Also, people in support of Morant and Handcock have stated that they were only following orders from their superior Captain Hunt, of which they were to take no prisoners. The orders weren’t issued by headquarters, but were issued by Kitchener who had commanded these orders essentially to remove spying Boers, as they were becoming an increasing problem in the Boer war. However this is no excuse for professional soldiers to murder unarmed men. Morant and Handcock surely knew that their acts and decisions were unjust, as Morant falsified reports and Handcock murdered Hesse, who was thought to be a witness of previous issues – “Morant falsified reports and is now proved to have instigated the murder of the two witnesses makes it clear he was not the slightest belief that he was carrying out open and legal orders as he claimed at his court-martial.” However, if in fact Morant was just ‘following orders’, essentially he, like the criminals at Nuremburg, is a war criminal as he had enough power and common sense to ignore those orders which were not instigated by Pretoria headquarters
In addition to this, Morant and Handcock never actually denied their involvement in the killing of the Boer prisoners, rather they admitted to it. Morant and Handcock admitted to their guilt the night before their execution in their ‘death letter’ – “We shot the Boers who killed and mutilated our friend” This statement verifies the couple’s guilt and shows that their actions were motivated by revenge as they refer to the killings as a result of their “mutilated friend”.
Also, none of the Boer prisoner’s executed were court martialed to reveal any relevance in regards to the murder of Captain Hunt – “In each case there was no court martial at all”. It can therefore be said that the death of those Boers had no clear justification, thus giving Morant and Handcock the label of cold-blooded murderers.
Hancock also formed written evidence that he in fact had killed the German missionary Hesse. He later denied the statement. The fact was established later by Lieutenant Witton that Handcock did in fact murder Hesse in cold blood, which can be seen in a written letter to Major JF Thomas – “Handcock had broken down and confessed to everything including shooting Hesse”. The letter succeeds in telling that Handcock murdered the Hesse’s African servant in cold-blood. This piece of evidence is highly significant- it shows that the murders of the Hesse and of his servant were futile and exorbitant. It is unlikely that this is a false statement as Witton wrote the book “Scapegoats of the Empire”. However Morant and Handcock were still relieved of the charges of murder of the German missionary, despite the fact that there were written accounts of their confessions. Subsequently arises the question; why were Morant and Hancock acquitted of Hesse’s murder despite the existence of a written admission? Max Sollit states the most plausible answer, “perhaps the officers of the court were…keen to show the world that at least British Colonial officers did not murder ministers of religion.” From this it can be seen that the couple are guilty of the murder of Hesse, a defenseless man.
Moreover, many supporters of Morant and Handcock stated that the two were convicted of murder to appease the German Kaiser, as the German missionary Hesse was killed, thus resulting in the belief that the duo were scapegoats of the British Empire. In his book Breaker Morant: A Horseman who made History, T. M Cutlach quotes an Australian soldier commenting on Morant’s execution – “The missionary was a German…one day was spent by several high officers in a feverish endeavor to find and persuade the C. in C. to reprieve Morant and Handcock. But the German Emperor had to be appeased”.
The fact remains however, that the two were acquitted of the killing of the German missionary, despite a written admission of the murder by Handcock – “All offices concerned were found not guilty and lieutenants Morant and Handcock were found not guilty on the charges of instigating the murder and murdering the Revered Hesse”, writes Max Sollit in his article for the Australian - ‘The myth of Harry “Breaker” Morant’. Sollit then goes on to point out that Hesse was actually a neutralized British subject, not a German at all. Subsequently the Kaiser would have no argument regarding the death of a British Subject, which is why, as historian Craig Wilcox states, “the German government made no complaints regarding Hesse’s death”.
In conclusion, Morant and Handcock were unquestionably murderers. Although popular opinion may view Morant and Handcock as Scapegoats because of the way they are portrayed by the media, a mass of indisputable primary evidence sheds light on their guiltiness in regards to the fact that they killed Boer prisoners, a German missionary and the Boer Visser primarily out of revenge. “Harry Morant, who legend says, was a scapegoat of Empire. The truth, however, was that he was a scapegoat of his own unstable character”.
Bibliography
1. Carnegie M. In Search of Breaker Morant
2. Sollit M. The Myth of Harry the Breaker Morant
3. Denton K The Closed File (1983)
4. Sydney Morning Herald (1902)
5. Denton (1983)
6. The bulletin (1902)
7. Wilcox Craig The Breaker Morant and Peter Handcock Case (2003)
Wilcox C. The Breaker Morant and Peter Handcock case (Memorial news 2003)
The Myth of Harry the Breaker Morant, the Australian , Max Sollit