21.12.2014 Views

o_199m9vaui14ib1cnu10di10pocoj4h.pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

66 THE NAVAL MUTINIES OF 1797<br />

position, and the copy of the vote was taken aboard.<br />

The crew received it with great satisfaction, and they<br />

promised to send Colpoys and Griffith ashore uninjured,<br />

and to return to their duty as soon as the King's pardon<br />

should be announced, i The three officers, together with<br />

the Rev. Samuel Cole, chaplain of the London, were put<br />

ashore the next day.<br />

At the inquest on the seaman who had died in<br />

Haslar<br />

Hospital, the jury showed their approval of the officers'<br />

conduct by finding a verdict of " justifiable homicide."<br />

1. A.S.I. 1022, A 428.<br />

2. Times, 13 May, J 282, A 436. Colpoys retired from his command<br />

directly after the mutiny. On 4 June he was in Tunbridge Wells (he<br />

wrote a letter on that date, asking for arrears of pay, A.S.I. 579.)<br />

In 1805 he was made the Treasurer of Greenwich Hospital (Letter to<br />

Sir T. B. Martin, p. 41). Spencer and Nepean both sent him letters<br />

in which they spoke with the greatest approval of his conduct on the<br />

London (ibid.). A conditional order for Colpoys to strike his flag was<br />

sent on 14 May (A.S.O. 1352, p. 84; see also Letter to Sir T. B. Martin,<br />

P- 3°)'<br />

It may be worth while to point out some inaccuracies in the chief<br />

published accounts of the fighting on the London, in addition to the<br />

almost inevitable mistakes in reporting the casualties. Mr. Hannay's<br />

account is accurate in most particulars ; but he says that some of the<br />

crew refused to go below, a statement that is not found in the original<br />

letters, and that the crew mutinied at the instance of the delegates,<br />

whereas the delegates were not on board when the disturbance began.<br />

This statement, however, which appeared in the Saturday Review, is<br />

corrected in the Naval History, vol. ii, p. 367. The Times (10 May)<br />

represents the marines of the London as firing into the boats of the<br />

delegates.<br />

Brenton (vol. i, p. 418) makes several mistakes. He says that a<br />

delegate shot Lieutenant Simms, whereas the delegates were not on<br />

board during the fighting. And he gives the name of the wounded<br />

lieutenant as Lyons. According to Captain Griffith, Brenton's description<br />

of Bover's conduct is quite wrong. He says that all the officers<br />

and marines were imprisoned. The chief object of Griffith (Sir E. G.<br />

Colpoys) in writing his letter to Sir T. B. Martin was to correct<br />

Brenton's mistakes. Schomberg (vol. iii, p. 19) makes Lieutenant Bover<br />

give the order to fire, and says that the marines obeyed the order.<br />

This mistake was copied, probably from Schomberg, by Brenton.<br />

Clowes (vol. iv, p. 171) says that the marines helped in resisting the<br />

delegates; and he follows Brenton in saying that the marines were<br />

imprisoned.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!