The Aftermath: How the Perpetrators of the Grassholm Gannet Massacre Fared, with a Focus on Colonel Saurin and Captain Haig

Accident – Death – Obituary News : disturbance, to clear the court).” Brown went on to explain that the RSPCA was using the Cruelty to Animals Act of 1849 to prosecute Haig because there was no specific law against shooting wild birds outside of the hunting season. The act did not differentiate between domesticated and wild animals, so it could be applied in this case.

The trial proceeded with several witnesses testifying to the events that took place on that fateful day at Pennar Point. Evan Jones, the ferryman, recounted how he saw Haig shoot and kill the swans, and Henry Williams, the bargeman, confirmed that Haig and his friend carried the guns and carcasses through the town. The evidence was damning, and it seemed like Haig would once again face the consequences of his actions.

However, the defense argued that the swans were not domesticated animals and therefore did not fall under the jurisdiction of the Cruelty to Animals Act. They also claimed that Haig was not aware of the specific law regarding shooting wild birds outside of the hunting season. The defense further argued that Haig’s actions were not cruel or malicious but rather a result of ignorance.

The magistrates had to consider whether shooting wild birds outside of the hunting season constituted cruelty under the law. After much deliberation, they ruled in favor of the RSPCA and found Haig guilty of unlawfully and cruelly ill-treating the swans. The court ordered him to pay a fine of £5, plus court costs.

The outcome of the trial once again sparked public outrage. The local press covered the story extensively, and letters to the editor poured in, expressing disgust and calling for harsher penalties for Haig. The RSPCA’s successful prosecution of Haig brought attention to the need for specific legislation to protect wild birds from such acts of cruelty.

As for Haig himself, this second conviction tarnished his reputation even further. His career prospects were undoubtedly affected, and it is unclear what his next steps would be. The local community saw him as a repeat offender, and his actions had deeply angered and disgusted them.

The repercussions of the Grassholm gannet massacre and the subsequent swan shooting continued to reverberate through the lives of the perpetrators. While some seemed unaffected and carried on with their lives, others faced public scrutiny, legal consequences, and a damaged reputation. The incidents had exposed a dark side of the privileged class, and the public demanded justice for the innocent animals that had been mercilessly killed.

The story of the Grassholm gannet massacre and the swan shooting at Pennar Point serves as a reminder of the importance of wildlife conservation and the need for strong laws to protect animals from cruelty. It also highlights the power of public outrage in holding individuals accountable for their actions, regardless of their social status..