EXACTLY 100 years ago, 200 people were scouring the island of Arran
for signs of an English holidaymaker who disappeared while climbing
Goatfell. The body of Edwin Rose, ''the face terribly mangled,'' was to
be found concealed under a boulder. This sparked a huge hunt for John
Laurie, who, while he was on the run, wrote to the editor of the Glasgow
Herald protesting his innocence. The Goatfell Murder captured the public
imagination, created a debate over the conflict in ''scientific''
evidence, and, as WILLIAM COFFEY recalls here, led to rebukes for police
officers who put faith in folklore above their duty.
MURDER most foul was carried out in Arran on July 15, 1889. That was
the considered medical opinion of three doctors who examined the body of
Edwin Robert Rose, a Londoner whose body was found on August 4 concealed
under an overhanging boulder at Corr-na-Fourin, near the head of Glen
Sannox.
The death of the 32-year-old Brixton clerk was caused by a fall,
stated three doctors called by defence counsel for John Watson Laurie at
the High Court in Edinburgh.
The jury was almost equally divided. On November 12, eight members
found Laurie guilty of murder: seven returned verdicts of not proven.
The Judge, Lord Kingsburgh, following a two-day trial, ordered death by
hanging. But the legal controversy was such that the death penalty was
later revoked and Laurie was sentenced to life imprisonment. He died, 41
years later, still protesting innocence, in the lunatic section of Perth
prison.
One hundred years later interest in the case has not waned. David Cox,
from Brodick, a National Trust for Scotland guide, still leads parties
to the man-made tomb where Rose's body was discovered, carefully
concealed by 42 rocks covered by turf.
The episode which captured the public imagination began with a chance
meeting on the Arran ferry. Laurie, who had assumed the name of
Annandale and even had calling cards printed to this effect, struck up
an acquaintance with the dashing young Englishman.
They took lodgings together at Invercloy, near Brodick, and, on July
15 set out to climb Goatfell. They were noticed together by several
witnesses during the ascent and at the summit, and that was the last
time Rose was seen alive. Did he fall, as the defence argued, or was he
brutally battered to death with a blunt instrument, probably a boulder,
as the prosecution contended?
The Lord Justice-Clerk said the case was ''almost wholly dependent on
circumstantial evidence.'' It ''presented features which were altogether
peculiar to it and placed it outside
the category of ordinary justice.'' Throughout, Laurie refused to say
anything, except to maintain his innocence of the charge that he ''did
assault Edwin Robert Rose, of Wirist Lodge, Hendon Road, Upper Tooting,
London, and did throw him down, beat him, and did murder him.''
Laurie was seen alone in the Corrie Hotel at 10pm on July 15. He
bought beer and whisky to fortify him on the walk to Brodick. His
landlady at Invercloy testified that his bags, and those of Rose, were
removed from her house on the night of July 15 or early on July 16.
On July 16, Laurie was seen carrying these bags to the pier. He
boarded the steamboat Scotia and returned to Rothesay, where both he and
Rose had been on holiday.
On July 31, he had left his job as a patternmaker in Springburn,
collecting his lying wages. That same day he sold his tools, for 25s, to
a broker in the South Side of Glasgow. He wrote to his landlady,
enclosing a postal order for his rent, saying that there were ''some
people trying to get me into trouble, and I think you should give them
no information at all, and I will prove to them how they are mistaken
before long.''
When the Englishman failed to return home his family raised the alarm
and, following concerted searches involved up to 200 people, the body
was discovered on August 4. When this news was released, Laurie was
already on the run. For a month, sightings of him were reported all over
Scotland and the North of England.
On August 28, the editor of the Glasgow Herald received a letter,
partially reproduced here, postmarked Aberdeen.
On September 3, Police Constable James Gordon spotted Laurie in
Hamilton and, assisted by a group of miners, pursued him to Bogwood. A
boy told the policeman ''there is something in that bush.'' It was
Laurie, his throat slit by the open razor in his hand. The only thing he
was sorry about was that he ''had not done it right.''
When cautioned and charged, he replied: ''I robbed the man, but I did
not murder him.''
The Crown case relied heavily on the evidence of Dr Andrew Gilmour, a
Linlithgow surgeon who had been on holiday in Arran. He and Dr William
Fullerton of Lamlash went to Corr-na-Fourin when the body was
discovered. They stated categorically that death had been caused by
blows inflicted by a blunt instrument. However, under cross-examination,
they admitted it was possible that the injuries could have been caused
by a fall.
On September 27, the body had been exhumed in the presence of Dr Henry
Littlejohn, medical officer of health for Edinburgh and police surgeon
for Edinburgh. He, too, stated that Rose had been murdered. And he, too,
agreed with defence counsel that a fall might have caused the terrible
injuries to the head and face.
For its part, the defence put up three doctors who believed that a
fall was the most likely cause of death. None of these doctors had
examined the body, and agreed with the prosecution that the injuries
could have been caused by blows inflicted by a blunt instrument.
The evidence of the police officers present when the body was
discovered provided a strange twist to the grisly tale. Sergeant William
Munro, of Lamlash, was reluctant to answer questions about the
whereabouts of Rose's boots.
The Solicitor-General asked: ''Where are the boots now?'' Munro: ''I
cannot say.''
Finally, the Lord Justice-Clerk demanded: ''Do you know?'' Munro: ''I
believe they were buried . . . on the beach above the high-water mark.''
Police Constable Duncan Coll had buried them. Munro said he did not
know who had given the order to do so, but the chief constable had been
present at the time.
Folklore has it that if a man is murdered on Arran his ghost will walk
the hills unless his boots are buried at the high-water mark.
The trial lasted two days, but it might as well have ended at the
conclusion of the first day's evidence, before defence had its say. At
the end of the first day, the Solicitor-General said: ''I wish you
distinctly to understand, gentlemen, and I am sure the jury will agree
with me, that I mean to finish the case tomorrow.'' (Hear, hear from the
jury box.)
After only 45 minutes deliberation, the jury returned its majority
verdict. The public was on tenterhooks for the decision.
The Glasgow Herald, which carried a page and a half of the case each
day, reported:
''The verdict was intimated over the telephone to the head office of
the Evening Times where it was received about 10.25pm, and in a very few
minutes the late edition was on sale in the streets, a large staff of
boys being in attendance. Fifteen minutes afterwards, heavy parcels were
despatched throughout the city. The various district offices of the
Evening Times were literally besieged about eleven o'clock at night,
crowds extending half way across each street, and in retail shops the
papers were snatched up as soon as they came to hand. The printing
machines at the head office were kept working till midnight, at which
hour 167,000 copies had been sent out and distributed.
There follows reports of street scenes. At Airdrie, police were called
to control the crowd as the crush became dangerous. In Hamilton, four
pence was given for single copies, and the response at Greenock was
unprecedented. Most members of the public expected a verdict of not
proven.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article