The outcome of the trial goes to show how a composite plot, ably supported by ingenuity of narrative techniques, can be made analogous to a set of clandestine attributes of legal procedures. The thesis question to be resolved in this paper is whether Billy Budd receives a just trial or not, following the crime he commits after being charged with mutinous provocations.
Judgment on the fate of Billy is legitimized per se by a number of factors that are ingrained in the protagonist’s characteristic features as well as in some external stimuli. Minkowitz argues that while Billy embodies ‘moral goodness and grace’ and is well liked among his colleagues, the ship’s master-at-arms John Claggart is ‘sinister’ (4). This perplexes the readers for they know who the culprit is according to the law. But mere understanding of the legal righteousness fails to provide an accurate picture of the author’s intentions. Captain Vere, for instance, is portrayed as a person of contradictory dispositions. He is stuck between the loftier ethics of law, which he is supposed to adhere to out of his professional responsibilities, and the apparent leniency of divine justice. He is the only person who knows that Billy is both clean-handed and guilty (Parker 37) and yet, he must convict Billy for his crime.
It is apparent that the execution of Billy Budd symbolically represents a ‘justified animosity into a retributive righteousness’ (Melville 78). The question about whether Billy Budd receives justice or not is answered by Yannella:
…Vere prejudges the case against Billy, uses irregular proceedings to convict him, and then executes him in a gross miscarriage of justice…Vere’s conservative rationale for hanging Billy, of course, is that it will silence and tame the sailors, who otherwise will take the captain’s inaction as a sign of weakness and an excuse to rebel (27-8).
It is, therefore, quite clear that Billy Budd does not receive