CHAPTER VI

THE YANDEHUN CASE

This case was one which created exceptional interest locally by reason of the fact that the accused was a minister of religion and a man well known in the Colony and Protectorate. He was connected with the United Brethren in Christ Mission and had been a minister of religion since 1878.

The accused, who was defended by four members of the Freetown Bar, was first charged with the capital crime of murder, but after some evidence had been given the Crown Prosecutor realized that he had not sufficient evidence to secure a conviction on that charge, and intimated that he proposed to call no further evidence, whereupon a formal verdict of Not Guilty was recorded.

The accused was then proceeded against on the following charges—(i) of being a member of the Human Leopard Society on or before the 5th November, 1912, the date of the Human Leopard Amendment Ordinance, 1912, and (ii) with having taken part in the operations of an unlawful society on the 17th October, 1909.

The accused had apparently been well educated, and whilst he was in the witness-box it was difficult to conceive how a man of his stamp could possibly be connected with a cannibal society; on the other hand, it was undisputed that he had permitted himself to be elected Mahawa (paramount chief) of one of the chiefdoms in the Protectorate, and had acted in that capacity from 1899 to 1905, which connotes much; and he stated that he only ceased to be Mahawa after his trial upon a charge of cannibal murder which took place before a judge and jury in Bonthe in 1905.

The case for the prosecution depended chiefly upon the evidence of two informers. Upon the depositions their testimony was corroborated by the evidence of two witnesses, one of whom was a petty trader and the other a teacher in another branch of the United Brethren in Christ Mission, but, as these witnesses when before the Special Commission Court swore that their previous statements were false, the case for the prosecution was left to depend almost solely upon the evidence of the two informers.

These two informers stated that towards the last quarter of 1909 (cutting-rice time) a meeting of the Human Leopard Society was called near Yandehun for the purpose of arranging for a certain newly appointed Mahawuru (sub-chief) to provide a victim to celebrate his appointment. At that meeting a number of important persons were present, and it was settled that the Mahawuru should give a girl to whom he stood _in loco parentis_, and that the murder should take place on the evening of the fourth day from that.

On the evening arranged the two informers and many others arrived at the appointed place, the Mahawuru enticed the girl to the spot, and he and his Lavari set upon her and killed her. Her body was divided up and one of the informers was despatched with a portion of the girl’s flesh to the accused and another member who had not attended the meeting. He handed over this flesh to this other member and asked him to give the accused his portion.

The next morning the informer went to the town of Victoria and saw the accused at the French Company’s Factory, and informed him that he had been sent to ask him whether he had received a share of the “meat” that was sent for him, to which the accused replied that he had received it. The informer stated that the accused then said, “All right, I am now going. I only came for that purpose,” and that the accused then took the road leading in the direction of Mobundo (New London), which is situated farther down the river and is one of the starting-places when going by water to Bonthe.

If that story was true, there could be no doubt that the “meat” was a portion of the body of the murdered girl, and an admission by the accused to a member of the Human Leopard Society that he had received such “meat” would have been conclusive proof that he was a member of that Society.

Both the informers also stated that they saw one of the witnesses, a petty trader, at the French Company’s Factory on that particular occasion, and also the school-teacher referred to. That was practically all, apart from proof of the girl’s disappearance at the time in question, that the prosecution could prove at the trial.

Upon the depositions, however, the case was much stronger. At the preliminary investigation in the District Commissioner’s Court the previous September the petty trader referred to stated that about two and a half years before September, 1912, early one morning he saw one of the informers and the accused coming out of the French Company’s Store. He further said that he got the school-teacher referred to to write a letter to a person at Moyamba, but he did not actually connect this letter with the day on which he saw the informer and the accused together. He admitted that the school-teacher had written a letter for him, that he took this letter to a person at Moyamba, and that just before he started for Moyamba with that letter he went to the French Company’s Store to get some provisions; but he denied, when before the Special Commission Court, having seen either the informer or the accused there.

The school-teacher in his depositions at the preliminary investigation in September, 1912, gave important corroborative evidence. He there said that the accused came to Victoria on the 17th October, 1909, and stayed the night with him; that the accused went out about 9 p.m. and returned about 10 p.m. with two persons (who had since been executed for leopard murder), and that these two stayed with him for about a quarter of an hour; that next morning the accused went to the French Company’s Factory and came back to the house; that he asked the accused to stay and preach for him, but the accused said “No,” that he was in haste, as the Government, since his previous trial, never allowed him to come to Victoria, and the witness fixed the date by saying that the petty trader came to him the same morning to have the above-mentioned letter written. This letter was produced and identified, and was dated 18th October, 1909. At this preliminary investigation this witness, when cross-examined by counsel for the accused, said further, “I am certain that the accused slept at Victoria on the night of October 17th, 1909.” He also said in cross-examination that he was certain that accused came there only for the purpose of collecting subscriptions for the Mission to which he belonged, and that on this occasion he got a subscription from at least one other person besides himself. But before the Special Commission Court all this was changed. The keystone of the accused’s defence was that his collections at Victoria were made on or about the 17th December, 1909, and that he only paid this one visit to Victoria during the year 1909, and these two witnesses, when before the Special Commission Court, made their evidence fit in with this defence.

The school-teacher witness was married to a niece of the accused, and both he and the petty trader witness admitted having gone back on their statements about seeing the accused in Victoria in October, 1909, after an interview with the son of the accused—who was also connected with the United Brethren in Christ Mission.[15]

The introduction of outside influences to vary the evidence of important witnesses for the prosecution gave rise to grave suspicion, but the net result so far as the actual charges were concerned was that the prosecution was left without corroboration of the evidence of the accomplices.

Had the only issue before the Court been the charges recorded, it is possible that counsel for the defence would not have called any witnesses, but would have claimed a verdict upon the evidence; but the Court drew attention to Section 11 of the Special Commission Court Ordinance, 1912, which declared that notwithstanding an acquittal, if the Court is of opinion that it is expedient for the security, peace, or order of the district that the acquitted person should be expelled therefrom, the Court shall report to the Governor, who may expel such person from the Colony and Protectorate accordingly.

Counsel for the defence therefore decided not to let the matter rest there, but to call evidence so as to exonerate the accused completely if it were possible to do so.

The accused himself first went into the witness-box and proved by letters to persons connected with his Mission in Freetown that in September, 1909, he had arranged to make a tour of his district early in October. He gave evidence to the effect that he started on the 20th October, proceeded up certain rivers some distance from Victoria, and that he remained in those parts preaching and giving magic-lantern entertainments, with the object of obtaining subscriptions for his mission, until early in December, when he came to New London (Mobundo), which he reached on the morning of the 7th December, 1909.

He related how he had gone to the school-teacher’s house at Victoria and then to the French Company’s Factory and then to one King, and how he had got subscriptions, only spending an hour or two at Victoria. He stated that he then walked to the outlying villages and obtained subscriptions from persons named Nicoll and Cole, that he then returned to New London, where he picked up his boat and started home for Bonthe, which he reached early on the morning of the 8th December. In corroboration of his story he produced the subscription book which he kept during the tour, and in which there can be little doubt that the names of King, Powell, Nicoll, and Cole written by themselves appear in their due places after the subscriptions given during the earlier period of the tour.

These subscriptions seemed to be perfectly genuine, the entries of the names seemed perfectly genuine, the whole book bore every appearance of being quite genuine. King and Nicoll, two respectable traders, proved their signatures in the book and said that they put them there in December 1909. In some details the evidence of King was inconsistent with that of the accused and his boatman, but this pointed to little more than that there had been no collusion.

Several servants of the accused were also called as witnesses for the defence, and a number of discrepancies were found to exist in the various accounts given of the circumstances connected with the trip to Victoria—a matter not without importance, as one at least of these servants would probably have accompanied the accused if he visited Victoria in October as well as December.

One thing was quite clear: viz., that the accused was at Victoria in or about December, 1909, and that he then collected subscriptions. The question therefore naturally arose as to whether his presence in December was inconsistent with his presence there on the 17th and 18th October. There could be no doubt that it was not. It is true that he had produced evidence that he was only at Victoria once during the year 1909, but this evidence was not of high value. There was nothing to prevent the accused having been at Victoria on the 17th and 18th October. His letters to Freetown showed that he had intended to begin his tour early in October, but his start was delayed until the 20th. The first Human Leopard meeting at Yandehun was, according to the prosecution, on the 13th October; prominent members of the Society would have had notice of this meeting prior to the 13th October. Assuming that the accused had such notice, he would have received it just about the time he had originally meant to start, and this would account for his start being delayed until the 20th of October. And the view that he made a surreptitious visit to Victoria for unlawful purposes was strongly supported by the fact that the witnesses for the Crown who testified to his visit had been tampered with. Then the chain of facts worked out by the prosecution connecting the witnesses and the letter of 18th October with the accused’s visit, though not sufficient to be of itself corroboration, was significant confirmation of the story of the informers.

The Court in giving judgment stated that, as the accused was a man of education and a minister of religion connected with a Missionary Society, they had been slow to form an opinion adverse to him, but that after careful and anxious consideration they were unwillingly forced to the opinion that he was so connected with the Human Leopard Society that it was expedient for the security, peace and order of the District that he should be expelled from the Colony and Protectorate of Sierra Leone; and this was accordingly done.

This man, who was born in America, successfully raised his American citizenship on the previous occasion when he was indicted for cannibal murder. The trial of a person residing in the Protectorate for an indictable offence ordinarily takes place before the Circuit Court Judge and assessors, who take the place of a jury, the assessors being usually native chiefs who sit with the judge and advise him on questions concerning native law and custom. At the close of the case the judge sums up to them as he would to a jury, and they individually give their opinion as to the guilt or otherwise of the person being tried. The judge, although he is not bound by their opinions, naturally attaches a good deal of weight to them, but the final verdict is left entirely with him. Non-natives, however, have the right, when charged with a capital offence, to be tried by a judge and jury in the Colony instead of the Circuit Court Judge and assessors, and the plea to the jurisdiction was successfully raised by counsel when the accused was before the Circuit Court, on the ground that he was an American subject and therefore a non-native so far as the provision regulating the trial of natives of the Protectorate was concerned. The case was then transferred to Bonthe, where he was found Not Guilty by a jury of educated natives. After his acquittal he rejoined the United Brethren in Christ Mission and went on a lecturing tour through America on behalf of the Mission. One of the European members of the Mission who was present during the trial of the case before the Special Commission Court stated that he had heard him lecture in the United States, and that by his eloquence and interesting description of Sierra Leone he drew large audiences and was successful in collecting a considerable sum of money for Mission purposes. He is also known in England, where he had many friends; on several occasions he has been the guest of persons in high position, to whom his trial upon a charge of cannibal murder must have come as a most unpleasant shock.

Footnote 15:

These two witnesses were subsequently prosecuted for perjury before the Circuit Court and found guilty.