The Bellamy Trial

by Frances Noyes Hart

A murder trial scandalizes the upper echelons of Long Island society, and the reader is on the jury...

The trial of Stephen Bellamy and Susan Ives, accused of murdering Bellamy's wife Madeleine, lasts eight days. That's eight days of witnesses (some reliable, some not), eight days of examination and cross-examination, and eight days of sensational courtroom theatrics lively enough to rouse the judge into frenzied calls for order. Ex-fianc�s, houseworkers, and assorted family members are brought to the stand―a cross-section of this wealthy Long Island town―and each one only adds to the mystery of the case in all its sordid detail. A trial that seems straightforward at its outset grows increasingly confounding as it proceeds, and surprises abound; by the time the closing arguments are made, however, the reader, like the jury, is provided with all the evidence needed to pass judgement on the two defendants. Still, only the most astute among them will not be shocked by the verdict announced at the end.

Inspired by the most sensational murder trial of its day, The Bellamy Trial is a pioneering courtroom mystery, and one of the first of such books to popularize the form. It is included in the famed Haycraft-Queen Cornerstone list of the most definitive novels of the mystery genre.

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Classics, Crime, Historical Fiction, Thriller, American

324 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1927

About the author

Frances Newbold Noyes Hart (August 1890 – October 25, 1943) was an American writer whose short stories were published in Scribner's magazine, the Saturday Evening Post, the Ladies' Home Journal.

Reviews

[Leo · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the first legal novels about the trial of Stephan Bellamy and Susan Ives accused of murdering his wife Madeline. This is a courtroom drama from 1927 and what drama it was. Felt a reality show but in 1920s. Couldn't help but be very morbidly courious on how things would go on and what things would come up under the terrigation. Not dull and boring as I was worried it would be. The story have not collected dust?!

[Annie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Originally published in 1927, Frances Noyes Hart’s The Bellamy Trial is one of the first legal thrillers. While it shows the prejudices and attitudes (all women are girls, unless they are elderly, for example) of the time, the central plot and premise hold up well. There are blustering lawyers, surprise witnesses, reversals, betting on the jury’s verdict, and all the trimmings. Readers who like to take a dip into the early works of a genre will get a kick out of this fast read...

Read the rest of my review at A Bookish Type. I received a free copy of this book from the publisher via Edelweiss, for review consideration.

[Yibbie · Rating 1 out of 5]

The Bellamy Trial by Frances Noyes Hart
I gave up on this book once. I even wrote a review. I thought I had given it a good chance because I was well past one hundred pages into it. This was my review at that point.
Reasons I quit...
I found it really slow. It just never did capture my attention and I was about 1/3 of the way through. Then there were a number of curse words. But more importantly, I didn't appreciate the author's attempt to make the numerous adulterers sympathetic.
It just wasn't for me.
Then a friend suggested that I keep going. Just a little farther the author reveals out there really wasn’t an affair going on.
So I picked it up again. This time I did finish, but I can’t say that really enjoyed it despite being sucked in for the last few chapters. Perhaps though, I should say don’t really like courtroom dramas, so I may not be the best judge of how good a book this really was.
The things I still didn’t like.
It was still really slow, but I guess not more than any other courtroom scene. This one was just drawn out to book length.
The language never really got better. It was nothing worse than you would find on TV, but there was more in this book than I was comfortable with.
While there really wasn’t a main affair, we are still lead to sympathize with the alleged adulterers before we know that they are innocent, and there were several side characters having affairs. The revelation that cleared them was strange. The husband kept back the information that he was being blackmailed supposedly for fear of distressing his wife by revealing letters written before their marriage. Even though, by doing that he helped incriminate his wife further. Then the ending was just so convenient. (I think even the author realized it). So that we would all be completely convinced of their innocence she introduces surprise witnesses. It does clear them, but it makes the original set of circumstances completely ridiculous. It seems the whole town was out around the hidden garden cottage having compromising picnics at 9 PM. Then the final reveal wasn’t really satisfying either. It was just odd. I guess it did find out who did it, but still, I didn’t like that solution any better than the first one.
I wouldn’t recommend it, but people who like courtroom stories might like it.

[Melissa Dee · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Bellamy Trial, written in 1919, was one of the first courtroom mysteries. While it is a bit creaky in places (you would be too at 100 years old!), it is still an engaging and readable mystery.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m so glad this book came into my life! The writing is so vivid and transporting, I felt like I was watching the murder trial and the eyewitness accounts. An amazing classic book!

[QHuong(BookSpy) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mới đầu nghĩ chắc drop cuốn này vì trinh thám pháp lý lại còn cả truyện chỉ là thẩm vấn nhân chứng trên toà. Nhưng mình rất bất ngờ là mình thích cuốn này. Nhịp truyện không hề chậm chạp như mình nghĩ, và chắc chắn là không có yếu tố dồn dập căng thẳng tạo không khí truyện, nhưng cách viết truyện súc tích không dài dòng, tập trung vào vấn đề chính nên đọc truyện không cảm thấy lề mề mà luôn luôn được hướng vào trọng tâm vụ án. Thông qua các phần thẩm vấn nhân chứng giữa công tố viên và luật sư bào chữa, người đọc được tái hiện lại toàn cảnh vụ án mạng với số lượng lớn người tham gia vừa trực tiếp vừa gián tiếp dẫn đến cái chết của nạn nhân và động cơ của hung thủ. Cho đến khi thẩm vấn chính các bị cáo, lúc này người đọc mới vỡ lẽ ra sự thật có thể không đơn giản và dễ nhìn như ban đầu. Uẩn khúc đằng sau còn sâu xa hơn, dẫn đến thủ phạm có thể là một người hoàn toàn khác.
Kết truyện mình thấy được mọi người khen và đánh giá cao về tính nhân văn, thông điệp này nọ. Mình thấy kết truyện đúng là khá trọn vẹn và vừa vặn, thoả lòng độc giả nhưng không đến mức phải cảm động xúc động. Thủ phạm tự lộ diện ở cuối truyện kèm theo động cơ rõ ràng, lật lại hoàn toàn vụ án mạng. Kết quả phiên toà thì cũng được spoil ở ngay chính tên truyện rồi, mình thấy là đáng ra không nên đặt tiêu đề truyện là Trắng án vì hoá ra tên gốc của truyện là The Bellamy trial. Đặt tên tiếng Việt này spoil luôn kết quả truyện.
Mình thấy ông luật sư biện hộ không giống hình ảnh luật sư điềm tĩnh, táo bạo như mình nghĩ. Ông luật sư này cực kì dễ bị kích động, rất nóng tính, ngổ ngáo và hay mắng lại chính nhân chứng, đồng thời thích khiêu khích công tố viên. Không hiểu sao ông này lại thành luật sư biện hộ được. Là mình thì mình không muốn để số phận mình đặt vào bàn tay ông luật sư này.

[Pamela Mclaren · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

While the main players in this story didn't exactly try to deceive that is exactly what they did in this story in which the tale is told during a murder trial. Throughout the story readers are sitting along side the reporter and the little red-haired girl who are flirting and perhaps growing in love while they watch the machinations of lawyers, jurors, witnesses and the accused, Susan Ives and Stephen Bellamy charged with murdering Bellamy's wife Madeleine.

Susan and Stephen had motive — they supposedly believed that Susan's husband Pat is carrying on an affair with "Mimi" — means and opportunity. And the prosecutor brings out a compelling and airtight case.

Written in 1927 by Frances Noyes Hart, a daughter of one of the founders of the Associated Press, The Bellamy Trial takes a "straight forward" murder trial and ramps it up to a fast-paced, action-packed tale as we go back and forth with what is happening between the reporters and those involved in the trial. Right up to the very end, readers are guessing — did they do it or ...?

It's an excellent mix of dialogue, descriptions and solid story-telling. And the twist at the end is not to be missed.

[Mary · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a reissue of a book from 1927, apparently one of the first legal thrillers.

One unusual aspect is that the entire story takes place in the courthouse. The reader gets to hear the witnesses and suspects as if he or she is a member of the jury, and must decide for himself (or herself) whether the witnesses are to be believed. There are two other players in the story, a seasoned male reporter and a young rookie reporter, described as "the red-headed girl," on her first assignment.

Of course, there are differences in the trial from what we have today (after all, this was published almost 100 years ago), it was still enjoyable to read, and held my interest throughout.

[Tara · Rating 4 out of 5]

A page-turning courtroom drama. Interesting narrative turn, as the entire novel takes place during a murder trial and consists entirely of testimony and spectator conversations. It really goes to show how convincing circumstantial evidence can be, regardless of guilt or innocence. I enjoyed thoroughly.

[Jennifer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! A compelling and satisfying story. Certainly one of my favorites I’ve read this year.

[Cindy Ladensack · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the middle of this book, I started to feel fatigued with all of the details, but by the end I was just so impressed. I wish I had read it uninterrupted, and I wish that I had the luxury of being able to sit down with pencil and paper to take notes while reading this book—I kind of want to study how the author paced the story, how the trial and the various witnesses’ testimonies and evidence unfolded.... it was that good.

[Rick Mills · Rating 5 out of 5]

Major characters:
Madeleine Bellamy, the victim
Stephen Bellamy, her husband
Susan Thorne Ives, Stephen's lover
Patrick Ives, Susan's husband
Anthony Carver, judge
Daniel Farr, prosecutor
Dudley Lambert, defense attorney

Locale: near New York City

Synopsis: We are at the opening of the murder trial of Susan Ives and Stephen Bellamy, both accused in the murder of Stephen's wife Madeleine Bellamy. We see the action through the eyes of two unnamed reporters: a young, inexperienced woman and an older, veteran crime reporter.

Once the jury is seated, the prosecutor Daniel Farr makes a long opening statement. A parade of witnesses establishes the fact that Stephen's wife Madeleine had gone to the Thorne estate's garden cottage in the night for a tryst with Patrick Ives and wound up stabbed to death. Both of their spouses are the prime suspects.  

Review: I immediately liked two things about this book. First, at the front is a comprehensive schedule of the trial, with all the characters identified. Second, the story is told from the point of view of a young newspaper writer who is covering her first trial, and is seated next to a veteran reporter who is filling her in on the background of the crime and court procedure. Neither one is named, which helps keep the focus on the trial. The procedural explanations given by the veteran reporter serve to inform the reader of what is happening.

The story is rigidly structured, each chapter comprises one day of the trial. 



Everything proceeds in a somber, quiet manner until witness Luigi Orsini takes the stand, and provides a welcome comic relief in his Chico Marx-like performance on the stand. This serves as an "intermission" of sorts.

Finally we hear a verdict. But that is not the end, as a few surprises await, which are not listed in the "program".

You will enjoy this book, especially if:
you read the Perry Mason books of Erle Stanley Gardner, and can't wait until the courtroom scene, this book is for you - it is all courtroom scene.
you enjoy the hard-to-find books by Nancy Barr Mavity, which feature courtroom trials through the eyes of newspaper reporters. 

For additional reviews indexed by author, please visit The Mystillery Blog and try The Mystillery Reading Challenges!

[Susan Ferguson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Written in 1927. The story of a murder trial taken day by day. The book takes place during the trial - each chapter opening and closing a day of the trial. Much of the commentary is done by a young, red-haired reporter covering her first murder trial. She is assisted in the commentary by a reporter who has covered many murder trials. And in between witnesses and during discussions of the coverage, a romance between the two develops. The trial is the murder of Mimi Bellamy and the prosecution claims that her husband, Stephen, and Sue Ives (Patrick Ives wife, her supposed lover) murdered her, one out of jealousy and the other to retain her station in life. The trial comes through to it's conclusion and decision. But the book is not quite over.

[Pharmacdon · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The Bellamy Trial” is part of the American Mystery Classics collection. This is not a Perry Mason courtroom drama, this is the trial from beginning to end with the verdict given by the jury at the end. The witnesses testified, the lawyers examine and cross-examine the witness, object to testimony, and the judge rules over all. Two newspersons discuss the proceedings with each other before the start of each day and during the lunch break, which adds an additional layer to the trial and a break from the trial narrative. The ending is what sold me on the book, otherwise it would have been a 3-star rating.

[Tracey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Court case whodunnit with added love story. Would have liked more from the reporters.

[Pocket_booAlek · Rating 2 out of 5]

Liczyłam na klimatyczny kryminał z intrygująca tajemnicą. Wyszło natomiast bardzo średnio.

[i m j o o · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5
Khá lôi cuốn, nhưng ko có gì quá bùng nổ

[Frances · Rating 3 out of 5]

The murder mystery part was very good, but the ‘romance’ between the journalist and the ‘red-haired girl’ was simply vom-inducing! 🤢

[David Dunlap · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent mystery! The novel consists of the testimony given during a murder trial with two defendants, punctuated by the exchanges of a red-headed writer and a more experienced journalist covering the trial; they share food and impressions of the proceedings, in effect functioning as a sort of Greek chorus. Susan Ives and Stephen Bellamy are on trial for the murder of Stephen's wife Mimi, who was (according to a former beau of hers, a man interested in breaking up the Bellamy marriage so that he could marry Mimi) allegedly having an affair with Susan's wife Pat. -- There are interesting twists and turns to the plot, and a last-minute revelation precedes the verdict. Following the verdict, the presiding judge receives a letter which reveals the solution to the murder. Fascinating...and very satisfying.

[Mark Robertson · Rating 3 out of 5]

According to the back cover, Rex Stout ranked The Bellamy Trial among the ten best mysteries of all time. I disagree. I liked the story, particularly the revelation of the guilty party and the Judge's reaction, but I didn't enjoy reading it as much as I expected to. For one thing, two key characters are reporters, the "red-headed girl" and a cynical reporter. Hart gives us the names of every major character in the story, but for some reason never identifies these two by name, despite the fact that they provide running commentary on the trial and develop a romantic relationship over the course of the eight-day trial. Often, I thought the dialog between these two sounded off.

More to the point, though, is something that Hank Phillippi Ryan alludes to in his introduction, saying "Savvy readers, even non-lawyers, will recognize the legal anachronisms and writer's conveniences: a jury comprised of only men, one that gets impaneled with nary a question from the judge or attorneys, where future witnesses sit in the courtroom to hear the testimony of those who take the stand before them, where the same lawyer represents both defendants, witnesses are allowed to relate entire episodes, and hearsay seems to be a randomly applied violation. But we forgive the technical imperfections - the story is a page-turner, subtle and careful and knowing and intricately plotted, with the truth tucked in along the way." I agree with much of that last sentence, but I do not forgive the technical violations. This is a courtroom drama, and I expect that the rules of the courtroom would be explained and respected rather than ignored and broken.

On top of that, I found much of the dialog between the lawyers highly unlikely to be tolerated by the judge, who gives them very long leashes both in questioning witnesses and in commenting on each others' techniques.

The story saves this book. The leading characters are well drawn and the plot twists very imaginative.

[Jennifer Kepesh]

Originally published in 1926, this is one of the first courtroom dramas, and it's full of all sorts of the froth and shenanigans associated with the 20s. The plot is based on a scandalous trial of the time. In this, the crime is the murder by stabbing of the young and beautiful wife of a local mechanic; on trial are her husband and the local young society matron, who are thought to have murdered Mimi because she was having an affair with the matron's wife. There is a lot of eyewitness testimony from rich wastrels, boardinghouse owners, upright brothers, bus drivers....there is drinking cocktails, there is driving on country roads, there is a gardener's cottage...

So, plenty of Roaring 20's tropes, but these were being deployed concurrently, as with Dorothy Sayers and Agatha Christie.

Early in the book, a dewy-eyed reporter explains to her more seasoned colleague that everyone, from a housewife to a president, is fascinated by a murder trial, by learning what caused someone to break through a solid wall of humanity to do something evil, and how they all wondered, "could I do the same?"

Later, the same reporter, saddened and disillusioned, says she will never cover a murder trial again, because it seems as though it will be a ritual of truth-finding and justice served, but instead, each person who is touched by the murder has their lives upended. All of their secrets, all of their motivations, laid bare to the public, changing how they are seen forever.

[Brian Williams · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a whodunnit murder mystery written in 1927 and set in Long Island New York. The reader follows the back story as an audience member at the trial of two people accused of murder. There is frequent "colour commentary" on the trial proceedings from a "red-haired" rookie reporter and an older veteran crime reporter. (I saw this as more a distraction from the story-telling than anything else).
It's an interesting structure for the mystery story. Readers need to suffer through the bluster of the prosecutor and a less than skilled defence attorney. Technical accuracy of the trial process does not figure into the story-telling. Despite that the concept is good, it is probably best for a stage or screen presentation, than a book. Shorter chapters would be welcome.
Highlights for me were the "reveal" after the verdict is rendered and the resulting conclusion of the story. It leaves the unanswered question for the reader to ponder: was Justice done? The Introduction by crime fiction author Hank Phillippi Ryan is informative and entertaining. It well worth reading, even if you decide not to read the book.
All in all, it's worth reading this book. The style of the writing is marred by the wordiness of the lawyers' speeches and the sometimes melodramatic prose. As Ms. Ryan wrote in the Introduction, it's "dated". The picture of the "county club" life of some of the characters contrasts with the hard scrabble existence of others, reflecting the 1927 setting.

[Pip Snort · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was unexpectedly good. It was persuasive and engaging and followed the patterns of the Courtroom quite closely, without exaggeration or excessive drama which so characterizes modern courtroom tv. It cleverly places the reader in place of a participant in the courtroom. We know nothing of the victim, or the acccuseds other than what we learn through the presentation of evidence and the cross-examination of witnesses.

The case is this: Notorious beauty Mimi Bellamy has been found murdered in a cottage on an abandoned property in the town of Rosemount, Long Island. The police investigate and arrest the husband, Stephen Bellamy and the wife of the man suspected to be her lover, Sue Ives. Mimi is accused of having an affair with Pat Ives, a man she had dated prior to the second world war. It is thought that Sue Ives discovered the affair, and enlisting Stephen Bellamy's assistance meets Mrs Bellamy at the abandoned cottage and does her in. A parade of witnesses are brought forth, each with their own motives and foibles.

The trial brings up quite a few twists and turns and the allegiance of the reader swings from guilty to innocent and back again at various points in the presentation of the case.

A delightful mystery.

[Katelyn Fadeev · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an old school murder mystery that I only picked up because it was available in Libby.

I have a lot of things that I don't like about this book, but then when I think back on it, it doesn't seem that bad. I had a hard time getting the characters straight at first, to a point where I almost went so far as to make a diagram for myself. I could have gone completely without the red-haired girl and the unnamed reporter... I understand how they were devices to provide context, but ultimately I found their dialog to be distracting. The book was very slow until the last two chapters.

I will say I was surprised at the ending of the book, which is the ultimate goal of a whodunnit, right? If you love The Great Gatsby I feel like you'll enjoy reading this on vacation.

[Jack · Rating 3 out of 5]

The last book I read was set in 1927, this book was actually written in 1927. It is very unique in that it puts the reader in effect, sitting as a member of the jury in a murder trial. All the reader is privy to is what evidence is given during the 8 day trial and by the 27 witnesses. The only other information comes from the observations of the "redheaded girl" and the reporter that sit side by side in the press area of the courtroom. This perhaps was the birth of the first legal thriller, published 6 years before the first Perry Mason. The reader is put into the position of deciding guilt or innocence. The truth is reveled after the verdict is delivered. Were you deceived??

[Benedetta Ammannati · Rating 5 out of 5]

L'ho letto per curiosità, perché pare sia stato il primo legal thriller. L'inizio è un po' noioso con una cert'aria anni 30, con la giornalista che sembra vacua, senza cervello. Però via via la storia prende forma in un crescendo di ansia e di timore: chi è il colpevole? Un processo quasi scontato dove gli imputati sembrano clamorosamente colpevoli, almeno fino al colpo di scena. Poi il verdetto e quando tutto sembra essere concluso il vero coup de thèatre, quello che nessuno avrebbe mai immaginato.
Finale imprevedibile e davvero inimmaginabile.
Peccato che questo libro sia poco noto al grande pubblico, per me è uno dei migliori thriller mai letti.

[Valectrice · Rating 3 out of 5]

This puppets to be one of the first courtroom mysteries. It’s an interesting whodunit, but I found the device of telling the story through witness testimony to be a bit heavy at times. It is inherently artificial and takes some of the life out of the story. It definitely kept the victim from having much presence in the story other than as the victim. I enjoyed the reveal of the murderer at the end. One question I don’t remember being answered was the basis for the connection between defense attorney Lambert and Sue Ives. An enjoyable enough period murder mystery.

[Miriam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a fun mystery. It was cool to see all those witnesses on the stand and try to parse the truth from their accounts. I certainly didn't get the truth before the story revealed it, but I had a good time trying to guess and weighing the different witnesses. The commentary from the reporters was good, though I wish it hadn't been quite so patronizing. Oh well, that's what I get for reading historical books with historical attitudes. Still, it wasn't too bad in that regard either. I had a fun time.

[Terri · Rating 3 out of 5]

Probably the best book I've read this year, and it's a "vintage" one, written in 1927, the first 'trial' mystery genre. Eight days in a courtroom...did she, did he, did they? Interesting to read and note the differences between the trials of 1927 and now (at least as written in novels). Prosecutor and defense lawyers present their cases. Are the witnesses telling the truth? They all seemed pretty credible to me...glad I wasn't a juror. Good read.

[Eric · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this rather long-winded. It is a straightforward recounting of a murder trial, with an "unexpected" ending.

I rather think that experienced GAD readers will work out the answer, but to give a reason for this assertion would be to spoil the plot. There is a romantic sub-plot which added little to my enjoyment.

I am afraid this is another American classic which, while a pleasant and easy read, was somewhat underwhelming and a tad disappointing.