Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

buried. He caused them to be taken up: the face was recognised as Zongobia's. The reason given for the distinction with respect to the head and its contents was, that eating any part of the head was supposed to cause madness in the countryof these Cannibals. They were called the Manni, or Maniani, and were notorious for this practice, for which they were despised by all their neighbours. On Mr Kearney's asking whether there was any quarrel or any enmity towards the deceased, he was told there was not; and upon some expression of surprise that so great an atrocity should be perpetrated with out any provocation or motive, it was thought sufficient to explain it by the same motives which induced Mr Kearney to kill a fat sheep. Quia Pei said, the cause of his having been sold as a slave was, that he had killed and eaten so many men as to render him formidable to the king of his country and to the head men, who made a palaver for him, and had him condemned and sold.

Philip Bragger was present at the examination and search. He saw the same facts, and had the same un. derstanding as Mr Kearney as to the confessions.

The substance of Mr Kearney's testimony was interpreted to the prisoner, and he was asked whether he wished to put any questions. He did not ask any question, but denied having participated in the murder in any way he had never confessed it: he was near the place, with his knife and pot, and was called by the others after the man was killed. In reference to the charge of holding the hands of Zongobia behind his back, he asked whether a person of his own slight frame was capable of such an exertion? With reference to the charge of having pointed out Zongobia as a fat man and fit to be

VOL. XII. PART II.

[blocks in formation]

Cockeye was a captured negro, of a nation bordering on the country of the nation to which the prisoner and Quia Pei belonged he resided at Charlotte-town, and generally was employed to look after and interpret for these people: he had interpreted at the examination before Mr Kearney. Quia Pei, who had been caught with the bag, on being told by the witness to tell all to master, and so avoid palaver (trouble,) did declare all that had been related concerning himself and the prisoner, and urged the prisoner also to confess; but the prisoner had not confessed any part in the transaction, but always firmly denied having any share in it, or any knowledge of it, until after the murder was perpetrated.

The Chief-Justice remarked, "that the Court was placed in a very delicate and difficult situation, having heard, as evidence against the prisoner, a great deal of matter that could not properly be admitted as such, if further confirmation of what was called the prisoner's confession had not been expected. The confession of the deceased, Quia Pei, although caught with such irresistible proofs upon him, did not appear to have been obtained wholly without the inducement of beneficial results to himself from making it. His implication of the prisoner at the bar was not evidence to convict the prisoner, unless assented to by the prisoner, or corroborated by other testimony, or by facts or circumstances.

H

What had been stated by Mr Kearney, and by Philip Bragger, of the acquiescence of the prisoner in that part of Quia Pei's confessions which implicated him, was of no avail, unless confirmed by the interpreters through whom it was derived; and now the principal interpreter (Cockeye,) denies that he ever meant to convey any such acquiescence on the part of the prisoner. On the contrary, the prisoner always denied, as he does now, having had any share in the transaction, or any knowledge of it, until it was completed. In this there was no confession on the part of the prisoner, nor any acquiesence in any facts connected with the crime that could materially affect him. There was no other evidence, nor any fact or circumstance, connecting him with the horrid business. (Here the Chief Justice asked the witnesses again if any such fact or circumstance had been discovered, and it was repeated that nothing of the kind had been found.) One or two circumstances seemed to have been disclosed, which, if well authenticated, might be sufficient to connect the prisoner with the actsuch as his having had previous conversation with the deceased, Quia Pei, the object of which was the killing of the deceased, and his having been near the spot, and, according to one of his seeming admissions, with a pot and a knife, which it was understood or supposed were afterwards employed in dissecting the body and cooking the horrid feast; but one of these apparent admissions, that of conversation, having the murder in view, was already explained away; and the prisoner said that he merely knew of such conversation being held between the deceased, Quia Pei, and his countrymen. There was no explanation to be had, except by questions to the prisoner, the effect of

which would be contrary to the genius and principles of British justice if they tended to extort evidence injurious to the prisoner himself, while they might have another effect, equally inconsistent with justice, by enabling him, if he possessed sufficient acuteness, as there was some reason to think he did, to discern the material bearings of the points comprehended in the questions so put, and to frame his answers accordingly; so as to explain away what might already have seemed established against him.

It became necessary, however, again to refer to the prisoner, in order to enable him to understand and explain the circumstances which appeared still to bear against him, and in particular the share which he seemed to admit that he had in the latter part of the dreadful business, The prisoner's answer, or rather statement, on this head, was, that when the man was killed, and they were proceeding to devour his body, they called him and invited him to partake; but he refused, saying, it was thought fatal in his country to eat human flesh, and that those who did so became inevitably mad. He was not a native of Quia Pei's country, but of a country bordering on it.

After this further denial of what was supposed to have been admitted, the Court thought it not right to put any further questions to the prisoner.

No farther evidence was produced on the part of the prosecution.

The prisoner having declared, through the interpreter, that he had nothing to say,

The Chief Justice proceeded to sum up the evidence. A most barbarous murder had been committed, accompanied with circumstances the most humiliating to human nature, in the undeniable proofs of a practice

f.

which was before held scarcely reconcileable to human possibility. He owned his first impression, on hearing this horrid transaction, in a way that compelled him to believe the fact, was, despair of effecting any moral improvement, or of making any progress in civilization, upon minds so lost and sunk in the lowest extreme of savage debasement; but, upon more mature reflection, he saw in it only a more striking instance of the depravity of human nature, when abandoned to itself, and destitute of social culture, and of religious instruction. This reflection was the more impressive, because it was matter of undeniable record in history, that the ancestors of the most civilized nations of Europe, even of Britons themselves, now the foremost in every social affection, as well as in all moral virtue and of pure religion, were in the general habit of offering human victims to their monstrous conceptions of the Supreme Being. Instead, therefore, of deserting as hopeless and disgusting the design of rescuing these rude savages from the depths of barbarism in which they were sunk, this remembrance ought to fill us at once with humility and with confidence, and to incite to a perseverance in the present exertions, till those who are now so abject should be made in all things equal to ourselves. In order fairly to discharge their duty in determi. ning according to the evidence, whether the prisoner at the bar was guilty or not guilty of the murder, it would be incumbent on the jury to dismiss from their minds all extraneous impressions, arising naturally, and almost necessarily, from the common relations of the horrid transaction, and from the conversation respecting it. They should exclude from their minds all foreign matters, even to the expression uttered by

the prisoner, with respect to the foreman of the jury, when apprised of his right of challenge,-an expression which filled the Court at once with an involuntary burst of laughter, succeeded immediately by a more appropriate sensation of horror. Doubts were entertained, whether in fact the prisoner had at all uttered that expression, which might have been, not improbably, interposed by one of the interpreters; and therefore the jury would keep it altogether out of their thoughts. The prisoner, it appeared, was implicated in the charge of having participated in the murder by one Quia Pei, since dead; who had been caught with the mangled fragments of a human body upon him concealed in a bag, shortly after the disappearance of the unfortunate man upon whom the murder had been perpetrated, named Zongobia. Quia Pei, when observed and interrogated by the native overseer, Hyena, at first attempted to conceal the bag, and then said simply, the contents were pieces of meat; it was, however, ascertained immediately by the thumb, and by other distinctive marks, that the whole was human flesh. This discovery furnished proof so nearly amounting to full conviction against Quia Pei, that denial could scarcely have been of any avail; he therefore, it appeared, confessed the act freely to the superintendent, Mr Ashford, who first examined him. There might have been some inducement in the words of the interpreter, desiring him to confess in order to avoid palaver, which he might have understood either as, "to save time and trouble," or as "to secure himself from mischief." The confession, however, appeared to have been made without reserve, as well to Ashford as to Mr Kearney, who was called in as the nearest Magistrate, and who came the

ensuing morning to put the business in train of legal investigation. In this investigation by Mr Kearney, Quia Pei avowed himself the principal perpetrator of the murder, but charged the prisoner with having suggested it to him, and with having pointed out the deceased, Zongobia, as a fit object for such a design; he also charged the prisoner with having participated with him in the perpetration of the murder, by holding the hands of Zongobia behind his back, while he, Quia Pei, threw him over, and proceeded to disable him by cutting off his hand; after which he cut his throat also, and severed his head from his body. Quia Pei showed to Mr Kearney the place where the murder was perpetrated, and where the head was buried, which was recognised as bearing the features of Zongobia. The reason given for sparing the head in the horrid vora city exercised on the body, was a belief in Quia Pei's nation, that to eat the human head, or any part of it, caused madness. The bones of the body were found in a shocking con. dition, bare, and some of them broken. Quia Pei is the leading person in all those discoveries, and he alone appeared to have carried off the mangled fragments; for it did not appear that any had been found upon any other. Quia Pei was, therefore, in every respect, the leading actor in the atrocious deed, and was proved to be so by undeniable circumstances, as well as by his own confession. That confession implicated the prisoner at the bar, as having suggested the design originally, and as having also assisted in the execution of it; but that confession was not evidence to convict the prisoner, unless confirmed by the assent of the prisoner himself, or by the testimony of other witnesses, or by concurring facts, or circumstances of

corroboration. It was understood, or rather supposed, that the prisoner had assented in the examinations before Mr Kearney; although it was admitted that such supposed assent was given tardily and reluctantly, and after many urgent instances and representations of the inutility of denial on the part of Quia Pei. But this assent the prisoner denied, and denied also having had any concern in the murder. In the particular inquiries directed to obtain a correct knowledge upon this point, it was found, that one of the interpreters through whom the examination was managed was detained in the country by sickness; but the other, the African interpreter, was in Court, and was the same who was then interpreting between the Court and the prisoner. This interpreter, Cockeye, was examined as to his having conveyed, or having been authorised to convey, any assent on the part of the prisoner to the charges made against him by Quia Pei, of having suggested and participated in the murder. He answered, that he did not convey any such assent, neither was he authorised to do so: on the contrary, the prisoner had then, as well as now, constantly denied all participation in the transaction and all knowledge of it, till after it was perpetrated. Here, then, was an end of the prisoner's confession; for if the first interpreter, through whom alone it could come to the others, had neither gi ven it, nor been authorised to give it, it was of no consequence how strongly the impression might have been made, nor upon how many; it was but misconception more widely and more strongly diffused. After this derangement of the train of evidence, which, it was understood, was to lead to the conviction of the prisoner, the Court felt considerable embarrass ment. There was not any collateral

or corroborative evidence, nor any matter of fact, nor circumstance affecting the prisoner. To put ques tions to him with a view to inform the Court, would have the effect of inducing him to give answers tend ing to criminate himself, which was contrary to the 'spirit and principles of British justice; or, if he was sufficiently artful, to frame answers for the purpose, he would thus deprive the Court of the little matter of evidence already in its possession, or destroy its effect. The matter of evidence of which the Court seemed to be previously in possession, consisted of a supposed assent on the part of the prisoner to his having held previous communication with Quia Pei, on the design afterwards executed, of putting Zongobia to death; and of an admission of being at the time near the spot where the murder was perpetrated, with a pot and a knife, and of having gone subsequently to the spot when called. If the Court and the Jury could be satisfied of the fact of this previous communication and concert in the design on the part of the prisoner, and of his subsequent presence near the place where the murder was perpetrated, so as to be within call, and to have joined on being called, the concurrence would be sufficient to establish the prisoner's guilt. But it was found necessary to refer again to the prisoner in respect to these points, and his answers conveyed a distinct denial of his having held any communication respecting the murderous design, previous to the perpetration of the murder; as also of having in any way participated in the act, or having known of it, till after it was perpetrated, when he was called by the perpetrator or perpetrators, and invited to join in the horrid feast, which he says he refused on the express

ground of a persuasion in his country that eating human flesh would cause madness, his country being not the country of Quia Pei, where human flesh is eaten, but bordering upon it. Thus, unless it is supposed that the prisoner had sufficient cunning, under all the difficulties of very imperfect interpretation, through two successive stages, to collect the bearings of the points of evidence on which the Court particularly dwelt, so as to frame his statements and allegations in the manner best calculated to save himself, and with this view to retract ultimately what he was understood to have freely admitted at first, there was no evidence against the prisoner beyond the accusation of the chief perpetrator, which was not supported and confirmed by other testimony. It would be for the Jury to consider whether the circumstances of previous communication and subsequent presence near the spot at the time when the murder was perpetrated, and junction with the perpetrator or perpetrators, upon being called, had been at first freely admitted, and afterwards artfully retracted by the prisoner. If those facts were established, the successive train and concert marked in them would connect the prisoner sufficiently with the act; but considering the way in which any knowledge that might have been had of these matters was obtained, it would probably appear too slight a foundation for pronouncing the prisoner guilty.

The Jury retired, and after an absence of about half an hour, returned their verdict-Guilty of assisting.

The Chief-Justice informed them that this verdict could not be received. The indictment charged the prisoner, not as assisting, but as the actual perpetrator of the murder, and

« ПредишнаНапред »