Byng was immediately placed in close confinement, and his younger brother, who had hastened to see him, was so struck by the abuse of the Admiral in every town he passed through that at sight of him he was taken suddenly ill, and died in convulsions. Byng had been burned in effigy in all the large towns, before he arrived in England; and his place in the country was mobbed, and the house with difficulty saved from destruction. The streets and shops were filled with caricatures and libelous ballads, abusing the ministry, as well as Byng; the ministry being held responsible popularly for not having sent an efficient fleet sooner. Such public excitement and universal condemnation, upon slight knowledge of the facts, was most unusual, and most unjust to the Admiral, who had faults enough to answer for. From Portsmouth he was sent to Greenwich, to await trial. Here he was again in close confinement, and an impression was sought to be conveyed to the public that he desired to make his escape. But Byng always manifested a desire to be put upon his trial, and seemed, to the last, confident of an honorable acquittal. In December he was taken back to Portsmouth, with the same parade of guards as when he had been brought up. The Court-martial to try him assembled at Portsmouth, on board the St. George, on the 28th of December, 1756, and sat every succeeding day, except Sunday, until the 27th of the following month. The charges against him were seventeen in number, but the court ignored most of them, and only imputed blame to Byng in that, during the engagement, he did not do his utmost to “take, seize and destroy” the ships of the French, and to assist such of his chief officers as were engaged. The prisoner’s conduct fell under a part of an Article of War providing for such offence; and the court had no other alternative than to pass sentence of death upon the unfortunate Admiral, as provided in the Article. But as all evidence showed that he did not lack personal courage, the court refused to find him guilty of “cowardice or disaffection,” and earnestly recommended him to mercy. In a letter to the Admiralty, signed by every member of the court, they say, “we cannot help laying the distress of our minds before your Lordships, in finding ourselves under the necessity of condemning a man to death from the great severity of the 12th Article of War, _part_ of which he falls under, and which admits of no mitigation, even if the crime should be committed by an error of judgment; and therefore, for our own conscience’s sake, we pray your Lordships, in the most earnest manner, to recommend him to his Majesty’s clemency.” This the Lords of the Admiralty did not do, but simply requested the King to submit the case to the twelve judges, as to whether the sentence was a legal one. There had been no question of its legality. The judges declared the sentence legal.