Part 26
In my interview with Lord Mulgrave, I had stated to his lordship, that the works on the Isle d’Aix were no impediment, because of the facility with which the enemy’s ships could be brought between the attacking British force and the fortifications, so as completely to interpose between the fire of the latter. Lord Gambier does not appear to have taken this view, but he completely proved its soundness by stating that the enemy’s ships lay within point-blank shot of their own works, so as to expose them to the fire of their own forts on Aix, if these fired at all, whilst my previous knowledge of the anchorage made it a matter of certainty to me, that it was not difficult for the British fleet to place the enemy in such a position. Lord Gambier’s assertion was one of the main points relied on in the subsequent court-martial, and his lordship’s own letter just quoted is in direct contradiction to the evidence upon which he relied for acquittal.
A more singular declaration is made by his lordship, that if the enemy were attacked by “fire-ships and other engines of the kind, they could run up the river beyond their reach.” In place of this the result, as will presently be seen, proved that the attempt to do so only ended in all running ashore, with the exception of two, and they ultimately escaped up the river because they were not attacked at all! But we must not anticipate.
Had Lord Gambier been, as I was, from having previously blockaded Rochefort in the _Pallas_, practically acquainted with the soundings, he must have taken the same views that I had laid before Lord Mulgrave, and in place of writing to the Admiralty all sorts of evil forebodings to “men and ships,” he would have seen that the attack, with the means indicated, was certain in effect, and easy of accomplishment.
CHAP. XX.
SAIL FOR THE BASQUE ROADS.—MY AWKWARD POSITION.—ILL-HUMOUR OF THE FLEET.—ADMIRAL HARVEY.—IMPRUDENCE OF ADMIRAL HARVEY.—COMPLAINS OF LORD GAMBIER.—INACCURATE SOUNDINGS.—LORD GAMBIER’S TRACTS.—COBBETT’S COMMENTS ON THE TRACTS.—DISSENSIONS IN THE FLEET.—LETTER TO LORD MULGRAVE.—MY PRINCIPLES OF WARFARE.—NIGHT-WORK.—MY PRINCIPLES OF ACTION.—THE ISLE D’AIX.—EXPLOSION VESSELS.
Without waiting to convoy the fire-ships and explosion vessels, the _Impérieuse_ sailed forthwith for Basque Roads in order to expedite the necessary arrangements, so that on their arrival no time might be lost in putting the project in execution; a point on which the Board of Admiralty was most urgent, not more in a belligerent than a political point of view, for as has been stated, the public was dissatisfied that the enemy had been permitted to escape from Brest; whilst our West Indian merchants were in a state of panic lest the French squadron, which had escaped the vigilance of the blockading force before Brest, might again slip out, and inflict irretrievable disaster on their colonial interests, then the most important branch of our maritime commerce.
The _Impérieuse_ arrived in Basque Roads on the 3rd of April, when I was received with great urbanity by the commander-in-chief; his lordship without reserve communicating to me the following order from the Admiralty:—
“Admiralty Office, 25th March, 1809.
“MY LORD,—My Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty having thought fit to select Captain Lord Cochrane for the purpose of conducting, under your lordship’s direction, the fire-ships to be employed in the projected attack on the enemy’s squadron off Isle d’Aix, I have their Lordships’ commands to signify their direction to you to employ Lord Cochrane in the above-mentioned service accordingly, whenever the attack shall take place; and I am to acquaint you that the twelve fire-ships, of which you already had notice, are now in the Downs in readiness, and detained only by contrary winds, and that Mr. Congreve is also at that anchorage, with an assortment of rockets, ready to proceed with the fire-ships.
“I am also to acquaint you that the composition for the six transports, sent to your lordship by Admiral Young, and 1000 carcases for 18-pounders, will sail in the course of three or four days from Woolwich, to join you off Rochefort.
“I have, &c. &c. “W. W. POLE.
“Admiral Lord Gambier.”
Whatever might have been the good feeling manifested by Lord Gambier, it did not, however, extend to the officers of the fleet, whose _amour propre_ Lord Mulgrave had either not attempted, or had failed to satisfy. Every captain was my senior, and the moment my plans were made known, all regarded me as an interloper, sent to take the credit from those to whom it was now considered legitimately to belong. “Why could we not have done this as well as Lord Cochrane?” was the general cry of the fleet, and the question was reasonable; for the means once devised, there could be no difficulty in effectually carrying them out. Others asked, “Why did not Lord Gambier permit us to do this before?” the second query taking much of the sting from the first, as regarded myself, by laying the blame on the commander-in-chief.
The ill-humour of the fleet found an exponent in the person of Admiral Harvey, a brave Trafalgar officer, whose abuse of Lord Gambier to his face was such as I had never before witnessed from a subordinate. I should even now hesitate to record it as incredible, were it not officially known by the minutes of the court-martial in which it some time afterwards resulted.[42]
-----
Footnote 42:
Minutes of a court-martial on Admiral Harvey, on board H. M. S. _Gladiator_, at Portsmouth, May 22nd, 1809.
-----
On ascertaining the nature of my mission, and that the conduct of the attack had been committed to me by the Board of Admiralty, Admiral Harvey came on board the flag-ship with a list of officers and men who volunteered, under his direction, to perform the service which had been thrust upon me. On Lord Gambier informing him that the Board had fixed upon me for the purpose, he said, “he did not care; if he were passed by, and Lord Cochrane or any other junior officer was appointed in preference, he would immediately strike his flag, and resign his commission!”
Lord Gambier said he “should be sorry to see him resort to such an extremity, but that the Lords of the Admiralty having fixed on Lord Cochrane to conduct the service, he could not deviate from their Lordships’ orders.”
On this explanation being good-naturedly made by Lord Gambier, Admiral Harvey broke out into invectives of a most extraordinary kind, openly avowing that “he never saw a man so unfit for the command of the fleet as Lord Gambier, who instead of sending boats to sound the channels, which he (Admiral Harvey) considered the best preparation for an attack on the enemy, he had been employing, or rather amusing himself with mustering the ships’ companies, and had not even taken the pains to ascertain whether the enemy had placed any mortars in front of their lines; concluding by saying, that had Lord Nelson been there, he would not have anchored in Basque Roads at all, but would have dashed at the enemy at once.”
Admiral Harvey then came into Sir Harry Neale’s cabin, and shook hands with me, assuring me that “he should have been very happy to see me on any other occasion than the present. He begged me to consider that nothing personal to myself was intended, for he had a high opinion of me; but that my having been ordered to execute such a service, could only be regarded as an insult to the fleet, and that on this account he would strike his flag so soon as the service was executed.” Admiral Harvey further assured me, that “he had volunteered his services, which had been refused.”
To these remarks I replied: “Admiral Harvey, the service on which the Admiralty has sent me was none of my seeking. I went to Whitehall in obedience to a summons from Lord Mulgrave, and at his lordship’s request gave the Board a plan of attack, the execution of which has been thrust upon me, contrary to my inclination, as well knowing the invidious position in which I should be placed.”
“Well,” said Admiral Harvey, “this is not the first time I have been lightly treated, and that my services have not been attended to in the way they deserved; because I am no canting methodist, no hypocrite, no psalm-singer, and do not cheat old women out of their estates by hypocrisy and canting! I have volunteered to perform the service you came on, and should have been happy to see you on any other occasion, but am very sorry to have a junior officer placed over my head.”
“You must not blame me for that,” replied I; “but permit me to remark that you are using very strong expressions relative to the commander-in-chief.”
“I can assure you, Lord Cochrane,” replied Admiral Harvey, “that I have spoken to Lord Gambier with the same degree of prudence as I have now done to you in the presence of Captain Sir H. Neale.”
“Well, admiral,” replied I, “considering that I have been an unwilling listener to what you really did say to his lordship, I can only remark that you have a strange notion of prudence.”
We then went on the quarter-deck, where Admiral Harvey again commenced a running commentary on Lord Gambier’s conduct, in so loud a tone as to attract the attention of every officer within hearing, his observations being to the effect that “Lord Gambier had received him coldly after the battle of Trafalgar, that he had used him ill, and that his having forwarded the master of the _Tonnant’s_ letter for a court-martial on him, was a proof of his methodistical, jesuitical conduct, and of his vindictive disposition; that Lord Gambier’s conduct, since he took the command of the fleet, was deserving of reprobation, and that his employing officers in mustering the ships’ companies, instead of in gaining information about the soundings, showed himself to be unequal to the command of the fleet.” Then turning to Captain Bedford, he said, “You know you are of the same opinion.”
Admiral Harvey then left the ship, first asking Captain Bedford “whether he had made his offer of service _on any duty_ known to the commander-in-chief?” To which Captain Bedford replied in the affirmative.
My reason for detailing this extraordinary scene, the whole of which, and much more to the same effect, will be found in the minutes of the court-martial previously referred to—is to show into what a hornets’ nest my plans had involuntarily brought me. It may readily be imagined that I bitterly regretted not having persisted in my refusal to have anything to do with carrying them into execution, for now they were known, all believed,—and, being my senior officers, had no doubt a right to believe—that they could execute them better than myself.
So far as regarded the neglect to take soundings of even the approaches to the channel leading to the enemy’s fleet, Admiral Harvey was quite right in his statement. Nothing of the kind had been attempted beyond some soundings on that part of the Boyart shoal, _farthest from the French fleet_! Had not my previous knowledge of the anchorage, as ascertained in the _Pallas_ a few years before, supplied all the information necessary for my conduct of the plans proposed, this neglect would in all probability have been fatal to their execution. Unlike Admiral Harvey, I am not, however, prepared to blame Lord Gambier for the neglect, as a slight acquaintance with the masters, whose duty it was to have made the examination, showed me that they were quite capable of misleading the commander-in-chief, by substituting their own surmises for realities. Certain it was, that although no soundings whatever of the approaches to the enemy’s fleet had been taken, those whose duty it was to have made them, as far as practicable, pretended to know more of the anchorage than I did![43] and had, no doubt, impressed the commander-in-chief that their reports were founded on actual observations.
-----
Footnote 43:
In the subsequent court-martial, one of these men constructed a chart of the soundings, as from his own personal knowledge, and in his verbal evidence said that he had never sounded at all! His chart was, nevertheless, made the basis of the trial, to the exclusion of the official charts!
-----
How far Admiral Harvey was justified in his intemperate allusions to the “_musters_” and _quasi_ religious practices on board the fleet, is a point upon which I do not care to enter, further than to state that these “musters” were found to relate to catechetical examinations of the men, and that I had not been many days in the fleet before the commander-in-chief sent a number of tracts on board the _Impérieuse_, with an injunction for their distribution amongst the crew.
Having by this time ascertained that, rightly or wrongly, the fleet was in a state of great disorganisation on account of the orders given to various officers for the distribution of tracts, and being naturally desirous of learning the kind of instruction thereby imparted, I found some of them of a most silly and injudicious character, and therefore declined to distribute them, but imprudently selected some, and sent them to my friend Cobbett, together with a description of the state of the fleet, in consequence of the tract controversy. It was a false step, though I did not at the time contemplate the virulent animosity which might be excited at home from Cobbett’s hard-hitting comments, nor the consequent amount of enmity to myself, which only ceased with my eventual removal from the Navy!
The fact was, that the fleet was divided into two factions, as bitter against each other as were the Cavaliers and Roundheads in the days of Charles I. The above-mentioned imprudent step incurred the ill will of both parties. The tractarian faction, consisting for the most part of officers appointed by Tory influence or favour of the Admiral, and knowing my connection with Burdett and Cobbett, avoided me; whilst the opposite faction, believing that from the affair of the tracts I should incur the irreconcilable displeasure of Lord Gambier, lost no opportunity of denouncing me as a concocter of novel devices to advance my own interests at the expense of my seniors in the service.
Strange as it may appear, almost the only persons who treated me with consideration were Lord Gambier, his second in command, Admiral Stopford, and his flag-captain, Sir H. Neale.
For this urbanity Lord Gambier had to incur the bitter sarcasm of the fleet—that when the Admiralty wanted to attack the enemy with fire-ships, he had denounced the operation as a “horrible and anti-Christian mode of warfare;” but that now he saw my plan of explosion vessels, in addition to fire-ships, was likely to be crowned with success, he no longer regarded it in the same light.
It was evident that amidst these contending factions, so fatal in a fleet where all ought to be zeal and unity of action—I should have to depend on myself. Disregarding, therefore, the disunion prevalent, and, indeed, increased four-fold by the further division of opinion with respect to Admiral Harvey’s disrespectful expressions to the commander-in-chief, I determined to reconnoitre for myself the position of the French ships, especially as regarded their protection by the batteries on Isle d’Aix, and for this purpose made as minute a _reconnaissance_ as was practicable.
Perhaps it ought to have been previously mentioned, that on the evening of our arrival, I had gone close in to the island, and had embodied the result of my observations in the following letter to Lord Mulgrave, to whom I considered myself more immediately responsible.
“_Impérieuse_, Basque Roads, 3rd April.
“MY LORD,—Having been very close to the Isle d’Aix, I find that the western sea wall has been pulled down to build a better. At present the fort is quite open, and may be taken as soon as the French fleet is driven on shore or burned, which will be as soon as the fire-ships arrive. The wind continues favourable for the attack. If your lordship can prevail on the ministry to send a military force here, you will do great and lasting good to our country.
“Could ministers see things with their own eyes, how differently would they act; but they cannot be everywhere present, and on their opinion of the judgment of others must depend the success of war—possibly the fate of England and all Europe.
“No diversion which the whole force of Great Britain is capable of making in Portugal or Spain, would so much shake the French government as the capture of the islands on this coast. A few men would take Oleron; but to render the capture effective, send twenty thousand men, who, without risk, would find occupation for a French army of a hundred thousand.
“The batteries on Oleron are all open, except two of no importance. Isle Gros would also be of infinite use to our cruisers in the destruction of the French trade.
“The commerce on this coast—and indeed on all the French coasts—is not inferior to that of England in number of vessels and men employed, though not in size of coasting craft.
“The coasting trade is the great nursery of English seamen, and yet we strangely affect to despise the French coasting trade. Must not the corn of the French northern provinces give food to the south? Are the oil and wine of the south of no consequence to those who grow none for themselves? I do not state these matters to your lordship but as an answer to the opinions generally current in England, and, indeed, too much entertained in the naval service also.
“Ships filled with stones would ruin for ever the anchorage of Aix, and some old vessels of the line well loaded would be excellent for the purpose.
“I hope your lordship will excuse the way in which I have jumbled these thoughts together. My intentions are good, and if they can be of any use, I shall feel happy.
“I have the honour to be, my Lord, “Your most obedient servant, “COCHRANE.
“The Right Hon. Lord Mulgrave.”
In this hurried letter the reader will readily recognise the principles laid down by me in a former chapter, for the most advantageous mode of warfare, viz. by harassing the enemy on his own coast, and by a perpetual threat of a descent thereon at any moment, to prevent his employing his forces elsewhere.
In place of the advice being even taken in good part, I had afterwards reason to know, that the views briefly expressed in this letter were regarded by the government as an act of impertinence. Yet nothing could be more sound. The French islands captured, and occupied by an adequate force, protected by a few ships, would have kept the enemy’s coasts in a constant state of alarm, so that it would have been impossible for the enemy to detach armies to the Spanish peninsula; had this policy been pursued, the Peninsular war, as has been stated in a former chapter, and its millions of National Debt, would never have been heard of. So much does the useful or useless expenditure of war depend on the decision of a cabinet, which can practically know little of the matter.
As it was—the French laughed at the clouds of cruisers intent on watching their coasting trade, which was carried on almost without interruption; our vessels going in shore in the day time, when the French coasters kept close under their batteries, and going off shore in the night, when they pursued their course unmolested. Provisions and stores were thus moved as wanted from one part of the enemy’s coast to another, with absolute safety. The great number of prizes which had fallen to the lot of the _Speedy_, _Pallas_, and _Impérieuse_ was almost solely owing to our working in shore at night, when the enemy’s coasters were on the move. In the day time we are usually out of sight of land, with the men fast asleep in their hammocks.
The constant readiness at sea for an enemy who never willingly left port, was, in those days, a great evil, though it was the one point inculcated by the Admiralty. It would have been far more to the purpose to have inculcated the necessity of damaging and alarming the limited seaboard of France, by means of small frigates capable of running in-shore, and to have left the French fleets, whenever they ventured out, to the supervision of squadrons composed of large ships, and specially appointed for the purpose. From the hundreds of ships then in commission, traversing the seas with no advantage to themselves or the country, such an arrangement would have annihilated the commerce, and with it the naval power of France. In place of this, attention to the condition of ships was the most certain way to reward. As the men could not always be employed in exercising guns and furling sails, a system of cleaning and polishing was enforced, till it became positive cruelty to the crews.
If the reader will refer to a previous letter of Lord Collingwood to the Board of Admiralty, he will fully comprehend my meaning. His lordship states that Lord Cochrane’s services on the coast of Languedoc in the _Impérieuse_ “kept the French coast in constant alarm, causing a total suspension of trade, and harassing a body of troops employed to oppose him; he has probably prevented those troops, which were intended for Figueras, from advancing into Spain, by giving them employment in the defence of their own coasts.” For “Figueras” read “Corunna,” and it will be evident, that had the same course been generally pursued on the Atlantic coasts of France, by order, or even under the countenance of the Admiralty, Sir John Moore would neither have retreated nor fallen; because, from the occupation which the French army would have found on its own coasts, he could not have encountered one on the Spanish soil.
One of my principal objects in returning to England, as has been said in a former chapter, was to impress upon the government the efficiency of this mode of proceeding on the Atlantic coasts of France, so as to prevent reinforcements from being sent to their army in the Peninsula. The success of the _Impérieuse_, I again repeat, warranted such an application on my part to the Board of Admiralty, in the expectation of being appointed to the command of an expedition to be carried into effect on this principle.
To return from this digression to the _reconnaissance_ of the enemy’s works on Isle d’Aix.
The opinion which I had expressed to Lord Mulgrave respecting the trifling importance of these works, was strengthened on actual inspection; indeed any opposition which they could have offered was too insignificant for notice, as was afterwards proved when a partial attack took place.
I could not say as much to Lord Gambier, after the opinion he had expressed in his letter to the Admiralty, for this would have amounted to a flat contradiction of his judgment, even though, as was afterwards known, such opinion had been formed on the reports of others, who gave his lordship their surmises as ascertained facts, an assertion which will be hereafter fully demonstrated.
In place, therefore, of officially reporting the result of my _reconnaissance_, I urged upon his lordship not to wait the arrival of the fire-ships from England, but as the fleet had abundance of materials, rather to fit up, as fire-ships and explosion vessels, some transports which happened to be present.