That of the 1st Battalion appears to have been written by, or under the eye of, Sir Amos Norcott, who then commanded it, and by whom the transcript transmitted to the Horse Guards is signed. For it is very full and explicit in relating the actions in which he was personally engaged (as, for instance, the account of the engagement at Buenos Ayres, which bears internal evidence of having been drawn up by an eye-witness) but is rather slight and meagre in the narrative of many Peninsular and other victories.
The Record of the 2nd Battalion, transmitted to the Horse Guards, and dated March 10, 1831, is a model of what such a document should be. It has been compiled with great accuracy; and the movements and engagements of the Battalion, the lists of killed and wounded, and the distinctions won by its officers and men, are recorded under separate heads and with great minuteness.
These Records have been continued to the present time, for the most part with great accuracy and precision.
The Records of the 3rd and 4th Battalions have also been placed in my hands. The latter, containing, of course, only the movements of the Battalion, calls for no comment; that of the 3rd Battalion has been, in the earlier parts, kept irregularly, probably in consequence of the Battalion being broken up and constantly in the field; and no one perusing it could form an idea of, or trace accurately the distinguished service of that Battalion during the Indian Mutiny.
Nor is it to Riflemen alone that I am indebted for assistance. I have to thank Major-General Sir John Adye for permission to use the plan of Cawnpore, published in his account of those eventful days; Major-General Payn for an interesting letter on the same subject; the author of the articles on Ashantee in ‘Colburn’s United Service Magazine’ for his liberal and unsolicited authority to use them as materials for my narrative; and especially Lieutenant-Colonel Home, R.E. for his kindness in giving me tracings of the plans of the operations at New Orleans deposited in the Quarter-Master General’s Office, and for permission to have copies made of the plans prepared in the topographical department of that office for the Record of the 52nd.
I have expressed in another place the assistance I have derived from the accurately kept journal of the late Major George Simmons, and from his separate memoir on Waterloo, which were placed in my hands by his widow.
I have not attempted to trace the strategical or tactical movements of the armies of which the Battalions have formed part, for two reasons: my own inability to record what has been so well described by abler pens; and also because any attempt to have done so would have swelled this book to an extent altogether disproportionate to its object.
For it must be borne in mind that I profess to be the historian, not of wars, but of this particular Corps only, and of that part it alone bore in them.
So, in like manner, I have not recorded the deeds of other regiments which may have acted with the Riflemen, save in a very few instances where it was impossible to separate the narrative of their movements from that of the movements of regiments which fought beside, or supported them. In the case of their old and most frequent companions in arms, the 43rd and 52nd, it was unnecessary that I should record their actions, since the histories of both these distinguished Corps have been fully and well written.[10] And if others who have fought, and fought well, beside the Riflemen are here unnoticed, and as yet without a special history, they must believe that their gallant deeds, albeit unrecorded here, live in the recollection and the praise of many Riflemen.