The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens
"Out of necessity: is it wrong to be a utilitarian?"
A Harvard lecture on Justice with Michael Sandel was made available online (it's on YouTube) over 14 years ago. On consequential moral reasoning, as an exemplary case for utilitarianism, Sandel introduces an infamous law case from 19th-century Britain.
In 1884, the yacht Mignonette, which was to be taken from Southampton (a port city in South East England) to its new owners in Australia, foundered due to heavy storm.
Fortunately, the crew (Dudley the captain, Stephen the first mate, Brooks the sailor, and Parker, the 17-year-old cabin boy) managed to escape to a lifeboat, with no food except for two cans of turnip and no fresh water. First three days, they ate nothing, the next day a can, and the day after a sea turtle and the other can, which helped them last a few days. Eight more days passed, and drinking sea water though he was warned not to, the cabin boy got sick.
On the 19th day, Captain Dudley proposed drawing lots, the loser would sacrifice his life for the rest, but Brooks refused. That night, Captain Dudley argued that if there was no vessel in sight by tomorrow morning, he should be killed. The next day, there was no vessel in sight. Captain Dudley told Brooks to avert his gaze, and Stephens that he was going to kill him. The cabin boy was lying at the bottom of the boat, too weak and sick to resist, and Captain Dudley cut his jugular vein with a penknife. They fed on the boy's meat and blood for four days.
On the 24th day, as they were “having breakfast”, according to Dudley's statement in his diary, a ship saw and saved them. When they reached the land, they went to trial for the murder of Richard Parker. When on trial, Dudley and Stephens didn't lie but said that what was done was done out of necessity. The prosecutor, though, stated, “Murder is murder.” This verdict, a counterexample to the utilitarian defense of Dudley and Stephen's, set a precedent regarding common law that necessity is not a defense to a charge of murder. Therefore, the two were sentenced to death by the jury and yet pardoned later by Queen Victoria to serve six months only.