The judge on summing up decidedly leaned towards the prisoners, and the result was a verdict of “Not Guilty.” The same jury was afterwards empanelled to try Mr. Sparling, Captain Colquitt, and Dr. MacCartney on another indictment, but no evidence being brought forward, they were all acquitted.
Thus terminated a trial which created an immense amount of interest, not only in Liverpool, but throughout the whole of the northern counties.
Before I relate the incidents of the second duel that took place in Liverpool, I will briefly give the particulars of another affair, which happened in the same year (July, 1804), which gave the gossips and quid nuncs of the town ample food for conversation. This was the court-martial on Captain Carmichael, the Adjutant of Colonel Earle’s regiment of Fusiliers, and formerly adjutant of Colonel Bolton’s regiment of “Royal Liverpool Volunteers.” He was charged with “disobedience of orders, and with addressing Colonel Earle in abusive and scandalous language respecting the officers of the regiment.” The court-martial was held by virtue of a warrant from His Royal Highness Prince William Frederick of Gloucester, the General commanding the district. The president was Colonel Bolton; the judge-advocate, Fletcher Raincock, Esq., barrister-at-law.
It appeared that on the 12th of June the Fusiliers were drilling on Copperas-hill (fancy our Volunteers drilling on Copperas-hill!), at the manual and platoon exercise, when they were commanded to “order arms” and “stand at ease” by the Colonel; his intention being
to keep the regiment for the remainder of the morning at firelock exercise. Something was said of a private nature by Colonel Earle to the Adjutant Carmichael, who, instead of replying, took no notice of the observation. He subsequently spoke to the Colonel in an insulting and impertinent manner, treating him at the same time with marked indignity—calling out, loud enough for the men to hear, “that he insisted upon the officers being called together to inquire into his conduct, for such things were said of him as he could not bear.” On being told that that was not the time nor place to bring charges against the officers, and that he should put down in writing what he had to say, and he would then be attended to, he did not seem satisfied, but continued to demand the calling of the officers together. Colonel Earle told him to go on with his duty. Captain Carmichael still took no notice of these orders; but said his feelings were “worked up to a fiddle-string.” Still disobeying Colonel Earle’s commands, he was told “to go home if he could not do his duty.” He was then heard to say that the officers, or some of the officers, were “a set of blacklegs.” For this offence Captain Carmichael was tried. He denied at first the right of the court to sit in judgment upon him, and raised three objections, two of which were read, and the third was stopped in
the middle, being overruled by the court. The court-martial sat five days, and the result of it was that Captain Carmichael was acquitted of disobedience, but found guilty of addressing abusive language to his commanding-officer. His sentence was “to be reprimanded at the head of his regiment.” Colonel Bolton was delegated to administer this reproof. Colonel Bolton spoke highly in the Captain’s favour, and stated that he had presented him with a piece of plate which he had bought for him when in London, to mark his respect for him, and his efficiency in drilling his (Colonel Bolton’s) regiment.
In the following year, 1805, the second duel was fought, which created as great a sensation as that between Mr. Sparling and Mr. Grayson, in the previous year. In this encounter the principals were Colonel Bolton and Major Brooks, the same party who had caused the mischief in the previously-mentioned affair.
The origin of the quarrel arose in this way:—Colonel Bolton, who had raised a regiment of volunteers, in 1803, which he had entirely clothed, armed, and equipped, mustering ten companies of sixty men each, was held in high respect and possessed great influence with government. On the death of Mr. Bryan Blundell, who held the appointment of Customs Jerker, Colonel Bolton obtained the vacant office for Major Brooks, who
had been formerly in the Lancashire Militia. After enjoying this place for a time, Major Brooks applied for an increase of salary. His application was referred to the West India Association, of which Colonel Bolton was President, to report upon whether an increase in the pay of the office was desirable or deserved. The Association reported adverse to Major Brooks’ application. He immediately, publicly, and in the most disgraceful manner, accused Colonel Bolton with being the cause of this refusal, as he had learnt that the Colonel had said that “£700 a year was quite income enough for a comparatively young, unmarried man.” Major Brooks, forgetting that Colonel Bolton’s friendship and influence had obtained for him, in the first instance, his appointment, did his utmost to force his benefactor into collision with him, and to such an extent was this annoyance carried, that at length a hostile meeting was arranged between the parties. As a soldier and gentleman, Colonel Bolton could no longer keep quiet. Major Brooks possessed, unfortunately for himself, a great amount of irritable vanity and pugnacity. He had been “out,” as it was then called, not long before with Captain Carmichael, whose trial by court-martial I have just detailed, upon some point of difference in military discipline. The meeting took place on Bootle Sands, and, to show Major Brooks’s temper,
on Captain Carmichael firing in the air, he exclaimed: “D--- it, why don’t you fire at me—we did not come here for child’s play!” In those days duelling was very prevalent, and small words brought out pistols and coffins for two.