Volume 2

The royal navy : a history from the earliest times to the present / by Wm. Laird Clowes. Assisted by Sir Clements Markham, Captain A.T. Mahan, U.S.N., H.W. Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, etc.

  • Clowes, W. Laird (William Laird), Sir, 1856-1905.
Date:
1897-1903
    moral qualifications. Many, again, had risen from the forecastle, and possibly brought with them reminiscences of the habits existing in the Caroline Navy; others had been privateer captains, an occupation which did not tend to make their moral sense more delicate. Professional honour was not yet a living force, and in some orders issued by Monck to the captains of a detached squadron, the threat of loss of wages as a punishment for disobedience came after, and was obviously intended as a more impressive deterrent than, tire disgrace of being cashiered.” The chief offences were embezzlement, theft, drunkenness, and cruelty. Drunkenness was shamefully common throughout the service. The rule of the ex- military officers seems to have been instrumental in gradually ameliorating the tone of the Navy, and in creating a feeling of professional pride which, though only incipient in the seventeenth, grew rapidly in the eighteenth century, and produced its finest results early in the nineteenth. But there were other reasons for the improvement of the spirit of the service. The Navy was becoming a life’s career instead of a mere episodal avocation, and the status both of men and of officers was being rapidly bettered. During the Civil War, the Parliament paid its seamen 19s. a month. While Prince Rupert was at sea, the men in the squadrons sent against him were paid 25s. From January 1st, 1653, the regular wages were: for able seamen, 24s.; for ordinary seamen, 19s.; for gromets, 14s. 3d. ; and for boys, 9s. 6d. It was ordered that every man’s rating or ability should be marked upon his wages’ ticket at his paying off, and thus he obtained a kind of certificate of efficiency, which, if satisfactory, was doubtless of great value to him. For the further encouragement of the men it was directed, on January 29th, 1653, that a certain proportion1 of them were to be rated midshipmen, with pay varying from FI 10s. to £2 5s. a month, according to the ship in which they served ; and it was stipulated that from December 14th, 1655, no one was to be so rated unless able in case of need to undertake officer’s duties. This opened up a systematic way of promotion from the forecastle to the quarterdeck. There had been midshipmen during the time of Charles I., but it does not appear that any special standard of competency had been exacted from them, or that the rating was regarded as one likely to lead to rank and professional honour. 1 I.e., in first-rates, 20; in second-rates, 16; in third-rates, 12; in fourth-rates, 8 ; in fifth-rates, 6 ; and in sixth-rates, 4.—1 Admin, of Roy. Navy,’ 314.
    Mr. Oppenheim notes that the earliest mention of midshipmen known to him occurs in the letter of a Mr. Cook, dated February 7th, 1643, in which the writer declares that he will not undervalue himself by allowing his son to accept a midshipman’s place. But from 1655 the rating became one of the recognised introductions to officer’s rank. It must not be supposed that the Commonwealth always paid its seamen regularly. The rule lay rather in the other direction, and at the Bestoration, wages to the amount of above T300,000 were owing, and some ships’ companies had received nothing for four years. Yet the Commonwealth did make serious efforts to treat its men better than James and Charles had treated theirs. There was, for example, no deliberate neglect of the sick and wounded. During the Dutch War the London hospitals were ordered to accommodate some, and various coast towns to provide for others. Ships, too, were regularly allowed “medical comforts” to the value of £5 per one hundred men per six months, and men invalided to the shore were retained in pay until their recovery or their death. It would seem, indeed, that, bearing in mind the then condition of the surgical, medical, and sanitary sciences, the sick and wounded fared remarkably well, and were in many respects better off than the able-bodied. For the better care of them, a board of four Com- missioners of Sick and Wounded was established on September 29th, 1653, with offices in Little Britain. These Commissioners under- took the surgical and medical direction of the Navy, and were invested with power to grant gratuities up to T10, and pensions up to £6 13s. 4d. Incidentally, they had charge of prisoners of war. The Chatham Chest, on the other hand, was mismanaged and in debt. Pensions were paid from it to the widows of officers, but not to those of men, and many men’s pensions were in arrears. An inquiry, instituted after the Bestoration, into the conduct of the Chest, revealed the fact that extravagance and carelessness, if not actual corruption, hindered the efficiency of this admirable benevo- lent fund under the Commonwealth. The pay of officers was raised in 1649, and again in 1653, from which period it stood as follows (see next page). Pensions to the widows of officers seem to have been always small, but they were in some instances augmented by gifts or gratuities of considerable value. Thus, for instance, in 1653, seven captains’ widows received gifts of from <£400 to £1000. H 2
    No text description is available for this image
    sentenced to receive ten lashes alongside each flagship, a punishment which Mr. Oppenheim detects as the origin of the later practice of flogging round the fleet.1 In the matter of rewards, the Commonwealth was much more liberal than preceding governments had been. An Act of 1649 gave the seamen, in addition to their wages, one-half of the value of men-of-war taken, the other half going to a fund for the relief of sick, wounded, widows and orphans.2 Men-of-war destroyed were paid for by the State at the rate of from £12 to £20 a gun. The proceeds of merchant prizes taken by men-of-war went, one-third to the officers and men, one-third to the sick and wounded fund, and one-third to the State ; and the proceeds of merchant prizes taken by hired vessels went, two-sixths to the officers and men, two-sixths to the sick and wounded fund, one-sixth to the owners, and one-sixth to the State. The “ tenths,” paid at an earlier date to the Lord Admiral, went towards the provision of special rewards and of medals. In 1653 a new scheme was introduced, and under it officers and men became entitled to 10s. per ton of every prize taken, besides £6 13s. 4d. for each gun carried by her, and to £10 per gun for every man-of-war destroyed, while the old “ tenths ” were given to the sick, wounded, and widows’ fund. It is true that the sums due were often not paid for years, hut there is no reason to doubt the good intentions of the government. The immense difficulties under which it laboured may be pleaded in some extenua- tion of its shortcomings. The giving of medals, sometimes with chains attached, to distinguished officers was no new thing in England. Charles I., for example, had given a medal to Rainborow for his conduct of the Sallee Expedition in 1637. Parliament continued the practice, if practice it can be called, giving medals to both captains and flag- officers for the victory over the Dutch in 1653; but it also gave medals to seamen. Mr. Oppenheim cites as a somewhat doubtful reference an order of the House, of November 15th, 1649, for medals to be conferred on “several mariners ” who had done good service in the previous year, but who may possibly have been officers. There is, however, no room for doubting that after Captain Robert Wyard, of the Adventure, hired merchantman, fought his action off Harwich in 1650 with a greatly superior force, he and his officers 1 ‘ Admin, of Roy. Navy,’ 357, 358. 2 This Act amplified a somewhat less generous Parliamentary resolution of 1642.
    and men were given medals of different values, ranging from ±‘50 down to 5s., and that each medal had, as was directed, “ the service against six ships engraved on one side and the arms of the Commonwealth on the other.”1 Nevertheless, the number of medals given to seamen was certainly not large, for the entire number of medals granted, to officers included, for the Dutch War was only one hundred and sixty-nine, the cost of them being ±2069. This sum seems to have also covered the cost of the gold chains conferred on Blake, Monck, and Penn. Yet that medals were obtainable by them, even though rarely, cannot but have encouraged the seamen. GOLD MEDAL FOR THE ACTION WITH THE DUTCH FLEET, 1653. (The original by T. Simon, was presented by the English Government, with a large additional border, to the Flag Officers, and, as above, to the Captains engaged.) Naval law may be said to have received its first codification under the Commonwealth. More than once in these pages mention has been made of disciplinary instructions issued to their fleets by particular commanders upon particular occasions. These instruc- tions, however, lapsed with the various occasions which called them into being. Rules of the kind for the government of the Earl of Warwick’s fleet were passed by the Commons in March, 1649; and 1 ‘ Admin, of Boy. Navy,’ 328, citing S. P. Dom., August 16th, 1650. Some of these medals were shown at the Royal Naval Exhibition of 1891, by Mr. J. Gr. Murdoch, who showed also the very rare medal “ for eminent service in saving the Triumph,” in July, 1653, together with “ Naval Rewards ” of 1650 and 1653.