Nominal List of Officers, Royal Artillery.
Major Alex. Munro.
Major J. Michell.
Captain L. Carmichael.
Captain H. B. Lane.
Captain Charles Deacon.
Captain Adam Crawford.
Captain W. C. Lemprière.
1st Lieutenant John Crawley.
1st Lieutenant Charles Ford.
1st Lieutenant R. A. Speer.
1st Lieutenant Francis Weston.
1st Lieutenant Benson E. Hill.
1st Lieutenant Alexander Ramsay.
1st Lieutenant Frederick Bayley.
1st Lieutenant James Christie.
1st Lieutenant Henry Palliser.
2nd Lieutenant T. G. Williams.
2nd Lieutenant B. L. Poynter.
2nd Lieutenant Henry Williams.
The fleet sailed from Jamaica on the 27th November, 1814, General Keane and the Admiral, Sir A. Cochrane, having preceded the others to make the necessary arrangements.
Sir A. Dickson’s MSS.
On the 24th December, a frigate from England joined the fleet, having brought out Major-General Sir Edward Pakenham, as Commander of the Forces, accompanied by Colonel Dickson and Colonel Burgoyne, as commanding officers, respectively, of Artillery and Engineers. On their arrival they learnt that—certain difficulties in the way of a passage to New Orleans through the lakes having been removed—the army had landed at a creek at the head of Lake Borgne on the 24th December. Being very anxious to join them, Sir Edward Pakenham and his staff pushed on in a boat without delay, for a distance of forty miles, through a number of dismal reed-covered islands, reaching the ‘Britannia’ transport at 10 P.M. Here they learnt that General Keane had landed on the morning of the 23rd with 2000 men at the upper part of a creek called Bayou Catalan, at the head of Lake Borgne;—that he had advanced to the bank of the Mississippi, and on the evening of the same day had been attacked by a strong force of the enemy, which he had repulsed, but not without considerable loss;—that the army had not yet moved farther forward, but was waiting for more troops to join,—only 2000 having been landed at first, and the remainder having gone up the creek in schooners, many of which had gone aground. By rowing all night, and adding thirty miles to the journey already made, Sir Edward Pakenham and his staff reached the head-quarters of Sir Alexander Cochrane, which were established in a few fishermen’s huts,—the only habitations that existed for miles round in that most melancholy and unhealthy district. By 11 A.M. on the 25th December, they succeeded in reaching the landing-place at the head of the creek; and ascertaining that the army head-quarters were only 2½ miles farther on, they proceeded to join them. The road which they traversed was merely a wretched marshy footpath along the bank of a little canal or bayou, which extended from the creek almost to the Mississippi, and was navigable for canoes to within 1000 yards of that river. On arriving at headquarters, they found the army on the ground on which they had fought on the 23rd; the number of men landed having been increased to 3500. The Artillery, which had been landed and equipped, was as follows:—
| 2 | 9-prs. with 110 rounds per gun. | |
| 4 | 6-prs. with 120 rounds per gun. | |
| 1 | heavy 5½-inch howitzer, with 60 rounds. | |
| 1 | light 5½-inch howitzer, with 60 rounds. | |
| 4 | light 3-prs. with 150 rounds per gun. | |
| Total | 12 | guns. |
Captain Lane’s rocket equipment, with 150 field rockets.
Three 5½-inch mortars (brass) under Captain Lawrence, of the Marine Artillery, with 20 rounds each.
The officers and men who had already landed were as follows:—
| Royal Artillery: | 16 | officers, and | 320 | non-com. officers and men. |
| R. A. Drivers: | 2 | officers, and | 61 | non-com. officers and men. |
Sixty-four horses had also been landed.
The Marine Artillery numbered 1 officer and 26 men, and they were assisted by 3 naval officers and 39 seamen.
The guns were distributed as follows:—
| 2 9-prs. | Major Michell. |
| 2 6-prs. | |
| 4 light 3-prs.: Captain Deacon. | |
| 2 6-prs. | Capt. Carmichael. |
| 1 light 5½-inch howr. | |
| 1 heavy 5½-inch howr. :Capt. Crawford. | |
The first duty which Colonel Dickson had to perform was to place what guns he had in battery, to destroy a 14-gun corvette, which lay in the Mississippi, and annoyed the camp. The gallant Colonel had a weakness for hot shot, and having made the necessary arrangements, placing all his guns on the levée (as the river embankment was called), except his 3-pounders, which were sent on with the advanced guard, he opened fire at 8 A.M. on the morning of the 27th December. He fired hot shot from his 9-pounders and shell from the other guns. He got the exact range almost at once, and the practice was excellent. The enemy returned a few random shots, and then the crew made for the shore; and until half-past 10, when the vessel blew up, not another shot was fired from it. The number of rounds expended in destroying this corvette was 191.
The army now prepared to advance against New Orleans; but, from want of horses, Colonel Dickson was obliged to leave two 6-pounders and a light howitzer behind; and as it had been resolved to make the ground which was their first head-quarters a sort of depôt for stores, &c., Captain Crawford was also left behind to superintend the forwarding of the necessary ammunition, &c., for the Artillery. The cold was so intense that the men of the West India Regiments suffered greatly, many dying from its effects, and all being more or less torpid. It seems superfluous to inform the reader that no change had been made in their dress or equipment, on leaving the West Indies, to prepare them for the change in temperature and the continued exposure.
On Sir E. Pakenham’s arrival, a rearrangement took place among the troops of the divisions. Major-General Gibbs was placed in command of the 4th, 44th, 21st, and 1st West India Regiments; and Major-General Keane in command of the 85th, 93rd, 95th, and 5th West India Regiments. The Artillery was distributed, as follows, for the advance:—Captain Deacon’s 3-pounder brigade and half the rocket equipment under Lieutenant Crawley, were to advance with General Gibbs’s brigade by a road leading through the fields to the main piquet-house of the enemy, against which they were to be employed to drive the enemy from the post, and to cover the advance of the column. The small mortars, and the other half of the rocket equipment, under Captain Lane, were attached to General Keane’s brigade, ordered to advance by the chief road, running along the bank of the river. Major Michell’s two 9-pounders and heavy howitzer, and Captain Carmichael’s two 6-pounders, were to be in reserve, and to move with General Keane’s column. The guns left behind with Captain Crawford were placed in battery on the river, to prevent boats or vessels passing up or down.
On the morning of the 28th December, at daybreak, the army moved forward; but the results of the day’s operations were far from favourable. General Gibbs’s column marched against the enemy’s piquet-house, known as La Ronde’s, and the 3-pounders and rockets having opened on it, it was soon evacuated by the American troops. Both columns then pressed on, and suddenly, at a turn of the road, found themselves within 700 or 800 yards of the enemy, whose force was drawn up behind an entrenchment flanked on either side by the river and a wood. A corvette was at anchor in the stream, to assist the American troops. A brisk cannonade was immediately opened against the English, and, although heartily replied to, the advantages of the enemy’s position were such that it was found advisable to withdraw to a distance of about 2200 yards from the enemy’s line, and to take up a position parallel to that of the Americans, and flanked by the river and the wood. Captain Carmichael’s 6-pounders had been disabled by the enemy’s fire, and were therefore exchanged for those left behind at the depôt. Entrenchments were thrown up in front of the 9-pounders, and a battery commenced in which it was proposed to place two 18-pounders which had been brought from the ships, transported on bullock-waggons originally intended for the conveyance of sugar hogsheads. This battery was at the angle of a field adjoining the high road to New Orleans, which ran parallel to the river. It was placed under the command of Lieutenant Speer, with a detachment of twenty gunners; and, as might have been expected from Colonel Dickson’s well-known proclivities, it was speedily supplied with the necessary apparatus for heating shot.
As Sir Edward Pakenham had decided on deferring any assault on the enemy’s position until some effect had been produced by heavy artillery, every exertion was used to land 18-pounder guns and 24-pounder carronades from the ships, and to draw them as far as La Ronde’s house, to remain there until the batteries should be got ready. Ammunition was also landed; but it was found necessary to take all the made cartridges to pieces and make fresh quantities, for which purpose all the available cotton and sheeting were taken from the houses in the neighbourhood, and all the regimental tailors were employed in making cartridges. The want of any artillery machines for the transport or placing of heavy ordnance was severely felt; the necessary guns however having been brought up on the 31st December, and ammunition having been prepared at the rate of 68 rounds per gun and 40 for each carronade, Sir Edward Pakenham directed that batteries should be made and armed that evening, as follows,—their position being where the army had penetrated when the first encounter with the enemy behind his entrenchments took place—about 800 yards distant from the American line:—
1. On the high road, and immediately adjoining the river, two 18-prs., with 50 rounds a gun, to fire upon the enemy’s defences on the right: officer in charge, Captain Lemprière. This battery was the most advanced of all.
2. A little in rear, and to the right of No. 1, was a battery of three 5½-inch mortars, with 30 shells each, under Captain Lawrence. A little in front of this battery, Captain Lane with the rocket battery was stationed.
3. To the right of the rocket battery a 7-gun battery was erected for Major Michell’s two 9-prs. and one heavy howitzer, and Captain Carmichael’s three 6-pounders (one of the disabled 6-prs. having been repaired) and his light howitzer. This battery was to be employed against the enemy’s guns, and the centre of his line.
4. On the centre road, which was parallel to the river and main road, and at right angles to the enemy’s entrenchments, there was a 10-gun battery, consisting of six 18-prs. under Captain Crawford, R.A., and four 24-pr. carronades under Captain Money, R.N. These guns were to be employed in the first instance against the enemy’s artillery, and afterwards to break down the entrenchment a little to the left of the centre.
5. To the right of the 10-gun battery was a second rocket battery under Lieutenant Crawley.
As these batteries had to be erected between 8.30 P.M. on the 31st December, 1814, and 5.45 A.M. on the following day, they could not be very strong. They were constructed of sugar casks filled with earth not rammed, one cask in thickness, and backed up. They were only one cask in height, and, as the platforms were also a little raised, it followed that the gunners, when standing erect, were head and shoulders above the parapet. The platforms were very ill-laid, uneven, and unsteady.
The night was very dark, and the working parties were not collected without much difficulty; but on Sunday morning, New Year’s Day, 1815, at daylight, all was ready. A heavy fog, however, came on at 4 o’clock, and not until 9 o’clock was it possible to see the enemy’s works. During the interval, the columns of Infantry moved to their respective posts to be in readiness for the assault.
On the fog clearing away, the English batteries opened vigorously, and at first a little confusion was apparent among the Americans. This soon disappeared, however; and, as their batteries were strong, and the embrasures strongly constructed with cotton bags, they soon served their guns admirably, and their heavy shot, penetrating the slight English batteries, caused a considerable number of casualties. After about three hours’ firing, the ammunition in the 10-gun English battery was nearly exhausted, the 7-field-gun battery had been silenced, a cheek of the heavy howitzer carriage was shattered, and several other injuries to the gun-carriage had been received. The heavy guns had, fortunately, received no injury; but want of ammunition soon compelled them to be silent also, to the great delight of the enemy. Even, however, if the ammunition had not failed, the nature of the batteries was such that the men could not have gone on much longer. The Americans fired from ten to twelve guns in their lines, and from four to five on the other side of the river, many of them being heavy guns—32-pounders and 24-pounders;—and although several of them had been dismounted by the fire of the English, the remainder were as active at the last moment as at any time during the day. The casualties among the Royal Artillery were as follows:—
Lieutenant Alexander Ramsay: mortally wounded.
12 Artillerymen killed.
13 Artillerymen wounded.
Owing to the uneven and loose state of the platforms, the ship carriages were found to be very awkward and unmanageable, so that the fire did not attain the necessary precision, nor could it be kept up with the rapidity necessary to silence the enemy’s guns. The carronades recoiled off the platform every round. The insufficient strength of the batteries, and the fact of the men being so unprotected, also tended to make the fire less active, and to prevent its silencing guns which were protected by good and solid cover. Colonel Dickson, in his report, said that if he had had heavy ordnance on proper travelling carriages, he was convinced that, with the same quantity of ammunition, he would have silenced or dismounted every gun in the American lines. It has been urged, and with reason, that it was a mistake to commence with so small a quantity of ammunition; but it must be remembered that there was no immediate certainty of a further supply, and the necessity of doing something had become every hour more urgent, as the Americans were busy daily in strengthening their position.
In consequence of the failure on the 1st January, Sir Edward Pakenham resolved to defer further action until the arrival of some reinforcements which he knew to be on the way, and in the meantime to withdraw the guns from the batteries, and the troops from the advanced position which they had taken up. The removal of the guns was not effected without great difficulty. The rain, which was falling continuously, had made the batteries and roads knee-deep with mud; but, thanks to the energy of Sir Edward himself, the whole was effected before daylight on the 2nd.
Although superfluous, it will confirm what has been so often said in the course of this history, with reference to the supply department of the Ordnance, if a few words written by Colonel Dickson be now quoted, with reference to the expedition against New Orleans, which had begun so unfortunately, and was to end so disastrously. “With respect,” he wrote, “to our own ammunition and stores, great quantities of articles have been sent that are perfectly unnecessary and never have been demanded, whereas others greatly required have never been sent, although demanded in the most urgent manner.” In this respect the narrative of the services of the Royal Artillery is singularly monotonous.
On the 3rd January, General Lambert arrived at head-quarters, and on the following day the 7th and 43rd Regiments marched in. The attack, which was now decided upon, cannot be understood without some preliminary explanation. It must be borne in mind that the Americans did not content themselves with remaining idly behind their entrenchments. They had erected flanking works at each end of their line, and had also made and armed batteries on the other side of the river, which were useful both for direct and enfilade fire. It was therefore resolved to send a column across the river, to attack and, if possible, capture the batteries there, prior to the general assault on the enemy’s main work. To do this it was necessary to obtain boats: and a canal was dug from the head of the lake to within a few yards of the river, up which forty-two ships’ boats were brought, ready to be launched in the river on the night of the attack. Considerable changes were made in the position and armament of the English batteries. In order to support the attack on the other side, the following guns were placed so as to command the river and fire at the enemy’s batteries on the right bank:—
| 4 18-prs. manned by R. A. | Under the superintendence of Lieutenant Speer. |
| 2 18-prs. manned by seamen | |
| 2 24-pr. carronades, manned by Marine Artillerymen. | |
| 4 field-guns, under Captain Carmichael. | |
The batteries against the main entrenchment on the left bank were two in number, containing four 18-pounders and four 24-pounders. It was first intended that Captain Michell’s brigade of heavy howitzers and 9-pounders should be sent across the river, if the attack on that side should prove successful; but this plan was subsequently altered, and Captain Michell’s brigade, with Captain Deacon’s, was employed in the main attack on the enemy’s line.
The attack took place on the morning of Sunday, the 8th January. As soon as it was dark on the previous night, the operation of carrying the boats from the canal to the Mississippi commenced, but was found to be more difficult than had been anticipated. There was scarcely any water in the opening which had been cut in the levée,—and between that and the stream the water was shallow, and the mud very deep. The greater part of the night was spent in getting the boats afloat. At 3.15 A.M. only thirty boats had been launched into the deep water, and the 85th Regiment alone had been embarked. The fatiguing nature of the work passed description, and the exertions made by all to overcome the difficulties were beyond praise. Many of the working parties were obliged to stand in mud which almost reached their waists; and yet there was not a word of complaint. Had the determination of the troops in the battle of the 8th been equal to that displayed on the night preceding, a painful chapter in English history need never have been written. The difficulties experienced in getting the force under Colonel Thornton transported across the river were almost equalled by those experienced in getting the batteries ready for the main attack. The ground over which the guns had to be transported was very heavy, and intersected with ditches: and at 4.30 A.M. the batteries were not yet half finished. The reader will bear in mind that it was necessary to defer the erection and armament of these batteries until the night preceding the engagement, in order to deceive the enemy.
When Sir Edward Pakenham quitted his quarters at 5 A.M. on the 8th, he was surprised to hear that Colonel Thornton’s party had not yet crossed the river; and, as it was so nearly daylight, he hesitated as to the wisdom of letting them go, as there would not be time for them to get possession of the works on the other side, and to bring up artillery to enfilade the enemy’s line in support of the general attack, which was to take place at daylight. Still, bearing in mind that, at the worst, Colonel Thornton’s movements would operate as a timely diversion, he sent to enquire how many men had been embarked: and, having been informed that the 85th Regiment, with some Marines—amounting in all to 460—had been put on board, and that there was room for 100 more,—he ordered that additional number to be embarked, and the whole to cross without delay.
Too literal obedience to orders is often fatal. Had the officer superintending the launching of the boats made use of a smaller number, and made more frequent trips with them across the river, there is little doubt that he would easily have succeeded in transporting the whole force in sufficient time. But, having received orders to launch forty-two boats, he obeyed his orders to the letter; nor did the unexpected difficulties which he encountered suggest to him the propriety of consulting Sir Edward Pakenham, with a view to modifying his orders, and bringing them into accord with the altered circumstances. The hurried embarkation at the end, and the smaller force employed, produced the alteration already mentioned in the disposition of the Artillery intended to accompany Colonel Thornton’s force. Major Michell, without his guns, and Captain Lane’s rocket detachments alone crossed the river.
MS. Journal of Sir A. Dickson.
At 5.30 A.M. Sir Edward proceeded to the front. Colonels Dickson and Burgoyne followed him; and the description of the battle may be summarised from the voluminous account of the former officer. Day was fast breaking, and, as they passed the house known as La Ronde’s, a rocket was fired, which, they afterwards learned, was a signal for the advance of the columns to the attack. They had not proceeded much farther when the fire of musketry commenced, followed by that of artillery; and, as they proceeded to a point about 600 yards distant from the enemy’s line, they observed the reserve troops moving forward by a road on their flank. It was evident that the attack should have been made a little earlier in the morning, as the Americans could not have directed their fire with such certainty against the English columns, which, as Colonel Dickson rode forward, he perceived must be distinctly visible from the enemy’s lines. At first the musketry fire was scattered along the line; it then became more general, although not so incessant as might have been expected. The fire of artillery was heavy, and kept up with the utmost vigour; but as Colonel Dickson advanced, he observed the infantry fire to be slackening,—heard that Sir Edward Pakenham was badly wounded,—and met the troops coming back in great confusion, the 1st Brigade, however, which had been in reserve, continuing to advance in good order. Seeing the field Artillery on his left slowly retiring, Colonel Dickson rode up, and ascertained from Captain Carmichael that he had moved forward according to order, taken up a position, and opened as soon as the musketry fire commenced; but that he had scarcely fired five rounds a gun when the attacking columns broke at the head, and such numbers of men came in front of his guns that he was obliged to cease firing; and being under a most heavy fire, without the power of returning it, he had thought it best to fall back. One 3-pounder gun had been dismounted, both gun-wheels having been shot away. It was soon apparent that the attack had entirely failed; but the sight of the 1st Brigade continuing to advance, and the 2nd commencing to re-form, gave some hopes of its renewal. These were, however, soon dissipated; the artillery and musketry fire of the enemy continued unslackened; and the 1st Brigade, followed by the other troops, was soon observed to move to the right towards the wood, and to lie down under cover. During the whole of these events, the fire from the Royal Artillery batteries, under Major Munro, was kept up with the greatest vigour. Colonel Dickson then moved the brigades of Artillery, and formed line for action on the road. While doing this, he heard that both General Gibbs and MS. Journal of Sir A. Dickson. General Keane were wounded,—the former mortally. “A little afterwards,” he wrote, “I heard of the death of Sir Edward Pakenham, who perished in a noble effort to re-establish the confidence of the troops, which had halted from panic just as they were arriving at the line of the enemy,—a panic which no exertion could restore, and which occasioned their total repulse and defeat. Major Macdougal, Sir Edward’s aide-de-camp, informed me that at the moment the column of General Gibbs’ brigade stopped they began firing front and rear, and Sir Edward, who was at some distance behind to observe the operation, immediately galloped up to the head of the column, exclaiming, ‘Lost from want of courage!’ and was trying to encourage the troops on, which he succeeded in doing for a few yards, when he was wounded in the thigh, and his horse killed. Major Macdougal having extricated and raised him from the ground, he was in the act of mounting Macdougal’s horse when he was hit again, and fell into Macdougal’s arms, ejaculating a few words, which were the last he spoke. He expired just as he was conveyed to General Gibbs’ house, thus falling a sacrifice to the misconduct of his troops, by which Great Britain lost one of her ablest and bravest soldiers, and myself one I must ever regret both as a commander and a friend.”
The troops advanced until very near the enemy’s line; but, the enemy’s fire becoming extremely heavy, they stopped, and began firing; and, confusion taking place, nothing could induce them to advance farther; so that, after losing a great number of officers and men, they fell back. A party, consisting of the light companies of the 7th, 43rd, and 93rd Regiments, with one hundred negroes, under the command of Lieut.-Colonel Rennie, 21st Regiment,—taking with them a spiking party of Artillery, under Lieutenant Ford,—attacked the advanced work on the right of the enemy’s line, which they succeeded in carrying, but not without great loss, Colonel Rennie and many officers and men being killed. They kept possession of the outwork for some time, and at last were obliged to leave it, in consequence of the heavy fire from the main work. This force was the advanced part of General Keane’s column, which consisted of the 93rd Regiment, with two companies of the 95th. It had been arranged that, in the event of Colonel Thornton succeeding in capturing the works on the other side of the river, General Keane’s column should press after Colonel Rennie’s force, and endeavour to turn the right of the enemy’s line through the small outwork. Unfortunately, the delay in sending Colonel Thornton’s force across caused Sir Edward Pakenham to alter this plan; and General Keane’s column was ordered to join the left of the 2nd Brigade in the main attack. What was the result? General Keane complied with the new order, and attacked the line to the left of the 2nd Brigade; but the ditch was found to be too deep at this place, and, after the most gallant exertions, his attack was repulsed with heavy loss. Had Colonel Rennie’s force, on taking the outwork, been followed by the 93rd Regiment, it is extremely probable that, by means of the open communication between it and the main work, the latter might have been entered and carried.
In the meantime, Colonel Thornton’s force, which had crossed the river without opposition, advanced rapidly, and carried everything before them. They turned and captured with great gallantry the whole of the enemy’s entrenchments, becoming possessors of the flanking batteries, which it had been decided, if possible, to secure and silence before the main attack commenced. These batteries contained sixteen Major Michell to Colonel Dickson, 8 Jan. 1815. guns and howitzers; and on one of the latter was found the inscription, “Taken at the surrender of York Town in 1781.” Major Michell’s conduct during this attack was thus described in Colonel Thornton’s despatch: “Major Michell of the Royal Artillery afforded me much assistance by his able direction of the firing of some rockets, it not having been found practicable in the first instance to bring over the artillery attached to his command.” Had the attack on the left bank of the Mississippi been as well carried out as that on the right, the defeat of the Americans would have been certain. As it was, General Lambert, to whom the command fell on the death of Sir Edward Pakenham, seeing how desperate the state of affairs was, and bearing in mind that no fewer than 2000 men had been killed or wounded, decided on withdrawing the army to its old encampment, which was to be strengthened to prevent surprise—should the enemy adopt the offensive. He also recalled Colonel Thornton’s force from the other bank, but not until that gallant officer had demolished the captured batteries and spiked their guns. He then decided on abandoning the expedition;—levelling the batteries which had been thrown up;—and rendering the heavy ordnance unserviceable. The boats were removed from the river and placed in the canal, and the wounded were sent away as rapidly as the limited boat accommodation would permit. In answer to some proposals made by General Lambert, the Americans agreed that all prisoners should be returned on both sides; and promised that the wounded in their possession should be sent down the river to the English ships.
The retreat of the English army towards the landing-place, where they were to re-embark, was admirably conducted in the face of great difficulties. The design was so effectually concealed from the enemy, that by the 18th January the whole army, with its field artillery and stores, had moved, and the bridges in its rear had been destroyed, without attracting the enemy’s notice. It may interest the reader to know that the rocket detachments acted as the Artillery of the rear-guard. On the evening of the 28th January the whole of the army had embarked on board the fleet. In the despatch from General Lambert reporting the ‘London Gazette,’ 8 March, 1815. re-embarkation of the army, he wrote: “Lieut.-Colonel Dickson, Royal Artillery, has displayed his usual abilities and assiduity: he reports to me his general satisfaction with all the officers under his command, especially Major Munro, senior officer of the Royal Artillery previous to his arrival, and the officers commanding companies.”
Before the news of the Peace, which had been concluded between England and America, reached the army which had been discomfited at New Orleans, a successful affair for the English arms took place. General Lambert had now proceeded with his force against Fort Bowyer, Mobile, and, after deliberate approaches by the Engineers, and the erection of powerful batteries, the fort was summoned. After a short parley, its Governor surrendered: begging, however, to be permitted to defer its evacuation until the following day, as so many of his men had got drunk. This was agreed to: but the gate of the fort was immediately given over to a company of British Infantry, and the British flag was hoisted. On the 12th February, the garrison marched out; and on the 13th, the arrival of the news of the Peace, which had been signed at Ghent, put an end to further operations.
The Second American War was unjustifiable in its commencement—was unpopular with the majority of the Northern States—and failed to effect either of the two great objects desired by the Americans—the annexation of Canada, or the coercion of embarrassed England into their own terms. Sixty years have passed away; and the first of these dreams is as visionary as it ever was. The loyalty of Canada is undimmed; and her power for self-defence is marvellously increased. She remains a Naboth’s vineyard in the eyes of American Ahabs: but their power for gratifying their lust is diminishing yearly with the development of Canadian resources, and the political manhood of the Canadian people. What is to be said of the second of the two objects which inspired the men who declared the war of 1812? For nearly three years—while they were fighting obscure and petty battles in the north and west, in which the combatants were numbered by hundreds only—the country, which they had attacked so wantonly while bearing her Titanic burden of war, was writing on the pages of history tales of conquest in Europe, which shall never die. Not until her hands were free again did England suffer the disaster at New Orleans: as if the fates grudged her unfilial sons their wish to strike with disaster the parent country, while in the agony of another struggle. And ere they obtained this one solace from New Orleans, the hand of the invader had reached the American capital.
But what better description of the uselessness of this war can be given than the words used by a modern historian in describing the Peace agreed to between the two countries? Russell’s ‘History of Modern Europe.’ “No notice whatever,” he writes, “was taken of the circumstances which occasioned the war.”
CHAPTER XXIII.
Waterloo.
The year, with which this narrative must for the present be brought to an end, was an eventful one. The same year which witnessed the great battle of Waterloo was the hundredth of the Regiment’s existence. How marvellous was the development of England’s Artillery between 1716 and 1815, cannot be better seen than in contrasting the two struggling companies of the former year with the magnificent force of Artillery collected in Belgium in 1815, of which its commander, To D. A. G. dated Brussels, 16 May, 1815. Sir George Wood, wrote: “I do believe there never was in the world such a proportion of Artillery so well equipped. The result must be felt by Europe.”
The growing importance of the arm is apparent from the following statistics. The proportion of guns per 1000 men in the British armies at Marlborough’s three famous battles was as follows: Blenheim, 1·2; Ramilies, 2; and Malplaquet, 1·1. In the Peninsula, the proportion was somewhat higher: at Corunna, 3; Talavera, 1·2; Albuera, 1·2; Salamanca, 2; Vittoria, 1·3; Nivelle, 1·3; Orthes, 1·3; and Toulouse, 1·2. But during the whole of the Peninsular War, the Duke of Wellington complained that he was inadequately supplied with Artillery; and as soon as war was inevitable in 1815, he urged upon the Government at home to send him a large proportion of that arm. The result was that in the British army at the battle of Waterloo the proportion of guns per 1000 men was no less than 3·7.
The circumstances, which led to this great battle, must first be briefly stated. It will be in the reader’s recollection that in February 1815, Napoleon quitted Elba; and on the 20th March entered the Tuileries. As he had foreseen, the army rallied round him; but to his mortification he found coldness and even mistrust on the part of the Chambers, and a decided apathy on the part of the civil population. He beheld also the whole of continental Europe resolving to arm against him,—to stamp out the man, who had so audaciously violated the solemn Convention of Paris; while England—to compensate for the weakness of her military contingent—furnished money to the other Powers, and a General whose name was in itself a host. No uncertain sound came from the European council, which sat at Vienna; and Napoleon saw before him a stern and growing resolution for war to the bitter end. He was not sorry. If he could win battles, he knew that he would have found a cure for all coldness at home:—the army, which had again placed him on the throne, would, if victorious, consolidate his power, and make him independent of all who distrusted him. He commenced, therefore, to reorganize and equip a force which should sweep all before it. He hastened his preparations, in the hope of encountering his enemies in detail, before they should have effected that concentration of their armies along the entire eastern frontier of France, which he knew they contemplated. It will be seen, hereafter, that on more than one occasion during this last of Napoleon’s campaigns, he was guilty of unaccountable lack of energy; but no one can fail to admire the spirit and ability with which in the short spring of that fatal year he organized the army, which was to ensure his complete success, or witness his utter ruin.
To realise his difficulties, one must bear in mind the state Hooper. of the country which he governed. “France had exhausted her vigour in the unrestrained indulgence of her passion for military glory. Her blood was impoverished,—her muscles relaxed, her nerves unstrung, her moral force debilitated by twenty-three years of almost uninterrupted warfare. The laurels gathered in a hundred battles were poor compensation for a paralyzed industry and a crippled commerce,—for desolate corn-fields and half-cultured vineyards. She was ’la belle France’ no longer;—she had used her prime in the debauch of war!” And yet from this country, Napoleon, before the middle of June, had raised the effective force of the regular army to no less than 276,000 men; besides having 200,000 other and inferior troops.
He determined to carry the war first into Belgium. For concentrating an army with this view, the line of fortresses on the French frontier to the north-east offered special advantages. And, on crossing it in force, he hoped to defeat the Prussians and English separately,—to make by this means the war and the Government unpopular in England,—and to detach from the Allies some whom he believed to be but half-hearted in their opposition to him. Another and important reason for selecting Belgium as the theatre of his operations, was the undoubted presence in that country of many who on his first success would flock to his standard.
On the night of the 14th June, Napoleon had collected on the French side of the frontier an army ready to march on the following morning, consisting of 128,000 men, and 344 guns. Of this number, 22,000 were cavalry; and the whole force was divided into five corps d’armée, besides the Imperial Guard, and four corps of reserve cavalry. On that night he slept at Avesnes, which he made his head-quarters, and from which he issued a characteristic address to his troops. Leaving him there,—with the great mass of his Hooper. army “gathered, so to speak, to a head at Beaumont,” and pointing directly upon Charleroi,—the reader is invited to turn to the English army, and examine its constitution and disposition.
A force of Artillery had been in Holland for some time with Sir T. Graham,—under the command of Sir G. A. Wood; and this formed the nucleus of the contingent of that arm in the Duke of Wellington’s army in Belgium. Many names familiar to the reader re-appear in the lists of those who fought at Waterloo. Colonel—now Sir Alexander—Dickson was still in America; but arrived in time for the battle. Others, who had received honours for their Peninsular services, were also there: Sir Augustus Frazer, Sir John May, Sir Hew Ross, and Sir Robert Gardiner. Norman Ramsay, transferred to another troop in order to be present, had also joined; and was already, as Sir Augustus Frazer Frazer’s Letters, p. 532. wrote, “adored by his men:—kind, generous, and manly, he is more than the friend of his soldiers.” Other names will appear, as the narrative proceeds; suffice it at present to say that it is doubtful if ever in one field, or even in one generation, the Regiment has had so many able men gathered together.
Sir George Wood was enthusiastic, and revelled in his command. His enthusiasm, while not forbidding him to point out his wants, aided him in remedying or bearing them. They were at first but two in number; but they were rather important to a force, for they were officers and men. Fortunately for him and the Corps, General Macleod was still Deputy Adjutant-General of the Royal Artillery, and was indefatigable in supplying Sir George Wood’s demands. As fast as the companies and drivers arrived from America, they were sent to Belgium; but the demand still exceeded the supply. Only six days before the battle, it is recorded that no fewer than 1000 drivers were wanting. This had been partly caused by the Duke of Wellington insisting on the formation of three brigades of 18-pounders, to be placed under the command of Sir Alexander Dickson; and partly by the demands of the small-arm ammunition trains. He would neither hire nor enlist Belgian drivers, saying that he placed too much consequence on his Artillery to trust it to such a crew; and he ordered Sir George Wood to write to General Macleod, requesting that four companies of foot Artillery might be sent out to act as drivers. It was not often that the Duke tried to coax the Board, or honoured Sir G. Wood to D. A. G. Brussels, 9 June, 1815. it with his reasons; but on this occasion he did. He said that he was well aware that it was not the particular duty of Artillery soldiers to take care of horses, but he was confident that should the Master-General be pleased to allow that duty to be performed by gunners for the present, the service would receive much greater benefit,—“the Artillery officers having more power over their own men, than any given number from the Line;” and that in the case of a siege they might do their Artillery duties in the trenches, as at Antwerp in 1814.
It was on the 4th April, 1815, that the Duke of Wellington reached Brussels. Less fortunate than Sir George Wood, he found that his demands, at first, were merely made excuses by the authorities at home for the exercise of official patronage. He at last ironically suggested to them that it would be well, before sending him any more Generals, to send him some men for them to command. The local arrangements, as far as the Artillery was concerned, are graphically described in Sir A. Frazer’s letters, and in General Mercer’s journal of the Waterloo campaign. The historian must, however, draw his information from a less sparkling stream,—the official letters of Sir George Wood and others. From these it is ascertained that Ostend was the principal port of disembarkation for artillery and stores: that Sir George Wood himself, and afterwards Sir A. Frazer and Lieutenant-Colonel S. G. Adye, superintended the arrival of these at Ostend, and their removal to various places; and that in these matters they were assisted by a man whom all united to pronounce marvellously able, Mr. Commissary Stace.
Sir G. Wood to D. A. G. Ostend, 1 May, 1815.
It appears that the urgent demands for more Horse Artillery came from Sir A. Frazer, who was appointed to the command of that branch; whereas the Duke himself at first seemed more anxious to get drivers for the brigades, and foot Artillerymen for the garrisons of Mons, Oudenarde, Ghent, and Ath. As early as the beginning of May, the Duke almost broke Captain Whinyates’s heart by deciding on changing his rocket troop into an ordinary troop: nor was it without much difficulty and pleading, that Sir G. Wood succeeded in obtaining permission for him to carry Mercer’s Journal, vol. i. p. 166. a proportion of 12-pounder rockets with his guns. The Duke’s prejudice against rockets was unmistakable; and his unofficial language on this occasion was somewhat unfeeling; but the official reason he gave was that when he Sir G. A. Wood to D. A. G. 1 May, 1815. had a proper proportion of Artillery attached to his army, as all other nations had, then he would bring the Rocket Corps into play; but that he thought, situated as he was, the gun a superior weapon. The argument, which had most weight in support of the request to retain a proportion of To D.-A.-G. 8 May, 1815. rockets, was thus stated by Sir G. Wood: “The Duke was determined at first to place the rockets in depôt, but after the good appearance of our friend Whinyates’s troop, and the plan and mode he suggested to his Grace, he has permitted him to take into the field eight hundred rounds of rockets with his six guns, which makes him very complete.”
The horsing of the Horse and Field Batteries during the Waterloo campaign was admirable; but the Field Artillery excelled in this particular to such an extent, that Sir George Ibid. Wood wrote: “the Horse Artillery are really jealous of their appearance.” The Duke had inspected the 9-pounder Field Brigade, commanded by Captain C. F. Sandham, and had been so pleased that he desired General Maitland to write to that officer as follows: “The Duke of Wellington has desired me to communicate to you (and I have to request you will do so to the officers, non-commissioned officers, and soldiers under your command), his unqualified approbation of the appearance of the brigade. I feel gratified in being able to assure you that he commented on the horses, appointments, and every part of it, with peculiar approbation.” This company, which was No. 9 of the 3rd Battalion, and fired the first shot at Waterloo, was—alas!—reduced in 1819. In forwarding a copy of the above complimentary letter to the Ordnance, Sir G. Wood said: “All the other brigades are equal, if not better, in horses.” What a contrast to the Field Brigades of Egypt, and the first years of the Peninsula!—how staunchly had the lessons taught by the experience of the latter been studied and accepted!
Sir G. Wood to D.-A.-G. Brussels, 12 May, 1815.
On the 12th May, the Duke desired Sir G. Wood to write to the Ordnance, requesting that two troops of Horse Artillery, in addition to the six already in Belgium, should be sent out; stating, as his reason, the deficiency of Field Brigades, and the impossibility of getting drivers in sufficient numbers. He would gladly have taken 1000 drivers over his actual artillery wants, for service with the small-arm ammunition waggons, which he had succeeded in horsing in the country. Sir H. Ross’s, the Chestnut Troop, and Frazer’s Letters, p. 530-533. Major Beane’s, were accordingly despatched; and arrived, the former, at Ghent, on the 9th June, and the latter on the 10th, at Ostend.
Constant changes in the armament of the troops of Horse Artillery in Belgium had been suggested with a view to increasing the weight of metal, and some of a tentative description were made in the beginning of May. On the 16th of that month, the following armament was finally decided upon:—
M.S. Return to D.-A.-G. with Letter from Col. Adye, 30 May, 1815, and Sir G. Wood, to D.-A.-G. 2 June, 1815.
| A. | 9-prs. | B. | Light 6-prs. | C. | Hvy. 5½-in. hows. |
| D. | Total. | E. | 9-prs. | F. | Light 6-prs. |
| G. | Hvy. 5½-in. hows. | H. | Caissons. | I. | Total. |
| Guns. | Ammunition Carriages. | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. | B. | C. | D. | E. | F. | G. | H. | I. | ||
| Sir H. D. Ross’s | Troop | 5 | ·· | 1 | 6 | 7 | ·· | 2 | ·· | 9 |
| Sir R. Gardiner’s | ” | ·· | 5 | 1 | 6 | ·· | 7 | 2 | ·· | 9 |
| Lt.-Col. Webber Smith’s | ” | ·· | 5 | 1 | 6 | ·· | 7 | 2 | ·· | 9 |
| Captain Mercer’s (G) | ” | 5 | ·· | 1 | 6 | 7 | ·· | 2 | ·· | 9 |
| Major Ramsay’s | ” | 5 | ·· | 1 | 6 | 7 | ·· | 2 | ·· | 9 |
| Major Bull’s | ” | ·· | ·· | 6 | 6 | ·· | ·· | 9 | ·· | 9 |
| Captain Whinyates’s | ” | ·· | 5 | 1 | 6 | ·· | 5 | 1 | 6 | 12 |
| 15 | 15 | 12 | 42 | 21 | 19 | 20 | 6 | 66 | ||
N.B.—Major Beane’s Troop, when it arrived, was armed like Sir H. Ross’s.
This change of armament proved very beneficial at Waterloo; but the credit of introducing it seems to have been ascribed, without reason, to the Duke of Wellington. Frazer’s Letters, p. 551. Writing two days after the battle, Sir A. Frazer said: “I must be allowed to express my satisfaction, that, contrary to the opinion of most, I ventured to change (and under discouraging - circumstances of partial want of means) the ordnance of the Horse Artillery.” And again: “I bless my stars that I had obstinacy enough to persist in changing the guns of the Horse Artillery.” The forethought was certainly more consistent in one who was an able and enthusiastic Horse-Artilleryman, than in one who, like the Duke of Wellington, knew little of Artillery details or tactics.
Mercer’s Diary, vol. i. p. 160.
The arrangement and constitution of a troop of Horse Artillery at Waterloo are given with minuteness by General Mercer in his Diary. Taking the troop, which he commanded, although only its 2nd Captain,[45] as a sample of those more heavily armed, it appears that each gun, and the howitzer, were drawn by 8 horses, and each waggon by 6. Each of the six mounted detachments required 8 horses; 5 were required for the staff-sergeants and farriers; 18 for the spare-wheel carriage, forge, curricle-cart, baggage-waggon, &c.; 17 horses for officers, and 6 mules, and 30 spare, additional horses. This gave a total of 226 per troop. There were 23 non-commissioned officers, artificers, and trumpeters; 80 gunners, and 84 drivers. On parade, the 5½-inch howitzer was the right of the centre division of the troop. It was of this troop that Blücher said, at the review near Ibid. p. 217. Grammont on the 29th May, that “he had never seen anything so superb in his life;” concluding by exclaiming, “Mein Gott! dere is not von orse in dies batterie wich is not goot for Veldt-Marshal!”
There is in the official correspondence of May and June 1815, a collection of quaintly amusing letters from various 2nd Captains of Artillery in Belgium, who, prior to the war, had been left in undisturbed command of their batteries,—their 1st Captains being specially employed—and who now wrote begging that the latter should not be allowed to join, and thus rob them of their chances of distinction and preferment. One of these—Captain Napier—wrote direct to the Master-General, protesting against the appointment of Captain Bolton to command his battery; which, he wrote, “hurt him much.” Little did he think as he wrote that a mightier hand than the Master-General’s was in a very few days to cancel the appointment, and that ere the first battle should be over, he should resume the command, vacant by his senior’s death! Pages might be filled with instances of this resentment at the presence of a 1st Captain; nor were they confined to attempts to prevent the seniors from joining. One 2nd Captain, whose commanding officer was wounded at Quatre Bras, wrote off immediately, begging the Master-General to appoint no one in his place, but to leave the command in his hands.
When the Allies were ready, as far as equipment was concerned, Brussels remained the head-quarters of the Duke of Wellington, and the army was scattered through the country, in a way which has excited much criticism among continental writers. Napoleon, when he fought the battles of Ligny and Quatre Bras, had hoped to find the English army still in its cantonments; but he was disappointed, for it had quitted them, and commenced to concentrate on the 13th and 14th June. His intention had been to defeat the Prussians, and compel them to retire on the base of their communications and supplies, and to compel the advanced part of the Anglo-allied army to retire from Quatre Bras on Brussels. In neither particular were his hopes fulfilled. He certainly compelled the Prussians, after their defeat at Ligny on the 16th June, to retire; but they quitted the main road to Namur, along which Napoleon expected that they would continue their retreat, and marched to Wavre by a road parallel to that occupied by Wellington between Quatre Bras and Brussels. This brilliant movement was unsuspected by Napoleon, whose remissness after Ligny and during the early part of the 17th was unaccountable. Disappointed in his Sir G. Wood to D.-A.-G. 24/6/15. plans with regard to the Prussians, he failed also in his purpose against the English. Marshal Ney with two corps attacked part of the Allied force at Quatre Bras, a place in front of the village of Genappe, where two main roads—from Genappe to Charleroi, and Namur to Nivelle—cross one another. The endurance of the Allies was tried to the utmost by having to wait the arrival of reinforcements, and to fight against superior numbers, but it was rewarded by a Cust. complete, although costly, victory. The first attack was received by the Belgians; but Picton’s English division, over 7000 strong, soon came up, followed by over 6,500 Brunswickers and Germans. The battle commenced at 2 P.M. on the 16th; and at 4 o’clock the Duke of Wellington came on the field with a brigade of foreign cavalry, and assumed the command. Later in the evening, the 1st British division, under Generals Cook and Maitland, with its artillery, arrived from Enghien, having marched for a period of fifteen hours;[46] and with the approaching darkness came the retreat of the French on Frasnes. This defeat ruined the French Emperor’s plans, and paved the way for the greater defeat of the 18th.
Sir G. Wood to D.-A.-G. 24/6/15.
The following field-officers, troops, and brigades of Artillery were present at the battle of Quatre Bras:—
| Lieut.-Colonel | S. G. Adye, commanding the Artillery of the 1st Division. |
| ” | Sir A. Frazer, commanding Royal Horse Artillery. |
| ” | Sir J. Hartmann, commanding King’s German Artillery. |
| ” | Sir J. May, Assist. Adjutant-General. |
| ” | Sir A. Dickson. |
| Captain Sandham’s Brigade, R.A. | Attached to the 1st Division. |
| Major Kuhlmann’s Troop, K. G. L. | |
| Major Lloyd’s Brigade, R.A. | Attached to the 3rd Division. |
| Capt. Cleeve’s Brigade, K. G. L. | |
| Major Roger’s Brigade, R.A. | Attached to the 5th Division. |
Major Heise, with Captain Rettberg’s brigade of Hanoverian Artillery, was also engaged.
The Horse Artillery and British Cavalry did not come up until after the battle; and the want of the latter was severely felt during the day, the French being very strong in that arm.
Sir A. Frazer’s Letters, p. 541.
Major Lloyd’s and Major Rogers’ batteries were warmly engaged at Quatre Bras. Two guns belonging to the former were lost, but were afterwards recovered. The troop of Ibid. p. 540. German Horse Artillery was of great service, sustaining the reputation which that corps had earned in the Peninsula. But the losses among the Artillerymen were small in proportion to those among the regiments of Infantry. Of 3750 British killed and wounded at Quatre Bras, only 28 belonged to the Royal Artillery. The losses were, however, very severe among the horses, and crippled the batteries very much. In Sir George Wood’s despatch announcing the To D.-A.-G. 24 June, 1815. battle, he wrote: “I beg you will be pleased to mention to his Lordship, the Master-General, the good conduct of that part of the Artillery which was engaged on the 16th. They were warmly engaged, being several times charged by the French Cavalry,—and tended much to the success of the day.” The merits of Quatre Bras, as a scene on which English courage and endurance were nobly displayed, are too often forgotten in the recollections of the greater battle, by which it was so speedily followed.
In consequence of the Prussians moving on Wavre, it became necessary for the Duke of Wellington to fall back also; and orders were given on the 17th for the army to retire to Mont St. Jean, not far from the village of Waterloo. This position had been carefully selected and examined by the Duke, with a view to the event which was now at hand. The retreat through Genappe was effected with the greatest order, and was covered by the Horse Artillery and Cavalry. Mercer’s Diary, vol. i. p. 270. Captain Mercer’s and Captain Whinyates’s troops were the last to retire, the former officer having been detailed for that duty—the latter having exceeded his orders, and remained behind, hoping to come in for some fighting. For the Horse Artillery and Cavalry, the retreat was no bed of roses. The heavy rains had made the roads and fields almost impassable. Genappe is in a hollow; and as the Horse Artillery mounted the slopes towards La Belle Alliance, pursued by the French Cavalry, they had to move at a gallop through fields, which would have tried them even at a walk. Sir Robert Gardiner’s troop was especially taxed in this way; and he used frequently to say that it was fortunate that his 6-pounder armament had not been exchanged for the heavier nature; for his guns would certainly have been captured had this been done. The nature of the ground which was traversed may be gathered from the fact that not a horse in Sir Robert’s troop reached Mont St. Jean without losing at least Communicated by Colonel L. Gardiner, R.-H.-A. one shoe. The whole night of the 17th was spent in shoeing the horses, and getting the troop ready for the work of the following day.
On the morning of the 18th June, the French army was drawn up on the south side, and the Allies on the Brussels side, of a long hollow, which common parlance has inaccurately named the “field of Waterloo.” The strength of the French army, according to the industrious Siborne—checked by later writers—was, in round numbers, 72,000; that of the Allies, about 68,000. The French had, in addition, Marshal Grouchy’s force of 33,000 men, fourteen miles away, on a blind chase after the Prussians, who were already six miles nearer Waterloo than their pursuers; and Wellington had a division of 18,000 men on detachment to his right, towards Hal, at a distance of ten miles. This extra precaution—this strange nervousness about his right—has been much and justly condemned by critics. When one reflects of what value that force would have been at different times during the 18th, one cannot but feel that if the Allied information to the right had been as carefully procured, as it had been to the left of the army, the whole of these 18,000 men might have been drawn in to the main body. However, even admitting this to be a blunder, the French were nevertheless utterly outmanœuvred. Napoleon’s remissness on the night of the 16th, and his idleness on the morning of the 17th, were now to receive the punishment which such qualities in the face of an enemy always deserve, and generally get.
Sir George Wood to D.-A.-G. 24 June, 1815.
The Artillery engaged on the side of the Allies was as follows:—
| Lieut.-Colonel | Sir A. Frazer, commanding R. H. A. |
| ” | S. G. Adye, commanding Artillery of 1st Division. |
| ” | Gold, commanding Artillery of 2nd Division. |
| ” | Williamson, commanding Artillery of 3rd Division. |
| ” | Sir J. Hartmann, commanding King’s German Artillery. |
| ” | A. Macdonald, commanding Six troops of H. A. attached to Cavalry. |
| Major Drummond, commanding Reserve Artillery. | |
| Lieut.-Colonel Sir A. Dickson. | |
The troops of Horse Artillery attached to the Cavalry were those commanded by—
Lieut.-Colonel Webber Smith,
Lieut.-Colonel Sir R. Gardiner,
Major R. Bull,
Major N. Ramsay,
Captain Mercer, and
Captain Whinyates.
The divisional Artillery was as follows:—
| Captain Sandham’s Brigade, R.A. | 1st Division. |
| Major Kuhlmann’s Troop, K.G.A. | |
| Captain Bolton’s Brigade, R.A. | 2nd Division. |
| Major Sympher’s Troop, K.G.A. | |
| Major Lloyd’s Brigade, R.A. | 3rd Division. |
| Captain Cleve’s Brigade, R.A. | |
| Major Rogers’ Brigade, R.A. | 5th Division. |
The reserve Artillery—the whole of which came into action early in the day—consisted of—
Lieut.-Colonel Sir H. D. Ross’s Troop, R.H.A.
Major Beane’s Troop, R.H.A.
Captain Sinclair’s Brigade, R.A.
Major Heise, and two brigades of Hanoverian Artillery, were also engaged.
It will thus be seen that the number of troops and brigades of the Royal Artillery engaged at the battle of Waterloo was thirteen, or a force of 78 guns, exclusive of the German and Hanoverian Artillery. Some companies of the regiment were also present with the small-arm ammunition for the army.
Captain Baynes acted as Brigade-Major to the Artillery; and Captain Pakenham, Lieutenants Coles, J. Bloomfield, and W. Bell, acted as staff officers.
Vide vol. ii. Appendix A.
The description of the battle which will now be given will be brief; as it will be necessary subsequently to enter with more detail into the services and conduct of the Artillery during the day.
The battle of Waterloo was—as Sir James Shaw Kennedy expresses it—a drama in five acts. The first was the attack on Hougomont at 11.30 A.M., many precious hours having been wasted by Napoleon; the second was the attack by the French on La Haye Sainte, at half-past 1; the third was the celebrated succession of cavalry attacks on the Allied line between Hougomont and La Haye Sainte, commencing at 4 o’clock; the fourth was the successful attack by Marshal Ney on La Haye Sainte, at 6 o’clock,—an event which if properly used by Napoleon might have had a very grave effect on the result of the battle, for it caused a great gap in the very centre of the Allied line; and the fifth was the celebrated attack on the Allied centre made by 12 battalions of the Imperial Guard, strengthened by the co-operation of Kennedy. other divisions, and supported “by a powerful Artillery, and what remained of the Cavalry.”
In the attack on Hougomont, the battery which most distinguished itself was the famous old I Troop—now D Battery, B Brigade, R.H.A.—under Major R. Bull, whose Peninsular history rivals that of the Chestnut Troop. It was armed with howitzers; and cleared the wood in front of Hougomont of the French troops,—firing shell with wonderful accuracy over the heads of the English Infantry; an operation Frazer’s Letters, p. 556. so delicate, as to make the Duke remark to Sir Augustus Frazer, who ordered it, that he hoped he was not undertaking too much. But Sir Augustus said that he could depend on the troop; and the event proved that he was right: for after ten minutes’ firing, the French were driven out of the wood. Webber Smith’s troop was also hotly engaged during this first attack, and suffered during the day very severely, not merely—as all did—from the French skirmishers, but also from having been on one occasion enfiladed by one of Prince Jerome’s batteries. Captain Bolton’s field brigade, which was to have so great glory at a critical period in the day, was in action at the first attack on Hougomont; and when subsequently moved more to the centre of the Allied line, its place to the left of Hougomont was taken by Norman Ramsay’s troop. It has already been mentioned that the first shot fired by the Allied Artillery at Waterloo was fired by Captain Sandham’s brigade. This was in reply to the first attack on Hougomont; and during the day no fewer than 1100 rounds of ammunition were fired by this single brigade.[47] Although beyond the province of this work to enter into the Infantry details of the battle, it must yet be said that, even in a day when the British Infantry showed a valour and endurance which have never been surpassed, their defence of Hougomont shines with especial lustre. Knowing its value, as strengthening the right of his line, the Duke had taken precautions on the previous night by loopholing the walls to render its defence more practicable. Although set on fire, and attacked repeatedly by superior numbers, it was never lost; its defenders showing a tenacity and courage, unexampled almost in the annals of war.
In the second act of the drama—the first attack on La Haye Sainte—Captain Whinyates’s troop and Major Rogers’ field brigade were first engaged; and it is important to Vide Appendix A. remember, with a view to the argument, which is to come, that it was during this act that the Artillery of the reserve was brought up. Sir Hew Ross’s and Major Beane’s troops suffered at this time great loss. Among the officers alone, Major Beane was killed, and both 2nd captains and two subalterns wounded.
The third act, the charges of the French cavalry, will be fully discussed in the argument, which will be found in the Appendix. Suffice it to say, at present, that they were preceded by clouds of skirmishers, and by a tremendous artillery fire; and that at no period of the day were the losses among the Artillery more severe. Among those who fell then was Norman Ramsay; and it was the lot of his Frazer’s Letters, p. 548. dearest friend to witness and to tell the circumstances. “In a momentary lull of the fire,” wrote Sir Augustus Frazer, “I buried my friend Ramsay, from whose body I took the portrait of his wife, which he always carried next his heart. Not a man assisted at the funeral who did not shed tears. Hardly had I cut from his head the hair which I enclose, and laid his yet warm body in the grave, when our convulsive sobs were stifled by the necessity of Nivelle, 20 June, 1815. returning to renew the struggle.” Two days later, the same hand wrote: “Now that the stern feelings of the day have given way to the return of better ones, I feel with the bitterness of anguish not to be described, the loss of my friend Ramsay. Nor for this friend alone, but for Dated 6 July, 1815. many others, though less dear than poor Norman.” And yet again, writing from Paris, Sir A. Frazer said: “I cannot get Ramsay out of my head; such generosity, such romantic self-devotion as his, are not common.” It was written of Ramsay, “Sibi satis vixit,—non patriæ;” and it is difficult to conceive a nobler eulogy. A man who never tampered with temptation, but trampled on it instead,—he left behind him the story of a life, which is a model for his successors in the Corps to imitate. There is a Waterloo going on daily in a soldier’s life: his enemies are more skilled than Napoleon—they are as relentless as death: they come dressed in many garbs, but their names are sloth, ignorance, and vice; and the weapon by which alone they can be overcome is an earnest and conscientious performance of duty. This weapon must be grasped most firmly, and wielded most mercilessly, when the duties to be performed are monotonous or uninviting; but its unfailing use, even through a life of uninteresting routine, will earn for the soldier, when the night comes, the same words as were spoken of Norman Ramsay, “Satis sibi vixit,—non patriæ.”
The fourth act of the drama witnessed, at 6 o’clock, the capture of La Haye Sainte by the French, after a magnificent defence by Major Baring and part of the King’s German Legion, which only failed from want of ammunition. There seems little doubt that the Duke of Wellington had underrated the importance of this position; indeed, he is said in later years to have admitted it. Fortunately, Napoleon did not sufficiently note the advantage he had gained; and contented himself with using its now friendly cover in preparation for his great final effort.
The Prussians had by this time arrived, and were in force on the French right. At the village of Planchenoit, they were already in such numbers that the French General, Loban, required 16,000 men to keep them in check. On the extreme left of the English, at Papillote, the advanced parties of another Prussian column had also arrived; and, all fear for his left being now at an end, the Duke of Wellington was enabled to strengthen his centre, and his right centre, by moving Vivian’s and Vaudeleur’s Cavalry Brigades from the left, accompanied by Sir Robert Gardiner’s troop of Horse Artillery.
The necessity of a great final effort was now apparent to Napoleon; and the curtain rose on the fifth act of the drama at half-past 7 o’clock. It is a point which the Artilleryman should never forget, that, in this majestic advance of the Imperial Guard, its head was broken and thrown into confusion by the fire of Captain Bolton’s guns, before the 52nd Regiment, and the Guards, did their celebrated work. It was at this time that Captain Bolton was killed, and that the Duke personally gave his orders to Captain Napier,—the 2nd Captain,—as the French approached, to load with canister.
While the advancing columns of the enemy were in the hollow, their artillery carried on a cannonade over their heads, more terrible than had been witnessed during the day. The following description of Mercer’s battery at the end of the day will give the reader an idea of the murderous Mercer’s Journal, vol. i. p. 331. fire to which the Allies were exposed. “Of 200 fine horses,” he wrote, “with which we had entered the battle, upwards of 140 lay dead, dying, or severely wounded. Of the men, scarcely two-thirds of those necessary for four guns remained; and those so completely exhausted, as to be totally incapable of further exertion. Lieutenant Breton had had three horses killed under him; Lieutenant Hincks was wounded in the breast by a spent ball; Lieutenant Leathes on the hip by a splinter; and although untouched myself, my horse had no less than eight wounds. Our guns and carriages were all together in a confused heap, intermingled with dead and wounded horses, which it had not been possible to disengage from them.” And this was but typical of most of the batteries engaged.
As for the Infantry, words cannot paint too highly their endurance on that long day. One regiment had 400 men killed or wounded, before they were allowed to fire a trigger; and all suffered heavily. Yet there was not a word of distrust as regarded their great commander. They pined with all their hearts for permission to attack, instead of lying where they often were—being shot by scores; but discipline was stronger than desire. Even at the worst times, a word from the Duke, or a report that he was coming, sufficed to produce a silence and a steadiness, as perfect as if on parade in a barrack-square. For those who were present, Waterloo was thus a double victory,—over their enemies, and over themselves. True discipline is a succession of such victories.
With the noble charge of the 52nd, followed by the general advance of the whole line, the French retreat became a rout,—the most disastrous, as has been said, on record: but the record referred to did not include the Titanic battles of the last few years. The Prussians took up the pursuit, and the Allied Army bivouacked on the field of battle.
So much detail connected with the services of the Artillery at Waterloo must of necessity be given in the Appendix, that it has not been thought advisable to anticipate it here. But there are several interesting Regimental matters connected with the battle, for the insertion of which this seems the most suitable place.
In the first place, the names of the officers belonging to the troops and brigades, which were present, may be given.
Total Number of all ranks of the following Troops and Brigades present at Waterloo, according to MS. Returns to Board of Ordnance, dated Paris, 18th September, 1815.
| R.H.A. Major R. Bull’s Troop, now “D” Battery, B Brigade. | |
|---|---|
| No. | |
| 2nd Captain Brevet-Major R. M. Cairnes | 168 |
| Lieutenant Louis | |
| Lieutenant Smith | |
| Lieutenant Townsend | |
| Lieutenant Colonel Webber Smith’s Troop, now “B” Battery, B Brigade. | |
| 2nd Captain E. T. Walcott | 167 |
| Lieutenant Edwards | |
| Lieutenant Forster | |
| Lieutenant Crawford | |
| Lieutenant-Colonel Sir Robert Gardiner’s Troop, now “A” Battery, B Brigade. | |
| 2nd Captain T. Dyneley | 174 |
| Lieutenant Harding | |
| Lieutenant Swabey | |
| Lieutenant Ingilby | |
| Captain Whinyates’s Troop (reduced in 1816). | |
| 2nd Captain Dansey | 194 |
| Lieutenant Strangways | |
| Lieutenant Wright | |
| Lieutenant Ward | |
| Lieutenant Ord | |
| 2nd Captain Mercer’s Troop, now “C” Battery, B Brigade. | |
| 2nd Captain Newland | 164 |
| Lieutenant Leathes | |
| Lieutenant Hincks | |
| Lieutenant Breton | |
| Major Ramsay’s Troop, now “D” Battery, A Brigade. | |
| 2nd Captain A. Macdonald | 173 |
| Lieutenant Brereton | |
| Lieutenant Sandilands | |
| Lieutenant Robe | |
| Lieutenant-Colonel Sir H. D. Ross’s Troop, now “A” Battery, A Brigade. | |
| 2nd Captain and Brevet-Major Parker | 159 |
| Lieutenant Hardinge | |
| Lieutenant Day | |
| Lieutenant Warde | |
| Lieutenant Onslow | |
| R.H.A. Major Beane’s Troop (reduced in 1816). | |
| 2nd Captain Webber | 169 |
| Lieutenant Maunsell | |
| Lieutenant Bruce | |
| Lieutenant Cromie | |
| R.A. Captain C. F. Sandham’s Brigade (reduced in 1819). | |
| 2nd Captain Stopford | 105 |
| Lieutenant Foot | |
| Lieutenant Baynes | |
| Lieutenant Jago | |
This and all the other Field Brigades were armed, each with five 9-pounders and one 5½-inch howitzer.
MS. Returns, dated 30 May, 1815.
| Captain Bolton’s Brigade, now “E” Battery, 8th Brigade. | |
|---|---|
| 2nd Captain Napier | 101 |
| Lieutenant Pringle | |
| Lieutenant Anderson | |
| Lieutenant Spearman | |
| Lieutenant Sharpin | |
| Lieutenant B. Cuppage | |
| Major Lloyd’s Brigade (reduced in April, 1817). | |
| 2nd Captain S. Rudyerd | 97 |
| Lieutenant Phelps | |
| Lieutenant Harvey | |
| Captain Sinclair’s Brigade, now “4” Battery, 3rd Brigade (Captain Gordon being absent). | |
| 2nd Captain F. Macbean | 104 |
| Lieutenant Wilson | |
| Lieutenant Poole | |
| Lieutenant Burnaby | |
| Major Roger’s Brigade, now “7” Battery, 13th Brigade. | |
| Lieutenant R. Manners | 94 |
| (Other officers’ names not given.) | |
These were the only troops and brigades which were engaged. There were others, which were in the vicinity, but not present at the battle; and there were also detachments of other brigades present with small-arm ammunition. Lieutenants E. Trevor, W. Lemoine, J. Bloomfield, and others already named, were present on staff or unattached duty.
Of the officers named above, the following were killed or wounded at the battle of Waterloo:—
Sir George A. Wood to Master-General, 24 June, 1815.
| Major W. N. Ramsay, | R.H.A., | ·· | Killed. |
| Major R. M. Cairnes | ” | ·· | Killed. |
| Major G. Beane | ” | ·· | Killed. |
| Major J. B. Parker | ” | ·· | Severely wounded: leg amputated. |
| Major R. Bull | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Captain Whinyates | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Captain Dansey | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Captain Macdonald | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Captain Webber | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Lieutenant Strangwaysr | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Lieutenant Brereton | ” | ·· | Severely, not dangerously. |
| Lieutenant Robe | ” | ·· | Severely, (since dead). |
| Lieutenant Smith | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Lieutenant Cromie | ” | ·· | Severely: both legs amputated. |
| Lieutenant Forster | ” | ·· | Severely: not dangerously. |
| Lieutenant Crawford | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Lieutenant Day | ” | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Major H. Baynes | R.A. | ·· | Slightly wounded. |
| Captain Bolton | ” | ·· | Killed. |
| Major Lloyd | ” | ·· | Severely wounded (died). |
| Captain Napier | ” | ·· | Severely wounded. |
| Lieutenant Spearman | ” | ·· | Severely wounded. |
| Lieutenant R. Manners | ” | ·· | Severely, (since dead). |
| Lieutenant Harvey | ” | ·· | Severely, right arm amputated. |
| Lieutenant Poole | ” | ·· | Severely, not dangerously. |
Dated 24 June, 1815.
The numerical losses, as shown by Sir George Wood in his official return to the Ordnance, were as follows:—
| Officers. | Sergeants. | Rank and File. | Horses. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Horse Artillery— | ||||
| Killed | 3 | 1 | 31 | 229 |
| Wounded | 14 | 8 | 107 | 59 |
| Missing | 0 | 0 | 7 | 21 |
| Total | 17 | 9 | 145 | 309 |
| Royal Artillery— | ||||
| Killed | 1 | 0 | 19 | 80 |
| Wounded | 7 | 4 | 61 | 34 |
| Missing | 0 | 0 | 2 | 12 |
| Total | 8 | 4 | 82 | 126 |
| King’s German Legion Artillery— | ||||
| Killed | 1 | 1 | 10 | 47 |
| Wounded | 6 | 1 | 47 | 44 |
| Missing | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Total | 7 | 2 | 58 | 94 |
| General Total | 32 | 15 | 285 | 529 |
There were two field brigades, which formed part of the Duke of Wellington’s army, but which were not brought up in time for the battle, although they were of great importance during the subsequent siege operations against the fortresses. Their armament was the same as that of the Vide ‘Hist. R.A.’ vol. i. p. 221. others; and one of them, Captain Brome’s, would appear to have been in position, although not engaged;—possibly detached at Hal. The officers with these, and their numbers, were as follows:-
| Total of all Ranks. | |
|---|---|
| Captain Brome’s Brigade, now 2 Battery, 13th Brigade, R.A. | |
| 2nd Captain J. E. G. Parker | 106 |
| Lieutenant Saunders | |
| Lieutenant Cater | |
| Lieutenant Molesworth | |
| Major G. W. Unett, now 3 Battery, 7th Brigade, R.A. | |
| 2nd Captain Browne | 106 |
| Lieutenant Lawson | |
| Lieutenant Montagu |
These brigades received the boon service granted for the battle of Waterloo under a Horse Guards’ decision, which was promulgated in Paris on the 5th September, 1815, including among Waterloo men all troops, which had on the 18th June been employed either in the village of Waterloo, or had been detached to the right to prevent the advance of the enemy towards Brussels by Hal.
The companies which were present with small-arm ammunition, or which furnished detachments for that service, will be found in the chapters on the various battalions.
The commendations passed on the corps generally for its services at Waterloo will be found in Appendix A, in support of the argument therein contained. But it may be interesting to the friends or descendants of individual officers, who were present, and who specially distinguished themselves, to read extracts from the reports sent to the Ordnance. These Dated Le Cateau, 24 June, 1815. will be given without comment. “I feel,” wrote Sir George Wood, “that I should particularly mention that I wish Lieutenant-Colonel Sir John May may succeed to one of the vacant troops; and I do assure you the conduct of Major Lloyd was conspicuous to the whole army. This officer and Captain Mercer[48] are candidates for the other vacant troop. Captain Mercer was the senior second captain in the field, and behaved nobly. I must also mention that Lieutenant Louis commanded Major Bull’s troop for some time. Lieutenant Sandilands was the only officer left with the command of poor Major Ramsay’s troop, the rest of the officers being wounded. I beg to mention him to your protection, as well as Lieutenants Coles and Wells, whom I have appointed to do duty with the Horse Artillery, and I beg you will use your interest with the Master-General that they may be confirmed.... I shall certainly give in the name of Captain Macdonald for brevet promotion; it was with great difficulty that he could be made quit the field when severely wounded,—as well as Lieutenant Brereton, who remained in the field of battle until Lieutenant-Colonel Macdonald ordered him to the rear, to have his wounds dressed.... Although Lieutenant-Colonel Gold was in command of a Division of Artillery in the field, I beg you will mention to the Master-General that I have received great benefit from his advice and zeal, during the time I have commanded the Artillery in the Pays-Bas.... I beg leave to mention that Lieutenant Bloomfield was both days in the field with me; and should he wish at some future time to be posted to the Horse Brigade, I hope he will not be forgot.” In another despatch to General Macleod, Sir George Wood wrote as follows: “I must call your particular attention to the officers who attended me personally in the field, whose merits I beg to recommend to the consideration of His Lordship the Master-General.” These officers were Lieutenant-Colonel Sir A. Frazer, Lieutenant-Colonel Sir J. Hartmann, Lieutenant-Colonel Sir A. Dickson, Lieutenant-Colonel Sir J. May, Captain Baynes, Brigade Major, Lieutenants Coles, Bloomfield, Bell, and Meëlmann—all of whom were mentioned by name.
To Sir G. A. Wood, 24 June, 1815.
Lieutenant-Colonel Macdonald thus described the services of his Adjutant: “In justice to the conduct of Captain Pakenham, who acted as my Adjutant in the battle of the 18th, I feel it a duty I owe this most promising officer to state to you that he made himself equally conspicuous by his coolness and bravery, and the precision with which he conveyed my orders to the troops of Horse Artillery I had the honour to command on that occasion.” Sir Augustus Frazer spoke in equally favourable terms of his Adjutant: Ibid. 23 June, 1815. “I beg to submit my hope that, in the promotion which may be expected, the Horse Artillery may not lose the services of Lieutenant Bell, who, both here and in the Peninsula, has acted as Adjutant of Horse Artillery, and is an officer of much professional merit, whose judgment, intelligence, and unceasing application to the duties of his office, have rendered him very valuable.”
Major Bull thus described the conduct of his gallant troop, now D Battery, B Brigade, Royal Horse Artillery: Major Bull to Sir A. Frazer, 19 June, 1873. “I consider it a duty I owe equally to the officers, non-commissioned officers, gunners, and drivers, to say that, throughout the day, and in every situation, nothing could exceed their coolness, intrepidity, and strict attention to orders; and as a proof of their zeal in the service, at one period of the evening when we were short of ammunition, and H Troop” (Major Ramsay’s) “on our left rather short of gunners, on an application for assistance, several of my men volunteered joining their guns, until our ammunition came up; and as far as was prudent or necessary, I granted their request. I must also beg leave to say that, from Major Cairnes having unfortunately fallen very early in the action, I received the greatest assistance throughout the day from Lieutenant Louis’s activity; and it is but justice to this officer to add, that, when I was under the necessity of quitting the field for half an hour, in consequence of my being wounded, he commanded the troop during my absence in a manner that did himself great credit, and gave me perfect satisfaction at a very arduous period of the action.”
General Colquhoun Grant, in writing of Captain Walcott, To Sir G. A. Wood, dated 15 July, 1815. said: “I beg to recommend this gallant and meritorious officer to your attention.” He added: “I have great pleasure in embracing this opportunity to mention my entire and full approbation of the conduct of Lieut.-Colonel Webber Smith, and the officers and men of his troop” (now B Battery, B Brigade, Royal Horse Artillery), “during the whole of the period they have been attached to the brigade under my command.”
Lieutenant-Colonel Macdonald,—an enthusiastic Horse Artilleryman—in addition to the letter quoted above, wrote Ibid. dated 16 July, 1815. as follows: “In addition to the names of the various officers belonging to the six troops of Royal Horse Artillery, attached to the Cavalry, whose lot it was to command troops on the memorable day of the 18th June, it has occurred to me to be no less my duty to express to you my admiration of the cool and determined conduct of Captain Walcott, who was some time detached from his troop on that day; and who, in the handsomest manner, after the whole of his ammunition was expended, volunteered to take charge of some of the guns of Major Ramsay’s troop, after it had suffered much by the loss of officers. It is also highly satisfactory to me to report to you the equally gallant conduct of Captain Dansey, of Captain Whinyates’s Rocket Troop, which I also had an opportunity of witnessing; and who was wounded when detached with rockets in the chaussée, which crossed the centre of the position. You are already aware, from your own observation, how much all the officers of these troops distinguished themselves on the occasion, and what a noble example they set to the non-commissioned officers and men by whom it was so gallantly initiated. Words are indeed inadequate to express my sense of the conduct of all, where the reputation, which the Horse Artillery had before obtained, was so nobly sustained, if not even surpassed; and which I must plead as my excuse for extending the limits of this communication beyond my original intention, viz., that of drawing your attention to the merits of Captains Walcott and Dansey.”
In reporting the death of Major Lloyd, from his wounds, Dated Paris, 3 Aug. 1815. Sir George Wood wrote: “I can, without hesitation, affirm that a braver, or more zealous officer, never entered a field of battle; and who did his duty on the 16th and 18th to the satisfaction of every General officer.” A few days later, in enclosing a letter from Lieutenant Brereton, Sir Ibid. 17 Aug. 1815. George said: “I have received from every commanding officer the handsomest testimony of the conduct of Lieutenant Brereton, both in the Peninsula, and at the battle of Waterloo; and I have it from General Byng to say that, on the battle of the 16th (the Horse Artillery not being engaged on that day), he proffered his service to act as aide-de-camp, which service he performed to the great satisfaction of the General.” At a subsequent date, in forwarding an application from Major Percy Drummond, Ibid. 8 Oct. 1815. Sir George Wood said: “I have ever found Major Drummond a most active, zealous, and attentive officer, having been under my command on several occasions, particularly in the battle of Waterloo.” In acknowledging a letter from Ibid. 28 Jan. 1816. Major Rogers, Sir George said: “Your company at all times did you every justice, and proved it under your command at the battle of Waterloo, in which your brigade bore a distinguished feature.” Almost every officer who served in the Artillery at Waterloo, received from his gallant commander some official commendation; and, by this means, many Regimental incidents connected with the battle have been handed down. In writing, for example, about an officer who lived to be a revered General in the Corps, Sir George Wood said: Dated Valenciennes, 29 Feb, 1816. “Lieutenant William Anderson has conducted himself in every situation as a good and zealous officer. On the 18th June,—on many occasions during that day,—he carried my orders, and brought off some disabled guns under a severe fire. Having my horses shot, I was forced to dismount him.”
Sir George Wood to Gen. Macleod, dated 3 July, 1815.
At the battle of Waterloo, the Artillery expended 10,400 rounds of ammunition. The amount fired by one battery, Captain Sandham’s, has already been stated; and it may be mentioned here that Captain Whinyates’s troop fired 309 shot, 236 spherical case, 15 common case, and 52 rockets.
Memoir of Sir E. C. Whinyates, p. 3.
The subsequent operations of the English army during the year, in which this history comes, for the present, to an end, will merely be glanced at. The main body of the army marched at once towards Paris; and the damage suffered by the Artillery during the battle was so quickly repaired, that Sir George Wood was able to take every gun with him that had been on the field, with four 18-pounders in addition; Sir George Wood to D.-A.-Gen., dated 3 July, 1815. making a total of 123 pieces of ordnance, and over 20,000 rounds of ammunition, with which the army marched on Paris. The collapse of any opposition, and the ultimate occupation of that city by the Allies, are facts well known to the reader. There were, however, some Artillery operations against the French fortresses, in which some brigades of Artillery, under Sir Alexander Dickson, were engaged. Maubeuge surrendered on the 12th July, and was taken possession of on the 14th, after three days’ open trenches, and firing. Landrecy surrendered on the 21st, and was taken possession of on the 23rd July, after two day’s open trenches, Sir A. Dickson, to D.-A.-G., dated 12 Aug. 1815. and about two hours’ firing. Marienbourg surrendered on the 28th, and was taken possession of on the 30th July, after one day’s open trenches and heavy bombardment. Philippeville was taken possession of on the 10th August, having surrendered on the 8th, after one day’s open trenches and heavy bombardment. Sir Alexander Dickson spoke in the highest terms of the officers and men under his command; he attributed to their energy the fact that at every place he was able to collect, previous to commencing operations, sufficient ordnance and ammunition to have reduced it, as he said, by main force. At Maubeuge, he had 60 guns—30 of which were 24-pounders,—20,000 round shot, and 26,000 shells. At Landrecy he had 60 guns, 24,000 round shot, and 22,000 shells. At Marienbourg, he had 15 mortars, with 3000 shells; and 6 24-pounders arrived, just as the place surrendered. At Philippeville, he had 66 pieces of ordnance, with 17,000 round shot, and 23,000 shells. During these operations, the Artillery was attached to a corps of the Prussian army, by which the sieges of the fortresses were conducted. The terms on which the duties were performed Sir A. Dickson to D.-A.-G., dated 12 Aug. 1815.were somewhat peculiar. “Our line of duty,” wrote Sir A. Dickson, “is to move the battering-train, keep it in order, fix the shells, fill the cartridges, and, in short, do every individual thing except fighting the guns: which my instructions neither authorize me to do, nor would it be pleasant to do, if they did; for we should not get the credit we ought, when working in competition with the Prussian Artillery: whereas, as the duty is conducted now, every fair and just credit is allowed for our exertions, and the service goes on with the utmost cordiality. Prince Augustus of Prussia is chief of the Artillery of that kingdom, and he takes into his own hand very much the application of the artillery; which is very pleasant for me, as I receive all the arrangements and instructions, direct from his Royal Highness. An application is given in every morning at the park during a siege, expressing the ordnance and ammunition required for the next day; and in the evening the Prussian Artillery come to receive their demands. I have, however, a few officers and men of the Royal Artillery in the trenches, to afford any assistance when required; and also to watch the practice, report about the fuzes, &c.”
Ibid. dated 22 Aug. 1815.
After the fall of Philippeville, Major Carmichael’s company, with the advanced division of the battering-train, consisting of thirty-three mortars and howitzers, reached a point near Rocroy, on the 15th August:—followed by Major Michell’s and Major Wall’s companies with ten 24-pounders, and a large supply of ammunition. The Prussians opened the trenches on the night of the 15th, and batteries were prepared for twenty-one mortars and howitzers. With such effect were these opened on the morning of the 16th, that before 9 A.M. Rocroy capitulated. After this event, Prince Augustus expressed himself highly satisfied with the exertions of the British Artillery attached to the battering-train; and orders reached Sir Alexander Dickson from the Duke of Wellington to bring the second battering-train, which was at Antwerp, to Brussels, and to land it forthwith. The next operation of any importance was against the town of Givet, against which no fewer than one hundred guns were collected. Before the bombardment commenced, however, the Governor consented to give up the place, and retire into Charlemont; which he did on the 11th September.
A force under Sir Charles Colville had been sent against Cambray, immediately after Waterloo, and the place—after a short siege—was carried on the 25th June. Of the conduct To the Duke of Wellington, 26 June, 1815. of the Artillery on this occasion, Sir Charles wrote: “The three brigades of Artillery under Lieutenant-Colonel Webber Smith, and Majors Unett and Brome, under the direction of Lieutenant-Colonel Hawker, made particularly Sir George Wood to D.-A.-G., Paris, 4 Sept. 1815. good practice.” The services of Major Unett’s brigade (now 3 Battery, 7th Brigade) received special mention in a report from Sir Charles Colville to Sir George Wood; and the following extract from a letter written by its gallant commander may interest the officers and men now serving in Major Unett to Sir G. Wood, dated 3 Aug. 1815. the battery. “My brigade, being in reserve, had not an opportunity of witnessing the late glorious battle of Waterloo, but it afterwards proceeded with the 4th Division of the army for the purpose of reducing the fortress of Cambray; and, in justice to my officers, I must be permitted to say that my three subalterns, never having been under fire before, deserve much praise for their cool and steady behaviour at their guns (within four hundred yards of the curtain of the citadel, in an open field), and which was clearly evinced by the uncommon good practice made, which so completely silenced the enemy as to cause (by driving them from their guns and ramparts) a most trifling loss to our Infantry when they stormed the place.” The French king entered Cambray on the day after it was taken: and on the same day, Peronne was taken by General Maitland and the Guards.
Arrangements for concluding hostilities, and entering upon a treaty, were soon made in Paris. One of the conditions inflicted on the French people was that an army of occupation should be left in France for five—afterwards reduced to three—years; and considerable difficulty was found in apportioning the various arms in the English contingent of that army.
The Duke of Wellington decided on reducing the Artillery share to a point far below what Sir George Wood thought desirable; and the latter urged his views very strongly, but, as he said, “What can a Lieut.-Colonel do against a Field-Marshal?”[49] However, his importunity succeeded in obtaining an addition of two companies to the Artillery force which was at first intended to remain in France.
MS. Return to B. of Ordnance, dated Paris, 10 Dec. 1815.
The following was the number ultimately decided upon:—
1 Colonel for duty as the Regimental Staff of the Royal Artillery in the Army of Occupation. 1 Assistant Adjutant-Gen. 1 Brigade Major Three troops of Royal Horse Artillery to be attached to the Cavalry, and to amount to 542 of all ranks, with 516 horses.
Seven brigades of Foot Artillery, having a company of Artillery to each; six of which were to be attached to the three divisions of the army, and one to be in reserve. The total of all ranks, with these brigades, amounted to 790; and there were in addition 599 officers and men of the Royal Artillery Drivers, and 770 horses.
For duty with the small-arm ammunition brigades for the three divisions of the army, there were three officers of Royal Artillery; 150 non-commissioned officers and men of the Royal Artillery Drivers; and 210 horses.
There was also a company of Royal Artillery in reserve, numbering 111 of all ranks.
One Lieut.-Colonel and one Major were attached to the Royal Horse Artillery.
Two Lieut.-Colonels and one Major were attached to the Royal Artillery.
And one Lieut.-Colonel was attached to the Royal Artillery Drivers.
| 1 Colonel | for duty as the Regimental Staff of the RoyalArtillery in the Army of Occupation. |
| 1 Assistant Adjutant-Gen. | |
| 1 Brigade Major |
The following were the five troops of Horse Artillery selected to return to England, when the above establishment was decided upon:—
MS. Return to B. of Ord. dated Paris, 10 Dec. 1815.
| Strength. | Horses. | R. A. Drivers attached. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lieut.-Colonel Sir R. Gardiner’s troop | 179 | of all ranks. | 198 | 22 |
| Lieut.-Colonel Webber Smith’s troop | 176 | ” | 197 | 20 |
| Lieut.-Colonel Sir H. D. Ross’s troop | 189 | ” | 219 | 30 |
| Major Whinyates’s troop | 223 | ” | 219 | nil. |
| Captain Mercer’s (late Beane’s) troop | 176 | ” | 196 | 26 |
| Detachment R. H. A. | 59 | ” | 156 | 83 |
Orders for the shipment of the battering-train also arrived in the end of 1815, with a view to its return to England; and, as Sir Alexander Dickson’s active duties on the continent then ceased, it seems but justice to the memory of one whose name has occupied so prominent a place in these pages, to quote a passage from a letter written by Sir George Wood, proving that his exceptional Peninsular honours had To D.-A.-G., R.A., dated Cambray, 2 April, 1816. not unfitted him for serving, when required, in a subordinate position:—“You may expect Sir A. Dickson in the course of the next week at Woolwich. I have found him the same good officer and man, as you well know him.”
The reductions, which followed the battle of Waterloo have been frequently alluded to in these volumes. They would furnish but a gloomy topic for the historian, for the pruning-knife was used without regard to sentiment, and some of the best companies in the regiment were the victims.
It is more pleasant to close this story in 1815, when the Corps was at the greatest strength attained since its birth,—a hundred years before. Suffice it to say that from 114 Kane’s List. troops and companies in that year, it fell to 79 before 1819, and even these were mere ghosts or skeletons of their former selves. For nearly thirty years, after 1819, the history of the Regiment was almost a blank page, and hopelessness and depression weighed heavily on its members.
But 1815 is the year in which this narrative ends; nor is it meant to close it with any gloomy foreshadowing of the years of inaction and despondency, which rolled on with dismal monotony, until the Regimental firmament was lit by the lurid fires of the Crimean struggle. In 1815 the military reputation of England was at a maximum. She possessed an army which had graduated with honours in the sternest school, and a General to whose words the Sovereigns of Europe listened with deference. Determination, single-mindedness, and an exalted sense of duty were the qualities which had animated the Duke of Wellington through his whole career. Their reward was found in his successes; and his successes were crowned in Paris. Imperfections exist in the most able, and even in the most conscientious; and England’s greatest General was certainly no exception to this rule. But, if we allow for the irritation caused by frequent and injudicious interference,—and for occasional hastiness, which led him to speak without always testing the accuracy of his information,—we must admit the Duke of Wellington to have been the most perfect type of an English soldier ever presented in the pages of our history. When, however, the Artilleryman seeks for something that is genial and lovable in the soldiers of that victorious age,—he turns from the cold and undemonstrative Chief, and dwells fondly on the men who had by their exertions raised Artillery, as a science, to an unprecedented point, and had elevated with it the Corps Hime. they loved. The researches of a recent writer have brought to light words spoken by a chivalrous enemy, which should be emblazoned in the records of every battery, and impressed General Foy. on the mind of every Artilleryman:—“Les canonniers Anglais se distinguent entre les autres soldats par le bon esprit qui les anime. En bataille leur activité est judicieuse, leur coup d’œil parfait, et leur bravoure stoïque.” Of the latter three qualities, two may be ensured by diligence in peace, and the third is tested by the difficulties and dangers of war: but the history of the great and the good in the Corps must indeed have been feebly written, if it do not strengthen among its living members that which exists now, as of old, “le bon esprit qui les anime.”
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX A.
The Duke of Wellington, and the Artillery at Waterloo.
Jones’s Sieges, vol. i., p. 222.
In the first volume of Sir J. T. Jones’s ‘Sieges in Spain,’ edited by Lieutenant-Colonel H. D. Jones, the following passage occurs: “It becomes the duty of the Editor to remove the very injurious and unmerited censure cast upon the officers of Engineers who were employed at the Siege of Badajoz, and which is contained in a letter from the Earl of Wellington to Major-General G. Murray, a copy of which is published in the collection of the Despatches of the Duke of Wellington.”
The Editor then proceeds to prove, most clearly and successfully, that the hasty language used with reference to the Engineers was not only injurious, but also unmerited.
The same great General is also convicted by his admirer, Napier, of hasty inconsistency in his private correspondence. It was of the very same troops, and referring to precisely the same time, that the Duke of Wellington wrote in one Napier’s ‘Peninsular War,’ vol. vi., p. 166. letter: “The soldiers are detestable for everything but fighting; and the officers are as culpable as the men:” and in another, “that he thought he could go anywhere, and do anything with the army that fought on the Pyrenees.”
Well might Napier say that the vehemence of the censure in the former of the quotations is inconsistent with the latter, and now celebrated, observation.
It now becomes the painful, and yet necessary, task of the chronicler of the services of the Royal Artillery, as of the member of the sister corps already quoted, “to remove a very injurious and unmerited censure” cast upon the Regiment, in a private letter, written by the Duke of Wellington, with reference to its conduct at the battle of Waterloo. Of this letter’s existence the world was ignorant until the year 1872, when it made its appearance in a volume of ‘Supplementary Letters and Despatches of the Duke of Wellington,’ published by his son. The sensation which it was certain ‘Athenæum.’ to produce was foretold by one of the reviews, and was anticipated by the noble Editor. As, however, his object was to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, the present Duke did not feel justified in withholding from publication any letter, which was found among his father’s papers, merely because it might wound the feelings of its readers, or give a new interpretation of historical events. And although the indiscriminate publication of a man’s private correspondence is a doubtful tribute to his memory, and a severe test of his reputation, it is, on the whole, fortunate for the Royal Artillery that this letter made its appearance, while officers were yet alive, who had taken a part in the battle referred to in its pages, and clearly remembered its details.
The original letter was written by the Duke of Wellington to Lord Mulgrave, then Master-General of the Ordnance, on the 21st December, 1815. The published letter was from a copy, or draft, of the original, which was found among the Duke’s papers. The hope that perhaps there may have been modifications in the original, which did not exist in the draft or copy, disappears before the fact that Lord Mulgrave’s answer was also found among the Duke’s papers, expressing his amazement at the letter he had just received. The harsh statements in the published draft, or copy, were doubtless, therefore, left in the original when forwarded. The circumstances under which the letter were written were as follows. The field officers of the Royal Artillery, who had been present at Waterloo, applied to the Master-General ‘Hist. R. A.,’ vol. ii. p. 356. of the Ordnance for the same pensions for service as had been given after Vittoria. The indignation with which the Duke of Wellington had heard of the Vittoria pensions was well known in the Regiment: nor can one avoid sympathising with him. Discipline must suffer if the power of rewarding, or recommending for reward, be independent of the commander of the forces as a channel. The special interference of the Ordnance on behalf of the Corps, which was their protégé, was not merely a breach of discipline, to which a man like the Duke of Wellington was not likely tamely to submit, but must have had an irritating effect on the rest of the army. When, therefore, the field officers of Artillery present at Waterloo resolved to apply for the same reward as had been given after Vittoria, they had the alternative before them of making their request through the Duke, basing it upon a precedent which was detestable in his eyes, or of availing themselves of the dual government, under which they served, by making a direct application to the Ordnance. Of these alternatives, the former would have been the more soldierlike, but was not likely to succeed: the latter, therefore, was unfortunately adopted.
The application was not couched in a very official form, nor was it officially pressed by Sir George Wood. The only reference to it which can be traced in that officer’s correspondence is in a letter announcing Major Lloyd’s death, Dated Paris, 3 Aug, 1815. in which he writes:—“Should Lord Mulgrave, in his goodness, be inclined to grant pensions to field officers and captains commanding brigades, similar to the battle of Vittoria, I hope and trust that the late Major Lloyd’s family may receive the benefit his service deserved.” The precedent of Vittoria was not quite a parallel case to that of Waterloo: in the former every brigade with the army had been in action; while, in the latter, some had been detached. It seems to have been on this distinction, mainly, that Lord Mulgrave based his refusal to grant the reward. To justify himself, he referred the matter to the Duke of Wellington, who approved of the refusal, as might have been expected, but did so in terms which reveal an inaccuracy, and a hastiness, unparalleled in his Grace’s correspondence. He wrote as follows:—