Dr Albert Ganado (The Sunday Times of Malta, October 16) has regaled us, yet again, with fascinating, yet alarming, details of Maltese history. And in his customary fashion he has added what appears to be hitherto unpublished data related to the eventual capture and execution of Caro Mitro and Nicola d’Anastasi, two of the die-hard mutineers of the Froberg Regiment.
Dr Ganado refers to an eight-page account of events published by the government “without delay” following the mutiny. This account, written by Vittorio Barzoni, includes a note of thanks to the Maltese for their good conduct, from Civil Commissioner Alexander Ball and General Villettes. It should therefore be considered the official version.
However, in October 1807, an eyewitness account was published in the London Athaneum Magazine of Literary and Miscellaneous Information, which casts a different light on events. This version was submitted by a correspondent who signed himself ‘O.R.’ and offers his own commentary on the events.
Whereas the official account includes no detail of the trial and execution of the two dozen mutineers, the later account informs readers in lucid detail of events that were less than admirable, according to the commentator. Each version was targeted at a different audience: one intended to support and appease the Maltese; the other to offer a note of caution to a more detached and circumspect readership in Britain.
These differences are best demonstrated by extracts from the Athaneum version. We take up the account of the events immediately following the court martial of the first, main group, of mutineers.
It should be noted that the punishment of serious crimes such as mutiny was generally carried out in the presence of either the whole garrison or of representatives of each regiment so that public example of the perpetrator’s humiliation would act as an additional deterrent. Readers may find some of the following details grisly, however, one should bear in mind that attitudes towards punishment and death 200 years ago, especially during times of war, were less sensitive than those of our so-called civilised times:
“Twenty-five of the principals were therefore selected, condemned by the court to die, and instantly carried to the place of execution. I may here be allowed to remark the extreme inveteracy the populace of Malta evinced on this occasion against these deluded men, who, whilst conducted to the main guard, were with difficulty saved by the military from the rage of the mob.
Froberg Regiment tunic button.“Even women fell upon them with stones, and one poor wretch exhibited at the gallows a mark of their fury in a dreadful bruise he had received in his eye, which rendered his countenance more peculiarly horrid at the moment of his sufferings. To this conduct the Maltese might have been urged by a spirit of loyalty to the British government, though it was, with far more probability, the ebullition only of their old rooted enmity to the Turks.
“The execution was an awful scene. All the regiments of the garrison and the provincial corps of Maltese were early assembled within the lines of Floriana.
“A gallows was erected in the centre to hang 10 of these fellows who had been concerned in the murder of the officers and artillery-man. The remaining 15 were to be shot. For some time previous to their last moments, some Catholic priests were long active in endeavouring to inspire them all with a proper sense of their situation, but in vain; death seemed to have no terrors to them, nor hope of futurity at present consolation!
“They suffered with the obstinacy of the American savage – they tightened the ropes round each others’ necks – blasphemed with horrid imprecations – danced on the scaffold – scorned – derided – and spat with contempt on all around them; bent upon a barbarous display of indifference to the punishment that awaited them.
Whereas the official account includes no detail of the trial and execution of the two dozen mutineers, the later account informs readers in lucid detail of events that were less than admirable
“Thus died 10 of the ringleaders on the gallows, evincing in their last moments not a spark of human feeling, except in a farewell kiss which they mutually exchanged.
“The remainder were shot; but the circumstances that attended their execution were unusual, and deserve to be mentioned. These poor fellows were stationed in very open files on each side of the gallows, their eyes uncovered, in front and nearly 40 yards distant from the division of soldiers who were appointed to fire upon them.
“On the first volley, three or four dropped, though several were slightly wounded: after the second fire, two of the culprits, unable to endure any longer the horror of their situation, ran away towards the fortifications, and a scene of the utmost confusion ensued.
“One of them in his way flung himself forward several times in an attempt to strike his head against a large stone, which had formerly been placed there as the tomb of a former mutineer, but he failed in his object of destroying himself, and again, fled, unhurt by a single shot of the number that were levelled at him.
“By this time, soldiers from all sides pursued the fugitives, firing at them confusedly; the mob closed, and it appeared the greatest miracle that two of the populace only were wounded in the disorder. The two sufferers who had caused it, amidst a shower of shot, threw themselves over the ramparts, 50 feet high, and were dashed to pieces by their fall.
“The remaining culprits were forgotten for the moment; numbers of them still lay bleeding in the agony of their wounds; nor were they finally dispatched till shot through and through at the muzzle of the musket.”
In conclusion, ‘O.R.’ states by way of caution:
“I grant their sentence was just, and that many may be found who defend the manner of rendering this public example more impressive to the multitude; but I maintain it was neither military nor a manly act, and a severe reflection on the boasted humanity of the British nation: and, notwithstanding the justice of their condemnation, I am well convinced that a little less indifference to their sufferings would have had no bad effect upon the spectators, whilst it would have displayed to them the superior feelings of benevolence, which form so striking a trait in the English character.”
As Dr Ganado indicates at the start of his article, censorship was important to the British. Here we see a case of tight control of the press in Malta yet a more liberal attitude to the freedom of the press in Britain.