Oct. 1805. Northumberland, with a grant of 20007. per annum. Rear-admiral the earl of Northesk was honoured with the insignia of the order of the Bath, and captain Hardy was made a baronet. It was probably owing to a paucity of vacant ribands of the Bath, and the intention of the british government to institute a new military order of merit, that the remaining captains of the Trafalgar fleet received no honorary distinctions. Medals were of course granted in the customary way. The first lieutenant of the Victory, the lieutenants acting as captains of the Ajax and Thunderer, and the first lieutenants of the Mars and Bellerophon, whose captains had been killed in the action, were promoted to post-captains; and the second, third, and fourth lieutenants of the Victory, the first and second lieutenants of the Royal-Sovereign, and the first lieutenants of all the other ships engaged, were made commanders. Four midshipmen of the Victory, three of the Royal-Sovereign, two of the Britannia, and one belonging to every other ship of the line and frigate present in the action, were also promoted to lieutenants. Eng lish ac counts. Passing over as unworthy of notice a ludicrous account of the state of the british fleet after the action, inserted by some wag in the Journal de Paris of the 7th of December, we shall bestow a few words upon the accounts of the battle published in England. The letter of vice-admiral Collingwood to the secretary of the admiralty claims our first attention. This letter has been praised for its style: we wish we could say as much of its accuracy. The accidental irregularity of the enemy's line is represented as the result of design. "They formed their line of battle," says the admiral, "with great closeness and correctness." "The structure of their line was new it formed a crescent convexing to-leeward." "Before the fire opened every alternate ship was about a cable's length to-windward of her second ahead and astern, forming a kind of double line." With such authority for a guide, no wonder that tacticians should set about investigating M. 1805. Villeneuve's new line of battle, "the double crescent Oct. convexing to-leeward.”* wood's about "A circumstance occurred during the action,' Colproceeds vice-admiral Collingwood," which so lingstrongly marks the invincible spirit of british seamen miswhen engaging the enemies of their country, that I take cannot resist the pleasure in making it known to their Témélordships. The Téméraire was boarded, by accident raire. or design, by a french ship on one side and a spaniard on the other; the contest was vigorous, but in the end the combined ensigns were torn from the poop, and the british hoisted in their places." Unfortunately for the fame of those concerned, this soulinspiring passage contains not a word of truth. The mistake arose thus. The spanish ship Neptuno, after having, with the loss of her mizenmast and other damage, surrendered to the Minotaur and Spartiate, drifted on board the Téméraire, while the latter had still foul of her, on the lee or larboard side, the late french ship Redoutable, and, scarcely clear of her astern, the Fougueux.† Long before captain Harvey and his officers landed in England, a spirited representation of this their valorous exploit was exhibited in the London printshops; and many persons, to this day, have not the most remote idea that the fact was ever questioned especially as, although the London Gazette contained two or three supplementary letters from vice-admiral Collingwood, not a hint was given that the first contained a mistatement. For even the letter, showing that the admiral had overrated by one (20 for 19) the number of prizes made on the 21st and 24th, was written by captain Blackwood at the office of the admiralty. That the various periodical publications of the day should place full confidence in an un * For the representation of this line see Ekins's Naval Battles, part 2. plate xxix. (51) Fig. 4. † For the position of these three ships just before the Neptuno surrendered, see diagram at p. 101. Oct. Col ling letter. 1805. contradicted official statement was to be expected; but it will hardly be credited that, nearly 20 years afterwards, an historical writer, who, at the period Adm. of the battle, had attained the rank of commander in the british navy, and who boasts, and may well boast, wood's of the "great opportunities he enjoys of obtaining the most correct information,"* should first declare that the "real facts" of the Trafalgar battle are detailed in the admirable letters of vice-admiral Collingwood," and then do no more than cast a reluctant doubt upon the passage in question, by the following note: " Subsequent information has proved this statement wanted confirmation ;"+-a note that, we verily believe, would not have been added, but for our positive denial, in the first edition of this work, of the statement to which it refers. 66 66 "I have not only," says vice-admiral Collingwood, "to lament, in common with the british navy and the british nation, in the fall of the commander in chief, the loss of a hero whose name will be immortal, and his memory ever dear to his country, but my heart is rent with the most poignant grief for the death of a friend, to whom, by many years' intimacy, and a perfect knowledge of the virtues of his mind, which inspired ideas superior to the common race of men, I was bound by the strongest ties of affection; a grief to which even the glorious occasion in which he fell does not bring the consolation which perhaps it ought. His lordship received a musketball in his left breast about the middle of the action, and sent an officer to me immediately with his last farewell, and soon after expired." Admiring, as we must, the feeling and impressive manner in which the death of lord Nelson is here adverted to, we are obliged to refer to a previous page of this work for a satisfactory proof that the statement with which the extract concludes is incorrect.§ * Brenton, vol. iii. Preface, p. 1. § See p. 117. Ibid. p. 475. The death of lord Nelson in the moment of victory, 1805. and the delay until then of any announcement to Oct. the second in command that the first was incapable of acting, show that the following passage in viceadmiral Collingwood's letter, as far as regards the inference meant to be drawn from it, rests upon no Adm. better foundation. "The Royal-Sovereign having linglost her masts, except her tottering foremast, I wood's called the Euryalus to me while the action continued, which ship, lying within hail, made my signals; a service which captain Blackwood performed with great attention." The few signals, made by the Euryalus for the dismasted Royal-Sovereign, while the action continued, must have been such only as the second in command of the fleet had been directed to make, if necessary, to his own division or column. How, indeed, could it be otherwise, when lord Nelson flatly refused to give up the command of the fleet, and did not breathe his last until the action had virtually terminated? Even then, agreeably to the rules of the service, the Victory's flag remained flying. Among the numerous omissions and mistatements that pervade the official accounts of this celebrated battle, the most extraordinary, as well as the most unjust, is the neglect to notice the services, or even to mention the name, of the Victory's captain; of the officer who, from a few minutes before the action was at its height to the moment of its successful termination, a period of three hours, acted in the capacity, and held the responsibility, of the commander in chief. Unfortunately the mere omission of captain Hardy's name in the public letter of vice-admiral Collingwood is not all the injury done to him. That might have arisen from unintentional neglect, and have been atoned for, in part, by a subsequent explanation and apology. But nothing short of the most humiliating acknowledgment could nullify the statement, that lord Nelson sent to inform vice-admiral Collingwood of his mortal wound "immediately" after he had Col letter. 1805. received it; and that the latter thereupon took upon Oct. himself the direction of the fleet, and ordered the Euryalus, "while the action continued," to make his signals. Truth, however, will ultimately prevail; and captain Hardy became rewarded, not only in a baronetcy, but in the marked approbation of the board of admiralty, who have never lost sight of him when a service was to be performed, that required the exercise of a large proportion of those qualities which characterise the good officer. Bren ac count. Capt. Two published accounts of this battle, one histon's torical, the other tactical, come next under consideration. In the first few details are given, except in reference to the proceedings of the Victory; and, as the relation of the occurrences on board that ship, including the manner of lord Nelson's death, is little more than a transcript from the works of doctor Beatty, messieurs Clarke and M'Arthur, and Mr. Southey, the value of that part of the account may be appreciated by what has already appeared in these pages. Nor have the other authorities, upon which our contemporary has relied for information, benefited him a whit more. Where, for instance, did he learn that the captain of the Redoutable was "mortally wounded" ?* or that the Tonnant, and not the Belleisle, came to the assistance of the Royal-Sovereign? or that the San-Augustin, and not the Neptuno, struck to the Spartiate and Minotaur?‡ But, for these errors of the pen, the pencil is to atone, in the shape of "a rough sketch of the action taken after the firing had ceased in the rear, and the enemy's van had wore to recover the prizes." This is the description given by the draftsman in his Key to the plate;" but, according to the statement of captain Brenton himself, (p. 458,) the " very moment" referred to is two hours afterwards, or just as lord Nelson had expired in the cockpit of the Victory. As is often the case in much more elaborate 66 * Brenton, vol. iii. p. 455. † Ibid. p. 466. + Ibid. p. 467. |