Lesson 3: Legal Dilemma: The United States vs. Holmes (1848)

Lesson 3: Legal Dilemma: The United States vs. Holmes (1848)

Discussion for Week 2: Moral Dilemmas.

United states vs. Holmes

On the 13th of March 1841, the American ship, the William Brown, left Liverpool for Philadelphia in the United States. At 10 O'Clock on the night of the 19th of April, the William Brown struck an iceberg. 41 survivors- the captian, the first mate, seven other crew, and 31 passengers, in all 41 people, were crowded into a lifeboat designed to hold 7. 31 other passengers went down with the sinking ship. As soon as the lifeboat was put to water, it began to leak. Even without the leak, however, the boat was seriously overloaded- the waterline was only 10 inches from the gunwale (the sidewalls of the boat). As a storm threatened, and the water was full of icebergs of various sizes, it became obvious that the lifeboat would have to be lightened if anyone were to survive. The captain reasoned that the right thing to do in this situation was to force some individuals to go over the side and drown. Such an action, he reasoned, was not unjust to those thrown overboard, for they would have drowned anyway. If he did nothing, however, he would be responsible for the deaths of those whom he could have saved. Some people opposed the captain's decision. They claimed that if nothing were done and everyone died as a result, no one would be responsible for these deaths. On the other hand, if the captain attempted to save some, he could do so only by killing others and their deaths would be his responsibility; this would be worse than doing nothing and letting all die. The captain rejected this reasoning. Since the only possibility for rescue required great efforts of rowing, the captain decided that the weakest would have to be sacrificed. In this situation it would be absurd, he thought, to decide by drawing lots who should be thrown overboard. The captain and crew simply threw the weakest men on board over the side, sparing only the strongest and those married couples who were together on board the lifeboat. (There were several 'honorable suicides'). As it turned out, after days of hard rowing and bailing, the survivors were rescued and the captain was charged with 'unlawful homicide.'
(adapted from Victor Grassian Moral Reasoning).
full details, plus the arguments for the defence:
tp:/wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/web/holmes.htm

Question: Imagine you were on the jury for Captain Hood's manslaughter charge. Would you declare Hood innocent, guilty of murder, or guilty of manslaughter? Why?
Objectives in this exercise:
-To construct an argument
-To identify some basic moral principles;