Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-09-12 00:00:00

THE CASE BROUGHT BEFORE TEE HOUSE OF

LORDS.

On Friday, the 19th of June, the day before the prison-
ers were committed for trial, Lord S`i•iftesbury, in his
place in the House of Lords, called the attention of Lord
Stanley of Alderley to the statements that had appeared
with regard to the—as his lordship termed it—atrocities
that had been committed by Captain Rogers and his two
mates, on board the Martha Jane, of Sunderland; and in
reply, Lard Stanley stated that when the facts were
placed before the Board of Trade, they should have the
best attention. The facts as given in evidence were
placed before the Board of Trade, and the result was,
that Mr. Harlin, the solicitor to the Treasury, was directed
to conduct the prosecution on behalf of the Crown.
With a view of seeing that justice was done in a case
involving so much importance, as the security of life and
proper treatment to the hardy mariners who plough the
mighty deep, and on whose indomitable courage, and at
the risk of their own lives in the hour of danger, our
commercial superiority mainly depend, when the govern-
ment directed the Board of Trade to take the initiative in
this prosecution, they were not blind to the many barba-
rities and acts of cruelty that had been previously alleged

against, not only the masters of our own mercantile ships,
*but also those of our American brethren, and with a view
of abolishing, or at least checking these diabolical acts of
cruelty that ,had been perpetrated—stepped in for the
purpose of, in future, protecting the lives of the poor
sailors from the tyrannical power exercised by some of
those placed in authority over them—some of wham have,
but in too many instances, escaped the punishment, they
so richly deserved, for their cruelty, and malpractices
to those under them.
But, be that as it may, the government did step in, and,
after hearing the details, no single person will gainsay
for one moment but that they were perfectly justifiA, and
thus, by their example, endeavour to put a stop to such
abominable practices carr'ed on on board ships sailing
under the flags of this country, and at the same time set
an example worthy to no followed by other nations where
similar practices have prevailed.

We have before stated that this case excited a more than
usual am)unt of interest, and that each day during the
tine it was being heard before the worthy stipendiary
Magistrate the Court was crowded by a large laxly of per-
sons anxious to know the result, but at the same time hor-
ror stricken at the awful enormities that were perpetrated
upoa a human being, as the :facts were daily brought for
ward in the evidence adduced.

From the time of the committal of the prisoners, until
their trial at the assz3s, this case was the chief topic of
conversation amongst the public, and, perhaps, scarcely
has there ever bee❑ one that engrossed more attention.
Each and all condemned the brutal atrocities perpetrated
upon the poor unfortunate deceased, and the prisoners
gained a most unenviable notoriety, not alone amongst
their own class, but amongst all who had read the sicken-
ing details as they had been brought forward.

THE TRIA.L OF THE PRISONERS.
Out of a calendar containing a more than usual large
number of prisoners, etarged with every description of
crime, this was almost the only one that excited any
particular amount of public attention, and on Wednesday,
the 19:.h of August, the day fixed for the trial to take
place, the court, and all the avenues leading thereto, was
densely crowded.- On Baron Watson entering the court,
at nine o'clock, the three prisoners were placed in the
dock, and were thus described :—Henry Rogers, aged 37,
master mariner; William Miles, aged 27, seaman; and
Charles Edward Seymour, aged 25, seaman, charged with
havinz, on the 6th of Jane, 1837, on board a certain ship
called the Martha Jane, then on the high seas, feloniously,
wilfully, and of their malice aforethought, killed and
murdered one Andrew Rose, a seaman on board the
vessel. The prosectVion was conducted by Mr. Attorney-
General Bliss, Q.C., E James, Q.C., and Mr. D.
Seymour, instructed by , Mr. [limit, Solicitor to the
Treasury. The prisoner, Henry Rlgers, was defended
by Mr. Monck, Q.C., and the two mates, Miles and
Sffm.atir, by Mr. Aspinall, instructed by Mr. Snowball.
`solicitor, of this town.

detailed as the acts of the prisoners. Then will arise

another questioner which is a question of law—what is the
character of this homicide, if you believe that it is so ?
Is it murder, or is it manslaughter ? To make it murder,
you must believe that it was done with malice afore-
thought; but this does not mean Lny long preconceived
design against the deceased, but if the p isoners intended
to do him some grievious injury, though they might not
have intended to do what would cause his death, yet they

would be responsible for his death, and would be respon-

sib!e to the extent of murder. That is the case,wbieh I
have to lay before you. You win take the law in r.,fe-
rence to it from the learned Judge, and the statement of
the facts from me."

The witnesses were then called, and' they most fully ansi
clearly roved all the facts as delivered above, and the
medical gentlemen gave the following evidence :—Mr.
Thsmond, surgeon. was examined by Mr. Bliss,and stated
that, assuming the evidence of the first witnesses to be
correct, and the treatment described by them to have
continued from the Fith of May to the 6th of June, it
p-obably would have induced such a condition as, joined
with the hanging, might have terminated fatally. Mr.
Wail, surgeon or the N )rthern Hospital, deposed that,
assuming the description of the treatment to be correct,
it would be sufficient to cause death. Mr. Pennington,
surgeon, was also produced to speak as to the probability
of death ensuing from. the causes• described.
CAPTAIN ROGERS'S DEFENCE.

The evidence for the prosecution Navin; been con.
eluded, Mr. Monck proceeded to address the jury in
defence of the captain, and on his behalf, asked the jury
if any one of them who ever sat in a criminal trial before,
had ever known such a prosecution, in which no possible
Motive was alleged for the offence which was stated to
have been-perlietrated? What could be the motive of
the prisoners, except sheer and pure malignity, in going
on with a series of acts of oppression and cruelty, one
after another, until they hurried their victim into death ?
It should be remembered that this vessel was short of
hands. There were three men wanting. There actually
were not men en )ugh comfortably, and according to the
character of the work and the exigencies of a voyage, to
work the ship; and yet the captain would rejeot the
services of a competent man, an able seaman, a sailor
fully capable of steering an I of performing all the duties
of a seaman on board a vessel. He rernholed the jury of
the position in which the captain of a vessel stool, if he
got about him incompetent men. The captain was the
person upon whose energies and determination, mental
and physical, upon whose prudence and discretion, not
only the property committed to his care, but that w ich
was infinitely more valuable, his own life, as well as the
lives of his crew, depended. If he got on board two or
three men who skulked, who could not or would not dis..
charge their duty, what was his position? He was taxing
the energies of the remaining 'able bodied men beyond
what they were able to bear. At any moment a storm
might arise. At any moment the safety of the ve€sel, the
property and the lives might be in jeopardy, and then he
would find himself with some men ineMcient, and the
others worn out with unremitting toil, and all because
some men had represented themselves as being capable of
performing duties which they were either incapable of
performing, or unwilling to perform. Ha asked the jury,
then, was it conceivable, that with three hands short, the
captain would have been anxious to throw away the
services of an able-bodied man? Thy mere suspicion of
anything of the kind was absurd. What. possible motive
could he have had for doing so, and for perpetrating euch
acts as those which hed been described, and which
were alleged to have hurried the deceased to his grave ?
What possible object could the prisoners hive in doing
that which could conduce to the death of the deceased?
The act of one could nat be taken, and, as it were, added
to some particular act of the other, to show' a common
object, and that object the destroying the life of the
deceased. What was there in the whole ease to show
that the deceased had not been brought to his grave by
long continued disease? Indeed it was very plain that
such was the fact. His close-cropped hair would lead
one to suppose thatihe had not. long left some hospital,
while hie Triv.nrm. 1
clearly that he was irea declining state of health. He was
-pot there to justify or to be the apologist of such acts as
putting a man into a cask or of any of the other modes of
punishing a refractory man which they had heard detailed
in the case. But that wise not the Ties ion. The question
was not whether what they had done was the best to
preserve the discipline of the ship, but wh After they had
of their malice aforethoteeht taken the deceased's life.
The learned counsel then dwelt on the fi; thy habits of the
deceased, and asked if it were probable that the prisoners
would have prevented him from avoiding them. They
punished him for those filthy habits, p Thaps, as a filthy
dog or cat only should be panishel ; and was it p-obab!e
that they would have prevented him fro n going forward
when the necessary canaeqaanee would bo a continued
indulgence in those habits.

In opening the case for the prosecution, Mr. Attorney_
General Bliss thus stated the nature of the charge :—The
three prisoners at the bar stand indicted for that they
feloniously, wilfully, and of their own malice aforethought
killed and murdered one Andrew Rose. Gentlemen, the
prisoners committed the offence between the 11th of May
and the sth of June in this yesr. The prisoner Henry
Rogers was the master of the ship on board which the
offence was committed. The prisoner William Miles was
chief mate, and the prisoner Charles Edward Seymour
was second mate of that ship. The deceased was an able
seaman, on board that ship ; and the means of death were
a series of violence and outrages committed by the
prisoners at the bar upon the person of Andrew Rose from
the 11th of May until two or three days before his death--
a system of beating and otherwise illtreating him in the
manner I shall particularly state, and finally by one extra-
ordinary act of violence and outrage, within three days
after which he died. The Martha Jane is a British ship,
owned at Sunderland, and had sailed from Hartlepool. last
year to Ca:cutta, where there was a change of masters
and from Calcutta she came on the homeward voyage to
Demerara, and after leaving Demerara she put into Bars
badoes to repair, and there there was another change of
masters and there it was that Henry Rogers became the
IlleiSter tar 4,lAc ah;p. Ik ..no 47--t
change of the crew took -place ; arid there it was that
Andrew Rose, the deceased, entered on board .the ship.
He entered on the 29th of April as an able seaman, and
he signed the ship's articles, which stipulated among
other things for a certain allowance of provisions.
Gentlemen, when he came on board the ship he was first
put to do some duty bythe second mate, who found fault
with him and who beat him ; and he beat Rose so
severely that Rose was advised by some of the crew to
leave the ship, aad he accordingly ran away. He was
away from the ship for several days,-but on the 9W, or
10th of May he was brought back by the police and he
was put in irons. The vessel sailed on the 11th of May.
At that time he appears to have been released from irons,
but the day after the vessel sailed he was again beaten by
Seymour. The learned Attorney-General then went on
to describe all the acts of cruelty, and the disgusting
treatment the poor fellow received at the hands of
the three prisoners, all of which . we have given in
detail, therefore it is unnecessary further to repeat them,
and concluded by saying—" These, gentlemen, are the
facts of the case, and these facts being brought before
the public department, her Majesty's government have
undertaken this prosecution. I do not think that that
circumstance will is any respect weigh with you, but you
are entitled to know who the prosecutors are, and we do
not live in an age when either any advantage or disadvan-
tage to justice is to be apprehended from the prosecution
being conducted by such a party. It is necessary that
this inquiry should be made in order that all British
seamen may knew that however far they are from tbis
country, they are never beyond the reach of British laws
to punish crime and protect innocence. No doubt the
principal question which you will have to inquire into on
this oeeasien, will be whether those acts of violence are
proved. We shall call before you some of the crew. We
have here all who were examined before the magistrates,
but I do not think it necessary on the part of the prose.
cation to call the whole of them. We shall call tour or
five, and the rest are near if the prisoners desire they
shall be called. You will hear their statement, and you
will judge hew far you will credit what they say as to the
conduct of the prisoners. Another question will be, whey
taer what they dal was proper correction for the deceased.
With regard to that we shall also put before you the
official log, which was kept by the captain, anti in which
by law captains are required to record the punishment
they Mat on any of their crews. You will find in that
log several entries made of floggings of Anirew Rose, the
deceased. You will fled besides evidence that these
entries could not all have been made at the time they bear
date, but you will also tiny this rematkable fact in all of
the log, that not one of the entries alludes to the biting of
the dog—not one to the putting into the cask—not one to
the hanging—nit one even to the whipping—but the THE VERDICT,
utmost that is stated, in the many charges that the log About half-past nine o'clock the jury retired for the
contains aealust the deceased, is that the Captain was purpose of considering their verdict, area in about an hour
obliged to stand over him with a whip, in order to compel returned into court, when the' foreman said that they
him to wash himself'; and that log imputes his death to found the death of the deceased was the result of the
his being rotten inside. Thus, gentlemen, it will appear cruelties inflicted on him by the prisoners, but they
from that that the captain and the mates could not wished his Lordship's direction as to the degree of homi-
have thought that these, their acts, were acts of tide that implied.
punishment to the deceased ; and it will be for you to His Lordship replied, what he stated before that it, as
say whether they were so, or whether, if they were, they reasonable men, they must have anticipated the death of
were not excessive and improper. Another ques- the deceased as the consequence of their treatment, the
tion will be, whether those acts so done by the jury would then find a verdict of murder; but if, as rea-
prisoners were the Cause of the death of the deceased ? sonable men they could not anticipate that their conduct
That is a question which you will have to judge of. You would have that effects then it would be manslaughter.
will say whether the deceased, coming on board a per- The jury again retited, and in about ten minutes re-
fectly healthy man, and sinking and dying after those acts turned and handed in a verdict of " Guilty of WILFUL
of violence and outrage to him—whether you have any i merman" against ea.ele of the prisoners, accompanying
reasonable doubt that they hastened his death. It is not that verdict with a. reconaraendatien to mercy.
necessary for you to believe that they alone caused his THE SENTENCE.
death; for if even the deceased had any disease upon him His Lordship then, amidst the solemn silence of the
and thoegh that disease might have been fatal, aad though court, passed. the sentence of death upon the three
he might sooner or later have died of it, still, if you be- prisoners, nod, in doing so, addressed them as follows:
Dere pat in consequence of the acts done by the prisoners Henry Rogers, William Miles, and Charles Edward Sey-
or any of them, his death was hastened, then, gentlemen, incur, you have been respectively found guilty of the
they are responsible for homicide. But on this you will crime of murder. After a most patient, and, I am sure.-a
be assisted by some medical men, who will be called most a'axious and impartial inquiry on the part of the
before you, and who, I understand, are of opinion that jury who have tried you, they have came to the conclusion
under no state of health or disease could it be that death thast the evidence warrants that charge. It is a case that
world not be caused or accelerated by the acts which are 'required the greatest attention on the part both of the

suners.

judge and jnrr; :amino one who heard the .account of your
barbarous treatment, as it was detailed he,re, hour after
hour, b❑t was convinced that if that evide.nce could be
relied on, your lives would be forfeited. It is. of the ut-
most importance in a maritime country like this', that the
power with which you are armed to repress from bordina.
tion on board your ships, should not be accornpan.ied with
too great severity, and the law should watch most care-
fully that that power is not too much extended. The.iury
have recommended you to mercy ; with that I have no
power to interfere, but, as is my duty, shall refer the i•e-

commendation to the authorities of the country-116r
Majesty's Ministers. Whether it will be attended with
success 1 cannot say, but I implore you to make the bet
use of your time„ and not rely upon it. Nothing mt./
remains for me than to pass the final sentence of the law.
His Lordship then passed sentence of death in the usual,
form on the prisoners, and appeared much moved in

- -
doing so.
At the conclusion of his Lordship's address, and as the
prisoners were ben; removed from the dock, the im-
mense crowd assembled, commenced cheering, and mani-
fested other tokens of approbation, but it was immediately
cheekel by the officers on duty'; and the prisoners were
removed that night to Kirkdale Gaol, there to await the
fulfillment of the awful sentence passed upon them.