Blog 47 Dover Kent 1856 - The murder of Lance Corporal Alex McBurney

Alexander McBurney was born in Antrim, Ireland, in 1835 to Thomas McBurney and Eleanor. He was the 4th of 5 boys and 1 girl.

By 1851, Alexander's mother was widowed. Details of his father are unknown due to a lack of records. The Young Ireland rebellion of 1848 had failed. The potato famine persisted, so life was hard. She worked as a muslin sewer. Alexander and his siblings worked as labourers and servants.

In the broader geopolitical context, the years before the Crimean War were marked by rising international and religious tensions. In 1850, Orthodox and Roman Catholic monks clashed over church control, resulting in several deaths. As these tensions escalated, Russia invaded the Danubian principalities of the Ottoman Empire in July 1853. France and Britain, worried about Russian expansion, promised to help Turkey. After diplomatic efforts failed, France and Britain declared war on Russia on 28 March 1854. Turkey joined the alliance on 10 April. Thus, the Crimean War began.

Back in Ireland, during the early months of 1854, the country was gripped by a kind of war fever as regiments departed and young men eagerly enlisted. Many believed the conflict would be brief. Irish soldiers made up around 30–35 per cent of the British army in 1854, and it is estimated that over 30,000 Irish served in the Crimea.

Amid this national recruitment, Alexander enlisted in the 49th Regiment of Foot as a soldier. In November 1854, at age 19, he sailed for the Crimea to serve in the 5th company, connecting his journey to the ongoing events.

During the Crimean War (1854–56), Alexander served in major battles. He saw action at Inkerman on 5 November 1854. He was present at Sebastopol during the siege from 11 September 1854 to 9 September 1855. Over this period, he was promoted to Lance Corporal by age 21.

While in Crimea, soldiers received "squad-bags" for extra belongings, which were then returned to them in England, forming the backdrop for later conflict in Alexander’s story.

After the war, Private Thomas Mansell accused Alexander of theft when his boots were missing from his returned squad bag. A judicial inquiry, while the regiment was at Aldershot, fully acquitted Alexander, yet it set the stage for their fateful rupture.

After the acquittal, the two men no longer spoke. There is no indication Alexander ever argued with Mansell or harboured resentment.

By August 1856, the regiment was stationed at the Archcliffe Fort in Dover, Kent.

Following their relocation to Kent, by late August 1856, the area remained unsettled after a recent soldier-perpetrated double murder by a Swiss Legion member (Blog 31). Tensions in the community were high again when, on Wednesday morning, 27 August, another shocking incident occurred in the meadow in front of the military hospital in the 49th Regiment’s camp at Archcliffe Fort, thrusting Alexander’s fate into tragedy.

A little after eight that morning, Thomas Mansell emerged with a loaded rifle, approached Alexander as he cleaned his gear, and shot him at close range.

After being shot, Alexander struggled to his feet, staggered a few yards, and, his voice strained with shock and pain, cried out, "I'm shot, I'm shot—Mansell has shot me!" before collapsing to the ground, the life ebbing from him.

The regiment's surgeon, Mr Hannay, was urgently summoned, but by the time he arrived, hope had slipped away—Alexander was already gone, leaving a painful void among his comrades.

Thomas Mansell had dropped the weapon after the act and, with an air of tragic resignation, simply said 'There!' before walking away. He was quickly seized by several men, who, shocked and disbelieving, followed the colonel's orders and handed him over to the civil authorities that morning.

At ten o'clock that morning, Thomas Mansell was questioned by the local judges. Observers described his demeanour as sombre, though his appearance remained unchanged.

News of the tragedy spread rapidly, and crowds gathered outside the police station, hoping to glimpse the prisoner.

In court, the prisoner stood handcuffed. He appeared calm and steady. He was tall, looked smart, and some found him likeable.

Privates John Parry and Edward Brophy described the case. The prisoner stayed calm and sniffed snuff as the judges discussed.

During the prisoner's examination, the camp was searched for the bullet, which was ultimately found embedded a few yards from the scene.

The Mayor informed the prisoner that he would stand remanded until Friday.

The following letter was dictated by the prisoner while in Maidstone gaol, and addressed to a comrade named James Annas, of the same regiment.

** Maidstone Gaol, Oct. 1, 1556. **

Please write to me as soon as you possibly can, for I long to hear from you. Let me know what the public opinion of it is.

Please send my respects to Drummer Meney and all enquiring friends, and receive the same respect yourself.

So no more at present from yours truly, Friend.

(Signed)Thomas Mansell, Maidstone Gaol, Kent.

In the aftermath of the tragic event, the inquest on the body of Alexander McBurney was opened on Thursday afternoon, 28 August 1856, before Mr G. T. Thompson, Esq., marking the beginning of official proceedings.

At the inquest, the deceased was described as a fine young man under 21. Evidence matched earlier accounts, with some updates. No ammunition had been issued since Crimea, as all soldiers had been ordered to surrender or fire their rounds. Mansell and the victim shared a hut in Crimea. They were friendly until they quarrelled over boots after their return.

The murder was witnessed by privates Parry, Moran, and Brophey from the same regiment. When they saw the prisoner kneel with his rifle and cock it, they thought he meant to snap it to clear the piece.

Private Benjamin Taylor stated that Mansell asked about his lost boots. When Taylor said he was unaware, Mansell asserted McBurney was responsible. Mansell threatened, "I'll get him if I live a thousand years." Taylor believed Mansell intended to report McBurney. He described Mansell as bad-tempered and withdrawn.

After hearing several witness statements, the inquest was then adjourned till Friday.

At the inquest, a policeman claimed to know the motive, but the coroner refused his testimony, criticising the police for seeking confessions. The jury agreed, and the policeman was not called.

Assistant-Surgeon Hannay said the autopsy showed the bullet passed between the lower right ribs. It went through the lower edge of the right liver, the main abdominal vein, and into the lower stomach. The bullet exited near the back of the stomach, then passed through the diaphragm near the heart. Finally, it emerged between the sixth and seventh right ribs.

The jury returned a verdict of wilful murder against Private Thomas Mansell, and the warrant was signed by the coroner to pass to the magistrate.

It is a mystery how Thomas obtained the rifle ball used in the shooting. He could not have saved it for this purpose since leaving the Crimea. At that point, he and McBurney had not quarrelled.

Proceedings continued the following Friday morning at the New Town-hall, concluding the adjourned examination of the prisoner.

He appeared subdued, a contrast to his previous demeanour on Wednesday, and was seen to shed tears during the proceedings.

The court was densely crowded with people eager to catch a glimpse of the accused.

At the conclusion of the examination, the Mayor, having first cautioned the prisoner, then asked if he had anything to say. He replied ''Not at present.”

Subsequently, it was decided that the trial would take place at the next Maidstone Assizes.

Lance Corporal Alexander McBurney was laid to rest at Copt Hill Cemetery on Friday, 29th August. The military procession, sombre and heavy with grief, included his entire company, joined by many soldiers from the camp and a crowd of saddened civilians—a tribute to the young man's brief but deeply felt life.

Mansell was conveyed to Maidstone gaol on the same Friday afternoon by Superintendent Coram.

When Mansell was sent to the Dover borough gaol on Wednesday, 3rd September, the governor told him he would not be loaded with irons unless he behaved violently. Pens, ink, paper, and small privileges would be provided. Touched by this kindness, Thomas burst into tears, saying repeatedly, 'Oh, I wish that I could bring back life.' This was his only mention of the crime, and it differed from his earlier behaviour.

On 15th December 1856, at the late winter assizes, Thomas Mansell was tried before Baron Bramwell.

The jury found him guilty of the murder and sentenced him to death by hanging.

The prisoner was initially ordered for execution on 1 January, the same day prisoner Redanies was executed, but execution was postponed because the Attorney General granted a writ of error, following an objection by Mr Russell, the prisoner's counsel, that the jury had been improperly empanelled, raising concerns about the legality of the trial.

The circumstances under which the writ of error was granted were considered unusual. There was no dispute about the prisoner's involvement in the incident.

It was proved that he had often argued with the deceased and harboured strong animosity toward him. Two or three comrades saw him approach the deceased, who had his back turned, and fire at him. The man instantly dropped dead. Given these facts, the prisoner's counsel, who was assigned by the Court, saw one hope. He could challenge the jury. If the jury came solely from Maidstone, where many opposed capital punishment, they might spare him. Recently, a Maidstone jury reportedly acquitted a girl charged with murder, despite strong evidence, due to such views.

He therefore challenged to the full extent permitted of the law, and objected to twenty-four jurymen who were summoned from other parts of tho county, and it was on account of the counsel for the prosecution, Mr. Ribton, ‘’exercising a right that has always been carried out by the counsel for the Crown in such cases of requiring the Maidstone jurors to stand by,” and going through the whole panel for the purpose of endeavouring to obtain an indifferent jury, that an application was made the Attorney General for a writ of error.

Baron Bramwell at the time of the trial expressed strong opinion that there was nothing in the objection, and he refused to reserve the point for further consideration, at the same time telling Mr Russell that he must take his own course to obtain a writ of error, and should not interfere, and the law officers of the court, who have had very great experience in criminal matters, are also of opinion that the proceedings under which the trial took place was perfectly legal, in accordance with the practice of conducting criminal trials.

The writ was received by Mr Streight, the deputy clerk of the assizes on the Home Circuit, and he thereupon proceeded to make out a written statement of the facts, which he transmitted to the Court of Queen’s Bench, and the next step that will be taken will be to have the matter argued before the judges of that court. The law, it appears, makes no provision in such a case for the attendance of counsel to argue the matter on behalf of the Crown, and unless counsel are retained, though it does not appear upon whom the duty of taking that step would devolve, the judges will have to come to the Host conclusion they can upon the facts laid before them.

The Home Secretary had forwarded to Mr Bone, the Governor of Maidstone Gaol, a respite for Thomas Mansell until the 5th of February. This, it was stated, was on account of the point law raised by the counsel for the prisoner. In communicating the intelligence, he impressed upon the prisoner that it was only respite, not reprieve.

Thomas received the information with cool impassiveness and remarked that he did not see that it made much difference.” He had been prepared to receive the Sacrament, and the respite was not mentioned to him until afterwards. He received the holy rite with every propriety of behaviour, and appears to be truly penitent.

When it became clear that the writ of error could not be disposed of that day, it was necessary to send down another respite, and when the matter goes before the Court, it would also be necessary to obtain a writ of habeas corpus in order that the prisoner may be present during the proceedings.

It was a rather extraordinary proceeding that the law should permit such a course upon a technical objection of such a character, and it would appear that in the event, which was not considered all probable, of the judges deciding that the jury was not empanelled according to law, the trial would be merely declared not to have been a legal trial, and the prisoner would be remanded till the next assizes, and be tried again.

On Friday, 30th January, Mr Russell moved in the Court of the Queen's Bench, to amend the record in the case, and entered into a somewhat complicated account of various objections which he took to the mode in which the jury were called at the trial and challenged by the Crown. It appeared that the principal objection related to a man named William Ironmonger, whose name was called over twice on each occasion.

Mr Ribton, who was counsel for the Crown, ordered him on "standby," and Mr Russell, who appeared for the prisoner, contended that he ought to challenge him forthwith, and before the rest of the panel was proceeded with; but his objections were overruled, and this and several other exceptions which took the mode proceeding on the occasion were made the ground of application to the Attorney General for writ of error, with view to having the points determined by th Court.

The writ of error was granted and sent to Mr Straight, the deputy clerk of the assize, who now brought up the record; and the only object of the present application was to take out certain words in the return, the effect of which, in the opinion of Mr Russell, might be doubtful when the case came for argument.

The return stated that Mr Ribton requested William Ironmonger to stand by, in order that "a reasonable time might be given to our Lady the Queen to assign a cause for challenging the said William Ironmonger." The words he proposed to omit were " a reasonable time."

Lord Campbell did not see what jurisdiction the Court had to make the alteration. It would be better to remit the return to Baron Bramwell, who tried the prisoner, and let him settle it.

Mr Russell: ‘’Baron Bramwell wishes to have the opinion of the Court as to what he ought to do.’’

Lord Campbell: ‘’Then I, for one, will not give him my opinion.’’

Mr Straight said he showed Baron Bramwell the record, and he thought the facts were properly stated.

Justice Wightman: ‘’There will be no difficulty altering it.’’

Mr Straight: ‘’Baron Bramwell is desirous that it should be altered, if your lordships think so.’’

Mr Ribton said he had read over the mended record prepared by his learned friend and saw no objection to it.

Lord Campbell observed that although this was not a matter in which the Court could interfere, yet if the counsel for the Crown and the prisoner both agreed to the alteration, the application might be granted.

Mr Ribton suggested that, as they were within one day of the end of the term, and as the case would have to go over until April if not disposed of in the term, the prisoner, who must be present in the court when the matter is argued, should be brought up by habeas corpus on Saturday.

Lord Campbell: ‘’Impossible.’’

Mr Ribton: ‘’It may be argued at the sittings after term.’’

Lord Campbell: ‘’We do not think that would be a proper proceeding.’’

Mr Ribton: ‘’The man's sentence is only respited until the 5th of February.’’

Justice Coleridge: ‘’The Crown will, of course, extend the respite.’’

Permission was then given to make the proposed amendments.

The Court of Queen’s Bench decided in favour of the conviction and against the points raised by the prisoner’s counsel.

The Attorney-General, Sir R. Bethell, however, was not satisfied with this decision and issued a new fiat, ordering that the case be raised at the trial and argued before the Exchequer Chamber, stating that a case of so much delicacy—involving human life—should obtain the judgment of the higher tribunal. Meanwhile, the sentence was respited to the 22nd June.

Due to the attempts of his counsel to set aside the proceedings on the trial, and the delays consequent thereon, it is no surprise that Thomas, of course, having a very imperfect knowledge of the nature of the proceedings that were being taken on his behalf, entertained a belief that the sentence would not eventually be carried out. After so many adjournments of the matter, and after having twice received a respite when the days were formally fixed for his execution, and although the authorities of the gaol earnestly endeavoured to remove that impression from his mind, there was no doubt that he felt convinced he would not be executed, and upon the intelligence being conveyed to him that the order for his execution had arrived, and that he must now make his final preparations for leaving this world, it came upon him like a thunderbolt.

When he had somewhat recovered, he declared in very angry and coarse terms that justice had not been done to him, and he complained bitterly of the judges having kept him so long in suspense.

Thomas did not appear to have conducted himself very well during any period of his confinement; his language and demeanour were frequently violent, and four turnkeys have been specially employed to be with him—two by night and two by day —during the whole of the period that has elapsed since his conviction.

Rev. King, the ordinary of the prison, has seen him constantly, but his exhortations appeared to have very little effect upon the unhappy man, and during the last few days his conduct has been more unsatisfactory than previously, and he never on any occasion expressed the slightest regret for the dreadful crime he committed.

The only occasion upon which the prisoner appeared to be at all impressed with anything like proper feeling upon the subject was on the afternoon of Sunday 5th July, after he had been visited by the chaplain, when he observed to one of the turnkeys, in reference to his crime and the sentence he was to undergo, "Well, after all,I think it is a just sentence." This condition of mind did not appear, however, to last but for a very short period, for upon the turnkey observing that he was glad to hear him state that, and it showed he felt his position, he instantly replied, "Oh, but I may change my mind in half an hour," and he repeated that he would commit the same act again if he were placed in similar circumstances.

Rev. King was with the prisoner the greater part of that sunday evening, and shortly before his departure Thomas said a prayer, at the suggestion of the ordinary, but it was evident that his heart was not earnestly in the matter, and he afterwards expressed a wish not to be troubled any more, and uttered a threat of using personal violence to the governor of the gaol if he came to him again.

Thomas retired to rest about eleven o'clock, but he did not sleep, except for a short period, and he got up early on the 6th July and dressed himself. He then, for the first time, appeared to feel his awful position.

Upon seeing the ordinary and the governor of the prison, he shook hands with them and thanked them for their kindness, and asked them to forgive him for the trouble he had given them, and for the manner in which he had acted upon several occasions.

He requested that the medal, which he had received for good conduct as a soldier, be given to one of the officers of his regiment, and he was assured that his request would be complied with.

A few minutes before twelve o'clock, Mr Wildes, under-sheriff of Kent, accompanied by some of his officers, arrived at the gaol and proceeded to the cell where the prisoner had been confined.

Calcraft, the executioner, then arrived shortly afterwards.

He commenced the task of pinioning, to which Thomas submitted without making any observation.

Thomas had allowed his beard and moustache to grow since his conviction. He did not betray the least emotion during these proceedings, and when the prison clock commenced striking twelve, he turned round to Mr Hillyard and said in a very cool manner," Are you not a little behind time?"

The usual procession was then formed, and Thomas walked with a firm step towards the place of execution. The moment he emerged from the gaol and took his place by the scaffold, he cast an earnest look at the crowd, and then proceeded to mount the ladder to the drop.

Calcraft laid hold of one of his hands to assist him, but he exclaimed, "I don't want that: and ran up the steps of his own accord.

The executioner then placed the cap over his eyes and adjusted the noose. The drop fell, and Thomas appeared to be dead in an instant.

The crowd, which was much smaller than usual assembles on these occasions, conducted itself in the most orderly and decorous manner, and it was observed that there were very few females among the spectators.

The body, after hanging an hour, was cut down and placed in a shell, and after the formal inquest, was buried in the course of the day within the gaol.

Very little is known about Thomas Mansell via ancestry. A newspaper reported that he was the son of a soldier and was born in Rochester, Kent. He had no living relatives apart from his brother, Edward, who was a drummer in the same regiment, which gave me something to research.

Edward was a few years older than Thomas, and on the 8th January 1856, he was discharged from Chelsea hospital, where he had been admitted, and the military had placed him on a pension due to his mental health. He was living somewhere near the hospital, described as a ‘poor, silly creature’.

So some believed that had the counsel employed for the defence possessed the knowledge that Thomas Mansell’s brother was a lunatic, and that Thomas Mansell himself was considered weak of intellect, a different verdict might have been found, and confinement for life adjudged, instead of a sentence of death.

Sir George Grey was, no doubt, aware of the insanity of the brother and had, no doubt, instituted the necessary inquiries respecting the prisoner, and the country was satisfied with the decision; but it was hoped the law would not take its course and scaffold its victim without the most searching investigation into the state of mind of Thomas Mansell.

It was understood that Mr Bone, the gaoler, with his accustomed humanity, on learning this fact, did communicate to the Home Office the intelligence that Mansell’s brother was insane; but there is no reason to think the sentence will not be carried out.

Mansell had hoped for a result of manslaughter and that his long military service and good conduct would induce the government to grant him a reprieve, but these hopes slowly faded, and he eventually succumbed to the fate of his future death. He spent his time diligently reading the scriptures and other books lent him by the chaplain, to whom he appeared sincerely grateful for his ministrations.

I looked deeper into their family history and found a Thomas Mansell and Brigette Newman who married in Chatham, Kent, in 1822. Their three children were Edward (born 1824), Thomas (born 1826), and Mary Ann (born 1829, died March 1830). The father was reportedly a soldier, which may account for the gap between the births.

By July 6, 1831, a widowed Brigitte Mansell remarried at St Mary's Church in Chatham, the same church where the children were baptised, marrying a widower named Terrence Gorman.

At the time of Brigitte's remarriage in July 1831, the boys, Edward and Thomas, were seven and five years old. In some cases, children were sent to the orphanage or workhouse when a widow remarried, which may have happened to them. There is also a possibility that Terrence Gorman was from Ireland; this could have later influenced Thomas's attitude towards Alexander. Life in the workhouse may have led the boys to join the military as soon as they were old enough, perhaps as young teenagers, in roles such as drummer boys (as Edward was), powder monkeys, or aides to higher-ranking soldiers, to escape poverty and the harsh conditions in a workhouse, but the war in Crimea may have a worse option, soldiers faced freezing temperatures, inadequate supplies of food and clothing, and poor medical care. Cholera, dysentery, and other diseases took a heavy toll on troops. Death toll estimates range from 400,000 to 700,000, with many more injured. A large portion of fatalities was due to disease rather than direct combat. The aftermath of the Crimean War revealed significant mental health challenges for returning soldiers, compounded by societal expectations and a lack of understanding.

So did a turbulent childhood and the horrors of war, finally tip him over the edge, along with his brother, or did insanity run in the family? I'll leave that for you to draw your own conclusions.

Let me know what you think in the comments.

LIFE AFTER

Edward Mansell was eventually admitted to Hanwell Lunatic Asylum, Middlesex, on 17th Jan 1861, and his life ended there on 28th Feb 1865, age 40

Family of Alexander McBurney

There were no reports that the family attended Alexander's funeral; they may not have been aware of his death or funeral until later, due to being in Northern Ireland or may not have had the money to travel and attend, or maybe he never told his family he was leaving and just disappeared and didn't put a next of kin on his military documents.

He was not forgotten by his brother Thomas, who, in 1907, when he welcomed his only son into the world, named him John Alexander, after his two closest brothers.

Alexander's youngest sibling, Hugh Bell, born on 11th June 1840, had also escaped the struggles in Ireland. He ended up in Cross Creek, Washington, Pennsylvania, USA, and on 1 June 1861, at the age of 20, he joined the 20th Regiment, MississippiInfantry, in the Confederate Army during the American Civil War. He was captured at the Big Black River area in Mississippi and held as a Prisoner of war on 7 July 1863 and was transferred to Fort Delaware on 29th February 1864.

After the war, he became a farm labourer, then a Moulder, then a Brick Mason. He married Abigail Watson in 1871; they had seven children. On 5th October 1876 at St Helena Parish, Louisiana, he officially became a citizen of the USA. He died at the age of 50 on 28th January 1891 in Slaughter, East Feliciana, Louisiana.

SOURCES

1. (1856, August 30). Another tragedy at Dover. Folkestone Chronicle, pg. 8.

2. (1856, September 2). Dover. South Eastern Gazette, pg. 4- 5.

3. (1856, December 27). The condemned murderers. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 5.

4. (1857, January 3). Respite of Mansell. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser, pg. 5.

5. (1857, January 31). The murderer Thomas Mansell. Canterbury Journal, pg. 3.

6. (1857, February 3). Motion to amend the motion. Kentish Gazette, pg. 6.

7. (1857, May 28). The case of Thomas Mansell. Dorset County Chronicle, pg. 12.

8. (1857, July 11). Execution of Thomas Mansell. Folkestone Chronicle, pg. 5..

9. Bring your backstory to life Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & Family History Records. Available at: http://www.ancestry.co.uk/

10. Archive, History’s colourful stories in black and white, Home | British Newspaper Archive. Available at: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/

11. Pictures and historical info from Wikipedia https://www.wikipedia.org/