Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v2p2.djvu/272

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

764

POST-CAPTAINS OF 1803.

9.	Thomas Burkitt, Seaman;–	$\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,}$	Executed at Spithead, Oct. 29, 1792.
10.	John Millward, Ditto;–
11.	Thomas Ellison, Ditto^[1];–
12.	William Muspratt, Commander’s Steward;– Sentenced to death, but respited.
13.	Joseph Coleman, Armourer;–	$\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,}$	Tried by Court Martial, and acquitted.
14.	Charles Norman, Carpenter’s Mate;–
15.	Thomas M‘Intosh, Carpenter’s Crew;–
16.	Michael Byrne^[2], Seaman;–
Total, 44 persons.

We now return to Mr. Peter Heywood, who had not completed his 16th year, at the time when the fatal mutiny took place; previous to which, says Lieutenant Bligh, when writing to Colonel Holwell, an uncle of the unfortunate youth, “his conduct had always given me much pleasure and satisfaction^[3]”

Compelled by circumstances over which he had no controul,

↑ John Millward and William Muspratt* took up arms for no other purpose but to assist in rescuing the ship. This, however, they had no means of proving; and as the circumstance of their having been armed was sworn to by the witnesses against them, the Court, as in Morrison’s case, could do no otherwise than find them guilty. Ellison, although rated an A.B. was only a mere youth.
* Errata: For William Muspratt read Thomas Burkitt.
↑ Michael Byrne’s sight was so extremely defective that he could have been of no service to either party.
↑ Lieutenant Bligh, although he thought proper to brand Mr. Peter Heywood with the vile appellation of mutineer, did not dare to charge him with any specific act that would have justified the use of such an epithet. On the contrary, he declared in writing that he had had the highest esteem for him till the moment of the mutiny, and that his conduct during the whole course of the voyage was truly commendable. He even went so far as to say to Mr. Wilson, the Deputy Receiver General of the Isle of Man, that his greatest hopes of assistance in suppressing the mutiny were from his dependence on Mr. Heywood, whom he expected would form a party in his favor. We must here observe, that his confidence in the other officers could not have been very great, or he would have made some effort more powerful than mere words, when his hands were at liberty, instead of confiding in the exertions and ability of a boy, and looking to him for the recovery of his authority. This reflection, if he ever had any feeling, must have distressed him in the subsequent part of his life but tyrants are generally as insensible of remorse, as they are deficient in true courage. His conduct when deposed at New South Wales, is sufficient to convince us that he did not possess too great a share of personal intrepidity.

[1] John Millward and William Muspratt* took up arms for no other purpose but to assist in rescuing the ship. This, however, they had no means of proving; and as the circumstance of their having been armed was sworn to by the witnesses against them, the Court, as in Morrison’s case, could do no otherwise than find them guilty. Ellison, although rated an A.B. was only a mere youth.
* Errata: For William Muspratt read Thomas Burkitt.

[2] Michael Byrne’s sight was so extremely defective that he could have been of no service to either party.

[3] Lieutenant Bligh, although he thought proper to brand Mr. Peter Heywood with the vile appellation of mutineer, did not dare to charge him with any specific act that would have justified the use of such an epithet. On the contrary, he declared in writing that he had had the highest esteem for him till the moment of the mutiny, and that his conduct during the whole course of the voyage was truly commendable. He even went so far as to say to Mr. Wilson, the Deputy Receiver General of the Isle of Man, that his greatest hopes of assistance in suppressing the mutiny were from his dependence on Mr. Heywood, whom he expected would form a party in his favor. We must here observe, that his confidence in the other officers could not have been very great, or he would have made some effort more powerful than mere words, when his hands were at liberty, instead of confiding in the exertions and ability of a boy, and looking to him for the recovery of his authority. This reflection, if he ever had any feeling, must have distressed him in the subsequent part of his life but tyrants are generally as insensible of remorse, as they are deficient in true courage. His conduct when deposed at New South Wales, is sufficient to convince us that he did not possess too great a share of personal intrepidity.

[1]

[2]

[3]