he was not in such or consciousness him criminally tions. He crepancies testimony of esses, because he e attorney-general, the exciting circumin which they were placed, as impossible to expect that ey should remember everything that occurred, and the fairest way would be to take a general view of the effect of their testimony. The learned counsel then said, that the main point upon which he rested the defence of the prisoner was, that his mind had become in such a state that when he killed the deceased he was not criminally responsible, and that it would be the duty of the jury to acquit him upon that ground. He wished them to understand that he did not mean to contend that the prisoner was in point of fact a madman without any lucid intervals, but that what had occurred on board the vessel had the effect of rendering him subject to paroxysms of madness, and that in one of those paroxysms he destroyed the deceased. The evidence for the prosecution clearly proved the prisoner's conduct to have been most extravagant and extraordinary; he appeared to have attacked the crew without any provocation, cutting them most cruelly, and acting altogether in a manner totally unaccountable. The witnesses had denied that any mutinous spirit existed on board the vessel; but whether there was an actual mutiny or not, he submitted that it was abundantly clear the crew were perfectly well satisfied that their conduct had been such as to subject them to punish

ment; for otherwise, when the captain had behaved to them in such a violent and cruel manner, they would surely have complained to the captain of the other English vessel when he came on board, or at all events when they got to Fayal they would have made their complaint; but although Reason, the deceased, Cone, and Lee, the three men who had so shortly before been treated in such a cruel manner, were the very parties who rowed the captain ashore, it did not appear that they made a single word of complaint; and this he submitted could only arise from a fear, that if inquiry were instituted, it would have the effect of bringing punishment upon them for their own conduct. It was admitted, that up to a certain period, the conduct of the prisoner had been particularly kind to his crew, and there could not have been a greater proof of his kind feeling than the fact that, out of his own small allowance of water, he gave a portion to one of the crew who was sick, and this kindness continued until his reasoning powers were destroyed by the cause to which he should afterwards allude. learned counsel then proceeded to read extracts from different works upon the subject of crime and insanity, contending that they bore out the conviction he had expressed, that the prisoner was not legally accountable for his actions. He should rely upon the circumstances of the case deposed to by the witnesses for the prosecution in support of that defence. was the position of the prisoner? He was the captain of a vessel containing a valuable cargo, said to be worth 80,000l., with an unknown crew, whom he had very good reason to believe were in a

The

What

were drowned at the places where they were lashed. When day broke the following morning, it was discovered that only about 30 were left alive. The sea was now making a clean breach into the forecastle, the deck of which was rapidly breaking up. About this time, whilst numbers were helplessly clinging to the bows and continued dropping off without the possibility of succour, the captain attempted to reach the shore, but was unable, and with some assistance regained the wreck. The lashings of the survivors were now undone, in order to give them the last chance of life. Mr. Thomas Guthrie, the chief mate, now on the spritsailyard, was washed out to the bowsprit. He saw the captain and second mate and steward clinging at the bows with about 18 or 20 dead bodies on the fragment of the wreck. Mr. Guthrie was now driven to a detached part of the wreck, but soon found it impossible to live with such a sea breaking over, and seizing a piece of plank under his arm, leaped into the water, and was carried over the reef, and got on shore. He found a passenger who had got ashore during the night; and one of the crew, John Robinson, plunged into the water when he saw the mate ashore, and partly swimming and partly diving, reached land. Five other seamen followed, and landed dreadfully exhausted. Almost immediately after the vessel totally disappeared. Thus out of 423 souls on board, only nine were saved.

6. THE ATROCITIES ON THE SHIP TORY.-In the Chronicle, for the year 1845, is given an abstract of the examination of Captain Johnstone, of the Tory, harged with having committed

unexampled atrocities upon his miserable crew; and it is there briefly stated, that upon trial the prisoner was found "Not Guilty" on the ground of insanity. The trial took place at the Central Criminal Court, on the 5th and 6th February, on an indictment for the murder of William Henry Rambert. The facts deposed to in evidence were substantially the same as given in the Police Report.

Mr. Jervis addressed the jury for the prisoner, and commenced by observing, that the interval which had been afforded to him, by the kindness of the court and jury, to prepare the defence, had not at all tended to diminish the anxiety with which he now rose to address them on behalf of the prisoner at the bar. That anxiety was not occasioned by any fear that the jury would be, in any way, prejudiced by what they had heard out of the court-and he would take that opportunity of thanking the attorney-general for the very fair and impartial manner in which he had laid the case before the jury-but from the difficulty in which he was placed by the very extraordinary character of the occurrence which they were inquiring into. He had no anxiety which arose from a belief of the prisoner's guilt, for he assured the jury that, in his own opinion, whatever might be the character of the act committed by the prisoner, that it would be impossible for the jury, under the circumstances that had been detailed by the witnesses, to find the prisoner guilty of the offence imputed to him by the present indictment, namely, wilful murder, and in the terms of the law, of his malice aforethought, and he trusted he should be able to satisfy them that at the time the prisoner committed the act im

puted to him, he was not in such a state of mind or consciousness as would render him criminally responsible for his actions. He would pass over the discrepancies that appeared in the testimony of the different witnesses, because he agreed with the attorney-general, that under the exciting circumstances in which they were placed, it was impossible to expect that they should remember everything that occurred, and the fairest way would be to take a general view of the effect of their testimony. The learned counsel then said, that the main point upon which he rested the defence of the prisoner was, that his mind had become in such a state that when he killed the deceased he was not criminally responsible, and that it would be the duty of the jury to acquit him upon that ground. He wished them to understand that he did not mean to contend that the prisoner was in point of fact a madman without any lucid intervals, but that what had occurred on board the vessel had the effect of rendering him subject to paroxysms of madness, and that in one of those paroxysms he destroyed the deceased. The evidence for the prosecution clearly proved the prisoner's conduct to have been most extravagant and extraordinary; he appeared to have attacked the crew without any provocation, cutting them most cruelly, and acting altogether in a manner totally unaccountable. The witnesses had denied that any mutinous spirit existed on board the vessel; but whether there was an actual mutiny or not, he submitted that it was abundantly clear the crew were perfectly well satisfied that their conduct had been such as to subject them to punish

ment; for otherwise, when the captain had behaved to them in such a violent and cruel manner, they would surely have complained to the captain of the other English vessel when he came on board, or at all events when they got to Fayal they would have made their complaint; but although Reason, the deceased, Cone, and Lee, the three men who had so shortly before been treated in such a cruel manner, were the very parties who rowed the captain ashore, it did not appear that they made a single word of complaint; and this he submitted could only arise from a fear, that if inquiry were instituted, it would have the effect of bringing punishment upon them for their own conduct. It was admitted, that up to a certain period, the conduct of the prisoner had been particularly kind to his crew, and there could not have been a greater proof of his kind feeling than the fact that, out of his own small allowance of water, he gave a portion to one of the crew who was sick, and this kindness continued until his reasoning powers were destroyed by the cause to which he should afterwards allude. The learned counsel then proceeded to read extracts from different works upon the subject of crime and insanity, contending that they bore out the conviction he had expressed, that the prisoner was not legally accountable for his actions. He should rely upon the circumstances of the case deposed to by the witnesses for the prosecution in support of that defence. What was the position of the prisoner? He was the captain of a vessel containing a valuable cargo, said to be worth 80,000l., with an unknown crew, whom he had very good reason to believe were in a

mutinous state. He knew that there was a scarcity of provisions and water, and he might very naturally suppose that this would increase the discontent of his crew, and while things were in this state he was led to believe that the crew intended to destroy his life, and to seize the vessel and her valuable cargo. The jury were aware of the representations that were made to the prisoner-he was told that the crew had sharpened their knives -that they had armed themselves, and also that there was a determination if he did not reach the island of Ascension the next morning, which he might at the time have known to be impossible, that he would no longer be captain of the vessel. The jury would also remember that French had told him a story about Dunn, and while he imagined that he was his friend, another of the crew came to him and told him that French had sharpened his knife to kill him, and this would naturally lead him to imagine that the whole of the crew were leagued against him, and that there were none of them upon whom he could place any confidence. What was the immediate effect of this? Why, from being a kind and mild wellconducted man, he was at once changed to a state of wildness and intemperance, and apparently to be regardless of his actions. He became furious and raving. The three men whom he supposed to be concerned in the mutiny he put in irons, and while in that condition, according to the testimony of one of the witnesses, he cut at them fifty times; and afterwards, with a drawn cutlass in his hand, he pursued the chief mate, Rambert, wounded him, and eventually drove him into the sea; and his

whole conduct at that time, he should submit, was such as to show that he was then clearly not accountable for his actions. It might be said that after this, which occurred in the month of September, the prisoner conducted himself perfectly quiet and calm for a month, and until the vessel had sailed from Fayal; but he should contend that the blow upon the mind of the prisoner had been struck, his reason was affected, and the moment the chord was again struck, a paroxysm of madness was the consequence. At Fayal there could be no doubt that he had conversed with the consul or the harbour-master upon the subject of the conduct of his crew, and that by this means was laid the foundation of what occurred so soon after their departure from that port. The string had been touched that affected his mind, and, according to the testimony of the boy who had been called, he at that place, without receiving any provocation, declared that when he got on board he would kill them all." The sight of the crew, who he believed were the persons whom he had such good reason to dread, again drove him to frenzy, and unchecked by reason and uncontrolled by judgment, there was no doubt that in a paroxysm of madness he committed the act for which he was now called upon to answer. He requested the jury to consider the circumstances under which the unfortunate man met his death. If the prisoner really desired to gratify any vindictive feeling, would he have sent for the man into his cabin and destroyed him in the presence of a number of the crew? He first sent for him at seven o'clock, and then, without any provocation, he