THE COURT-MARTIAL AT PORTSMOUTH.
TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THrs Court has now sat for nine days. Its sittings commence at ten and finish at four. A complete report of the evidence would fill about six copies of the Times newspaper; though in point of fact it has occupied somewhat less than one. The summayy that has ap- peared is not made by one who knows much about nautical matters; how far the points of the evidence have been discriminately given, we have no means of ascertaining. It is not our purpose, therefore, to hazard any judgment' respecting the issue of the inquiry ; but of the nature of the charge we may speak, and of the causes that led to its being preferred, so far as they appear. Of the nine articles exhibited against Captain DicKINSON*, the first, second, third, sixth, seventh, and eighth, if proved to their utmost ex- tent, would only indicate on his part such an error of judgment as the best and bravest man might fall into. And looking to the long lapse of time that had intervened between the commission of the error and the trial, to visit it with blame now, would be the very tyranny of jus- tice. We say if proved. It is unnecessary to observe that there is great physical difficulty in ascertaining the precise position of a vessel during the smoke and confusion of such a conflict as that of Navarino. Still more difficult must it be to decide whence a„ball comes ; nor does its hitting an object of necessity prove how it was aimed. And ac- cordingly we find, as might be expected, very considerable discrepancy in the evidence on these points, though given by inen of tried honour and great experience. The fourth article seems a sort of makeweight. The only articles, in short, that merit notice, and on which the Court will probably take some time to deliberate, are the fifth and ninth,— the former charging Captain DICKINSON with reportiin,' Captain BATHURST dead, when only wounded ; the latter charging him with getting up a letter to the Admiral calling on him to bestow the com- mand of the Genoa on Captain DICKINSON. The subject of the " round-robin" was fully discussed in the evidence given on Thursday. It is admitted to have been presented by Captain DICKINSON to Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON, in the name of the Genoa's crew. That it was a gross breach of naval discipline, no one can doubt. It was deeply regretted by Captain DICKINSON, and an apology for the fault was made and accepted. The error of the report respecting Captain BATHURST'S death is not fully explained: certain it is that this excel- lent officer survived the action for a number of hours, and that he was capable of issuing orders is admitted. Now to the animus of the proceedings against Captain DICKINSON. We cannot agree with a correspondent, whose letter we subjoin, in blaming Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON for bringing forward these long passed over charges against Captain DICKINSON, until it be shown that the cause for bringing them forward did not warrant him. The lapse of time, the consent. of the Admiral to pass over the affair of the " round-robin," would not, in our opinion, have justified him in sup- pressing facts, or what he deemed to be facts, where the rights of third parties were at stake. The battle of Navarino was altogether a singular one. As daring in its plan, as gallant in its conduct, as splendid in its results, as the most famous of the engagements that have shed lustre on our arms, while it received the most unequivocal testimonies of approbation from foreigners, it was stigmatized in En,- land by an epithet which in the compass of English literature was never taken but in mutant partem. Not only were we determined not to praise the actors in the destruction of the fleet of our ally the Sul- tan, but we were determined that no one else should. The policy or impolicy of this resolution we shall not discuss. If it had been rigidly and impartially acted on, the trial on which we are commenting would never have been heard of.
And here conies the query—why was it not acted on impartially ? Who was the personage that advised the Admiralty to take from Captains BAYNES and CAMPBELL, whose conduct in the action was unimpeached, the honorary rewards assigned them by the generosity of the Russian Monarch, and to allow similar rewards to be bestowed on Captain DICKINSON, whose conduct, both in the action and after it, had been impeached ? If the other Captains had been allowed to wear their foreign honours, or if CaptainThcioNsoN had not been allowed to wear his, the errors or faults of the latter might have slumbered in eternal silence.
We confess we cannot see, supposing no charge had ever existed against Captain DICKINSON, how a high-spirited man like Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON could avoid protesting against the distinction which was sought to be drawn between him and others equally worthy of honour. At the same time, we fully concur in the just reasoning of our corre- spondent, when, on general principles, he deprecates such proceedings as the present court-martial. What we wish is, to put the saddle on the right horse. Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON was not attacking Cap- tain DicierNsoN when he complained to the Admiralty of the titles bestowed on him, but defending Captains BAYNES and CAMPBELL. The real enemy of ,Captain DICKINSON was the gentleman behind.the curtain, who was content, in his anxiety to serve him, to suffer if not advise most gross injustice to others.
" TO THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR.
"Portsmouth, September 3. " DEAR SIR,—Knowing that you take a great interest in all that concerns the right arm of our country, the Navy, I hope you will allow me to say a -word or two on the Court Martial now sitting on Captain Dickinson at this place; which, though trifling in its details, and carried on with extreme slow- ness, not to say apparent indifference, excites in a considerable degree the attention of all the officers of the Navy. The singularity of its having been ordered so long after the supposed offences were committed, and after Cap- tain Dickinson's conduct had been rewarded by promotion and honoured • See the Spectator of last week. with testimonies of approbation from foreign powers, is one cause why the whole proceeding receives much attention. It makes every officer sensible that no lapse of time, and no testimony of approbation, can insure lam against public censure and a public trial, particularly as it was this day stated in Court, that the New Naval Ins.trartams expressly reserves to superior officers the power of bringing forward complaints at any period. A still greater singularity, perhaps, is the Admiralty's insisting that the Court Mar- tial should take place, though Sir Edward Codrington has expressly declined being the prosecutor, and has protested in strong language against Captain Dickinson being brought to trial. If the Admiralty can order a Court Mar. tial in opposition to the will of a commander, when the trial is likely to be
i
favourable to the prisoner, it may order one when it is likely to go against himslt him ; and, therefore, the applause or one's immediate commander, even act- ing in obedience to his order, may not secure a junior officer from the vein, seance of the Admiralty. " One part of the case to day excited a strong feeling in the Court, and par- ticularly in Sir H. Blackwood. It was this : Captain Dickinson had given to Sir Edward Codrington a letter—a sort of round-robin—from the crew Genoa, contrary to discipline. This offence was discussed among the captains of the fleet at Malta; and, by the intercession of Captain Spencer and others, and an expression of regret on the part of Captain Dickinson, was overlooked. The Admiral returned the letter to Captain Dickinson ; and, as far as he was concerned, destroyed all evidence that it had ever existed. There was an express, not an implied forgiveness, extended by the Admiral to Captain Dickinson. In the course of the proceedings this day it ca,ue out, that air Edward Codrington had stated to the Admiralty in strong terms his wish not to subject Captain Dickinson to the ordeal of a public trial for an offence, ` which, whether erroneously or not, he had consented to overlook ;' and that, notwithstanding his forgiveness of that offence—notwithstanding his declining now to urge it—the Admiralty:rnake it one of the charges against Captain Dickinson, and Sir Edward Codrington is compelled to color into Court, and on his oath—greatly I think to the damage of his own honour— to substantiate all the particulars of this forgotten and forgiven offence. I say to the damage of his own honour, for how came the Admiralty to know of the offence ? Why, Sir Edward Codrington informed them of it, alter he had forgiven the offence, and placed the documents substantiating it beyond his reach.
" This brings to light another curious fact, which is this : Sir Edward Codrington said not one word to the ..\ilmiralty against Captain Dickinson, till the latter, by mistake or otherwise, which is of no consequence, received a higher honorary distinction than Cnatain Baynes, the Admiral's Captain. One was to have an order wile dianainig, and the other without ; though the Admiralty, for some reason which is unexplained, required Captain Baynes to send his umfiamonifed order back. The distinction 'made betweea the two captains excited the Admiral's wrath ; he regarded it as a sort of insult to and he hastened to Lord Melville to pour into his private ear the manifold causes Of cone:Mint be had against Captain Dickinson, which hail slumbered from the battle of Navarin till this unhappy affair of the diamond decoration offended his vanity, Whether he told Lord Melville: particularly of the round- robin Or ilia, dims not appear ; but he told him quite enough to poison his mind azainF:t Captain Dickinson, and, probably, the latter maim for ever, without hearing of the cause, been put down in the black hooks of the First Lord of the Admiralty, but for the hatred of Mr. Croker. The fact shows how slily alai insidiously the character of the best and !papa. men in his Alajesty's.gleg vice may be taken away. Sir Edward Codringma avowed, without liesintion or shame, that he had made these representations against Captain Dickinson ; and he also avowed, glorying indeed in the avowal, that he remonstrated against granting that officer a public trial whom he had so seriously accused. If you remember, Sir, that, generally speaking, those who get access to the First Lord's ear, and who get inure of the high places in the service, are the younger sons of our nobility, of which you will find damning proofs in Lord Collingwood's Letters. You will find in this possible means of poisoning his ear a complete explanation of the otherwise unaccountable circumstance, that the bravest and best officers in the service have frequently been laid upon the shelf. atm Croker's is said to have operated in this case beneficialiv,—a very unusual charm-. ;•- istic of his influence, from his hatred of the Vice-Admiral. The lag,
treated the Irish Secretary with all the hauteur of a Vice-Admiral, sir ea former has repaid it with all the presumption of a useful harrenu. Mai '- Wally took opportunities to annoy each other. Now, when the
ral had unburdened himself to the First Lord, the First Lord was obliged to state to the Board the reasons which the Admiral had probably mentioned to him for not granting permission to Captain Dickinson to wear the diamond order. The -Board, at the suggestion of Croker, seized hold of this in- formation, claimed it as public and official property, insisted on the hardship done to Captain Dickinson by thus having his good character privately taken away, and would hear of nothing but a public trial to compel Admiral Codrington to substantiate his charges or allow Captain Dickinson to clear himself. Sir Edward Codrington, from his vanity king wounded, privately accused Captain Dickinson, and Mr. Crokcr's maimed vanity has obtained for him a public trial, the result of which will be, Midi neither the Captain nor Admiral, like the wily Secretary, will escape scot in The whole matter is very curious, as showing the influence which the bau- bles bestowed by foreign sovereigns has over the rough minds of our naval heroes. Till a cross more was given to one than to the other, not a word was breathed against the conduct of any one concerned in the celebrated battle of Navarin ; but the instant one gets a ribbon more than another dare is crimination and recrimination, and the mighty heroes make it quite lest- pable to all the world, that no one of them has deserved the honours he has received. Now that we have little fighting, and long may we do without. it, the little that is required causes more discussion than all our great victories. Another curious feature was observed on the trial this morning. The Admiral stated that after the battle he had a vast number of compli- mentary letters from every ship in the fleet; so that our sailors have tally shared in the march of intellect, and have become, like court poets, the writers of congratulatory effusions. They remind one of the illustrious son- neteers of Italy, who never employ less than a few score of sonnets to con- gratulate the preacher of every successful sermon. The blow given to naval discipline by the Court Martial, the great alteration which has taken place :n the character of our naval officers quarrelling for the baubles a Toni:_a sovereign can bestow, and the rude tars of Old England turned author,:, just now, when our ports are resounding with naval preparations, a
they are filling cartridges and making sundry exertions amh indicate
prehension of war, lead to many and not pleasing reflections. These, lam- ever, I must leave to your greater sagacity, and remain,
Your obedient servant, P.S. The general opinion is here, that the tedious affair . All parties will be blackened, but no oneiwill be condme nod.
Previous page
