the one a perfect stranger to me, and the other known only about two years previously, and then only introduced to me by a friend who wished me to give him some temporary employment, which I did, and subsequently interested myself in getting him the appointment of Secretary to the Southern Whale Fishery Company – these two parties, before they had been many hours on the Island, presumed to pass judgement upon my acts of omission and commission, and condemned the whole proceeding altogether.13
Enderby later concluded that the Special Commissioners were
apparently guided in their opinions by information they derived from a man I had threatened to dismiss from the Company’s service for incompetency, but for whom they expressed great sympathy, and knowing my intentions towards him, they, out of a spirit of opposition, promoted him, but ultimately dismissed him at Sydney, where he was complaining of having been harshly dealt with by Messrs. Dundas and Preston after having done what he was pleased to term ‘their dirty work’ …
The man’s identity is a mystery.14
As things now stood, Dundas and Preston had Enderby’s resignation as Chief Commissioner and Lieutenant Governor, and were in control. Enderby would soon be gone. In his letter of resignation of 28 January 1852 to Earl Grey, British Secretary of State for the Colonies,15 he had pointed out that having resigned as Commissioner of the Southern Whale Fishery Company, his stay was ‘no longer desirable or requisite’ and that he intended to quit the islands ‘at an early period’.16
But then something totally unexpected occurred, something which would have been of little importance in the normal run of events, but which took the confrontation between Charles Enderby and the Special Commissioners to an altogether different and intensified level.
After an uneasy standoff, during which neither party spoke or communicated with the other, three whaling ships returned within the space of a few days. The catches of the Samuel Enderby, which arrived from a year-long voyage on 3 February,17 and of the Brisk, which returned from a 10-month voyage on the 5th,18 cannot have been noteworthy19 or they would surely have been commented on by Enderby, who would have been glad of positive results to support his cause. But the Lord Nelson, which made port on 8 February after a year away, brought 300 barrels of sperm oil, one of the colony’s best results.20 Its voyage was, in fact, only bettered by the Earl of Hardwicke, which had arrived ‘a full ship’ on 11 November the previous year.21
However, the Lord Nelson’s voyage, although commercially successful, had been one of the colony’s worst in terms of its crew. Captain Dobson had been ill for some time, one ordinary seaman had died and been buried at sea, two crewmen were suffering severely from scurvy and three others, including a black American, John Downs,22 were sick with scurvy and confined to their bunks. The Brisk had also fared badly: three invalids needed to be hospitalised ashore. From its master, Captain Freeman, Dundas and Preston were interested to learn, and include in their report to the Company’s directors, that ‘everything here has hitherto been anarchy and confusion, no authority being either recognised or obeyed’.23 Three days later, when Dr Rodd reported to them on the sickness aboard the Lord Nelson, they were able to add: ‘Mr. Rodd … expressed contrition for his past disregard of our authority, and stated that he was instigated by Dr. Ewington on that occasion. In compliance with his recommendation, we had one of the invalids of the ‘Nelson’ [Wright] removed to the infirmary on shore.’ Their report went on to say:
In reply to an observation which we made to Mr. Rodd, to the effect that we were determined to maintain proper discipline, he replied, that he entirely concurred in the propriety of our measures, and considered it a matter of regret that we had not arrived long ago to carry them into operation, as by that means the Company would have been saved a heavy loss, more especially as regards the stores: he did not scruple to declare, that Mr. Enderby, as we only too well know, had sent home false and delusive statements in regard to the islands.24
Rodd was apparently backed up by Mr Riley, chief officer of the Lord Nelson, who informed the Special Commissioners ‘that the crew of that vessel were far more manageable and obedient than when last here, and that the change was to be attributed to the altered state of things which they found here on their arrival’.25 Almost exactly a month later, the Commissioners would have cause to remember their comments, on being confronted by the Brisk’s crew in a state of near mutiny – when it was Enderby’s turn to comment on the state of discipline ashore.
At first, Wright was the main cause of concern among the sick seamen, and it was expected that Downs would soon recover. On his second day, Rodd prescribed Downs ‘Half a pint of porter three times a day; the diet the same as Wright.’ This diet, as shown by an earlier entry respecting Wright, consisted of ‘1 lb of lean meat, 1 lb of flour, and tea and sugar, the usual shore rations’26 – although as Dundas and Preston pointed out, ‘It is lamentable that we have not a single vegetable of any kind to give the crews now in port, though many of the men much need them.’27 In all, 18 men were on the sick list; 10 were from the Brisk and the Lord Nelson. With the infirmary full, three bunks were put in the mangling house for the last three men brought ashore, one of whom was John Downs.
The mangling house, built as a communal laundry with a copper, tubs and a mangle, was a single room just 10 × 15 feet (4.5 × 3 metres). It was never intended for occupation. Draughts entered through the floor, which was of untongued boards, and through warped spaces in the walls. Because there was no ceiling or tarred lining, the air was free to enter through gaps in the shingle roof, which leaked in several places.28 To compensate for these conditions, the invalids were issued with an extra blanket apiece, in addition to the bedding from their bunks aboard ship. Dundas and Preston recorded that on 11 February they ‘visited the invalids, and found them getting better’.29
On 14 February, six days after he was brought ashore, Dr Rodd described Downs as better; but two days later as ‘not so well’. The entry in his Daily Report Book read: ‘Downes: it would be better for him to have three glasses of sherry per day in lieu of the porter.’30 Dr Ewington, who had been dismissed from the Company’s service, went to see Downs at Dr Rodd’s request. He described the room the men were in as in a most filthy condition, and the stench intolerable.31 His subsequent affidavit stated: ‘All the men complained of being placed in such a hole, and … the stench was so great they could not endure it.’32
On the 19th, the Special Commisssioners reported: ‘The surgeon having reported Downes (a black), one of the invalids from the “Nelson”, to be in a dying state, we appointed a man to sit up with him to-night.’33 It is believed that Granger, the man assigned to the mangling house and himself an invalid, had been in the habit of helping himself to the sick men’s supply of porter and sherry, as well as to their rations.34
At 11 o’clock on the evening of 21 February, Downs died. Before Dundas and Preston’s arrival, Enderby had always ‘deemed it his duty personally to attend to the case of any invalid brought under his notice’;35 but in Downs’ case he had been ‘prohibited from interfering’, had been under the impression that Downs was getting better, and had ‘heard nothing more respecting the sick men’ until he was informed of the death on the morning of the 23rd.36 Rodd’s death certificate gave the primary cause of death as dysentery, and the secondary cause as salivation,37 caused by the over-administration of mercury by Captain Dobson while Downs was aboard the Lord Nelson.38 Dr Ewington later said he told Enderby ‘that the masters of the ships ought to be prevented from using mercury in the way they did, but this was in consequence of a conversation with Captain Dobson, of the Lord Nelson, who boasted to me that he could cure any of his men with mercury, and that he always gave them plenty of it’ – to cure syphilis.39
William Mackworth returned from his six-week assignment to Sydney the day before Downs’ death. He had gone to New South Wales in the Fancy with oil from the Earl of Hardwicke, with instructions to bring back sheep and stores and to enlist new hands for the
whaling crews – no easy task, as he lost several of the Fancy’s men to the Australian goldfields.40 He returned to find Enderby stripped of his office and ‘many other changes’. He delivered papers connected with his voyage to the Special Commissioners and, presumably on request, a copy of his personal diary covering the period from 4 July to 29 October, when Enderby was absent from the colony.
The fact Mackworth makes no mention of the conflict between Enderby and the Special Commissioners, and only the briefest of entries regarding Downs’ death, shows how quickly, as a servant of the Company, he had come under Dundas and Preston’s influence. On 22 February he noted, ‘A seaman Downs of the Lord Nelson died last night’; and on the 23rd, ‘Funeral of deceased Seaman took place – Read the Burial Service’ – again no mention of the storm that raged between Enderby and the Special Commissioners on the day of Downs’ burial. Just back from his mission to Sydney – for which he might equally have been castigated – Mackworth’s entry for the following day shows how unprivate his private diary had become, for he wrote: ‘Charged Mr Enderby’s Account with the amount of his Salary for Table money payable here for 118 days being the period he was for the second time absent from his post – also with the value of the Spirits destroyed by him’ – which at the time he had hailed as ‘The wisest step of the Chief Comr since his arrival … in effectually putting an end to the damning fountain of crime [caused by] the issue of spirituous liquors.’41 Significantly, this entry was the first time Mackworth had referred to his former superior as Mr Enderby rather than the Governor, his Excellency, or the Chief Commissioner.
Enderby, on belatedly hearing of Downs’ death, immediately requested that the Special Commissioners instruct the medical officers to report the cause of death to him. Shortly after sending this note, he was:
waited on by Mr. Rodd … who informed me he had called at the desire of the Special Commissioners, who were anxious to look at the book containing the register of births, deaths and marriages, which was in my custody … As I had no reason to apprehend any improper intentions on the part of Messrs. Dundas and Preston, I handed the book to Mr. Rodd, with instructions to return it after the Special Commissioners had inspected it … In about half an hour Mr. Rodd came back, without bringing the book or certificate, and said that he was instructed not to furnish me with any such certificate; and that with reference to the register book, they, Messrs. Dundas and Preston, would see about it (meaning its being returned to me).42
Mackworth then called on Enderby to say that he had orders to inter the seaman’s body in an hour’s time. Enderby reminded him he was still Lieutenant Governor until his resignation was accepted, and said he would not allow the burial to take place until he had sighted the death certificate. He commented later:
Mr. Mackworth appeared frightened at the position in which he was placed … and inquired of me what he was to do. I reminded him of his duty as a magistrate [whom Enderby had appointed], and gave him written orders not to inter the body … but he said he must obey the orders of the Special Commissioners, who, he said, he believed held some authority from Her Majesty’s Government to act; he thus admitted that he was not a free agent, and consequently not a person to whom any one could appeal for impartial justice.43
Enderby then sent a second note to Dundas and Preston: ‘The Lieutenant-governor will thank Messrs. Dundas and Preston to return, per bearer, the registers of births, deaths and marriages, and the certificate of the death of the seaman Downs.’ This note was handed to the Special Commissioners by Enderby’s servant. They read it, and told the servant, ‘There is no answer.’44
Enderby now sent a final notice to Mackworth, stating: ‘I hereby give you notice that I cannot sanction the interment of the seaman Downs until I obtain a certificate of the cause of his death. (Signed) Chas. Enderby, Lieut-governor.’45
About an hour later, he witnessed the body of John Edward Downs being carried by seamen past Government House towards the graveyard, followed by Dundas and Preston. The funeral service was conducted by Mackworth, who must have known by now that Enderby was right about the Special Commissioners’ neglect of their duties in the treatment of Downs, and must have been more uncomfortable than ever about his involvement – although nobody could have foreseen then that the affair would go as far as a parliamentary inquiry in the British House of Commons.
CHAPTER TWELVE
Enderby Under Siege
The spate of correspondence on the day of Downs’ funeral continued with a letter of protest from Enderby to the Special Commissioners, pointing out that ‘as you have uniformly treated me with great contumely and disrespect, which has encouraged the Company’s servants to behave in like manner towards me … I hold you responsible for all acts which appertain to my office as Lieutenant-governor until I hear from Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for the Colonies, to whom I shall submit all your proceedings.’ Rather unwisely, as it would immediately backfire on him, he finished his letter: ‘As I have already informed you, I shall not venture out of the house during the day, thereby subjecting myself to acts of incivility, since I have neither the power to resist or resent them.’1
The Special Commissioners replied that they had received his letter with ‘much surprise’, pointing out that ‘If Mr. Enderby is not treated by the Company’s servants with what he may conceive to be proper respect, the Special Commissioners can only regret it. They certainly found him held in very little respect at the time of their arrival, and it is not therefore to them that must be imputed the want of respect of which Mr. Enderby now complains.’ Their letter concluded by reminding him that they held his resignation of the office of Lieutenant Governor.2 The fact they said they were holding on to it, rather than awaiting the opportunity to forward it, meant, of course, that Enderby still precariously retained the office.
His response was to post a notice on the door of Government House, to the effect that he had been grossly insulted, and could no longer fill the office of Lieutenant Governor. And that since everyone was in the pay of the Southern Whale Fishery Company, they would subject themselves to dismissal if they were to obey orders from him. And further, that although he would retain the appellation of Lieutenant Governor, he could no longer exercise the duties of that office, and therefore released the magistrates and constables from their oaths to him.
This notice, dated 24 February 1852, was followed by a second one, informing everyone that as an earlier notice of 15 June 1850 controlling the introduction and sale of liquor without his permission had been violated in the case of the ships Chieftain (on which Dundas and Preston had arrived) and the Fancy, he no longer had the power to enforce such an order, and hereby cancelled it.3
The same day Mackworth called on him, noting later that ‘in the course of a very unpleasant interview with the late Chief Commissioner today, he expressed to me his determination to use his utmost efforts to ruin the Company should the present course pursued towards him by the Company’s Representatives be continued’.4 Enderby’s phrase ‘should the present course’ came close to implying that the Special Commissioners were already doing the ruining, and perhaps needed to modify their approach.
Enderby’s ill-advised threat clearly showed the stress he was under. As far as the Special Commissioners were concerned when his remark was reported to them, he had made a very serious threat, and the damage was done.
Next day, Mackworth ‘read to Mr Enderby [Former Chief Commissioner] a letter received this day from the Special Commissioners requiring Mr Enderby to vacate the Company’s Official Residence’ – until now better known as Government House – ‘now occupied by him and placing at his disposal the Apartments now occupied by the Special Commissioners – Mr Enderby replied that he would not comply with the order and that he was determined to shoot either me or any other man attempting to remove him or his effects by force.’5
This time Enderby made no attempt to qualify his threat – which he considered the appointment he had received from Her Majesty made it h
is duty to carry out – as it was yet another of Dundas and Preston’s insults to his viceregal office. He gives his version of the confrontation in a statement, later printed in the House of Commons Parliamentary Papers:
I informed [Mr Mackworth] that I would not remove, and that I would shoot any one presuming to touch me or my effects; whereupon he asked me if I would shoot him; to which I replied, Certainly, if you attempt to put the threat in execution; and I made preparation accordingly [to execute] a threat which I considered the appointment I had received from Her Majesty made it incumbent on me to carry out. Mr Mackworth had been my friend, and I had entertained considerable friendship for him; nevertheless he was the tool of designing men … So far from my being guilty of the charges alleged against me by Messrs. Dundas and Preston of attempting to annoy them, I believe I should more justly be charged with not having offered a more vigorous resistance to their proceedings.6
The day after this confrontation, Charles Enderby posted a third notice:
PROTEST
As the Special Commissioners appointed by the Southern Whale Fishery Company have determined by force or otherwise, to remove me from my present residence (against which removal, under any circumstances, I protest), and as there is no civil court of law (as in other colonies) to which I can appeal for redress, I hold them responsible for the consequences of such compulsory movement of myself and my effects; and I intend appointing two competent persons to decide whether the house or apartments, &c. &c. selected for me are sufficient, bearing in mind that I brought with me from England two servants, and am consequently entitled to room for that number.
I should wish to know if the Special Commissioners are desirous of appointing any persons to meet those to be selected by me.
(signed) Charles Enderby,
The Enderby Settlement Page 16