Part 17

It may be well imagined that the alarm of the citizens of London was extreme. The Government, however, though unable at the period to quell the insurgents by force, remained firm in their demand of “unconditional submission as a necessary preliminary to any intercourse.” This, perhaps, was the very best line of conduct that could have been adopted. The seamen—and it was a palliation of their misguided behaviour—never seemed to think of assuming an offensive attitude, and were thereby left in quiet to meditate on the dangerous position in which they stood in hostility to a whole country. They grew timorous, the more so as the Government had caused all the buoys to be removed from the mouth of the Thames and the adjacent coasts, so that no vessel durst attempt to move away for fear of running aground. The mutineering vessels held together, nevertheless, till the 30th of May, when the _Clyde_ frigate was carried off through a combination of its officers with some of the seamen, and was followed by the _Fiorenzo_. These vessels were fired upon, but escaped up the river. On the 4th of June, the king’s birthday, the Nore fleet showed that loyalty to their sovereign still existed, by firing a general salute. On the 5th another frigate left the fleet, and its place was supplied by a sloop and four men-of-war, which had left Admiral Duncan’s fleet at the Texel to join the mutiny. On the 6th Admiral Lord Northesk met the delegates by desire on board the _Sandwich_, and received from them proposals for an accommodation, to which Parker still put his name as president. The answer was a firm refusal, and this firmness seems to have fairly humbled the remaining spirit of the mutineers. From that time one vessel after another deserted the band, and put themselves under the protection of the fleet at Sheerness. On the 10th the merchantmen were allowed, by common consent, to pass up the river, and such a multitude of ships certainly never entered a port by one tide. By the 12th only seven ships had the red flag flying, and on the 16th the mutiny had terminated, every ship having been restored to the command of its officers. A party of soldiers went on board the _Sandwich_, and to them the officers surrendered the delegates of the ship, namely, a man named Davis and Richard Parker. The latter was confined in the black-hole of Sheerness garrison until his trial, which was preceded by the trials of some others of the mutineers. Two, who, like Parker, suffered death, were tried at the court-martial held on board the _Royal William_, at Portsmouth, on the 21st June.

This court-martial had before it the six mutineers belonging to the _Pompée_. The evidence of all the witnesses, to the number of seventeen, on the part of the prosecution, went strongly to condemn the prisoners Gutherie, Calloway, Ashley, and Johnson; and some circumstances tended to make Davis and Braham more connected with the business. In the course of the evidence called and questioned, it appeared that these disaffected men were not able to get a real seaman to sign their paper, or to take the oath tendered. Such men as took the oath did it through fear, and were the illiterate part of the crew, most of whom could not write their names or understand what they had sworn to. It is but justice to the well-affected part of the ship’s company to admit the propriety of their conduct, in exposing the proceedings of the six prisoners. The conduct of Sergeant Sweet, of the Marines, in giving his evidence, was particularly commendable. The testimony on the part of the Crown closed at four o’clock. Several papers, very essential to clear up this black and mysterious business, had been destroyed; the only thing found was amongst Johnson’s clothes, which was a form of oath, as follows:—“I, ——, do swear to stand true till death in promoting the cause of liberty with equity, while a prospect of obtaining it remains.” Here the paper was torn, which showed there was something more to follow. The trial was so numerously attended from the ship and the shore, that props were obliged to be put under the beams of the _Royal William_, to support the immense number of people who flocked on board.

The court-martial ended on the 23rd June, at half-past six. By the sentence of the court, Calloway, Gutherie, Johnson, and Ashley were to suffer death; but the two former were recommended to mercy. A fifth mutineer was to be imprisoned twelve months, and the sixth acquitted. This sentence was confirmed, and Johnson and Ashley were executed on the 28th June.

The trial and conviction of these men were followed by the more momentous trial of Parker. This took place at Greenhithe upon the morning of the 22nd June, 1797, at ten o’clock. A court-martial was held on board the _Neptune_, in pursuance of an order from the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, for the trial of Richard Parker, a seaman on board the _Sandwich_, upon charges of which the following is the substance:—Making, and endeavouring to make, mutinous assemblies on board the _Sandwich_, and others of her Majesty’s ships at the Nore, on or about the 12th of May; disobeying the lawful orders of his superior officers, and treating his superior officers with disrespect.

Captain Moss, of the _Sandwich_, was the prosecutor; and the court was composed of the following officers:—

President, Vice-Admiral Sir Thomas Paisley, Bart. Comm. Sir Erasmus Gower _Neptune_, 98 Captain Stanhope Ditto „ Markham _Centaur_, 74 „ Williamson _Agincourt_, 64 „ Wells _Lancaster_ 64 „ Lane _Acasto_, 44 „ Sir Thomas Williams _Endymion_, 36 „ King _Syrius_, 36 „ Pierrepoint _Naiad_, 36 „ Riou _Mary Yacht_, 36

Admiral Buckner was the first witness called.

_Q._ “Do you know the prisoner?—_A. Yes._

_Q._ “Does the prisoner belong to the _Sandwich_?—_A._ I heard so; but in what capacity I know not.

_Q._ “Will you report what you know of the prisoner being concerned in a mutiny on board the fleet at the Nore, on or about the 12th of May; or of any instances of disrespectful language or conduct to his officers during the time this mutiny existed?—_A._ The first time I observed anything particular in the prisoner’s conduct, farther than parading about with a vast number of people on shore with a red flag, was on or about the 20th of May, when I went on board the _Sandwich_ for the purpose of making known to that ship and others his Majesty’s proclamation of pardon on their returning to their duty, on the terms granted to their brethren at Spithead, which the delegates, among whom was Parker, had previously assured me they would be satisfied with. On my going on board with my flag in my boat there was no respect shown me whatever. The officers were then without their side-arms, and had no command in the ship. Unwilling to return on shore till an opportunity offered for my speaking to the people, I waited for a considerable time, when Parker, with others, came on the quarterdeck, and said that none other but themselves (meaning, I presume, the ship’s company), should be present. The prisoner then tendered me a paper containing what he called a list of grievances, saying, at the same time, that until those were redressed, they would not give up the power then in their hands. They insisted, also, on the personal attendance of the Admiralty to ratify their demands. Finding my efforts to restore order of no avail, I went on shore. On the 22nd certain troops arrived at Sheerness; on the 23rd my flag was struck on board the _Sandwich_. On the evening of that day I was examining at the Commissioner’s house; and while I was inquiring into complaints laid against two marines by a part of the military, the prisoner and a man whom they called Davies, with three or four others, I believe, came abruptly into the house, and demanded why those men were in custody; telling me, at the same time, that my flag was struck, that I had no authority, and that the power was in their hands. They then took the men away, as they said, to trial. Another expression made use of by Parker was that he was not to be intimidated. About the 4th of June I received a letter from Parker, or rather, I should say, with his signature. In this letter he said that the Administration had acted improperly in stopping the provisions, and that the foolish proclamation was calculated to inflame the minds of honest men. I have nothing more particular to relate.

_Q._ “You have had frequent conferences with the prisoner?—_A._ With him at the head of many others, in order to bring them to a sense of their conduct. He, in general, took the lead as the spokesman, sometimes with a degree of insolence, appealing to the rest whether he was not authorized to speak the sense of the whole, and if it was their wish it should be so. He even prevented one man in particular, whose name I don’t know, from answering a question I had put to him; saying, at the same time, ‘Hold your tongue; if you don’t, I’ll take care of you.’ While I was on board the _Sandwich_, I forgot to mention that I remonstrated with them against keeping those disgraceful ropes, called yard-ropes, hanging; but the delegates, amongst whom was the prisoner, refused to remove them.

_Q._ “In your conversation with the prisoner, did you ever experience any degree of insolence?—_A._ I sometimes did; but generally his deportment was the reverse, and he behaved with a great deal of apparent respect.” (Here were read Admiral Buckner’s letter to the Admiralty informing the Lords Commissioners of the mutiny; a letter from Captain Moss to Admiral Buckner, informing him of certain particulars respecting the mutiny; Richard Parker’s letter to Admiral Buckner, the substance of which was stated in the Admiral’s evidence.)

The prisoner put some questions to show that the Admiral had been treated with respect. The President of the Court advised the prisoner to invalidate, if he could, by any question, that part of the narrative of Admiral Buckner which stated that he had released two marines, and told the Admiral that all his authority on board ship was at an end. The prisoner put no question to this effect. The other witnesses this day examined were—Lieut. Justice, of the _Sandwich_, and Mr. Snipe, Surgeon of the _Sandwich_, who stated that Parker acted as President of the Committee, and leading man on all occasions. The prisoner was about to ask some questions; but, being cautioned by the Court that they might criminate himself, they were withdrawn. Captain Surridge, of the _Iris_, who was present at what passed at Commissioner Hartwell’s, and Captain Dixon, of _L’Espion_, who accompanied Admiral Buckner on board the _Sandwich_, confirmed the Admiral’s evidence. At four o’clock Captain Dixon’s evidence was interrupted, and the Court adjourned to the next day.

_June 23._—The witnesses examined were—Captain John Wood, of the _Hound_; Nicholas Plat, third lieutenant of the _Sandwich_; William Levingstone, boatswain of the _Director_; Samuel Hallard, carpenter of the _Director_; Thomas Barry, seaman of the _Monmouth_; and John Summerland, seaman of the _Monmouth_, and others, most of whom were severally cross-examined by the prisoner. The evidence for the Crown being closed, the President asked when the prisoner would be ready for his defence, who said that he thought that he could not be ready before Monday.

_June 26._—The judge-advocate informed the prisoner, that in consequence of his application for certain witnesses necessary to his defence, those witnesses had been sent for to Sheerness, and were then present. The court then informed him that he might proceed with his defence, and asked him whether he chose to read it himself, or to let the judge-advocate read it. He replied he would read it himself; and then addressed the court in the following terms:—

“As I have been brought up from my youth to the sea, to the knowledge of some persons now present, nothing can be expected from me but a plain statement of facts; and it is impossible for me to dress up my defence in such pompous terms as I might do if I had the assistance of a lawyer. In the first place, I beg to return my thanks to the court for having indulged me with sufficient time to prepare my defence against the heavy charges which are brought against me. Nothing but the consciousness of the integrity of my intentions, and that I entered into this business with the hope of checking the progress of that bad spirit which I saw prevail among the fleet, could support me in the situation in which I now stand. Vice-Admiral Buckner has deposed, that he has often held conversation with me and the persons who were called delegates, and that my behaviour to him was sometimes respectful and sometimes otherwise. I never waited upon the admiral but by the order of the delegates, and pursuant to the instructions which I received from them. I never sported with the feelings of the admiral, but couched the representations I had to make in as respectful terms as I possibly could. It may be asked how I came to be the person fixed upon on these occasions? I was chosen by the delegates, for that purpose, and I could not resist their commands. I declare solemnly that I knew nothing of the mutiny till it had broke out in the fleet. In about two days afterwards I perceived that a bad spirit was prevalent among the men, and I then entered into it for the purpose of checking, as well as I could, the violence of their proceedings, and I am satisfied that, if I had not taken an active part in the business, though it has terminated so unfortunately, it would have terminated with consequences still more dreadful; and, conscious of the purity of my intentions, I can wait the decision of this honourable court with calmness. Vice-Admiral Buckner says that, on the 20th of May, when he went on board the _Sandwich_, he was not received with the proper respect due to his rank; but I am sure the admiral does not attribute that want of respect to me; for he states, in his evidence, that I did not go on board till after him; and upon this part of the charge I have no doubt of being able to satisfy the court of my innocence, because he states that as soon as I came on board I apologised to him for the disrespect which had been shown him, and told him that if he would accept of it, there should be three cheers, and the yards manned. The admiral acknowledges this. There was a stir made towards cheering him, and this was done at the risk of my life. Some evil-disposed persons in the fleet had infused an idea into the minds of the men that the admiral was not competent to decide upon their grievances, and also the people on board the _Inflexible_ had sent us word that if we offered to cheer the admiral, they would come alongside the _Sandwich_ and sink her. On the same day Captain Moss sent Mr. Bray, the master of the _Sandwich_, to know the reason why the _Inflexible_ had beat to quarters? When the persons sent got on board the _Inflexible_, they found the tompions taken out of the guns, and the matches lighted ready for action. There were meetings of the committee on board the _Inflexible_, to overawe the general meeting of the delegates, and these meetings were held daily on board that ship; and notwithstanding the stigma which has been thrown upon the _Sandwich_, the whole of the measures that were adopted originated on board the _Inflexible_. After a consultation among the ship’s companies, I was directed to present the paper, containing the list of grievances, to Admiral Buckner, and everything I did was by their orders. After the paper had been presented to the admiral, he proceeded to Sheerness. I saw that Admiral Buckner’s flag was struck, but I did not know the reason of it; and it was with the utmost concern that I saw the red flag flying in its place. There were many signals given that day by the _Inflexible_ which I did not understand. With respect to what the admiral has said of my taking away two marines, I must state to the court that it is true. I was that day on shore, at the commissioner’s house, and went there by order of the persons calling themselves delegates. While they were refreshing themselves on shore with the usual allowance of a pint of beer each man, information was brought them that two marines had been taken up, and were then in confinement, for approving the proceedings of the sailors. They ordered me and some others to go to the guard-house, and inquire into the reason of their being in custody. When we got to the guard-house we were informed by the sentinel that he had no such persons in his custody. We then heard that the marines were at the commissioner’s house. We were then ordered by the delegates to go there, and bring them on board. We informed the admiral of the commands we had received; and he told us the marines had been taken up for having used improper language in the neighbourhood of Queenborough. I was desired by those who accompanied me to examine them. I did examine one of them; the other was very much intoxicated. While I was examining him the admiral said, “Now, Parker, you are at the right point—your questions are very proper.” When the examination was finished, they were sent on board the _Sandwich_, and put into confinement, and the next day they were sent to their respective ships, and I knew no more about them. I submit it to the judgment of the court whether it is probable that four men, unarmed, could forcibly take these men away in the face of a garrison? But throughout the whole of the business I treated Admiral Buckner with as much respect as the nature of the transaction in which I was employed would admit. I must here state that there was a conversation improperly represented. The admiral said to me, “Parker, consider my feelings.” I replied to him, “Sir, it gives me great pain to see the red flag flying in place of yours. I had nothing to do with it,—I have my feelings as well as another man; but I am but an individual.” Throughout the whole of this business I wish to acknowledge that Admiral Buckner and Commissioner Hartwell were indefatigable in their endeavours to satisfy the minds of the sailors.