The Sea: Its Stirring Story of Adventure, Peril, & Heroism (Vol. 1-4). Frederick Whymper
time in the greatest jeopardy through the disaffection of the men, but that our national existence, almost—and most certainly our existence as a first-class power—was alarmingly threatened, the cause being nothing more nor less than a very general spirit of mutiny. To do the sailors justice, they sought at first to obtain fair play by all legitimate means in their power. It must be noted, also, that a large number of our best officers knew that there was very general discontent. Furthermore, it was well known on shore that numerous secret societies opposed to monarchy, and incited by the example of the French Revolution, had been established. Here, again, the Government had made a fatal mistake. Members of these societies had been convicted in numbers, and sent to sea as a punishment. These men almost naturally became ringleaders and partakers in the mutiny, which would, however, have occurred sooner or later, under any circumstances. In the case of the mutiny at Spithead, about to be recounted, the sailors exhibited an organisation and an amount of information which might have been expected from “sea-lawyers” rather than ordinary Jack Tars; while in the more serious rebellion of the Nore, the co-operation of other agents was established beyond doubt.
The first step taken by the men was perfectly legitimate, and had it been met in a proper spirit by the authorities, this history need never have been penned. At the end of February, 1797, the crews of four line-of-battle ships at Spithead addressed separate petitions to Lord Howe, Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet, asking his kind interposition with the Admiralty, to obtain from them a relief of their grievances, so that they might at length be put on a similar footing to the army and militia, in respect both of their pay and of the provision they might be enabled to make for their wives and families. Lord Howe, being then in bad health, communicated the subject of their petitions to Lord Bridport and Sir Peter Parker, the port admiral, who, with a want of foresight and disregard of their country’s interest which cannot be excused, returned answer that “the petitions were the work of some evil-disposed person or persons,” and took no trouble to investigate the allegations contained in them. Lord Howe, therefore, did nothing; and the seamen, finding their applications for redress not only disregarded, but treated with contempt, determined to compel the authorities to give them that relief which they had before submissively asked.
In about six weeks they organised their plans with such secrecy that it was not till everything was arranged on a working basis that the first admiral, Lord Bridport, gained any knowledge of the conspiracy going on around him. He communicated his suspicions to the Lords of the Admiralty; and they, thinking a little active service would prove the best cure for what they simply regarded as a momentary agitation, sent down orders for the Channel Fleet to put to sea. The orders arrived at Portsmouth on April 15th, and in obedience to them Lord Bridport signalled to the fleet to make the necessary preparations. As might almost have been expected, it was the signal, likewise, for the outbreak of the mutiny. Not a sailor bestirred himself; not a rope was bent; but, as if by common consent, the crews of every vessel in the squadron manned the yards and rigging, and gave three cheers. They then proceeded to take the command of each ship from the officers, and appointed delegates from each vessel to conduct negotiations with the authorities of the Admiralty. No violence nor force was used. The first-lieutenant of the London, ordered by Admiral Colpoys, one of the best-hated officers of the service, shot one of the mutineers, but his death was not avenged. They again forwarded their petition to the Admiralty, and its closing sentences showed their temperance, and argued strongly in favour of their cause. They desired “to convince the nation at large that they knew where to cease to ask, as well as where to begin; and that they asked nothing but what was moderate, and might be granted without detriment to the nation or injury to the service.” The Admiralty authorities, seeing that with the great power in their hands they had acted peaceably, only abstaining from work, yielded all the concessions asked; and a full pardon was granted in the king’s name to the fleet in general, and to the ringleaders in particular. In a word, the mutiny ended for the time being.
THE MUTINY AT PORTSMOUTH.
It was resumed on May 7th. As Parliament had delayed in passing the appropriations for the increase of pay and pensions, the crews rose en masse and disarmed all their officers, although still abstaining from actual violence. Lord Howe, always a popular officer with the men, and their especial idol after his great victory of June 1st, 1794, was sent down by the Cabinet with full power to ratify all the concessions which had been made, and to do his best to convince the men that the Government had no desire of evading them. He completely mollified the men, and even succeeded in exacting an expression of regret and contrition for their outbreak. He assured them that their every grievance should be considered, and a free pardon, as before, given to all concerned. The men again returned to duty. The fleet at Plymouth, which had followed that of Portsmouth into the mutiny, did the same; and thus, in a month from the first outbreak, as far as these two great fleets were concerned, all disaffection, dissatisfaction, and discontent had passed away, through the tact and judicious behaviour of Lord Howe. There can be no doubt that the tyranny of many of the officers had a vast deal to do with the outbreak. In the list of officers whom the men considered obnoxious, and that Lord Howe agreed should be removed, there were over one hundred in one fleet of sixteen ships.
Strange to say, the very same week in which the men of the Portsmouth fleet returned to their duty, acknowledging all their grievances to be removed, the fleet at the Nore arose in a violent state of mutiny, displaying very different attributes to those shown by the former. Forty thousand men, who had fought many a battle for king and country, and in steadfast reliance upon whose bravery the people rested every night in tranquillity, confident in their patriotism and loyalty, became irritated by ungrateful neglect on the one part, and by seditious advisers on the other, and turned the guns which they had so often fired in defence of the English flag against their own countrymen and their own homes.
Richard Parker, the chief ringleader at the Nore, was a thoroughly bad man in every respect, and one utterly unworthy the title of a British sailor, of which, indeed, he had been more than once formally deprived. He was the son of an Exeter tradesman in a fair way of business, had received a good education, and was possessed of decided abilities. He was a remarkably bold and resolute man, or he would never have acquired the hold he had for a time over so many brave sailors. He was unmistakably
“The leader of the band he had undone,
Who, born for better things, had madly set
His life upon a cast,”
and until overtaken by justice, he ruled with absolute sway.
Parker had, eleven years previously, entered the navy as a midshipman on board the Culloden, from which vessel he had been discharged for gross misconduct. A little later, he obtained, however, a similar appointment on the Leander frigate, and was again dismissed. We next find him passing through several ships in rotation, from which he was invariably dismissed, no captain allowing him to remain when his true character disclosed itself. It did not usually take long. At length he became mate of the Resistance, on which vessel, shortly after joining, he was brought to a court-martial and “broke”—i.e., his commission taken away—and declared incapable of serving again as an officer. After serving a short time as a common sailor on board the Hebe, he was either invalided or discharged, for we find him residing in Scotland; and as he could no more keep out of trouble ashore than he could afloat, he was soon in Edinburgh gaol for debt. But men were wanted for the navy, and he was eventually sent up to the fleet as one of the quota of men required from Perth district. He received the parochial bounty of £30 allowed to each man. He joined the Sandwich, the flag-ship of Admiral Buckner, Commander-in-Chief at the Nore. The best authorities believe him to have been employed as an emissary of the revolutionists, as, although he had only just been discharged from gaol, he had abundance of money. His good address and general abilities, combined with the liberality and conviviality he displayed, speedily obtained him an influence among his messmates, which he used to the worst purpose. He had scarcely joined the fleet when, aided by disaffected parties ashore, he began his machinations, and speedily seduced the majority of the seamen from their duty. In some respects the men followed the example of those at Portsmouth, selecting delegates and forwarding petitions, but in other respects their conduct was disgracefully different. When mastery of the officers