A Short History of the Royal Navy 1217-1815 Volume II, by Hannay, David
Whole book · 33 sections
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE ROYAL NAVY — PREFACE — CONTENTS — CHAPTER I THE WAR WITH FRANCE TILL 1693
A SHORT HISTORY
OF THE
ROYAL NAVY
1217-1815
BY
DAVID HANNAY
VOLUME II
1689-1815
METHUEN & CO.
36 ESSEX STREET W.C.
LONDON
First Published in 1909
I submit this second part of the Short History of the
Royal Navy to the kindness of the reader and the
animadversions of reviewers with a profound sense of its
deficiencies. That some were inevitable where so much had
to be told in so narrow a space is no excuse for such errors
as I have committed. It is my sincere hope that they are
not very frequent nor very gross, and that my book does at
least indicate the main outlines of the polity and the
achievements of the navy. It is my pleasant duty to thank
the Reverend William Hunt for his kindness in revising my
proofs, and for the many excellent suggestions he made. I
have also to present my thanks to Messrs. Blackwood for
giving me their permission to make use in Chapter III. of
matter published in Blackwood’s Magazine; and to the proprietors
of the Saturday Review for allowing me to make
use of articles on the mutinies of 1797, formerly published in
that periodical.
Authorities.—Burchett, Memoirs of Transactions at Sea 1688-1697; Lediard,
Naval History of England; Colomb, Naval Warfare; Troude, Batailles
navales de la France; Delarbre, Tourville et la Marine de son temps; Toudouze,
Bataille de la Hougue; Lambert de Sainte-Croix, Marine de France 1689-1792;
Code des Armées Navales; Crisenoy, L’Inscription maritime; Calmon-Maison,
Châteaurenault; Martin Leake, Life of Sir John Leake; De Jonge, Geschiedenis
van het Nederlandsche Zeewesen.
The Revolution of 1688 drew a line across the history of
England, and marked the termination of the great
struggle between King and Parliament. From that time
forward it was settled beyond all dispute that when the two
differed the last word was not to be with the king. Our
sovereigns have ruled by a Parliamentary title, and the
authority which conferred the Crown must always be superior
in fact, if not in theory, to the Crown itself. Within Parliament
the dominating body must necessarily be the House of
Commons, which has the command of the purse. After 1688
the Crown, or the aristocracy, could only govern by securing
the support, by means of pocket boroughs, by persuasion or corruption,
of a majority of the Lower House. The navy, like the
rest of the nation, was deeply affected by the change. From
this time forward we hear little of the personal influence of the
king. It was to the House of Commons that the navy appealed.
Officers who wished to push their fortunes no longer thought of
securing the goodwill of the sovereign or of a favourite. They
became members of the House of Commons and earned promotion
by serving a Parliamentary party. In one way the
change was for the manifest good of the navy. It now had
a master who might be unwilling to pay handsomely, but
who both would and could pay whatever he chose to promise
with a regularity far beyond the power of the king. In the
years following the Revolution there were indeed complaints
of wages in arrear and of necessities neglected. But this was
only during the first period of strife. The increasing wealth
of the nation supplied Parliament with ample means, and
after a time the money was always regularly forthcoming.
In another way the change was not so good. A great deal
of party spirit was introduced into the navy, and there were
times when Whig and Tory animosities interfered with the
loyal discharge of duty.
The Revolution also dates, if it did not cause, an evolution
in the navy. After 1688 the sea service was sharply marked
off from the army. During the reign of King James it had
not been uncommon to find men who had served alternately
as soldiers and sailors, while some held double employments.
Isolated cases of the kind may be met with later, but they
became very rare, and soon disappeared altogether. The
formation of a large standing army, and the participation of
England in Continental wars, drew off the gentlemen volunteers
who had been found in the fleets of Charles II. The stamp of
man described in old plays as “a coxcomb but stout,” had a
natural preference for the army. It did not take him off dry
land, and the practice of retiring into winter quarters enabled
him to combine a great deal of pleasure with his fighting. A
ship was at all times but a prison, and in those it was a prison
very much overcrowded and abounding in foul smells. The
navy was left entirely to the tarpaulin who had been bred to
the sea, and could endure its hardships.
The final victory of the tarpaulin element in the corps of
naval officers brought with it both good and evil. The good
lay in their seamanship. Even a bad seaman is better than
an ignorant or careless landsman in command of a ship. The
purely technical part of the navy’s work, that which consisted
in the mere handling of the vessel, was better done in
the years following the Revolution than had been the case
before, except during the Interregnum, when also the sailors
had been the predominant element. The evil which came
was of a kind not to be wholly attributed to the disappearance
of the military officer from the higher ranks of the fleet.
It was that there was a distinct fall in the purely military
spirit, and as a navy is a fighting as well as a navigating force,
this was a misfortune. When we speak of a fallen military
spirit, it is not meant that there was any sinking in the mere
courage of the service, but only that the naval officer as he
became at the Revolution and as he remained till far into the
eighteenth century, was first and foremost a seaman, and that
he had a tendency to discharge the military side of his duty
in blind obedience to various rules of thumb. Two reasons
may be assigned for this. Times of revolution are very often
followed by times of lassitude. The seventeenth century had
been very stormy, and it was to be expected that the Englishman
of the following generations would be a less daring and
original man than his ancestor of the Civil War time. The
sailors shared in the general deadening and commonplaceness
of their age. It was only natural that men who went to sea
as boys, and were never asked to be more than sailors, should
not have tried to be more. Then it was the misfortune of the
navy that just at a time when it was tending to stupidity in
military conduct, it was called upon by authority to obey a
set of hard and fast rules.
Mention has already been made of the fighting orders
drawn up by the admirals of the Commonwealth at the close
of the First Dutch War, and reissued by Penn when he sailed
on his expedition to San Domingo. It will be remembered
that these rules established the line ahead as the regular
formation for a fleet about to engage the enemy. After the
Second Dutch War they were reissued by the Duke of York
with certain additions of his own, and they became the
orthodox pattern for the navy’s method of fighting. It is to
them that we owe it that the line of battle passed from being
the order adopted for the purpose of coming most effectually
into action with the enemy, and grew to be regarded as an
end in itself. The duke’s orders would not perhaps have
hampered a more original generation; but they were sure
to have a deadening effect upon men who felt no natural
impulse to think. The admiral who conformed to the
orders could always plead that he had obeyed authority,
whereas if he departed from them, and his independence was
not justified by a brilliant victory, he would be in considerable
danger of being accused of insubordination. The harm done
by these instructions arose mainly from two of the articles.
No. VIII. lays it down that “if the enemy stay to fight (his
majesty’s fleet having the wind), the headmost squadron of
his majesty’s fleet shall steer for the headmost of the enemy’s
ships.” No. XVI. contains the following peremptory instruction:
“In all cases of fight with the enemy, the commanders
of his majesty’s ships are to keep the fleet in one line, and (as
much as may be) to preserve that order of battle which they
have been directed to keep before the time of fight.” The
duke had foreseen that an English fleet, being to leeward,
might wish to force on a battle. In this case it was directed
that the van upon obtaining a favourable position for the
purpose, should tack and break through the enemy. So
soon as it had broken through it was to turn, and attack
from windward. In the meantime the centre and rear were
to remain to leeward, and co-operate with the van. But
this was a very difficult manœuvre to carry out against even
a moderately efficient opponent. Ships performing it would
be liable to lose spars and to drift to leeward towards their
own centre. Moreover, an enemy who kept his wind and stood
on might possibly file past, and so deliver the fire of all, or the
greater part, of his ships into the unsupported English van.
Article III., which prescribed this method of attack, remained
a mere counsel of perfection, and was soon dropped out of the
fighting orders. It was, I venture to affirm, never acted on
except by Howe on the 29th of May 1794, and then with
only partial success.
The course followed by English admirals was less complicated
and risky than this, but also less likely to prove
effectual when fully carried out. When they were to leeward
and the enemy would not attack them, they manœuvred to
gain the weather-gage. When they had the wind of the
enemy, they came down on him with their fleet in line—the
leading ship of the English steering for the leading ship
of the enemy, and the others behind for their respective
opponents. Thus the two fleets engaged van to van, centre to
centre, rear to rear. To take “every man his bird” was the
familiar naval image for a well-conducted action with an
enemy who did not shirk. Of course this method only
applied to the case where the two fleets were going in the
same direction. If one turned, the two would pass one
another, and then they must curl round again before the
action could be resumed. The advantage of engaging the
enemy from the leading ship to the last was this, that it
prevented any portion of his ships from tacking, and so
putting some of the English between two fires. The drawback
was that if the two fleets were even not very unequal,
no overwhelming superiority was developed on either side at
a chosen point. The damage done was about equivalent, and
the two separated without decisive result. This would not have
been the case if the admirals after the Revolution had been
as ready as the chiefs of the Dutch wars to depart from their
line when once it had served its purpose of bringing them in
contact with the enemy. If the captains had been allowed to
steer through the hostile line wherever they could find or
make an opening, a general mêlée must have ensued, and the
battle would have been fought out. But here came in the
influence of Article No. XVI., which prescribed the retention
of the “same order” all through the battle. If an English
captain stood out of the line to press through the enemy, it
must necessarily be broken. But this was rigidly forbidden.
Therefore the system of fighting adopted by our navy at the
close of the seventeenth century made it inevitable that our
admirals would attack from windward, would spread themselves
all along the enemy’s line, that the damage done would
be pretty equally divided between the two fleets, and that the
enemy, having the road to leeward open, could retire whenever
he pleased.
The Revolution brought no considerable alteration in the
mere administrative machinery of the navy. From that time
forward the office of Lord High Admiral was habitually put
into commission, but the change was made for the purpose
of finding the greatest number of places for Parliamentary
supporters, and was in substance not very different from the
method adopted by the Commonwealth, by Charles I., and by
James I. It was of more importance that the reign of
William III. saw the complete establishment of half pay.
The later Stuarts had granted allowances to flag officers
and a few captains, but the Parliament of the Revolution
first regularly provided for the support of a body of officers
of all commissioned ranks when not in active service. This
also was inevitable if the country was to maintain a regular
staff for the fleet. It was neither possible to maintain the navy
continually on a war footing, nor to disband the whole corps
of officers so soon as peace was signed, and trust to forming
another when the need had arisen.
The establishment made by King James II. in 1686 fell
with its maker. The handsome table-money allowance was
not paid after the Revolution, and the officers were thus
thrown back on the old scale of pay. This meant that the
captain of a first-rate who had flattered himself with the hope
of receiving £535, 18s. 4d. per annum found that he was in
fact only entitled to £285, 18s. 4d. Captains of the lesser
rates were disappointed in proportion. At the same time
the regulations depriving them of convoy money, and restricting
their chances of casual gains, were more strictly enforced.
The trading classes had won great power by the Revolution,
and could put pressure on the House of Commons, and they
were not unnaturally eager to defend themselves against
extortion. Their case was good, but the grievance of the
naval officer was not the less genuine. Yet the loss of
King James’s establishment was probably not much regretted
by the navy at large, since it benefited the captains only.
Other ranks had their grievances. The complaints of the sea
officers were so loud and persistent that at last the Government
was compelled to do them some justice. By an Order of the
Commissioners of the Admiralty dated 14th February 1694,
it was established that the sea pay “of the flag officers,
commanders, lieutenants, masters and surgeons of their
majesty’s ships be increased to as much more as it is at
present.” As a set off to this the number of servants they
were entitled to take to sea at the expense of the Crown was
reduced. With this provision for the officers on active service
came the formation of a half-pay list. It was somewhat
arbitrarily constructed. The benefit was confined to “all
flag officers and commanders of ships of the first, second,
third, fourth and fifth rates, and of fireships, and also the
first lieutenants and masters of the first, second and third
rates who have served a year in ships of rates respectively, or
have been in a general engagement with the enemy, and shall
have performed their duties to the satisfaction of the Lord
High Admiral of England or the Commissioners executing
that office.” These were to “be allowed half pay during their
being on shore in time of peace at home.”
This establishment was too good to last. When the Peace
of Ryswick was made, the country was burdened with a heavy
debt. The House of Commons was in an economical mood.
It insisted upon disbanding a large part of the troops, and
was only prevented from leaving the officers entirely without
support by the strenuous exertions of the king. William III.
made no effort to save the naval officers, for the House of
Commons had no such jealousy of the fleet as of the army.
The sea officers presented a petition stating their hard case.
The petition was laid on the table in a busy session, and was
for a time smothered, but in the following year the Commons
took up the case of the naval officers, and the result was the
establishment of April 1700. This new scheme cut down
the rate of pay allowed during the last six years. According
to a tolerably uniform practice, the reduction was less severe
with the higher than with the lower ranks. While the
Admiral of the Fleet was reduced from £6 to £5 per diem,
a captain of a fifth-rate was reduced from 12s. to 8s. But
while the House of Commons was thus economising the
whole pay, it fully recognised the necessity of maintaining
a “competent number of Experienced Sea Officers, supported
on Shore, who may be within reach to answer any sudden or
immergent Occasion; and therefore do humbly propose the
number of Flag Officers, Captains, Lieutenants, and Masters
following, to be always supported on Shore while out of
Employment, by the Allowances against their Names exprest.”
The scale drawn up by Parliament provided for 9 admirals at
sums ranging from 17s. 6d. per diem for the Rear-Admiral
to £2, 10s. for the Admiral of the Fleet. For 50 captains
who had served during the “late war,” at 10s. a day for
20 and 8s. for 30. For 100 lieutenants who had seen
service, in the following proportions: 40 at 2s. 6d. and
60 at 2s. For 30 masters, of whom one half were to
receive 2s. 6d. and the other half 2s. per diem. The total
half-pay charge of that time was only £18,113. No officer
who took service with the merchants, or had other employment,
was to be entitled to the allowance. As officers on the half-pay
list died or were drawn for active service, an equal
number of others who were duly qualified were to step into
the enjoyment of the allowance. It will be seen that this was
at best a half measure. Many men who deserved to be
supported were left without provision, yet the House of
Commons had adopted the principle of granting half pay, and
that was a great step towards the complete establishment of
the rule that all who served the State were entitled to be
maintained at its expense, even when they were not immediately
wanted. It is in this tentative way, not by great
administrative schemes, but by small measures meant to meet
a present necessity, that the whole of the organisation of our
navy has grown. At the close of the reign of Queen Anne
the right to half pay was made general.
One other great change directly affecting the navy was
brought about by the Revolution. The expulsion of King
James left England free to become the leader, and the main
promoter, of the opposition to Louis XIV. From that time
forward our enemy was always France. When we met the
Spaniard or the Dutchman again, it was with very rare exceptions
because they were allies of the French. The resistance
to Louis XIV. grew into a general colonial and political rivalry
between France and England. The fight was prolonged
throughout the eighteenth century and into the nineteenth.
Some knowledge of the navy we were to meet in every sea and
in so many battles during a century and a quarter is necessary
in any history of the Royal Navy.
The French Navy is marked off very sharply from our
own by the fact that it was always, and solely, the handiwork
of the Crown. In England necessity taught the nation that it
must have a fleet, and the nation either forced attention to its
wants on the Crown at times when the king was indifferent, or
provided itself with a naval force when the royal authority was
suspended or subordinate. France is admirably placed for
commerce, but it has not the same need for trade as England.
It is a great corn-growing and wine-producing country, and
its inhabitants have grown rich by constant industry and
thrift. They have rarely shown much faculty for trade on a
great scale. In such conditions the navy fell into neglect,
except when the ruler wished to possess one for political
reasons. When Louis XIV. attained his majority vigorous
efforts were made to form a powerful fleet. In 1669 the
king restored the office of Admiral, which had been suspended
by Richelieu, in favour of his natural son the Count
of Vermandois. The Count was a child and the navy was
governed in his name by a Minister of Marine and a Council.
The Minister of Marine for some years was M. de Lyonne,
who worked under the supervision of Colbert. This great
administrator, who laboured hard to supply France with
foreign commerce and colonies, applied an almost feverish
activity to the work of creating a fleet. Five military ports
were established, namely, Dunkirk, Havre, Brest, Rochefort,
on the Channel and the Ocean, and Toulon on the Mediterranean.
Dunkirk and Havre were too shallow for ships of
great burden. The long stretch of coast from Brest to the
frontier of Spain is ill provided with harbours. The old port
of Brouage, which had been used in the Middle Ages, had
become silted up, and was useless. Colbert was compelled
to create a harbour and an arsenal at Rochefort, where there
had formerly not even been a village, though the place has
great natural aptitude. Yet Rochefort has always been of
subordinate importance. The great naval station of France
on the Ocean has been at the magnificent harbour of Brest.
Toulon, the naval station of the Mediterranean, is also a fine
natural harbour. The mechanical ingenuity of the French
has always been shown in shipbuilding. It was comparatively
easy for Colbert to provide fine vessels. Some of the noblest
warships of the time were built under his directions. These
were the ships which excited the admiration of Charles II. and
his brother, when the Count D’Estrées brought his squadron
to Portsmouth at the beginning of the Third Dutch War.
It was less easy to form a corps of officers and to collect
crews. Although France possesses some excellent seamen in
Normandy and Brittany, the maritime population has never
been large. There were few experienced officers, either
gentleman or tarpaulin, to command the king’s ships. The
seamen of Dieppe, St. Malo, or Havre were daring. They
had invaded the Spanish West Indies before Hawkins made
his first voyage, but they were not numerous enough to supply
the king with an equivalent for the large body of ship’s
captains trained among ourselves by the Civil War and the
wars with the Dutch. Besides, they were hardly the men to
whom a king of France would have cared to entrust the
honour of his flag. In the early years of the king’s reign it
was found necessary to give the command of fleets and
individual ships to mere gentlemen who were not only not
seamen, but who looked down upon those who were, with all the
contempt usually shown by the French noblesse for mechanics.
This partly accounts for the ineptitude shown by French naval
officers during the naval campaigns of 1672 and 1673. The
exertions of Colbert did much to remedy this defect. By
twenty years of hard work and the most energetic driving, he
formed a naval organisation. The orders issued for this
purpose were so numerous that it was found necessary to
reduce them to a Code. Colbert began the work, but did not
live to finish it. On his death in 1683 he was succeeded
by his son Colbert de Seignelay, who continued what his
father had begun. The famous Ordonnance, or Code of Law
of the old French Royal Navy, was at last completed, and
by a curious coincidence it was promulgated in April 1689,
in the month before the beginning of the war with England.
This body of laws, or regulations, was very French in its
completeness, its air of logical coherence, and its excessive
regulation, of every detail of the service. It was contained
in twenty-three books. It divided the French Navy into four
branches, three civil and one military. The three civil
branches, collectively known as La Plume, or the Pen, were
divided between the purchase, manufacture, and care of
materials. The administration of the dockyards was in the
hands of the Pen. At the head of each dockyard was a civil
officer, called the Intendant de la marine. The military branch,
called L’Epée, or the Sword, consisted of the naval officers.
It was entrusted with the navigation and the fighting of the
ships. Under the old organisation established by Richelieu,
the control of the dockyards had been given to the Sword;
but Colbert, who was a civilian, and who cherished a lively
jealousy of the military officers, had reversed this arrangement.
The Sword was never quite reconciled to its degradation, and
its feuds with the Pen went on until the French Royal Navy
was destroyed by the Revolution. While Colbert lived and
the king was young, the central authority was strong enough
to compel obedience, but in later years all the parade of
precision in the language of the Ordonnance, and all the
power of the king, could not keep the civil and military
officials from quarrelling, from disobeying orders, and disputing
the meaning of the most exactly worded regulations.
The head of the Sword was naturally the Admiral of
France, who was a member of the royal family, and except
in the case of the Count of Toulouse, a dignified figurehead,
and not an effective chief. His administrative work was done
by the Minister of Marine and the Council. Next to the
Admiral came the two Vice-Admirals, Du Levant the Mediterranean,
and Du Ponant the Ocean, who commanded in
chief when he was absent, each in his own sea. The next
rank was that of Lieutenant-General. We may say for
purposes of comparison that the Admiral of France answered
to our Lord High Admiral, and the Vice-Admirals to our
Admirals, while the Lieutenants-General answered to our
Vice-Admirals. Next came an officer happily unparalleled
in our service. This was the Intendant des armées navales,
who is not to be confounded with the Intendant de marine.
He was a civilian who accompanied every French squadron,
and had supreme authority over the Commissaires, or Pursers,
and the civil work in all its branches. But he had also a
right to sit on councils of war, and was authorised to report
on the behaviour of the naval chief in action. The Intendant
des armées navales was in fact a French equivalent for the
Dutch Field Deputies, and he acted in exactly the same way,
by hampering the fighting chief when he was an energetic
man, and by reducing him to submission when he was a weak
one, and of course by irritating and exaggerating the jealousies
of the Pen and the Sword. He was a spy whose word could
make or mar the fortunes of a naval officer, and yet was not
a competent judge of the naval officer’s work. That Colbert
should have created such a rank, and that it should have been
preserved by the very able men who succeeded him in the
government of the French Navy, shows that they were all
blinded by the professional jealousy of the civil official for the
fighting man, and by the Frenchman’s mania for over-governing.
The next in rank was the Chef d’Escadre, Rear-Admiral
or Commodore. Then we have another civil official, the
Commissaire Général à la suite des armées navales, a subordinate
of the Intendant des armées navales, who watched the Captain
as his superior did the Admiral. The order of precedence in a
French ship could not offer much novelty. There was the
Capitaine du Vaisseau, or Post-Captain, and the Capitaine du
Brûlot, or Captain of a fireship. The second in command was
called the Major. He commanded the soldiers in the ship’s
company, and all landing parties. Then came the Lieutenant, and
after him the Enseigne. The recruiting of the corps of officers
was provided for by the Gardes de la marine. There were
three companies of the Gardes: one at Brest, one at Rochefort,
and one at Toulon. They were mostly young men of gentle
birth—that is, members of the noblesse who had a right to a
coat of arms and to the privileges of their caste,—but members
of respectable families who had received the education of
gentlemen were admitted. They were supposed to receive a
very thorough professional training, and to be drafted into the
ships when qualified. The fact did not always square with the
theory. It was found that young gentlemen of good family
and some influence were kept to their books with great
difficulty. A certain number of them did no doubt attain to
a level of book-knowledge very rare among our officers, but
the whole history of the eighteenth century is at hand to
prove that as a class they were inferior in practical capacity to
the men brought up in the rough school of the English Navy.
The crews were raised by the classes, the predecessors of
the Inscription maritime, a great system of naval conscription.
Like so much else in France, this also was founded by
Richelieu, but it was perfected by Lyonne and Colbert, and
was finally established by the Ordonnance of 1689. All
Frenchmen engaged in working in ships or boats throughout
the whole coast of France, and on the banks of rivers large
enough to carry a lighter, were held to be subject to serve in
the classes. They were divided into seven, which were to
serve successively for periods of four years. All seafaring
men, waterman or lighterman, were inscribed on the lists of
the Commissioner of the District. During the four years of
their liability to serve the king they were not allowed to
engage with private employers. It was calculated that the
total number subject to service was 60,000. The obligation
began at the age of ten, and lasted till the man was too old
to work. As a compensation for this unlimited obligation a
retaining fee was promised to men not serving, and those who
had served at sea were entitled to a small pension when their
period of liability to service was over; while hospitals were
established at all the ports, and employment in the dockyards
was promised to all who were so severely hurt as to be unable
to go to sea, but were still capable of doing some work. This
famous institution exists in a modified form to-day, and has
often been the subject of admiration among ourselves. On
paper it no doubt possessed immense advantages over our
rough-and-ready system, or no system, of raising crews by
bounties and impressment. Yet whenever the French Crown
endeavoured to use all the resources provided by the classes,
the neatly constructed machine broke down. The seafaring
population rebelled against its severity, and in practice the
king was constantly driven to impress men very much in the
English fashion, without regard to their class. In the last
years of the reign of King Louis and until the Revolution,
the financial distress of the French Government made it
impossible to provide half pay, and the hospitals were
neglected. The classes was in fact a more uniform and grinding
oppression than our own impressment, and was not more
efficient in producing crews.
In truth, the merit of the French organisation was altogether
more on paper than in reality. It looked very coherent
and beautifully divided, but its distinctions and divisions
answered to no natural classifications in the work to be done.
For instance, to make the Sword responsible for fitting out
the ships and yet to leave the control of the dockyards to
the Pen was simply to provide for incessant conflicts of
authority between the two, and to divide the responsibility.
The English system of putting a retired naval officer at the
head of the dockyard as Commissioner was incomparably simpler
and better. It is needless to point out that nothing could
be more fatal to the independence of character of an officer
commanding a fleet than the presence of the Intendant des
armées navales. But the spirit of the Ordonnance is best
shown by the article which forbade the captain to make any
kind of changes in the armament of his ship. It was no
doubt necessary to guard against mere eccentricity, but if such
a regulation as this had been enforced in the English Navy
it might never have had the carronade, and would certainly
have had to do without the many improvements in gunnery
introduced by Sir Charles Douglas in the last quarter of the
eighteenth century. The Ordonnance was full of that over-regulation
which is the ruin of all independence of character
and originality of mind. Other faults the French Navy had
which arose out of the social condition of France. The
officers were one of the many privileged corps which ended
by destroying the French monarchy. They stood much on
their rights, and were above all extremely jealous of the
admission of colleagues who were not of noble birth.
When King William’s Government was able to settle
down after the confusion of the Revolution, one of its first
duties was the reconquest of Ireland, which was still holding
out for King James. Louis XIV. was giving open support to
his cousin, and war had really begun in March, two months
before the formal declaration, when a French squadron under
the command of Louis Gabaret landed King James at
Kinsale. The material force at the disposal of the English
Government was considerable. It consisted of 173 vessels
of 101,892 tons, carrying 6930 guns, and requiring when
fully manned 42,003 men. Of the 173 vessels 108 were
rated. The rating of English ships, which had first been
settled according to the number of their crews, was now
based on the number of guns. There were six rates in all—the
first carrying 90 guns and upwards, the sixth 18 guns
or less; unrated ships were little craft such as sloops, ketches,
smacks, yachts, etc. With the help of the Dutch fleet, this
was more than enough to be a match for the French, but
Parliament was justly persuaded of the necessity for increasing
the Navy. In 1690 it voted £570,000, to be employed in
the building of 17 ships of 80 guns and 10 ships of 60.
Three of 70 were also ordered to be built, making the total
addition of 30 vessels. The 80-gun ships of that time were
three-deckers, and of a burden of 1100 tons. The 60-gun
ships were of 900 tons. The time allowed for completing
this list was four years. In spite of the wear and tear of the
war, and the limited number of prizes we were able to take
from the French, the additions made to the navy in the reign
of William III. were very considerable. It increased from
108 to 174 rated ships, and in tonnage from 101,000 to
158,999. The increase was greatest in vessels of the
fourth and fifth rates—that is, in vessels carrying from 30 to
60 guns. The political confusion of the early years of the
king’s reign combined with corruption to neutralise the material
strength of the navy to some extent. It was the policy of
the king to divide employments between the two parties to
which he looked for support, the Whigs, and those Tories
who had accepted the Revolution. In pursuit of this policy
his first Board of Admiralty was chosen from both. Arthur
Herbert, who was a Tory, was made First Commissioner.
Other members of the Board belonged to the same party,
but it included William Sacheverell, who was a strong Whig.
The presence of men belonging to different factions in the
same governing body was sure to lead to dissensions, and it
was not long before the quarrels of the Admiralty Board
became very violent. In order to facilitate the manning of
the fleet two new regiments of marines were raised. The
admiral’s regiment had been disbanded because it was suspected
of being too much attached to the deposed king. The
new corps were formally established in 1690, but the work
of recruiting them was begun in 1689. They were raised by
Herbert, who had been created Earl of Torrington after an
action about to be mentioned, and by the Earl of Pembroke,
and were named, according to the custom of the time, after
their colonels. By the first establishment they were to
consist of 12 companies each of 200 men; but the number
of companies was afterwards increased to 15.
As for the sailors, it is needless to say that they were
raised in the usual manner. Although much was done for
the officers in this reign, the men were no better paid than
before. Their wages remained throughout the century at
the figure fixed in the reign of Charles II., and were not increased
till a rise was extorted by the mutinies of 1797. The
main grievance of the seamen was not so much the amount
as the irregular payment of their wages. In the earlier times
after the Revolution they were kept waiting because the
Government was in want of money, but the system of pay
subjected them to long delays even when the resources at the
disposal of the Government were ample. It had been the
custom in the old days of the Winter and Summer Guard
to pay the men only at the end of the commission. This
was no hardship when the term of service lasted only a few
months. But the practice was continued when we had begun
to maintain fleets abroad for years together. In King
William’s reign the injustice did not reach the height it was
destined to attain later on, yet the men were often driven to
sell their pay tickets at a heavy discount because the distresses
of the Treasury, or the delays due to a complicated system
of accounts, kept them waiting during months for their hard-earned
wages.
The great bulk of the officers who had served King James
passed over to his successor. A few, indeed, followed the
exiled king, and among them was Sir Roger Strickland, who
as a Roman Catholic was disqualified for office. Captain
David Lloyd also adhered to his master, and was very busy
during the years next ensuing in endeavouring to shake the
new allegiance of his former brother-officers. In this, however,
he had no success. In spite of discontent, and although
some naval officers endeavoured to provide for their own
safety in case of a restoration by sending promises to King
James, the navy as a whole remained loyal.
The war now beginning lasted with an interval of truce
between 1697 and 1702, until the signing of the Peace of
Utrecht, in the reign of Queen Anne. It was in reality one
continuous war waged by Europe in self-defence, and by
France for the purpose of establishing the predominance of
the house of Bourbon. The naval part of this struggle is
divided into two periods. During the first, which lasted to
the close of 1793, the French king kept great fleets at sea.
After that date the exhaustion of his treasury through the
calls made upon it by the land war rendered him incapable
of meeting the allies at sea with equal forces. He was
driven by penury to lay up his ships, and the war on the side
of France was conducted by privateers. In this second
period the allied fleets still kept the sea, swept the French
coast, and co-operated with the armies.
When hostilities began in 1689, the first object of the
French was to give assistance to King James in Ireland. The
first duty of the English was to defeat his efforts, and then to
cover the passage of our own forces. The Dutch had to
protect their own commerce and to co-operate with us in the
general purposes of the war.
The news that the French king was about to supply his
cousin with the means of passing over to Ireland reached
London early in March. A squadron was prepared to sail
for the purpose of intercepting Gabaret, but it started too late.
Herbert, who went in command without resigning his place
as First Commissioner of the Admiralty, did not reach Cork
until the 17th of April. All he could do now was to intercept
whatever further help the French might be sending to the
assistance of the Jacobites. He knew that a force was
preparing at Brest under the command of the Count of
Châteaurenault. Not finding any sign of this expedition on
the coast of Ireland, Herbert stood over to Brest. Either
at this time, or shortly afterwards, he detached George Rooke
with a small squadron to the west of Scotland, for the double
purpose of rendering what help he could to the Protestants of
Ulster and preventing the French from sending help to the
Scottish Jacobites. The wind was easterly on the coast of
France, and Herbert failed to reach Brest in time, or to
approach it close enough to prevent Châteaurenault from
sailing with a fleet of vessels of from 40 to 60 guns, 5
fireships, and a number of transports carrying 6000 soldiers.
Finding that the French had escaped him, Herbert returned to
the south coast of Ireland, and was off Cork on the 29th April.
The French fleet were seen in the neighbourhood of Kinsale,
and Herbert stood in to place himself between them and the
coast. Châteaurenault made no attempt to land at Kinsale,
but steered west for Bantry. At Baltimore, Herbert obtained
information of his enemy’s destination. He at once pursued,
but on rounding Cape Clear caught sight of the Frenchmen
heading for Bantry Bay. This was on the afternoon of the
30th of April. The day being far advanced, Herbert did not
follow Châteaurenault at once, but lay to all the night. The
force under his command is variously stated as nineteen and
twenty-two ships of the line. The average size of the English
ships was about the same as the French.
On the 1st of May the wind was blowing off the land.
Châteaurenault had disembarked as many of the soldiers as
were carried in the men-of-war on the previous evening. But
the transports were still undischarged, and had not yet been
able to work up to the town of Bantry. Seeing that the
English were somewhat, though not much, inferior in number
to himself, the French admiral came to the very proper
decision to engage. He got under way about half-past eleven,
and stood down the Bay. As he had the weather-gage, he had
the choice of attack. Herbert lay to to receive him. At the
moment of getting under way the French fleet was in order
of convoy, that is, in three parallel columns; Châteaurenault
himself in the middle, with the van division under the command
of Gabaret on one side, and the rear commanded by
Forant on the other. When the order to draw into a line of
battle was given, Gabaret should have stood on ahead, leaving
a sufficient space for the admiral’s division between himself
and Forant. But he moved so slowly and kept his wind
at such a distance from the enemy that Châteaurenault
in a fit of impatience crowded on sail, ran between the van
division and the English, and took the place of van himself,
thus leaving Gabaret to fall in behind and form the centre.
In consequence of these misunderstandings the French line was
in considerable disorder, which was increased by the fact that
the narrow water of Bantry Bay left little room for manœuvring,
and that the fleet was speedily compelled to tack. It would
appear that these conditions ought to have afforded Herbert
an opportunity for working to windward and forcing a close
action with the enemy. It is, indeed, asserted that he made an
attempt to gain the weather-gage, and could not do so because
the French kept their wind so carefully. Thus the battle was
confined to artillery fire at a considerable distance, and no
great harm was done on either side. The French make an
unfounded claim to have sunk an English ship. On the
other hand, it is allowed that the French Diamant, Captain
Coëtlogon, was set on fire. The biographer of Sir John Leake,
who served in the battle as commander of the fireship
Firedrake, claims the honour of this achievement for his hero.
He says that the feat was performed by a “cushee piece”
invented by Leake’s father, the Master-gunner of England.
But the cushee piece was never heard of again, as Captain
John Leake judged it to be as dangerous to its friends as its
enemies, for which independence of judgment he was badly
treated in the will of his indignant parent. The two fleets
continued onwards in a disorderly way and firing at one
another over a distance of twenty-one miles till they were off
Dursey Head, then Châteaurenault, finding that he was being
drawn out to sea, and remembering that he was answerable
for the safety of the transports, returned to Bantry Bay.
Herbert, satisfied that enough had been done, made for the
general rendezvous of the fleet near the Scilly Isles, thereby
leaving Châteaurenault free to complete the disembarkation of
his soldiers, collect his transports, and return to Brest. His
whole expedition had lasted only for eleven days, and was
considered by the French a glorious success.
This estimate shows that the French took a modest
view of what constituted success in naval operations.
Châteaurenault, if he had pushed his attack home on Herbert,
might have had some English prizes to show, and might have
greatly encouraged the enemies of England, besides landing
his soldiers and bringing off his transports. But he at least
had some case. What is extraordinary, when we think what
had been once the standard of the English navy, was that
Herbert bragged of having gained a victory because he had
not been routed by an enemy of slightly superior force, and
that his countrymen, instead of laughing at him, or asking
indignantly why he did not fight again, threw up their caps
and huzzaed. The battle, and the praise given it, were
melancholy signs of the poorness of spirit which had come
over Englishmen since the Second Dutch War. It was the
beginning of a dull method of doing work in the navy, happily
never universal, but much too common, during the next half
century or more. We see the French admiral intent on
carrying out some operation other than attacking the English
fleet, fighting a little, but with great care not to fight seriously.
Opposite him is the English admiral, who has no idea that a
decisive battle is possible unless the enemy is good enough to
supply him with one, and perfectly ready to go off so soon as
a few broken spars give him an excuse for saying enough has
been done. Herbert went on from Scilly to Portsmouth.
The king may not in his heart have thought much of the
battle, but he knew the necessity of pleasing the naval officers
and the great Tory party. He therefore professed himself
satisfied, knighted two of the captains, John Ashby and
Cloudesley Shovell, and made Herbert Earl of Torrington.
Rooke, on being detached by Herbert, had gone on at once
to the west of Scotland. He was in the estuary of the Clyde
in May, and for about a month was very active against King
James’s partisan in the islands. On the 8th of June he was
called off to escort Kirke, who had been detached with a body
of troops for the purpose of raising the siege of Londonderry.
Rooke’s squadron consisted of five vessels, one of which was
the Dartmouth, now under the command of Leake, who had
been promoted for his use of the cushee piece on the 1st of
May. The squadron anchored in Rathlin Bay, and from
thence went off to Lough Foyle, whence there is a clear
waterway up to Londonderry. From what happened a month
later, it may be taken for granted that nothing whatever
prevented the smaller ships from being carried up to Londonderry,
nothing, that is, except a want of goodwill and manhood
on the part of Kirke and Rooke. Unfortunately, they
were wanting. Rooke was indeed a brave man who did
gallant service in later years. But his conduct in these weeks
was not worthy of his later reputation. Kirke was a drunken,
violent, foul-mouthed ruffian. It is idle to speculate what was
passing in his head. He may not have been a mere coward,
but he acted as if he had some hidden reason for not exerting
himself. He held a council of war on board the Swallow,
and it was decided that as there were not troops enough to
operate against the enemy outside the town, nothing could be
done, as if it would not have been much to carry provisions
and a reinforcement of men into Londonderry. He retired
to the Island of Inch, and there remained perfectly quiescent.
Rooke in the meantime cruised in search of French privateers
and Jacobite prizes. Whatever his motives may have been,
his actions were those of a man who thought it no shame to
fill his own pockets by prize-hunting while his countrymen
were starving and fighting in desperation on the turf walls of
Londonderry. At last, under the influence of pressing orders
from England, it was decided to do something, and something
was done in a way which covers with ignominy the memory
of the officers who did not dare to act before. During the
month of delay, due to their sloth or half-hearted treason,
the besiegers had had time to throw up batteries on the banks
of the Foyle, and to draw a boom across the river below
Londonderry. The operation was therefore more difficult
than it had been, and yet it was done with no great loss. On
the 26th July the Dartmouth was told off to break the boom,
and convoy two victuallers, the Mountjoy and the Phœnix,
small vessels both belonging to Londonderry. Leake performed
his work in a thoroughly officer-like fashion. So soon as the
flood-tide began to run, and there was water enough to float
the Dartmouth and victuallers, he stood into the mouth of the
Foyle, with the Mountjoy and Phœnix, towing behind him the
long boat of the Swallow. The Irish batteries opened fire,
but the little squadron held on steadily, the Dartmouth giving
all the cover she could to the merchant ships. Their progress
was slow for the wind was light, and the tide was not yet
running strongly. The Mountjoy reached the boom first, and
was steered straight at it by her skipper Browning. The
victualler had not enough way to break through the obstacle.
She recoiled from the boom and tailed on shore, that is to say,
she grounded stern first. The Irish raised a yell of gratification,
and rushed down to the bank, where they opened a heavy
fire on the Mountjoy. Browning was shot dead, but his men
fired a broadside on the crowd. The shock, aided by the
tide, floated the Mountjoy. In the meantime the long-boat
towed by the Dartmouth had rowed up to the boom, and,
undeterred by the musket fire from the banks, had cut through
the ropes which held the spars together, and had made an
opening. Then she towed the Phœnix in. The Mountjoy and
the Dartmouth easily forced their way through the loosened
spars. The disheartened besiegers broke up their camp and
marched away. It was a gallant piece of work, well done by
Leake and the merchant skippers, but the ease, and the
trifling cost with which it was done, are lasting reproaches to
Kirke and Rooke.
After the relief of Londonderry, Rooke had other important
work to do in the Irish Sea. In August he covered the
transport of Schomberg’s army to Ireland, and co-operated
in the capture of Carrickfergus. Then he cruised down the
coast, threatening the towns held for King James, and landing
where the enemy was not too strong to be attacked. As
the autumn drew on, and his ships became foul, Rooke came
round to the Downs, and his squadron was laid up for the
winter. In the meantime, the Grand Fleet of combined
English and Dutch had cruised in the Channel under the
command of Herbert, who was joined by Edward Russell.
They looked into Brest, and cruised at the mouth of the
Channel, going every now and then into Torbay for provisions.
There were many complaints of the want of beer. At last,
when the autumn had begun, the Grand Fleet also came
back, and was laid up. It was still not thought prudent to
keep the great ships out late in the autumn.
On a general survey of the operations of the year it
cannot be said that either party had displayed much energy.
The French fleet had done nothing proportionate to its
pretensions and its paper strength. In 1692, the King of
France was believed to possess 110 rated ships and 690 other
vessels of war. This figure is of course absurd, unless we are
to suppose that it included all the lighters and row boats
employed in his harbours. The fleet carried 14,670 cannon,
and was manned by 2500 officers and 97,500 men. We may
presume that this estimate covers the dockyard workmen.
Ninety-seven thousand five hundred men was more than the
whole number of Frenchmen liable to be drawn by the classes,
and it is very doubtful whether the French king ever had
the service at sea of one-half of them at any given moment.
Still, when all deductions are allowed for, this was a great
force. It had done nothing in proportion to its size. There
would have been no difficulty, considering that all Ireland
except the north was in the hands of King James, in
establishing a naval station at Bantry Bay, or even at Dublin,
and from either of these ports the French could have done
something effectual to stop the passage of Schomberg’s army.
They were content to land their troops in Ireland, and then
to return. But we certainly did very little to prevent them,
and the feeble conduct of Herbert in the action of Bantry
Bay promised very ill for the future.
The winter afforded the English Government an opportunity
to prepare for a vigorous campaign, but it was
neglected. The first joy over the Revolution was followed
by a reaction. The two sections of the victorious party,
the Whig and the Tory, began to quarrel and to struggle
for predominance. These factions were nowhere more
acutely felt than at the Admiralty. It is said by several
authorities, and denied by nobody, that Herbert had fallen
back into the dissolute habits of his early life. He was
addicted to excesses which are ruinous to a man’s nerve and
energy. It is certain that the work of the Admiralty was
so badly done that the French privateers were very successful
against our trade. In the new establishment of pay, made
in 1694, it was said that the increase of salary was given in
order that the officers might no longer be able to make their
poverty an excuse for not doing their duty. Given the moral
level of the Restoration and the Revolution, it is not incredible
that captains, who were sulky at the loss of their table money,
did refuse to exert themselves in defence of the merchant
ships unless they were bribed. The old complaints of bad
rations, bad pay, and bad beer were loud in the fleet. At last
it was found necessary to make a change at headquarters.
The existing Board of Admiralty was dissolved, and replaced
by another with the Earl of Pembroke at its head. Torrington
was very indignant, and threatened to resign the command
of the fleet in the Channel. He was pacified with gifts, and
then showed his zeal as an officer by staying in London to
enjoy himself. He afterwards said that he had warned the
Government that a larger fleet must be prepared, but did
not take the effectual step of insisting upon resigning unless
he was supplied with sufficient force.
A strong fleet was indeed necessary, for the French king
had at last decided on making a serious attack in the Channel.
His Toulon squadron was to be brought round from the
Mediterranean, and was to join the Vice-Admiral du Ponant, the
Count de Tourville, at Brest. Then the whole force, which
was intended to reach the imposing figure of 78 ships of the
line, 30 fireships, and 15 galleys, besides frigates and other
attendant small craft, was to come into the Channel. The
French Government, exaggerating the meaning of the discontent
in England, was under the impression that a Jacobite
rising would take place upon the appearance of the French
fleet. On our side there was no understanding of the gravity
of the coming crisis. In March Admiral Killigrew was
dispatched with thirteen sail of the line and two fireships to
protect the Mediterranean convoy. He was joined by some
Dutch men-of-war. The combined squadron met with bad
weather, and put into Cadiz on the 3rd of April. While
lying here Killigrew received information that Châteaurenault
was to be expected shortly on his way out to the ocean.
Killigrew left Cadiz, and went into Gibraltar Bay, where he
was joined by Captain Skelton, who was also on convoy duty
with six ships. The combined force stood over to the Barbary
coast to look for Châteaurenault, who might be supposed to
be likely to hug the shore of Africa in order to escape
observation. The common fate of our fleets at that time
attended this operation. Killigrew was too late. On the
11th of May, Châteaurenault was seen outside the allied fleets.
Killigrew pursued, but his ships were foul with long cruising,
perhaps by neglect, for some of them had not been cleaned
for seventeen months. The French squadron easily outsailed
its pursuers. Killigrew then returned to Cadiz, and collected
the trade before returning home. He reached England at the
beginning of July and there heard of a disaster further up
channel, which left him no resource but to carry his ship into
the Hamoaze, and there take shelter behind batteries.
This disaster was the Battle of Beachy Head, which the
French call the Battle of Bévisier, a corruption of Pevensey
Bay. As the year grew on, the English Government became
aware that a large French force might soon be expected in
the Channel. The crisis was a very dangerous one, since the
king had sailed for Ireland with all the best troops. There
were few left in England, and the discontent of the Jacobites
was notorious. The naval preparations made to meet an
enemy were insufficient. When Torrington was at last sent
down to Portsmouth on the 28th May there were but thirty-two
English ships and eighteen Dutch collected.
Tourville had sailed from Brest on the 13th of June. The
reinforcements brought him by Châteaurenault raised his fleet
to something over seventy ships of the line, with thirty fireships
and some small craft. He sailed into the Channel, and
his approach was first known to Torrington on the 22nd. The
English admiral was completely surprised by the appearance
of the enemy. At a later period, when his conduct was called
into question, he endeavoured to throw the blame for his want
of knowledge on the ministers, who, as he complained, had not
sent him down till the last of May, when it was too late for
him to station look-out ships off Brest. It does not, however,
appear why he thought it necessary to stay in London till he
was driven out by a special order. After the change in the
Admiralty Board he had no official duties in the capital, and
if he stayed there till he earned from the sailors the nickname
of Lord Tarry-in-Town, it was presumably because he did not
wish to leave. Even so, he was with the fleet on the 30th
of May, and might have detached look-out ships to the mouth
of the Channel. He said he did, and then immediately afterwards
said he did not, because all his frigates were engaged in
shipping Lord Pembroke’s newly raised regiment of marines.
The Dutch, to whom he entrusted the duty, without taking the
trouble to see whether it were executed, were too busy shipping
their stores to have leisure for anything else. The allied fleet,
in fact, presented a picture of sloth and carelessness. When
the enemy was known to be in the immediate neighbourhood,
it weighed anchor, and dropped down to Dunnose. Here it
was joined by two English and three Dutch ships of the line,
which raised it to fifty-five. Torrington anchored and
remained at anchor until the 25th. On that day he again
weighed with the wind at N.E. and on the afternoon sighted
the French to the south of the Isle of Wight. They were
much scattered, and some of them were far to leeward.
In such circumstances Monk would at once have attacked the
enemy within striking distance in the hope of crippling him
severely before he could be reinforced. Torrington drew his
fleet into a line of battle and made towards the enemy. But
he soon came to the conclusion that “they had enough in a
body to have given us more than sufficient work.” He could
not understand why they had not attacked him. It is probable
that they abstained because he was to windward and they
were scattered. To Monk the fact that the enemy was shy
would have been an extra reason for attacking. To Torrington
it only suggested dismal reflections as to what might happen
if the French became enterprising, and therefore he retired.
During the 26th he worked back from the south of the Isle of
Wight to the N.E. A letter which he wrote on this day to
the Council is marked on every line with glee over the
embarrassment the crisis was likely to cause to his political
opponents. He did indeed say that he would watch the
enemy, and get to westward of them if he could; but before
this he had expressed his opinion that the best course was to
fall back to the Gunfleet, and then the ships from the west
might come up to Portsmouth, and join him over the “Flats,”
that is the shallows at the mouth of the Thames. The ships
from the west were Killigrew’s squadron. Torrington knew
that they had been cruising and must be foul, and it was
certainly within his knowledge that they were less numerous
than his own fleet. Yet he proposed to subject them to the
risk of passing the French fleet, which he thought too great
to be run by himself. This was not how Tromp had behaved
when he united the fleets of the Maas and the Texel in defiance
of Monk at the end of the First Dutch War.
It would seem that there are two types of fighting man.
The first when in presence of the enemy instinctively thinks,
“How can I strike with the most effect.” The great race are
of this type. To it belong Blake and Monk, Hawke, Hood,
Nelson, and their like, among our admirals; and, among our
enemies, Tromp, De Ruyter, and Suffren. Then there is
another kind of fighting man who may be brave enough
personally, but who, when he is a commander, instinctively
says, “How can I prevent the enemy from hurting me.” This
kind of leader has fortunately been rare with us at sea, but
Herbert was of the race, and so was Byng. Such men are
always looking over their shoulders, always making the most of
the enemy’s force, always exaggerating the defects of their
own command. They seek for excuses to do nothing, and
when they do come to the resolution to fight, the opposite
determination to retreat forms itself underneath, as it were
spontaneously. This was the natural tendency of Herbert as
he had already shown in Bantry Bay, and it was strengthened
by his wish to punish those political rivals in London who had
refused to take his advice, and had turned him out of the
Admiralty.
When his letter of the 26th reached the Council it was not
unnaturally interpreted by them as indicating a wish to retire
to the Gunfleet at once. This may have been a mistake, but
an admiral who said that he had “heartily given God thanks”
that the enemy declined battle, and added, “I shall not think
myself very unhappy if I can get rid of them without fighting,”
had no ground to complain if he was thought to be
wanting in spirit. No member of the Council was more bitter
against Herbert than his brother seaman Edward Russell, a
rancorous man, and an extreme Whig. He was very probably
moved by jealousy, but the queen and the civil members of
the Council can hardly be severely blamed for not entirely
trusting one admiral, when another admiral condemned him
without stint. On general grounds the Council was justified
in expecting more energy from Torrington. The danger was
not that a great French army could land, this the queen’s
counsellors knew to be impossible, but that a small corps of
French troops might be thrown on shore which could act as a
rallying point to the partizans of King James. It was a great
object to rouse the general patriotic feeling of the country, and
there was no more effectual method of doing that than a
battle. The case was one in which it was better to fight, and
be beaten, than not to fight at all. A letter was written in the
queen’s name to Torrington. It was worded with no
apparent want of confidence, and it left him free not to fight if
he preferred; but it ordered him strictly not to lose sight of the
French, to get to windward of them if he could, but to fight on
the first advantage rather than to go to the Gunfleet.
The letter reached Torrington on the 29th of June. He
called a council of war which agreed with him that it implied
an order to fight on the first advantage. A previous council
of war had confirmed his opinion that it was better not to
fight. It may be laid down as a general rule that a council of
war is a mere blind for the commander-in-chief. When it
does not consist of his dependants it must still necessarily be
full of his inferiors in rank, who have been trained by the
habits of their life not to contradict the commanding officer.
Besides, when he wants to fight, it looks cowardly to recommend
retreat, and, when he wants to retreat, it looks like a reflection
on his courage to insist upon fighting.
The fleet was now lying off Beachy Head some nine or
ten miles to the south. The enemy again were some eighteen
miles off to the S.W. The fleet weighed anchor at nine
o’clock at night, and remained beating to and fro till daybreak.
The wind was off the shore. The enemy also was under
way at sundown, but at two o’clock in the morning Tourville
was heard to fire guns as a signal to anchor. The sound
was heard and understood in the English fleet. An opportunity
now presented itself for slipping between the French
and the land, and getting to the westward of them for the
sake of joining Killigrew. Tromp would have made a push,
but Torrington seems to have been in a dogged and stupid
mood with no very fixed intention in his mind, save to
make all the trouble he could for other people. At daybreak
the fleet had not much altered its position. Beachy
Head was still twelve miles to the N.E. and the French were
visible at anchor to the south. At four o’clock the signal
was made to form the line, and at eight o’clock the “bloody
flag,” the red flag hoisted at the fore-topmast-head, which
was the signal to engage the enemy, was run up in the flagship.
Two vessels had joined Torrington since he left Dunnose.
His total force now consisted of thirty-five English, and
twenty-two Dutch. According to the order established for
the fleet, the Dutch led when it was upon the starboard tack.
As the wind was N.E. and the enemy to the South and
West, the fleet bore down with the wind on the right quarter,
the Dutch led. Torrington himself was in the centre with
the Red Squadron, with Sir John Ashby between him and the
Dutch, and Sir George Rooke between him and the Blue
Squadron in the rear. Sir Ralph Delaval commanded the
Blue Squadron. The fleet it must be understood was not
perpendicular, but parallel to the enemy though a little
behind him. Thus the ships of the allied fleet had to bear
down on the French in a number of lines which struck upon
them at an angle, but were parallel to one another. When
the allied fleet was seen to be approaching, the French weighed
anchor and lay with their heads pointing to N. of W. in
a long concave line. The official French list gives seventy-two
vessels present in the line, but the English counted that
there were thirty-four ahead of the French admiral and forty-eight
behind him. In this there was probably exaggeration,
and perhaps downright lying. Tourville himself had his flag
in the Soleil Royale, a magnificent ship of 110 guns. The
van was commanded by the Lieutenant-General Châteaurenault
and Lieutenant-General the Marquis de Villette
Mursay. The rear was under the command of Count D’Estrées,
Vice-Admiral du levant, and the Lieutenant-General Gabaret,
who had been promoted after the action of Bantry Bay.
Fire began at nine o’clock when the Dutch ships under
Admiral Cullemburg came into action with the French van.
Owing to the inferiority of the allies in numbers there was
a danger that as they could not stretch all along the line of
the French fleet some of the ships in the French line would
turn to windward, and put either the Dutch or the English,
according to circumstances, between two fires. The danger
was one which De Ruyter had had to face in the battles
of 1672 and 1673, and he had provided for it by telling
off a squadron to watch the enemy’s van and had then
thrown the bulk of his own force on the rear. It shows how
useless experience is to naturally stupid men, that although all
the senior officers present had served either with, or against, De
Ruyter, none of them thought of following his example. All
the allied leaders could do was to endeavour to get as near
as they could to stretching themselves out to the same length
as the enemy by sending the van down against the French
van; by keeping the Red Division opposite the enemy’s centre;
and by leaving the attack on the rear to Sir Ralph Delaval.
While they were bearing down, Herbert changed his mind
once, or twice, as to the exact point of the enemy’s line he
wished to reach, and altered the course of his ship accordingly.
The result was that Sir John Ashby became puzzled as to
the intentions of his commander-in-chief, and finally ended
by attaching himself to the Dutch. In the end Torrington
placed himself opposite the rear of the French centre so that
there came a gap between him and Ashby. Being afraid that
the French would stand out of their own line, in order to
pass through this opening, Herbert kept his ships a good
distance from the enemy so that he might be the better placed
to head off such as attended this movement. As the French
began to move ahead slowly, just as the allies came down,
the Dutch could not get abreast of the leading ship, and
struck on them at the ninth.
The Dutch began to fire at nine, Sir Ralph Delaval at
half-past nine, and the centre at ten. At the two extremities
the fighting was hot. Sir Ralph Delaval pressed eagerly on
the squadron of Count D’Estrées, and pushed his attack with
such energy that the enemy seemed to flinch. Sir John
Ashby in the van found himself abreast of Tourville. He
fired two guns in order to see whether the Vice-Admiral du
Ponant would be a “reasonable enemy.” Tourville disdained
to strike first at his inferior in rank, and it was not until
Ashby’s first broadside had been delivered that the Soleil
Royal opened fire. The wind, which had been strong in the
early morning was still blowing a good breeze. It was used
by the ships at the head of the French line to work to windward.
Between eleven and twelve o’clock they succeeded in
doubling on the Dutch and putting them between two fires.
Admiral Cullemburg’s squadron fought gallantly but was
overpowered. What had happened was seen on the centre
and rear. Torrington’s attention was called to the movement
by his flag-captain who asked if he also intended to allow
himself to be weathered. He answered that he did not, and
began at once to work up to windward. As Sir Ralph
Delaval had pressed closely on D’Estrées, he had fallen to
leeward of the commander-in-chief, and there was an “elbow”
in the English line. By two o’clock the wind fell away to
a dead calm and movement became restricted on either side
to what could be done by towing, or drifting along with the
tide. Cannonading went on between the two stationary fleets
for some time. At last the ebb-tide set up a strong westerly
current. The Dutch dropped anchor with all sails set. As
the French were not seamen enough to do the same thing
they drifted to the west. One Dutch ship which was too
much damaged to anchor floated away, and became a prize.
Then Herbert drifted down to the neighbourhood of the
Dutch and anchored close by them. The allies remained at
anchor, till the easterly current began to flow with the flood-tide
in the evening. Then they got up anchor and tided
eastwards towards the Thames. The pursuit of Tourville
was timid. He followed next day, but in line of battle which
limited the speed of his fleet to that of the slowest vessel in
it. To this timidity Torrington owed his safety from complete
destruction. A few of the more severely crippled Dutch and
English vessels were set on fire, but the great bulk of the
allied fleet got safely into the Thames.
The subsequent movements of Tourville may be dismissed
in a few lines. He remained in the Channel until the early
days of August, ranging at will up and down and of course
paralysing commerce, but he did nothing more against our
coast than burn the little town of Teignmouth in South Devon.
There was nothing in fact that he could do. The Jacobite
rising did not take place because he had no troops to land to
help the country gentlemen, who were resolved not to move
until they were secure against being attacked by the Government’s
forces before they were sufficiently organised to offer
any resistance. In August Tourville returned quietly to Brest.
There had been a furious outbreak of anger in the country
against Torrington and a great movement of patriotism which
was unspeakably to the advantage of King William’s government.
Yet when Torrington was brought to trial in December
he was acquitted. The acquittal was intelligible. King
William’s victory at the Boyne, gained just after the battle of
Beachy Head, had put the country into good humour, and the
admiral’s most bitter accusers were the Dutch who were not
popular in England. But it was none the less a misfortune.
Torrington had not done his utmost. His position indeed was
a difficult one, but it was not worse than Monk’s in 1666, or
De Ruyter’s in 1672, ’73, and he had not behaved as these
men had done. When a court martial could find no fault
with his management it lowered the whole standard of conduct
expected of an English naval officer. It showed that a man
who leaned to the side of timidity would not be condemned by
other officers. Then, too, the court, which could see nothing to
blame in his feeble effort of attack on the 30th June, must
have been composed of men of a lower level of intelligence
than the sea chiefs, whether Dutch, or English of the previous
wars. It laid the foundation of that pedantic adherence to
the line and the practice of engaging from van to rear which
afterwards led to the monstrous sentence on Admiral Mathews,
to the helpless weakness of Byng, and to the stupidity of
Graves. Perhaps the ugliest feature of the whole transaction
was this, that the English excused Torrington very largely on
the ground that the chief sufferers in the battle had been the
Dutch. There was something very base in the code of honour
of people who did not think it ignoble to throw the burden of
battle on an ally.
While Tourville was ranging the Channel the English
government had fitted out a fresh armament. It was put
under the combined command of Sir Richard Haddock, Sir
John Ashby, and Admiral Killigrew. This fleet could, however,
do little. The French were no longer at sea, and the great
ships were laid up as usual before the beginning of autumn.
Yet one good piece of service was done before the year was
closed. Marlborough had suggested that an expedition might
be sent to act against the partisans of King James in the
south of Ireland. The scheme was approved by King William,
and Marlborough sailed in September, under an escort of third
and fourth rates commanded by the admirals. Cork was
taken on the 29th September, and the bulk of the ships then
returned to the Channel, leaving a few to co-operate with
Marlborough in the attack on Kinsale. This completed the
expedition. A separate squadron of ships had cruised during
this year on the coast of Ireland, under the command of Sir
Cloudesley Shovell, and had co-operated in the taking of
Duncannon.
In this year the French had again made very little use of
their naval force. In spite of Tourville’s victorious cruise in
the Channel, the English cause had advanced as a whole.
King James had been beaten from the north and east of
Ireland, and deprived of two very important ports in the south.
That this was so was due to the little help afforded him by
the French navy. King Louis seems never to have thought
of keeping a squadron permanently on the coast of Ireland,
though it would have been easy and manifestly advantageous
so to do. In the Channel, Tourville had really effected very
little. He is perhaps not to be blamed for retiring in August.
Nobody then thought of keeping the great ships out in autumn,
and the French ports in the Channel are very poor. But he
had shown undeniable want of enterprise against Torrington.
His pursuit had been so feeble after Beachy Head that we
may doubt whether he was the man to have taken advantage
of the weather-gage of the change of wind which Herbert
feared had occurred. His own countrymen were ill-satisfied
with him. The famous epigram of Seignelay that he was
poltron de tête mais non de cœur, is well known. If this was
all the French could do when their powers were at the best it
would be the fault of the allies if they did not some day turn
the tables on their enemy.
The operations of 1691 were of a nature to confirm this
belief. A powerful fleet was sent to sea by the allies under
the command of Russell. Its movements throughout the
summer were wearisome and unimportant. It went to and
fro between May and the beginning of autumn. In the meantime
Tourville was at sea with a fleet of eighty sail of the line.
His cruise is rather a famous passage in French naval history.
He contrived to keep the sea without allowing himself to be
forced to battle—and at last, by making clever use of a shift
of wind, managed to get into Brest untouched by the allied
fleet. The pride of the French of the time with this achievement,
and the satisfaction they have expressed at it since, are
the condemnation of a navy, and a method of conducting war.
Tourville was quite strong enough to fight the allies, yet his
movements were directed to avoiding battle and to capturing
merchant ships. As a matter of fact, he missed his great prize,
the Smyrna convoy, and in the meantime Limerick, King
James’s last stronghold in Ireland, was taken, and the country
thoroughly subdued. The great French fleet had preserved
itself, but the King of France had lost an ally who kept up a
useful diversion of the resources of England. A fighting force
which makes it a principal object to avoid battle is doomed to
defeat when it comes across an enemy who makes it a steady
rule to fight. But the French never took the view that if you
wish to use the sea you must drive your enemy off it, and if
you want to do that you must smash him. In the dullest
times the English navy has always understood that the beating
of the French navy was the preliminary to everything
else. The French government, which was much distressed by
lack of money, was angry with Tourville for missing the convoy,
and accused him of timidity.
In 1692 the French at last learnt by a painful experience
the truth of Bacon’s saying that “Occasion turneth a bald noddle
after she has presented her locks in front, and no hold taken, or
at least turneth the handle of the bottle first to be received
and afterwards the belly which is hard to clasp.” After
wasting three years either in delivering their blows wide, or
hitting feebly when the direction was good, the French at last
made a serious effort to strike England to the heart. But
what they might have done with a fair prospect of success in
’89, ’90, or ’91, they attempted with insufficient means in
’92. Their deficiencies were due to causes which a little foresight
would have made them understand were sure to operate
sooner or later. The events of ’90 had taught the English
Government the necessity for vigorous preparations. At the
same time an accident, such as was always likely to occur,
prevented a timely concentration of their own forces. The
Toulon fleet, under Châteaurenault, ought to have joined
Tourville at Brest early in the year, but it was delayed by bad
weather. It was, and always has been, a cause of weakness to
the French that their two seacoasts on the Mediterranean and
the Atlantic are separated from one another by the Spanish
Peninsula. An enemy who is in a position to occupy the
Straits of Gibraltar with a strong naval force is admirably
placed, to prevent one-half of the French fleet from uniting
with the other. Even when there was no hostile squadron in
the Straits, persistent bad weather might confine the French in
the Mediterranean. At a later date, attempted concentrations
of the French fleet broke down from these very causes. But
this was a probability which ought to have been provided
for. Louis XIV. ought either to have made his officers act
with more spirit or not to have allowed an important part of
his fleet to go back to the Mediterranean at the close of ’91.
As it was, his effort to carry out a scheme of invasion with a
part of his naval force, when the whole of them would not have
been too many, ended, as it was bound to end, in disastrous
failure.
The allied Dutch and English fleets were out early. Their
Governments had a double motive for wasting no time. They
were aware that an army of invasion, consisting in part of Irish
regiments in the service of France, was being collected in
Normandy for the invasion of England. In spite of many
disappointments King James was still hopeful, and he had
persuaded the King of France to make an effort to help
the Jacobites in England. The army of invasion, some
30,000 strong, was collected in the Côtentin. They were
quartered at La Hougue, on the eastern side of the Côtentin.
Another object for which the allies had to provide was
the safe return of the ships, Dutch and English, composing
the Smyrna convoy. It was coming home under
the protection of a squadron commanded by Sir Ralph
Delaval. In order to discharge the double duty of covering
the return of the convoy and watching the French, a detached
squadron under the command of Rear-Admiral Carter cruised
on the coast from Brest to Cape La Hague, the north-westerly
point of the Côtentin. Delaval brought his convoy back in
March and then joined Carter on the coast of France. In
later times the English navy would have prepared to prevent
the concentration of the French fleet by cruising off Brest, but
at the end of the seventeenth century our officers had not
yet acquired that confidence in their vessels, and the vessels
had not been so far perfected, as to make cruising in spring on
so dangerous a coast as that about Brest appear practicable for
the great ships. The grand fleet was not in fact fully ready
for sea till May, when Russell called in the detached squadrons,
and united his whole force at St. Helens.
There was another reason for bringing the fleet together.
The Government had decided on making a demonstration.
During the last few months, as indeed at all times in King
William’s reign, the Jacobite agents had been very busy. The
great discontent undoubtedly existing among the naval officers,
and partly due to the grievances as to their pay, had appeared
to give the friends of the exiled king an opportunity.
Captain David Lloyd had been running to and fro with great
zeal. His old comrades were too much attached to him to
betray him to the Government even when they were opposed
to his party, and there were no doubt great numbers of
English naval officers who were as well disposed as other
Englishmen to restore the exiled king if only he would not
be his own worst enemy. These men would not be shocked
by arguments in his favour. As they had themselves been
praised and in some cases rewarded for deserting King James,
it would be unreasonable to expect that they should have
been greatly offended when asked by an old brother officer to
desert back to him from King William. The activity of Lloyd
was perfectly well known to the English Government. He
had spoken to Carter, who had immediately reported the whole
of the conversation to the queen. Lloyd himself does not
appear to have taken all the grumblings he heard among his
brother seamen very seriously, and the Council of Regency was
probably not very frightened. But it wisely decided to bring
all doubts to the test. On the 15th May a letter drawn up
in the queen’s name by the Secretary, Nottingham, was sent
down to the flag officers and captains of the fleet. In this
letter the queen informed them that she had heard stories
accusing them of disloyalty but she did not believe the
accusations, and continued to repose the most complete
confidence in their fidelity. This profession of a confidence it
would have been wise to assume, even if it had not been
sincerely felt, was at once communicated by Russell to his
subordinates. It had the effect which had been hoped for.
The fleet answered by unanimous expression of loyalty. An
address expressing the perfect readiness of all the officers to
venture their lives, with all imaginable “alacrity and resolution,”
in defence “of the Government and of the religion and liberty
of the country and against all Popish invaders whatsoever,”
was drawn up and signed on behalf of the fleet by sixty-four
flag officers and captains.
An opportunity was speedily given to these officers to
show that they could be as good as their word. A council
of war decided to take the initiative against the French. A
body of troops was to be landed at St. Malo, while the allied
fleet was to lie to the westward of that place in order to
provoke a battle. On the 18th May, Russell sailed from St.
Helens, and on the following day when he was about twenty
miles off Cape Barfleur, the easterly corner of the Côtentin, the
look-out ships to the westward of the fleet made the signal for
seeing the enemy. In fact, while the allies had been talking
of invading France, Tourville had sailed from Brest with the
intention of covering an invasion of England, and after
suffering some delay from the weather had come so far. The
two fleets now opposed to one another were divided as follows,
and consisted of the elements shown on these lists:—
THE DUTCH
THE ENGLISH
The White Squadron
Red Squadron
Blue Squadron
Guns
Guns
Guns
The Zealand
90
The Royal William
100
The Victory
100
Konig Wilhelm
92
London
100
Albemarle
90
Brandenburg
92
Britannia
100
Windsor Castle
90
West Friesland
84
St. Andrew
100
Neptune
90
Printz
92
Royal Sovereign
100
Vanguard
90
Printzess
92
St. Michael
90
Duchess
90
Bexhirmer
84
Sandwich
90
Ossory
90
Casteel Medenblick
86
Royal Catherine
90
Duke
90
Captain General
84
Cambridge
70
Resolution
70
North Holland
68
Plymouth
60
Monk
60
Erste Edele
74
Breda
80
Expedition
70
Munickendam
74
Kent
70
Royal Oak
74
Gelderland, A.
74
Swiftsure
70
Northumberland
70
Stadt Meeyden
72
Hampton Court
70
Lion
60
Etswout
72
Grafton
70
Berwick
70
Printz Casimir
70
Restoration
70
Defiance
70
Frisia
70
Eagle
70
Montague
60
Riddershap
72
Rupert
60
Warspight
70
De 7 Provintzen
76
Elizabeth
70
Monmouth
70
Zurick Zee
60
Burford
70
Edgar
70
Gelderland, R.
64
Captain
70
Stirling Castle
70
Vere
62
Devonshire
80
Dreadnought
60
Zealand, A.
64
York
60
Suffolk
70
Haerlem
64
Lenox
70
Cornwall
80
Leyden
64
Ruby
50
Essex
70
Amsterdam
64
Oxford
50
Hope
70
Velew
64
St. Albans
50
Chatham
50
Maegd van Dort
64
Greenwich
50
Advice
50
Tergoes
54
Chester
50
Adventure
50
Medenblick
50
Centurion
50
Crown
50
Gaesterland
50
Bonaventure
50
Woolwich
54
Ripperda
50
Deptford
50
Schattershoff
50
Stadden Land
52
Hoorn
50
Delft
54
The list of the French fleet given by Monsieur Troude is
as follows:—
Guns
Guns
Guns
Bourbon
64
Fort
60
Content
64
Monarque
90
Henri
64
Souverain
84
Aimable
68
Ambitieux
96
Illustre
70
Saint Louis
60
Couronne
76
Modéré
52
Diamant
60
Maure
52
Excellent
60
Gaillard
68
Serieux
68
Prince
60
Terrible
76
Courageux
58
Magnifique
76
Merveilleux
94
Perle
56
Laurier
64
Tonnant
76
Glorieux
64
Brave
58
Saint-Michel
60
Conquerant
84
Entend
60
Sans-Pareil
62
Soleil Royal
104
Triomphant
76
Foudroyant
82
Saint-Philippe
84
Orgueilleux
94
Brilliant
68
Admirable
90
It will be seen that the force of the two fleets was
extremely unequal; the allies being in fact more than twice
as strong as their enemy. If this was a surprise to the French,
the information supplied to Louis XIV. by the Jacobites in
England, and by his agents in the Low Countries, must have
been far less accurate than is commonly supposed. If, on the
other hand, he really did believe that the grumblers in the
English fleet, and that Russell the admiral, who was
undoubtedly in communication with the exiled court at St.
Germain, would betray their country to its hereditary enemy
on the field of battle, and under the eyes of all the world, he
must have been singularly impervious to experience. Tourville
received peremptory orders, dated the 26th March, and worded
in a style insulting to him. He was told to go near enough
to the enemy to see them for himself, and not to be misled
into believing that merchant-ships were men-of-war, as he was
accused of doing during the off-shore cruise of 1691. If on
reaching La Hougue he found the allies already there, he was
to attack them whatever their numbers might be. If victorious,
he was to cover the passage of the army to England. If
defeated, he was to save his fleet as he best could. Should
the allies not be near La Hougue when he arrived, he was
to transport the army without waste of time. If the allies
attacked him during the passage, he was to fight with obstinacy,
so as to give the army time to land. In case the allies
appeared after the landing, he might avoid a battle if they
exceeded in number by ten ships.
When the French were signalled by the guns of the look-out
ships at three o’clock on the morning of the 19th, the
weather was foggy. Fearing that the enemy might stretch
past him to northward, Russell signalled to the rear to
tack and close the space between him and the coast of
England. At four o’clock the mist lifted and the enemy
were seen to the westward with their heads pointing to
the south. As this showed that they had no intention of
attempting to turn him on the north side Russell countermanded
the order to the Rear or Blue Division. The allied
fleet was not in order of battle but scattered some ahead,
some to windward, and some to leeward of the admiral. The
wind was blowing from the S.W., and the French therefore
had the weather-gage. The line was formed at eight o’clock with
the Dutch or White Squadron in the van, and to the south of the
Red Squadron which formed the centre, then came the Blue
Squadron farthest to the north. There must have been a
distance of many miles between the first and last ship of this
great fleet of ninety-nine sail, and the Blue Squadron was still
to leeward. Having made his simple disposition to meet the
attack Russell lay with his topsail to the mast waiting for
the enemy to come on. With a resolution of character which
shows his innate superiority to Herbert, Tourville charged home.
He directed his attack on the centre of the allied line, telling off
a few ships in his van and rear to watch the van and rear of
the allies, and prevent them from doubling on his own fleet.
The battle began about ten o’clock, and lasted till about
five in the afternoon. The French ships engaged with the
Red Division made no attempt to break through the English
line. The battle was conducted entirely by cannonading at
short ranges, and the English claimed that their fire was more
rapid than the French. When the enemy’s attack was fully
developed Russell ordered the van to tack for the purpose of
getting to windward of the French, and putting them between
two fires, and at the same time signalled to the Blue Division
to come closer to the centre. Neither order could be obeyed,
for the wind was very light so that the ships were unable to
manœuvre. The real battle was always between the Red
Squadron and the ships immediately around Tourville.
About two o’clock in the afternoon the wind, after falling
altogether, rose again, but from the N.W., thus giving the
weather-gage to the allies, and by five o’clock Tourville began
to draw off. He doubtless felt that enough had been done
for honour, and he hoped that the Red Squadron had been
sufficiently mauled to cripple it from pursuing him. The
wind was light and variable. As the French ships drew away
to the westward it fell calm and the mist arose again; then
there was a short squall from the east. Sir Cloudesley Shovell
with the rear division of the Red Squadron broke through
the French in the interval between the centre and the ships
which had been stretched out to observe the rear of the allies.
Captain Hastings of the Sandwich was killed at this phase of
the action. The two fleets became mingled in the fog,
and drifted to the westward with the ebb-tide. Both anchored
at the flood, but at this moment a portion of the Blue
Squadron which had worked to the westward of the French
drifted back through them in the mist and darkness. They
were fired on as they came through, and Rear-Admiral Carter,
whose division made this movement, was killed. The sound
of the cannonading was heard by the rest of the allied fleet,
but it could take no part in the action. When he saw that
the enemy was in retreat Russell had ordered a general chase,
that is to say he left each ship free to go at its utmost speed.
But no great rapidity of movement was possible. The wind
had fallen, and the fog made it impossible to see.
This was the end of what strictly speaking is called the
battle of La Hogue, from the old spelling of La Hougue. The
name is improperly used, for the actual battle was fought off
Cape Barfleur. The battle of Barfleur was in fact the title
commonly given by our ancestors, but it has been displaced
by the name of the place which was the last scene of the four
days’ pursuit following on the action. The pursuit began like
a nightmare, in strenuous effort to act without the power to
move. Both fleets had anchored during the night. When
daylight came there was a thick haze and the French were invisible
to the allied fleet. What little wind there was, was from
the N.N.E. At about eight o’clock some of the Dutch ships
caught sight of the enemy to the W.S.W. The pursuit was
resumed, but, as the ships could not move more quickly than
they were carried by the tide, the progress was very slow.
At four o’clock in the afternoon the ebb-tide ceased, and both
fleets again anchored, the French in order to avoid the risk
of being carried among their pursuers, and the allies so that
they should not lose ground. They had moved so little
during the ebb-tide that they were still off Cape Barfleur,
and at no great distance from the scene of the battle. As
long as the tide was flowing it was useless to move, but at
ten in the evening, when it turned, both fleets again got under
way and began to drift to the west. About this time the
fore-topmast of the Britannia, which had been seriously injured
in the action, came down, and as Russell did not transfer his
flag to another vessel, this delayed the Red Squadron under
his immediate command. Many of them must have suffered
in the action. Whether because they felt bound to remain
about their admiral, or because they could not move any faster,
the ships of the Red Squadron fell somewhat behind in the
pursuit while the Blue and White pressed on ahead. At four
in the morning of the 21st both fleets anchored again. They
had now tided so far that they were almost off Cape La
Hague. Both were much scattered. A part of the French
had passed the Cape, the others had not. Among those
which had failed to get beyond the headland was the Soleil
Royal, Tourville’s flagship. She had suffered very severely in
the action from the fire of the Britannia and the ships just
ahead and astern. It has been said with some appearance of
truth that if Tourville had had the resolution to set her on
fire he might have brought the whole of his fleet round Cape
La Hague. But she was the pride of the French Navy, and
had been named from the king himself who was the royal
sun of France, and the admiral could not make his mind up
to sacrifice her. He had, however, transferred his flag to
another ship the Ambitieux.
When the fleets were ordered to anchor, only a portion of
the French was able to obey. Whether it was because they
had slipped their cables on the previous night, and therefore
could not anchor, or whether their anchors would not hold, it
is certain that they were unable to stop themselves from being
carried to the eastward towards the allies. The position then
in the early hours of the 21st was this, one part of the French
fleet was ahead, to the west another part was drifting eastward
between the land and the allies. The best sailing ships
of the White and Blue Squadrons were well ahead of Russell,
who with the Red Squadron was furthest of all to the east.
The inability of the ships immediately about him to anchor
showed Tourville that it was useless to endeavour to keep
his now divided fleet acting as one body any longer. If he
summoned the ships to the west to his assistance he would
bring the whole fleet into a trap between the land and the
enemy, who was in overwhelming numbers. Since he could
no longer exercise his powers as commander to any advantage
there remained nothing for him but to abdicate. He therefore
hauled down his flag of command from the main-topmast-head,
as a signal that every captain was free to act as he thought
best for the safety of his ship. The French fleet now split into
fragments. One part, under the Chef d’escadre Pannetier
made a push for the Channel between the coast of France and
the island of Alderney. The easterly current of the flood-tide
splits at Cape La Hague. While the main body flows up
Channel a branch turns off, and runs with great speed between
the west side of the Côtentin and the island of Alderney.
This makes what we call the Race of Alderney, and the
French the Raz Blanchard. The navigation is dangerous, and
would, under ordinary circumstances, have been avoided by the
heavy ships, but circumstances only left the French a choice
of evils, and they ran through the Race to seek refuge under
the guns of St. Malo.
Russell, seeing that the division of the French and the
distress of the vessels drifting towards him made it no longer
necessary to keep his fleet together, signalled to Ashby, and
the Dutch to pursue Pannetier. Meanwhile he, with the
Red Division and the laggards of the White and Blue, prepared
to deal with those of Tourville’s ships which had failed
to round La Hague. Ashby could not reach the enemy.
Pannetier had time to get his ships over the bar of the
Rance, and take refuge under the guns of the corsair town
of St. Malo, before his pursuers reached him. Ashby returned
next day and joined Sir Ralph Delaval, who, in the meantime,
had done a good stroke of work at Cherbourg. When it
became clear that they were trapped the ships of Tourville
had no resource but to endeavour to fly to the eastward
between Russell and the land, to round Cape Barfleur and to
take refuge at La Hougue. Three of them were too crippled
for further flight. These were the famous Soleil Royal, for
whose sake so much had been risked, the Admirable, and the
Triomphant. All three were run ashore at Cherbourg, and the
others fled eastward. Russell left Sir Ralph Delaval to deal
with the stranded ships, and followed the rest. Delaval could
do nothing on the evening of the 21st, but on the following
morning he sent in the boats and fireships, under the command
of Captain Heath, Captain Greenaway, and Captain
Foulis. The Admirable and Triomphant were burnt. But
the fireship with which Captain Foulis endeavoured to burn
the Soleil Royal was sunk by the Frenchmen’s fire. Hereupon,
Delaval hauled in as close as he could and opened fire on the
great stranded flagship. When he had battered her for some
time, and found that no further resistance was made, he took
his boats and boarded her. Sir Ralph Delaval’s report contains
a detail which is discreditable to King Louis’s navy. He says
he found many men and wounded men in the Soleil Royal,
but no officers. She was burnt by the English. When the
work was done Sir Ralph was disturbed by thirty sail approaching
him from the west. This, however, turned out to be Sir
John Ashby’s squadron, and the two officers united their forces,
and followed the admiral to the east. A few of the French
ships under command of Nesmond escaped by sailing round
the British Isles.
Russell pursued Tourville round Cape Barfleur. The
French admiral ran as close as he could to La Hougue, with
the thirteen vessels still about him. It was not until the
evening of the 22nd, so light was the wind and so slow
were the ships of that time amid tides and variable breezes,
that Russell was able to anchor in the neighbourhood of
the fugitives. On the 23rd he sent in the boats and fireships
under Rooke, who burnt six of the enemy. On the
24th the work was completed by the destruction of the
other seven. The French indeed were panic-stricken, and
the resistance was trifling. Not more than ten men were
killed in this piece of service, which if attempted against
an alert and resolute enemy must needs have been very
costly.
The battle pursuit and destruction spread over these five
days, and included under the name of “La Hogue” make
nearly the last passage of naval warfare of a brilliant decisive
character which we shall meet for three-quarters of a century.
The navy had work of vital importance to do, and a function
of unusual importance to fulfil. But it was no longer to meet
equal fleets at sea, except on rare occasions, and when it did
its own method of fighting was dull. The French fleet very
soon ceased to contend with the allies in the ocean and
channel altogether, and in the Mediterranean its efforts were
spasmodic. The great change has been attributed to the
disaster of La Hogue, without sufficient reason. We have
seen that the operations of the French in previous years had
been very languid. Their weakness during the rest of the
war was to be mainly attributed to the French king’s want of
money. His resources were overburdened by the war on
land against the League of Augsburg, and he could not
afford to fit out great fleets. But to our ancestors the
importance of the battle of La Hogue was naturally a subject
of high gratification. The material loss inflicted on King
Louis was considerable, and the blow to his prestige greater
still. They could feel that the Channel was now safe, not
indeed from privateers, but from great fleets sent out to cover
an invasion of England. Besides, after the spiritless straggling
operations of the last three years, the resolution of Russell and
the vigour of his pursuit were an immense change for the
better.
The decline of the French navy was not immediately
visible. An attempt to attack St. Malo at the close of 1692
was given up as hopeless, and the ships under Pannetier’s
command were able to make their way to Brest undisturbed.
In 1693 the French even achieved a considerable measure of
success, partly through their own good management, and
partly by the help of mistakes of the English Government.
Russell was no longer at sea. The shifting politics of the
time, and his own position as one of the leaders of the Whig
party, combined with the king’s discovery of his intrigues with
St. Germain to remove him from command. His place was
taken by Killigrew, Delaval, and Shovell, who were combined
in a joint commission as admiral. The practice of giving
the command at sea to a committee was once more revived
because the Government distrusted a single command. The
result was to discredit for ever the appointment of several
men to do work which most especially requires unity of will
and authority.
The fleet was collected under the joint admirals in April.
It was not manned without great difficulty. Crews had to be
found by taking men out of the privateers and by embarking
five regiments of soldiers to serve as marines. Neither the
Government nor the admirals had any definite plan of
operations for the year. But an object was found for them
by the necessity of escorting the Mediterranean trade safe on
its way. The French privateers had been very active, and
the convoy work at least of the English navy very badly
done. Ships had remained in port rather than face the risk of
making a passage. The necessities of the English and Dutch
revenue compelled the Government to forward the trade, and
so a squadron was told off under the command of Rooke and
the Dutch admiral Van der Goes, to carry the outward-bound
Smyrna convoy into the Mediterranean. The twenty-three
ships, Dutch and English, appointed to protect the
convoy would have been insufficient to deal with the Brest
fleet, and the admirals were therefore ordered to see Rooke
and his Dutch colleague well past Ushant. In the latter days
of May the whole force was collected and sailed with the
merchant ship under its protection in the beginning of June.
By an oversight, which reflects very little credit on their
intelligence, the admirals omitted to find out whether the
French were in Brest or not. They had been ordered to
accompany the convoy thirty leagues past Ushant, and they
reached that point on the 4th of June. Not being satisfied that
enough had been done for safety they exceeded their instructions
so far as to continue with the merchant ships till they
were fifty leagues W.S.W. off the island of Ushant. Then
they left them and returned to the Channel. It is an example
of the vices still prevailing in our naval administration that
though the fleet had only just been collected it was in want of
provisions already. When the admirals had returned to
Torbay they learnt what they ought to have been at the
trouble to find out before, namely, that Tourville had left
Brest. At the same time the English Consul at Leghorn
forwarded information that the French Toulon fleet was
ready to sail from Toulon. This report did not reach the
admirals till the 13th June. When it was too late they
realised the extent of the danger threatening Rooke. Tourville
had in fact sailed south in May with orders to wait for
the convoy. Messages were sent in hot haste to warn Rooke
of his danger, but the disaster had happened before they
could reach him.
While the admirals and Government were realising their
mistake and were looking forward to the inevitable outcry
in the City and House of Commons, the great convoy had
been rolling southward at a speed regulated by the slowest
of the merchant ships, happy if it made three miles an hour
in favourable circumstances. It reached Cape St. Vincent
on the 17th June. Here Rooke despatched a look-out vessel
ahead, to see if there were any enemies in Lagos Bay, on the
south coast of Portugal between Cape St. Vincent and Faro.
The wind was very light, and the convoy made little progress.
Next day the frigates discovered ten sail of French ships
standing out of Lagos. The position was an extremely
difficult one. With a large force of men-of-war so close at
hand there was little hope of safety in flight for heavily laden
merchant ships. It was decided to make a push for the
friendly Spanish port of Cadiz. The wind from the N.N.W.
was still light, and it might be that the French being to leeward
would be unable to work up. But this course, though perhaps
the best, where all were bad, led the convoy right into the
jaws of Tourville’s fleet of eighty-six sail. Battle was hopeless,
and flight not much better. Yet to run was all there was
to do. The French advanced squadron had fallen back
merely to draw the convoy on, and even if the bait had not
succeeded there could have been but one end to the meeting.
A hurry and a scurry such as may easily be imagined followed.
Some of the small ships ran close in shore, by Rooke’s orders,
and endeavoured to find a refuge in Faro, San Lucar, or Cadiz.
By these we must understand very small craft from 40
to 100 tons. The heavier ships, meaning boats from
150 to 300 tons, the size of a large merchant ship
of those times, did their best to shelter themselves
behind Rooke and Van der Goes, and they all struggled
to get away into the open sea. The Dutch warships were
in more danger than our own, for being in the van they were
to leeward and nearer the French. Tourville must have
suffered from a constitutional inability to act with energy
except by fits and starts. He now repeated, and with even
less excuse, the very mistake he made after the battle of
Beachy Head. His pursuit was slack. Some of the Dutch
ships were overtaken and captured after a gallant resistance.
But Rooke was able to carry a great part of the convoy to
Madeira, and from thence home to Cork. He joined the
admiral in the Channel in August. Tourville, after giving up
the pursuit of Rooke too early, returned to the Straits where
he spent his time in capturing or destroying the smaller
merchant vessels. The total loss to the Dutch and English
was put down at twenty-nine vessels taken and fifty destroyed.
This business of the Smyrna convoy may be said to be
the turning-point of the war. Louis XIV. had sent Tourville
to capture the Smyrna convoy mainly because he looked to
gain money. In the following year he ordered the Brest fleet
into the Mediterranean, and he made no serious attempt to
contend with the allies in the western seas during the remainder
of the war. At the time, and while the smart of the
loss was fresh in England and Holland, this could not be
known. The capture of the convoy led to a furious outcry
against the Admiralty in England, and to violent inconclusive
discussions in Parliament. Yet it was the direct
cause of a great change for the better. The Government
was fully waked up to the necessity of taking its fleet
more seriously in hand. The effort to conduct a war by
a committee was given up. Russell was restored to the
command. At the same time, the officers were stimulated
to do their work with a better heart by increase of pay and
the establishment of the half-pay list. With sinking energy
on the side of the French and increasing efficiency on our own
the naval war took a new character. From this time forward
there was an overwhelming superiority on the side of the allies.
England came to contribute an increasing proportion of the
naval force employed, for the land war was straining Holland
to the utmost. When the struggle with Louis XIV. came
to an end at the Peace of Utrecht, England was much the
one unrivalled sea power as she was when Napoleon surrendered
to Captain Maitland of the Bellerophon.
CHAPTER II EXPEDITIONS, CONVOY, AND THE PRIVATEERS
Authorities.—See last Chapter; Memoirs of Forbin and Duguay-Trouin;
Poulain, La Course au 17me Siècle.
The second and larger division of the War of the League
of Augsburg can be most conveniently dealt with by
subjects rather than in chronological order. There
were no great campaigns between equal forces of sufficient
interest to be taken by themselves. Throughout all these
years the overpowering fleets of the Alliance cruised unchecked
on the sea, hemming France in, harassing her coast, annihilating
her commerce, and rendering assistance to the armies
operating against her. Detached squadrons issued from
England year after year to attack the French possessions in
the New World and defend our own. In the meantime, the
efforts of France on the sea were ever more strictly confined
to the cruises of her privateers.
The object before the allies when once they had vindicated
their superiority on the ocean was to harass the French coast
and to co-operate with the armies on shore wherever an
opportunity presented itself. The first duty was done with
more barbarism than success. In the November of 1693 a
futile attack was made on St. Malo by Benbow. Infernal
machines, invented by one Meesters, a Dutchman in the English
service, were drifted in for the purpose of destroying the
shipping. They exploded too soon, and did no harm to the
enemy. This attack on St. Malo was both the beginning and
the type of a kind of operation we adhered to till the middle
of the eighteenth century. Good powder and shot, and the lives
of men, were thrown away in one dab after another at this or the
other point on the French coast. It was very rarely that the
expedition succeeded in causing any serious destruction to the
enemy. When it did, the harm inflicted on France was never
enough to cripple her power, though the suffering caused to
individuals was no doubt cruel. The English Government
hardly ever showed itself capable of understanding that to
assail unfortified towns does no good, and that fortified towns
must be attacked with sufficient resources. To give more
than a mere mention to such enterprises as these here would
be to overestimate their importance altogether.
In 1694 this work of harassing the French was taken in
hand, with results excellently calculated to show how a fleet
ought to act, and how it ought not. Russell was at sea at a
reasonably early date, with the intention to watch the Brest
fleet and to endeavour to destroy that port itself. If the
French fleet remained in the harbour the whole of his force
would be needed for the purpose. If, however, Tourville had
gone south a detachment might be left to deal with Brest, and
Russell could go on. This recognition of the fact that the
proper employment of an English fleet was to follow the enemy
was perfectly sound in principle. So much cannot be said for
the plan of attack on Brest. It might be a very advantageous
thing to destroy the great French arsenal, but such a place
was certain to be so strongly fortified as to be impregnable to
the sudden attack of a mere flying column. Yet no greater
force than can be fairly described by the name was put under
the command of Tollemache. As a matter of fact the expedition
was hopeless, for it had been betrayed to King Louis by some
of King William’s servants who were in communication with
St. Germain. One of the traitors was the great Marlborough.
As early as the 19th May, Russell learnt that Tourville
had already sailed for the south. Before starting in pursuit,
the new Admiral of the Fleet was able to deliver one effectual
stroke at the enemy. A large French convoy of merchant
ships was lying in Berteaume Bay under the protection of one
French man-of-war. Russell dispatched a light squadron
under Captain Pritchard to destroy it. The work was
thoroughly done, and was followed up by the destruction of
a number of other vessels going south with provisions to
Tourville. Then, on the 5th or 6th June, Russell sailed for
the south, leaving Lord Berkeley to carry out the attack on
Brest. On the 7th of June Berkeley entered the wide channel
between the Pointe St. Mathieu and the Pointe du Raz, called
the Iroise. The entrance to the Bay of Brest, named Le
Goulet, or Gullet, is on the north-east corner of this channel.
It is a narrow passage which leads into the land-locked Bay of
Brest. The bay is shut off from the sea by a peninsula
running south from the Goulet. The western side of this
peninsula, after running due north and south, turns to the
west with a curve to the end at the north, and forms the
anchorage known as the Roads or Bay of Camaret.
The object of the expedition was to land in Camaret Bay,
seize the peninsula on the western side of the harbour, and,
using that as a basis of operations, open the entry to the bay
to the fleet; and then destroy the arsenal of Brest. The
French were on their guard; Camaret Bay was bristling with
batteries and lined with troops. To go on was an act of folly,
and so Carmarthen, who surveyed the bay, gave Tollemache to
understand; but the soldier, though an exceedingly brave man
and a good subordinate, was no general, and he was burning
to distinguish himself. He urged the naval officers on, and
among them he found an ally in Lord Berkeley. The result
was that several ships were all but battered to pieces by the
French cannon, and Tollemache landed at the southern corner
of the bay with a few hundred men—an act of headlong folly
which cost him his life, and sacrificed the lives of many others.
Then the expedition came away.
There was a kind of wrong-headed magnanimity about the
conduct of Tollemache which extorts a certain respect, but the
succeeding operations are merely examples of how to combine
the greatest possible malignity of intention with a high degree
of ineptitude in the execution. Berkeley came back to
St. Helens for refreshments, and then returned to the coast of
France to take revenge. What he did was morally on a level
with the desolation of the Palatinate, for which King Louis
had been so bitterly reproached by his enemies, and it had
this further disgrace attaching to it, that it was imbecile. The
English fleet only bombarded Dieppe and Havre, killing a
certain number of women, children, and unarmed men, and
burning a few houses. Then it threatened La Hogue and
Cherbourg. This done, it came back to St. Helens for
refreshments. When invigorated by repose it returned to
Dunkirk, and exploded more infernal machines to no
purpose.
In 1695 it was the same story. We made a demonstration
at St. Malo, then we burnt the little fishing town of
Granvelle, and then we achieved another failure at Dunkirk.
In the following year these feats were renewed at Calais and
elsewhere, till the war died down and was brought to a pause
by the truce called the Peace of Ryswick in 1697. When
it was resumed, the Admiralty had learnt that these expeditions
were forms of waste, and we hear little or nothing of
them during the reign of Queen Anne. It is probable that
Captain Pritchard did more harm to the enemy by destroying
the convoy in Berteaume Bay than was inflicted in all these
expeditions, and he did it at a thousandth part of the cost.
More legitimate and fruitful than these attacks on the
French coast towns were other operations of the fleet, which
may be classed under two heads. First are the cruises of
what our ancestors called “The Grand Fleet”—that is to say,
movements of great forces representing the bulk of our
effective naval power in Europe. Then contemporary to, but
apart from them, were the cruises of squadrons, designed to
protect our own colonial possessions or menace those of the
French. These two kinds of naval operations were so far
independent of one another that it is not necessary to tell
them together. Again, many of them were so barren in results
that it is superfluous to tell them in detail. Yet the mere
fact that they took place shows the magnitude, the persistence,
and the coherence of our efforts to make full use of the
fleet. It has seemed to me most advisable to set them both
forth briefly in parallel columns, and give particular accounts
of the more notable among them afterwards.
Grand Fleets
Small Squadrons
The year of Beachy Head.
December 1689 to May 1690.—Captain
Lawrence Wright to the West Indies,
with ten ships and three small vessels.
Contemporary with this cruise was the
expedition of Sir W. Phipps from New
England against Nova Scotia, then a
French colony, and Quebec.
Year of Russell’s first command in the Channel.
12th December 1690 to August 1691.—Captain Ralph Wren to the West
Indies. He died of fever, and many of his men with him. The squadron was brought home by Boteler.
Year of La Hogue.
In 1692 there was no colonial expedition.
Disaster of Rooke’s convoy.
January to August 1693.—Cruise of Sir F. Wheeler to the West Indies, with twelve sail and three fireships.
Russell in Channel. Goes to seain May. Sails for Mediterranean in June. Enters Mediterranean in July. Operations on coast of Catalonia. Winters at Cadiz. Goes up Mediterranean again in March 1695. Returns to England in November of that year.
January to September 1695.—Captain Robert Wilmot to West Indies, with five ships and one fireship. Wilmot died of fever, and one vessel was lost for want of hands.
April 1696 to October 1697.—Cruise of Vice-Admiral Nevil to West Indies. This squadron was almost totally destroyed by fever—only one captain returned.
There was now a break of four years, due to the truce
which followed the Peace of Ryswick, 20th September
1697.
Grand Fleets
Small Squadrons
1700.—Sir George Rooke sent into Baltic to support Charles XII. of Sweden against Denmark.
No colonial expedition.
September 1701.—Benbow to the West Indies, where he died on the 4th November 1702 of wounds received in action with Du Casse. The command passed to Whetstone.
June to November 1702.—Rooke’s cruise to Cadiz, and attack on treasure ships at Vigo, in co-operation with the Dutch.
July to October 1702.—Sir John Leake attacks French in Newfoundland.
June to September 1703.—Cruise of Sir C. Shovell into the Mediterranean.
January to September 1703.—Rear-Admiral Graydon’s cruise into West Indies to replace Benbow.
January to September 1704.—Shovell and Rooke in Mediterranean; capture of Gibraltar and battle of Malaga.
No new expedition to colonies.
April to November 1705.—Shovell and Peterborough; taking of Barcelona.
April 1705 to December 1706.—Sir William Whetstone commanding in West Indies. He left in command Kerr.
February to October 1706.—Sir John Leake in command on coast of Spain.
October 1706 to April 1707.—Sir John Jennings in West Indies.
1707.—Sir C. Shovell to the Mediterranean. He was wrecked on the Scilly Isles when returning from this cruise, 23rd October 1707.
March 1707 to November 1709.—Sir Charles Wager in the West Indies.
March to October 1708.—Sir John Leake to the Mediterranean.
1708 to October 1709.—Sir George Byng left behind by Leake, winters at Minorca, taken by Stanhope. He returned with convoy in October 1709, leaving Whitaker with a squadron. Whitaker was succeeded by Baker, and then by Norris, till war ended.
September 1710.—Captain George Martin takes Port Royal, and Nova Scotia from the French.
April to October 1711.—Disastrous expedition under Sir Hovenden Walker against Quebec.
These two lists are not exhaustive. They do not include
minor operations against the French coast in the Channel,
nor do they mention all the subordinate parts of the colonial
expeditions. It is also necessary to bear in mind that the
Grand Fleets were the fleets of the allies, not of England
alone. The Dutch always contributed a part of the strength,
and their share of the common force was nowise inferior in
spirit, or skill, to ours. In one of the elements which go to
make efficiency they were not rarely superior. Their health was
too often better, since, to the deep discredit of British administrations
of that time, we did not on the average feed our men
as well as the Dutch. The colonial expeditions were our own,
and the work was done at an awful cost of life by disease.
In these circumstances the cruises of the allied Grand
Fleets could only be the successive exercises of an overwhelming
superiority, directed against an enemy whose resistance
must needs be passive, with rare and fitful efforts at retaliation.
Year after year the great combined naval armaments
of England and Holland sailed south in the spring. Before
the Peace of Ryswick (1697) they went once to aid the
Spaniards, who were contending feebly against the French
in Catalonia. After the renewal of the war, they went
repeatedly to aid the Hapsburg pretender, who was endeavouring
to drive the Bourbon King of Spain, Philip V., from the
throne he occupied by right of inheritance and the will of
Charles II., the last of the Austrian dynasty. They also
served to cover the movements of English and Dutch
commerce by mewing up the only fleet which Louis XIV.
endeavoured to maintain in Toulon. Incidentally they
enabled us to secure what Cromwell had hoped for, and
what our Charles II. endeavoured to obtain by his marriage
treaty—namely, a port of war near the Mediterranean, where
an English fleet could keep its stores, repair damages, and
find a safe anchorage without being dependent on the goodwill
of an ally.
The interest of a conflict between strength and weakness
cannot be in proportion to the importance of its results.
These campaigns must therefore (considerations of space being
also of much weight) “speak by their foreman”; by the
typical examples. None seem more representative than the
first great cruise into the Mediterranean in 1694, and that
expedition of ten years later which put us in possession of
Gibraltar.
It has been said above that the Grand Fleet had gone
to sea in the spring of 1694 under the command of Russell.
He was also the chief of the “commission for executing the
office of Lord High Admiral”—and therefore combined the
whole civil and military authority in his own person. The
fleet consisted of fifty-two English and forty-one Dutch
ships of the line, with their attendant fireships and small craft,
when all were collected at St. Helens. When he was sure
that the French had no fleet in Brest to assist in the defence,
the admiral returned to St. Helens on the 23rd May, and
sailed with his whole force on the 29th. On the 6th June
the force designed to carry out the already mentioned raid
on Brest was detached, and Russell sailed for the south in
pursuit of the French with thirty English and twenty-two
Dutch. He was off the Rock of Lisbon on the 25th June.
Here he was reinforced by ships both English and Dutch, and
his force was raised to sixty-three. A little later he was
burdened by the co-operation of nine very inefficient Spaniards.
In July Russell entered the Mediterranean, to the great
relief of the palsied Spanish Government, now trembling in
impotence before the French army of invasion in Catalonia
and the French fleet in the Mediterranean. The enemy retired
as the allies worked their way slowly up the coast and finally
took refuge in the roadstead of Hyères, to the east of Toulon.
Russell and his Dutch colleagues were then able to cover the
Spanish forces in Catalonia and the Spanish coast trade from
French attack. As autumn approached, they prepared to
return; but King William wisely came to the decision that
there was no better way of protecting English and Dutch
naval interests at home than by keeping the French fleet shut
in the Mediterranean. Russell therefore received orders to
winter in Cadiz. He had to struggle with the unreasonable
requests of the Spanish Government, which expected its allies
to do everything for it, and could itself do little or nothing.
Yet, as they were well supplied with money, stores, and even
artificers from home, the allies passed the winter abroad at
no greater cost than would have been incurred in their own
ports.
In the spring of 1695, English troops were sent out under
Brigadier Stewart, and a Dutch contingent under the Count
of Nassau. The allies, after delays attributed to the dilatory
preparations of the Spaniards, moved up the coast, and reached
Barcelona on the 19th July. Stimulated by Russell, the
Spanish viceroy of Catalonia resolved to take the offensive
against the French, who were in possession of the northern
part of the principality. It was decided to besiege Palamos,
a coast town just south of Cape San Sebastian. English and
Dutch soldiers were landed to aid the Spaniards, who for
their part signally failed to keep the promises they had made
to supply tents and tools for work in the trenches. Yet the
siege, which began on the 9th of August, was making fair
progress, when it was suddenly broken up by the decision of
Russell himself. The Duke of Vendôme, who commanded the
French army in Catalonia, put false information in his way,
to the effect that a French fleet of sixty-five sail was fitting for
sea at Toulon. Hereupon Russell re-embarked his soldiers,
advised the Spanish viceroy to renounce all hope of retaking
Palamos, and sailed to find the French. This measure has
been praised, in view of the danger that the fleet from Toulon
might have interfered with the siege. Yet if Russell was
confident of his capacity to meet King Louis’s ships in battle—and
if he was not it was a gross blunder to form the siege
at all, and another to sail for the purpose of meeting a superior
fleet—he had it in his power to force on an action by pressing
the attack, and waiting till the enemy came to interrupt him.
By sailing in response to a mere rumour, he enabled the
French to effect their purpose of raising the siege at no cost.
Moreover, he did not secure the battle he sought. The French
having nothing to gain by an action, did not indulge him with
a meeting. The weather proved stormy, and in the end the
allies returned in September to Cadiz without Palamos, and
without a battle. Russell then sailed for home, and reached
England after a prosperous voyage early in November, leaving
behind him a squadron under the command of Rear-Admiral
David Mitchell. The impotent conclusion of the attack on
Palamos leaves us in some doubt whether Russell was not
rather a fortunate than a spirited man. Yet his continuance
abroad for a year and a half, his wintering at Cadiz, and his
two cruises in the Mediterranean, did serve to prove that
the allies had clearly gained the upper hand at sea. They
could not have remained for so long, nor have cruised undisturbed,
if the French had been in a position to use their fleet.
The end of these operations was somewhat tame. Sir
David Mitchell had been left with sixteen ships of the line
of the middle and lower rates. On the 15th October Sir
George Rooke arrived from England with a squadron, and
the total force of the allies was raised to thirty sail, exclusive
of the small craft. Information, no more accurate than the
false report which drew Russell away from Palamos, led
Rooke to believe that a powerful French fleet was coming to
sea. He took refuge in Cadiz harbour, and there spent the
winter. Sir David Mitchell was once sent out in search of
some French vessels said to be lying in Lagos Bay, but they
were not found, and the allies were otherwise quiescent.
Meanwhile, King Louis was indeed preparing to make an
attack, or rather a double attack, on King William. During
the early days of 1696 Sir John Fenwick’s assassination plot
was hatching in England, to the knowledge and with the
approval of the French sovereign and the exiled King James.
Troops were collected at Calais to be pushed over so soon as
the murder of King William was known to have been achieved.
In the meanwhile a fleet of fifty-one sail was being prepared
at Toulon with considerable difficulty, partly through the
penury of the French Government, partly because of the pertinacity
of its sailors in resisting or evading service. The
object of this armament was to provide a force which should
be at hand to take advantage of the confusion expected to
ensue on the violent death of King William. It is known to
all that this complicated scheme of combined murder and
military operations broke down. Fenwick’s plot was revealed
to the Government. The great ships which had come home
with Russell in the autumn were hurried to sea in February,
and the French coast was patrolled and orders were sent to
Rooke to return at once.
These orders reached him at a time when his mind was
much exercised by reports of the approach of the French
fleet from Toulon. He put to sea in the early days of
March. The enemy had already sailed under the command
of Châteaurenault. It is one more illustration of the rather
modest standard of efficiency expected from the ship of the
time, that to send a fleet to sea so early as March was counted
hazardous. The result went to show that the estimate was
not wholly unjust. Both fleets were scattered in a storm,
and suffered damage. They returned to port, but again put
to sea so soon as their injuries were made good. Rooke,
who had the start, reached home on the 22nd April.
Châteaurenault ran into Brest about a fortnight later—not
unobserved, but unopposed. This escape of his fleet was
added to the list of naval miscarriages of which Parliament
was constantly complaining. Rooke and Mitchell were called
to account, but no blame appears to have been thought to
attach to them. Indeed, the error lay mainly in the Government.
It ought to have kept a more powerful force in the
Straits if it wished to prevent the French from leaving the
Mediterranean. Fenwick’s plot was the last resolute effort
made by the enemy against the Government established by
the Revolution. Peace was becoming an absolute necessity
for France, and it was made at Ryswick in 1697.
For a brief space both sides took breath, and then the
struggle began again—the main cause being the resolution
of the allies to prevent Louis XIV. from establishing a
grandson of his own on the Spanish throne on terms which
would practically have annexed the vast possessions of the
Spanish monarchy to the crown of France. England was
drawn into the struggle with reluctance, and was in fact
only provoked to fight when the French King, subordinating
his duties as a sovereign to his feelings as a gentleman,
recognised the son of the exiled James II. as King of
England.
The accession of Queen Anne brought one change to
the government of the navy. It had been the intention
of King William in the last days of his rule to re-establish
a Lord High Admiral. The Earl of Pembroke was chosen
for the place, and the admirals who were to act as his
advisers were named. By the king’s death all commissions
were annulled, but his intention was carried out, though with
a change of persons. The office of Lord High Admiral was
revived in favour of the queen’s husband, Prince George of
Denmark, who was provided with a council. Some fault was
found with the legality of this measure, but it passed without
serious opposition—thanks to the popularity of the queen, and
the fact that public attention was turned elsewhere.
The war, though essentially a continuation of the former
struggle, was begun, in so far at least as the naval side of
it was concerned, in somewhat changed conditions. A grandson
of King Louis now sat on the throne of Spain. It was the
object of the allies, by whom, however, he had been at first
recognised, to compel him to resign. Therefore it was sure that
he would be their enemy to the extent of his power. An
inevitable consequence of this change was that the allied
English and Dutch fleets could no longer rely on being
allowed to use Spanish ports. One of the earliest measures
taken by the Queen’s Government was to send an officer,
Captain Loades, to Cadiz to bring away the naval stores
kept there for the use of our ships serving in the Straits
and the Mediterranean. It shows to what an extent
we had made use of this port, that the stores left there
amounted to more than Loades could stow in the vessels with
him. He was therefore compelled to sell part of them to
the Spaniards at a loss. Two hulks belonging to us, and
used for the purpose of “heaving down,” that is, lightening,
and pulling on one side ships which it was necessary to
clean when they returned foul from a cruise, were towed
out to sea and sunk. An experience of this kind must have
quickened our desire to obtain possession of a port entirely
our own.
Though Philip V. had been accepted by the Spaniards
as their king, a party in favour of the Hapsburg dynasty
was known to exist, and to be strong in the coast provinces.
So upon the outbreak of the war in 1702, a fleet of fifty sail,
of which thirty were English and twenty were Dutch, was
sent to Cadiz under Rooke, carrying with it a strong force
of soldiers under the Duke of Ormonde. It cleared the
Channel on the 21st July, and after looking into Corunna
went on to the south. On the 12th August it left Lisbon,
which, since the Spanish ports were shut to us, and the
King of Portugal was among the allies, had become our
house of call and store magazine, as it had been in the
Commonwealth wars. Very shortly the fleet was before
Cadiz. The work to be done required, above all things, tact.
It was the duty of the expedition to assail the Spaniards in
so far as they were the armed supporters of King Philip V.,
but to propitiate them in so far as they were the potential
supporters of the Hapsburg party. The chiefs so managed
matters that they took no effectual steps against the armed
forces of King Philip, while they allowed grievous wrong to
be inflicted on the people of the country. Cadiz was
bombarded to the injury of the inhabitants. Meanwhile
the Puerto de Santa Maria, on the other side of the bay,
was occupied by the English and Dutch, who applied themselves
to drunkenness, the rape of women, and deliberate
insults to the Roman Catholic religion—three kinds of
violence exquisitely adapted to excite the scorn and hatred
of the people of Andalusia. After a month and a little
more of wrangling with one another, the chiefs, who could
agree on nothing else, agreed to come away.
On the way home, information was received that several
Spanish treasure galleons returning from America under protection
of a French squadron commanded by Châteaurenault
had put into Vigo. Here was a definite object offering a
plain aim both to public spirit and private greed. Dissensions
ceased. Sailor and soldier united in vigorous co-operation.
There is a spacious outer bay at Vigo, and a convenient,
though smaller, inner anchorage reached through a narrow
entry. A boom had been laid across this, and the French
and Spaniards were anchored within. On the 12th October,
the allies, led by Admiral Hopson, dashed at the boom while
soldiers landed for the purpose turned the fortifications on
shore. The French warships and Spanish galleons were
either destroyed by the allies or by their own crews. The
Government treasure had been disembarked and was far inland,
but a good deal of miscellaneous pillage no doubt fell to the
squadron and the troops. On the 19th the expedition sailed
away, and reached England on the 7th November. Its
doings added another chapter to the dreary history of
parliamentary debates on “naval miscarriages.”
In 1703 a Grand Fleet went out to the Mediterranean
under command of Cloudesley Shovell. It swept the coasts
of Spain and Provence, endeavouring to quicken the Hapsburg
party in Spain and to send help to the Protestants of the
Cevennes, who were in revolt against King Louis—with no
success in either case. But the following year saw operations of
another order, forming a fruitful campaign—movements of large
hostile armaments over a great area, a balance of forces, and
a clash of conflict leaving permanent results.
At the close of 1703 the Archduke Charles, the Hapsburg
claimant of the Spanish throne, was brought over to this
country by Rooke from Holland. It was the purpose of the
Government to send him south with such a force as would
enable him to vindicate his rights. After delays caused by
bad weather he sailed under the protection of Rooke on the
12th February 1704. The English admiral had with him
only ten sail of the line, five English and five Dutch, but was
accompanied by a swarm of transports and trading ships.
He did not reach Lisbon till the 25th February. On the
2nd March reinforcements reached him under command of
Sir John Leake, and on the 9th he went to sea in order to
cruise for the outgoing Spanish trading fleet bound to the
West Indies, which he did not meet though he took several
other prizes. Orders were sent him to proceed up the
Mediterranean for the purpose of forwarding the Hapsburg
cause and aiding the coast towns of our ally the Duke of
Savoy. Rooke left Lisbon with thirty-seven sail, but no
troops, and was off Cape St. Vincent on the 29th April. He
now went on to the Mediterranean. On the 8th May he was
off Cape Palos, north-east of the Spanish port of Carthagena.
Here a small squadron of French ships was seen and chased.
They were on their way to Cadiz. Complaints were made
that though they were overtaken they were not attacked, and
strong blame was thrown on Captain Andrew Leake for the
failure. On the 10th the detached squadron rejoined the
admiral, and on the 19th the fleet was off Barcelona. The
Prince of Hesse-Darmstadt, who was with Rooke, had been
governor of the province for King Charles II., and he was
convinced, rightly enough as subsequent events proved, that
the sympathies of the townsmen were with the Hapsburg
cause. He wished to make an effort to induce them to rise,
but Barcelona was held for King Philip by a strong garrison
under the command of Don Francisco de Velasco, a man of
rigorous character. The Catalans, like our own ancestors
whether Whig or Jacobite, were too prudent to rise against
regular soldiers till they were assured of solid support. This
Rooke could not give. He had no troops with him, and he
held himself bound to go on to the Riviera to aid the Duke
of Savoy. A few hundred English and Dutch marines were
landed, but no movement followed in the town, and they were
re-embarked. Rooke therefore left the coast of Catalonia, and
steered towards Provence.
The French fleet had left Brest early in May. It consisted
of twenty-three vessels, under the command of the
Count of Toulouse, a bastard son of the king’s, and a simple-minded
honest man of no great faculty. The strain on the
French king’s resources had not allowed him to equip great
fleets in 1702 and 1703, but the events of those years showed
him that an effort must be made. In 1704 he ordered
squadrons to be prepared both in Brest and Toulon. The
object was to unite them in the Mediterranean, where they
could cut short further intrigues with the insurgent Huguenots,
and give both moral and material support to his grandson in
Spain. The English Government was aware of the preparations,
and in April a strong fleet was collected in the Channel
under Shovell. He had orders to retire up Channel, bringing
with him the store ships loaded for the squadron at Lisbon,
if the enemy came on in great force. If, however, he heard
that Toulouse had gone to the Mediterranean, he was to
follow with not more than twenty-two sail, taking care to leave
a sufficient force for the protection of trade in the home
waters. On the 12th May Shovell obtained information that
the French had gone south, and he therefore detached Sir
Stafford Fairborn with light ships to Kinsale to act as a
trade guard, and followed the enemy to the coast of Portugal.
The Count of Toulouse had a long start, and was nearing
the neighbourhood of Rooke by the time Shovell reached
Lisbon. In the latter days of May the position was this.
On the 25th Rooke was joined by frigate, with the news that
a French fleet had passed the Rock of Lisbon steering to the
south. The frigate passed through the enemy at sea, and
knew that they had entered the Mediterranean. Rooke also
learnt from other sources that the towns of the Duke of Savoy
were in no danger. A council of war was held, and it was
resolved to return to the Straits. If the French fleet was
met on the way it was to be engaged. The Count of
Toulouse, with twenty-three sail of the line, was cutting across
the route of the allies and heading for Toulon. Another
French squadron was getting ready in that port somewhat
tardily. Shovell was still distant, but was making his way
out to join and put himself under the orders of Rooke. All
these forces were converging by devious routes to a final clash
of battle.
Important events were to take place before they met.
On the 27th of May the ships of Toulouse were sighted by the
look-out vessels of Rooke’s fleet. But the abounding caution
of the commanders of that generation was shown once more.
The average speed of the French ships was better than that
of the allies, yet it would have been possible to bring them
to action by ordering all the ships to sail at their best rate of
speed in a “general chase,” when the quickest of the allies
could have overtaken the slowest of the French. But to do
this appeared dangerous to the flag officers of 1704, since it
might subject them to attack in detail, and they pursued in a
body, regulating their speed by that of the slowest sailer
among them. Thus the Count of Toulouse kept and improved
his lead. On the 29th the allies were within ninety miles of
Toulon. Then, fearing that all the French forces would unite
and put them at a disadvantage, they returned down the
Mediterranean. On the 14th June Rooke and Shovell united
their forces in the Straits.
So far nothing very brilliant had been done, and the escape
of Toulouse with his far inferior fleet was even discreditable
to the allies. But now strong pressure was put on Rooke and
his colleagues to act. Hitherto the conduct of the naval war
had been of a somewhat peddling order. The buccaneering
achievement at Vigo stood alone as a feat of any brilliancy.
In the beginning of the war the failure of an officer named
Munden (brother of him who retook St. Helena from the
Dutch) to stop some French ships at Corunna, and his
acquittal by a somewhat complacent court martial, had roused
fierce anger in the country. There had since been a shameful
business in the West Indies. The nation was becoming
thoroughly tired of “naval miscarriages,” and the ministry
was resolute that something should be done. Something
doable lay at the very hand of the allied fleet. After hesitation,
and discussions in the inevitable councils of war, it was
resolved to make an attempt on Gibraltar, which Cromwell
had indicated as a good post for us to hold half a century
before. Though Rooke only acted under pressure, his conduct
now compares very favourably with that of Russell in 1695.
If he was slow and very cautious, at least he was resolute and
exact. He did not allow the mere wind of the French fleet
at Toulon to draw him off, but stood on guard with the bulk
of his force, and sent in a squadron under George Byng to
bombard the town, while a body of marines was landed under
command of the Prince of Hesse, on the neck of the peninsula,
to cut the garrison off from relief, at any rate, by small parties.
Gibraltar even then was strong. Its fortification mounted a
hundred guns, but its garrison of 150 men was ridiculously
inadequate. On the 23rd the bombardment took place—the
Spaniards making such reply as was possible to 150 men.
The mole was swept by the fire of the ships’ guns, and
then stormed by the sailors. An explosion, either deliberately
caused by the Spaniards, or produced by one
of our own men who dropped a light into a magazine,
did considerable harm to the stormers, and for a moment
there was a panic. But the Spaniards were too few
to take advantage of the chance, or indeed to man the walls.
Next day the governor promised to surrender, and the town
was delivered on the 25th. The total loss of the allies was
60 killed and 217 wounded, nearly twice the number of the
Spanish garrison, and almost all English. They shed their
blood honourably and profitably in adding this noble fortress
to the “patrimony of St. George”—happier men than the
thousands of their comrades who perished miserably in these
wars, fever stricken in filthy ships, rotten with scurvy, starved,
or poisoned by bad food.
Gibraltar newly taken, and shattered by the attack, was
not as yet capable of serving as a port of war for the fleet.
Not even water could be found in sufficient quantities. Twelve
hundred marines were landed to form a garrison capable of
repelling any sudden attack from the land, and a magazine
was made up out of the stores of the ships. Then the allies
stood over to Tetuan, and sought for provisions and water
among the Moors. On the 9th August they had obtained
what they wanted, when the captain of the Centurion, who
had been on the watch to the eastward, came in with the news
that the French fleet was at hand. Though the course to be
followed in the event of such a foreseen occurrence as this
might have been maturely considered already, a council of
war had to be held. It was decided to work up towards the
enemy, and give battle. If the Count of Toulouse, who, being
to the eastward, had the weather-gage in the easterly wind
blowing at the time, had been well advised, he would have
forced on battle at once. But he manœuvred to avoid action,
and even fell back towards Malaga. This gave the allies
time to re-embark half the marines they had landed at Gibraltar.
The meeting of the fleets was delayed till the 13th August.
By that date the allies had got to windward of the French
who were now between them and the fortress. Both fleets
were heading to the south. At ten o’clock in the morning
the allied line bore down on the French. Sir Cloudesley
Shovell and Leake led the van. Rooke commanded in the
centre with Dilkes and Wishart. The Dutch formed the rear
of the line. In number of guns and ships the two fleets
were fairly equal, but the allies were short handed, and in
want of ammunition. The course of the battle presented
little of interest. Van was opposed to van, centre to centre,
and rear to rear. They hammered each other with their
guns, and the valour shown was great. Sir John Leake, if
his Life is to be trusted, did wish to do more than fire and
be fired into. He commanded the leading squadron in the
allied line and was opposed to the French admiral, the
Marquis de Villette Mursay. The French officer’s ship, the
Intrépide, caught fire in the poop, and he bore out of the line
to extinguish the flames. This movement was understood as
a signal by the ships of his squadron, and they followed him
to leeward. Leake now wished to pursue and break through
the French line, but that fatal article in the Fighting Instructions,
which prescribed the maintenance of one order throughout
the action, interfered. He was told to remain where he was—and
was reduced to be a spectator of the rest of the action,
which took the form of a persevering exchange of blows
between the centre and rear divisions of the two fleets. They
separated at four in the afternoon, both much damaged. The
battle of Malaga was one of the most bloody ever fought at
sea. Nearly 3000 men fell in the allied line, and the loss of
the French, who however only acknowledged 1500, cannot
well have been much less. On their side, too, an extraordinary
number of officers of distinction were slain.
For two days the fleets remained near one another. The
wind shifted to the west, and gave the French the weather-gage,
but they made no use of it to renew the battle. In the
allied line many ships already depleted by the bombardment
of the 23rd July, and the drafts made upon them to supply
the Prince of Hesse with a magazine, had fired away almost
all their powder. Some had run short in the action. They
were prepared to accept battle if it was forced upon them,
with the resolution to board the enemy, and settle it with cold
steel since they could not use their guns. But in their hearts
they were relieved—and no shame to them, and no credit to
him—when Toulouse filed away northward to Toulon. Then
they returned to Gibraltar Bay, where they remained till the
24th of August. The marines drawn from the garrison were
again landed and damages made good as far as might be. On
that day Rooke sailed. On the 26th he told off a squadron
to remain on the coast of Portugal with Leake, and sailed
with his battered ships and sorely tried crews for England,
which he reached on the 25th September.
Gibraltar having been taken was to be held, and as it was
not yet sufficiently settled to be able to rely for long on its
own strength, its salvation depended on Leake’s squadron.
Sir John was hardly a great commander, yet from the day
that he relieved Londonderry his conduct was always marked
by a certain alacrity in action. During the winter of 1704-05,
he stood by Gibraltar loyally and with energy. The Spaniards
had collected an army to retake the town, and early in October
the Prince of Hesse called for help. Leake came at once from
Lagos with stores and encouragement. On hearing that a
French naval force was approaching, he put to sea. Uncertainty
as to the strength of the enemy and some damage
received by bad weather induced him to return to Lisbon to
refit, but he was back reinforced by the 29th October and had
the deserved good luck to capture three French warships.
Leake now remained by Gibraltar till the 21st December. On
both these visits his guns relieved the pressure on the town by
firing into the camp of the besiegers. Then he again went
back to Lisbon. During his absence a French squadron
under M. de Pointis arrived to form a blockade. On the 10th
March, Leake was back again, and this time he destroyed five
Frenchmen including the flagship in Gibraltar Bay. The remainder
of Pointis’ ships fled to Toulon. Leake now remained
till March. The besieging army broke up its camp in despair,
and Gibraltar was safe. Leake was able to sail for England
and reached it in April. As Gibraltar had been taken, so it
was saved by the fleet, for the sake of which we hold it, and
on which in the last resort it depends.
It is a striking coincidence that the year of the taking of
Gibraltar was also the year of Blenheim. The superiority
passed to the allies on land as well as on sea. Henceforth
the French king could do less and less with his navy. Year
after year the Grand Fleets poured out of the Channel in
spring, and swept like a great tidal wave round the coasts of
the Peninsula, and into the Gulf of Lyons. They made the
capture of Barcelona, and its relief, possible. It was they who
enabled General Stanhope to take Port Mahon which, together
with Gibraltar, remained in our hands at the end of the war.
They kept the Hapsburg cause alive in Spain for a space.
Yet their operations present only a repetition of similar incidents,
and enforce always the same lessons: that where the road
lies over the sea, the ships only can stop it for an invader, or
open it for invasion—an obvious but apparently an easily
forgotten truth.
Writing in 1704, Josiah Burchett, the Secretary of the
Admiralty, had occasion to acknowledge the ill success of an
expedition sent to the West Indies during the reign of King
William; “but,” he went on, “when had we an opportunity, or
at least when was there any attempt made by us from the
beginning of the last war, to this very time, where the
advantage proved in any degree equal to the charge and inconveniences
that did attend it? The injuries we did to the
French when Sir Francis Wheeler commanded in the West
Indies were inconsiderable, and what have our successes been
before and after that expedition? I doubt it was found that
our squadrons came home in a much worse condition than
when they set forth, both as to men, and all other circumstances;
and not having the good fortune to do any sensible
injuries to our enemy, they (i.e. the enemy) had the satisfaction
of knowing what inconveniences we involved ourselves in.”
The cruises carried out after 1704 might be summed up in
much the same terms. As we were then engaged against the
Spaniards as well as the French, a change was made in the
scope of our operations. The peculiar character of Spanish
trade with the new world, in which the most valuable portion
of the home-coming cargoes was the bullion brought from the
mines of Mexico and Peru, gave us an opportunity to achieve
one success of a kind highly profitable to the officers and men
engaged. In 1709, Sir Charles Wager captured a treasure
ship, and he also inflicted loss on her companion ships, which
was most injurious to the Spaniards. But this action stands
almost apart in a long series of cruises of little interest, and no
important result.
The nature of these operations can be shown by a brief
account of the first. When the war began in 1689 it was
felt that the French plantations in America, and more
especially those in Hispaniola, represented a portion of the
enemy’s resources which it was desirable to diminish. The
English officers in America were ordered to molest the French
to the utmost of their ability. In order that they might be
the better able to perform this duty they were reinforced by a
squadron from Europe. It consisted of one third rate, seven
fourth rates, one fifth rate, and of two fireships, and was commanded
by Captain Lawrence Wright, an officer of some five-and-twenty
years’ standing, who had been in the West Indies
before. His orders were to ship the Duke of Bolton’s
regiment of foot at Plymouth, and to sail for the Leeward
Islands, that is the more northerly of the Lesser Antilles
which stretch from the Virgin Islands to Dominica. Here he
was to co-operate with Colonel Codrington, the governor, whose
headquarters were at Antigua. The governor was to add what
forces he could, and attacks were then to be made upon the
French. Elaborate directions were given to Wright—that he
was to be guided by a council of war, to act in so far as
operations on shore were concerned, under the general direction
of the military officers, to spare what sailors he could for
operations on land, and not to send ships from his squadron
without consent of the governor and council, lest the islands
should be “exposed to insults.”
Thus directed, and with these limited powers, Captain
Wright sailed from Plymouth on the 8th March 1690 with
a number of merchant ships under his protection. Storms
scattered the convoy immediately after it left the Channel, but
it arrived safe at Madeira on the 2nd of April. On the 11th
May it reached Barbadoes. Though only two months had
passed since the squadron had left England, and it had
stopped at Madeira, the crews were so sickly, presumably
from scurvy, that Captain Wright was compelled to land many
of his men to be cured, and could not sail till the 27th May.
On the 30th of the month he reached Antigua. Colonel
Codrington joined him with some soldiers, and a series of
buccaneering operations was begun against the French at
St. Christopher, and St. Eustatius to the west of Antigua, and
at no great distance. Men were landed, forts taken, plantations
plundered and burnt, negroes carried off. No attempt was
made to hold the French islands, and this form of purely
destructive warfare went on till about the middle of July.
The hurricane months (July, August, and September) were
now upon them, both sailors and soldiers were sickly, and
the expedition returned to Antigua. Wright went out to
Barbadoes, and there remained till the 6th October. The
island lies out of the usual track of the hurricane, and that
danger is considered to be “all over” in October, though there
have been some notable and destructive exceptions to these
rules.
On the 6th October, Wright again sailed to join Codrington
at Antigua, and a plan was laid for attacking the French
island of Guadaloupe. It is to be noted that Wright’s crews
having been sorely diminished by sickness, he had been compelled
to press sailors from the merchant ships at Barbadoes.
While the English squadron was collected for the purpose of
attacking St. Christopher, the French privateers sailing from
Hispaniola, Martinique and Guadaloupe, had been very busy.
They were known to have captured numbers of our merchant
ships, and the trade was threatened with ruin. Some of them
cruised at their ease within sight of the shore at Barbadoes,
taking the small vessels employed to bring from Virginia the
bacon and maize which were the provisions needed for the
negro slaves. There was even danger of famine. At Antigua,
Wright was called off by orders to sail for England, and did
actually come back as far as Barbadoes. Here, however,
counter-orders were sent him to remain, and promises of
reinforcements. In January of 1691 store ships, and one
man-of-war, reached him. This addition to his force, small as
it was, was yet welcome, for he had been compelled to detach
vessels on convoy service, doubtless in answer to the loud
outcries of the merchants. In February he again joined
Codrington, and the scheme of attacking Guadaloupe was
resumed. On the 27th of that month, Marie Galante, a little
outlying island just south of Guadaloupe, was raided with
the usual details of plunder and arson. Then a landing was
effected on Guadaloupe, but in May these unworthy operations
were brought to an end by the report that a French squadron
had reached Martinique from Europe, and was coming on.
At once the troops were re-embarked, not without signs of
panic, and a council of war decided to return to Barbadoes.
Wright and Codrington had come to open quarrel. At Barbadoes
the naval chiefs health broke down. He resigned his
command, and sailed for home. Some of the ships followed
him with a convoy. Others remained in the West Indies.
Wright, who left Barbadoes amid a chorus of jeers and
accusations of cowardice, may fairly be considered to have had
hard measure. He was never again employed at sea, though
he held some dock-yard posts. There is nothing to show that
he was a man to rise above adverse circumstances, but the
bare narrative of the events of the cruise given above is his
best excuse. Let us look at the facts, bearing meanwhile in
mind that what is to be said of them applies in different
degrees, but always to some extent, to every expedition we
sent to the West Indies from the beginning of the war in
1689 down to the peace of Utrecht. In the first place the
material force given to the commander was inadequate to the
work he had to do. It was not sufficient to capture the
principal French posts, yet he was ordered to make attacks
on the enemy’s territory. The inevitable result was that,
while he had his ships concentrated for miserable burning
and plundering raids, the French privateers cruised unchecked.
The blame for this rests mainly on the Government. It repeated
in the West Indies the very mistake of ordering attacks
on coast towns with insufficient forces, which as we have seen
it was also making in the Channel. Then these material
forces, too weak in themselves to begin with, suffered from
causes serious enough to have paralysed greater powers. It
was a brutal and greedy generation, callously indifferent to
the well-being of the men. The younger Hawkins, and
Lancaster—the captain of the East India Company—had
shown how to keep crews healthy on long voyages even in
the tropics. We had the example of the Dutch to guide us.
Yet the chiefs of the navy allowed their men to rot from
scurvy and perish by fever, not from want of knowledge,
which they could have acquired at once if they had looked
for it, but from mere hardness of heart and selfishness. The
destruction of life by disease in our fleets was everywhere great,
and in the West Indies it was enormous. Of the superior
officers who sailed with Admiral Nevill in 1696-1697 only
one captain lived to return home. The pestiferous squalor
of the lower deck avenged the sailors. At the close of Captain
R. Wilmot’s expedition of 1695 one vessel was lost on the
reefs of Florida, from sheer want of men to handle her sails.
The sailors followed the example set them, and were affected
by the spirit of their time. They found consolation for the
hardships of life afloat in excesses on shore. Burchett assures
us that the harbours of the West Indies were more fatal to
the men than the sea.
In this atmosphere, as of a town smitten by plague where
men hasten to enjoy while they can, sailors and soldiers were
sent to plunder. Each soon began to suspect the other of
attempting to defraud, and the passions of disappointed
gamblers were added to the professional rivalry of men who
in that generation were rarely honest enough to subordinate
their passions to the general good of “the king’s service.”
The fierce feuds of sailor and soldier flamed up in these
expeditions, but the case of Admiral Benbow shows that a
British admiral of that generation could not always rely on
loyal and honest support even from his subordinates. Add to
this, that jarring soldier and sailor elements were constantly
called upon to combine in councils, and that they were both
subjected to a vague check by the governors and councils of
the islands. In such conditions effective operations were not
possible.
While the Grand Fleets were cruising, often unopposed
and never effectually checked by the French, while the
colonial expeditions sailed year after year to fail, or at the
best to achieve half successes, by their own defects rather
than from the strength of their enemy, the allies suffered
severely at sea from the enterprise of the corsairs who won
for France nearly all the glory and profit she gained from
these naval wars. This side of the struggle is of peculiar,
indeed it may be said to be of contemporary, interest. French
writers are fond of dwelling on the success of their privateers
in the later seventeenth, and early eighteenth centuries. They
argue that it proves their national aptitude for swift destructive
attacks on trade, and draw the deduction that if ever war
breaks out again between them and us, they must revert to
the methods of the men who, if they could not disturb the
movements of the great allied fleets, did at least make the
conflict costly to English and Dutch commerce. It is their
belief that if they can only do what those adventurers did on
a somewhat larger scale, then England, which is far more
dependent on trade than she then was, and is now under the
obligation to import large quantities of food, which was not
then the case, will find her superiority in fleets of no avail. We
are looking then at what concerns us directly when we turn
our attention to the doings of the French corsairs between
1689 and 1712.
Owing to a combination of circumstances the guerrillero,
or partisan war of the sea, was then conducted in exceptionally
favourable conditions. When they have been detailed, and
the results reached have been summed up, we shall be in a
position to judge how far those conditions, favourable as they
were to the corsairs, were also of advantage to our enemy.
This failure of the French fleet had a double effect. French
coasting trade conducted in small vessels, fitted to hug the
shore and take refuge under coast batteries, went on, disturbed,
but not destroyed. But French oversea commerce was almost
wholly suspended. Thus numbers of men were thrown out of
employment, and the shipowners were driven to look elsewhere
for profit. Both were inevitably turned to privateering.
We had seen the same consequence ensue in Elizabeth’s reign,
when the Spanish war interrupted our chief oversea trade.
Again, so soon as the great fleets had no longer to be manned
for cruising, the king had a strong motive to find other
employment for his sailors and his officers. Therefore he
allowed them to go on privateering voyages, and even hired
out his vessels for the purpose or entered into partnership with
the owners. Here again our own Elizabethan precedent was
closely, if unconsciously, followed. Similar causes produced
similar results, and as Elizabeth became the partner of
“adventurers” on plundering expeditions to the West Indies,
or to Cadiz, so King Louis entered into contracts with his
armateurs for similar ventures. Finally, the French leaders
of that generation were of much the same stamp as our
Elizabethans. M. de Pointis, the Chevalier de Saint Pol, the
Count de Forbin, Jean Bart, and Duguay-Trouin were the
French equivalents of Raleigh, Cumberland, Drake, Frobisher,
and Hawkins. Some of them won their way to social
position, and the royal service, by good fighting in the
privateers. Others were king’s officers lent for the work.
While Tourville kept the sea, the share of the privateers
in the war was small, and the harm they did very trifling in
comparison to the injury inflicted on the Smyrna convoy by
the French fleet in 1693. Only a part of their total later
activity in the war directly concerned us. Jean Bart, a
Fleming of the Flemish town of Dunkirk, cruised mainly
against the Dutch in the North Seas. The two greatest
single achievements of the French privateers, the capture of
Carthagena by M. de Pointis in the reign of King William
(1697), and the capture of Rio de Janeiro by Duguay-Trouin
in the reign of Queen Anne (1711), were directed
against the Spaniards and the Portuguese respectively. They
were very similar to Drake’s raid on the West Indies in 1585.
The Dunkirk privateers preyed on our commerce after their
town had become French, as they had done while it formed
part of the Low Country possessions of the King of Spain.
We blockaded it with indifferent success. Other ports also
sent out their corsairs. Our chief interest is with the Breton
town of St. Malo, and with the activity of its hero Réné
Duguay-Trouin. He used other ports, Dunkirk or Rochelle
occasionally, and Brest often. He co-operated with other
men, notably with the Count of Forbin, but St. Malo was
his headquarters and also the typical corsair town, while he
was the central dominating figure of the corsair war. Jean
Bart died in the middle of the conflict. Forbin had other
activities. Saint Pol, Nesmond, and many more who could
be named, were subordinate. Following the scheme of this
book, I take him as the characteristic illuminative example.
The Breton town of St. Malo stands on the northern
coast of the Duchy towards the eastern end, and close to
Normandy. It is on the eastern end and at the mouth of
the Rance. At that time it was still an island, not yet
turned into a peninsula by a causeway. It was surrounded
by ancient mediæval walls of less extent than the present
fortifications. The population were seamen, traders in peace,
corsairs in war. There were local leaders, burgesses not counted
as nobles, but in the odd old French phrase “living nobly”
as merchants and shipowners, not by retail trade, nor manual
labour. The approach to the Rance is dangerous, through
reefs and over a bar, but there is good anchorage inside.
The privateers of St. Malo had been recognised as a useful
force, and their organisation had been controlled by the crown
since the fifteenth century. It had been finally fixed by
Colbert. The captains sailed with a recognised commission
and large powers, extending even to life and death, for the
maintenance of discipline. The crews were recruited by free
enlistment, and received wages, which might go to fifteen
crowns for the course or cruise of four months. Custom,
embodied in royal ordinances, regulated the division of the
prize. After payment of legal expenses, and of ten per cent.
to the Admiralty of Brittany (a separate office from the
Admiralty of France), two-thirds belonged to the owner, and
the remaining third was divided among the officers on a fixed
scale, while the men were rewarded at discretion by gifts in
addition to their wages. When the king lent the ship he
took a fifth of the prize, after the deduction of legal expenses,
and admiral’s fees. The adventurers who helped to fit the
vessel out, with their officers and the crew, divided the
remainder.
Among the armateurs, merchants, and shipowners of
St. Malo “living nobly,” the family of Trouin had a conspicuous
place. Luc Trouin de la Barbinais, father of the
corsair, had himself served against the Dutch and Spaniards.
Réné, who afterwards added Duguay to his name to
distinguish himself from his elder brother, was a younger son
of a large household. His parents had intended him for a
priest, and he had some schooling from the Jesuits at Rouen.
But he was not made for the church. When the war opened
in 1689 he was seventeen years old, and his family allowed
him to follow his natural bent. He began his career as a
volunteer in one of the ships of the firm. These were light
craft, provided with guns, but relying mainly on their large
crews. It was not their interest to destroy their prize, so
whether she was a small warship (a large one they would
naturally avoid) or a merchant vessel, their method was always
the same, namely, to run alongside, or to run the bowsprit
over the waist of their opponent, and to carry her at a rush.
A very short apprenticeship was considered enough for one of
the owners’ family. In his second year the young Réné was
already in command of a light cruiser. In 1692 he captured
an English convoy. In 1693 he cruised at the mouth of the
Channel in the Hercule, 30, and took two rich English prizes.
In 1694 he commanded the Diligente, 36, and after some
success was captured by an English squadron. He was
carried as prisoner to Plymouth, but escaped by the help of
a pretty shop girl who had a lover among the gaolers. At
that time he was in peril of severe treatment, for he had
broken the laws of war, out of bravado, by firing a derisive
shot at a heavy English vessel before hoisting his own flag
and sailing off. After his escape his brother gave him the
Francois, 48. In this vessel he took part in the capture of an
English convoy protected by two men-of-war, the Sanspareil
and the Boston. Here we have to note that a change—a
very significant change—came over the corsair war about this
time.
In the first three years of the war the privateers cruised
alone, picking up what straggling merchant ships they met.
But the allies answered by sending their trade under protection
of warships in convoys. It therefore became necessary
to make the attack with forces capable of overcoming the
guard. So the corsairs began to cruise in well-appointed
squadrons of four, six, or ten ships, in part commonly supplied
by the king. These forces flew at far higher game than the
straggling merchant ship. Their course was identical with
that following in the ensuing century by Hawke, when he
assailed Desherbiers de l’Etenduère, namely, to fall upon the
warships first. When the French were in sufficient numbers
both to throw a superior force on the men-of-war, and to
spare vessels to capture the merchant ships at once, they did so;
when this was not the case they disposed of the armed guard.
They made no attempt to form a precise order themselves, but
swept down on the guardships of the convoy, attacking always
by two or more against one, and overpowering their enemy in
detail. The protecting English and Dutch ships made many
gallant fights, but they showed little readiness to meet attack
by counter-attack. It was their custom to form a line and
wait to be assailed. This passive attitude left the Frenchman
free to make his arrangements as he pleased. Duguay-Trouin,
and his colleagues, still relied much upon large crews,
and upon boarding. Yet an alert, well-handled ship could
often avoid being grappled. For instance, we often hear how
a French corsair swept down on the side of some Englishman
or Dutchman, but failed to grapple because the wary opponent
had “thrown all aback,” that is to say, had pulled the yards
round so as to present the front of the sails to the wind.
This would stop his motion, and begin to make him move
backwards. If now the attacking ship, which by the necessity
of the case would be going with the impetus of high speed,
ranged up alongside she might miss her aim, or the large iron
hooks called grappling-irons, which she threw out to take hold
of her prey, might not get fixed; or again they might, but the
ropes to which they are fastened broke under the strain of the
diverging masses. Then the assailant would shoot ahead, and
the vessel attacked would have a chance to cross her path,
and sweep her with a broadside. In order to have something
more than the boarders to rely on, the corsairs increased the
size of their vessels and broadsides, till they sailed with ships
of fifty-six guns. Still the favourite method of the corsairs
was to rush to close quarters, on both sides at once when they
could, and throw an irresistible force of boarders on the
enemy’s deck.
Many hot fights of this kind took place in both divisions
of the war. One of the most desperate was fought in 1697
between Duguay-Trouin and the Dutch Bilbao convoy under
Baron Wassenaer. The years from 1693 to 1697 were, on
the whole, at least in so far as we were concerned, the most
profitable to the corsairs. Our navy was still staggering
from the administrative vices of King Charles’s reign, and the
Government was hampered by financial embarrassments. The
merchants complained that the protection was insufficient, and
was supplied late, so that they lost the season, and the
market, and were put to heavy expense while waiting for
their guard. Officials replied that they did what they could,
and accused the merchant captains of bringing misfortunes on
themselves by leaving the protection of the warships, to hurry
on as they neared home. There was truth on both sides. It
is certain that merchant skippers both then, and for long
afterwards, were often tempted to run risks by the hope of
getting in early, and well ahead of competitors in the market.
Yet the constant successes of the privateers show that the
navy was not well handled.
We renewed the war in more favourable conditions, and
with a better experience. On the whole, the corsairs had
far less success. Nevertheless, even in this period, Duguay-Trouin
hit us some shrewd blows. In 1705 he took a large
English man-of-war, the Elisabeth. In 1707 he sailed in
combination with Forbin, at the head of a squadron of twelve
vessels. Their orders were to intercept a convoy of military
stores which the English Government was sending to Spain
under the protection of three large men-of-war, the Devonshire,
80, the Cumberland, 80, and the Royal Oak, 74, with the
Chester and the Ruby of 50 guns. It was met, and scattered
off the Lizard on the 10th October after very hard fighting.
The English captains fought most bravely, but no more can
be said in their favour. Though our squadron was outnumbered
it contained three vessels far superior in strength to
any among the French. Moreover, they were divided when the
action was begun by Duguay-Trouin who rushed straight at
us. Yet Captain Richard Edwards who commanded did not
attempt to do more than present a defensive barrier between
the merchant ships and the oncoming French, who were thus
able to concentrate as they pleased, and crush him in detail.
As a captain he did his duty manfully, fighting his ship, the
Cumberland, till she was dismasted, and unable to resist further.
The Chester and Ruby were also taken. The Devonshire
fought till evening, when she blew up with the loss of all her
crew, except three, and of three hundred soldiers she was
carrying out to Spain. While this fierce conflict was in
progress, the transports and merchant ships made their
escape, and most of them reached Lisbon.
Here we might leave Duguay-Trouin, for his later services
did not greatly concern us. Yet it belongs to our story to
record that in the following year he cruised with ten ships,
hired by, or belonging to, himself and his brothers. No prize
was met, and the expense of keeping so many vessels at sea
to no purpose nearly brought the house of Trouin to ruin.
This fact in his career supplies an opportunity for summing up
the corsair war. It brought him, we see, fame but not profit,
and it may be added that this is what it did for France.
Looking at it as a whole we note that it gives no support to
the often-renewed contention, that attacks by cruisers on
sea-borne trade can of themselves bring a maritime power to
submission. The work, often tried, has never been better
done, and we may feel sure never will be better done than by
Duguay-Trouin, and the men he represents here. Yet we see
that it did not stop the march of the Grand Fleets of the allies
for a day, nor did it ever dam up the main stream of their
commerce. Again, the achievements of this famous corsair
do by no means prove that single ships, however swift, can
destroy commerce. It was while trying to prey on our
shipping single-handed that Duguay-Trouin became a
prisoner at Plymouth. Precisely the same experience befell
Jean Bart, and Forbin at Portsmouth. Their successes were
gained in well-appointed squadrons able to meet the shock of
battle. The moral of the story is that a maritime power
can always defeat the attacks of single ships on its trade by
giving convoy. The protecting squadron can only be overpowered
by a force like itself, and we come at once to
operations of war far beyond the power of the mere corsair
or commerce destroyer who relies on his speed only. Success
in these operations must finally fall to whichever side possesses
the most numerous, and the best-appointed squadrons.
CHAPTER III THE MEN AND THE LIFE
Authorities.—This chapter has been founded mainly on: Rooke’s Journal,
published for the Navy Records Society; the Minutes of the Court-Martial
on Stucley and Brookes of the Milford; Lillingston’s Reflections on Mr.
Burchett’s Memoirs, and Burchett’s Justification of his Naval Memoirs,
published separately, but sometimes found together; Maydman’s Naval Politics;
and William Hodge’s An Humble Supplication of the Seamen’s Misery.
When the war of the Spanish Succession came to an
end, the navy held perhaps an even higher place
than it has occupied since. At the signing of the
Peace of Utrecht, Great Britain was not so much the greatest
naval power in the world as the only power. Holland had
been overtaxed by the necessity of taking a foremost place in
the war on land; France was bled nearly to death; Spain
had ceased to possess even the show of a fleet. The Scandinavian
nations and Russia were confined to the Baltic.
Elsewhere there was nothing. In the midst of this general
prostration we ruled at sea, not only without an equal, but
without a second.
There was a great danger in a supremacy of this nature.
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, and
he who is the best because the others are very bad may
himself be far from good. The truth concerning the British
navy during the earlier eighteenth century is that it owed at least
as much to fortune as to its merits. At heart it was sound, and
moreover it existed by a necessity, and in conformity with the
nature of things, since it was for this country the indispensable
instrument not only of power but of safety. Therefore
it could not absolutely fail till the nation behind it withered.
None the less it was hampered by defects, which might well
have proved all but ruinous, had our enemy been more
capable. Yet that he sank so completely by his own weakness
was perhaps, in the long run, a misfortune to us. A
sound beating at some not vital point, which could have been
demonstrated to be the result of maladministration, would
probably have roused the nation into taking the Admiralty and
the navy in hand, and would have been for our good. No
such lesson was inflicted, and we drowsed on in rather ignoble
toleration for a dull half-century. A sound beating at some
not vital point which could have been shown to be the result
of pedantic adherence to a stupid method of fighting might
have stung the navy itself into intellectual activity. Again no
such lesson was given, and the navy drowsed on in brainless
acquiescence to the Fighting Instructions. Great then as our
position was, when compared with our neighbours’, we were yet
at a level from which we could not have sunk without
becoming dangerously bad.
It is a significant fact that the mere quality of our ships
was poor. The superiority of the French shipbuilding, already
noticeable in the reign of Charles II., was maintained for long.
When Spain began to revive under the Bourbon dynasty she
also constructed vessels far superior to ours. In the year
after the renewal of warfare in 1739 a Spanish 70-gunship,
the Princesa, which however only mounted 64 guns, was
taken by three English vessels of the same rate. It
cost them five hours and a half of fighting to get her, and
although this no doubt speaks well for her captain and crew,
her long resistance to apparently overwhelming force was
largely due to her fine build. She was of 1709 tons, whereas
English vessels of the same rating were only of 1225;
therefore she would be stronger and could carry a heavier
battery. Her lower deck ports were higher out of the water,
and could be worked when ours had to be closed in bad
weather. The inferiority of our ships, rate for rate, to the
French and Spanish had been noted before, and had produced
some effect, but the capture of the Princesa gave a much
needed stimulus. Nor was it only in size, and what depends on
size, that our ships were inferior. Their lines were poor, so that
they were crank (i.e. liable to overturn) and sailed badly. To
some extent this inferiority of our models was due to economy.
The Admiralty made its vessels of weak scantling, that is with
a minimum of timber, and preferred to patch up old ships
rather than build new ones, and therefore perpetuated inferior
types. This was also part of the general slackness of the
time. We were content to be guided by routine, and to leave
the building of our ships in the hands of shipwrights who
were mere artisans going by traditional rule of thumb.
The difficulty of knowing what sort of men the officers
and crews of our old navy were is very great. They have
left small record of themselves, and they were too remote
from the general life of their time to come under the notice of
ordinary witnesses. The pictures we do possess of them are
mostly drawn by satirists of whom one only, Smollett, was a
man of genius and had personal experience. Unfortunately his
spirit was bitter, and his purpose led him to pick out mainly
the most extravagant and worst parts of his subject.
Records of courts martial, again, tell a good deal, but it is
necessary to remember they also are of the nature of selections
of the worst. It was the bad not the good officer who came
before a court martial. Pamphlet controversies reveal
something, but once more it is the worst. That our navy
sailed the sea in such bad ships with comparatively few
disasters is proof of its seamanship. That its fighting was on
the whole successful, in spite of absurd rules and of defective
intelligence in leadership, shows that though the head lay
wrong, the heart was right. All the materials were there,
they only wanted better handling.
The evils afflicting the navy are easy enough to see. First
among them was brutality. The times were hard. A glance
at the trials which arose out of General Oglethorpe’s agitation
against the management of some of our prisons will show
how callous our ancestors could be in the early eighteenth
century. The navy produced no General Oglethorpe. Though
many officers sat in Parliament, none of them made a serious
attempt to check the unquestionable ill-usage of the sailors.
From that we may draw the deduction that they wanted
humanity to incur the ill-will of the Admiralty by insisting on
reform, or that they were indifferent to the miseries of others;
or finally that, like the Roman Prefectus Castrorum, who had
been a common soldier, and who was known to the men as
“Bring another,” because he was for ever breaking sticks on
their backs and calling for more, they were all the harder
because they themselves had suffered.
Here is one brief passage of naval manners in the early
eighteenth century, written by a naval pen in the Journal of
Rooke’s expedition to Cadiz in 1702:—
“At six this evening Captain Norris coming on board
this ship [the flagship] my Lord Hamilton, Captain Ley,
Captain Wishart, and Captain Trevor, were standing on the
quarter-deck, and as Captain Norris came up, Lord Hamilton
asked him if he had taken any more wine or brandy. This
means whether he had captured a ship laden with this kind
of cargo. The other answered No; upon which Captain
Trevor asked the price of his claret, whether he might have
any at 4 li a hogshead. Norris said he would have 6 li or
salt water, and then Captain Ley said he would rather the
prizes were ashore than he would give the 6 li the hogshead;
upon which Captain Norris said he was a rascal that he
wished his prizes ashore; the other replied he was a rascal if he
called him so; and then Captain Norris struck Captain Ley
and threw him over the gun, which Mr. Hopsonn hearing, as
he and I were in my cabin, ran out, and upon inquiry found
he [Norris] had hurt Captain Ley, and by the admiral’s
directions ordered him to be confined, upon which Captain
Norris drew his sword, and offered to stab Captain Ley, but
Admiral Hopsonn, holding his hand, ordered him to be
disarmed, and confined in Mr. Rayney’s cabin.”
It is a scene of huckstering and violence on the very
quarter-deck of the flagship. Yet though Ley died soon
afterwards, perhaps from the effect of the blow, Norris was
never called to account, and lived to be the most distinguished
officer of the reign of George I. and the early years of George II.
The same Journal, under an earlier date, makes mention
of one Captain William Moses of the Milford who accused his
lieutenant and one of his midshipmen of attempting to murder
him. It turned out on inquiry that he had wounded himself,
in order to bolster up charges which he was bringing against
these officers. They were brought to a court martial, the
lieutenant was acquitted, and the midshipman let off with
a mild rebuke. The story of this latter, whose name was
Cæsar Brookes, is worth quoting from the minutes of the
court martial.
The witnesses, who disagree in many details, are at one
in saying that in the middle watch of a certain night, when
the ship was on the coast of Africa, the captain, one Mr. Mite
a passenger, and various officers, were sitting together on the
quarter-deck drinking wine. Here the agreement ceases. Mr.
Cæsar Brookes joined the party, and then, according to the
captain, he voluntarily, without provocation, and out of pure
native arrogance, advanced the proposition that he could fight
any two men—nay, he swore he could. For this he was
rebuked by the captain, who told him he might perchance
meet one who was a better man than himself. To this
Mr. Brookes, flaming into outrageous disrespect, answered,
“Well, damme, you’re not,” and was thereupon justly confined
for his mutinous behaviour. Brookes gives a very different
version of the affair. According to him, he was only arguing
that in defending narrow passages one man, if conveniently
placed, could fight two—a scientific question of shock tactics,
in fact, very proper for an officer to discuss. For this he was
first abused and then put under arrest, though his carriage
throughout was of the most respectful kind. The witnesses
do not, with two suspicious exceptions, support the captain’s
version of what took place. The exceptions are sailors who
tell the same tale like parrots. One of them had been let out
of irons by the captain, although he had beaten the gunner,
after the quarter-deck scene be it observed. If the court
martial thought that Captain Moses had been attempting
subornation of perjury, it was not without excuse. Now
follows a scene in the captain’s cabin, in which, teste
Captain Moses, he was bearded by his extra midshipman;
but Mr. Brookes says it was otherwise, and that he was
assaulted. Certain it is that the midshipman remained in
confinement for six mortal months in the sweltering heat
of the Guinea Coast. At Cape Coast Castle, Captain Moses
had reason to believe that his life was threatened by the
implacable and unbridled Brookes. It seems that Mr.
Donnidge the surgeon went to have a conversation with the
imprisoned midshipman, and by way of telling him something
really worth hearing, let him know that the captain had taken
medicine and that it had done no good. Mr. Brookes, on
hearing that physicians had so far been in vain, remarked
that if he could meet the captain on shore he would give him
two pills that should move him. Hereupon Mr. Donnidge
rushed out, and finding the captain’s boat manned alongside,
warned the crew to keep a good watch, for he believed that
their commander’s life was threatened. Something of Mackshane
the toady surgeon in Smollett’s Roderick Random
seems to hang about Mr. Donnidge. Then there is another
story of an anonymous letter found in the captain’s cabin,
warning him that the lieutenant and the midshipman were
plotting to raise a mutiny and run away with the ship. The
letter was either an impudent practical joke or another device
of this remarkable naval captain’s, much on a level with the
wound on his leg. The notes are but brief, and many clues
were not followed up; but one ends with the conviction that
the court martial came to a sound and humane decision.
It told Mr. Brookes that he had plainly been too free with
his tongue, but that six months’ arrest on the coast of Africa
was quite punishment enough, and it dismissed the captain’s
rigmarole story of conspiracy to murder and mutiny as
frivolous and vexatious.
The name of Captain Moses may serve as connecting link
to another tale of the sea life of that time. It was told in
1704 by an army officer of the name of Colonel Luke
Lillingston, in the course of a controversy with Burchett, the
Secretary of the Admiralty, and historian of the naval wars
of King William and Queen Anne.
In 1695 an expedition left England to harass the French
West Indies. The squadron was commanded by Captain
Robert Wilmot, and the soldiers were under the command
of Colonel Lillingston. As a military operation it was of no
importance, and its character has been sufficiently described
in the previous chapter. Our subject here is naval human
nature as it was displayed towards the close of the seventeenth
century and remained for two generations. Lillingston had
served as Lieutenant-Colonel of Foulkes’s regiment in the
expedition of Sir Francis Wheeler in 1692, and had, he tells
us, seen instances of the “arbitrary behaviour” of naval officers.
So extreme was this, and so much was it resented by military
men that in 1695 they were most reluctant to subject themselves
to “the ill usage and insolent behaviour of commanders
at Sea, especially to officers of the army.” Lillingston moved,
he assures us, by a sense of duty, agreed to go with Wilmot.
A regiment was made up for him by drafts from others, and
the expedition sailed at the end of January. The naval
commander, who as senior captain was called commodore,
carried two women with him, in defiance of the regulations,
and, so the soldier asserts, was on various occasions “pleased
to be very drunk.” He touched at Madeira, and on the way
there had the following conversation with Lillingston. The
men had not been on good terms, and we see clearly that the
soldier expected the sailor to be brutal, and was on the watch
for instances of “arbitrary behaviour.”
“He (i.e. Wilmot) told me he found I was a little strange
to him, and [that he] should be glad we might understand
one another better. I told him, I thought if there was any
strangeness it was on his side, and as we had both promised
His Majesty to maintain an entire confidence, and a friendly
correspondence, it should not be my fault if we did not, and
so offered, forgetting all that was past, to begin a more
sociable agreement from that time, and so we drank to one
another again. ‘But,’ says the Captain, ‘our agreement is very
necessary on our own accounts, for if it be not our own faults
we may both make our fortunes in this voyage, and provide
for ourselves as long as we live.’ With all my heart said I,
I shall endeavour not to be wanting to myself provided the
King’s business be done too. ‘Damn the King’s business,’ says
he, ‘we will do the King’s business, and our own too. But
I’ll be free, with you,’ says the Captain, ‘I had the misfortune
to kill a man (and I think named him) and it has almost
ruined me, for it has cost me above a thousand pound, and
I am resolved this voyage shall pay for it, and if you will join
with me in such measures as I shall propose, this voyage shall
make up all our losses.’”
Lillingston refused, and Wilmot went off in the sulks,
growling:—
“Well well” says he “if you don’t think fit to join with
me you may let it alone, but I am resolved to make myself
amends. I won’t go to the West Indies to learn the language.
I’ll take care of myself, let the King’s business go how it will.”
When the squadron reached Madeira, Wilmot endeavoured
to get rid of the military officers. He seized an opportunity
to sail while most of them were ashore buying provisions.
A sudden gale was his pretext. Fortunately his ships were
scattered in a storm; one of them came back to Madeira, and
the officers were picked up. At a council of the officers of
both arms, Wilmot had refused to allow Lillingston’s captain-lieutenant
to sit, alleging that no officer under the rank of
captain had a right to a seat. Now the captain-lieutenant,
according to the military customs of the time, commanded what
was counted as the colonel’s company and ranked as the senior
captain. Wilmot was induced to see reason by the arguments
of the commissary Murray; but Lillingston, not unfairly, quotes
his conduct as an example of pure arbitrary insolence. He
had turned the captain-lieutenant out of the cabin “with
a rudeness that I had never seen among gentlemen.” At the
Leeward Islands Wilmot was again “pleased to be very
drunk,” and went the length of offering to give away commissions
in Lillingston’s regiment. The military and naval
elements came, in fact, to open quarrel. From the Leeward
Islands this jarring expedition went on first to San Domingo,
where some Spaniards, then our allies, joined us. There was
delay, wrangling, and an incessant conflict between soldier and
sailor. Wilmot, says Lillingston,
“loitered away six days in the Bay. During this time
how his people were employed I know not, but as for himself
he spent the time in diversions every day rowing about the
bay in his barge with the Ladies, and attended by trumpets and
all the music of the fleet in other boats to recreate himself
and the women, with the pleasantness of the country.”
When at last the expedition got to its work of plundering
the French settlements in Haiti, Captain Wilmot, who had
been joined by various Jamaica privateers, kept ahead of the
troops as they marched along on shore, and applied himself
to robbing the plantations, particularly of their negroes, who
were then very valuable booty. At Port de Paix the commodore
made his last attempt to induce the colonel to come
to an understanding for their common advantage:
“But smiling he takes me by the hand and leading me
aside he told me he wanted to speak with me, and now he
showed himself in his own colours a second time and
made his last attempt to bring me over to him; he told me he
would comply with all the orders of our council of war, and
assist me with all the men he could spare, and do everything
he could to forward the service if I would but join with him
in one thing, and allow a second. The first was I should
consent to his having an equal share of the plunder with me
in case the fort should be taken.
“To this I made him no answer but asked him what was
his second proposal. ‘Why,’ says he, ‘if you will join with me
when the fort is taken and all done that can be done on the
island we will carry these three Spanish men-of-war away with
us to Jamaica, for,’ says he, ‘the dogs have got a great many of
the negroes, and other plunder, and if you will consent,’ says
he, ‘we’ll make them pay us well before we part with them.’
[Lillingston objected that this would be dishonest and would
certainly get them into trouble at home.] ‘’Tis no matter
for that,’ says the commodore, ‘we are a great way off England,
and it may be long enough before the news of it will come
there. We may make it worth our while and may easily
make it up when we come home.’ I told him I could not
concern myself in such a thing unless the Spaniards gave us
some just occasion. ‘Occasion,’ says he, ‘there is occasion
enough, for they have got away our negroes, and it is easy
enough to pick a hole in their coats on that account, and
answer it at home.’”
Wilmot’s confidence that news took a long time to come
home from the West Indies, and that accusations were easily
answered by people who had money in their pockets, was not
unfounded. Strange things happened in those waters. It
may well have been within the commodore’s memory that in
the reign of Charles II. a man-of-war sent out to suppress the
buccaneers had gone over to them, after her captain had run
his master through the body, and had then fled.
It is unnecessary to dwell much more on this story. Port
de Paix fell, and then the fever broke out among the sailors
and soldiers, both the allies separated and returned to their
own ports. Lillingston became very ill, and while in bed,
and as he thought dying, was pestered by several of the
captains, William Moses being one of them, to sign certain
papers which were meant, he supposed, to exculpate the commodore.
The military officer asserts that Wilmot stopped on
the north side of Jamaica, and there sold the negroes he had
plundered, for twenty pounds a head, putting the money into
his pocket. Lillingston remained ill in Jamaica, and the
ships returned home by the Straits of Florida. The fever
went with them. One vessel was lost on the Florida shoals
from want of men to handle her sails. Some of her crew
were brought off. Others were left to perish in the surf
because they had broken into the spirit-room, and were hopelessly
drunk. Wilmot died of fever, and so did Captain Lance
who succeeded him. The command fell to Captain Butler
who brought the squadron home. In England the commodore’s
widow, Ruth Wilmot, accused Butler of having broken
into her husband’s desk, and of having stolen his plunder.
A lawsuit followed which ruined both. In the course of the
suit affidavits were produced by both sides, and one of these,
made on behalf of Captain Butler, for the purpose of discrediting
the witness of Ruth Wilmot, gives a curious picture of the
discipline of the navy at that time. It deals with the moral
characters of one Theophilus Buxton and others.
“Theophilus Buxton during such his employment (of
steward to wit) was a person guilty of frequent drunkenness,
abominable profaneness, execrable oaths, blasphemy, thieving
and embezzlement, and the said Buxton and John Heath
having, in one of their drunken fits at sea, set a candle on a
jar of oil in the steward’s room next to the powder room, by
which means the oil took fire, the said ship with all that was
in her had in all probability been burnt or blown up had not
the second lieutenant of the ship, with much difficulty and
hazard, put out the fire, for which offence the said Buxton,
and John Heath had about forty lashes apiece given them
by order of Captain Butler, then commander of the said ship,
and after the said Buxton came into the harbour he ran away
from the said ship. And these deponents further say, that
they likewise well know John Brinley, mariner in the said
Dunkirk, who was a person very negligent of his duty, and
very seditious, and at Portsmouth threatened his said Captain,
and to kill one of the lieutenants of the said ship, and attempted
to head the ship’s company in an open mutiny, and these
deponents believe that the said Buxton, Heath, and Brinley
are such profligate persons that they will swear anything that
their malice and desire of revenge can dictate to them.”
It must not be supposed that the navy captain, who was
a mere brute, was always a man of obscure birth. In August
1742 a court martial was held at Spithead for the trial of
an officer, who, if long descent, rank, and family connections
were always, and not only as a rule, enough to form a gentleman,
ought assuredly to have been one. This was the
Honourable William Hervey, third son of the first Earl of
Bristol of the name. He had been captain of the Superb,
60, in the fleet which sailed for the West Indies under Sir
Chaloner Ogle in 1740, and he was proved to the satisfaction
of a court composed of brother officers, and presided over by
Admiral Cavendish, to have been guilty of conduct surpassing
anything Smollett has described in his grim pictures of the
navy. His first and second lieutenants, the gunner and purser
of his ship, swore that he beat an old seaman named White so
brutally that the man was carried insensible to his hammock, and
died there accusing the captain of being the cause of his death;
that he often beat the quarter-masters from the wheel with
a cudgel, and had on one occasion actually endangered the ship
in this way, during a paroxysm of rage; that he once threw
a paper under the table of his cabin, ordered a subordinate
to pick it up, and kicked him while on his knees, to the peril
of his life; that he injured his gunner seriously by a foul
kick; that he thrashed his purser on the deck at Kinsale;
that he threatened to beat all his officers, “from the first
lieutenant to the cook’s boy,” and that he not only abounded
in abusive terms, but enforced them by insulting gestures.
Captain Hervey’s defence consisted of the plea that he was
never violent in word or action except when he was provoked,
and in an unsupported counter-charge of cruelty to certain
Spanish prisoners against his first lieutenant, which the court
dismissed. It is consistent enough that while violent captains
behaved with a brutality never heard of now except among
the roughest and most ignorant class of the community, officers
of weak character had some difficulty in obtaining ordinary
respect from their subordinates. The discipline of the navy,
in the highest sense of the word, was bad, though its mere drill
might be sound. There was not as yet a standard of conduct,
a prevailing spirit of honour to control and inspire all alike.
Men with whom the loyal discharge of duty is not the
first aim, want only temptation and opportunity in order to
disgrace themselves in the very presence of the enemy. The
charge of cowardice was frequently made at this time. It
was indeed one of the regular taunts brought against bad
commanders. We may believe that in a sense it was often
unjust. Brutal men are not seldom endowed with animal
courage, and do not always fail from mere fear. Indeed that
weakness would hardly be common among those who, by their
own choice, followed a dangerous profession. What, however,
we might expect to discover among officers, who agreed with
Wilmot in the resolution to look after their own business, and
to make themselves easy for life, was a want of the sense of
honour which feels a stain like a wound. They would easily
be guilty of avoiding battle when no profit was to be expected,
not out of pusillanimous tenderness for their personal safety,
but because to their base minds there was no advantage to be
secured by running risks. If by any chance the cupidity
which restrained them from obeying honour and duty was
stirred to active malignity by hatred of a comrade or of a
superior, if, moreover, they were far away from home and
might hope, even foolishly, to escape punishment, such persons
would be capable of sinking to well-nigh any excess of baseness.
By keeping these conditions in mind, we can understand
that most shameful passage in the history of the Royal Navy,
the betrayal of Benbow by his captains in August 1702.
Not much is known of the early life of John Benbow,
about whom some legends have accumulated and who has a
higher reputation than his recorded services justify, partly
perhaps because his name strikes the ear, and partly because
of his melancholy end. His origin is uncertain. That he
was trained to the sea in the merchant service is known.
He served in a subordinate place in the navy for a time,
and he attracted the notice of James II. by making a
manful defence of the trading ship he commanded against a
Barbary pirate. That he cut off the heads of his prisoners,
put them into a bag with salt, and tumbled them out on the
floor of the custom house at Cadiz may or may not be true.
It is a credible tale of one who assuredly was a thorough
Tarpaulin, and also it may well have been invented of such
a man, or transferred to him, from some older legendary
sea hero. Common report says that he had a rough
tongue, and we may accept its testimony. The “gentlemen
captains” of the time would no doubt have defined him
as a “Wappineer Tar,” the abusive equivalent of Tarpaulin.
His reputation must have been good, for he was chosen to
command a squadron in the West Indies after the Peace of
Ryswick, and was sent back again in 1701 to intercept the
Spanish plate ships which afterwards fell into our hands at
Vigo. His movements are of little interest till August 1702.
In that month he sailed to intercept a French squadron
commanded by M. du Casse on the Spanish Main. On the
19th he discovered his opponent with a squadron of ten ships,
and immediately attacked with the eight vessels he had with
him. His line was formed in the usual way, his flagship, the
Breda, being in the centre, and the others ahead and astern of
her. Two of his ships, the Defiance, Captain Kirkby, and the
Windsor, Captain Constable, fairly ran soon after the action
opened. If the French admiral had pushed his advantage he
must have destroyed Benbow’s squadron. But M. du Casse
was on treasure-carrying duty, and did not care to incur the
hazard of having his ships crippled. After doing some damage
to the Breda, he drew off at night. Benbow now rearranged his
line, putting the Breda at the head, and placing the misbehaving
ships, the Defiance and Windsor, immediately behind her,
in the hope of shaming their captains into some sense of
honour. But example is wasted on men resolved to misbehave.
For four days the admiral followed the French, but his captains,
with the exception of the officer commanding the Ruby,
Captain George Walton, took every opportunity to fall behind.
On the fifth day of the pursuit, and the sixth since he had got
touch of the enemy, Benbow had his ships together, and
renewed the action. Again he was shamefully ill supported.
A cannon shot shattered his right leg. He had his cot brought
up on deck, summoned his captains on board the flagship, and
made a last appeal to their honour. Encouraged in all
probability by their confidence that the wound would be
mortal, and that they could tell the tale in their own way, the
misbehaving captains insisted on returning to Jamaica. Even
the officers who had done their duty joined in recommending
retreat, from a belief that their comrades would desert them.
The squadron went back to Jamaica, but though Benbow’s
wound was mortal he lived long enough to do the Royal
Navy one signal piece of service. He brought his disloyal
officers to a court martial. The heart of the navy was still
sound in spite of the vices on the surface, and the misconduct
of these men had been too gross for pity. Sentences of death
or dismissal were passed on all, and the offenders were sent
home for execution. Kirkby, and Wade of the Greenwich, were
shot on board the Bristol at Plymouth. Hudson of the
Pendennis died before trial, else he would have shared their
fate. Constable of the Windsor was dismissed the service, and
imprisoned. Even the officers who had reluctantly joined in
the recommendation to retreat were sentenced to dismissal,
and were pardoned only by the intercession of the admiral.
It was said, apparently by way of palliation for Kirkby and
Wade, that they had behaved well before, and were less
cowards than traitors. There is probably this amount of
force in the pitiful excuse, that they were greedy men
chiefly intent on pelf, who in their foolish cunning hoped to
revenge themselves on their rough chief by ruining his chance
of gaining glory. To end before a firing-party was their
proper fate. It has been the good fortune of the navy that
the nation has always been very serious where it was concerned,
and that in the worst of times there has always been
within its own ranks the capacity to apply the last indispensable
sanction of the code of honour.
The condition of the great dim mass of seamen, whose
fate so often depended on the bad commander, is not easy to
realise. But we have every reason to believe that it was hard,
even in comparison with that of other sailors. The word is
used here of all the elements forming the crews of our ships,
though the “sailormen” to use their own expression—that is
to say those bred from boyhood to the sea—never formed a
majority, and even rarely amounted to a third of the complements.
The majority was always made up of soldiers and
landsmen. This proportion of one-third sailors and two-thirds
landsmen was enforced on the privateers. Taking the
whole body of those who lived in the warships, and by the
sea, they suffered from two standing grievances throughout
the whole of the eighteenth century,—the amount of their
pay, and the system of payment. Though the establishment
of William III. doubled the pay of the officers, and the
new establishment of 1700 did not make very material
reductions, nothing was done for the sailors. They continued
to receive 20s. a month for a month of twenty-eight days in
the case of able seamen, and less for others. To the true
sailors this was peculiarly hard. The first effect of a war was
to send up the wages in merchant ships to 45s. and
50s. a month, while as much as £7 would be paid to the
colliers for the voyage from the Tyne to London, though it
might last only six or seven weeks. It was for this reason
that the press was needed to man the navy. Landsmen,
waisters, and marines were found with no great difficulty.
Not being trained sailors they were not sought by shipowners.
But the real sailors were. Therefore it was necessary to draw
them to the navy by offers of bounties to make up the bad
pay of the state, and when this temptation failed, as it
invariably did, to attract a sufficient number, then to drive
them in by the press.
Nor was the bad pay all, or even the worst. Their
wretched 20s. or less a month were paid to the men on a
system both wasteful to the state and cruel to its servants.
At home the payment was made by a commissioner who
went round with a staff of clerks, and held an inspection on
each ship. Then he held another, named a recall, in the
dockyards, to take in the men overlooked, or absent during
the first. The process was long, and it led to an absurd
outlay on travelling expenses and clerks’ wages. Such as it
was this system applied only to the ships at home. It was
long before the crews abroad, including the officers, were paid
till their return to England. If the men had remained
always with the same ship the evil, though severe enough,
would not have been so great. But they were shifted about
from vessel to vessel, and had often to present “pay tickets”
for four or five different ships. In the later seventeenth
century, before it became usual to maintain large squadrons
abroad for years, the wrong was not so acutely felt. But in
the eighteenth it became a monstrous oppression. The discontent
it caused, after leading to many minor mutinies,
culminated in the great outbreak of 1797. If the sailors had
not been unorganised and unrepresented in Parliament, and if
it had been impossible to obtain them by force, a remedy must
have been found earlier. A bad system has always indirect
bad consequences, and one result of this was a sheer waste
of public money. Funds voted for a given ship could not
be paid till the proper claimants appeared. Meanwhile the
money lay in the hands of the treasurer of the navy, who
received the interest. If he left office he was still responsible
for the unclosed accounts, and the money remained with him.
It is even said that far into the eighteenth century the accounts
of ships commissioned in the reign of Queen Anne had not
been wound up. For the sailors themselves the system
worked out in downright robbery. When they could get
their pay tickets they were driven to sell them to speculators
at enormous discounts. In order to protect them against this
their tickets were kept in the hands of the captains—with the
result that they might never reach the proper owner. It was
a common accusation against bad commanders that they
robbed their men in combination with the purser.
One practice of the old navy certainly lent itself to fraud.
The captain was allowed four servants for each hundred of
his ship’s company, and was accustomed to count this among
the perquisites of his office. Indeed the total of their wages
is sometimes spoken of as part of his pay. A captain was
fully entitled to employ men shipped on these terms as
servants, and he had a good claim to the patronage which the
power of selecting them gave him. He could for instance
provide for a son, or the son of a friend, by bringing
him to sea, rating him captain’s servant, and training him to
become an officer. Many of the best of our chiefs, Nelson
himself being one of them, served their apprenticeship or part
of it in this very way, and where the captain was an honourable
man who used his patronage on a high principle the
state was the gainer. The history of our navy in the last
century shows that a large proportion of our captains did use
their privilege in this spirit. But here there is no question of
money profit. That could only be got in two ways, of which
the first was mean and the second fraudulent. A captain
could take servants to sea, on the understanding that he was
to draw their pay, and give them what part he chose of the
ten pounds a year allowed for them by the state. He
could also keep false musters, that is, return boys or men as
present when they were not in the ship. This was an offence
punishable by dismissal, but it was habitually committed.
In its least criminal form it was done to allow a boy, who was
still at school, to be borne on the books of a ship in order to
shorten the time he would have to serve at sea, according to
regulations before passing for lieutenant. A distinguished
officer who died in our own time, Sir Provo Wallis, had had
his name on the books of a ship for some years before he
joined. At its worst it was the offence of keeping false
musters, pure and simple. The names of imaginary persons
or of lads, who never meant to go to sea, were entered on the
roll of the ship’s company, and their wages drawn by the
captain. In the old slang phrase they were known as
“Captain’s Hogs” and it is said that as many as thirty or forty
of them drew pay in a single ship. At ten pounds a head
this made a material addition to the commander’s salary.
Bad pay, badly given, did not sum up the wrongs of the
sailors. The constant infliction of the lash was, as far as we
can see, not felt as more of a grievance by sailors than by
schoolboys. But the bad food they did resent, and there
can be no doubt that the rations supplied were frequently
inferior, while the practice of putting six men on the allowance
of four, in long voyages, caused the amount supplied
to be insufficient. It may be that the men did not realise
how much the want of ventilation and the prevalence of
dirt was against their interests. But they suffered from
them none the less. It must be repeated that the administration
did not sin from want of knowledge. There was a
standing order to keep the ships properly aired. But a
writer of the time, Henry Maydman in his Sea Politics, has
explained why this regulation was not applied. Captains
frequently took the steerage, the space of the main-deck
in front of their cabins, for themselves, forcing the officers,
who ought to have had it, further forward, so that the after-hatchway
was shut to the men. Thus only the fore-hatchway
was left to the crew, or for the purpose of establishing
a draught. When the ship was at sea, and the ports closed,
the air below grew foul, and turned food and drink bad. It
is to this we have to look for the explanation of the frightful
ravages of fevers during the cruises of the time. A few weeks
at sea even in European waters commonly made the ships
sickly. At the close of the century a long cruise at sea
was relied on to make them healthy. In the interval a
great internal revolution had been wrought in the navy,
dating from about the end of the War of the Austrian
Succession, and carried on partly by Captain Cook, partly
by Dr. Gilbert Blane, who accompanied Rodney to the
West Indies in 1782, but caused originally by the influence
on the naval officers of the great revival of intelligent
humanity in the country.
CHAPTER IV THE TWO COLONIAL WARS
Authorities.—Beatson, Military Memoirs; Campbell’s Lives of the Admirals;
Schomberg’s Naval Chronology; Burrows’ Life of Hawke.
From the signing of the Peace of Utrecht in 1713 till
the beginning of the colonial war with Spain in 1739,
the Royal Navy was used as an instrument in the hand
of diplomacy to keep the peace, or as the police of the seas.
Europe was disturbed in the North by the last stages of the
struggle between Peter the Great of Russia and Charles XII.
of Sweden, in the South by the foolish ambitions of Philip V.,
the first Bourbon king of Spain, and his second wife,
Elizabeth Farnese. But the statesmen who controlled the
policy of Western Europe during most of these years, Sir
Robert Walpole in England and Cardinal Fleury in France,
were unwearied in warding off another war. Once, in 1718,
a strong fleet sent into the Mediterranean, to put a stop to
one of the Italian ventures of Philip V., destroyed a much
weaker and very ill-handled Spanish fleet off Cape Passaro,
in Sicily. As a rule, the appearance of our ships was enough.
Now and then an officer found some chance of distinction in
service against the pirates, largely recruited among the
privateers of the war, who swarmed in distant seas. The most
signal example was the suppression of a noted adventurer
of this class, named Roberts, by Sir Chaloner Ogle, on the
West Coast of Africa in 1722. Meanwhile war on a vast
scale was being prepared by two causes—on the Continent
by the rivalries of France and Austria in Germany, and Spain
and Austria in Italy, together with the ambition of the rising
kingdom of Prussia and its great King Frederick; and on
the sea by the collision of England with Spain and France
in America, and with France in India. Great Britain was
drawn into the Continental War by the Hanoverian interests
of the royal family and the desire to maintain the balance
of power. Here the navy played an indispensable but
secondary part. But in the colonial struggle it was the
foremost combatant, and exercised a decisive influence.
A common interest drew France and Spain into alliance
against us, but the causes of hostility were various. As
regards Spain, they go back to the reign of Charles II. From
the time of our settlement in Jamaica it had been our
constant wish to secure the right of trading with the
Spanish colonies, while firmly refusing the Spaniards all
access to our own. The buccaneer wars, in so far as they
were more than plundering raids conducted by miscellaneous
scoundrels, were the attempts of private adventurers to carry
out this policy. By the Peace of Utrecht we secured the
right to share in the trade of Spanish America. Agents
were allowed to establish themselves at Carthagena on the
Eastern, and Panama on the Western side. We secured an
asiento, or contract for the supply of negroes. We were
also authorised to send one trading ship of 500 tons burden
laden with manufactured goods to the Spanish Main in each
year. This arrangement led, as it was bound to lead, to
much smuggling. As Spain revived, under the more intelligent
administration of the Bourbon dynasty, the abuse of English
treaty rights was resented. The Spaniards said that the treaty
ship was continually supplied with fresh goods by tenders, and
complained that other smugglers haunted their coast, and
were guilty of many excesses. To protect themselves, they
insisted on searching English vessels found near their coast,
and condemning those they considered guilty, and Spanish
adventurers retaliated by piracy. Hence arose a long angry
conflict of claims and counter-claims between England and
Spain, complicated by political disputes in Europe, and only
prevented from ripening into war by the resolute peace policy
of Walpole. The Parliamentary Opposition, composed largely
of disappointed office-seekers, and, as they afterwards proved,
incapable administrators, took up the cause of the West India
traders. There was much general denunciation of the atrocities
of the Spaniards. The best known instance given was that
of a certain John Jenkins, master of a trading vessel called
the Rebecca of Glasgow. Jenkins asserted that in 1730 his
vessel had been boarded by a Spanish guarda costa, or revenue
cutter, in the West Indies, and that the Spanish captain, who
is habitually described as “the infamous Fandino,” had cut
his ear off. His vessel was undoubtedly searched near Havana,
but was allowed to proceed on her voyage, and there is no
evidence for the story that his ear was cut off except his own
word. As the country grew tired of the long predominance
of Walpole, and was worked into a pugnacious mood by
the Patriots, use was made of Jenkins’s case to appeal
to popular sentiment. A theatrical scene was arranged
before a Committee of the House of Commons, and the
man was prompted to declare “that he had recommended
his soul to god, and his cause to his country” when he was
subject to the violence of Fandino. At last Walpole, seeing
that the country was resolved on war, yielded, dishonestly,
to what he believed to be a mistaken policy for the sake of
keeping office. War with Spain was declared in July 1739.
The Colonial quarrel with France arose in another way—and
one more honourable to us. The trade of her colonies
was less worth striving for than the Spanish, and she was too
strong to be hectored. The aggression came from her. In
America her agents endeavoured to unite her possessions, in
Canada and Louisiana, by annexing the valleys of the Ohio
and the Mississippi, which were first explored by her brilliant
and daring adventurers. The result would have been to
confine the growing British colonies between the Alleghanies
and the Atlantic. In India the French Company was bankrupt.
It endeavoured to gain the means of expelling its
prosperous English rival, by acquiring political power among
the native princes. For a time the Colonial conflict with
France was postponed by the great European war arising over
the scramble for the heritage of the house of Austria on the
death of Charles VI. It was our exceeding good fortune
that, when the decisive struggle for trade colonies and
supremacy at sea had to be fought out, the attention and the
resources of France were mainly employed on an attempt to
acquire a predominant position in Central Europe.
This was the happier for us because years were to pass
before we could afford to dispense with any of the help fortune
gave us. Never was the Government of England less able
than during the fag end of Walpole’s rule and the administration
of the so-called Patriots. Never, save during the last
ignoble days of Charles II., was the navy less fit to meet the
calls of a great war. Its paper strength was indeed imposing.
There were 124 ships of the line—of from 100 to 50 guns
each, and 104 of lesser rates—that is, of 40 guns each or less.
The total was 228, and it exceeded the united navies of France
and Spain in everything except the quality of the individual
ships. But it was suffering from the moral and intellectual
diseases spoken of in the previous chapter. The long peace
had afforded no opportunity of testing the quality of officers.
In the earlier years its chiefs were worn-out and commonplace,
or brutal and noisy. All those years did for us was to bring
forward the men who were to lead gloriously in after times.
From the point of view of the navy, the struggle waged under
various names, the Spanish War, the War of the Austrian
Succession, and the Seven Years’ War from 1739 to 1763
with an eight years’ truce in the middle, was one and the same
war. Fortunately for us, if we were bad, our enemies were
worse. Spain was languid, brainless, and could only fight on
the defensive. France was overtaxed, distracted by a multiplicity
of aims, drifting to bankruptcy, corrupt at heart and
frivolous. Great Britain was a mighty force, healthy, though
afflicted by bad habits, but capable of reform, and even at its
worst advancing on sound lines. Therefore it could bear its
administrative scum as a mighty river carries driftwood and
rubbish on its surface. This floating trash may make a block
and delay the current for a short space, but the moving water
flows below, and accumulates in irresistible pressure till one
day it sweeps the obstruction out of its path.
In describing this struggle only a brief space need be given
to the early years, and in them what is best worth looking at
is the promise of better times. Vernon in the West Indies
and Mathews and Lestock in the Mediterranean are the
dominant figures of the first period—and the types of all the
navy had to succeed in shedding, or to perish. Beside them
we see the gradual rise of Anson and Hawke, and with their
predominance the triumph of the good over the bad.
The Spanish War, or War of Jenkins’s Ear as it came to
be called when the rage of the country was over, began by
attacks on the possessions of Spain in the New World. A
rigid blockade of our enemy’s ports at home and invasion of
his territory in Europe would have brought him to terms more
effectually. But we had no sufficient army, and the navy,
besides being hardly yet fit for prolonged blockade in stormy
seas, much preferred colonial expeditions rich in prize and
plunder. To the country nothing seemed more likely to be
effectual than the seizure of Spanish colonies—or more
lucrative. During the long peace, in 1726, ’27, a powerful
fleet had been sent to blockade the port of Porto Bello for the
purpose of stopping the sailing of the treasure-ships, and so
depriving King Philip V. of the means of being mischievous in
Europe. Admiral Hozier who commanded, his successor, and
many thousands of officers and men died miserably of fever.
The memory of this sacrifice to Walpole’s peace policy rankled,
and an expedition to Porto Bello was sure to be popular. It
was the port of lading for the treasure from the South Seas,
and the headquarters of the guarda costas employed, as we
said, to destroy our trade—but as the Spaniards put it, to stop
our smuggling. An attack on it had been vehemently
supported by the Patriots, and particularly by a sailor who
was very conspicuous among them.
Edward Vernon had been a captain in the navy since
1706 and was the son of a Secretary of State. He owed his
rapid rise to family influence, and no conspicuous service is
recorded of him. During the peace he had been for several
years member for Ipswich, and had been among the loudest-mouthed
of those who first assailed the “profligate” administration
of Sir R. Walpole, and then imitated him in
everything except his love of peace and his admirable finance.
The navy now and then produces a person who “has the gift
of the gab ‘although’ he was bred to the sea,” and is
continually playing the British seaman to the gallery. Vernon
was the example of the type in his generation. He was as
brave as any man, but too proud of what he ought to have
taken for granted. He was clever, but far too conscious of
his cleverness. Withal he was arrogant, had no control over
his temper, and was afflicted with an insatiable vanity.
Already he had boasted that he would take Porto Bello with
six ships. When the war began, he was sent with nine vessels
to keep his promise. Vernon left in July 1739, and reached
Jamaica late in October. On the 20th November he sailed
into Porto Bello with six ships, and took it almost without
resistance. The fortifications were not complete, nor were all
the guns mounted. The garrison was crippled by tropical
fever and was seized by a panic. They ran from their guns
under the fire of our ships, and the town was captured with
less loss than has often accompanied the taking of a sloop.
Vernon behaved with humanity when in possession of the place.
This easy success threw the nation into a delirium of joy, and
turned Vernon’s head completely. He became convinced that
all fortifications could be taken by merely rushing at them.
In the position of unchecked authority he held in his own
squadron, surrounded by men who deferred to him in obedient
silence even when they did not toady him, his arrogance and
self-assertion swelled till they grew to the proportions of
mania. Vernon made an idle demonstration off Carthagena
on the 6th March 1740, but nothing else was done.
Meanwhile the country was preparing to follow up the first
success. After changes of plan, hesitations, and much
administrative confusion, it was finally decided to make a
double attack on Spanish America. A small squadron under
Anson was to go round Cape Horn and range the west coast
of South America as far north as Panama, while a great expedition
carrying a body of troops under command of Lord
Cathcart was to sail to the West Indies, join Vernon, and other
troops drawn from the British possessions in America, and
then the whole was to fall on the Spaniards. The actual point
of attack was left to the discretion of the chiefs. Anson’s
justly famous voyage may be left aside for the present with
the observation that as part of a combined operation it was a
failure through the delays shown in dispatching the expeditions.
According to the original plan, Lord Cathcart was to
have reached the West Indies at the end of October 1740
under protection of six warships. But the Government heard
that the Spaniards were sending out a fleet. France was also
beginning to move for the purpose of supporting Spain. The
Government delayed the expedition till a more powerful fleet
could be collected. It left England under the care of 25 warships
commanded by Sir C. Ogle on 26th October, at which
date it ought to have been on the field of operations. On the
19th December it reached Dominica, where Lord Cathcart died,
and was succeeded by General Wentworth. It was not at
Jamaica till the 7th January. Meanwhile the enemy had not
been idle. The attention of France, still nominally at peace
with us, was drawn off by the death of the emperor and the
opening of the Austrian Succession. Spain was left to her
own resources, which, however, proved greater and were better
handled than we had expected. Don Rodrigo de Torres
sailed on the 10th July, reached the West Indies unmolested
by us, sent part of his ships to reinforce Carthagena under
Don Blas de Leso, and then went on, still unmolested by us,
to Havana. It may be added that he finally brought the
Spanish trade home unseen, and even unsought by us.
The great English expedition reinforced by troops from
the North American colonies, and by negroes to do the work
of the trenches, left Jamaica by the 26th January 1741, and
after some further hesitation was led against Carthagena. It
reached its destination on the 4th March. The town
stands at the north end of lagoons, and can only be entered at
the western end by large ships at the Boca Chica, or Small
Mouth. It was not accessible from the sea front because of
the shoal water and the heavy surf. The Boca Chica was well
fortified, and there were other outworks dotted along the
lagoons. These had to be beaten down before the body of the
place, which was further defended by a strong outwork called
the San Lazaro and a double wall, could be reached. From
the 9th to the 26th March we were fighting up along the
lagoons with good success. Vernon accused the military men
of sloth and incompetence, and afterwards repeated his charges
in a scolding pamphlet full of provable misstatements of fact.
At Carthagena he pestered his military colleagues in a tone
which revolted the pride of General Wentworth. Still, by the
end of March we were close to the town, and on the 1st April,
a fatal date, Vernon dispatched a vessel to England with a
report of victory. It was soon followed by another with
authentic tidings of disaster. The wet season begins at
Carthagena at the end of March, and the troops were already
very sickly. Their condition was aggravated by the fact that
the admiral seized the only supply of good water for the fleet.
At last Wentworth, who was plainly a weak man unfitted to
contend with a bully, had the feebleness to allow himself to be
badgered into making an attempt to storm the unbreached San
Lazaro, and was repulsed with frightful loss. Vernon made
no use of his ships against the town, though there was ample
depth of water for them, as M. de Pointis had shown when he
took the place in 1697.
It was now clear that Carthagena could not be taken without
a regular siege, an operation at that season, and with our
resources, impossible. A council of war was held in the cabin
of the flagship. The soldiers when asked what they proposed
to do answered that they must first learn what help they were
to expect from the fleet. Vernon burst out in an explosion of
abuse, and was firmly answered by Wentworth. Then he
flung out of the cabin in a fit of shrewish rage, and remained
during the rest of the council in the stern gallery, bawling
occasional interruptions. There could be but one end to the
debate. The expedition retired with shame, and the odd hits,
and the loss of several thousand men.
Nor would there be any profit in going into the details of
the war in the West Indies. Few conflicts have ever been
more insipid. Operations similar in purpose to this at
Carthagena but on a smaller scale were carried out by Vernon
and Wentworth near St. Jago de Cuba in the autumn of 1741,
and at Porto Bello in the spring of 1742. In 1743 a squadron
under Sir Charles Knowles was beaten off with severe loss in
attack on Puerto Cabello and La Guayra on the Main. Then
the war died down to mere privateering for a time, to revive
slightly towards the end. Knowles fought a moderately
successful action with a Spanish force near Havana in
September 1748. But he was disliked by some of his officers
and accused of not doing enough, was tried by court martial,
and reprimanded. A feud arose among his officers, who fought
it out in duels. The West Indies in this war were destined to
give us no glory, and very doubtful profit. The honour of the
flag was deeply stained by Captain Cornelius Mitchell, who
while in command of a superior English force showed mere
cowardice in the presence of the French in August 1746. For
this he was only dismissed the service by a very weak court
martial. Some good did, however, come to the navy and the
country from this scandal. In 1749, after the conclusion of
the war, it helped to persuade Parliament to revise the Naval
Discipline Act of Charles II. The rest of the war in the
West Indies deserves no further notice. The Spaniards
avoided battle except on the one occasion named, and applied
themselves to bringing home their trade, with fair success.
The French were too overtaxed elsewhere to appear in force.
We not being put on our mettle, drowsed on in sloth, quarrels,
and scandals. On both sides the privateers were active.
Throughout the course of the war we took from the Spaniards
1249 ships, and they from us 1360. Our prizes included
several treasure-ships, and were the more valuable. To
conclude this side of the subject, it may be added that after
France joined in the war against us we took from her
2185 ships, and she from us 1878. The balance in our
favour was therefore 196.
Here also may be put what remains to be said of Vernon.
It is to the honour of a man of whom little good can be told,
that if he was insolent to colleagues and harsh to his officers,
he showed an intelligent humanity to his crews. He reduced
the excessive allowance of rum given to men in the West
Indies, and introduced the custom of diluting it with water.
The mixture is said by tradition to have got its name of “grog”
from his nickname of “Old Grog,” given him for his practice of
wearing a grogram boat-cloak. This is the only kindly trait
(for we cannot praise him for not behaving like a buccaneer
at Porto Bello) in an unamiable character. Vernon had
offered to resign after the failure at Carthagena, but was
flattered into remaining by ministers who were unwilling to
see him among them till his tar-barrel popularity had waned,
as they no doubt began to see it would soon do. He did
return at the close of 1742. In 1744 his name was passed
over in a promotion of admirals, and he resented the slight
in a letter of incredible insolence to the Board. Yet in April
1745 he was promoted Admiral of the White, and appointed
to a home command during the Jacobite rising. On
service he began a course of violent wrangling with the
Admiralty, and finally threw up his post in a pet. Then he
appealed to the public in anonymous pamphlets with clap-trap
titles, consisting largely of official letters which he had clearly
no right to publish. When called to account for what was
at the best a gross irregularity, he refused to acknowledge his
responsibility, and was, by the king’s orders, struck off the
list of admirals. He died on his estate at Nacton, in Suffolk,
on the 30th October 1757, forgotten and obscure—an example
of the worthlessness of mob popularity.
It is indeed a pleasure to turn from this story of loud
talk and little performance to Anson’s immortal voyage. Not
that it was without dark shades and disasters, not only because
it ended in triumph, but because there was at the head of it
a hero, and round him a band fit to follow a hero. Of Anson
himself it may be said that in him English manhood gave
itself a witness amid the vulgar crowd of Vernons, Knowleses,
Mitchells, Mathews, and Lestocks. Stern but just, asking for
no affection, but deserving it, and commanding absolute
confidence, he was indeed “the flower and pattern of all bold
mariners ... unchangeable of purpose, crafty of counsel, and
swift of execution; in triumph most sober, in failure ... of
endurance beyond mortal man.”
It had at first been intended to send two expeditions to
the South Seas, one under Anson to Manila, and another
under Captain Cornwall round the Horn. But the Government
changed its mind. Anson alone sailed, and was directed not
on Manila but on Panama. There was delay, as always at
that time, and the squadron did not leave England till the
18th September 1740. It consisted of six ships:—
Guns.
Men.
Centurion
60
400
George Anson, commodore.
Gloucester
50
300
Richard Norris.
Severn
50
300
Honourable Edward Legge.
Pearl
40
250
M. Mitchell.
Wager
28
160
Dandy Kidd.
Trial
8
100
Honourable G. Murray.
There were two victuallers, transports to carry stores—the
Anna and Industry. The squadron was fairly provided, but
was hampered by a number of so-called soldiers who were in
fact Chelsea pensioners, sent on board in disregard of Anson’s
protest. All who could walk deserted. The others died
before the ships entered the Pacific; among them it is said
that there was a veteran who had fought at the Boyne for
King William. On the 25th October the squadron was at
Madeira, and it reached St. Catherine, in Southern Brazil, on
the 21st November. Already the scurvy had broken out, and
Anson stopped to restore the health of his crews till the 18th
January 1741. From St. Catherine the squadron fought its
way South through storms to Port St. Julian, famous in the
voyages of Magellan and of Drake. From thence it went
on to the Pacific by the Straits of Le Maire and the Horn.
It was a less dangerous route than the Straits of Magellan,
but the incessant tempest made it perilous. Through one
unbroken fury of wind and wave the squadron struggled on
to the Pacific, but all did not reach it. The navigation of the
time was rude, there were no chronometers, no means of
finding the longitude. Two of the ships of the squadron, the
Severn and the Pearl, came up on the wrong side of South
America, and returned to England. Of the others the Wager
rounded the Horn, but was wrecked in the Golfo de Peñas.
Anson did not reach Juan Fernandez, the island of Robinson
Crusoe, or at least of his original Alexander Selkirk, till
10th June, with his crew reduced to a mere handful by scurvy.
The Trial, the Gloucester, and the Anna came in one
after the other. The last was broken up, and her crew taken
into the other vessels. It was September before the crews
were sufficiently revived for service. During the last months
of 1741 and the first of 1742, Anson remained on the coast
taking prizes and capturing Paita. The Trial was condemned.
His squadron was too weak to effect anything against Panama,
and he missed the heavily laden ship, which came yearly from
the Philippines to Acapulco, in Mexico. On the 28th April
he left the American coast and stretched across the Pacific.
Storms and scurvy raged round him again, and the Gloucester
had to be sacrificed. The Centurion now alone remained.
With her, Anson reached Canton, 21st November 1742, where
he refitted. Then he took the sea once more to look for the
Manila treasure-ship. On the 20th June 1743 he met and
captured the Nuestra Señora de Covadonga, a prize of immense
value, off Cape Espiritu Santo, in the Philippines. As a feat
of war the achievement was naught, for the Spaniard had
most of his guns dismounted, and fought at hopeless disadvantage.
Anson’s greatness comes from this—that he
conquered so much to be there at all. He returned with his
prize to Canton, sailed for home on the 15th October 1743,
and reached Spithead on the 15th June 1744.
The naval operations carried out against Spain in Europe
were in themselves insignificant, and are only worth noticing
because they led to war with France. The actual declaration
of war was not made till 1744, by France on the
20th March, by England on the 31st, but it was a pure
formality. Conflicts had already taken place on the sea
between the ships of the two nations; the battle of Dettingen,
in which English troops took part as allies of Maria Teresa,
had been fought, and an attempt had been made to cover an
invasion of England in the interests of the Jacobites. France
was openly giving moral and material support to Spain
before actually joining her. While the great expedition to
the West Indies was preparing, Sir John Balchen was dispatched
to the Spanish coast with a small squadron. It was
characteristic of our half-hearted way of conducting the war
that he was ordered out only to capture the treasure-ships.
They, however, were warned in time, and so came safe home
to Santander. Balchen was in some danger of falling in
with a much superior force sent out by the Spaniards to look
for him, and returned having effected nothing. Meanwhile
Haddock was watching Cadiz, not so vigilantly, however, but
that a Spanish squadron got away unimpeached by us, and
reached Ferrol. The Spanish Government collected troops on
the east coast as if to threaten Minorca, and on the north
as if in preparation for an invasion of England, to be supported,
it was hoped, by help from the Jacobites. The apparent
danger of Minorca distracted Haddock, who was even short-handed
till reinforced by a squadron under Lestock. At home
a powerful force was collected under Sir John Norris to repel
the threatened invasion. He sailed twice to watch Ferrol,
but was driven back by storms in July and August. When
1740 ended, we had certainly done nothing proportionate to
our immense numerical superiority. The Spanish fleets lay
quiet in port, or slipped away to the West Indies, and the
Basque privateers were active even in the Channel. In 1741
there was no change. Sir John Norris was again at sea in
the Channel and Bay of Biscay, but to little purpose. Haddock,
with his fleet reinforced by Rear-Admiral Lestock, continued
to watch Don José Navarro at Cadiz. In December the
English fleet had become very foul, and was compelled to go
into Gibraltar and clean. Navarro at once put to sea, and
entered the Mediterranean. Meanwhile a French fleet under
M. de Court had left Toulon, and advanced south along the
coast of Spain. So soon as he knew that the Spaniards had
passed him, Haddock started in pursuit, but only came up in
time to see the French and Spanish fleets join, and to find
himself in the presence of a very superior force. It was
notorious that M. de Court would support Navarro if attacked,
but since France was still endeavouring to make war and
keep peace at one and the same time, he would not attack
us. Haddock was allowed to go on to Minorca. The
allies covered the passage of some Spanish troops to Italy,
and then went into Toulon. Here they remained till February
1744. Haddock, old and worn-out, resigned his command
to Lestock at the close of 1741. In May 1742 Admiral
Mathews came out with a commission not only to command
the fleet but to be Minister at the court of Sardinia. It
would have been difficult to make a worse choice. He was
stupid, boorish, illiterate, and of a violent temper, which earned
him in Italy the nickname of “Il Furibondo.” Moreover, he
had a long-standing quarrel with Lestock, and had asked
that this officer might be recalled. The Ministry did not
consent, and Mathews revenged himself by coarse insolence
to his subordinate. A proud man would have sought his own
recall; but Lestock was only sulky and malignant.
During 1742 some service was done. In June a squadron
of Spanish galleys was burnt at St. Tropez by fireships under
the command of Captain Callis, who earned the last gold
collar and badge given for this kind of service. In August a
detached squadron under Captain Martin forced the Bourbon
king of the Two Sicilies to withdraw the troops he had sent
to serve against our ally the Queen of Hungary by threatening
to bombard Naples. With these exceptions, 1742 and 1743
wore away, while Mathews was mostly at Turin, and his fleet
lay at anchor without practice at sea. Some acts of violence
on the coast of Italy are recorded against our captains. The
British Minister at Florence, Sir Horace Mann, who looked
upon them, with the sole exception of Captain Temple West,
as “genteel porpoises,” asserts that when some of our men
robbed a church of a cross and of the sacrament, Mathews
hung the cross round the neck of his pet monkey, and stuck
the consecrated wafer on the beast’s forehead. The tardy
determination of France to take an active part on the sea
gave a stimulus to the war in the early days of 1744.
In this year she acted with some vigour both in the
Channel and in the Mediterranean. At the close of 1743
troops had been collected at Dunkirk for an invasion again,
in the hope of causing a Jacobite rebellion. A fleet of
twenty-four sail was armed at Brest, and put under the
command of M. de Roquefeuil. He sailed at the end of
January, was off the Eddystone on the 3rd February 1744,
and had come as high as Dungeness by the 24th. The peril
served for a moment to calm the feuds of the politicians, for
the country was terribly frightened. English soldiers and
foreign mercenaries were called in from abroad, and we
applied to the Dutch for the contingent they were bound to
supply by treaty. A fleet was collected under Sir John Norris
in the Downs, and a battle seemed inevitable. But a succession
of heavy gales from the east and north-east drove
the French out of the Channel back to Brest, and the peril
passed away.
While the wind and the inefficiency of the enemy were
standing our friends in the Channel, a transaction was taking
place in the Mediterranean which did us little honour and was
the beginning of infinite bitterness. It was known by the end
of 1743 that France was coming actively into the naval war.
In January 1744 Mathews came down from Turin, where
he had been acting as Minister, and resumed his functions of
admiral. His fleet was at anchor in the roadstead of Hyères,
between the mainland and the islands of Porquerolles, and
there it remained till M. de Court and Don José Navarro put
to sea from Toulon on the 19th February. It consisted of
twenty ships of the line when he rejoined it, but was raised
by reinforcements to twenty-nine. The allies numbered
twenty-eight, twelve of them being Spaniards. One of the
Spanish ships, the Real Felipe, carried 116 guns, and
her fellows were fine ships. The French were somewhat inferior,
and the weight of metal as well as of numbers was
in favour of Mathews, but the battle which followed was a
disgrace alike to the discipline, the intelligence, and, with a few
exceptions, even to the manhood of the navy.
When the enemy was known to be at sea, we struggled out
from Hyères, foul from long lying at anchor, and clumsy from
want of practice. The code of signals, too, was arbitrary and
poor. The same signal was found both in the fighting and
the sailing orders, and meant different things in each. During
the 10th February and the night of the 10th-11th Mathews’
fleet struggled towards the enemy in light breezes and baffling
currents. On the morning of the 11th it had got between the
enemy and Toulon. The van under Admiral Rowley and the
centre where Mathews was himself, were in a position to force
a battle on the allies, who lay in a line to the south and west
of them, heading to the west with the French in the van and
centre, and the Spaniards in the rear, and therefore nearest us.
But the English rear under Lestock had drifted apart in the
night, and was five miles astern. In the light breezes it could
not come up in time to be of use. Yet Admiral Mathews
decided to give battle. We bore down at one in the afternoon,
so that the English van came into action with the French centre,
and the English centre with the Spanish ships behind M. de
Court. If the breezes had been stronger, or the French more
alert, their van might have doubled back, and have put our
leading ships between two fires. They did not, and Admiral
Rowley maintained a lively cannonade with M. de Court till
the French admiral turned in the evening to help the
Spaniards, whom he believed to be hard pressed. At that
part of the line there had been not only failure but shame.
Admiral Mathews brought the Spaniards to an action. He
would have made it close had several of his captains not been
“shy.” He himself in the Namur showed the courage
which is the redeeming quality of his type, and stood out of
his line with the signal for the line still flying in order to come
closer to the enemy. Captain Cornwall of the Marlborough
fought the great Real Felipe nobly, being himself mortally
wounded, and his ship cut to pieces. Captain Edward Hawke
in the Berwick set a fine example, and compelled the Spanish
Poder to strike. But with these exceptions nobody did
brilliantly and several captains showed what, if it was not
actual cowardice, was the kind of confusion and stupidity which
keep a man well away from the enemy. These “cankers of a
long peace” proved once more that a loud voice, a blustering
manner, and a parade of brutality are no guarantees of
courage. A notable feature of the battle was that it gives the
last example of the old practice of using a fireship in action.
One was sent down to burn the Real Felipe, but the result
showed the limitations of this old-fashioned weapon. She was
reduced to a sinking state by the well-directed fire of the
Spaniard, who also sent out a boat to tow her clear. It was
perhaps fortunate for us that she was shattered by an explosion,
and went down, since the enemy might possibly have
turned her against the Marlborough, then lying crippled where
she had pushed in among their own ships. Night and the
confusion of both sides ended the battle, but the allies had
suffered some rough handling, and were chiefly intent on
retreat. Mathews might well have renewed the action when
he was at last joined by Lestock. He came, however, to the
strange conclusion that he could not follow the enemy, because
it was his duty to protect the coast of our allies in Italy—though
it would surely have taxed a less torpid intellect than
his to say what that coast was to be protected against, unless
it were the very fleet he was refusing to pursue. The enemy
was actually allowed to recover the Poder, which he abandoned,
and to retire unmolested to Carthagena. The Poder was then
burnt by us. Mathews returned to Mahon, where he solaced
his feelings by putting Admiral Lestock under arrest.
The failure off Toulon, coming as it did after a long succession
of repulses in the West Indies, and futilities in Europe
where nothing effectual had been done to intercept the
Spanish fleets, stirred the country to deep anger. The news
came slowly, and it was not until Lestock had returned under
arrest, and Mathews had resigned and had come home, that
their recriminations began to bring out the whole truth.
Parliament took the matter up, and carried out a preliminary
inquiry during April and March of 1745. Lestock and others
were heard at the bar, and Mathews, who was a member, in
his place. The debate left him, according to Horace Walpole,
“in the light of a hot, brave, imperious, dull, confused fellow,”
and it also left the House persuaded that a court martial
must be held on the whole battle. On the 18th of April, the
Commons with their Speaker waited on the king at St. James’s
Palace with a petition that a “court martial may be held in
the most speedy and solemn manner, to inquire into the
conduct of Admiral Mathews, Vice-Admiral Lestock, Captains
Burrish, Norris, Ambrose, Frogmore, and Dilk,” together with
that of the lieutenants of the Dorsetshire, who were accused
of misleading their captain, Burrish. The king granted the
petition. The measure was somewhat irregular, and might be
represented as trenching on the rights of the Admiralty,—it was
so considered by Anson who was now on the Board,—but the
case was exceptional, and it was by no means certain that the
Admiralty would have acted if Parliament had not applied firm
pressure. The action it took is one more reminder that, in
the dullest times, the country has always been in earnest about
its navy. It may, as Sir Charles Pasley has said, have played
with the army, which it long regarded with jealous distrust and
dislike, but where the navy was concerned it knew that its
very existence was at stake. Therefore, though tolerant of
much corruption in the naval, as in other branches of the
administration, it was roused to wrath, and the resolve to have
the whole truth out, by any failure on the sea.
A court martial, consisting of no less than twenty-four
members, and presided over by Sir Chaloner Ogle, began to
sit on the 11th September 1745. First it tried the four
lieutenants of the Dorsetshire, whom their captain had
accused in order to clear himself, and acquitted them. Then
it tried Captain Burrish, and condemned him to be cashiered.
Captain E. Williams of the Royal Oak was next tried and
condemned, but with less severity on the ground that he was
old and nearly blind. Captain John Ambrose of the Rupert,
who had shown courage and zeal in single ship actions, was
yet condemned for misconduct at Toulon, and sentenced to
be cashiered during the king’s pleasure. He was restored in
rank, but never again employed, and died a superannuated
rear-admiral. Captain Dilk of the Chichester shared his fate.
Captain Frogmore of the Boyne died before the trial. Captain
Norris of the Essex did not dare to face a court martial.
He fled into Spain from Gibraltar, and was never heard of
more. Five supplementary trials were held on Captains Pelt,
Sclater, Temple West, Cooper, and Lloyd. The last three
named were sentenced to be cashiered, but the finding was
generally considered unjust, and all three were restored. The
sentence of the court in this case is worth noting. Temple
West and his colleagues had been stationed in the van with
Admiral Rowley, and had taken steps to prevent the French
ships, which stretched ahead of our line, from doubling back
and putting us between two fires. It is doubtful whether the
enemy had any such design, though his movements seemed
to show that he had, and the counter-measures of these
captains were correct. But they had acted without the
express orders of their superior. They were therefore to be
punished, not for doing what was wrong, but for doing what
was right without orders. Observe that the punishment
inflicted on them for what at the worst was a pardonable,
even an honourable error of judgment, was identical with the
penalty imposed on Captain Burrish, who showed the white
feather. We have to come to the conclusion that, according
to the principles of a court martial at that time, it was better
that an English fleet should be defeated than that an officer
should disregard an order no longer applicable to the circumstances,
or act with independent intelligence. If this rule had
continued to prevail, Nelson would have been cashiered for
his bold move at St. Vincent.
That some such rule did prevail in their dim minds is
indeed obvious from the result of the two great trials which
followed on these small ones. Vice-Admiral Lestock was
tried in May 1746, and honourably acquitted. The charges
against him were, in substance, that on the night before the
battle, when the signal to form the line was flying, the admiral
signalled the fleet to lie to for the night. At that moment
Admiral Lestock’s squadron was separated from the main
body of the fleet. On any intelligent interpretation of the
orders it is clear that Lestock should first have joined the
other ships, and should then have lain to with them. He
preferred to lie to at once, and drifted still farther apart in the
night. Next day he was five or six miles astern. He pleaded
that he could not come up, and that as the signal for the line
was flying he was bound to remain in a line even although
that kept him out of the action. One thing is abundantly
clear from his defence, and it is that whenever he saw a
conflict of orders Lestock habitually preferred that one of
the two which kept him away from his admiral, and well out
of reach of the enemy. In after times Rodney, who served
in this fleet before the battle, and who knew the men, recorded
on the margin of Clerk’s Naval Tactics his firm conviction that
Lestock had betrayed his admiral. Rodney was headlong in
his judgments, but his is the voice of one seaman of that
time judging another, and shows what charges were not
thought incredible. Certain it is that Lestock behaved like
a man who was very glad of any excuse not to help a superior
whom he hated. Yet he was honourably acquitted.
There now remained nothing to be done but to try
Admiral Mathews. He appeared before a court martial in
June 1746—and was sentenced to be cashiered. That he
was a stupid man, and was equally unfit to be a minister
plenipotentiary or an admiral, is true. In giving up the
pursuit of the allies, and so losing his chance to renew the
battle, he showed extreme dulness and even want of spirit.
But in the action he had fought manfully, and if his example
had been well followed the Spanish squadron would in all
probability have been cut to pieces. His great sin in the
opinion of the court was that he engaged in such a way as
to make the maintenance of the line impossible while the
signal to preserve it was flying. Again we have to arrive at
the conclusion that, from the point of view of the court
martial, it was better that the enemy should not be brought
to action than that the line should be disordered. Such a
result could only have been reached by men who had never
spent an hour in thinking out the methods of fighting a
battle to the best purpose, but had simply accepted the
sixteenth article of the Fighting Orders with the docility of
pedants. The consequence of their finding was to rivet the
tyranny of a pedantic rule so firmly that it required forty
years of war, and an extraordinary combination of happy
circumstances at the end of them, to free the navy from its
bonds.
In the course of these trials an incident took place which
is of interest, because it settled the question of the subordination
of the military to the civil courts. The President of the
court martial formed to try Admiral Mathews was Perry
Mayne, Rear-Admiral of the Blue. It happened that Admiral
Mayne had sat on a court martial in the West Indies to try
a lieutenant of marines named Frye, and had sentenced him
to dismissal and imprisonment. Lieutenant Frye took
proceedings against the members of the court in England
for acting beyond their powers and for imprisoning him
illegally. He gained his case, and £800 damages. In the
course of these proceedings a writ was issued by Sir John
Willes, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, against Perry
Mayne and Captain Rentoul, another of Mathews’ judges, who
also had sat on the court martial. The other members of
the court were extremely angry at this interference with their
President, and recorded a violent protest against the action of
Sir John Willes, in which they were encouraged not only by
the king, who was a German prince, and very ignorant of
English ways to the end of his life, but by the Lords of the
Admiralty and Corbet the Secretary, who ought to have
known better. Sir John Willes at once asserted his authority
by attaching all the members of the court for contempt. They
were compelled to present a very humble and public apology.
While the failures of the chiefs who had risen during the
long peace and their quarrels were filling the eyes and ears of
the world, a great work was beginning to be done for the
Royal Navy, quietly and within the walls of the Admiralty.
It dated from December 1744, when Anson was appointed
as a member of the new Board, with the Duke of Bedford as
head. The duke was an indolent, great noble, who served the
state because public life was proper to a man of his rank.
But he was honest and sincerely patriotic. Though too much
accustomed to a splendid and pleasure-seeking life to be a
hard worker himself, he supported Anson steadily. Other
politicians, and notably the Duke of Newcastle, were too
incapable, and too completely devoted to jobbery, to give any
active help, but self-interest made them understand that
something must be done for the navy. The country would
not tolerate a repetition of the miscarriages of the early years
of the war, and efforts must be made to bring about an
improvement, if the eminent persons engaged in the parliamentary,
and court, scuffling of kites and crows, were to be
safe in their lives and estates. A good method of securing
this desirable end was to obtain the services of a competent
workman, and to let him labour unhampered. No better
help could have been found than Anson’s. The great
seaman’s connection with the administrative work of the navy
began in 1744, and continued with brief interruptions till his
death in 1762. Until 1751 he served as a subordinate under
Bedford and Bedford’s successor, the Earl of Sandwich, who
both trusted him. After that date he was himself First Lord,
almost continually. Anson was not fitted to shine in the
society of London. He could not shake off the silent retiring
habits formed during long years of cruising in solitary command
at a time when the chief was accustomed to keep all
subordinates at an awful distance. He was proud and shy,
a little hard too, and inclined to be grasping, as strenuous
ambitious men commonly are. It is therefore not surprising
that he excited a good deal of dislike, and laid himself open to
the attacks of writers so different, and so well able to make
their voices heard, as Horace Walpole and Smollett. We,
whose ambitions he has not disappointed, and whose advances
he did not snub, can judge him by another standard. We
can remember that if he took care of his own fortunes, he also
worked hard to improve the quality of our shipbuilding, and,
what was even more important, to improve the quality of the
senior ranks of the navy, while he did a great deal to promote
inquiry into, and reform of, the corruptions of the dockyards.
Some years had to pass before the new spirit, hampered as
it necessarily was by inherited evils, could produce much
effect. A glance at the operations of 1744 will show from
what a low level of energy the naval administration had to be
raised. Though the retreat of M. de Roquefeuil before Sir
John Norris and the February gales had shown the weakness
of our enemy, we yet called upon the Dutch to send the
twenty ships they were bound to supply by treaty. These
vessels were duly sent. Nothing effectual was done with
the large force now collected. In April and May Sir Charles
Hardy with the Grand Fleet escorted the Mediterranean trade
as far south as Lisbon. The French, after the failure of
Roquefeuil’s cruise, had reverted to the plundering warfare of
the former war. Fourteen vessels were sent out in twos and
threes with orders to join at sea and attack our commerce,
under the command of M. de Rochambeau. Admiral Hardy
protected the trade against his attacks till it was safe in the
Portuguese ports, and then returned home. The return
voyage was marked by an incident which gives no high
opinion either of the discipline of the fleet or of its intelligence.
On the 8th May a sail was seen to the northward, and
Captain Watson of the Northumberland, 74, was ordered to
chase, but not to lose sight of the fleet. He did lose sight.
A mist came on, but a gun was heard by the officers on deck,
Captain Watson himself being in his cabin, and was understood
to be a signal of recall. The captain came up, but
continued to hold on, although a second signal was reported
by the midshipman on the forecastle. In the afternoon the
mist lifted, and the Northumberland was found to be close to
two large French warships, the Content, 60, and the Mars, 68,
which had a frigate, the Venus, 26, with them. At this time
the Northumberland was not cleared for action, nor indeed
was she ever in proper order throughout the fight. The master,
James Dixon, implored the captain to get his ship into better
condition, but no notice was taken. A midshipman named
Best swore at the court martial that he heard the master say
to the chaplain that it was sad Captain Watson should take
the ship into action in the condition he was in. When asked
what he understood by this, he answered that he supposed the
master to mean that captain “was in liquor.” The evidence
was not tested, though both the master and chaplain were
present. Captain Watson’s actions were certainly not those
of a sober man. He bore down on the two Frenchmen,
passing the Content, which was nearest and engaging the Mars,
whereby he enabled both to fall on him at once. The
Northumberland was cut to pieces. Captain Watson received
first one wound and then a second. He staggered to the
accommodation ladder, and stood holding to the railing and
bleeding to death. The master, it was sworn, came on the
quarter-deck “with his hands in his breeches and his hat on,
seemingly in a surly mood.” He declared that there were
no men to fight the ship, and indeed the crew were running
from the guns, while all the marines on the poop who were
not shot had escaped below. In these conditions the flag
was hauled down. The master gave the command after
appealing to the captain to surrender, in order to save the men
from being killed “like cows.” The first lieutenant, Craven,
made a motion to hoist it up again, and even spoke of blowing
the ship up rather than surrender her to the enemy. But his
heroism did not go beyond words, and indeed the Northumberland
was in no condition to fight further. Yet he was
the superior officer, and, if he had wished to repeat the heroism
of Sir Richard Grenville, had all the necessary authority.
The court martial acquitted the lieutenant honourably, but
sentenced the master to imprisonment for life in the Marshalsea.
It would have sentenced him to death, but took the
more merciful course in consideration of the good advice he
gave the captain, which, if it had been followed, would have
prevented the loss of the ship.
Here, by way of illustration, may be taken the case of
another vessel, lost in the following year. This was the
Anglesea, 40, commanded by Captain Elton. She was
cruising on the south coast of Ireland, and fell in, off the Old
Head of Kinsale, with the Apollo, a French privateer of 56
guns. Captain Elton rushed into action with all the folly of
Captain Watson. His decks were not cleared, nor his men
properly at quarters. The gunner could not as much as get
the key of the powder magazine till the last moment. So ill
did Captain Elton handle his ship that he allowed the Frenchman,
who was to windward, to cross his stern, rake him, and
range up on the lee side. As the Anglesea was one of the
crank ships then common in our navy, she heeled over so
much that the water ran in at her ports. Thus she lay, with
her upper deck exposed to the small-arm fire of the Frenchman,
her hull and rigging at the mercy of a heavier broadside
than her own. In twenty minutes she was a beaten ship.
Captain Elton fell, shot through the body. Two of his men
took him down to the surgeon, but on reaching the main-deck
from the quarter-deck found he was dead, and so left him.
The ship was surrendered by Lieutenant Baker Philipps.
The court martial found that the chief cause of the loss
of the vessel was the negligent and unofficerlike conduct of
Captain Elton. Yet it sentenced Philipps to be shot, though
with a recommendation to mercy in which all joined except
the President. Baker Philipps was shot. Admiral Vernon
afterwards quoted this as a proof that naval courts martial
did their duty. The shocking contrast between the cruel
severity shown to this young officer and the scandalously
light sentences passed on greater offenders, had probably not
a little to do with making Parliament see that the naval
court martial had to be taken in hand.
Sir Charles Hardy’s own work was half done. He
returned home, leaving M. de Rochambeau at sea. The
Frenchman blockaded the merchant ships in Lisbon. Among
them were vessels on their way out with stores for the
garrisons and ships in the Mediterranean. The necessity for
action was pressing, and a fleet was sent out. It is a proof of
the little confidence felt in the senior officers of the day that
the work was entrusted to Sir John Balchen, a veteran of the
wars of King William and Queen Anne, who had fought some
forty years before as captain against Duguay-Trouin with
more courage than success, and had lately been appointed
Governor of Greenwich Hospital as a reward for long service.
In spite of his great age (he was seventy-five), and his claim
to exemption, Balchen left his well-earned rest, and took
command of the fleet. He drove off Rochambeau, saw the
trade safe to Gibraltar, and returned home in September. On
the 4th October the fleet was scattered by a great storm at
the entry to the Channel. Balchen’s flagship, the Victory,
disappeared during the night of the 4th-5th October with her
crew of a thousand men. She was considered an ill-built vessel
and may have capsized, but Guernsey tradition asserted that the
sound of minute guns was heard from the Casketts through
the gale, and it was guessed that the Victory had been driven
on the rocks. In one way or the other the sea took its own.
During 1745 the fleets cruised unopposed. In the
Mediterranean Admiral Rowley, who had succeeded Mathews,
blockaded the Spaniards at Carthagena. He was so superior
that he was able to send ships to harass the French trade as
far off as the West Indies, to watch Cadiz, and to act against
those Italian states in alliance with France. In America a
squadron sent from the Leeward islands under Commodore
Warren, covered the expedition from New England, a partly
patriotic and partly commercial speculation of the colonists,
which took Louisbourg in Cape Breton from the French in
April, May, and June. Our enemies were so incapable and so
unenterprising that our fleet had little to do. During the
latter part of the year the interest of the country was mainly
turned on the Jacobite rising. The share of the navy in this
passage of our history was naturally important, since it had to
prevent the French from sending help to the Jacobites. But
no serious move was made by the French fleet, and no
opportunity for service other than patrolling the coast, and
capturing single ships which endeavoured to slip in with
money and stores for the Prince, presented itself. The navy
did indeed contribute materially to make the rising less serious
than it might have been. Prince Charles had sailed from
Nantes with two vessels, the Doutelle, a small craft in which
he himself sailed, and the Elizabeth, a 64-gun ship employed
to carry the bulk of his arms. When on the 47th parallel
and thirty-nine leagues west of the Lizard, they were met by
the Lion, 58, commanded by Piercy Brett. He had been one
of Anson’s lieutenants, and had been appointed by him captain
of the Centurion at Canton. As the commodore was not
authorised to have a captain under him the Admiralty refused
to confirm the commission. Anson, in great anger, had refused
to accept promotion to the rank of the rear-admiral. The
ministerial change of December 1744 had brought him back,
and Brett, who had been made captain in the interval, was
allowed to date his seniority from his appointment at Canton.
He now attacked the Elizabeth, and the two fought one of the
fiercest of recorded single ship actions. They were so well
matched that they beat one another to a standstill, but the
substantial fruits of victory remained with the Lion, for the
Elizabeth was compelled to put back. The Doutelle went
on and reached Scotland.
In 1746 the success of the Colonial expedition against
Louisbourg, encouraged the Government to fit out an imitation
of it to attack Quebec. Lestock, who retained a very ill-deserved
reputation for capacity, was appointed to command
the ships, and Lieutenant-General St. Clair, the troops,
consisting of some engineers and artillery with six regiments
of foot. The preparations were delayed till the season was
passed for a voyage across the Atlantic. It was therefore
sent to the French coast on raiding expedition. Nothing
need be recorded of it save that it did not sail till the 14th
of September, that troops were landed cleverly enough to the
west of Port Louis on the southern coast of Brittany, and
then re-embarked when it was found that they had no means
of taking the town of L’Orient, which lies a little behind Port
Louis and further up the river Blavet. L’Orient was the
dockyard of the French East India Company, and its destruction
was much desired by us. After failing at L’Orient, the
expedition went on to Quiberon Bay, where it again landed
soldiers, and again found that there was nothing to be done.
Finally the transports carried the soldiers to Ireland, and
Lestock returned to Portsmouth.
In the following year, 1747, the new spirit at the Admiralty
began to tell. The fleet was employed with vigour on well-selected
services, and was rewarded with proportionate success.
It was no longer used to convey insufficient military expeditions
to besiege towns they had not the means of taking,
or to invade countries they were not numerous enough to
occupy. The French Government was stung by the fall of
Louisbourg, and by the news from India, into making efforts
to use its fleet to better purpose, and the increase of activity
on both sides gave an energy to the naval war it had not as
yet possessed. In spring it was known that two squadrons
were to sail from France together and were to divide at sea—one,
commanded by M. de la Jonquière, was then to steer for
America, and the other, of which M. St. George was the chief,
was to sail for India. They were composed of eight king’s
ships, and of six of the vessels of the French East India
Company. Transports and merchant vessels were to go under
their protection. A squadron of sixteen ships of from 40 to
90 guns were formed to intercept them, and Anson took the
command while still retaining his seat on the Board. It is
characteristic of the prevailing jobbery of the time that this
force was not got together without the necessity of defeating
an intrigue. Two of the vessels selected to serve under Anson
were the Defiance, 60, Captain Grenville, and the Bristol, 50,
of which William Montagu, commonly called Mad Montagu, a
brother of Lord Sandwich, was captain. Neither of these
officers was wanting in spirit. Grenville was killed in the
action of the 3rd May, fighting most gallantly, and whatever
could have been said against the sense of Mad Montagu, a
noisy violent man of much deliberate eccentricity whose rôle
it was to play the rattlepated Jack Tar, his courage was above
dispute. But both would have preferred to cruise alone, and
pick up prizes. Grenville belonged to the famous “cousinhood”
of the name, and his cousin George Grenville, who was on the
Board, attempted a little manœuvre on his behalf. An order
to Anson not to keep the Defiance and Bristol with him for
more than seven days was put into a letter which the Duke of
Bedford was expected to sign without looking at it. The
Duke did detect the trick, and refused to sign, declaring
that “they should deserve to be hanged for it if it was
done.”
Anson sailed for his station off Finisterre on the 9th April,
sent his look-out sloops to watch Rochefort, and stretched
his fleet out in a line abreast, each ship a mile from the other,
in order to diminish the risk that the enemy would pass
undiscovered. In the early morning of the 3rd May the Falcon
sloop brought the news that she had seen the French the day
before steering for the west. Anson called in all cruisers,
collected his ships, and steered to cross the presumed route of
the enemy. Between nine and ten the French squadron was
seen to the S.W. It was at first not possible to estimate its
strength, for warships and transports were all sailing together,
and the one could not be distinguished from the other.
Anson therefore kept his fleet in a body lest he should meet
an equal enemy whom it would be rash to attack in disorder.
As the space between the two fleets was reduced, it was seen
that the French had divided. Nine vessels were formed in a
line to meet our attack, while the others were making off to
leeward. La Jonquière and St. George had, in fact, no more
than that number of vessels fit to meet line-of-battle ships.
When the inferiority of the enemy’s force was seen, Anson
ordered a general chase. The English captains went into
action at their best speed, attacking the enemy on both sides.
The French fought brilliantly, but the superiority of force
against them was so overwhelming that they could do no more
than sacrifice themselves bravely in order to give their charge
time to escape, which many of the merchant ships did succeed
in doing. Six of the French king’s ships and four of the
Company’s were taken. Yet the French sold their defeat dear.
Five hundred and twenty men were killed and wounded in
our ships. The loss of the enemy was about seven hundred.
It was about four o’clock in the afternoon when the first of the
English ships—Anson’s old ship the Centurion, now commanded
by his former lieutenant, Denis—came up with the
rear of the French ships as they were edging away to leeward,
and hoping to delay our attack by showing a firm front till
the night should come. The action was over at seven.
Anson was made a peer for the victory, which filled the
country with well-grounded delight. Our superiority in
numbers and weight of ships was great, and as a battle the
action of the 3rd May was not glorious, but here was a success
won by foresight, good management, and activity against a
gallant enemy. It was the first time that so much could be
said since the war began in 1739, and it was the promise of
greater things to come.
On the 21st-22nd June, some six weeks after Anson had
ruined the French expeditions to America and India, Captain
Thomas Fox, who was cruising with a small squadron on the
47th degree of North Latitude, met and scattered the valuable
convoy coming home from San Domingo. Forty-eight prizes
were taken by our ships, and the injury inflicted went beyond
the material loss, for the disaster showed how little able the
French were to protect their sea-borne commerce against
the British Navy. They were too weak to keep the road
open, in face of energetic direction given to our forces by the
new Admiralty. Before the close of the year a third blow
drove the lesson well home, and did a great deal to bring
France to recognise the necessity for making peace. The
outward bound trading ships to the French West Indies were
collected at Rochelle. A strong squadron of eight line-of-battle
ships of the French Royal Navy, and of one 64-gun
ship belonging to the Indian Company, was told off to protect
them. The Chef d’escadre, or Rear-Admiral, Desherbiers de
l’Etanduère, was in command, with his flag flying in the
Tonnant, 80, a noble vessel. Indeed l’Etanduère’s squadron
was a stronger one than La Jonquière’s, and the vessels composing
it were superior in build and strength to our ships of
the same nominal force. A powerful squadron was prepared
to intercept this convoy. What was wanted in quality of
ships we made up in number, and fourteen vessels were sent
to overpower the French nine. The command was given to
Rear-Admiral Edward Hawke, the captain of the Berwick,
whose gallantry had stood out brilliantly against a background
of blundering and pusillanimity in the battle of Toulon five
years before.
Being fixed by the necessity they were under of reaching
the West Indies soon after the end of the hurricane season in
October, the enemy’s time of sailing could be calculated.
Hawke left England on the 9th August for his cruising
ground, the latitude of from 46° to 48° N. The enemy was
sighted on the 14th October. The ensuing action was an
almost exact reproduction of Anson’s engagement with La
Jonquière. Hawke has had an affectionate biographer in our
time, and the glory he won twelve years after this meeting
with the convoy reflects back on all his life. Therefore he
has naturally been credited with displaying great originality,
but the truth is that he followed the pattern given him
by Anson six months before, down to the details. The
English ships approached in order, till they were near enough
to estimate the enemy’s inferior numbers. Then they went
ahead in general chase, attacking on both sides, and crushing
their opponent by weight of numbers. As l’Etanduère’s
squadron was stronger than La Jonquière’s, it made a harder
fight. The French flagship, the Tonnant, proved too much
for any of our vessels, and in company with the Intrépide,
commanded by the Count of Vaudreuil, broke her way through
and escaped. Captain Philip Saumarez in the Nottingham, 60,
who pursued the two for a time, was killed. But six of the
eight French were taken. They did not surrender till they
were thoroughly wrecked. As his own vessels were severely
cut up, Hawke made his way home and reached port on the
31st October. Meanwhile the French merchant ships, protected
by the Content and a frigate, had continued their voyage
and had escaped for the time being. Hawke, however, took
the precaution to send a sloop to the West Indies with the
news, and many of the French vessels were captured by our
cruisers when nearing their destination.
It will be observed that on both these occasions the French
officers secured the escape of the vessels put under their protection.
The substantial victory may therefore, in a sense, be
said to have been theirs, since they did what they were sent
out to do. The question then arises whether Anson and
Hawke could not have done better, since they were sent out
to interrupt the enemy’s commerce, and since they had a
superiority of nearly two to one in fighting ships. They
might have detached four sail to pursue the trading vessels,
and still have left themselves a superiority over the French
squadron of twelve to nine on the 3rd May, and of ten to
eight on the 9th October. Yet the policy of making the
destruction of the fighting force of our enemy as near as
might be a certainty was the sound one, since, if his fleet was
once driven off the sea, his convoys could not sail at all.
Moreover, it is to be remembered that in 1747 the general bad
quality of our ships might well lead our admirals to think
that they could not afford to dispense with any superiority of
numbers over the French.
With Hawke’s victory the naval war in Europe came to
an end. In the East Indies, however, it continued. One of
the few relieving features in the dulness of this war—or these
wars, the Spanish and the French—is the extension of the
activity of our fleet into the remote east. Hitherto when the
Royal Navy had gone to the Indian Seas it had been on
particular missions, but from 1744 it acted there continuously,
and in squadrons, for so long as the countries were at war in
Europe. Not that anything the navy did there was very
flattering to our pride. Rather the contrary, indeed, since the
dispensation by which it was arranged that while we were bad,
our enemy should be even worse, was nowhere more conspicuously
to our advantage. Yet it marks one step in the
growth of the navy that it is found taking over its duties on
the other side of the world.
In 1744 a squadron of 4 ships, two of 60, one of 50, and
one of 20 guns, was sent to the Eastern Seas under Commodore
Curtis Barnett. Here at once there is occasion to note
how well we were served by the folly of our opponent. A
man was then at Paris who was admirably qualified to defeat
any enterprise we might undertake against the French posts
in India. This was Bertrand Mahé de la Bourdonnais,
governor of the French islands of Bourbon and Mauritius.
He had not been trained as a king’s officer, though the rank
of Capitaine de Frégate was conferred upon him. He was a
native of St. Malo, a merchant skipper and trader. But he
had acquired all the knowledge needed to make a skilful naval
commander, and had shown great faculty in his government.
La Bourdonnais was convinced that England would attack the
French settlements in the East, and he laid a scheme before
the king’s ministers for forestalling us. His plan was accepted,
and he was promised a squadron of five vessels. But
La Bourdonnais, most happily for us, had excited the hostility
of the French East Company by his self-assertive character,
and his exposures of its corruptions, and his talent for scornful
retort. The company opposed his scheme, and had influence
enough to get it laid aside. It persuaded itself and the king’s
ministers that it would be possible to maintain neutrality with
the English East India Company. Neither thought fit to
consider the probable action of the British Government, which
might very well decline to be guided by the company. Being
deprived of the force promised to him, La Bourdonnais was
driven back on his own resources, and on those he could draw
from the islands.
Commodore Barnett sailed from Spithead on the 5th May
1744, and after touching at Porto Praya in the Cape Verd
islands, went on to the Indian Ocean. After rounding the
Cape, he visited Madagascar, where fresh meat could always be
got from the natives, and then stood over to the coast of
Sumatra. He detached two of his vessels to take post in the
Straits of Malacca, between Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula,
and himself went through the Straits of Sunda, between Sumatra
and Java, and took up his station in the Banca Straits,
between Sumatra and Borneo. He was thus on the trade
route between China and the European possessions on the
coast of Coromandel. On the 25th January 1745 three French
China ships of great value sailed right into his hands. In
these far seas he did not trouble to look for an Admiralty
Court, but carried his prizes into Batavia, sold them to the
Dutch for £92,000, and divided the proceeds at the capstan
head. Then he came across to Madras.
The relations between the English and the French
Company did, to some extent, justify those who held that a
neutrality could be maintained if the traders only were considered.
The English Company was flourishing, and asked
nothing better than to be allowed to trade in peace. The
French Company was not so well off, and therefore was much
more lean, hungry, and disposed to adventure. But it was
not strong on land, and at sea had so far no force. A tacit
arrangement was made by which the French promised to
abstain from attacking us by land, so long as Barnett did
not assail them from the sea. The Company persuaded the
commodore to accept this arrangement, and 1745 passed in
insignificant movements. Barnett died in the spring of 1746
at Fort St. Davids.
The command now fell to the senior captain, Edward
Peyton, and its fortunes in his hands have caused the death
of Barnett to be esteemed a misfortune. The arrival of reinforcements
from home and arming of a prize taken from the
French had raised the number of the squadron to six, one of 60,
three of 50, one of 40, and one of 20 guns. It had, therefore,
a total of 270 guns, and all the vessels, with the exception
perhaps of the French prize, were built for war. The quality
of the squadron must be taken into account in estimating
what followed. While our ships were idly parading the Bay
of Bengal, La Bourdonnais was straining every nerve to fit
out a squadron at the Île de France, now Mauritius. In the
spring of 1746 he had scraped together, by all kinds of
devices and makeshifts, eight vessels, one of them being a man-of-war
mounting 70 guns, and the others converted merchant
ships of from 26 to 36 guns. The total was 292, and most
of the pieces were small. The vessels were indeed full of men,
but a large proportion of them were Lascars and Caffres. La
Bourdonnais sailed on the 29th March, and after nearly suffering
total shipwreck on Madagascar left it for the Coromandel
coast in May, and arrived there in June. On the 25th of
this month, before he had touched at any of the French settlements,
he met the English squadron at sea between Fort St.
Davids, at Cuddalore, and Negapatam, to the south of
Pondicherry, the chief French port. Knowing his inferiority
in artillery La Bourdonnais tried to come to close quarters
and overpower the English by the number of his men. Peyton
baffled this effort by keeping well to windward, and the encounter
resolved itself into a distant cannonade, by which one
of the French ships was crippled and very little harm was
done to us. That little was enough to deprive Peyton of all
desire to meet the French again. He held a council of war
next morning, and by its advice sailed away to Trincomalee,
leaving La Bourdonnais free to continue his voyage to
Pondicherry. The decision was without excuse, for if
Peyton had used his eyes at all during the cannonade of
the day before, he must have learnt that he had to deal with
ships of very inferior armament. But some of his own vessels
were in no good condition, and he could think of nothing but of
their defects, and of the excuse afforded him for a retreat.
La Bourdonnais anchored at Pondicherry on the 9th July,
and began at once to prepare for attacks on our settlements.
The history of his quarrels with Dupleix, the governor-general,
does not concern the naval operations, since they did not
prevent him for carrying out his attack on Madras. He was
at sea again on the 4th August to look for Peyton, and met
the English commander coming back from Ceylon. From
the 8th to the 11th August the two squadrons were in sight
of one another, but so convinced was Peyton of the inferiority
of his squadron that he not only avoided action but sailed
away to Bengal. La Bourdonnais now returned to Pondicherry,
picked up soldiers, and sailed for Madras on the 15th
August. The action of Peyton was again unpardonable, for
even if he felt too weak to engage the French at sea, he could
have contributed men and guns to the defence of Madras.
The help his mere presence on the coast would have afforded
is proved by the fact that when in the middle of the siege La
Bourdonnais received a false report of the appearance of large
English ships, he was preparing to re-embark his men. But
the French commander was not one of those who are to be
drawn off by mere rumours. He waited for confirmation, and
when it did not come, he pushed the siege, and the place
surrendered on the 29th September. This event and its
consequences, the breach of the capitulation made by La
Bourdonnais and the seizure of the town by Dupleix, were
the beginning of the great fight between the two companies.
At the change of the monsoon in October, which suspended
naval operations for sailing ships, La Bourdonnais returned
to his own government in the islands, and appeared no more
in those seas. He was compelled to return home, was accused
of corruption by his opponents of the company, and died ruined
and broken-hearted. Once more our best help came from our
enemy.
In the following year, 1747, Peyton was superseded by
Rear-Admiral Griffin, who is accused of treating his predecessor
with great brutality. It is very possible, for Griffin
was one of the bad officers who then infested our navy,
insolently tyrannical to his subordinates, and shy before the
enemy. His own conduct was no better than Peyton’s, for he
allowed M. de Bouvet, with a much inferior squadron from
Mauritius, to revictual the French garrison of Madras, and did
nothing against him either coming or going.
Now, however, the East Indies began to profit by the
revival of energy and intelligence at the Admiralty. A
squadron of ten ships, of which six were of the line, was sent
out at the end of 1747 under the command of Edward
Boscawen, one of the new race of officers who were being
brought forward by Anson and Bedford. Boscawen owed
much to family influence, for he was a brother of the
Viscount Falmouth, who once cowed a recalcitrant secretary
of state by significantly saying, “Remember, sir, we are
seven,” that being the number of pocket boroughs owned by
the Boscawen family. But the admiral was a man of
ability, who would have won promotion at any time when it
was to be won by merit. He sailed in November, but did not
reach Fort St. Davids, which since the loss of Madras had
become the Company’s chief station on the Coromandel
coast, till the 29th July 1748. The length of the voyage
was due partly to delay at the Cape to recruit the health of
the crews and partly to an unsuccessful attempt to land at
Mauritius. The force collected under Boscawen was the
greatest seen as yet in eastern waters, for it consisted of
ten English line-of-battle ships, and five smaller vessels,
together with armed vessels belonging to our own Company
and the Dutch. The French had nothing to oppose to this
armament on the sea, and as the admiral had brought 1500
soldiers with him, it would seem that it ought to have been
easy to sweep the French from the coast of Coromandel
altogether. But the military forces were of inferior quality,
consisting of independent companies raised for the service of
the Company, and had as yet no military spirit. The scientific
branches, and in particular the engineers who were of the
first importance for siege work, were very poor. The siege of
Pondicherry, undertaken in revenge for the capture of Madras,
was badly managed, and turned out a complete failure.
Boscawen, who directed the operations on shore, was no
general, and was badly served by his engineers. A bombardment
by the fleet took place on the 26th September, but it was
little better than a farce, for the shallow water made it
impossible for our ships to approach near enough for their
fire to be effective. At a later period in the fighting in the
Carnatic the Company’s soldiers found that they were being
fired at with the cannon balls then wasted on Pondicherry.
After lasting from the 8th August to the 30th September, after
not a few panics among the raw soldiers of the army and the
sailors landed to work the guns, the siege was raised with a
loss of 1065 Europeans.
Peace had now been made in Europe, and Madras was
restored in return for Louisbourg. The war indeed was only
beginning between the Companies, but henceforward it was
carried on ashore, and in the name of the native princes.
Boscawen returned in the following year.
CHAPTER V THE SEVEN YEARS’ WAR TILL 1758
Authorities.—See Chapter IV.; Mr. J. Corbett, Seven Years’ War; Barrow,
Anson and Howe.
It may appear that I have given undue prominence to the
corruption and bad spirit of the navy in these years.
But the insistence has been deliberate, for the great work
which had to be done from 1744 onwards, for a generation,
was to raise the standard of conduct expected from officers,
not only by public opinion working from without, but by
their own code of honour working within the ranks of the
service. This would only be effected by bringing forward
new men. If rules and regulations could have saved the
navy from discredit and mismanagement, it had all it needed
in the code of the Duke of York. The evil lay not in the laws
but the men. Till they were better there was no real hope
of reform. That one was wanted was beyond all question.
In 1749 Sandwich, now First Lord, acting perhaps at the
instigation, and certainly with the hearty approval, of Anson,
made an Admiralty visitation of the dockyards. It was the
first ever held by the Lords of the Admiralty or even by the
administrative officers of the Navy Board. According to
Sir John Barrow, who condensed the report in his life of
Anson, they, i.e. the Lords of the Admiralty, “found the
men generally idle, the officers ignorant, the stores ill-arranged,
abuses of all kinds overlooked, the timber ill-assorted, that
which was longest in store being undermost, the Standing
Orders neglected, the ships in ordinary in a very dirty and
bad condition, filled with women and children, and that the
officers of the yard had not visited them, which it was their
duty to do; that men were found borne and paid as officers
who had never done duty as such, for which their Lordships
reprimanded the Navy Board through the comptroller; that
the store-keepers’ accounts were many years in arrear, and,
what was most extraordinary, that the Navy Board had never
required them;—in short, gross negligence, irregularities, waste,
and embezzlement were so palpable, that their Lordships
ordered an advertisement to be set in the various parts of the
yards, offering encouragement and protection to such as
should discover any misdemeanours, committed either by the
officers or workmen, particularly in employing workmen or
labourers, on their private affairs, or in any other abuse
whatever.”
The abuses noted, and for a time amended by the
Commission of James I. and by James II., had sprung up
again to their old height under the favour of negligence and
self-seeking at headquarters. It was idle to hope to deal
with these evils by sporadic visitations and encouragement
to the common informer. What was wanted was constant
watching, and it was long before this was supplied. Lord
Sandwich’s visitation was not repeated, and it was not till
1770 that Sir Edward Hawke ordered one to be held every
two years. Even this measure proved of little effect, and
the first years of the nineteenth century were reached before
the old element of slovenly corruption had become intolerable
and Lord St. Vincent was able to begin a thorough reform.
The preliminary to cleaning out the dockyards was
the bringing of the navy’s combatant branches up to the
due level. It was a matter of life and death for England
that this should be done. The great weakness of France
at sea and the decadence of Spain, allowed us to escape
disaster in the War of the Austrian Succession. The same conditions
were repeated in the war which began in 1755. But
if we had met the great American War in 1778 with the
navy in the condition in which it was in 1739, and then
had been called upon to face the revived naval power of
France, the somewhat improved navy of Spain and the
Dutch, irreparable disaster must have followed. We could
not have endured that strain with Mathews, Lestock, Vernon,
Knowles, Griffin, Peyton, Cornelius Mitchell, Watson, and Elton.
In 1746 the Government took steps to regulate promotion
to flag rank. It had hitherto been the custom to select
the officers for the higher commands from any place in the
list of captains, though they were naturally taken from
towards the top. The captains passed over were left in the
same rank and on their scanty half pay of ten or eight shillings
a day. Though the state was undoubtedly entitled to take
competent men where it could find them, it was felt that this
practice of passing over old officers who might have to serve
under juniors, or were left in poverty, inflicted a hardship.
It also had the obvious drawback that it left the list of
captains crowded with men who were beyond work. An
Order in Council, issued on the 3rd June 1747, decided that
when old officers in the rank of captain were passed over by
the promotion of the younger men to flag rank, they were to
“be appointed by commissions from the Lords Commissioners
of the Admiralty to be rear-admirals in general terms.” The
effect of the order was this. The active list of admirals consisted
of those who belonged to one of the squadrons—Red,
White, or Blue. When then a captain was meant to serve at
sea he was promoted Rear-Admiral of the Blue. The captains
senior to him were named merely rear-admirals. This gave
them no right to command. They were superannuated with a
rear-admiral’s pension, in order that they might “retire with
honour and have a competent subsistence in their old age.”
It was the introduction of the modern system of allowing
men to retire with a rank above that which they hold when
their active service ends. The benefits of the order were
limited to old officers who had served at sea since the
beginning of the war with Spain in 1739, but the hardship
inflicted on those not so qualified was confined to one
generation. In future the old officer who was passed over
because of his “great age and other infirmities” knew that
he would “retire with honour.” The disadvantage of the
system was that when the state wished to reach some capable
officer well down on the list it had to make a great addition
to what is now called the non-effective vote, that is to the
pensioned men who are doing no work. But the advantages
of putting a stop to an old grievance, of giving security and
content to the officers, and of enabling the Admiralty to bring
on younger men, were cheaply bought at this price.
Another piece of work taken in hand was the improvement
of the quality of the ships. The inferiority of our vessels was
seen so soon as they came to be compared with the Spanish
and French. Inquiry showed that though schemes had been
drawn up in 1706 and 1719, and attempts had been made to
improve the ships later, they had all been habitually neglected.
Our vessels had been built, not only on bad principles, but
not on any regular scale, so that vessels of the same rate
were of different sizes, and the fittings of one could not be
used for another. Here as elsewhere there was waste. A
new scheme was made in 1746 and modified in 1751 without
bringing complete amendment.
The scandals of the navy had also shown the necessity
for a revision of the laws regulating the discipline of the
service. Hitherto the Navy Discipline Act had been that
passed in the thirteenth year of Charles II. (1661). It
conferred the right of holding courts martial, but under
inconvenient limitations. The jurisdiction of the court was
confined to offences committed on the high seas, and in
the main rivers of His Majesty’s possessions below
bridges. There was thus no power to punish offences committed
ashore or in foreign countries. This was conferred
in 1720, and some further amendments were made in 1745
and 1748. The worst defects of the old system remained
and they were serious. The power to hold a court martial
was given only to the commander-in-chief, that is the admiral
or captain acting as commodore, with a separate command.
If he died, or was compelled to come home by bad health,
another commission had to be sent out to his successor.
When Vernon came home from the West Indies, his successor,
Sir Chaloner Ogle, was left for a whole year without power
to hold a court martial, as the first vessel sent out with his
commission was captured. Neither could the power be
delegated by the commander-in-chief to any officer whom he
detached. It was alleged in the course of the debates in
Parliament in 1749 that, during the late war, a captain serving
on the coast of Portugal had put his first lieutenant in irons.
He went into Lisbon where there were several other warships,
and the imprisoned officer applied for a court martial, but
as the commander-in-chief was not present none could be held.
The vessel left for England with the first lieutenant still in
irons. On her way a French man-of-war was met. The
captain then gave such visible proofs of derangement of mind,
that the other officers shut him in his cabin and released the
first lieutenant who took command of the ship. When she
reached home an inquiry was made, and it was found that the
captain was insane.
In another respect there was room for amendment. The
commander-in-chief was himself president of the court, which
consisted of all the post-captains in sight when the court-martial
flag was hoisted. The want of a limitation in the
number made the tribunal often of a most unwieldy size. It
was also obviously in the power of a commander-in-chief to
pack a court, by sending away all the captains whom he could
not trust to acquit or condemn “by order.” As he was the
only authorised president he was there to give the order
himself. When it is remembered that every admiral had then,
and afterwards, a number of “followers,” officers who had
served under him, and whom he always made interest to have
with him, and who for their part looked to him to push their
fortunes, when too we remember the brutal temper of such
men as Mathews, Lestock, and Griffin, it will be seen that
this was no imaginary danger, indeed bitter complaints were
made of the partiality of the courts martial.
The new act of 1749—the 22nd George II.—corrected
these defects. It provided that the right to hold courts
martial should go with the command, thereby removing the
risk of such a break as occurred in the case of Vernon and
Ogle, and that it could be delegated to officers commanding
detachments. Further, it took away the right to act as
president from the commander-in-chief and gave it to the
second in command. It limited the number of officers
sitting in the court to not less than five, or more than
thirteen. It also limited the court’s power of inflicting imprisonment
for any offence to two years, and for contempt to
a month. The cases of the master of the Northumberland
and of Lieutenant Frye of the Marines had no doubt their
share in bringing about this change.
The most famous of the alterations made in 1749 was that
inserted in the 12th and 13th articles of the Articles of War
which were incorporated in the Act. The 12th article provides
the punishment to be inflicted “on Every Person in
the Fleet who through Cowardice, Negligence, or Disaffection,
shall in Time of Action withdraw or hold back, or not come
into the fight or Engagement, or shall not do his utmost to
take or destroy every ship which it shall be his Duty to
engage, and to assist and relieve all and every of his Majesty’s
Ships or those of his Allies which it shall be his duty to
assist and relieve.” The 13th Article deals with him who hangs
back in chase or does not “relieve or assist a known Friend
in View to the utmost of his Power.” Originally the court
had a discretion, but by the terms of the new Act the only
punishment a court martial could inflict was death. At a
later period the severity of this penalty was considered
excessive, and in 1779 the power to inflict a lesser penalty
was restored to the court martial, but in 1749 Parliament
had just heard from the mouth of Vernon that the savage
punishment of poor young Baker Philipps was just, and it
knew how austere the court had been with humble James
Dixon, the master of the Northumberland. It also knew
what bowels of compassion had been found for the captains
of Toulon and for Lestock and Mitchell. If Parliament was
resolved that what was law for obscure and friendless men
should also be law for the chiefs of the navy, it may have
been stern but it was not unjust. The Bill was introduced
by ministers who had the advice of Anson, and we may fairly
conclude that he did not disapprove of the change.
From 1748 to 1756 the country remained at peace, but
it was of the kind compatible with continuous “military
operations.” Both in the East Indies and on the continent
of North America and among the islands of the West Indies,
the British Government of that time had to deal with a more
violent version of what we have seen happen in our day in
the valleys of the Nile and the Congo. The main outlines
of the struggle were given at the beginning of the last chapter.
On the frontier of Nova Scotia the two states were in peculiar
contact of irritation. The frontier had never been clearly
marked, and the French strove to delimit it in their own
favour by a characteristic mixture of pertinacious diplomatic
pettifogging and violence. In the East the intrigues of
Dupleix with the native princes of the Carnatic aimed at
ruining the commerce of the English company by cutting
off the establishments on the coast of Coromandel from
access to the interior. On the continent of America the
seventy thousand or so French in Canada and Louisiana were
incessantly endeavouring, not only to recover the greater part
of Nova Scotia, but to bar the million and a half of English
settlers from access to the valleys of the Ohio and the
Mississippi. Resolute action on the part of the British
Government would probably have averted war, but the Duke
of Newcastle, who was the prevailing politician of the day,
was intent on Parliamentary management. The king too
was rendered nervous by fears for his hereditary dominions
in Hanover. From sheer want of vigorous direction on our
own part we drifted, through a succession of small conflicts,
into open though unavowed war in 1755, and into formally
declared war in 1756. The situation was that of 1739,
with differences. Then we had begun with the Spaniards, and
had only come into collision with the French later on. Spain,
in this case, did not intervene till the very close, and in an
hour of folly. Once again, too, France became entangled in a
great European land war, and was unable to devote her whole
attention to the sea. We engaged in the land war as allies of
Frederick of Prussia and in defence of Hanover, but our main
attention was devoted to the sea and to our colonies.
The first serious hostile movement made by the British
Government was directed towards the East. The India
Company had soon occasion to regret that it had parted so
easily with Boscawen’s squadron. In 1753 it was calling on
the Government for naval help, and in February 1755 a
squadron was despatched under the command of Rear-Admiral
Charles Watson. It was delayed at Kinsale by a storm, and
two vessels were seriously damaged. They were replaced,
and Watson reached Bombay in November with four sail of
the line, and two small vessels. He brought a reinforcement
of troops and Colonel Clive. His first piece of service was
not against the French. The Royal Navy was now beginning
to take permanent hold on the Eastern seas. No more
pressing duty awaited it than to put a stop to piracy. This
had always flourished on the western or Malabar coast of
India, and had never been effectually checked by the
Portuguese, the Dutch, or by ourselves. By far the most
formidable of these pirates belonged to a branch of the
Mahrattas, which had gained possession of the island of
Geriah, had become independent, and had transferred its
native practice of robbery from the land to the sea. These
pirate Mahrattas infested the coast in vessels called “grabs”
and “gallivats”—the first a species of magnified lighter
armed with guns, the second light rowing and sailing galleys.
Sporadic attacks had been made on them by the company,
and by occasional ships of the Royal Navy. Mathews had
served against them. But hitherto nothing effectual had been
done. In 1755 the presence of a well-appointed squadron
and of a disposable body of troops encouraged the company’s
agents at Bombay to make an effort to root out the pirates
of Geriah. On the 7th of February 1756 Watson sailed from
Bombay, carrying the soldiers under command of Clive with
him, and in co-operation with a body of Mahratta troops
supplied by one of the princes of that nation, who wished to
reduce Angria, the chief of the pirate state, to obedience.
They proved to be of little value, for they were chiefly
intent on plunder, and had secretly more sympathy with their
piratical kinsmen than with their allies. Angria showed
little spirit. The vigour of Admiral Watson who battered
down the fortifications of Geriah on the 12th February,
and the firmness of Clive who took possession of the place,
disappointed the Mahrattas. Our squadron and the troops
divided £150,000 of prize money.
On the 30th April Watson and Clive went on from the
coast of Malabar to that of Coromandel on the east. By the
20th June they reached Madras. The French Government,
not being as yet ready for war, had recalled Dupleix and had
brought a pause in the conflict of the companies. Watson’s
next service was to carry Clive to Bengal to revenge the
Black Hole of Calcutta, and to begin the conquest of India.
But as this service became rapidly connected with the war
against France, and as the operations in the eastern seas lay
very much apart, I shall turn from them till they can be taken
up again, and connected with the general movements of the
world-wide conflict.
While Admiral Watson’s squadron was recruiting from its
long voyage at Bombay, warlike operations, the forerunners of
open war, were beginning on the Atlantic. The appeals of
the colonists who found themselves unable to expel the French
from the post they had established on the Ohio—Fort Duquesne
on the site of what is now Pittsburg—had at last induced the
British Government to take action. In December 1754 Commodore
Keppel, a gentleman of the Albemarle family, who had
sailed as midshipman with Anson and was destined to play a
prominent part in coming years, left the Downs with a body
of troops under command of Braddock. The expedition
reached Hampton Roads by the 20th February 1755. Its
disastrous end, in an ill-planned and worse-directed attack on
Fort Duquesne in July of this year, is a well-known episode of
our colonial history. The sending of Braddock stimulated the
French Government to reinforce its garrisons in Canada. On
the 3rd May of 1755 the Lieutenant-General Count de
Macnémara sailed from Brest with nine sail of the line
fully armed and seven frigates. He had under his protection
eleven sail of the line fitted as transports and full of troops.
These vessels were armed with 24 or 22 guns only, or
as the French expression has it, en flûte. To be armed
en flûte was to be armed like a flyboat with guns only on the
upper deck. Macnémara saw his charge well out into the
ocean, and then returned to Brest with six of the liners and
three of the frigates. The other warships and the transports
held on to Canada under the command of Dubois de Lamotte.
Meanwhile the news that the French were in motion
stirred the British Government to counter action. Boscawen
was ordered to sail for America with instructions to intercept
the French by force. He left on the 27th April, with eleven
sail of the line, and two small vessels. After he had gone the
cabinet received further reports which gave them an exaggerated
idea of the French strength. Admiral Holburne was
ordered to follow Boscawen with six sail of the line, and a
frigate. He left on the 11th May, and joined his chief on the
banks of Newfoundland on the 20th June. But Boscawen
had already failed to stop the French. When Dubois de
Lamotte approached Newfoundland he divided his squadron
and convoy into two. One division was steered to enter St.
Lawrence by the Straits of Belleisle, on the north of Newfoundland.
The other took the commonly used route to the
south between Cape Ray and Cape Breton. Boscawen had
stationed himself off Cape Ray. On the 9th June the French
were sighted, but the weather was foggy and covered them
soon from view. Next day the fog lifted for a space, and
three of the French ships were seen. They were the Alcide,
64, the Lys, armed en flûte with 22 guns, and the Dauphin
Royal, another of the man-of-war transports. The Alcide was
commanded by M. d’Hocquart who had already been twice
prisoner of war to Boscawen. In 1744, when he was captain
of the Medée, 26, he had been taken by the Dreadnought.
This was Boscawen’s first ship, and from it he got his name of
“Old Dreadnought” among the sailors. Again M. d’Hocquart
had struck to Boscawen in Anson’s battle of 3rd May 1747.
When the English officer commanded the Namur and he
himself the Diamant, M. d’Hocquart’s ill fortune pursued him.
The Alcide was overhauled, hailed by Howe in the Dunkirk,
60, and told to stop. The French captain asked whether it
was peace or war, and was told that he had better prepare
for war. D’Hocquart made all the defence he could, but the
Dunkirk was reinforced by Boscawen’s ship, the Torbay,
74, and he became a prisoner for the third time. The Lys
was taken by the Defiance, and the Fougueux. The
Dauphin Royal escaped in the fog. No other prizes were
taken, so that Dubois de Lamotte carried two fully armed
liners, three frigates, and ten transports with their men and
stores safe into the French American ports. Boscawen’s
expedition was therefore, in the main, a failure. The jail fever
was raging in his squadron. It had been manned, according
to old custom, in haste on the approach of war, by the press,
from the slums and the prisons. Boscawen took his ships to
Halifax in the hope of restoring the health of his crews, but
with the result that he infected the town. Meanwhile the
French commanders, finding the coast clear, sailed for home on
the 15th August and reached Brest on the 21st September.
Boscawen returned in the autumn, reaching England in
November.
While fighting had begun in America we were at home in
a state of war which was no war. The Duke of Newcastle
was driven by dread of unpopularity to appear to do something.
The country, thoroughly persuaded that the time had
come when it must make the decisive fight for its trade and
colonies, was burning for war. But continental complications,
and above all his own vacillating timid character, made Newcastle
shrink from vigorous action. There was indeed an
immense bustle of preparation. Ships were ordered into
commission by the score from the beginning of the year, and
the work of putting the fleet on a war footing was accompanied
by the inseparable offers of bounty and press-warrants.
On the 23rd January 1755 there came out one proclamation
offering a bounty of thirty shillings to every able seaman
between twenty and fifty years of age who would volunteer,
and twenty shillings to every ordinary seaman. On the 8th
February another followed recalling all seamen serving abroad,
and raising the bounties to £3 and £2, while the common
informer was stimulated by rewards of £2 to whomsoever
would tell where an able seaman was in hiding, and of
£1, 10s. to the betrayer of an ordinary. A hot press went on
in all the ports. The war was a merchants’ war, and the
traders of London and the outports offered bounties in
addition to those given by the state. By this combination of
persuasion and force the fleet was manned after a fashion.
Yet the mere fact that the competition for men sent up the
wages of merchant seamen by leaps and bounds made the
work of filling up the warships very difficult. It was necessary
to have recourse to the prisoners in the jails, who were allowed
to volunteer into the navy, or were sent there as punishment.
Parliament suspended the provisions of the Navigation Laws,
which limited the number of foreigners who could serve in a
British ship to one-fourth. It even tempted them to serve
under our flag by allowing them to obtain letters of naturalisation
at the end of two years, instead of the usual limit of
eight. By this act the Crown was empowered to suspend the
manning clauses of the Navigation Laws whenever war should
break out in future.
The dire need for men led to the adoption of two measures,
one of private enterprise, which did good work in its time, one
administrative of which we feel the benefit to this day. In
1756 was founded the Marine Society. This body was formed
to take charge of destitute boys, whom it fed, clothed, and
sent into the navy, where they were trained as seamen. The
spring of 1755 is a notable epoch in the history of the Royal
Navy, for it saw the foundation of the present corps of Marines.
The regiments raised hitherto had always been “disbanded”
or “broken” at the end of the wars. They had never held a
properly settled position, and there had been a constant
tendency to rob the force of its best men by rating them as
able seamen so soon as they had been long enough at sea to
learn the business. At the end of the War of the Austrian
Succession the Duke of Cumberland had recommended the
formation of a permanent military corps to be placed entirely
under the authority of the Admiralty. Nothing, however, was
done till the 3rd April 1755, when the Lords Justices, who
governed during the absence of the king in Hanover, issued
a warrant authorising the formation of fifty companies of one
hundred men each, which were to have their headquarters at
Chatham, Portsmouth, and Plymouth. The value of the
Marines (the title Royal was not granted till 1802) was
rapidly demonstrated, and their numbers were increased.
Thirty companies were added before the end of 1755.
Twenty more were ordered to be raised in July 1756, and
another thirty in March 1757. Two years later, on 3rd
March 1759, one lieutenant, one corporal, one drummer,
and twenty-three privates were added to every company.
By the end of the war the total strength of the force was
18,000.
All this stress of preparation was presided over by mere
infirmity of will. In July the Ministry, still guided by
Newcastle, sent Sir Edward Hawke to sea with twenty-one
sail of the line, but with no definite orders to begin hostilities.
He was told to intercept a French squadron from the West
Indies and to capture French merchant ships. The squadron
put into Cadiz, got warning which enabled it to avoid the
English fleet, and reached Brest safely. But 300 merchant
ships manned by 8000 men were taken, and carried into our
ports. This seizure of trading ships in a time of nominal
peace gave the French Government an opportunity to denounce
us to Europe as pirates. Many Englishmen thought it would
have been more for our honour to make war openly, since we
were about making it at all. Yet the French had little right to
complain after the example they had set in India and America.
The vessels were not condemned as prize, and as they were
largely loaded with fish their cargoes rotted, so that it was
necessary to tow them out to sea and sink them. Hawke
returned to port, ill pleased with the work he had been set to
do, and was replaced in the Channel command by Admiral
Byng. Then Byng was sent out to convince the country that
something was being done. He took a French line-of-battle
ship, the Esperance, but still war was not proclaimed. The
French Government professed a wish to keep the peace. Yet
at the end of 1755 and the beginning of 1756 it marched
troops down to the Channel. As the Duke of Newcastle had
succeeded for a time in infecting the nation with his own
cowardice, we were thrown into an unutterably shameful panic
by fear of invasion, though we had a powerful fleet in commission
at home, and the French had not the means of fitting
out a dozen ships at Brest. Under cover of this diversion the
French invaded Minorca in April. Then at last the Government
was brought to confess that war was war. Our
proclamation appeared on the 17th May, and was answered
by the French on the 9th of June.
The panic of the country in the early months of
1756 was to some extent justified. Yet its underlying
belief, that if it could only find a man to rule it had the
strength to assert its maritime and colonial supremacy, was
well founded. In point of mere material force the navy was
far superior to the French. At the beginning of 1756 we
had, including the 50-gun ships which were still counted as
fit to lie in a line of battle, 142 liners. The smaller vessels
were 125, taking frigates and sloops together. When the
bombs, fireships, and other craft such as hospital ships were
included, the total was 320. The quality of our vessels,
though still not all it ought to have been, had improved
greatly under the new establishment of 1745. The discipline
of the navy had bettered with the vessels. Some of the old
leaven still remained, and in one respect much was left to be
done. We had yet to learn how shameful it was that a fine
squadron should be paralysed by disease as Boscawen’s had
been. But we were on the right path. The intellect of the
navy was awake, and was beginning to apply itself to improving
its armament and its discipline. There was as yet
no revolt against the Fighting Orders.
Want of numbers was the least of the evils which weighed
on our enemy. In 1754 the navy of France included only
60 line-of-battle ships. Of these, 8 were in need of
thorough repair, and 4 were still in the stocks. During
the brief administration of M. de Rouille efforts were made to
reinforce this list. Fifteen new line-of-battle ships were
launched by 1756. We may suppose that they included the
vessels building in 1754. If the eight in need of repair were
thoroughly overhauled by the same date, this would give
France 71 line-of-battle ships. But the French did not
include the 50-gun ships, of which they had 10, in the list,
and they had therefore about 81 vessels to oppose to our 142.
Of ships of 20 to 44 guns they had only some 40 to oppose
to our 83. Their navy was therefore about one-half as
numerous as ours. It must be remembered that at this time
France still held Canada and important stations on the coast
of Coromandel. She was under the same obligations as ourselves
to scatter her forces all over the world, and that with
the prospect of being everywhere outnumbered. With such
a task to overcome, the French had need of the very highest
efficiency in every branch of the naval service. But their
navy had as much to seek in quality as in quantity. The
corrupt and careless government of Louis XV. had allowed
the storehouses to become nearly empty. During the years
of peace no attempt had been made to give the officers
practice. In 1756 it was calculated that of 914 officers 700
had nothing to do except mount guard for twenty-four hours
in the dockyards eight or ten times a year. The old feud
between the Pen and the Sword—that is, the civil and military
branches of the navy—raged furiously. On the ships there
was mutual hostility between the officers of the regular corps
and the supplementary officers taken in on the outbreak of
war, and known as officiers bleus. None of the corporations
of the old French monarchy was more aristocratic or more
jealous than the Corps de la marine. The so-called despotic
King of France had far less power of choosing his officers
than the constitutional King of Great Britain. M. de Rouille
endeavoured to revive the professional spirit of the officers,
dulled by years of dawdling about the dockyards, by establishing
the Académie de la marine, with the well-known writer on
tactics, Bigot de Morogue, as its first head. But it was years
before this could bear fruit, and France began the Seven Years’
War with all the conditions internal and external against her.
How came it, then, that her navy was not mewed up in port
at once? The answer is easy. Because the British Navy
had its arms tied behind its back by the incapacity of the
men who ruled, till Pitt freed it.
The first great operation of the war was conducted under
a fatal combination of administrative stupidity in London and
of the old leaven in the fleet. Reports that the French were
preparing a powerful squadron at Toulon began to reach
England before the end of 1755. The orders to prepare had
been given in August, but in the destitution of the French
dockyards eight months passed before it was ready. The
boasted classes failed to produce men, and the French
were driven to offers of bounty, and to attempts to recruit
Italian sailors at Genoa. It was long before the urgent
representations of our Consul at Genoa, and of General Blakeney
at Minorca, could make the Ministry see that the island was
in danger. Blakeney was a gallant old Anglo-Irishman born
in 1672, who had fought against the Rapparees in 1690, and
served under King William and Marlborough, had been at
Carthagena with Vernon, and had defended Stirling Castle
against the Jacobites in the ’45. He commanded the place,
though bedridden with gout, in the absence of Lord Tyrawley
the Governor, who according to the easy practice of the day
drew his salary at home. It was not less characteristic of
the time that many officers of this threatened garrison were
absent on leave when the French invaded the island.
Richelieu landed with 14,000 men at Ciudadela on
the 19th April. After many delays and much confusion,
the Ministry had at last been brought to see that Minorca was
in danger, and a squadron of ten ships had sailed to relieve it
on the 6th April. The command of the squadron was given
to an officer whose name has a tragic interest unique in the
long list of British admirals. John Byng was the fourth son
of that George Byng, Viscount Torrington, whose active
subordinate share in the Revolution of 1688, and command in
the Mediterranean in 1718, have been already mentioned.
The son was born in 1704, and had gone to sea at the age of
thirteen. He served under his father at the battle of Cape
Passaro, and became post-captain at the age of twenty-three.
He had gained no distinction, nor had he sought any, on those
remote unhealthy stations where the most arduous work of the
navy was being done. His portrait is that of a handsome,
refined, but plump and easy-going young man, and compares
ill with his father’s. George Byng has the lean, eager face of
one who though of gentle birth had to climb by his own efforts.
John Byng has the air of one whose father was born before
him, and who did not rise, but was carried up with no effort of
his own by the fortune another had made. He had sat in
Parliament, and had not escaped the corrupting influence of
the factious, selfish, jobbing spirit of the political world of
his generation.
Byng was selected to carry the reliefs to Minorca on the
11th March, but nearly a month passed before he sailed.
Though we had a great fleet commissioned and commissioning,
much difficulty was found in manning the ten ships assigned
him for the service. The Admiralty refused to draft men from
well-manned vessels on the ground that they were needed at
home. Some part of the blame for this must be put on
Anson and Boscawen, who were on the Board. The great
responsibility lay on the mere politicians and borough-mongers
whose folly was paralysing the strength of England, but it
must be confessed that Anson in dealing with political chiefs
and colleagues did not show the courage he had never failed
to display in fighting the storm or the broadsides of the
enemy. As Byng was to reinforce the garrison of Minorca,
he carried with him both the officers who were at home on
leave and Lord Robert Bertie’s regiment of foot. By a piece
of blundering, for which Anson cannot be held blameless, the
marines were landed to make room for the soldiers. If now
they were landed in Minorca, the squadron, already ill manned,
would have been dangerously weakened. As the French were
known to have a fleet at sea, Byng was thus put at a serious
disadvantage, and an angry sense of ill-treatment rankled in
his mind, not unnaturally, but fatally, for it had a share in
causing him to adopt a line of conduct which brought discredit
to his country and a shameful death to himself. It never
occurred to him that if he beat the enemy’s fleet soundly he
could safely land the soldiers who had taken the place of his
marines.
His orders were dated the 1st April. He was told to sail
to the Straits of Gibraltar. If on arriving there he heard that
the French had sent vessels into the Atlantic bound for
America, he was to detach part of his squadron under his
second in command, Rear-Admiral Temple West, to follow
them, and proceed with the remainder to Minorca. If he
found that the island was being attacked, he was to render
what help he could, and if not, then to blockade Toulon.
There is a certain futility in these orders, for they take no
notice of the contingency that even if Byng was able to beat
off the French warships, or found none to fight, the relief he
brought might not be sufficient to enable Blakeney to resist
the troops already landed under Richelieu. But he would do
much if he could cut the French off from Toulon, and however
feeble the measures of ministers may have been, it was
not the less his duty to do his utmost. Byng, unhappily for himself,
and for us, drew the strange deduction, that since he was
not supplied with the means of relieving the garrison altogether,
he was justified in making a feeble use of his ships. Orders
were also sent to General Fowke, who was in command at
Gibraltar, to spare a part of his garrison for Minorca if he felt
that he could part with them safely.
The voyage out to Gibraltar was tedious. It was not till
the 2nd May that Byng reached the Rock, where he was joined
by Commodore Edgcumbe with the Princess Louisa, 60,
and the Fortune sloop, part of a small squadron which had
been cruising in the neighbourhood of Minorca when it was
invaded. The Deptford, 50, and the Portland, 50, joined
shortly afterwards. At Gibraltar Byng also heard of the
landing of the French, of their strength, and of the distressed
position of the English garrison shut up in Fort St. Philip, at
the mouth of Mahon Harbour. On the 4th May he sent off a
dispatch which is of extreme importance as illustrating the
state of mind he was in, and as explaining his conduct. In it
he says:—
“If I had been so happy as to have arrived at Mahon
before the French had landed, I flatter myself I would have
been able to have prevented their setting foot on that island;
but, as it has so unfortunately turned out, I am firmly of
opinion, from the great force they have landed, and the
quantity of provisions, stores and ammunition of all kinds they
have brought with them, that the throwing men into the castle,
will only enable it to hold out a little longer time, and add to
the number that must fall into the enemy’s hands; for the
garrison in time will be obliged to surrender, unless a sufficient
number of men could be landed to dislodge the French or
raise the siege.”
After thus declaring that all efforts must be useless,
he promised to go on to Minorca to do what he could, and
in case it should turn out to be nothing, then he would
return to Gibraltar to cover that place. This letter, which was
sent home overland, gives the measure of the man. It may
be compared with the letter which Herbert had sent up to
London on first sighting Tourville’s fleet off the Isle of Wight
in 1690. Both men were plainly under the influence of a
mischievous delight on contemplating the embarrassment
which a national disaster would be likely to bring on the
ministers who had sent them out with insufficient fleets.
Herbert had the excuse that he was in the presence of a much
superior force. Byng makes no mention of inability to fight
the French fleet. He was prepared to retire without a battle
if he could not get security that the French troops would also
be driven off by the reinforcement he had brought, and this he
had already declared to be impossible. In the same letter he
speaks of the chance that the French would come on to
Gibraltar when they had got all the vessels ready they possibly
could. He neither contemplated the possibility of attempting
to beat them in detail before they were all ready, nor the
effect likely to be produced on Richelieu if his communications
with France were cut. Yet a strong fort open to relief from
the sea might have made a prolonged defence, and could have
given time for further reinforcements from England. When
they arrived, the total surrender of the French would be
inevitable. It was natural that when this letter reached
England the Ministry concluded that Byng did not mean to
exert himself to relieve Minorca, and that foreseeing a disaster,
they took measures to turn popular rage against the admiral.
They would have been more than human if they had not, and
Byng was a foolish man indeed if he did not know that they
were very basely human.
The squadron, now increased from ten to thirteen sail,
left Gibraltar on the 8th May. General Fowke, with a
weakness equal to Byng’s, declined to part with more than
250 men. There had been councils and confabulations of
weak men, all ending in agreement that the enterprise was
hopeless. So Byng reluctantly approached “the post of the
foe.” On the 19th he was in sight of Minorca at the south-easterly
point where St. Philip stands at the mouth of the
long land-locked harbour of Mahon. The French fleet was
not then in sight. The Phœnix frigate commanded by
Captain Hervey, with the Chesterfield and Dolphin, were
sent on ahead with the officers belonging to the garrison,
and orders to communicate with General Blakeney. Before
they could reach the harbour mouth the French fleet was
sighted to the south-east, and Byng recalled the frigates.
It was an unnecessary measure, due to excess of caution,
for the frigates were not indispensable to the fighting power
of the fleet, and the military officers they carried would
have been of great value to the garrison.
The rest of the day passed in manœuvres, and without
a battle. Byng’s squadron was outsailed, but he showed no
zeal to force on an action, and confined himself to endeavouring
to remain to windward. During the night the fleets
parted, and at daybreak were not in sight of one another.
They were from 30 to 40 miles off the island. It was
hazy, but cleared up about ten, when the enemy was seen
a long way off to the south-east. The wind was from the
south-west. By midday the two fleets were approaching
one another, both close hauled, the French on the port, the
English on the starboard tack, in two lines forming an
obtuse angle. About one we weathered the head of the
French line, and Byng afterwards boasted of having gained
the weather-gage. If he did it by fair sailing, his ships
cannot have been so inferior in quality to the enemy as he
pleaded they were when he had to excuse himself. As the
French habitually preferred to engage to leeward, which left
their line of retreat open, it is probable that he attributed
to his own skill what was the deliberate act of the enemy.
About two o’clock the English had passed to windward, and
to the south of La Galissonière, our last vessel being nearly
abreast of his first. We were thirteen of the line, and the
French twelve. Being now in the position to force on a
battle, Byng brought his fleet round, all ships turning
together, so that we headed in the same general direction
as the French, and ordered the Deptford to leave the line
so that we might be ship to ship with the enemy. It was
a strange action in an admiral who complained bitterly of
the inferiority of his fleet, but was doubtless due to mere
pedantry. Byng, who was a martinet in the fopperies of his
profession, had no idea of fighting a battle except by the
orthodox pattern, van to van, centre to centre, rear to rear,
and having one ship more than his opponent, did not know
what to do with her. Here are the two fleets in the order
in which they engaged:—
English
Defiance
60
Capt.
Andrews.
Portland
50
〃
Baird.
Lancaster
60
〃
Edgcumbe.
Buckingham (flagship of Admiral West)
68
〃
Everitt.
Captain
64
〃
Catford.
Intrepid
64
〃
Young.
Revenge
64
〃
Cornwall.
Princess Louisa
60
〃
Noel.
Trident
64
〃
Durell.
Ramillies (flagship of of Byng)
90
〃
Gardiner.
Culloden
74
〃
Ward.
Kingston
60
〃
Parry.
French
Lion
64
Capt.
de Saint-Aignan.
Triton
64
Capt.
de Mercier.
Redoutable (flagship of Commodore de Glandèvez)
74
Capt.
de Vilarzel.
Orphée
64
Capt.
de Raymondis.
Fier
50
Capt.
d’Herville.
Guerrier
74
Capt.
Villars de Labrosse.
Foudroyant (flagship of La Galissonière)
80
Capt.
Froger de l’Eguille.
Téméraire
74
Capt.
de Beaumont Lemaître.
Hippopotame
50
Capt.
Rochemore.
Content
64
Capt.
de Sabran Grammont.
Couronne (flagship of Commodore La Clue)
74
Capt.
Gabanous.
Sage
64
Capt.
Durevest.
When the order to engage was given, the fleets were not
parallel, but on lines converging to form an acute angle
ahead of them. Thus the leading English ship was nearer
the leading ship of the French than the rear was to their
rear. So if each bore down on the Frenchman opposite to
it at the time, the vessels in the van would come into action
first, and would be exposed to a converging fire, while it
would depend on the enemy’s decision to stay still and be
attacked, whether the centre and rear of the English fleet
ever got into action at all.
Admiral West came down on the Frenchmen briskly,
and then hauled up with the heads of his ships in the same
direction as theirs. Meanwhile the other English vessels
were steering to come into action while carefully preserving
their relative positions to the vessels in the van. In the
French line vessels here and there stood out, and ran to
leeward. Our men cheered, thinking they had forced the
enemy to flee, but the movement was the result of design.
As these vessels ran to leeward, those astern “let all draw”
and shot ahead. Thus a movement in advance was given
to the whole French line, and the distance which the English
ships of the centre and rear had to cover before reaching
their proper opponents was constantly increased. In any
case, the French admiral would almost certainly have succeeded
in filing past the leading English vessels, crippling
their rigging, and then running down to form a new line
to leeward. But he was helped by a piece of bungling in
our squadron. The Intrepid, the sixth ship, lost her foretop-mast.
As she was before the wind, this ought to have been
no great disaster, but she was so badly steered that she
came right round and lay across the path of the following
ship—the Revenge. According to all rule, tradition, and
honour, the Revenge ought to have passed between the
crippled Intrepid and the enemy—that is to leeward. But
she tried to pass to windward, could not do so, and then
backed her topsail to stop her way and prevent a collision.
The vessels behind did the same thing, and thus our fleet
broke in two. The five ships ahead of the Intrepid followed
the enemy with Admiral West, while the others remained
behind. It was about this time that the flag-captain,
Gardiner, pointed out to Byng that if he stood out of his
line he could bring the Frenchman then running past him
to closer action. The admiral answered that Mathews had
been broken for not taking his fleet down in a body, and
that he would not incur the same fate. Rather than offend
against the superstition of the line of battle, he would let
the enemy get off unhurt. La Galissonière did get off
with little damage, leaving us with three ships badly crippled
in their rigging, and the whole fleet in scandalous disorder.
So ended the battle of the 20th May. It was first and
foremost an example of what must happen so long as our
navy continued to be bound by the stupid pattern set up in
the Fighting Instructions for all actions against an enemy of
equal, or approximately equal, force—so long, in fact, as we
continued to engage to windward, ship to ship, leaving the
enemy his line of retreat open, and depriving ourselves of the
power to push the attack home, by making it a rule to adhere
to the formation in which we began the fight. In these
conditions decisive results were not to be achieved. But
Byng did ill even according to this stupid model. He ought
to have arranged his fleet parallel to the enemy before he bore
down, and he ought not to have begun firing, as he did, when
at such a distance that he could do no harm. Yet the lame
and impotent conclusion of the battle and his own bungling
might both have been forgiven, or even passed unnoticed, but for
what followed. The fleet was satisfied that it had made the
enemy run, and the nation would have been satisfied too, if
there had been any effort to help Fort St. Philip in the days
following the battle. There was none. For four days Byng
loitered near the scene of the action, repairing the vessels
crippled on the 20th. He said it was not easy to do, and
indeed, from first to last, showed a marked disinclination to
attempt anything that was not “easy.” Then a council of
war came to the conclusion, which is always so welcome to
weak men weakly led, that nothing more could be done. The
fleet returned to “cover” Gibraltar, leaving Minorca to its
fate. Before the complacent dispatch in which Byng
announced his decision could reach home, the news of the
failure had been given by La Galissonière’s boastful letter to
his own king. It was published in Paris, and sent on from
thence. In truth the French admiral was very nervous,
constantly expecting the reappearance of the English in
superior force, and was only kept from retiring to Toulon by
the incessant driving of Richelieu. The honour both of the
defence and of the attack in this campaign belongs wholly to
the soldiers. When the result of the meeting of the two fleets
was known, there burst out a storm of rage of which the echoes
can be heard to this day. It is not pleasant to hear a people
howling for the life of a man, whether he be the great and
terrible Strafford or poor, weak, self-satisfied John Byng.
The manifestations, too, were vulgar. The mob hanged the
admiral in effigy, the City of London sent deputations asking
for his life, the Prime Minister gabbled promises that he
should be punished. Meanwhile Byng had returned to
Gibraltar on the 19th June. He found there a reinforcement
of five line-of-battle ships under Commodore Brodrick, who
had arrived on the 15th from England. Preparations were
being made to return to Mahon when Hawke came into
Gibraltar to take command and also to send Byng home for
trial together with the witnesses. Fowke was also recalled.
The admiral heard of his supersession with unaffected, or at
any rate with remarkably well-simulated, indignation. He
wrote a furious self-laudatory letter on the 4th July, all but
claiming a statue for his exertions. On the 9th July he sailed
a prisoner in the Antelope, and reached England on the
19th August.
He was first imprisoned at Greenwich, and then sent to
Portsmouth for trial. In the sentimental reaction of coming
years, it was said that he could not expect fair treatment in
the prevailing rage of the nation, and that he was made a
sacrifice by base-minded politicians. But nobody can read
the minutes of the court martial without seeing that the
admiral had a perfectly fair trial, and was condemned on his
merits, while the politicians who had an interest in securing
his condemnation had left office before the court martial
began, and remained out till after his execution. Newcastle
had been replaced by the first short administration of Pitt.
The court martial began to sit on the 17th December 1756,
and sentence was given on the 28th February 1757. The
court found that the admiral had offended against the 12th
Article in that he had not done his utmost against the enemy.
Therefore, though it acquitted him of cowardice or disaffection,
it found him guilty of negligence, and condemned him to the
only punishment it was authorised to inflict, which was death.
Attempts were made to save his life. The House of
Commons even passed a Bill to relieve the officers forming the
court martial from the obligation to preserve secrecy as to
what had passed in their private decision on the sentence. It
was hoped that they might have something to say which would
avail the prisoner, but when questioned by the House of
Lords they could answer nothing to the purpose. The Upper
House rejected the Bill, and the admiral was shot to death on
the deck of the Monarque on the 14th March 1757. He
died with dignity, and protesting to the last he had been
made a victim.
In the changes of things and in the usual reaction by
which Englishmen habitually atone for the fury of their rage,
he came indeed to be thought of as a victim, yet the sentence
was just. Coward, in the sense that he suffered from the
pitiable cowardice which makes a man sick and giddy at the
approach of personal danger, he was not. Neither was he
disaffected, in the sense that he was scheming to upset the
Government he served. As these were the forms of cowardice
and disaffection contemplated by the Act, the court very
properly acquitted him under these heads. But he was a
coward in the intellectual sense. Having a dangerous piece
of work to do, and one in which the very errors of the Government
rendered it only the more incumbent on him to make
all wants good by his own exertions, he thought chiefly of
doing it at the least risk, and was resigned to failure. The
excuses he made were pitiable. All through he insisted
on the inferiority of his fleet. Yet he had thirteen ships to
twelve. It is true that the French were better vessels, the
Foudroyant with her 80 guns, for instance, being superior
in real strength to the Ramillies with her 90. Yet the
Foudroyant afterwards surrendered to a much smaller ship
than the Ramillies. He harped on the lesser weight of
his guns, and it is true that the 42-pounders carried on
the lower deck of some French ships were heavier than any of
ours. Yet he had 834 guns to the Frenchman’s 806, and
the 42-pounder was afterwards rejected from our navy as
too lumbering for ship-work. All through he kept insisting
on the risk of doing this or that, till he brought upon himself
the scathing answer of Blakeney: “I have served these sixty-three
years, and I never knew any enterprise undertaken
without some danger; and this might have been effected with
as little danger as any I ever knew.” It was monstrous that
men should think they could make war without hazard.
Therefore the court justly found Byng guilty of “negligence,”—that
is to say, all that deficiency to do enough, all that hanging
back from strenuous effort, which are due to want of spirit,
to a selfish regard of what the soft-minded man thinks are the
interests of his safety, to the moral cowardice which falls short
of mere physical poltroonery, and the disaffection which stops
on this side of deliberate treason. The law had been made
stern after the experience of the last war. Byng knew the
conditions of his servitude. They were in the Act by which
he exercised his own authority, and he sinned against the
light.
Brutal as the wrath of the nation was, it was founded on
a sound sentiment. If England was to take her place in the
world, there had to be an end of Mathews and Lestock, of
Peyton, Griffin, and Cornelius Mitchell. Voltaire’s famous
jest that the English shot an admiral to encourage the others
suffers from the worst defect a scoff can have. He meant it
for a reductio ad absurdum. It was a perfectly accurate
statement of fact. The shooting of Byng did encourage the
others. Henceforward there might be errors and stupidities,
and failures here and there. So there always will be while
men remain men, but a service is to be judged by its general
spirit, and by the view it takes of errors and failures. Nobody
who looks critically at the history of the British Navy in the
eighteenth century can fail to note a vast difference between
the years before and those after 1757. And we insult the
memory of the seamen of the eighteenth century if we suppose
that this is so only because the wrath of the nation drove them
to greater exertion, or that they did not think the execution
of Byng just. Some did not. His second in command,
Temple West, resigned rather than continue to serve if he was
to be liable to punishment for “an error of judgment.” West
by the use of that phrase gave currency to a sophism which has
often been used to obscure the real significance of this great
sacrifice. But the navy had not protested against the change
in the Naval Discipline Act of 1749. The officers who tried
Byng did not shrink from applying the law though it cut them
to the heart to send a brother in arms to a shameful death.
If they had been dishonest men, they might have acquitted
him of negligence, but they saw the truth and they did their
terrible duty. There is nothing to show that the seamen,
whether on the quarter-deck or before the mast, did, as a body,
think the sentence unjust. Indeed, the whole navy was now
burning with a spirit which asked for nothing better than to be
relieved of such leadership as Byng’s.
Three months after the admiral met his fate, the great
administration of the elder Pitt was formed. At last the
power of England was about to be directed, not by pettifogging
and parliamentary intrigue, but by genius and passion.
Yet the full effect of the change could not be felt for a space,
and until 1758 was well advanced the work of Newcastle
may be said to overlap that of Pitt. We may look for a
moment at the interval before the power of the navy was fully
free to act.
When Hawke superseded Byng in July 1756 it was too
late to save Minorca, and no means were at hand for its
recovery. He cruised unopposed by the French till December,
and then returned home, leaving the command to Admiral
Saunders. The interest on both sides was centred now in
North America. The French had to reinforce and support
their colonies. Our aim was to intercept their succours, and
to make ourselves masters of the French port at the mouth
of the St. Lawrence, as preparatory to the conquest of Canada.
At home our Channel fleet was to watch Brest, and our
Mediterranean fleet to keep a check on Toulon; while in
America preparations were making to attack Cape Breton
upon the arrival of a naval force from England. The work
of watching the French ports was not uniformly well done.
In April a squadron of four sail under the command of
M. Durevest escaped Saunders in the Straits of Gibraltar
after a slight brush, and held on to America. In May, Vice-Admiral
Henry Osborn came out with reinforcements, and took
over the command. The total force was thirteen of the line
and two 50-gun ships, a much larger force than the French ships
at Toulon could hope to face in open battle. Osborn was
a good representative of that large body of naval officers whose
names are associated with no single action of great renown,
but who did much and varied service, and who contributed to
the glory of more fortunate rivals by weary cruising and vigilant
watch far away from the scene where more brilliant reputations
were being earned. He was also a very typical officer
of his time, when the life of the chief was one of stern solitude,
and his exercise of authority was harsh. By nature Osborn
was of a cold, saturnine disposition. He made no friends, and
if he did not actively make enemies his hand weighed on all
under his command with oppressive severity. But his vigilance,
his strenuous discharge of duty, and his severe exaction
of their utmost from his subordinates fitted him admirably
for the work he had to do in the Mediterranean, in 1757 and
the early months of 1758.
The loss of Minorca imposed a heavy disadvantage on the
British admiral who had to watch Toulon. The nearest
port at which vessels could be docked was Gibraltar, and
this was a serious consideration before the use of copper
sheathing had been introduced, and when ships grew rapidly
foul. In December, when Osborn was at the Rock, M. de la
Clue left Toulon with five sail of the line and one 50-gun
ship, in the hope that he might elude his opponent and follow
Durevest to America. But Osborn was on the watch in the
Straits, and La Clue put into the Spanish port of Carthagena.
Here he was watched rather than blockaded. Two more
liners and a frigate succeeded in slipping in and joining him.
On the 5th February 1758 he put out to meet reinforcements
promised him from Toulon, and went as far as Palos; but his
friends did not appear, and fearing to have the whole British
squadron on his hands, he returned to Carthagena. On the
25th February a reinforcement did appear off the port. It
consisted of the Foudroyant, 80, commanded by Captain
Duquesne, who had with him the Orphée, 64, and the
Oriflamme, 50. Duquesne declined to come within the island
of Escombrera, which lies at the mouth of Carthagena
harbour, and waited outside to be joined by La Clue. A
squall drove him to sea, where his little squadron was sighted,
scattered, and chased by Osborn. The Orphée struck to the
Revenge and the Berwick. The Oriflamme was driven on
shore, but succeeded in getting off and joining La Clue in
Carthagena. A noble story is connected with the fortunes
of the Foudroyant.
Among the ships under Admiral Osborn’s command was
the Monmouth, 64, a poor little liner of our starved model,
but a quick sailer. She was commanded by Arthur Gardiner,
who had been flag-captain to Byng in the miserable battle
of Minorca, and his first lieutenant was Robert Carkett, one
of those officers who rose from before the mast. Little is
known of Gardiner, save that he had been chosen by Byng to
be his flag-captain, which implies that he was a “follower” of
his admiral and was under obligations to him. In the battle
he had given Byng good and manly advice, and in the court
martial his evidence had told severely against his chief. The
memory of that day had rankled in Gardiner’s mind. Now
La Galissonière’s flag had flown in the Foudroyant in the
battle, and the English captain had come to regard her with
a concentrated hatred. He is reported to have said that
whenever he met her he would attack her, at all odds, and
either take her or perish. Charnock, to whom the traditions of
the navy of that time came directly, quotes a letter telling
how “Two days before he left his port (viz. Gibraltar) being
in company with Lord Robert Bertie, and other persons, he
with great anguish of soul told them, that my Lord Anson
had reflected on him, and said he was one of the men who
had brought disgrace upon the nation; that it touched him
excessively, but it ran strongly in his mind, that he should
have an opportunity shortly to convince his lordship how
much he had the honour of the nation at heart, and that he
was not culpable.”
When now, on the morning of the 28th February 1758,
Gardiner found himself among the chasing ships of Osborn’s
squadron, and saw the French ships in flight, he singled out
the mighty Foudroyant, and crowded sail in pursuit. The
Swiftsure and the Hampton Court accompanied him, but
they were heavy sailers and soon fell behind. The chase began
early in the morning, and was prolonged till evening, when the
Foudroyant and the Monmouth were alone. As he pressed
on the chase, Captain Gardiner, so tradition recorded by
Charnock tells, said to a military officer who was with him,
“Whatever becomes of you and me, this ship (pointing presumably
at the Foudroyant) must go into Gibraltar.” Also
he called his crew aft, and said, “That ship must be taken,
she appears above our match, but Englishmen are not to mind
that, nor will I quit her while this ship can swim, or I have
a soul left alive.” Finding that he could not shake off his
pursuer, and feeling not unreasonably confident that the other
English ships were too far off to act against him, Captain
Duquesne turned on the Monmouth. If M. Troude, the most
careful historian of the French Navy, is right, the Foudroyant
suffered from a weakness which was infinitely dishonourable.
Her crew was so mutinous that Captain Duquesne could not
use the guns of his second deck. The men ran below very
soon after the action began. This goes far to explain the
action. The Foudroyant, a larger vessel than our three-deckers
of the time, carried a broadside at least twice as heavy
as the Monmouth’s, and ought, if properly handled, to have
made a wreck of her in two broadsides. The bad conduct of
Duquesne’s men does not diminish in any way the credit due
to Captain Gardiner, who could not know how ill his opponent
would be supported, and it does go to prove the moral
inferiority of the French Navy at that period. The engagement
began about seven o’clock between these two opponents
so ill matched in material strength, and lasted till about midnight
before help came to the Monmouth. Her mizen-mast
was shot away and about a hundred of her men fell killed or
wounded, but the mainmast of the bulky Frenchman was
brought down on the fore, and he became an unmanageable
wreck. At last the Swiftsure and the Hampton Court
came up, guided by the sound of the cannon, and at one in
the morning Duquesne surrendered, insisting, with chivalrous
politeness, on giving up his sword to the officer commanding
the Monmouth. This was not now Captain Gardiner. He
had been wounded early in the action, but refused to leave
the deck. Later he was mortally struck, and handed over
the command to Lieutenant Carkett with a last exhortation
not to let go his hold of the Frenchman. He died with the
supreme consolation of knowing that no one could ever again
accuse him of disgracing his country.
La Clue remained at Carthagena till he found an
opportunity to slip out and escape to Toulon in April. The
attempt to send help to North America had broken down
before the watch of the English admiral. It was Osborn’s
last service. An attack of paralysis reduced him to the
necessity of coming home in July. He was thanked by the
House of Commons, and acknowledged its thanks in the words
which sound best in the ears of Englishmen, protesting that
he had done no more than his duty, and hoping that his
services might be “the most inconsiderable that shall be thus
honoured.” The command in the Mediterranean devolved on
Admiral Brodrick, but the war in that sea died down till it
revived in the annus mirabilis of 1759.
The share of the work thrown on the Channel fleet was
not so successfully done. Until the superiority of the navy
had been more fully established, and St. Vincent had organised
his system of sleepless blockade, winter and summer, Brest
was a bad port to watch, opening as it does on the wide and
stormy Atlantic, not, as Toulon does, on the fierce and fickle
but not formidable Mediterranean. In January of 1757 M.
de Beauffremont left Brest for America with a squadron. It
was too early to venture to enter the St. Lawrence, and he
sailed first for the West Indies. Thence he made his way to
Cape Breton in June, carrying with him a large convoy of
merchant ships. At Cape Breton he found M. Durevest with
the four vessels which had eluded Admiral Saunders in April.
Another reinforcement joined him under the command of
M. Dubois de Lamotte, who had left Brest on the 3rd May
with nine sail of the line. The total force under Beauffremont’s
command now amounted to eighteen sail of the line and five
frigates. An admirable opportunity was offered him of doing
some service, but he effected nothing of the active order. His
mere presence on the coast had put a stop for the time to a
scheme of Lord Loudoun for an attack on Louisbourg. In so
far he did some good to his side in a passive way, and with
that he was content. And with that he continued to be
content. Admiral Holburne sailed from St. Helen’s on the
16th April, picked up some troops at Cork, and reached
Halifax in July. His purpose was to join with Lord Loudoun
and the colonial forces in an attack on Louisbourg. But the
French were judged to be in too great strength to allow of
success, and the combined operation was given up. Admiral
Holburne, with his fleet of sixteen sail of the line and three
frigates, paraded past Louisbourg in August and dared
Beauffremont to battle. But the Frenchman would not come
out. Holburne returned to Halifax, was reinforced by four
sail of the line, and resumed the blockade of Louisbourg, but
on the 24th of September a hurricane of extraordinary
violence scattered his fleet, and he was blown home. The
most severely damaged vessels were sent back at once. The
admiral came on with the others, and the trade from Halifax.
When the coast was clear Beauffremont came out at the end
of October, and reached Brest in November.
We are now at the end of the preliminary period of the
Seven Years’ War, and on the eve of the great campaigns
which left the Royal Navy the uncontested mistress of the
seas, and Great Britain the dominating power in Asia and
America. A few words may be devoted to the moral and
intellectual qualities of the two navies opposed to one another.
It will be seen that from 1755 till well in 1758 our operations
had not on the whole been successfully conducted. But when
we look close it appears that, except in the notorious case of
Byng, the fault lay with the rulers who did not use the fleet
with vigour. In one respect the navy had still a good deal
to learn. Its blockades were not maintained with the severity
of later times. Our admirals, or perhaps it was rather My
Lords at the Admiralty, shrank from the risks of a blockade
of Brest in winter and spring. But even in the Mediterranean
the method of conducting a blockade inevitably diminished its
effect. A fleet was kept together outside an enemy’s port
till it was all in want of water and a refit. Then it was
taken back in a body, with the result that for the time being
the blockade was raised. In the Mediterranean this was of
less importance, because there always remained the chance of
catching the enemy in the Straits. Yet the temporary
absence of our fleet allowed M. de la Clue to escape first from
Toulon, and then from Carthagena. On the ocean this
periodical raising of the blockade rendered any effectual watch
in Brest impossible. Yet our navy did, in the main, endeavour
to keep close to the enemy’s ports in order to be in a position
to attack him whenever he came out, and the aim it steadily
pursued was to bring on battle with the French and beat
their squadrons at sea. So it gained steadily in skill by
prolonged cruising, and it grew no less steadily in confidence
and daring.
When we turn to the French we find a great difference.
With them the constant aim was to fight as little as might be
when fighting was necessary, and to achieve their purpose
without fighting, if possible. La Galissonière did not follow
up his success against Byng, though he had ocular demonstration
of the clumsiness and timidity of his opponent. Beauffremont
had declined battle with Holburne, though numbers
were on his side. Yet the French spoke of the glory of La
Galissonière, and Beauffremont was held to have done right.
It would be a very silly national vanity which sought the
explanation of the difference in any want of personal courage
among the French. Though a nervous and excitable they
are a valiant people, and the history of their navy is full of the
heroic fights of individual ships against long odds. What
explains their inferiority in enterprise is the principle upon
which they acted. It has been stated with simplicity by one
of their writers on the art of war at sea, Ramatuelle. He
says gravely that the French Navy did not aim at destroying
a few of the enemy’s ships, but at a more serious object,
namely, the execution of its mission. On the face of it this
seems absurd, for what more serious object can any fleet have
than to defeat its opponent and make itself master at sea?
The French answered, that given the great number of the
English warships it was idle to suppose that they would ever
be destroyed wholly in battle, and that they themselves would
be worn out long before a decisive result could be obtained.
Therefore when a French admiral sailed to relieve a colony,
or save some particular post from attack, or land men to be
used against a British possession, he was to avoid battle as far
as he could, and if forced to fight then to engage to leeward,
cripple as many as he could of the enemy’s spars, and slip
away. In short, his aim was always to keep his own fleet
intact, and not to destroy the enemy’s. There is a superficial
air of ingenuity about all this, but it was in the long run a
fatal method of conducting wars. It left us free to direct our
blows where we pleased. It made it certain that our fleets
would never be seriously crippled. It made it inevitable that
sooner or later we would break down the French defence,
since that which attacks and wears away will always in the
end break through a passive opposition. But its worst
consequence was the degrading moral effect it had. The
French Navy was taught that to be brought to battle was a
misfortune, and thus it came to have a predisposition to give
way, to avoid, to seek shelter, to run. We grew accustomed
to look upon our opponent as one who feared our blows, and
to take it for granted that the French would never stand
in the face of an equal force. The working of these two
widely different ideals of conduct will be seen in the following
years of the war.
CHAPTER VI THE YEARS OF TRIUMPH
Authority.—See last Chapter.
The privateer who plays so conspicuous a part in the
maritime history of France is but a dim and subordinate
figure beside the great disciplined and
triumphant navy of this country. We can generally afford to
neglect him and his doings altogether. Yet in the Seven
Years’ War he does for one moment come forward in a
manner so characteristic and instructive, that we may look
at him very briefly before turning to the operations of honest
warfare. Ever since the reign of Henry VIII. it had been
the custom to favour these skimmers of the sea in Acts for the
Encouragement of Seamen, which invited all sorts and conditions
of men to set out armed ships to plunder the enemy.
In the age of Elizabeth their part was honourable, for the
privateers then were often gallant gentlemen—Raleigh or the
Earl of Cumberland—who fitted out warships against the
national enemy, as their ancestors had raised bands of spearmen
and archers to follow King Edward or King Harry.
But as the State grew in power and resources, such men
found their proper place in the regular forces. The privateer
tended more and more to become a mere vulgar plunderer.
His competition with the navy for men had made him a
nuisance, as far back as the time of the Commonwealth. The
private ship with its slovenly discipline, and the greater
chances of earning booty it offered, attracted all the restless
spirits to whom the order of the navy was grievous. “A
regular built privateer” became the naval officer’s phrase for
a dirty, ill-managed, inefficient ship. The last great age of
the privateer was the War of the Austrian Succession, when the
navy was bad and incapable of blocking the enemy’s ports.
In the Seven Years’ War, when the navy was equal to its
work, the innate tendency of men, whose sole aim was plunder,
to sink into mere pirates was rapidly shown. As French
commerce soon disappeared off the sea, the privateers were
driven to choose between starvation and the robbery of
neutrals or even of their own countrymen. They made the
choice which might have been expected of them. Very soon
the outrages of the privateers in the Channel became a
downright pest. They took to boarding neutral vessels, and
to extorting booty or blackmail. At last the complaints of
friendly states drove the British Government to adopt vigorous
measures of repression. Extreme offenders found their way
to Execution Dock, and in 1759 an Act was passed limiting
the right to receive a “letter of marque” to vessels of over one
hundred tons, belonging to owners who could give some
guarantee of good conduct. An exception was made for
small vessels belonging to the Channel Islands, which did
some useful piloting and scouting work. The privateers are
only mentioned here because the measures taken to restrain
them show that the navy was growing in power to discharge
its proper function, and that the country was coming to
realise that it ought to leave the duty of representing it on the
sea to a disciplined force with a code of honour.
It has been said already that some time passed, after the
formation of Pitt’s great ministry in June 1757, before the
naval and military powers of the country could be co-ordinated
for definite and profitable purposes. One of the uses to which
they were put reflects little honour on the sagacity of the
Great Commoner. He reverted to futile expeditions against
the coast of France. By the inevitable working of unvarying
conditions these revivals of old errors produced identical
results. They do not deserve that more time should be spent
on them than is necessary to record that they took place,
and came to an unavoidable failure. In September of 1757
Hawke sailed with a strong squadron, carrying a detachment
of troops under General Mordaunt, for the purpose of taking
Rochefort. He sailed on the 8th of that month, and by the
6th October he was back, and Rochefort was not taken.
We did plunder the poor little island of Aix, and that was
all—all except the ensuing court of inquiry and wrangle.
Yet it was decided to make another and more serious effort
next year, for Pitt clung with persistence to this part of his
military policy. His critics called it breaking windows with
guineas, but he valued it for two reasons. He hoped that
the pressure on their coast would constrain the French to
withdraw part of their troops from Germany where they were
threatening the king’s electorate of Hanover, and were weighing
on our ally the King of Prussia. It was a bad reason, for
if an effectual diversion was to be made we ought to have
landed a substantial army, capable of establishing itself in
France. The second and perhaps better reason was given
in 1759 by Captain Hervey of the Monmouth, who was serving
in the Brest blockade, under Hawke, when he landed on
the little island of Molines and levied a contribution on the
inhabitants. The priest appealed to him to spare their
poverty, and Captain Hervey answered, “That he was sorry
to distress the poor inhabitants, but what he now did was
to show the enemy and all Europe that the French could
not protect their people in their own sight, much less dare
the invasion of England.” After the shameful panic of 1756,
there was something to be said for the policy of showing
that our fleets could sweep along the French coast, and that
the enemy would not dare to give them battle. This purpose
at least was achieved to the full by the great combined
expedition which made three sorties in 1758. A fleet of
twenty-four sail of the line under Anson convoyed 14,000
troops under the Duke of Marlborough to St. Malo in June.
The place proved too strong, and the expedition came back
to the Isle of Wight. A scheme for attacking Cherbourg was
defeated by a storm, and the expedition returned. The Duke
of Marlborough was now replaced by General Bligh, a veteran
called over from Ireland to take up the “buccaneering” work
when officers of more interest had come to regard it with
weary disgust. A second sortie was made, and Cherbourg
was taken on the 6th August. This was our only genuine
success, for several privateers were destroyed and some guns
were brought away. As it was thought that more might have
been done, the expedition sailed on its third sortie in September
to make another attempt on St. Malo. But by
this time we had achieved our purpose of inducing the French
to withdraw troops from Germany and look to their own
coast. The soldiers landed to invest the town were assailed
by superior numbers, and driven to re-embark in the Bay of
St. Cas with heavy loss. The military management was not
good, but no skill could have secured success. The naval
work of transport and convoy was thoroughly well executed.
It is a satisfaction to be able to turn to scenes where the
navy was more effectually employed. In March of 1758 a
squadron of small vessels, under the command of Captain
Holmes, drove a French and Austrian garrison out of Embden,
a port belonging to our ally the King of Prussia. This was
a most useful piece of service, since it helped us to retain the
power to land soldiers on the continent for the defence of
Hanover and the prosecution of the war in Germany. In the
following month of April Hawke was allowed to use a squadron
in a way much better calculated to convince the French of
our superiority at sea, and of their inability to invade, than
any number of mere sporadic raids on their coast, since it
gave them no chance of retaliating as they did in the Bay
of St. Cas. Pitt, who was always well informed of the enemy’s
movements, learnt early in the year that a great convoy was
being prepared in the Basque Roads for America, and was
to sail under protection of a small squadron. Hawke was
sent to intercept it with seven sail of the line and three
frigates. He found five French line-of-battle ships and several
frigates, with forty merchant ships carrying 3000 troops to
reinforce the American garrisons, starting or about to start
from the Basque Roads and the Pertuis d’Antioche, the
anchorages on the mainland just opposite the islands of
Oléron and Ré. Between the 4th and 6th of April he broke
up the convoy and drove it into the mud. In their anxiety
to escape to Rochefort up the Charente the Frenchmen threw
their guns overboard and started their water to lighten the
ships. When it is remembered that they were five to seven,
and on their own coasts, the prompt flight of the French liners
speaks aloud of the little spirit of their navy at this period.
On the 7th of the same month of April Captain John
Campbell of the Essex, 64, and a fireship, the Pluto, Captain
James Hume, fell in with and scattered a convoy of twelve
French merchant ships from Bordeaux under protection of a
frigate and a large privateer. The two armed ships were
taken after a resistance which cost Captain Hume his life.
Such pieces of service as these were not glorious, but they
were typical examples of the work done by the fleet to sweep
the enemy off the sea.
Far beyond the waters of Europe the navy was beginning
to apply itself to the task of rooting out the French settlements.
The operations of 1758 were preparatory for the great undertaking
of the following year; one of them makes us acquainted
with the oddest figure of all this war, the Quaker Thomas
Cumming. This man was a trader on the west coast of
Africa, who had elaborated a scheme for expelling the French
from all their stations. When asked how he reconciled his
active share in hostilities with his religious principles, he
answered with ingenious casuistry by saying, that if his scheme
had been executed with the force he thought necessary there
would have been no resistance, and therefore no fighting.
Mr. Cumming had been busy from early in 1757 in urging
his ideas on Ministers, but it was not till he secured a hearing
from Pitt and in the following year that he saw his advice
put in practice, though on a smaller scale than he wished.
In the interval a French squadron, commanded by M. de
Kersaint, had made an unsuccessful attack on Cape Coast
Castle. This event may have served to awaken ministers to
the need there was for putting our settlements on a safer
footing. The fortunes of M. de Kersaint may be followed
for the sake of one name with which they make us acquainted,
and also because they show how wide-ranging are the movements
of war at sea. Having failed at Cape Coast Castle the
French officer stood across the Atlantic to the West Indies.
At Cape Français, now called Cape Haytiën, in Hispaniola, he
was engaged on convoy work, when he had an action with
a British squadron under Commodore Forrest on the 21st
October. The English and French accounts cannot be reconciled.
According to our version three of our ships engaged
most gallantly with a much stronger French force and got
the better of them. Our story runs that M. de Kersaint,
having shown a disposition to engage, Commodore Forrest
consulted his two subordinate captains, and one of them
answered that it would be a pity to disappoint the Frenchman.
The officer to whom this spirited reply is attributed was
Captain Maurice Suckling, to whom we owe the introduction
into the navy of the heir of all its past labours, and the most
famous of all its chiefs, his nephew, Horatio Nelson. The
action need not be discussed. It was counted a gallant affair
long before Nelson, with whom it was always a cherished
memory and the 21st October a fateful day, was known to
fame. Beyond confirming our growing sense of superiority
to the French it produced no effect, for the convoy got away.
If, as the French deny, M. de Kersaint was in much greater
force, he no doubt acted on the rule of his service described
above, and threw away his chance of overpowering the three
British ships in order to fulfil his mission to see the merchant
vessels safe to port.
It was in March 1758 that Mr. Cummings saw his idea
put into practice. A small squadron, under Captain Henry
Marsh, sailed on the 9th of that month, carrying the Quaker with
it. On the 30th April (the month in which Hawke scattered
the French convoy in the Basque Roads), St. Louis de
Senegal was taken, and the supply of slaves for the French
colonies much reduced. An attack on the island of Gorée in
May failed, and then the commodore sent on to the West
Indies with the trade, which in plain English meant the
kidnapped negroes.
So far the enterprise had been successful enough to
encourage a repetition and to earn Mr. Cummings “the
gratification of a handsome pension.” It was decided to complete
the conquest begun by Commodore Marsh. The officer
chosen for the task was Keppel. On the 26th October he
sailed from Cork with four line-of-battle ships, one 50-gun
ship, six smaller vessels, and a body of troops. He was driven
back by bad weather, but started finally on the 11th
November. On the way out the 50-gun ship, the Lichfield,
was lost on the coast of Morocco. The loss was of no great
importance to the squadron, but it is to be mentioned because
we afterwards, and that at a time when Pitt took a tone of
haughty superiority to the civilised powers of Europe,
condescended to pay the bloodstained savage, whom we
termed Emperor of Morocco, a heavy ransom to save the crew
from slavery. It was one of the worst passages in our long
ignominious toleration of the pirates of Barbary. On the
14th December Keppel was at the Canaries, and on the 28th
he reached Gorée a little island near the Cape de Verd. The
French post soon surrendered under the combined pressure of
bombardment by the ships from the sea and attack by the
troops under Colonel Worge on shore. Worge remained as
governor of Senegal, and Keppel returned home.
While Marsh and Keppel were expelling the French from
the slave-producing region of West Africa, the navy had taken
a foremost share in delivering the first great blow at the
French dominion in North America. Boscawen and Amherst
had taken Louisbourg, and had thereby cleared the way for the
capture of Quebec by Wolfe and Saunders in the following
year. The incapable Government of France was now fairly
launched into a war in Germany, and could spare neither
attention nor adequate forces for the defence of its
colonies.
A squadron of six line-of-battle ships and five frigates
left early in the year for Louisbourg and arrived in safety.
Three of the liners were armed en flûte, and were practically
mere transports. Such a handful of vessels as this was not
even a match for the English ships which had wintered at
Halifax. Our squadron in North American waters was now
under the orders of Sir Charles Hardy, who came out in the
Captain in early spring. M. Drucourt, the naval officer who
was governor of Louisbourg, foreseeing that he would be seriously
attacked, could only use the vessels in the port to strengthen
his defences of the place. Three frigates, the Biche, the Echo,
and the Fidèle, were sunk to block the entrance to the harbour.
The measures taken to prevent the English from coming in
had one good effect for the French. They prevented the
useless sacrifice of more of their ships than were already in
harbour. On the 29th May Captain Duchaffault de Besné,
who had left Rochefort on the 2nd with four liners, one armed
en flûte and three frigates, appeared outside Louisbourg.
Finding the entrance closed he landed the soldiers he brought
with him and went on to Quebec, where he remained a
helpless spectator of the disaster.
Boscawen meanwhile had left Spithead on the 18th
February with a powerful fleet, escorting 13,000 troops under
the command of Amherst, who had Wolfe with him as one of
his subordinates. The soldiers were distributed in 150
transports. This great armament sailed first to Halifax, where
Boscawen collected the whole naval force in those waters, now
amounting to twenty-three sail of the line and eighteen frigates.
When the necessary arrangements had been made at the base
of operations soldiers and sailors started, “well combined in
mutual love to each other and common resolution against the
enemy,” on the 29th of May, just when Duchaffault was
landing the last French reinforcement. On the 2nd June the
fleet reached Gabarus Bay, on the south-eastern coast of
Cape Breton, below the place where a heap of ruins marks
what was once the site of Louisbourg. The combined operations
lasted till the 26th July, when Drucourt beat the chamade
after a stout fight. As there was no enemy at sea the bulk of
the work fell to the army, and was performed in a fashion
presenting a welcome contrast to the futility of Carthagena
and Pondicherry. Amherst was a capable general, and
Wolfe, besides being the most exact of officers in all matters
of detail, had the calm and rapid mind of the born leader in
war, and that zest for the joys of battle which makes the
supreme fighter. To the navy it fell to land the troops, to
supply them, to assist in the bombardment by which some of
the French ships in the harbour were destroyed, and to do one
dashing piece of work in its own line.
The steady bombardment from land and sea had greatly
reduced the French squadron in the harbour, but two of their
ships remained in a condition to aid in the defence as late
as the 24th of July. These were the Prudent, 74, and the
Bienfaisant, 64. Boscawen resolved to cut them out, that is,
to send in armed boats to board them and bring them away.
At noon of the 24th a barge and a pinnace or cutter from
every ship, each commanded by a lieutenant and a mate
or midshipman, met at the flagship. The command of the
whole was given to George Balfour of the Etna fireship, and
John Laforey of the Hunter sloop, the two senior commanders
of the fleet. The commander was, and is, the captain who is
not of full, or “post” rank. It might have given a thinking
Frenchman some ground for reflection if he had known that
of these officers Balfour was a Scotchman, and therefore one
of a people which had once been the old ally of France,
while Laforey’s name is only the anglicised form of La Foret,
and he was of Huguenot descent, one of the thousands whose
swords and skill were turned against their persecutors by the
revocation of the Edict of Nantes. The boats collected at
evening round the flagship of Sir Charles Hardy, who
commanded the advance ships at the mouth of the harbour. At
midnight they put off in a thick fog with muffled oars and in
strict silence. The steady fire from our batteries attracted the
attention of the French, who were on the ramparts in expectation
of an immediate assault, and were keeping up a constant
musketry fire. Laforey and Balfour led their boats past the
battery at the mouth of the harbour unseen and unheard.
They had carefully marked the place of the French ships
during the day, and were able to take a sweep out into the
harbour and advance through the night and the fog, till the
hulks of the Prudent and the Bienfaisant loomed up through
the darkness. Then the uncontrollable love of the British
seamen for shouting broke out into wild cheering, and all the
boats dashed alongside the liners. Laforey carried the
Prudent and Balfour the Bienfaisant. One of them is said by
tradition to have made his way into the bows of the French
ship by a place more convenient than seemly. The actual
taking of the vessels was not difficult, as most of their
crews were ashore aiding in the defence. But the noise in
the harbour drew the fire of the land batteries, and
the duty of taking the prizes out was one of great hazard.
The Prudent was aground and could not be moved, so that
Laforey had to set her on fire, but the Bienfaisant was towed
away in spite of the fire from the batteries. It was next day
that M. Drucourt surrendered. The total loss of the French
Navy was four line-of-battle ships burnt and one taken, four
vessels sunk to block the entry to the harbour and frigate taken.
Only one vessel, the Comète frigate, found an opportunity to
slip through the blockade and escape to France.
After the fall of Louisbourg, Sir Charles Hardy was
despatched to the mouth of the St. Lawrence with a body of
troops, commanded by Wolfe, to destroy some French ports
and intercept the squadron of Duchaffault, who, it was
calculated, would endeavour to get away before the winter.
The destruction was effected, but the ships escaped. Boscawen
returned home with the bulk of the fleet, leaving Rear-Admiral
Durell to winter in Halifax, and resume the blockade of
Quebec in spring. The victorious British fleet and the
French squadron were making their way home in the stormy
autumn weather by the same route. On the 27th October,
when Boscawen’s ships were much scattered by gales and he
had only four liners—one being the captured Bienfaisant—and
some frigates with him, he fell in with Duchaffault, seventy
miles to the west of Ushant. The French squadron consisted
of four of the line and one 56-gun ship belonging to the
American company. It had just captured the Carnarvon,
East Indiaman. The stormy weather prevented a close
action, which was fortunate for the Frenchman, for two of his
liners were only armed en flûte. Duchaffault’s vessels
scattered after some confused firing. He himself got to the
Basque Roads, the Carnarvon was retaken, and the other
vessels, with one exception, reached home. The unlucky ship
which did not was the Belliqueux, 74, commanded by
Captain Martel, who seemingly became confused between the
bad weather and the British fleet. He lost his course
completely, came up on the wrong side of the Land’s End,
and was embayed in the Bristol Channel. While at anchor
under Lundy, he was sighted by the Antelope, 50, Captain
Thomas Saumarez. According to our account the Belliqueux
surrendered, and was a valuable prize, for she was found to be
full of fine furs. The French will have it that she was unfairly
taken, her captain having appealed to the humanity of our
officer on the ground of the distressed state of his ship, and
having also cited cases in which English vessels had been
helped at French ports in war. The incredible tale is still
told to illustrate the “disloyalty” of the English.
It goes much further to prove how much the French
warships were used as transports and traders, partly by the
Government, but also by their own officers, who made up for
bad and irregular pay by what they called la pacotille, i.e.
commercial ventures. If Captain Martel did, as his countrymen
say, propose to go into Bristol and throw himself on the
“loyalty” of the English for relief, it is also highly probable
that he meant to get money for his furs from the Bristol
merchants.
We have now come to the annus mirabilis of the Seven
Years’ War, 1759. It was a year of extraordinary events and
changes of fortune, and was also emphatically the year of the
navy. From first to last the fleet was our main weapon, but
both before and after 1759 it met with no worthy adversary
at sea, and was mostly employed in co-operating with troops.
In this year it had to contend with other fleets, and the tale
to be told is one of true naval warfare.
The experience of 1758 had not been wholly lost on the
French Government, incapable as it was. It had been brought
to see that its fleets must be better used if its colonial
possessions were not to fall one by one before such expeditions
as had taken Louisbourg. To meet the English
everywhere was plainly impossible, but there was one course
which, if followed with success, would bring swift and decisive
victory. England itself might be invaded. A blow struck
home to her heart would be mortal, and would at once undo
all the effect of her successes in distant seas. The ministers
of King Louis XV. were the more encouraged to try the
venture because they were convinced that the British fleet
would be so weakened by distant enterprises as to be unable
to collect a superior force in the Channel. So a plan such
as had been laid before by Louis XIV., and was to be laid
again by Napoleon, was drafted. Troops were collected on
the coast of Normandy, and at Vannes in the Morbihan, on
the south side of Brittany. To clear the way for them the
fleet was to be used in a fashion which shows that the
boasted originality of Napoleon’s genius was in this, as in
so many other fields, largely mere imitation of the methods
of the old monarchy. The first object was to draw off and
distract the British fleet. A squadron was to be prepared at
Dunkirk, and put under the command of Thurot, a very brave
and honest privateer captain, who had made for himself a
reputation. It was to sail north and draw off our ships by
menacing the coasts of Scotland and Ireland. The main
French fleet had its headquarters at Brest, and was to be led
by M. de Conflans, Vice-Admiral and Marshal of France.
La Clue was to sail from Toulon, pass the Straits and
join the fleet at Brest. The two were then to cover the
passage of the army under the Duc d’Aiguillon, which again
was to come out from Vannes in transports, and from the
coast of Normandy in flat-bottomed vessels building at Havre.
It will be seen that this is essentially Napoleon’s plan in a
simpler and less hazardous form, with the further merit that it
was to be executed by the French fleet alone, and not with
the co-operation of a most inefficient and reluctant ally. His
scheme could not have come within measurable distance of
success save by miracles of good fortune and the help of
incredible ineptitude on our side on which he had no right to
calculate. Of this one it may be said that if the French fleet
had been efficient, and the chiefs prompt and bold, it might at
least have driven us hard in the Channel. But it needed
these conditions, and also that the naval resources of England
should have been less than they were, and her admirals less
vigilant and resolute. As every one of these conditions was
wanting, the invasion scheme broke down in a long succession
of failures and disasters. Pitt met it by effectual counter-measures
in European waters, and did not for one instant
slacken in his efforts to sweep the French from the continent
of North America, the West Indies, and the Eastern Seas.
Every aggressive French naval force in Europe was faced by
an opposite more powerful than itself, and meanwhile Wolfe
and Saunders sailed to Quebec, while Moore and Hodgson
acted in the West Indies. In those waters the French Navy
did appear, represented by a squadron under M. de Bompart,
who sailed early and came back late, in time to be one of the
causes which hurried on the final disaster of the great invasion
scheme.
In all this year the sun looked down, as the world rolled
round on its diurnal course, first on Pocock and D’Aché contending
on the coast of Coromandel, then on the mobile,
elastic, and impenetrable barrier drawn by the fleets of
Boscawen and Hawke round the coast of France, then on the
British squadron helping to break the French dominion in
America to pieces. All else went on behind the home fleets,
and was dependent on them, and as no narrative can be
simultaneous, but must needs be consecutive, the first place
is to be given to the operations of the war in Europe. At the
most northerly point of the line we had to defend, Commodore
Boys was stationed to watch Thurot’s squadron in Dunkirk.
Admiral Smith was stationed with Piercy Brett in the Downs,
and between them and Boys, Rodney watched the flotilla
preparing at Havre de Grâce. Hawke, with the grand fleet,
took in hand the blockade of Brest, while the duty of preventing
the junction of La Clue with Conflans, by blockading
Toulon, or by holding the Straits of Gibraltar, was entrusted
to Boscawen. A glance at the map will show that the
advantage of position lay with us. The hazards and uncertainties
of war at sea are always many—and they were
more numerous in the times when the ships depended on
sails and the wind. Yet the balance of chances was on our
side, since it was more probable on the whole that Hawke and
Boscawen could combine, if either failed to stop his immediate
adversary, than that Conflans or La Clue could. On the supposition,
however, that Boscawen was eluded and left behind, so that
Hawke was in peril of having both French fleets on him at
once, he could still fall back on, or be joined by, the ships in
the Downs. Then he would be able to give battle, while
Boscawen could follow, and either make our force overwhelming,
or bring up a fresh squadron on the French when newly
damaged by battle. Our squadrons had in fact the advantage
of having shorter distances to go than the French in order
to join forces, and even if driven back they would be driven
back on the support of friends.
In order of time the first effectual blow struck by our
navy at the French as they endeavoured to unite for the
invasion of England was the bombardment of Havre, on
the 2nd July, by Rodney. Flat-bottomed boats were being
constructed there, and we poured bombs on them, with good
effect, for a whole day. In order to direct the service the
better, Rodney transferred his flag from the Achilles, 60, which
drew too many feet of water to come close in on that shallow
coast, to the Venus frigate, commanded by Captain Samuel
Hood. This service brought together two men of strong and
widely different character, who will be found acting together
at a great crisis twenty-two years later—not, however, for the
first time, for Hood had been a subordinate with Rodney in the
Ludlow Castle long before. The bombardment was effective,
and so was a stroke struck at some of the French boats as
they endeavoured to slip down the coast later on. Meanwhile
Boys watched Thurot at Dunkirk so closely that the Frenchman
had no chance to escape till the very end of the year.
The first ruinous blow at the complicated French scheme
was given far to the South.
Boscawen sailed from Spithead on the 14th April with
eight sail of the line and frigates to take over the command
on the Mediterranean. He joined Brodrick, who was already
blockading Toulon, off Cape Sicié, on 16th May. The fleet
now consisted of fifteen ships of the line, with twelve frigates
and sloops and two fireships. La Clue, who had been unable to
drive off Brodrick’s smaller force, could do nothing against
Boscawen. His squadron was not yet ready for any service.
The blockade lasted till the 8th July, when want of water and
the necessity for cleaning his ships compelled Boscawen to
return to Gibraltar. While before Toulon he had made an
unsuccessful attempt to destroy two French frigates under
protection of the coast batteries. He reached Gibraltar on the
4th August, after taking in fresh water on the neutral coast of
Spain, and began to clean and refit. Frigates were stationed
on the Spanish shore and the coast of Barbary to give notice
of any attempt of the French to pass the Straits.
The retreat of our squadron opened the way to the French,
and if La Clue had thought himself able to act at once, he
might have passed the Straits while Boscawen’s ships were
taking in their water on the coast of Spain. But the sense of
inferiority, material and moral, which plainly weighed on the
minds of all French naval officers in this year, made him
hesitate. Having that to do which could only be done by
extreme promptitude, he did not leave Toulon till the early
days of August, when the British admiral was already at
Gibraltar, and in a position to intercept him in the Straits.
During the night of the 16th-17th of August the French fleet
approached the passage leading to the Ocean. It was sighted
by Captain M‘Cleverty, of the Gibraltar frigate, who was
cruising between Estépona and Ceuta Point, and who reported
at once to the admiral. Boscawen’s fleet was still at work
refitting, and in the flagship, the Namur, the sails were
unbent—that is, not fixed to the yards. But such good speed
was made that by ten o’clock at night the ships were all out.
They went as they were ready and as place served, with no
pedantic attention to the fopperies of order. Boscawen had with
him the Warspite, Culloden, Swiftsure, Intrepid,
America, Portland, and Guernsey. Admiral Brodrick
could not clear the bay till later than his commander-in-chief,
and followed him with the other ships. There was an interval
of some miles between them, but the wind was easterly, and
Brodrick was certain of being able to join his chief if the
leading ships were able to overtake the enemy. Both pressed
eagerly along the route they calculated that the enemy must
have followed.
Meanwhile the French admiral, who had with him twelve
sail of the line and three frigates, had headed his pursuers,
and as the British ships were leaving Gibraltar Bay had got
as far as Cape Spartel, and had cleared the current which runs
from the ocean into the Mediterranean. At ten at night he
had his ships about him, though not in good order; for some
of them were bad sailers, and were lagging behind his flagship
L’Océan. Yet he believed that he could communicate his
orders, or at least show the course he meant to follow. So he
headed W.N.W., and then put out the guiding light of the
flagship in order to conceal his route from the English frigates.
The calculation that his own captains would see and understand,
in the darkness and the excitement, was rash—and all
the more because when he left Toulon it was understood that
if the Straits were passed the fleet was to head for Cadiz,
anchor there, and make another start. It was a foolish plan,
because it invited another blockade. La Clue, therefore, was
absolutely right in making for the open sea. But now was
seen the influence of that miserable theory, that war can be
waged effectually by hasty runs from one cover to another
and by evasion. Five of the French line and all the frigates
were at some distance from the flagship. When La Clue and
the six vessels so close to him, that they had no shadow of
excuse for not seeing what he was doing, steered to the
W.N.W., the laggards acted on the supposition that the
obvious course was to run for cover, and headed nearly due
north for Cadiz. Thus all through the night the two sailed on
diverging lines, and when day broke the French admiral found
himself with seven sail only of his fifteen about him, and saw
that five of his line and all his frigates had vanished in what
direction he knew not, though he might well have guessed,
under the horizon.
At this moment the best course he could have followed
might well have been to steer for Cadiz, whither it was probable
that his lost vessels had gone, and where they were indeed
waiting for him. The next best course might have been to
keep on straight for Brest. But he remained where he was,
looking about for the liners which had parted company. Some
sail were seen on the horizon, and La Clue headed towards
them in the hope that they were his friends. They turned
out to be Swedish merchant-ships. Then other sails were
seen behind, and for them also the Frenchman steered only to
discover that they belonged to the fleet of Boscawen. Nothing
now remained to be done but to flee for refuge, and in the
circumstances the only cover La Clue had any chance of
reaching was the neutral coast of Portugal, to the North.
When the French were seen on the forenoon of the 18th
August, the British fleet was still in two divisions: Boscawen
was leading with one, and Brodrick was some distance astern.
The easterly breeze was stronger near the land than out at
sea, and when the presence of the enemy was signalled,
Brodrick crowded on sail, and rapidly reduced the space
between himself and his admiral. It is a proof of the superiority
of our officers and men in seamanship, the art by which
the utmost is made of a ship, that although the French vessels
were as a rule better built for speed than ours, and although
those with La Clue were swift and their crews had every
motive to make haste, yet the van of the British fleet forced
on action early in the afternoon. The French would only
make a running fight, as their pursuers overtook them,
one by one, and ranged themselves on either side. Captain
de Sabran-Grammont, of the Centaure, 74, the last ship in the
French squadron, and the first to be overtaken, showed the
virtue which redeemed the follies and vices of the nobles of
his country, a flawless personal valour. He made a gallant
effort to cover the flight of his brother-captains. Though
Boscawen and two others attacked him at once, he made so
fierce a resistance that the Centaure did not surrender till long
after dark, when the captain was dead, 200 of her men
had fallen, and she was so shattered that the prize crews
had the utmost difficulty in keeping her afloat. Boscawen’s
flagship the Namur lost her mizen-mast, and the admiral had
to transfer his flag to the Newark. But for errors of management
on the part of individual captains, the whole of the
French squadron must have been taken. Some of our
captains were awkward in handling their ships, and allowed
other vessels of ours to get between them and the enemy.
Others who came up on the lee side of the French did so at
such a distance that they were never able to force a close
action. These mistakes provoked Boscawen into declaring when
all was over, that “It was well, but that it might have been a
great deal better.” No French vessel was taken on the 18th
except the Centaure. During the night two, the Guerrier and
the Souverain, turned to the west, and escaped in the dark.
Both reached Rochefort. The four remaining with the admiral
took refuge in the waters of Portugal at Lagos. The flagship
L’Océan and the Redoutable ran ashore, the Téméraire and the
Modeste anchored some distance out, in reliance on Portuguese
neutrality. But Boscawen would not allow that to be any protection.
Both were taken, and the two which had been
beached were burnt. La Clue, who had lost a leg by a cannon-shot
in the action of the day before, died at Lagos. For the
breach of Portuguese neutrality we afterwards apologised, but
no rebuke was given to Boscawen.
The Toulon fleet’s share in the great invasion scheme had
completely failed. Boscawen returned home with part of his
fleet and a large convoy of merchant-ships. Admiral Brodrick
remained to blockade the French, who had taken refuge in
Cadiz. A storm drove him off in January 1760, and they
were able to escape to Toulon.
Though a combined operation was no longer possible, after
the disaster of the 18th and 19th August, the French still
clung to the hope that an invasion might be carried out from
Brest, where M. de Conflans lay with the main fleet. All
through the fine-weather months he was keenly watched by
Hawke. The French force was of twenty-one sail of the line, the
English of twenty-five, and the difference was enough to convince
the ministers of Louis XV. that it was useless to expect a victory
from the use of open force. Yet they would not renounce the
hope of carrying out an invasion by means of a fleet confessedly
unequal to the hazard of giving battle on the way to our
shores. The situation must have arisen in any case, for even
if La Clue had escaped Boscawen’s pursuit, it was to be
supposed that the English admiral would follow him, and
thereby bring his own ships to reinforce Hawke. The two
would have formed a very superior force to the combined fleets
of Conflans and La Clue, even if the second, after evading
Boscawen, had also avoided running into Sir Edward’s much
stronger fleet outside of Brest. If he had steered for Rochefort,
the French admirals would still have been divided.
When this combination was ruined by the defeat of La Clue,
by the capture and destruction of five of his best ships and the
imprisonment of most of the others at Cadiz, all hope of invading
England ought to have been resigned. But the French king
and his ministers could not reconcile themselves to failure.
So they hit upon a scheme of folly such as would be incredible
in other than men too ignorant to understand the task they
had undertaken, too vain to allow themselves to be taught, and
so reckless in their selfish frivolity that rather than allow themselves
to be blamed for doing nothing they would do what in
all probability would bring ruin to the officers and men at
their orders.
In substance it was that M. de Conflans was to wait till
bad weather drove Sir Edward Hawke away from Brest.
Then he was to slip out, pick up the transports and troops
collected for the invasion at Vannes, and convoy them to some
point on the coast of Great Britain. The calculation was
that even if Conflans was intercepted by Hawke, he would be
able to cover the transports, which could go on to their destination,
or at the worst could come back safe. Yet the French
ministers had the means of knowing that there was a British
squadron in reserve behind Hawke in the Downs, and that the
events at Lagos had set free Boscawen. We still hear of
invasion schemes no wiser than this, and it is no waste of
space or time to insist on the folly of this historical plan.
Conflans, who was visibly unequal to the duty of giving Hawke
battle, was to go to sea hampered by a convoy and there run
the hazard of being brought to action. The convoy, notoriously
incapable of defending itself, was to be supposed to go
on even when its protecting ships were assailed, though there
were other British ships than Hawke’s, and he could have
spared part of his fleet for the purpose of pursuing the transports,
and yet have left himself equal to Conflans. If
Napoleon had not laid plans equally fantastic, if projects
for the invasion of England every whit as absurd were not
elaborated by soldiers of the kind called “scientific” to-day, we
should be tempted to think that the plan of campaign drafted
at Paris in 1759 could only have been the work of the feather-headed
harlot who managed the languid debauchee on the
French throne, and of the men who got office by her favour.
With most naval battles we can afford to treat the sea as
an open plain needing no description. But this is not the case
with the battle of Quiberon. The lie of the land is as
necessary to be kept in mind as the shape of the country is
for the proper understanding of Oudenarde or Salamanca. It
has been said above that while Conflans lay blockaded at Brest,
the troops for the invasion of England were collected at
Vannes, in the Morbihan, on the south side of the Breton
Peninsula. From the Pointe de Penmarch, the south-westerly
headland of Finisterre, the coast runs to the east, but with a
slope to the south, till it reaches the entry of the river Vilaine.
Here it turns wholly to the south, and stretches down to the
Pyrenees and the coast of Biscay. It is mostly foul on the
southern side of Brittany, and fringed with islands. At two-thirds
or so of the distance from the Pointe de Penmarch to
the mouth of the Vilaine, the peninsula of Quiberon juts out
to the south, in shape something like a lobster’s claw with its
hook turned to the east. On the eastern side is the bay of
Quiberon. The anchorage is fine where the bottom of sand
mud and shells is free from rocks, but in many places it is
foul, and of its total breadth of nine miles, only five or six are
really safe for large vessels. Following the line of the
mainland on the north side, we reach the entry to the tangle
of islands, deep passages, shallows, and lagoons named the
Morbihan, to the north of which is the town of Vannes.
In this refuge the transports had been collected to wait till
the fleet came round from Brest and secured them a safe
passage to the sea. The Morbihan is closed on the south side
by the peninsula of Rhuis. The coast goes eastward from
Rhuis to the Vilaine, and then runs south in a rolling line to
the Pointe de Croisic, at the northern side of the Loire,
beyond which it need not now be followed. The peninsula of
Quiberon, the entry to the Vilaine, and the Pointe de Croisic
form roughly a right angle. Now draw a line from Croisic
to the Pointe de Conguel on the north-west, which is the
southern extremity of the peninsula of Quiberon. All along
that line, with openings of clear water here and there, are
piled the perils of the Breton coast, innumerable and thrown
together in inextricable confusion. In front of Croisic and
at low tide a number of black rocks at distances of from
three and a half to five and a half miles show the position of
the mass of sunken reef called the Plateau du Four. To the
west of the Four there is an open passage closed on the outer
side by the rocks called the Grands Cardinaux. From them
stretches to the north-west an unbroken column of islands
and rocks, separated from the Pointe de Conguel by the
passage known as La Teignouse. The approach to this is
made perilous on the west by the Plateau de Mirvideaux.
To the south and west of the small islands between Les
Grands Cardinaux and La Teignouse lies the Fair Island,
Belleisle. The entry to Quiberon by La Teignouse being
hazardous, the bay is approached from the south-east—that is
to say, between Les Grands Cardinaux and Pointe de Saint
Jacques on the peninsula of Rhuis, which is due north of
them. This opening is ten miles across. When a fleet was
coming in from the open sea, it would pass to the south of
Belleisle and of Les Grands Cardinaux. Then it would turn
first to the north, and afterwards bend to the north-west, till it
reached the clean anchorage inside the peninsula of Quiberon.
The triangle of perils and barriers here roughly described was
the scene of the most heroic achievement in the long history
of the Royal Navy.
Hawke established the blockade of Brest early in June.
No serious attempt to drive him off was made by the French.
On the 2nd July Conflans tried to do by trick what he dared
not venture to do by force. The bulk of Hawke’s fleet lay
some distance off at sea, while an inshore, or advanced,
squadron under Captain Hervey watched the French fleet at
anchor in Camaret Bay, just outside the entrance to Brest.
This was the Augustus John Hervey, afterwards third
Earl of Bristol, who was the son of the Lord Hervey so
savagely attacked by Pope, and of the beautiful Molly Lepel.
He maintained the well-established reputation of his family
for immoral ability. His marriage to, and collusive divorce
from, the notorious Elizabeth Chudleigh, bigamous Duchess of
Kingston, are conspicuous events in the scandalous chronicle
of the time. But though his private life was always disorderly
and occasionally ignominious, he was a very brave and skilful
naval officer. All through the summer of 1759 he and
Captain Keppel were the eyes and hands of the fleet. When
on the 2nd July four French line-of-battle ships stood out of
Camaret Bay to drive him off, Hervey did not hesitate to
engage for a moment, though he had with him only two of the
line and some frigates. He well knew that the sound of his
guns would soon bring up Hawke’s fleet, and it did. The
French drew back immediately under the protection of their
batteries. Their intention had been, after driving off Hervey,
to go round to Quiberon, chase away the small squadron
under Captain Reynolds, of the Firm, and liberate the
transports at Vannes—a proposal worthy of the intelligence
they showed all through the year. The sub-blockade of
Quiberon remained unbroken. When the Firm became foul,
Reynolds was relieved by Captain Duff, of the Rochester, 50,
who remained in possession of the waters of the French bay
with four 50-gun ships and some frigates till he was swept
into the great hurricane of wind and battle of the 20th
November.
The fine weather and the energy shown by Pitt in
supporting the fleets at sea made it possible to keep the
crews well supplied with provisions. They enjoyed a good
health of which there were few examples in the previous
history of the navy. Yet the blockade was tedious work,
relieved only by such events as this action of the 2nd July,
by the cutting out of the Modeste from under the French
batteries, a gallant feat of Hervey’s, or by the unsuccessful
attempt of Captain Barrington of the Achilles to destroy some
French ships in the Morbihan. Meanwhile there was growing
impatience at Paris with the timidity of Conflans, who showed
extreme reluctance to go to sea without an express order.
Conflans had served with some credit, but he owed his
command to court favour, and had no reputation as a
manœuvrer in the French Navy, while all his words and
actions show him to have been light and ostentatious, with no
firmness of character. The instructions he issued to his
captains when he did go out are full of a pretence of
confidence which was ridiculous after the timidity of the
summer, and more ridiculous when read by the light of the
final disaster. He wrote as if he feared that Hawke would
not give him a good chance to fight.
On the 9th November a gale, and the needs of the
blockading fleet, did for the French what they could not do
for themselves. Hawke was compelled to bear up for Torbay.
Frigates were left to watch Brest. The westerly gale which
had forced Hawke to draw off from the dangerous lee shore
of Brest, brought home the French squadron of M. de
Bompart, now coming back from the West Indies. To his
surprise and relief, he found the way to port open. His safe
arrival convinced Conflans that Hawke must be gone.
Taking the crews out of Bompart’s ships to reinforce his own,
the marshal put to sea on the 14th November, when the
wind had moderated, and the last great effort of the French
to carry out the invasion began.
On the same date Hawke left Torbay to resume the
blockade of Brest. On the 16th he was met by the news
that the French had been seen twenty-four leagues to the north-west
of Belleisle, steering to the south-east. There could be
no doubt in Hawke’s mind that they were bound for Quiberon,
and he instantly headed in pursuit. The news that the
French were at sea spread rapidly over England, and produced
an outburst of popular anger against Hawke, which gives the
exact value of the most sweet voices of the mob. It ought
to have rejoiced to hear that the enemy was out, and had
only to look at the measures taken by Government to see
that there was no peril. The troops and militia were put to
some disturbance, which was unnecessary, save for the purpose
of quieting the national nerves. A more rational measure
was the formation of a reserve squadron of six ships of the
line under Rear-Admiral Geary to reinforce Hawke. In these
days, too, Vice-Admiral Saunders reached the mouth of the
Channel on his way back from the conquest of Quebec. He
had but three liners with him, and they were much tried by
service, yet without a moment’s hesitation he sailed to join
the Channel Fleet. It is true that he did not arrive in time to
be of service, but it was fine conduct, and an instance of the
noble spirit now animating the navy which of itself was enough
to calm all fears.
While the hubbub was raging at home, Hawke was straining
to overtake Conflans. The wind between the 14th and
the evening of the 19th November either fell calm or blew
from the east, hampering both fleets. On the evening of
the 19th it began to blow strong from the west, and
there was every sign of a coming gale. Conflans was
to the south-west of Belleisle, and Hawke behind him.
Fearing that the force of the wind would cause him to make
the land during the night, the French admiral carried little
sail. Hawke, who was farther out, had less motive for caution,
and was able to carry more sail than his opponent, thereby reducing
the distance between them. When the late November
daybreak came, this was the position; out at sea was Hawke
with twenty-three sail of the line. Ahead of him, and just
so far ahead of him as to be under the horizon line, was
Conflans with twenty-one sail and five frigates or sloops.
Both were flying before a rising gale from the W.N.W.
and heading to enter Quiberon Bay by the passage between
the Grands Cardinaux and the Plateau du Four. Ahead of
Conflans was the Vengeance frigate of 28 guns, whose
captain, Nightingale, was carrying all the sail he could
bear, and was firing signal guns rapidly to warn Commodore
Duff at anchor in Quiberon Bay that the French fleet was at
hand. Duff at once ordered the cables to be cut and all
speed to be made to sea, for there was not a moment to be
lost if his little squadron was to escape from between the land
and an overwhelming enemy. The surest road to safety was
round the Pointe de Conguel, and through La Teignouse to
the north of Belleisle. But to beat through that channel, all
scarred as it is with rocks, in the face of a gale blowing right
down from the W.N.W., was a feat which only one of his
ships could achieve. The others were compelled to take
the frightfully perilous course of running down the east side
of Belleisle and rounding it to the south. Every yard of the
road brought them nearer to the French fleet, which was
coming up from the west and south. It was a question of
minutes whether Conflans’ ships would or would not cut the
path of escape. Never since the fleet of Bazan was seen
stretching across the roadstead of Flores in the Azores had
an English squadron been in greater peril than Duff’s, and the
men knew it well. Therefore it was that when the lookout-man
at the masthead of the Rochester hailed to report that
he saw Hawke’s sails to windward of the enemy, a wild shout
of joy went up, and the men threw their hats into the sea at
the French, in a horseplay of defiance. It was the gesture of
the boxer or single-stick player at a country fair who gave
a challenge. It was now about eight o’clock in the morning.
The reader will bear in mind that Duff’s ships were just about
to be pinned to the south coast of Belleisle, that the French
ships were closing in on them from the sea, and that the
topsails of Hawke were rising over the horizon against the grey
November sky. The clouds were driving furiously overhead.
The Norsemen, whose descendants were numerous in the
English fleet, and not absent from the French, would have
seen the Valkyries riding, and would have heard the voices of
the “choosers of the slain.” Here is the list of the ships and
the captains:—
THE FLEET OF HAWKE
The Royal George
100
Sir E. Hawke. Capt. Campbell.
Union
90
Sir C. Hardy. Capt. J. Evans.
Duke
90
T. Graves.
Namur
90
M. Buckle.
Mars
74
Commodore James Young.
Warspight
74
Sir John Bentley.
Hercules
74
E. Fortescue.
Torbay
74
Hon. A. Keppel.
Magnanime
74
Lord Howe.
Resolution
74
H. Speke.
Hero
74
Hon. G. Edgecumbe.
Swiftsure
70
Sir T. Stanhope.
Dorsetshire
70
P. Denis.
Burford
70
J. Gambier.
Chichester
70
E. S. Willet.
Temple
70
Hon. W. Shirley.
Revenge
64
J. Storr.
Essex
64
L. O’Brien.
Kingston
60
T. Shirley.
Intrepid
60
J. Maplesden.
Montagu
60
J. Rowley.
Dunkirk
60
R. Digby.
Defiance
60
P. Baird.
Duff’s Ships and the Frigates
Rochester
50
Capt. R. Duff.
Portland
50
M. Arbuthnot.
Falkland
50
Fr. S. Drake.
Chatham
50
J. Lockhart.
Minerva
32
A. Hood.
Venus
36
T. Harrison.
Vengeance
28
G. Nightingale.
Coventry
28
F. Burslem.
Maidstone
28
D. Diggs.
Sapphire
32
J. Strachan.
FLEET OF CONFLANS
Soleil Royal
80
Conflans Capt. de Chézac.
Tonnant
80
Chevr. de Beauffremont, Chef d’escadre.
Formidable
80
Saint-André Duverger, Chef d’escadre.
Orient
80
Guébriant de Budez, Chef d’escadre.
Itrépide
74
Chasteloger.
Magnifique
74
Bigot de Morogues.
Glorieux
74
Villars de Labrosse.
Thésé
74
de Kersaint.
Héros
74
Vicomte de Sanzay.
Robuste
74
Marquis de Vienne.
Northumberland
74
Chevr. de Belingant.
Juste
70
Saint Allouarn.
Dauphin Royal
70
Vicomte d’Urtubie.
Inflexible
70
Chevr. de Caumont.
Dragon
70
Levassor de Latouche.
Eveillé
70
Chevr. de Laprévalais.
Sphinx
70
Chevr. de Coutance-Laselle
Solitaire
70
Vicomte de Langle.
Brilliant
70
Boischateau.
Bizarre
70
Chevr. de Rohan.
Frigates:—Vestale, Aigrette.
Corvettes:—Calypso, Prince Noir.
The first report that he was approaching the enemy was
given to Hawke by the signal of the Maidstone at about half-past
eight. But it was not until a quarter to ten that Howe in
the Magnanime, who had been sent on to make the land and
guide the fleet, was able to signal that the French fleet was
ahead, and to report its force. Meanwhile the French admiral,
who was at first incredulous of the approach of his opponent,
had been convinced at last that the British fleet was indeed
upon him, and had begun to collect his ships, which had been
scattered in pursuit of Duff. He endeavoured to form a line,
and appeared resolved to give battle. When Howe’s signal
was seen, Hawke gave the order to form the line abreast, and
for the heavy sailers which were lagging behind to set more
sail and come up to his flag. As the British ships rose above
the horizon both fleets were much scattered, and the admirals
were endeavouring to bring them together. It was not a
rapid process with sailing-ships, which could not spread much
canvas in stormy weather. The whole forenoon slipped away
before a shot could be fired, and all the vessels were still to the
west and south of Belleisle at midday. Duff joined Hawke at
eleven o’clock. The French admiral was now able to measure
the strength of the force about to fall on him. He estimated
it at thirty sail of the line, which even when the 50-gun ships
of Commodore Duff were counted in was an exaggeration,
only to be accounted for by fear, or by a dishonest wish to
excuse the weakness of his conduct to his superiors. Losing
all confidence, Conflans decided not to give battle, but to
make for Quiberon Bay. He therefore hoisted the signal
for retreat, and set the example by leading the way in the
Soleil Royal. He did not believe that Hawke would follow
him into the narrow and broken waters of the bay, but he
calculated that if the English admiral did take this bold
course, he himself could work up towards the peninsula of
Quiberon, and so gain the weather-gage and the advantage of
position over an opponent embayed on a hostile and unfamiliar
coast. This is what he said in his exculpatory dispatch, but
it has much the look of an afterthought, and the probability is
that Conflans really hoped to reach the enclosed waters of the
Morbihan before being overtaken.
Had he been opposed to a commonplace officer, he would
probably have succeeded. Hawke was too bold a man to
turn his mind to considerations of superfluous prudence in the
presence of an enemy who was manifestly seeking to avoid
battle. The signal for the line abreast was hauled down and
replaced by another, for the vessels nearest the French to
pursue, to overtake, and to bring the enemy to action, and for
all others to come on at their best speed, pressing into battle
where and how they could. The two fleets swept on past
Belleisle, rolling and pitching in the rising sea. It was
shortly after two in the afternoon that the French admiral led
his flying force round the Grands Cardinaux, and already the
battle had begun with the ships behind him. The Warspight,
Sir John Bentley, and the Dorsetshire, Captain P. Denis,
were the first of the English ships to come up with and open
fire on the enemy. They were soon joined by the Revenge,
Magnanime, Torbay, Montagu, Resolution, Swiftsure,
and Defiance. Thus, when the French ships ran between
the Grands Cardinaux and Plateau du Four, all those at the end
of their line were already mingled with their pursuers, and both
the fleets came in together locked in a savage embrace of battle.
Never in the long history of war was the truth
that the timid is also the dangerous course more convincingly
shown than in this battle. As the English ships
overtook the French, ranging up on both sides, they did not
linger by the first they met, but pushed on ahead, leaving the
work of destruction to be completed by their comrades
coming on behind. Thus the French rear ships were
successively assailed by superior numbers firing into them from
right and left. It must also be remembered that when the
ships turned round Les Grands Cardinaux and headed to the
north and north-west, they turned their left sides to the wind
and were pressed over to the right. The slope, or list, given
to them was so great that it was impossible to open the ports
of the lowest tier of guns on the lee side. When any
English captain came up on the lee side of a Frenchman, he
himself had the full use of his weather battery, while his
opponent could not fire his heaviest and most effective tier of
guns. Conflans, in fact, had so managed matters that he gave
Hawke’s superiority of numbers an effect it could not have
had if the French fleet had accepted battle outside Belleisle, in
good order, and in a united body. The rear of his line was
miserably crushed. The Formidable, 80, the flagship of the
Chef d’Escadre Saint-André Duverger, was shattered to pieces
by our fire. Duverger himself and 200 of his men
were slain, and his ship surrendered. The Thésée, 74, filled
and went down with all hands, unquestionably because her
captain, M. de Kersaint, opened his lower deck ports to fire
and allowed the water to rush in. Keppel on the Torbay all
but incurred the same fate by running the same hazard, but
his ship freed herself of the water in time.
A detailed description of the battle is an impossibility.
The wind shifted suddenly from W.N.W. to N.N.W.,
and increased in violence as it travelled round, adding to the
already frightful confusion of the forty and odd great ships
manœuvring in the confined triangle of water bounded by the
coast and the islands. The sea was heaving underfoot, driven
in great waves before the wind, and dragged seaward by the
ebb. The storm howled through the rigging. The ships
under reduced canvas made short tacks to avoid the rocks all
around. Conflans, after stretching up to Quiberon Bay, turned
back to the help of the ships behind him, and the two fleets
were mingled in a wild whirl of storm and battle. Collisions
were incessant between enemies and friends, but the English,
as being the more practised seamen, avoided them better, and
suffered from them less. To the French admiral it suggested
itself as a possibility that he might fight his way out again,
and get once more to windward of Belleisle. Signals followed
one another rapidly from the Soleil Royal, but they were not,
and they could not be obeyed. The rolling of the ships
rendered their fire ineffective, and the danger of wreck compelled
the captains to think constantly of the safety of their
vessels. Sunset, too, came early, and the dark put a stop to all
manœuvring. Thus there was neither time nor opportunity
to take many prizes. One other French ship, the Superbe,
shared the fate of the Thésée, and the Héros, dismasted and
riddled by the English fire, hauled down her flag and dropped
anchor. But the enemy was none the less completely beaten.
Seven of his ships found refuge in the Vilaine by grovelling
over the mud bar of the river. Others fled down the coast to
the south, where one of them, the Juste, was stranded near
St. Nazaire. Her first and second captains, the brothers
Allouar, had both fallen. Conflans himself ran inside the
Point du Four, and anchored off Croisic. When darkness
came down, Hawke made the signal to anchor. It was, according
to the code of the time, two guns fired to leeward, and was
naturally not distinguished while cannon were being fired on
all sides. Several of the English ships kept under way all
night, but most anchored between the Grands Cardinaux and
the little island of Dumet, which lies to north-east towards the
mouth of the Vilaine. Two English ships, the Essex and the
Resolution, were lost on the Four in the dark. The captain
of the Héros finding that he was not boarded by an English
prize crew, took advantage of the darkness to cut his cables
and allow his vessel to drive ashore near Croisic, when
Conflans had anchored in the Soleil Royal. In the morning
the admiral found himself alone, with the bulk of Hawke’s
fleet at anchor a few miles off. Hopeless of escape, he ran his
flagship ashore to prevent her from falling into our hands.
Judged by the fighting alone, the battle of Quiberon was
less arduous than many we have fought with the French and
all we have fought with the Dutch. But the fighting was in
this case the least of the battle. It stands in the first rank, if
not at the head of all the heroisms of the fleet, because it was
won over the storm, the sea, and the rocks, as well as over man.
The boldness of Hawke in flying at his enemy before his own
force was thoroughly united, and the magnificent seamanship
of his captains in circumstances of unparalleled difficulty set
this battle apart. Although the French had but one vessel
taken and five destroyed, they were utterly routed. The
seven ships which fled into the Vilaine were lost for all
practical purposes, and the spirit of their navy was broken for
the rest of the war. There is a legend which tells how the
sailing master of the Royal George expostulated when ordered
to take the ship among the rocks of Quiberon, and how
Hawke answered that his subordinate had done his duty by
pointing out the danger and was now to obey the order. If
this story has not an actual, it has a mythical, truth. What
gives its peculiar character to Hawke’s victory at Quiberon
was its magnificent military quality. To the mere seaman
there was something like madness in rushing just before dark
into the most frightful of the possible perils of navigation.
But the admiral, though a finished seaman, was also a great
fighting leader, and to him the occasion seemed one on which
to use his skill, not to avoid but to incur dangers, for a great
purpose. Nothing equal in conduct will be met for twenty-two
years, and until we come to Hood’s fine, though unsuccessful
effort to save the island of St. Kitts from the Comte de
Grasse. Indeed the whole passage of the blockade of Brest
and the battle of Quiberon was without precedent in the
history of the navy, and without an equal successor for forty
years. The tenacity with which the fleet kept its watch into
the stormy winter months would have appeared the excess of
temerity to the naval officers of former times, who thought it
dangerous to leave the great ships at sea after September.
What also was without precedent was the success with which
the crews were kept in health by the determination of the
admiral that they should be regularly supplied with fresh meat
and wholesome beer. After Quiberon the stormy weather
made the service of the victuallers difficult, and there was a
change for the worse which is recorded in the navy’s one
contribution to epigrammatic literature—
“Ere Hawke did bang
Monsieur Conflans
You sent us beef and beer;
Now Monsieur’s beat
We’ve nought to eat
Since you have nought to fear.”
It adds a grace to the heroic figure of Hawke that he
was tender of the lives and of the health of his men. But
his good sense taught him that sickly crews must needs make
a crippled fleet.
The history of the invasion year may be concluded with
a brief notice of the fate of Thurot. He escaped from Dunkirk
with five ships on the 17th October, and made his way
to the coast of Norway. From thence he came down to the
Hebrides early in 1760. Two of his vessels were disabled
by weather at different times and left him. On the 20th
February he appeared off Carrickfergus in the north of
Ireland, and took the place. On the 28th of the same
month Captain Elliot of the Eolus, with two other frigates,
fell in with the three Frenchmen and took them after a sharp
fight, in which Thurot, a brave humane man worthy of a better
service and a better fate, lost his life. And so went out the
last spark of the French scheme for the destruction of
England.
When darkness closed down on the Bay of Quiberon
on the 20th November, the great operations of naval warfare
came to an end, for there was no longer any fleet to meet
ours at sea. The navy had duty to do both during 1759
and afterwards in co-operating with the army in the conquest
of French possessions. But its work, however indispensable,
was ancillary, and a repetition of the same tale with the same
moral would be tedious. I shall therefore, as in the case of
the operations of the reigns of King William and Queen Anne,
simply give a list of the expeditions.
Expedition.
When Begun.
When Ended.
Commodore Moore and Major-General Hopson
attack Martinique unsuccessfully, and Guadaloupe
successfully. The arrival of Bompart’s squadron
compelled Moore to concentrate his ships, which
gave the French privateers an opportunity to do
considerable injury to our trade. Their activity
confirmed the British Government in its intention
to deprive them of their ports of supply by taking
all the French islands. No action took place
with Bompart.
End of November 1758
May 1759.
Vice-Admiral Saunders and Wolfe sail from
Spithead, pick up the ships left on the American
coast, and take Quebec on the 17th August.
Saunders sailed for home two months later.
17th February 1759.
18th October 1759.
Commodore Keppel and Major-General Hodgson take Belleisle.
29th March 1761.
7th June 1761.
Commodore Sir James Douglas and Lord Rollo
take Dominica in the Antilles. They sailed from
Guadaloupe.
4th June 1761.
8th June 1761.
Rear-Admiral Rodney and Major-General
Monckton complete the conquest of the French
settlements in the West Indies, except those in
Hayti.
8th January 1762.
26th February 1762.
After Spain had joined France, a great combined
expedition under Sir G. Pocock, with Lord Albemarle
as General, sailed from home, and, after
collecting forces in the West Indies, took Havana.
5th March 1762.
11th August 1762.
In the East Indies Admiral Cornish and Colonel Draper took Manila.
1st August 1762.
6th October 1762.
While the campaigns of 1758 and 1759 were being
fought out in Europe and America, the rivalry between
France and England in the Eastern Seas was decided to
our advantage. In this struggle the navy played a very
essential part. The scene of its labours and final triumph,
was on the eastern or Coromandel coast of the Indian
Peninsula. Here the course of the war was dictated to a
very large extent by certain physical conditions. From
March to October is the season of the S.W. or rainy monsoon.
Then the wind is favourable to all ships entering the
Bay of Bengal. It blows away from the land and renders
the coast safe. Immediately under the land, however, there
is a belt of water subject to variable winds, which blow
alternately on to the land from the S.E. and off it from the
S. or W. When the wind is from the S.E. the sea becomes
rough, and the coast, being very ill provided with harbours, is
dangerous. All currents during this season flow strongly to
the north. Thus the tendency of wind and water alike is
to carry all ships into the Bay, and to make the Coromandel
coast safe. After October and till the end of February
comes the season of the N.E. monsoon, which, blowing on
to the land, makes a rough sea and a dangerous coast, and
also tends to blow all ships out of the Bay of Bengal. Thus
in the ordinary course of trade vessels would come in with
the S.W. monsoon, and arrange to start so as to get the help
of the N.E. monsoon on their homeward voyage. Thus too
the period of operation for fighting fleets would be during
the S.W. monsoon, since at that time the coast was safe,
and both sides would take the opportunity to send out
reinforcements to its garrisons on shore, while its commerce
would be coming in at the beginning and going out at the
end of the period. With the N.E. monsoon all sails disappeared
from the Bay of Bengal—those of commerce on
their homeward voyage, those of war to their respective ports,
which for the French meant the island of Mauritius, and
for the English, Bombay on the western or Malabar coast.
Here, as in Europe, we had an advantage of position. The
Malabar coast is nearer the Coromandel than is the Mauritius,
and therefore the British squadron, when directed with
common energy, could always be at the scene of operations
before its opponent, and could be placed so as to intercept
all French forces on their way to Pondicherry.
Mention has already been made of the co-operation of
Admiral Watson and Clive in the suppression of Geriah
early in 1756. They reached Madras on the 20th June,
one day before the taking of Calcutta by Suraj-ud-Daulah
and the tragedy of the Black Hole. The vengeance for
this outrage is one of the most famous stories in our history.
But it belongs to the history of the East India Company
rather than to that of the navy. Against an enemy who
possessed no ships, the fleet could only act by providing for
the transport of troops, covering their landing, attacking forts
on the coast, and landing stores or naval brigades. Admiral
Watson did his share in the work actively in the early
months of 1757, and he was passively consenting to the
fraud by which his name was forged for the purpose of
cheating Omichand. A small naval brigade shared in the
battle of Plassey. In any case the sudden extension of
British power which came out of the overthrow of Suraj-ud-Daulah,
would probably have led to a renewal of the conflict
with the French Company, but hostilities were precipitated
by the European and American quarrels of the two
countries. In March 1757 the French fort at Chandernagore,
just above Calcutta, was occupied after a sharp fight, in the
midst of the complicated negotiations and conflicts with the
Nabob of Bengal. Admiral Watson did not live to take
part in the naval conflict with the French, but died in
September of 1757. He was succeeded by Rear-Admiral
George Pocock, to whom it fell to command at sea in the
decisive struggle for supremacy in India.
No attempt will be made here to describe the series of
battles fought during 1758 and 1759. These actions present
little more than a weary repetition of examples of the working
of the pedantic Fighting Instructions. Though Pocock was
unquestionably a man of great energy, strong mind, and the
utmost zeal for the service, he wanted the originality and
independence of intellect to break away from the traditional
method. Thus action after action presents the same monotonous
picture. The British squadron works to windward to
secure the power to force on battle, and comes down in line to
engage the enemy from end to end. The French wait for the
attack, fire to cripple the rigging of those of our vessels which
present themselves first to its blows, and then slip away,
damaged more or less severely, but never so seriously that they
cannot reach the port they are steering for, while our crews are
knotting, splicing, and replacing ropes and spars. It was by
no single well-delivered blow, by no telling victory that we
finally forced our opponent out of the Indian Seas, but by
persistence, by a better average of practical seamanship, by the
possession of greater resources—by, as it were, slowly pushing
him in front of us as by a steady application of weight.
The conflict on the sea blazed up in 1758. The French
Government had realised the necessity for making an effort to
preserve its East Indian possessions in 1757. A squadron
was fitted out at Brest under M. D’Aché, and sailed on the
6th March. It was driven back by bad weather, and two of
the vessels belonging to it were taken to serve in America
with M. Dubois de Lamotte. On the 4th May M. D’Aché
sailed again with one king’s ship and five belonging to the
Company, carrying with him a body of troops under the headlong
and passionate Lally, the most unhappy and one of the
least wise of the Irishmen who have been the enemies to this
country. The dates of D’Aché’s cruise illustrate the slow
progress of fleets at that time. He reached Rio on the 23rd
July, and remained there for two months to recruit the health
of his crews—no unusual stoppage in the Indian voyages of
the period. He reached the Île de France on the 28th
December, and sailed for India on the 27th January 1758.
On the 26th April he reached the coast of Coromandel—little
less than a year after he had left Brest. While D’Aché was
slowly sailing to the East, Pocock had been reinforced in March
by Commodore Charles Stevens, and his squadrons had been
raised to seven vessels of from fifty to sixty-four guns. He
knew that a French force was on its way and must be now
approaching the coast of Coromandel. On the 17th April he
sailed from Madras and worked to the southward in search of
the enemy, but did not succeed in meeting him. D’Aché had
passed unseen and had anchored at Carical, a French post to
the south of the English station of Cuddalore, which is to the
south of Pondicherry. Pondicherry itself is well to the south
of Madras. The French officer had with him eight vessels—for
he had found some at the Île de France—one more than
Pocock, but only his flagship the Zodiaque, 74, was a warship.
The other seven were vessels belonging to the French East
India Company, were built for trade as well as fighting, and
even if they carried their full nominal armaments of forty-four,
fifty, or fifty-four guns, inferior in solidity to Pocock’s.
The one ship more of the French would barely put them on
an equality with our squadron.
From Carical D’Aché sent on Lally to assume his
government at Pondicherry, and he himself struck at the
English station of Cuddalore. He had the good fortune to
cut off two small vessels, the Triton and Bridgewater, which
were driven ashore under the citadel of the place, Fort
St. David. Meanwhile Pocock was coming back from his
unsuccessful cruise to the South. On the 29th April the two
fleets sighted one another, and a confused action ensued. The
dull rules of the Fighting Instructions were badly executed by
some of Pocock’s captains, and one of D’Aché’s officers showed
downright cowardice. After the usual cannonade the two
fleets separated in the customary respective conditions of
British and French squadrons after an action fought according
to rule. The French, whose ships were crowded with Lally’s
soldiers, had a heavy list of killed and wounded, because we
preferred to fire at our enemy’s hull. In the British squadron
several vessels were so crippled in their rigging as to be
unmanageable. D’Aché anchored at Alamparva, north of
Pondicherry, where one of his vessels became a wreck in the
surf. Pocock went on to Madras to refit and bring three of
his captains to court martial. One was dismissed the service,
and the other two sentenced to lesser penalties. The incident
is an example of that wholesome severity which, by assigning
to every man a definite responsibility and calling on him to
answer for every failure, has established the magnificent
discipline of the Royal Navy, and has been the austere parent
of its splendid efficiency.
From Alamparva D’Aché went to Pondicherry and landed
his soldiers and his numerous sick and wounded. At the close
of May Pocock appeared off the port. The French Admiral,
whose squadron was ill fitted, had recourse to every device to
avoid action, and all the rabid driving of Lally could not make
him incur risks. As the authorities at Madras were rendered
nervous for their safety by the strength of the French military
force they recalled Pocock, and thus enabled D’Aché to
co-operate with Lally in the capture of Fort St. David in June.
In July, however, the admiral was back off Pondicherry
seeking battle. D’Aché would fain have avoided a meeting
and have returned at once to the Île de France. Prayers and
threats from the authorities and Lally induced him to stay,
and to play a game of hide-and-seek in the calms and varying
inshore winds of the coast. On the 3rd August, after infinite
confusing movements and varying breezes, another barren
cannonade took place off Negapatam. Again both admirals
anchored, Pocock at Carical and D’Aché at Pondicherry. On
the 3rd September the Frenchman sailed for the Île de France,
and the sea being now clear of enemies, Pocock went round to
Bombay to avoid the storms of the north-easterly monsoon.
This campaign has certain features of interest. Though
Pocock’s arms were tied by the Fighting Instructions, he
showed a vigour in attack and a persistency of effort which
promised final victory over his timid opponent. But the
working of those instructions is full of warning. It has been
ingeniously argued by the late Admiral Colomb that the
presence of an effective naval force, for which he invented—or
to which he adapted—the name of “Fleet in Being,” on
a given coast will of itself so act as to stop all operations
against that coast on the part of an enemy. Yet in this case,
though the British squadron was at least a full match for the
French, and Pocock’s will to strike was of the best, we see that
he failed both to prevent D’Aché from landing soldiers at
Pondicherry and from co-operating in the taking of Cuddalore.
He failed partly because of the timidity of the Council which
called him back to Madras, but mainly because he was tied by
formal rules of battle which did not allow him to develop freely
the whole strength of his command. Had he been free to
take his fleet always where he thought best, and to use it
unbound by foolish laws, had he been one of those great and
original captains who have the moral and intellectual courage
to break away from worn-out traditions, there can be no doubt
that his campaign of 1758 on the coast of Coromandel would
have been marked by a decisive battle. It might well have
been far more costly than the two engagements actually fought,
but we may assert, without undue patriotic confidence in our
own navy, that it would have broken the French naval forces
in those seas to pieces. As it was, the balance of advantage
was rather with the French than with us. The moral of the
story is surely, that it is not enough for a fleet to be “in
being” if it is not also in action, and that there is but little
use in action which is not allowed to drive its blows home to
the heart.
The operations of 1759 bear some likeness to those of the
previous year, but with a marked difference. Our squadron
well supplied, strictly disciplined, grew in strength, efficiency,
and confidence. D’Aché was joined at the Île de France by
ships of the navy from Europe commanded by Froger de
l’Eguille, who had taken part in the action with Byng. But
his very numbers were an embarrassment to him. The French
islands were too poor to feed the crews of the squadron. They
were only kept from starvation by sending some of the ships to
buy food at a great cost from the Dutch at the Cape of Good
Hope, and others to live from hand to mouth on the coast of
Madagascar. Stores were almost wholly wanting, and the
work of refitting the vessels was either not done at all, or was
done by sacrificing one necessary to serve as makeshift for
another. It is therefore not surprising that whereas Pocock
was back from the Malabar coast and was cruising in the Bay
of Bengal in April, D’Aché was unable to leave the islands
till the middle of July. He was near Batacaloa on the east
coast of Ceylon at the end of August. He had eleven ships
to Pocock’s eight, but many were weak, all were badly fitted,
and there was little heart or confidence in officers or men.
To a large extent his crews were natives. The utmost he felt
able to do was to carry some reinforcements to Pondicherry,
and his ambition did not reach beyond effecting this service
without being brought to battle if he could. When then he
was sighted by Pocock on the coast of Ceylon, he applied
himself to slipping away and succeeded. The British admiral,
having lost sight of him, hastened to cut his road at Pondicherry,
and another scene of cannonading, of damaged rigging
for us, and of final escape for the French, took place on the
10th September. D’Aché reached Pondicherry while our
ropes and spars were being repaired at Negapatam. During
the rest of the month the British admiral made successive
attempts to provoke his opponent to battle. The furious
Lally, whose one idea of government was to lay about him
with a flail, strove hard to get service out of his naval colleague.
But D’Aché, who was deep in the ruinous intrigues of the
French settlement, would do nothing. He would not even
stay on the coast though prayed to do so by his countrymen.
His officers were as eager to be gone as himself. At the end
of September he sailed for the islands, and the French flag
disappeared from those seas. When his opponent was gone
Pocock went round to Bombay. From thence he sailed for
home with a great convoy, and arrived on the 22nd September.
The naval war was at an end in the East Indies by the utter
collapse of the French. Their possessions being cut off from
help, fell before the superior forces of the English company.
Pocock was rewarded by the immensely lucrative command
of the fleet which sailed in the combined expedition against
Havana in 1762, when Spain, in a moment of Royal folly,
was dragged into the war against us. On that enterprise and
of the contemporaneous expedition which Pocock’s successor
in the East Indies command, Cornish, led against Manila, no
more will be said here than that they were marked by a loyalty
of co-operation between sailor and soldier which was then a
novelty.
CHAPTER VII THE AMERICAN WAR TILL 1780
Authorities.—See authorities for previous years; Mundy’s Life and Correspondence
of Lord Rodney; Barrow’s Life of Howe; Chevalier, Histoire de la Marine
Française pendant la guerre d’independence Americaine; Parliamentary History;
Annual Register.
The interval of fifteen years which separates the end of
the Seven Years’ War from the beginning of the
American War in 1778 saw no change in the organisation
of the navy. An improvement in their half pay was
given to the captains in 1773. In 1715 the right to enjoy
half pay when not on active service, which had hitherto been
limited to twenty-five officers of this rank, was extended to all.
The amount had come to appear insufficient by 1773, and the
captains petitioned Parliament for relief. Their case was
stated by Howe, who was then member for Dartmouth. Lord
North, the Prime Minister, began by opposing the motion, on
the ground that it affected the revenue, and ought therefore
to have been made by a minister. But the sympathy of the
house was with Howe and his clients. A committee of
inquiry was appointed, and on its report Parliament decided
that the increase ought to be granted. A sum of £7000 was
finally voted, and the scale of half pay was fixed at 10s. a day
for 50 captains, 8s. for 30, and 6s. for all the others, in
their order of seniority. Howe and the more fortunate naval
officers, who were members of the House of Commons and who
gave him support, acted an honourable part on behalf of their
brothers in arms. They would have done still better if they
had gone on to represent the far more cruel grievances of the
men. Had they acted with spirit for those fellow-seamen who
did not belong to their own class, they might have secured
a hearing, and have saved the navy from the long list of
mutinies which were to disgrace the coming war. But so
much magnanimity and foresight was perhaps not to be expected
in those years of the eighteenth century. Nothing was
done for the sailors. The isolated mutinies were sometimes
suppressed with severity, but were sometimes concealed from
public knowledge, and condoned. A long course of neglect
and weakness, with now and then a spasm of ferocity, bore its
natural fruit in the combined mutiny at Spithead in 1797.
The discipline of the navy continued to benefit by the
admirable work done in the Seven Years’ War by the great
chiefs and the less famous officers whom they inspired. Their
influence and example went on bearing good fruit, and have
indeed never ceased to be felt, but have been carried from
one generation to another of their successors. Remote from
the corruption of the dockyards and the fury of political
factions on shore, on solitary voyages, in long cruises, in
blockades, in battle and storm, the admirals and captains who
were trained in the schools of Anson and Hawke, Pocock
and Boscawen, and were themselves to train the admirals and
captains of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, went on
perfecting the seamanship and fighting efficiency of the fleet.
An anonymous officer, who wrote in 1788, could declare in
answer to those who boasted of the ancient discipline of the
navy, that “if we compare the past practices and methods, as
they have been explained to us thirty years ago by old seamen
in the service, with the present, we shall find, that in no one
thing under the British Government has there been so much
improvement as in the art of fighting, sailing, and navigating
a British ship of War.” The reason he gives is full of instruction,
and deserves to be quoted at length:—
“The old method of enforcing discipline was without
method, by main strength and the frequent use of the rattan,
without which no officer, from the captain down to the
youngest midshipman, ever went upon deck. Even twenty
years ago there was much of this discipline (if it can be called
by the name) remaining in the service. Last war [i.e. between
1778 and 1783] there is no doubt that the internal discipline
of His Majesty’s ships in general was brought to as great a
degree of perfection, almost, as it is capable of receiving;
I say in general. There were indeed exceptions; but in
captains bigoted to the old customs, and whose ships might
always be distinguished by their awkwardness and inactivity
and by the indifferent figure they cut in action, though commanded
with bravery. This general improvement proceeded
from a method adopted in every branch of an officer’s and
sailor’s duty, by dividing and quartering the officers with the
men, and making them responsible for the performance of
that portion of the duty allotted them, without noise, or the
brutal method of driving sailors like cattle with sticks.
Whether it were to make or shorten sail, to manœuvre the
ship, to keep the men clean clothed, clean bedded, and
berthed, this method was practised.”
The writer attributes the efficiency of the crews and the
good health they enjoyed even in the West Indies, while under
the command of Rodney and Hood, to this more humane and
intelligent system. He claims that there were cases when out
of twenty-two sail of the line cruising together, there were not
twenty-two men who could not come to quarters. The reader
who compares this with the terrible ravages made by fever and
scurvy in the naval expeditions of Queen Anne’s reign and the
beginning of the Seven Years’ War will see how vast had been
the change for the better. The example of Captain Cook and
the exertions of Rodney’s doctor, Gilbert Blane, brought about
improvements in the diet of the men which saved thousands
for the service of their country, who would have been thrown
to the sharks in former times. All this reform was the spontaneous
work of the navy. There was so little about it of
Admiralty system that no universal system of quartering men
and dividing work was established till far into the nineteenth
century. Captains followed the practice of the officers under
whom they had first served, with improvements of their own.
The perfected discipline of the navy was the result of the
labours of hundreds of officers, many of whom are completely
forgotten, thinking, experimenting, and toiling, each in his own
sphere, but all with the same noble love of good work. Therefore
it had, and has, a grand life of its own, incomparably
higher, and far more enduring than the mechanical order
enforced by a minister or king. “It is the service” was the
most emphatic praise a naval officer could give, and “It is
not the service” his most severe condemnation. “The
Service” was the formula standing for that combination of
smartness, of cleanliness, of precision of movement, of exactness
of stroke, of resolution to endure, and of intrepidity to
venture, which is the glory of the navy, its strength, and the
real explanation of its triumphs. It is of this too that the
nation has the best reason to be proud. There is something
rather servile and more than rather blind in the habit of
attributing all success to the commander. In the long run the
Roman Legion will wear down Hannibal, and it is a greater
feat for any people to produce the organism which is animated
by the virtue of tens of thousands of its sons, than the exceptional
leader, whose genius does not always last even for the
whole of his own life. We do well to put up monuments to
Nelson, and it would be to our honour to remember other
admirals more fully than we do. The navy itself is the living
memorial raised to the generation of forgotten men whose
names have passed into forgetfulness, but whose work lives to
this day on the quarter-decks and forecastles of every ship
flying the cross of St. George.
While the seamen were steadily perfecting the discipline
of the navy, their rulers on shore were allowing the administration
to drift back to the corruptions of Walpole’s time. The
cause of this unhappy reaction is easily stated. George III.
came to the throne with the determination to be king. This
meant that he would not consent to be a puppet in the hands
of the Whig oligarchy of Revolution families, who had dominated
his grandfather. He could not crush them by the use of
force, and was consequently compelled to fight them with
their own weapons, which were interest and corruption.
Interest meant that he bought the obedience of Members of
the House of Commons by bribery. Every branch of the
public service, and the Royal Household also, suffered because
places were given to buy votes, and no reform could be effected
without losing the support of members of Parliament who
profited by the abuse. The evil was particularly bad in the
navy. Parliamentary boroughs and dockyard seats were
regularly filled with henchmen of the king’s ministers, on the
understanding that they gave their help to suppress inquiry.
Money voted with a great appearance of precision for specific
purposes was not applied to the ends for which it was in
theory granted. What became of it nobody was ever able to
discover. On paper the system of accounts was so rigid that
fraud might have appeared to be impossible, but its very
severity made it cumbersome, and the men in office were not
even honest. When taxed with misuse of the nation’s money
they were in the habit of boasting that they did not take it
for themselves. It is probable that they did not put it directly
into their own pockets, but their defence was sophistical.
Corruption was needed to keep them in place—and place was
lucrative. Every department had its own treasury. The
money paid out by the Exchequer was put to the account of
the minister. The bankers paid interest on it, and this interest
was the perquisite of the members of the ministry. It was
their interest to delay payments and conceal the actual use
made of the funds. Brougham repeats a story which illustrates
the spirit of the politicians of that generation. When Lord
North was appointed Paymaster of the Forces he found that
he had to divide the emoluments with another politician. His
disgust was great, and he revenged himself by a characteristic
jest. A dog made a mess in the passage outside his room.
Lord North sent for one of the servants, ordered him to carry
the offensive matter away, and take care that his colleague
received his due share, for said he, “Mr. Cooke is to have half
of everything that comes into the office.”
When the war with France came in 1778 the mischief had
been in full swing for seven years under the administration of
Lord Sandwich, which began in 1771. During that period
he had received for the building and equipping of the navy
£6,472,072, besides large sums charged on the debt. This
was nearly twice as much as had been voted between 1755
and 1762, and considerably more than a million beyond the
votes of 1763 to 1771. These sums did not cover the whole
expense of maintaining the navy. The supplies were voted
under three heads. There was the Ordinary of the Navy,
which meant the maintenance of the dockyards, care of the
ships not in commission, and half pay. Then there was the
Extraordinary of the navy, the “building, rebuilding, and
repairs” and all “extra works over and above what was meant
to be done upon the heads of wear and tear in ordinary.”
The third vote was for so many men at £4 a head per month
of twenty-eight days. Of this sum £1, 16s. was for wages of
all ranks, 19s. for rations, and the balance covered current
expenses in replacing rigging and ammunition. This was
naturally the largest sum of all. The votes for 1779 for
example were respectively: for the Ordinary, £369,882,
6s. 1d.; for the Extraordinary, £579,187; and for 70,000
men “for 13 months, including ordnance,” £3,640,000. The
£6,472,072 supplied to Sandwich between 1771 and 1778
did not include the vote for men. Though the sum was so
considerable, the Admiralty was unable to find fifty line-of-battle
ships for sea in the summer of 1778.
Why so much money produced such unsatisfactory results
was well shown in the course of a discussion in the Commons
on the 13th January of this year. Mr. Temple Luttrell quoted
figures to show that as much had been voted for the repairs
of the Namur, the Defence, and the Arrogant, as would
have built them new from the keel at the most extravagant
rate. Yet they were not fit for service. An even more
scandalous case was that of the Dragon, 74. She had been
launched in 1760 in the heat of the Seven Years’ War, and
was one of the vessels then hastily constructed of green
timber to meet a pressing need. They were rotten by 1771,
and Sandwich was in the habit of taking credit to himself for
his exertion to replace them by better ships. What had
happened with the Dragon was this—that between 1771 and
1778 the Admiralty came to Parliament for successive sums,
amounting to £27,000, for her repairs, and £10,273 for her
stores. Yet in the latter year she was notoriously lying in a
rotten state at the head of Portsmouth Harbour, and not one
penny of this money had ever been spent upon her. The facts
were not disputed. All that the Sea Lords, who answered for
the Admiralty, could say was, that they had not pilfered the
money themselves, and that this sort of thing had always been
done. The answer was, that it was directly contrary to the
representation of the House of Commons in 1711. It was on
this occasion that Burke threw the book of the estimates across
the Speaker’s table, knocking over a candle, and all but breaking
the shins of the Treasurer of the Navy, Welbore Ellis. He said,
that it was “treating the House with the utmost contempt, to
present them with a fine gilt book of estimates, calculated to
the last farthing, for purposes to which the money granted was
never meant to be applied.” Burke was right, but the Whig
Opposition had done nothing to amend the evil in its days of
power, and had little right to take a lofty moral line with its
successors. Contempt was the exact word for the attitude
taken towards all criticism by Sir Hugh Palliser and Lord
Mulgrave, the naval representatives of the Admiralty in the
Lower House. Palliser was arrogant and laconic, lying as to
the state of the fleet with a burly assurance. Lord Mulgrave,
the Irish peer, better remembered as the Captain Constantine
Phipps, with whom Nelson made his early voyage to Spitzbergen,
was fluent, jocular, and insolent. A docile majority supported
them by voting “the previous question” as the most convenient
way of stifling inquiry.
Indignant contemporary critics declared that accounts
made in this fashion were in fact deliberately designed to
“envelope in utter darkness the true appropriation of the
immense sums they (the Ministers to wit) extort thereupon
from the public.” The respective shares of deliberate design
and mere convenient use and wont in producing the disorder
present a nice question. What is beyond dispute is, that when
the gilt book of the estimates showed the expenditure of such
and such sums for repairs and stores, and when the money was
devoted to other purposes, and the vessels named were lying
rotten and unfit for sea, it must have been impossible even for
the best informed officials to know the effective strength of the
navy. Indeed, nothing is more difficult than to find what was
the real available force of the fleet at this crisis. The common
printed authorities, Beatson’s Naval and Military Memoirs,
Schomberg’s Chronicle, and Derrick’s Memoirs of the Royal
Navy (all good books in their different ways), contradict one
another. It is only natural they should, for there were no
accurate sources of information. It was not till 1773 that the
Admiralty itself began to try to take stock of its vessels. In
that year it was ordered that a return, to be known as the
“Progress of the Dockyards,” should be made every week, showing
what ships of all classes were under the care of the officials.
There was also a monthly list of ships in full sea pay. It
ought to have been possible to make an exact return of the
strength of the navy by adding the one to the other. But
these papers were avowedly untrustworthy. A ship in full sea
pay, or commission, might go into the dockyard for repairs. She
would then appear in the Weekly Progresses, and if the totals
alone were looked to, she would be counted twice. Then a
vessel was considered to be in full sea pay when her captain
was appointed, but months might pass before he joined
her, and in the meantime she lay unmanned. So she,
again, would be included twice. The Weekly Progresses
were drawn up by the clerks of the Navy Office, and
the monthly lists by the Admiralty officials. They were
independent and might not agree. Some allowance must
be made for mere blunders. It is obvious, too, that the
dockyards returned such rotten hulks as H.M.S. Dragon
among the ships under their charge, while the fact that a man-of-war
was in full sea pay hardly established a presumption
that she was manned, rigged, or as much as in good repair.
These official papers are therefore but blind guides. When
the great reform of the navy administration was begun in the
early years of the nineteenth century, a manuscript book
called the “Progress of the Navy from 1765 to 1806” was
compiled in the Admiralty. The author warns all who may use
it that his sources were untrustworthy, but he professes to have
done his best to get at the truth and to have made the
necessary deductions. It may be accepted as giving the
nearest attainable approach to an exact statement of the paper
strength of the navy during the years which it covers.
According to this authority, the total nominal force of the
Royal Navy in January 1778 was 399 vessels, of which
274 were in full sea pay, or commission, while 125 were
in ordinary, or reserve. The usual phrase of the time was
“lying by the walls”—that is to say, in the dockyards. The
advance during the war will be seen from the following list:—
Vessels in Full Sea Pay.
Total of all Vessels.
1st January 1778
274
399
〃 〃 1779
317
432
〃 〃 1780
364
481
〃 〃 1781
396
538
〃 〃 1782
398
551
〃 〃 1783
430
608
This, however, is paper strength. It includes battered
hulks fit only for harbour duty, prizes needing a refit, yachts
and ships building. Even at the very end of the war such
authorities as Keppel and Howe could not agree as to the
number of vessels really available for service. Ships were
put into commission simply in order to please supporters by
conferring professional favours on them, their relations, or
clients. A great display of pennants might be made by this
device, but it was a show out of all proportion to the effective
strength. Then, as in much later times, it was the dishonest
official practice to include vessels building in the list of the
navy. Thus, in the last year of the war, it was said that we had
four first-rates of 100 guns. In reality there had been three,
which were reduced to two by the sinking of the Royal George
at Spithead. Another was ordered to replace her, and a fourth,
the Queen Charlotte, which afterwards carried Howe’s
flag on the 1st June, was also begun. They were not ready
for years, but they were counted in to make up the tale
of four.
Where our evidence is confessedly not sound, it is idle
to make confident assertions about the strength of the fleet.
But the sea pay lists represent what was the utmost claimed
by the Government as ready for immediate service. The
figures for the beginning and the end of 1778 will show
what was the disposition of the fleet, and also what was the
first effect of the outbreak of hostilities with France.
January 1778.
December 1778.
Station.
Number.
Station.
Number.
East Indies
6
East Indies
5
Jamaica
22
Jamaica
21
Leeward Islands.
19
Leeward Islands
10
North America
92
North America
85
Mediterranean
6
Mediterranean
5
Newfoundland
13
Newfoundland
15
Convoy and Cruising
22
Convoy and Cruising
36
Ships at home
94
Ships at home
97
——
Western Squadron
43
274
——
317
The difference between the two lists is partly accounted for
by transfer of vessels from one station, or duty, to another.
The high figure of the North American station came from
the use of numbers of small craft to co-operate with the
troops employed against the insurgents from 1775 onwards.
In the main, however, the second list differs from the first by
the addition of the Western Squadron—that is, the great force
of battleships collected under Keppel to meet the French at
Brest.
It will be seen that there is an increase in the vessels
employed on “Convoy and Cruising.” We tell only half the
service of a navy in war when we confine ourselves to the
movements of the squadrons and the battles. The other half
consists in the patrol duty done to protect trade and keep
down the enemy’s attacks on commerce. To explain it by
narrative would be tedious and confusing to the reader, but
the following list of the warships of various classes employed
in this way at and about home when the war began will help
the reader to realise how the duty was provided for:—
Cruisers
Ship.
Guns.
Disposition.
Thetis
32
To come to Plymouth.
}
Channel Islands.
Actæon
44
〃 Spithead.
}
Seaford
20
〃 Falmouth.
}
Hyæna
20
〃 Spithead.
}
Cygnet
16
}
To the Downs.
Grasshopper
14
}
Pheasant
8
}
Boston
28
To cruise between Belfast Lough and the Mull of Cantyre.
Stag
28
To cruise in the Irish Channel.
Squirrel
20
To cruise between the Dodman and the Land’s End.
Harpy
18
}
To convoy the trade from Ireland to England.
Wolf
8
}
Wasp
8
At Plymouth.
Beaver’s Prize
14
To cruise between Flambro’ Head and Yarmouth.
Merchant A. S.
20
}
To cruise from Flambro’ Head to Shields.
Content A. S.
20
}
Queen A. S.
20
North Shields.
Heart of Oak A. S.
20
Liverpool.
Three Sisters A. S.
20
}
Leith.
Leith A. S.
20
}
Three Brothers A. S.
20
Bristol.
Satisfaction A. S.
20
Greenock.
Cutter Meredith
6·10
To cruise from Beachy Head to Portland.
Cutter Sherburne
6·8
To cruise from Portland to Ram Head.
Convoy
Ship.
Guns.
Disposition.
Belleisle
64
To proceed to St. Helena to convoy the East India trade home.
Jupiter
50
}
To cruise on coast of Spain and Portugal till the 20th October, and return with the trade.
Medea
28
}
Warwick
50
To convoy the trade to Canada from Cork, and return to Spithead.
Chatham
50
}
To cruise between Stromness and the isle of Bona, for the protection of the Hudson’s Bay trade, and repair with it to the Nore.
Portland
50
}
Jason
28
}
Atalanta
16
}
Montreal
32
To convoy trade to the Mediterranean and repair to Spithead.
Hussar
28
To cruise between Oporto and Lisbon.
Pelican
24
To cruise between Finisterre and Lisbon.
Fly
14
To convoy trade to Holland and return with it to the Nore.
Savage
14
To proceed to New York with dispatches and return to Spithead.
Hawke
10
To proceed to Newfoundland with dispatches and return to Plymouth.
Endeavour
10
To proceed with dispatches to Jamaica.
Ranger
8
To attend the Yarmouth Herring Fishery and return to the Nore.
Resolution
12·12″
}
In remote parts.
Discovery
8·8″
}
The letters A.S. stand for “Armed Ship.” These were
merchant craft bought into or hired for the navy, and armed
with small guns. The Resolution and Discovery were the
ships of Captain Cook, then on his last voyage. It must be
remembered that these lists represent the cruisers and convoy
ships at home or sent directly from home. On every station
the admiral would detail part of his command for such duties
as these.
The manning of the navy continued to present the old
difficulties, aggravated by the fact that we had lost the services
of the thousands of American seamen who had been found
in our ships in the last war. They were now manning the
privateers which preyed on our commerce as far abroad as the
Channel and the Mediterranean. All the old complaints were
heard of the cruelty, the unconstitutional character, and the
inefficiency of the press. A Bill to abolish it was introduced
and favourably received in the House of Commons, but went
no further. The fact is that the press was indispensable. We
would not train men in peace. The merchant seamen would
never enlist of their free will in the navy, and were the less likely
to do so because the first effect of a war was to send up wages
in the trading-ships. But the press was not only needed for
the sailors. They indeed were sought by it with particular
zeal, because their skill was indispensable in the ships as riggers
and to set an example to other men in handling masts and
sails in all conditions of weather. It was on them, too, that
the captain relied in the greater perils of navigation. But
they never formed the bulk of the crews of our warships,
nor was it possible they should. In a debate on the Bill to
abolish the Press, held on 11th March 1777, Lord Mulgrave
declared that the total number of seamen in the country was
only 60,000, while the number required for the navy in war
had sometimes risen to 80,000. If the whole body of our
merchant seamen had been swept into the navy and their
places in our trading-ships taken by foreigners who swarmed
in to earn the high war wages, there would still have been
a deficiency. In truth we never secured all the merchant
sailors. The list of men rated as seamen was made up by
taking landsmen, who either volunteered or were impressed,
and were not uncommonly vagabonds and jail-birds. Though
all might be known officially by the same name, a wide
distinction was always made among the crews themselves,
and in the opinion of the officers, between the “prime seamen”
who had served their apprenticeship in the long sea voyages
and could turn their hand to anything, and the mere “man-of-warsman,”
who had not been bred to the sea and had only
been taught the work of his particular station. It was
inevitable that in crews composed in this fashion there should
have been wide differences of quality and that some of their
elements were worthless and criminal. Neither was it denied
by the representatives of the Admiralty that this was the case.
On the 11th November of 1777, Mr. Temple Luttrell said in
the Commons, “Your bounties procure few good seamen, and
your press warrants, though enormously expensive, fewer still,
while great numbers are daily deserting from your ships and
hospitals to commit robberies and murders in the interior
counties.... I am assured that fifty have lately deserted
from the Monarch while in dock, forty from the Hector, and
twenty-five from the Worcester, six of these are confined at
Winchester for felonies, and there are two committed to Exeter
jail on a charge of murder.” Lord Mulgrave’s answer was
that fifty men had indeed deserted, from the Monarch, because
Captain Rowley was humanely unwilling to treat his men as
slaves, and that the deserters were not to be regretted, because
“the health of the rest was preserved, as the service was freed
from a number of men not to be depended on.” No reply
was given on other points. Lord Mulgrave’s tone of jaunty
flippancy was characteristic of the incompetent Government
which led the country unprepared into the most disastrous
of its wars.
Yet in 1777 the navy was beginning to reap the benefit
of the General Press warrant issues in October 1776, when
the king and his ministers were at last forced to recognise
that the rebellion in America was very serious. It was now
possible to lay hands on good men by force. Until this was
the case, our ships were not uncommonly manned in the
fashion described in the following letter from Captain Price
of the Viper sloop on the North American station in
1775, as quoted by Beatson in his Naval and Military
Memoirs:—
“I am very much distressed for Petty officers, as well as
Warrants. My Carpenter infirm and past duty, my Gunner
made from a livery servant, neither seaman nor gunner; my
Master a man in years, never an officer before, made from a
boy on board one of the guardships, he then keeping a public
house at Gosport. Petty officers I have but one, who owns
himself mad at times. A Master’s Mate I have not, nor anyone
I can make a Boatswain’s mate. I have not one person
I could trust with the charge of a vessel I might take to bring
her in.”
What complication of slovenliness and jobbery there was
behind that master who had been borne as a boy on a guardship
and yet kept a public-house at Gosport, we do not know,
but it must be allowed that H.M.S. Viper differed vastly from
the smart British man-of-war with her crew of fine seamen
which is supposed to have represented the navy of the
eighteenth century. It is probable, however, that she only
differed in degree from the average vessel in commission at a
time when jobbery was common, and there was no press at
work to sweep in the thoroughbred seamen.
When our navy was weakened by corrupt administration
and political faction, it was about to be matched against more
formidable foes than it had met since the Dutch wars of the
seventeenth century. The Americans were only privateers, but
they were active and skilful. The French joined battle with
us in 1778, the Spaniards in the following year, and the
Dutch in 1780. Of these the first and second were not only
more numerous but far more efficient than they had been in
the two previous struggles. The disasters of the Seven Years’
War had stung the pride and patriotism of the French, and
they had made serious efforts to restore their strength at sea.
Public subscriptions had been opened to supply ships, and
though the money promised was not always paid, they did something
to supply the Government with funds. Choiseul, who was
minister at the end of the war, tried hard to restore the naval
service. Some of his changes and intended reforms were
fantastic and could not last. Yet he did not a little to provide
ships and to give the officers opportunities for practice.
When he was driven from office by the king’s fear that he
meant to provoke another war with England, his work was for
a time lost. But after the death of Louis XV. and the
accession of Louis XVI. the French Navy became again an
object of attention to the Government. With the encouragement
of the young king, two able ministers, Turgot and
M. de Sartine, strove hard to make it worthy of the rank of
France among nations. These efforts were greatly increased
as the progress of the American insurrection began to afford
hope that an opportunity would be found to take revenge for
the disasters of past years. In 1778 the French Navy
consisted, according to official papers, of 122 vessels, of which
73 were of the line. A very large proportion of these were
new, and were admirably built. The French naval officers
had studied hard, and were animated by pride, both patriotic
and professional, and the desire to retrieve their reputation.
Spain was a nerveless power, as Burke said years afterwards,
and had not recovered even in the mere number of her
population, still less in intellect and character, from the terrible
exhaustion of the seventeenth century. Yet her king,
Charles III., had tried seriously to supply his dominions with a
navy. Happily for us, he was a man of limited intelligence,
and made the common mistake of supposing that numbers
constituted strength. In 1778 his navy presented a list of
141 vessels, in all of which 62 were of the line. Though his
liners were with few exceptions two-deckers of 60 and 70
guns, they were fine ships. Some of them had been built by
English shipwrights in the Spanish service. If Charles III.
had been content with forty line-of-battle ships, and had spent
the money economised on the building vote on giving practice
to his squadrons and on forming a good corps of seaman
gunners, his navy would have been a more serious opponent
than it was. Still, the addition of the sixty-two Spanish liners
with all their defects to the French seventy-three constituted a
combination able to try the resources of our navy to the
utmost.
The Dutch Navy had fallen far below the standard of its
great days. In 1780, when the United Provinces joined the
alliance against us, they had only twenty-six line-of-battle ships
of from 50 to 76 guns, and twenty-nine lesser vessels. Great
efforts were made to add to this short list during the course
of the war, but the additions were made too late to have any
considerable effect. Holland, too, though it had not withered
to the same extent as its old enemy Spain, had sunk from its
former energy. Yet the seamanlike skill of the Dutch crews,
their steady gunnery and phlegmatic valour, made them rank
higher in the opinion of our navy than the French, and far
higher than the Spaniards. The best contested battle of the
war took place between an English and a Dutch squadron.
The beginning of the great naval war with France in the
spring of 1778 was preceded by three years of warlike
operations. They were mainly of an ancillary character, and
the scope of this book does not allow them to be told in detail.
It must suffice to say that they may be divided into two
classes. On the Atlantic seaboard and the American lakes our
officers and men were engaged in supporting the military
forces employed to subdue the insurgents, or to repel inroads
on Canada. Captains Douglas and Pringle did good
and gallant service both in aiding Sir Guy Carleton to repel
the invasion of Montgomery and Arnold, and in clearing the
way for Burgoyne’s advance into the valley of the Hudson
during the autumn of 1777. Here it was possible to force the
enemy to action with the advantage of better discipline
and larger resources in our favour. Less success was achieved
along the far-stretched seacoast of the plantations. The
fault lay to a very great extent with the Ministry, which would
not recognise the magnitude of its task. It estimated the
case so ill that in 1775, the year of Lexington and Bunker
Hill, and of the publication, on the 23rd August, of the
proclamation for “Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition in
North America,” it reduced the establishment of the navy.
The vote for men was cut down by 2000, and the total
estimate was lowered from £2,104,917 to £1,674,059.
From this figure it rose to £5,001,895 in 1778. In
October 1776 the General Press warrant was issued. The
bounty, though raised to twelve guineas, failed to draw
volunteers. At that date there were on the muster books
at home 8933 men. By the December of 1778, and under
the strain of stern compulsion, the complements of our ships
had been collected, at least on paper, on an adequate scale.
The return for the 1st January 1778 is 62,719, and from
that level the navy advanced to the 107,446 men borne on
its books on 1st January 1783.
During the three years from 1775 to 1778 the admirals
successively commanding on the American station, Samuel
Graves, Shuldham, and Howe, were endeavouring to overawe
hundreds of miles of seacoast swarming with active seamen
who were thrown out of work by the interruption of trade.
In the summer of 1775 Graves had at his disposal four line-of-battle
ships and twenty-one smaller vessels. If he had
been able to make free use of all of them, they still would
have been inadequate to the work to be done, but he was
compelled to keep the bulk of them together at Boston
to support General Gage. Reinforcements gradually brought
the station up to the nine liners, 64- and 50-gun ships, and
eighty or so small craft of all kinds which were under
the flag of Howe, who assumed command in July 1776.
But he was bound to attend mainly to the duty of helping
his brother, Sir William Howe, during the advance to, and
occupation of, Philadelphia.
The result was precisely what any competent naval
adviser would have predicted. Our admirals were always
able to cover the movements of troops and to carry out
punitive expeditions against seaports. Of these there were
many, and they were justified by the attacks made by the
inhabitants on our boats’ crews and small cruisers. But
they were wretched expedients, for they exasperated the
enemy without crushing him into submission. Meanwhile
American armed vessels intercepted supplies, cut off our
boats, and captured transports—all the more easily because
these last usually sailed without convoy. On one occasion,
in August 1775, the insurgents actually landed in Bahama,
and carried off a hundred barrels of gunpowder—a very
seasonable supply to General Washington.
Out of this weakness at home came the second task
thrown on the navy. Quick-sailing American privateers were
soon swarming all over the Atlantic. The French and
Spanish Governments professed to maintain strict neutrality,
and did occasionally take measures to stop the use of their
ports by the Americans, when the king’s Ambassadors were
energetic in protesting, and could quote a definite instance.
But they saw our growing embarrassments with glee, and
encouraged the privateers under hand. With this secret
support to help them, and the even more effectual aid due to
the unprepared condition of our navy, the privateers cruised
with signal success. In 1777 they did heavy damage in the
West Indies, and it was found necessary to appoint a convoy
for the Irish linen trade with England—a precaution we had
never been compelled to adopt in the Seven Years’ War.
It was calculated in February 1778 that the insurgent corsairs
had then taken 739 British ships. Of these, 174 had been
released or recaptured, but the net loss was £2,600,000.
Counter captures of American ships engaged on the
coast and West India trade were made to about equal
numbers, but the loss and the retaliation were alike injurious
to the commerce of the empire. The number of American
privateers known to exist was 173, carrying 2556 guns and
about 14,000 men. We had captured 34, but they were
promptly replaced, and were reinforced by Frenchmen who
fitted out their ships almost without disguise in French
ports.
On the 13th March 1778, the Marquis de Noailles, then
French Ambassador in London, made the momentous but
not unforeseen announcement, that his master had signed a
treaty of commerce and friendship with the United States,
which he considered as already in possession of their independence.
He added the ironical diplomatic expression of a
hope that this alliance with the king’s American rebels, as
our ministers were bound to consider them, would not disturb
the friendly relations between the countries; but both sides
knew that war was come. If the fighting did not begin
immediately, the explanation of the delay is simply that
M. de Sartine had not yet been able to bring the French
Navy into thorough order, while King George’s ministers
were, if I may use an expression which some of their successors
have not scrupled to apply to themselves with a strange
inverted pride, “muddling through.”
Had the house of Bourbon which ruled in France and
Spain, and was resolved to abate the power of England,
been in a position to adopt the most effectual method of
attack, it would have thrown an overwhelming force into
the Channel at once, thereby paralysing us all the world over.
But King Louis XVI. was hardly ready, and Spain, according
to her custom, was not ready at all. King Charles III.
maintained a show of neutrality till the following year, and
was allowed to do so by the British Government, which
continued till the last moment to profess the belief that he
would not intervene. Had Lord North and his colleagues
been ready to meet a danger foreseen by everybody else,
one British fleet would have been promptly off Brest, while
another would have been detached to the Mediterranean to
blockade Toulon. Neither side having its squadrons fit for
immediate use, there was an interval of pause. One French
fleet was prepared at Brest under the Comte D’Orvilliers,
a very old officer who had commanded the training squadron
during peace, and had in that position proved himself a
good instructor and a shrewd judge of character. Its purpose
was to menace us at home, and so limit the force which
could be detached to America. Our answer was the formation
of the Western Squadron. The command was given
to Keppel under pressure of public opinion. This admiral
was then the most distinguished survivor of the leaders of the
Seven Years’ War. Lord Hawke, Boscawen, Pocock, and
Saunders were dead or in retirement. Rodney, who was
as yet comparatively unknown, had ruined himself by
gambling and electioneering, and had taken refuge from
his creditors in Paris, where he had accumulated a new load
of debt. The character and position of Keppel had an
important influence on the early stages of the war. He
was by family connection a strong Whig. Burke, who
loved him, has recorded in the “Letter to a Noble Lord,”
that “though it was never shown in insult to any human
being, Lord Keppel had something high. It was a wild
stock of pride on which the tenderest of all hearts had grafted
the milder virtues.”
From early in 1777 Sartine had begun to prepare a
squadron at Toulon. It was got ready with difficulty, for
the Treasury was always in straits, and the classes then, as
ever, worked ill. The purpose it was to serve was to carry
help to the Americans. The command was given to the
Comte d’Estaign, a great noble of the Rouergue, now known
as the department of Rodez. D’Estaign had been bred a
soldier, had served in the East Indies, and had held a governorship
in the West Indies. He was accused by us of having
shown sharp practice when a prisoner of war to the East
India Company. His bold, undertaking disposition had induced
his sovereign to impose him on the corps of naval officers,
which was discredited by the failures of La Clue and Conflans
in 1759, and the timidity of D’Aché. That he was
our ostentatious enemy was another strong recommendation.
From his conduct in command we may gather that his daring
was born of a heat of the blood, and not of a settled resolution
of mind. He was therefore subject to fits of depression under
the weight of responsibility. D’Estaign, whose destination
was well known, was allowed to sail unmolested. Reinforcements
were sent to Howe under the command of Admiral
Byron. Byron, the grandfather of the poet, had all the
knightly virtues of his brilliant cavalier house. He had
sailed with Anson, had shared the wreck of the Wager to
the south of Chiloe, had recorded his adventures of starvation
among savages, or in friendship and love among the Spaniards
of Chili, in a fine narrative, and had been the commander of a
voyage of circumnavigation singularly barren of discovery. He
was a brave, steady officer, but without original faculty for the
higher parts of war, and so persistently unfortunate in meeting
storms that the sailors had nicknamed him “Foul Weather Jack.”
The first movement was made by D’Estaign, who left
Toulon on the 13th April with a squadron of twelve sail of
the line and four frigates. Baffling winds, the unskilfulness
of his crews which contained few seamen, and the bad sailing
qualities of some of his ships delayed his progress, and it was
not till the 15th May that he was able to clear the Straits
of Gibraltar. The series of operations which opened with his
appearance off the Delaware on the 9th July was long, and
ranged from New England to the southern limit of the West
Indies. While it was beginning, the main fleets of England
and France were coming to battle in the Channel. It will
tend to make a narrative which runs the danger of being confused
from the number of contemporary events somewhat
clearer if we turn to the first meeting between Keppel and
D’Orvilliers, noting only that Byron left Plymouth with
thirteen sail of the line and a frigate on the 9th June to
reinforce Howe, and therefore race D’Estaign across the
Atlantic in a parallel and more northerly course. How he
lost the race we shall see.
Amid delays and the wrangling of opposition with
ministerial orators, the grand home fleet, or Western Squadron,
was slowly made ready. On the 12th June, Keppel sailed
from Plymouth with twenty sail of the line, and was joined
later by two more. When on his way to his station off Brest,
and at a distance of some twenty miles to the west of the
Lizard, he met the French frigates Belle Poule and Licorne.
There was as yet no formal declaration of war, but the absence
of this mere ceremony only served to give an air of irregularity
to his actions. The French frigates were ordered to come
under the admiral’s lee. The Licorne being overtaken by
the Hector 74, obeyed, but not without firing a broadside as
she hauled her flag down—a mean demonstration very much on
a level with our exercise of the rights of war while we denied
that war as yet existed. The Belle Poule was summoned by
the frigate Arethusa, a vessel of equal strength. Her captain,
La Clochetterie, naturally refused to obey an order which
Captain Samuel Marshal of the Arethusa had no right to give.
A smart action ensued. The Arethusa rigging was cut to
pieces, and the Belle Poule made off on the approach of fresh
British ships.
Keppel returned to St. Helens on the 27th June, having
learnt that the French fleet at Brest was stronger than his
own. On the 9th July, the very day by the calendar on which
D’Estaign was seen off the Delaware, he again went to sea
with thirty sail of the line and six frigates. His second in
command was Sir Robert Harland, and his third was Sir Hugh
Palliser, the member of Sandwich’s Board of Admiralty who
has been already named. D’Orvilliers had left Brest on the
previous day with thirty-two sail of the line and fourteen
frigates. He was endowed with large powers to punish or
reward, and carried energetic instructions from Sartine
to repair the misfortunes and errors of the past. The
minister gave him clearly to understand that the king might
pardon his officers for being beaten, but not for failing to
fight hard.
On the 23rd July the fleets sighted one another 90 miles
W.N.W. of Ushant in a westerly wind. We were between
the enemy and the land, and therefore to leeward. The
French admiral did not avail himself of his windward position
to force on a battle, but followed the cautious tradition of his
service and kept aloof. Four days of thick unsettled weather
followed, hiding the opponents from one another. In this
interval two of D’Orvilliers’ ships, the Bourgoyne, 80, and the
Alexandre, 64, had separated and returned to Brest. Thus he
was reduced to equality of numbers with Keppel, and to real
inferiority of force, for one of his ships was of only 56 guns—a
tolerably sharp warning of what may happen to officers who
miss opportunities. At 9 a.m. on the 27th the French were
seen eight miles to the W.S.W. with the wind at S.W. They
were on the port tack, and heading to seaward. Keppel at
once pressed in chase, while D’Orvilliers brought his fleet
round to the starboard tack, and continued to hold his wind
as if wishing to avoid battle. It was Keppel’s object to
bring one on, and he headed for the rear of the French line.
His own rear showed the usual tendency of a long line to
straggle, and signals were made to Palliser, who commanded,
to urge him on. Shortly after ten we were coming close on
the rear of the French. A squall of both mist and rain swept
over both fleets, hiding them from one another. When it
cleared, the French admiral was seen to have turned his fleet
again, and was heading to the west, still to windward, but so
close that he would pass within cannon shot on the opposite
tack. To Keppel this was a disappointment, for he actually
avowed his belief that if the Frenchman meant to fight
seriously he would have remained where he was. In other
words he was of opinion that D’Orvilliers ought, as a man of
honour, to have allowed his rearguard ships to be overtaken
one after another, and crushed by the fire of the English as
they came up in succession. By taking this absurdity for
granted, Keppel gave the measure of his own intelligence as an
admiral, and of his inferiority to D’Orvilliers as a manœuvrer.
The much debated battle of Ushant was in fact little
more than a feeble parade. The fleets were going at the
rate of five miles an hour, or at a combined speed of ten
miles; allowing 150 feet for the average length of a ship
this meant that each individual vessel would be abreast of
the passing enemy for about a minute. A little more than
an hour was employed by the whole of the two forces in
sweeping alongside from end to end. During this brief period
of cannonading, made up as it was of much briefer flashes of
combat between their component parts, the French gunners
did more execution than ours. They pierced some of our
ships on the water line where they were exposed as they lay
over to leeward, and seriously crippled the rigging of many of
them. As the two lines began to pass clear, D’Orvilliers
ordered his van, nominally commanded by the Duc de
Chartres afterwards known to infamy as Philippe Egalité,
to turn and engage Keppel’s rear division on the lee side,
meaning to turn his centre and rear at the same time, thus
putting Sir Hugh Palliser between two fires. But he was
ill obeyed by the Duc de Chartres, whom common fame
accused of cowardice, and finding that his plan could not be
executed, he ran down to leeward and formed his fleet on the
starboard tack heading to the east, and in the same direction
as ours. Keppel had wished to turn his fleet also, but many
of his ships were severely crippled in hull and rigging, and
the order could not be executed. One of the most injured
was the Formidable, 90, flagship of Sir Hugh Palliser. We
therefore remained on the same tack. With both heading in
the same direction, and we to windward, an opportunity might
appear to have offered itself for our favourite manœuvre of bearing
down, and engaging from end to end. But in the course
of these twistings and turnings, the van and centre, which were
less injured than the rear, had gone further to leeward and
were nearer the French. Palliser found the Formidable
unmanageable, and his division remained about him. Thus
Keppel could not get his whole force together, and would not
attack with a part. When night fell D’Orvilliers left two
quick sailing vessels to show a light in order to produce the
erroneous impression that he was still there, and steered for
Brest where he anchored on the 29th. Keppel, concluding
on reflection that he had many ships injured, that the enemy
was better able to repair damage than he was, and that Brest
was a dangerous lee shore, decided to return home, and
anchored in Plymouth on the 31st July. On the 23rd August
he was at sea once more, and on the 28th October back at
Spithead. D’Orvilliers came out on the 18th August and
was home again at Brest on 30th September. Our fleet took
several French prizes, but there was no meeting, while our
trade was fortunate in escaping French cruisers. And this
was the summer campaign of 1778 in home waters.
I would prefer to say nothing of the shameful service and
national quarrel which arose out of this poor battle, but it is
too full of warning, and had too much influence on the
history of the coming years to be passed over. We know
from a letter of Samuel Hood, who was then Commissioner
of Portsmouth dockyard, that as early as the 4th of August
it was common knowledge that the chiefs of the fleet were on
bad terms. Keppel, in his public letter, had praised both
Harland and Palliser, but in truth he was fiercely angry with
the second, whom he accused in his heart of having deliberately
prevented the action of the 27th from becoming a real victory.
It is obvious from his recorded words and his whole tone, that
he believed Sir Hugh Palliser had acted as the agent of
Sandwich in the execution of a conspiracy for his ruin. The
solitary dignity of his quarterdeck left him unchecked to
brood over this imagination till he was in the state of mind of
some unhappy victim of the mania of persecution. I fear we
must add that there were sycophants under his command who
fed his delusions. We still possess a toadying acrid letter
from no less a man than John Jervis, then captain of the
Foudroyant, and at all times a strong Whig, which shows
him busy in the mean work of making bate. Being answered
according to his folly, Keppel grew so wise in his conceit that
he reached the point where he became convinced that there
was a plot to cause the overthrow of the British fleet, in order
to discredit such an eminent Whig as himself, that Sandwich
was the author, and Palliser the agent thereof. It was not
sane, and it was the kind of insanity to which only a dull
intelligence would have been liable when exasperated by
soured vanity. But “the spirit of faction” was so rampant in
England at the time, and had so thoroughly aroused one of
the worst faults of our character, a tendency to loud-mouthed
and contentious hectoring, that he did not want kindred
spirits to fool him to the top of his bent.
The press, animated as it was by the malignant spirit of
Junius, whose voice had only just fallen silent, took up the
tale. Whigs bragged that their admiral had saved the state
from the ministerial treason of Sandwich. Ministerial papers
replied that their vice-admiral had baffled the Whig traitor.
Charge and counter-charge came thick and grew more specific.
On the 15th October the Morning Intelligencer made a
poisonous attack on Palliser, fortified by details which must
have come from Keppel’s partisans, and would not have been
given without his approval. Sir Hugh, being hot-headed, by
no means a clever man, and probably ill advised, called upon
Keppel for a contradiction. He ought to have been silent or
to have sued the paper for libel, and to have produced his
admiral in the witness box. Keppel, who shirked taking
responsibility all through, would not write an answer. In an
interview he took a high and mighty tone, and spoke of the
dignity of despising the press. Sir Hugh, again most
foolishly, made a public answer to The Intelligencer, and
allowed himself to be entangled in a controversy with “the
bronzed and naked gentlemen of the press.” Both men were
members of Parliament, and they met in the debate of the 2nd
December. Palliser spoke to vindicate himself, Keppel to
injure his subordinate. He got over the question why he
praised Sir Hugh in his public letter, by saying that he meant
only to refer to his personal courage, which was undoubted,
and that this was the most important quality of an officer.
If we could suppose that he meant what he said, these words
might again be quoted as giving the measure of his intelligence.
But his excuse was a subterfuge. For the rest he would say
nothing definite. He would sneer. He would insinuate. He
would give to be understood. He would do anything except
show candour. He wished Sir Hugh to be condemned for
gross misconduct, and while forwarding the condemnation with
cunning, he wished to maintain a fine attitude of magnanimity
and of regard for the king’s service, thus escaping the
inconvenience of having to prove his charges at a court
martial.
To suppose that Sandwich wished to produce his own
utter ruin by causing the defeat of the Western Squadron,
would be to put ourselves on the moral and intellectual level
of Keppel, his sycophants in the fleet, and his friends of the
opposition. But the First Lord was as pure an intriguer as
many of them. There can be little doubt that he encouraged,
and none that he allowed, Palliser to bring his chief to a court
martial on charges of mismanagement of the fleet in the
battle. Keppel had shown the poorest commonplace of the dull
tactics of the time, but he had been orthodox in a brainless
way. The hope, no doubt, was that public opinion would be
turned against the Whig. The exact contrary result followed.
First a body of admirals headed by the veteran Lord Hawke,
now nearly at the end of his honourable life, protested
against the decision of the Admiralty to allow an inferior to
accuse a superior. It is a necessary consequence of the
respect which all disciplined men have for authority, that the
higher ranks must always be protected from being proved to
be in the wrong by the lower, lest the indispensable spirit of
subordination should suffer. That the chief is in error is to
be deplored, but not demonstrated. Then the far from
ignoble sympathy of the mass of Englishmen for a supposed
victim was aroused on behalf of Keppel. His court martial,
which lasted from the 7th January to the 11th February 1779,
ended inevitably in his acquittal. His friends made much of
his sufferings from persecution, but they were allowed to make
his poor health the excuse for a private bill to exempt him
from the necessity of being tried on the flagship in Portsmouth.
His triumph took place in the more comfortable
surroundings of the governor’s house. The London mob,
always ready for riot in the 18th century, celebrated the
finding of the Court by rabbling the houses of Palliser and
Lord North, and burning the gates of the Admiralty in
Whitehall, under the leadership of the Duke of Ancaster and,
as it is said, of the youthful William Pitt.
Palliser resigned and demanded a court martial. Though
Keppel still refused to appear as accuser, the trial was held on
the flagship between the 12th April and 3rd May. It ended in
an acquittal with the qualification that Palliser ought to have
made the admiral acquainted with the condition of the Formidable.
Sir Hugh retired to the Governorship of Greenwich
Hospital. Keppel was so popular that the Admiralty did not
dare to remove him. But he was now in love with his parts
of martyr and factious politician. He began to wrangle over
orders, and to find offence where none was. At last he was
allowed to haul down his flag at his own request. In his place
in Parliament he was not ashamed to sneer at a brother
officer, who, in the course of 1779, had to retire up Channel in
face of an enemy twice his strength, and to insinuate that he
himself would have been bolder in such a pass than he was
with the equal fleet of D’Orvilliers, and the coast of Brest
under his lee in July 1778. For a time he, with the help
unhappily of Howe, an incomparably better man, set the
disgraceful example of refusing to serve because what they
were pleased to call their honour was not safe with Sandwich.
His tar barrel popularity was clamorous for a space, and he
succeeded Vernon on many tavern signboards, but by 1783
Rodney and Hood had arisen, and the patriot hero of 1779
had become the “Cautious Leeshore.”
While the battle of Ushant was being half fought, and the
subsequent quarrel was dragging its slow length along, a
brilliant campaign was being conducted on the coasts of
America. D’Estaign, it will be remembered, had cleared the
Straits of Gibraltar on the 16th May. His squadron consisted
of the Languedoc, 80 (Flagship), Tonnant, 80, César, 74,
Zélé, 74, Hector, 74, Marseilles, 74, Protecteur, 74, Guerrier, 74,
Vaillant, 64, Provence, 64, Fantasque, 64, and Sagittaire, 64,
with the frigates Chimère, Engageante, Alcmène and Aimable.
Some of them were bad sailers, and as the crews had been
completed by drafting soldiers, they were awkward. The
neglect of the past weighed on the French fleet, and the nerve
of the Admiral. D’Estaign spent much time in practising his
raw crews, a wise precaution no doubt, but one which was
fatal to rapidity of movement. He added gratuitously to the
causes of delay by turning aside to chase prizes. On the
8th July he reached the Delaware, and landed M. Gérard de
Rayneval, the French Minister to Congress, whom he had
brought with him. Even then he would not make haste to
begin his attack on the British squadron. On his way north
to New York, and on the 10th July, he actually lost sight of
his fleet because he employed his mighty flagship, the
Languedoc, in chasing a trumpery British vessel named the
York, of 10 guns and 60 men. These were not the methods
to employ against the wary, resolute, and thorough antagonist
he was about to encounter.
Howe had been informed early in May of the coming
intervention of France. Her entry on the scene made it
absolutely necessary to withdraw our troops from Philadelphia
and concentrate at New York. Of the total force of eleven ships
of the line and sixty-eight smaller craft under the admiral’s command,
some were at our naval port Halifax, others were at New
York, and others in Rhode Island, then held by a body of
British troops under General Pigott. Howe called all the
ships which could be spared from local duties to his flag, and
set about covering the retreat of the army now led by Sir
Henry Clinton. Transport to convey the troops by sea were
wanting, and it was also thought to be the more dignified
course to march through the Jerseys. On the 18th June the
army had crossed the Delaware under cover of the squadron,
and made its way to Navesink, harassed, but not seriously
impeded by Washington. Howe reached Sandy Hook on the
29th June, and waited to cover the entry of Clinton into New
York. Here he was informed of the sailing of D’Estaign, and
of the reinforcements destined for himself, which had left
Plymouth under Byron so late as the 9th June. On the
30th June Clinton’s army appeared on the heights and was
passed over to New York by the 5th July. Barely was the
passage concluded when Captain Gardner, of the Maidstone
frigate, sent a lieutenant with the news that D’Estaign had
been seen to enter the Delaware. On the 11th July the
Zebra sloop ran in with the news that the Frenchman was
close at hand. If D’Estaign had taken less than nearly two
months to make the run from Toulon, the concentration of
our forces at New York would have been defeated, for Howe
was far too weak to give battle, and must have been shut up
in the Delaware.
The force actually with Howe consisted of six 64-gun ships,
three of 50, two of 40, frigates, and small vessels. The 40-gun
ships being wholly unfit to lie in a line of battle, Howe was
practically outnumbered in the proportion of two to one by
the fine squadron of D’Estaign. Outnumbered as he was, he
had no resource but to stand on the defensive, and the
anchorage at Sandy Hook happily afforded him an admirable
position. Sandy Hook had once been a peninsula, but the
sea having broken through the narrow isthmus connecting it
with Navesink, it was already an island running due north
and south, and so forming a natural mole to the anchorage.
Outside it is the Middle Bank, and to the north is the East
Bank. There are two entries from the sea to the roadstead—one
between the Middle Bank and Sandy Hook, which is too
shallow for big ships at the northern end, and the other
between the Middle Bank and East Bank, which is rendered
uncertain by a bar. Batteries were thrown up at the north
end of Sandy Hook. The squadron was then anchored in a
line from the extremity of Sandy Hook to the west, in this order.
The Leviathan, a store ship turned into a floating battery,
Ardent, Nonsuch, Trident, Somerset, Eagle (Flagship),
and Isis. Frigates were brought inside to the south, while the
Vigilant, Phœnix, and Preston were posted behind the bar
between the Middle and East Banks. Fireships and gunboats
were placed where they could threaten the flank of the French
fleet if it crossed the bar. The ships in the line were anchored
with a spring on the cable—that is, with a cable carried out
from the stern and fastened to the cable of the anchor so that
their broadsides could be worked round to bear on an
approaching enemy. If then D’Estaign attacked, every means
possible had been provided to crush his ships in detail as they
cleared the Middle Bank, and came under the fire of the
batteries at the extremity of Sandy Hook and of Howe’s line.
Our squadron was short-handed, but the deficiency was
promptly made good by the eager zeal of the sailors in the
merchant ships and transports. Though they habitually
avoided the press when they could, there was no hanging
back at this crisis, and the volunteers outnumbered the call
made by the admiral. As many of them must have served at
one time or another, and all were “sailormen” able to set up
rigging and splice ropes, they were not mere raw recruits.
The officers and men of Clinton’s army came forward readily
to serve as marines.
The hazard before D’Estaign was not trifling. Yet had
he attacked at once when he appeared off Sandy Hook on the
12th July, he would have found Howe’s dispositions still
incomplete. Even later he ought beyond all question to have
stood in. The total destruction of Howe’s squadron would
have given so severe a blow to the material strength and the
prestige of England that it would have been cheaply purchased
by the sacrifice of half D’Estaign’s ships. So would have
reasoned his subordinate the captain of the Fantasque, Suffren.
But again the past weighed on the unstable mind of
D’Estaign. He anchored four miles from Sandy Hook, off
Shrewsbury, and remained till the 21st examining the bar,
and communicating with the Americans. The risk of grounding
on the bar seemed too great to him to be run, and in all
probability he asked himself, what would happen if the British
reinforcements arrived and found him amid the wreck of
Howe’s ships with a crippled squadron? On the 22nd he
made a show of falling on, and then sailed away to the south.
A small convoy fell into his hands, and he had the satisfaction
of blockading a British port for ten days.
Howe at once dispatched frigates to watch the enemy.
Observation and rumour led him to believe, rightly, that
D’Estaign meant to proceed to co-operate with an American
force in an attack on Sir R. Pigott on Rhode Island. But for
some days he was too weak to move. On the 26th July the
Renown, 50, joined him from the West Indies. She had
passed through the French squadron on her way, unmolested
and perhaps unobserved. Misled by bad information from
home, Howe had been under the impression that Byron was
bound for Halifax. He had sent thither for news, and on the
26th his messenger returned with the report that nothing was
known there of the reinforcements, but that the Commissioner,
Captain Fielding, was sending on the Raisonable, 64, and
Centurion, 50, which had refitted. They joined the flag at
Sandy Hook safely. On the 30th July the Cornwall, 74,
came in from Byron’s squadron with a depressing story.
The admiral had met his accustomed fortune in weather
when he was least able to contend with his implacable enemy.
He had left Plymouth on the 9th June with one 90-gun
ship, eleven 74, one of 64, and a single frigate. If
numbers were all in war, while speed and efficiency were
little, his squadron had been more than enough to sweep
D’Estaign from the coast of America. But Byron sailed late,
and his ships were ill provided in all ways. The crews had
been made up by drafts of prisoners who brought the jail
fever with them. So bad was the condition of the fleet that
it was unable to contend with a summer storm which broke
on it in the middle of the North Atlantic on the 3rd July.
Some of the ships returned home, and all were scattered.
Byron himself struggled on alone toward Sandy Hook till
the 18th August, when he sighted the French fleet, and turned
back to Halifax, where he found one only of his command.
Except the Cornwall, none reached Howe’s flag in time to
be of service. Those which limped in later, and by degrees,
were crippled in rigging, and foul with putrid fevers.
On the 29th July, the day before the Cornwall joined his
flag, Howe heard that D’Estaign had been sighted off Rhode
Island, to the east of New York. The object of the Frenchman
was manifestly to co-operate with the insurgents in attacking
the British force then occupying the island, under the command
of General Pigott. Howe was the last man in the world to
be deterred by mere inferiority of numbers from exerting
himself in the king’s service, and outmatched as he still was,
he prepared to support General Pigott. Contrary winds
detained him at New York till the 6th August. On the 9th
he was off the southern end of Rhode Island. Rhode Island
is one of several which nearly block up a great oblong bay
opening to the south in the coast, which here runs nearly due
east and west. It is separated from the mainland on the east
by the Sakonnet Channel, and from the island of Conanicut
on the west, by the Eastern Passage. The Western Passage
divides Conanicut from the mainland, and leads to the land-locked
waters of Narragansett Bay. The town of Newport
stands nearly at the south-western end of Rhode Island, and
here General Pigott had concentrated his troops when the
American general, Sullivan, passed over from the mainland to
attack him. D’Estaign had anchored within Brenton’s Ledge,
at the south-western point of Rhode Island, on the 29th July.
He sent two frigates up the Sakonnet Channel and two liners
up the Western Passage to Narragansett Bay, and then
entered the Eastern Passage on the 8th August, anchoring
above the town of Newport, at Goat Island, between Conanicut
and Rhode Island. His appearance in overwhelming strength
sufficed to gain him a naval success without fighting. A small
British flotilla, consisting of the frigates and sloops Orpheus,
Lark, Juno, Flora, and Falcon, was caught at hopeless disadvantage,
and was burnt by the commanding officer, Captain
Brisbane, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the
French. The crews were added to the garrison of Newport.
Howe was off Brenton Point on the 9th. He had a
difficult game to play, for he was still inferior to his opponent
by a third, and he had to take the offensive. Everything
depended on precision of movement, and the British admiral
transferred his flag to a frigate in order that he might keep
his whole squadron always under his eye. The question
whether the proper place for an admiral was in the midst of
a battle or outside of it was argued in the eighteenth century,
and has been debated since. It really resolves itself into
the other question, whether the admiral is best employed in
setting an example or in directing the operations of which he
must needs lose sight from the moment that his flagship is
involved in the fire and smoke of battle. Tradition and the
point of honour dictated the first course. Sound judgment
agrees with them—whenever the example is of more moment
than the direction. But there are times when it is not, and
the early days of August 1778 off Rhode Island was one of
them. Yet only an officer of Howe’s established reputation
for cool intrepidity could have afforded to break away from
old usage, and it is said that he was so far impressed by the
fear of being thought shy that he intended to return to his
flagship if a battle had to be fought.
D’Estaign credited his opponent with more energy than
he had himself shown at Long Island. He was seriously
afraid of being attacked by fireships at anchor—and indeed
they had been prepared, and would have been used. When,
therefore, the wind shifted from south to north-east on the
morning of the 10th, he came at once to sea, cannonading
Pigott’s batteries at Newport as he passed, and calling in the
two liners sent to Narragansett Bay. Though he had numbers
and the wind in his favour, he made no attempt to force on
a battle, and manœuvred to keep the weather-gage. Howe
strove to win it, intending to fall on the Frenchman
and to use his fireships. He succeeded, but a furious
gale scattered both fleets on the 11th, and they were not
rallied till the 17th. In the interval, the French had suffered
more from the storm than our ships. Three of them, the
Languedoc, Marseilles, and César, were attacked while crippled
by the Renown, Preston, and Isis, smaller vessels, but under
complete command. None of them were taken, thanks to the
timely arrival of help. Howe reunited his squadron at Sandy
Hook, and then returned to Rhode Island on hearing that the
Frenchman had reappeared. But D’Estaign had lost all
confidence, and was oppressed by a sense of the need for
stores and repairs. He sailed away to Boston. Sullivan
withdrew from Rhode Island, exploding against his ally in
terms of rude and taunting reproach. Howe found the French
too strongly posted in Boston to be assailed, and after reconnoitring
their position on the 30th, returned to New York.
Byron’s scattered ships now began to drop in, but Howe’s
service was over for the time being. On the 25th September
he handed over his command to Gambier, and sailed for home.
On his return he refused to serve under Sandwich, who had
supported him so ill. The reason was a bad one, and was
not excused by the fact that the minister’s hacks endeavoured
to throw blame on the admiral. An officer who pleads a
personal offence as an excuse for not fighting his country’s
enemies sets an example which is only just short of mutinous.
Gambier was soon superseded by the arrival of his
superior Byron. “Foul Weather Jack” made haste to refit his
ships at New York, and on the 18th October went to look
into Boston. Storms blew him about, he lost vessels, and
was forced to take refuge in Newport, Rhode Island. D’Estaign
in the meantime had been striving with the ill-will of the
Bostonians, a people described by the English historian
Beatson as of “a sour, morose, and sullen temper.” They
were very angry with the French for not giving more support
to Sullivan at Rhode Island, and showed their ill-will by
making riotous attacks on the sailors of their allies. One of
D’Estaign’s officers, M. de Saint Sauveur, was actually killed
in a savage conflict between the townsmen and the French
boats’ crews. The admiral was nevertheless able to refit his
squadron mainly with our own naval stores, captured and
brought into port by the active American privateers. The
approach of winter made campaigning hazardous on the
stormy Northern coast, and on the 4th November D’Estaign
sailed for the West Indies, where the French wished to recover
their losses in the previous war. All through this war the
main fleets will be found leaving the Antilles when the
hurricane months begin in July, and the summer favours them
in the North. Then, as winter approaches, and the hurricane
season is over in October, they will be found streaming back
to take part in the defence or conquest of the islands round
the Caribbean Sea. The change in the scene of conflict had
been foreseen by us. On the 4th November, the very day
that D’Estaign left Boston, Hotham sailed from New York
with two 64-gun ships, three of 50, and three frigates, carrying
5000 men of the army in North America, which was already
too weak for its work. They were destined for Barbadoes
first, and then for the general protection of the Sugar Islands.
So close did Hotham and D’Estaign come to one another
on the passage that a Newfoundland dog belonging to an
English officer, which fell overboard, is said to have been
picked up swimming by the French flagship the Languedoc,
but there was no meeting.
Though to follow the cruise of D’Estaign and Byron to
its close will compel us to overlap contemporary operations
elsewhere, an even greater degree of confusion would be
created by making an arbitrary break in the narrative of
one continuous series of movements. Yet it is necessary to
go back for a brief space to explain what the rival admirals
found waiting for them, when they came escaping from the
snowstorms and icy cold of the North to the unfailing
easterly trade winds, the baffling land breezes, the sun, and
the purple seas of the West Indies.
The French possessions in those waters consisted of part
of San Domingo, of Guadaloupe, Martinique, and Marie
Galante. Dominica, between Martinique and Guadaloupe,
was in our hands. Next to the South came Santa Lucia,
a French island, and beyond it St. Vincent and Grenada,
English possessions. The whole of the Lesser Antilles
constituted the Leeward Station, so called because they lie
to leeward of Barbadoes. The reader may be reminded
that as the easterly trade wind is permanent in the West
Indies, and is therefore called “the true breeze,” to leeward
always means to westward, and to windward is to eastward
for the Creole and the seafaring man. During the early
months of 1778 there had been the usual examples of
breaches of the law of nations on both sides, and the consequent
mutual accusations, very loud and very futile. The
French had no naval force at hand except a few frigates
and sloops. Our own squadron consisted of one 74-gun ship,
one 70, with frigates and sloops to the number of fourteen.
From the month of June onwards they were under the
command of Samuel Barrington, a member of the well-known
Irish family. Barrington remained at Barbadoes waiting to
see what the French would do. In September he discovered.
The Marquis de Bouillé, Governor of Martinique, collected a
flotilla of frigates, sloops, and trading-craft, embarked troops
and Creole volunteers, and soused down on Dominica. It
fell at once, and the history of its fall is highly characteristic
of our management in those days. Forts had been built
and guns landed for the defence of the island. Nothing was
wanting except a garrison. There was no force in Dominica
save parts of two companies of the 48th and a handful of
artillerymen—not enough to hold a small fort. Having
nothing else to do, they surrendered. Barrington complained
that he was misinformed as to the strength of the enemy.
If he had not kept his line-of-battle ships idle at Barbadoes,
he could have found out for himself, and one of them cruising
round Martinique would have stopped Bouillé. It was quite
in keeping with this sloth and this dependence on information
supplied by governors that Barrington joined the noble band
of officers who refused to serve in responsible places under
Sandwich because their honour was not safe with him.
Having allowed Dominica to go for want of support, he
left Barbadoes in order to see after the safety of Antigua, to
the north of Guadaloupe. It was our naval dockyard in the
Leeward Islands. Antigua having a competent garrison was
in no danger. Then he returned to Barbadoes, and waited
till he was joined on the 10th December by Hotham with
the ships and soldiers from New York.
The combined squadrons at once proceeded to give the
French a Roland for their Oliver by seizing Santa Lucia. The
French island was not much better prepared for defence than
Dominica, and when it was attacked on the 13th and 14th
of December the Governor retired to one of the hills in the
interior, while the coast fell into our hands. Barrington
anchored in the Cul de Sac, a bay on the western side of
the island opening on to the Caribbean Sea, while the troops
besieged the French Governor. Next day D’Estaign appeared
with his more powerful squadron. He had anchored at Fort
Royal, in Martinique, on the 9th December, and it had been
his intention to assail Barbadoes. The danger of Santa Lucia
compelled him to change his plans. He shipped Bouillé and
his troops, and on the 15th made his effort to rescue the
island. It proved but feeble. Barrington had placed his
seven ships across the mouth of the Cul de Sac, throwing up
shore batteries to cover his flanks. If he was wanting in
foresight and enterprise, he was stout. D’Estaign behaved as
he had done at Sandy Hook, making mere shows of attack,
and excusing himself by pleading that the treacherous breezes
under the land hampered his movements. They presented
real difficulties, but in the opinion of D’Estaign’s best officers
he was too easily disconcerted by such obstacles. Bouillé
landed with his troops, but failed to shake the hold of the
British troops on their positions. Then D’Estaign heard
by a privateer that Byron was on his way from North America.
Instead of judging as his countryman Mahé de la Bourdonnais
had done at Madras, that the approach of relief for his enemy
was a reason for making an instant and strenuous effort, he
re-embarked the troops on the 28th, and next day anchored
at Fort Royal in one of the fits of depression and self-pity
which alternated with his outbursts of energy. M. Micoud,
the French Governor of Santa Lucia, surrendered on the 30th,
he having also nothing else to do, and the island remained
with us, to serve as Rodney’s headquarters in the great crisis
of the war.
Byron had indeed left Newport in Rhode Island, on the
14th December, after a desperate struggle with his old enemy
the storms, which very nearly drove one of his liners on shore,
and did considerable damage to the spars of others. With
twelve sail of the line he struggled through the winter weather,
and reached Barbadoes on the 7th January 1779. Then he
pushed on to Santa Lucia, which he made his headquarters
for the watch on D’Estaign at Fort Royal. The French
admiral now outnumbered, was cautious, and would risk
nothing. He only came out to go in again. In February
Byron was reinforced by Rear-Admiral Rowley. Though
this officer was stationed to windward of Martinique, to
intercept any reinforcements coming to D’Estaign, he failed.
The French admiral was successively joined by the Comte
de Grasse, Rodney’s opponent on a future date, from Brest,
by Vaudreuil from the coast of Africa, and by La Motte
Picquet from Toulon. They brought his strength up to
twenty-five sail of the line and twelve frigates, which gave
him a distinct superiority of numbers over Byron.
The next passage in the naval campaign illustrated at
once some of the burdens laid on our admirals, Byron’s
poorness of judgment in the greater operations of war, and
the miserable character of the principles on which the French
were content to act. In June the West India convoys were
collected for their return to Europe. The meeting-place of
the ships was St. Christopher, to the north-west of Guadaloupe.
Commerce was so essential to England that no admiral
could have neglected to give it protection. Nor could the
country, which was suffering severely from the strain of the
war, have endured the entire stoppage of the West Indian
trade for the year in order to leave the fleet free—a measure
occasionally taken by the military and autocratic Government
of France. But Byron could have secured the convoy from
danger by blockading the French at Fort Royal. He did not
know of the arrival of La Motte Picquet, and had every reason
to believe himself still superior to D’Estaign. Even if he were
not, and the Frenchman came out to give battle, this was
precisely what an English admiral ought to have desired.
But Byron sailed away to Saint Christopher to mother the
convoy, leaving the road open to his enemy. If D’Estaign
had been a truly bold man, and not only a gentleman of showy
daring in “the imminent deadly breach,” which indeed he was,
he would have sought out Byron at once after the junction of
La Motte Picquet’s squadron. But he was content to dwell
in the traditional French policy of avoiding battle and
grabbing at ports. Freed from Byron’s watch, he swooped
on small game. St. Vincent was carried by an expedition of
irregulars under a bold partisan of the name of Trolong de
Rumain, a lieutenant in the French Navy. Trolong was helped
by the Caribs, and even more by a quarrel then raging
between the English Governor and his Council. St. Vincent
having been secured, D’Estaign on the 2nd July fell on
Grenada with his great fleet and Bouillé’s troops.
Byron having seen the convoy on its way home, returned
to Santa Lucia on the 1st July—to learn that St. Vincent was
gone, that D’Estaign was at sea, and that some other of our
possessions was menaced. He was ill informed as to the
strength of his opponent, and remained in doubt for two or
three days as to what the Frenchman was doing. While preparing
to attempt the recapture of St. Vincent, he heard of
the danger of Grenada, and came down to its assistance—too
late. On the 6th July a battle was fought off the island
which marks the very nadir of the pompous futile tactics
developed under the old Instructions. Byron had with him
twenty-one ships to his opponent’s twenty-five, and was to
windward. D’Estaign, at anchor when the Englishman
appeared, stood out, keeping to leeward, and waiting to be
attacked. We came down in a slanting line, the leading
English ship steering for the leading Frenchman. Of course
our van came into action unsupported, and was cut to pieces.
Then D’Estaign made no attempt to push his advantage, but
whisked round, and returned to his anchorage. Byron picked
up the fragments, and seeing that Grenada was gone, sailed
away to St. Christopher again. A few weeks of mere
parade followed. D’Estaign made motions as if to force on a
battle, but did nothing effectual. Byron was ready to fight
again, if his opponent would provide him with a battle. In
August he left for home, handing over the command to
Admiral Parker. D’Estaign, after touching at San Domingo,
sailed for the coast of America to join General Lincoln, in the
unsuccessful attempt to retake Savannah, occupied by us
during the previous autumn. The siege was raised in
October, and the French admiral left for home followed by
the growls of the discontented Americans.
While these operations were running their course on the
American coast and in the West Indies with various fortunes
and no striking display of ability, in the later months, an
amazing example of the essential weakness of England’s
enemies was being given at home. Spain joined France in
the summer of 1779, bringing to the aid of her allies the
unwieldy bulk of her nerveless fleet. The Courts of Paris
and Madrid came to the decision to attempt an invasion under
the protection of their united squadrons. French troops and
transports were collected at Havre and St. Malo. On the
3rd June, D’Orvilliers sailed south to meet the Spaniards with
twenty-eight of the line, nine frigates, and eight small vessels,
and by direction of his Government stationed himself at the
Sisargas, twenty miles west of Corunna. Slothful and
unready as ever, the Spaniards had not fully joined till the
26th July, and four days more were spent in settling signals
and other details of business. D’Orvilliers had no confidence
in the success of the lumbering armament he was called upon
to direct. He thought that the sixty-six liners of which it was
composed made too large a force to be manœuvred. The
Spaniards might be brave and willing, but were in his
opinion neither officers nor seamen. Don Luis de Córdoba,
their commander-in-chief, a man of seventy-five, is described
as having “no personal existence,” and as having seen no
service except against the Moors. His individuality was
displayed only in senile obstinacy and vanity. Provisions
were ill supplied, the health of the fleet was bad and grew
worse. D’Orvilliers’ heart was broken by the death of his
only son, an officer in the flagship, who fell a victim to the
pest. In these miserable conditions, material, moral, and
mental, the new Armada sailed from the coast of Galicia.
On one side reinforcements had been sent to North
America under Arbuthnot in the early months of the year,
and an attack on the Channel Islands had been beaten off.
Sir Charles Hardy, an old officer, was drawn from retirement
and appointed to succeed Keppel, when he and other admirals
refused to serve. Hardy sailed with the grand fleet of thirty-five
sail to the West on the 16th June, and remained at sea
covering the trade and watching for the enemy. With
bolder management he might easily have delivered a crushing
stroke at D’Orvilliers at the Sisargas during the fifty
mortal days while the French were waiting for the lagging
Spaniards. D’Orvilliers and Córdoba reached as high as Plymouth
on the 14th August, and their presence caused a lively
panic in the country. But nothing came of it all, except the
capture of the Ardent, 64, which fell into their hands by the
bad management of her captain. First the allies were
paralysed by calms, then the wind turned easterly on the
17th, and blew them out westward. They sighted Hardy,
but failed to bring him to action or to prevent him reaching
Spithead, and by the 14th September had broken up and
had turned back to their respective homes. The four days’
command of the Channel for which Napoleon was to sigh had
been theirs, but they did nothing with the opportunity.
CHAPTER VIII THE AMERICAN WAR TILL THE FALL OF YORKTOWN
Authorities.—As before.
The course of the war in 1780 was dictated by the
political conditions. France, disappointed by the
futile end of the great demonstration in the Channel
in 1779, did not renounce naval warfare in European waters,
but was turning her attention towards giving more effectual
aid to the Americans, and to efforts in combination with the
Spaniards for the entire expulsion of England from the West
Indies. Spain watching Minorca, and blocking Gibraltar, was
prepared to co-operate with France in Europe and the
Antilles, while making an effort to recover Florida. Don
Bernardo de Galves, sailing from Havana, did achieve
success in this minor and isolated operation. The most
effectual defence for us would have been to blockade Brest,
Ferrol, Cadiz, and Toulon. But with an equality of numbers
against us and the peremptory obligation to give naval support
to the army in America—the cancer which drained our
strength in all these years—the high line could not be taken.
Moreover, the rigid enforcement of our belligerent rights
against neutrals at sea was steadily bringing us into collision
with Holland, to the verge of a conflict with the Northern
Powers, Russia, Prussia, and the Scandinavian States, and this
would have been sheer ruin; for the revolt of the plantations
had cut us off from the supply of American naval stores, and
we were dependent on the Baltic for timber, pitch, and hemp,
without which our fleets could not have been fitted for sea.
D’Orvilliers and Luis de Córdoba having shrunk away
from the Channel in September 1779, we were at liberty to
set about defending our remoter interests, the relief of Minorca
and Gibraltar, and the strengthening of our naval position in
the New World. Mention has been made of the sailing
of Arbuthnot in June. He had with him a convoy of
400 merchant-ships with stores for General Clinton at
New York. Having turned aside to defend the Channel
Islands, he sent his convoy into port to wait for him. A shift
in the wind delayed his departure from the Channel, and
though he got away safe under the wing of Hardy’s grand
fleet, he did not reach New York till August. Here he took
over the command from Sir John Collier, who had superseded
Gambier, and he co-operated in December 1779 with
Cornwallis in the taking of Charlestown, in Carolina, after the
retreat of D’Estaign from before Savannah. In the West
Indies Hyde Parker had a superiority of force over D’Estaign’s
successors, the Comte de Grasse and La Motte Picquet, and
was able to confine them to Fort Royal.
At the close of 1779 measures were taken to relieve
Minorca and Gibraltar and to reinforce the West Indies.
A great convoy was collected to carry stores and soldiers to
the Mediterranean fortresses. It sailed under the guard of
twenty-two line-of-battle ships and many frigates. The
command was given to Rodney, who after relieving the
fortresses was to go on with part of the fleet to the
West Indies, and there supersede Parker. With Rodney a
new spirit entered into the conduct of the naval war. He
was the ablest officer, except Howe, who had yet hoisted
his flag, and was indeed a man of quite another stamp
from Keppel, Byron, Parker, Hardy, or Arbuthnot. In the
Austrian Succession and Seven Years’ Wars he had gained a
reputation in the service for ability and zeal, had been captain
under Mathews and Hawke, had commanded in the Leeward
Islands, and had been bitterly disappointed when he was
superseded by Pocock during the capture of Havana. He
was eager, was not satisfied with the prevailing formal application
of the Fighting Orders, and had turned his intellect to the
conduct of war. His defects were that he was no longer
young, and that his health was ruined by diseases which were,
at least in part, the result of early dissipation. It was his
misfortune to be too deeply conscious of the fact that he
represented an ancient family of Somersetshire gentry and
was closely connected with the ducal house of Chandos.
His brother-officers appeared to him in the light of middle-class
persons of inferior breeding who lived mostly in the
ports when on shore. The naval habits of the time kept the
captain and admiral in great seclusion, since it was hardly
thought consistent with their dignity to speak with subordinates
except on matters of duty. Under the influence of
pain and social arrogance, Rodney carried this isolation to
an extreme. He had ruined himself by gambling and
bribery at elections, and had taken refuge from his creditors
in Paris when the American War began. A loan from the
French Marshal Biron saved him from imprisonment as a
debtor in the Bastille. On his return to London he sought
for employment, and the refusal of other admirals to serve
opened the way for him to his great but tardy opportunity.
The jobbery and favouritism of the age had by no means left
him untouched. During his famous command in the West
Indies he made his own son a post-captain at the age of
seventeen, and he drove his subordinate, Isaac Coffin, into flat
revolt by forcing mere lads on him as lieutenants. When he
sailed for Gibraltar in December 1779, two influences were at
work in his mind, a noble and ignoble. He burned to gain
glory for himself and victory for his country by vigorous
conduct of the war, and he was deeply concerned to repair
his shattered fortune by prize money.
Rodney sailed on the 27th December 1779, taking with
him both the reliefs for Minorca and Gibraltar, and a convoy
of merchant-ships bound for the West Indies. The trade was
seen clear of the Channel, and sent on its way on the 7th
January 1780. The main fleet now went on to Gibraltar
with the stores and reliefs, and on the 8th, when 300 miles
E.N.E. of Finisterre, fell in with and captured a Spanish
convoy of one 64-gun ship, seven frigates and sloops, and fifteen
merchant-ships, bound for South America. This prosperous
beginning of the service was soon followed by a more signal
success. Storms in the Straits had distressed the awkward
Spanish blockading fleet, and the greater part of it had been
forced to take refuge in harbour. But a squadron of eleven
ships of the line under the command of Don Juan de Lángara
was stationed off Cape St. Vincent to intercept the relieving
force which the Spanish Government was convinced would not
exceed ten liners. On the 16th January Rodney swept down
on this inferior force, in a brisk breeze rising to a gale from
the west. He steered between them and the land as they
endeavoured to escape, overtook them in the night, and
destroyed them completely. Six were taken, one of the
prizes being Lángara’s flagship, and a seventh blew up with
the loss of all hands. Two of the prizes were recaptured by
their Spanish crews during the storm following the action,
but as Barceló, the Spanish admiral, did not venture to leave
the protection of the forts at Algeciras, there was no further
opposition to the relief of Gibraltar. Rodney’s subordinate,
Digby, went up the Mediterranean to Minorca with stores.
On the 14th the admiral left for the West Indies with six
sail of the line, and four days later Digby, leaving four ships
to aid in the defence of the fortress, took the others, and the
empty storeships, back to the Channel unopposed by Frenchman
or Spaniard. This handsome success, the just reward of
intelligent measures vigorously executed, raised the spirit
of the nation, and Rodney sprang at once from comparative
obscurity, outside his own profession, into universal popularity.
I will again treat the operations in West Indies and on
the coast of North America as the main stream of the war,
and therefore follow Rodney’s flag for the present. He
reached Santa Lucia on the 27th March to find Sir Hyde
Parker anchored at Gros Islet Bay, and menaced in his turn
by a superior French force. Until the middle of the month,
Sir Hyde had been engaged in watching La Motte Picquet
and the Comte de Grasse at Fort Royal, and in covering the
arrivals and departures of the merchant-ship convoys. In
common with all other naval commanders on the West Indian
stations, he looked forward to taking a share in the recapture
of our lost islands and in the conquest of the French possessions.
About the middle of March he was expecting to be
joined by transports conveying troops under General Vaughan
from North America, and therefore took port to windward—which
is to eastward—of Martinique to meet and protect them.
On the 21st the junction was effected, and at the same time
Parker heard that the French were expecting reinforcements
from Europe. He left Commodore Collingwood with four
sail of the line to look out for them, and returned to Santa
Lucia with the other twelve of his command, and General
Vaughan’s troops. The French at Fort Royal had in the
meantime divided. Part had gone to San Domingo with La
Motte Picquet. The Comte de Grasse remained with the
others to wait for the fleet coming from France. Immediately
after Parker anchored at Choque Bay, in Santa Lucia, his look-out
ships reported that they had seen a great French convoy
entering Fort Royal. On the top of this report Commodore
Collingwood ran into Choque Bay with his detached squadron,
and the news that he had been chased by sixteen French sail
of the line, had escaped them, had met four sail of Rodney’s
squadron which that officer had sent on, and had sent them
back to their admiral with the information that the French
were in force.
The newcomers were the powerful fleet fitted out at Brest,
and they came under the command of Luc Urbain de Bouëxic,
Comte de Guichen, a man of sixty-two, and one of the most
interesting figures in the French Navy of the day. He represented
at once all that was best in the French noblesse of
his generation, its virtues of good breeding, high personal
honour, and loyalty—all that was most accomplished in the
scientific training of the French naval officer of the eighteenth
century, and all that was most fatal in their theories of the
conduct of war. No man handled a fleet with more precision
or with greater elegance, and no man manœuvred with more
dexterity not to injure his opponent, but to baffle that
opponent’s attempts to injure him. We shall see why he
fairly divided the honours of the coming encounter with
Rodney, but it was characteristic of his school, and was its
condemnation, that his active career was to end in the Bay
of Biscay two years later in failure and discredit, simply
through the breakdown of the manœuvring he loved under
the direct thrust of Kempenfelt. On the 23rd March he
joined Grasse at sea to windward of Martinique. Having
now twenty-four sail of the line to Parker’s sixteen, he prepared
for the reconquest of Santa Lucia, and appeared to
leeward of the island on the 24th. He was not quick or
energetic enough to prevent Parker from covering the entry
of another convoy of troops from Barbadoes, which came in
round the north end of the island, on that day; nor did he
intercept Rodney, who joined Parker on the 27th, raising the
total British force to twenty-two of the line, and taking up
the command.
On the 2nd April Rodney put to sea in search of Guichen.
The French admiral followed the usual course of officers of his
service. Though equal in number to his opponents, he declined
battle, remained at anchor under the guns of Fort Royal, and
waited till the absence of the British fleet should offer him an
opportunity to strike at one of the British Antilles. Rodney
returned to Gros Islet, leaving frigates to watch. On the 15th
April, Guichen came out, having with him a detachment of
troops commanded by Bouillé. Rodney was instantly informed
of his movements, and started in pursuit. On the 16th April
he sighted the French twenty-four miles west of the Pearl
Rock, a little island outside Fort Royal. On the following
morning he was to windward of his enemy, having twenty sail
of the line to Guichen’s twenty-two. The French had stood
off to the N.W. when sighted, and had been followed by the
British. Both fleets were to leeward of Martinique. At
6.45 a.m. Rodney signalled that he intended to attack the
enemy’s rear, and at 7 a.m. ordered his line to close till the
ships were at one cable’s length from one another. The order
to bear down was given at 8.30. Both fleets were heading to
the N.W., and the French were very much extended. There
was a gap between their rear and their centre. Guichen seeing
that his rear division was in peril, at once reversed the order of
his van and centre, and stood to the south to its assistance.
He thereby closed the gap, and as his rear turned also to the
south, it became the van. Rodney was thus baffled, and drew
off, resuming his course to the north. Guichen then turned his
fleet in the same direction, and the two again stood to the
northward side by side out of gun-shot. At 11 a.m. Rodney
hoisted the signal to engage. It was his intention that his fleet
should steer for the enemy’s rear with the ships at a cable’s
length apart. His captains unfortunately understood the
signal to attack the rear as applying only to the first movement.
Brought up in the old faith of the Fighting Instructions, they
fought as they had been trained to fight—steering van to van,
centre to centre, and rear to rear. Rodney’s plan to concentrate
his whole force on a part of the enemy was spoilt, and the battle
to leeward of Martinique ended as many others had done, with
a great deal of damage to the spars of the British ships and the
retreat of the French little hurt.
This failure remained a subject of bitter regret to Rodney.
At the time and afterwards he attributed it to the deliberate
misconduct of his captains, who, he said, let the French escape
in a factious spirit of opposition to the king’s Government.
More credible explanations are: the influence of unintelligent
rules of tactics; and his own partly valetudinarian and
partly arrogant solitude. If he had explained to his captains
the principles on which he meant to fight, his orders would not
have been misunderstood, and it would have been impossible
that they should have been disobeyed. The merit of his proposed
plan is manifest when it is compared with the mechanical
rules of the Fighting Orders. Yet that merit may be, and has
been, exaggerated. Such a concentration as he designed could
always be answered by an enemy who was prompt to reverse
his order and to close his line, as Guichen showed in the early
hours of the day. So long as the British fleet engaged to
windward, there could be but indifferent security that the
enemy would not cripple its rigging and slip away. Rodney,
in short, set the example of innovating on the formal tactics
of the time, but before great results could be obtained much
more had to be done than he showed himself prepared to do
on the 17th April 1780.
The operations following the battle were marked by no
decisive event. Rodney, after keeping for a few days between
Guichen and Fort Royal, returned to Choque Bay to refit.
Several of his ships, and the flagship among them, the
Sandwich, had been severely damaged. Guichen, after visiting
the Dutch island of St. Eustatius to procure stores, stationed
himself to windward—that is, to the west of Martinique. His
object was to effect a junction with a Spanish squadron under
Admiral Solano, which was known to be on its way from
Europe. Rodney followed him. Exasperated by the want of
support he had suffered from in the last action, he put his
fleet through a severe course of manœuvres, and drew the reins
of discipline tight with a severity which aroused the wrath of
his subordinate, Sir Hyde Parker, who on his return home
was with difficulty restrained by the advice of Sandwich from
creating another naval scandal. Twice Rodney came close
enough to Guichen to bring on partial actions—on the 15th
and 19th May. But the Frenchman was resolved not to be
brought to close action. He had the weather-gage, and kept
it so carefully that only the van ships of the British line came
into action with the rear of the French as the two fleets
passed on opposite tacks. It was characteristic of the spirit
and principles of the French Navy of the time that Guichen
was much praised for, and was visibly proud of, his success in
baffling Rodney’s attempts to bring him to battle. Rodney,
who might have cut off two or three of the rearmost French
ships if he had ordered his van to steer into the enemy’s line,
was not prepared to depart wholly from the old methods.
On the 21st May, Guichen, whose ships were in want of
repairs, went off to the northward, and Rodney lost sight of him.
The French returned to Fort Royal, and the English to
Barbadoes.
At Carlisle Bay, in that island, on the 22nd May, Rodney
was joined by the Cerberus frigate. Her captain, Mann,
brought news that when cruising off Cadiz he had sighted
a Spanish squadron of twelve sail of the line on the 2nd May,
with a convoy of merchant-ships. He had followed it for
days, had convinced himself that it was bound for the West,
and had left his station to warn Rodney. Sir George, who
received further information from Lisbon, put to sea to intercept
the Spaniard, who he concluded was bound for Martinique.
But Don José Solano steered a more northerly course, and
on the 10th June effected a junction with Guichen at Guadaloupe.
Rodney had been reinforced by five ships of the line
while to windward of Martinique, but was now so much outnumbered
by the united Spaniards and French that he
returned to Gros Islet Bay and stood on his guard. Nothing
was attempted by the enemy. The Spaniards were horribly
sickly and in no condition for service, while several French
ships were worn out. On the 5th July the allies separated,
Solano going to Havana, and Guichen to Cape François,
in San Domingo, from whence on the 16th August he sailed
for Europe. Rodney was joined at Santa Lucia by reinforcements
under Commodore Walsingham on the 12th July, but
no opportunity for action was presented by the enemy. The
hurricane season, during which the West Indies are dangerous,
had begun, and the trade had to be seen safe to Europe.
Rodney sent off the merchant-ships convoyed by Sir Hyde
Parker, detached ten of the line under Rowley and Walsingham
to Jamaica, and sailed himself with ten ships of the line to
North America.
On the North American station the British squadron had
been commanded since the latter part of 1779 by Rear-Admiral
Marriott Arbuthnot, a somewhat dull man of impracticable
temper. During May he had co-operated with
Sir Henry Clinton in the occupation of Charlestown, but during
the rest of the year he had been checked by the appearance
on the coast of a French squadron of nine sail of the line
under the Chef d’escadre D’Arzac de Ternay. Ternay had
sailed from Brest on the 2nd May, escorting 9000 troops
under Rochambeau. On the 20th June, near Bermuda, he
fell in with four British sail of the line under Cornwallis, who
was escorting a flock of merchant-ships homeward bound
through the Florida Straits. The two squadrons cannonaded
one another feebly. Ternay having “his mission to fulfil,”
would not stop to crush Cornwallis, and went on to Rhode
Island, which he reached on the 11th July. Arbuthnot, who
was reinforced by Graves on the 13th July, made preparations
to co-operate with the army in an attack on the French;
but delays followed one another, and no attack was made.
The brief stay of Rodney on the station was not marked by
any active operation. Arbuthnot looked upon him chiefly
as a competitor for shares of prize money, and was angry
at his intrusion. Sir George, whose health suffered in the
keen air of a northern autumn, reached New York on the
22nd September, and was back in the West Indies on
the 12th December.
In home waters the war was conducted with languor on
both sides after Rodney’s relief of Gibraltar. The British
Government having to meet calls all over the world, could only
collect some thirty sail of the line in the Channel, which were
successively led by Admiral Geary, a worn-out veteran, and
Admiral Darby. Geary, after a cruise in June and July,
during which he made a few prizes of merchant-ships, resigned
in August. One object of his cruise was to see a large convoy
of ships bound to the East and West Indies safe out of reach of
the French and Spanish fleets. It was to be guarded when
clear of European waters by Captain Moutray in the Ramillies,
74, with the Thetis and Southampton frigates. The
convoy consisted of five East India Company’s ships, of
eighteen transports carrying a regiment to the West Indies,
and of forty West Indian merchant-ships. Moutray left
Spithead on the 29th July. He was allowed two other line-of-battle
ships till he was 300 miles beyond the Scilly Isles.
He met Geary at sea, and was escorted by the grand fleet
till he was some 340 miles west. Then he was left,
the admiral thinking that he was now safe. But he was
running into extreme peril. The French had sent the Chef
d’escadre Bausset with seven of the line and the Spanish
ships at Brest to join Don Luis de Córdoba at Cadiz.
While they were there, secret information of the sailing of the
convoy and of the weakness of Moutray is said, by Spanish
historians, to have reached the Prime Minister of Spain, the
Count of Floridablanca. He at once ordered Córdoba and
Bausset to sail and intercept the prize. They were right across
Moutray’s route when, on the 8th August, in Lat. 36° 40 N.
and Lon. 15° W., their sails were seen on the horizon at
sundown from the masthead of Moutray’s advance ship.
Thinking the sails belonged to neutral ships, he held on till
night. Then the number of lights reported as seen ahead
made him alter his mind. He signalled to his convoy by
gun-fire to lie to with their heads to the west, and then,
again by gun-fire, ordered them to continue their course. It
was his meaning that they should go as they were then
pointing. The captains of the Indiamen, transports, and
merchant-ships understood that they were to resume the
course they were on before they lay to, which was to the
south. His signals had been heard by the allies, who steered
for the sound of the guns. So when the sun rose on the
9th August, Moutray with his solitary 74 and frigates was well
out to the west and to windward. The sixty-three ships under
his charge were sailing right into the arms of a big French
and Spanish fleet, which closed on them, and carried them all
into Cadiz. It was the greatest disaster suffered by British
commerce since Tourville had scattered the Smyrna convoy.
The necessity for satisfying the public by making an example
led to Moutray’s trial by a court martial, and he was reprimanded.
In truth, nothing he could have done would have
saved his convoy when once it was close to so great a force.
He lived to be appointed as Commissioner of the Dockyard
at Antigua, and to have some difficulties with Nelson.
The allies returned in triumph to Cadiz, and their success
encouraged the Spaniards to persevere in the war. A great
fleet collected in the port in October,—Spanish ships, Frenchmen
from Brest and from Toulon, and Guichen with a
worn-out squadron from the West Indies; but it did
nothing, and scattered to winter quarters.
In 1781 the war grew in intensity. Disputes arising
partly out of the exercise by the British Government of
its claim to take an enemy’s goods out of a neutral ship,
and partly out of the encouragement given to the Americans
by the city of Amsterdam, led to a declaration of war on
the Dutch Republic by Great Britain in December 1780.
To guard against an attack by the Dutch on the trade with
the Baltic, from whence our naval stores were mainly drawn,
it was necessary to station a squadron in the North Sea,
which threw an additional burden on the already heavily
taxed navy. Every ship which could be patched up for
service had to be put into commission. The number of
vessels in “full sea pay” was 398, and 90,000 men, including
20,000 marines, were voted to form the crews.
So many were the calls on the navy that it was not
possible to collect sufficient line-of-battle ships for service
in home waters. The nominal superiority of the allies was
overwhelming, but the difference between paper and real
strength has rarely been better shown than in this year.
The Dutch were not ready. The French, though incomparably
the most formidable of our enemies, could not man
and officer all their ships effectively. The Spaniards were
miserably inefficient. France and Spain alike were intent
on pushing the war in America, or in endeavouring to recover
Minorca and Gibraltar. Both dreaded the dangers of the
Channel. Thus no resolute effort was made to assail Great
Britain itself. In America our enemies gained, by the
intelligent use of their fleets, the success which established
the independence of the United States. In European waters
the British Government was compelled to leave the garrison
of Minorca to its fate. After a siege begun on the 18th
August 1781, it surrendered on the 4th February 1782.
Yet the foundations of our power were not only not shaken,
but were not seriously menaced.
Before taking up the story of the war in American waters,
it will be convenient to show how the heart of the empire
was guarded, and how the forces on both sides started for
operations in distant seas. The British Government had
to provide first of all for the free movement of its trade—a
task greatly complicated by the war with Holland. Then
it had to reinforce its squadrons in America, to endeavour
to strengthen its general position by seizing the Dutch
possessions at the Cape, and by providing for the safety of
Gibraltar. The great fortress was on a superficial view a
mere burden on the fleet throughout the war. Three great
armaments had to be sent for its relief first and last. Two
of them were provided only by leaving the Channel with
small or no protection. Some English public men were of
opinion that it might be profitably exchanged for an island
in the West Indies. Yet it attracted a large part of the
enemy’s forces which might have been employed with more
damaging results to us elsewhere. It is true that for this
we have to thank the want of intelligence of our opponents.
To recover Gibraltar was an object for which the King of
Spain was prepared to make every effort, and he could think
of no other way of taking it than by direct siege. His
Ambassador in Paris, the Count of Aranda, had sagacity
enough to see that it might be recovered “in the heart of
Jamaica.” Aranda could, however, secure no hearing. So
long as our opponents were intent on mastering Gibraltar
by bombardment and blockade, the obvious interest of
England was to keep it from capture. Nor could the pride
of the nation be reconciled to the surrender of this trophy
of former wars. Its importance to the ultimate interests of
the naval power of Great Britain was to be amply proved in
the next war.
To provide for the free movement of the trade a small
squadron of one line-of-battle ship and a few frigates was
stationed early in the year on the east coast of Scotland.
Privateers, American and French, had already been active
in those waters, and were now to be reinforced by the Dutch,
who, when once at war, set vigorously to work to make up
for the neglect of their fleet in previous years. Commodore
Keith Stuart, who was in command of the small protecting
force, found it insufficient. The history of the war in the
North Sea during 1781 shows with what difficulty and at
what a cost trade is carried on when the command of the
sea is disputed. The Artois frigate was appointed to
protect the merchant-ships bound to the Baltic. During
the spring 200 merchant-vessels collected in the Firth
of Forth. They were detained at first by weather, and
then by orders from the Admiralty, which feared that
they would be captured by Dutch frigates. Their provisions
were consumed and heavy expenses incurred. In the meantime
another flock of trading-ships had been collected on
the east coast, and was sent to the Firth of Forth under
the protection of a squadron commanded by the Vice-Admiral
Parker whose services in the West Indies have
been mentioned. He came up from the Downs collecting
the traders on his way. On the 10th June he had
collected his charge, 500 merchant-ships in all, at Leith.
Before he could see them on their way, the homeward-bound
convoy from Jamaica came in—seventy trading-craft
under the protection of four sail of the line, one 50-gun
and one 44-gun ship—much battered by storms, and
infested with scurvy after a long voyage. The West Indiamen
stopped only to obtain fresh vegetables, and then
continued their voyage to the South. On the 27th June
Parker sailed, saw his convoy safe to the Baltic, and then
cruised in the North Sea, waiting for the homeward-bound
ships.
The condition of Parker’s squadron shows that the
Admiralty had indeed been driven to sore straits to provide
protection for the North Sea trade. After he had been joined
by Stuart with the Berwick, 74, he was able to make up
a line of seven vessels in all, but it was only by including
two which were not line-of-battle ships—the Preston, 50,
and the Dolphin, 44. The Princess Amelia, 80, was
nominally a strong ship, but she was so crazy with age
that it had been found necessary to reduce her armament.
She carried only 24-pounders on the lower deck instead of
32-pounders, and the rest of her guns were 18-pounders and
9-pounders. Parker’s flagship, the Fortitude, 74, and the
Berwick represented the solid part of his command. If the
Dutch had been able to send an equal squadron of strong
ships, it would have gone hard with “Vinegar” Parker.
Happily for him and for the interests of British trade, the
Dutch had to make shift with the old and weak when they
needed the new and strong. On the 20th July a squadron
of seven ships, to form the line, and a number of frigates sailed
from the Texel with a large fleet of merchant-ships under their
protection. The admiral in command was the Schout-bij-nacht
Johan Arnold Zoutman, an elderly officer, of the same
stamp as his English opponent, an excellent practical seaman
beyond doubt, and a stout-hearted man, but nothing more.
His line of seven was made by including three ships of
54 guns and one of 40. The largest of his ships was the
Admiral Generaal, 74, commanded by Captain Kinsbergen.
Zoutman’s flag was in the Admiraal de Ruiter, 68, and one
64-gun ship, the Holland, made up the tale. Other two ships
were sent out to accompany the convoy, but were not available
for an action with the British squadron.
Contrary winds and the usual obstructions inseparable
from the task of convoying a swarm of clumsy merchant-ships
delayed Zoutman’s movements. It was not till the first days
of August that he was clear of the shallows of the Dutch
coast. In the meantime, the British trade homeward bound
from the Baltic had collected behind Parker. On the 5th
August the Dutchman bound northward, and the Englishman
southward, sighted one another on the Dogger Bank, in
a north-westerly wind—Parker being to the windward and
westward. Each admiral sent his convoy on its way, and
both prepared for a fair trial of strength.
The battle which followed has an almost pathetic interest.
It was one of the last fought on the old traditional rules, and
it was fought by men who played the game with a single
heart. Therefore it showed what was best in those rules,
their downright manhood, and what was weakest, their hidebound
pedantry. Zoutman seeing that Parker had the
weather-gage and the option of battle, lay to on the port tack,
heading to the north. Sir Hyde Parker bore down to engage
from van to rear, every man to take his bird. His flagship
was in her orthodox place, the middle, which in a line of
seven was the fourth. Zoutman was the fifth in his line.
Now the proper opponent for an admiral is an admiral. Parker
therefore laid the Fortitude alongside the Admiraal de
Ruiter. But as there were three ships ahead of him and
three astern, while there were four ships ahead and two astern
of Zoutman, it followed that there were three English to four
Dutch in the van, and three to two in the rear. The last
ship of Parker’s line had consequently no opponent. In the
van the Berwick, 74, was very rightly laid alongside the
leading Dutchman, the Erzprinz, 54. The second English
ship tackled the third Dutchman, and the third the fourth.
Therefore the second Dutchman had no opponent. Yet every
ship was kept in its position, since the signal for the line was
flying. Not a shot was fired by the Dutch as their enemies
came down to the attack. They lay quiet, with their marines
admirably pipeclayed drawn up on their poops. When the other
sportsman was comfortably in his place, Zoutman opened fire.
English and Dutch pounded one another with stolid resolution.
The loyalty of the seamen of the time to the superstition of
the line of battle was wonderfully shown in the van.
Commodore Stuart had rightly closed with the leading Dutch
ship to prevent her from getting to windward and doubling
on the head of our line. The Berwick being a far heavier
ship than the Erzprinz, was able to drive her to leeward.
In following up the attack the Berwick fell to leeward, and
then finding herself out of her proper place, tacked back to
resume her station. The battle was a cannonade of three
hours and a half. At the end of that time the Dutch drew
off, and Parker did not pursue. His ships were severely
damaged, and his casualty list, 111 killed and 318 wounded,
was a more severe loss than any suffered in action with the
French in this war, in proportion to the number engaged.
Zoutman returned to port, and Parker continued his voyage
home. The safe arrival of the Baltic convoy was a subject
of very natural rejoicing, and much was made of Parker’s
“victory,” though victory there was none. He for his part
was discontented, and resigned his command, saying, we are
told, that he wished the king younger admirals and better
ships. At a later period he was chosen to command in the
East Indies. He sailed in the Cato, 50, for his station.
His fate is unknown, for he never reached his destination, and
no trace of him was left, save a vague story that a great ship,
which may have been his, had been wrecked on the coast
of Malabar, and that the survivors of the crew had been
massacred by the natives.
While these operations were running their indecisive course
in the North Sea, two great armaments had sailed from
Spithead and from Brest, each on a distant mission, and each
carrying with it subordinate squadrons to be detached for still
more remote destinations. On the 13th March Admiral
Darby sailed from Spithead with twenty-eight line-of-battle
ships. Some were to be detached to the West Indies, and
others to sail for the Cape of Good Hope and take it from the
Dutch, when Darby’s immediate service was performed. He
had also with him the outward-bound East Indiamen. His
orders were to collect the vessels laden with provisions in Irish
ports for the use of the garrisons of Gibraltar and Mahon, to
convoy them to the fortresses, to detach the reinforcements for
the West Indies, and the squadron destined to the Cape with
the East Indiamen under its charge, and to return to the
Channel. To meet the victuallers, he steered for the south
coast of Ireland, and was there delayed till they joined him
from Cork. While Darby was waiting on the south coast of
Ireland the Comte de Grasse left Brest on the 22nd March,
with twenty sail of the line, bound for the West Indies, and
having with him a small squadron to be detached for an
attack on the British settlements in the East Indies. Darby,
having collected his victuallers, went on his way, and Grasse
on his without a meeting. The strenuous futility which is
conspicuous in the operations of all parties in this war was
never more visible than in this misuse of two great fleets. If
Darby had fallen on Grasse and had driven him back to
Brest, the Americans would have been deprived of the aid
which enabled them to take Yorktown at the close of the year.
If Grasse had been joined by even six or eight Spanish ships
in an efficient state, and had fought a whole-hearted battle
with Darby off the Old Head of Kinsale, it is possible that
the entire naval defence of Great Britain might have been
ruined, and it is eminently probable that the relief of Gibraltar
would have been stopped—in which case the fortress must
have fallen for it was at the end of its resources. But the
rulers in London and Paris had their eyes on the end of the
earth and could not see that victory at home would mean
success all over the world.
The web of naval warfare covered the North Atlantic, the
threads crossed, the shuttle flew to and fro. All were players in
the same game and each acted on the other. The squadrons
detached to the Cape and the Indian Ocean by Darby and
Grasse went into a wider field and acted apart. The North
Sea was a field by itself, but the other fleets and squadrons
from Newport in Rhode Island, down the East Coast of
America to the West Indies, across the Atlantic to the Straits
of Gibraltar, and north to the Channel, worked together, and
on one another in harmony or in conflict. Let us see how
the players stood when Darby sailed from the south of
Ireland for Gibraltar, and Grasse steered from Brest for the
West Indies.
When the year began the French squadron of seven sail
of the line and two frigates lay at Newport. It was
commanded by Chevalier Destouches, who succeeded to the
command on the death of Ternay, on the 15th December 1780.
Arbuthnot was in command of the British squadron of eight
ships of the line, two 50-gun ships, and twenty-three
frigates, with his headquarters at Long Island. His ships
had to patrol the coast and to co-operate with the British
forces acting in the southern Colonies. In January he sailed
to reconnoitre the French, but on the 23rd his squadron was
beaten back by a violent gale. The Culloden, 74, was lost
on the end of Long Island, and the Bedford, 74, dismasted.
The America, 74, was driven out to sea, and did not rejoin
his flag for weeks. Washington throughout the year was
striving to bring about a concentration of French and
American forces on either the northern or southern parts of
the divided British. He urged Destouches to put to sea
while Arbuthnot was disabled. But the Frenchman was
oppressed by anxiety lest the stormy weather should be as
fatal to him as to his opponent. He sent Le Gardeur de
Tilly with one 64 and two frigates to fall on the British
transports of Arnold’s force in Virginia. The French officer
found that they had taken refuge in Elizabeth River, and
returned. On his way to Rhode Island he captured the
Romulus, 44, and a number of prizes. Meanwhile
Arbuthnot lay at Gardiner Bay in Long Island. Under the
steady driving of Washington, Destouches got to sea on the
8th March, with seven of the line and two frigates—one of
them the captured Romulus, and 1500 French soldiers
under Viomesnil, to reinforce the Americans in Virginia.
On the 10th Arbuthnot followed him with eight ships of the
line and two frigates. The two steered for the Chesapeake in
squally weather, mists, and driving rain. The English
squadron was the quicker of the two. On the 16th March
it overtook the French between forty and fifty miles N.E.
by E. of Cape Henry. It was in the power of Arbuthnot to
put himself to leeward of Destouches, and between him and
the coast in the north-easterly wind. But faithful to tradition
he let the Frenchman run to leeward of him, and then made
two rushes at him in the old style. The Frenchman as usual
fired to dismast and slipped away. Yet Arbuthnot was the
more pertinacious of the two. After an inconclusive action
he anchored at Lynn Haven in the Chesapeake, and Destouches,
finding the road still barred, went back to Rhode Island.
Arbuthnot came back to Long Island, having at least baffled
the enemy’s attempt to carry reinforcements to Virginia, so
that at the close of March both were again “as they were”
at Long Island and at Newport.
Meanwhile events of no very honourable character had
occurred in the West Indies. Rodney had returned to his
station, the Leeward Islands, from North America on the
12th of December 1780. He was soon joined by Samuel
Hood with reinforcements from Europe. Hood, when the war
began, had been commissioner of the dockyard at Portsmouth.
The acceptance of this post was by custom held to mark an
officer’s final retirement from active sea service. But the
Admiralty wished to supply Rodney with a second in command
who would work more harmoniously with him than Parker.
Hood had served under Rodney’s eye at the beginning of
his career. He had been captain of the Vestal, from which
Rodney directed an attack on a French flotilla in 1759.
The refusal of many flag officers to take commands while
Sandwich remained First Lord supplied another reason for
departing from usage. Hood, who was no political partisan,
or who at least was no Whig, was included in a promotion
of flag officers, and was sent with reinforcements and a large
trade convoy to the West Indies. Soon after he joined, the
Childers sloop brought news of the outbreak of the war with
Holland.
No more welcome message could have reached the ear
of Sir George, for it brought to a very embarrassed man the
hope of infinite prize money. The Dutch Island of St.
Eustatius, lying high up in the Lesser Antilles, had been used
for the purpose to which the British port of Nassau in the
Bahamas was put in the American Civil War. It had become
a great dépôt of contraband, by which the French profited
largely. It was also the seat of an unwonted trade of more
legitimate character. The West Indian planters were under
the necessity of buying all the food for their slaves in the
North American colonies. As the supply could not be stopped
without producing ruin to the British Islands, Government was
compelled to relax the rigour of its navigation laws, and permit
the planters to obtain supplies through neutral ports. This
authorised trade concentrated at St. Eustatius. Maize and
pork were brought from America, and British goods were
brought to pay for them. Long rows of warehouses sprang
up on the usually empty shore of the one landing place of the
Dutch island.
The news that St. Eustatius was fair prize reached Rodney
on the 27th January. On the 3rd February he seized the
island. The neighbouring port of Saba was taken at the
same time, and a Dutch convoy was followed and captured.
From that moment and for the ensuing weeks Rodney became
blind to the interest of his country and to his own honour
in the contemplation of the stupendous mass of booty which
was at last to make him a rich man. A part of his force was
to have sailed to seize the Dutch possessions on the mainland
of South America. The admiral would not part with a ship.
Essequibo and Surinam were left to be taken by a swarm of
privateers. There was no French force in the Leeward
Islands except four of the line at Fort Royal. Lest they
should come to molest him at St. Eustatius Rodney stationed
the bulk of his fleet outside that port. In vain did Hood, who
was detached for the blockade, point out that the belt of
calm under the land of Martinique, the fitful breezes, and the
westerly set of the current in the Caribbean Sea made it
impossible to lie close up to the land and intercept reinforcements
coming to the French from Europe. In vain did he
ask leave to cruise to windward of Martinique on the track
of any French force which might be coming. Rodney,
reduced to the moral level of a buccaneer, would think of
nothing except that if Hood were to windward of the island,
the French at Fort Royal might slip out and recapture the
booty at St. Eustatius. There he himself remained superintending
the sorting and packing of the spoil. In that position
they were at the end of April when Grasse was seen
coming round the south end of Martinique on the 28th April.
While the French admiral was crossing the Atlantic
Darby had carried out the relief of Gibraltar. He saw the
ships ordered to the East Indies safe on their way, and on
the 11th April was off Cadiz. His look-out frigates counted
thirty-six Spanish sail of the line at anchor in the port.
They had grown foul while blockading the fortress, and had
run out of stores. They were in fact “wanting in everything
at the critical moment,” as Wellington was to find the Spanish
armies at no distant day. Córdoba, their admiral, was a man
of childlike faith and piety. When a French officer came to
expostulate on the scandalous spectacle presented by a fleet
of thirty-six sail which allowed a weaker force to relieve the
fortress under its eyes, he left his cabin with his rosary in his
hand. He listened to the carnal arguments of the Frenchman,
and then replied with saintly unction, that it had pleased God
to make the English stronger on the present occasion, but that
he would doubtless give the superiority to the Spaniards in
his own good time. He then went back to his prayers.
Darby was allowed to carry his convoy into Gibraltar, and
to despatch others to Mahon not yet besieged. He met no
opposition from the Spaniards except from a few rowing
gunboats, which fired at him from a respectful distance,
when the breeze had fallen. On the 19th April he sailed for
home—his work done. He swept close by Cadiz, “lifting his
leg on the Spaniards” as Horace Walpole puts it, but they
would not come out.
On his way back he missed a piece of service which would
have given him a well-earned reward. While he was to the
south the convoy which Rodney had taken from the Dutch,
together with much of his booty, was on its way home.
Another rich convoy was due from Jamaica. The French
Government had news of them, and sent six sail of the line
and four frigates and sloops to intercept them. La Motte
Picquet fell in with Rodney’s prize convoy about sixty miles
to the west of the Scilly Isles. They were under the protection
of Commodore Hotham with two line-of-battle ships and
three frigates. Seeing the superiority of the French, Hotham
ordered his convoy to disperse, and drew his warships into a
line. But the Frenchman followed the booty and Hotham
was not alert enough to molest him. Twenty of the convoy
were taken. La Motte Picquet, satisfied with his gains, now
turned home to Brest. It was well for him that he did.
Darby was informed of the capture of Hotham’s convoy, and
at once sent Rear-Admiral Digby with a squadron to effect its
recapture. But Digby never sighted the chase. The look-out
ship of the main force with Darby, the Nonsuch, 64,
commanded by Captain Sir James Wallace, fell in with one
of La Motte Picquet’s ships, the Actif, 74, commanded by
M. de Boades, and the two fought a desperate action, which
lasted through hours of the night of the 14th May. Both
were severely mauled. The Nonsuch lost twenty-six men
killed, and sixty-four wounded; the Actif fifteen killed and
thirty-eight wounded. The action may be quoted to prove that
there was at this time no difference in efficiency between the
best ships in the French navy and our own. La Motte Picquet
took his prizes into Brest, and with them the fortune of Rodney.
Little was left to the admiral except a ruinous series of lawsuits,
brought against him by British merchants engaged in
the authorised trade at St. Eustatius, whose goods he had
impounded without discrimination. The Jamaica convoy got
safe to port. Darby anchored at Spithead on the 22nd May.
On that very day Rodney was hurrying from Antigua to
Barbadoes to make good the consequences of his mismanagement
in March and April. On the 28th April the Comte de
Grasse was seen coming round the southern end of Martinique,
and now began a series of operations in which all the movements
of the British fleet were dictated by the French admiral,
and all led up to loss. Hood, held back to leeward by
Rodney’s orders, the wind, the calm, and the current, could
do nothing to prevent his opponent from hugging the shore
and reaching Fort Royal with his warships and convoy. On
the 29th Grasse was joined by the four line-of-battle ships in
the fort. On that day, on the 30th and on the 1st May,
encounters took place between the two fleets. Grasse, having
ulterior objects to achieve, would not allow himself to be drawn
into close action. The well-trained French captains of guns
made excellent practice. Several of Hood’s ships suffered
severe damage in their spars, and one, the Russell, 74, was
badly injured on the water-line. All of course were proportionately
disabled for working to windward. Hood, finding
himself outmatched in force and his fleet diminished by
damage, drew off to the north and sent the injured Russell
into St. Eustatius. She reached it on the 4th May, and
brought Rodney the first news that Grasse had reached
Martinique. He sailed to join Hood on the 6th with the
two ships of the line he had kept with him, and on the 9th
joined his subordinate between Montserrat and Antigua. Injuries
to ships and want of stores made it necessary for him
to take the whole fleet to the dockyard at Antigua.
Grasse, having the Caribbean Sea open before him, free to
go where he pleased and strike where he chose, left Fort
Royal on the 9th May to retake Santa Lucia. The attack
was made on the 11th and 12th without success. The
strength of the British posts on Pigeon Island, the Morne
Fortuné, and the Vigil enabled General St. Leger to hold out.
He was aided by a small squadron under Commodore Linzee.
The discovery that the British posts were strong, and apprehension
that Rodney might appear, induced the French admiral
to embark the soldiers he had landed and return to Fort
Royal. Rodney was indeed at sea, and had steered to assist
Santa Lucia. He received news of the retreat of the enemy
when near Barbadoes on the 23rd May. As that island was
ill prepared for an attack, and his fleet still in need of stores
with many sick in the crews, Rodney anchored in Carlisle Bay.
Grasse had decided to fly at lesser game, and was content to
retake Tobago. An advance squadron of his fleet first appeared
off the island. It had been detached before the attack—which
the French historians, with some economy of truth, call
a false attack—on Santa Lucia. Colonel Ferguson, the
Governor of Tobago, appealed for help to Rodney, and the
admiral, who received the message on the 27th May, sent
Rear-Admiral Sir Samuel Drake on the 29th with three ships
of the line, three frigates, and three sloops to his assistance.
Hardly was Drake out of sight before news came that Grasse
had sailed on the 22nd from Fort Royal apparently bound for
Tobago. Rodney was in no small anxiety for his subordinate,
but Drake, who sighted the whole French fleet off Tobago on
the 30th, retreated in time. The French had landed at Great
Courland Bay on the 24th, and Ferguson, who had but four
hundred men and some armed blacks, retreated into the hills,
hoping to hold out till Rodney could come. But Bouillé
arrived on the 31st May. He was ever a partisan of
“thorough,” and well knew there was no time to waste. By
his orders two plantations were fired in terrorem, and the
clamours of the planters, who formed a large part of his force,
compelled the governor to surrender on the 2nd June. When
Rodney came from Barbadoes on the 3rd the mischief was
done. Until the 9th both fleets manœuvred along the string
of small islands called the Grenadines, till Rodney, finding that
he could not bring his enemy to close action, returned to
Barbadoes, and Grasse went north to Fort Royal.
Strenuous futility continued to be the note of the operations
on both sides. The end of all this display of force by
Grasse had been the transfer of a small island from England
to France. In Paris there was indeed a very general belief
that Grasse had not done enough. His nephew, who carried
home his despatches reporting the operations off Fort Royal
from the 29th April to 1st May, had a very cold reception
from the king. The admiral’s excuse that the British ships
were all coppered and sailed better than his own was grimly
received. If we are to accept it the French officer deserved
high credit for baffling Rodney’s efforts to bring him to battle
between the 3rd and 9th June—credit, that is, for skill if not
for high spirit. The English reader may be excused for not
accepting it at once, for, if it is well founded, Rodney was
grievously to blame for allowing himself to be baffled. But
this lament of want of speed is heard on both sides, till we
are almost forced to regard it as a standing excuse. Sir
George’s failure can be sufficiently explained by the fact that
his mind had been clouded by a passion of avarice at St.
Eustatius, and that his health was breaking down. He was
not free either in body or mind to give minute attention
to his command. His solitary habits grew on him, and his
second in command, Hood, angered by the distant hauteur of
his chief, paid sullen and exact obedience to orders and held
his peace. In his letters he repaid himself by scornful invective.
On his return to Fort Royal Grasse prepared for the
vigorous campaign which was to redeem his reputation and
to decide the war in North America. All through the war
Washington had been eagerly pressing for a combined attack
on the British forces either in New York or in the South, and
Grasse had orders to co-operate. Washington would have
preferred the first, but when he found that the French preferred
the second he accepted the alternative. Grasse left Fort Royal
on the 5th July for Cape Français (now Cape Haytien) in San
Domingo, taking with him a convoy of 200 merchant ships.
At Cape Français he received the pressing appeals of Washington
and the French authorities to come on to North
America with ships, troops, and bullion. The ships he had,
and he increased them by taking the vessels already at Cape
Français which were destined to convoy the trade home.
The merchant ships were ordered to remain in the colony till
the next season—a bold measure, which would probably have
been beyond the courage of a British admiral who served a
commercial state. Three thousand two hundred troops with
ten field pieces and a siege train were lent him by M. de
Lillancourt, governor of Saint Domingo. Bullion he could not
obtain in the French colony. An appeal to the Spaniards at
Havana produced about £60,000. On the 28th July Grasse
sent the Concorde frigate with the announcement that he was
coming, and on the 5th August he sailed through the Bahama
Channel for the Chesapeake, carrying the troops in his warships
so as not to be hampered by transports.
Rodney was informed by Captain Forde of La Nymphe,
who had seen the French at sea on the 5th July, that Grasse
had sailed. He at once concluded that the French admiral
was bound to the coast of America, and he prepared to reinforce
the British squadron on the station. For himself he
could not go. His health had broken down, and it was
impossible for him to face an autumn campaign in the
searching cold of the North. He handed over his command
to Hood with orders to take fourteen sail of the line to
America, and then on the 1st August sailed with a convoy
for Europe.
All now began to move to the decisive point at Yorktown.
Arbuthnot had resigned his command and had gone home on
the 2nd July. His successor, Rear-Admiral Graves, began
by sending information to Rodney that the French fleet was
believed to be coming from the West Indies. Then leaving
Captain Edmond Affleck at New York he went to sea himself
with six ships of the line, to intercept reinforcements from
Europe for the enemy, to cover the movements of our own
convoys, to watch Boston, and, if possible, to meet whatever
ships Rodney might send him from the West Indies. Sir
George had acted, as we have seen, on his own initiative, and
had sent the sloop Swallow to report the approaching arrival
of Hood. The Swallow reached New York on the 27th
July, and was sent on by Affleck to meet Graves at sea. She
unhappily fell in with two privateers, by whom she was driven
on shore and destroyed. The Active, sent by Hood to
report that he was coming, was also taken, and neither message
reached Graves. Hearing nothing, and being in want of stores,
the admiral returned to Sandy Hook on the 16th August.
Hood in the meantime had sailed from Antigua on the 10th
August, and on the 27th he was off the Chesapeake. Finding
no British force there he went on to Sandy Hook on the 28th.
Forty-eight hours after he had gone Grasse arrived with twenty-eight
sail of the line, and two 50-gun ships. He anchored at
Lynn Haven. Thus Lord Cornwallis, who had been compelled
to evacuate the Carolinas, and had marched through Virginia
to Yorktown, where all his troops were collected by the 22nd
August, was cut off from communication with New York by
sea, while Washington, with the American troops, and Rochambeau,
with the French, were gathering round him by land.
Whether he could have been saved from the superior
forces collecting about him is perhaps doubtful. Whatever
chance he had was lost through want of aid from General
Clinton in New York, who continued to believe that he, and
not Cornwallis, would be attacked. The violent controversy
between the generals does not require to be dealt with here.
On the return of Graves, Clinton urged him to attack the
French squadron at Newport. The admiral had, however, to
reprovision his ships, and he received two pieces of information
in quick succession which disposed of any plan for an attack
on Newport. On the 16th August La Nymphe joined him
with the report that Hood was on his way, and a few days
later he learnt that the French squadron, commanded since
the 6th May by the Chef d’escadre Barras de San Laurent
who had superseded Destouches, had sailed to the southward.
When Hood appeared off the bar of Sandy Hook, Graves
came out to join him on the 1st September, and their united
forces steered for the Chesapeake to intercept Barras. On the
5th September the British fleet of twenty-one sail of the
line was off Cape Henry, and the advance ship, the
Solebay, signalled the presence of a French fleet in Lynn
Haven. Admiral Graves formed his line of battle and stood
on. Grasse shipped his cables and stood out with twenty-four
of the line, forming his array as he went. When the two
were nearly opposite one another, the British to windward
in a fine breeze from the N.N.E., Graves wore his fleet
together, and bore down on the enemy, both lines being on
the port tack and heading to sea. A sudden shift of the
wind and a shoal called the Middle Ground hampered the
movements of the fleets. The British line was not all brought
into action, for it struck on the enemy at an angle, thus only
the van under Rear-Admiral Drake was closely engaged.
The rear under Hood might have brought the enemy to
close action if it had been allowed to break the line. But
Graves adhered to the old rule which prescribes the maintenance
of the same formation throughout a battle. So the
French were once more allowed to slip away after crippling
several ships of the British van, and damaging one, the
Terrible, 74, so severely that it was found necessary to take
her men and stores out, and set her on fire on the 11th.
Both fleets remained out for some days without again coming
to action. On the 9th Grasse returned to Lynn Haven.
During his absence Barras had slipped in with six sail of
the line, bringing with him the battering train about to be
used against Cornwallis at Yorktown. He found two British
frigates, detached by Graves to cut away the buoys left by
Grasse on his anchors, and captured them both. After
destroying the Terrible, Graves looked into the Chesapeake
again, and finding the enemy too strong to be attacked, sailed
away to Sandy Hook, which he reached on the 19th
September. Cornwallis was left to his fate. Graves was
joined on the 24th by Rear-Admiral Digby with three sail of
the line, and the news of his appointment to the Jamaica
station, and a few days later by two other ships from the
West Indies. He sailed on the 17th October on a forlorn
effort to save Cornwallis, who had been forced to surrender on
that very day. The British fleet looked again into the
Chesapeake, saw that all was over, and returned to Sandy
Hook. Graves then handed over the command to his
successor, Digby, and left for his new station.
The fall of Yorktown was the practical end of the war
in North America. While Cornwallis’s army was undergoing
its fate, the allies had made another idle demonstration at the
mouth of the Channel. Thirty-six sail of the line, under
Don Luis de Córdoba, appeared at its entrance early in
August, while thirteen others cruised on the coast of Ireland
to intercept trade. Darby, weakened by the departure of
Digby for America, was with difficulty reinforced to thirty
sail, and had to lie at anchor in Torbay. The allies, who had
come on the very tardy reflection that the best way to prevent
relief to Gibraltar or Minorca was to watch the mouth of
the Channel, did not dare to attack him. They feared to be
crushed in detail if they attacked in line ahead, and were
persuaded they had no room (they might have been persuaded
that they had no seamanship), to attack in line abreast.
On the 14th September Darby put to sea to make an effort,
and found the enemy gone. They had in fact separated on
the 5th September in wretched health. The French went
home to Brest, the Spaniards to Cadiz, whence eighteen of
the least inefficient of them sailed under Don Miguel Gaston
to escort the treasure ships from America. In the absence of
an enemy the service was successfully performed. Darby
remained at sea till November to protect trade.
CHAPTER IX THE CLOSE OF THE WAR AND THE EAST INDIES
Authorities.—Naval and Military Memoirs of Great Britain, by Beatson; Naval
Chronology, by Isaac Schomberg; Memoirs and Correspondence of Lord de
Saumarez, by Ross; Life and Correspondence of Rodney, by Mundy; Life of
Viscount Keppel, by T. Keppel; An Essay on Naval Tactics, by Clerk; Naval
Battles of Great Britain, by Ekins; “Letters of Sir Samuel Hood,” by Hannay,
in Navy Records Society Publications; Naval Researches, by White; Plans of
Battles of the War, by Matthews; Life of Howe, by Barrow; La Marine
française, by Chevalier; Batailles navales de la France, by Troude; Journal
de Bord du Bailli de Suffren, by Moris; Histoire du Bailli de Suffren, by Cunat;
Siege of Gibraltar, by Drinkwater; Sea Power in History, by Mahan; Het
Nederlandsche Zeewezen, by De Jonghe; Marins et Soldats français en
Amerique, by the Vicomte de Noailles; La Marine Militaire de la France sous
le règne de Louis XVI., by Lacour-Gayet.
The independence of the United States had been secured
and a great blow struck at England by the surrender of
Cornwallis at Yorktown. The allies had now to secure
prizes for themselves. Gibraltar was to be taken in Europe
and Jamaica conquered in the West Indies. On the 4th
November 1781 Grasse sailed from the Chesapeake for
Martinique, where he anchored on the 25th. On that day his
unresting military colleague, Bouillé, pounced in his characteristically
feline style on St. Eustatius. He landed where no
landing was expected. The red coats of the Irish regiment
of Dillon, which formed part of his force, disarmed suspicion,
all the more easily because no watch was kept. The
Governor was splashing in his bath when the French came
down upon him, and so the loss of St. Eustatius was added to
the chapter of regrettable incidents. Grasse and Bouillé were
now free to push their enterprises against the British West
Indies, opposed for the time being only by the inferior fleet
under Hood, who had sailed from Sandy Hook on the
11th November and had reached Barbadoes on the 5th
December. The French officers had been instructed to
expect reinforcements to be brought to them from Europe
by Vaudreuil. If strengthened in the way promised they
would have held a commanding position. The French
Government took measures to keep its word, but its plans
were shattered by a brilliant stroke of vigilance and activity
delivered by the British Navy.
It was known in London that a great force was in
preparation at Brest, and measures were taken to intercept
it at its starting place. On the 2nd December, Kempenfelt,
who had succeeded Digby as second in command in the
Channel, left Spithead with twelve sail of the line and one
50-gun ship. The calculation was sound, and Kempenfelt
sailed in good time, but the force given him might well have
proved insufficient. Guichen left Brest on the 10th December
with nineteen sail of the line and a convoy carrying troops.
His orders were to detach Vaudreuil to the West Indies with
five sail and the transports, to send two to the East Indies,
to post La Motte Picquet with two others where he would
meet the trade coming home from San Domingo, and to
take the others to Gibraltar. Kempenfelt had been delayed
by the weather, but on the 12th December he sighted the
French 150 miles to W.S.W. of Ushant. They were to the
southward of him in a south-easterly wind. Guichen and
the warships were ahead on Kempenfelt’s lee or starboard
bow as he came down on the port tack. The transports
and merchant ships were directly behind Guichen and were
therefore uncovered. Haze and fog, with clear intervals,
surrounded both fleets and hid the approach of the English,
but the French admiral’s disposition was unpardonable. He
ought to have kept his convoy to leeward of him. If Kempenfelt
had been an unenterprising man he might have hesitated to
attack where he was menaced by a superior force, but he was as
bold as he was seamanlike, and he did not hesitate to punish his
opponent for his error. He dashed straight on in a general chase,
each ship going at her best speed with frigates and two deckers
ahead, swept past the stern of the French warships, and broke
into the convoy. Fifteen transports were captured, with 1062
soldiers on board. The rest scattered in terror. Guichen,
confused by the consequences of his own want of foresight,
and perhaps by the fog, allowed his opponent to collect his
warships, which had been separated by the chase, and to round
up his prizes before night. Kempenfelt detached Captain
Caldwell in the Agamemnon with La Prudente to pursue the
convoy. Five more fell into Captain Caldwell’s hands. Guichen
returned rather piteously to Brest, and the blow delivered to
the W.S.W. of Ushant was felt by Grasse in the West Indies.
Kempenfelt anchored at Spithead on the 20th December.
He was a man to be remembered for this fine feat, for
a long career of good service, and for his efforts to provide
the navy with a better code of signals. He is remembered
because he was the admiral whose flagship, the Royal George,
went down at Spithead on the 29th August 1782, carrying
with her Kempenfelt, most of his officers, hundreds of seamen,
and also very many women with some children, the families
of the men. They were allowed to remain on board while
the ship was fitting for sea. The Royal George was
receiving a parliamentary heel, that is to say she was
weighed down on her side at the anchorage in order to
clean her partially below the water line. According to the
explanation which satisfied the Admiralty, she sank because
the water ran in at the ports. But the navy, which indeed
was rarely charitable in its judgment of the Admiralty, was
of opinion that a piece fell out of her side under the strain,
for she was notoriously rotten. It was said that the decision
not to attempt to raise her was due to the prudent resolution
of My Lords that the truth should not be revealed. She had
been built in 1756.
Though disappointed of the reinforcement promised him,
Grasse was still much stronger than Hood. He could collect
twenty-nine sail, while the English officer could only hope to
muster twenty-two—until Rodney returned from Europe. On
the 5th January 1782 he left Fort Royal on an expedition
against the British islands, St. Christopher and Nevis. Hood
at Barbadoes was informed on the 8th that the French were
at sea. Scouts were despatched to observe their movements,
but it was not till the 14th that a letter from General Shirley,
Governor of St. Christopher, told Hood that they had been
seen off Nevis, and that their destination became clear. Hood
sailed at once for Antigua. He had twenty-one sail of the
line with him, but expected to be raised to twenty-two by
the junction of the President. With this force, inferior in
number as it was to the French fleet, “I beg you will assure
their Lordships,” so he wrote to Sandwich on the 20th January,
“I will seek and give battle to the Count de Grasse, be his
numbers as they may.” The promise was given on the
20th January. On the 21st, Hood was at Antigua. On the
22nd, he embarked General Prescott with a detachment of
troops, and sailed in search of the French.
The little island of Nevis lies directly west of Antigua.
To the north, and separated from it by the shallow strait
appropriately called the Narrows, is the larger island of
St. Christopher, commonly called St. Kitts. The capital of
St. Kitts, Basseterre, is on the south-western side of the island.
Here Grasse had anchored on the 11th January and had
landed soldiers, who drove Governor Shirley and General
Fraser, the officer in command of the troops and island militia,
to take refuge on Brimston Hill, close to the shore north-west of
Basseterre. During the night of the 23rd Hood rounded the
south point of Nevis, running before the easterly trade. It
was his intention to fall on the van of the French at daybreak
on the 24th, and crush it at anchor. But during the night a
careless officer of the watch in the Alfred ruined himself
and the admiral’s plan by running into the Nymphe. The
Alfred was damaged, and delay was caused by the necessity
to repair her. Before Hood could approach the anchorage of
Grasse he was seen, and the Frenchman put to sea with his
twenty-nine sail of the line. Hood, whose first object was to
land Prescott, anchored his fleet on the tail of a bank to the
south-east of the position just left by Grasse. As his ships
stood in they were attacked by the French in a half-hearted
way. The operation was carried out on the 25th, after a day
and night of weary manœuvring, in which Hood kept the
advantage of position, and Grasse put his fingers to the plough
as if he thought it would burn them. On the 26th he made
two feeble attacks on Hood, and then stood off. Reinforcements
came in and raised his force to thirty-six sail of the line,
but he did not come on again. He only remained cruising
and watching till the 14th February.
In the meantime Prescott had landed and had made an
effort to relieve Brimston Hill. He was beaten back by
Bouillé with superior numbers. As it was obvious that they
could do nothing, the troops were embarked on the 29th and
sent off to Antigua. Hood maintained his anchorage till all
hope was gone. The planters of St. Kitts had suffered
severely by Rodney’s confiscations at St. Eustatius, and
were sulky. They had not even mounted the twelve 24-pounders
and two mortars given them for their protection.
These pieces fell into Bouillé’s hands, and were used against
Brimston Hill. When the Frenchman found the siege of
the hill slow work, he took to his usual course of burning
the plantations. The planters raised a clamour, and under
pressure from them Shirley offered to capitulate on the
13th February. On the 14th, Hood having done all that in
him lay, summoned his captains to the flagship, instructed
them to set their watches by his, and to get under way at ten
that night. The fleet slipped off quietly, and without interruption
from Grasse, round the north end of St. Kitts. There
is no finer passage of combined caution and daring in the
war. We had lost the islands, but Grasse had thrown away
the chance to crush the English ships. He no doubt wished
to preserve his own ships for their ulterior purpose, the conquest
of Jamaica. While tendering them he inevitably allowed
the escape of Hood’s ships, which were to have a conspicuous
share in ruining that ulterior purpose in the following April.
Between such opponents, only the fitting occasion was required
to show beyond all peradventure where the superiority lay.
The occasion was at hand. Hood reached Antigua on
the 19th February. On the 22nd he left for Barbadoes, and
met at sea Rodney, who had reached that island on the 19th.
Rodney had left Plymouth on the 14th January with twelve
sail of the line. He had beaten out of the Channel in the
teeth of the wind, and had rounded Ushant in a gale which
sent the waves over the deck of his flagship, the Namur. He
came back to his command somewhat restored in health by
an operation he had undergone at Bath, but more aged, more
secluded, than ever, and he had to bring with him a private
doctor, Gilbert Blane. Blane should be mentioned with
honour in every history of the navy, for he did much excellent
work in introducing into our ships that cleanliness which
means health, which again means efficiency and the power to
endure. The improvement in this respect was already great.
Our fleets in the West Indies presented a spectacle such as
would have filled the seamen of Queen Anne with amazement.
They were showing that it was possible to keep the crews long
at sea on that sickly station and yet preserve them more free
from disease than in port and at home.
Rodney took his united command to Gros Islet Bay, in
Santa Lucia, and there settled down to watch Grasse, who
had returned to Fort Royal on the 26th February. The next
move of the French was a secret to nobody. Grasse was to
ship Bouillé with his soldiers, to go to San Domingo and there
pick up more French ships and soldiers. Then he was to be
joined by the Spaniards from Cuba, and the whole force was
to fall on Jamaica. The success of this large scheme depended
wholly on the ability of Grasse to get away with his ships and
men from Martinique. It was Rodney’s duty to see that he
did not, and under the veil of disease and premature age
weighing on him, he was resolute to do that duty. He did
not forget the exhortation of Sandwich, that he carried the fate
of the empire in his hands, and he meant to bear his charge
worthily. Therefore he kept strict watch. Neither man nor
officer landed except on duty, and a line of frigates kept
the French under observation. The watch lasted till the 8th
April, when Captain Byron of the Andromache frigate came
into Gros Islet Bay with the news that the French were
getting to sea. Before noon the fleet was at sea, and standing
to the north in pursuit of the enemy.
Of the two fleets about to engage in the greatest and the
most decisive encounter of the war, the English was the
stronger. Sir Charles Douglas, Rodney’s captain of the fleet,
did indeed endeavour to show by comparisons of tonnage and
guns that the French though outnumbered were materially
stronger than ourselves. But our guns were heavy enough
to shatter our enemy, and there were more of them. Moreover,
the great improvements in gunnery introduced by
Douglas himself, and other captains, constituted an element of
superiority far more valuable than any mere weight of the
pieces. The average skill of our officers and men was higher
than the French. Finally, and this was a very important
consideration indeed, the French admiral was hampered by a
great convoy. He was compelled to detach the two 50-gun
ships out of his total force of thirty-three ships of the line, to
guard his transports. Two of his liners were disabled by
accident on the evening of the 11th April. Rodney’s thirty-six
ships of the line were all free for fighting alone, and he
lost none by mismanagement.
During the night of the 8th April the two fleets stood to
the north, past the island of Martinique, and along the west
side of Dominica. On the morning of the 9th, fifteen of the
French ships of the line had worked clear of the land, and
were in the “true breeze” blowing through the Saints Channel—the
straits between Dominica and Guadaloupe. The others
and the transports were in the belt of calms under the west
side of the island. Sir Samuel Hood with nine ships of the
English van had worked up as far as the leading French.
The others were becalmed under the land. The Comte de
Grasse had now a magnificent opportunity to crush a part of
his opponent’s fleet when it could not be supported. He made,
however, only a very half-hearted attack on Hood, cannonading
his ships at a respectful distance from windward,
and doing little damage except to the spars. As the other
British ships worked up he grew still more timid, and the
evening came before any decided result had been obtained.
From the evening of the 9th to the evening of the 11th the
two fleets continued to struggle with the wind or want of it,
rather than with one another. Grasse succeeded in working
his convoy out from under the shadow of Dominica, and
sending it to Guadaloupe protected by the two 50-gun ships.
Two of his liners were disabled by bad seamanship. Yet on
the evening of the 11th he had so far succeeded in his
manœuvres to avoid battle that the bulk of his ships were
through the passage. Rodney prevented his attempt to get
away by ordering “a general chase.” His quickest vessels were
allowed to sail at their best speed, and soon overtook the
laggards among the French. Grasse was compelled to call his
whole fleet back to cover the menaced vessels, and at nightfall
both fleets were to westward of the passage again.
During the night the Zélé, 74, ran into the French flagship, and
was severely damaged. It was necessary to send her in tow
of a frigate to Guadaloupe. When day broke on the 12th,
the fleets were so placed that Grasse could no longer avoid a
battle. The French were to the north of Rodney, and both
fleets were in the easterly trade wind. Ships were sent from
the British van to pursue the crippled Zélé on her way to
Guadaloupe. Grasse, to cover her, called down the ships to
windward of his flag, and began to form his line. Sir George,
who had been roused in the morning by the flag-captain with
the welcome news that “God had given him his enemy on
the lee bow,” made prompt answer to the preparations of the
Frenchman. Time would have been lost by waiting for the
return of the ships pursuing the Zélé. The rear, therefore, was
ordered to lead into action. The last ship in the line stretched
up towards the French, the next fell in behind her, and so on
till the order of the fleet was reversed; the rear became the van
and the van the rear, the pursuing ships taking their places
as they returned. The fleets approached one another on a
converging line forming an obtuse angle, the French having
the wind on the port, and the British on the starboard side.
Rodney’s order to engage the enemy close to leeward was
hoisted at about 8 a.m. The leading ship of his line reached
the third in the French at 7.45 a.m., and then bearing up, began
to pass along the French line on the lee side. Others followed
in their order, and the two went past one another slowly, the
English in excellent order, firing rapidly and steadily, the
French in ragged disorder, fighting gallantly but at a growing
disadvantage. When the leading English ship had just passed
the last French, and the two lines were side by side from end
to end, there occurred the movement which gives this battle its
peculiar importance in naval history.
The action had lasted for about two hours, and the confusion
in the French fleet had been increased by the shift of
the wind to the southward, which forced the head of the line
towards the English. A great gap was formed in the formation
of the French astern of the seventeenth ship. Sir Charles
Douglas, who saw the opening, urged Rodney to pass through
it and cut the French line. The movement was easy, for the
English ships were not close-hauled, and by putting the helm
down could pass to windward through the opening. Sir
George hesitated before assuming the responsibility of departing
from the rule that an admiral should not alter the formation
in which he began an action. On the second and urgent
appeal of his captain of the fleet, he consented to make the
movement. The helm of his flagship, the Formidable, 100,
was put down, and she passed through the enemy, followed by
the vessels immediately astern of her. One of the vessels
ahead, the Namur, 90, followed the admiral’s example. All
the ships of the English line, counting from the last of the
centre to the rear, passed through another gap in the French, in
the smoke, without knowing what they had done till they found
themselves to windward of the enemy. Thus the fleet of the
Comte de Grasse was broken into three fragments. The van
bore on to the south. Six ships cut off in the centre turned
westward. The rear ships were headed off from the isolated
fragment of the centre.
The wind now fell, and the two fleets remained for a space
motionless. When it rose again, the English streamed down
on the isolated Frenchmen in the centre. They were
surrounded, overpowered, and compelled to surrender. The
flagship, the Ville de Paris, 100, was surrendered by Grasse
after a long and gallant fight. It was the general opinion
in the fleet that an insufficient use was made of the victory,
and that twenty prizes might have been taken if Rodney had
been more energetic. Sir Samuel Hood, a bitter judge of his
superior, had some difficulty in obtaining leave to follow the
enemy on the 18th April. He took three other prizes in the
Mona Channel on the following day.
The battle of the 12th April, or of the Saints, or of
Dominica, for it is known by all names, may be said to have
been the end of the naval war in America; for no operations
of any consequence took place there till the peace of the
following year. The discontent of Rodney’s captains was not
made public. To the nation which had seen no such success
in the war hitherto, the victory appeared wholly glorious,
and was a very natural subject of triumphant satisfaction.
Rodney was made a peer of Great Britain, and Sir Samuel
Hood received an Irish peerage. In naval history the battle
is chiefly remarkable because it marked the end of the old
formal, or rather pedantic, style of fighting established in the
seventeenth century. It showed naval officers by practical
example that the way to win decisive victories was to break
into the formation of the enemy, even if they did thereby
sacrifice their own, and so bring about a mêlée in which
individual superiority would have full play.
The war can now be wound up by a brief account of the
final relief of Gibraltar and of the contemporary naval campaigns
in the East Indies.
During September of 1782 Gibraltar received, and had
repelled with ease, the last attack of the Spaniards and their
French allies. Floating batteries, from which much had been
expected, were brought against the fortress in vain. But as
the allies were masters of the Straits, the garrison was in danger
of being reduced by starvation. Reliefs of stores and men
were urgently needed. The British Government was hard
pressed to find ships for the service. A Dutch squadron was
known to be ready for service in the Texel, and as the concentration
of French and Spanish warships in front of
Gibraltar made the employment of a large force necessary,
the Ministry was in no small perplexity lest, while Gibraltar
was being relieved, the coast of England should be attacked.
But the Dutch were timid. The naval advisers of the
Government, of whom Keppel, then at the head of the
Admiralty, was one, convinced it that the risk was not great.
Public opinion, too, would not have tolerated further delay.
On the 11th September, two days before the final attack of
the allies, Howe left Spithead with thirty-four sail of the line,
eight frigates, and a number of fireships. He had under his
protection a convoy of transports carrying provisions, military
stores, and two regiments of infantry, the 25th and the 59th.
Every effort had been made to provide the admiral with the
best force the country could collect. But the navy was
severely taxed to meet the calls made upon it. Many of the
ships had been fitted out with difficulty, and though the best
officers and men available were sent on the service, complaints
were heard that the crews were made up by the inclusion of
inferior elements. At a later period the condition of Howe’s
fleet was the subject of an undignified squabble between him
and Keppel.
Bad weather delayed the progress of the relieving fleet.
Howe was off Faro on the 9th of October. Here he heard of
the failure of the attack on Gibraltar, and that the fortress was
safe so far. Skilful management was still required to carry
the transports into the harbour in face of the superior numbers
of the enemy, and the obstacles caused by currents and winds.
His iron nerve, his seamanship, and his mastery of the details
of a great fleet qualified Howe for the work admirably. Yet
even he could not have succeeded at all against efficient
opponents, nor against such enemies as he had, if he had not
been to some extent beholden to fortune. The help fortune
gave him came in a shape which in no way diminished the
honour due to his fleet. On the night of the 10th October it
blew a heavy gale from the west. The awkward French and
the more than awkward Spaniards suffered severely at their
station in Algeciras Bay. One Spaniard was driven ashore,
and lost, under the guns of Gibraltar. Some were dismasted,
others were swept into the Mediterranean. The good seamanship
of Howe’s officers and men showed once more that the
winds and waves are in favour of the more skilful navigator.
They contended successfully with the gale. By the evening
of the 11th October the transports had been brought to the
entrance of Gibraltar Bay, and the warships were to windward
of them for their protection. A few only entered. The great
bulk of the transports, unable to bear up against the westerly
wind and the current which sets into the Mediterranean, were
“back-strapped”—that is to say, they were carried past
Gibraltar into the inland sea. Howe had to follow his charge
as far as Fuengirola on the 12th. He collected the transports
at the Zaforina Islands, and placed his warships to protect
them. Don Luis de Córdoba, the Spanish admiral who
commanded the allies, followed the English into the Mediterranean,
not to seek battle, but only to cover those of his ships
which had been driven to the eastward. Fog, rain, and the
heavy groundswell following on the storm put the seamanship
of naval officers and skippers of the transports to a severe test,
but they were equal to their task. The wind had shifted
to the N.E. during the night of the 15th. By the 18th
victuallers and transports were safe in Gibraltar. On the 19th
the enemy were seen to windward. Having relieved the
fortress, Howe did not think proper to accept battle in the
narrow space between Ceuta and Europa Points. He stood
into the Atlantic. Next day the allies, who were still to windward
of him, made a feeble attack on the van and rear of his
line. They then drew off. Howe, who had not absolute confidence
in all his captains, and who was by nature rather
resolute and exact than adventurous, played his game with
caution. On the 21st the allies went off, and gave him no
opportunity to strike with advantage. He remained cruising
till the 28th October, when he detached Sir Richard Hughes
with eight sail to the West Indies, and then steered home.
He anchored at Spithead on the 14th November. He had
done an admirable piece of service. If it was rather a triumph
in the handling of a fleet and in seamanship than such a
triumph in fighting as Nelson would have won twenty years
later, we must remember that much had happened in the
interval to give British officers a well justified confidence.
When the war died down on the Atlantic and in the West
Indies, it was still being fiercely waged in the Bay of Bengal.
In those waters it had flamed into energy only as it drew
towards its final crisis and end elsewhere. Until 1782 the
Eastern seas presented a languid scene. In 1778 England
and France were alike feebly represented at sea to the east of
the Cape. When the Company, hearing that war had begun in
Europe, resolved to seize the French settlement of Pondicherry,
it had a squadron at hand. One line-of-battle ship, the Ripon,
60, three small men-of-war of the Royal Navy, and one armed
ship of the Company’s, constituted the whole force commanded
by Sir Edward Vernon. The still weaker French squadron
was at the Île de France. Vernon blockaded Pondicherry on
the 8th August, in order to support Sir Hector Munro’s
besieging army. On the 10th the French squadron appeared.
It consisted of the Brillante, 64, two small ships of the king’s,
and two armed merchant-vessels. A feebly conducted action
ended by the separation of the combatants. The French
commander, M. de Tronjolly, anchored at Pondicherry, and
remained there till the 21st August. He brought no effective
help, and when Vernon began to threaten him again, he
slipped away, leaving Pondicherry to resist as it best could, till
it was forced to surrender on honourable terms on the 16th
October. The French had ceased to be rivals of England in
the East Indies, and would in all probability never have reappeared
there, if the Company had not found a new and a
most formidable enemy in Hyder Ali, the great Sultan of
Mysore. Their few ships remained, partly by necessity, but
not a little by the free choice of their officers, at and about
the Cythera of the French Navy, the Île de France. Tronjolly
was replaced in 1779 by M. D’Orves, who brought a 74-gun
ship with him, L’Océan. In January 1781, D’Orves made
a transient appearance on the coast of Coromandel. His
tardy arrival and prompt departure served only to disappoint
and anger Hyder Ali.
Vernon’s successor, Sir Edward Hughes, who came out in
1779 in the Superb, 74, had no French enemy to consider;
but when the Dutch joined the enemies of England he co-operated
with the Company’s forces in capturing all their posts
on the Coromandel coast. On the 11th January 1782 he
aided in the taking of Trincomalee, in Ceylon, where a capture
of Dutch trading-ships laid the foundation of the great fortune
he won during his command. On the 8th February he was
back at Madras, and on the following day he was joined by
Captain Alms, who brought with him the Monmouth, 64,
Hero, 74, and Isis, 50, and also the news that a new and
unwonted opponent was about to intrude on the solitary
reign of the British forces in the Bay of Bengal.
It has been noted above that when Admiral Darby sailed
from Spithead on the 13th March 1781 to relieve Gibraltar
he had with him a squadron and a convoy carrying troops
which were to be sent on for more distant service. These
were the eight men-of-war commanded by “Governor”
Johnstone, and the transports carrying troops under General
Meadows. Their immediate object was to conquer the Dutch
settlement at the Cape. The Dutch, aware of their own
weakness, had appealed to the French Government for
support. The French, willing to support their allies, and also
hoping to inflict a severe blow on England by co-operating
with Hyder Ali, gave their aid. When the Comte de Grasse
sailed for the West Indies from Brest on the 22nd March
1781 he had with him five ships of the line and transports
carrying troops which were to be detached—in the first place
to rescue the Cape, and then to aid Hyder Ali. The French
squadron was commanded by the only officer of whom it can
be said that he was the only “great captain” our navy had
been called upon to meet since it had fought the Dutchman
De Ruyter one hundred and ten years before.
Pierre André de Suffren de Saint-Tropez, born in 1729 at
St. Cannat in Provence—in the modern department of the
Bouches du Rhone—was the third son of the Marquis de
Saint-Tropez. Like many other younger sons of Provençal
families, he was provided for by being placed in the Order of
Malta (i.e. St. John of Jerusalem), and also in the French
Navy. He became a Garde de la marine in 1743, and from
that day till 1781 had been in almost constant service either
in the French Navy or in “the caravans of the Religion,” as
the cruises of the galleys of Malta in the Levant and on the
coast of Africa were officially called. He had taken part
in nearly all the few successes and the most conspicuous
disasters of the French Navy for some forty years. His
reputation as a good practical seaman and vigorous officer
was undisputed. His experience had given him a fiery scorn
for the pedantic tactics of his generation. They were in his
opinion merely decent cloaks for timidity. In 1781 he was
still only Knight of the Order, and had not as yet received
the dignified office of Bailli of Provence, from which came his
popular name of “the Bailli.”
On the 29th March, Suffren parted from the main fleet
of the Comte de Grasse when in the latitude of the Azores.
He was soon aware that Commodore Johnstone was ahead
of him. A Portuguese fishing-boat spoken by one of his
squadron informed him that the English squadron had
passed. It must have appeared very doubtful to Suffren
whether he could hope to overtake and pass it. Several of his
transports were heavy sailers, and some of his ships were in
want of water. In order to procure more, it was necessary
to make for the Portuguese island St. Iago, in the Cape de
Verd Islands, and to anchor at Porto Praya, on the south side.
On the 16th April the French squadron came round the south-east
point of the island in straggling order. One of their ships
was towing a transport. As the harbour came in sight the
leading French vessel saw that it was full of ships and that
several of them were men-of-war. Johnstone had, in fact,
anchored at Porto Praya on the 11th of the month, in a
slovenly and unofficerlike way, with his transports and warships
confusedly mingled. If Suffren had been an orthodox
French officer of the stamp of Guichen, he would have seen
an excellent opportunity to “fulfil his mission,” and would
have hurried on, prepared to risk suffering from want of water,
in hope to reach the Cape first. Suffren reasoned as Hawke
would have done. What he saw was an admirable opportunity
to cripple Johnstone, and he attacked. That his own squadron
was not in hand was to him a small matter. It was ten in
the morning, and he calculated that many of the English
sailors would be ashore in search of water and stores. The
confusion of Johnstone’s squadron was obvious. Suffren saw
that the rain was falling on the just and the unjust, and he
struck his blow. For the neutrality of Portugal he showed
no more respect than had been shown by Boscawen when he
pursued La Clue into the waters of Lagos, where Suffren, then
a lieutenant in L’Océan, had been taken prisoner.
The action of Porto Praya is one which is at once
difficult to tell in detail but easily summed up. Five vessels
composed his command—Le Héros, 74 (flagship), L’Annibal,
74, Le Vengeur, 64, L’Artésien, 64, and Le Sphinx, 64.
When he stood in at the head of his squadron, L’Annibal
and L’Artésien were close to Le Héros. Suffren could
not lie to for the Vengeur and Sphinx, lest he should be
carried to the leeward by wind and current. He struck in
at once among the huddle of Johnstone’s squadron, composed
of the Hero, 74, Monmouth, 64, Romney, 50 (flagship),
Jupiter, 50, and Isis, 50, and three frigates, which were
mixed with East Indiamen and transports. There was a
wild scene of cannonading, collisions, boardings and attempts
to board, in which the three ships which were closely
engaged did, and suffered, much damage. They were not in
force to overpower Johnstone, and the Sphinx and Vengeur
not only came up late, but did not press their attack close.
After a couple of hours’ hot work, Suffren cut his cables and
left the anchor he had dropped to hold him in position during
his attack. He was followed out by the Annibal and
Artésien and the East Indiaman Hinchinbroke, which had
been captured. Johnstone followed his opponent at leisure
and timidly. The Hinchinbroke was retaken, but no zeal
was shown to renew the action. Johnstone, a blustering,
pamphleteering man of no reputation as an officer, made an
attempt to conceal his own want of conduct and spirit by
bringing Captain Sutton of the Isis to a court martial, by
which he was honourably acquitted, and the two fought a
series of lawsuits.
Though his attack failed to achieve victory, it showed the
English naval officers that in Suffren they had an opponent of
an enterprising spirit rare in the accomplished service to
which he belonged. He had so far gained his object that
Johnstone remained at Porto Praya repairing damages till the
1st May. In the meantime the French officer pushed on, and
reached the Cape on the 21st June. The troops he landed
under the command of Count Conway were sufficient to
garrison the Dutch settlement against the English expedition.
While Suffren was refitting at False Bay, the English squadron
appeared on the coast. It made no attempt to assail the
French squadron or the colony, but several Dutch East
Indiamen which had anchored in Saldanha Bay were
captured on the 22nd of July. After cruising for a time off
the Cape, Johnstone sent Captain Alms to India, and went first to
Saint-Helena, and then home. On the 26th August Suffren
left the Cape for Port Louis, which he reached on the 25th
October.
The French squadron, composed of the ships already in the
islands and those brought out by Suffren, sailed from Port
Louis on the 7th December 1781. It consisted of L’Orient,
74, Le Héros, 74, L’Annibal, 74, Le Sévère, 64, Le Bizarre, 64,
Le Vengeur, 64, Le Sphinx, 64, L’Artésien, 64, L’Ajax, 64, Le
Brillant, 64, Le Flamand, 64, together with seven frigates,
sloops, and gunboats. The command was held by M. D’Orves;
but Suffren, who though only capitaine de vaisseau, had local
rank in the Indies as Chef d’escadre, was appointed to succeed
on the death or resignation of his superior. D’Orves, whose
health was ruined, broke down in the Bay of Bengal, resigned
his command on the 3rd February 1782, and died on the 9th.
On the 3rd, therefore, Suffren was again in command. His
struggle with the naval power of England lasted till the news
of the peace reached him on the 29th June 1783. During
those seventeen months he fought the five actions on which
the French dwell with pride, for they constitute the most
glorious passage in the history of their navy. It is true that
he took no English ship in any of them and that he failed to
achieve the object he fought for. Yet we cannot but see the
greatness of the man. “Brave Suffren must return from
Hyder Ally and the Indian Waters; with small results; yet
with great glory for six non defeats; which indeed, with such
seconding as he had, one may reckon heroic.” Carlyle includes
Porto Praya to make the tale of six, and he says the final
word of any just judgment on “the Bailli.” If ever a man
lived who justified Napoleon’s maxim that war is an affair not
of men but of a man, it was he. It was by his personal
merit that his squadron came to the very verge of winning a
triumphant success. That he failed was due to the fact that
the French Navy, in spite of the tardy efforts of the
ministers of Louis XVI., was honeycombed by the intellectual
and moral vices which were bringing France to the great
Revolution—corruption, self-seeking, acrid class insolence,
and skinless, morbid vanity. On its way from the islands
the squadron fell in with and captured the English
Hannibal, 50. One of her officers was placed as a prisoner
on parole in the mess of the French Bizarre. An officer of
the regiment of Austrasie, which was being carried by the
squadron to aid Hyder Ali, the Chevalier de Mautort, says in
his Memoirs that this officer was a cheerful young gentleman
who did not speak four words of French, but made himself
very pleasant. Withal he showed his professional zeal by
keeping an alert watch on all that went on about him, and,
adds the Frenchman, he cannot have been greatly impressed
by the way our work was done. A man can gain no higher
praise than this, that he raised the institution he belonged to
above itself—and so much Suffren did. The English force
opposed to him was to show how the virtues of an institution
can atone for the deficiencies of a commonplace chief and
baffle the genius of an enemy. When the great captain is
found in command of the superior force, then we have the
victories of Nelson.
The object of the French officer was to obtain such a
position on the coast of Coromandel as would strengthen the
hands of his Government when the time came to make peace.
In order to do this, he aimed first at destroying the squadron
of Hughes, then at obtaining possession of a port or ports
where he could land men, both those he had with him and those
whom he knew to be coming from Europe to aid Hyder Ali,
and also to refit his own ships. On the 13th February 1782
he appeared off Madras with twelve sail of the line—the eleven
which had come from the Île de France, and the Hannibal
taken from the English, and now turned into a French
warship. Hughes was at anchor there with nine sail of the
line. To have attacked him at anchor would have been
dangerous and unnecessary, since the departure of the French
to the south, as if to attack Trincomalee, would be sure to
draw the English admiral out.
Suffren acted on that calculation with success. He stood
to the south, and was followed by Hughes. One of the subordinate
French captains in charge of the convoy of transports
and prizes accompanying the French fleet was so careless as
to allow them to fall to leeward of the battleships, where
they were between Suffren and Hughes. Six of them,
including one which carried 300 soldiers, were captured. On
the 17th February Suffren, who was to windward of the
English squadron, which was heading to the south, bore down
on it from N.E. He led his squadron and ranged along the
weather-side of the English till he reached the fifth ship. It
was his wish and his order that those of his vessels which
could not find room on the windward side of their enemy
should pass to leeward, and so put him between two fires. He
was ill obeyed. Only two of his rear ships did as they ought,
and several never came into action. Yet he did carry out a
concentration of superior on inferior numbers. The fifth
English vessel which he engaged was the Superb, 74, Hughes’
flagship. She and the ships astern of her suffered severely.
The last ship in the English line, the Exeter, 64, carrying
the broad pennant of Commodore King, was cut to pieces.
The conduct of the commodore partly explains why the good
management of Suffren was balked of its reward. He had
been covered by the blood of his flag-captain, Reynolds,
who was cut in two by a cannon-shot at his side. His
ship was battered by two enemies, and a third appeared to
be about to join them. One of his officers asked him what
was to be done. “There is nothing to be done,” said King,
“but to fight till she sink.” The rest of the explanation
must be sought in the fact that, as Suffren told the Minister
of Marine in a moment of bitterness, the French officers who
had spent years in the Cythera of the Île de France, leading
idle, self-indulgent lives ashore, and intent on trading ventures
called “la pacotille” (peddling), were neither officers nor
seamen. Finding that he was not backed up as he should
have been, Suffren drew off at dark. He had to some extent
attained his object. The Superb and the Exeter were so
badly mauled that Hughes went off before the northerly wind
then blowing to refit at Trincomalee. While he was absent,
Suffren went to Porto Novo to establish relations with Hyder
Ali on the 21st February, and on the 4th April the troops
he had landed took Cuddalore. This is a passage in naval
history which should be remembered when we hear of the
necessity for naval bases. It shows that a victorious fleet
will soon supply itself with a base.
While Suffren was making himself master of Cuddalore,
Hughes was endeavouring to secure the safety of Trincomalee.
He left it on the 4th March, came to Madras, when he was
reinforced by two of the line, and went back with soldiers and
stores. Suffren having put matters on as good a footing as
he could at Cuddalore, followed Hughes to Ceylon. On the
12th April, the date on which Rodney defeated Grasse in
the West Indies, another battle was fought in the east.
Again Suffren attacked, and this time, more as it seems by
accident than from good management, he concentrated a
superior force on an inferior, falling with three vessels on the
Superb, and the ship ahead of her, the Monmouth, 64. Both
were severely cut up, but as on the former occasion several
of the French captains were shy or awkward. The fleets
separated without loss of a ship on either side, and anchored
near one another on the coast of Ceylon. Suffren was first
at sea on the 17th, and offered battle on the 19th; but Hughes
declined. Then the Frenchman went to Batticaloa to refit, and
thence back to the Coromandel coast. Hughes, after stopping
at Trincomalee, followed him. The two continued watching
and waiting an opportunity till the 6th July, when Hughes,
for the first and last time, attacked his opponent. The battle,
which was fought near Negapatam, was notable for the fact
that it may be said to have been blown out by a sudden shift
of the wind, which headed both fleets, and threw them into
complete confusion. In the disorder of the close the French
Sévère was surrounded by English ships, and her captain,
M. de Cillart, ordered his flag to be struck. It was hoisted
again by his subordinates, and the Sévère renewed her fire.
The incident was an ugly one, and led to an angry correspondence
between the admirals. Cillart was suspended by
Suffren, and was afterwards dismissed the service.
After the action in July, Hughes went to Madras. He was
expecting reinforcements, and so was Suffren. But the Frenchman
showed greater alertness. On the 21st August he was
off Batticaloa, where he met his reinforcements, and on the
25th he attacked Trincomalee, which surrendered on the 31st.
Hughes, who had not left Madras till the 20th, did not appear
off Trincomalee till the 3rd September. Another engagement
followed, Suffren attacking from windward and Hughes edging
away. Again he was ill supported, and his irritation provoked
him into an explosion of hot Southern rage. Impatience with
the pottering of his captains led him to plunge into action in
a disorderly way, which gave Hughes an advantage. In spite
of that, and though a shift of the wind transferred the weather-gage
from the French to the English officer, and though our
naval historians speak currently of the defeat of Suffren, it is
certain that Hughes did not feel sufficiently victorious to
pursue when his opponent drew off.
The two fleets withdrew to their respective bases—Hughes
to Madras, and Suffren to Trincomalee. He lost one of his
74’s when entering the harbour—the Orient—by the bad seamanship
of her captain, and another when he returned to
Cuddalore. The change of the monsoon suspended operations
for a time. Hughes having lost the excellent harbour of
Trincomalee, could not remain on the east coast, and therefore
had to go round to Bombay through storms which damaged his
ships severely. He missed Sir Richard Bickerton, who was
coming out with stores, and who had a stormy passage in and out
of the Bay of Bengal, as he sought, and followed, his superior to
Bombay. If Suffren’s captains had had their wish, and if the
Minister in Paris had been obeyed, the French squadron would
have returned to its Cythera. But “the Bailli” knew that if he
returned to the islands, Hughes would be able to forestall him
in the Bay, when the monsoon changed again. He took
the responsibility of remaining where he was, and wintered at
Achin, in Sumatra, which was under the supremacy, if not
actually in the possession, of the Dutch his allies. Therefore
he was on the scene of operations two months before Hughes
could come round from Bombay.
On the coast of Ceylon he met Bussy, a once famous
fighter in India, who had been sent from Europe to take the
general command in the East, with troops. The reinforcements
provided for Suffren were generally sent in small bodies,
and were frequently intercepted. But his fleet had now been
raised to fifteen sail, and was the mainstay of the enemies of
the Company. Hyder Ali was dead, but his son Tippoo
Sultan continued the war, though it was going against him.
The struggle concentrated around Cuddalore, where Bussy was
assailed by a superior army. Hughes, whose fleet had now
been brought up to eighteen sail, co-operated with the besieging
army. His superiority in number of ships was discounted
by the ill-health of his crews, which were very sickly. The last
encounter between the old opponents took place on the
20th June, and was of the commonplace eighteenth-century
order—save for two details. The French fleet of fifteen sail
attacked the British fleet of eighteen from windward—and it
was the British fleet which retired. Then Suffren had received
an order from home—an order inspired by the capture of the
Comte de Grasse in the battle of Dominica—to hoist his flag
in a frigate and direct his line from outside. He obeyed, and
it perhaps throws some light on the question whether the
proper place for an admiral is in his line, where he can set an
example, or outside of it, where he can see and direct the
whole, that on this occasion the French fleet came into action
in far better order than in previous engagements.
The retreat of Hughes left the army besieging Cuddalore
in a dangerous position. It depended on transport by sea for
most of its provisions, and might have been driven to a
disastrous retreat. But at this moment the news that the
preliminaries of peace had been signed in Europe on the 20th
January reached India, and was communicated to Suffren on
the 29th June. He returned to Europe to die of apoplexy in
1788, and when next the French and English fleets met,
the outbreak of the great Revolution had made another
world.
CHAPTER X THE FIRST STAGE OF THE WAR
The authorities for the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars are numerous. An
English writer will naturally give the first place in the list to The Naval History
of Great Britain, by William James, a trustworthy, laborious, and indispensable,
but dry and too often unintelligent chronicle, which covers the whole story
from 1793 to 1815. The Naval Chronology of Isaac Schomberg ends at the
Peace of 1801. Captain Mahan’s Influence of Sea Power upon the French
Revolution and Empire is a survey of the principles rather than the mere
events of the whole war. On the French side we have Troude, Batailles
navales de la France, the chronology quoted for earlier chapters; Chevalier,
Histoire de la Marine française sous la première République, a history up to
1799; Rouvier, Marins français sous la République; Moulin, Les Marins
de la République; Lecène, Marins de la République et de l’Empire. The
Naval Chronicle (1799-1818) did not begin with the war, but it looks back
on events antecedent to its own beginning. Brenton’s Naval History of Great
Britain from 1783 to 1836, first published in 1823 and recast in 1837, professes
to be a general history, but is chiefly valuable for the writer’s personal
reminiscences and the traditions of the service which he repeats. An excellent
study of one of the most important episodes of the early years of the war is
Cottin, Toulon et les Anglais en 1793. For the battle of the 1st of June the
main authority now is Rear-Admiral Sturges Jackson’s Logs of the Great Sea
Fights 1794-1805, edited for the Navy Record Society. Sir N. H. Nicholas’
Letters and Despatches of Lord Nelson is a mine of information from the
operations at Toulon till 1805. Biographies of officers first become abundant
at this period. Those which are of most value for the opening stage of the
war are:—Burrows’ Howe, Ross’s Saumarez, Osler’s Exmouth, Tucker’s
St. Vincent, Lady Bourchier’s Codrington; and for the operations in the West
Indies, Collier Willyams’ special work on the subject, which is the basis of the
account given by Bryan Edwards in his History of the West Indies.
When England was dragged into the war already raging
between France and the German powers, against the
wish of her rulers, and by the deliberate action of the
revolutionary authorities in Paris on the 1st February 1793, she
came in as the ally of all Central and Western Europe. By
the spring of 1795 she was left to fight single-handed on the
sea. The French armies had overrun Holland in January
of that year. Prussia, hampered by an empty treasury and
distracted by her anxiety to secure a share in the third
partition of Poland, made peace at Bâle on the 5th April.
Spain, weak, exhausted, and ill governed, was eager for peace.
France, which had no cause to fear her and was anxious to
withdraw the troops serving on the Pyrenean frontier, to
reinforce the armies in Italy, on the Rhine, and in the Low
Countries, gave her favourable terms. A treaty of peace,
which was the preliminary to a treaty of alliance, was signed,
also at Bâle, on the 22nd July. From the 1st February
1793 to the Franco-Spanish treaty of Bâle, 22nd July
1795, makes the first period of a war which was destined
to last, with two brief intervals, for another twenty years.
It was on both sides a struggle for existence. Revolutionary
France fought to secure her new social order. To protect
the gains of the Revolution, she strove to secure her “natural
limits”—the Pyrenees, the Alps, the line of the Rhine. To
guard herself against the hostility which this increase of
power was sure to arouse in her neighbours, she had to gain
possession of advanced guards and outlying fortresses to
cover her new frontier, to subjugate Holland, and keep
Spain in a dependence which must also include Portugal.
But with the coast of Europe and its resources, from the
Texel to the Maritime Alps, in the possession of France,
the position of England would have been one of extreme
danger. Therefore, in order that she herself might be safe,
she had to endeavour to force France back into her old limits,
and since France was resolved to secure her “natural limits”
for her own security, she was committed to an endeavour to
subjugate England. The fight could not end till one side
was fairly beaten, and France was not vanquished, and shut
once more within her frontier of 1790, till the Peace of Paris
of the 20th November 1815 was signed. All Europe had
to combine to bind her; for the causes which drove her to
dominate Holland and Spain, as a defence against England,
operated to compel her to seek other outworks and subdue
other possible assailants beyond the Rhine and the Maritime
Alps. In this mighty struggle of forces and principles it
was the part of England to dominate the sea. Her strength
on the sea made her the one power whom the French armies
could not strike to the heart. Therefore she was the permanent
enemy of France, the constant ally of her foes, and in
the end the controlling member of the European Coalition
which dictated the Treaty of Paris.
The part which England played was to herself glorious
and profitable, and to Europe advantageous. It was also
arduous. But the student of the history of the time, if he
approaches the subject with a just determination to see it
in a dry light and to judge by the evidence, must soon be
convinced that if the nation was called upon to make great
efforts and endure much, the burden was not imposed on it
by the naval forces of its enemy. If we are to realise the
real character of the task and estimate the true merit of
the performance, we must first come to a sound understanding
of the condition of the French fleet, which was our one serious
opponent. The other navies thrown or dragged into the
conflict served to do little more—if we put aside the gallant
fight of the Dutch at Camperdown—than to multiply the
number of posts which required to be watched, and so to
add further severity to the already cruel strain of blockade.
When our squadrons began to get to sea in the summer
of 1793, they found in front of them an enemy disorganised
by four years of administrative destruction and attempted
reconstruction, and morally ruined by four years of progressive
anarchy.[1] The ordonnance of Louis XIV. had never been
honestly carried out. The classes had been cruelly worked.
The compensations promised to the seafaring population had
never been given. Bad food, no pay, and nakedness were the
lot of the sailors in the king’s ships. Therefore they hated
the king’s service, and fled from it when they could. The
State punished them by billeting soldiers on their families,
and the outrages perpetrated by these men on the women
and girls were notorious. It has been already said that the
French officers of the regular, or grand, corps were nobles.
Being nobles, they insisted on equality among themselves to
the injury of discipline, and were perfectly insolent to all men
who were not of their own class. None of the many ignorant
things said of the French Revolution is more ignorant than
the assertion that it gave Frenchmen their love of equality.
What it did was to declare that all Frenchmen should be
equal, and that there should be an end of the division of the
people into nobles above, who were equal among themselves,
and the roture, or non-noble, below, who also were equal
among themselves. As the grand corps had never been
sufficiently numerous to officer the fleet on a war footing,
it had been found necessary to employ supplementary
officers drawn from the merchant service. These men, who
were known as the “blue officers,” because their uniform had
not the red facings and knee-breeches of the grand corps,
were not allowed to reach the higher ranks. They had to
endure much impertinence.
It follows that no part of the French nation was better
prepared to join the revolt against class privilege and in
the demand for universal social equality than the sailors.
A memory of long suffering and of bitter wrong rankled
among the crews. Ulcerated pride, and the vanity which
is peculiarly sensitive in the Frenchman and is easily driven
to ferocity by wounds, exasperated the non-noble officers, and
made them the natural leaders of revolt. In front of these
elements of rebellion were the officers of the grand corps,
very good sort of gentlemen individually in most cases, but
even at their best quite unable to help showing their inbred
hereditary conviction that they were of a finer clay than their
comrades who were not of their class. It is a belief which
can be shown with the most irritating insolence by an
assumption of exact politeness.
In 1786 the Government had acknowledged the necessity
for a change. The Marquis de Castries, then Minister of
Marine, simplified the old ranks, and abolished the Gardes de
la marine. He proposed to recruit the corps of officers in
future by élèves de la marine, who might be of non-noble birth.
But while breaking down the old exclusive rule, he still made
a distinction. Élèves who came from the schools of Vannes
and Alais, which were confined to the nobles, could become
lieutenants at once. All other élèves had to pass through a
rank of sub-lieutenant, and were therefore put at a disadvantage
from the beginning. It was an excellent example
of the kind of concession which provokes, and does not satisfy.
When, in 1789, the king summoned the States General, he
made a tacit confession that the absolute monarchy had
brought France to financial ruin and administrative collapse,
and could itself find no remedy. In fact, the monarchy
abdicated, and the spontaneous anarchy of the Revolution broke
out. It raged with extreme violence in the dockyards and
the fleet. As early as March 1789 an outbreak, immediately
provoked by the sufferings of the workmen and the sailors
from the scarcity of that severe winter and bad harvest of
1788, took place at Toulon. Count d’Albert de Rions,
commandant de la marine, was attacked, and nearly murdered.
After the fall of the Bastille on the 14th July 1789, disorders
broke out at Brest, and spread to Rochefort and L’Orient.
The details need not be given here. The essential in all of
them was that the workmen and sailors understood liberty
and equality to mean that they were not to be ordered about
by their old masters; that the stronger had the right to
command, and that the nation was now the stronger; that the
privileged corps were the natural enemies of the nation. The
French Navy was well represented in the States General, or
National Assembly, and many debates on it took place. In
April 1790 a scheme of reorganisation was drawn up. It was
in the main a sound one, and did in fact lay the foundation of
the modern French Navy. But its details may be omitted,
since years were to pass before it could even begin to be
applied. The essential of the case here is that the General
Assembly had to begin by reorganising the existing corps of
officers; that it was in fear of a reaction and counter-revolution;
that it distrusted the civisme, or loyalty to the Revolution, of
the noble officers; that it dared not check the zeal of the
workmen of the dockyards and the sailors; and when that
zeal took, as it did from the first, the form of mutinous attacks
on the Grand Corps, the Assembly did not venture to punish
offenders who were its eager partisans. After each explosion of
violence, it ordered an inquiry, and then decided that everybody
concerned had acted from a good motive, including the
unhappy officers who had been threatened with “the lantern,”—that
is to say, the halter,—mobbed, kicked, and thrown
into prison. The position of these officers became intolerable.
The majority fled abroad, where they formed a regiment, in
the emigrant army of Condé. It has been calculated that
three-fourths of the old corps were lost to France. Those
who remained included a few who were convinced partisans of
the Revolution; others remained because their poverty gave
them no means of escape. Admiral Trogoff de Kerlessi, the
Breton noble who surrendered the ships at Toulon to Lord
Hood in 1793, was one of these. But loyal or not loyal to
the Revolution, they were alike oppressed and distrusted. The
place of the emigrants was taken by men whose chief merit
came to be their civisme, which was manifested by blatant
pot-house oratory, self-assertion, and intrigue. The evil which
the anarchy of 1789-93 did to the French fleet was not
made good till the fall of the Empire. The inward and
spiritual forces of discipline were killed. Even under the
emperor, orders on such vital things as the gunnery drill
of the crews were constantly met with outward and visible
signs of neglect and disobedience. Perhaps because the best
of the French nation does not naturally tend to the sea, it is
also an undeniable fact that the French Navy produced no
equivalent for the multitude of capable men from the ranks,
and the non-commissioned officers, who replaced the emigrant
aristocratic officers in the army. They had as good an opportunity
on the water as on the land, but they did not come.
The old monarchy had left the Revolution the materials
of a noble fleet. The calculation of James in his Naval
History is allowed to be sound. He puts the relative strength
of the French and English navies in line-of-battle ships at
Number of Ships.
Number of Guns
Aggregate Broadsides.
English
115
8718
88,957
French
75
6002
23,057
The proportion in frigates was nearly two to one in our
favour.
The Royal Navy was suffering from internal evils which
broke out in 1797, but none of them were fatal, or beyond
comparatively easy cure. In the interval between the Peace
of 1783 and February 1793 three powerful fleets had been
commissioned—in 1786, in consequence of the disturbed state
of Holland; in 1790, on the prospect of a war with Spain—the
Spanish armament; and in 1791, when intervention in
the East appeared to be likely to become necessary. No
fighting had ensued, but the efficiency of the dockyards had
been tested. There was nothing to delay the vigorous use
of the fleet in February 1793 except the old-standing difficulty
always found in passing suddenly from a reduced peace
establishment to a war footing, when the crews had to be
collected by the press. It was, however, so serious that
though Lord Howe, who was appointed to command the
Channel fleet, “kissed hands” at court on his appointment on
the 6th February, he did not leave London till the 27th May,
and did not sail from St. Helens till the 14th July. An
interval of six months, therefore, passed between the declaration
of war and the appearance in home waters of the fleet
which was to protect our shores. Lord Howe’s command
was indeed not the first to be ready for service. France was
to be attacked at three points—in the Channel, in the Mediterranean,
and in the West Indies. The squadron appointed
for the West Indies, and commanded by Sir John Jervis, was
not able to sail till the very close of the year; but the Mediterranean
fleet, under Lord Hood, sailed in detachments during
April and May.
That it was safe to send Hood with his twenty sail of the
line to the Mediterranean before the home fleet was ready is
a signal proof that the Government felt it could rely on the
disorganisation of the enemy to serve as our defence for a
time. France had been at war since the previous year, and
the contending portions of Girondins and Jacobins in Paris
had alike been deliberately provoking a war with England.
If they had been wise, they would have had a part at least
of their fleet in a condition to act at once. But if wisdom
can be attributed to the dominant elements in the National
Assembly, the praise can be given only on the ground that
a universal war was needed to confirm the triumph of the
revolutionary parties. The ruin of their finances and the
whirlwind of the social Revolution precluded all possibility of
immediate effective action at sea. If we look only to the
number of ships in commission and their distribution, France
was in fairly good position to strike at once. There were
three sail of the line and seven frigates at San Domingo, five
frigates at Martinique, and two sloops at Cayenne. The
Mediterranean fleet, recently reinforced from the Channel,
consisted of eighteen sail of the line, sixteen frigates, and a
number of small craft. In the Channel and on the Atlantic
coast there were seven ships of the line at Brest, one at
Cherbourg, three at the isle of Aix, together with seven
frigates and other small vessels. The Vendéens were in arms
for the king, and the authorities at Paris were well aware of
the necessity for cutting them off from foreign support. On
the 8th March, Admiral Morard de Galle, an officer of the
old grand corps, was ordered to sea to cruise on the coast
with three sail of the line. Bad weather drove him back to
port, or served as an excuse for his return with his ill-appointed
and mutinous ships. With feverish energy, and
perhaps in the sincere though frantic belief that revolutionary
energy would atone for the want of other elements of strength,
the National Assembly commissioned fresh vessels, drove
them to sea, and collected a squadron in Quiberon Bay under
Villaret-Joyeuse. Morard de Galle took command of the
whole on the 22nd May, seven days before Howe left
London. By the 1st August he had with him nineteen sail
of the line—four less than left St. Helens with Howe on the
14th July.
The operations in the Channel till the close of 1793 are
without interest. Howe sighted the French hull down off
Belleisle on the 31st July. Calms, squalls, and thick weather,
the shyness of the enemy and the rawness of his own
force, hastily manned and commanded by officers grown
somewhat rusty in peace, combined to prevent an engagement.
Till the close of the year the English admiral was either
cruising in search of the enemy, and to protect trade, or was
coming back to Torbay with sprung masts and split topsails
to refit, and for stores. In November the French squadron
of Vanstabel escaped his pursuit by sheer superiority of
sailing due to the finer lines of their hulls and the more
scientific cut of their sails. Morard de Galle did not dare
to force an engagement. That he was outnumbered was a
sound reason for avoiding battle. And he had still better
cause in the state of his crews. Unpaid, unclothed, fed on insufficient
rations of salted meat only, and infested by scurvy,
they had good cause for discontent. A worse cause of weakness
than even these paralysed him. The crews were in the
full fever of revolutionary disorder, and had acquired a settled
habit of mutiny. They were distrustful of the civisme of
their admiral, and maddened by the fear of treason. After
many clamours, they forced their admiral to return to
Brest on the 28th of September. The delegate of the
National Assembly, Tréhouart, who accompanied the fleet,
recognised the necessity for the return; but as usual the blame
was laid on the want of civisme of the chiefs. Morard de
Galle was dismissed and imprisoned. Several captains were
sent before the revolutionary tribunal, and most of them were
put to death.
While the French were dismissing and beheading their
officers, public opinion in England as represented by the Press,
was condemning Howe. He was violently abused in the
blackguard newspaper style of the time, and was ridiculed in
highly coloured caricatures. One by Isaac Cruikshank shows
“How a great admiral, with a great fleet, went a great way,
was lost a great while, saw a great sight, and then came home
for a little water.” The admiral chants piteously—
“Oh Lord when I get to Torbay,
How folks will gape and stare;
Are non come back the Lord knows how
And been the Lord knows where.”
Another, drawn with the genius of Gillray, and inspired
by all his brutality of rancour, shows Howe blinded by a
shower of gold coins, and standing on a gold shell. He is
saying, “Zounds! the damned hailstones hinder one from doing
one’s duty. I cannot see out of my eyes for them. Oh it
was just such another cursed peppering as this, that I fell in
with on the coast of America in the last war, and a deuce of
a thing it is, that whenever I am just going to play the devil
I am either hindered by these confounded French storms, or
else loose (sic) my way in a fog.”
Here we have the English counterpart of the French
popular fury which doubted the civisme of Morard de Galle
and suspected him of treason. But the Government of
England was strong, and upheld its admiral.
The contemporary operations in the Mediterranean began
by a success which seemed to promise a speedy end of the
war. By the middle of July Hood was on the coast of
Provence with twenty-one sail of the line. He met the
Spanish fleet at sea near to Iviça on the 6th, and found it in a
miserably inefficient state. But the French fleet at Toulon
was in a still worse condition than the Brest fleet. It had not
dared to tackle even the feeble Spaniards. When orders were
given to go to sea, the crews refused, saying that they were to
be sold by treason, and would not sail in order to reach a
foreign prison. The Admiral Trogoff de Kerlessi was a
Royalist, whom his poverty alone had prevented from
following other officers of his opinions into the emigration.
The Royalists were strong in the south of France, though
divided among themselves into those who wished the king to
govern with the constitution of 1791, and those who aimed at
the restoration of the absolute monarchy. The country was
in open opposition to the Jacobin Government at Paris, and
was bubbling with intrigue. Hood established a communication
with the Toulonese Royalists through a Lieutenant Cooke,
who was sent in on the pretext that he came to arrange an
exchange of prisoners. Cooke, who has been erroneously
described as a son of the discoverer, was afterwards killed as
captain of the Sybille in her action with the Forte. On the
28th August the Toulonese were terrified by hearing that the
Jacobin army which had just destroyed Lyons had occupied
Marseilles, and was about to march on their own town. In
the panic which the news caused, the Royalists combined to
surrender the town, with dockyard and ships, to the English
admiral, who was in co-operation with the Spanish fleet of
Don Juan de Lángara, the officer who had been defeated and
taken prisoner by Rodney in the relief of Gibraltar in 1780.
In the course of the 28th and 29th they took possession. The
sailors from Brest who were Jacobin in sympathy and the
Jacobins in the town were over-awed.
The occupation of Toulon seemed to promise a speedy
counter revolution in at any rate the south of France, or
failing that, then the entire ruin of the French naval power in
the Mediterranean by the permanent retention of the port.
Both hopes were disappointed. Political causes which must be
passed over here weakened the allies and their French friends.
Toulon is a difficult town to defend on the land side. No
sufficient force for the purpose could be collected by the allies.
The Austrians would send no soldiers. The Spaniards who
were sent proved untrustworthy. The Neapolitans, who came
in some numbers, were worthless. The only solid elements in
the garrison, the Piedmontese and the English soldiers, were
too few. When, therefore, the Jacobin army was put under
the command of Dugommier, an excellent officer, and its
artillery was directed by Napoleon Bonaparte, who here first
came conspicuously forward, it soon gained command of high
ground from which it could bombard the harbour and render
the anchorage untenable. On the 19th December Toulon
was evacuated. The evacuation, which was complicated by
the necessity for bringing away thousands of French refugees,
was a scene of horror, and the preliminary to other scenes of
horror when the Jacobins gained possession and took vengeance
on their countrymen. Hood brought away as many of
the French ships and as much of the naval stores as he could,
and endeavoured to destroy the rest by fire. The task of
destruction was entrusted to Captain Sidney Smith, who had
joined the fleet as a volunteer in a small vessel purchased and
armed by himself in the Levant. Smith, a very vapouring,
but also a very stirring and quick-witted man, did his best, and
made the most of what he did in his reports. The ill-will of
the Spaniards, who perhaps wished to preserve a French naval
force as a counterbalance to the English, and the rapid advance
of the French, prevented the destruction from being thorough.
Yet the allies carried off four sail of the line and burnt nine.
They burnt fifteen frigates and carried off five. The English
troops who might have prevented the retaking of Toulon were
in Flanders under the Duke of York, or were about to sail to
the West Indies in the expedition convoyed by Jervis, and
commanded by Sir Charles Grey.
The war in the West Indies is one of the most instructive
and interesting parts of the great revolutionary struggle. It
was only begun by the capture of Martinique in 1794, and
will be most conveniently dealt with as a whole, and together
with the ancillary services of the navy. For the present I
think it most convenient only to note that in April Santa
Lucia and Guadaloupe, together with some smaller posts, were
occupied. In June the arrival of French reinforcements at
Guadaloupe gave an entirely new character to the war in this
region. Only a few days before this expedition intervened,
there had been fought in European waters the great battle
which was to decide whether England was or was not to be
free to continue her conquests in distant seas.
The fact that this expedition had sailed from Rochefort
on the 25th April, unseen by British look-out ships, and had
reached the West Indies before warning was given to Sir
John Jervis, would seem to indicate some want of vigilance in
the English blockading squadrons and look-out ships. The
question whether the watch maintained on the French ports in
the early stages of the war was well conducted has been much
debated. Every reader of naval controversy has heard of
the respective merits of the kind of blockade preferred by
Howe, and the course followed by Jervis when he had
become Earl St. Vincent and was in command in the Channel.
Under St. Vincent the blockading fleet was expected to remain
outside the enemy’s port in all seasons, save when the
westerly gales drove the heavy ships to take refuge at Torquay,
from whence they could return rapidly to their station when
the wind shifted. During the absence of the heavy ships an
inshore squadron of picked vessels remained at anchor on
the French coast just outside of the range of French guns.
Howe preferred to keep his ships at anchor in English
ports, leaving frigates to watch the enemy, and report if they
came to sea. The method of St. Vincent, which had been
adopted before him by Hawke, imposed a very severe strain on
both men and ships. Howe’s course was the milder, the more
endurable to officers and crews. But it was open to the
criticism that it allowed the enemy too good a chance of
getting to sea unobserved, when it naturally followed that
there was a difficulty in discovering what course he had taken,
and in bringing him to action. On that ground alone St.
Vincent’s blockade must be judged to be superior, and it had
the further advantage that it tended to keep the fleet in better
training though at a cruel cost to humanity. Yet we need
not forget that even when St. Vincent’s rules were most strictly
enforced, individual French ships and small squadrons did
get to sea, while the torpor of their main fleet was deliberately
enforced by the Government which had renounced the
policy of meeting the English fleets in battle, and fitted out its
own with no more aspiring ambition than the wish to impose
a burden on England by forcing her to keep up trying
blockades. It would be rash to assert that such a French
expedition as that of 1794 would not have sailed successfully
at any stage of the war.
The course of events in European waters during that year
can hardly be quoted as a case in point against Howe’s
method. It is true that he wintered in home ports, and did
not sail from St. Helens till the 2nd May; but he was off
Brest before the main French fleet was at sea, and if he did
not remain outside that port the reason must be sought in the
nature of the task set him. The French harvest of 1793 had
been very bad, and this failure of the home supply of food
was aggravated by the disorder of the country, which
hampered industry. France was in serious danger of famine,
and the Government had directed its diplomatic agent in the
United States, M. Genêt, to purchase foodstuffs, hire American
vessels, and send them to Europe in a convoy. On the
24th December 1793, Rear-Admiral Vanstabel sailed from
Brest to act as escort to the trading-ships, with two sail of the
line and four frigates. The French Government had given its
cruisers an order to impound all food on its way to England in
neutral vessels, and the British Government had retaliated by
declaring all food designed for the use of Frenchmen to be
contraband of war. When, therefore, Lord Howe sailed from
St. Helens, his orders were to intercept the convoy. The
French, who were aware that the British fleet would if possible
stop the grain-ships, had sent Rear-Admiral Nielly to meet
them with five sail of the line, 300 miles to the west of
Belleisle. Nielly left Brest on the 10th April, the day before
Vanstabel left the Chesapeake with his hundred and twenty
grain-ships.
It is self-evidently true that if Howe had been outside
Brest by the beginning of April, Nielly could not have sailed.
But the British Government was in some anxiety for its own
trade, and Howe was ordered to take with him nearly a
hundred merchant-ships, which could not be collected sooner,
and to see them clear of the Channel. The whole swarm
of vessels which left the Isle of Wight with him amounted
to 148 sail, of which 49 were men-of-war, and 34
were ships of the line. Howe took the convoy to the
Lizard, and then sent the merchant-ships on under
the protection of eight ships of the line. Six of these,
under the command of Rear-Admiral Montagu, were ordered
to accompany the convoy to Cape Finisterre, and then
cruise between Cape Ortegal and Belleisle till the 20th,
when they were to join the flag off Ushant. Two were to
accompany the merchant-ships to their destination. Howe
with twenty-six sail of the line and seven frigates steered for
Brest to discover whether the main French fleet had put to
sea. It was discovered at anchor.
This fleet, now commanded by Villaret-Joyeuse, a member
of the old Royal Navy, and a comparatively young man, was
within one of the same strength as the English—twenty-five
sail of the line. Great exertions had been made by the
French Government to fit it out thoroughly. Sailors had
been brought from Toulon, and the crews were filled up by
levies of landsmen. Every effort had been made to rouse
the patriotism of the crews and confirm their confidence by
eloquent appeals to their emotions. As a security that the
officers would be kept up to the mark, and also as a precaution
against the recurrence of the mutinous disorders which had
disturbed the fleet of Morard de Galle, the Government
had sent down two delegates with large powers of reward and
punishment—Jean Bon Saint André, and Prieur de la Marne.
The name of Jean Bon was freely used by wits in England
as a Turk’s Head, or chopping-block for satire. They
expatiated at large in prose and verse on his absurdities and
cowardice. But Jean Bon was by no means an absurd man.
He had been a sailor in his youth, before he became a
Protestant preacher in his native town, Montauban. In the
Convention he had been distinguished by Jacobin zeal and a
great command of the windy rhetoric of the time. But
he was neither fool nor coward. At a later period he did
good service for Napoleon as Prefect at Mayence, and left
the reputation of an honest and able official. His influence
in the fleet was exercised on the side of energy, and his
absurdities were superficial. If he dictated to the admiral,
he had begun by making the crews understand that mutiny
would no longer be tolerated. That Villaret-Joyeuse was
better obeyed than Morard de Galle had been was mainly
due to the presence of a representative of the dreaded Committee
of Public Safety and to the decision of Jean Bon.
The Republican fleet which lay at Brest in 1794 was in
truth a better force than France was able to send to sea later
in the war, when the spirit of the crews had been damped by
defeat, when they had ceased to believe in the possibility of
victory, and when long periods of stagnation in port had
rendered them awkward and timid. It was indeed far from
being efficient. Most of its captains and officers were
merchant seamen who had no experience of naval military
work. Its crews were largely landsmen. The Government
was well aware of its want of training, for they instructed
Villaret-Joyeuse to take the opportunity, afforded by his
cruise for the protection of the convoy, to drill his men. They
were to be taught the rudiments of their business at the very
moment when they were about to meet an enemy. On the
other hand, it must not be forgotten that the English officers had
not yet reached the level of skill they attained later. Howe
had to complain of the awkwardness of some of his captains.
The proportion of men who were at sea for the first time in
their lives was large in his fleet also. The “prime seamen,”
impressed for the fleet in 1793, had been largely sent to the
Mediterranean or West Indies. There were vessels under
his command which counted but a low proportion of men
bred to the sea in their complements. No doubt the level of
skill was higher in the English than in the French ships.
But the superiority of Howe’s force was not what the
superiority of the crews of coming years was to be. It was
based less on training than on a better spirit of discipline,
and the quality of its cadastre of officers—commissioned,
warrant, and petty. Defoe’s maxim that “good officers
presently make a good army,” holds true of fleets, though, no
doubt, more time is required to make a man useful in a ship
than to drill a soldier.
When Howe saw the French at anchor on the 5th May
he might have judged it wiser to remain off Brest, so as to
prevent them from getting out to cover the arrival of the
convoy. But he could have no security that the convoy
would make for Brest, and if it had reached the French ports
to the south while he was blockading Villaret-Joyeuse, the
main purpose of his cruise would have been lost. He therefore
stood to sea to seek for Vanstabel and his charge on and
near the 47th degree of latitude—the course which would
naturally be followed by merchant ships on their way to
Europe. He remained sweeping the trade route without
seeing a sail, till he came off Brest again on the 19th, to
which he returned since he had ordered Admiral Montagu
to meet him off Ushant on the 20th. The weather had
been foggy, so foggy that on the 17th the French fleet, on its
way out, had passed Howe’s ships close enough to let the
Frenchmen hear the fog signals struck in the English fleet.
The watch bell was tolled on the starboard, and a drum beaten
on the port, tack. The English fleet did not detect the
neighbourhood of the enemy, and on the 18th the fleets were
out of sight of one another. Villaret-Joyeuse had left Brest
on the 16th, and after so narrowly avoiding a collision, he
steered for the west to meet Nielly at his rendezvous, three
hundred miles west of Belleisle. Howe, on the 18th, was
returning to the east, and on the 19th his frigates reconnoitred
the anchorage and discovered that Villaret-Joyeuse was at
sea. On the same day the Venus frigate joined him
with important news from Montagu. On the 15th the
rear-admiral had fallen in with and captured the French
corvette, Maire Guiton, and several merchant vessels. They
belonged to an English Newfoundland convoy protected by
Captain Thomas Troubridge in the Castor frigate. The
Castor and the vessels she was convoying had all fallen into
the hands of Nielly, who had sent them off as prizes.
Montagu learnt from the Englishmen in the crews of the
recaptured ships, that Nielly was waiting to join Vanstabel.
As their united force would have outnumbered his, he informed
the admiral, and asked for reinforcements. Howe, who also
knew that Villaret-Joyeuse was at sea, realised the danger
that his detached squadron might be overwhelmed, and at
once steered to the south-west to afford it protection. On
the 21st he fell in with a number of Dutch merchant vessels,
just captured by Villaret-Joyeuse, and retook them. From
the men on board and the logs of the ships he learnt that the
French admiral was steering to the west to meet Nielly, and
in a direction which would carry him away from Montagu,
who was therefore in no danger. The main English fleet
went in search of the Frenchman. Montagu, for his part,
came to the rendezvous off Ushant on the 20th, and, not
finding Howe there, returned in a few days to the Channel,
an act of weakness which he and his apologists endeavoured
to justify, but which had no valid excuse. It was an oversight
on the part of Lord Howe that he did not take measures
to call Montagu’s six line-of-battle ships to his flag. If they
had been with him in the coming battles the result could not
well have failed to be more decisive.
From the 21st to the 28th of May, Howe was diligently
seeking the French between the 47th and 48th parallels of
latitude. On the morning of the 28th they were seen
directly to the south of him, and to windward in the brisk
south-westerly wind then blowing. Villaret-Joyeuse, who had
been joined by the Patriote, 74, from the squadron of Nielly,
had now exactly the same number of ships as Howe. When
the English topsails were first seen by the French they were
supposed to be perhaps the convoy or the ships of Nielly’s
squadron. He therefore bore down till he was near enough
to recognise the English fleet, which he did when it was
separated from him by a space of ten miles. The first duty
of the French admiral was to manœuvre to secure the safety
of the convoy. The more effectual course would have been
to force on a close battle and drive Howe away. Villaret-Joyeuse
was far too painfully conscious of the defects of his
command to take the bold line which would have commended
itself to his old chief, Suffren, with whom he had served in
the East Indies, but was contrary to the general tradition of
the French Navy. Therefore, like the plover, which endeavours
to draw the intruder away from the place where its nest is,
the French admiral manœuvred to tempt his opponent away
from the route of the grain-ships. There was in truth little
risk that he would not be followed, to say nothing of the fact
that it was impossible to know exactly where Vanstabel would
be at a given moment. The wholesome tradition of our navy
was to destroy the fighting force of the enemy. When his
opponent was in front Howe fixed upon him. The operations
of the following five days were performed in the space of the
Atlantic stretching around the point 47° 34′ N. and 13° 39′ W.,
and to 47° 48′ N. and 18° 30′ W. A line drawn west from
Belleisle, and another drawn south from Lion’s Bank in the
North Atlantic, meet on the field of the operation of the 28th
and 29th of May and the 1st of June.
When he knew that Howe was to leeward of him the
French admiral ordered his fleet to come to the wind on the
port tack, and stood to the westward, in the south-westerly
wind. But the inexperience of his captains and crews
prevented the quick formation of a good line. Some of his
vessels fell behind and to leeward. A little after one o’clock
he tacked his ships in succession—one after the other, each
tacking where her leader tacked—came back to pick up and
cover the isolated vessels, and then stood to south-east. When
the French were seen the English fleet pressed to windward,
and at a quarter to ten the signal was made to prepare for
action. As it had to work to windward its approach was
naturally slow, and the whole day might have passed without
an encounter but for the bad handling of some of the French
ships. As it was, the first shot was not fired till about half-past
two. To tack a fleet of the size of the French, in succession,
was an operation requiring some two hours for its
due performance. The last of the line had not reached the
turning point when the first of the English came within
striking distance. At that moment the French were to the
south-east and the windward of the English, and all, except
the ships which had not returned, were heading to the east-south-east.
Howe had told off a squadron of his best sailing
ships to harass the enemy’s rear, seize hold of his skirt, as it
were, and stop his attempt to get away. This squadron consisted
of Rear-Admiral Pasley’s flagship, the Bellerophon,
74, Captain William Hope; the Russell, 74, Captain John
Willet Payne; the Marlborough, 74, Captain the Hon. G.
Cranfield Berkeley; and the Thunderer, 74, Captain
Albemarle Bertie. Though the average speed of a French
fleet was commonly better than our own, the quickest English
ships sailed better than the slowest of the French. As
Villaret-Joyeuse was compelled to keep his ships together he
had to regulate his speed by that of the worst sailer among
them. Admiral Pasley’s squadron would probably have overtaken
him even if his evolution had been completed by half-past
two. At the moment of the first intact the English fleet
was heading to the westward towards the French rear. At
about three o’clock, as the enemy completed his evolution, it
also began to tack in succession, and to follow, still heading
for the rear of Villaret-Joyeuse’s line, and still to leeward, in
pursuit of the opponent who was slipping away to the eastward.
The Russell, Marlborough, and Thunderer,
with the frigates, held on longer than the others to get into
the wake of the French, and then turned. Both fleets now
stood eastward, the French ahead, while the leading English
ships kept up a bickering fire with the end of their line. At
about five o’clock the Revolutionnaire, 110, fell back from her
place in the line and took post at the rear. Her great bulk
and solidity fitted her to stand battering. Her captain,
Vandongen, fought her stoutly and was killed in the action.
As the darkness came on the Revolutionnaire fell behind and
put before the wind. She was engaged by the Bellerophon,
the Russell, the Thunderer, the Marlborough, the
Leviathan, 94, Captain Lord Hugh Seymour, and the
Audacious, 94, Captain William Parker. She suffered
severely, and it was believed in the English fleet that she had
surrendered. It is probable that she would have been taken
if Howe, who did not trust all his captains sufficiently to
welcome a night action, had not recalled the ships engaged
at about eight o’clock. She continued to be engaged on the
Audacious till nearly ten. Captain Vandongen fell at nine-thirty.
His first and second lieutenants had been killed or
disabled. The third lieutenant, Renaudeau, was wounded
immediately after taking over the command. The Revolutionnaire
staggered out of action a wreck, under her fourth
lieutenant, Dorré. But she had put her mark on most of the
ships which engaged her, having damaged the Bellerophon
severely, and shattered the rigging of the Audacious so
thoroughly that the English 74 was compelled to put before
the wind and return to Plymouth. The Revolutionnaire
reached Brest (where her officers and crew were sent to prison
on a charge of treason) under the escort of the Audacieux,
74, from Nielly’s squadron, which joined Villaret-Joyeuse on
the 29th but was detached to help her.
During the night the two fleets continued standing to the
eastward on the starboard tack. Next morning the French
were seen to windward, about six miles off, on the starboard
bow of the English. The Audacieux was standing across
our route some distance ahead to join her admiral, who,
as has just been stated, sent her off to help the Revolutionnaire.
At seven o’clock Howe ordered his ships to tack in
succession, and menace the rear of the enemy as on the
day before. By this movement he also manœuvred to set to
windward. At about eight o’clock the Cæsar, 74, and the
Queen, 74, the leading ships of Howe’s line, now heading
westward, began to cannonade the rear ships of the French
who were still standing to the east. Villaret-Joyeuse, seeing
his rear ships menaced, and being anxious lest some of them
should be cut off as on the day before, wore his fleet in
succession, turning them, that is to say, before the wind, and
bringing them nearer the English. The result of this
movement was to bring the French on to the same tack as
the English, but nearer them though still to windward, and
the two fleets stood on to the west, cannonading one another
at some distance, for the French hung back from a close
engagement. At half-past eleven Howe signalled to his
fleet to tack in succession and pass through the enemy, but
deciding, on consideration, that the order was premature he
annulled it, and then repeated it at half-past twelve. The
smoke made it difficult to see the order, and when it was seen it
was ill obeyed. The leading ship of the English line, the Cæsar,
was commanded by Captain Molloy, who had commanded the
Intrepid, 64, in Graves’ action with Grasse, off the Chesapeake,
in the previous war, and had then fought with signal gallantry.
But in the actions of 1794 he suffered, according to his own
account, from a persistent course of misfortunes, and, according
to others, from a want of zeal, which brought on him great
discredit in the fleet, and condemnation by a court martial.
The Cæsar was too far from the enemy, and when she was
ordered to tack, she wore, and so went further than before,
running to leeward of her own friends. The Queen, 98,
Captain John Hutt, the flagship of Rear-Admiral Alan
Gardner, the ship next to the Cæsar, did tack and so did
those immediately behind her, but partly because they were
damaged in the rigging, and partly because the French line
was well closed, they failed to break it at any point. They
ran along it on the leeside between it and the centre and
rear of the English fleet. The result of Howe’s manœuvre so
far had been to throw his own fleet into confusion. Seeing
that if he waited to tack till his turn came, he might be too
late to reach the enemy, he tacked his flagship, the Queen
Charlotte, 100, and broke through the French line ahead
of the fifth ship from the rear. Then he tacked again and
stood in the same direction as the French, who were now to
leeward of him. He was followed by his fleet, but in a
confused swarm. In the prevailing disorder and the smoke,
the English could hardly tell whether their broadside would
go into a friend or an enemy. Yet Howe gained the essential
advantage he had aimed at. He forced to windward of the
French fleet, and gained the weather gage. The two ships
in the rear of the French line, the Indomptable, 80, Captain
Lamesle, and the Tyrannicide, 74, Captain Dordelin, were cut
off and surrounded. Seeing their peril Villaret-Joyeuse wore
out of his line to support them. He was followed by the
centre and rear of his fleet, and he rescued the two ships.
He even threatened the Queen, which had been much
mauled and had fallen behind. His van had followed him.
The Queen was promptly supported. Both fleets were in
much confusion, and at five o’clock the fire ceased.
The action of the 29th May had ended to the notable
advantage of Howe. Though several of his ships were
damaged, none were too disabled to serve. On the other hand
Villaret-Joyeuse had lost the Indomptable, which was so much
damaged that he felt constrained to send her home under
escort of the Mont Blanc, 74. The Montagnard, 74, left the
fleet without orders. The fleet which had sailed from Brest
was therefore diminished by loss of four of its ships. Moreover,
it had lost the weather gage, and with it the power to
delay a decisive action. When the action of the 29th ended
the French admiral wore again, but his fleet on the port tack
rejoined his van and stood to the west followed by the
English fleet. The Montagnard, which had separated from the
fleet, fell in with Admiral Vanstabel and the convoy. On
the day following the action, the 30th May, Vanstabel, with
his grain-ships, sailed across the water where it had been
fought, and while Howe, who had come out to intercept him,
and the Brest fleet, which was there for his protection, were
sailing to the west, continued on his way to France.
The wind was still south-westerly, but it had diminished in
strength. The weather became foggy, and the hostile fleets
not only lost sight of one another, but it was often not possible
for the ships in each to see their friends. On the 30th May
Villaret-Joyeuse had a piece of extraordinary good fortune.
He was joined by the Trente-et-un Mai, 74, Captain Honoré
Ganteaume, from Concale, and by Rear-Admiral Nielly, with
the Sans Pareil, 80, Captain Courand; the Trajan, 74, Captain
Dumourier; and the Téméraire, 94, Captain Henry Morel.
His fleet was therefore again brought up to twenty-six sail.
During the 30th and 31st May the two fleets continued
sailing to the west, sighting one another in glimpses through
the fog. By the evening of the 31st the air had cleared.
The French were then to leeward of the English at a distance
of four or five miles. It was somewhat of a surprise to Howe’s
officers to find their opponent undiminished in numbers and
so little damaged. Howe, who was no more inclined than
before to fight a night battle, and who knew that the French
could not now get away, was content to continue on the same
tack with them during the night. At dark they were on his
lee quarter. When full daylight had come on the 1st June
they had so far gained on him that they were on his lee bow.
The battle now about to be fought is among the most
important in the history of naval war. Its significance is to
some extent obscured by the fact that we see it in the perspective
of time—that is to say, across subsequent events of
an apparently greater order, with which we naturally, though
unfairly, make our comparisons. But the just comparison is
with what went before. I have endeavoured to show how
the British admirals of the eighteenth century had been compelled,
and were for the most part content, to fight on the
poor model provided by the Duke of York’s Fighting Instructions.
They bore down on the enemy from windward,
engaged van to van, centre to centre, rear to rear. And they
complied with Instruction XVI.: “In all cases of fight with
the enemy the commanders of his majesty’s ships are to keep
the fleet in one line, and (as much as may be), to preserve that
order of battle, which they have been directed to keep, before
the time of fight.” The result had been to produce such
formal and inconclusive actions as were fought by Pocock
and D’Aché in the East Indies, by Keppel and D’Orvilliers off
Ushant, and in many other places. About the time of the
American War of 1778-1783 a general impatience had
begun to be felt with this established system. A witty French
minister declared that what a naval battle meant was the meeting
of two fleets, a great expenditure of powder and shot, and
a separation—after which the sea was never a whit the less salt.
Arbuthnot’s action with Destouches off the Capes of
Virginia, Parker’s fight with Zoutman on the Dogger Bank
had exasperated the navy. Then came Rodney’s victory off
Dominica, when he broke his own line in defiance of Instruction
XVI. and with brilliant results. We cannot say with
certainty how far the speculations of Clerk influenced the
minds of naval officers. They have commonly denied him
any influence at all. His ingenious plans for forcing on
decisive actions are open to the criticism of Captain White,
who, in his notes on Rodney’s battle, said that Mr. Clerk
would not have found it so easy to manœuvre real ships on
real water, as to move his models on the dining-room table.
The late Rear-Admiral May, when Captain of the College at
Greenwich, once observed to me, while looking at Clerk’s
scheme for an attack on the enemy’s rear from windward,
that it was very pretty if the enemy was fool enough to let
you carry it out. There are no bottes secrètes in war—no
lunges which cannot be parried. Any attack is effective only
when the better fighter tries it on the less good. And here
we come to the root of the matter—to that dominating idea
of Clerk’s book which remains sound whatever may be the
value of his applications.
It is essential to know what that idea really was. I do
not think that it is to be found in his ingenious plans for
concentrating a superior number of ships on an inferior
number of the enemy’s. Every such attempt to concentrate
can be countered and baffled by an alert opponent. The real
value of Clerk’s speculations lies in the truth of the hypothesis
on which he reasoned, and the general recommendation, or
exhortation, he founded thereupon. They are to be read in
the introduction to his book on Tactics. He said to naval
officers that they and their crews were superior in quality to
their enemies, and had proved that superiority in single ship
actions, yet their great battles had commonly led to no
decisive result, and why? Because they allowed themselves
to be tied by pedantic rules. These rules were useful to the
side which wished to avoid a decisive action. To the stronger,
who had every reason to wish for a chance to develop his
strength, they were bonds and obstructions. Therefore, he
urged, use your formation as a means of bringing your ships
into action. Then it has served its purpose, and you can let
it go, break into your enemy’s formation, and allow free play
to your individual superiority. With or without his help, or
spontaneously, and with stimulus from him, these opinions
had been spreading in the navy. On the 1st June 1794 the
time and the opportunity for their application had come.
Howe’s claim to rank among the great captains is based on
the fact that he did apply them.
He would hold his place, even if it could be shown that he
did not do the best he could have done. The prevailing
authorities are agreed that he did not, and the more friendly
plead his sixty-eight years, and the strain which had been
laid on him, as excuses. It had been severe since the
2nd May, and heavy indeed since the morning of the 28th.
The obligatory remark that Nelson would have done far
otherwise is rarely omitted. I shall not undertake to prove
a negative. Being the younger man, Nelson might have
had the strength to do more than Howe if he had ever
met an opponent who had capacity and opportunity to
manœuvre. Let us leave easy and barren assumptions
aside, and see what were the facts with which Howe had
to deal.
In the first place he knew, by his experience on the 29th,
that the fleet on his lee-bow could and would manœuvre.
Villaret-Joyeuse had shown, by wearing out of his line to
extricate the Indomptable and the Tyrannicide, that he was
not the man to lie idle while part of his fleet was assailed by
superior numbers. The French admiral was quite capable of
countering any attempt at concentration. On the other hand,
Howe could not rely on the intelligent execution of his orders
by all his captains. The simpler the task he set them the
better would it be executed. Then he knew that while the
manœuvring power of the French was not contemptible, their
gunnery was bad. The loss of life in his fleet had been
small, and none of his ships had been so disabled on the
29th as to be unable to take her place in the line on the
1st June. Therefore it followed that so long as the ships of
the two fleets were fairly matched in size, a superior power
would be developed by each English ship by virtue of her
better gunnery. What was required was that the action
should be close, and that the enemy should not be allowed to
practise the favourite French manœuvre of firing to dismast,
and then slipping away to leeward. The end could be
obtained by bearing down on the enemy, van to van, centre
to centre, rear to rear, not for the purpose of hauling up to
windward and then keeping in the same order, while the
enemy went off on his open line of retreat, but to break in on
him, to pass through his line, to cut his retreat, and so to
force him to fight it out. The process of breaking through
would give opportunities to rake the enemy’s ships, a mêlée
would be produced, and the individual superiority of the
English ships would have free play. When Howe decided on
this departure from tradition, he, with his sixty-eight years
and his training in the strictest sect of the Pharisees, showed
a greater daring, a greater originality, than was to be displayed
by the men who followed him, who handled more practised
fleets, who benefited by the confidence he had inspired, who
fought enemies whose nerve he had broken. The battle of
the 1st June was the foundation of the later superiority of the
English fleet, and by far the most essential part of any
building is its foundation.
Lord Howe signalled that he meant to attack the centre
of the enemy’s line, and then that he would break through
and engage to leeward. His line bore up at about a quarter-past
eight, after a pause had been made to allow the men to
have breakfast. The approach was slow, for the opportunity
was taken to rectify the order of the ships so that they should
be fairly matched. The course steered was to the north-west,
the ships advancing on oblique lines to assail the enemy who
was on their bow, and who lay in very good order awaiting
the attack, in a line ahead from west to east. The wind,
though less strong than on previous days, was still from the
south-west, and the sea was calmer than it had been for the
last few days.
It was nearly half-past nine when Howe’s fleet came
within range of the French guns and the enemy opened fire.
For a few moments none of his ships answered. They were
waiting till they were in a position to answer with effect. If
the admiral’s orders had been exactly obeyed each of his
captains would have steered for the space astern of the
Frenchman corresponding to himself in the hostile line, and
would have passed through it, and would have engaged to
leeward. But the order was not exactly obeyed, sometimes
because the French closed their line and no open space was
left; sometimes because the rapidly gathering cloud of smoke
deprived zealous officers of the power to see; sometimes
because an effective effort to obey was not made. The
signal to pass through the enemy’s line was accompanied by
a superfluous and mischievous note to the effect that the
captain who could not find a place to pass was at liberty to
engage without passing. It was superfluous, because there
was surely no necessity to tell any man that he was not
expected to do the physically impossible, and mischievous,
because this official recognition of the alternative gave the
weaker sort an excuse for not doing their utmost. There
were those who did not. The Cæsar hauled up too far to
windward, exposed herself to the concentrated fire of the
leading French ships, was damaged, made distracted vacillating
movements, was of no use, and yet suffered more loss of life
than some vessels which really contributed to the victory.
Following the line from west to east, the Bellerophon
engaged the Gasparin to windward, but close and hotly, till
the Frenchman, together with his next ahead, the Convention,
flinched, bore up and ran to leeward, heading to the east.
The rigging of the Bellerophon was cut to pieces, and she
could not follow. Yet she lost fewer men than the Cæsar.
But Admiral Pasley, who lost his leg, was among the wounded.
The Leviathan engaged the America to windward to good
purpose, pushing her hard, driving her out, following her, and
swinging round to leeward of her as she strove to follow her
leaders to the eastward. Old habit had fixed the French
captains in the faith that a naval battle was to be fought by
firing to dismast and then slipping away to form a new line
to leeward. The Russell engaged the Téméraire till this
French ship also slipped away. Then she pressed on, and
falling in with the America helped to take her. The Royal
Sovereign fought the Terrible, drove her out of the line,
and then joined in overwhelming the America. The Marlborough
broke through the French line astern of the
Impétueux, the next behind the Terrible, became entangled
with the former and the Mucius, her next astern, so that
the three fell aboard one another, and the English ship was
severely mauled. The Defence cut the line between the
Mucius and the Eole, suffering much. The Impregnable,
Tremendous, and Barfleur engaged the Tourville, Trajan,
and Tyrannicide to windward—not as closely as Howe would
have wished. The Barfleur was the flagship of Admiral
Bowyer, who also was wounded, and her captain was Cuthbert
Collingwood, the most calmly intrepid of men. No want of
goodwill can have restrained him. In the smoke her crew
could see only a short distance. They believed, and for a
time Collingwood himself believed, that a French ship beside
them had sunk. “Up jumped the Johnnies on the guns and
cheered,” so Collingwood records, but they were mistaken.
The Culloden and Gibraltar fired from windward, not
closely, nor to the purpose. The Queen Charlotte, Howe’s
flagship, was steered to break the line astern of the French
flagship, the Montagne. As she came down she took the
fire of the Jacobin and the Achille, the next French vessels,
without reply. The captain of the Montagne—or the Admiral
Villaret-Joyeuse—understood her aim, backed their sails, and
endeavoured to bar her road. Gassin, the captain of the
Jacobin, saw it too, and, letting all draw, shot ahead to close
the line. He took the officer-like course, but he took it too
eagerly. The Jacobin nearly ran into the stern of the
Montagne, and to avoid a collision had to port her helm, and
was carried on till she ranged up on the leeside of the
flagship. The Queen Charlotte swept through the space
left by her advance. The flag of the Montagne flapped
against the shrouds of the English flagship, so closely did
she pass. Her broadside was delivered with shattering force,
and then she ranged up between the Montagne and the
Jacobin. If either had been laid on her bow she must
have suffered, if not disaster, still great injury. But the
Jacobin soon stood on, and then so did the Montagne, which
had made little or no reply to the English fire. The Brunswick
headed to pass through the gap left by the Achille
which had followed the Jacobin, but Captain Renaudin, of the
Vengeur, stood on and barred the way. Then Captain John
Harvey, of the Brunswick, obeyed the admiral’s signal in
the spirit since in the letter he could not. He ran into the
French ship, his three starboard anchors hooking the Frenchman’s
port fore-shrouds and fore-channels. When his master,
Mr. Stewart, asked if the anchors should be cut away he
answered, “No, we have got her, and we will keep her.”
The two ships turned before the wind, and drifted to leeward,
grappled one to the other. The Valiant, the Orion, the
Queen, the Ramillies, the Alfred, the Montague, all
engaged to windward more or less closely—some of them
notably rather less than more. The Royal George broke
through between the Républicain and the Sans-Pareil. The
Majestic engaged to windward. The Glory broke in
among the ships of the French rear, and the Thunderer
passed behind the last of them, and so entered the mêlée.
These movements which must needs be told consecutively,
were contemporaneous, or nearly so. As the French ships
pushed on to close spaces ahead of them, a westerly movement
was given to the line, and the English vessels furthest to the
east had the greater distance to go and so came later into
action. Though Howe’s orders were not fully obeyed the
French formation was broken, and the English were mingled
with the enemy’s vessels in confusion. Out of that confusion
order was again evolved. The general movement to leeward
carried most of the French clear, and among them the
Montagne, which shook off the Queen Charlotte, crippled
by the loss of her main topmast. When the two fleets were
disentangled, Villaret-Joyeuse was able to form a line to
leeward, but ten of his ships were surrounded by the English.
He came gallantly back to their assistance and rescued four,
the Républicain, the Mucius, the Scipion, and the Jemmapes.
Two of the English ships were put in peril by his return—the
Queen, which had eagerly pushed through the broken French
rear, and the Brunswick, which had drifted away locked to
the Vengeur. Their strife was furious, and carried to a decisive
conclusion. Captain Harvey was mortally wounded, but the
Vengeur, shattered by the fire of the Brunswick and other
English vessels, sank, carrying part of her crew down with her,
but not before she had surrendered.
The return of Villaret-Joyeuse alarmed the captain of the
fleet, Sir Roger Curtis, and he urged the admiral to call his
ships about him lest the Frenchman should take his revenge.
Howe, so exhausted by four days of strain that he nearly fell
from fatigue, yielded to his importunity. The English ships
were recalled, and before two o’clock the action ceased. We
remained in possession of six prizes, the Sans-Pareil, Juste,
America, Impétueux, Northumberland, and Achille. The total
loss of life from the 28th May to the 10th June was but 290
killed. The wounded were 858. The casualty list of the six
French ships taken was greater—1266 in all, and the total
loss must have been very much heavier.
The operations of the campaign did not end when the
fleets drew apart on the afternoon of the 1st June. Admiral
Montagu was not allowed to remain in Plymouth Sound.
When the Audacious brought news on the 3rd June that
the fleets were in contact, he was ordered out again, and he
sailed on the 4th with nine sail of the line. On the 8th June
he was off Brest where he found himself in the midst of
enemies. A reserve squadron had been fitted out in the port,
and two at sea. It was weaker than Montagu’s, and retired
before him to Bertheaume Bay. But on the 9th the fleet of
Villaret-Joyeuse, diminished, but still formidable to Montagu’s
squadron of nine, hove in sight. He slipped between the two,
and retreated to Plymouth where he anchored on the 12th.
In the meantime, Vanstabel, who, after crossing the scene of
the action of the 29th May, had anchored at Penmarch, came
into Brest under cover of the French fleet, and the great food
convoy was safely housed. The main English fleet made for
home when it lost sight of the French on the 1st of June.
Part of the ships were left at Plymouth, but the majority and
the prizes anchored at Spithead on the 13th of June.
CHAPTER XI THE WAR TILL THE END OF 1797
Authorities.—See the list of Authorities in the previous Chapter. Also, Projets et
Tentatives de Débarquement aux Îles Britanniques by Captain Desbrière.
The victory of the 1st of June was followed by an
interval of more than two years marked by no great
naval conflict. The French Navy was at once too
completely disorganised and too ill-directed to act with effect.
It was indeed driven to exertions injurious only to itself by
the Jacobin rulers in Paris, who were themselves driven on by
such passions as the “beastly froth of rage” which caused
them to issue their decree of the 24th May 1794—the
decree forbidding their armies and fleets to give quarter to
Hanoverians or Englishmen. It was repealed on the 30th
December, five months after the fall of the Terrorists on the
27th of July, and when experience had shown the French that
not they but their enemies were to have the more frequent
opportunities to refuse quarter. The English fleet had no
substantial opponent at sea at whom to strike, and was,
moreover, but poorly led for the most part.
In the Channel, Howe, who continued to hold the command
though his health never recovered from the strain of the campaign
of 1794, cruised from September till the end of the year.[2]
But he continued to prefer his own system of watching the
French from an English channel port by means of a lookout
maintained by frigates. His infirmities and age were in
fact disqualifying him for active service. He would willingly
have retired, and indeed was never at sea after the spring of
1795, though he was compelled, by the unwillingness of the
Government to allow him to resign, to retain the nominal
command. Lord Bridport, brother of Lord Hood, who first
acted for him at sea and then succeeded him in the Channel
command, held the same views as to the best way of using
the fleet, and applied them with far less energy and faculty.
The Admiralty did not as yet impose a more vigorous
line of action on its admirals. Between the growing weakness
of Howe, the natural want of energy of Bridport, and the
lack of intelligent direction from Whitehall, the movements
of the Channel fleet went somewhat by fits and starts. In
November, the Canada, 74, Captain Hamilton, came into
Torbay, where Howe was at anchor, with the news that he
had barely escaped from a French squadron which had taken
his colleague, the Alexander, 74, commanded by Captain
R. R. Bligh, a different man from the officer whose name
is for ever associated with the mutiny of the Bounty.
Howe went at once to cruise off Ushant, believing that the
main French fleet was at sea. But it was only a small
squadron commanded by Nielly, which had taken the Alexander
as she and the Canada came back from convoy
duty. Howe’s fleet, which included four Portuguese liners,
was much blown about and damaged by rough weather.
If the English ships, and to a greater extent our Portuguese
friends, suffered from the rough weather of the Channel
in autumn and winter, the French fleet at Brest was all but
finally ruined. Villaret-Joyeuse was hounded out to sea on
the 24th December with thirty-five sail of the line. Six of
these were to form a detached squadron under Renaudin,
who had been promoted to Rear-Admiral for his gallant
defence of the Vengeur. He was to take his command round
to Toulon. So great was the distress of all France, and
particularly of its poorest province (Brittany) for food, that it
had not been found possible to provision any of these thirty-five
ships except the six of Renaudin’s command for more
than three weeks. The hostility of all Europe and the penury
of their Government combined to deprive the French of naval
stores. Their ships were patched up by makeshift devices
and with inferior material. Half a century after 1795, the
Prince de Joinville noted that as the French maritime population
was very poor and ill fed, the men drawn from it for
service in the fleet were inferior in size and strength to the
seamen of the north of Europe—including, of course, Great
Britain. He found that these men did not gain strength
till they had been well fed and well looked after in the navy
for some months. In 1795 the French seacoast population
was even poorer than about 1840, and the men drawn from
it were not sufficiently clad, and were fed on almost starvation
rations in the fleet. We must remember that our successes
were gained against overstrained and patched-up ships, with
inferior spars fished with bad material and sails of poor
cloth; manned by crews not only raw from want of practice,
but weak from downright want of food, and depressed by a
sense of inferiority in knowledge and force. Our ancestors
rejoiced in looking at caricatures of the starving French
reduced to mere scarecrows by hunger, and in comparing
them with the typical Englishman, a mass of fat and brawn.
The French had made themselves hateful by their aggressions
and plunderings, and we resented their arrogant claim to
impose regeneration and freedom on their neighbours while
they were themselves in a squalid welter of bloodstained
anarchy. Yet they were gallant men who faced storm and
battle in such destitution—and we shall not again have to
meet enemies enfeebled as they were.
Villaret-Joyeuse had to face a December gale with such
a fleet when he obeyed his orders on the 24th of December
in 1794. It drove the Républicain on the rocks, and his fleet
had to anchor in Camaret Bay. He sailed on the 30th, only
to suffer a month of misery. The Neuf Thermidor (the Jacobin
of the 1st of June renamed), the Scipion, and the Superbe sank.
The Neptune was driven on shore. By the 2nd February
the weakened fleet was back at Brest. The news that the
French were at sea brought Howe out for his last cruise, to
intercept them if possible, and to cover the trade. The
stormy weather disposed of Villaret-Joyeuse, who, however,
captured a hundred of our merchant-ships, and the Daphne,
a 20-gun ship, and Howe returned to Spithead after looking
into Brest to be sure that the French fleet was not at
sea. If he had been outside Brest on the 24th of December,
the French might have been spared a disaster. Yet the
weakness of his method of watching from afar off and
starting to pursue from a distance was clearly demonstrated
immediately after his return to Spithead. Renaudin sailed
with his six line-of-battle ships on the 22nd of February,
and reached Toulon unmolested by us, on the 2nd April, but
having suffered much from the weather, and with a long
sick list.
The French took advantage of the absence of a blockading
fleet off Brest to send out squadrons to protect their own
coast trade and attack our commerce. In May an English
watching squadron of five sail of the line under Cornwallis
was off Ushant. It saw and pursued a French force of three
liners under Rear-Admiral Vence, then engaged on convoy
duty. Vence fled to the Penmarchs, pursued by Cornwallis,
who took part of his convoy on the 8th and 9th of June.
The danger of Vence brought Villaret-Joyeuse out from Brest
with nine sail. Cornwallis was pursued and overtaken on the
16th, but so poor was the gunnery of the French that though
they attacked his rearmost ships on both sides, they did little
harm, and suffered not a little themselves. Cornwallis got
safe to Plymouth with his prizes, and his retreat was highly
praised for its steadiness and good management. Bad
weather forced the French back to Belleisle, and when they
turned again to Brest on the 19th June they fell in with
another and a stronger opponent.
The Vendéens were still fighting for the royal cause in
France, and were calling for help to the Royalist exiles and
for the presence of a prince to lead them. An expedition
had been prepared in England, which was to have been commanded
by the Count d’Artois—in after times King Charles X.
It included 200 exiled officers of the old French Navy,
and sailed on the 11th June from Spithead under the protection
of Sir John Borlase Warren, who had his flag in a
frigate, but had three line-of-battle ships and fifty transports.
Lord Bridport accompanied the expedition with fourteen sail
of the line to protect it from the Brest fleet. Warren’s mission
was to land the Royalists at Quiberon. On the 19th June
Bridport dispatched him to Quiberon, and steered himself for
Brest. Immediately after Warren had parted from Bridport
on his way south-east to Quiberon, he sighted Villaret-Joyeuse
on his way back from Belleisle to Brest. He retreated,
warned Bridport, and the two rejoined on the 20th. Bridport
took the three liners of Warren’s squadron, and pursued
Villaret-Joyeuse. On the 23rd June there was a confused
encounter about the island of Groix, which lies north-west
of Belleisle. The French admiral was ill obeyed by his
overtaxed subordinates, who disregarded signals, and fled to
L’Orient, on the mainland opposite Groix. Three of his ships
were overtaken and captured after a gallant resistance. The
dangers of the coast and a fog added to the disorders of the
fight. The French admiral complained bitterly of the conduct
of his captains. Bridport, who had three prizes to show, the
Alexandre (the English Alexander taken by Nielly on the
7th November of the previous year through her bad sailing,
and now retaken for the same reason), the Tigre, and the
Formidable, renamed by us the Belleisle, was praised for his
victory. But the opinion of his fleet and the verdict of
history was adequately expressed by Codrington, then captain
of the Babet frigate in his fleet. “It is greatly to be regretted
that His Lordship called the ships out of action, as they could
of course go where the large French three-decker did. He
might have captured or destroyed all the ships of the enemy.”
Warren remained on the coast till September a helpless eye-witness
of the dreadful fate of the French Royalists at Quiberon.
Nearly all the 200 naval officers among them perished in the
water, in action, or before the Republican firing parties. Frenchmen
who were prepared to assert that Perfidious Albion had
contrived the whole disaster in order to secure the destruction
of the dreaded royal corps, have not been wanting. The
French ships at L’Orient remained till the close of the year,
unmanned partly by desertion, partly by the disbanding of
crews which could not be fed. During the last days of 1795
and the first of 1796 they were remanned after a fashion, and
slipped away to Brest and Rochefort.
In the meantime the French armies had overrun Holland
at the close of 1794, had driven out the army of the Duke
of York, and had set up a subject republic. Our ally
became our enemy, and a squadron had to be told off to
watch the Texel under Duncan, in company with a dozen
very ill-found Russian warships. But from the date of Lord
Bridport’s victory till the close of 1796 there was little for the
fleet to do in the Channel and North Sea but to watch.
Want of funds compelled the Republican Government to
follow the example given by Louis XIV. after 1693—to lay
up its main fleets and take to commerce destroying.
The operations in the Mediterranean from December 1793,
when Hood was forced to retreat from Toulon, till Jervis
evacuated the Mediterranean in December of 1796, correspond
with the campaigns in the Channel—with the exception
that they include no 1st of June.
When he had withdrawn his ships filled with French
refugees from Toulon, Hood paused for a time at Hyères.
The refugees had to be provided for at Leghorn, from whence
most of them returned home after the fall of the Terrorists.
The remnant of the French fleet at Toulon could not move
for months. An opportunity for dealing a severe blow to
France was presented by the state of the island of Corsica.
The Corsicans had not wholly renounced the hope of achieving
independence of the French, who had conquered them
some thirty years earlier. One party among them was deeply
offended by the irreligion of the French Republicans. It had
for chief the famous Pasqual Paoli, who had fought against the
French conquest, and had for years been a pensioner in
England. He had returned to Corsica by favour of the
Revolution, and was now in the possession of great influence
over his countrymen. Paoli, who hoped to secure the
independence of Corsica under English protection,—which
meant to govern the country himself with our support,—offered
his co-operation. Hood sailed from Hyères on the
24th of January 1794, bringing with him the British troops
under Sir David Dundas. A storm forced the fleet to Elba
and caused delay. But the occupation of the island with the
help of Paoli was an easy undertaking. The few French
troops took refuge in the coast towns of Bastia and Calvi.
Dundas declined to co-operate at Bastia on the ground
that he had no adequate force. But Bastia was taken
between the 4th of April and the 21st of May by the seamen,
the marines, and the soldiers appointed to serve as marines,
who were under Hood’s orders. Calvi was besieged on the
19th June, and surrendered on the 10th of August. The fact
that Nelson, the only one of our admirals whose personality
has stamped itself on the memory and imagination of the
English people, was concerned in these sieges and lost his
right eye at Calvi, has given them an undeserved prominence.
The garrisons were cut off from supplies by sea and land,
and must have surrendered when they did, if no shot had
been fired against them. On the 14th June Corsica was
declared a kingdom, with George III. for its sovereign, and
coins were struck in his name. But our hold on the island
was weak. It depended in reality on the continued support
of Paoli and on his retention of influence over his countrymen.
Sir Gilbert Elliot, our Commissioner first at Toulon
and then in Corsica, ruined the whole foundation of our
position. Sir Gilbert was a high-minded and able man, a
conspicuous member of that portion of the Whig Opposition
which was shocked by the French Revolution into allying
itself with Pitt. He would not consent to govern by the
advice of Paoli, and would endeavour to introduce clean-handed
methods of administration, impartial justice, and the British
jury among a people divided by irreconcilable family feuds.
With the best intentions in the world, he mortally offended
our only possible friends, the Paolists, who hoped for a self-governing
Corsica administered by them, and he entirely
failed to placate our enemies. The calm and perfectly right-minded
manifestation of the innate and comprehensive
superiority of Englishmen on the part of our officers, did not
fail to produce its unfailing effect. It exasperated the
Corsicans beyond endurance. We were soon universally
hated, and our tenure of Corsica was certain to end whenever
a serious attack could be made on us from outside. A very
few months of English virtue converted the population into
partisans of the French. A far larger army than we could
spare, frequently reinforced, would have been required to hold
the island.
The attack came by the end of 1796. Until then we
were employed in beating back successive feeble sorties of
the French from Toulon, and in co-operating with the
Austrian armies in Northern Italy. The efforts of the French
to maintain their hold on Corsica by expeditions from a
ruined dockyard were begun with a promptitude highly honourable
to their energy. As early as the 5th June, just over six
months after the expulsion of the allies, Admiral Martin sailed
with seven ships of the line. He met with a slight measure
of success, for he retook the Alceste, a frigate carried away in
December, and assigned to Sardinia as her share of the
prizes. But when Hood, warned by his frigates, took up the
pursuit of the French squadron, it could but retire and seek
refuge in the Golfe Juan, commonly called by English sailors
Gourjean. Hood, who had an old experience of attacks on
fleets at anchor, laid a plan to fall on the French two upon
one. But it was delayed by unfavourable weather till Martin
had fortified his ships by batteries on shore. A scheme for
using fireships was given up as impracticable. Martin was
blockaded by a combined English and Spanish squadron
under Hotham till a storm drove the watchers off, and he
escaped to Toulon on the 2nd of November. It would seem
that the allies might as well have been off Toulon in May.
But the method of watching from afar, which in the Mediterranean
meant from San Fiorenzo or Leghorn, was as much
a favourite with Hood as with Howe. In November, Hood
went home on leave, and on the understanding that he was to
return. But he could not agree with ministers, and did not
go to sea again.
Hotham, his successor, an easy-going gentleman, was not
the man to change a method of conducting war which gave
him much time at anchor at San Fiorenzo or Leghorn. He
had gone to Leghorn to cover convoys which could have been
much better covered by a close blockade of Toulon, when
Martin put to sea again, on the 2nd March, with fifteen sail
of the line. The 12,000 men required to make up the
crews of these vessels had been found only by drafting 7500
soldiers into them. Martin had only 2300 sailors in addition to
officers and petty officers. A gleam of good fortune was again
allowed him. On the 7th March he took the Berwick, 74.
Her masts had been rolled out of her by the carelessness of her
officers, and she was following Hotham to Leghorn under jury
rig. But this small advantage was all Martin could gain.
Hotham, who sailed from Leghorn on the 9th, was informed of
the whereabouts of the French by his frigates on the 10th. He
pursued in baffling breezes and calms. On the 13th and 14th
an encounter took place between them which has some resemblance
to Bridport’s action near Groix. The French straggled,
and the French admiral was ill obeyed. Two French vessels,
the Ça Ira, 80, and the Censeur, 74, were taken after a stout
resistance. Some vague cannonading on opposite tacks took
place between the fleets. It is to the credit of the French that
they inflicted a loss of 74 killed and 284 wounded on the
English vessels most exposed to their fire. The Illustrious,
74, Captain Frederick, lost 90 of the total. Hotham had
with him a Neapolitan 74, the Tancredi, commanded by a man
whose name is associated closely with the Royal Navy for
another reason, the unhappy Carracciolo. When the fragmentary
battle was over, Hotham excited the wrath of his
subordinate Nelson by placidly putting aside advice to pursue
with vigour on the ground that two vessels had been taken
and they had done very well.
An admiral of this kidney was not the man either to
intercept Renaudin, who joined Martin at Hyères on the
4th April, or to keep the French confined to Toulon. They
were almost ruined there by a mutiny of starving, unpaid men,
but got over the difficulty, and were at sea again on the
7th June. The second sortie was even feebler than the first.
Martin chased Nelson, who had been detached to Genoa, back
on Hotham, at San Fiorenzo. Though reinforced by
Renaudin, he was weaker than the English admiral, who had
been joined by Admiral Mann with nine sail of the line on
the 14th June. There was nothing for it but another retreat,
another ineffectual distant cannonade—the final retreat of
Martin to Toulon, and the return of Hotham to San Fiorenzo.
As the English admiral moved periodically from San
Fiorenzo to Leghorn and from Leghorn back to San Fiorenzo,
there was obviously nothing to prevent Richery from leaving
Toulon on the 24th September with six of the line and three
frigates on a cruise to America. He did so, passed the Rock
of Gibraltar, and on the 7th October fell in with an English
convoy of thirty-one merchant-ships under the protection of
two 74’s and the French prize Censeur armed en flûte. Richery
retook the Censeur and captured nearly all the merchant-ships.
Spain having made peace with France in July, Richery
was able to take his prizes into Cadiz, where he was promptly
blockaded by Rear-Admiral Mann with six ships, and so
remained for months. Hotham, again, was not the man to
prevent Honoré Ganteaume from leaving Toulon for a cruise in
the Levant on the 10th October. He did sail with one of
the line and five frigates, released some scattered French vessels
watched by us, did considerable damage to Russian and
English trade, escaped the pursuit of Troubridge, and was
back at Toulon on the 5th February 1796. Hotham, worn
out by his exertions, resigned his command to Sir Hyde
Parker on the 1st November 1795, and sailed for home, to
be rewarded by an Irish peerage. Sir Hyde Parker was
superseded by Sir John Jervis on the 30th of the month.
During 1796 the new admiral could do little, for the
French fleet was paralysed by penury in the Mediterranean
as in the Channel. He had to look on almost helplessly while
Napoleon, who took command of the army of Italy in March, was
conducting the first and perhaps the greatest of his campaigns.
It was at least a campaign which showed what genius and
enthusiasm, even if it be only enthusiasm for a full belly and
plenty of plunder, can do against professional pedantry and
routine. By June his victories had cowed Naples into deserting
the coalition, and her help, such as it was, was lost. On
the 28th June he seized Leghorn, and a source of supply to
the fleet was lost, an opening for British trade was closed.
The loss of Corsica was seen to be at hand, and on the
10th July Elba was seized as an alternative storehouse.
Jervis’ fleet hampered the French coast trade, and captured a
battering-train on its way to the siege of Mantua. But Spain,
whirled about by every folly under the rule of Godoy, was
seen to be coming into the war. On the 25th August, Jervis
received orders from home to evacuate Corsica. Nelson was
appointed to superintend the evacuation on the 26th September,
and when he withdrew from before Leghorn to execute the
order, a French expedition under General Gentili crossed to
the island on the 19th October, on the very day we retired
somewhat harassed by the partisans of France.
While we were withdrawing from Corsica, the movements
of the fleets seemed to be leading to a clash of battle. On
the 29th of July, Jervis wisely desirous to concentrate his
forces, had recalled Mann from before Cadiz. He came, but
without stores, and Leghorn being now shut to us and
Corsica unfriendly, he had to be sent down to Gibraltar to fill
up. While he was absent, Richery had sailed on a plundering
expedition to Newfoundland, escorted by Don Juan de
Lángara with a Spanish fleet on the 7th August. Spain did
not declare war till the 5th October, but the declaration was
then as always a mere formality. After seeing Richery on
his way, Lángara returned, and on the 29th September left for
Toulon with nineteen sail. On the 1st October he met Mann,
and chased him into Gibraltar. Then he went on towards
Toulon, picking up seven more ships of the line, which raised
his force to twenty-six sail. Mann, moved by reasons which
pass all understanding, called a council of war, which as usual
agreed with the commanding officer, and sailed for England.
His withdrawal weakened Jervis vitally. In after days the
admiral said that if Mann had rejoined him, the battle which
was to be fought off Cape St. Vincent on the following 14th
February would have been fought in the Mediterranean. Yet
it is to be observed that Jervis fought at St. Vincent with
fifteen ships against twenty-seven. Now, when Lángara was
seen off Cape Corso on the 5th October with twenty-six sail,
Jervis was near at hand in Mortella Bay with fourteen. He
had many responsibilities on him—the troops to be withdrawn
from Corsica, the garrison at Elba, and the French not far off
at Toulon. On the 14th February of next year he was free
to make play with his admirable squadron. Yet it can hardly
be doubted that if he had struck on the 15th October, as he
did on the 14th February, the absence of Mann would not
have prevented him from gaining a victory which would have
dashed the Franco-Spanish naval coalition to pieces. He
judged the risk too great, and sailed for Gibraltar on the 2nd
November. From Gibraltar he went by order of the Government
to Lisbon. We had left the Mediterranean, which was
not to see an English fleet again till the summer of 1798.
Lángara, much troubled by gales, formidable to his unseamanlike
fleet, reached Toulon on the 26th October. He left it
again on the 1st December with a French squadron of six
sail under the command of Villeneuve. Lángara put in to
Carthagena, but the Frenchman went on to Brest. He
passed the Straits on the 10th December. Jervis had not yet
left for Lisbon, and the French squadron was sighted, but
could not be pursued. A storm which blew right into the
anchorage at Gibraltar was raging at the time. One of Jervis’
ships was driven on shore, and two were damaged. The
admiral could do no more than send a frigate home with
the news that a French squadron had escaped from the
Mediterranean. Villeneuve went on to Brest. On the 21st
December he was seen and chased by the blockading fleet of
Admiral Colpoys, but though forced to turn from Brest, he
reached L’Orient safely on the 23rd. Villeneuve’s was not the
only reinforcement received at this time by the French forces
in the Channel and the Bay. Richery, after doing considerable
damage in Newfoundland, had reached the island of Aix on
the 5th of November, and had gone on to Brest with part of
his squadron. A part, detached on the coast of America, had
preceded him. Richery was swept into the most determined,
and by far the most nearly successful, of the efforts made
during this war to invade the British Isles in force.
The very nature of the struggle they had provoked taught
the French to dwell on the hope of delivering the much
threatened blow at the heart which was to bring their enemy
to the ground. Schemes of invasion abounded, and may
still be read with interest (or amusement) in Captain Desbrière’s
history of Les Projets et Tentatives de Débarquement aux
Îles Britanniques between 1793 and 1805. Some were
only foolish. Some, without ceasing to be foolish, were
ferocious. The most notable of these were the plans for
carrying a chouannerie into the British Isles. A chouannerie
was a warfare of atrocious brigandage. It took its name from
the desperate Royalist partisans who, when no longer able to
oppose the Republican armies in the field in Brittany, betook
themselves to highway robbery, housebreaking, murder and
torture of political opponents, or even only of defenceless
people who possessed property. As they naturally preferred
to act by night and by surprise, they were known as the
Chouans—the brown owls. In the fury of their hatred the
French planned to let loose hundreds of insubordinate soldiers
and common criminals on the English coast as a measure
of revenge for the evils which, so they argued, the support
given by England to the Royalist partisans had brought upon
France. Soldiers who were in prison for acts of indiscipline
were formed into a corps under the name of the Légion des
Francs. Another corps, aptly surnamed the Légion Noire,
was formed of common criminals. The two were to be
landed on the English coast to burn, murder, and plunder.
The calculation made was that France stood to win in any
case. If the two legions did murder and pillage, loss would
be inflicted on England. If the English shot or hanged
every man of them, France would be rid of hundreds of violent
blackguards. The calculation was silly, in spite of its specious
air of cunning. The Chouans in Brittany knew the country
and the language, and had friends. The legions would have
been perfectly helpless in England—and so they proved in
February 1797. In that month a French naval expedition
of two frigates, a corvette, and a lugger, escaped unobserved
from Brest, and landed about 1500 of the Légion des Francs
and the Légion Noire at Fishguard, in Pembroke. Captain
Castagnier, who commanded the ships, had hardly sailed out
of sight before these intended Chouans with their leader, Tate,
a rascally American adventurer, surrendered to an inferior force
of Welsh militiamen under Lord Cawdor. They had no
intention of losing their lives in a frantic attempt to do mere
mischief. The English Government then called on the French
to exchange a number of its English prisoners for these cowardly
ruffians. When the French refused, they were brought to their
senses by a threat to land the legionaries on the coast of
France without exchange. The mere prospect created a panic,
and the British Government had its way. The end of the
Fishguard invasion was therefore that hundreds of useful
Englishmen were exchanged against men who were a danger
and a burden to France, while other hundreds of honest
Frenchmen who were capable of serving their country well
remained in prison for months.
Before the Fishguard Invasion ended in sour pleasantry,
a more sane and manly attack had failed, partly through
mismanagement, but to a far greater extent because of the
protection which the superhuman powers governing this universe
have not seldom afforded to England. When the war
in La Vendée had fairly come to its close by June 1796,
the general commanding the Republican army, Lazare Hoche,
urged that the large army of 117,000 men left free by the
submission of the Royalists should be used for an invasion of
the British Isles. His Government was ready to approve, but
for a time it distracted its general by double-minded schemes.
The belief that our empire in India was the cause, and not,
as in truth it was, the consequence, of our strength, was general
in France. The French Navy, conscious of its inability to
contend with the concentrated force of the Royal Navy in
the four seas of Britain, and longing for the warm seas and
abundant prize money of the East, was eager for an expedition
to India. So the Government at Paris played with dreams
of a great expedition to the East Indies which was to drop a
body of French troops in Ireland on its way, and the naval
officers at Brest obstructed all other plans. The good sense
of Hoche saw that division of aim must be fatal to success,
and he at last persuaded his superiors to consent to attempt
a vigorous invasion of Ireland. An invasion of England in
force would have inflicted the worse blow, but it was rightly
judged to be, if not impossible, yet so hazardous that it was
not entertained. What Castagnier was able to do with four
small vessels and a few hundred cut-throats in February 1797,
might conceivably have been done by ten line-of-battle ships
and several thousand good soldiers in 1796. But a Government
which was ready to risk a few small vessels and a flying
column of men whom it would willingly have seen at the
bottom of the Channel was not disposed to run an equal
hazard with valuable ships and fine soldiers. An invasion of
Ireland would cause great, perhaps paralysing embarrassment
to England. The country was on the verge of rebellion,
France was full of Irish exiles who promised the co-operation
of their countrymen. So an invasion of Ireland was undertaken.
All through the summer preparations were made. The
English Government was well served by its spies in France.
Some of them were among the Irish exiles. But it could
learn nothing definite as to the exact aim of the invasion
which was known to be in preparation. The vacillations of
the French Government served it in one way. No definite
information could be obtained where no definite plan was
adopted. Nothing could be done save stand on guard and
watch. The measures of defence taken were sufficient if they
had been more effectually applied. A force kept at about
fifteen sail of the line cruised off Brest. A western squadron
of five, under Curtis, watched beyond the Brest blockade.
The grand fleet, under Bridport, lay at Spithead to support
and reinforce. But Spithead was too difficult to leave against
head-winds and too far off to give an adequate support to the
Brest blockade, and the blockade itself was somewhat slackly
kept. Our measures were half measures. We had partially
dropped Howe’s plan of watch from afar, but had not yet
adopted St. Vincent’s close watch on the spot.
On the 15th December 1796 the French expedition drew
out from the inner harbour of Brest to the outer roadstead.
Some collisions took place among the vessels on their way,
but they were not more serious than the similar misfortunes
which were to befall Bridport’s ships a few days later. On the
16th the French fleet was ready to start. It consisted of
seventeen sail of the line, fourteen frigates, two corvettes, one
brig, and three luggers, with transports, and it carried
14,750 soldiers under the command of Hoche. The French
admirals—Morard de Galle, Bouvet, and Nielly—had hoisted
their flags in frigates, which they had the option to do; but
Richery had his flag in the Pégase, 74. Morard de Galle was
with Hoche in the Fraternité. The wind was from the east,
the weather frosty and clear. The orders were to steer
through the Raz du Sein, the southerly passage through
the rocks which on that side bound the roadstead of Brest.
This course was adopted in order to avoid the English
blockading force the better. But on the 16th our ships under
Admiral Colpoys, who had just taken up the command, were
some fifty miles away to the west, too far off to strike quickly,
with the east wind against them—too far off also to be
quickly warned by Sir Edward Pellew, who with his own
frigate, the Indefatigable, 44, and others, was close to the
French port. When through the Raz the French were to steer
for 120 miles W.¼S.W. and then head for Bantry.
A detailed account of their cruise belongs rather to the
history of the French than of the English Navy, which, for
reasons about to be given, as good as vanished for the next
few days. But the fate of the invasion cannot be left untold.
As the day grew on on the 16th, the wind drew round to the
S.E., and became unfavourable to a fleet passing the narrow
Raz du Sein. With an unpardonable want of foresight, Morard
de Galle had not provided for this highly probable contingency.
So when he suddenly decided in the afternoon to
take the direct course to the west through the wide Iroise, and
steered in that direction himself, he was followed only by the
Nestor, 74, and the Romaine and Cocarde frigates. The rest of
the ships either followed Bouvet through the Raz du Sein or
hesitated and made movements which are now uncertain. One,
the Séduisant, was wrecked on the Grand Stevenec. Pellew,
who watched the French closely, added to their confusion by
false fires and signals of no meaning. He sent the Phœbe
frigate to warn Colpoys, and when assured of the direction the
French were taking, went himself in search of his admiral.
The French, therefore, were divided from the beginning, and
so remained. On the 17th Bouvet had with him the vessels
which had followed him through the Raz du Sein, eight line-of-battle
ships and eight frigates. The wind in drawing round
to the S.E. had become milder, bringing with it a drizzle of
rain and fog. He steered for Bantry, and on the 18th crossed
the track of the Fraternité which was standing to the south
to look for him. Thus the French naval and military commanders-in-chief
went roaming out to the Atlantic, looking for
their command, which was steering away from them. On the
19th, Bouvet was joined by Nielly and Richery with six sail of
the line and two frigates. In variable and gusty winds they
pushed on for Bantry. The wind was from the west when
he sighted Mizen Head on the 21st, but it swung round to the
east, and drove him to leeward of Bantry Bay, and to the point
of Dursey Island. Only eight of the line-of-battle ships and
six frigates succeeded in tacking into the bay with Bouvet,
where they anchored between Bear Island and the southern
side, instead of going into Beerhaven, between the island and
the northern bank, where they would have been safe. The
others remained beating to and fro outside. On the 24th
the weather was fine, and there were 6000 soldiers in
the ships with Bouvet. A landing could easily have been
effected, and as there were few troops in the south of Ireland,
the French might well have occupied Cork, where lay an
immense mass of military and naval stores. But the
command in the absence of Hoche was in the hands of
Grouchy, whose name is associated with a still greater French
disaster eighteen years later. He hesitated. No landing was
made, and on the 25th the wind settled in the east, and blew
with fury down the bay. Bouvet was forced to sea in his frigate,
lost heart, and made for Brest, which he reached on the 1st
January 1797. Bedout, of the Indomptable, 80, to whom the
command now fell, held on till the 29th, when he too cut his
cables and fled seaward before the easterly wind. All hope
was not given up even yet, and some of the French vessels
went to the mouth of the Shannon, which had been named
as the alternative landing-place. They found nothing to do,
and so turned home to France. Meanwhile the two commanders-in-chief
had been groping for their commands. The
Fraternité had been lost in fog and tossed in storm. She
had sighted the lights of Bouvet, had mistaken them for
those of an enemy; had turned away; had been chased,
compelled to throw guns overboard to lighten herself for
flight, and to alter her course again and again; had returned
off Bantry Bay on the 29th, only to find the Révolution, 74,
endeavouring to save the crew of the sinking Scévola frigate,
and had finally steered for France. The wrecks of the French
armament reached home between the 11th and 14th January.
Afflavit Deus et dissipati sunt.
One of the line-of-battle ships carried into Bantry Bay by
Bouvet was destined not to escape. The Droits de l’homme, 74,
commanded by Captain Baron La Crosse, had been among the
vessels which went to the mouth of the Shannon. While
cruising there, she captured the Cumberland letter of marque—that
is to say, trading-ship, which carried a commission
authorising her to act as a privateer. The Cumberland had
on board thirty soldiers on their way home from the West
Indies. La Crosse took the English passengers and crew
into his own ship, and sent the Cumberland to France with
a prize crew. Then he headed for home, after looking once
more into Bantry. He lost sight of the Irish coast on the
9th, and on the 13th, in strong westerly winds and thick hazy
weather, calculated that he was seventy-five miles to the west
of the Penmarchs. Early in the afternoon two vessels were
seen to windward in the haze, and Captain La Crosse steered
to the S.E. to avoid them. At about 3.30 two other vessels were
seen to leeward cutting off his road to France. They were
the Indefatigable, 44, Captain Sir Edward Pellew, and the
Amazon, 36, Captain Reynolds. Captain La Crosse had to
fight his way home between them. In conversation with an
English army officer, taken prisoner in the Cumberland,
Lieutenant Pipon, he had declared that he would sink rather
than surrender. His conduct was to show that these were
not words of idle boasting. The Droits de l’homme was
indeed a 74 and her opponents were frigates, but
though one 74 was adjudged more than a match for
two frigates, she was at a disadvantage. She was so built
that her lower deck ports were fourteen French inches—nearly
sixteen English—nearer the water than in other vessels
of her class. While under a press of sail to throw off the
pursuit of the ships seen to windward, she lost her fore and
maintop. Having no sufficient spread of sail aloft to steady
her she rolled heavily, and the water poured on to her main-deck.
It ran down the cables on the English prisoners who
had been sent to the cable tier to escape the shot of their
friends. So Captain La Crosse was not able to make use of
the 36-pounders on his main deck but had to rely on
the 18-pounders and smaller guns of his upper decks,
firing from a high and most unstable platform. The Droits
de l’homme had in fact the use of a lighter broadside than the
Indefatigable, a very heavy frigate, armed with 24-pounders
on her main deck. Her sole advantage was that she carried
700 soldiers in addition to her crew, and could replace the
250 casualties she suffered in the action.
It began at 5.30. The Droits de l’homme was steering
to the west for the coast of France. The Indefatigable
overtook her, and tried to rake her. The French captain
baffled the attempt, and then Pellew shot ahead, risking
and receiving a raking broadside, which did his frigate little
harm, and placing himself on the Frenchman’s bow. At a
quarter to seven the Amazon came up and took her station
on the other bow. At 7.30 the two English frigates shot
ahead, the Indefatigable to repair damage to her rigging,
the Amazon, because the press of sail she carried to gain
her station had given her so much way that she could not
stop. Then the action was resumed, to be again suspended
to repair damage at 10.30 and once more resumed. It
lasted through the night. The English crews fought with
fine manhood and skill, often up to their waists in water
on the main decks. Guns broke from their fastenings and
had to be made secure again—as often as four times. They
were often filled with water after being loaded, and the
charges had to be withdrawn before they could be reloaded
and safely fired. Repairs had to be done in the rigging,
and the Amazon used up every inch of spare rope. The
Frenchman fought with a heroism which surmounted the
loss of all hope of victory, or even of escape, manœuvring
to board so long as his ship could answer her helm, and
always baffled by the English frigates, which were under
perfect control. At 4.30 the moon broke through the
clouds for a moment, and Lieutenant George Bell, on the
forecastle of the Indefatigable, saw the land. None of
the three ships could know where they were. It was only
certain that they were on a lee-shore, the wind blowing
strong and the sea running high. The Indefatigable was
turned to the north, and was followed by the Amazon.
Just before daybreak breakers were seen on the lee-bow.
The Indefatigable was brought round to the south, but
not the Amazon which was unmanageable, and was driven
on shore. As the Indefatigable stood southward in the
first light of day, her crew saw they were in Audierne Bay,
and Droits de l’homme lay on her side in front of Ploxevet
with the sea breaking over her. Her mizen-mast, the lower
foremast, and bowsprit had gone. The cable of the only
anchor she had left was cut by English shot, and after a
manful effort to reeve a new one had been made, and the
anchor had failed to hold, she drove ashore. The position
of the Indefatigable was terrible, for her one chance of
escape was to round the Penmarchs at the south point of
Audierne Bay, and she was damaged. But her crew and
officers showed “their full value,” as their captain gratefully
acknowledged. She cleared the rocks and gained the open
sea.
The Droits de l’homme lay without possibility of help,
for two days, in the breakers, and two more passed before
the last survivors were taken from the wreck. The story
may be read in the narrative of Lieutenant Pipon. The
English prisoners were called up from the cable tier with
the cry Pauvres anglais! Pauvres anglais! Montes Bien vite.
Nous sommes tous perdus. When the boats were lowered
some women and children, who were among the English
prisoners, were given the first chance of escape. But the
boats were shattered alongside, and they all perished. The
Droits de l’homme lay breaking up, and the crew perished
slowly, one brave man, the sailmaker, Lamende, nearly lost
his life in an attempt to swim ashore with a line, and an
army officer who followed him was drowned. The English
worked manfully in the common cause, one of them, a
merchant skipper, going over the side fourteen times to save
the people in the boats. They could get neither food nor
fresh water. The pangs of hunger can be outlived but not
those of thirst. Many drank urine and salt water and went
mad. Of the 380 who remained on the wreck on the fourth
night half were dead in the morning. The French Government
released the English prisoners freely, and gave several
of them rewards in money. The shipwrecked crew of the
Amazon were well treated. La Crosse survived and was
promoted. The loss of the Droits de l’homme was an incident
in a campaign, but skill and manhood, heroism, humanity,
and devotion to duty are noble and immortal things. We
cannot look at them too carefully or too long.
In all these events fortune had a great share, but excepting
the activity of a few frigates, the Royal Navy had little part.
When Admiral Colpoys heard from the captain of the Phœbe
that the French were at sea, his fleet was in want of stores,
and he knew not where the enemy was gone. So he bore up
for Spithead, and, dropping part of his ships at the western
ports on the way, reached it on the 31st December with six
sail. Bridport, urged to get quickly to sea when the Government
learnt that the French were out, had started on the 25th,
four days after Bouvet reached Bantry. But he met difficulties.
The Prince ran into the Sans-Pareil, and the Formidable
into the Ville de Paris. The Atlas grounded. Then he
was stopped in a gale, and he did not sail with his fourteen
ships of the line till the 3rd January 1797. He cruised about,
from Ushant to Cape Clear, chased the much chased Fraternité
on the 9th, and intercepted nothing. He was fifty-seven
miles west of Ushant when the last of the returning French
ships entered Brest. Before he returned to Spithead on the
3rd February, he detached Rear-Admiral Sir W. Parker to
join Jervis with the Prince George, Namur, Irresistible,
Orion, Colossus, and Thalia frigate. They were to be
usefully employed, for it was this reinforcement which enabled
Jervis to fight the battle of Cape St. Vincent.
The five line-of-battle ships and the frigate were sent to
join Jervis at his rendezvous at Cape St. Vincent in fulfilment
of a promise that the squadron carried off by Mann
should be replaced, and his force brought up again to twenty
sail. They served to bring him up to the fifteen he had
had a few weeks before they joined him on the 6th February.
The Courageux, 80, had been lost, and the Gibraltar, 80,
driven on the Pearl Rock during the furious gale of the 10th
December, in which Villeneuve escaped from the Mediterranean.
Shortly after Jervis left Gibraltar for Lisbon on the 16th
December, the Zealous, 74, struck on a rock in Tangier Bay,
and was badly damaged. As he entered Lisbon on the 21st,
the Bombay Castle, 74, ran ashore and was lost. When he
left it on the 18th January to escort a Portuguese convoy out
of danger and to observe the Spaniards, the St. George,
98, after running into and dismasting a Portuguese frigate,
grounded heavily on the great Cachop. His command had
therefore been brought down to ten by the 6th February.
To complete the tale it may be added that the fifteen were
nearly reduced to fourteen or even thirteen while it was still
dark on the morning of the 12th, when the Culloden, 74,
ran into the Colossus, 74, because the second, after holding
her wind too long while the fleet was tacking in succession,
suddenly bore up across the bows of the first, and tore her
fore-rigging badly.[3] The energy of Captain Troubridge of
the Culloden brought his ship quickly into trim, and she
took a leading part in the coming battle.
Lángara had been superseded by Don José de Córdoba
at Carthagena, and the Spanish fleet under its new admiral
came on in pursuit of a wild scheme to sail to Brest, join the
French ships there, now under the command of Villeneuve,
then join a Dutch force in the Texel and renew the attempted
invasion of England. The scheme was wild on many grounds,
but particularly because of the utter want of quality in
the Spanish fleet. It has already been said, when speaking
of the American War, that the Spanish Government had
endeavoured to form a great fleet by building more ships
than it could afford, and had never had money to spend on
training officers and men. Every evil it suffered from in
1779 had been intensified under the imbecile government of
King Charles IV. A mass of fine ships was heaped up, but
they were manned with crews which hardly included a tenth
of seamen, and commanded by officers who had had little
practice. Nothing had been done to improve it since the
wars began in 1793. On the contrary, neglect, failure to pay
or even feed the men, made the service odious, and it grew
even worse. The best officer in the Spanish navy, Jose
Mazaredo, had refused to take the command unless the
Government bound itself to commission no more ships than
it could man. He had been arrested, to punish him for
questioning the wisdom of his superiors. Every officer in the
Spanish fleet knew its unfitness to meet the English.
Every English officer knew its weaknesses too, and
nobody better than Jervis. He was aware that the narrow
failure of the invasion of Ireland had shaken the nerve of the
country. The discontent in the fleet, which was just about
to break into mutiny, was not unknown to him. A victory
was very necessary to England. A weak man would have
looked to numbers alone, and would have been cautious.
Jervis looked to the quality of the enemy, and the greatness
of the crisis. He saw how much better it would be that
every one of his fifteen ships should go to the bottom if only
she could take a Spaniard with her, than that Córdoba should
reach Brest. Therefore as Hood sailed from Antigua resolved
to fight Grasse, be his number what they might, so Jervis
waited at Cape St. Vincent, resolute to give battle whatever
numbers the Spaniards might bring against him.
On the morning of the 13th February he was joined by
the Minerva, 36, which had just sighted the Spaniards, and
had been chased by them. Nelson had been sent up the
Mediterranean in her to bring away Sir Gilbert Elliot from
Porto Ferrajo, whither he had retired after the evacuation of
Corsica. He now hoisted his commodore’s pennant in the
Captain, 74. At four in the afternoon the signal was made
to clear for action, and during the night the fleet remained
under reduced canvas, keeping its post of watch. The
signal guns of the Spaniards were heard at half-past one on
the morning of the 14th, and at half-past two, a Scotchman,
Captain Campbell, in the Portuguese service, who commanded
the Carlotta frigate, spoke the flagship, and informed Jervis
that the Spaniards were fifteen miles to windward—that is, to
the west of him. Daylight came on the 14th with fresh
breezes from the west and a thick haze. At six, reefs were
shaken out and the search for the enemy began. By seven,
strange sails were seen in the haze to the S.S.W. stretching
across our route to the S.E. The reconnoitring
frigates and sloops reported their numbers, which were discovered
to be greater as the air cleared. At 8.20 the
signal was made to prepare for battle, and at 9.20 the
Culloden, Blenheim, and Prince George were ordered
to chase. When at 9.47 the Bonne Citoyenne sloop
reported seeing more vessels to the S.W., the Irresistible
and Colossus were ordered to join in the chase. The Orion
joined without orders and was not recalled. About ten the
air cleared, and the two fleets were fully revealed to one
another.
The Spaniards were aware of the approach of Jervis, and
two of their look-out frigates had actually seen part of his
ships, but they underestimated his strength. Their national
carelessness, intensified perhaps by the desperation of men who
knew they were devoted to a hopeless task, was never more
conspicuous. Their ships were wandering in two confused
shoals, one of nineteen sail was to windward and westward of
the English, another of six was to leeward and eastward.
The two were trying to join, but there was a wide interval
between them. A twenty-sixth Spaniard was seen outside
the windward division, and a twenty-seventh was coming up
from leeward. Jervis at once headed from the open space
between the two divisions. At 10.57 the order was given to
form in a line of battle ahead and astern of the flagship as
most convenient.
As the ships fell in to their places the line was formed
thus:—
Culloden
74
T. Troubridge.
Blenheim
90
T. L. Frederich.
Prince George
98
{ {
Rear-Admiral W. Parker. T. Irwin.
Orion
74
Sir J. Saumarez.
Irresistible
74
G. Martin.
Colossus
74
G. Murray.
Victory
100
{ { {
Admiral Sir J. Jervis. Captain-of-Fleet R. Calder. Flag-Captain G. Grey
Barfleur
98
{ {
Vice-Admiral W. Waldegrave. J. R. Dacres.
Goliath
74
Sir C. H. Knowles.
Egmont
74
J. Sutton.
Britannia
100
{ {
Vice-Admiral Thompson. T. Foley.
Namur
90
J. Whitshed.
Captain
94
{ {
Commodore Nelson. 〃 Miller.
Diadem
64
G. H. Towry.
Excellent
74
C. Collingwood.
The manifest confusion of the enemy, added to their
knowledge of his want of discipline, gave the British seamen
a boundless confidence. His numbers were naught, and
Jervis’s men could dismiss that vain show in the spirit of
Alaric’s scoffing answer to the threats of the Romans, “The
thicker the hay the better the mowing.” There were fine
ships in the Spanish fleet, there was personal courage which
might have been trained to efficiency, there were some officers
who could have handled good instruments if they had had
them. There was nothing else. Therefore as the naval
historian, James, puts it with more than his usual liveliness,
our seamen “rattled through the business, more as if it were
a game of harmless sport, than one in which the hazard
thrown was for life or death.”
It was half-past eleven when the Culloden opened fire,
and by midday the head of the line had cut into the gap
between the disorderly shoals of Spaniards. If it had stood
on it would have passed, and the enemy would have been
free to unite behind it. At 12.8 Jervis signalled the order to
tack, and the Culloden came round to fall on the rear of the
Spaniards who were huddled to windward heading to the
north to pass our line as it went south. The Blenheim and
Prince George tacked in succession to follow the Culloden.
Tacking in succession was not only a slow movement, but if
it had been carried out the fleet must have fallen behind the
weather division of the Spaniards. To keep them permanently
divided our line should have turned together, or
should have begun to turn in succession from the rear. At
about 1 o’clock the Spaniards had passed down our line to the
rear. Their lee division made a feeble effort at 12.30 to
break through the line ahead of the Victory, and join the
ships to windward. Their road was barred, and they were
headed off in confusion by her heavy fire. One only passed
down the line to leeward—it was supposed she was the
Oriente, 74—exchanged broadsides with the closing ship, the
Excellent, and joined the main body. As she passed the
rear she was fired into by our frigates which were in their
station to rear and to leeward of the line, and returned their
fire without doing them any harm.
So far there was nothing to show that the battle would
differ very materially from many previous encounters of fleets
passing in opposite directions. It would not have differed if
literal obedience had been paid to the signal made by Jervis
at 12.51—“To take suitable stations, and engage as arrive
up in succession,” which implied that the ships were to continue
following one another. But just before, or just at, or
just after this moment,[4] Nelson made a movement which
altered the whole character of the battle. He brought the
Captain round on her keel, passed astern of the Diadem, the
vessel next behind him, and ahead of the Excellent. Then
he threw himself ahead of the Spaniards, who were trying to
pass the rear of the line, and turned them off. He turned his
ship from being the third from the rear into being the first of
the van, for as he came round he fell on the enemy ahead of
the Culloden. The Captain was hotly pressed, but was
relieved first by the Culloden then by the Blenheim, which
passed between her and the enemy, and pushed on. Other
vessels turned and came up to press on the enemy. The rear
ships of the line did not follow the example of the Captain
till Jervis, who had tacked the Victory, and was standing to
the north, ordered them to do so. All then fell on the retreating
Spaniards, of whom four were taken. Meanwhile the
enemy to leeward had worked to windward, formed a line, and
came up to support the main body, falling into position to
rear of it. Jervis called his ships together to cover his prizes,
and the battle ceased at five o’clock. The circumstances of
the capture of two of these prizes, the San Josef and San
Nicolas, which were boarded and captured by Nelson, are
famous, but the details belong to his biography.
St. Vincent was a famous victory, and, moreover, it was
a most timely one. Therefore the joy it caused in England
was thoroughly justified, and Jervis nobly earned his earldom.
It may seem ungracious to make reservations, and yet some
independence of judgment may be exercised even on Jervis.
When we have fully recognised the political courage he showed
in giving battle when he would not have been blamed for
caution, and for the strength of mind which enabled him
to scorn vain shows, we are free to ask whether the actual
fighting of the battle on his part, and the use made of it,
justify us in thinking him “a great captain.” I venture to
suggest that they do not. But for the independence of Nelson
the battle might well have ended in a passage on opposite
tacks and an artillery duel. On the day following the battle
he was in sight of twenty-three Spaniards, and he was content
to cover his prizes. In his fleet only the Captain had been
seriously injured, and the loss acknowledged was only 300
men. He is reported to have said that if the enemy came
on he would have burnt his prizes—but why not burn them
and attack? He was between the Spaniards and Cadiz, and
could have forced on a battle. Their quality being what it
was he could surely have destroyed them utterly. Much has
been said of Rodney’s failure to follow up his victory on the
12th April 1782. We have heard a great deal of Howe’s
weakness on the 1st of June. Everyone has laughed at
Hotham, who was too much at ease in Zion, and has applauded
Nelson’s impatience with his easy-going ways. Yet
Jervis cuddled his prizes as tenderly as ever did Rodney,
Howe, or Hotham. Four was a small part of twenty-seven.
Still Nelson said nothing, and Jervis stands as a monument
of energy. But Nelson was too busy glorying in his triumph,
and claiming to have done more than the fine thing he
actually had done, even at the expense of brother officers—(witness
his acrid tone to Parker, who called his attention to
the fact that the Captain had been early and well supported
by the Prince George)—and Jervis was a bully. The
Spaniards were allowed to reach Cadiz, and Jervis went to
Lagos, where he began a new series of operations.
The battle of St. Vincent had ruined the left wing of the
great combined Spanish-French-Dutch army of invasion.
The French, though as resolute as ever to invade, were not
ready so soon after the failure of Morard de Galle to make
another attempt. For the rest of the year, therefore, the first
part fell to the Dutch fleet. Since Holland had been overrun
by the French armies at the close of 1794, and had established
the Batavian Republic in February 1795, the Dutch had had
many reasons to regret the change. Their French friends
fleeced them at home, and England occupied their colonies
and swept their trade off the sea.[5] Although the French had
dragged Holland into war with England, the hostility of the
Dutch was strong and spontaneous. They fretted under the
dictation of the French, but they had an active hatred of
England, which, after joining with Prussia to impose the rule
of the Stadtholder on them by force in 1786, had dragged him
into war with France, had failed to give him effective military
support, and when the country was overrun by France had at
once—on the 19th January—begun to embargo Dutch ships
and cargoes lest they should fall into French hands. We
acted with reluctance and under the pressure of necessity, but
the Dutch, who lost the goods, attributed our action to greed
and malignity.
Therefore they entered readily enough into schemes for
invading England, but still with caution. They refused to
ship French troops in the fleet they prepared in the Texel,
being afraid of their allies. The French co-operation was
dropped for this, and for other reasons. The French Government
of the day was very jealous of its most famous generals,
and at that moment of Hoche in particular. It would gladly
have seen him sail in search of glory on any venture, the more
desperate the better. The general, who perfectly understood
the real meaning of all this tender care for his glory—ended
by declaring that he would not play Don Quixote on the sea
for the benefit of men who would gladly see him at the
bottom of it. The combined Dutch and French army of
invasion dwindled into a purely Dutch army, and finally
disappeared altogether. Daendaels, the general who was to
have commanded it, had an hereditary Dutch understanding
of maritime things, and he saw that the preliminary to an
invasion of England was the defeat of the English fleet in the
North Sea. But it was not till October 1797 that the
Batavian Republic ordered its naval forces to act.
The command of the English fleet in the North Sea was
given to Adam Duncan, then vice-admiral, who was soon
afterwards promoted to admiral. Duncan had been a follower
of Keppel’s, was commonly known as Keppel’s Duncan, and
was by common consent an excellent officer. He had been
long unemployed, and it may be the case that he owed his
appointment to the command in the North Sea, not only to
his reputation as an officer and seaman, but to the fact that
he was closely connected by marriage with Dundas, afterwards
Lord Melville, who held the vitally important post of general
manager of corruption, and distributor of patronage in Pitt’s
ministry. When he took up his command he had but four
ships of the line with him. It is true that he had the
co-operation of a Russian squadron, but it was in a most
inefficient state, and proved of small value. In fact it
embarrassed our squadron, for it was in incessant need of
stores and repairs, while the necessity to flatter the touchy
vanity of our ally, the Russian Government, compelled us to
treat it with much respect. Duncan had to struggle with even
another and a worse defect, which is very exactly indicated in
a letter written to him in August 1796, by Sir C. Middleton,
afterwards Lord Barham, one of the Commissioners for the
navy, who wrote: “My own wish is to have your force very
strong, but I plainly perceive, from the many irons we have
in the fire, that I shall be overruled. The same cause
obliges us to employ your frigates on many extra services,
and which I have charged the secretary to acquaint you with
as often as it happens; but necessary as this information is
for your guidance, I am afraid it is often forgot.”
The best ships were taken for the Brest blockade, the
Channel, the Mediterranean. Duncan’s own flagship, the
Venerable, 74, leaked continually, and was only kept in
service by endless care. It is therefore not to be wondered
at that in February 1796 two Dutch squadrons, commanded
by Braak and Lucas, succeeded in escaping from the North
Sea to the West Indies and the Cape. During the middle of
1797 Duncan’s troubles were enormously increased by the
mutiny at the Nore, which will be dealt with in the next chapter.
On the 3rd October Duncan, who had been cruising for
eighteen weeks, was compelled to return to Yarmouth for
stores with the bulk of his fleet, leaving Captain Henry
Trollope with the Russell, 74, Adamant, 50, and several
frigates and smaller vessels to watch the Texel. On the
7th the Dutch came out under the command of Jan Willem
de Winter, who had been trained as a naval officer, had
gone into exile in 1786, had served in the French Republican
armies, and was a general in the army as well as vice-admiral
in the fleet. His fleet consisted of the
Vryheid
94
{ {
Vice-Admiral de Winter. Capt. van Rossern.
Jupiter
94
{ {
Vice-Admiral Reuntjes. Rear-Admiral Menses.
Brutus
74
{ {
Rear-Admiral Bloys. Capt. van Treslong.
States General
74
Rear-Admiral Storij.
Cerberus
64
Capt. Jacobson.
Devries
64
〃 Zegers.
Gelykeid
64
〃 Ruysen.
Haarlem
64
〃 Wiggerts.
Hercules
64
〃 Van Rysvort.
Leyden
64
〃 Musquetier.
Wassenaer
64
〃 Holland.
Alkmaar
50
〃 Kraft.
Batavier
50
〃 Souters.
Beschermer
50
〃 Hinext.
Delft
50
〃 Verdoorn.
with twelve frigates and other small vessels.
The Dutch were sighted at once by our look-out vessels,
and news was sent to Duncan, who left Yarmouth in pursuit.
As De Winter was known to be heading to the south, and
the wind was northerly, ranging from N.E. to N.W. and
W. by N., Duncan stood over the North Sea from Yarmouth
to the Texel, to put himself between De Winter and his port,
and to gain the weather-gage, which gave him the means of
forcing on a battle. The Dutch, well observed by our look-out
vessels to whose crews they appeared to be somewhat
awkwardly handled, stood over to Lowestoft, and then
returned to their own coast. They were seen at about half-past
eight on the morning of the 11th October by our fleet,
which was coming down from the north with the wind at
W. by N.
The ships with Duncan were—
Venerable
74
{ {
Admiral Duncan. Capt. W. G. Fairfax.
Monarch
74
{ {
Vice-Admiral R. Onslow. Capt. E. O’Brien.
Russel
74
Capt. H. Trollope.
Montagu
74
〃 J. Knight.
Bedford
74
Sir T. Byard.
Powerful
74
Capt. W. O’Brien Drury.
Triumph
74
〃 W. Essington.
Belliqueux
64
〃 J. Inglis.
Agincourt
64
〃 J. Williamson.
Lancaster
64
〃 J. Wells.
Ardent
64
〃 Burgess.
Veteran
64
〃 G. Gregory.
Director
64
〃 W. Bligh.
Monmouth
64
〃 J. Walker.
Isis
64
〃 W. Mitchell.
Adamant
64
〃 W. Hotham.
with eight frigates and small vessels.
Elaborate comparisons have been made to show that one
fleet was stronger than the other, but they are idle in view of
the simple fact that some of the English did not come into
action, and some of the Dutch got out of it sooner than was
becoming. Physical obstructions and fortune played a part—and
every man who wears a blue coat is not a hero.
As Duncan came down in pursuit his ships were scattered,
the best sailors in front, the worst behind. It would have
been possible to unite them all, only by causing the more
advanced ships to lie to till the laggards came up. At
eleven the advanced ships did shorten sail to unite the fleet.
But the Dutch, who were in a line heading from S.W.
to N.E., with their heads towards the Texel, were gradually
drawing towards their own coast. Camperdown, in North
Holland, was about nine miles from them. Delay on
Duncan’s part would have given them a chance to slip off to
the Texel. Therefore his plan for fighting the battle was
not, and could not, be carried out. His intention was to
form his fleet on the starboard line of bearing, which, with
the wind at W. by N., would be a line from S.W. to
N.E. parallel to the Dutch. Then he meant to act as Howe
had meant to do on the 1st June, break through the enemy
from windward to leeward, all along from van to rear. As
the day wore on towards the early dark of October and the
Dutch drew nearer the land, the impatience of Duncan,
which was patent to his officers, grew beyond control.
He renounced all attempt to form a line, ordered Onslow,
who was to the south and leeward of him, to break through
the enemy’s rear, and the whole fleet to break through.
Then first Onslow, and next the admiral went down on the
enemy, setting an example to the ships about them. Duncan,
an old friend and correspondent of Clerk, was penetrated
with his confidence that the proper policy for an English fleet
was to break into the enemy’s formation and produce a
mêlée. Moreover, we have his actions to prove how well he
understood that whatever the fate of the English ships was
to be, the country would be served if the Dutch were left
in no condition to invade for the next six months.
The battle began at 12.40, and at 3 it ended. The two
hours and a half while it lasted were the hottest hours of
battle in the whole war. The Dutch were awkward in fleet
manœuvres from want of practice, but they were more
phlegmatic, more solid, better gunners, and better ropemen
than the French. They reserved their fire till our ships were
close, and their two first broadsides, as English officers
experienced them confessed, “were terrible.” Onslow, who
cut through the line astern of the Dutch between the Jupiter
and the Haarlem, and Duncan, who cut the line behind the
States General, were both heavily pounded, and so were the
vessels which followed them. If there was final concentration
of English ships on the Dutch centre and rear, there had been
a preliminary concentration of Dutch ships on the English
leaders. Three vessels lost more than a hundred men each.
The Ardent, 64, which belonged to Duncan’s division and
was closely engaged with the Vryheid, lost no less than 148
killed and wounded—more than a third of her crew. Her
captain, Burgess, and her master, Don, were both slain.
The total loss was officially stated to be 825, but the committee
appointed to distribute a public subscription for the
wounded and the families of the dead put it at 1040. The
eleven Dutch ships taken were so shattered as to be of no
further use. Admiral De Winter was taken prisoner. The
ships in the Dutch van escaped too soon, after doing too
little to help the others. On our side all did not come equally
well into action. Captain John Williamson, of the Agincourt,
had hung about the outskirts of the fight in a very
feeble way. In 1779 he had been a lieutenant with Captain
Cook, and had witnessed the murder of his commander from
a launch, not only without attempting to save him, but without
attempting to rescue his body. He was brought to a court
martial and, though acquitted of cowardice, was sentenced to
be put at the bottom of the list of post-captains for misconduct.
Nelson once complained that actions fought near home
were more thought of than those fought far off. Camperdown
is an exception to the rule—if rule there be. It was early
half forgotten, and is much neglected among our battles.
Yet it was a great deliverance from fear of invasion at the
time, and the quality of the enemy we conquered must place
it far above St. Vincent as a battle. At Trafalgar a far
better appointed fleet than Duncan’s fought a much less
formidable enemy, on the same method as he fought the
Dutch. Much pedantry has been expended in inquiring
whether both admirals did or did not alter their first plans—as
if it could ever be a reproach to a leader of men that he
adapted his actions to the circumstances. That Duncan did
not waste time in forming the starboard line of bearing, and
thereby give the Dutch an opportunity to slip away, is
manifestly true—and to a plain man it appears that he did
alter his plan. Nelson at Trafalgar may have done what he
had meant to do all along, but he had Duncan’s battle to
show the advantage of doing it. Yet Duncan is commonly
spoken of to-day as a brave old fellow who blundered on a
victory, and nobody has noted how little originality was required
in 1805 to do what had been already done in 1797. I know
of no reason why Duncan is not to be credited with sense
enough to foresee, and intend, the consequences of his acts.
CHAPTER XII THE MUTINIES
Authorities.—In addition to the general histories and biographies of officers
named already, two pamphlets ought to be consulted for the mutinies. A
Narrative of Occurrences which took place during the Mutiny at the Nore in May
and June 1797, by Rear-Admiral Charles Cunningham, 1829; and The Natural
Defence of an Insular Empire, by Admiral Phillip Paton, 1810.
The year of St. Vincent and Camperdown was also the
year of the great mutinies which mark a turning-point
in the history of the navy. They were the culmination
of long-standing grievances caused by old evils.
If we could reconstruct a crew (supposing the thing to
have been done fairly and without beautifying), the spectacle
would surprise, and somewhat disenchant, the spectator. To
do it fairly we must take not a crack frigate commanded by a
popular officer with a good reputation for luck in prize-taking,
but one of the ordinary vessels, liners or less, which did the
bulk of the heavy work of the old wars. If the date chosen
had been well on in any of our naval wars, and certainly if
it had been taken in the midst of the last and greatest, the
figures of wax or wood—which we suppose to be properly
ticketed—would tell a curious tale. It would be startling to
see how many foreigners there were, how many landsmen, how
many boys, how many quota-men, and state-the-case-men.
The quota-men were those whom each county of the United
Kingdom was called upon at one period in the old war
to supply for the fleet. Of course they all came from the
Cave of Adullam, and were, in fact, the scamps of every
neighbourhood, tempted by high bounties. Their character
is sufficiently well indicated by the fact that Parker, who
headed the mutiny at the Nore, was a quota-man from Perth.
The state-the-case-man is more complicated. As the press-gang
swept all fish into its net, a great many were seized who
were, or believed themselves to be, exempted. They were
for ever appealing to the Admiralty for release, and the
Department kept writing to the captains about them. For
convenience, these letters were marked outside “State the case.”
Hence the expression a “state-the-case-man,” as applied
to the poor forced complaining creatures, of whom every
captain would have been delighted to get rid, if only he could
have kept his complement up without them. Of such material
our crews were largely formed in the most triumphant
times; for the navy was not popular with the real sailors,
and least of all with the best. Although the prime men
who were the real nerve of a crew were supposed to form
a third only of the complement, they contributed more to
the list of deserters than the ordinary seamen, landsmen, boys,
and marines put together. Every ship carried a proportion of
landsmen, who were not expected to do real sailor’s work.
This perversity of the seamen was a sore grievance to officers.
Admiral Cunningham, who was captain of the frigate Clyde
during the mutiny at the Nore, and wrote an account of it, was
very severe on them. He thought that they were as happy
as mortal sailor could expect to be. But they were of another
way of thinking.
This wrongheadedness of theirs, too, was an old story—as
old as the seventeenth century—and, in spite of Admiral
Cunningham, was thoroughly intelligible. It was a question
of pay, both in amount and manner. As far back as the
reign of William III., Captain Saint-Lo put the whole thing
into a nutshell. The wages of A.B.’s were then 23s.
a month for a month of twenty-eight days, which is 25s. a
month on the year. This rate of pay remained unchanged,
in spite of the fall in the value of money, till the mutiny at
Spithead scared Parliament into greater, but still very
measured, liberality. Now in Captain Saint-Lo’s time the
average wages of a good man in the merchant service during
war were 50s. and 60s. a month. In the eighteenth century
they were known to go as high as £4. The men who
manned the coal-ships in the North Sea earned as much as
£6, £7, or £8 the run. Here was a contrast which the A.B.
naturally perpended. But what had equal, or even greater,
weight with him was the reflection that, whereas a man in
the merchant service was sure of his money at the end of the
voyage, the man-of-war’s man could never know when he
would be paid. Admiral Cunningham quoted as one of the
blessings of the sailors that the Admiralty had done all human
wisdom could do to see that each man got exactly his right
amount; but, unluckily, it was precisely the fatherly care of
“My Lords” which constituted the grievance. The treatment
given to the seamen had indeed been improved in the course
of the eighteenth century. In 1758, George Grenville, who
was then Treasurer of the Navy, persuaded Parliament to
pass “an Act for the Encouragement of Seamen employed in
the Royal Navy; and for establishing a regular method for
the punctual, frequent, and certain payment of their wages;
and for enabling them more easily and readily to remit the
same for the support of their wives and families; and for
preventing frauds and abuses attending such payments.” But
these fine promises of the title of the Act were spoilt by
many limitations. A man who volunteered was to receive
an advance of two months, and could assign part of his pay
for the support of his family. All men who had served for
a year and upwards were entitled to be paid the wages due
to them (less a deduction of six months, which was kept back
as a guarantee against desertion) whenever the ship they were
in came into a home port where there was a Commissioner of
the Navy. But pressed men got no advance, and none of the
men were paid when serving abroad, or at a home port other
than a naval dockyard. The deduction of six months was
calculated in a way which the sailors complained of. Their
wages were paid by months of four weeks, but the deductions
were made in calendar months.
In practice the men got their wages not in hard coin on
board, but in pay-tickets, which had to be presented at an office,
and were only cashed when all the red tape had been duly
complied with. As a ship’s commission in war-time might
last four years, we can easily imagine what this might mean
for a man who had been pressed out of a home-coming
merchant-ship at the beginning of hostilities, and also what
it meant for his wretched wife and family. But even this
was not all. It frequently happened, when there was great
need to keep fleets at sea, that when a ship was “paid off”
and her crew had received their “tickets,” they were bodily
turned over to a fresh ship, with their paper money in their
hands, and sent off on another four years’ cruise. Admiral
Ekins, who wrote after the great war, when something had
been done for the men, says that he heard of a case of one
who had served fourteen years without touching a penny of
actual pay. This he gives as mere report; but he adds
that, to his own knowledge, men often served nine years
without the receipt of wages. After that, one understands
what Nelson meant when he said that his heart was with
the men who mutinied at Spithead. After all, their main
demands were that their pay should be raised above the
figure fixed in Charles II.’s time, when money was worth
twice what it was in 1797, and that they should be paid
whenever a ship returned to England—which assuredly were
moderate requests. The practical results of the old system
were horrible. For one thing, as the men had to buy their
clothes, they were actually reduced to nakedness and rags
for want of money. When a crew were turned over in the
style described above, the Jews (by race or occupation) were
allowed on board. To them the sailors sold their tickets at
the price they were likely to get in a forced market. On
these occasions a certain latitude was allowed by the humanity
of officers. Liquor was winked at, and the “wives” of the
sailors were allowed on board. The scenes which followed
on the mess decks reproduced the animalism of the South Sea
Islands without the picturesqueness. But it was not only by the
“Jews,” and on board, that the unfortunate sailor was pillaged.
William Hodges, who in 1695 made a pathetic representation
of their grievances to Parliament, draws a dreadful picture
of the misery inflicted on the whole class by the monstrous
system on which they were paid. Hodges does not measure
his language, and was plainly one of those good men in
whom zeal for justice has eaten up moderation; but his
statements are too substantially in agreement with probability
to be rejected. From him we learn that when the sailors’
tickets were sent home to their families to be cashed, the poor
women were compelled to come up to the pay office for their
money, even from Scotland, and then if they were ignorant
of the forms to be complied with, or a “Q” (query) was put
against any name, which he declares was often done on
frivolous pretexts, they were put off, and had their journey
for nothing. Of course they sold the tickets to traders, who
made a business of speculating in them. Hodges takes great
credit to himself for having bought large quantities at the very
moderate discount of half a crown in the pound. It is
probable that, allowing for all risks—stoppage of deserters’
wages and Government delays—he did not make much profit.
Still, his boast shows that a sailor’s family was thought lucky
if it only lost 12·5 per cent. on his wages. Hodges may be
believed when he says that in one small precinct of London
he found a thousand, besides children, belonging to seamen’s
families in absolute destitution.
There must have been a great fund of loyalty and
discipline in England in the eighteenth century; otherwise
all this would not have been endured for over a century by
armed men, who again and again had the country, apparently
at least, at their mercy. It is noteworthy that it was mainly
against this that the fleet mutinied at Spithead. The Nore
business was the work of political agitators—quota-men,
themselves supported by quota-men. Little was said of the
cat, which may, we venture to think, be taken as evidence
that the cat was never the grievance it has been called.
Admiral Cunningham asserts that the good men considered
it a protection against the bad. The grievance of the pay,
and the inhumanly long detention on shipboard, explains why
the real seamen, who knew how valuable they were to the
merchant-skipper, avoided the navy as much as they could.
It is said by Admiral Ekins that, when Captain Manley Dixon
was commissioning a ship for the Mediterranean, his crew was
made up by men turned over from a ship which had just come
home. A body of them came to him to represent that they
had not been ashore for nine years, and to ask that, if he
could, the captain would give them a run. Manley Dixon
gave them his promise that he would, and kept it; nor had
he any cause to regret his humanity. Captains of this stamp
did much to alleviate the hardship of the system, but it
sufficiently explains the straits to which we were driven to
get good men. They were, indeed, extreme. Prisoners of
war, smugglers, debtors, boys, old men, convicts, anything
that could stand on two legs—all were taken. When Manley
Dixon himself laid the Lion across the bows of the Guillaume
Tell outside of Malta, he was not only short-handed, but
the large majority of his crew were boys—which explains why
he did not allow himself to be boarded by the Frenchman,
who had some two thousand seasoned fighters on board.
There is an absolutely comic story told of Sir Home Popham,
who was going on a foreign station as Admiral. He complained
to the Admiralty that his crew were mere boys. In reply, he
was told that his books showed that he had received his due
proportion of A.B.’s—which is, by the way, a pleasing illustration
of the trustworthiness of official papers. Popham was
not to be fobbed off in this style. He weighed his crew,
and found that they averaged under jockey-weight. Then the
Admiralty did scrape together a hundred grown men for him.
A crew of boys with a stiffening of seasoned seamen was not
unpopular with captains, for it was active and amenable to
discipline. The convicts were another story, yet even with
them something could be done. It is said by Ekins that
one captain received a batch of fifty at once. He called
them aft, and made them a pregnant speech. He said that
he knew their record, but was resolved to consider them as
men of fair character, subject to this one proviso—if any of
them misbehaved, he was to be punished twice as severely
as another man. It was noted that the convicts generally
behaved particularly well, and no doubt came back reformed
characters. Perhaps it may be said that this is not only a
disenchanting picture, but that it starts the question how,
with such materials, we contrived to do so well? To this
question several answers may be made. The human animal,
even when he is a quota-man, state-the-case-man, or convict,
is indefinitely improvable by discipline, particularly when it can
be promptly and efficaciously enforced by the cat. Our
discipline was good, and the cat was not, as a rule, abused;
such officers as Pigot and Corbet being, in spite of foolish
talk to the contrary, the exception and not the rule. Then
there was always a proportion of men who preferred the order
of the navy, and its life of adventure, to the pay of the
merchant service. These seasoned the lump. Then there
was the captain, with his harsh standard of efficiency and
his nearly absolute power, to keep everybody up to the mark.
We had an admirable cadre of officers, and under them a good
body of warrant officers. They, with a proportion of really
fine seamen, and the steady corps of marines, supplied a mould
so strong and so admirably built that a great deal of inferior
material could be run into it without too much risk.
It was impossible that discontent should not be rife, and
its existence was shown by the mutinies in individual ships
which occurred during the American rebellion. They were
generally hushed up, and quieted by concessions to the
mutineers; but there was no general removal of grievances.
With the outbreak of the Revolutionary war the grievances of
the men were renewed and intensified. The press needed
to supply the immense fleets then armed was severe. A rise
of thirty per cent. in the price of all necessaries reduced the
already inadequate pay to a starvation level. Minor grievances
were more keenly felt because of the increase in the great one.
It was the custom of the Admiralty to give the men only
fourteen ounces for a pound in their rations, in order to
prevent what was called leakage of stores. The medical
stores were insufficient and bad; indeed, the whole medical
department was ignorant and corrupt. The Greenwich
Hospital pension was only £7, as compared with the £13
given at Chelsea. Then, too, the experiments of Captain
Cook, and the reforms in diet by which Blane kept
Rodney’s fleet in the West Indies in perfect health, had
taught the sailors that fresh vegetables were an effectual
protection against scurvy. Yet the Admiralty persisted in
serving out flour to the squadrons when they were in harbour
in England. The seamen felt—and they would have been
made of strange flesh and blood if they had not felt—bitterly
aggrieved that they, who were necessarily exposed to great
hardships for the defence of their country, should also be
unnecessarily subjected to a loathsome disease for want of
what the Admiralty could easily have supplied. Here, then,
were all the elements of mutiny. Legitimate discontent
among the men, felt most keenly by the prime seamen, who
exercised a great influence over their less skilful comrades,
but also felt by the ordinary seamen, landsmen, and marines;
and at the Admiralty an authority which was obstinate in
neglecting real grievances, and had shown itself weak in
dealing with insubordination in the last war. It was certain
that as soon as a general combination could be formed—always
a difficult thing to do among ships on active service—there
would be an outbreak. Admiral Patton had predicted
one as far back as ’92.
In the winter of 1796 a combination was formed
in the Channel fleet then cruising off Brest under
Bridport. It seems to have been confined to the prime
seamen, who calculated, rightly, as it turned out, that their
comrades would follow their lead. Four anonymous petitions
were sent to Howe—“Black Dick,” as the sailors called him—who
had been compelled by gout to resign the command of
the Channel fleet, and was recruiting at Bath. Howe sent
them to the Admiralty, which, finding them in the same
handwriting, dismissed them as the work of an “ill-intentioned
person,” and of no importance. This neglect was taken by
the men as a proof that even Howe, who was very popular
with them, could or would do nothing for them. They
decided to act, and the opportunity came when Bridport
anchored at Spithead in the early spring of 1797. It was
known that the fleet would go to sea on the 16th of April,
and the men were resolved that the order to weigh should not
be obeyed till their grievances were redressed. By some
means, which have never been revealed, news of this decision
was given to Captain Patton of the Transport Office at
Portsmouth on the 12th, and by him carried to the Port-Admiral,
who at once forwarded it to London by semaphore.
The Admiralty recognised the gravity of the danger at last,
but could think of no way of dealing with it except to order
the fleet to sea at once. Bridport hoisted his signal
accordingly, but the men were ready with their plan and their
determination. They manned the yards with cheers, hoisted
the red flag—which was the recognised signal for battle—at
the main, and took the command out of the hands of the
officers. There are some features of this mutiny which are
altogether exceptional. No man’s name is associated with it
as leader; it was absolutely unanimous, the marines joining
eagerly with the sailors; no officer was hurt; the admiral’s
flag was not hauled down; the discipline of the ships went
on as before—so much so that some bad characters, who took
the opportunity to get drunk, were soundly flogged by their
own comrades; but the crews would not get up anchor. A
committee of thirty men—two delegates from each ship—was
appointed to state their grievances to the king and both
Houses of Parliament. It met in the cabin of Howe’s old
flagship, the Queen Charlotte, and there drew up its
petitions. They are excellently worded, quite free from
bombast, and contain only a demand—firmly enough made,
to be sure—that the pay of the A.B.’s might be raised to a
shilling a day, and that of all others in proportion; that their
grievances as to pension and rations should be removed, and
that reasonable leave should be given to men in home ports
to see their families. The delegates also insisted on a free
pardon from the king, to be given in all the forms.
The devil in whom it had refused to believe being now
raised, the Admiralty behaved after the unchanging pattern
of authorities, who are obstinate when they might have yielded
with credit. It became frightened. The position was, indeed,
a dangerous one enough; for, though little memory of the
fact remains, the spirit of the army was not much better than
that of the fleet. The military pay had also remained
stationary since the reign of Charles II., and in 1797 there
was a serious danger that the garrisons near London would
break out as the sailors had done. Fortunately, the Duke of
York used his influence with success. The War Office was
induced to be wise in time, and military discipline was saved
from the shock of forced concessions to mutineers. There
being no Duke of York to speak for the sailors, things had
been allowed to drift to the pass they had now reached.
By this time it was clear that the whole fleet was discontented.
In the circumstances the use of force was perhaps impossible.
There remained the alternative of instant, frank, and unreserved
compliance with demands which, after all, were very moderate.
Concession ought to have been the easier because it was
universally felt in the country that the men were only asking
for what should have been spontaneously granted at the
outbreak of the war. The Admiralty took the weak man’s
favourite middle course, which combines all the evils of the
other two, and misses the good in them. The Board went
down to Portsmouth and began to negotiate with the delegates.
It showed a distinct tendency to make scapegoats of the
subordinate officers, but refused for days to promise the rise
of pay. The result of this line of action hardly needs to be
told. The delegates refused to abate a jot of their demands.
They even increased them by adding a demand that the
grievances of particular ships should be corrected—in other
words, that officers accused of tyrannical conduct should be
dismissed. After ten days of useless talk, “My Lords” surrendered
at discretion, promised everything, and took themselves
off, having done their best to consolidate the power of
the delegates, and not a little to weaken still further the
authority of the officers. The red flag was hauled down, the
Committee was dissolved, everything appeared to have returned
to the old order, and the mutiny to be at an end. It
was promised that the fleet should not go to sea till the House
of Commons had voted the money for the increase of pay,
and the king’s proclamation of pardon was published.
Though it appeared difficult for the Admiralty to add to the
blunders it had already committed, it contrived to do so.
Some delay took place in the publication of the king’s
proclamation, and the introduction of the vote for the wages
in the House of Commons. As days passed, and nothing
was heard of the proclamation or of the vote, the suspicions
of the men were aroused. They knew the danger in which
they stood, and began to fear that the Admiralty meant to
cheat them. It was an absurd enough suspicion, but a not
unnatural one. The Admiralty ought at least to have foreseen
that it could only be removed by the utmost promptitude and
openness, since there was no power at hand to control the
fleet. Yet it kept silence, and delayed the execution of its
promises from day to day. At Spithead discipline seemed
to be restored. The bulk of the squadron moved round to
St. Helens, leaving Colpoys’s flagship, the London, and the
Marlborough at Spithead. Whether order would have remained
unbroken is perhaps doubtful; but just at this
moment the Admiralty took a step which set the whole
mutiny flaming again. An order was sent down to the
captains of ships which was a masterpiece of folly. It began
by instructing the officers to be more careful in superintending
the issue of stores to the men, and then proceeded to give
them a number of directions as to the course to be taken for
the preventing of future mutinies. The first part, which by
implication accused them of pilfering—a charge never made
by the delegates—caused profound indignation among the
officers. The second, of which the substance was immediately
known to the crews, converted their suspicions into certainty—and
they instantly broke out again. With this outburst began
the second and distinctly criminal stage of the great mutiny.
Hitherto the conduct of the men had been as innocent as the
nature of the work they were doing permitted. Now they
were about to illustrate the universal tendency of all revolt
against authority to degenerate into sheer violence and
rebellion.
This order was to be inserted in the general instructions
between the clauses providing for the reading of the articles
of war and for the rating of the ship’s company. Among
other things, it directed the captain to “see that the arms and
ammunition belonging to the marines be constantly kept in
good order and fit for immediate service as well in harbour
as at sea.” At the end was a general direction to officers to
be ready “on the first appearance of mutiny to use the most
vigorous means to suppress it, and to bring the ringleaders to
punishment.” Hitherto the inspection of the marines’ arms
had been left to the marine officer. That a change should be
made at this moment was not unnaturally considered an
ominous sign by the men. The purpose for which it was
made was clear enough to crews which were from the very
nature of the case in a state of “preternatural suspicion.”
Neither the arrival of the order nor its purport could be wholly
concealed, though the captains were as reserved as they
possibly could be. Rumours leaked out in an exaggerated
form, and had the very worst effects on the minds of the men,
who were already angry at the apparent delay on the part of
Parliament to vote the money required to make good the
promises of the Admiralty. This delay was undoubtedly a
mistake. Pitt, looking too exclusively to the dignity of the
Government, had decided that it would be the more becoming
course to grant the money by a silent vote. As a mere
matter of Parliamentary manners he was probably right;
but it argued a certain want of imagination on his part that
he did not realise the effect the silence of the House would
produce on the sailors. The necessary forms of business
might have made it impossible to bring the motion in sooner,
but some notice might have been taken of the petition of
the sailors to the Commons. Pitt decided otherwise, the
Admiralty acted in its own injudicious way, and the mutiny
broke out again at St. Helens just two days before Parliament
voted the £372,000 required to provide for the increase
of pay.
The disturbance began in the Duke, a three-decker,
which had been the vessel immediately ahead of Rodney’s
flagship in the line of battle in the great battle off Dominica
in 1782. The crew forced their way into Captain Holloway’s
cabin, and insisted on seeing the menacing Admiralty order.
Holloway had destroyed it, foreseeing the effect it was likely
to produce if made public. The crew were not to be stopped.
They seized Holloway, and sent a message to the admiral
demanding a copy of the order, with the threat that they
would hang the captain or inflict “a degrading punishment”—in
other words, flog him—if it was not produced. This
was mutiny pure and simple, but Bridport was helpless, and
the order was given up. Of course, it was instantly sent
round the fleet to exasperate the prevailing ferment. This
happened on the 5th or 6th of May. On the 7th, Bridport,
having heard that the French fleet at Brest had dropped down
to the outer harbour, hoisted the signal to proceed to sea.
Thereupon the scene of the previous 15th April was repeated.
The red flag was hoisted, ropes were reeved at the yardarm
as a threat to “traitors” who should fail to support their
fellow-members of the crews, and the officers were disarmed.
The fleet was divided. The bulk of it was at St. Helens,
while Admiral Colpoys, with his flagship, the London, and the
Marlborough remained at Spithead. From the deck of
the London the coming and going of the boats among the
ships at St. Helens was distinctly visible. Judging rightly
that the mutiny had broken out afresh, Colpoys decided to
make a fight for his authority. He turned up his crew, and
asked them whether they had any complaints to make. They
answered they had not. Whether Colpoys overrated the
meaning of the answer or not, he certainly decided to fight.
The men may only have meant that, unlike the crew of the
Marlborough, who had particular grievances, they had no
complaint to make of their officers. It did not follow that
they were disposed to break away from the rest of the
squadron. The question was soon put to the test. Boats
were seen coming into Spithead from the ships at St. Helens.
They could only be bringing the delegates on their way to
demand the adhesion of the London. Colpoys at once
paraded the marines on the quarter-deck, stationed sentries at
the sally-ports, and gave orders that the boats were to be
fired on if they insisted on coming alongside. Then he
ordered the sailors below. Some obeyed, but it was noted as
a bad sign that among those who went below were the three
warrant-officers, the boatswain, the gunner, and the carpenter.
A portion of the crew, including, as would appear, most of the
real sailors, collected in a group forward, and stood there
facing the admiral, who remained with his officers and the
marines on the quarter-deck. The delegates came alongside,
and were warned off by the sentries. They then appealed to
the crew, and with effect, for the men in the forecastle began
to stir, and some of them started to unlash one of the forward
guns and train it on the quarter-deck. Bover, the first
lieutenant of the London, threatened to fire if they did not
desist. Some of the men were cowed, but one of them, made
of stouter and more dangerous stuff, dared the lieutenant to
fire. Bover took him at his word, fired, and shot him dead.
If the crew had been really wavering and the marines steady,
this act of vigour would probably have quelled the mutiny.
But, in the spirit they were in, it had a directly contrary
effect. The whole crew broke out at once. The men forward
rushed aft; those below rushed on deck; the marines broke
from their ranks and mingled with the sailors. As might be
expected in such a scene, different accounts were given of
what happened. There was certainly a fight, in which several
of the mutineers, a midshipman, and the officer of marines
were more or less severely wounded. As a matter of course,
the officers were soon overpowered. It is extraordinary that
no harm was done to Colpoys himself. He attributed his
escape to the fact that he faced the mutineers all through.
They seem to have preserved some respect for him personally.
According to one story, a mutineer who called him “a d——d
b——y rascal” was silenced by his fellows with the threat of
being thrown overboard; and another, who aimed a musket
at him through a grating, had his weapon knocked out of his
hands. But the men appeared determined to go to all
lengths against Bover. He was dragged to the forecastle,
and a rope prepared to hang him at the yard arm. The
noose was actually round his neck, when Colpoys manfully
came forward and declared that the lieutenant had acted by
his orders. It shows how strong the tradition of discipline
was among the crews still, that this was accepted as a justification.
One of the topmen is also said to have appealed to the
mutineers to spare Bover because “he was a brave boy.”
The admiral and the topman contrived between them to save
his life. Of course the London now joined the other ships,
and the Marlborough with her. Colpoys and Bover were,
after some discussion whether they should not be tried on
board, sent on shore for trial. The coroner’s jury which sat
on the mutineer found a verdict of justifiable homicide. The
wounded midshipman and marine officer were carried to
Haslar, but the sick and wounded seamen in the hospital
showed such a savage determination to do them a damage
that the authorities found it necessary to transfer them to a
private house.
This second phase of the mutiny lasted from the 7th to
the 15th of May, and was in all ways worse than the first.
Many of the officers were set on shore by the men, and
among them, Admiral Alan Gardner, who had, idly enough,
drawn his sword on the delegates in the cabin of the Queen
Charlotte during the first stage of the mutiny. It is said
that when told that a cutter was manned to take him on
shore, he replied that he should at least be allowed his barge,
and that the barge was allowed him. When the news of the
mutiny reached London, the Admiralty had recourse to the
officer to whom it might well have appealed at the beginning.
It sent Howe down on the 10th with the Act just passed by
Parliament for the increase of pay, and the king’s pardon.
It was the admiral’s last piece of service, and a more disagreeable
one could hardly have been found, for he had in
fact to notify the surrender of Government to the mutineers.
It was a duty, however, which he could not possibly refuse,
for there were no means of coercing the men, and they would
apparently not be convinced that no deceit was intended
except on the word of “Black Dick.” Howe did the work in
his usual solid way. He met the delegates on board the
Queen Charlotte, and persuaded them to promise that
the fleet should return to duty. The promise was kept. The
squadron went to sea at once, and there was an end of what
is commonly called the mutiny at Spithead, but was in fact
the double mutiny at Spithead and St. Helens. If the disorder
had ended here, the movement would have stood
altogether alone among military seditions. Certainly no
body of mutinous men was ever provoked by more genuine
grievances, and none ever behaved with greater moderation
on the whole. But it was not in the nature of things that it
could stop here. The men had tasted the pleasure of defying
authority, which is of itself corrupting. During the second
outbreak they objected by name to over a hundred officers
of all ranks from Colpoys down to two masters-at-arms.
All these officers were left on shore when the squadron put
to sea. The Admiralty did not try them, and it did keep
them on full pay; but it did not restore them to their ships.
This was, of course, a very bad example, and could only
serve to convince all crews that they could get rid of any
officer they pleased. If the prime seamen had preserved
their influence throughout the fleet, the agitation might have
died quietly. But these men soon made the discovery
commonly made by any class which has headed a revolt
against one above. It had set an example to those below.
In the Channel, where the quality of the crews appears to
have been above the average, there was no more open disorder,
though the mutinous feeling continued to require
watching. On other stations, where the quota-men and the
convict element were more fully represented, the example set
at Spithead was followed, and this time the leaders were
seditious agitators of the stamp of Parker and Bott.
The end of the mutiny at St. Helens overlapped the
beginning of the mutiny at the Nore. This more criminal
movement began on the 12th May, three days before Howe
received the submission of the delegates of the Channel fleet.
At that date the North Sea squadron was at sea, under
command of Admiral Duncan, watching the coast of Holland.
There were at the Little Nore some half-score frigates and
small vessels, together with two 64-gun ships—the Inflexible,
commanded by Captain Ferris, and the Director,
commanded by Captain Bligh. This was the Bligh of the
Bounty, he who was afterwards deposed from his governorship
of New South Wales by Major Johnston of the 102nd Foot.
It would have been strange if there had been mutiny to the
fore, and he not there. The flagship of Buckner, the Port-Admiral,
was the Sandwich, 90, which was not armed for sea-service,
having only her upper-deck guns on board. She was,
however, full of men, and of prime seamen. For fear that they
would desert, these men were not allowed on shore. Buckner,
who wished to preserve them for Duncan, would not even give
them to the frigate captains who applied for some of them by
name to fill the petty officers’ berths. We can understand that
there was much sulky indignation among them, and that the
news of the outbreak at Spithead, which filtered in, set up some
ferment on the flagship’s lower deck. There was a man on
board her who was admirably fitted, by training and character,
to turn discontent into mutiny. In France, as it had been
four years earlier, this man would probably have played a
considerable part. By us he is only remembered as Richard
Parker the Mutineer, who ended his life at the yardarm of the
Sandwich. He was the son of a tradesman at Exeter, and
he began life in the position of a gentleman, as midshipman on
board the Culloden in 1786. He was discharged from her,
and then from the Leander, for immoral conduct, and for
setting a bad example to his messmates. In 1793, when
he had finished his time as midshipman and was rated mate,
he was broken by court martial for insubordination, was sent
before the mast, and thence invalided into hospital. For
a space he disappeared. When he reappeared, he was in
prison for debt at Edinburgh. He had married, and had
attempted the trade of schoolmaster. To escape from prison,
he took the bounty, and came into the navy again as
quota-man from Perth. He had only been drafted to the
Sandwich six weeks before the mutiny broke out. This
is not unlike the early career of many heroes of the French
Revolution. Whether Parker belonged to one of our native
revolutionary societies of the time is not certain. It was
afterwards asserted that he did, and was sent on board as
being, from his training, a likely person to foment a mutiny.
This, however, is so much the kind of story which would be
told that it cannot be accepted as evidence. On the other
hand, it is not intrinsically improbable. He himself had the
grace to “die game,” and without betraying his associates on
shore, if he had any. All we can be sure of is, that he was
very much the stamp of man who did belong to Jacobin
societies, and that his training had qualified him admirably for
the part he played. On board the ships at the Nore he had
to his hand plenty of the kind of material which the
demagogue loves. The London police had been in the
habit of sending its criminals on board for some time, and
among them undoubtedly were members of the Corresponding
Society and United Irishmen. Men of a better stamp felt the
common grievances, and there was a feeling among them—very
wrong-headed, but not wholly base—that it would be
mean in them not to back up their fellow-seamen at Spithead.
That Parker had been active in fomenting the mutiny is
clear from the fact that he appears as leader from the very
beginning. It broke out on the Sandwich while most of the
captains were on board the Inflexible, attending a court
martial on a Captain Savage. As had been the case at
Spithead, no violence was done to the officers. In the course
of the day an incident happened which showed the difference
of the two movements. The San Fiorenzo frigate arrived from
Portsmouth. The mutineers cheered her as she came in, believing
perhaps that she came to ask her help for the Channel
fleet. But the San Fiorenzo was a loyal ship. Her captain,
Sir Harry Burrard Neale, seeing from the look of the ships at
the Little Nore that something must be wrong, gave orders
that the cheers should not be answered. This was a bad
sign for the mutineer leaders, and in the course of the
day they learnt that the crew of the Clyde frigate, commanded
by Captain Cunningham, was also loyal and would
obey their officers. This was a warning to Parker and his
associates of the dangerous nature of the game they were
playing. Their one chance of success was the unanimity of
the fleet; but they had gone too far to go back now. It was
decided to coerce the recalcitrant ships. On the 13th the
Inflexible ranged up alongside the San Fiorenzo, and
threatened to fire into her if the crew did not cheer. With
the consent of Captain Neale, the sign of adhesion was given.
It is one of the comic incidents of the mutiny that, when the
men took the command from Captain Ferris, they rated him
midshipman to show that there was no ill-feeling. A similar
course was taken with the Clyde. But though these ships
were forced to appear to join, and to accompany the mutineers
when they went out from the Little Nore to the Nore, they remained
loyal to their officers. The men of the Clyde did so
far show themselves mutinous as to insist on getting rid of the
doctor and the sergeant of marines. The latter was, perhaps,
a bully, and the medical department was, as we have said
before, exceptionally and intensely unpopular among the men.
Cunningham would have stood by his officer; but the doctor
became frightened, and begged to be allowed to go. The
sergeant of marines was discharged regularly to save appearances,
and replaced by a man appointed in the ordinary way.
The conduct of the men of the Clyde and the San Fiorenzo
is worth noting, because it shows what it was that finally
brought about the ruin of the mutineers. This fleet was not
unanimous. These two vessels were forced into the mutiny
against their will, and on board all the other vessels there was
a loyal minority. The daily proceedings on board were not
noted with detail on the logs, for good reasons; but it is
known that on several vessels there were officers who defied the
mutineers all through and withstood Parker to his face; yet
they were protected from outrage by a minority of the men.
There were two stages in the mutiny at the Nore. The
first lasted from the 15th to the 31st of May. During this
period the only ships engaged were those already mentioned.
On the 31st vessels began to drop in from the North Sea, and
they continued to come till the 6th June. These were the
ships which aroused the intense indignation of the whole
country by first deserting their admiral in the presence of
the enemy in the Texel, and then attempting to blockade the
Thames. During the first fortnight the mutinous ships
moved out to the Nore, dragging the reluctant Clyde and
San Fiorenzo with them. The red flag was hoisted, and
Admiral Buckner’s flag was hauled down. Day after day
Parker with his committee of delegates and a mob of mutineers
several hundred strong landed at Chatham and paraded the
streets with red banners. Buckner was helpless. The only
garrison in the town was a handful of invalids, and they, it was
noted, began, “when elevated with drink,” to express the intention
to appoint delegates of their own and to demonstrate for
themselves. Parker was abundantly insolent to Buckner personally,
but, on the whole, there was no great violence shown.
A committee from the fleet visited the hospital, and used such
strong language that the assistant-surgeon, a certain Mr.
Safferay, committed suicide in a fit of terror by shooting
himself. The boatswain of the Proserpine, who had made
himself hateful to the men, was seized and dragged off to the
Sandwich to be hanged. But he pleaded the orders of his
superiors, and, strange to say, the excuse was accepted, as it
had been in the case of Lieutenant Bover. The mutineers
did not, however, let the boatswain off altogether. They
paraded him round the fleet with two large swabs tied to his
shoulders and a rope round his neck, while a boatful of
drummer boys beat the rogue’s march. There was as yet
more vacant horseplay and noise than violence among the
mutineers. So little did the crews appear to be in earnest
that they allowed eight days to pass before they presented
their list of demands. When it was handed in, it was found
to begin with a superfluous demand that, whatever had been
given to ships at Spithead should be given to those at the
Nore, and then to contain a demand that a ship’s company
should have a right to object to an officer, and that the
articles of war should be revised. It was now becoming
clear that there must be no paltering with this mutiny.
Lord Spencer, the First Lord, with his colleagues, Lord Allan
and Admiral Young, came down to Chatham with an offer
of pardon to those who would return to duty at once, but
resolved to direct resolute measures against the disorderly
ships. The militia was called out, and steps taken to put
Chatham in a state of defence. An attempt to bring the
men to reason quietly was made on the 28th May, when the
king’s proclamation of pardon was read on all the ships.
It was not without effect. On the Brilliant, at least,
the mutinous party only kept the upper hand with difficulty.
Throughout the fleet the loyal minority was encouraged, and
some of the mutineers shaken. Parker did not improve his
popularity by causing one of the sailors of the Brilliant to
be ducked for speaking disrespectfully of the delegates. Still
the mutineers kept possession of the squadron. The first
serious blow was given them by the escape of the Clyde and
the San Fiorenzo. Cunningham and Neale decided to
make a push for freedom, and would have done it sooner if
they had not had hopes of bringing off the Director.
Cunningham was sure of his own men, who had refused to
put him on shore, though Parker came with the demand
himself, and had stood at quarters all through the night of
the 28th with the guns cast loose, expecting every moment to
be fired into. On the 29th, Cunningham took an opportunity
while the ships were swinging in the tide, so that he was not
actually under the guns of a mutinous ship. He cut his
cables and made a dash for Sheerness. The mutineers fired
on him as soon as their guns would bear, but he escaped
serious damage, and after tacking twice, contrived to turn into
safe anchorage under the guns of the forts. Sir Harry Neale
was less lucky. A pilot, who had been smuggled on board
the San Fiorenzo through the mutineers’ guard-boats, cut
his cable too soon, and she cast the wrong way. There was
nothing for it but to run through the mutinous ships, which
Sir Harry did successfully, though fired into right and left.
The San Fiorenzo was carried over to the coast of Essex,
and thence to Portsmouth. On her way out she sighted the
first of the ships which had deserted Duncan standing into the
Thames with the red flag flying. Neale kept the red flag up
himself as long as he was in any danger, and then went on
to Spithead, where he arrived not only safely, but with a
French privateer, which he picked up on his way down.
The desertion of Duncan by his squadron was the
culmination of the great mutiny. It was also the event which
proved to the country and to the better stamp of men
throughout the fleet what the consequences of insubordination
inevitably are. None were made more indignant by it than
the crews in the Channel, who refused to have any dealings
with Parker, and even volunteered to assist in reducing the
mutineers to order. News travelled slowly in those times,
and it is probable that the crews in the North Sea had only
a very vague notion of what had been the end of the Spithead
outbreak; but they did know that there was a Dutch
force in the Texel getting ready for an invasion of England,
and they did their best to leave it an open road. As might
be expected, the conduct of these men was throughout wanting
in the moderation shown at Spithead. Among the
demands which they made was one that in future a common
sailor should be a member of every court martial by which a
foremast man was tried. The revolutionary flavour of that
demand was beyond dispute. When the ships actually
reached the Nore, some of their crews not only committed
acts of savage violence on officers, but were guilty of downright
piracy.
The trouble in Duncan’s ships began in Yarmouth Roads
on the 27th of May, the day before the Clyde cut her cable
and ran for Sheerness. On that day the crew of the
Venerable, 74, the flagship, who are said to have been
instigated by Parker, and who must in any case have known
what was happening at the Nore, ran into the rigging and
began cheering in a disorderly manner. They had to deal with
a body of officers who were not to be trifled with. Duncan called
the marines under arms, and sent his officers among the men
with orders to bring them down. The order was obeyed, and
the men mustered in the waist. Then the admiral gave
them a little address, the point of which was that he would go
all lengths before he would allow the command of the ship
to be taken out of his hands. When one of the men cried
out that this was precisely what they meant to do, the
admiral drew sword on him, and would have cut him down if
his arm had not been held by the chaplain. Then he ordered
all who meant to stand by their officers to go over to the
starboard side, and was instantly obeyed by all the crew
except six. These six were at once put in irons in the
wardroom. They were, obviously, entirely surprised by
the turn their adventure had taken, and sent a humble
message begging for pardon. Duncan, with what would have
been weakness in another man, forgave them. It was not
credible that the crew of the Venerable was the only one
infected by the mutinous spirit, and the admiral called on his
captains to report whether they had seen any sign of disaffection
among their men. With the single exception of
Captain Hotham, of the Adamant, 50, they replied that they
had seen none. Duncan went on board the Adamant and
mustered the crew. There was a repetition of the scene on
the Venerable’s deck; one of the crew of the Adamant
told the admiral that they meant to dispute his authority.
Duncan was, as his pictures remain to prove, a man of great
height, and his physical strength was immense. He seized
the impudent fellow, and swung him over the side of the ship.
Then, holding him suspended by one hand, he asked the
crew to look at this fellow who dared to dispute his authority.
The Adamants cheered with delight, and no more was heard
of their discontent. For a moment it appeared as if the
admiral’s personal influence would keep his whole squadron
steady; but the appearance was delusive. On the 29th May
he ordered his ships to sea, and they stood out; but no sooner
were they clear of the shoals off Yarmouth than all of them
which had been declared to be trustworthy deserted him,
leaving him only his own flagship and the Adamant, on
which he had already faced and disarmed the mutiny.
Duncan’s further conduct is famous in our naval history. He
took the Venerable and the Adamant over to the Texel.
There he remained through the summer, announcing his
intention to fight the Dutch if they came out, and go down
with the flag flying. As he had his two crews now well in
hand, it is credible that, if the enemy had put to sea, our
naval history would have included another last fight of the
Revenge.
The rest of the squadron now went off in detachments to
the Nore, to the number of ten or a dozen line-of-battle ships
and frigates. On board some of them, at least, disgraceful
weakness was shown by the officers. No one, perhaps, has
the right to sneer at the commander who quails before
unanimous and violent mutiny, unless he has himself faced
that most dreadful of military dangers. But there is no
excuse for an officer who shrinks from doing his duty when a
part of his command is ready and even eager to support him.
According to Brenton, who was then one of his lieutenants,
Captain Fancourt, of the Agamemnon, was guilty of this
weakness. He yielded to his crew at once, and not only so,
but when he was told by some of the petty officers, who sent
the message through Brenton, that, if he would order the
marines to act, a large part of the sailors would stand by him,
he deliberately refused, on the ground that there would be a
fight, and that he could not bear to see his poor men “writhing
on the deck.” As was only natural, no captain in the
squadron was treated with more absolute contempt by the
mutineers than Fancourt. By the 6th of June the North Sea
ships had assembled at the Nore. Their arrival revived the
spirit of Parker and his associates, which had been greatly
shaken by the escape of the Clyde and the San Fiorenzo,
and then further damped by the subsequent escape of the
Serapis and the Discovery, armed transports, which
succeeded in following the example set by the frigates. The
news, too, from the shore was very bad; but the leaders still
hoped to cow the country. A blockade of the river was
ordered, and the trade stopped. Parker still professed great
loyalty. The feasts on the Restoration Day, 29th of May,
and the King’s Birthday, the 4th of June, were observed with
all the usual forms. On the 4th of June, Parker sent on shore
for the chaplain of the Sandwich to preach the Birthday
sermon. The chaplain, whose name was Hatherall, came,
and he had the courage to choose for his text Job xxvii. 5—“God
forbid that I should justify you; till I die I will not
remove mine integrity from me”—and to preach a loyal sermon
on it. To the credit of the men, he was allowed to land unhurt.
Other incidents of these days were not equally creditable.
The surgeon of one ship was tarred and feathered. Brenton,
who does not give the names, says that this man had been
drunk in his cabin for five weeks, and he half excuses the act
as one of “wild justice.” On the Monmouth, whose captain,
Lord Northesk, afterwards third in command at Trafalgar,
disliked the use of the cat, the men flogged the second master,
two masters’ mates, a midshipman, and a sergeant of marines.
They then shaved their heads, and turned them ashore.
Parties landed from the ships and plundered the farmhouses.
Trading vessels were overhauled and pillaged. In fact, the
fleet was rapidly drifting into mere piracy. Meanwhile the
anger on shore was growing daily. Troops and volunteers
poured into Sheerness. The forts at the mouth of the Thames
were supplied with furnaces for heating shot. Some vessels in
the Long Reach were manned and got ready for service. The
whole body of merchant seamen, who were threatened by the
blockade of the Thames, were eager to serve against the
mutineers. On the 6th of June Parliament passed the Act
for preventing the seduction of sailors or soldiers, which
made all communication with the mutineers an indictable
offence.
This Act really broke the backbone of the mutiny. It
showed the men that the country was not to be cowed. The
timid or more moderate were frightened, and those who had
committed themselves too far began to clamour for desperate
courses. Parker talked of taking the ships over to Holland,
and surrendering them to the enemy. Whether, even if he
had induced the squadron to follow him, he could have got off
is very doubtful. Lord Keith, who had arrived a few days
before to take command of the naval operations against the
mutineers, had removed the beacons and buoys from the Swin
and other shallows at the mouth of the Thames, for the express
purpose of cutting off their retreat. Without pilots, whom
they could not obtain, they could hardly have got the ships
out. But there was no inclination on the part of the men to
follow Parker they knew not where. He himself obviously
felt that the game was going against him, but an air of
defiance was kept up painfully enough. Lord Northesk was
“ordered” on shore with a statement of grievances to be
given to the king. On the 7th the effigies of “Billy Pitt”
and “Dundas” were hung at the yardarm. Parker went
round the fleet reading extracts from what he called the
king’s “foolish” proclamation, with seditious comments; but
on board the Ardent, 74, he was openly rebuked by a Lieutenant
Wardour for garbling it, and enough men stood by the
officer to save him from retaliation. In fact, the dislike of all
Englishmen for an upstart was beginning to tell against the
mutineer leader. He was openly jeered at as a “pretty
admiral of the fleet.” It does not appear that Parker ever
called himself by this title, and the story that he proclaimed a
“floating republic” is a myth; but he did exercise authority,
and it soon became offensive. On the 10th June the first-fruits
of the combined disgust, fear, and repentance of the men was
seen in the escape of the Leopard. The captain had been
landed, but one lieutenant at least remained on board, with
some subordinate officers. This officer, whose name was Robb,
learnt that he would find support if he attempted to retake
the ship. During the night of the 9th June, he, with the help
of some masters, mates, and midshipmen, trained two of the
wardroom guns forward and loaded them with grape-shot.
Next morning, when the tide was flowing, and therefore able
to carry the ship up the river, he threw open the door and
unmasked his battery. Then, leaving trusty men by the guns
with orders to sweep the deck, if necessary, he rushed out and
ordered the mutineers to surrender. There was a fight, but
in the end Robb and his fellow-officers contrived to cut the
cable, to get enough sail set to give the Leopard steerage
way, and to carry her off, fighting fiercely all the time with
those of the mutineers who refused to submit. He brought
her up the Thames with the remnant of the mutineers under
hatches. The Repulse, 64, followed. Her crew spontaneously
replaced the officers in command. She ran on the
Nore Sand and lay under the fire of the mutineers for an
hour and a half, but was at last got off, and carried into
Sheerness. From that moment till the final surrender of the
Sandwich, one vessel after another either cut and ran, or
merely hauled down the red flag and hoisted the blue—which
the sailors called the “signal of agreeableness.” On board the
Standard the leader of the mutineers, whose name,
“strangely enough,” says Captain Cunningham, was William
Wallace, shot himself when he saw the game was up. A few
of the more desperate men seized a smack and fled across the
North Sea. They ran her ashore on the coast of Holland.
Parker himself, whether from irresolution or from what in a
better man one might call magnanimity, did not attempt to
escape. He was surrendered by his messmates of the
Sandwich, and, as we have said, met his death at the fore-yardarm
like a man, having written the proper sort of letter
to his wife, expressed due contrition for his offences, and
asked, as the leader of an unsuccessful rebellion should, that
his life might be accepted as sufficient sacrifice. If it was all,
or even partly, affectation, at least it was the affectation of a
man who knew the becoming thing to do. There were in all
eighteen mutineers executed, of whom four were marines.
The total number of men condemned to death was nearly
forty; but the Government was not disposed to be more
severe than it could help. When Duncan, at the head of
a fleet consisting almost wholly of ships which had been
in the mutiny, gained the battle of Camperdown, the king
was advised to publish a general pardon. It was long before
the discipline of the navy wholly recovered the shock it had
received; but the great mutiny was over, and the State could
afford to be generous without fear that its generosity would be
mistaken for weakness.
The grievances of the men being universal, the conditions
which led to insubordination were found everywhere more or
less. As the Government in its dire need of men had gone
so far as to send such known rebels as United Irishmen into
the crews of some of its ships—particularly into those which
had their headquarters at Beerhaven and to some of the
vessels with Jervis—there was no lack of agitators ready to
profit by the unrest of their comrades. Something, too, must
be allowed for the force of example. Men mutinied on one
station when they heard of a mutiny elsewhere. It was the
report from Spithead which started the outbreak at the Nore.
It was the arrival of the Alcmene frigate from the Nore
which set going the ferment in Jervis’s squadron. The
fatal result of all successful insubordination is that it sets the
worser kind of man arguing that, if so much has been
extorted already, more can be obtained by the same method.
Therefore spasmodic outbreaks continued for a time to occur
at home and abroad as the fire spread. Some were of little
importance, and may be briefly dismissed. Among them was
the insubordination at Plymouth which followed the mutiny
at the Nore. Lord Keith had been sent there from Sheerness
when the last of Parker’s followers surrendered. He was to
hoist his flag in the Queen Charlotte as second in
command of the Channel fleet. The outbreak was a comparatively
slight one, and Keith quelled it by firmness and
tact. In October, so soon as the news began to arrive from
home, a very serious mutiny took place among the ships at
the Cape. This was suppressed mainly by the firmness of
the governor, Lord Macartney, and of Dundas, the general
in command. They threatened to sink the ships, which
were few in number and were lying under the guns of the
forts. To this threat the men surrendered. Several of the
more active leaders were hanged or flogged.
The most dangerous and the best known aftermath of the
great convulsion at home was the so-called mutiny off Cadiz.
The movement never went beyond partial disorder and
treasonable threats in individual ships. Still, in view of
Duncan’s experience at Yarmouth, it would be rash to assert
that if firmness and promptitude had not been shown, a part
at least of the Mediterranean fleet would not have broken
away. It does not appear that Jervis had cause to distrust
the ships which had fought under him on the 14th February,
but as the summer wore on the Government began to reinforce
him. Not unnaturally, it selected for this service such
ships as it preferred to employ at a distance—namely, those
which had been conspicuous in the Spithead mutiny, or had
been noted for bad conduct in the squadron serving under
Curtis on the coast of Ireland. These ships were swarming
with United Irishmen, who formed a large proportion of
the eleven to twelve thousand Irish in the fleet. In Jervis’s
own squadron the marines had been largely recruited among
Erse-speaking Irishmen. The admiral was early informed of
what had happened in the Channel, and took his measures
with vigour. All visiting from ship to ship was stopped, even
the captains being forbidden to ask one another to dinner.
The marines were quartered apart from the sailors, and the
speaking of Irish was forbidden. Jervis took the wise and
bold course. He made no attempt to conceal the news of the
mutiny at home from his men. When the letter-bags were
found to contain circulars, written in a fair hand, inciting the
crews to mutiny, he ordered them to be delivered. He
trusted to his own vigilance and to the wholesome effects of
occupation. The bombardments of Cadiz were at least partly
undertaken to keep the men busy. Being a man of judgment,
he looked to it carefully that his men were well fed. He
spared no pains to procure fresh food and vegetables from
Morocco, so that his squadron was better provisioned and was
in better health than many ships had been in home ports.
Under an admiral of this stamp mutiny had the least possible
chance of coming to a head. Resolute officers knew they
would be supported, and the crews were saved from the
exasperation provoked by unfair treatment and unwholesome
food. Therefore Jervis never had to deal with a general
outbreak, as Bridport had at Spithead, but only with the
rebellious element represented by the United Irishmen, or
rascals of the stamp of Bott of the Princess Royal, an agent
of the Corresponding Society. A little firmness was enough to
dispose of them. How completely this was the case was shown
by the fact that Maitland of the Kingfisher (afterwards
Maitland of the Bellerophon) suppressed disorder in his
vessel by running the first man who was mutinous to him
through the heart, and Captain Pearce of the St. George, with
the help of his first lieutenant, Halley, was able to seize and put
in irons two agitators who were rash enough to defy his authority.
They were tried, condemned to death, and hanged next
day. The admiral’s determination and his power to keep order
were never doubted in his squadron. Among the vessels sent
from the Channel was the London, the vessel in which Lieutenant
Bover had shot the mutineer. Bover had returned to his post,
and it does not appear that the crew bore him any grudge.
When the London came into the Tagus, her captain, Purvis,
went in his barge to report to the admiral. While he was in
the flagship, the Ville de Paris, one of his barge’s crew,
seeing a sailor looking out of a lower-deck port, sang out to
him, “I say there, what have you fellows been doing while we
have been fighting for your beef and pork?” The sailor of
the Ville de Paris gave him this friendly warning: “If
you’ll take my advice, you’ll say just nothing at all about all
that here, for by G——d if old Jarvie hears ye, he’ll have you
dingle dangle at the yardarm at eight o’clock to-morrow morning.”
The crisis of the disorder was the so-called mutiny of
the Marlborough. This vessel had come out from England,
where an outbreak quelled with some difficulty had taken place
in her. A court martial was held on the principal mutineers,
and one of them was condemned to death. Jervis, who had a
keen sense of the value of an imposing spectacle, determined
to make an example. He gave orders that the execution
should be carried out next morning, although it was a Sunday,
and by the crew of the Marlborough—not, as was the custom,
by a boat’s crew from another ship. Captain Ellison, of the
Marlborough, an old officer who had lost an arm in action,
went to the flagship to protest, and was received by Jervis
very theatrically on the quarter-deck of the Ville de Paris,
in the presence of all her officers. Jervis refused either to
postpone the execution or to allow it to be performed in the
usual way. With a brutal ostentation of authority, not unusual
with him, he insulted Ellison by asking him if he was
afraid, by threatening to send an officer to supersede him, and
by jeering at his age. Ellison was compelled to endure the
insolence of the admiral. He returned to the Marlborough,
and next morning the execution took place in sight of all the
fleet. A large force of armed boats was sent under Captain
Campbell of the Blenheim with orders to lie alongside the
Marlborough and fire into her if any disorder took place on
board. The mutineer was brought to the cathead, and the
rope was put round his neck. At eight o’clock the signal gun
was fired from the flagship, and the man was swung off. By
some horrible piece of neglect the tackle had been so badly
fitted that it would not work properly, and the man had to be
lowered. For a moment it was thought that the crew had
broken into mutiny, and Campbell brought his boats nearer.
But the defect was quickly put right, and the execution was
completed. Then Jervis, who had been watching the scene
from his flagship, said, “Discipline is preserved, sir.”
No account of the year of mutiny would be complete without
at least some record of the story of the Hermione frigate.
It was a case in which a badly constituted crew was driven
frantic by a captain of manifestly inhuman violence and
brutality. The mutiny occurred in September in the West
Indies. Pigot, the captain, was an officer of no mark. He
seems to have been one of those men in whom the exercise of
authority and seclusion from the check of criticism by equals
permit the development of moral putrefaction. It is difficult
to write on that subject without touching on things which are
tacenda. There was in the sea life of long confinement to the
ship and long solitary cruises an underworld of the brutal
lust generated among segregated men. The power to torture
by flogging bred the foul love of inflicting torture which is
never far from lust. It is a stock, and as it seems, a true story
that Pigot, growing more and more frantic in cruelty, ended
by threatening to flog the last men off the yards when the
sails were handled. Two fell in their hurry to come down,
and were killed by their fall on the deck. Pigot ordered the
bodies of “the lubbers” to be thrown overboard. That night
“hell broke loose” in the Hermione. The crew rose in
revolt. Pigot was beaten down in his cabin and hurled overboard,
all the commissioned officers were butchered—some of
them while piteously appealing for mercy for the sake of their
wives and children. The gunner, the carpenter, and one midshipman
only were spared. It is recorded that the boatswain
was given over to be tortured by the ship’s boys, and that they
killed him slowly by scraping his flesh from his bones with
dumbscrapers. Then the mutineers took the ship into La
Guayra, and handed her over to the Spaniards.
It has been counted a signal example of the good fortune
of England that the French made no attempt to profit by the
disorganisation of the fleet during all these months of 1797.
Some ridicule has been directed in France against members
of the Directory who thought interference would be injudicious,
since it would only tend to reunite the English. Yet the
Frenchmen who judged thus judged rightly. There was no
general disloyalty to the State among the mutineers. If there
had been, what could have prevented the mutineers from
taking the ships to Brest, or the Texel? If they shrank
from going over to the enemy, they could still have sailed to
America, for they were provisioned for long blockades, and
there were men among them who could navigate. In the
United States they would have found a safe refuge in
an English-speaking community. They rose only against
grievances. They did not attain all they wished, but they
obtained a part, and they shocked their rulers into beginning
to improve the conditions of their service.
CHAPTER XIII THE NILE
Authorities.—See Chapter XII., and La Jonquière Expedition d’Egypte.
The failure of Hoche, the defeat of the proposed combination
with the Spaniards by the battle of St. Vincent,
the shattering of the Dutch fleet at Camperdown, had
proved that an invasion of the British Isles was a venture only
to be achieved by such a combination of good fortune for the
French, and bad management on our part, as no sane ruler
of men could expect. Yet during eight years, including the
short fallacious Peace of Amiens, the successive Governments
of France, the Directory, the Consulate, and the Empire
continued to make the attempt. All their efforts at sea and
some of their enterprises on land were directed to that end.
The expedition to Egypt in 1798 was as much a part of the
invasion scheme as the raid of Humbert. It was meant
to turn the flank of England by assailing her in India. The
Northern Coalition of 1801 was but another plot to turn
England’s flank—promoted by the French, and made possible
by the help of her erratic ally, the Czar Paul. The
Boulogne flotilla was to have made the direct attack. It was
all one undivided story which ended in 1805—leaving behind
it a heritage of madness in the shape of Napoleon’s maniacal
determination to conquer England on the Continent—in other
words, to make the independence and well-being of Europe
incompatible with the existence of his own government.
The army of England was not dissolved. It remained rather
a paper than an effective force, but still in existence as a
possibility and a threat. As if to emphasise their determination
to strike at the heart of England, the Directory appointed
Napoleon himself as general of the Army of England on the
26th October 1797. The nomination was little more than
a formality. Napoleon did not even visit his command till
early in February 1798, and then only in passing and on his
way to Belgium. The conqueror of Italy did not need his
great sagacity to see that the venture was insane with such
resources as the Directory could command. In the month
of May their coast defence forces led by Muskeyn were
beaten in an effort to retake the Marcouf islands, off La
Hougue, where England had an advance post of observation
held by bluejackets and marines. Napoleon, who knew well
enough that the Directory feared him as a possible military
despot, was no more disposed than Hoche to play Don Quixote
on the sea to please men who would gladly have seen him at
the bottom of it. He turned to the great flanking movement
which was to destroy England through India, leaving lesser,
and less fortunate, men to tilt at windmills.
The turning movement was essentially no less a delusion
than the direct attack, but it looked feasible, it offered
promising vistas of glory and adventure in the East, and it
gave Napoleon a field wherein he might do showy things to
fascinate the French imagination, and withal bide his time. It
was indeed feasible up to a certain point, because the British
Mediterranean fleet was tied down to blockade Cadiz. Jervis,
content with heading off and driving back the Spaniards, had
retired first to Lagos, and then to Lisbon, carrying with him
his four prizes, the cherished reward of the toils and perils of
officers and men, to be divided in becoming proportions.
What those proportions were we can learn pleasantly from the
estimate made by Nelson in a letter to Lord Spencer dated
7th September, of what the shares due for three French
prizes he caused to be destroyed would have come to, if he
had ordered their preservation:—to the commander-in-chief
£3750; to the junior admirals each £1625; to captains
each £1000; to the lieutenants class each £75; to warrant
officers each £50; to petty officers each £11; to seamen and
marines each £2, 4s. 1d. The men had their share to a penny,
and we can understand the jest of the Irish sailor who was
seen saying his prayers before Trafalgar. When asked by
a lieutenant if he was afraid, he answered that he was not,
but was only praying that the enemy’s bullets might be distributed
on the same scale as the prize money—the lion’s
share to the officers. St. Vincent, as he must now be called,
did not leave Lisbon till the 31st March, and then applied
himself to watching the twenty-six or twenty-eight Spanish
ships in the port and to that repression of the spirit of
mutiny described in the previous chapter.
Cadiz was twice bombarded at night. On the 3rd and the
5th July some damage was done to shipping and to houses.
Some conflicts took place with Spanish guard-boats and
galleys, in one of which Nelson was in great peril. News
came that a Spanish treasure-ship had taken refuge at Santa
Cruz de Tenerife, and on the 15th July Nelson was detached
to seize it. He had with him his flagship the Theseus, 74,
the Culloden, 74, the Zealous, 74, and the Leander, 50,
with the Seahorse, Emerald, and Terpsichore, 32-gun
frigates, and the cutter Fox. But he was not provided with
the detachment of troops he thought necessary. Mainly for
want of them, the attack failed disastrously. On the 22nd
July an attempt was made to occupy a height overhanging the
town, but the post was too strongly held to be carried by
a mere landing party. On the evening of the 24th and in the
small hours of the 25th, a double direct attack on the mole,
and by the Citadel, was made with the Fox and boats. The
Fox was sunk by cannon-shot off the mole, and so were some
of the boats with her. Nelson lost his right arm. A few
officers and men struggled on to the mole only to be shot
down by musketry. The attack near the Citadel was no
more fortunate. Troubridge, who commanded, succeeded in
landing through the surf which stove his boats, but only to
find he was helpless and to be compelled to purchase leave to
return to the ships by promising that no further attack should
be made on the islands. We lost in all 141 men and officers
shot or drowned, and 105 wounded. Nelson was compelled
to return home to months of suffering. From April 1797 to
May 1798 the Mediterranean was unvisited by an English
naval force, the French were free to cross it in every direction
to fix their grip on the Ionian Islands, their share of the
plunder of Venice, and to prepare for their great venture.
Jervis, who spent much of his time at Lisbon, was joined by
a Portuguese squadron, but the necessity for watching the
Spaniards kept him to the west of the Straits.
Therefore did it seem feasible to the French to apply
themselves to the profitable task of turning the Mediterranean
into “a French lake,” by seizing Egypt, and then to revenge
themselves on England by making Egypt the starting place
for an attack on India. Preparations were made all through
the earlier part of the year, and the expedition might have
sailed before it did if an alarm of renewed war with Austria
had not turned the attention of the French Government
to another direction. The English ministers knew that
preparations were being made, but did not know for what
particular purpose. It seemed not improbable, though it
surely ought to have appeared unthinkable, that the fleet at
Toulon was going to try to run past Jervis and make for
Ireland, where rebellion had broken out. There were from
thirty to forty French ships of the line at Brest and other
ocean ports, and the Army of England was still in being, at
least on paper. To go to see what was being done at Toulon
was the obvious course.
Nelson returned from home to the fleet off Cadiz on the
29th April 1798. Lord Spencer, the First Lord of the
Admiralty, guided by his own good sense and the advice of
Sir Gilbert Elliot, Lord Minto, had already selected him as
the officer to be entrusted with the duty of intercepting the
Toulon armament. His judgment coincided with the opinion
of Jervis, who spontaneously detached Nelson on a reconnaissance
into the Mediterranean on the 2nd May. Nelson sailed
in his flagship, the Vanguard, 74, and on the 4th he picked
up, at Gibraltar, the Alexander, 74, the Orion, 74, the
Emerald and Terpsichore, and the Bonne Citoyenne
sloop. On the 9th he sailed for Toulon. On the 19th
St. Vincent received orders from home to send twelve line-of-battle
ships into the Mediterranean to destroy the French
armament, and he was recommended to give the command to
Nelson. He was promised reinforcements to replace the ships
he detached. They reached him on the 24th, under command
of Sir R. Curtis, and that night the inshore squadron watching
Cadiz, was replaced, under cover of the dark, by the newcomers,
and was detached up the Mediterranean so that the Spaniards
should see nothing to excite their suspicions and give them
news to report to the French.
In the meantime Nelson had gone ahead and had been off
Cape Sicié on the 17th. He learnt from a captured privateer
that a great armament was indeed in preparation, but could
learn nothing of its destination. On the 21st the Vanguard
was dismasted in a north-westerly gale, which had begun to
blow on the 19th, and was compelled to anchor to refit at
San Pietro in Sardinia. His ships had been seen at a distance
by the French in Toulon, but they put to sea on the 19th by
favour of the north-west wind which drove him off. The
armament consisted of twelve sail of the line under Admiral
Brueys d’Aigalliers, an officer of the old French royal corps.
The warships were crowded with Napoleon’s troops, and
accompanied by transports. The French warships as usual
had been manned with difficulty, and were short-handed.
Though three months’ provisions were carried for the soldiers,
only two months’ were carried for the crews, a fact which had
an influence on the movements of Brueys later on. Immediately
after leaving Toulon the armament was joined by
a convoy from Genoa on the 21st May. The north-westerly
gale blew it on its course, and as it went down the eastern side
of Corsica and Sardinia it was sheltered from the violence of
the storm. On the 27th it was joined at the mouth of the
Straits of Bonifacio by another convoy from Ajaccio, while
a third from Civita Vecchia, followed a parallel course, and
joined the main body off Malta on the 9th June. If the fleet
of Jervis had not been tied down to watch Cadiz, it would have
been easy to prevent the army for the invasion of Egypt from
ever coming together. The possession of Malta, in the opinion
of the French, who share the common belief of mankind that
whoever holds a port commands the sea about it, would have
gone far to forward their scheme for making the Mediterranean
a French lake. The Order of St. John of Jerusalem, to which
it belonged, had been nearly ruined by the loss of its estates
in France during the Revolution, and was too poor to maintain
troops. The French army took possession on the 13th June,
and on the 18th sailed on its way to Egypt, leaving a garrison
in the island.
While the French were profiting by the delay of the
English to take early measures to intercept them, Nelson was
refitting at San Pietro. On the 27th May, the day on
which the Ajaccio Convoy joined Brueys and Napoleon, he
left San Pietro to resume his watch off Toulon. He was back
on his cruising ground on the 31st to learn that the armament
was gone to a destination he could not discover. On the
5th Captain Hardy, of the Mutine brig, brought him the
news that Troubridge was coming with reinforcements, which
would raise his command to fourteen sail. On the 7th they
joined him. In a time when the movements of ships were
controlled by the wind the seaman had certainties on which
to calculate. Nelson knew that a fleet hampered by a swarm
of transports could not have gone westward in the late north-westerly
gale. Therefore he sought them on the east of
Corsica and Sardinia. When off Gianute he was misinformed
by a Moorish vessel, which told him that the French were at
Syracuse. At Naples, on the 17th June—four days after the
French had taken Malta—he learnt that the enemy had gone
south past Sardinia. At Messina, on the 20th, he heard
of the capture of Malta and Gozo. On the 22nd he
was twelve leagues to the S.W. of Cape Passaro in Sicily,
and was there told by a neutral, who had seen them at sea,
that the French had left Malta on the 18th and were going
to the east. Napoleon was as little a friend to delay as
Nelson. He knew since the 1st June of the presence of
English ships at San Pietro, and that he was liable to
interruption. Knowing that he pressed on, but did not take
the normal course from Malta to Alexandria. He followed
a route to the north of it along the southern shore of Crete.
When therefore Nelson, concluding most justly that the
French would not go east except to attack Egypt, pressed
on in pursuit along the shortest line, he crossed the route of
his enemy, and they sailed in parallel lines. On the 25th,
when the French were off Gozo di Candia, Nelson was directly
to the south of them, barely sixty miles away, near Cape
Dernah, in Africa. As he was not weighted by transports
and was sailing on the more direct route he headed his
opponent, and reached Alexandria on the 28th June to find
the port empty, and the Turks wholly ignorant that they were
menaced by any danger. He was in a fever of excitement.
Of eager, vehement temperament, and by nature a striker of
fierce strokes, he had overshot the mark, and his blow had
been wasted in the air. His frigates had parted from him
in the gale which dismasted the Vanguard, and had not
rejoined. He was groping for his foe in the dark, and had
missed him. His mind was agitated by his imagination. He
saw himself, in his first important command, chosen over the
heads of his seniors to meet a great crisis, and it seemed as
if he had failed. He already heard in fancy the howl of disappointment
which would go up in England, worded with all
the ruffian fluency of the newspapers; and he loved honour—he
loved popularity. Agitation clouded his sagacity. He
could not consider how probable it was that his unhampered
squadron had passed the enemy, how unlikely it was that they
were heading for any other point than Egypt, an old object
of French ambition, a post from which India could be
menaced. On the 29th he hurried away to the coast of
Anatolia, from the place where British interests could be
injured, to one where the French could have gone only in a
fit of childish folly. Forty-eight hours after he had left, and
when his topsails were hardly over the horizon to the north-east,
the French were seen in the west, and the invasion of
Egypt began.
It was allowed to go on for a month undisturbed, and
Napoleon was at liberty to gain the victories which prepared
the way for his rise to despotic power in France. Nelson,
meanwhile, had reached the coast of Anatolia on the 4th July,
had battled his way back against head winds to Cape Passaro
by the 18th, had obtained water and stores at Syracuse by
the connivance of the Neapolitan Government and in defiance
of its treaty with France, and had gone to sea again by the
25th, still ignorant of the whereabouts of his enemies save
that they were somewhere in the Levant. On the 28th the
Turkish Pasha at Coron, in the Morea, told him that they had
been seen four weeks before to the south of Crete, heading to
the south-east. That they had gone to Egypt did not admit
of a doubt. Nelson steered once more for Alexandria, and
on the 1st August the Zealous signalled that the French
were at anchor in Aboukir Bay to the west of the Rosetta
mouth of the Nile.
Napoleon had preferred to keep the squadron on the
coast to co-operate with his army, though he gave the admiral
conditional leave to sail for Corfu, if he could not take his fleet
into the old harbour of Alexandria or find a safe anchorage
elsewhere on the coast. Brueys could not leave for Corfu even
if the general had been honest in giving him leave to go, for
he was short of water and provisions, and most of what the
shore could supply was taken for the army. To get into the old
harbour was difficult. To get out of it in the face of a blockading
force would have been impossible. A squadron once shut
in it might be destroyed by bombs. So he sought for a safe
anchorage and thought he found it at Aboukir, to the N.E. of
Alexandria. Aboukir, the ancient Canopus, is the western point
of the bay which lies west of the Rosetta branch of the Nile,
and it has a shallow harbour stretching from N.W. to S.E. with
an island at the N.W. point. Brueys, as an officer of the old
royal corps, serving revolutionary France from necessity, disliked
his captains as members of the class which had ruined and
degraded his own. He thought them boors, and knew them
to be ignorant. He had no confidence in his command, for his
ships were all short-handed, and several lacked a fourth or
even a third of their complement. The proportion of genuine
seamen was small and the discipline bad. No practice could
be given while the ships were crowded with soldiers and
military stores. When the ships were cleared of the army
there had been little time to drill the men, and little will on
their part to be drilled, for the anarchical spirit of the Revolution
was strong among them, and it was difficult to secure obedience.
Therefore Brueys was justified in believing that his squadron
was unequal to an encounter with an English force of
approximately the same strength. His wisest course was to
meet battle, if meet it he must, in conditions which would put
the least possible strain on its weakness. The measures he
took say little for the military intelligence of the famous royal
corps. He might have placed his ships at the N.W. corner of
the bay, close to the bank which lines the shore, and where
the English could not place ships on both sides of his.
He did anchor them so far from the bank that there was room
for an enemy to pass between them and the land, and he
arranged them in a very obtuse angle, with its apex pointing
to the N.E. If an attack was made at either end, the
other would not be able to support the part assailed. The
history of war contains no more tragic example of a force weak
in itself and so handled that all the causes of defeat were
heaped upon its weakness. And this was done in the face of
an English squadron trained in a fine school of discipline,
rendered confident by long success, perfected by practice in
nerve and judgment, led by that man of all men who was best
qualified to give its strength free play. One of the most idle
of idle discussions has chattered round the imaginary problem
whether the course of doubling on the head of the French line,
actually adopted by the English fleet, was taken by Nelson’s
order or inspired by the example of Captain Foley of the
Goliath. It was perhaps the greatest of Nelson’s great
qualities, his truest claim to be a consummate leader of men,
that he lived in genial harmony with his subordinates, discussing
all possible contingencies with them, laying down the
principles, and leaving to every man the inspiring freedom to
co-operate within the just bounds of his duty, to act as circumstances
served in the spirit of his orders, as a free man, and
not as one bound to follow the letter like a mere instrument.
Whether the French line would be doubled on must depend
on its position at the moment of battle. The advantage of
doubling and putting an opponent between two fires had been
obvious to average human intelligence from of old. On
a previous page of this book it has been shown how Tourville
did it at the battle of Beachy Head. The manœuvre, like all
the work of man, fell short of perfection. There was a risk that
when two ships were firing into a third placed between them
they would fire into one another. It was a risk which
weighed with good officers, notably with Captain Saumarez of
the Orion. He thought that, given the superiority of our
gunnery, we developed a superior force whenever an English
ship came into action with a French ship of the same rate or
one not greatly superior in armament. It is possible that
part of the loss suffered by the English squadron was inflicted
by English hands. It is a not incredible might-have-been, that
if our ships had stretched along the outside of the French line,
each anchoring as she came up and covering the passage of the
comrade behind, we might have reached their rear ships before
they got away, and so have taken them all. But the advantages
of the course followed were palpable. It was certain that the
French ships, attacked on both sides, would be rapidly crushed,
for their insufficient crews were overtaxed when compelled to
fight both broadsides. The nominal strength of the crews of
the French ships was 11,000 men. Their actual force was
7850. Twenty-five men per ship were absent guarding the
watering place on shore, and many were away in the boats
engaged in bringing off water when the English appeared.
They had sighted the coast of Egypt about Alexandria
on the morning of the 1st August. The Alexander, 74,
Captain Ball, and Swiftsure, 74, Captain Hallowell, were
sent in to reconnoitre, and reported at 10 a.m. that they
saw the harbour full of vessels, but that the French squadron
was not there. At 1 p.m. the Zealous, 74, Captain Samuel
Hood, signalled that the enemy was at anchor in Aboukir.
The Swiftsure and Alexander were recalled, and the
squadron headed for the enemy. By about 5.30 it was to
the north of Aboukir Island, which, from the battle of the
night, was to receive the name of Nelson Island. The
Mediterranean charts of the time were generally untrustworthy,
and seamen had to rely on their own observation
to learn the depths of water. Nelson hailed the Zealous
to ask of Captain Hood if he thought the ships could turn
with the security that they would clear the shoal. Hood
replied that he did not know, but would stand in and try.
The orders were to attack the enemy’s van and centre, and
to anchor. It was at six o’clock that the order was given
to stand in, and the squadron which had come from the west
turned to the south to throw itself on the French van. At
that moment eleven ship were in line. The Goliath, 74,
Captain Foley; Zealous, 74, Captain Samuel Hood; Orion,
74, Captain Sir James Saumarez; Audacious, 74, Captain
Davidge Gould; Theseus, 74, Captain Miller; Vanguard, 74,
Nelson’s flagship, of which Edward Berry was captain;
Minotaur, 74, Captain Louis; Defence, 74, Captain Peyton;
Bellerophon, 74, Captain Darby; Majestic, 74, Captain
Westcott; and the Leander, 50, Captain Thompson. The
Culloden, 74, Captain Troubridge, always an unlucky ship,
was outsailed and was behind, and the Alexander and
Swiftsure were still further off.
The French squadron consisted of thirteen vessels and
was anchored as follows:—The Guerrier, 74, a very old ship,
Captain Trullet, was at the head, and lay nearly two miles
to the south-east of Aboukir island. Behind her and stretching
to the south-east lay the Conquerant, 74, Captain Dalbarade,
a vessel so rotten with age that her armament had been
reduced, and manned by a crew of only four hundred. The
Spartiate, 74, Captain Eimeriau; the Aquilon, 74, Captain
Thevenard; and the Peuple Souverain, 74, Captain Raccord,
which was as much worn out as the Conquerant. The
Franklin, 80, Captain Gillet, the flagship of Rear-Admiral
Blanquet Duchayla, and the Orient, 110, the flagship of
Admiral Brueys, whose flag-captain was Casabianca, and who
had with him Ganteaume as captain of the fleet. The line
turned to the south beyond the Orient, and consisted of
the Tonnant, 80, Captain Dupetit Thouard; the Heureux,
74, Captain Etienne; the Mercure, 74, Captain Cambon;
the Guillaume Tell, 80, flagship of Rear-Admiral Villeneuve,
whose flag-captain was Saunier; the Généreux, 74, Captain
Lejoille; and the Timoléon, 74, Captain Léonce Trullet.
Four frigates of forty guns were anchored inside the line,
and one of them carried the flag of Rear-Admiral Decrès.
When Nelson was sighted by the French at 2 p.m. a hasty
council of war was held in the Orient. There was discussion
what ought to be done, though lack of means and of time
forbade the doing of anything save one thing—that was
to lie and wait for the English attack in the hope that it
would not be made till next morning, and with the expectation
that it would not be made on the van, though that, as
being the windward end of the squadron, was precisely the
point at which attack would be most effective, and least
liable to interruption by the French ships to leeward.
The attack was made that night, and was made on the
van. At six o’clock, just as the sun was touching the horizon,
the Goliath crossed the bow of the Guerrier, pouring in her
fire with such effect that the Frenchman’s foremast came
down. The men on the deck of the Goliath, who could
see that they had drawn the first blood, cheered the happy
omen, and the cheer was taken up by the crews at the guns
below. The Goliath was to have been anchored with a
spring at her cable, abreast of the Guerrier, but the anchor
did not hold, and she was brought up abreast of the Conquerant.
The Zealous followed in her wake and took the
place she had failed to hold abreast of the Guerrier. The
Orion followed, and, passing inside of the Goliath and
Zealous (so wide was the space between the French ships
and the shoal water), anchored by the Spartiate. The
Audacious came along the same track and anchored by
the Peuple Souverain. The Theseus passed astern of the
Guerrier, through the overwide interval of 150 metres
between the French ships, and ahead of the Conquerant,
then swept inside of her comrades and assailed the Aquilon.
Nelson came into action behind the Theseus, but passed
outside the French line, and, neglecting the already overpowered
Guerrier and Conquerant, anchored on the starboard
side of the Spartiate which was already attacked on the
port side by the Orion. The Minotaur passed outside
the Vanguard and joined the Theseus in firing into the
Aquilon. The Defence came on behind the Minotaur
and assailed the Peuple Souverain. She had no colleague,
but the French ship was so weak as to be hardly able
to fire her guns without danger to herself and was no
formidable antagonist. Thus eight English ships were in
action with five French, of which three were more or less
unfit to be in a line of battle. So the French van was
rapidly crushed and the victory was won.
The destruction of the French squadron was not to be
completed with the same ease. The next in order to the
Peuple Souverain in the French line was the Franklin, 80,
next to her came the Orient, 110, and the Tonnant, 80.
These three powerful ships formed, as it were, a central
citadel to the French line, and our most severe loss was
suffered in action with them. The Bellerophon, which
followed the Vanguard, passed the Franklin, and came
under the broadside of the Orient. The Majestic went
beyond the Bellerophon and came into action with the
Tonnant. Both were severely mauled. The Bellerophon
was shattered by the fire of the Orient, and drifted off down the
bay. The Majestic was fiercely dealt with by the Tonnant,
fell away from her, and became entangled with the next in
the line, the Heureux. The Heureux’s captain, Etienne, had
called up his men to repel boarders, or to board, when the
Majestic broke away and was brought up beside the
Mercure. These two ships suffered far more severely than any
of the others engaged. The Bellerophon lost 49 men
killed and 148 wounded. The Majestic, 50, killed, including
her captain Westcott, and 143 wounded. Between them they
suffered a greater loss than all the ships of Jervis’s squadron
at the battle of Cape St. Vincent. But now the vessels which
had not been near enough to take part in the first attack
began to come in. The Swiftsure attacked the Franklin
and the Alexander, L’Orient. They were joined by the
little Leander which had been delayed by her efforts to
drag off the ever unlucky Culloden, which had grounded on
the Aboukir shoal. The Leander anchored ahead of the
Franklin and raked both her and the Orient. As the fire in
the French van ceased by the surrender of the overpowered
ships, our vessels dropped down and helped to crush the
enemy’s centre. They were aided by the frightful disaster
which befell the Orient. She caught fire and blew up. The
French ships beyond her cut their cables and drifted away.
The isolated Franklin fought long and gallantly but was overpowered
at last. In the French rear Villeneuve, hesitating,
contemplating difficulties, thinking of safety and seeking it
not by grasping the nettle, but by evasion, as he was to do
seven years later, did nothing to help his comrades. He
thought it much that he could escape next morning with his
flagship the Guillaume Tell, the Généreux and two frigates.
Nelson, who had been wounded in the head by a langrage
shot while engaged with the Aquilon, thought, that if he had
not been disabled, even they would have been taken. But
the case was indeed one for saying they had done very well.
During the night and the following morning all the French
ships, except Villeneuve’s four, were taken or destroyed.
Brueys fell on the deck of his flagship. The total loss of the
French is difficult to estimate. It has been put by themselves
at 1451 killed and 1479 wounded. The loss in Nelson’s
squadron was 218 killed and 678 wounded, and to that total
of 896, the Bellerophon and the Majestic contributed
390. Of the ships which were active in crushing the van
the Zealous lost only 1 killed and 7 wounded, the Theseus
4 killed and 7 wounded, the Defence 4 killed and 11
wounded, while the Leander had only 14 men wounded and
none killed.
Six days after the great turning movement had been
wrecked in Aboukir Bay, the attack on England from the
ocean ports of France began to be put into execution. It
was to be directed through Ireland, and was to be double.
One squadron under Savary was ordered to carry troops from
Rochefort, while another and stronger squadron was to carry
a division from Brest. Combined operations are liable to
fail from obstacles which upset the most promising combination,
and this was no exception to a common experience.
Savary did indeed sail unseen from Rochefort on the 6th
of August. He reached Killala Bay, between Sligo and Mayo,
on the 21st. He had with him the Concorde, 40, the
Franchise, 36, the Medée, 36, and the Venus, 28, and they
carried General Humbert, an officer of much spirit and
ingenuity, and 1150 soldiers. Now, as for the raid Humbert
made, the victory he won at Castlebar, his surrender at
Ballinamuck, and the difficulty he said he found in discovering
a real general among the many English officers of that title he
heard of, are they not written in the books of the chronicles
of Ireland? The story inspires a profound gratitude to the
Providence which confined the invasion to Humbert and
1150 men, and spared us Hoche with ten times (or more)
that number. Having landed his charge, Savary was quickly
away on the 23rd and anchored safely at Royan, in the
Gironde, on the 9th September, from whence he returned to
Rochefort on the 20th.
Bompard, who was to sail from Brest, was not so fortunate.
His start was delayed first by want of money, for the finances
of France were still in such a distressed state that the Government
could not send him so small a sum as £6000 to
pay the soldiers, and the men refused to sail without an
advance. Then there was an alarm of an English inroad into
Holland, and troops were held back to meet that danger.
But the worst obstacle was the watch of the English blockading
fleet. Its frigates cruised in the Iroise, and the line-of-battle
ships were at hand. Bompard made one attempt to
get away by the passage between the Black Rocks and
Ushant, saw Bridport ahead of him, and went back. During
the night of the 16th September he did get away, for though
the wind blew strongly from the N.E. off shore, Bridport had
taken his ships away to the northward of Ushant. So
Bompard was free to sail out through the Raz du Sein to
the southward, under cover of the dark. Next morning he
was clear of the land in hazy weather, but he saw, and was
seen, by the Ethalion frigate, Captain Countess, who had
with him the Boadicea frigate, Captain R. Keats, and the
brig Sylph, Captain White. They were between him and
the Bee du Raz. Captain Countess attached himself to the
French squadron, which consisted of the Hoche, 74 (the old
Pégase), the Immortalité, Romaine, Loire, Bellone, Coquille,
Embuscade, Resolue, and Semillante frigates and a schooner.
The squadron carried 3000 troops under Generals Hardy
and Ménage. Captain Countess despatched the Boadicea to
warn Bridport, who, after looking into the Iroise to obtain the
evidence of his own eyes, sent warning home that a French
squadron had escaped what a very polite fiction would call
his vigilance.
The Ethalion followed Bompard, retiring when menaced,
and coming back again when the French went on. Bompard
took the seeming cautious, but in reality very rash, course
of endeavouring to shake off his pursuer by steering wide
out to the south. He could hardly have provided more
effectually for his own defeat. His one chance of success
(and it was a poor one now that Savary’s success had aroused
his enemy’s vigilance and had turned his attention to the
Irish Coast) was to head an intercepting force. Every hour
he added to his voyage increased the danger that he would
be intercepted, and he was. When Bridport’s message reached
England Sir J. B. Warren was sent from Cawsand Bay to
the west coast of Ireland to bar the road. He sailed on
the 23rd September, and on the 10th October was off Achill
Head. If Bompard had gone direct to his destination, Killala
Bay, trusting, as from the nature of his task he had to trust,
to fortune, he would have been off Tory Island some days
before Warren was in a position to attack him, and might
have landed Hardy in Killala Bay. As he preferred to try
artful management, where speed and boldness were wanted,
he was sighted on the 11th October, near the Island, by
Warren, who then had with him the Canada, 74, Robust, 74,
Foudroyant, 80, Magnanime, Ethalion, Anson, Melampus,
and Amelia frigates. The English officer pursued and
overtook his enemy on the following day. The Hoche, Bompard’s
one line-of-battle ship, was easily overpowered, and six of
the frigates with her were captured in a succession of fights
off the west coast of Ireland. The utmost audacity could
have brought no worse fate on Bompard and his command.
Isolated French ships reached the Irish coast—as, for
instance, the brig Anacreon, which in September visited the
coast of Donegal, went back on hearing of the surrender of
Humbert, and returned to her starting-point, Dunkirk, bringing
a valuable prize with her. On the 12th October Savary
sailed again from Rochefort with a larger squadron and
1090 soldiers. He looked into Killala, found that a landing
was hopeless, and went back to Rochefort. He was chased
and had to throw guns overboard to lighten his vessels, but
he got back safe.
The direct invasion scheme had broken down. Yet the
whole story puts these two questions—Did it break down
because of the strength of our guard? What does the failure
teach us to expect in the future? No fair-minded man can
assert that fortune had no share in our success. Hoche’s
expedition would have succeeded as fully as the expedition of
Savary and Humbert, but for some measure of bad management
on the part of Morard de Galle, and the persistence of
bad weather. Of the expeditions of 1798, both of Savary’s
reached the coast of Ireland and returned in safety. So did
the Anacreon. Bompard alone was defeated at sea. The
most obvious lesson of it all is of course that better management
than Bridport’s will always be needed, and the better
the enemy the greater the want. Other nations study these
stories. We must not take it for granted that a French
Revolution will help us by disorganising our foes.
The double failure in Egypt and on the coast of Ireland
suspended all schemes of invasion for a time. France and
England alike had their eyes fixed on Napoleon’s army in
Egypt. The news of the disaster in Aboukir Bay produced
a profound effect throughout Europe. A storm broke out in
France against the Directory, who were accused of having
“deported” the best general and the best army of the
Republic. Public men who had been loud in promoting the
expedition began to throw the blame for it on one another.
Public excitement and anger were aggravated by the speedy
discovery that a new coalition was forming, and that France
would again be called upon to fight for her very existence, at
least for all she had gained by the Revolution. To recover
Napoleon and his army became a leading object with the
French. To keep them in Egypt was no less the object of
England. The best that could have happened would have
been that Napoleon should have made a serious attempt to
carry out his grand scheme of marching on the footsteps of
Alexander the Great, through Persia and Afghanistan to India.
He would have perished on his march, and Europe would have
escaped years of misery. But to keep him away from the
battlefields of Europe was a real gain. The most effectual of
all ways of doing this would have been to retain a large force
on the coast of Egypt, and send out troops. It was not the
course taken. Nelson sent the Leander home with his despatches
carried by Captain Berry. She fell in with the Généreux
on the 18th August, and was captured. On the 14th August
Sir James Saumarez sailed with the Orion, Bellerophon,
Minotaur, Defence, Audacious, Theseus, and Majestic, to
escort the French prizes the Franklin, Tonnant, Aquilon, Conquérant,
and Peuple Souverain. Three of the prizes were destroyed, and
it would have been better that all should have been burnt. But
the just reward of the toils and dangers of officers and men,
and more especially of commanders-in-chief, junior admirals,
and captains, was not to be thrown away. So Saumarez made
a slow, painful voyage westward with his convoy of battered
hulks. He summoned Malta, was defied by the French
general, and gave arms to the islanders who had risen against
the French, driven to desperation by pillage and the violation
of their women. Malta was blockaded by the Portuguese
ships which had served with Jervis, and the Lion, 64. On
the 19th Nelson sailed with the Vanguard, Culloden, and
Alexander for Naples. He left the Zealous, Goliath,
and Swiftsure, the Seahorse, Emerald, and Alcmene
frigates, and the Bonne Citoyene sloop to watch the coast of
Egypt. He himself, in an evil hour, sailed for Naples. It is
not superfluous to point out that though Nelson was ardently
desirous to weaken the French in Egypt he landed his
prisoners, for whom he could with difficulty provide, and they
afforded Napoleon a welcome reinforcement for his army. If
the prizes had all been burnt after whatever stores were of use
had been taken out of them, if Nelson had sought a basis of
operations in some Turkish port in Crete or Cyprus, the
prisoners could have been kept in one of those islands and
Egypt better watched.
Our ships would at least have been better employed than
many of them were destined to be on the coast of Naples.
The operations in which he was engaged till he left the
Mediterranean occupy a justly promoted place in the biography
of Nelson. They need few words here, and those few
only to show that they were a pure waste of force. The
kingdom of Naples on the mainland was indefensible against
a French army in central Italy by naval force. The Government
was rotten and the troops were worthless. The obvious
deduction from these facts was that we ought to have confined
ourselves to blockading Malta, and ought to have warned
the king of Naples that he was not to expect any help from us if
he plunged into adventures. What happened was that Nelson,
acting under influences which must be looked for in his
biographies, egged on the king of Naples to make an attack
on the French force occupying Rome, which brought on him
an ignominious thrashing, and drove him to abject flight to
Sicily in November and December of 1798. Henceforth
a British squadron reinforced to eight sail of the line and
four Portuguese were employed looking on idly at the occupation
of Naples, till the advance of the Austrian and Russian
armies in Northern Italy compelled the French to retreat.
Then they rendered superfluous assistance to the Neapolitan
Government to recover what could not be defended against it.
While they were so employed their separation from other
English forces in the Mediterranean helped to create a
position of very serious danger. Meanwhile, an English
squadron, under Rear-Admiral Duckworth, carrying troops
under General Stuart, took possession of Minorca. The
Turks took up arms against the French, and Russia intervened.
The Ionian Isles, except Corfu, were regained from the French.
The Government at Paris was driven to see that an effort
must be made in the Mediterranean.
Lord Palmerston is credited with the shrewd saying that
whenever a man is heard to say that “something must be
done,” it is safe to calculate on his doing something foolish.
To strike out with no definite aim is rarely the way to deliver
an effective stroke, though it may at times, and with help
from fortune, be a more hopeful course than lying still.
Whether the French Government matured any coherent
scheme during the last months of 1798 and the first of 1799
is highly doubtful. We can only be sure as to what was
actually done by them and for them. It was in substance
this, that their fleet at Brest was sent into the Mediterranean,
if not to do some definite thing, at least to see what could be
done. The Minister of Marine, Eustache Bruix, came down
from Paris to take command himself. He was well supplied
with money, and it was in his power to pay the sailors and
dockyard hands. Great and ardent exertions were made. The
ships were better appointed and far better manned than any
French fleet had been during the war. The admiral was popular
with the men, and he had cause to look with confidence on
the force which he had equipped by the middle of April. It
consisted of the following ships of the line. The Ocean, Invincible,
Républicain, Terrible of 110 guns; the Formidable and
Indomptable of 84; the Jemmapes, Montblanc, Tyrannicide,
Batave, Constitution, Révolution, Fongueux, Censeur, Zélé,
Redoutable, Wattignies, Tourville, Cisalpin, Jean Bart,
Gaulois, Convention, Duquesne, J. J. Rousseau, Dix Août of 74,
together with ten frigates, sloops, and ships armed en flûte as
store ships.
Bridport had joined the small squadron which was
watching Brest in April, and had with him sixteen sail of the
line. He had looked into the Iroise, and knew that the French
were preparing for sea, but according to his usual practice he
cruised at some distance to the W.S.W. of Ushant. On the
very day on which he took up his position—the 25th April—Bruix
sailed through the Raz du Sein. He was sighted by
the Nymphe frigate, Captain Fraser, who at once reported
to Bridport. The English admiral, punctual as ever in his own
fashion, looked into Brest once more on the 26th, and then went
off to Cape Clear. He was convinced that the enemy were
bound for Ireland, and they confirmed his belief by putting a
small vessel carrying an officer entrusted with a misleading
dispatch in his way, an old but well-preserved stratagem.
Bridport sent warnings to Cadiz and to England, and Bruix
was left at liberty to go south.
The situation in front of him was nearly all he could
wish. There was indeed no French force he could join.
The Généreux was at Corfu, and the Guillaume Tell at Malta.
Nine vessels taken from the Venetians were scattered between
Alexandria, Ancona, and Toulon, but they were of no value.
On the other hand, the Spaniards had a squadron of uncertain
number and certain inefficiency at Cadiz, which had to be
watched by the English, and was therefore of indirect help to
Bruix. Nothing need be said of the Russians and Turks,
save that they were moving in the Mediterranean. Bruix’
real opponents were the English, and they were scattered.
Fifteen sail of the line under Lord Keith were blockading
Cadiz. One was at Tetuan. Four were with Duckworth at
Minorca. Nelson had eight English sail of the line and four
Portuguese, divided between the blockade of Malta, the
harbour of Palermo, where he himself lay at the urgent prayer
of King Ferdinand to calm the nerves of the old women of
both sexes in the runaway Neapolitan Court, and the coast
of Southern Italy, where the Royalists were gaining ground
against the Republic set up by the French. As the French
troops had been called off to meet the allies in Northern Italy,
the Republic was collapsing from internal weakness. Minorca
was of real value as a basis for a strong fleet blockading
Toulon. As an isolated post hastily occupied by a handful
of soldiers, it was a mere burden. The whole disposition of
our forces was as unintelligent and as vicious as it well could
have been. Our naval forces in the Levant engaged in
watching the coasts of Egypt and Syria may be left aside as
not being immediately affected, and as being too far off to
render prompt help.
On the 3rd May, Keith was told by the Success frigate
that she had sighted the French off Oporto coming south.
With a big fleet coming against him from the Ocean, and
nineteen, or so, Spaniards more or less ready for sea in Cadiz,
his position looked hazardous. He had need for steady
nerve, but the admiral though not a brilliant nor quick-witted
man possessed that solid virtue in a useful degree. He
waited, ready for fight or retreat, till he saw what was going to
happen. On the 4th, in the morning, the French were
sighted, thirty-three sail of them, in the W.N.W. The wind
was blowing hard from the west, rising to a storm, and it drove
curtains of confusing sea fog before it. As it blew right into
Cadiz Bay, the Spaniards could not move. Keith kept
between them and the French. His expert ships maintained
their formation and lost no spars in the stormy weather,
which threw the French into confusion and caused them much
minor damage. The fleets lost sight of one another in the
fog, and on the 5th Bruix ran through the Straits before the
gale. Two or three of his liners had suffered damage by collision
and loss of spars, but he might have sent all three into
Carthagena and still have had twenty-two for a bold stroke.
It was not till the 12th that Nelson at Palermo heard of the
inroad of the Brest fleet into the Mediterranean. If Bruix
had employed those seven days in steering for Southern Italy,
he had ninety-nine chances out of a hundred to souse down on
the vessels blockading Malta before they knew of his approach,
to capture them, to cut off Nelson at Palermo, leaving him
to rage single-handed with the Vanguard among the old
women of both sexes of the Neapolitan Court, to fall on the
ships on the coast of Naples, capturing, driving ashore, or
driving off every one of them. Then he might have gone on
to the Riviera and Toulon by the east of Sardinia and Corsica,
after doing his cause a substantial service. He knew the
divided state of the English forces. He had laid some such
plan as this. But like his brother French admirals in this
war, he was chilled by the first check. The damage suffered
by his ships on the 4th and 5th froze his ardour, and he
steered piteously for Toulon, where he anchored on the 14th
May with his two crippled ships, the Batàve and the Fougueux.
And now for two months these numerous fleets, French and
English, were engaged in missing one another in a game of
blind man’s buff.
St. Vincent saw the French pass the Straits on the
5th, and at once summoned the Edgar from Tetuan, and
Keith from his cruising ground between Cadiz and Cape
Spartel. On the 12th he followed Bruix—or rather, he
steered for Minorca to join Duckworth, who was in danger
of being cut off, and to cover the island, which in the absence
of a covering naval force might have been retaken by the
Spaniards. He joined Duckworth on the 20th, and had
twenty sail of the line on hand. On that day Nelson had
concentrated his ships at Maritimo. On that day, too, the
Spaniards, who on finding the blockade of Cadiz raised by the
withdrawal of Keith, had come to sea hoping to be able to
retake Minorca, staggered into Carthagena half dismasted by
the gale. On the 22nd, St. Vincent left Minorca for Toulon,
but hearing that the Spaniards were coming round, put himself
on their road to Toulon at Cape San Sebastian on the 26th.
On that day Bruix left Toulon for the Riviera with twenty-two
sail to co-operate with the French armies now fighting in
retreat before the allies. On the 30th May, St. Vincent was
joined by Rear-Admiral Whitshed with five sail of the line
sent out from home to reinforce him. On the same day he
sent Duckworth with four ships to join Nelson. He now
moved up the coast towards Toulon, but on the 2nd June he
found his health unequal to the strain of service at sea, and
left the fleet for Minorca in his flagship the Ville de Paris,
100—for he would not go, so he said, in a frigate “like a
convict,” and his regard for his dignity was strong enough to
make him weaken his successor by the loss of a very powerful
ship. Keith, to whom the command now fell, went towards
Toulon, while Bruix after convoying a fleet of transports with
provisions to the French garrison of Genoa, went to Vado, and
anchored there on the 4th. His movement to the east was
revealed to Keith by the crew of a prize, and he went in
pursuit on the 5th. When off Cape Delle Melle, he received
orders from St. Vincent to detach two more ships to Nelson,
and to cruise off Rosas to intercept Bruix, who was, rightly
enough, supposed to be bound for Carthagena. If the commander-in-chief
had abstained from meddling, Keith would
probably have met Bruix with twenty ships against the
Frenchman’s twenty-two. On the 8th June, Bruix left
Vado for Carthagena, which was what St. Vincent calculated
he would do. If he were bound in that direction, what
need was there to reinforce the distant squadron of Nelson at
the expense of the immediately threatened fleet of Keith,
which was reduced by the detachment to eighteen sail of the
line? If to divide your forces in the presence of an enemy
is a blunder, and what Napoleon when criticising Cornwallis
called an “insigne bêtise” then St. Vincent committed that
blunder, that insigne bêtise. If Keith had obeyed his orders
precisely, he would in all probability have met Bruix with
eighteen ships to twenty-two. But Keith was aware of his
inferiority in numbers, and he came to Minorca to pick up
the Ville de Paris. The Frenchman slipped through the gap
he left, and reached Carthagena on the 22nd June. While he
was going on his way, and the Batàve and Fougueux, repaired
at Toulon, followed and joined him, Keith first picked up the
Ville de Paris on the 15th June, and went back to watch
Toulon. On the 19th he secured more reward for toils and
dangers by capturing a small French squadron of three frigates
and two brigs under Rear-Admiral Perrée, who had escaped
from Syria and was on his way home. He cruised off Toulon
from the 20th to the 23rd, while Bruix was anchoring at
Carthagena, while Nelson was still watching for him, and
while the Royalist forces were completing the ruin of the Republicans
at Naples. On the 24th he went to Vado, just as
Nelson, relieved from anxiety about Bruix, came into the Bay of
Naples in time to secure his dear King and Queen of Naples
a fine feast of hangings and torturings to console them for
their spasms of terror during the last few months. The
Republicans had been beaten without need of our help, but
if Nelson had not been at hand to see that due vengeance was
taken on Jacobins, they would have saved their lives by
capitulation. On the 25th, Bruix sailed from Carthagena
with the refitted Spanish ships. Next day Keith went to
Vado, and from thence to the east end of Minorca. On the
27th June he wrote to Nelson asking him to send such ships
as he could spare to assist in defending Minorca, and Nelson
refused on the ground that the safety of His Sicilian Majesty’s
dominions must be secured. Bruix, the only enemy who
could have assailed either, was then on his way from
Carthagena to Cadiz, which he reached on the 11th July.
On the 8th, Keith had been joined near Minorca by Sir
Charles Cotton, who brought twelve sail of the line from home.
On the 10th he left in pursuit of the French, of whose presence
at Carthagena he had been informed. On the 21st July,
Bruix sailed from Cadiz, dragging with him a reluctant
Spanish squadron which was forced to accompany him
by its intimidated Government. When Keith sailed from
Gibraltar on the 30th July the Frenchman had a long start,
and it was lucky for him that he had. The French sailed ill,
and the Spaniards still more badly, so that when Bruix and
his Spanish colleague, Mazaredo, anchored in the roadstead of
Brest they were just ahead of Keith, who sailed a greater
distance and started nine days behind them.
Such was the famous cruise of Bruix—one of the passages
of the great Revolutionary war which best deserves study.
The French gained a material advantage, for they carried off
a Spanish squadron, and so secured a hostage for the obedience
of the Spanish Government and people, who were becoming
restive under the disasters brought on them by the Alliance.
But what is to be said of the English officers who allowed
them to gain this advantage, such as it was? Bridport, who
was negligent, and was befooled, is defended by nobody. Can
anything be said for St. Vincent? for Nelson? even for Keith,
the least responsible of the three? St. Vincent made it
inevitable that he would be weak in the Straits of Gibraltar
when he allowed so large a proportion of his fleet to be
detached to Naples. Nelson intensified the bad consequences
of the initial mistake when he egged the Neapolitan Government
on to make its silly attack on the French, thereby
bringing down a torrent of disasters. Two English liners
and the Portuguese could have blockaded Malta in the then
prostrate state of the French. If six of the eight ships of
the line with Nelson had been in the Straits on the 5th May,
they with the sixteen already there would have been in a
position to give battle to Bruix at once, and thereby to
give the best possible protection both to Minorca and to
Naples. When the French did appear, St. Vincent divided
his fleet by sending Duckworth to Naples, and then weakened
Keith by forcing him to detach two other vessels. And
that he did just when he was doing all that lay in his
power to bring about a battle with forces which he knew to
be superior. The conduct of Nelson can be explained, but
is a commander to be held excused when we say that he was
but a fallible man, liable to be besotted by erotic delusion
and megalomania? We suffered no disaster. We only
failed, and for that escape from the natural consequences of
our acts we have to thank the Providence which had served
us already by blowing Hoche and Morard de Galle away
from the coast of Ireland.
The escape of Bruix was followed within a month and
a few days by the escape of Napoleon from Egypt. As war,
according to his own maxim, is an affair not of men but
of a man, this was a disaster of the first magnitude for the
enemies of France. Hood, who had been left to watch the
coast of Egypt in August, was superseded on the 2nd of
February 1799 by Troubridge with the Culloden and
Theseus. A month later—on the 3rd March—Troubridge
was in turn superseded by Sir Sidney Smith, who brought
with him the Tigre, 74, and some small craft. By a piece
of most eccentric management, Smith had been appointed
Envoy Plenipotentiary to the Porte in combination with his
brother, Spencer Smith, who already held the post. Being
what our ancestors called a “bold undertaking fellow” and
we call a “very pushing man,” Smith gave himself the airs of
a commander-in-chief, to the extreme exasperation of Nelson,
who snubbed him with emphasis. All these officers successively,
or in combination, contrived almost, but not quite, to
cut off Napoleon from communication with France. They
bombarded the ships in Alexandria repeatedly with no great
effect. From March to the 21st of June, Smith was busily
engaged in helping the Pasha of Acre, Djezzar (the Butcher),
to repel the attack of Napoleon, who had marched out of
Egypt to follow on the footsteps of Alexander the Great.
After his return to Egypt, Smith helped a Turkish army to
land at Aboukir—an adventure comparable with the Neapolitan
advance on Rome, and similar in its results. The Turks
were cut to pieces on the 25th July. Napoleon, who was
informed of the renewal of the war on land in Europe, was
preparing to escape before the Turks landed at Aboukir.
As the vital work of confining him to Egypt had been
subordinated to the security of His Sicilian Majesty’s dominions,
the blockading squadron was small. The two liners, the
Tigre and Theseus, Sidney Smith had with him, were
taken by him to Cyprus for stores on the 9th August. On
the 23rd Napoleon sailed from Alexandria, the coast being
clear, and got away. On the 1st October he touched at
Ajaccio, and on the 9th he landed at Fréjus. His return
marks an epoch in the history of the war, of Europe, and
of mankind. It was followed by the overthrow of the
Directory and his assumption of despotic power as First
Consul. From that day all the power of France was
directed by his great and maleficent genius. He might
have escaped in any case, but he was helped to escape
by the British Government and its admirals. They were
loud in proclaiming the necessity of imprisoning him in Egypt,
but they kept an insufficient force to blockade him, because
they preferred to employ their ships to peddle in the Bay of
Naples, or to patrol round the island of Minorca.
CHAPTER XIV INVASION TILL THE CLOSE OF 1801
Authorities.—As before.
The retreat of Bruix from the Mediterranean and the
return of Napoleon were followed by a pause in the
naval war. The French fleet was exhausted by the
effort it had made, and its return to Brest was followed by
an outbreak of discontent, mutiny, and desertion among the
crews. The Spaniards they had brought with them, sixteen sail,
were politically useful to France as hostages, but were of
no military value. The Spanish Ferrol squadron, which
was to have joined Bruix when on his way to the Mediterranean
in April, had missed him, perhaps deliberately, had
then gone on to Aix roads, where they were attacked to no
purpose by the frigates and bomb-vessels of an English
squadron commanded by Rear-Admiral Pole on the 2nd July.
They returned home in the course of September, after an
attempt to enter Brest. While the French naval forces were
thus exhausted, Napoleon was absorbed in the discharge of
obligations which were preliminary to the renewal of an attack
on England. He had first to make himself master of France
by the coup d’état of the 18th Brumaire VIII (9th November
1799). Then he had to beat the Austrians who were
pressing on the south-eastern frontier of France, and to bring
about a separation between them and the Russians, with
whom they were on very bad terms. In the interval the
French could do nothing to help the army Napoleon had left
behind him in Egypt, except endeavour to send blockade
runners with news and stores. It became continually more
difficult for them to do even this. They were excluded from
Italy, and Corfu had surrendered on the 3rd March 1799 to
the Turks and Russians.
When Keith left the Mediterranean in pursuit of Bruix,
Nelson remained in temporary command, but in the absence
of an enemy he had nothing to do save to tighten the blockade
of Malta and keep an eye on Minorca, which continued to
be a burden and a cause of division of forces. He did not
cease to be absorbed in schemes for the promotion of the
interests of Their Sicilian Majesties—schemes which were
superfluous if the French were beaten in Northern Italy, and
were certain to be blown into space so soon as they were
victorious. The English Government being well aware by
this time that Nelson had “Sicilified” his conscience, decided
to send Lord Keith back to his post as Commander-in-Chief
in the Mediterranean. It was his due, for he had been sent
out to be second in command to St. Vincent, and the duty
had been handed over to him by his chief. Keith was not a
genius, but he had common sense, he had not forgotten that
he was the servant of King George III., and he was impervious
to the fascinations of the court of Naples.
Keith sailed on the 20th November 1799 to resume the
command, and reached Gibraltar on the 6th December. In
the absence of a French fleet he had no duty to discharge
except to superintend the blockade of Malta and help our
Austrian allies as far as he could. Malta had long been cut
off from communication with home. An attempt was made to
relieve the garrison on the 18th February. A small convoy
was sent under the protection of the Généreux, which had
escaped from Corfu. The convoy was commanded by the
Rear-Admiral, Perrée, who had been taken by Lord Keith in
the previous year. The convoy was scattered, Perrée was killed,
and the Généreux was taken by a number of vessels immediately
commanded by Nelson in his flagship the Foudroyant.
On the 30th February the Guillaume Tell, the last survivor of
the French fleet of the battle of the Nile, which was lying in
Malta, made an attempt to escape. She was sighted, pursued,
surrounded by a swarm of enemies, and was surrendered,
after a most magnificent defence, by Admiral Decrès, who
held the superior command in her, and who was to be
Napoleon’s Minister of Marine. The fate of the garrison was
now certain, but General Vaubois held out till English troops
had been landed to reinforce the islanders, and till hunger
compelled him to surrender on the 5th September 1800.
The occupation of Malta was timely, for it coincided with
the collapse of the allies in Italy, and made us independent of
ports on the mainland. In spring the Austrians seemed to be
making themselves masters of Northern Italy, and the English
Government appeared to be about to support them with
decision. Troops were sent to Minorca under command of
General Fox. Others followed, and were ordered to follow,
under the commandership-in-chief of Sir Ralph Abercromby,
an old officer who at least knew his business in the field, and
had done promising service in the West Indies and the Low
Countries. But Austria and England were preparing victory
for France under a vain show of energy. The Austrians had
got rid of their Russian ally, the great Suvarof, a real captain,
whose habit of concentrating his men, striking at the heart of
his enemy, and wringing the last drop of gain out of every
success, shocked their pedantry. Moreover, it was their
intention to deliver Italy from French oppression and
revolutionary principles for the purpose of putting it into
their own pockets. Therefore they had no wish for the help
of an associate who would cry halves. They were going
to work by the book of arithmetic, sagaciously besieging and
taking post after post, and thereby they allowed Napoleon
ample time to organise the army which was to wrench all
their conquests from them in one day of battle. The English
Government was disposed to help by sending soldiers to
fight a little and then come away. Sir Charles Pasley, author
of a treatise on The Military Policy of the British Empire,
which appeared in 1808 and produced a great impression, said
epigrammatically that we worked with our navy and played
with our army. The operations before 1800, and on too
many occasions afterwards, till Spain gave us a safe footing
in 1808, justify his scoff. It was too much the custom of
the English Government to overcrowd soldiers into leaky
transports where they were plagued by scurvy, and to
keep them hanging round the outskirts of the European
conflict. Like an immortal personage in a great English
classic, our army was always making the gesture of taking
its coat off. When it was allowed to land, the generals
were carefully instructed to go no farther than they could
go back easily. They were to advance with their eyes
over their shoulders. In the autumn of 1799 we had
made an inroad of this half-hearted kind into Holland in
co-operation with the Russians. It was badly led, for the
Duke of York, an excellent commander-in-chief at the Horse
Guards but a deplorable general in the field, was the leader.
But the forces employed were insufficient. We gained a naval
advantage. The remains of the Dutch fleet fell into our
hands at the Nieuwe Diep, partly through the bad management
of their admiral, Storij, but mainly because the Dutch
sailors would not fight. They had an hereditary loyalty to
the house of Orange, and they were discontented with a life
of unpaid idleness under the Batavian Republic. And here
it is not irrelevant to record that the Dutch sailors were already
swarming into our navy and merchant ships. It was calculated
that in 1800 as many as 20,000 Dutchmen were sailing under
our flag. As the predominance of France grew more and more
oppressive, as she dragged one country after another into
her struggle with England, ever increasing numbers of foreign
sailors sought a refuge from ruin at home in our ports. They
were invited by the English law, which gave naturalisation
and with it the right to command a merchant ship to any
foreigner who had served for two years in our navy. Northern
seamen were preferred, both because they were hardier men, and
because coming from kindred races Jansen easily became
Johnson, and Pieterzoon Peterson. Therefore it was that we
were able to man both our navy and our merchant service,
which doubled during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic
wars.
Our share in the resistance to France in Northern Italy
during the command of Lord Keith was quite on the then
prevailing model. It was efficient in so far as it was naval,
and in so far as it was military it was pitiful. Abercromby came
to Minorca in May, and we made the gesture of taking off our
coat to help the Austrians at the siege of Genoa, where
Massena was tenaciously holding out with the last French army
in Italy. But the coat was not taken off. The navy blockaded
vigilantly, helped to capture small French posts, and did some
gallant cutting out. The cutting out of the Prima galley
from the mole of Genoa by Captain Beaver was as dashing a
piece of work of that kind as was done in the war. The
galley slaves, of whom some were criminals, but some were
prisoners of war, rowed the galley out with alacrity when
Beaver had loosened the chains which bound her to the mole.
The story had a sickening sequel. It seems incredible that
Keith, a man of honour and humanity, should have sent the
greater part of these poor wretches back to Genoa, where they
were butchered by Massena. But “such things were,” to use
a favourite phrase of Nelson’s. The incident was typical, for
at that time we were much in the habit of landing against the
French, inviting the help of the people, and then leaving them
in the lurch. “Such things” went far to put a meaning into
Napoleon’s abuse of Perfidious Albion, which used all men for
her own advantage, and left them to suffer for trusting to her word.
Massena was starved out by the 4th June, and next day
the town was occupied by the allies—Austrian soldiers and
English ships. English soldiers were going to come from
Minorca, but did not. It was perhaps fortunate they did not,
for nine days after our vessels anchored at the mole, Napoleon’s
army smashed the Austrians at Marengo. A beating usually
extorted an armistice and large surrenders from Austria. So
it did now. An armistice was signed at Alessandria two days
after the defeat. The Austrians surrendered their conquests
in Piedmont wholesale, and on the 23rd Massena reoccupied
Genoa with such promptitude that the Minotaur was hardly
able to warp out of the port in time to escape capture.
Political necessities made it incumbent on Napoleon to
return to Paris, and the full harvest of Marengo was not
gathered till the close of 1800. But a great wind of terror
began to blow all along the Italian Peninsula. The Queen of
Naples went off to implore the Czar Paul to save her dominions.
Nelson went with her, and the English Minister at Naples, Sir
William Hamilton, who had been superseded after many and
flagrant proofs of dotage. Naples may be dismissed for the
present with a brief notice that the king continued to attempt
to play a part, and gain an increase of territory in Central
Italy—at least to enrich his collections of pictures and
statues by the plunder of Rome. He had an army, and it
was handsomely tailored. But as King Ferdinand’s cynical
son and successor remarked when he was asked to approve of
a new uniform for his army, “You may dress them as you
please, they will always run away.” When war was resumed
in the autumn, the Neapolitan army bolted at the mere sight
of a small French force, the cavalry riding in panic over the
panic-stricken foot at a slashing pace—and King Ferdinand
went down on all fours. It was a relief to be rid of Naples,
but the occupation of Malta in September had been timely.
After the return of Napoleon to Paris, there took place one
of those delusive negotiations in which he not uncommonly
sought a military advantage. He tried to turn the armistice
with Austria into a naval armistice with England. But as
usual with him, the terms he offered were excessively favourable
to himself. He wished to retain the right to send six
frigates armed en flûte to Malta and Egypt, and to obtain
security that they would not be examined or stopped. His
intention was to fill them with soldiers and stores to reinforce
the garrison and the army of occupation. The English Government
would have been guilty of incredible folly if it had accepted
such a proposal. It refused, and Napoleon resumed hostilities
in October. On sea there had been no suspension. We had
taken Malta, and had defended Elba, and we were at last
preparing to intervene with vigour in Egypt. It was a consideration
of the first importance that the French should not be
in actual possession of the country when serious negotiations
for peace were begun.
Egypt would have been evacuated in January 1800 but
for want of good management on our part. On the 24th of
that month Kléber signed a convention with the Grand Vizier
by which he undertook to evacuate the country if his army
was allowed to return home. Sidney Smith, who commanded
on the coast, did not sign the convention, but he agreed to
allow the Frenchmen to pass. When, however, he referred
to Keith, who had just returned from England, the admiral
who had general orders not to allow the French to go except
as prisoners, refused his consent. His refusal was notified to
Kléber, who considered himself cheated, and took his revenge
not on us, whom he could not reach, but on the unhappy
Turks, who were perfectly innocent of any breach of faith.
He fell upon them, and defeated them with enormous
slaughter at Heliopolis. When the English Government
heard the facts, it gave its consent to the free return of the
French army. But it was now too late. Kléber had been
murdered by a Mahometan fanatic. His successor, Menou,
would not confirm the convention, and nothing remained to
be done but to send an army and turn him out. It is
customary to speak of the convention of El Arish as a
foolish business. Yet the Turks had a fair right to recover
their province when they could, and some ground to complain
of us for spoiling their chance. The British army would have
lost one of the most honourable passages in its history if the
convention had been carried out. But politically we had
everything to gain by the evacuation of the country.
Kléber’s twenty thousand men were a chip in the porridge
of the half-million soldiers of France. Marengo and
Hohenlinden were won without them. Napoleon’s position
would have been notably weaker after Marengo if Egypt had
been already lost. This was an advantage which was ill
replaced by the honour of the thing, and the feather in our
cap. Moreover, we could not know that Kléber would be
murdered, and that Menou would show military ineptitude.
The autumn of 1800 was rich in examples of the two
ways of making war, the right and the wrong. Napoleon left
the command in the field to his generals. On the 3rd December
the defeat of the Archduke John by Moreau at Hohenlinden
brought Austria to the ground. She made peace for herself,
though bound by treaty and subsidies not to act apart from
us. Brune and Murat completed the subjugation of Italy.
Naples became a mere appendage of France by the treaty of
Foligno, and the treaty of Lunéville, signed by France and
Austria on the 9th February 1801, left England without an
ally on the Continent. When he was rid of Austria and
dominator of Italy, Napoleon was free to concentrate his
attention on the war with England. As England had no
sufficient army with which to attack him at home, she was
everywhere on the defensive—on the superior defensive, no
doubt, but on the defensive—except where it was possible to
assail an isolated body of French troops—to wit in Egypt.
Our utter inability to attack the bulk of Napoleon’s power was
well shown in June 1800. St. Vincent, who had hoisted his
flag as commander-in-chief of the Channel fleet on the 26th
April, detached Sir Edward Pellew with seven sail of the line
on the 1st June to escort 5000 troops under General
Maitland. They were to seize Quiberon, and to revive the
Royalists of Brittany and La Vendée to activity. St. Vincent
acted, of course, by orders of the Government, which was much
inclined to such expeditions, and had hopes of success in an
attack on Brest, which came to nothing. The expedition of
Pellew and Maitland came to as good as nothing. A small
fort was taken, a number of small vessels were captured or
destroyed, a brilliant piece of cutting-out work was done by
Jeremiah Coghlan, a favourite and follower of Pellew. But as
the west of France was occupied by a strong army under
Bernadotte, General Maitland could make no impression, and
could only re-embark in haste. Pellew was eager to attack
Belleisle, but as the island was held by 7000 men and
was powerfully fortified, a landing would have been a costly
folly. General Maitland very rightly refused to lead his
men to destruction. They were landed on the island of
Houat, where they remained till they were picked up at
the end of July by Sir J. B. Warren, who brought other
troops with him under General Pulteney. The whole force
went south at the beginning of August to join Keith and
Abercromby, and to make up an army which was to be
employed in Egypt, the only field in which such a military
force as we could then muster could be used with effect. It
was hoped that a stroke might be delivered at the Spaniards
on the way. The squadron of Admiral Malgarejo, which had
returned from the coast of France in the previous September,
was at Ferrol, the great Spanish arsenal in Galicia. Ferrol,
which lies on the north side of a land-locked harbour, is
approached by a fortified channel a mile and a half long.
The navy did not force the passage. It landed Pulteney’s
soldiers and a naval brigade under Pellew on Doniños beach
to the north of the passage between Gabeiras and Serantes or
Golfin Points. Doniños is directly to the west of Ferrol, and
is separated from it by some miles of hilly country. The
soldiers drove back a small force of Spanish militia and
advanced to heights from which they had a clear view of
Ferrol. Pulteney had a walled town before him, and he
knew that it was occupied by a garrison. He appears to
have exaggerated the numbers of the Spaniards. But there
was a garrison, and there were walls. As the navy had not
forced the passage, it could give him no help in attacking the
town. He had no battering-train, but only a few light field
pieces which the sailors had landed and dragged up for him.
He came to the conclusion that time and men must be spent
to take Ferrol—and he had neither to spare. He therefore
re-embarked, and it is hard to say that he was wrong. His
failure has been much derided, and it has been usual to say
that the navy did its part. But the navy did not do its part,
which would have been to force an entrance to the harbour of
Ferrol, and bring the water front of the town under its guns.
It asked the army to storm unbreached fortifications.
After this futility, and another at Vigo, the combined
expedition went on to Gibraltar, and there joined Keith and
Abercromby. Before it went on its proper work, it made
another such demonstration as that at Ferrol. On the 4th of
October the whole force was brought round to Cadiz. The
customary version of the story is that the Spanish governor,
Morla, appealed to the English commanders to spare the
town, which was suffering from a great epidemic of yellow
fever, and that the gallant Englishmen, ever generous to a
suppliant foe, sailed away. This is poetry. The prose of the
story is well told by Keith’s captain of the fleet, Philip Beaver.
“Independent of the objection which a dreadful malady,
called by some the plague and by others the yellow fever,
opposed to our disembarking, the late season of the year, the
danger of the coast, and the difficulty of communication
between the soldiers and sailors were deemed sufficient by
the two commanders-in-chief to relinquish the attempt.”
Abercromby had orders not to land unless he was sure of
being able to embark immediately in case of need. The
naval officers would not promise to be able to re-embark his
men at all times. Moreover, confusion had arisen when an
attempt was made to get the soldiers into the boats, and they
were suffering severely from scurvy after months of detention
in wet and overcrowded transports, on a diet of salt meat, and
sleeping on dripping decks in their clothes and blankets.
But now at least the time of fumbling and pottering was over.
On the 5th November, Keith and Abercromby sailed for
Malta, leaving Warren with six sail of the line to watch the
Straits. They collected their command at Malta, and on the
20th December they sailed to the Levant with resources
sanely adapted to an attainable end.
Napoleon was well aware of the value of Egypt as an asset
when the time came for making peace. He strove hard to
relieve the army of occupation. He drew up elaborate schemes
for reinforcing it by squadrons of French and Spanish which
were to combine by complicated movements. What was more
to the purpose was that he sent out frigate after frigate crowded
with men and stores from Toulon and the western ports. When
he heard of the concentration of Abercromby’s force at Malta,
he redoubled his efforts. Some of the vessels he sent reached
their destination. The Egyptienne and Justice frigates anchored
at Alexandria on the 3rd February 1801—four days after
Abercromby, who sailed from Malta on the 20th December
1800, had anchored in Marmorice Bay, in Caramania, on the
31st January. The fleet of seven sail of the line, frigates,
and from 60 to 70 transports turned with relief from a stormy
sea to the land-locked harbour. Keith owed his knowledge
of its existence to Sidney Smith, so ill was the Levant known
at the time. As the leading vessel turned into the entrance
between towering headlands she seemed to the ships behind
to be steered against a precipice. Here the fleet lay recruiting
the health of the soldiers, practising them in landing, collecting
stores, listening to the fluent and unfulfilled promises of the Turk,
till the 22nd February, when it sailed for Egypt. It sighted
the coast on the 1st March. On that day the last relief from
France reached Egypt. The Régénérée frigate and Lodi brig
ran into Alexandria parallel with Keith’s convoy. The Régénérée
had sailed on the 13th February with the Africaine
from Rochefort. The history of the Africaine shows at what
a cost this work of reinforcing an isolated force oversea in
face of a superior enemy had to be done. She separated
from the Régénérée, and on the 18th February, being then
near Ceuta, was sighted, chased, and overtaken by the Phœbe,
Captain Barlow. The Africaine had in her 400 soldiers and
officials in addition to her crew of 350. Her captain, Saulnier,
who had commanded the Guillaume Tell under Decrès, made
a gallant attempt to resist capture, and fell in the action.
She could make no effectual resistance, and when Saulnier’s
successor, Magendie, struck his flag, there were 343 dead and
wounded out of 715 men packed into her. The loss of the
Phœbe was—1 man killed, 2 officers and 10 men wounded.
The history of the expedition to Egypt belongs to the
army from the 8th March when it was landed by three detachments
and in beautiful order. The bad generalship of
Menou aiding, our soldiers showed that they could look the
best soldiers of France (who yet fought valiantly) in the face,
and in the back too. In June Sir Home Popham, coming
from India, landed an Indian contingent at Kosseir on the
Red Sea, which crossed the desert to Cairo in June. The
ships in the Mediterranean rendered help and stood on guard.
Their last service was to drive off the belated squadron of
Honoré Ganteaume which arrived on the coast on the 7th
June.
The doings of that squadron touch our own naval history
closely. Ganteaume was ordered to sail from Brest with three
80-gun ships and four 74’s. Five thousand soldiers and officials
were crowded into his vessels. It was given out that they were
bound for San Domingo. This was done to spread a false impression,
and not without effect. Ganteaume went through the
Raz du Sein on the 8th January, but, finding his way barred by
an English squadron, came back. St. Vincent had now established
his close blockade in the face of some sulky opposition
from officers accustomed to the easier ways of Bridport. He
applied his rule “always close up to Brest in the easterly
winds.” It is therefore a useful corrective to much we are
told of the merits of that blockade, to note that while a
heavy gale was blowing from the N.E. on the 23rd January,
Ganteaume made a dash through the Iroise and got away
clear to the south. When St. Vincent heard of the escape of
the French squadron he was deceived as to its destination.
Our numerous and capable spies had no doubt reported the
rumour that San Domingo was the aim, and St. Vincent sent
seven ships of the line to the West Indies. Ganteaume bore
on for the Mediterranean, much tried by the gale, and for a time
separated in his flagship, the Indivisible, from the rest of his
squadron. But he reunited them on the 1st February, and on
the 9th he ran through the Straits. On the 13th he captured
the Success, and learnt from her that Keith must by this
time be close to Egypt. He considered his mission hopeless, and
steered for Toulon, very full of complaints as to the damage
done to his ships and other obstructions. Warren, who could
not stop him in the Straits, hurried to Minorca to protect
that perpetual clog and nuisance to the fleet. At Minorca
he heard that our late ally of Naples was being bullied
into joining the French against us, and sailed to Sicily to
protect our interests. He reduced his squadron, leaving
one of his six liners to protect Minorca. Such is the value
of a basis of operations which the forces based upon it
dare not leave to its own resources. Ganteaume reached
Toulon on the 18th February, two days before Warren
reached Minorca, and on the 19th March sailed again. On
the 25th he sighted Warren coming back from Sicily by the
east side of Sardinia, and turned back to Toulon. He had
seven sail to five, and a fine chance to win honour. But he
had his mission to fulfil, and though he believed it to be
incapable of fulfilment, he was prepared to make it an excuse
for avoiding action. Warren, having lost sight of him, went
hunting for him to south and east. On the 5th April
Ganteaume was back in Toulon. On the 25th he was
hounded out by Napoleon. He went down the coast of
Italy, gave some help to the French forces then endeavouring
to drive out the Anglo-Tuscan garrison which held Elba, left
the three slowest ships of his squadron at Leghorn, pushed,
driven by the anger of the First Consul to unwonted daring,
through the Straits of Messina, and actually sighted the coast
of Egypt 210 miles west of Alexandria on the 7th June. He
detached the Heliopolis brig to Alexandria, where the French
troops were still holding out, and waited for news. As none
came as soon as he expected, he concluded that the Heliopolis
was taken, and so went next to Bengasi in Tripoli intending
to land troops there on a hopeful mission to march by the
desert to Egypt. As a matter of fact the Heliopolis found
the coast clear and got safely into Alexandria. Keith,
who had warning by the Pique frigate that Ganteaume
was not far off, had gone in pursuit of him. The Frenchman
was actually sighted, but cut his cables, and went off to
Toulon. It is a tell-tale comment on his incessant complaints
of the state of his squadron that he not only out-sailed Keith,
but on the 24th sighted the Swiftsure, Captain Keats, on
his way from Egypt to Gibraltar near Cape Dernah, overtook
her, captured her, and carried her with him to Toulon, where
he dropped anchor on the 22nd July. The French ships were
indifferently fitted, the crews unpaid for a year, ill-rationed, and
in rags. Yet here we see one of their squadrons, timidly
commanded, elude the vaunted St. Vincent blockade, pass an
English squadron unhindered in the Straits of Gibraltar, range
the whole length of the Mediterranean, and end without
disaster after capturing a line-of-battle ship and a frigate, to
say nothing of small craft destroyed. How would it have
been if the equipment had been better, and the chief had
been Suffren or Duguay Trouin?
The frigates and the cruise of Ganteaume’s squadron, were
not the only nor the most formidable efforts Napoleon made
to preserve his hold on Egypt. The formation of the
Northern Coalition was in fact a part of his policy, which
aimed at securing her conquests for France. In theory the
coalition was an alliance signed on the 15th December 1800,
by Russia, Prussia, Denmark, and Sweden, to restrict England’s
exercise of her belligerent rights at sea. The immediate
pretext was the capture of the Danish frigate Freya, whose
captain refused to allow merchant ships under his protection
to be searched, on the 25th July 1800. There was much
hypocrisy in the outcry over the alleged wrongs of neutrals.
No doubt they were annoyed, and to some extent injured, by
England’s assertion of her claim to capture her enemy’s goods
in their ships. But Sweden, in a recent war with Russia, had
gone as far as England in the exercise of belligerent rights.
Russia had urged England to go to all lengths against the
shipping of revolutionary France, and Denmark had profited
largely by her position as a neutral. The real author of the
coalition was Napoleon, who worked on the admiration felt
for him by the erratic (perhaps the mad) Czar, Paul. Paul
put pressure on the northern powers, who dared not offend
him. He was annoyed by the occupation of Malta by
England, for he had taken the island under his own protection.
As the coalition depended on him it was weak, for
Paul had made himself an object of hate and fear to all about
him. His war with England inflicted heavy loss on the
wealthier classes in Russia. A plot, of which the English
Government was certainly not entirely ignorant, was being
laid against him. The English Government could not, however,
afford to wait till the Russians had rid themselves of
their mischievous ruler by the use of the so-called “Asiatic
Remedy,” which was in vulgar English, murder.
Therefore on the 12th March, Sir Hyde Parker, who had
with him Nelson as second in command, sailed from Yarmouth
with fifteen sail of the line, afterwards raised to eighteen.
His mission was to coerce Denmark and Sweden into leaving
the coalition, if they could not be persuaded to retire by
Mr. Vansittart, afterwards Lord Bexley, who was sent to
Copenhagen on a diplomatic mission. The naval forces of
the allies may have amounted to forty-one sail of the line,
but the Russians, who had the most numerous fleet, were still
shut up in the ice in Revel.
The English fleet was off the Naze of Norway by the
18th March. On the 23rd Mr. Vansittart, who had gone to
Copenhagen, returned with the news that the Danes would not
surrender. On the 30th the fleet passed the Sound, giving
the Danish coast a wide berth, and not encountering any
opposition from the forts on the Swedish side. It anchored
at Hveen, an island in the Sound, about fifteen miles above
Copenhagen. Parker, Nelson, Rear-Admiral Graves, Domett
the captain of the Fleet, and Stewart, who commanded a contingent
of soldiers carried by the warships, reconnoitred the
enemy’s position on the same day in the lugger Lark. They
soon saw that the Danes had not been negligent in preparing
to resist attack. The position to be assailed was a strong
one by nature. Copenhagen stands at the east end of the
island of Zeeland, on both sides of a narrow inlet running
from N.E. to S.W. The entrance to this inlet was (and is)
covered by the Trekroner forts, then mounting 68 guns. From
the south side of the inlet the coast runs to the south. The
Danes had drawn up their floating defences, line-of-battle
ships without masts, frames and other vessels to the number
of thirty-seven, carrying 628 guns, along this bit of coast.
They were supported by batteries on shore, but as the sea is
shallow near the land the support was not very close. In
front of the line was the water of the King’s Deep (Konge-dyb)
and beyond that the shoal called the Middle Ground. On
the eastern side of the Middle Ground is the Hollander’s Deep
(Hollaender-dyb). In the King’s Deep the water is shallower
on the eastern than on the western side. The admirals were
ignorant of this fact, for their pilots served them ill. These
so-called pilots were in fact mostly mates of merchant ships
who had traded to the Baltic. They knew just as much as
was needed for their trade, and proved both timid and
untrustworthy. To fall on from Hveen at the north end
of the Danish line would have been to take the bull by the
horns, for the fleet must have begun by meeting the fire of
the Trekroner and of the heavy ships the Danes had placed
close by the forts. If the southern end was to be attacked
then the fleet must first go down the Hollander’s Deep, turn
the end of the Middle Ground, and work up the King’s Deep,
where the navigable passage is barely three-quarters of a mile
wide. The waters were so little known that our officers had
no security that the thing could be done, and in any case it
was absolutely necessary to have the aid of a south-easterly
wind. The obstacles were so serious that when a council
of war held in Parker’s flagship, the London, on the night
of the 30th, some voices were for abstaining from attack.
But Nelson was strong for energetic action. He offered to
give battle to the Danes, attacking by the south end himself
with ten ships. Sir Hyde Parker was persuaded by his energy,
gave his consent, and added two ships to the ten sail asked
for by Nelson. He did well to give them, but the naval
position of England would not be what it is if many of her
admirals had been so poor of spirit as to be ready to leave
the peril and glory of battle to subordinates.
On the 31st Nelson reconnoitred the Hollander’s Deep.
On the 1st April, the fleet weighed and anchored to the N.W.
of the Middle Ground. In the afternoon Nelson took the
ships assigned to the south end of the Ground and anchored
for the night. His squadron was composed of the Elephant,
74, Captain Foley, the flagship; Defiance, flagship of Rear-Admiral
Graves, whose captain was R. Retalick; Edgar, 74,
Captain Murray; Monarch, 74, Captain Mosse; Bellona,
74, Sir. T. B. Thompson; Ganges, 74, Captain Fremantle;
Russell, 74, Captain Cuming; Agamemnon, 64, Captain
Fancourt; Ardent, 64, Captain Bertie; Polyphemus, 64,
Captain Lawford; Glatton, 54, Captain Bligh; and Isis,
50, Captain Walker. There were also eighteen frigates,
sloops, bombs, and fireships. The Danes, counting them
from south to north, were the Prövesteen, 56, a three-decker
cut down without masts; Valkyrien, 48, two-decker
without masts; Rendsborg, 20, transport; Nyborg, 20, transport;
Jylland, 48, two-decker, without masts; Suœrdfisken,
20, floating battery, masted; Kronborg, 22, frigate, without
masts; Elven, 6, sloop rigged; Gerner, 24, battery, mastless;
Aggershuus, 20, transport, mastless; Sjcelland, 7, two-decker,
unrigged, Charlotte Amalie, 26, Indiaman; Söhesten, 18, masted,
battery; Holsteen, 60, rigged line-of-battle ship; Infödstretten,
64, two-decker, masted; Hjeelperen, 6, rigged frigate; Elephantin,
70, line-of-battle ship without masts; Maro, 74, line-of-battle
ship, mastless; Denmark, 74, rigged line-of-battle ship;
Trekroner, 74, ditto; Iris, 40, rigged frigate; Tarpen, 18,
rigged brig; Nidelven, 8, ditto; and ten small craft of four
guns each. A glance at these lists is enough to show which
of these two forces was the more powerful. Even putting
aside the ordnance carried—which was 1014 pieces for the
English, and 696 for the Danes, including the Trekroner
forts—our opponent marshalled a number of weak little vessels
quite unfit to meet the shock of the broadside of a line-of-battle
ship.
The night before the battle was spent by the English
fleet in further soundings in the unknown waters about it, and
by Nelson in drawing up his final dispositions. It was
his intention to enter the King’s Deep from the south, and
advance as far as the Trekroner battery. It was very
naturally understood that Sir Hyde Parker should give his
support by attacking the north end of the Danish line with
the ships which remained with him. They were the London,
98, W. Domett, 1st captain, Captain R. W. Otway, 2nd
captain; and St. George, 98, Captain Hardy. She was,
properly speaking, Nelson’s flagship, but he left her for the
more handy Elephant, and Hardy accompanied on the day
of battle. The others were the Warrior, 74, Captain Tyler;
Defence, 74, Captain Lord Henry Paulet; Saturn, 74,
Captain Lambert; Ramillies, 74, Captain Dixon; Raisonable,
64, Captain Dilkes; and Veteran, 64, Captain
Dickson.
The wind blew fair from the S.E. on the morning
of the 2nd April, and the signal to attack was given at
9.30. The ships stood in with various fortunes. The
Agamemnon, which was to have led, had anchored on the
east of the Middle Ground, and was not able to round the
point. Her place as leader was taken by the Edgar which
advanced till she was abreast of the Nyborg, the fourth ship
in the Danish line, and then anchored by the stern. Then the
Polyphemus anchored on the port bow of the first Dane, the
Prövesteen. The Isis passed the Polyphemus and anchored
on the quarter of the Prövesteen. The two vessels which
followed, the Bellona and the Russell, misled by the
mistaken belief that the water was deepest on the side of the
Middle Ground, went too near the shoal water and grounded.
Their misfortune, like the similar bad luck of the Culloden
at the battle of the Nile, acted as a warning to those
behind. The first of these, the Elephant, starboarded her
helm, avoided the shallows, and took her station opposite the
centre of the Danish line, where she had only the Elven and
the Dannebrog opposed to her. The Glatton and Ardent
anchored between the Elephant and the Edgar. The
Ganges, Monarch, and Defiance went ahead of the
Elephant. The Defiance, the furthest to the north of
our ships, did not reach the northernmost point of the
Danish line. The English bombs were stationed behind
the centre of the line. Thus the Trekroner forts and the
heavy ships near them were attacked only by the frigates
under Captain Riou, which suffered severely. Parker
detached three of the ships he had retained, the Veteran,
Ramillies, and the Defence to assail the Trekroner from
the north, but they had to tack against the S.E. wind, and
could not reach a position in which they could be of service
in time. The action began at 10 a.m. All the English ships
were in position by 11.30, and the action was of the hottest
till about one o’clock. The Danes fought very stoutly, and as
men fell their places were taken by volunteers from the
shore.
Colonel Stewart has left a most lively account of the
bearing of Nelson in the midst of the conflict. In his
narrative we see the small and alert figure of the
admiral pacing his quarter-deck, the stump of his right arm
leaping with a nervous movement, and his whole being
uplifted with exultation. The work was hot, he said, but not
for the world would he be elsewhere. It was the unaffected
expression of the true nature of a man to whom the
gaudia certaminis was no idle phrase. Yet the Elephant
had but feeble adversaries, and was among the least severely
tried ships in the line. Her 10 killed and 13 wounded was
a trifling loss beside the 24 killed and 51 wounded of the
Defiance, the 31 killed and 111 wounded of the Edgar,
the 30 killed and 64 wounded of the Ardent, the 33 killed
and 88 wounded of the Isis, an enormous proportion for a
50-gun ship. All were surpassed by the casualty list of the
Monarch, the heaviest suffered by any of our line-of-battle
ships in the war, 56, including her captain, Mosse, killed, and
164 wounded, a full third of her crew. Seen from the deck of
the London, the position of the squadron looked more
perilous even than it was. Sir Hyde Parker, influenced
perhaps by Captain Domett was early inclined to hoist a
signal of recall. There was a discussion between Kim,
Domett, and the captain of the London, Waller Otway.
Finally it was decided that Domett should go to the
Elephant with a message to Nelson telling him that he was
free to obey the signal to retire or to disregard it, as he judged
fit. Domett did not go, for while he was changing his
dress Captain Otway, who is our authority for the story,
jumped into a passing boat to carry the message. He
reached the Elephant through many perils, but before he
was alongside, the signal had been hoisted and disregarded.
Nelson, whose bearing shows that he regarded the signal as
an order and not as a permission, did not repeat it. He gave
expression to his derision by putting his telescope to his
blind eye and declaring that he could not see the signal.
The order was in fact foolish in the extreme, for the
squadron could only retire before the south-east wind through
the narrow passage in front of the Trekroner forts. The
signal was disregarded by Rear-Admiral Graves, and obeyed
only by Riou’s frigates, which were getting the worst of it in
their engagement with the forts. They retired, and Riou was
killed in the retreat. Moreover, the fire in the southern end of
the Danish line was slackening. Vessels were silenced and
driven out of the line. In some cases the overpowered ships
were remanned from the shore and the fire resumed. There
was nothing irregular in this action of the Danes. They
were perfectly entitled to retake prizes if they could, and a
ship was not even a prize till possession was taken by the
captors. But Nelson seized the opportunity to bring the
action to an end. He sent his letter to the Prince Regent of
Denmark, claiming a right to take undisturbed possession of
the vessels which had struck, and calling the Danes brothers.
The Prince Regent might well have treated the letter as a cry
of distress. But he had good reason to avail himself of the
opportunity to put a stop to the battle with credit. He knew
that the Northern Coalition was in fact dissolved before the
battle began. He had been informed on the eve of the 2nd
April that the Czar, Paul, had been murdered in the night of
the 24th March, and he was well aware that the new Czar,
Alexander I., would not be allowed to follow his father’s
policy. Therefore he agreed to arrange an armistice, and
consented to stop his fire. Nelson took possession of his prizes
and hastened to evacuate the field of battle he had won. The
Elephant and Defiance grounded on their way out, a
pretty clear indication of what must have happened if Parker’s
signal had been obeyed under the fire of the forts. Nelson’s
qualities as a fighter of battles were never more conspicuously
shown than in this action, and they are not discredited in the
least by the fact that, as many great captains have done (and
will do to the end of time), he pieced out the hide of the lion
by the skin of the fox.
The rest of the operations in the Baltic were of the
nature of formalities. The Swedes would not risk the six
liners they had in commission. While the fleet was in Kjöge
Bay the Russians made proposals for an armistice which it
was much our interest to accept. Sir Hyde Parker was
recalled on the 5th May. Nelson, to whom the command
came, hurried to Revel in the hope of catching the Russian
squadron. He arrived on the 14th, eleven days after the
Russians had cut their way through the ice and had sailed to
Cronstadt. The polite letter he wrote to the Russian Government
and his offer of a visit to St. Petersburg, were met with
the dry comment that his words were not consistent with his
actions, and a firm intimation that he must go away. He
growled, but he went, and on the 19th June he left the
Baltic at his own request.
The collapse of the Northern Coalition threw Napoleon
into one of those fits of convulsive fury in which he stormed
with all the epileptic rage of an Italian plebeian. He found what
consolation he could in accusing the English Government of
having paid for the murder of the Czar. But he still persevered
in his efforts to send direct help to his army in Egypt.
As we have seen, he was driving Ganteaume hard all through
the spring. And he had another scheme on hand—a scheme
which was the forerunner of larger plans to be laid in the course
of the next few years. The French Government had purchased
six Spanish ships of the line then lying at Cadiz. They were
to be manned by French crews and commanded by Dumanoir
Lepelley. The three French liners of Ganteaume’s squadron,
discarded by him at Leghorn, the Indomptable and Formidable
of 80, and the Desaix, 74, were to sail from Toulon to
Cadiz. The nine were then to be joined by six Spaniards
under Don Juan Joaquin Moreno, and the fifteen were to sail
for Egypt, picking up soldiers in Italy on their way. It would
be rash to say that Napoleon would not have made movements
corresponding to these with his armies. He did many rash
things with his armies, and while he was aided by fortune and
the timidity of his opponents his audacity was successful. But
on land his armies were handled by himself, were superior in
quality, and his opponents were nervous. At sea such daring
was too bold, for the superiority lay with the English. They
knew it and were confident. In this case the plan was particularly
wild, because Sir James Saumarez, an excellent officer,
was cruising in the Straits, with seven sail of the line, and
was therefore at the very meeting-place of these forces.
On the 13th June the three French ships named above,
together with the Muiron, 38, a frigate taken from the
Venetians, left Toulon under Rear-Admiral Durand Linois,
carrying a detachment of troops, under General Devaux.
Ganteaume was in the midst of his rush to Egypt and back.
Warren, whose station was the Gulf of Lyons, was away looking
for him. Linois was able to leave the Gulf unopposed, but
not unobserved by the frigates Warren had left behind him.
Those, and they are apparently many, who suppose that a
port can “command” a sea may observe that Minorca proved
no obstacle to Linois. His voyage was slow, and it was not
till the 1st July that he passed Gibraltar. He was informed
that there were only two English ships off Cadiz. On the 3rd
July he captured the brig Speedy, commanded by Lord
Cochrane, afterwards the famous Earl Dundonald, and learnt
that there were in fact seven, and that they were across his
road. Napoleon had spoilt, or had materially helped to spoil,
his own plan for the relief of Egypt by his cunning. He had
spread a story that the united French and Spanish ships were
to attack Lisbon. His purpose was to draw the attention of
the English Government from the Levant. What he did was
to convince his enemy that Cadiz must be closely watched, for
Lisbon was not only the capital of our most trustworthy ally
in Europe, but was a most important depôt of English trade.
Therefore Saumarez had been sent from England on the
15th June with the Cæsar, 80, Pompée, 74, Spencer, 74,
Hannibal, 74, Audacious, 74, Thames, Phæton, frigates,
and the Plymouth lugger. He was joined in the Straits by
the Venerable, 74, and Superb, 74.
Here then was a warning example of what was likely to
be the end of all schemes for uniting squadrons which started
from far distant ports, and in the face of an alert enemy who
operated on interior lines. They could only succeed if these
squadrons to be thus united had been efficient. And then all
this ingenuity would have been superfluous. Saumarez could
not have kept his station outside of Cadiz for twenty-four
hours if the thirteen Spaniards, then in the port, had been more
than the vain show of a squadron.
When he discovered what was in front of him Linois
turned into Algeciras Bay and anchored on the west side.
On the south he was covered by the Isla Verde, where there
was a Spanish fort. On the north he was supported by the
battery Santiago. The shore is foul with rocks. There
were fifteen Spanish gunboats to give him help. He anchored
the Formidable at the north end, opposite the Santiago fort;
south of her was the Desaix, and next to her the Indomptable.
The Muiron was placed north-west of the Isla Verde. On
the 5th July Saumarez, acting on the established rule of the
navy, attacked. He had with him six of his seven liners, for
Captain Keats of the Superb, who had just been detached to the
mouth of the Guadalquivir, was unable to rejoin in time.
The English squadron rounded Cabrita point at about eight
a.m., and fell on as well as they could. For fortune helped
the French greatly. The wind was light and erratic. The
English ships could not come into action either when or where
they wished. Linois landed soldiers to fight the ill-manned
Spanish forts. The English ships at the mercy of alternate
puffs of wind and calms, could not come into action together,
and were badly mauled. The Cæsar, which engaged the
Formidable and the Desaix, was nearly beaten to pieces.
But the worst fate befell the Hannibal, Captain Ferris, for
she grounded, was shattered thoroughly, and compelled to
surrender. The French ships had cut their cables and had
beached themselves. Saumarez too had drawn off, finding it
impossible to press his attack thoroughly home.
The check was a shrewd one, for nothing could hide the
fact that six English ships of the line had attacked three
French, supported by batteries and gunboats it is true, and
had drawn off with the loss of one of their number. We
had 121 killed and 240 wounded. The Hannibal contributed
74 to the list of killed, and the survivors were prisoners.
The French confessed to 306 killed, and the wounded must
have been more numerous, but there is a doubt as to the
numbers. The Spaniards too lost men. Yet the allies could
claim a success, though after all it only helped to prove the
essential weakness of Napoleon’s plan. Linois was sure that
he would be attacked by fireships, and appealed to his
friends at Cadiz for help. On the 9th the Spanish admiral,
Moreno, came round with six sail of the line to escort Linois.
On the 12th the nine, having their prize the Hannibal in
tow, sailed for Cadiz. Their fortunes before they got there
showed how unfit they were to contend with English squadrons
at sea. Saumarez’ squadron had been refitted with energy.
The Cæsar was got ready by miracles of hard work on the
part of her crew and of seamanship on the part of her
captain, Jahleel Brenton. The Superb, at once rejoined, and
the six followed the nine allies, who went off in flight. During
the night the pursuing English squadron forced on an action.
The enemy, going off in what was to have been a line abreast,
but rapidly became a confused huddle, could only fight feebly
in retreat. Two of the Spanish ships, the mighty three-deckers,
San Hermenegildo and Real Carlos, caught fire and
blew up, with the loss of nearly all the 2000 men they
carried. The rest of the allies hurried as best they could to
Cadiz, followed by the English. Luck again helped the
French, for the Venerable grounded on the San Pedro rock
while tackling the Formidable. But the combination scheme
had broken down, and Saumarez, in spite of the check in
Algeciras Bay, had, said St. Vincent, “put us on velvet.”
Turning movements, evasions, combinations, and coalitions
had all failed. The threat of direct attack was kept up till
the armistice, which was the preliminary to the Peace of
Amiens, was signed on the 1st October. Napoleon persevered
in collecting small craft to be used for the purpose of carrying
an army to the shore of England. The scheme was as old as
the reign of Louis XV., and, as we have seen, had been revived
by the Directory in a feeble way. The invasion flotilla was
to be taken up again by Napoleon himself on a far larger
scale two years after 1801. It will be most appropriately
discussed under the later date. The policy of the First
Consul in 1801 cannot be taken as indicating a serious
intention to attempt the invasion of England at that time and
with the resources then at his disposal. He brought troops to
the coast, and collected small transports, in order to inspire
fear in England, and thereby put pressure on her Government
to make the peace which was greatly desired by the country,
tired as it was by the strain of a long and laborious war.
His aim was attained to some extent. The seamen indeed
treated the flotilla with contempt for substantial reasons, which
were excellently stated by Captain Beaver in a paper which
the reader will find printed as an appendix to his life by
Admiral Smyth. He pointed out that a swarm of small
craft built flat, so that they could work in shallow water and
be beached, and therefore leewardly, would be swept hither
and thither in the currents of the Channel. But the seamen
failed to persuade their countrymen. It has also been at all
times impossible to convince soldiers that the Channel and
the North Sea cannot be crossed by an army as if they were
rivers. All the persons rudely described by St. Vincent as the
“old women” in and out of Parliament were greatly disturbed
by the invasion flotilla.
The Government was manifestly under an obligation to
act against the flotilla with vigour. It took the very best
course it could find both to quiet the mind of the country and
to make sure that its directness would be vigorously applied.
It put Nelson in command of what may be called a counter
flotilla, operating from the coast between Orfordness and
Beachy Head, against the French flotilla, which was being
concentrated for the threatened dash at Boulogne. He
hoisted his flag in the Medusa frigate in the Downs on the
30th July, and went instantly to work like the born fighter
he was. The effectual course would have been to land
soldiers, take Boulogne, and burn the flotilla. But our small
army was quite unable to provide the 80,000 or 100,000 men
needed for an offensive movement against the numerous troops
of Napoleon. There was nothing for it but to hit at his naval
forces with naval forces. The result of the manful efforts
we made was no surprise to the seamen. It was found to
be impossible to prevent small flat-bottomed craft, which could
take the ground at low tide, and hug the shore at high tide,
from creeping along from creek to creek, and shore battery to
shore battery. The large vessels could not get near enough
to them on the shallow coast to do harm with the artillery of
the time, which had an effective range of about 1200 yards.
With the help of support from the shore they could generally
deal with small craft and boats. Therefore they could be
concentrated at Boulogne. When there they were collected at
that point, and they could be protected. The Boulogne flotilla
was bombarded with some, but not much, effect at its anchorage
on the 4th August. We could not bring a sufficiently
heavy force near enough to do serious harm. But to bring the
flotilla to Boulogne was a useless preliminary to real work
unless it could get out. Its inability to make a sortie in
open daylight, and with a good wind, was confessed. What
chance it had of succeeding in the venture, in calm, fog, or
long winter night, was shown on the 15th August.
A quadruple cutting-out expedition on a large scale was
then despatched by Nelson. It consisted of four divisions of
armed boats, commanded respectively by Captain E. T. Parker,
Captain P. Somerville, Captain Cotgrave, and Captain R. Jones.
Parker reached the flotilla with his division about midnight,
but found that vessels swarming with men, barricaded and
swathed in boarding nettings, anchored head and stern, fastened
to one another by chains, constituted a floating fortress too strong
for his boats. He was himself mortally wounded, and his boats
repulsed with a loss of 21 killed and 42 wounded. The divisions
of Captain Cotgrave and Captain Somerville were more
affected by the tide than Parker’s. They reached the French
anchorage later than he, and not with their boats together.
They too were repulsed with loss. Captain Jones’ boats were
swept to the eastward and failed to reach the enemy. If
this happened to the active, well-manned men-of-war boats,
what must have been the helplessness of the flat-bottomed
craft of the flotilla in the Channel currents. Our total loss
was 44 killed and 126 wounded, who all fell victims to the
necessity for quieting the fears of the “old women.”
The longing of both countries for peace could no longer be
disregarded by their Governments. An armistice was signed
on the 1st October, and a so-called peace was signed at Amiens
on the 27th March 1802, though Napoleon most assuredly
did not mean it to endure, and no wise man in England
believed that it could last.
CHAPTER XV TRAFALGAR
Authorities.—The last and the most complete collections of the evidence for the
events dealt with in this chapter will now be found in Projets et Tentatives de
Débarquement aux Iles Britannique, and in the supplementary volume, La
Campagne Maritims de 1805—Trafalgar, by Captain E. Desbrière. See also
Trafalgar and the Nelson Touch, a series of articles with ensuing correspondence
in the Times for September and October 1905.
The peace signed at Amiens in March 1802 served two
useful purposes. It gave the nation a breathing space,
and it allowed Napoleon an opportunity to convince all
Englishmen who were not beyond being taught by experience
that with him no lasting peace was possible. His annexations,
his insolent denial to England of any right to a voice
in the affairs of the Continent, his dishonesty in the matter
of the withdrawal of the French troops from Holland, his
persistence in calling on England to evacuate Malta, and
the hostile measures against English trade which he adopted,
soon convinced all but a few that war with him was inevitable.
There could be no peace with a ruler who endeavoured to
force England to adhere to the letter of a treaty which he
was himself violating daily in spirit and substance. He did
not believe that peace could be permanent, but trusted that it
would last till he had found the means to arm against us at
sea. In the hope that he could revive French shipping by
means of a colonial trade, he sent a great armament to reoccupy
the French part of the island of San Domingo, which
had been lost by a revolt of the slaves. Another was sent
to the East Indies provided with instructions how to attack
our possessions. The English Government, urged by public
opinion, defeated his plans by forcing on war in May
1803.
The brevity of the suspension of hostilities allowed no time
for important internal changes in the navy, but this interval
saw the beginning of administrative reforms which were to
produce their chief fruits after 1815. St. Vincent, who had
become First Lord in the Addington Ministry in 1801, was
profoundly conscious of the waste and corruption which
prevailed in the Navy Office. He persuaded, indeed it may
be said that he forced, his colleagues to pass the Act of the
43rd George III., which appointed Commissioners “for inquiring
into irregularities, frauds, and abuses in the Navy Departments,
and in the business of prize agency.” The Commissioners
produced a series of reports between 1802 and 1805, which
revealed much mismanagement and the existence of not a
little pilfering. The Commission of 1802 was succeeded in
1806 by another “for revising and digesting the civil affairs
of the Navy,” which also made reports in 1809. These
documents are full of instruction, but they cannot be analysed
and extracted here. Their immediate effect was good, for
they terrified evil-doers and aroused the temper of the country.
But they produced their main fruits as late as 1830, and
during the administration of Sir James Graham.[6] St. Vincent,
intent on reform, was obstinate in refusing to believe in the
renewal of war with France. He was accused of allowing
the strength of the navy to fall to a dangerously low figure.
His enemies did their best to raise public anger against him,
and Pitt attacked him hotly in the House of Commons.
A little sober investigation reduces these charges to
moderate proportions. St. Vincent’s critics were as unmeasured,
and as indiscriminating in criticising him, as he and
his followers were in scolding the Navy Office. In Parliamentary
and other public discussions our English respect for
truth is qualified by a lively sense of the value of loud-mouthed
and hectoring accusations of stupidity and turpitude as instruments
of controversy. In March 1803 there were perhaps
not so many vessels in commission as there might have been,
and it is possible that St. Vincent had carried economy too far
in the dockyards. But the French dockyards were empty,
and Napoleon was taken completely by surprise—as indeed
he confessed. He had exhausted his resources by fitting out
the fleet sent to San Domingo, and his naval arsenals had
been stripped bare. Some of the vessels he sent out were
unable to reach French ports before the renewal of hostilities.
Six of the line took refuge in the Spanish port of Ferrol, and
another hid at Cadiz. Even including these seven, he had
only thirteen sail of the line ready for sea, and they in bad
condition. We had thirty-nine, and the superiority in frigates
was much greater. Thus we were able to blockade our
enemy with overwhelming forces from the beginning. Nelson
took the command in the Mediterranean; Pellew off Ferrol;
Cornwallis off Brest; Sir Sidney Smith in the North Sea;
while Keith took the command of the reserve in the Downs.
As for the condition in which these squadrons were, we have
the word of Sir Edward Pellew, a very competent witness.
Speaking in the House of Commons on the 15th March
1804, he said:—
“I know, Sir, and can assert with confidence that our navy
was never better found, that it was never better supplied, and
that our men were never better fed or better clothed. Have
we not all the enemy’s ports blockaded from Toulon to
Flushing? Are we not able to cope anywhere with any force
the enemy dares to send out against us? And do we not
outnumber them at every one of those ports we have blockaded?
It would smack a little of egotism, I fear, were I to
speak of myself, but as a person lately having the command of
six ships, I hope I may be allowed to state to the House
how I have been supported in that command. Sir, during the
time I was stationed off Ferrol I had ships passing from the
fleet [i.e., the fleet in the Channel] to me, every three weeks
or a month, and so much was the French commander shut up
in that port deceived by these appearances that he was
persuaded, and I believe is to this very hour, that I had
twelve ships under my command, and that I had two squadrons
to relieve each other, one of six inside, and one of six outside.”
When Pellew was speaking, a year after the war began,
the whole sea-going naval force at Napoleon’s disposal,
including vessels belonging to the Batavian Republic
and stationed at the Cape or in the Indian Ocean, did not
exceed, and except on paper did not reach, 48 of the
line and 37 frigates. At that time England had in commission
88 ships of the line, 13 ships of 50 guns, 125
frigates, and a swarm of sloops, gunbrigs, cutters, and “armed
ships”—hired merchant-ships carrying guns. We had every
means of collecting stores, and the French had few. The
disproportion of force in our favour was so overwhelming, and
was so well known, that it is hard not to feel some contempt
for the flushings of apprehension and spasms of clamorous
terror into which our fathers were thrown by the fear of
invasion.
The disposition of our[7] forces was admirably calculated to
place concentric barriers, elastic, mobile, but tough and
impenetrable, between the shores of Great Britain and a
Continental assailant. The inner barrier consisted of the fleet
under the command of Lord Keith, who had his headquarters
in the Downs. He had 21 sail of the line and 6 ships of
50 guns, 29 frigates, 26 sloops, 12 bomb-vessels, 25 gunbrigs,
32 cutters and luggers, 19 armed ships. These vessels watched
the coast of France, and the dependent Batavian Republic
from Havre to the Texel. There was on our own coast a
swarm of armed boats:—135 between Yarmouth and Leith;
149 between Southend and Orfordness; 181 between
Hastings and the mouth of the Thames; 138 from Poole to
Newhaven; 21 at Liverpool, Glasgow, and Greenock; 114 on
the coast of Ireland: in all, 738. Keith’s fleet was also the
reserve on which other fleets could fall back in case of need.
Next, outside of Keith, came the Brest blockade under
Cornwallis:—20 sail of the line, 5 frigates, 1 sloop, 5 cutters, or
luggers, or schooners. Beyond Cornwallis was the squadron
watching Rochefort:—5 sail of the line, 1 frigate, 1 cutter.
Then came 7 sail of the line, 2 frigates, 1 sloop, 1 cutter,
which watched Ferrol. In the Mediterranean, Nelson had
13 sail of the line, 1 50-gun ship, 11 frigates, 10 sloops, 3
bomb-vessels, 6 gunbrigs, 2 cutters. In the East Indies were
6 sail of the line, 2 50-gun ships, 7 frigates, 5 sloops. In
the West Indies were 8 sail of the line, 1 50-gun ship, 11
frigates, 20 sloops, and 15 small craft. The vessels doing
convoy work may be left aside at present.
As we had no such army as could assail Napoleon at home,
this mighty force could only cruise and watch till such time
as the Emperor of the French (to give him the title he
assumed on the 18th May 1804) put its strength to the test.
He threatened invasion by arrogant word and ostentatious
deed. There were then, there are now, it is probable that
there always will be, disbelievers in the sincerity of his threats.
He wrapped himself in clouds of lies, and he is not to be
believed on his bare word, either when he said he would
invade, or when he declared that he had never seriously
contemplated invasion. As he said himself, he served a
merciless taskmaster, “the nature of things,” and it was in the
nature of things that his empire was subject to attack by the
powers of Central and Eastern Europe. He cannot have
meant to attempt an invasion of England at a time when
the armies of Austria were actually marching against him.
We know that during the last months of 1804 and the first of
1805, when war with Austria seemed imminent, he suspended
his preparations for an invasion of England, and resumed
them only when a letter from the Emperor Francis II. gave
him assurance that he would not be interrupted. But though
he was bound to bow to necessity, and turn from England
when the frontier of the Rhine was in danger, it by no means
follows that he would not have made the attempt had it been
at any time possible. He had promised the French to rid
them of their hereditary enemy England, and he could only
make sure of keeping his word by invasion. His power
depended on his popularity, and that depended on victory.
He had risen to a towering height by running great risks, and
he went on running them to the end, to keep what he had
won. If he believed anything, he believed that his presence
in England at the head of an army would bring the country
to submission at once, and even to revolution. Assuredly he
did mean to run the hazard of making an invasion, subject
always to the leave of “the nature of things,”—if, that is to say,
the forces at his command and the circumstances around him
allowed of the venture.
It is not necessary to produce reasons for believing that he
never meant to risk a crossing of the Channel with a flotilla
alone. He had given conclusive reasons for not running
that hazard when the Directory made him General of the Army
of England in 1797. The swarm of flat-bottomed boats he
collected between the spring of 1803 and the autumn of 1805,
and the army he encamped at Boulogne, were never meant to
act by themselves. The flotilla might be used under protection
of a fleet. The army was very well placed to be drilled,
and kept under his own eye and influence for all service. His
assurances that he meant to invade with the flotilla and army
by themselves were designed to satisfy public opinion in France,
and inspire fear in England. It must not be forgotten that
Napoleon was betrayed, and knew he was betrayed, by people
about him who dreaded the consequences of his rule to France.
Their identity is uncertain, though Talleyrand has been supposed
to have been one of them. Whoever they were, these persons
known as the “he-friend,” and the “she-friend,” and the “son
of the friend,” had access to Napoleon’s most secret papers, and
communicated the substance of them to a certain Count
d’Antraigues, an exiled French Royalist attached to the Russian
mission in Saxony. Through Antraigues the information came
to the English Government. Napoleon, who knew he was
betrayed but could not detect the traitors, used countermines
to confuse and mislead them. Many of the minutes he made
and the orders he issued have much the air of having been
designed to reach his enemies and put them on a false scent.
When the preliminaries of October 1801 were signed,
there were 250 flat-bottomed boats in existence of the model
brought to France by Muskeyn. In March 1803 only 136
were available. Napoleon began at once to repair and
strengthen this remnant. His first plan was to add a
moderate number of flat-bottomed boats, and to draw largely
on fishing and coasting craft for his transports. It was soon
found that these resources would be insufficient. By July
1803 he had adopted plans for building 1410 flat-bottomed
vessels, and in August the number was fixed at 2008. They
were to be divided into frames of 110 feet by 25, drawing
8 feet, rigged as barques; chaloupes of 76 to 80 feet by 17,
drawing 5 to 6 feet, rigged as brigs; bateaux cannoniers of
60 by 14 feet, drawing 4½ feet, rigged as luggers; caiques—small
luggers and schooners; bomb-vessels, and péniches, a
species of fishing-boats. All carried guns, from the twelve 24-pounders
of the frames down to the single obusier or shell-firing
gun of the péniches. They were built all along the
north coast of France, at Paris, on the Rhine and in Holland.
They were brought to their headquarters at Boulogne,
down rivers and canals and by voyages along the coast
from fort to fort and creek to creek. Harbours were
cleared for them, and batteries built for their protection. The
most determined efforts on the part of our naval officers failed
to prevent these craft from collecting in and about Boulogne.
But there Napoleon’s success with them ended. They could
not be sent to sea. The fine schemes for combining troops
and transports remained mere schemes. The ports cleared for
the transports silted up again as fast as they were made.
When the vessels were anchored in the harbours, they could
only get out in driblets. When they anchored outside, they
were harassed by English attacks, and injured by gales.
Napoleon was eye-witness to the destruction of a number of
them by a gale in June 1804. It is true that we did them
but little harm. Our sea-going ships could not push their
attacks home on a shallow coast, and we did not build corresponding
vessels for the purpose. An attempt to make an end
of them by a species of floating mines called “catamarans,” much
favoured by Mr. Pitt, proved a failure in October 1804. Yet
the utmost they could do was to escape destruction. They
could not go out, as Napoleon knew from the first. His naval
officers told him the truth with perfect candour.
Something else must be done to clear the way for an
invading army, and there was only one thing which promised
success. A force of sea-going ships must be collected to
protect the transports. Therefore, from the end of 1803
till late in 1805, the correspondence of Napoleon is filled with
elaborate plans for concentrating a fleet in the Channel.
These plans of campaign and the letters written in combination
with them fill hundreds of pages in the vast compilation
of Captain Desbrière. This most competent French authority
is inclined to believe that much of the vast correspondence
was meant to be betrayed and to mislead the English Government.
No other rational explanation can indeed be found
for the confusing way in which proposals for expeditions to
Scotland, Ireland, and the East Indies are mingled with plans
for bringing squadrons from Brest, Rochefort, Ferrol, Cadiz,
and Toulon together in the Channel. These alternative
schemes, eccentric in every sense of the word, were never
acted on. If they were designed to deceive the British
Government, they failed.
The solid core of a mass of mere words was the design
to concentrate a strong fleet in the Channel. A squadron,
or squadrons, of the ships at Napoleon’s command was, or
were, to cross the Atlantic in order to distract the attention
of the English Government and induce it to send ships in
pursuit. Napoleon’s intention was that his vessels should
come back and unite in the Channel, where they would have
a superiority over the English who, he calculated, would be
weakened by detachments. The English Government had
early warning that this was in fact his plan, and prepared
to defeat it by a counter policy of concentration. The penury
of the French dockyards and the time required to build the
flat-bottomed boats compelled Napoleon to delay the application
of his plan. Seven of his ships were blockaded in
Spanish ports, and his relations to Spain were peculiar. She
was bound by treaty to join him in the war, but was allowed
to compound for armed help by the payment of a subvention.
England might fairly have considered this contribution to the
funds of its enemy, and have declared war on Spain at once.
But it refrained until 6th October 1804, when it seized
the home-coming Spanish treasure ships in the Straits of
Gibraltar. Spain declared war in December. Napoleon’s
plans may be divided into those laid before and those laid
after October 1804. It is enough to say of the first, which
were never put to the test, that after a variety of hypothetic
suggestions had been made and rejected, Napoleon decided
in favour of the comparatively simple scheme that Latouche-Tréville,
who commanded at Toulon, should elude Nelson and
head for Rochefort, drive off the English blockading squadron,
and be then ready to co-operate with the fleet at Brest. There
was nothing impossible, or even very hazardous, in this plan.
Nelson made it his boast that he did not blockade Toulon.
He only watched the port by frigates, remaining on the coast
of Sardinia with his liners, hoping that the French would
come out, and that he would be able to bring them to battle.
He had every right to rely on victory if a battle could be
secured; but, as the future was to show, he was not entitled
to calculate on meeting the Toulon fleet. Success would
depend on the receipt of prompt information from his
frigates, but Nelson remained far from Toulon, he allowed
his squadron to drive in the north-easterly winds, and was
seldom at his rendezvous, and so days often passed
before the frigates could find his flag. It was, too, a fixed
idea of his, that if the French left Toulon, it would be for
the purpose of renewing their disastrous adventure in
Egypt. Napoleon, who read his mind with remarkable
sagacity, and who ranked his judgment low, had calculated
on this very fixed idea of the English admiral’s as an element
in his own favour. It is by no means improbable that the
concentration at Rochefort might have been effected if
the resources of the Toulon yard had been greater. But the
squadron was fitted for sea with difficulty. Latouche-Tréville
died on the 20th August 1804. His successor had to be
selected, and then came the war between Spain and England,
which brought a new element into the problem. At that
moment, too, there was a strong probability that war would
break out with Prussia and Austria. The invasion schemes
were hung up, and in September Napoleon was intent on
organising attacks on England’s colonies. Even these were
designed to draw off English forces from home waters and
leave the road free for a push from Brest and Boulogne.
Their real purpose was known to the English Government,
which was warned by its secret agents, and showed itself well
aware of its enemy’s purpose.
Villeneuve was chosen to succeed Latouche-Tréville, mainly
because the emperor looked upon him as a lucky man, and
because that was a valuable quality in the prevailing dearth of
capable admirals. On the 12th December 1804 orders were
sent to Villeneuve to prepare for a great expedition to the
West Indies, where he was to be joined by Missiessy with the
squadron from Rochefort. They were to capture colonies, and
after a stay of sixty days to come back to Rochefort. Nothing
was said of ulterior movements in the instructions to them.
But orders of nearly the same date were sent to Ganteaume at
Brest to get to sea, make a commerce-destroying cruise on the
coast of Ireland, go to Ferrol, pick up the French and Spanish
ships there, and join Villeneuve and Missiessy on their return
from the West Indies. If the concentration was effected,
Napoleon would have, so he thought, that command of the
Channel which, as he told Latouche in July, would make him
master of the world. But he was trying to overreach his taskmaster,
“the nature of things.” Such a scheme could succeed
only by a truly wonderful combination of capacity on the part
of his officers, of incapacity on the part of the English officers,
and of good fortune. Two parts out of three of the scheme
failed. Missiessy did indeed get away from Rochefort on the
11th January 1805, reached the West Indies, did considerable
damage to our trade, and got safe back by the 20th May.
Ganteaume was unable to get to sea without a battle with the
blockading fleet, and he was forbidden to fight. Villeneuve
got to sea on the 17th January, when a north-easterly gale had
forced the English look-out frigates off the coast. The result
did to some extent justify Napoleon’s foresight. Nelson, who
heard on the 19th that Villeneuve was at sea, acted on his
fixed idea that Egypt was the object of the French, went to
look for them in the Levant, and was not back to his rendezvous
in Sardinia till the 27th February. But Villeneuve
had been driven back on the 20th January by bad weather.
On the 22nd he wrote a letter to his friend the Minister of
Marine, Decrès, which if Napoleon had seen it and had known
where to look for a more resolute officer would have caused
his instant dismissal. It can be compared only with the piteous
letter in which the Duke of Medina Sidonia implored Philip II.
not to give him the command of the Armada. Villeneuve
declared that he had always longed for a useful but not for a
glorious career; that this enterprise he was sent on could end
in nothing but disgrace; that his ships looked very well in
harbour, but were helpless at sea; that the troops given him to
attack the English islands were a pest; and that he wished the
emperor would name his successor. Napoleon was exasperated
with the admiral’s “lack of decision.” Yet he had to accept
Villeneuve also as part of “the nature of things.” At first the
proposed combination was given up. Orders were sent to
Missiessy to consider himself independent, and they reached
him. In a short time Napoleon received assurance from Austria
which convinced him that he was for a time safe from molestation.
In March the great combination scheme was taken up
again. Counter orders to wait for Villeneuve were sent to
Missiessy, but failed to reach him. On the 2nd March orders
were sent to Ganteaume to sail for Ferrol, pick up the French
and Spanish ships, go to Martinique to join Villeneuve, and
then head back for the Channel. On the same day orders
went to Villeneuve to sail to the West Indies, and wait for
Ganteaume at Martinique for forty days. If he failed to
appear, Villeneuve was to return by San Domingo and the
Canaries, waiting for him there once more, and on his failure
to appear, was to go to Cadiz. All was to depend on the
success of Ganteaume in getting away. “The nature of things”
was to be overreached. But it is not so easy to overreach “the
nature of things.” The concentration broke down first because
Missiessy did not receive his counter orders, and therefore did
not wait for Villeneuve, and then because Ganteaume failed to
leave Brest. He was too closely watched by Cornwallis.
On the 30th March, Villeneuve got away from Toulon
with eleven sail of the line. Nelson’s policy of no-blockade
produced the effect which some naval officers at least had foreseen.
The French fleet was sighted on the 31st March, thirty-five
miles south of Toulon, by the Phœbe and Active frigates.
The Phœbe went in search of Nelson, who was at the Gulf of
Palmas, in Sardinia, on that day; but she did not report to him
till the 4th April, for he had left Palmas on the 3rd to water at
Pula. Villeneuve, who had heard that Nelson was at Palmas,
steered to the west of the Balearic Islands, and was missed
by him. It is strange that the British Government knowing
what it knew of Napoleon’s intentions, and having adopted
the proper counter-policy of concentration in the Channel, had
not ordered its admiral in the Mediterranean to disregard the
imaginary danger to Egypt. Once more Nelson manœuvred
to protect what the French were not attacking. He stretched
his look-out ships from the south of Sardinia to the coast of
Africa, and went to Palermo. On the 16th April he was at
the south end of Sardinia, and on that date he learned that
Villeneuve had passed the Straits of Gibraltar eight days
before. The French admiral had stopped outside the Spanish
harbour of Carthagena on the 7th, and had called on Admiral
Salcedo to join him. The Spaniard excused himself, and
Villeneuve went on to Cadiz that night. He drove off the
blockading squadron of Sir John Orde—six sail of the line and
frigates. Orde retired to a safe distance, and then sailed to
join Cornwallis in the Channel. On the 9th, Villeneuve
reached Cadiz, where he was at once joined by the Aigle and
the Spanish admiral, Gravina. Most of the Spanish vessels,
six in number, were unable to be in time to sail with the
French. The allies straggled across the Atlantic, and had
the good fortune to unite their eighteen sail at Fort de France
in Martinique by the 16th May.
When the French admiral reached the Antilles, he had
no other orders than those dated the 2nd March, which
directed him to wait for Ganteaume at Martinique for forty
days, and then to cruise among the Canary Islands. He
therefore waited, and undertook no other operation than the
recapture of the Diamond Rock, then held by an English
naval detachment which was a thorn in the side of the
French island. The Rock was retaken on the 31st May,
but on the previous day Villeneuve had been joined by the
Didon from Rochefort. She brought orders which were
well calculated to disturb him. They were dated the 14th
April, and after informing him that he was to be joined by
Rear-Admiral Magon from Rochefort with two sail of the
line, instructed him to wait in the islands for another month,
to distinguish himself by taking English islands, to come
to Ferrol, join the French and Spanish ships there, and head
for Brest and Boulogne. These orders implied that Villeneuve
must be prepared to fight a battle in the Channel.
The admiral, who well knew the defects of the ships with
him, and who could judge that the raw ships at Ferrol would
be still less capable of meeting the English, was sorely disturbed
at the prospect of having to undertake such a venture
at the head of such a force. He knew, too, that lack of
provisions would make it impossible for him to remain for a
month in the West Indies, while he had every reason to fear
that his enemy, who must by this time have learned his
whereabouts, would attack him. He was aware that Admiral
Cochrane, who had been sent from before Ferrol in March, was
in the West Indies with six sail. It was a simple enough
business to attack the English islands. When, therefore,
Magon joined him on the 4th June, Villeneuve embarked
more soldiers from the garrisons of the islands, and sailed
to assail Antigua. On the 10th he captured an English
convoy near the island, and learned from his prisoners that
Nelson had reached Barbadoes in pursuit of him on
the 4th.
The English admiral had paid dearly in anxiety for the
looseness of the watch he kept on Toulon. When he was
informed that the French squadron had left the Mediterranean,
he hurried in pursuit. But the wind was against him. He
reached Tetuan on the 4th April, and left next day, but it
was not till the 10th that he anchored in Lagos Bay. He
had had every cause for anxiety. The French had escaped
from the Mediterranean, and he had no indication whither
they had gone. He was almost equally disposed to sail to
the West Indies lest they should be bound to Jamaica, or
to steer for the Scilly Islands in order to be at hand in case
their destination was the Channel or the coast of Ireland.
His troubles were aggravated by the fact that a convoy of
transports carrying General Craig and a body of troops bound
to Sicily and Naples had left England on the 17th April,
under protection of Admiral Knight, with two line-of-battle
ships, the Queen and the Dragon. It might have fallen in
with Villeneuve. On the 10th his doubts were removed.
Rear-Admiral Campbell, the officer in the Portuguese service
who had warned Jervis of the neighbourhood of the Spaniards
on the day before the battle of Cape St. Vincent, now gave
Nelson information which convinced him that Villeneuve had
sailed for the West Indies. The convoy with General Craig’s
expedition came in, and was sent on its way to Sicily. Nelson
left Bickerton in command in the Mediterranean, and with
ten ships pursued Villeneuve on the 11th.
Orde had sent home information of Villeneuve’s escape,
and had also given warning to the West Indies. The Admiralty
was taking measures to send Collingwood, then
serving in the Channel, in pursuit of the French, when it was
informed that Nelson had gone on his own responsibility.
Collingwood was ordered to Cadiz to replace Orde, who had
shown a lack of precision, and a counter concentration of
naval forces was prepared in the Channel and the approaches
to it. The anxiety in the country was keen. It was said in
the press that nobody in England slept quietly, for there
was a very general appreciation of the real significance of
Villeneuve’s cruise. There was so little doubt on the subject
that on the 9th May a London paper, the Morning Chronicle,
stated that many were of opinion that the French admiral
would join the ships at Cadiz and Ferrol and then enter the
Channel. The public was relieved when it learned that
Jamaica was in more danger than the mother country.
When Nelson reached Barbadoes, he was misled by
circumstantial but unfounded reports given him by Major-General
Brereton into the belief that the French had gone
south to attack Trinidad and Tobago. He went immediately
in pursuit to the Gulf of Paria, only to learn that he had been
misinformed. He at once returned, and was off Martinique
on the 10th, the very day on which Villeneuve, after hastily
sending the troops he had drawn from the garrison of
Martinique and Guadaloupe back in frigates, had sailed for
Ferrol. Nelson heard of the departure of Villeneuve at
Antigua, and on the 13th he also sailed for Europe. The
Frenchman was undoubtedly right in leaving the West Indies
at once. Even a successful battle (and he did not look upon
success as possible) would have destroyed his power to carry
out what Napoleon in a letter to him dated the 29th April
called the “essential operation,” the union of the French
squadrons in the Channel. But he took too northerly a
course, and therefore lengthened his voyage unduly. His
mistake had disastrous consequences for him. Nelson, when
starting to return to his proper station in the Mediterranean,
despatched the Curieux brig, Captain Bettesworth, with information
for the Admiralty. On the 19th June, Bettesworth
sighted the allies 900 miles N.E. of Antigua. He pressed
on, and in the early hours of the 8th July gave Lord Barham,
the old naval officer who was then First Lord, the news
that Villeneuve was on his way back. The Government
was well aware of the real purpose of the French fleet. Lord
Barham had only to carry out a settled policy when he at
once ordered Calder, who had succeeded Cochrane in command
of the Ferrol blockade, to call in Rear-Admiral Stirling, who
was watching Rochefort, and to bar Villeneuve’s road to
Ferrol. Calder received his orders on the 15th, called Stirling
to his flag, and stationed himself 90 miles west of Finisterre.
On the 22nd he sighted the allies to the south of him.
Nelson, sailing on a more southerly route, had reached Cape
St. Vincent on the 17th. He had good professional cause
for returning to his proper station. Yet it is strange that
even at that hour he remained firm in the faith that the
ultimate aim of the French was Egypt. If he had read the
mind of Napoleon as Napoleon read his, he would surely have
steered for Ferrol. In that case, he would have headed
Villeneuve, and would have united his ten ships to the fifteen
then with Calder. The twenty-five would have made an end
of the twenty French and Spanish ships and of the great
invasion scheme at a blow.
The mountain fell in labour, and produced a ridiculous
mouse. When Calder saw the allies to the south of him on
the 22nd July, he rightly decided to attack their twenty sail
with his fifteen. His intention was to cut through their line
and destroy their rear. Calder cannot be blamed for failing
to carry out his plan, for a dense fog settled down on the two
fleets. It was so thick that the combatants could not see
where the vessels nearest to them were save by the flash of
their gun-fire. After preliminary movements of no significance,
the fleets engaged in line ahead, standing to the south. The
English to leeward engaged the van, composed of the Spaniards,
and the centre of the allies. The fire of the Spaniards was so
wild that when the English frigate Egyptienne reconnoitred
them before the battle, they failed to hit her, though by the
testimony of her first lieutenant, she went close enough “to
see the moustachios of the Dons.” Two of the Spanish ships,
the San Rafael and the Firme, leewardly tubs, sagged through
Calder’s line, and were taken. The fleets separated in the
dark after a cannonade which did some damage to masts and
spars. The charge of weakness brought against Admiral
Calder is based on his conduct in the days following the
battle. He showed no desire to renew the action, and was
very unduly nervous about the part which might be taken
against him by the French and Spanish ships in Ferrol. Yet
an officer of a daring spirit (and at such a crisis it was the
duty of every officer to show the utmost daring) would have
calculated that his fifteen vessels were quite able to ruin the
eighteen enemies in front of them long before help could
come out of the land-locked harbour of Ferrol. Even if his
own fleet was to be shattered in the act of destroying the
enemy, it would still have put a stop to any further movements
of theirs in the direction of the Channel. Calder was
unduly cautious, and it is to be feared that he was also unduly
over anxious for the safety of his prizes, the reward of toil and
danger. He went off to put them in the way of safety, very
complacently calculating that Villeneuve would go south to
Cadiz where Nelson would be waiting for him.
Villeneuve was well disposed to go to Cadiz, and had
Napoleon’s leave to go if his fleet suffered such injury in
battle as should render it incapable of carrying out the
essential operation—which, said the Emperor sanctimoniously,
may God forbid. He had no confidence in his command.
On the 6th August, when the impression made on him by
the action of the 22nd July was fresh, he told his friend Decrès
that the French and Spanish Navies were incapable of producing
large squadrons fit to meet the English. And such as
his force was it was sickly and had been weakened by
desertion in the West Indies. The decision to go to Cadiz
was to be taken later. When Villeneuve was assured by
Gravina that their fleets could enter Vigo in the then prevailing
wind he decided to go thither, and he anchored in the
spacious Spanish harbour on the 26th July.
When Napoleon heard that the English squadron blockading
Rochefort had disappeared from before the port, he
concluded that Villeneuve must be already on his way back,
and that the English knew it. The squadron brought home
in May by Missiessy, and now commanded by Allemand,
was then in Rochefort. It had orders to escape to sea, to
go on a commerce destroying voyage on the coast of Ireland,
and to meet Villeneuve if he came back at the time first
fixed. The Emperor now proposed to send Allemand to meet
Villeneuve at once. But he had sailed before the counter
order reached Rochefort. To Villeneuve orders were sent
almost in profusion. Following a practice which grew on
him, and was the despair of his generals during the Peninsular
War, Napoleon wanted to regulate everything from a distance,
and would keep suggesting alternative courses. Yet the
general drift of his orders was plain enough. Villeneuve
was not to be enticed into Ferrol, which is difficult to leave
except in certain states of the wind, was to call out the
French and Spanish ships there, join Allemand, and come
on to Boulogne. If he had been resolute enough to leave
the Emperor to answer for the consequences in this world
and the next, Villeneuve might have made a bold stroke,
and might at least have failed with honour. On the
28th July, six days after the battle off Ferrol, this was the
position. Keith’s fleet was in the Downs and the North Sea,
where, during the westerly winds, it could do little to help
the ships in the Channel. Cornwallis, with twenty sail of
the line, was watching the twenty-two ships of Ganteaume at
Brest. There were fourteen French and Spaniards in Ferrol.
Calder, who had not yet divided his force, was not far from
that port. Allemand, who had sailed later than had been
intended, had wisely not gone to cruise on the coast of
Ireland, but had placed himself 120 miles to the west of
Ferrol, to meet Villeneuve, who was at Vigo with eighteen
sail, of which, however, three, two Spaniards and one French,
were unfit for further service. Nelson, who had been persuaded
at last that the French were not aiming at Egypt (apparently
by the arguments of Collingwood), was off Cape St. Vincent
on his way home with eleven sail, carrying out spontaneously,
though tardily, the Government’s policy of concentration.
Collingwood, with four sail, remained off Cadiz to blockade
six Spaniards. Sir R. Bickerton, with another four of the
line, was watching another six Spaniards at Carthagena. On
the 1st August Villeneuve left Vigo and went to the outer
Bay of Ferrol, leaving his three lame ducks behind. Calder
had been forced north by south-westerly winds. Then it
was that he detached the ships originally taken from before
Rochefort. He returned with nine sail, and, finding the enemy
in force, fell back on the 9th on Cornwallis. Nelson was on
his way north, well out at sea tacking against head winds.
On the 11th he was off Ushant, and on the 13th he joined
Cornwallis. The allies, who were in great need of stores, did
not sail till the 11th. Villeneuve distrusted his fleet more
profoundly than ever, for, when anchoring in Arosa Bay, his
ships had all come into collision with one another. He had
been told that Allemand was cruising in search of him, but
the Didon, which he sent to meet the Rochefort squadron,
was taken by an English frigate. He could hear nothing.
The wind was against him. Success appeared to him
impossible, and he was not stern enough to sail to destruction
since his master would have it so. The weak man, heavily
laden, grasped at the qualified leave given him to go south,
and on the 15th August, being then 200 miles W.N.W. of
Finisterre in a N.E. wind, he bore up for Cadiz.
With the retreat of Villeneuve the great concentration
scheme came to an end. He retired to Cadiz followed by the
screaming abuse of Napoleon, who was justly angry, if only
because this ignominious end to his grand schemes tended
to make him the laughing stock of Europe. Whether he was
as angry as he pretended to be is another matter. Rage was
one way of persuading the gallery that the failure was not
his fault. He had a great and thoroughly vulgar capacity
for working himself into fits of hysterical fury, and for falling
to cursing like a very drab. He did not altogether resign
the hope of making use of Villeneuve’s fleet. While washing
his hands of all further attention to details, he gave orders
that the combined fleets were to undertake operations in the
Mediterranean. He also decided that Villeneuve was too
great a coward to be trusted with the command any longer,
and that he must be replaced by Admiral Rosily.
So far the initiative had belonged to the French, who were
the assailants. Their attack had broken down, and now came
the turn of the English to assail. When the arrival of Nelson
raised the fleet, under Cornwallis, to forty sail of the line, the
admiral felt so sure of his position that he did not hesitate to
divide his forces. Nelson went home to rest, taking two liners
with him. Two others were sent in for repairs. Eighteen
were despatched on the 16th, under Calder, to go in search of
Villeneuve. Napoleon called this separation an insigne bêtise,
in view of the fact that Villeneuve might have burst into the
Channel with a force very superior in numbers to the eighteen
sail with Calder, or the seventeen which remained with Cornwallis.
He would have had thirty-four if he had joined both
the Ferrol ships and Allemand. If fleets and armies were
pieces on a draft board, with fixed unvarying powers, the
speculation would be worth following up. But they are
composed of weapons handled by men who can do but what
they can. Will an obese man who has one leg shorter than
the other and weak lungs be much the better (he will, of
course, be somewhat the better), if he meets two professional
fighters separately, and not together. It is quite possible
that if Villeneuve had come on, he would have passed Calder
without a meeting. In these very months, Nelson came
from Cape St. Vincent to Ushant, through seas crossed
by the squadrons of Villeneuve, Allemand, and Calder, but
met none of them. Allemand ranged down the coast of
the peninsula to the latitude of Cape St. Vincent, went
back to the Channel, came to the Penmarks, cruised, and
waited for Villeneuve, till no hope remained that he could
come, then turned to commerce destroying in the Atlantic
with immense success, until he anchored at Aix on the
24th December. But Panic and Flight were our allies.
Cornwallis suffered nothing by the division of his forces. On
the 20th and 21st August he easily beat back the Brest
ships, which were forced to make a show of coming out by
Napoleon. Villeneuve had run for Cadiz before Calder left
Ushant. He sighted Cape St. Vincent on the 17th, Allemand
being then barely out of sight behind him. On the
21st he entered Cadiz observed by Collingwood, who was
watching the port with three sail of the line, his fourth being
then at Tetuan. Collingwood fell back slowly, just ahead of
the pursuing French, resolved that if they drove him into the
Mediterranean, they should be “backstrapped” into it with
him. The allies gave up the pursuit, and Collingwood, with
his three, resumed the watch on Cadiz. He was joined by the
detached ship at Tetuan, by Bickerton from Carthagena, and
at last by Calder. On the 30th August thirty English sail of
the line were collected outside Cadiz. It was on the 2nd
September that Nelson, then at his house at Merton, heard
that the allies were in Cadiz. He hurried to town, and offered
his services. It would have been strange if the Government had
declined the offer of its greatest fighter of battles at such a
moment. Nelson left Spithead with the Victory and the
Euryalus frigate on the 15th September, picked up the
Ajax and Thunderer on the 18th, and joined Collingwood
on the 28th.
The battle he came to fight was offered him primarily by
the obstinacy of Napoleon, but immediately by the wounded
vanity of Villeneuve. The Emperor had ordered his fleet,
and the Spaniards whom he ordered about as his own, not to
suffer themselves to be blockaded by an inferior force, but he
allowed his orders to sail to stand when he knew that
Collingwood had been reinforced. Decrès, the minister of
Marine, did not tell Villeneuve that he was to be recalled
when Rosily reached Cadiz. The truth reached the unhappy
man indirectly, and by public rumour. In a fit of selfish
vanity, he, who had been so cautious in avoiding risks when
a great end was to be obtained, now decided to rush to sea,
when no great advantage was to be gained, and when the
danger of destruction was closer than it had been at any
moment since he sailed from Toulon in March—and did it
wholly and solely that he might escape a personal disgrace.
By his orders the allied fleet prepared to put to sea on the
18th October.
Nelson was then cruising some twenty miles west of Cadiz,
in a position to steer for the Straits and intercept the enemy
whenever he should come out, if, as was nearly certain, he
headed for the Mediterranean. He had with him twenty-seven
sail, and six were at Gibraltar watering and provisioning. It
was on the 19th, when he had just sent Collingwood an
invitation to dinner, that he learnt, through the vessels watching
in shore, that the enemy were coming out. The wearing of
the flagship and the signal for a general chase to the east told
the fleet that the allies were moving. The English ships
pressed on to head the enemy, each at its best rate of speed,
so that the fast sailers outstripped the slow. The allied fleet
had worked out of Cadiz with difficulty. On the afternoon of
the 20th it was to the south of Cape Trafalgar, and the
English fleet was so near that a battle could not be avoided.
During the night our look-out vessels saw the long “lighted
street” of lanterns which marked the position of the allies.
The fleet had returned from the position attained by the
general chase of the 19th, and was almost back to its cruising
ground. The weather had been variable from squall and haze
to calm. The ships were scattered on the morning of the
21st October—a day of very light breeze from N.W., a heavy
swell, and a falling barometer, signs of a coming storm. The
enemy was seen in the E.N.E. about nine miles off, heading
south. The scattered condition of the English ships did not
signify much. They knew what they had to do, and they
knew that their enemy was incapable of baffling any vigorous
attack. Immediately after joining the fleet Nelson had held
a meeting of senior officers in his flagship and had explained
his method for disposing of the allies—the Nelson touch.
The memorandum in which he laid down the principles of his
attack remains to tell us what they were. If the enemy were
found to windward, then the English fleet was to attack from
leeward, which it must do in close-hauled lines ahead, and
was to be disposed in three such lines. One, the lee line, led
by the second in command, was to cut off a smaller number of
the enemy at the rear. The second or weather line, led by
himself, was to cut the formation of the enemy at the centre,
where his flagship would be. A third, or advance squadron,
was to cut through the enemy ahead of the flagship. Nelson
displays his contempt for his opponents by two assumptions.
One is, that the enemy drawn out in one very long line would
not meet this attack by a counter move, as D’Orvilliers had
baffled Keppel’s menace to the rear of his line in the battle of
Ushant in 1778. The other is that the ships of the enemy
thus cut off, amounting to just more than half, could not be
succoured by their van before they were crushed. Supposing
the enemy to be to leeward, then the three lines were to be
drawn up opposite his centre. The lee line, under the second
in command, was to fall all together on a smaller number of the
enemy’s rear. The weather line and advanced squadron were
to be used by himself so as to prevent the centre and van from
turning to support the rear. In this case Nelson does his
enemy the compliment of supposing him to be capable of
making a counter move. If he inverts his line by wearing
together, the English lee line is to continue to attack the same
ships, though they would now be van, and not rear. It is
clear, however, that if this was done (and it was the obvious
thing to do), the enemy’s rear and centre had only to let all
draw in order to come at once to the help of the ships assailed.
Nelson’s manifest conviction that his enemy could not
manœuvre, and that his gunnery was bad, was thoroughly
justified. It has become rather the fashion to affect a
“chivalrous” respect for the enemy at Trafalgar. That is
a very pretty sentiment, and is the easier to feel because the
more we make of our foe the more do we make of our victory.
But though the thirty-three ships of the line which left Cadiz
with Villeneuve unquestionably carried thousands of gallant
men, they constituted a very bad fleet. Less than half of them
belonged to the squadrons which had crossed the Atlantic
with Villeneuve. The rest were the raw ships from Ferrol, or
Spanish vessels manned at Cadiz from hand to mouth, and at
the last moment. Even the most experienced of them were
incapable of manœuvring, and that by the confession of their
own chiefs. Their gunnery was not only inaccurate, which in
very close fighting was not of the first consequence, but was
slow in the case of the French, and very slow in the case of
the Spaniards. Their powder was of inferior quality and
fouled the guns quickly.
It has become so much the custom to speak of everything
Nelson did as in some sort miraculous that the memorandum
has been treated as a revelation of original genius. Yet
when we look at it coolly it is obviously only a plan to do
deliberately what Duncan did on the spur of the moment, and
under the pressure of circumstances, at Camperdown. The
resemblance between the battles becomes still closer when we
look at what was actually done on the 21st October.
After the sweeping movements and variable weather of
the last few days, the fleet was in some apparent disorder.
The division into three of the memorandum was not attempted.
The ships were in two swarms, Collingwood’s lee division of
fifteen sail, and Nelson’s weather division of twelve.
Nelson’s Division.
Victory
100
{ {
Vice-Admiral Lord Nelson. Capt. T. M. Hardy.
Téméraire
98
〃 Eliab Harvey.
Neptune
98
〃 T. F. Fremantle.
Conqueror
74
〃 Israel Pellew.
Leviathan
74
〃 H. W. Bayntun.
Ajax
74
Lieut. J. Pilford.
Orion
74
Capt. E. Codrington.
Agamemnon
64
Sir E. Berry.
Minotaur
74
Capt. J. M. Mansfield.
Spartiate
74
Sir J. Laforey.
Britannia
100
{ {
Rear-Admiral Lord Northesk. Capt. C. Bullen.
Africa
64
〃 Digby.
Collingwood’s Division.
Royal Sovereign
100
{ {
Vice-Admiral Collingwood. Capt. E. Rotheram.
Mars
74
〃 G. Duff.
Belleisle
74
〃 W. Hargood.
Tonnant
80
〃 C. Tyler.
Bellerophon
74
〃 J. Cooke.
Colossus
74
〃 J. N. Morris.
Achille
74
〃 R. King.
Polyphemus
64
〃 R. Redmill.
Revenge
74
〃 R. Moorsom.
Swiftsure
74
〃 D. G. Rutherford.
Defence
74
〃 G. Hope.
Thunderer
74
Lieut. J. Stockham.
Defiance
94
Capt. P. C. Durham.
Prince
98
〃 R. Grindale.
Dreadnought
98
〃 J. Conn.
In the feeble wind and allowing for the scattered state of
the ships, together with the slow sailing of some of them, the
task of forming the two into one regular line, or each one
itself into a regular line, would have taken hours. In the
meantime the enemy would have been slipping off. It was
ever Nelson’s way to trust to the spirit not the letter, the
substance and not the mechanical order. “Lord Nelson
determined to substitute for exact order an impetuous attack
in two distinct bodies.” So said Collingwood, writing to a
brother seaman, Admiral Pasley, and he may really be
supposed to have known what his lifelong friend, who thought
him fit to be entrusted with the entire management of the
lee line, meant. “It (Nelson’s plan) was executed well and
succeeded admirably; probably its novelty was favourable to
us, for the enemy looked for a time when we should form
something like a line.” There were men in the fleet who
thought the plan was not executed, because the mere order of
going of the memorandum was not observed. There was no
drawing up in three lines before the enemy’s centre, no attack
in line abreast, or all together at the same moment, on an
inferior number of the rear ships. Captain Moorsom of the
Revenge thought the plan had been wholly thrown over.
So did Israel Pellew of the Conqueror. But Collingwood,
and Codrington of the Orion, who said they all scrambled
into action as best they could, inspired by the example
of their leaders and the spirit of the memorandum,
thought overwise. Whatever dubitations there may have
been in the minds of men here and there, the whole
fleet knew well enough that they were not asked to
display “the froth of discipline and the tricks of parade.”
When signal 72, “Form the order of sailing in two columns,”
went up at seven o’clock, and was followed in a few moments by
76, “To bear up and sail large on the course steered by the
admiral or that pointed out by him,” and the compass direction
E.N.E. was given, they knew they were to steer for the enemy
and fall on his centre and rear in such order as time and
distance, wind and speed, and the formation of the allies
should allow. To the look-out ships of the French the
English seemed to come up from the W.S.W. in a long string
of groups of ships stretching from north to south. The allies
were lying in a concave line also stretching from north to
south. They turned to bring their heads on Cadiz. Their
advance squadron, commanded by the Spanish admiral,
Gravina, which had been to windward of the van before the fleet
turned, and was now the rear, was trying to fall in behind the
centre, and formed the projecting southern point of the crescent.
They were not in exact order, for some were to leeward of
others, so that the whole seemed to form two lines. Beginning
from the north they lay thus:—
Neptuno
80
Spanish
Capt. Don Cayetano Valdés.
Scipion
74
French
〃 C. Berenger.
Intrépide
80
〃
〃 L. A. C. Infernet.
Formidable
80
〃
{ {
Rear-Admiral Dumanoir-le-Pelley. Capt. J. M. Letellier.
Duguay-Trouin
74
〃
〃 C. Touffet.
Mont Blanc
74
〃
〃 G. J. N. La Villegris.
San Francesco de Ases
74
Spanish
〃 Don Luis de Flores.
Rayo*
100
〃
〃 Don E. Macdonel.
Hèros
74
French
〃 J. B. J. R. Ponlain.
San Agustin*
74
Spanish
〃 Don F. X. Cagigal.
Santissima Trinidad
130
〃
{ {
Rear-Admiral Don B. H. Cisneros. Commodore F. de Uriarte.
Bucentaure
80
French
{ {
Vice-Admiral Villeneuve. Capt. J. J. Magendie.
Redoutable
74
〃
〃 J. J. E. Lucas.
San Justo
74
Spanish
〃 Miguel Gaston.
Neptune
74
French
〃 E. T. Maistral.
San Leandro
64
Spanish
〃 Don J. Quevedo.
Santa Ana
112
〃
{ {
Vice-Admiral J. M. de Alava. Capt. J. Gardogui.
Indomptable*
80
French
〃 J. J. Hubert.
Fougueux
74
〃
〃 L. A. Beaudouin.
Pluton
80
〃
〃 J. M. C. Kerjulien.
Monarca*
74
Spanish
〃 Don T. Argumosa.
Algesiras
74
French
{ {
Rear-Admiral Magon. Capt. G. A. Bronard.
Bahama
80
Spanish
〃 Don D. Galiano.
Aigle
74
French
〃 P. P. Gourrège.
Montañes
74
Spanish
〃 Don J. Salcedo.
Swiftsure
74
French
〃 C. E. L. H. Villemadrin.
Argonaute
74
〃
〃 J. Epron.
San Ildefonso
74
Spanish
〃 J. Bargas.
Argonanta*
80
〃
〃 A. Parejas.
Achille
74
French
〃 G. Denieport.
Principe de Asturias
112
Spanish
{ {
Admiral F. Gravina. Rear-Admiral A. Escaño.
Berwick
74
French
Capt. J. G. F. Camas.
San Juan Nepomuceno
74
Spanish
〃 Don C. Churruca.
* The vessels marked with an asterisk were those lying inside.
As the day wore on to noon the string of groups forming
the confused looking English line began to collect into two
“distinct bodies.” At the northern end ships fell in behind
the Victory, which was steered for the allied van. To the
south they collected behind Collingwood. The enemy looked
in vain for a time when each should form something like
a line. As the whole approached the curve where the allies
were forging slowly ahead, ready to show at least the passive
and defensive courage of brave men who had not the skill to
display active valour, Collingwood ordered his squadron to
form the leeward line of bearing. If the order could have been
executed it would have brought all the ships of his division
into a line on his starboard side deflected from him at an
angle and stretching from N.N.E. to S.S.W. Then his
ships would infallibly have come into action in such a way
that the most southerly of them would have struck on the
projecting southern point of the allied crescent, before the
most northern reached her point of attack near the centre.
But the order cannot have been intended to produce exact
obedience, Collingwood even made exact obedience impossible.
The Royal Sovereign, his flagship, at the northern end of his
line, a clean swift-sailing ship, curved all sail and swept on
ahead. Nobody stopped for the heavy sailers. The signal
was meant to tell the captains to advance along lines parallel
to the course of the flagship as well and as fast as they
could, and between her and the rear of the enemy. They did
advance in a string, the quick sailers close to the Royal
Sovereign, and the tubs struggling in the rear. The
Defence was two hours later in getting into action than the
Royal Sovereign, a clear proof that she never was even
nearly on the larboard line of bearing. Nelson, for his part,
did less than Collingwood to satisfy any expectation the
enemy may have entertained of seeing a line formed. Captain
Blackwood of the Euryalus, the frigate which had rendered
excellent service in watching the allies, has left a memorable
picture of the admiral’s bearing and conduct on this last
morning of his life. Blackwood was summoned early to the
flagship, and came in the hope of hearing that Nelson had
decided to give him the command of the Ajax or the
Thunderer, then in charge of lieutenants, because their
captains had gone to England to attend a court-martial on
Sir R. Calder. He was mistaken. Nelson had called him
to act as witness to the codicil to his will he had just
written, wherein he left to the nation the legacy he perhaps
ought not to have left, but which ought not to have been
refused. Then the admiral wished to make his wishes clear,
and to pour his heart out with all the freedom of his expansive
nature among friends, now when the approach of peril and of
the decisive hour were producing the exhilaration they never
failed to arouse in his soul of flame. Blackwood, speaking for
himself and for all the officers, urged Nelson to allow other
vessels to pass ahead of the Victory to meet the first shock,
and leave him free to direct the general movements of his
fleet. He consented. He even allowed Captain Blackwood to
row to the Leviathan with a message to Captain Harvey to
take the head of the line. But when Blackwood returned he
found that nothing had been done to render obedience possible.
The Victory was still carrying on. She was headed at the
enemy’s van and then at his centre. Her swaying course
added to the confusion prevailing among the ships behind her.
But it kept the enemy in doubt as to the exact point on which
the attack would fall. At 11.40 Nelson signalled that he
meant to pass through the enemy’s line and bar the road of
retreat to Cadiz. A quarter of an hour later he sent up the
famous signal which, as some authorities tell us, was to have
been, “Nelson expects that every man will do his duty.” If I
may be permitted to express a personal preference, I wish it
had been. That England expects every man to do his duty
is at best a copy-book heading, and we cannot quite forget
that she stands in expectation with the articles of war in
hand, and death or other punishment denounced against all who
fail. The personal appeal of Nelson, who of all admirals did
most by his personal influence, would have been appropriate
and heroic. When the weather division was all but touching
the enemy’s line, Nelson sent Blackwood and his brother-captain,
Prowse of the Sirius, back to their ships. He
told Blackwood to hail the captains of the ships behind the
Victory, and tell them to break in on the enemy where they
could, standing not upon the order of their going—and parted
from him with the prophecy that they were not to meet again,
for he did not believe that he would survive the battle.
It was a little before noon of the 21st October that
England began to reap the reward of generations of wise
effort honestly made, while France and Spain began to pay
for unwisdom and neglect of long standing. The famous plan
of battle was comparatively a small matter, a clever device
which a clever enemy could have baffled, or at the best a
more effectual way of doing what Howe had done on the
1st June—of producing a mêlée in which the better quality
of the English fleet would have full play. The chief gave
that superiority entire freedom. In his memorandum he
had frankly told his officers that unforeseen conditions might
make it impossible to carry out his plan exactly as he
designed it, but that no captain could be wrong who laid his
ship alongside an enemy. And the men knew their superiority—not
in valour, the quality which is indispensable to a good
force, but will not itself make a good fighting force. The
valour and intellectual alertness of the French had never
left themselves without witness in their fleets. The Spaniards,
less active and intelligent than the French, could at their
best fight the batteries of their ships with the same sort of
courage they showed in defending Saragossa or Gerona.
The superiority lay in the power to strike quick and hard,
to repair damage, to use their weapons.
In the little wind there was the English came on at the
rate of about a mile and a quarter an hour. The effective
range of fire of the guns of the time was from a thousand
to twelve hundred yards. Therefore, as our leading ships
came on they were under fire for half an hour or so before
reaching the line. Until they were within four to five
hundred yards they would be liable to the concentrated fire
of two or more of the enemy, while as they approached the
enemy’s line, through which they meant to steer, the danger
of a raking broadside increased with their proximity. If the
fire of the allies had been what the fire of the well-drilled
English ships was, two broadsides in five minutes (some could
fire three), the leading ships of both divisions must have
undergone ten or twelve broadsides before they were in
a position to reply. If the aim of the enemy had been
good they would have been torn to shreds. The Royal
Sovereign, the first to cut the line, passed astern of the
Santa Ana, raking her with great effect, and ahead of
the Fougueux. She ranged up on the starboard side of the
Spaniard, who made but a feeble reply, but she was fired into
by the Fougueux, the Monarca, and the Indomptable. The
time seemed long to her officers and men before relief came.
But in some ten minutes, the Belleisle, which had been left
three-quarters of a mile behind the Royal Sovereign broke
in astern of the Fougueux and took off part of the fire. A
few minutes later help came from the weather division. The
Royal Sovereign was relieved of most of her assailants, and
was left to fight it out with Santa Ana whose side she fairly
battered in. In the course of the battle she was rendered
unmanageable, and she lost 141 killed and wounded. But
she was not shattered beyond repair, and her loss was four
less than the loss of the Ardent, 64, out of a far smaller
crew at Camperdown.[8] As much may be said of all the
vessels which lost heavily, the Victory, the Téméraire, the
Belleisle, Mars, Tonnant, Bellerophon, Colossus.
They came in early against fresh opponents, they were
engaged with several at once, they were roughly handled;
but in such conditions and against equal skill they would
have been destroyed. The most striking proof of the poor
gunnery of our opponents is afforded by the fortunes of
the Africa, 64. She was separated, and to the north,
before the battle began. She joined Nelson’s division by
passing in front of the enemy’s van within range, and she
took part in the hottest fighting at the centre. Yet her loss
was only sixty-two, less than half the loss of the Ardent
at Camperdown.
The Royal Sovereign had broken the enemy’s line astern
of the Santa Ana a little before twelve. There were sixteen
French and Spaniards of the line between her and the last
ship in the curved formation of the allies to be dealt with by
Collingwood’s fifteen. The Victory, with the Neptune on
the port and the Téméraire on the starboard side, broke in
two ships ahead of the Santa Ana. The Victory passed
astern of the Redoutable, the Neptune ahead of her and
astern of the Bucentaure, the Téméraire attacked the Spanish
San Justo astern and to leeward of the Redoutable. Thus a
concentration was effected on the enemy’s centre as the ships
of the weather division came up. The allies astern of the Santa
Ana moved ahead to help friends, or because the wind carried
them slowly on. The ships of the English lee division broke
in among them, or, in the case of the heavy sailers who came in
late, swept round the end of the line. There was here no concentration
of superior numbers by us, but a development of
superior power of gunnery which shattered the enemies within
reach and broke the whole, so that the last comers of the
English finished the action with little loss to themselves, and
indeed, in the case of the Prince, with no loss at all. When
the weather division fell on the group of the allies about the
Bucentaure it stopped their way. The ten ships ahead of the
central group stood on leaving a break between themselves
and the hard-pressed centre. In vain did Villeneuve hoist
signals to bring them into the action, so long as he had a mast
to hoist signals on. Dumanoir signalled that he had no
enemy to engage, and he behaved as if he had no wish to find
one. He could bring his ship’s head round with the help of
their boats, and could find wind to take a sweep out to the
west, and run away with all who would follow him at the
close of the battle. All did not. Some of the ten came
voluntarily into action comparatively early, turning back manfully
to help their friends. Two refused to follow Dumanoir at
the end—Don Cayetano Valdés of the Neptuno, and Captain
Infernet of the French Intrépide were found faithful and struck
for honour, when they could no longer strike for victory.
But the chivalry which does not recognise that the feeble
bearing of Dumanoir-le-Pelley was no small aid to our success,
is a chivalry which has forgotten that a regard for truth is one
of the qualities of a knight and a gentleman.
Every child in the English-speaking world knows how the
death which Nelson saw coming to him struck him down on
the Victory’s quarter-deck, and how he died in her cockpit—thanking
God that he had done his duty. He had also done
his work. He had so directed the long acquired superiority
of the English fleet that it could act untrammelled by
pedantry and could despise vain shows. It had exercised
its whole strength and had swept hostile fleets off the sea.
When the battle of Trafalgar ended at five o’clock in the
afternoon of the 21st October, the epoch of battles at sea was
over for long years. There was plenty of work for the navy to
do. There were no more battles to fight. Of the thirty-three
ships of the allied line, four—the Formidable, Mont Blanc,
Scipion, and Duguay-Trouin—escaped seaward and steered for
France, only to be captured off Cape Ortegal by five English
ships of the line under Sir Richard Strachan: the Cæsar, 80,
Strachan’s own ship; the Hero, 74, Captain Alan Hyde
Gardner; the Namur, 74, Captain Halsted; the Courageux,
74, Captain Lee; and the Bellona, 74, Captain Pater.
Observe that in this action, where no English ship was isolated
amid several opponents, we lost 24 killed and 111 wounded in
all. The loss of the enemy was 730. Eleven ships escaped
into Cadiz, where the French among them remained till they
were taken by the Spaniards in 1808. Eighteen were taken,
one of them, the French Achille, caught fire and was destroyed.
Four—one French and three Spanish—remained as prizes in
our hands. The others were wrecked, destroyed by us, or
recaptured in the storm following the battle. Nelson had
decided to anchor. Collingwood, to whom the command fell,
elected not to do so. Perhaps he thought that the most
seriously injured vessels could not anchor, and that the less
injured must keep under way to help them. It was a question
of seamanship, and of that art he was a master. Our total
loss was 1690. The loss of the allies cannot be accurately
fixed, but it was very much greater. Villeneuve, who fought
his flagship bravely, remained a prisoner till he was released
on parole, and killed himself in France.
CHAPTER XVI THE COMMAND OF THE SEA
Authorities.—In addition to the books named above, the reader may consult the
earlier letters of Sir Charles Napier in the collection named The Navy, its Past
and Present; The Past and Future of the British Navy, by the Hon. G.
Plunkett (Lord Dunsany); Impressment Fully Considered, by Captain A. J.
Griffiths; Captain Mahan’s War of 1812; Captain Robinson’s British Tar and
Nelson’s Signals, published by the Admiralty, and written by Mr. Perrin.
The phrase “The Command of the Sea” may be so used
as to be rhetorical and misleading. It is so used when
it is meant to assert or imply that the power exercising
the command can exclude an opponent from access to
the sea, or can be secured against all loss and defeat on the
water. If “command” means solitary possession, then it was
never enjoyed by England throughout the whole of the Revolutionary
and Napoleonic wars. Her navy suffered more small
defeats, and her trade was more harassed in 1813 than in
any year of the war. In 1810, six years after Trafalgar,
three French frigates sailed to the Indian Ocean. Two of
them were lost in action, but the third, the Clorinde, made her
way home, and, though she was chased by a line-of-battle ship,
got safe into Brest. In that year four English frigates were
destroyed at a blow at Grand Port in Mauritius. When
“command” is used with exaggeration it has not much more
meaning than the figurative expression which speaks of the
ocean as covered by the sails of a naval power. There have
been men who took these words as intended to state a fact.
General Lauriston, who accompanied Villeneuve to the West
Indies, says in one of his letters that they had all heard of the
English ships as covering the ocean, and yet they had only
seen two at anchor in the Antilles. If, however, we are content
to employ the words as meaning the power to send fleets
to and fro, to conduct trade, to effect conquests, and carry on
wars oversea—then England had the command from the
beginning, and had it because she fought an enemy crippled by
revolutionary anarchy. The use she made of her superiority
was often governed by considerations wholly unconnected with
the strength of the navy. If she did not conquer Java till
1811 it was not for want of naval strength. It was because a
large army could not be sent from India while Mysore was
unconquered and the Mahrattas were not subdued. But if
we are to discuss all these aspects of a multiform war, a short
history of the Royal Navy would be lost in a long history of
more than twenty years of warfare on land, of diplomacy, and
of finance. We must be content to keep to the forces with
which England exercised the command of the sea, the purposes
for which she used them, and the methods which she employed.
The forces were the material strength and quality of the navy.
Her purposes were the protection of trade, and the prosecution
of wars over sea. The methods were, first, the destruction of
the enemies’ main fleets, which I have already endeavoured to
deal with, and then blockades, patrol by vessels cruising on the
ocean routes, the transport of, and co-operation with, the armies.
Sea-going Ships.
Harbour Ships etc.
In Ordinary.
Harbour, in Ordinary.
Building.
Officers.
Men.
1794
279
32
49
60
37
2207
85,000
1795
326
69
37
51
27
2727
100,000
1796
376
70
29
59
58
3094
110,000
1797
401
80
34
72
46
3351
120,000
1798
451
85
51
73
36
3482
120,000
1799
469
115
48
62
28
3744
120,000
1800
468
131
42
88
28
3658
120,000
1801
472
134
39
90
36
3693
120,000
1802
451
128
54
113
35
3950
130,000
1803
232
10
210
156
55
4220
50,000
1804
395
45
79
103
80
4203
100,000
1805
508
45
69
104
81
4228
120,000
1806
579
55
46
108
131
4172
120,000
1807
636
58
54
117
108
4511
120,000
1808
642
53
59
167
111
4823
130,000
1809
709
64
46
160
82
4955
130,000
1810
692
72
37
175
72
5118
145,000
1811
658
69
38
195
59
5107
145,000
1812
621
71
40
166
80
5260
145,000
1813
613
72
40
174
110
5502
140,000
1814
644
69
43
180
72
5594
140,000
1815
485
35
115
206
43
5682
70,000
When the war began in 1793 the Royal Navy had in commission
for sea-service:—26 ships of the line from 60 guns
and upwards, 7 of 50, and 3 of 44 guns, and 199 vessels,
from 38-gun frigates down to the cutter of 4 guns. In commission
for harbour duty were 3 ships of the line and 11 of
other classes. She had 169 vessels, including 87 of the line,
5 of 50 and 15 of 44 guns; “in ordinary,” that is to say, not
in commission but fit, when repaired, for active service; 72,
of which 25 were of the line, 7 were of 50, and 3 of 44 guns,
only fit for harbour duty but not in commission; 21, of which
12 were of the line, were building or ordered to be built—in
all, 411 vessels. The officers on the active list were 2378
in number, and 45,000 men were voted by Parliament.
The strength of the navy at the beginning of the succeeding
years of the war was as given in the table on the preceding
page.
In 1800, 120,000 men were voted for the first two months
of the year, and 110,000 for the rest of the year. In 1801,
120,000 were voted for the first three months, and 135,000
for the rest of the year. In 1802, the year of the peace,
130,000, 88,000, and 70,000 were successively voted. In
1803, the year of the renewal of the war, the votes were for
50,000, 60,000, 100,000 men successively. In 1807 the
numbers were 120,000 for the first month, and then 135,000.
In 1814 they were 140,000 for seven, and 90,000 for six
months. The vote was by the month of twenty-eight days
and thirteen to the year.
During the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars the use
of the carronade in the navy was considerably extended.
This piece, invented by General Melville, and first cast in the
Carron foundry in Scotland, was introduced into the navy in
1779. It was a short piece with a large bore, and a powder
chamber, light, easily handled and destructive to timber when
fired at short range. The shot was large in proportion to the
size of the piece, and because of its destructive effect on wood
it was to have been named the “Smasher.” At first the
carronades were only placed where there was no room for long
guns. But its effect at close quarters proved so tempting that
in some cases the long guns were replaced by carronades. In
1782 the Rainbow, 44, was so rearmed. The change made
in the weight of her broadside added—or seemed to add—immensely
to her strength. Her forty-four long guns gave a
broadside weight of 318 lbs. The forty-eight carronades she
received in lieu of long guns, gave her a broadside of 1238
lbs. The Rainbow made an easy capture of a beautiful
French frigate, the Hébé. But then she was able to come
close to the French ship before opening fire. When this
advantage could not be secured the carronade was of no value,
for it had only a short range. Its weakness was fully demonstrated
in the action between the Phœbe and the American
frigate Essex. The American ship was armed with carronades
on her gun deck. The Phœbe was to windward, and her
captain, Hillyar, who knew the inferiority of his opponent’s
armament, kept his distance, and battered the American into
ruin. As the carronade was never counted officially in the
armament of a ship, its introduction led to confusion, and
some dishonesty in estimating the strength of our ships and
our enemies. We counted all the pieces of ordnance of our
opponent but only our own “guns.” The carronade was
adopted by foreign navies after 1783. During the wars
which began in 1793 the navy had the benefit of a much
improved system of signalling. The old system was one by
which particular combinations of flags, or the place of flags in
the rigging, conveyed a certain order. The new or numerary
system was elaborated by Lord Howe in combination with
Kempenfelt, and was largely developed by Sir Home Popham.
It will be seen from this list that the navy attained to its
maximum of numbers of ship’s officers and men in the years
following Trafalgar. The increase was most marked after
1808, the year of the beginning of the war in Spain, and the
largest numbers were reached from 1810 to 1814. There is
a very general agreement among the best authority that the
augmented size of the fleet was not accompanied by a growth
in real power. It is maintained that, on the contrary, the
efficiency of the fleet fell off. Its gunnery was neglected for
mere “polish,” and the crews deteriorated in quality. Many
explanations of the decline have been given. The disappearance
of French fleets from the sea is said to have rendered
our officers somewhat careless of their gunnery. The unwillingness
of the Admiralty to authorise expenditure of powder in
practice has been rendered responsible for the decline of skill.
The hardships of life in the navy aggravated by the brutality
of some officers are held to have deterred men from entering
the service, and to have made them eager to desert when they
were in it. The large proportion of foreigners employed is
given as another cause of the loss of efficiency. There are
elements of truth in all this criticism and apology. When
seven hundred vessels more or less were in commission, only
a small minority had an opportunity to see service. Some
officers of known zeal and capacity passed years without once
being under fire. If the heart of a captain was intent on seamanship
and smartness he might be tempted, by the small
chance of meeting a foe, to neglect the gun drill of his crew.
If he feared to be blamed by the Admiralty for expending too
much powder, he would not venture to avail himself of the
device employed by some of his colleagues, who obtained
practice for their men by pretending to see suspicious strangers,
and who did not hesitate to make fictitious entries in their
logs. After the loss of several English vessels, captured in
rapid succession by the Americans in the war of 1812, the
decline of our gunnery became a commonplace. So did the
cruelty of certain captains of “crack” ships, who sacrificed
everything, including humanity, to “overpolish.” We hear of
crews driven to mutinous explosions by officers who would
send their men aloft ten or twelve times to finish off
some mere detail of the set or stowing of sails. Such men
enforced attention to their pedantry and foppery by the
lash. Mere declamation can be neglected, but we cannot
reject the testimony of Codrington given in the very midst
of the American war, in a private letter written from the
station, and supported by examples. “I have heard,” he said,
“many shocking stories of cruelty and misconduct witnessed by
the relators, officers now in this ship.” If there is any truth
in the statement that the number of floggings inflicted in
English ships diminished by a half when the Admiralty ordered
quarterly returns of punishments to be made, it is manifest
that there must have been a gross abuse of the power to flog.
It is certain that we employed many foreigners, and one of the
English vessels lost in the war of 1812, the Epervier, had
foreigners in her crew.
Yet it is doubtful whether these explanations of the
decline of our discipline and skill are satisfactory. No vessel
lost to the Americans was so scandalously lost as the
Ambuscade, taken by the French Bayonnaise in 1798. She
was outmanœuvred by a smaller ship, and carried by boarding.
In the American war the Phœbe, which took the Essex in the
South Seas, and the Shannon, which took the Chesapeake, were
nowise inferior to their opponents in gunnery. Nor were we
always beaten in that war by gunnery or by American seamen.
The Decatur, which took the Dominica by boarding,
was commanded by a French privateer, Captain Diron, and
manned by a French crew. The discipline of the navy was as
severe for the marine as for other men. Yet there never was
any difficulty in recruiting for the marines. If our navy sank
below the level of 1805, the reason must be sought in its size.
One hundred and forty-five thousand men was an immense
number to take from the population of Great Britain when it
was less than half what it is to-day. And they had to be
found just when increased numbers of soldiers were needed,
when our merchant shipping had doubled, and when there was
a great development of manufacturing industry and of agriculture.
If we had been forced to rely on our own population
we could not have found the men. We succeeded because
multitudes of foreign seamen were driven to seek service in
England by the ruin of commerce in their native countries.
Even with their help the Admiralty was unable to supply crews
of good quality to all the ships. If the Epervier was largely
manned by negroes and foreigners, she had many feeble, undersized
Englishmen who were taken because no better could be
obtained. The physical strength of the men was a consideration
of the first importance in the warships of the old navy.
All the work at the guns had to be done by downright pulling
and hauling. The proportion of one man to every 500
pounds of metal was just sufficient to work the gun, and could
not be maintained when the crew was short-handed, or when
it was necessary to fight both broadsides. The effort required
to run out a 32-pounder, which weighed 55 cwt. 2 lb. on the
weather broadside when the ship was leaning over, was severe
even for a full crew of twelve men. The demand for good
men had far outrun the supply. The existence of the United
States added materially to our difficulties, for it supplied our
sailors with an English-speaking country to which they could
escape. During the later stages of the war the navy was compelled
to form its crews with ever-increasing difficulty. It
found marines who, when they enlisted, had a security for
permanent employment and a pension. The sailors did not
form a permanent corps and were sent adrift when their ship
was paid off. The regular bred seamen preferred the good
wages and freedom of the merchant service, or emigrated to
America. The miscellaneous landsmen, who formed a large
part of our crews, were obtained by bounties and the press.
The press did indeed take time-expired apprentices from the
merchant ships at sea, and they constituted a valuable part of
our crews. On land it was of little value. During 1811,
1812, and 1813, 29,405 men were impressed, 27,300 of them
deserted, and as 3000 trustworthy men were employed in the
gangs which seized them, the navy was in fact the loser to the
amount of 1000 men. The naval rendezvous, placed in “the
vilest sort of public house, with a something that had once been
a Union Jack suspended from a pole, but from filth and dirt
wearing the appearance of a black flag,” was not only a scandal,
but a useless expense. Pressgang midshipman was a byword
for a ruffian. The practice of incorporating criminals and
vagabonds in the navy, which was as old as the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, was continued throughout the great war. Captain
Anselm Griffiths, whose description of a naval rendezvous has
been quoted above, is emphatic about the criminal element in
the navy. “What,” he says, “was the mass of discontent and
impatience generated by a forced association with the refuse of
our jails, convicts, vagabonds, thieves not brought to justice
from lenity, smugglers, White Boys, suspected Irish during the
rebellion, all who from loss of character could not procure
employment, the idle and the worthless,—all was fish that came
to the net.”
Such accounts of the crews of the navy as this might be
quoted in numbers. We are tempted to wonder how the
work was done with such men, and whether there can be any
foundation for the praise given to the seamanship and
gunnery of the navy. But Captain Griffiths, and other
authorities who support him, spoke of the bad elements. With
them were others of a very different order—the marines and the
pressed men of good character. The great length of the war
allowed time for the formation of a class of men who were
trained wholly in the navy and were attached to it by habit
and affection. When Broke commissioned the Shannon, he
left England with a crew composed of drafts from the guardships
of very mixed quality, and of a majority of boys
provided by the Patriotic Society and the workhouses. If
the Shannon had met a well-appointed American frigate
within three months she would have fared no better than the
Epervier or the Java. But she was six years in commission
before her famous action. Broke had time to weed out the
bad characters. The boys grew to manhood under his wise
training. The same process was going on in other ships. If
we could have limited the establishment of the navy to 80,000
or even 100,000 men, every ship might have been as well
manned as the Shannon. It is even possible that the
weaknesses of the navy were made to appear greater than
they really were by the fact that the Admiralty, which
naturally looked first to fleets Napoleon was building in
European ports, kept its best men for the European
stations, and compelled captains, whose ships were commissioned
for distant seas, to put up with the worst. The
increase in the staff of officers from over two to over five
thousand, brought with it the necessity for not being too exacting
as to their quality. Something must be allowed for the
jobbery of the time. There were men in the navy who owed
their positions to no merit of their own, but to the fact that
some one of influence had spoken for them. We must, again,
allow for the fact that there was as yet no uniform standard
of discipline. The captains had wide discretion, and the bad
ones were unchecked.
Whatever evils the overgrowth of the navy brought with
it, the increase was unavoidable. In the years following
Trafalgar, the English Navy was in something not unlike the
position of the French armies in Spain after 1809. They
were far more numerous than the army of Wellington in
Portugal. Yet they were frequently unable to collect a force
to oppose him, because they were compelled to spread themselves
over the whole of Spain. We have recently learned
how rapidly an army, which is powerful on a field of battle,
can be frittered into small detachments when it has to guard
long lines of communication, and to occupy a wide expanse of
territory. The English Government was, from the year 1793,
under a peremptory obligation to guard trade routes extending
from Canton to the St. Lawrence. The task did not become
lighter after Trafalgar. Napoleon adopted a definite policy.
He began to build line of battleships on a great scale.
As his power spread he increased their numbers till he had
upwards of one hundred and fifty in ports extending from
Venice to Hamburg. They were rarely sent to sea. Many
of them, built hastily of green timber, began to rot so soon as
they were launched. But it was impossible to neglect them.
Squadrons must be employed to watch them. The bulk of
our navy was necessarily employed in that work. While our
squadrons were watching hostile ports, our commerce was
subject to a double form of attack. Light squadrons and
single ships sailed from French ports on commerce destroying
cruises. Privateers sailed not only from French ports, but
from colonial harbours, Martinique and Guadaloupe, Bourbon
and Mauritius, and the Dutch islands of Java and Sumatra.
These attacks had to be guarded against by blockade, by
convoy, by patrol, and by the conquest of the ports from
which the privateers sailed.
The history of blockade cannot be told. It is a long
monotonous roll of sailings from one point to another and
back again, of periodical returns to port to refit or for
provisions, of ships driven away by gales from the land,
or forced to work to sea that they might not be driven on
a lee shore. The daily fulfilment of a routine, isolation from
family life and all society other than that of messmates,
exposure to cold, to heat, to wet, make up the lot of the
officers and men of a blockading fleet. And this was the
work on which the majority of the navy was employed. The
brief intervals spent in a home port when food and water
had to be renewed, were hardly less painful than the time
spent on the cruising-ground, for the rule that neither
officer nor man might sleep on shore rendered the promise of
more leave, given in 1797, almost nugatory. Indeed an
increase of pay was the most solid advantage the seamen
gained in that year. In 1808, when the need for more men
became very urgent the pay of the sailor was raised to
£1, 12s. for the lunar month. The secluded unnatural
life of the blockading squadrons was terrible for all ranks.
Some of the consequences it produced cannot be named.
Not a few of the men went mad under the strain, multitudes
were hardened in heart and distorted in character.
The blockades did the work assigned them. When, in
1809, Napoleon endeavoured to send a strong squadron, drawn
partly from the Brest fleet and partly from ships at Rochefort,
to the West Indies, his plan was ruined by the Channel fleet.
The bulk of his force did get away from Brest, but only to be
sighted by the British forces and driven into the Basque
roads. There they were attacked by fireships under the
immediate command of Lord Cochrane (Dundonald) and the
superior direction of Lord Gambier. The operation was not
so completely successful as it might have been. Cochrane
was so dissatisfied by the interference of his commander-in-chief
that he forced the Admiralty to bring Gambier to a
court martial. Even so, the attack ruined the French squadron,
and the reinforcements never reached the French islands.
Here we see the normal working of the blockade, which left
the French fleet no chance of getting to sea, except by the
help of good fortune in evading the watch of the British ships.
No great French fleet ventured to sea, and only once did
a considerable French squadron incur the risk of trusting itself
far from port among the English forces. Napoleon would not
hazard the great fleet he was building up till he had vanquished
all enemies on the Continent, and could make a final attack
with all the forces of Europe. But though the main purpose
was achieved the duty became continually more severe till after
the Russian campaign, when the destruction of the Grand Army
compelled the Emperor to take the crews of his ships and make
regiments of them. As his power spread up to 1812, more and
ever more ports had to be watched, and it became constantly
less possible to block them all effectually. The vast works he
carried out at Cherbourg made the harbour capable of holding
line-of-battle ships and imposed more blockading duty on
the navy. After the fall of Prussia in 1807 he brought the
coast of the Baltic under his control, and more ships were
needed to counteract his plans. The coast-line to be watched
was so long that though the English Government strained its
resources to the utmost, though the navy was increased by
desperate measures, it was impossible to prevent cruisers and
small squadrons from escaping to sea. In 1812 when 621
vessels were in commission, and the establishment of the navy
was 145,000 men, Admiral Allemand sailed from Rochefort.
He eluded the blockading squadron. He almost succeeded in
cutting off the Pompée, 74, which was compelled to start
eighty tons of water to lighten herself for flight. He cruised
in the Atlantic for the destruction of commerce, and, though he
had little fortune in meeting English trading vessels, he got
safe back to Brest. Allemand’s raid shows that the new fleet
Napoleon was forming was not so incapable of keeping the sea
as it has often been supposed to have been. An action fought
in this same year must have been a warning to the English
Government, if any were needed, that it dare not fail to
maintain its naval forces at the highest attainable level of
strength. On the 21st February the Victorious, 74, Captain
Talbot, which was watching the growing Franco-Venetian squadron
at Venice, fought an action with one of the vessels belonging
to it, the Rivoli, 74, Captain Barré. The Victorious had been
detached from the Toulon blockade, the Rivoli was at sea for
the first time, yet the action lasted for four hours, and though
the Rivoli was finally compelled to surrender, she inflicted
a loss of 27 killed and 99 wounded on the Victorious.
At the beginning of 1808, the year in which the great
increase began, the need for numbers had been even more
effectually taught. English troops were then engaged in somewhat
fretful operations on the coast of Calabria. The French
had recovered Corfu and held Venice. The calls on our fleet
in the Mediterranean were many. Collingwood was co-operating
with the troops, in southern Italy, leaving frigates to
watch Toulon. The French Government decided to reinforce
its squadron at Toulon by bringing round six ships—the
Majestueux, 120, the Ajax, Jemmappes, Lion, Magnanime, and
Suffren, 74’s, from Rochefort. They were commanded by the
same Admiral Allemand who was throughout his career very
successful in avoiding the many squadrons sent against him.
Rochefort was blockaded by Sir Richard Strachan with seven
sail of the line. Sir Richard generally kept his squadron at
anchor in the Basque Roads, but at the close of November 1807
he was compelled, by the lack of provisions, to go to the rendezvous
he had assigned to the victuallers which were coming to join
him—a point thirty miles or so south of Roche Bonne. A
frigate and a brig were left to keep watch. North-easterly
gales forced Strachan to the south. The victuallers did not
keep touch punctually. The work of transferring cargo at
sea in rough weather was tedious. Allemand, seeing that he
had only a frigate and a brig before him, put to sea on the
17th January and steered for the Mediterranean. He had a
good start, and as the wind turned to the west and rose to a
storm he got clear away with five of his ships. The Majestueux
was injured in the gale and compelled to return to Toulon.
Allemand passed the Straits of Gibraltar and reached Toulon,
unseen by any English cruiser, on the 6th February. Strachan,
who was fighting his way back to his station against the north-easterly
wind when he heard of Allemand’s escape, followed
him to the Mediterranean. But he was embayed by the
westerly gale. He did not pass the Straits till the 10th,
and he joined Thornborough, Collingwood’s second in command,
at Palermo on the 21st. Ganteaume, who commanded
at Toulon, put to sea with Allemand’s ships on the 7th
February, made his way round to Corfu to revictual the
garrison, drove off the Standard, which he found there,
discharged his mission, and was safe back at Toulon by the
10th April. Collingwood, who concentrated his ships and
pursued him, failed to meet him. In the meantime, two French
frigates, the Pénélope and Thémis, which sailed from Bordeaux
on the 21st January, had cruised near Madeira, had destroyed
English property to the value of a quarter of a million, had
entered the Mediterranean, and had reached Toulon before the
end of March. Criticism after the event could show that if
this or the other officer had done something he did not do,
Allemand, Ganteaume, and the frigates would have been cut
short somewhere. But the palpable fact was that our forces
had not prevented the cruises of the Frenchmen. When
Strachan followed Allemand he necessarily left Rochefort free
for the privateers to enter or leave. With all our superiority
over the French fleets we still could not have too many men,
too many ships, and an increase was not to be avoided, be the
evils it entailed what they might.
The blockading fleets composed the screen covering all the
other operations of our ships. They were not able to protect
completely, but without such protection as they did afford
other duties could not have been performed. The most
exacting and most constant of these was convoy. The whole
British Navy was engaged in the protection of trade, but the
task was peculiarly imposed on the ships which sailed with the
fleets of merchant vessels. It had always been counted one
of the most pressing of an admiral’s duties to protect “the
trade.” Hood took a crowd of merchant crafts with him when
he sailed to reinforce Rodney in the West Indies in 1780.
Rodney brought the trade with him when he returned home
in ill-health. Howe was called upon to see a hundred trading
ships well clear of the Channel when he sailed in 1794. But
after that year the main fleets were relieved of the duty.
They were left free to pursue the enemy’s fleets, and the
protection of the traders against privateers, and single man-of-war
cruisers was left to detachments. It was a tedious and
thankless duty. The rate of sailing of the merchant ships
was very slow. The need for vigilance was unceasing, and
peculiarly great, while just leaving or approaching the land,
for it was then that the prowling privateer was most active.
As the trading fleet neared its destination the skippers were
tempted to push ahead to reach their market first, and they frequently
fell into the hands of the hostile commerce destroyers.
The naval officers, who were liable to be accused of neglecting
their duty by the owners of the captured ships, had long complained
of their inability to control the merchant skippers.
When the war was renewed in 1803 the Government took
measures to reduce the loss inflicted on our shipping to the
lowest attainable level, by compelling all vessels not specially
exempted to sail in convoy. It passed “An Act for the
better Protection of the Trade of the United Kingdom during
the present Hostilities with France” (anno 43d Geo. III. cap.
57). By this Act merchant ships were required to sail in convoys,
to obey the naval officer commanding, and not to
separate wilfully under a penalty of £1000, if the cargo
belonged to a private owner, and of £1500 if it was composed
of naval or military stores. If a vessel did leave the convoy,
and was captured, the owner forfeited all right to recover his
insurances. Vessels might be licensed to sail without convoy,
and the vessels of the East India Company, and of the
Hudson’s Bay Company were expressly exempted.
An event which occurred on the 14th and 15th February
1804 would seem to indicate that the East India Company
could well dispense with convoy. The French admiral, Linois,
the victor of Algeciras, had been sent to the east with General
Decaen. He obtained early news of the outbreak of hostilities
when at or near Pondicherry and went off at once to Java in
such a hurry, that he did not wait for an English naval
officer whom he had invited to breakfast. On his way he
captured a number of valuable English ships, and then he
sailed from Batavia to intercept the Company’s vessels on
their way from Canton to Europe. This very valuable
trading fleet consisted of sixteen vessels of the nominal burden
of 1200 tons, but a real tonnage of from 1300 to 1500.
They were armed with from 30 to 36 guns, and carried crews
of 60 white seamen, and 120 Lascars. Their guns were as
a rule of no great value, and in real force they were far
inferior not only to a frigate but to a heavy corvette. Linois
had with him the Marengo, 74, the Belle Poule, 40-gun frigate,
the Semillante, 36, the Berceau, 22, and the Aventurier, 16.
On the 14th February he sighted the Company’s ships to the
E.N.E. of Pulo Aor, an island near the east side of the
southern extremity of the Malay Peninsula. They were on
their way to the Straits of Malacca—sixteen of them in all—the
Earl Camden, the ship of the Company’s commodore,
Nathaniel Dance; the Warley, Henry Wilson; Alfred, James
Farquharson; Royal George, John Fam Timmins; Coutts,
Robert Torin; Wexford, W. Stanley Clarke; Ganges, William
Moffat; Exeter, Henry Meriton; Earl of Abergavenny,
John Wordsworth; Henry Addington, John Kirkpatrick;
Bombay Castle, Arch. Hamilton; Cumberland, W. Ward
Farrer; Hope, Jas. Prendergass; Dorsetshire, Rob. Hunter
Brown; Warren Hastings, Thomas Larkins; Ocean,
J. Christ. Lochner. The size of the 1200-ton ships, the fact
that they were painted to represent two tiers of guns, the
craft of Commodore Dance, who hoisted the man-of-war
pennant on three of them, and the bold bearing they all
assumed, cowed Linois. He hesitated to attack till the
Indiamen saw his hesitation, bore down on him and drove him
to flight. The Company’s skippers richly deserved all the praise
and rewards they received. The knighthood given to Dance was
handsomely earned. Yet it would be a great mistake to
conclude from the affair of Pulo Aor that the Company’s
ships could rely on their own strength. Linois was singularly
disappointing to his friends whenever he attempted to attack,
though he could fight manfully with his back to the wall.
Indiamen did on several occasions make gallant and successful
fights. On the other hand they were frequently taken by
frigates and privateers. When Sir E. Pellew came to take the
command in the East Indies in 1804 the shipping had been
well-nigh ruined in the Bay of Bengal by French and Dutch
privateers. It was only by submitting to accept convoy that
the Company was able to revive its trade.
There were, however, limits to what the navy could do to
protect trade by convoy. Vessels might be captured while on
their way from their port of departure to the rendezvous.
Gales might scatter them when collected. Fog and mist
might afford cover to the assailant. By far the most effectual of
all ways of protecting trade was to capture the ports from
which the assailants sailed. Therefore from 1793 to 1811,
when the Dutch island of Java was taken, the navy was
engaged in a series of colonial expeditions. They began with
the seizure of St. Pierre and Miquelon, the two little islands
belonging to France on the south coast of Newfoundland, and
of Pondicherry—three ports always occupied at the beginning
of a war, and restored at the close. St. Pierre and Miquelon
were taken in May, and Pondicherry was occupied August
of 1793. In the same year Tobago was taken from the
French, and Martinique was attacked without success. The
royalists of the island called the English forces in, but
Rochambeau, the general in command, held his ground. The
planters of the French half of San Domingo also appealed to
England for protection against their insurgent slaves. It was
so freely given that Jamaica was for a time left without a
garrison. The spectacle of a triumphant servile revolt was
dreadful to all the slave owners of the West Indies. The
operations on the coast of this island were disastrous to the
troops. They dared not carry negroes with them from our
own islands lest they should be infected in the rebellious spirit
of the French slaves. No use could be made of the negroes
of San Domingo. Therefore the soldiers had to engage in
work which is fatal to the white man in the tropics. Whole
battalions were swept away by fevers. The part of the navy
in this case and in most colonial expeditions was to carry the
troops, to land them, to supply naval brigades. These services
were necessarily unvarying in character. The occupation of
a Dutch island in the Moluccas differs only in the names of the
men and ships from the occupation of a French island in the
West Indies. In these cases, too, the navy though an
indispensable, was a subordinate, part of the forces engaged. It
carried the soldiers and it helped them, but the army effected
the conquest. Nothing could well be more idle than to
speculate as to which of the two, the sailor or the soldier, was
the more essential to the victory. The soldiers could not
reach the place to be taken unless they were carried in ships,
and the sailors could not occupy the land without the soldiers.
To speak of these conquests as the gift of the Sea Power is
inaccurate if not absurd. The Sea Power of itself could never
have taken the Cape, or Mauritius. Many of them were not
taken to be kept. The permanent occupation of Martinique
or Guadaloupe would have been offensive to the West Indian
interest, since their produce would have competed with that of
our own islands in the home market. These islands were
taken primarily because they were the headquarters of the
privateers who preyed on our commerce, and secondarily
because they were useful pledges to have in hand when peace
was to be arranged.
A list of these expeditions given without monotonous
detail will show by what steps England applied and completed
her command of the sea.
In January 1794 Sir John Jervis arrived at Jamaica with
four sail of the line, escorting 7000 troops under the command of
Sir C. Grey. They made an easy conquest of Martinique,
which had a garrison of only 700 men in March, and in April
occupied St. Lucia and Guadaloupe. In June, Victor Hugues,
by birth a mean white of the last-named island, and a Jacobin
of the most brutal character, but of energy and capacity,
arrived from Europe with nine vessels, and troops. He landed
in Guadaloupe. An attack made on his ships at Pointe à
Pitre by Jervis was repulsed. He drove the British garrison
from pillar to post, and reconquered the island by December.
Reinforcements reached him in September. Others sailed
from Brest in November, and, though attacked by English
ships near Désirade, reached Guadaloupe in January 1795.
Hugues rapidly took or retook Santa Lucia, St. Vincent,
Grenada, and Dominica. Our naval forces were not numerous
enough to watch everywhere. Nor were our troops, who were
rapidly diminished by disease, able to occupy in sufficient
force.
In August of 1795 Rear-Admiral Keith Elphinstone (Lord
Keith) landed the troops which occupied the Cape. In July
and August of the year the ships on the East India station
and troops from India occupied the Dutch posts on the east
side of Ceylon, in Molucca, and Cochin.
In April 1796 Rear-Admiral Christian came to take the
command in the West Indies in succession to Jervis, bringing
troops under the command of Sir Ralph Abercromby. Santa
Lucia was retaken at once, St. Vincent and Grenada in June.
In the East Indies the Dutch posts at Colombo, Amboyna,
Banda, etc., were occupied. In August a half-manned Dutch
squadron of three line-of-battle ships and four frigates fell into
the hands of Keith at Saldanha Bay.
In February 1797 Spain having declared war, Rear-Admiral
Harvey and Abercromby, with 5 sail of the line and troops,
seized Trinidad. The Spanish admiral, Ruiz de Apodaca,
whose ships were half-manned, burnt his squadron, and the
small garrison could offer no resistance. An attack on Porto
Rico in April was beaten off.
In 1799 Surinam was occupied.
In September 1800 Curaçao was surrendered by the
inhabitants, who were terrorised by a mob of piratical adventurers
calling themselves republicans.
In 1801, on the formation of the Northern Coalition, the
Danish and Swedish islands in the West Indies, St. Martin,
Saba, St. Thomas, St. John, Santa Cruz, St. Bartholomew,
were occupied. The Dutch island, St. Eustatius, was occupied.
In the East Indies, Ternate was taken. Portugal having been
driven by the threats of France and Spain to exclude other
trade, we took possession of Madeira.
By the terms of the Peace of Amiens, England made a
wholesale restoration of her conquests. Trinidad, which was
of value as a depôt for the smuggling trade with the Spanish
colonies in South America, was retained. In the East we
kept Ceylon. On the renewal of the war the work of the
previous years had to be done over again.
In 1803 the Dutch islands in the West Indies were reoccupied,
and the negroes of San Domingo were helped to
destroy the remnants of the French troops among them.
In 1804, at the close of the year, an unsuccessful attack was
made on Curaçao. Surinam was occupied in April and May.
In 1806 the Cape was reoccupied.
In 1807 Curaçao was taken at a rush by Captain
Brisbane.
In 1808 Marigalante fell into our hands, but an attempt
to seize St. Martin ended in the death or capture of all the
men landed.
In 1809 Senegal was taken for the express purpose of
rooting out the privateers who made it their headquarters.
In the West Indies a powerful expedition, carrying 10,000
troops under General Beckwith, escorted by Admiral Cochrane,
took Martinique. Cayenne was occupied by a naval brigade,
and our old enemy, Victor Hugues, the Governor, became our
prisoner.
In 1810 Cochrane and Beckwith took Guadaloupe. In
the East, Mauritius was taken, and Amboyna and the
Moluccas fell into our hands.
In 1811 the work was completed by the occupation of
Java by a large army from India.
These expeditions, which sailed to occupy islands from
which attacks could be made on our trade, were not the only
tasks imposed on the navy in the interest of commerce. As
Napoleon fixed his yoke on Europe, and endeavoured to
compel all its peoples to join him in excluding English trade,
it became necessary to force an entry to new markets, and to
find the means of getting access to the old. It was in order
to obtain fresh markets that the expeditions to the river
Plate were undertaken in 1806 and 1807. Few passages in
history are better fitted to show what is the rigid limit of the
power of a fleet than these adventures. The first was promoted
by the admiral on the Cape Station, Sir Home Popham.
He saw that new markets were becoming necessary, and he
knew that the Spanish colonists were discontented. From
these sound premises he drew the illegitimate deduction that
the people of Buenos Ayres would welcome English rule. He
persuaded the authorities at the Cape to despatch troops to
Buenos Ayres. The navy carried them there, but it could not
save General Beresford and his men from being compelled to
capitulate when the townsmen rose on them. The commercial
classes in England forced the Government to continue the
enterprise begun by Sir Home. Monte Video was occupied,
and Buenos Ayres was again attacked in 1807. But our
troops, ill-commanded by General Whitelocke, were again
forced to surrender. England was on the verge of finding
herself committed to a war of conquest in South America,
which would have employed her whole disposable army, when
the rising of Spain against Napoleon in 1808 gave her an
honourable excuse for withdrawing from a compromising
adventure.
The eager disposition of the trading classes in England to
follow the lead given by Sir Home Popham, was immediately
stimulated by Napoleon’s Berlin decree of the 27th October
1806. It was the beginning of a furious rivalry between
himself and the British Government, in which each endeavoured
to prevent the other from obtaining any benefit
from neutral trade. The emperor strove to exclude our
commerce, and we to prevent any goods from reaching
Europe except through English ports. The neutral was
ground between the upper and the nether millstone. The
navy was employed in covering a vast contraband trade, which
arose inevitably from the natural desire of the inhabitants of
Europe to obtain goods they needed, and England’s equally
natural desire to sell. There was an element of hypocrisy on
both sides, and in practice each undid much of its public policy
by an underhand use of a licensed trade. Napoleon undoubtedly
employed this device to obtain the very things he pretended
to exclude. But he attempted to confine the right to disregard
his decrees to himself. Therefore the smuggling trade
could not be dispensed with, and it became one of the duties
of the navy to shepherd the smugglers. The great field of
this peculiar commerce was the Baltic. The Peace of Tilsit,
between France and Russia in July 1807, threatened England
with a renewal of the Northern Coalition. Her Government,
whether informed of the secret articles of the treaty directed
against it, or acting, as it was entitled to act, on the certainty
that the Emperor of the French would lay hands on any
weapon he could reach to be used against England, took
prompt measures to diminish the danger. In September it
despatched a powerful combined expedition to occupy Copenhagen
and seize the Danish fleet. If this vigorous measure
requires any justification, one can be found in the paroxysm
of rage which it provoked in Napoleon.
The seizure of the Danish fleet entailed a war with Denmark,
and during the ensuing years the navy had to fight
many sharp actions in order to cover the merchant vessels on
their way into and out of the Baltic. When in that sea the
trading vessels were frequently compelled to cruise to and fro
till they could co-operate with the smugglers on shore, or till
the Governments found a way of admitting their goods out of
sight of Napoleon’s agents. As Russia was compelled to
make believe to go to war with England, and was very
seriously engaged in depriving the Swedes of Finland, a brush
took place in August 1808. The English fleet co-operated
with the inefficient fleet of the Swedes, and escorted the 200
transports carrying English troops, under Sir John Moore, to
their assistance. The Russian fleet would not be drawn into
a battle, but one of their liners, the Sewolod, 74, was cut off
and taken. The Russian crew showed solid courage, but
their gunnery was not above the Spanish level. The British
fleets remained in the Baltic till the downfall of Napoleon
began. The service was trying, and the loss from shipwreck
was at times severe. But the work was mainly political, apart
from the obligation to protect the traders from privateers
sailing from ports under French control. Among the political
duties discharged was one which demonstrated the scope of
the navy’s power. Napoleon had compelled the Spanish
Government to supply him with a body of troops for use in
Germany—for he was as hard put to it to find men for the
vast armies his victories compelled him to maintain, as the
British Government was to keep up the establishment of its
navy. He had stationed the Spaniards in Denmark, and they
were there when their country rose against the French in 1808.
The British Government found means to inform the Spanish
general, Romana, of what had taken place. He concentrated
the greater part of his men, by forced marches in August, at
Nyborg in Fünen, and embarked them on board an English
squadron commanded by Sir R. Keats. They were sent on
to Spain.
It cannot well be said that the power of the navy was
shown in the discharge of another piece of political duty it
had been called upon to perform at the other extremity of
Europe from the Baltic. In 1806 Napoleon was instigating
the Turks to attack Russia, who was still in arms against him.
The English Government desired to help the enemy of our
enemy, and Sir Thomas Duckworth was sent with a squadron
to coerce the Turks into keeping the peace. He forced the
passage of the Dardanelles in February 1807, and placed his
squadron opposite Constantinople. But he unfortunately
allowed himself to be played upon by the diplomacy of the
Turks, and the French ambassador, General Sebastiani. He
delayed action till the Turks had thrown up batteries which
made the position of his squadron dangerous, and he was compelled
to retreat. On his return his squadron was roughly
handled by the Turkish batteries.
With the beginning of the war in the Peninsula the navy
was provided with a field on which it could perform, profitably
and with a definite aim, duties which it had too often been
called upon to discharge to no purpose. From the beginning
of the war it had escorted troops to be landed for conquest or
co-operation with allies. Many of these undertakings were of
the most futile character. If it took Abercromby to success
in Egypt, it also took General Fraser to disaster. It carried
Sir John Moore to the fiasco of the Swedish expedition, and
General Stuart to that barren victory at Maida in Calabria,
which was followed by re-embarkation, and served no other
purpose than to aggravate the sufferings of the very people
we came to help. After Sir Sidney Smith covered the escape
of the Portuguese royal family in November 1807 and escorted
them to Brazil, the work of our army was to be done on a great
scale, nobly, and with triumphant results in Spain and Portugal.
It would be pleasant to dwell on the incidents of the story; on
the feats of the Impérieuse, and the untiring activity of
English cruisers which intercepted the coast roads, and helped
to keep the war alive all along the coast of the Bay of Biscay.
The navy helped to take coast forts, or defend them. It
embarked the Spanish irregular bands when hard pressed, and
disembarked them to begin again. It contributed marines to
hold the lines of Torres Vedras. It kept the sea routes clear
for the food and reinforcements sent to Wellington’s army.
But a service made up of scores of small actions cannot be
shown by a few examples, or told fully except at great length.
The same work was being done on a smaller scale on the
coasts of Sicily and Calabria, to guard the island against the
attacks of the two successive French rulers in Naples—the
emperor’s brother Joseph, and his brother-in-law Murat—and
to keep resistance to them alive on the mainland. When
Napoleon had extorted Venice and Dalmatia from Austria,
English ships entered the Adriatic to carry on there the work
of blockade and harassment which others were doing elsewhere.
But in this sea the little war of skirmishes, single combats, and
affairs in boats, was varied by an action too considerable and
too significant to be allowed to pass among minor operations.
On the 13th March 1811 a Franco-Venetian squadron of
four heavy frigates, two lighter frigates, and some small craft,
commanded by Captain Dubourdieu, attacked an English
squadron of three frigates and a 22-gun corvette, under Captain
Hoste, near Lissa. The French officer was to windward, and
he attacked in two divisions, a weather and a lee line, heading
to cut through the English and surround the rear ships. If
Hoste had been forced to remain passive with an awkward fleet,
Dubourdieu would no doubt have succeeded. But a good
breeze was blowing, and the English squadron was thoroughly
alert. Hoste closed his line till the bowsprit of one ship was
over the taffrail of the ship ahead of her, and he stood on. As
he was moving ahead the Franco-Venetians were compelled to
advance on slanting lines, and the lee ships masked part of the
weather line. Hoste knew that a sunk rock lay across his
course. He stood on in hot action with the leader of the
Franco-Venetian weather line and of the lee line, which came
behind, till he could not safely go any further. He then wore
his line together. The leading Franco-Venetian ship, the
Favorite, ran on the rocks, and the others wore to escape
her fate. Their division into two lines became a cause of
confusion. The single unhampered English line cut them to
pieces, and they were beaten with the loss of three frigates.
Dubourdieu would have done better if he had formed his
squadron in a single line, had engaged the four English vessels
to windward with four of his frigates, and had left the two
others to double on one end of Hoste’s line. Even so he
would probably have been beaten. When the English had
turned, two French vessels assailed the Amphion, Hoste’s frigate,
which was now the rear ship of his line. But the English
officer shot from between them, and crossed the bows of the
vessel on his lee quarter. Superior mobility and quality
more than counterbalanced advantages of number and position
or ingenuity of plan of attack.
This is the lesson which Lissa teaches, and which had
been taught by every encounter in the war, great or small. But
patent as it was, England might have overlooked it but for a
series of actions with a new enemy which occurred at the close
of the twenty-three years of war. It is not my intention to
depart from my rule of not describing small ship actions or
operations on lakes. Therefore I do not tell in detail the
events of the war of 1812 with the United States. The single
ship actions and encounters between flotillas on the American
lakes, of which it was composed, have been affectionately
studied by the patriotism of a great people. To us they are,
but for one consequence they had, only minor events in a long
and varied history. To describe how the vast numerical
superiority of the English navy enabled it in the end to drive
the American flag from the sea and to cover invasion of the
territory of the United States, would be to tell a story which
has little intrinsic interest. The consequence of the early
actions of the war were, however, of extreme importance.
There was a serious risk that England would come to the
end of the war in the complacent belief that she was endowed
with a privilege to be superior on the sea. Her superiority
was the fair reward of foresight and preparation. When
looked at properly, her victories over the French and Spanish
Navies afforded no guarantee that she would not be beaten if
she forgot that:—
The same arts that did gain
A power must it maintain.
The rapid loss of a handful of vessels to a single opponent
in the course of a few months drove that lesson home by a spasm
of pain to our pride and self-confidence. The United States
were not at that time able to maintain a great fleet. The
rulers of the Republic very wisely decided that since they could
not possess many ships, they would take care that such ships
as they had should be of excellent quality and excellently
handled. They won the just reward of sound judgment and
timely preparation. Nor was that reward a slight one. The
victories of the United States frigates and sloops taught
England that there was on the other side of the Atlantic a
growing power which must one day be numerous and wealthy,
which would be able to maintain great fleets, and had shown
that her seamen could defeat all but the best of the English
Navy. Idle attempts were made to belittle these successes by
insisting on the size and armament of the American frigates.
The navy knew their size and armament before it fought them.
It learnt only from experience that the Americans could make
full use of these advantages, which they had for the rest procured
for themselves and not by accident. The good sense
of the navy and the country would not be blinded. Englishmen
drew the very sane deduction that they could be beaten
at sea if they allowed other people to surpass them in the
quality of their armaments and in skill. Nothing is more
striking than the sense of insecurity, the doubts about the
future, the painful consciousness that there was something misleading
and hollow in all our naval successes, which can be
traced in the writings of seamen from the end of the great
war. They all insist that we must not rest on our successes,
but prepare for yet harder struggles in the future. A
great work of reform and instruction began in the years
immediately after the close of the war, and it began under the
impulse given by the successes of the American ships. The
fortune of England has been wonderful, and it never served her
better than when it gave her that warning. The Americans
had beaten her because they were prepared and capable,
and what the Americans had done others could do if we
allowed ourselves to be surpassed.
That what we needs must call fortune has had a great
share in the victories of England on the sea cannot be denied
by any sound-minded man who looks at the history of her
navy as a whole. Fortune, and not England, has provided that
from the day when Hubert de Burgh and the men of the
Cinque Ports defeated Eustace the Monk, till the Treaty of
Paris was signed in 1815, she has never had to meet an
enemy at once strong in numbers and good in quality on the
sea, except during the second half of the seventeenth century
when she fought the Dutch. They, a small people
occupying a little corner of land, compelled to fight on shore
for very existence, were necessarily surpassed. The Spaniard
was always inept at sea. The French navy, the creation of
Louis XIV., has been valiant, ingenious, not seldom successful,
but it was neglected, starved, misused by the monarchy, and so
torn to pieces by the Revolution that it could never recover.
The sound national instinct, the healthy social order, the
innate love of good work which have shaped our Navy, are
just subjects for pride. But they are also a lesson and a
warning. Great navies are forming now, which have
thoroughly learned all we have taught. We must not rely
on possessing the same superiority we had in the eighteenth
century without strenuous effort. And we must not forget
what that superiority was. It did not lie in numbers nor in
armament, nor in methods of attack, however valuable these
elements of strength may be. It lay in that skill of the men
who handled the weapons, in that loyalty to the service, in
that readiness of resource, promptitude to decide, and firmness
to act, without which, numbers, arms, and ingenious tactics are
of no avail.
FOOTNOTES
[1] I have thought best to leave whatever it is needful to say about the internal
history of the British Navy in these years until it can find a place in the account
of the events of 1797.
[2] I omit all mention of the mutinies in single ships which began to occur about
this time, thinking it more convenient, and more likely to tend to clearness, to treat
them along with the general outbreak of 1797.
[3] We may stop for a moment to look at this list of accidents. Whenever an
accident happens to the navy to-day there is an outcry over the decay of seamanship,
and profuse assertions that such things did not occur in the good old days are
made. Yet we see that, when Bridport started on his tardy pursuit of Morard de
Galle, two collisions and one grounding took place in his fleet. Between the 10th
December 1796 and the 12th February 1797 there were six accidents, two of them
total losses in the fleet of Jervis—nine accidents in about eight weeks among the best
forces we had. The losses of Villaret-Joyeuse in his disastrous winter cruise in 1794
were hardly greater. The grounding of the St. George was attributed to the
Portuguese pilot. But the presence of a pilot does not remove the responsibility of
the captain and his officers. Lisbon was as familiar to us as any English port.
Would a navigating officer now need a pilot when entering or leaving Lisbon? And
was the pilot responsible for blundering into the frigate?
[4] The times entered in the logs were taken from the watches of signal officers
and masters. They were not chronometers, nor were the observations made by men
engaged in calm scientific investigation. Discrepancies are frequent, and it is
rarely, perhaps never, possible to be sure if the time at which any movement was
made to within a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes. Other discrepancies are
frequent.
[5] The occupation of the Dutch Colonies will be told when the ancillary services
of the navy are dealt with as a whole.
[6] Though I do not undertake to give a full account of the Commissions and
their Reports, I will take leave to say a few words as to the general impression
an examination of them has left on me. There was waste due:—1st, to the
division of responsibility between the Admiralty Board and the Navy Office; 2nd,
to the survival of the old belief that a man in a Government office committed no
mortal sin if he “licked his fingers”; 3rd, to the fact that while the work of the
Admiralty and Navy Board had increased enormously since 1793, there had been
no proportionate increase in the administering and supervising staff. Pitt, who long
clung to the belief that France would be reduced to submission by financial distress,
and was by nature a rigid economist, was unwilling to add to the permanent
expenses of Government, and accounts remained unchecked and unbalanced for
want of hands to do the work. Money was lost, because expenditure could not
be followed, and checked. Fallen mankind availed itself of the opportunity. Big
men kept public money lying at their bankers, who gave them interest for it. Little
men drew pay for work they never did. Contractors took illegitimate profits. All
this was bad, but it may all be conceded, and yet we may find that we cannot
accept the wholesale denunciations of the Navy Board made by St. Vincent, and
by his men, notably his sycophantic secretary, Tucker. Such a story as that of the
illegal—at least the tyrannical—impressment of D. E. Bartholomew speaks very ill
for the spirit prevailing in the men about St. Vincent, and for him. The notorious
case of Sir Home Popham is even worse. Sir Home was accused of having wasted
public money on the repair of his ship in India. He was very capable of taking
care of himself, and he forced an inquiry. It was proved to demonstration that in
the accounts on which the accusation brought against him was based, the same sums
had been counted several times over, and some of them were given in pounds sterling,
and not in the correct currency—rupees. The total was in fact multiplied by ten,
and a legitimate outlay of £7000 was swollen, either by deliberate dishonesty,
or by carelessness amounting to dishonest negligence, to an enormous figure. How
many officials were denounced on no better grounds than Sir Home Popham? No
man is so unscrupulous in accusation as a passionate reformer convinced of his own
virtue, unless it be a follower eager to earn the approval of his reforming patron by
a display of zeal.
[7] I give all figures sous bénéfice d’inventaire. Nothing is better calculated to
show how hard men find it to be accurate than the discrepancies between the list of
ships given by different authorities in 1804, or at any time. James does not agree
with Tucker (Life of St. Vincent), and neither agree with Captain Desbrière
(Projets et Tentatives). It must be remembered, too, that at any given moment a
squadron might be below its establishment owing to the absence of ships in need of
repair or stores, or above it because ships joined the flag as reliefs or in transit.
[8] I am not unaware that Duncan’s ships bore down on the Dutch at Camperdown
from windward, and that although they suffered a greater loss of life in proportion
than the ships of Trafalgar, they were not sunk, or ruined beyond repair. But at
Camperdown our ships were running before a strong breeze, on a rough sea, and were
on an average heavier ships than their opponents. Therefore they crossed the belt
of danger during their approach more rapidly, were better able to stand hammering,
and were fired at from a more unsteady platform than was afforded by the almost
becalmed ships of the Franco-Spaniards. Moreover, the Dutch deliberately reserved
their fire.