EFFORTS TO EXCITE MUTINY IN THE ENGLISH FLEET
Of Duckett, an amateur rebel envoy, mentioned in connection with the
arrest of Napper Tandy,[259] something remains to be said. He was a
man of very active habits, and if less impulsive would have had more
friends. Tone, already the victim of misplaced confidence, viewed many
men with suspicion, and let them see it. In 1796 he was passing as a
French officer, and mentions in his diary that, when waiting to see
De la Croix, the minister of war at Paris, Duckett, who chanced to be
also in the ante-room, sought to enter into conversation with Tone by
handing him an English newspaper. Advances of this sort, though natural
in an exiled Irishman meeting another, were not without effect in
making Tone distrust and avoid him.[260] Duckett no doubt had projects
connected with the enterprise in hand to which the chivalrous Tone
would not stoop; but of these Tone knew little, and his prejudice was
formed on quite different grounds. These suspicions were shared by
Madgett, an official in the French War Office. Duckett, it appears,
told Madgett that two expeditions were to proceed to Ireland. 'Madgett
said that he had endeavoured to put Duckett off the scent by saying
he did not believe one word of the story, but that Duckett continued
positive.' Tone adds that the information was probably true; but that
it was terribly provoking it should be known to Duckett, 'to whom, by
the by, De la Croix revealed in confidence all that he knew, for which
he ought to be damned.' Tone later on admits that he knows nothing
against Duckett unless by report.[261]
Tone's unhealthy impression Dr. Madden caught contagiously. In the
first edition of his book, published forty years ago, he conveys that
Duckett was a spy subsidised by England.[262] Innuendo grew at last
into accusation, and a more recent edition records that Duckett,
'there is good reason to believe, was not employed by the Irish
Directory, but by the British Minister, Mr. Pitt.'[263] Again, we
are told that Duckett was '_assuming_ the character of an agent of
the United Irishmen at Paris, and continually dodged Tone in all his
movements.'[264]
I cannot endorse this imputation. In no pension list, or account of
secret service money, is the name of Duckett to be traced; nor is there
one line to criminate him in the archives of the Home Office. Nay more.
Open the 'Castlereagh Papers,' and there Duckett is found denounced as
a sworn enemy to England. These valuable State papers were published
ten years previous to the issue of Dr. Madden's revised edition; but,
uninfluenced by their revelations, he renews the charges against
Duckett.
Guillon, who has had access to the Government archives in France,
says that Truguet, Minister of Marine, had thrown himself heart and
soul into the projected invasion, and proposed to land 30,000 men in
Ireland, under Hoche; and 60,000 later on in England; but the Directory
deemed the plan too daring, and threw it aside; until Tone's memorials
made their thoughts recur to invasion, and they then adopted a portion
of the rejected scheme of Truguet.[265] An interesting letter from
Duckett to Truguet, Minister of Marine, turns up among the intercepted
despatches. This functionary had just been succeeded by a new hand.
Is the Government still resolved to prosecute the same plans and the
same projects [Duckett asks]. Can my country rely on its promises? Let
me know, I beseech you in the name of Liberty, what is to be done?
Shall I go home to accelerate the period for the arrival of which we
are all solicitous? Consider that it is only patriots and enemies of
England who risk anything--it is their blood that will flow.
The fears I had lest I should not be able to convert your bill into
money are unfortunately realised. I have presented it to Citizen
Reinhard, explained to him who I was, and what I was going to do.
I showed him how necessary it was that I should leave Hamburg. He
replied that his personal means did not permit him to comply with
my application, adding that he could not act, because I had not a
particular letter for him.
* * * * *
A mysterious task and goal are glanced at.
I am grievously mortified that I am not at this moment at the
place of my destination. You know how deeply I interest myself in
this cause; my presence will be conducive to the success of our
friends. I wait for nothing but your answer to set out. I would
merely request you to speak about me to your successor, to explain
to him my situation and my necessities, in order that he may take
into consideration the expenses which I shall be absolutely obliged
to incur; for, when once arrived at my post, it will perhaps be
impossible for me to receive assistance from him. I therefore
beg of you to make him put me beyond the reach of accidents, by
causing a sum that will afford me the means of subsisting and
acting to be remitted to Hamburg. It does not belong to me to fix
it. It is for him in his wisdom to see what sum will be necessary
and indispensable for the expenses of six months. It would be
superfluous to assure you of my attachment to the cause, and of the
high consideration which I have for you personally.
P.S.--Address your answer to Citizen Reinhard: it is he who
undertakes to forward this letter to you.[266]
It will be remembered that the betrayer whom Mr. Froude dramatically
pictures as unbosoming himself to Downshire was the confidant of
Reinhard at Hamburg, had access to his house, and used that fact to
prove that his services, as an informer, were worth purchase by Pitt.
I have elsewhere shown that the letters headed 'Secret Information
from Hamburg,' which have crept into the 'Castlereagh Papers' to
puzzle the world,[267] can only have been written by 'Lord Downshire's
friend'--_i.e._ Turner. One appears at page 306 of the first volume of
that work. _There_ the objects vaguely broached by Duckett are revealed
as plainly as though Reinhard himself had whispered the word. The spy,
having furnished other items of news, writes:--
'Duckett is at Hamburg; he has denounced Stone at Paris as a
traitor.[268] I hear he [Duckett] has got money from the [French]
Government for the purpose of renewing the mutiny in the English
Fleet.'[269]
Obstinately hostile winds, as in 1796, once more saved England. Tone,
whose untiring energy had accomplished the organisation of the invading
forces, soliloquises in his diary of 1 August, 1797:--
I am, to-day, twenty-five days aboard, and at a time when
twenty-five hours are of importance. There seems to be a fate in
this business. Five weeks--I believe six weeks--the English Fleet
was paralysed by the mutinies at Portsmouth,[270] Plymouth, and the
Nore. The sea was open, and nothing to prevent both the Dutch and
French fleets to put to sea. Well, nothing was ready; that precious
opportunity, which we can never expect to return, was lost; and now
that at last we are ready here the wind is against us, the mutiny
is quelled, and we are sure to be attacked by a superior force. At
Brest it is, I fancy, still worse. Had we been in Ireland at the
moment of the insurrection at the Nore, we should beyond a doubt
have had at least that fleet, and God only knows the influence
which such an event might have had on the whole British Navy.
Much that Tone privately penned is found confirmed by a secret
committee which sat while Parker's[271] corpse hung in chains at
Sheppey. It appeared that the crews were largely sworn to espouse
the Irish cause; 'to be faithful to their brethren who were fighting
against tyranny;' to carry a portion of the fleet into Irish ports,
hoisting, instead of the Union Jack, a green flag emblazoned with
_Erin-go-bragh_.[272]
Dr. Madden's suggestion that Duckett was a spy of Pitt's is reiterated
with cruel consistency. Part of the grounds of his suspicion was
Duckett's intimate relations with Reinhard, also suspected by Madden,
but who is now shown conclusively to have been true. Madden frequently
quotes from the 'Castlereagh Papers,' but overlooks the following
letter from Sir J. Crawford to Lord Grenville, one wholly inconsistent
with his hypothesis that Duckett, like Turner, was a spy for Pitt.
Crawford was, of course, the British representative at Hamburg.
October 23, 1798.
I shall abstain from any measures against Duckett, continuing, at
the same time, to have him narrowly watched, which I hitherto have
so completely, that there is scarcely a single step which he has
taken since he has been at Hamburg with which I am unacquainted.
His views for the present seem to be turned principally towards
his Majesty's dockyards, and not choosing to venture in England
himself, he is very desirous of getting over hither some one of
those evil-disposed persons whom he knows to be employed in the
dockyards, for the purpose of concerting with him the means of
setting them on fire.... He is in very little esteem in France,
and is particularly ill with Talleyrand.[273] His principal
supporter is Bruyes (_sic_),[274] brother to the deceased admiral,
and who was Minister of the Marine. He pretends that, in case
of a successful attempt on the part of the French to land in
Ireland, his object would be to get over to that country; but I
have not hitherto been able to learn any particulars respecting
his commission. He affects much secrecy, even with those with whom
he lives in the greatest intimacy.[275] He has of late been in
correspondence with Holt,[276] the rebel chief, who, through him,
has been pressing the French for assistance. He says that there are
3,500 land troops on board the squadron which lately sailed from
Brest, but that they have French uniforms for 7,000 men, with the
view, as he pretends, of clothing the first bodies of Irish that
might join them in the same way as their own troops, and thus, a
numerous body appearing in French uniforms, of impressing the Irish
nation at large with an idea that they had landed a considerable
force.[277]
This letter explains the more ambiguous despatch written two months
before. Wickham transmits, by direction of Portland, for the
information of the Irish Viceroy, a copy of a secret note,
which had been confirmed by the arrival of Mr. D---- [_i.e._
Duckett] under a feigned name in Hanover, on his road to Hamburg,
and I have little doubt of the truth of the rest from my intimate
knowledge of the writer. D., by the extreme vigilance and activity
of Sir James Crawfurd, has been discovered and arrested on his
road; but, as he has been acknowledged as a person attached to the
French Mission at Hamburg, and claimed as such, I fear there are
no hopes whatever of his being delivered up, or even of having his
papers examined.[278]
Your lordship, who will be aware of the extreme delicacy of this
business, will no doubt feel the necessity of keeping the whole
of it as secret as possible. In the mean time it is a point of no
slight importance that this man should have been discovered on his
road, and his journey so much delayed as that the object of it will
be, in all probability, defeated.[279]
Tone's prejudice against Duckett influenced Macnevin. 'Mr. Duckett is
still here,' writes Reinhard to De la Croix in another intercepted
letter. 'I proposed to Mr. Macnevin to reconcile himself with Mr.
Duckett. He has refused to do so.'
It is remarkable that while the usually clear-sighted physician
suspects Duckett of being an English spy, he praises '_the zeal and
talents of_ TURNER.'[280] Nor is there one line in Tone's Diary to
indicate distrust of Turner; but the wrong man, in true dramatic style,
incurs suspicion and blows. On September 21, 1797, Tone called on
General Hoche at Rennes. Hoche spoke of Duckett, and Tone destroyed
him with an expressive shrug, adding that he had boasted at Paris of
his acquaintance and influence with General Clarke, and even with
Hoche himself. Two days later Colonel Shee, the uncle of Clarke, and
who accompanied the expedition to Bantry Bay, also inquires if Tone
knew Duckett. 'I answered that Duckett was a scoundrel. I besought him
to put Hoche on his guard.' It appeared that Duckett had made two or
three advances to Shee, who, however, had consistently avoided him.
Tone's gorge is raised, and he ends some remarks of asperity with 'I'll
Duckett him, the scoundrel, if I can catch him fairly in my grip.'[281]
Duckett, according to the Hamburg spy, now shown to be Turner, was
employed by the French Government to excite mutiny in the British
fleet. Its first outburst was at Portsmouth; it was renewed at the
Nore. As historians, who might be expected to treat largely of such
incidents, barely notice that mutiny, a few remarks here are perhaps
admissible; the more so as it will be necessary to recur again to
Parker, who led the revolt. It assumed so formidable a front that
Truguet thought it might prove the death-blow to England's greatness.
Parker, who possessed wonderful powers of persuasion, was soon
joined by a large portion of Lord Duncan's squadron, and became the
_soi-disant_ admiral of the fleet. He blockaded the Thames, and
threatened to starve London. His mutinous force now consisted of
twenty-four sail of the line. Each ship was governed by a committee
of twelve, together with two delegates and a secretary, and all
assembled by beat of drum. The pulse of public feeling was shown in
three per cent. Consols falling to forty-five. The Board of Admiralty
visited the scene of the mutiny, but failed to effect an arrangement.
Lord Northesk, R.N., waited on Parker to hear his terms. These were
so exacting that Northesk hesitated. The following is culled from
the (London) 'Courier' of June 8, 1797, and it will be seen how much
Parker's letter differs from the mild version of it given in Campbell's
'Lives of the Admirals':--
They persisted that the whole must be complied with.... Lord
Northesk was now rowed on board the 'Duke of York' Margate packet,
under a flag of truce, with three cheers from the 'Sandwich,' and
with the following paper to ratify his credentials.
'TO CAPTAIN LORD NORTHESK.
You are hereby authorized and ordered to wait upon the King,
wherever he may be, with the Resolutions of the Committee of
Delegates, and are directed to return back with an Answer to the
same within 54 hours from the date hereof.
R. PARKER, President.
Northesk, furnished with a passport from Parker, returned to town,
while Pitt and Dundas were hanged in effigy at the yard-arm. It was
even debated to surrender the fleet to the French. Thereupon Sheridan
suggested that all the buoys and beacons should be removed. A paper of
the day states that the troops, ordered to fire on the fleet from the
batteries at Gravesend, broke out into mutiny themselves, declaring
that fratricide formed no part of their duty. The biographical
dictionaries say that the popularity of Northesk and the firmness of
Lord Howe caused the utter collapse of this great mutiny; but such
history is misleading. The 'Repulse' was the first ship to abandon the
cause, and becoming stranded was mercilessly cannonaded by the fleet.
Its foremast and rigging were shot away; its decks were red with blood.
Two more deserters, the 'Agamemnon' and 'Vestal,' escaped better. In
slipping their cables and entering the Thames it was supposed that
they were carrying into effect an already debated plan of bombarding
Gravesend. The rest of the fleet followed and found themselves snared
into the hands of the Government. When this fact became apparent,
the mutineers were filled with fury. The ships separated, turned the
great guns on each other, and fought furiously for hours, until at
last Parker succumbed. In reading the trials of the delegates one
is struck by such Celtic names as Sullivan, Donovan, Walsh, Hughes,
Brady, MacCarthy, Maginnis, Coffey, and Branon. Strange reports were
current.[282] The 'Courier' of June 6, 1797, records that
when he [Parker] was carried before the magistrates, he took two
letters out of his pocket, saying, 'These are my authorities; it
was on these I acted.' From this it has been inferred [adds the
'Courier'] that he was set on by 'higher powers,' as the lower
class call them: they say that Parker has declared he will not die
till he has garnished Temple Bar with heads.
However, he made no distinct revelation. He was subjected to a number
of interrogatories, 'dans lesquels,' observes a French authority, 'on
chercha vainement à découvrir les secrets moteurs de l'insurrection.'
Duckett's letter to Truguet, minister of marine, and the information
of the Hamburg spy, help to throw light on this stirring episode. The
mutiny is commonly ascribed to the harsh regulations of the Admiralty.
A deeper design underlay it. Parker was at first committed to stand
his trial before a civil court; but a court-martial was suddenly
substituted. This deprived him of the forensic services of Erskine,
whose powerful eloquence had successfully defended Horne Tooke against
the Cabinet of Pitt. It was desirable that so dangerous a man should
be got rid of without delay. His application for an adjournment was
refused; and on June 30, 1797, he suffered death.
These mutinies were largely the work of Duckett, acting under the
instructions of La Croix, the French minister of war. Tone, as we have
seen, hated Duckett, whom he constantly snubs and denounces. Had there
been a co-operation, the event would doubtless have been different.
However all moderate men rejoiced at the issue. The mutiny formed part
of a scheme to sever England's right arm; but the chivalry of Tone
recoiled from a manœuvre of which he finally saw the importance while
hesitating to approve of it. Dutch and French fleets for the invasion
of Great Britain and Ireland had been nearly ready to start at the time
of the mutinies.
Pitt used a powerful engine in subduing the mutiny. He despatched
to the Nore a Roman Catholic priest, who impressively preached the
doctrine of submission.[283] This was probably the same priest of whom
Father O'Coigly complains as worrying him in the condemned cell in the
hope of persuading him to inform.
FOOTNOTES:
[259] _Ante_, p. 72.
[260] Many men recoil from affable persons who seem over-anxious to
know them. Sir Gavan Duffy in _Young Ireland_ states that Davis had
been prejudiced against the subsequently most distinguished Darcy
Magee, because he had 'obviously determined to transact an acquaintance
with him.'
[261] Tone's _Journals_, ii. 141. (Washington, 1847.)
[262] _United Irishmen, their Lives and Times_, 1st ed. i. 40-75.
[263] _Ibid._ 2nd ed. ii. 37.
[264] _Ibid._ iv. 603.
[265] _La France et l'Irlande._ (Paris, 1888.)
[266] _Castlereagh Papers_, i. 294-5.
[267] The puzzle is increased by the noble editor's arrangement of the
letters--made without regard to chronological order.
[268] Stone is the man who had been tried in 1795 for high treason, and
found guilty. But Duckett, though a staunch rebel, may have had good
reason for denouncing Stone three years later. Madame de Genlis, in
her _Mémoires_, upbraids Stone with having treacherously retained some
money which had been entrusted to him for Pamela. See tome iv. 130-1.
[269] Clarke, when giving Tone his commission in the French army,
asks him (_Journals_, i. 151) if he knew one Duckett: 'I answered I
did not, nor did I desire to know him.' Clarke replied that Duckett
was 'clever.' Clarke, afterwards Duke de Feltre, stooped to ignoble
tactics from which Tone recoiled. Clarke was a strong advocate for
_chouannerie_ (see Tone, ii. 96-9), and probably encouraged Duckett in
his scheme for destroying the English dockyards and exciting mutiny in
the fleet.
[270] At Portsmouth, when Lord Bridport gave orders to put to sea,
every ship at St. Helens refused to obey. The marines fired and five
seamen were killed. The crew of the 'London' turned the guns, and
threatened to blow all aft into the sea. The officers surrendered; the
marines laid down their arms, and Admiral Colpoys and Captain Griffiths
were put in confinement.
[271] Leader of the mutiny.
[272] _Report of the Secret Committee of Commons, England_, 1799.
[273] As Tone suspected Duckett to be a spy, he doubtless cautioned
Talleyrand against him. These misgivings spread from bureau to bureau.
[274] Tone's _Diary_ of June 16, 1798, praises the talents and activity
of Bruix; 'but what could he do? In the first place, he had no money,'
&c.--ii. 501.
[275] Turner's instructions from the Home Office were, if he would not
prosecute, to open a correspondence, at least, with leading rebels.
[276] Joseph Holt, a Wicklow Protestant, published his memoirs in two
volumes, but does not mention Duckett.
[277] _Castlereagh Papers_, i. 263-4.
[278] Duckett was secretary to Leonard Bourdon, who voted for the
death of Louis XVI., and by his energy overthrew Robespierre, July 27,
1794. He headed the Conspiracy of the Faubourgs in 1795, and doubtless
applauded Duckett in his scheme.
[279] _Castlereagh Papers_, i. 263.
[280] _Vide_ Dr. Macnevin's memorial relative to a landing in
Ireland.--_Ibid._ i. 305.
[281] Tone's _Journals_, i. 208. (Washington, 1827.)
[282] The _Courier_, describing the execution of the delegates, states
that the inextinguishable vitality of one man named Lee presented a
striking spectacle, and that extra balls had to be poured into his
head before he was despatched! A letter from the Irish Under-Secretary
of the day, now preserved in the State Paper Office, reveals that
Lee was discovered to have been a most determined United Irishman,
and had joined the fleet for the sole object of helping the cause
he had at heart. Lee and Duckett seem to have acted in concert. How
largely the British navy was composed of Irish sailors, and under
what circumstances their discontent originated, appear from an
amusing anecdote. Shortly before Trafalgar, the first lieutenant of
a man-of-war, when making his rounds to see that all hands were at
their guns, observed an Irish sailor kneeling in prayer: 'What! are
you afraid?' exclaimed the officer. 'Afeard, indeed!' replied the
tar, contemptuously. 'I was only praying that the shots of the French
might be distributed like the prize money--the lion's share among
the officers.' Tone assured Carnot that England had recently raised
80,000 Irishmen for her navy and marines. Carnot did not tell him in
reply to reserve that statement for the marines themselves, but took
it as strict truth. The computation, however, will not stand historic
scrutiny. According to an official return, it appears that Ireland had
furnished 11,457 men for the navy, and 4,058 for the marines.
[283] Of course with the sanction of Bishop Douglas, whose name is
often mentioned in the _Castlereagh Correspondence_.