o_199m9vaui14ib1cnu10di10pocoj4h.pdf

8 THE NAVAL MUTINIES OF 1797
received, though differing a little in the handwriting, were
obviously dated by the same person, and I had therein further
reason to think that they were fabricated by some malicious
individual who meant to insinuate the presence of a general
discontent in the fleet. Not resting, however, on this conclusion,
I wrote to the officer at Portsmouth, to whom I was
naturally to expect such applications would, in my absence,
be addressed, to inquire whether any such dissatisfaction
existed in the fleet. The answer was that no such appearance
had been heard of there, and it was supposed the petitions
had been framed for the purpose I suspected. On 1 the
morning of the 22nd March, the day after I was able to come
to town, one of the Lords of the Admiralty, now absent on
ilt
service, happening to call on me, I related these particulars
to him, showed him the petitions, and sent them the same
day to his house in the Office, that they might be communicated
to the noble earl [Spencer] who presided at that board." 3
is evident that neither Howe nor Spencer nor anyone
at the Admiralty had a suspicion of the risk which they
were encountering. And they can hardly be blamed for
neglecting the petitions. The conditions of service in
the navy were no worse than they had been for generations;
the whole administration was working as smoothly
as usual ; there were no signs of insubordination ; and
the only indication that any of the seamen felt themselves
aggrieved was the appearance of a few cautious and
anonymous petitions for an increased rate of wages.
Yet all
this time discontent was spreading in the fleet,
and the calm was only the prelude to a sudden storm.
The actual grievances of the seamen, and the questions
why the outbreak should come at this particular time,
and to what extent the mutiny was justifiable, must be
left for separate discussion. It is enough for the present
1. This inquiry was made by Rear-Admiral Lord Hugh Seymour.
In all probability Seymour contented himself with asking a few of the
officers whether they had noticed any unusual discontent among their
crews. (See James, vol. ii, p. 24.) Moreover the inquiry must have
been made in the latter half of March, while the Channel fleet was at
sea. Naturally no disorder had been noticed before the fleet sailed,
fox the seamen were purposely on their best behaviour.
2. Speech in the House of Lords, 3 May. Pari. Hist., xxxiii, 476.