On July 5, 1884, a small yacht carrying four crewmen got caught in a storm off
the Cape of Good Hope—and sank in just 5 minutes.
The men only managed to grab a couple of tins of turnips before the ship sank—but no fresh water.
In the following weeks, they floated aimlessly in a flimsy lifeboat hundreds of miles from land.
When the 17-year-old cabin boy lost consciousness, the captain killed him
so the men could eat his flesh to survive. Just a few days later, they were rescued.
Today we explore the story of the Mignonette and the gruesome murder
that sparked a landmark case involving survival cannibalism.
Built in 1867, the Mignonette was a 52-foot yacht designed for coastal sailing—but
when an Australian lawyer visiting England bought the boat in 1883,
he wanted it delivered to his home—in Australia.
This of course posed a challenge, as Australia was thousands of miles away,
and the Mignonette was not designed for such an arduous journey.
Nevertheless, the wealthy lawyer was determined to get his yacht—and he managed to find someone
foolhardy enough to take on the challenge for a reasonable fee: 31-year-old Captain Tom Dudley.
And so, on May 19, 1884, the Mignonette set off on the 15,000-mile journey from
Southampton, England, to Sydney, Australia.
Captain Dudley’s crew consisted of 37-year-old Edwin Stephens, 39-year-old
Edmund Brooks—and an orphaned 17-year-old cabin boy by the name of Richard Parker.
On July 5, the Mignonette hit a gale about 1,500 miles northwest of the Cape of Good Hope.
As the young cabin boy went below decks to make the crew tea before bedtime,
a wave struck the boat and washed away the bulwark.
Realizing the ship was doomed, they all jumped into a 13-foot wooden dinghy with just enough
time for Dudley to grab the compass and a few tins of turnips before the ship went down.
Stranded hundreds of miles from the nearest land with no fresh water,
the situation quickly grew dire.
They managed to catch a sea turtle at one point—which offered them momentary
respite from hunger—but with no water, the men continued to suffer from severe dehydration.
After failing to catch any rainwater, they eventually resorted to drinking their own urine.
Presumably mad with thirst, the 17-year-old cabin boy, Richard Parker, turned to drinking seawater
as a final resort. This, of course, made him violently ill and put him on the brink of a coma.
According to later testimony, there had been discussion among the men about a sacrificial
killing, but the topic was dropped. But now that the young cabin boy seemed to be on the brink
of death, it presented the perfect opportunity to kill and eat him for the sake of the group.
Captain Dudley rationalized killing him by explaining that
he and Stephens had wives and families to live for. Parker was just an orphan.
Around July 25, the decision was made: Parker would have to die
if the others were to live. Dudley signaled to Stephens to hold Parker’s legs if he struggled.
After a quick prayer, Dudley drove his penknife into Parker’s jugular and killed him.
The three men drank Parker’s blood and fed on his body over the next few days.
Presumably overcome with guilt, Stephens ate very little of Parker.
Dudley later described the gruesome scene during his trial, saying:
"I can assure you I shall never forget the sight of my
two unfortunate companions over that ghastly meal.
On July 29, the three survivors were rescued by a German sailing ship.
They insisted on taking Parker’s remains to England for a proper burial.
Once ashore in Falmouth, England, all three men assumed Parker’s killing was
justified and that they would be protected by the custom at sea.
This custom basically dictated that shipwrecked survivors could sacrifice someone through a
random selection process called drawing lots—which meant drawing straws, sticks,
or pebbles—or whatever object might be available after a shipwreck. And
whoever got the shortest straw or stick would be the unfortunate chosen one.
As the three men told customs officials about murdering and eating the young boy,
a police officer named Laverty overheard them and told his friends down at the station.
This selection process, thought Laverty, didn’t sound so random.
As a result, the men were arrested for murder on the high seas.
The public was surprisingly forgiving. Being in a coastal city,
the townspeople were accustomed to losing loved ones to the sea—and so, they were sympathetic to
the situation the three men found themselves in. Perhaps most surprising, the victim’s
brother even showed forgiveness by shaking the mens’ hands in court.
The court, on the other hand, was not so forgiving.
Authorities at the time were worried about the custom of
the sea and the dangerous precedent it set for unpunished murders—and
so it was decided that Dudley and Stephens must be punished to set an example. Indeed, no law stated
that necessity—in their case, starvation—was a defense for taking young Richard Parker’s life.
Dudley and Stephens were convicted of murder and sentenced to be executed. The other sailor, Edmund
Brooks, was discharged, as it was determined he had always been against killing Parker—though,
ironically, it was he and Dudley who ate most of Parker.
In the end, due to a lack of evidence—and what was described by one historian as
“a complete mess of a court case”—their sentence was commuted to just six months.
Thomas Dudley would go down in history as the cannibal captain,
which was the headline used to announce his death from bubonic plague in 1900.
While Dudley and Stephens only served a minimal sentence for killing and eating someone,
the case is still discussed as an example of necessity as a defense
and whether murder is ever justified for survival.
So what do you think in this case? Does taking one life justify saving three others?
What would you have done in this situation?
Thank you for watching today’s video. If you enjoy stories about ships and maritime history,
please consider subscribing to be notified when I post a new video.
Your feedback and support are greatly appreciated.