gone directly to Berenger, having been paid first to Butt in order to discharge a loan. There was independent evidence from the bank to this effect.

On the other hand, Lord Mulgrave had promised him a host of enemies, and there was every indication that the promise had been fulfilled. As soon as the Stock Exchange committee voiced its suspicions, John Wilson Croker wrote to Cochrane on behalf of the Admiralty demanding a further explanation of his conduct. On
22
March, Cochrane sent an outline of his defence, including affidavits from his servants who confirmed that Berenger had been wearing the green uniform of the sharpshooters and not the staff officers' red uniform when he visited Cochrane. Their Lordships were not prepared to comment on this evidence, except insofar as they informed Cochrane that he had now been superseded in his command of the
Tonnant.
One of the key witnesses for the defence on the matter of the green uniform was Isaac Davis, who was just leaving Cochrane's employment to join the navy. His affidavit was enclosed in the letter to the Admiralty on
22
March. However, when an attempt was made to recall him for the trial in June, it was discovered that the navy had despatched him to Gibraltar on H.M.S.
Eurotas
on
1
May.
⁴⁵

Cochrane had already had occasion to retain Richard Gurney as counsel for other purposes. Though Gurney later denied it, Cochrane described visiting him and confiding the whole matter of the pending Stock Exchange trial and the nature of the defence to him. Gurney had not, of course, been briefed for the defence at that point but he was clearly a possible choice.

Long before the trial took place, there were two developments which Cochrane and his friends found ominous. The Stock Exchange entrusted the prosecution, rather unusually, to an Admiralty solicitor, Germain Lavie. Not only was he an Admiralty solicitor, he had been deeply involved in the Gambier court-martial and was responsible for the production in that case of the strange charts with their mysterious "rocks" and "shoals". Cochrane denounced the "collusion between a high official at the Admiralty and the Committee of the Stock Exchange". But there was an equally disagreeable surprise in store for him when he discovered that the prosecution at the trial was to be led by no other than his former counsel, Richard Gurney.

Strictly speaking, there was nothing illegal in all this, and if Cochrane had given an early advantage to his enemies this was in part the measure of his own inability to fight on equal terms in courts and debates. The other arrangements for his trial were just as unpromising but, once again, there was nothing in them over which he could reasonably quarrel.

The trial judge was Lord Chief Justice Ellenborough, defender of Warren Hastings as Edward Law. Son of a bishop, his dry and precise Cumberland intonation reflected an attachment to the formalities of his profession. To the Radicals, he was the violator of the spirit of the constitution who in
1806
had been Chief Justice and political cabinet minister simultaneously. He was no longer in the cabinet at the time of Cochrane's trial, but the memory remained bitter.

Ellenborough's impartiality was doubted when he presided over the trials of such Radical publishers as Leigh Hunt and his brother John. In March
1812,
the
Morning Post
had published a grotesque eulogy on the Prince Regent, announcing:

You are the
Glory of the People
- You are the
Protector of the Arts -
You are the
Maecenas
of
the Age.
Wherever you appear,
you conquer
all
hearts,
wipe away tears, excite
desire and love,
and win
beauty
towards you - You breathe
eloquence
- You inspire the Graces - You are an
Adonis in loveliness!

In the
Examiner
on
22
March
1812
Leigh Hunt reminded his readers of the truth behind this ludicrous sycophancy.

What person, unacquainted with the true state of the case would imagine in reading these astounding eulogies, that this "Glory of the People", was the subject of millions of shrugs and reproaches! . . . that this "Conqueror of Hearts" was the disappoint er of hopes! - that this "Exciter of desire" (bravo! Messieurs of the
Post) -
this
"Adonis
in loveliness", was a corpulent man of fifty!

For good measure, Leigh Hunt added that the Regent was, in truth, "a violator of his word, a libertine over head and ears in debt and disgrace, a despiser of domestic ties, the companion of gamblers and demireps, a man who has just closed half a century without one single claim on the gratitude of his country, or the respect of posterity". The Hunts were prosecuted for a seditious libel, though they saw more signs of guilt in Ellenborough's behaviour.

He knew that we were acquainted with his visits to Carlton house and Brighton (sympathies not eminently decent in a judge) and with the good things which he had obtained for his kinsmen; and we could not help preferring our feelings at the moment to those which induced him to keep his eyes fixed on his papers.
⁴⁶

As the Hunts went to gaol for two years, Tom Moore imagined the Prince drinking Ellenborough's health among his cronies.

A compliment too to his Lordship the Judge

For his speech to the Jury - and zounds! who would grudge

Turtle soup, though it came to five guineas a bowl

To reward such a loyal and complaisant soul ?

We were all in high gig - Roman Punch and Tokay