Part 14

I was permitted to sail a second time, without receiving official praise or blame for the part I had acted. These were discouraging circumstances. But they did not disturb my temper. My principal object was to get ready for sea with all possible haste. I was surprised on my return to be threatened with the fate of Admiral Byng, and I was still more surprised to be charged with cowardice.

With thirty ships of the line I sailed early in July. The French admiral sailed from Brest with thirty-two ships. I believe that, when the fleets came in sight of each other, the French were not a little surprised to see me so strong. I desire not to throw the slightest imputation on the courage of the French admiral. I believe him to be a brave man, and one who had some particular reasons for the line of conduct he pursued. I was determined, if possible, to bring the French to battle, as I had every reason to think that their having avoided an engagement, when it was for four days in their power to attack me, was owing to their expecting some capital reinforcements. I therefore thought that the sooner I could engage them the better, especially as I knew that the principal fleets of our trade were daily expected in the channel, and if the French fleets had been permitted to disperse without an action, our East and West India fleets might have been intercepted, the convoys might have been cut off, and the stake of England might have been lost. I beg leave to mention, that in the reign of King William, the gallant Admiral Russell was two months in sight of a French fleet, and he could not possibly bring them to action. My being in sight of the French fleet four days before the engagement will not, therefore, appear quite so extraordinary as it has been represented. Had it not been for the favourable change of wind on the morning of the 27th of July, I could not have brought the French to action when I did.

I am exceedingly sorry, sir, that the Admiralty have refused me the liberty of producing my instructions. In all former courts’-martial the instructions and orders have been sent with the charge to the members of the Court. As it has been denied in this instance, I must, and do, submit.

Although on the 27th of July I fought and beat my enemy, and compelled him to take shelter by returning into port, yet the effect did by no means answer my wishes. I rushed on to re-attack my enemy. Why I did not accomplish my design will be seen in the evidence I shall produce. I might, it is true, have chased the three ships which were visible on the morning of the 28th of July, but with very little prospect of success. I, therefore, chose to return to Plymouth with my shattered fleet, to get ready for sea again, not, however, forgetting to leave two ships of the line to cruize for the protection of our trading fleets, which, thank God! all arrived safe.

On my return, sir, I most cautiously avoided to utter a syllable of complaint, because it might have suspended our naval operations, which at that time would have been highly dangerous. I could not think of attending to a court-martial when greater objects were in view.

With respect to the second edition of the _Formidable’s_ log-book, it appears to have been fabricated rather for the purpose of exculpating the prosecutor than to criminate me. I shall, therefore, pass it over, and permit the gentleman to make the most of such an exculpation. I cannot, however, be so civil to the alterations and additions in the log-book of the _Robust_. Captain Hood’s conduct must have struck the court, as I believe it did every person, except the prosecutor, with astonishment.

A great stress, sir, has been laid on my letter to the Admiralty. There is a passage in it where I seemed to approve the conduct of every officer in the fleet. The court will observe, that I was not in my letter to inform all Europe, that a vice-admiral, under my command, had been guilty of neglect, whilst there remained a possibility of excuse for his conduct. As to courts-martial, one very bad consequence will, I am sure, result from this trial; it will terrify a commander-in-chief from accepting a commission, if he should be liable to be brought to trial by every subordinate officer.

“As I have touched on my letters, I will just observe, sir, that the most disagreeable task that I ever experienced was that of writing my letter of the 30th of July. However, if I wrote ill, I am confident that I fought well, and the destruction of the trade of France was evident from the number of rich captures which were made, a number far exceeding anything ever known in so short a period! His Majesty noticed this in a speech from the throne....”

The admiral then proceeded to reply seriatim and in detail to the five articles against him, and having concluded, called his witnesses, who established his complete exculpation, if, indeed, there could have been anything to explain or clear in his conduct. Among these witnesses was the Vice-Admiral Sir Robert Harland; and Captain Jervis, the future hero of St. Vincent, who emphatically said, “I cannot boast of a long acquaintance with Admiral Keppel; I never had the honour to serve under him before, but am happy in this opportunity to declare to the court, and to all the world, that, during the whole time the English navy was in sight of the French fleet, he displayed the greatest naval skill and ability, and the boldest enterprise, on the 27th of July, which, with the promptitude and obedience of the Vice-Admiral Sir Robert Harland, will be subjects for my admiration and imitation as long as I live.”

The proceedings of the court-martial concluded on February 11, 1779, by an honourable acquittal of Admiral Keppel; the court unanimously deciding that the charge exhibited against him was malicious and ill-founded; it having appeared that the admiral, so far from having, by misconduct and neglect of duty on the days alluded to, lost an opportunity of rendering an essential service to the State, and thereby tarnishing the honour of the British navy, behaved himself as became a judicious, brave, and experienced officer.

The court did, therefore, unanimously and honourably acquit Admiral Augustus Keppel of the several articles contained in the charge exhibited against him, and he was fully and honourably acquitted accordingly.

The President, on the acquittal being announced, addressed himself to the admiral in the following words, delivering to him his sword at the same time:—

“ADMIRAL KEPPEL, it is no small pleasure to me to receive the commands of the court I have the honour to preside at, that in delivering to you your sword I am to congratulate you on its being restored to you with so much honour, hoping ere long you will be called forth by your sovereign to show it once more in the defence of your country.”

The concourse of people that surrounded the court was immense. As soon as the sentence was pronounced an exclamation of joy burst forth in repeated peals, which was immediately communicated to the crowd without, and soon became general throughout the town and the whole nation by general illuminations.

In the “Gentleman’s Magazine” for Feb. 1779, the following paragraphs show the great sensation created by the acquittal:—

“Thursday, Feb. 11.—About eleven o’clock at night, the news having arrived of the acquittal of Admiral Keppel, a riotous mob, to testify their zeal on the occasion, suddenly assembled, and did a great deal of mischief, by breaking the windows of those houses that were not illuminated, and entering the houses, and destroying the furniture of some gentlemen, against whom the popular cry had been raised, particularly of Lord North, Lord Germaine, Lord Mulgrave, Sir Hugh Palliser, Captain Hood, and some others; but on the appearance of the military, and some of the leaders being apprehended, they dispersed, without attempting to rescue those who were in custody.

“Friday, Feb. 12.—At a Court of Common Council held at Guildhall, a motion was made, and unanimously agreed to, That the thanks of the court be given to the Hon. Augustus Keppel for his spirited conduct during the action of the 27th of July last, for the protection given by him to trade, &c., &c.

“Another motion was at the same time made, That the freedom of the city be presented to Admiral Keppel, in a box made of heart of oak, richly ornamented, and embellished with gold, &c., which motion was likewise agreed to.

“Sunday, Feb. 14.—Admiral Keppel’s flag was hoisted on board the _Victory_ at Spithead.

“Thursday, Feb. 18.—Admiral Keppel received the thanks of the House of Commons. He also received the thanks of the House of Lords then sitting.

“Friday, Feb. 19.—Admiral Keppel attended the levee at St. James’s, and was graciously received by His Majesty.

“Saturday, Feb. 20.—Admiral Keppel dined, by invitation, at the London Tavern. His carriage was drawn by sailors through the city, and the illuminations were more general in the evening than ever was known.”

The trial of Sir Hugh Palliser by court-martial seemed a necessary consequence of the acquittal of Keppel. Palliser was accordingly tried at a court-martial held on board the _Sandwich_ at Portsmouth. The investigation lasted from April 12 to May 5, 1779, and the result was, that though the court blamed Palliser for not having made known to his commander how the _Formidable_ had been so crippled by an explosion, that Admiral Keppel’s signals could not be attended to, yet the court found that Sir Hugh’s conduct had been in many respects highly exemplary and meritorious, and in general terms acquitted him. Despite of this, the popular feeling ran strongly against Sir Hugh Palliser, and though a brave and experienced officer, he never found favour with the public again. He resigned, in 1779, his seat in the House of Commons, his appointment as a lord of the Admiralty, and all his other official employments. He, however, eventually became Governor of Greenwich Hospital, and an admiral of the White. He died at Greenwich the 19th March, 1796.

Admiral Keppel remained a popular man to the day of his death. The admiral, when the party of the Marquess of Rockingham came into power, in 1782, was made first lord of the Admiralty, and a privy councillor; and, on the 22nd April, 1782, he was created Viscount Keppel of Elvedon, in the county of Suffolk. He continued, with a slight intermission, first lord of the Admiralty till 1784, when, soon after, he retired into private life, where his constant amiability and unaffected cheerfulness won him to the last the affection and cordial attentions of all around him. He died of gout in the stomach on the 2nd October, 1786, at his seat, Elden Hall, Suffolk, and, as he was never married, his peerage expired with him; but the noble family to which he belonged still flourishes high in rank and well-merited reputation. The admiral’s grand nephew is now head and representative of the house, as sixth Earl of Albemarle.

Edmund Burke, in his famous “Letter to a Noble Lord,” thus refers to Admiral Keppel:

“No man lives too long, who lives to do with spirit, and suffer with resignation, what Providence pleases to command, or inflict; but, indeed, they are sharp incommodities which beset old age. It was but the other day that, on putting in order some things which had been brought here on my taking leave of London for ever, I looked over a number of fine portraits, most of them of persons now dead, but whose society, in my better days, made this (Beaconsfield) a proud and happy place. Among these was the picture of Lord Keppel. It was painted by an artist worthy of the subject (Sir Joshua Reynolds), the excellent friend of that excellent man from their earliest youth, and a common friend of us both, with whom we lived for many years without a moment of coldness, of peevishness, of jealousy, or of jar, to the day of our final separation. I ever looked on Lord Keppel as one of the greatest and best men of his age; and I loved and cultivated him accordingly. He was much in my heart, and I believe I was in his, to the very last beat. It was at his trial at Portsmouth that he gave me this picture. With what zeal and anxious affection I attended him through that his agony of glory, what part my son took in the early flush and enthusiasm of his virtue, and the pious passion with which he attached himself to all my connections; with what prodigality we both squandered ourselves in courting almost every sort of enmity for his sake, I believe he felt, just as I should have felt such friendship on such an occasion. I partook, indeed, of this honour, with several of the first, and best, and ablest in the kingdom, but I was behindhand with none of them; and I am sure that if, to the eternal disgrace of this nation, and to the total annihilation of every trace of honour and virtue in it, things had taken a different turn from what they did, I should have attended him to the quarterdeck with no less good will and more pride, though with far other feelings, than I partook in the general flow of national joy that attended the justice that was done to his virtue. Pardon, my lord, the feeble garrulity of age, which loves to diffuse itself in discourse of the departed great. At my years we live in retrospect alone; and, wholly unfitted for the society of vigorous life, we enjoy, the best balm to all wounds, the consolation of friendship, in those only whom we have lost for ever.”

THE MUTINY OF THE “BOUNTY.”

The outrageous act of insubordination on open sea, known as “The Mutiny of the _Bounty_,” has proved, from the lasting interest it has excited, and from its extraordinary results, one of the most wonderful events in the annals of our navy. The memory of the foul crime has flourished, not only in tales, dramas, and poetry, but in the very good that Providence worked out of it. Pitcairn’s Island, where the mutineers and their descendants settled, and Norfolk Island, whither the latter have removed, are models of civilisation to the whole Polynesian world. In poetry, the Mutiny has been done the highest, and, indeed, the unfairest honour. Lord Byron’s magnificent production, “The Island; or, Christian and his Comrades,” has converted the guilty mutineers into a band of heroes; and his lordship, with a morbid taste for criminals of the corsair stamp, has thrown a glow of chivalry over deeds which deserved only the whipping post and the gallows. He, too, passes over, in a very few impressive lines, the great and real heroism of the whole affair—a heroism that deserved an Odyssey for its record. I allude to the conduct of Captain, afterwards Admiral, William Bligh, a seaman, illustrious in consequence, who, when his mutinous crew cast him and nineteen others adrift in an open boat, guided and cheered his associates with undaunted energy and perseverance, through a sail of more than 3,500 miles, until they arrived safe at the Dutch settlement, in the island of Timor, without losing more than one man. Lord Byron wrongfully compares with the Spartans of Thermopylæ, Christian and his comrades, who, with one or two exceptions, as they afterwards turned out, were murderous vagabonds merely. A far juster comparison would have been that of William Bligh and his companions in the open boat, with the unconquered spirits that defended the pass of Thermopylæ. The British navy ought well to be proud of the memory of Captain Bligh. Before proceeding to a summary of the mutiny, a word or two may be said biographically of the principal actors in the terrible transaction.

To begin with Bligh, a giant spirit in difficulty. He was a scion of the family to which belong the Earls of Darnley, and he was the grandson of Richard Bligh, Esq., of Tinten, near Bodmin, in Cornwall, and the son of William Bligh, Esq., by Jane, his wife. He was born at Bodmin in 1753, and received a home education. He went very early in life into the royal navy, and was soon remarked for his aptness and his steady and sensible performance of his duty. After passing his examination as lieutenant, he, on the understanding that his promotion should go on, went as sailing master, under Captain Cook, and was for four years with that great navigator, in the _Resolution_. In Cook’s history of his researches in the Southern Pacific, Bligh’s name frequently occurs. Bligh was a lieutenant when he was appointed to command the _Bounty_. He was a strict disciplinarian, but by no means a harsh or unamiable man. He would have his orders obeyed, but he, at the same time, was always studious of the comfort and happiness of the men under him. By his own family and by all his associates in his profession he was thoroughly beloved and respected.

Fletcher Christian, master’s mate on board the _Bounty_, and the chief and worst mutineer, was a man of good family and education, and had actually owed his advancement in the service to Captain Bligh. He was the brother of Professor Christian, Chief Justice of Ely, the well-known editor of “Blackstone’s Commentaries.”

Peter Heywood, a midshipman on board the _Bounty_, who joined the mutiny, and who, after being convicted and pardoned for it, redeemed his character and became a captain in the royal navy, was of a very respectable family, and was grandson of Mr. Heywood, Chief Justice of the Isle of Man. Peter Heywood was, no doubt, the Torquil of Lord Byron’s poem.

Edward Young, a midshipman, and another mutineer, was nephew of Admiral Sir George Young, Bart.

Alexander Smith, _alias_ John Adams, the most remarkable of the mutineers, and afterwards the famous patriarch of Pitcairn’s Island, was a sailor of the ordinary class.

David Nelson, the botanist, a credit to his great name, who sailed with and shared the perils of Bligh, was a man of much scientific knowledge. He had been in Captain Cook’s last voyage, and was appointed to the _Bounty_ on the recommendation of Sir Joseph Banks.

The circumstances of the mutiny were as follow:—

His Majesty’s ship _Bounty_, an armed vessel, was fitted out under the express desire of King George III., and sailed from England in the winter of 1787, commanded by Lieutenant Bligh, on a voyage to the Society Islands to gather bread-fruit trees, and to bring them for transplantation to the British West India settlements, in which climate, it was the opinion of Sir Joseph Banks, they might be successfully cultivated, and prove a succeedaneum for other provisions in times of scarcity.

The _Bounty_ actually departed on its voyage from Spithead on the 23rd December, 1787, and after having to change its first intended course by Cape Horn for the Cape of Good Hope, arrived at Otaheite, the chief of the Society Islands, on the 25th October, 1788. Here Bligh and his crew were received in the most friendly way by the gentle inhabitants of the island, and here they passed a delightful but too enervating period of five months and a half. The worst of it was, the charms of the place proved too strong a temptation for the seamen of the _Bounty_. The women of Otaheite had fascinated them to a degree that deprived them of all sense of right or duty. Well might a locality in the island be termed “Point Venus.” The whole territory seemed a Paphos, for in no savage land had there before ever been found women so beautiful, so agreeable, and so affectionate. I have it from one of Captain Bligh’s descendants, that the captain always attributed the mutiny solely to the irresistible desire of the crew to return to the society of the Otaheite women.

Byron, in his poem, agrees with Bligh in this view, and thus depicts Otaheite:—

“The gentle island, and the genial soil, The friendly hearts, the feasts without a toil, The courteous manners but from Nature caught, The wealth unhoarded, and the love unbought; Could these have charms for rudest sea-boys, driven Before the mast by every wind of heaven? And now, even now prepared with others’ woes To earn mild Virtue’s vain desire, repose?”

Byron’s description of the Otaheite girl, Neuha, gives a fair idea of the charms of the female population of Otaheite:—

“There sat the gentle savage of the wild, In growth a woman, though in years a child, As childhood dates within our colder clime, Where nought is ripen’d rapidly save crime; The infant of an infant world, as pure From Nature—lovely, warm, and premature, Dusky like night, but night with all her stars; Or cavern sparkling with its native spars; With eyes that were a language and a spell, A form like Aphrodite’s in her shell, With all her loves around her on the deep, Voluptuous as the first approach of sleep; Yet full of life—for through her tropic cheek The blush would make its way, and all but speak; The sun-born blood suffused her neck, and threw O’er her clear nut-brown skin a lucid hue, Like coral reddening through the darken’d wave, Which draws the diver to the crimson cave.”

A slight sign of a mutinous intention was shown at one time during the stay on the island. Charles Churchill, the ship’s corporal, and two seamen, William Musprat and John Millward, temporarily deserted; but, after some days’ search for them, they surrendered, and threw themselves on Bligh’s mercy. He generously, but not wisely, as it turned out, forgave them. Bligh had made good, however, the object of his voyage, so far as to have received on board a great number of the bread-fruit trees in various stages of growth, and there was every prospect of their being capable of preservation. The ship, thus laden, quitted Otaheite on the 4th of April, 1789, and continued her course in a westerly direction, touching at one more island, and then meditating her progress through the Pacific Ocean towards the Moluccas. The ship lost sight of the Friendly Islands on the 27th of that month, and everything like good order was supposed to prevail on board—even the mid-watch was relieved without the least apparent disorder; but at daybreak on the 28th, the cabin of Captain Bligh, who commanded the _Bounty_, was forcibly entered by the officer of the watch, Fletcher Christian, assisted by Churchill, Mills, and Burkitt, who dragged him instantly on the deck, menacing his life if he attempted to speak. His endeavour to exhort and bring back the conspirators to their duty proved of no avail. Each of the desperadoes was armed with a drawn cutlass or a fixed bayonet, and all their muskets were avowed to be charged.