Read Ebook: History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery Vol. 1 Compiled from the Original Records by Duncan Francis

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 1204 lines and 221726 words, and 25 pages

As the guns of the Tower blazed out their welcome to the King, the smoke must have clouded over such an accumulation of testimony in the Ordnance offices hard by, proving that there may be an economy which is no economy at all, as might almost have penetrated the intelligence of a Board. This period in the history of the Ordnance is unsurpassed, even by the many blundering times which, in the course of these volumes, we shall have to examine, down to that day in the year of grace 1855 when, "from the first Cabinet at which Lord Palmerston ever sat as Premier, the Secretary at War brought home half a sheet of paper, containing a memorandum that the Ordnance--one of the oldest Constitutional departments of the Monarchy ... was to be abolished."

In the early days of the Ordnance Board, its relations with the navy were more intimate than in later years. The gunners of the ships were under its control, and had to answer to it for the expenditure of their stores. In this particular, as in most details of checking and audit, the Board was stern to a degree, and not unfrequently unreasonable. In 1712, the captain of a man-of-war, sent to Newfoundland in charge of a convoy, found the English inhabitants of the Island in a state of great danger and uneasiness, and almost unprotected. At their urgent request, he left with them much of his ordnance and stores before he returned to England. With the promptitude which characterized the Board's action towards any one who dared to think for himself, it refused to pass the captain's or gunner's accounts, nor would it authorize them to draw their pay. Remonstrance was useless; explanations were unattended to: the lesson had to be taught to its subordinates, however harshly and idiotically, that freewill did not belong to them, and that to assume any responsibility was to commit a grievous sin. It actually required a petition to the Queen and the Treasury before the unhappy men could get a hearing, and, as a natural consequence, an approval and confirmation of their conduct.

The arming of all men-of-war belonged to the Ordnance; indeed, the office was created for the Navy, although, in course of time, Army details almost entirely monopolized it. Although obliged to act on the requisitions of the Lord High Admiral, their control in their own details, and over the gunners of the ship as regarded their stores, was unfettered. The repairing of the ships, and to a considerable extent their internal fittings, were part of the Board's duties; but it is to be hoped that the technical knowledge of some of their officials exceeded that possessed by the Masters-General. A letter is extant from one of these distinguished individuals, written on board the 'Katherine' yacht, in 1682, to his loving friends, the principal officers of the Ordnance. "I desire" he wrote, "you would give Mr. Young notice to proceed no further in making y^e hangings for y^e great bedstead in y^e lower room in y^e Katherine yacht, till ye have directions from me."

But the Naval branch of the Board's duties is beyond the province of the present work. Of the Military branch much will be better described in the chapters concerning the old Artillery trains, the Royal Military Academy, and in the general narrative of the Royal Artillery's existence as a regiment. A few words, however, may be said here with reference to their civil duties, once of vast importance, but, with the naval branch, swallowed up, like the fat kine of Pharaoh's dream, by the military demands which were constantly on the increase, and were fostered by the military predilections of the Masters and Lieutenants-General.

The civil duties have been well and clearly defined by Clode in his 'Military Forces of the Crown,' vol. ii. He divides into duties--1. As to Stores; 2. As Landowners; 3. As to the Survey of the United Kingdom; 4. As to Defensive Works; 5. As to Contracts; and 6. As to Manufacturing Establishments.

Of the first of these it may be said that their system was excellent. Periodical remains were taken , and a system of issues and receipts was in force which could hardly be improved upon.

In the course of our story we shall find many such lives crushed beneath the wheels of an official Juggernaut. Alas! that Juggernaut is still a god!

'The Survey of the United Kingdom' will be the most honourable vehicle for transmitting to posterity the story of the Board's existence; for, although not yet completed, to the Board is due the credit of originating a work whose national value can hardly be over-estimated. The defensive works erected under the Ordnance already live almost in history, so rapidly has the science of fortification had to move to keep pace with the strength of attack. Their contracts showed but little favouritism, and, on the whole, were just: they included everything, from the building of forts to the manufacture of gunpowder and small arms; and, in peace and war, they reached nearly over the whole civilized world. With this extensive area came the necessity for representatives of the Board at the various stations,--who were first, and wisely, civilians, three in number; afterwards, most foolishly, owing to the increasing military element at the Board, two soldiers, the commanding officers of Artillery and Engineers, and one civilian. And as no man can serve two masters, it was soon apparent that the military members could not always serve their local General and their absent Board; discipline was not unfrequently strained; jealousy and ill-will supervened; and when the death of the Board sounded the knell of the Respective officers, as they were termed, there can be no doubt that it removed an anomaly which was also a danger. Under the new and existing system, the commanding officers of Artillery and Engineers occupy their proper places: they are now the advisers of their General, not his critics: and the door is opened for the entry of the officers of the scientific corps upon an arena where civilian traditions are unknown or powerless.

Of the manufacturing departments of the Ordnance, what has to be said will come better in its place in the course of the narrative.

In summing up, not so much the contents of this Chapter, which is necessarily brief, as the study of the Board's history, the following are the ideas presented to the student's mind:--The Board of Ordnance formed a standard of political excellence,--which it endeavoured to follow when circumstances permitted,--of financial and economical excellence, which it planted everywhere among its subordinates for worship, but which was not allowed the same adoration in its own offices in the Tower. It saved money to the country legitimately by an admirable system of check and audit--illegitimately too often by a false economy, which in the end proved no economy at all; it obstructed our Generals in war, and hampered them in peace: it was extravagant on its own members and immediate retainers to an extent which can only be realized by those who study the evidence given before the Parliamentary Commission of 1810-11. Jobbery existed, but rarely secret or underhand; and its extensive patronage was, on the whole, well and fairly exercised. And although every day shows more clearly the wisdom of removing from under the control of a Board that part of our army, the importance of which is made more apparent by every war which occurs, yet the Artilleryman must always remember with kindly interest that it was to this board and its great Master that his Regiment owes its existence, that to it we owe a nurture which was sometimes too detailed and careful, but under which we earned a reputation in many wars; and that, after a long peace, it placed in the Crimea, for one of the greatest and most difficult sieges in history,--difficult for other reasons than mere military,--the finest siege-train of Artillery that the world has ever seen. In command of the English Army, during this war, the Board's last Master died; and in the list which preceded him, and with which this chapter closes, will be found names which would almost atone for the worst offences ever committed by the Board over which their owners presided.

LIST OF THE MASTERS-GENERAL OF THE ORDNANCE.

The earliest of whom there is any record is

RAUF BIGOD, who was appointed on 2nd June, 1483, "for life." His life does not, however, seem to have been a very long one, for we find

Sir RICHARD GYLEFORD, who was appointed in 1485.

Sir SAMPSON NORTON was undoubtedly Master of the Ordnance, appointed in 1513, as has been proved by extant MSS.

The next one about whom there is any certainty would appear to be the one who heads 'Kane's List'--

Sir THOMAS SEYMOUR, who was appointed about 1537. Other lists show Sir Christopher Morris as Master at this time; but there seems little doubt that he was merely Lieutenant of the Ordnance, although a distinguished soldier, and frequently in command of the Artillery on service.

If one may credit 'Dugdale's Baronage,' the next in order was

Sir THOMAS DARCIE , appointed in 1545: but if so, he merely held it for a short time, for we find him succeeded by

Sir PHILIP HOBY, who was appointed in 1548.

The next in rotation in the best lists is

Sir RICHARD SOUTHWELL, Knight, shown by 'Kane's List' as appointed in February, 1554, and, by certain indentures and Ordnance accounts which are still extant, as being Master of the Ordnance, certainly in 1557 and 1558.

The next Master held the appointment for many years. He was

AMBROSE DUDLEY, Earl of Warwick, and can be proved from indentures in the possession of the late Craven Ord, Esq., which are probably still in existence, and from which extracts were made in 1820 by the compiler of a manuscript now in the Royal Artillery Library, to have been appointed on the 19th February, 1559, and to have held the office until 21st February, 1589, over thirty years.

Possibly owing to the difficulty of finding any one ready to undertake the duties of one who had had so much experience--a difficulty which occurred more than once again--the office was placed in commission after 1589, probably until 1596. From 'Burghleigh's State Papers' we learn that the Commissioners were, the LORD TREASURER, the LORD HIGH ADMIRAL, the LORD CHAMBERLAIN, and VICE-CHAMBERLAIN SIR J. FORTESCUE.

On 19th March, 1596, ROBERT, EARL OF ESSEX, was appointed Master of the Ordnance, and held the appointment until removed by Elizabeth, in 1600. No record of a successor occurs until the 10th September, 1603, when

CHARLES, EARL OF DEVONSHIRE, was appointed. He died in 1606, and was succeeded by

LORD CAREW, appointed Master-General throughout England, for life, in 1608. He was created Earl of Totnes in 1625, and died in 1629. From a number of Ordnance warrants and letters still extant, there can be no doubt that he held the office until his death. For a year after, until 5th March, 1630, we learn, from the Harleian Manuscripts, that there was no Master-General. On that date

HOWARD LORD VERE was appointed, and held office until the 2nd September, 1634, when

MOUNTJOY, EARL OF NEWPORT, was appointed.

On the 22nd January, 1660, a most able Master-General was appointed, whose place the King afterwards found it most difficult to fill. He was

JOHN, LORD BERKLY OF STRATTON, }

Sir JOHN DUNCOMBE, Knight, and }

THOMAS CHICHELEY. }

This Commission lasted until the 4th June, 1670, when the last-named Commissioner , was appointed Master of the Ordnance, and in the warrant for his appointment, which is now in the Tower Library, there is a recapitulation of the names of previous Masters, which includes one--placed between Sir Richard Southwell and the Earl of Essex--which does not appear in any other list, but which one would gladly see included--

Sir PHILIP SIDNEY.

After the death of Sir Thomas Chicheley, the office was again placed in Commission, the incumbents being

Sir JOHN CHICHELEY, son of the late Master,

Sir WILLIAM HICKMAN, and

Sir CHRISTOPHER MUSGRAVE, the last-named of whom afterwards became Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance. This Commission lasted from 1679 to 8th January, 1682, when the celebrated

FREDERICK, DUKE DE SCHOMBERG, Marquis of Harwich, Earl of Brentford, Baron of Teys, General of their Majesties' Forces, Master-General of their Majesties' Ordnance, Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Count of the Holy Roman Empire, Grandee of Portugal, General of the Duke of Brandenburg's forces, and Stadtholder of Prussia.

After his death, the Master-Generalship remained vacant until July, 1693, when it was conferred upon

HENRY, VISCOUNT SIDNEY, afterwards Earl of Romney, who held it until 1702. He was succeeded, almost immediately on Queen Anne's accession, by her favourite, the great

JOHN, EARL OF MARLBOROUGH, who held the appointment until he fell into disgrace with the Queen, when he resigned it, with his other appointments, on 30th December, 1711. He was succeeded by

RICHARD, EARL RIVERS, who, after six months, was followed, on 29th August, 1712, according to the British Chronologist, or on the 1st July, 1712, according to Kane's List, by

JAMES, DUKE OF HAMILTON, who was killed in a duel in November of the same year.

For two years the appointment remained vacant, but in 1714 it was again conferred upon

JOHN, now DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH, who held it until his death, in 1722. He was succeeded, as follows, by

WILLIAM, EARL OF CADOGAN, on 22nd June, 1722, and by

JOHN, DUKE OF ARGYLE AND GREENWICH, on 3rd June 1725.

At this period there is an unaccountable confusion among the various authorities. The 'British Chronologist' and the 'Biographia Britannica' make the list run as follows:--The Duke of Argyle and Greenwich was succeeded, in 1740, by John, Duke of Montague, and resumed office again, for three weeks, in 1742, when, for the last time, he resigned all his appointments, being again succeeded by the same Duke of Montague, who continued to hold the office until 1749, when he died.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet