MUTINY ON BOARD THE WINCHESTER.

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume IX, Issue 913, 3 May 1854, Page 4

MUTINY ON BOARD THE WINCHESTER.

The following leading article from the Times bearing upon the recent mutiny on board Sir Fleetwood Pellew's flag ship, will be read with interest :—: — It may yet be remembered that when, this time last year, (two years), the authorities at the

Admiralty saw fit to select Sir Fleetwood Pellew for the East Indian station, we remonstrated with the greatest earnestness against that appointment. We did *o from the fact that forty years had elapsed since he had been at sea, or actively engaged in the duties of his profession. The last mention that is made of ins name in our naval annals is, that he was present, as Captain of the Resistance, at the capture of the town and batteries of Port d'Anzo, coast of Italy, and of a convoy in the year 1813. We have been forcibly reminded by a recent transaction, which may ere long attract no inconsiderable share of public notice, that very disagreeable events occurred while Captain Pellew was in command of the Resistance in the Mediterranean. It may be that these events constituted the reason why the name of Fleetwood Pellew has remained for so long a period unknown or unnoticed by the pubHe. They were of great notoriety at the time. A mutiny occurred on board of the Resistance. The ship's company, which had been remarkable for discipline and conduct, was in some way so mismanaged as to break out into open revolt — but they shed no blood. The mutiny was finally got under, and the trial of the poor wretches who had been driven to so illegal a course, followed as a matter of necessity. The substantive charge was proved against them, and the court-martial before which they were tried had no optiou hut to sentence some of the number to death. The greatest commiseration was felt for their fate, and every ingenuity was used to save the mutineers. A flaw was happily discovered in the minutes, and they were reprieved. As soon as the affair was known at the Admiralty the Resistance was ordered hi me, and paid off at once. This circumstance will serve to show the opinion entertained of the transaction at the time by the admiral on the station, who had every means of informing himself as to its real merits. If we are to accept the records of the Navy List as truth, we find that since the Resistance was paid off forty years ago, Captain Pellew was not called out tor active service until the time when he was selected by the Duke of Northumberland as | a pioper person to hold probably the most important office which a naval officer can be called upon to fulfil. Mark the event. The last mail which reached us from Hong Kong brought intelligence of a mutiny on board of Sir Fleetwood Pellew's flag ship, the Winchester. This occurrence took place on the Bth of November last, when the crew of the Winchester, who, it is said, had not been permitted to go ashore for eighteen months, resolved at last to send a petition to the Admiral upon the subject. There is no suggestion made iv the report we have received, that the petition was any but one of the humblest kind, and presented without any circumstance of insolence or disrespect. The only reply which the Admiral vouchsafed to it was, that the ship should be got ready to go to sea. This answer se^ms to have caused great discontent among the men which did not, however, diphy itseH in any other form than " a noise below in the course of the evening." Sir Fleetwood Pellew immediately ordered that the drum should beat to quarters. Some of the men refused to come upon deck, upon which ihe Admiral ordered the officers to go below with drawnswords, and drive them up at the weapon's point. These gentlemen had, of course, no option, and descended to execute Sir Fleetwood's orders. In the course of this operation two men, so runs the intelligence, were severely wounded. If the report be true, and we have every reason to believe in its accuracy — it would not be a little remarkable that a mutiny occurred on board the last ship Captain Pellew commanded, and that a similar event should have taken place on board the first ship to which he has been appointed after an interval of forty years of shore life. The Admiral does not appear to have learnt the happy knack of managing men in the inteival. Of course, it is not lor us to decide upon the merits of a case which is only before the public as yet in the shape of simple intelligence. Sir Fleetwood Pellew may be as signally right in the present instance as he was signally to blame in the affair of the Resistance off Magdalena Island, on the Sardinian coast. The second transaction is one which must become the subject of grave investigation at the Admiralty. If the charge of cruelty or tyranny is brought home against Sir Fleetwoo J Pellew, the public and the profession have a right to expect that he be recalled at once, and dismissed from an employment for which he is clearly unfit. When another period of forty years shall have expired, and not till then, let him have another trial. It will, of course, be for naval officers to say ' how far it is consistent with the rules of sound j policy in governing larg"> bodies of men that they should be kept close prisoners on board ship for so long a period as eighteen months. To any one who looks at the transaction not as a naval officer the infliction of such confinement, except as a punishment, would seem to be the very wantonness of unchecked barbarity. We would leave it to the decision of as many of our readers as have made a long sea voyage to decide what their own feelings would have been, even after a run of few weeks, had they not been permitted to go on shore for a few hours on reaching port. We speak, of course, under correction, but we believe it will be found that the conduct adopted by Sir F. Pellew towards his ship's company is as contrary to the usage of the service as it is to the dictates of ordinary prudence or humanity. Supposing, then, the point to be decided against Sir Fleetwood Pellew, the question arises — and it is *ne of a very serious character at the present time — is such a person fit to be trusted for a moment longer upon so important a post? These are no visionary evils of which we are speaking { but the qutstion is one whick mast receive instant decision at the Admiralty. The people of this country will not tolerate for a moment any trifling with their commercial security at sea, or with the prestige of their naval fame. Any blow that reaches us upon this side must come from our own hands. If we fall, it must be by our own suicidal act. The danger, then, is so imminent' — the fact so notorious — that we feel it our most urgent duty to press upon the attention of the public the position of Sir Fleetv/ood Pellew, as Britisk admiral on the East Indian Station.