The Real Captain Kidd

of minor importance, this trial having, as has already been explained, been postponed in order that Kidd might get the papers which had been ordered by the

taking them, so far from being a pirate, he had done his King and country service. Their plea that the trial should be put off in order that these papers might be procured had been allowed as reasonabl

d without their production; and that not one of the judges who took part in it, the most prominent of whom was the Lord Chief Baron Ward, who had been present in Court the day before, and heard the arguments for the postponement of the[171] trial, made any comment on the absence of Kidd's counsel, or

the suspicion of foul play on behalf of one or more of the great personages interested in the case. In this connection there are certain facts which it is impossible to ignore. At the time of the trial, impeachments were pending in Parliament against Orford, the late First Lord of the Admiralty, and Somers, for their participation in Kidd's enterprise. No efforts had been spared by their political opponents to induce Kidd to make damaging disclosures against them. Thus far they had been unsuccessful. Kidd had remained faithful to his employers. But dead men tell no tales; and neither Orford nor Somers could have felt any security against untoward disclosures on his part so long as he remained alive. Comin

ead the jury, and were only prevented from doing so by Kidd's simple questioning of them. Ignorant of the rules of the court he tried more than once to break in and give his own version whilst they were giving theirs. "Hear me," he cried, springing up in court on one occasion; but was promptly reduced to silence by the reminder that when the time came, he could question the witnesses. He did ask them some very pertinent questions, from the answers to which it[175] was clear that they had wilfully endeavoured to deceive the Court. But he was, of course, no adept in the art of systematic and persistent cross-examination. As time went on, and it became evident that whenever he asked any question with the object of testing the credibility of the two deserters, he was stopped by the judge, and whenever their evidence was in conflict with his statements or those of any of his men, it

l. "Will you ask any

t trouble the Court any

oined Culliford in[177] open piracy, and had since been promised their lives if they would take Kidd's. This, however, was clearly not the view of the Lord Chief Baron. Speaking of Kidd in his summing up he said: "He has called some persons here to give an account of his reputation, and of his services done in the West Indies, and one of them says" (as a matter of fact they all swore to it) "he did good service there. Well, so he mig

." In other words, Bradenham in the judge's opinion, was a witness whose voluntary evidence on an ordinary occasion was worthless. His testimony could only become of value, when given under compulsion, with the object of saving his own life, and after he had been drilled[179] to cast it into such a shape that it would in the opinion of the legal advisers of the Crown, imperil the life of another man of unimpeachable antecedents, whom the Government desired to destroy. It is to be feared that such views of the value of King's evidence were by no means rare in those days. When questioned by the Judge, why, if he thought the Quedagh Merchant was a lawful prize, he did not have her condemned, Kidd's simple answer was that his men would not allow him to do s

keep the deserters in hand, or in coming to terms with Culliford, after they had left him

es" (i. e., by the King's evidence) "to be the goods of Armenians and other people that are in amity with the King: and Captain[181] Kidd would have them to be the goods of Frenchmen, or at least that the ship was sailed under French passes. Now

re that Bellamont had sent them over to England. His case was that he had given them to Bellamont, and he believed that Bellamont was keeping them back. Being unable to

not[182] see any French passes

you had French passes.

are this to anybody that

see any; but I only said I

ask him whether I h

say he had French passes, but I never saw them. I have hea

you hear nobo

er.

n vain to ask

. "What was that pret

1

"I saw

you have he

heard of it, but

from these two, Kidd called

ed-Mr. Davis, pray give an account, w

or for Anguilla) "and there he sent his boat ashore, and there was one said Captain Kidd was publ

ron Ward. "Wh

ptain Kidd

ptain Elms say they

say they were French passes. Says he, I

h King or his subjects, or that the ship was sailed under a French pass, or indeed that there ever was a French pass shown or seen. He appeals to the witnesses over and over aga

n the high sea, and these were the goods of persons in amity wi

r his subjects, or that the ship had a French pass. Otherwise neither of them (sic) will excuse him from being a pirate; for if he takes the goods of friends, he is a pirate: he had no authority for that; there

lready been stated, had been made Parliamentary paper

t one of them. Had they been produced, as they ought undoubtedly to have been in accordance with the order of the House of Commons, it[186] would have puzzl

e proclamation was dated the eighth of December, 1698. It had been sent out to St. Marie's on board of Captain Warren's squadron, which was conducting the ambassador of the Great Mogul on a tour to the Eastern seas that he might see with his own eyes that the Government was at last making a serious effort to suppress the Eastern piracy. It declared the King's intent to be "That such as had been guilty of any acts of piracy in the seas East of the Cape of Good Hope, might have notice of His Most Gracious Intention of extending His Most Royal mercy to such of them as should surrender themselves, and to cause the severest punishment to be inflicted upon those who should continue obdurate." The King's intent seemed therefore plain, that he would pardon all those wh

d, consider the nature of this proclamation, and what was

s of it. Now[189] there are four Commissioners named that you ought to surrender to. But you have not su

re condemned to death along with Kidd, and their comrades, some of whom when it became clear that they woul

say, but to ask him" (Bradenham) "whether I did ever disobey my c

No. I cannot

es, whether I ever disobeyed my captain's commands.[190] Mr. Palmer, di

always obedient

I do anything against my captain's commands?

but that he did always obe

d not Captain Kidd often say that his com

have often hea

how came you to g

"For want

d always obeyed[191] his commands, and had no share. I came ho

beyed my captain in

rd. "There is no do

hing more to say replied, "My lord, I had many

n Ward. "What p

y French

ron Ward. "Wh

ord Bellamo

you to make your defence, you should have objected it at the be

difficult to see how he could have done so, Kidd's impassioned entreaties at the beginning of his trial on the preceding day for the production of thes

"My lord, I have nothing to say, but that I have been sworn against by perjured and wicked people." After sentence had been pronounced, he added, "My lo