librsnet@mail.ru
The Nineteenth and Their Times. J. Biddulph
prevent him from looking after the welfare of the regiment. There had been many casualties among the horses,[14] as well as among the men; and Lord Macartney is said to have conceived the idea of gradually allowing the 23rd Light Dragoons to disappear from want of horses and men, and of raising a corps of European cavalry in their place. As the men died, the extra horses were taken from the regiment, and Lt. Colonel Floyd was forbidden to entertain recruits, of whom a certain number were procurable, probably from Infantry regiments on the spot. Sir John thereupon addressed the Bengal Government, by whom a reference was made to Madras recommending the deficiencies to be made good. The Madras Government thought the regiment was very well as it was, and demurred to corresponding with Sir John while he was under arrest. The Bengal Govt. pointed out that that need not prevent them from corresponding with the next officer in the regiment. They dwelt on the importance of maintaining the regiment in an efficient state, and expressed their sense of the value of the services rendered by the Regiment in dealing with the Mutiny of the Native Cavalry at Arnee, and their “desire of giving the Company’s service the full benefit of the good discipline of H.M.’s 23rd Light Dragoons.” The Madras Government replied that they would be glad if the Bengal Govt. would take over the whole of the charges of the regiment. For their part, they thought it useless to recruit for the regiment, when there were already more men than horses, and it would be better to transfer the superfluous men to the Infantry, as horses were expensive, and a diminution in their number was a useful economy. Warren Hastings brushed all such cobwebs aside, and sent 147 horses from Hyderabad to remount the regiment. In spite of their protests, the Madras Government entered into a correspondence with Sir John which was characterized on both sides by much bitterness. A detachment of the regiment was at this time at Ellore in the Masulipatum district.
There seems to have been some expectation at this time that the regiment would be recalled to England, probably on account of Lord Macartney’s recommendations to the Court of Directors. Anyhow, a Madras letter, dated 26th May 1785, published in the Calcutta Public Advertiser, says: “The 23rd Regiment is to remain in India. The appointments and recommendations of Sir John Burgoyne, are approved of.” In the middle of July, a detachment of the regiment was sent to Arcot, but was almost immediately recalled to San Thomé.
Meanwhile, Sir John Burgoyne’s troubles were coming to an end. On the news of the quarrels, resulting in Burgoyne’s arrest, reaching England, much interest was excited in the highest quarters. The matter was twice discussed in the House of Commons, on the 19th July and 9th August, and it was generally recognised that the trouble had primarily arisen from a faulty system. Burgoyne was held to have been correct in his behaviour, and received reassuring letters, written by the King’s commands, pending the official settlement of the question. It was determined to appoint at once a new Commander in Chief of Madras, besides filling the vacancy caused by the death of Sir Eyre Coote, and to remove the chief actors in the quarrel on both sides. Burgoyne continued under arrest till the nearly simultaneous arrival in Madras, at the beginning of June, of Lieut. General Robert Sloper as Commander in Chief in India, and Lieut. General Sir John Dalling as Commander in Chief in Madras. General Sloper brought with him instructions to convene a Court Martial for Burgoyne’s trial, and for Burgoyne’s return to England after the trial, whatever its result might be. Lord Macartney, at the same time, received orders for the surrender of the assignment to the Nawab of Arcot, and private intelligence of the appointment of his successor. He had been severely wounded, a few months before, in a duel with one of the Council, due to his own overbearing temper, and his health was bad. Believing that he was about to be recalled, he resigned his post, and sailed for Calcutta to confer with the Bengal Government before sailing for Europe. While in Calcutta, he received news of his appointment to succeed Warren Hastings; but his health would not permit him to stop in India, and he sailed for England.[15]
General Sloper appointed a Court Martial on Burgoyne, with Sir John Dalling as President. The Madras Council at once claimed the right to appoint the Prosecutor, which being disallowed, they wrote complaints in their usual style to the Court of Directors. Another grievance with the Council was, that they were not given a copy of the Proceedings. Their desire apparently was to prosecute the quarrel through Lord Macartney in England. The wish of the Government in England, and of the Court of Directors, was to bury the unseemly quarrel as speedily as possible, and the Proceedings were withheld. A year and a half later, the Madras Government were still writing to the Governor General for a copy. The exact charges, of which there were nineteen, cannot now be ascertained, but they partially related to Sir John Burgoyne’s behaviour in September 1783, more than three months before the date of his arrest, and charged him with causing and exciting mutiny and sedition, and refusing to take command of the King’s troops. On the 11th July, after sitting for nineteen days, the Court came to the following resolutions—
1st.
That Major General Sir John Burgoyne did not refuse to take upon him the command of the King’s troops after Major General Stuart was put under an arrest; but that he declined superseding that Major General, so long as he viewed him especially appointed by the King, and he remained in the capacity of acting as such.
2nd.
That the line of conduct pursued by Major General Sir John Burgoyne on the 19th September and quitting camp the eve of that day, was productive of the happiest consequences.
3rd.
That in no instance whatsoever did Major General Sir John Burgoyne disobey any orders immediately proceeding from the Government.
4th.
That the equivocal situation of Lieut. General Lang, from his standing in both services,[16] and this Government having at present no charter rights to confer such high ranks, well warranted his Majesty’s general officers in witholding from him their obedience.
5th.
That the orders sent to Lieut. Colonel Sterling by Major General Sir John Burgoyne, seem to be solely for promoting good discipline in his Majesty’s troops, and to respect only their internal economy, which, as the King’s Commander in Chief, he had not only a right to give, but enforce also.
6th.
That in the instance for which Major General Sir John Burgoyne was originally put in arrest, it appears the government acted from half information, not having before them the postscript to the General Orders of Major General Sir John Burgoyne.
7th.
That the letters before the Court from Major General Sir John Burgoyne to Lord Macartney or the Presidency, so far from being mutinous or seditious, are not even disrespectful. The facts which they assert are strong; but in the manner and expression they are as decent and proper as the circumstances which gave them birth could reasonably admit.
Sentence.
The Court having thus maturely considered of the evidence and records in support of the prosecution, and likewise the defence and those in support of it, is of opinion that the Prisoner Major General Sir John Burgoyne Bart. is not guilty of the charges alledged against him; and doth therefore most fully and honorably acquit him of all and every part of the same.[17]
(Signed)
John Dalling,
Lieut. General & President.
Immediately on the close of the proceedings, the Council addressed Burgoyne in peremptory and discourteous terms, desiring him to leave the country; and there appeared every chance of a fresh quarrel arising, when some influence (probably Sir John Dalling’s) intervened, and thenceforward there was peace. Burgoyne’s claims for arrears of pay and allowances, for himself as Commander in Chief, his Aide-de-camp, and his secretary, for the period he had been under arrest, were admitted; his passage money was advanced to him, and he was preparing to sail, when death overtook him on the 23rd of September at the age of forty-six. A tablet to his memory was placed in St. Mary’s Church in the Fort, by the officers of the King’s troops. Lang was withdrawn from the service by the Court of Directors who granted him a special pension of one thousand a year. Stuart, a few years later, was given the Colonelcy of H.M.’s 31st. In consequence of these disputes, the offices of Governor