The charges against him were seventeen in number, but the court ignored most of them, and only imputed blame to Byng in that, during the engagement, he did not do his utmost to “take, seize and destroy” the ships of the French, and to assist such of his chief officers as were engaged.
The prisoner’s conduct fell under a part of an Article of War providing for such offence; and the court had no other alternative than to pass sentence of death upon the unfortunate Admiral, as provided in the Article.
But as all evidence showed that he did not lack personal courage, the court refused to find him guilty of “cowardice or disaffection,” and earnestly recommended him to mercy.
In a letter to the Admiralty, signed by every member of the court, they say, “we cannot help laying the distress of our minds before your Lordships, in finding ourselves under the necessity of condemning a man to death from the great severity of the 12th Article of War, part of which he falls under, and which admits of no mitigation, even if the crime should be committed by an error of judgment; and therefore, for our own conscience’s sake, we pray your Lordships, in the most earnest manner, to recommend him to his Majesty’s clemency.”
This the Lords of the Admiralty did not do, but simply requested the King to submit the case to the twelve judges, as to whether the sentence was a legal one. There had been no question of its legality. The judges declared the sentence legal.
On the very same day they did so, the Lords of the Admiralty, at the head of whom was Lord Temple, signed a warrant for carrying the sentence into execution, on February 28th.
Admiral Forbes, one of the Board of Admiralty, refused to sign it; and the sentence was generally considered by naval officers cruel in the extreme. Admiral West demanded a revision of the 12th Article, and declared he would resign unless it was abrogated. Wm. Pitt characterized it as unjustly severe, but it was only modified twenty-two years afterwards, by inserting, after the word death, “or to inflict such other punishment as the nature and degree of the offence shall be found to deserve.”
As Byng was a member of the House of Commons it was necessary to expel him before execution, and this led to a long and acrimonious debate as to an appeal to the throne for mercy. Nothing was done, however. Byng’s political enemies were too strong for his friends, among whom was Mr. Fox, and pardon was no longer hoped for. In the meantime the execution had been postponed, but was finally ordered for the 14th of March. This decision was met by Byng almost with cheerfulness, as he was to be relieved from imprisonment, indignities and protracted anxiety, which had lasted for seven months.
The sentence was carried into effect on the day appointed, on board the Monarch, in Portsmouth Harbor. About noon, having taken leave of two friends and a clergyman who had attended him, Byng walked out of the state cabin on to the quarter-deck, where two files of marines were drawn up to execute the sentence. He advanced with a firm and deliberate step, and composed and resolute countenance, and wished to suffer with his face uncovered; but his friends represented that perhaps his look might intimidate the marines, and prevent them from taking proper aim. So he allowed a handkerchief to be tied over his eyes, and kneeling on a cushion, dropped his handkerchief as a signal for the marines to fire. Five balls passed through his body, and he dropped dead instantly. The time consumed from the moment he left the cabin until his body was in its coffin was just three minutes.
He left a paper containing a solemn protest against the malice and persecution he had encountered, and saying that he felt justice would ultimately be done his memory. He also declared that he had done his duty, to the best of his judgment, and that he forgave his enemies.