Produced by Brian Coe, Wayne Hammond and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from images made available by the
HathiTrust Digital Library.)
HISTORY
OF THE
ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY.
VOL. II.
[Illustration: MAJOR-GENERAL SIR ALEXANDER J. DICKSON,
G.C.B. AND K.C.H.,
DEPUTY ADJUTANT-GENERAL, ROYAL ARTILLERY,
AND
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ARTILLERY.]
HISTORY
OF THE
ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY.
COMPILED FROM THE ORIGINAL RECORDS.
BY CAPTAIN FRANCIS DUNCAN, M.A., D.C.L., LL.D.,
ROYAL ARTILLERY.
SUPERINTENDENT OF THE ROYAL ARTILLERY REGIMENTAL RECORDS;
FELLOW OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON,
AND OF THE ROYAL GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY.
[Illustration]
“L’histoire de l’Artillerie est l’histoire du progrès des
sciences, et partant de la civilisation.”
NAPOLEON III. _Chislehurst, Nov. 22, 1872_.
VOLUME II.
WITH A FRONTISPIECE.
LONDON:
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.
1873.
_The right of Translation is reserved._
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
TO
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS
FIELD-MARSHAL THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE,
K.G., G.C.B., K.P., G.C.M.G.,
COLONEL OF THE ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY,
THIS
HISTORY OF ITS SERVICES
IS RESPECTFULLY, AND BY PERMISSION,
DEDICATED BY
THE AUTHOR.
PREFACE.
Unforeseen circumstances having arisen since the publication of the
First Volume of this work, which rendered it possible that the Author
might be unable to complete the narrative while holding the appointment
of Superintendent of the Regimental Records, it has become necessary to
modify the original plan. There were two alternatives,--either to
compress the history between 1783 and the present date into one volume,
sacrificing many matters of minor interest,--or to write, as fully as in
the former volume, the history of a period additional to that already
treated of, leaving the subsequent years and their campaigns to be
described either by the Author’s successor, or by himself at some future
time. After consultation with some of the senior officers of the Corps,
the latter alternative has been adopted; and the addition of certain
statistical tables, and of a copious index to both volumes, will, it is
hoped, render the work, as far as it goes, a complete one. Unless
anticipated by an abler pen, the Author does not despair of being able
to avail himself at some future time of the continued access to the
Regimental Records, now systematically arranged, which has been promised
to him by the Deputy Adjutant-General of the Corps,--with a view to
compiling narratives of the War in the Crimea, and of the Indian Mutiny.
* * * * *
The almost unanimously kind reception given to the first volume, not
only by the press, but to a most cheering extent by his brother
officers, demands the Author’s grateful acknowledgments. It has
encouraged him in the labours, the results of which are now submitted to
the public; and has satisfied him that he did not err in the estimate he
placed upon a Regimental History, as a means of awakening and
intensifying _esprit de corps_.
CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
PAGE
PREFACE v
INTRODUCTION ix
CHAPTER
I.--REACTION 1
II.--THE NECESSITY, BIRTH, AND PROGRESS OF THE
ROYAL HORSE ARTILLERY 30
III.--WITH THE DUKE OF YORK IN FLANDERS 54
IV.--1796 TO 1799 70
V.--THE CHRISTENING OF THE CHESTNUT TROOP 88
VI.--EGYPT 104
VII.--TO 1803 134
VIII.--THE EIGHTH BATTALION 138
IX.--THE NINTH BATTALION 150
X.--THE SIEGE OF COPENHAGEN 158
XI.--MONTE VIDEO AND BUENOS AYRES 168
XII.--THE OLD TENTH BATTALION 185
XIII.--PENINSULAR WAR: ROLIÇA, VIMIERA, CORUNNA 195
XIV.--WALCHEREN 223
XV.--PASSAGE OF THE DOURO, TALAVERA 242
XVI.-BUSACO AND TORRES VEDRAS 262
XVII.--BAROSSA, BADAJOZ, ALBUERA 280
XVIII.--CIUDAD RODRIGO AND BADAJOZ 307
XIX.--SALAMANCA AND BURGOS 321
XX.--VITTORIA AND SAN SEBASTIAN 338
XXI.--CONCLUSION OF THE PENINSULAR WAR 373
XXII.--THE SECOND AMERICAN WAR 392
XXIII.--WATERLOO 412
APPENDIX A.--THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON, AND THE ARTILLERY
AT WATERLOO 444
” B.--THE ROYAL ARTILLERY, AND THE MAGNETIC
SURVEY OF 1840-8 465
” C.--TABULAR STATEMENT, SHOWING DATE OF FORMATION
AND FORMER DESIGNATION OF EVERY
BATTERY OF THE REGIMENT NOW IN THE
SERVICE 470
INDEX TO VOL. I. 479
” ” II. 492
INTRODUCTION.
Having in the Preface stated the plan of this volume, it is incumbent on
the Author now to acknowledge, with gratitude, the assistance he has
received during its execution. Acting on a suggestion made by one of the
reviewers of the first volume, he has noted in the margin the various
authorities on which the narrative is based; and, as in many instances
these are manuscript letters in the Record Office, he has given the
dates of such,--to facilitate access to them by any one anxious to
obtain information in detail.
Among those to whom the Author is chiefly indebted, Sir Collingwood
Dickson--for the reason stated in the body of the work--stands first.
Not only the Author, but the Regiment at large, is indebted to him for
the generous confidence with which he entrusted the letters and journals
of his distinguished father to the writer of this history. The labours
of Captain G. E. W. Malet, R.A.--so visible in the tables at the end of
this volume--demand the next place in the Author’s acknowledgment;--and
the Reader will be able to judge how great has been the value, to this
narrative, of the published writings of Captain H. W. L. Hime, R.A.
Sir J. Bloomfield, Sir E. C. Warde, Sir D. E. Wood, General Burke
Cuppage, Major-Generals W. J. Smythe and C. J. B. Riddell, Colonel
Lynedoch Gardiner, Major H. Geary, and Lieutenant J. Ritchie, have
contributed valuable information connected with the history of the
Regiment to which they belong, and have greatly facilitated the Author’s
labours. The assistance of Sir Edward Perrott, and of Captain H. W.
Gordon, C.B., is also gratefully acknowledged.
To Mr. James Browne, the author of ‘England’s Artillerymen’ a double
debt is owing. His labour produced the Index to the first volume; and
his published work has been a mine of reference, the value of which
became more apparent, the more it was explored. Written without the
adventitious aids at the disposal of the custodian of the Regimental
Records, it is yet so exhaustive and accurate, that, when admiration of
it has ceased, it is only because that feeling has passed into envy.
The admirable Index to the present volume is due to the skill, ability,
and industry, eminently possessed by the Assistant-Superintendent in the
Record Office, R. H. Murdoch, Esq., R.A. These talents were generously
placed at the Author’s disposal, with a view to this work being made as
complete as possible.
The conducting a work of this description through the press,--although
the last occupation in point of time,--is not the least in point of
importance. Careful comparison with the MSS.,--much patient and merely
mechanical labour,--and watchfulness, lest errors of style should be
overlooked in the anxiety to secure rigid accuracy, or lest the latter
should be sacrificed to attempts at literary embellishment,--all these
are involved in the process. And all these have been displayed by one
who has assisted in this operation,--the Rev. G. Martyn Ritchie,
Chaplain to the Forces, whose services the Author acknowledges with
gratitude.
Not unfrequently the official letter-books differ from Kane’s List of
Officers in the spelling of proper names. Where the correct reading is
doubtful, that found in the letter-books is given in the body of the
work, and both are given in the Index.
History moves so rapidly, that even while this work has been in the
press, a slight alteration in the pay of the non-commissioned officers
and men of the Regiment has been made, making the rates given in the
following pages as those of the year 1873, accurate only up to the 1st
of October in that year. The reader can with ease make the requisite
corrections.
HISTORY
OF THE
ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY.
CHAPTER I.
REACTION.
Reaction and retrenchment followed the Peace signed at Versailles in
1783; and with them came dullness and despondency in the Regiment. Until
1787, when the state of France caused universal alarm in Europe, and
preparations for possible hostilities already commenced in England, the
prospects of promotion had been most disheartening. During the American
War, a large number of subaltern officers had been appointed by the
Generals serving with the English armies, and it was found, in 1783,
that in this respect the establishment of the Regiment had been
considerably exceeded. With somewhat distorted ideas of justice, it was
ruled that the pay of the supernumeraries should be provided by means of
stoppages from the officers of all ranks on the proper establishment,
and that no new appointments should be made until all the
supernumeraries had been absorbed,--an event which did not take place
until the 14th February, 1786.
Dullness, therefore, reigned during these years in the Warren at
Woolwich,--dullness in the Academy,--dullness in foreign stations, where
the detachments were at times forgotten altogether,--and dullness the
most stupendous in the offices of His Majesty’s Ordnance.
Uneventful, however, as this period of the Regimental History
undoubtedly was, it possesses to the student a peculiar interest. Its
domestic details invite attention, as representing the transition stage
of the Regiment from a past which had been glorious, to a future which
was to be more glorious still,--the last act, so to speak, of a drama in
which Artillery meant many things, but rarely implied mobility; and a
breathing-time, which admitted of much internal organisation being
perfected, which had been forgotten or overlooked in the midst of war.
In the years between 1783 and 1792 there was much to interest, much to
amuse, and not a little to cause pain; but the details, although
necessary to be told, are wholly domestic.
The strength of the Regiment remained until 1791 at four Service
Battalions, each consisting of ten companies, and ten companies of
invalids. In March 1791, two additional companies were formed for
service in the East Indies, but they belonged to no particular
Battalion. The companies, which had been reduced to a minimum in 1783,
were raised to a greater establishment in 1787, a year in which
recruiting on a considerable scale was ordered, and never was wholly
suspended until after Waterloo. The bounty allowed to each [Sidenote: R.
A. Reg^l. Orders.] recruit was five guineas.[1]
The promotion consequent on the formation of the East India Companies
mentioned above was as follows:--1 Major, 3 Captains, 5
Captain-Lieutenants, and 9 First Lieutenants.
[Sidenote: Letters to the Master-General, 1783-92.]
On the reduction in 1783, all men who were eligible were transferred to
the invalids, or to the out-pension list; and men who were not entitled
to that privilege, but who were ordered to be discharged on reduction,
received donations:--“If [Sidenote: M. S. Reg^l. Orders.] going to his
home in Ireland, 38 days’ pay; to Scotland, 28 days’ pay; and if to any
part of England, 14 days’ pay.”
Prior to the general recruiting in 1787, a special company of
artificers was raised--in 1786--for service in Gibraltar. As these men
were put under the officers of Engineers, a Royal Warrant was issued on
the 25th April, 1787, to define the proper position of that Corps, the
name of which was then changed from the Corps of Engineers to the Corps
of Royal Engineers. The Warrant said: “Our said Corps of Royal Engineers
shall rank in our Army _with_ our Royal Regiment of Artillery; and
whenever there shall be an occasion for them to take part with any other
Corps of our Army, the post of the Royal Corps of Engineers shall be on
the right _with_ the Royal Regiment of Artillery, _according to the
respective dates and commissions of the officers_ belonging to the Royal
Regiment of Artillery, and the Corps of Royal Engineers.”
The vagueness of this Royal Warrant, and the inconveniences which might
arise from it, were not lost upon the officers of the senior Corps, who
communicated their opinions to the Master-General through Colonel
Macbean, the Commandant at Woolwich. On the 25th October, 1787, the Duke
of Richmond, having taken His Majesty’s pleasure, replied: [Sidenote:
Duke of Richmond to Colonel F. Macbean.] “I have received the King’s
commands to acquaint you that His Majesty only meant the said Warrant to
relate to the circumstance when officers have occasion to parade by
themselves _without their men_, for a funeral or any other military
purpose; but that the directions contained in the said Warrant are not
to be understood to authorize any officer of the Corps of Royal
Engineers to take the command of any detachment of the Royal Regiment of
Artillery, although he may be senior in rank to the oldest officer of
the said detachment, unless such officer of the Corps of Royal Engineers
should be the senior officer of the whole Garrison or Command, when, by
virtue of his commission, he would of course take the command of the
Royal Regiment of Artillery with that of other troops. I am further to
signify to you His Majesty’s pleasure, that when any companies or
detachments of Royal Military Artificers and Labourers are to take post,
it is to be next to the Royal Regiment of Artillery, _and upon their
left_. And the officers of the Corps of Royal Engineers are on such
occasions to take post and fall in with such companies or detachments of
Royal Military Artificers and Labourers.”
Prior to the raising of this question of precedence between the two
Ordnance Corps, the general question of precedence over the rest of the
Army had been raised at Gibraltar in 1783, owing to the Governor having
directed the Artillery Guards to parade in the centre of the others, on
general guard-mounting parades. The commanding officer of Artillery,
Major Thomas Davies, having in vain protested, referred the matter to
the Master-General, who ordered the four Colonels-Commandant of
Battalions to assemble at Woolwich, and report to him on the origin of
the privilege claimed and exercised by the Royal Artillery. The result
was, that on the 1st July, 1784, the Secretary at War wrote to the
[Sidenote: War Office, 1/7/84, to Sir G. A. Eliott.] Governor of
Gibraltar as follows: “The Duke of Richmond having put into my hands
your letter to him of the 24th February last, together with the papers
it refers to, touching certain claims of the Royal Regiment of
Artillery, first stated in a representation of the officer commanding
that Corps at Gibraltar; and His Grace having desired me to take the
King’s pleasure thereon, I have accordingly had the honour of submitting
them to His Majesty, and am commanded to acquaint you, that as the
privilege claimed by the Royal Artillery of taking the right upon all
parades appears to have been acknowledged and confirmed by a Regulation
given out in public orders to the Army by His Royal Highness the late
Duke of Cumberland, when Commander-in-Chief; and, as that Regulation
hath not yet been cancelled, His Majesty considers the same to be still
in force, and is therefore pleased to direct that it shall be adhered to
on all occasions, when the compliance with it will not be attended with
material injury to the public service.”
Next in importance to these questions of precedence, among the
Regimental events contained in the period of which this chapter treats,
comes the formation of a Head-quarter office for the Regiment. Prior to
1783, each Battalion was ruled by its own Colonel-Commandant, wherever
the companies might be serving; and details, which should have been
under the control of the senior Artillery officer on the spot, were
regulated from a distance. The Ordnance Office was, in one sense, a
Head-quarter office for the Regiment; but a want existed of some _one
military and regimental_ channel through which the wants and
correspondence of the Battalions might reach the Board. In a letter to
Captain Macleod, who was the first to hold this much-needed office, the
want was well expressed. “The [Sidenote: Officer commanding R. A.,
Canada, to Captain Macleod, 7 Aug., 1783.] officers and men of different
Battalions, that generally compose commands of Artillery abroad, make
the post of a Brigade-Major obviously useful to prevent a multiplicity
of returns to different Battalions, which must often fall short of the
information required at home. The enclosed return, for instance, will
show that we have officers here without a knowledge of what Battalion
they belong to.” The appointment of Captain--afterwards Sir
John--Macleod was a very fortunate one. He was styled Brigade-Major,
when appointed in 1783; and in 1795 the designation was altered to that
of Deputy-Adjutant-General. In 1806 an Assistant-Adjutant-General was
added to the office; and in 1859, a Deputy-Assistant-Adjutant-General.
When Captain Macleod was first appointed, he was under the orders of the
Commandant of Woolwich Garrison; but in a very short time he made
himself so useful to the Master-General and the Board, and was so
conversant with all those details which could not possibly be familiar
to officers, who were so frequently changed, as the Commandants were in
those days, that most of the Regimental correspondence soon passed
_direct_ between him and the Board. So delicate a position required
great tact, and this quality Captain Macleod eminently possessed.
Appearing to act under the orders of the Commandant, and courteously
anticipating his wishes, he really was the mouthpiece of the Board in
controlling the affairs of the Regiment. His correspondence is a
masterpiece of courtesy, skill, and clearness. “The leading feature
[Sidenote: Memoir of Sir J. Macleod, ‘United Service Journal,’ July
1834.] of his character was the confidence he inspired in others, and
the unbounded trust they reposed in him; and thus, whether called upon
for counsel, or to act under unforeseen or sudden emergencies of
service, he was ever ready and prepared to meet its exigencies.... Of
every soldier he made himself the friend. To his equals in rank he was a
brother; to those beneath him a father in kindness and counsel; and to
the private soldiers a benefactor, ever watching over their comfort and
their welfare.... Throughout his long career he was never known to act
with the slightest approach to severity; and yet he never failed to
maintain discipline, to reprove fault, or to check irregularity. He
animated zeal, excited energy, and aimed at perfecting discipline by
always appealing to the better and nobler feelings that prevail with the
soldier’s character.” An office, which, with an ordinary man, would have
remained always subordinate, was raised by him so as to be the very
centre of the Regimental life; and although there have been times in its
history, when the progress and success of the Regiment have been rather
in spite, than by means of it, these occasions have been rare; and--as
in the case of the commencement of the Peninsular War--were forgotten in
the exertions which followed them. In a Regiment so large, and so
scattered, the value of some central organization, not merely for
_routine_, but also for maintaining and encouraging _esprit de corps_,
can hardly be overrated.
It has been said that Captain Macleod commenced to hold the new office,
as a Brigade-Major. It may be added that the ideas of a Brigade-Major’s
position were not exalted. From 1783 to 1790, Captain Macleod conducted
all his business in one small room, shared by his clerks, two in number;
but in 1790, offices having been provided for the Adjutants of the
Battalions, who had hitherto been made to work together, the
Brigade-Major was allowed the same privilege, and drew lots with the
others--according to custom--for a separate apartment. In a long
official correspondence, extending over a long lifetime, the only
irritation displayed by Sir John Macleod was at the official delays of
the Board for which he laboured. But, even then, his indignation took
the form of gentle irony. Whether writing, as he did in the end of the
year 1786, requesting that his travelling allowances for 1783 might be
sent him with as little delay as possible, or reminding the Board of a
demand for stationery sent in many months before, he was never disturbed
into strong language. “I hope you will forgive me,” he wrote, [Sidenote:
To B. of Ordnance, 9 Dec., 1784.] with reference to his last-named
demand, “for begging you to _give orders for its going through the
different forms_ with as much expedition as possible, the stationery of
last year being now entirely exhausted.” An amusing instance of his
quiet way of answering criticism from underlings at the Ordnance
occurred in 1785. Many people who had assisted the troops during the
American War came to England, and generally applied for Government
assistance. A negro, named James Buchanan, presented himself at the
Ordnance, and requested assistance, on the plea that he had been
employed during the war as a labourer with one of the companies on
service. The case was referred to the Brigade-Major, who replied that no
such man was to be found on the rolls of the men so employed. The man,
still adhering to his statement, was told to go to Woolwich and
endeavour to substantiate it. On doing so, he was at once recognized by
Captain Macleod as a man who had done duty with his own company; and he
reported accordingly.
The opportunity could not be resisted; and some official of the Board
wrote an offensive demand for explanation of the contradictory
statements made by the Brigade-Major. With quiet sarcasm, Captain
Macleod wrote: “The Board will easily understand my inconsistency in
disclaiming one day and acknowledging the next, when I inform them that
their petitioner _has acquired the name of James Buchanan, by being
christened since his arrival in England_.”
The dullness at the Board, consequent on the retrenchment which had to
be practised, was cheered by the genial kindness of the Master-General,
the Duke of Richmond, who displayed the greatest interest in the
military branch, down to the humblest individual. To the student it is
also varied by exasperating anecdotes, illustrating the perfection of
official doubt and criticism. The return from America of the companies,
many of whose men had been in prison at various periods during the war,
offered admirable opportunities for the practice of virtues which were
strongly represented at the Honourable Board. To a man landing at
Woolwich, the sympathy of the Ordnance took the doubtful form of a
peremptory order to refund, it might be, certain moneys which had been
drawn for him while a prisoner of war,--their welcome home was a
disallowance. As for the Captains of the returning companies, they were
allowed no peace. No consideration was given on account of their men
having been scattered over a whole continent; the same minuteness of
detail, the same superabundance of vouchers for every charge, was
demanded, as if their companies had never left Woolwich Warren. One
Captain, unable to give the exact dates and sufficient proofs of the
deaths of certain men, who had been killed on distant detachments, was
rash enough to question the justice of such a demand, and to point out
the difficulties in the way of its compliance. Misguided, miserable man!
Little did he know the system of audit, which prevailed in the year of
grace 1784. Argument was inadmissible; the full pound of flesh, in the
form of vouchers and authorities, was insisted on by the official
Shylocks; and if circumstances rendered this an absolute impossibility,
their remedy was simple. Of this wretched [Sidenote: Ordnance
Letter-book, 1784.] Captain, we read that “an order was sent to the
agent to stop his pay until the sum of 223_l._ had been paid.”
In the correspondence of the period, this officer’s name does not appear
again for some weeks,--but then in a startling manner. In a letter to
the Commandant of Woolwich from the Surgeon of the 4th Battalion, we
find that the ill-fated Captain “was so violent last night that I had to
put a strait waistcoat on him.” Had he received notice of a fresh
disallowance from his unfeeling auditors? This, indeed, does not appear;
but from the fact that he had been perfectly sane before this
correspondence, and recovered his sanity afterwards, it almost appears
as if his reason had tottered under the admirable system of audit,
which made no allowance, and would listen to no argument.
The consistency of these examiners was as admirable, as their
pertinacity or their indifference. They were no less reluctant to part
with money except on abundant evidence, than they were determined to
have it refunded unless similar evidence could be shown for its
retention. From the dull pages of the Brigade-Major’s letter-books we
learn of a just and lawful claim made by a gunner on his return from New
York. It does not appear that the claim was denied, but the line taken
by the suspicious officials was to doubt the man’s identity. The
difficulty of proving this may be imagined from what followed. The usual
evidence which the man himself could produce was, like his assertion,
scornfully rejected. A certificate from an officer under whom he had
served, and who was then at Woolwich, was not considered sufficient,
even when followed by a second and third of the same description, and
from different officers. According to their own documents, the examiners
said the man had died in New York; and they would hear of no
resurrection. The matter reached the Commandant, who took it up warmly.
A little alarmed, but not convinced, the auditors wrote to Bath to ask
General Pattison, who had commanded at New York at the date of the man’s
supposed death, whether it had not taken place. But they mistook their
correspondent. He replied that he had no means of answering their
question, but he added, “I should hope that certificates from three
respectable officers, accompanied with a recommendation from the
Commanding Officer of the Battalion, who I am very confident would not
have offered any but on the very surest grounds, will be deemed
sufficient vouchers of the poor man’s pretensions.” From the subsequent
cessation of the correspondence, it is presumed that the claimant’s
identity was at last admitted.
At no period of the Regiment’s history was the paternal rule of the
Board more detailed, and more inclusive of the veriest trifles. The
incessant references which had to be made by the Commandant, before he
could make the slightest change in the Garrison, and the constant petty
collisions between the civil and military departments, picture to the
student an intolerable _régime_. Nor was the overbearing of the civilian
officials confined to offensive correspondence. A story is handed down
of a mighty servant of the Board, rejoicing in the title of “Clerk of
the Cheque,” who paid periodical visits to Woolwich, and evinced his
scorn for the military branch in every way. On one day, the Commandant
had ordered the troops to parade for his inspection; and sentries were
placed at various points to keep back the crowd of sightseers, which had
assembled. Just as the Commandant came on the ground, a scuffle was
observed taking place between a sentry and one of the crowd. The
Garrison Sergeant-Major was sent to ascertain the cause; and on his
arrival he found the Clerk of the Cheque insisting on his right to
ignore any military control. The Sergeant-Major argued, but without
success; the intruder said he was Clerk of the Cheque, and demanded
admission. From verbal to physical persuasion was the next step; and
_both_ the military individuals flung themselves on their civil rival.
It was without result; strong in the majesty of his office, the Clerk of
the Cheque held his ground. The disturbance at length drew the
Commandant himself to the spot, and he took up the discussion; and, like
the Sergeant-Major, resorted to the argument of physical force. It was
an awful moment; as he reads of it, the student’s blood runs cold; for
the battle was now condensed into a fight for the superiority of the
civil over the military branch of His Majesty’s Ordnance. And for the
moment the Clerk of the Cheque prevailed:--pushing the Commandant on one
side, he swaggered across the enclosure. But his triumph was
short-lived; the matter was reported to the Master-General, who ordered
the offender to proceed to Woolwich and make a public apology.
Doubtless, however, he expiated the humiliation by some of the many ways
of paper irritation, which he had at his disposal.
The delay in executing repairs and meeting demands was excessive. Twelve
months were not considered too long a period to answer a requisition,
and much longer was generally taken. A fence happened to require repair
in front of the barracks, and its dangerous state was repeatedly pointed
out by the Commandant. But not until years had passed and an officer had
killed his horse, and broken his own collar-bone, did any steps occur to
the Board to remedy it. Even then, while they were brooding, accidents
continued, coming to a climax one night, when “the Chaplain, in walking
[Sidenote: General Cleaveland to B. of Ordnance.] home, fell in and
broke the principal ligament of his leg.”
A temporary chapel existed in the Warren, and, although the duties of
the Chaplains will be discussed hereafter, it may be mentioned, while
considering the Board’s delays, that in 1783 the Chaplain applied for “a
cushion and furniture for the pulpit, a surplice, Bible and
prayer-books, and a few hassocks, those in use having been purchased in
1753.”
[Sidenote: 1787. Rev. E. Jones to B. of Ordnance.]
After patiently waiting for _four_ years, the Chaplain again sent in a
demand, stating that it was _impossible_ to use those he had _any
longer_.
The procrastination of the Board led, as may be imagined, to many
inconveniences. A company in the Bahamas was ordered to be in readiness
to return to England, and no [Sidenote: Colonel Macbean to
Master-General, Feb. 9, 1787.] clothing was sent to it for the year
1784, as the Board promised to make immediate arrangements for its
transport; but 1784 passed, and also 1785, and then 1786, and no
transport was forthcoming, nor was any clothing sent for these three
years.
It is a relief, however, to turn from the Board and its shortcomings,
and to study the purely Regimental details of the period. Tame, and
uninteresting, as they may appear beside the terrible seedtime in
France, where the dragon’s-teeth of discord, licence, and rebellion were
being scattered, to bring forth a thirty years’ harvest in Europe of
armed men, they cannot be passed by in any work pretending to tell the
story of the Regiment. They speak of an interior economy which has
utterly disappeared,--of a time which might fitly be called “the age of
the Colonels-Commandant.” So completely _honorary_ has that rank now
become in the Regiment, that the exercise of one small piece of
patronage--the nomination of the Brigade Adjutant and Quartermaster--is
the only link which connects those who hold it with the active duties of
the Corps.
On the 30th January, 1873, the Colonels-Commandant were invited to leave
their retirement, and to meet their brother officers once again at the
Regimental mess. This rare _réunion_ formed a marked contrast to the
days referred to in this chapter. _Then_, the Colonels-Commandant of the
four Battalions were entitled to live in barracks in the Warren; and an
attempt was made to place them on the same roster for duty as the
Colonels. Thanks to the conscientious and far-seeing judgment of the
officers who then held the rank, this order was cancelled. The following
protest, submitted by them to the Master-General, will sufficiently
explain the situation:--
[Sidenote: Letter to the Master-General, Sept. 1785, from Major-Generals
Cleaveland, Pattison, Brome, and Godwin.]
“With respect to the proposition of the 1st and 2nd Colonels of the
Battalion quartered at Woolwich to take the duty alternately of being
always on the spot, and commanding there, we beg leave to say (if by 1st
Colonel is meant Colonel-Commandant) that, as General Officers, we are
under the necessity of dissenting from it. We wish to look up to your
Grace as the guardian and protector, under our gracious Sovereign, of
the Corps of Artillery, as well _individually_ as _collectively_; and,
therefore, as this measure would be derogatory thereto, we trust that
your Grace, having condescended to ask our opinions, will be pleased to
relinquish it. Your Grace is sensible that by the custom of the Army
immemorially established, and confirmed by the Royal sanction, Colonels
having the rank of General Officers are exempted from being stationary
with their Regiments; and that, by a late regulation, even
Lieut.-Colonels having the rank of Major-General are not required to be
with their Regiments any further than they may judge necessary for
becoming responsible for their being in good order and discipline, the
care and command devolving upon the Major or senior Captain. However
faint, my Lord, our prospects may be of deriving equal advantages with
other General Officers, from the rank we have the honour to hold, we
have yet every reason to believe and expect that the privileges annexed
to it will be equally preserved to us. In the year 1773, the late
Master-General was pleased to give an order, which seemed to _require_
the residence of the Colonels-Commandant at Woolwich, whereupon the late
Generals Belford and Desaguliers had an audience of His Majesty, and
laid at his feet a memorial praying for redress, which His Majesty was
graciously pleased to grant.”
Although, however, relieved of a duty beneath their rank, the connection
of the Colonels-Commandant with their Battalions remained of the closest
description. No officer was allowed to be promoted, under the rank of
Field-Officer, without a recommendation from the Colonel-Commandant of
the Battalion in which he might be serving; nor was any exchange allowed
without the consent of both the Colonels-Commandant concerned. The
recruiting, clothing, and discharges of the men were under the same
control; and the private affairs of the officers were also frequently
the subject of their official consideration. It has been already hinted,
at the commencement of this chapter, that for some reasons the period
between 1783 and 1792 is a painful one to study. It is impossible to
give a sufficient reason; but as to the _fact_, there is no doubt that
there was then a bad spirit among some of the younger officers, which
manifested itself not unfrequently in acts of open insubordination. The
pages of the Ordnance letter-books of this time bristle with accounts of
courts-martial on officers, an occurrence most rare before or since. Nor
were they due to any stern, unforgiving discipline, visiting slight
offences with heavy punishment. The offences were all of one
description,--distinct and grave insubordination. Whether sufficient
care had not been taken in the appointment of officers during the
American War, or whether this war had engendered among some an unruly,
ill-disciplined, and impatient spirit, it is impossible now to say. Nor
was tragedy wanting. One case occurred, in 1785, of an officer who had
been commissioned in America during the war, and who, on his return to
England, had been repeatedly guilty of minor offences. A prolonged
absence without leave brought matters to a crisis. He was, after some
difficulty, traced to a low lodging-house in London, and, after many
unavailing orders to return to Woolwich, was at last brought down by
escort. A general court-martial was assembled for his trial at the Horse
Guards, where all such courts were then held; and from the official
registers it can be traced that he was convicted. Before, however, the
sentence was promulgated, we learn from a letter in the Brigade-Major’s
correspondence that he was found one morning dead in his room. No
explanation is given,--merely a brief report of the occurrence, leaving
the reader to his own conjectures as to the manner and the cause.
But, painful as it is to come across such passages, the pain is almost
forgotten in the pleasure which the same correspondence affords, when
treating of the earnest fatherly interest displayed by the
Colonels-Commandant in the young officers under their control. In later
days, the life and progress of the Regiment have been, as a rule, in the
keeping of its younger members; but, at the time now spoken of, it was
emphatically the devotion of the fathers of the Corps, which tided it
over the shoals of discontent, stagnation, and despair. A jealous love
of their noble traditions animated them; they had all shared the toils
and the honours, which had so welded the Regiment into a glorious unity;
and they laboured with an unselfish love to inspire the younger members
with an _esprit_, which should make them worthy channels of their own
deep feelings.
They expressed in the earnestness of their lives that which was said in
words by one of the Colonels-Commandant at the _réunion_ in 1873,
mentioned above: “The glory of our Regiment [Sidenote: General B.
Cuppage.] has been in our keeping; but we are now old and passing away,
and we commit it to you.” How much of the noble spirit which animated
the Corps in the commencement of this century was due to the unwearying
teaching of the older officers at the period now treated of can never
be told; but the student of the correspondence still preserved cannot
but attribute to it an abundant share.
One of the duties always performed at this time by the Field-Officers of
the Corps was the testing the value of new inventions. The list of such
during this period is long and quaint. The inventors were both
professional Artillerymen and amateurs; although it must be confessed
that the latter received greater encouragement than the former. It seems
hardly credible, but it is a fact, that in the year of grace 1790 the
Field-Officers of Artillery were repeatedly assembled to examine into
the merits of a 3-pounder _leather_ gun, invented by Sir John Sinclair.
Nor were rifled guns unknown at this time. One of the most persistent
inventors was a Mr. Wiggins, who produced rifled guns to fire belted
spherical shot. He succeeded with the smaller guns, 1 and 9-pounders;
but was not successful with the larger. An 18-pounder which he produced
before the Board was certainly not a success; for, on firing two rounds
with common proof-charge [Sidenote: Inspector of Artillery to
Commandant.] and one shot, “on the second round it burst into a great
number of pieces.” Although, however, the Field-Officers were available
for this duty, any interference with the manufacturing departments in
the Arsenal by the Garrison officials was not allowed nor tolerated.
There were repeated attempts made by successive Commandants to assume a
control over the Arsenal, but without success.
Another duty which occupied the senior officers at this time was
connected with the Regimental Hospital and the medical officers of the
Ordnance. Complaints were repeatedly made _by_ the Surgeons, and not
without reason; and complaints were often made _of_ them, but generally
without cause. The system of making the Surgeon find medicines for the
sick, out of a fixed and inadequate money allowance led to much
correspondence; and attempts made to extort from the military surgeon
any charges made by a civil practitioner for attendance on men on
furlough led to very stormy remonstrances. On the other hand, the
varying rate of stoppages made from the pay of the sick led to
discontent on _their_ part. It was actually proposed by the Board to
take away the whole of a man’s pay when in hospital, lest the Captains
of Companies should be induced to send men when in debt into hospital,
and to appropriate the balance of their pay. This unworthy suspicion was
resented by the Colonels-Commandant in the following dignified words:
[Sidenote: Dated 4 July, 1786.] “With regard to the temptation which
might induce a Captain to send his men to the hospital, and keep them
there as long as he could, in order to clear their debts by
stoppages--we hope, and, indeed, are confident, that there is no Captain
now in the Corps of so illiberal a mind as to be thus unworthily
attentive to his own interest in preference to that of His Majesty’s
service; and should there ever be hereafter any one of such bad
principles, a collusion must take place between him, the Surgeon, and
the Soldier, before his base purpose could be accomplished.”
The Regulations for the Ordnance Medical Department were embodied in a
distinct form in the years 1786 and 1787, but not without much meeting
of committees and examination of witnesses. Much of the labour and
expense which fell upon the medical officers at Woolwich were caused by
the presence in that Garrison of 150 men of the Invalid Battalion, who
were incessantly under treatment. It cannot be said that men were driven
out of the service in those days without every endeavour being made to
effect a cure. From the lists of men recommended for discharge in the
year 1791, which are deposited in the Record Office, we find that one
had been “sick in the country for _four years_;” another suffered from
rheumatism, loss of sight and of hearing; another had “an inveterate
sore leg of many years’ standing;” another was “insane, and burthensome
to the Battalion;” another “hectic, and subject to fits;” another “hurt
in the back, and otherwise infirm;” while a very common epithet was
“completely worn out.” There were other grounds, however, for
discharging men, than mere medical. One man has been handed down as
having been discharged because “he was unsightly,” another was
“unpromising,” a third “irregular,” while of a fourth the curt
characteristic placed against his name is the word “thief.”
History frequently repeats itself in small matters as well as large. The
legislation suggested by the present Secretary of State for War, with
reference to men who have occasion to go to hospital on account of their
own indiscretion, was in force in Canada for many years prior to
1791,--a fine of 10_s._ 6_d._ being levied from every Artilleryman in
such a position. A commanding officer, however, went to Canada who
declined to enforce this fine; and the question as to the origin and
duration of the custom was therefore referred to the Commandant at
Woolwich. He replied: “From the Brigade-Major I learn the custom has
long been abolished in Woolwich, and in other places, as tending to
induce the soldier to conceal his complaint, or apply to quacks for a
cheaper cure; both of which may be prejudicial to his constitution.”
[Sidenote: Whitehall, 23 May, 1786.]
The decisions arrived at by the Board in 1786, with reference to the
medical officers, may be briefly stated. The principal medical officer
at Woolwich was to be called Surgeon-General, and was to receive
half-pay of 10s. per diem, while he was to be relieved of the expense of
finding any medicines for the hospital. The Surgeon of the Battalion at
Woolwich had to provide all the medicines for his Battalion, “excepting
bark and wine,” in return for which he was allowed 120_l._ per annum.
The Surgeon of the Battalion detached in England remained at Woolwich
with such companies of the Battalion as might be stationed there,
providing the medicines required by them, and by the company in
Scotland, as well as all the companies of the Battalion _when on the
line of march_,--receiving in return remuneration at the rate of 12_l._
per company annually. The recruits of the Battalions abroad were also
under his care, and he received 12_l._ annually for each detachment of
fifty men, in return for the medicines he had to provide. So far, this
Surgeon had little to complain of. But the next burden was always
greater than he could bear. He had to take charge of the men of the
Invalid Battalion, not merely those at Woolwich, but also those on
detachment, furnishing them with medicines, in return for the annual sum
of 70_l._ When one bears in mind that no man entered the Invalid
Battalion until he was completely crippled, and that his daily medicine
was probably as necessary to him as the air he breathed, the inadequacy
of the Surgeon’s remuneration in this item becomes apparent. The
Surgeons of the Battalions, to which the companies at Gibraltar and in
Canada respectively belonged, went on service with these companies, and
received 12_l._ per annum for each company, in addition to their pay--in
return for which they had to provide all medicines “except bark and
wine.” The same allowance was paid for detached companies of the various
Battalions to the Ordnance Surgeon on the spot. Civil artificers and
labourers in the employ of the Ordnance were entitled to medical
attendance and medicines, by paying at the rates of one penny and one
halfpenny _per week_ throughout the year to the Ordnance medical officer
on the station. The rule with regard to officers was worded as follows:
“It is expected that the Surgeons of the Artillery and Ordnance at the
different places should give their attendance to the military and civil
officers without fee; but, with respect to supplying them with
medicines, it is recommended to the military and civil officers to
subscribe 2 guineas a year each, for which the Surgeon is to supply them
with medicines; otherwise they are to pay for such medicines as they
use.”
Such were the regulations for the medical officers of the
Ordnance,--revealing a system which was faulty and has disappeared, but
which it is interesting to reproduce in a history of the Corps. But
there were other non-combatants also--no longer represented in the
Regiment, but who deserve to be mentioned--the Regimental Chaplains.
These gentlemen, at the period treated of, did not belong, as now, to
one department for general Army service, but belonged to the various
Battalions of the Corps. This, however, did not imply that they did duty
with their Battalions; far from it. Excellent men, they drew their pay
with a punctuality worthy of all praise, but it was not among their
congregations in the Warren, but away in quiet rural rectories--in fat
livings which they held. They were pluralists; and they clubbed together
to pay a curate in Woolwich to perform their joint duties. It is sad to
have to say, also, that they did not pay their substitute very
liberally. They paid him each eighteen-pence a day--a sum so inadequate
that it drew forth the remonstrances of the Commandant, [Sidenote:
Commandant to Master-General, Nov. 14, 1787.] who wrote to the
Master-General that, “considering the reverend gentleman’s constant
residence and attendance, his dress and appearance, which are always
obliged to be decent, and the disadvantage of having no surplice fees to
add to it, it will not permit him even to eat at the mess--the cheapest
and best mode of living here.” The sum of two shillings and sixpence a
day from each Chaplain was requested for their substitute; such as was
given in other Garrisons. It will thus be seen that the system was
officially recognised; and, indeed, was but one of the many vicious
customs which have disappeared before public opinion. There were certain
occasions when the attendance of the Chaplains was insisted upon,
although they were few and far between. One such occurred in 1785, when
the King announced his intention of coming to Woolwich to review the
Regiment. The Chaplains were hurriedly written for, “in order,” wrote
the Brigade-Major, “that you may be at Woolwich in proper time to _march
by_ with the Regiment.” One of the number replied, that on account of
the distance at which he lived, and the fact of his being 86 years of
age, he would be unable to attend,--which he greatly regretted, as he
would have much liked to march past again before he died. The others
obeyed the summons, one only protesting a little on the ground that the
Battalion to which he belonged was at that time scattered in the West
Indies and Canada. A few years later, in 1792, when a camp was formed at
Bagshot, the Chaplains were ordered to attend and encamp with the
companies; and from that time their duties ceased, more and more every
year, to be so purely honorary as they had been.
Returning now to the combatant part of the Corps, there are certain
details connected with the dress of the officers and men, which can
hardly fail to be interesting, and which find a natural place in a
chapter like this. Owing to a circumstance arising out of the American
War, we are fortunately in possession of very circumstantial accounts on
this point. After the Convention of Saratoga, many of the officers of
Burgoyne’s army remained prisoners of war for nearly three years. On
their return to England, they claimed compensation for loss of their
equipment, &c., stating their case as follows:--“The subscribers wish to
represent the constant and unavoidable loss they sustained in the mode
of payment of their subsistence, as the impossibility of supplying the
Convention Army with specie laid them under an absolute necessity of
drawing their pay at very extravagant rates, being paid by public bills,
in the negotiation of which, from the Congress paper currency, they
suffered a discount which in the 1st year may be estimated at 20 per
cent.... We beg leave to observe that, in conformity to the wishes of
the Generals commanding the troops, we were under the necessity of
building huts at our own cost and charges, in order to take the more
effectual care of the men, to attend to their wants and to alleviate
their distresses. Much expense was incurred on this score. We have also
to observe that the Congress at different periods obliged us to remove
to most of the provinces in America; and in those several marches of at
least 1500 miles, it must naturally occur that many and heavy charges
were sustained by us. On being exchanged, we were unavoidably obliged to
come to New York individually, and there being no public conveyance, we
were necessitated to purchase horses, to transport ourselves and
baggage, from people who took every advantage of our distresses,” On the
claims of officers on this account reaching the Ordnance, the first step
was, simply, to refuse to admit them; on their being urged again in
stronger terms, the next step was to refer them to some one else to
ascertain the truth of the claimants’ statements, it being an official
axiom that any one demanding money was probably an impostor, and to be
treated accordingly; and, lastly, on being satisfied of the accuracy of
the claim, the invariable course was to offer something considerably
less than the sum demanded. From a remonstrance made against the offer
in this case we learn what was laid down by the Board of Ordnance in the
previous year, 28th June, 1782, as the equipment of an Artillery
Subaltern, and the cost at which it was to be valued in compensating for
its loss by shipwreck, or imprisonment. It was as follows:--
£ _s._ _d._
_Regimentals._--1 suit of full uniform 12 12 0
1 frock suit of uniform 7 7 0
1 laced hat 2 13 0
2 pairs of boots 3 3 0
1 regimental great coat 3 0 0
1 plain hat 1 1 0
12 shirts 9 0 0
12 stocks 2 2 0
12 pairs of stockings 3 12 0
6 linen waistcoats and breeches 7 4 0
12 handkerchiefs, at 3_s._ 6_d._ 2 2 0
1 pair of pistols 4 4 0
1 regimental sword, belt, and clasp 2 12 6
1 sash 1 11 6
3 pairs of shoes 1 4 0
_Camp Equipage._--Bedstead and bedding complete 12 12 6
1 pair of canteens 8 8 0
2 hair trunks 3 0 0
1 case with bottles 2 2 0
1 cask with kitchen utensils 3 3 0
Saddle and bridle 4 4 0
-------------
£96 17 6
-------------
The contents of the knapsack of an Artillery soldier at this time were
as follows; the knapsack itself being made of painted canvas:--
4 white shirts.
1 check shirt.
6 _false collars_.
1 canvas frock.
1 canvas pair of trowsers.
1 leather cap.
2 pairs of shoes.
1 pair of black cloth gaiters.
1 pair of white stockings (thread).
1 _powder-bag and puff_.
1 razor.
1 shaving-box.
1 pair of shoe brushes.
1 cloth brush.
1 twin screw and worm.
1 brush and pricker.
1 leather stock.
1 rosette.
1 pair of worsted stockings.
3 pairs of Welsh yarn socks.
1 pair of shoe-buckles.
1 pair of knee-buckles.
1 stock buckle.
1 large and 1 small comb.
The annual issues of clothing were settled by the Master-General on 17th
March, 1788, to be as follows.
Each sergeant was to receive annually
1 coat.
1 white cloth waistcoat.
1 white cloth breeches.
1 _frilled_ shirt.
1 black leather stock.
1 pair of worsted stockings.
1 gold laced hat.
Black cloth with 3 dozen buttons for a pair of gaiters.
5_s._ 3_d._ in lieu of a pair of shoes.
The same articles were supplied to the other ranks, with the exception
that while the corporal’s coat had two epaulettes, the bombardier’s had
only one; and that the hats of the drummers were plain, instead of
gold-laced. The drummers had also fur caps supplied to them when
required. In the West Indies the men received white linen waistcoats and
breeches, instead of cloth; and wore white gold-laced hats instead of
black.
The men of the Invalid Battalion received the same articles as those of
the Marching Battalions, with this exception, that their coats were
lined with _red_ instead of white, and their waistcoats and breeches,
instead of being white, were _blue_.
So much for the clothing of the Regiment at this time; a few words must
now be said as to its drills. And perhaps this can be done most easily
by describing a field-day, which took place on the morning of the 9th
July, 1788, before the King. On the arrival of His Majesty, a salute of
21 guns, at intervals of 8 seconds, was fired by a company, which
immediately afterwards fell in on the left of the line. It was not until
the preceding year that the Regiment had [Sidenote: Order by
Master-General, 4 July, 1787.] been ordered to fall in in two ranks,
when under arms. The King having ridden down the ranks, the Regiment
broke into open column, and marched past in slow and quick time. The
line having been reformed, and the Manual Exercise practised, the
following marvellous evolutions commenced:--Two rounds were fired from
_flanks to centre_ of each Battalion; the line then retired one hundred
yards towards the Barracks, and fired two rounds from _centre to flanks_
of each Battalion; and then returned to its former ground. Here it fired
two rounds by grand divisions from flanks to centre of each Battalion;
then one round by wings of each Battalion; and, finally, each Battalion
fired a volley.
Having so rung the changes on small-arm firing, a certain number of the
men were detached to man 12 field guns, the line opening to allow these
guns to come up. As a contrast to modern Field Battery drill, the solemn
orders issued to the officer commanding these guns may be
quoted:--“Lieutenant-Colonel Walker will advance towards Woolwich Common
with his 12 guns, 4 in front, and in three lines. This column will
incline to the right, so that the right-hand gun may be near the
right-hand hedge. When they have got about halfway between the front of
the Barracks and the sunk fence, the 4 guns in the front line are then
to halt, while the 4 guns in the centre line form the left of the front
line. The 12 guns then in one line will fire two rounds from _flanks to
centre_, then change their front to the left by wheeling on the centre,
and in that position fire two rounds from _centre to flanks_. The 6 guns
on the right will then fall in with the rear of the 2nd Battalion, and
the 6 guns on the left will fall in with the rear of the 4th Battalion.”
It requires the reproduction of such elephantine movements as the above,
to realise sufficiently the progress made since that time in Field
Artillery. This most wooden style of drill was the fashion in England;
and we owe the change, which followed to the wars of the French
Revolution, which taught that a General, to win battles, must be
something more than a drill-sergeant, and that an army must learn not
merely to fight, but to move, and to move with rapidity. The only
element in the field-day just described which gives the student the
slightest relief, is a mention made that the Gentlemen Cadets were
employed as Light Infantry towards the end of the day. Of course this
was all wrong, and one would rather find that they had been employed on
a public occasion like this, as Artillerymen; but it is a relief to read
of anything implying rapidity of movement, after the dull, ponderous
description of the line moving solemnly backwards and forwards, firing
from flanks to centre, and centre to flanks.
To this style of drill our want of success in Flanders, in the campaigns
shortly to be described, was mainly due. Our Generals had their brains
so saturated with the drill-book, that on active service, if they
encountered an enemy who violated its rules, they were utterly
nonplussed. Had they won a victory by ignoring the regulations under
which they had been so strictly exercised, their satisfaction would have
been but a doubtful one. They had yet to learn that although drill and
dogged courage are admirable qualities in troops, they will not
compensate for the lack of those qualities in a General which are
necessary to ensure success.
Only one or two points remain to be noticed. First, the amalgamation of
the Royal Irish Artillery was contemplated as early as 1788, although it
did not take place until after the Union in 1801. The delay was mainly
caused by the protest of the officers of the Royal Artillery, who would
have suffered greatly from supersession,--the promotion in the Irish
corps having been much more rapid than in that from which it sprang.
Amalgamation must always produce this supersession to a certain extent;
and the Board listened to the remonstrances, and deferred the
incorporation of the Irish Artillery for some years. About the same date
that this question was being discussed, a long petition was forwarded
from Gibraltar, in which the officers of the Royal Artillery there
stationed pointed out how much better the position had become of
officers in the Royal Engineers of the same standing as themselves, than
their own. The wording of the petition was faulty, and its arguments
were unsound; thus giving the Master-General an opportunity, of which he
availed himself, to administer a dignified rebuke to the malcontents.
On one point, however, he admitted the force of their complaint. The
rank of Major had been abolished in the Royal Engineers, its holders
being made Lieutenant-Colonels, and thus obtaining a decided advantage
over their contemporaries in [Sidenote: Duke of Richmond, 10 March,
1788.] the Artillery. “This difference,” wrote the Master-General, “and
there being no rank of Major, is, I admit, an advantage in point of rank
in favour of the Engineers. The reason of the rank of Major being
suppressed in the Corps of Engineers was that there were no troops
belonging to them to be commanded in Battalions, and therefore there
could be no use for an officer of that description.” In the year 1827,
the rank of Regimental Major was abolished in the Royal Artillery, its
holders being made Lieutenant-Colonels, but with Majors’ pay; and in the
year 1872, the rank of Major was substituted for that of First Captain,
on account of the responsibility attached to the command of a Battery of
Artillery.
It was during this period that a blow was struck at the custom, which
had hitherto prevailed, of buying and selling the appointments of
Adjutant and Quartermaster. On the [Sidenote: Colonel Miller, Pamph.,
1868.] 24th February, 1783, the Master-General ordered that no such
appointment should in future be sold, with this exception, that any
officer who then held an appointment which he had obtained by purchase
would be allowed to sell it when he relinquished it, but must accept
100_l_. less than he gave for it; and that his successor must also sell
for 100_l_. less than that purchase-money; and so on until the price
should be extinguished. It was ruled, at the same time, that a
Captain-Lieutenant, holding an Adjutancy, should vacate it on being
promoted to a Company; and that as soon as any “warrant” of a
Quartermaster should become vacant without purchase, “some meritorious
non-commissioned officer should be recommended for the same.”
A privilege which the Regiment had hitherto enjoyed was abolished, and
with good reason, in 1785. Prior to that date no charge was ever made
for the subsistence of either officers or men of the Royal Artillery
when being conveyed by transports to foreign stations, an exemption
which was not accorded to the rest of the army. Doubtless the custom
arose from the fact that the Board of Ordnance, which in one capacity
governed the Artillery, in another capacity hired the transports; but
the case had only to be stated to ensure remedy. On the 27th August,
1785, it was ruled that a “stoppage of 3_d._ per diem (being the same as
is made from the rest of His Majesty’s troops) be made from _the
officers_, non-commissioned officers, and privates of the Royal
Artillery during the time they shall be on board ship.” Doubtless, the
same individuals would be glad if, in the year of grace 1873, they could
travel on board ship at the rate of 3_d._ per diem.
Perhaps of all the letters which the student finds in the official
correspondence of the period, the following is the most amusing. It
ought already to have been mentioned that when the Captain of a Company
retired on his pay, awaiting a vacancy in the Invalid Battalion, his
Captain-Lieutenant received certain allowances connected with the
command of the Company. Apparently, the regulations were not very clear
on the subject; or, as is very probable, decisions had been given in
individual cases, which had not been promulgated to the Regiment--a
pernicious custom which existed in the 18th century, and even since. A
Captain William Houghton had retired in this way; and from his
retirement the following cry of agony reached the [Sidenote: 2 April,
1789.] Commandant of his Battalion:--“Ever since the day your goodness
was made known to the Regiment in getting me leave of absence to retire
from duty till provided with an Invalid Company, I have never had a
moment’s peace with my Captains-Lieutenant. Their first claim was for
_one_ non-effective--I gave it; the next was for both--I gave them; and
was then told they had a right to the 6_l._ per annum allowed for
stationery--this I gave up also. They have now demanded my share of the
stock purse, and the 20_l._ per annum granted by His Majesty’s warrant,
27th July, 1772, to the Captains of Artillery, on account of the
slowness of promotion in the Regiment. Had I known these were to be the
hard conditions of a little rest before death, it would have been all
fair; but in that case I certainly should have remained with my Company,
provided I had done duty upon crutches.”
Only one point remains now to be mentioned before turning to the causes
which led to sudden augmentations in the Regiment, combined with the
commencement of hostilities. On the 26th August, 1792, volunteers were
called for from the Companies at Woolwich, to form part of a guard
ordered to attend His Excellency Viscount Macartney, who had been
appointed Ambassador to the Court of the Emperor of China, and also to
act as instructors in gunnery to the troops of that potentate. The
strength of the party was as follows:--One sergeant, 3 corporals or
bombardiers, 1 drummer, and 15 gunners, under the command of Lieutenant
Parish. An advance was made to the detachment of a year’s subsistence to
purchase necessaries, and a second suit of clothing was given to the
non-commissioned officers and men.
It has been difficult to confine this chapter to these purely domestic,
although necessary, details, because, after 1787, the whole firmament of
history has been lurid with the events in France, which were ripening
into a state of things such as has never been seen before, or since. In
1792 it became apparent that war between England and France was
inevitable. Recruiting had been brisk since 1787; in 1790 a free pardon
had been offered to all deserters, who should return to their Regiments;
in the first month of 1793 an augmentation to the Artillery was
authorized, which will form the subject of the next chapter; and in
October 1793, the following increase to the establishment was ordered,
viz.:--
30 Gentlemen Cadets.
{ 1 Sergeant.
To each of the 40 marching { 2 Bombardiers.
Companies of the 4 { 10 Second Gunners.
Battalions { 1 Sergeant Conductor on Sergeant’s pay.
{ 10 Drivers upon Second Gunner’s pay.
To each of the 4 marching }
Battalions } 1 Surgeon’s Mate.
Every officer, without exception, had been ordered to join in 1792; and,
although it was not until the beginning of 1793 that the French
Ambassador was dismissed from the Court of St. James’s, it was evident
that a sufficient _casus belli_ had been found in the operations of the
French army in the Low Countries, and the menace to England implied in
France obtaining the control of the River Scheldt.
A sufficient _casus belli_, it has been said; but the student of history
must indeed be blind who fails to see that this was but a secondary
reason. A panic had seized upon the most stable European governments, a
dread lest the revolutionary principles which animated the French people
should spread beyond the confines of France. Nor was their fear without
reason. Even England had been penetrated by Republicanism; societies
were formed, ostensibly for Parliamentary Reform, and under the title of
_Friends of the People_, which desired undoubtedly the overthrow of the
monarchy. An Englishman, the author of ‘The Rights of Man,’ had been
elected a member of the Assembly in Paris, on account of his advanced
political opinions; and, after his trial for sedition in England, an
English mob showed their sympathy by taking the horses out of his
advocate’s carriage, and drawing it themselves to his residence. That
unfailing barometer of political disturbance--the funds--told also a
tale of great uneasiness. [Sidenote: ‘Annual Register,’ 1792.] The Three
per Cents., which stood in January 1792 at 93⅜, fell before December in
the same year to 74; and all other Government securities were at a
corresponding discount.
The state of France was, indeed, enough to appal the most indifferent.
In the powerful language of the chronicler of the French Revolution,
France, roused by many causes, [Sidenote: Carlyle.] faced the world “in
that terrible strength of Nature which no man has measured;” and
“whatever was cruel in the panic-frenzy of twenty-five million
men--whatsoever was great in the simultaneous death-defiance of
twenty-five million men--stood there in abrupt contrast, near by one
another.” France was now “seeking its wild way through the New,
Chaotic--where Force is not yet distinguished into Bidden and
Forbidden--but Crime and Virtue welter unseparated, in that domain of
what is called the Passions.” ... “The Gospel of Man’s Rights was
preached abroad with the fearfullest Devil’s Message of man’s weaknesses
and sins;” and a whole nation was drunk with revenge, and terror, and
blood.
Penetrating with different effect into every class of men in England,
the tale of the French Revolution penetrated even the recesses of the
Ordnance. Raising their eyes from ledgers, and gazing across the
Channel, even the members of the Honourable Board were moved; and on the
first day of the New Year they resolved on a step, which should bring
Field Artillery more into accord with the era in the history of war
which was now to commence. Nor was it an hour too soon; for in three
weeks’ time, on the 21st January, [Sidenote: Carlyle.] 1793, “there was
in the streets of Paris a silence as of the grave--eighty thousand armed
men stood ranked, like armed statues of men; cannons bristled,
cannoneers with match burning, but no word or movement; it was as a city
enchanted into silence and stone: one carriage, with its escort, slowly
rumbling towards the Place de la Révolution, the only sound.” The last
of the dragon’s teeth was about to be sown, and a crime to be committed
which should bind the governments of Europe together against France, as
one man: to whom France should answer, [Sidenote: Danton.] “The
coalesced Kings threaten us: we hurl at their feet, as the gage of
battle, the Head of a King.”
Of a truth, the Honourable Board had not moved a day too soon. Let us
trace in our next chapter the development of that portion of the Corps
which dates its origin from that terrible month of January 1793.