Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE MIGNONETTE CASE.

The trial of, Thomas Dudley and Edwin Stephens; - the captain and mats of the yacht Mignonette, for the wilful murder of the lac Richard Parker on the high seas, on July ,25, took place at Exeter on tho 6th of November'(writes tho Argus' London correspondent), before Mr Baron Huddleston. The court was densely crowded, even hulk* being piesent. The prisoner Dudley

seemed to he in good spirits but Stephens was noxious and depressed. The counsel for the defence insisted that the ao'ion of the prisoners wasljostitieil by the necessity of their case. The jury returned the following special verdict, adding thereto a strong; expression of sympathy and compassion for the sufferings the prisoners had undergone:- “Ihat on July 5, 1884, the prisoners, with one Brock-, all able bodied English seamen, aird the deceased, an English boy, between 17 and 18, the crew of an English yacht, were east away in a aorm, on the high seas 1600 miles from the Cape of Good Hope, and were compelled to put into an open boat; that in this boat they had no supply of water and no supply of food except two lib tins of tur nips, and for three days they had nothing else to subsist on. . . That the boat was drifting on the ocean, and was probably more than 1000 miles from land ; that on the 18th day when they had been seven days without food and five without water, the prisoners spoke to Brooks as to what should be do- e if no succour carr.e, and suggested s meone should be sacrificed to save the rest, but Brooks dissented, arid the boy, to whom they were understood to ref r, was not consul ted ; that on the day before the act in question Dudley proposer! to Stephens and brooks that lots should be cast who should bo put to death to save the rest, but Brooks refused to consent, and it was not put to the boy, and itt point of fact there was no drawing of lots ; that on tlrat day the prisoners spoke of their having families, and suggested it would be better to kill the boy, that their livesTihould be saved, and Dudley proposed that if no-vessel was rn sight by the next morning the boy should be killed ; the nex . day; no vessel appearing, Dudley r obi Brooks he had better go and have asleep, ami.made signs to Stepliens anil Brooks that the boy bad better be k ded. Stephens agreed to the act, tint Brooks dissented from it; that the hoy was then lying at the bottom of the boat quite helpless, and extremely weakened by famine and by drinking sea water, and unable to mike airy resistance, nor did be ever assent to being killed ; that Dudley with the assent of I Stephens, went to the boy, and telling him Iris time was come, put a knife into his throat ami killed him ; that the three men fed upon the boy for four days; that on the fourth'day after the act the boat was picked up by a passing vessel, and the prisoners were rescued, still alive, hut in the lowest state ef prostration ; that they were carried to the pot of Falmouth, and committed tor trial at- Exeter ; that if the men had not fed upon the ho ly of the boy they wou’d probably not have survived to he so picked up and rescued, but would wi bin the past four days have died of famine ; that the boy, I eiug in a much we .ker condition, was likely to have died before them ; that at. (be time of the act there was r;o sail in sight, nor any reasonable prospect of relief ; tlrat under lln se circumstances there appeared to the prise* ires every probability tlrat unless they then ■ r very soon foil upon the boy or one of themselves they would die of starvation ; t'>at tirere was no appreciable chance of -raiiug life, except by killing someone for the n k rs to eat; that, assuming any necessity to kid anyone, there was no greater necessity for killing the boy, than any of the three other men ; hut whether, upon the who i* matter, the nrisoners were and are guilty of murder, the j-'ry ale. ignorant, a d refer to the Court;" - [lt. will he seen by reference to the latest cablegrams that the piisom rs wore sentenced to death, but i-spited during her V aj,-sty's pleasure, and sul s quently committed to gaol for aix mondi .]

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DUNST18850102.2.13

Bibliographic details

Dunstan Times, Issue 1192, 2 January 1885, Page 3

Word Count
761

THE MIGNONETTE CASE. Dunstan Times, Issue 1192, 2 January 1885, Page 3

THE MIGNONETTE CASE. Dunstan Times, Issue 1192, 2 January 1885, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert