THE JUNIOR MUTINEERS.

Colonist, Volume II, Issue 189, 12 August 1859, Page 3

THE JUNIOR MUTINEERS.

Last year we gave an account of the mutiny on board the Junior- (an American whale-ship), and the murder of the captain and third mate. They were tried in Sydney and afterwards forwarded to Boston in the above vessel, under the command of Captain ...Gardiuer. The following is the sentence of each, as appears in the Boston correspondence of the New York Tribune :■ — " Boston, April 23, 1859. "The convicted mutineers of the whale-ship Junior were sentenced on Thursday. Cyrus W. Plumer, who was convicted of the murder of Captain Molten, was sentenced to be hanged on the 24th of June. Carther, Herbert, and Stanley, who were convioted of manslaughter on two indictments—first, for the killing of Captain Meilen ; and, second, for the killing of Smith, oiie of the mates—were sentenced to. hard labor in the State prison for five years and ten months, and to fines of 2000 dollars each. In case of uon-pnyment of the fines before the term of the sentence expires, they are to he sent to gaol until the fines are paid, or they are discharged by due course of law. They have already been sent over to prison, and two of them have been set to picking stone, and the third is set to work hi the furniture shop. "Some interesting proceedings took place on the occasiou of the sentence. Plumer submitted a written statement, which was read by the clerk, in vvhich he declares that the blood of Captain Mellen is not upon his head. If the facts could be made known, lie says it would appear that he and others intended to take the officers prisoners, and that the firing was at first accidental, and arose from a derangement of the plans agreed upon; that Captain Mellen was actually killed by Fifield, who struck him with a hatchet, as he afterwards boasted; that the real culprit and most guilty person was one of the officers (viz., Nelson Provost, one of the mates); that he (Plumer) at no time shewed a bloodthirsty disposition, but, on the contrary, did all he could to protect the lives of those on board. These statements are in some degree confirmed by certain affidavits. The first is that of Alfred F. Gardner, of Nantueket, late master of the barque Lousiana, who brought the Junior home after the mutiny. He details various facts which led him to the conclusion that Provost was at the bottom of the outbreak. He was so well satisfied on this point that ho refused to bring him home in the Junior. On the home passage Captain Gardiner occupied the same berth which Captain Mellen occupied when he was killed. From a close observation of the shot holes, and the position which the Captain must have been in, he is satisfied that the shots could not have struck him. This seems to confirm the suspicion thrown upon FiSiild. GBorge M. Patrick, mate of the ship India; -which brought Provost home, says that he believed, and the crew of the India believed, that Provost was at the bottom of the mutiny ; that on the passage home Provost'told him that he knew what was going to take placa that night before he went to bed. He also testifies, that Provost was often terrified in his sleep, and said he was afraid somebody would kill him ; that he said Fifield was one of the ringleaders.; that Plumer saved his life after the affair was over. Patrick goes on to state many things in relation to Provost which, if correctly stated, go to shew that he is a very great scoundrel, whether he is guilty of this crime or not. Richard Carther, one of the men convicted of roanslaughter, makes a statement that Fifield said to him that Plumer missed the captain, but he (Fifield) did not. He then shewed what he said was the captain's blood on his frock. I am told that Herbert and Stanley do not confirm the truth of Plumer's statements. They consider him the ringleader, and mainly responsible for the revolt. There is, however, no thing intrinsically improbable in the statements which are made against Fifield and Plumer. The former is known to have been engaged in a conspiracy, and was used as a witness by the Government with that understanding. And as for Provost, who was also a witness for the Government, it was the general impression of those who heard and read the whole evidence, that he was a bad man, to say the least. The testimony of Gardner and Patrick seems to be unbiassed and unimpeaehed; that of Carther must go for what it is worth."

The following advertisement in the Auckland Examiner^ of July 27th, with regard to the new Tariff will no doubt cause some amusement to our readers:— ■WANTED an Interpreter to translate the above *' Tariff, a thorough knowledge of the oil and Italian Business indispensable. No person need apply unless he can prove whether or not Soda Crystals, Bath Bricks, Vinegar, Split Peas, &c, are Oilmen's Stores. Salary #700 per annum. Also, A skilled Artizan, Engineer, Blacksmith, and Ironmonger, to distinguish between Hardware and Ironmongery of all sorts, which in Legislative Language of said Tariff are to pay a duty of 3s per foot, and rod, bolt and bar Iron and Nails, which in said Legislative Language are not to pay any duty. Salary £800 per annum. ■ A Certificate from the Attorney-General as to any Candidates knowledge of "Legislative Language,"' will be considered conclusive and satisfactory. Apply, between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., at the Lunatic Asylum, Domain. N.B.—No discarded Minister's application will lie entertained, as such appointment might lead to Mandamuses, Injunctions, &c.