Chapter III: Part 3

Ince had a farm at the top of the Rock, which is still called by his
name. He had an only son, a clerk in the Commissariat department at
Gibraltar, under Commissary-general Sweetlove, who, together with his
wife, died in the fever of 1804, leaving an infant son, who was
brought up by his grandmother. The eldest daughter of Lieutenant Ince
was married at Gibraltar to Lieutenant R. Stapleton, of the 60th
Rifles, who exchanged with Lieutenant Croker into the 13th Foot, and
then sold out.

One day Mr. Ince was trotting at an easy pace up the Rock, when the
Duke of Kent, overtaking him, observed, “That horse, Mr. Ince, is too
old for you.” “I like to ride easy, your Royal Highness,” was the
subaltern’s meek reply. “Right, but you shall have another, more in
keeping with your worth and your duties;” and soon afterwards the Duke
presented him with a very valuable steed. The old overseer, however,
was unable to manage the animal, and he rode again to the works on his
own quiet nag. The Duke, meeting him soon after, inquired how it was
he was not riding the new horse, when Ince replied, he was unable
sufficiently to curb his spirit and tranquillize his pace. Ince then
prayed his Royal Highness to honour his servant by receiving the noble
creature into his stud again. “No, no, overseer,” rejoined the Duke;
“if you can’t ride him easily, _put him into your pocket_!” The
overseer readily understood his Royal Highness, and exchanged the
beautiful steed for his worth in doubloons.

-----

Among the various stirring incidents narrated by Drinkwater, is the following, relative to the peculiar advantage of the boys of the soldier-artificer company during the siege.

“In the course of the day,” 25th March, 1782, “ a shot came through one of the capped embrasures on Princess Amelia’s Battery (Willis’s), took off the legs of two men belonging to the 72nd and 73rd regiments, one leg of a soldier of the 73rd, and wounded another man in both legs; thus four men had seven legs taken off and wounded by one shot. The boy, who was usually stationed on the works where a large party was employed to inform the men when the enemy’s fire was directed to that place, had been reproving them for their carelessness in not attending to him, and had just turned his head toward the enemy, when he observed this shot, and instantly called for them to take care; his caution was, however, too late; the shot entered the embrasure, and had the above-recited fatal effect. It is somewhat singular that this boy should be possessed of such uncommon quickness of sight as to see the enemy’s shot almost immediately after they quitted the guns. He was not, however, the only one in the garrison possessing this qualification; another boy, of about the same age, was as celebrated, if not his superior. Both of them belonged to the artificer company, and were constantly placed on some part of the works to observe the enemy’s fire; their names were Richmond (not Richardson, as stated by Drinkwater) and Brand; the former was reported to have the best eye.”[41] Joseph Parsons,[42] another youth of the company, was also employed as a _looker-out_ on the works; and though his name has escaped the notice of the historian, he was nevertheless no less efficient.

-----

Footnote 41:

‘Drinkwater.’ Murray’s edit., 1846, p. 108.

-----

Footnote 42:

Parsons joined the company in February, 1779, and was discharged, as a
private artificer, 1st January, 1809, on 1_s._ 4_d._ a-day.

It was an object that every one in the fortress should be rendered useful in some way or other, and the boys of the company—out of sympathy for their youth—were, for some time after the commencement of the siege employed on the works at Europa quarry, then but little annoyed by the enemy’s fire. At length, inured to labour, and taught by events to expect danger, it was considered of greater advantage to occupy their time at the different batteries; and on the 15th February, 1782, the Chief Engineer directed their removal to the works and fortifications,[43] with the view of looking out for the enemy’s projectiles, and giving warning of their approach. On the 21st June following, such of the boys as were masons in the company were engaged under Mr. Hutchinson, a civil foreman, in rounding stones, agreeably to the instructions of Major Lewis of the artillery. These stones, according to Drinkwater, were “cut to fit the calibre of a 13-inch mortar, with a hole drilled in the centre, which being filled with a sufficient quantity of powder, were fired with a short fuse to burst over the enemy’s works.” It was an unusual mode of annoyance, and for its novelty was employed for some time; but not effecting the damage that was desired, it was ultimately laid aside.[44] On the failure of this experiment, the boys returned to the perilous posts assigned to them on the batteries to look out. At this duty they continued as long as the siege lasted, and doubtless, by their vigilance in its execution, they were the means of saving many valuable lives, or otherwise preventing casualty.

-----

Footnote 43:

Order Book—Chief Engineer’s.

Footnote 44:

‘Order-Book’ (Chief Engineer’s) of 21st June, 1782; and ‘Drinkwater,’
Murray’s edit., 1846, p. 118.

-----

Of the two boys who have been so favourably noticed by Drinkwater, it may not be unacceptable to devote a small space here to their brief but honourable history. Their names were Thomas Richmond[45] and John Brand; the former was known at the Rock by the familiar sobriquet of _shell_, being the better looker-out; and the latter by the name of _shot_. Richmond was trained as a carpenter; Brand as a mason. Their fathers were sergeants in the company.[46] Richmond’s was killed at the siege. As might be expected, the beneficial services of these boys at the batteries acquired for them no common celebrity and esteem.

-----

Footnote 45:

Not Richardson, as Drinkwater has it, p. 108.

Footnote 46:

Brand’s father, a mason by trade and a Perthshire man, was the first
artificer enrolled in the company.

-----

The siege being over, the youths were sent to Mr. Geddes’s school, at that time the principal seminary at Gibraltar. This gentleman paid every attention to their instruction and improvement, and, as a consequence, they progressed rapidly in their studies. Being found quick, intelligent, and ingenious, some officers of the company patronized them, and placed them in the drawing-room under their own eye, with the view of making them competent to fill better situations. Brand in time became corporal, and Richmond lance-corporal, which ranks they held on the 8th May, 1789, when they were discharged from the corps, and appointed by the Commander-in-Chief assistant-draughtsmen.[47]

-----

Footnote 47:

‘Order-Book’ (Chief Engineer’s), 8th May, 1789.

-----

Having made considerable proficiency in their trades, they were employed for some years previous to their discharge as modellers, which art they continued to follow with great tact, skill, and perseverance, until they quitted the fortress. After several trial models of various subjects, these young men commenced the gigantic task of modelling Gibraltar, at which they worked with unwearied application for nearly three years. Succeeding so well in this their first great and public undertaking, Brand[48] was directed to make a model in polished stone of the King’s Bastion, and Richmond[49] a model of the north front of Gibraltar. Nearly the whole of the years 1790 and 1791 were spent in perfecting them; and for these noble specimens of art they were favoured with the flattering congratulations of the highest authorities at the fortress. The better to exemplify the appreciation entertained of the models, and of the merits and talents of the modellers, they were recommended to the Duke of Richmond for commissions. His Grace immediately ordered them to proceed to Woolwich, to undergo some slight preparatory training. That training was short—a few months sufficed, and then they were honoured with appointments as second lieutenants in the royal engineers. Their commissions were dated 17th January, 1793.[50] Soon the young subalterns, rich in intelligence and full of promise, were sent abroad; but before the close of the year, both fell a prey to the prevailing yellow fever in the West Indies.[51]

-----

Footnote 48:

Assisted by sergeant James Shirres, an ingenious artizan and modeller.
This non-commissioned officer, after serving at the capture of
Minorca, was made a sergeant-major of the company that served there,
2nd May, 1800, and on the 31st December, 1804, was appointed overseer
in the royal engineer department at Plymouth.

Footnote 49:

Assisted by Antonio Marques, a Minorcaen artificer.

Footnote 50:

‘London Gazette,’ 13,494. 15 to 19 January, 1793.

Footnote 51:

The education of these youths is highly creditable to the officers of
engineers. Many similar instances of boys in the corps acquiring
distinction by their talents, have subsequently occurred, the honour
of which, in great measure, is due to the officers. Assistance and
encouragement they never fail to give in cases where their efforts are
likely to meet with success, and numbers have thus qualified
themselves to fill important situations with efficiency and credit, in
their own profession, and afterwards in civil life. Richmond and
Brand, however, are the only instances in which commissions have been
given from the ranks of the artificers, or sappers and miners, into
the corps of engineers.

-----

The three models alluded to were brought to England in 1793 by desire of General O’Hara. The large model of the entire Rock was deposited in the museum in the Royal Arsenal, and the other two were presented to His Majesty George III. Private Joseph Bethell had charge of the first model,[52] and Private Thomas Hague[53] of the other two. The large model, from being lodged in a public place open to visitors, was well known. It was an object of considerable attraction, “and was much admired,” so Drinkwater writes, “for beauty of execution and minute correctness.”[54] A visitor to the Arsenal in those days corroborates the just encomium of the historian, and thus records his impressions:—

“I walked yesterday morning to Woolwich Warren, that immense repository of military arts, the _palladium_ of our empire, where one wonder succeeds another so rapidly, that the mind of a visitor is kept in a continual gaze of admiration. Should I be asked what has made the strongest impression on mine, it is a magnificent view of the rock of Gibraltar, which was made there, formed of the very rock itself, on a scale of twenty-five feet to an inch, and presents a most perfect view of it in every point of perspective.”[55]

-----

Footnote 52:

Drinkwater says (p. 108), “that one of the works of these young men,
while pursuing their studies at Woolwich, was to finish the large
model of the rock of Gibraltar.” The historian has certainly been
misled here: the model was finished before it left the fortress, and
did not reach the Arsenal until after its makers had been
commissioned, and left England for the West Indies. The placement and
adjustment of its several parts were intrusted to a military artificer
named Bethell. He was to have been assisted by another private, who
accompanied him for the purpose, from Gibraltar; but having broken his
leg at Woolwich, his services were thus lost. Private John McNaughton,
a carpenter of the Woolwich company, was put to the model in his
place. I knew McNaughton well, and he assured me that the model was
not touched by any hands but his own and Bethell’s, and that on no
occasion were the modellers present during its fixation. McNaughton
seems to have been an excellent artificer, and always an active
soldier. During the mutiny of Parker, he was employed in repairing
Tilbury Fort, and in erecting temporary defences below Gravesend. He
afterwards served under the great Abercrombie in Egypt; next was
employed in constructing the towers on the Sussex coast, at the time
of the projected invasion of Napoleon; and, lastly, was many years in
Newfoundland. He was discharged 24th January, 1815, on 1_s._ 4_d._
a-day, and died at Woolwich in April, 1853, aged 84.

Footnote 53:

Hague was a tall, intelligent mechanic, a fine modeller, and a smart
soldier. On account of these qualities, he was selected to take charge
of the models for George III. Having put them together on their tables
at Buckingham Palace, His Majesty, the Queen, and royal family, with
other illustrious personages of the court, came to see them. Hague was
cited before them to explain the model, and to point out the defences
which, from their prominence in the late siege, had acquired historic
identity. His observations were listened to with attention, and His
Majesty awarded him a gratifying proof of his royal approbation. Soon
afterwards Hague returned to Gibraltar, and on the 31st March, 1815,
was discharged and pensioned at 1_s._ 8_d._ a-day. He was subsequently
employed as a modeller in the grand store; was married in 1827; and
died at the Rock about 1833, upwards of 100 years old.

Footnote 54:

‘Drinkwater.’ Murray’s edit., 1846, p. 108.

Footnote 55:

To this the visitor adds a description of the model, which is adjoined
here, on account of the model itself having long since been destroyed.
“First then,” says the writer, “are the Spanish lines; then the
perpendicular rock, rising bold from the neck of the neutral ground,
which is not many feet above high-water mark. On the east, or left
hand, is the Mediterranean Sea; and on the west, within the mole or
pier, is the Bay of Gibraltar, in which the largest ships in the
British Navy may ride safe. The garrison, town, and forts, are to the
westward, whence the rock rises with a more gradual acclivity to the
summit,—the east side of which is also perpendicular, and inhabited by
monkeys. On the highest point is the Levant Battery, which is nearly
three times and one half the height of St. Paul’s church, or 1375 feet
above the level of the sea. The southern extremity of the model of
this rock towards Europa Point, being too large for the room, and less
important, is cut off. This description ought to fill a
volume.”—Gentleman’s Magazine, part 2, 1798, p.648.

-----

Nine years after its placement, the museum in the arsenal was fired by an incendiary, and this celebrated model was unfortunately destroyed.[56] The other two models, which held a place in Buckingham Palace for about twenty-seven years, were presented in 1820 by George IV. to the Royal Military Repository at Woolwich. They are now daily exhibited in the Rotunda, and are, perhaps, about the best specimens of workmanship and ingenuity in the place. That of the King’s Bastion is finely wrought, and is really beautiful; that of the north front, bold and masterly. Both claim the particular attention of visitors, exciting at once their surprise and admiration.

-----

Footnote 56:

This was on the 22nd May, 1802. The account given at the time of this
disgraceful act is as follows:—“A dreadful fire broke out at Woolwich,
and from the investigation which has taken place into this calamitous
circumstance, there is but too much reason to believe that this
disaster was not the mere effect of accident. The fire broke out, at
one and the same time, in three different places, besides which a
great mass of combustible materials have been discovered. The loss to
Government will be immense. The damage done to the Model-room is
particularly to be lamented, as several choice works of art have been
destroyed, without the power of reparation; however, the injury done
to the beautiful model of the rock of Gibraltar is not so great as was
at first represented, it having sustained but a slight damage, which
can be easily repaired, and the whole restored to its original
state.”—Dodsley’s Annual Register, 1802, p. 404. The journalist is
wrong in his remarks concerning the state of the model after the fire.
It was completely destroyed, and not even the fragments are now in
existence. Some persons, indeed, with whom I have conversed, bear out
the chronicler in his record, and affirm that the model was repaired,
and _is now_ in the Rotunda; but they have given me a fair inference
of the mistaken character of their recollections, by uniformly
referring to the model of the _north front_, executed by Richmond and
Marques, which, at the very time that the fire occurred, formed one of
the curiosities of Buckingham Palace. Drinkwater (p. 108, Murray’s
edit.) attests the fact of its destruction; and in this he is borne
out by the ‘Repository Detail of Arms,’ &c., printed in 1822. In that
catalogue (at p. 9-21) is a list of the arms, models, &c., of the
_original_ institution preserved from the fire of 1802, and collected
by Sir William Congreve, but no mention is made of the model in
question. This, then, is the best attainable evidence of the certainty
of its demolition, coupled with the acknowledgment, at page 52 of the
same catalogue, that the “North end of Gibraltar,” the model mistaken
for the one destroyed in the Arsenal, was presented to the Repository
by George IV. Had the large model of the Rock been preserved, Sir
William Congreve would most certainly have noted it in the detail.

-----

1783.

State of the fortress—Execution of the works depended upon
the company—Casualties filled up by transfers from the
line—Composition—Recruiting—Relieved from all duties, garrison and
regimental—Anniversary of the destruction of the Spanish battering
flotilla.

For about six months previously to the termination of hostilities, the siege had been carried on with fearful vigour, and the destruction it occasioned, revealed to a mournful extent the efficiency of the enemy’s cannonade. The tiers of batteries on the north front, the whole of the fortifications along the sea face, and indeed every work of a permanent character, were considerably damaged or thrown down. The town too was little better than a vast ruin, and its houses were levelled to the rock, or were left standing in tottering fragments, or at best in their shells, despoiled and untenanted, as so many monuments of an unbounded calamity. The inhabitants, driven shelterless into the streets, were compelled either to leave the fortress, or to locate themselves under canvas amid the general desolation; or to seek a comfortless retreat in the dark and gloomy caverns of the rock. Such was the wreck to which Gibraltar was reduced at the close of the siege, and the work of restoration, therefore, was both extensive and pressing.

The reconstruction or repair of the fortifications and other public works at the fortress, in great part depended upon the company; and the more so, since the numbers of the line competent to work as tradesmen were inconsiderable. Assistance from the civil population of the place was neither given nor expected, as the works in the town secured to them abundance of employment and excellent wages. Policy, therefore, dictated the expediency of paying particular regard both to the numerical and physical efficiency of the company.

At the close of the siege, there were twenty-nine rank and file wanting to complete the soldier-artificers, which number was increased to thirty-nine by the end of May. To supply this deficiency, the Governor ordered the transfer of an equal number of artificers from regiments in the garrison; and on the 31st July, the company was complete. Still, there were many of the men who, from wounds received at the siege, or from privation and hardship, or from exposure in camp, in summer, to the excessive heat of the sun, and in the autumn, to the heavy rains, were unequal to the exertion required from them on the works. Among them were the best masons and carpenters of the company, who were stated to have been “expended” during the siege. Accordingly, on the 31st of August, sixty-seven men, good “old servants, and those that had lost the use of their limbs in the service,” were discharged and “recommended,” whose vacancies were at once filled up by volunteers from the line.

After this desirable pruning, the composition of the company stood as under:—

1 Sergeant-major.
10 Sergeants.
10 Corporals.
4 Drummers.
38 Masons.
33 Smiths.
54 Carpenters.
21 Sawyers.
32 Miners.
6 Wheelers.
5 File-cutters.
4 Nailors.
3 Gardeners.
7 Lime-burners.
3 Coopers.
1 Painter.
1 Collar-maker.
1 Brazier.
___
Total 234

As far as circumstances permitted, the strength of the company was never allowed to sink beneath its establishment, for whenever a casualty occurred, it was immediately filled up. Not only was the Chief Engineer anxious on this point, but the Governor and Lieut.-Governor felt equal concern, and were ready to give effect to any measure which should yield the required result. If, at Gibraltar, the recruiting failed from the want of the proper classes of mechanics to join the company, the Duke of Richmond found means in England and Scotland to meet the case. His Grace was both an admirer and an advocate of the military system of carrying on the works, and took peculiar interest in the recruiting, even to superintending the service, and acting in some cases as the recruiting sergeant. Hence the company, seldom short of its complement of men, invariably afforded a force of more than 220 non-commissioned officers and artificers to be employed constantly in restoring the fortifications, &c.: the sick at this period averaged about eight a day.

To obtain the full benefit of their services, and to expedite the works, the soldier-artificers were excused from all garrison routine—as well as from their own regimental guards and fatigues—and freed from all interferences likely to interrupt them in the performance of their working duties. Even the cleaning of their rooms, the care of their arms and accoutrements, and the cooking of their messes, were attended to by soldiers of the line. Every encouragement was thus given to the company to work well and assiduously, and every liberty that could possibly be conceded, not excepting a partial abandonment of discipline, was granted to them. Nevertheless, to impress them with the recollection that their civil employments and privileges did not make them any the less soldiers, they were paraded generally under arms, on the Sunday; and to heighten the effect of their military appearance, wore accoutrements which had belonged to a disbanded Newfoundland regiment, purchased for them at the economical outlay of 7_s._ a set. Perhaps no body of men subject to the articles of war were ever permitted to live and work under a milder surveillance; and it might be added, that none could have rendered services more in keeping with the indulgences bestowed. They did their duty with zeal, and the works progressed to the satisfaction of the engineers and the authorities.

The remembrance of the late siege was not likely soon to be effaced from the memory of those who participated in it; and hence the company, regarding themselves in a peculiar sense as the fencibles of the fortress, and as having contributed largely to its defence, commemorated the event by means of a ball and supper. The festival was held at the “Three Anchors Inn,” on the 13th of September—the anniversary of the destruction of the battering flotilla—on which occasion Lord Heathfield, and Sir Robert Boyd, the Lieutenant-Governor, with their respective staff-officers, dined with the company, and retired after drinking one or two complimentary toasts in praise of their gallantry at the siege, and their useful services on the fortifications and works.[57]

-----

Footnote 57:

This anniversary supper was held by the non-commissioned officers
annually, on the date named, at the _Three Anchors_. After the first
year, the tickets of admission were 16_s._ 6_d._ each, or 5 dollars
and 4 reals, which provided, in the language of one who used to have a
seat at the table, “a sumptuous entertainment.” At that time the
dollar was 3_s._, and the real 4½_d._ Each ticket admitted a married
non-commissioned officer and his family, or a single one and his
friend. The privates took no part in the celebration. On each
occasion, the Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, &c., honoured the company
with their presence, and made gratifying allusions to their services
at the siege. The night of the festival used to be familiarly termed
_Junk-ship night_, both by the inhabitants and the soldiers. The
custom was perpetuated till the year 1804, when, from the fearful
epidemic that prevailed, it was necessarily omitted, and was never
again held. It was a common opinion that the Duke of Kent interdicted
these loyal anniversaries, but such was not the case. The last one was
held in September, 1803, after his Royal Highness had been recalled
from Gibraltar.

-----

1786-1787.

Company divided into two—Numerous discharges—Cause of the men becoming
so soon ineffective—Fourth augmentation—Labourers—Recruiting
reinforcements—Dismissal of foreign artificers—Wreck of brig
‘Mercury’—Uniform dress—Working ditto—Names of
officers—Privileges—Cave under the signal house.

On the 30th June the Duke of Richmond divided the company into two, owing to the professional duties of the Chief Engineer rendering it impracticable for him to pay proper attention to the discipline and interior management of so large a body. The two senior officers at the fortress were appointed to take immediate charge of these companies, and each was authorized to receive an allowance of 56_l._ 10_s._ per annum in lieu of all charges for repair of arms, &c.[58] The Chief Engineer, nevertheless, continued in command of both companies. In the estimates, however, annually presented to Parliament, the corps was not recognized as being formed into two companies, possibly with a view to prevent the members of the House of Commons being drawn into a profitless debate upon a fancied attempt to increase the corps; a debate which, very likely, would not have been productive of compliments to his Grace, as by his extensive but lately rejected schemes for national defence he had made himself in some respects obnoxious to the House and to the country.

-----

Footnote 58:

This sum seems to be a sort of standing equivalent, and has existed
without alteration, through all the changes of advanced or reduced
prices in material and labour, to the present day.

-----

By this time there were many men in the corps, who from length of service and other causes were no longer fit for the duties of the department; and there were others, also, who from continued misconduct were worthless and burdensome. Captain Evelegh, returning to England about this period, lost no time in making the Duke of Richmond acquainted with the state of the companies, and of advising the discharge of all who were inadequate to their pay. His Grace at once acquiesced, and the companies being well weeded, eighty-two men were discharged during the winter and ensuing spring.

In so young a corps, scarcely fourteen years embodied, it might occasion some surprise why so many men became ineffective in so short a time. The reason is obvious. At all periods since the formation of the corps, the demands for mechanics of good qualification were urgent. Under thirty years of age men could seldom be had from the line, whose services were worth acceptance, being either irregular in conduct, or possessing but little pretension to ability as tradesmen. Mechanics were therefore generally received at thirty-five to forty-five, and oftentimes at the bald age of fifty. Neither age nor height was an insuperable disqualification, provided the candidate for transfer or enlistment possessed sufficient stamina for a few years' hard wear and tear. It was not therefore to be expected that they could serve long in the companies, more especially, as, the works of the fortress being always important and pressing, the men were obliged to labour zealously to meet the exigency, exposed to all the fitful and depressing changes of wind and temperature.

In the course of the interview with the Duke of Richmond, Captain Evelegh proposed that an augmentation of 41 labourers should be made to the companies. Of the necessity for this his Grace was not so well persuaded, for knowing the ready disposition of the Governor of Gibraltar to provide men, at all times, for the services of the works, he felt assured that no difficulty would be found in obtaining any number required from the line, on a proper representation of their need being made. He would not therefore sanction the measure; but, as his Grace was aware, from the extent of the works in progress, that the demand for mechanics was very great, and as he was moreover much averse to the employment of civil artificers, he considered it would be a far greater public benefit to increase the corps with mechanics than labourers. He therefore, in September, took upon himself the responsibility of augmenting the companies with forty-one masons and bricklayers, which fixed the strength of the corps as under:—

1 Sergeant-major.
10 Sergeants.
10 Corporals.
4 Drummers.
250 Private artificers.
——
Total 275

Each company was to consist of 137 non-commissioned officers and men.

His Grace, moreover, ordered that such of the artificers as were not sufficiently skilful at their trades, to the number of forty, were to be employed as labourers, if required, but he did not contemplate that any such could be found in the corps. From this slight innovation, however, soon after followed the authorized enlistment of _labourers_ as a part of the establishment,—a measure not in any sense welcomed by the old artificers, who conceived they were losing caste and position by the association.

Means for obtaining transfers and recruits at Gibraltar were now considerably straitened. The Duke of Richmond, therefore, undertook to furnish the number authorized to be added to the corps, and to supply the constantly-recurring casualties. Upon this duty his Grace employed several officers of engineers in the manufacturing districts of England and Scotland. Captain Rudyerd was the chief recruiting officer in North Britain, and he seems to have been the most successful in obtaining recruits. Married men[59] with families were not debarred from enlistment, if their personal appearance and talents as tradesmen were favourable. More attention was now paid to age than heretofore; and none were received over thirty-five years old, unless under extraordinary circumstances. The bounty allowed to each candidate was 13_l._ 13_s._ 6_d._

-----

Footnote 59:

The regulation with regard to the wives and families of recruits going
to Gibraltar, as established by the Duke of Richmond, is sufficiently
curious, by comparison with the present very limited system, to be
mentioned here. On the 9th September, 1786, the Duke arranged that to
every 20 men, 10 women and 10 children should be allowed to accompany
them. If there were more than that number with the party, lots were to
be drawn, and those who did not gain prizes were to find their own
passages; the lots were not to divide families, but were to be drawn
by the men until the number allowed was completed. If encouragement
had been given to any men to hope that their families would be
provided with passages, the bargain was to be faithfully adhered to.

-----

Five batches[60] of recruits, numbering in the whole 183 artificers, were sent to the Rock in rapid succession; but as they were long in arriving, it was considered expedient to hire civil artificers from Portugal and Italy to expedite the works. However desirable it might have been to adopt this course, the Duke of Richmond disapproved of it. He had always a great aversion to the engagement of civil artificers, whether from England or from places on the Continent, arising from the great expense attending their employment and their general irregular conduct. His Grace, therefore, ordered that the foreign artificers should be discharged on the arrival of the recruits, which was accordingly done.

-----

Footnote 60:

Of the following strength:—

21 men 15th Sept. 1786, embarked on board the 'New
Euphrates,' and landed 6th Oct.
58 ” 21st Sept, 1786, embarked at Leith, on board the
brig ‘Mercury.’ Wrecked 24th Sept.
25 ” 6th Nov. 1786, embarked in the ‘Adventure;’
landed.
35 ” 23rd Mar. 1787; landed.
44 ” 15th and 16 Apr. 1787; landed.
——
Total 183 ” About 100 of this number were bricklayers and
masons, the crafts most required at the Rock.
===

-----

Of the second party of recruits, it may be permitted to take a more than passing notice. It was composed of 58 men, all mechanics, “in the prime of life,” under charge of sergeant Sherriff, accompanied by their wives, 28 in number, and 12 children—in all 101 persons. They embarked at Leith on the 21st September, on board the brig ‘Mercury,’ Thomas Davidson, master. The crew consisted of 11 men. The ship sailed with a fair wind; but on the 23rd, when nearing the coast of Flanders, she was greatly buffeted by a boisterous gale. At three o’clock on the morning of the 24th, Sunday, the steeple of Ostend was recognised, and, accordingly, the course of the vessel was shaped towards the chops of the channel. A storm now set in, and as danger was apprehended, the captain and crew were anxious and vigilant. Skill and exertion, however, were of no avail, for at seven o’clock in the evening she struck upon a sand-bank, about six miles off Dunkirk. The wind continued blowing hard to the north, while the sea, “running mountains high,” dashed the frail bark to and fro with a fury that broke her masts, destroyed her bulwarks, and tore her sails to shreds. At nine o’clock she went to pieces, and melancholy to add, all on board perished but three. The survivors were John Patterson, ship’s carpenter; Walter Montgomery, blacksmith; and Daniel Thomson, mason. The two latter were recruits. On fragments of the wreck they floated all night, and at ten o’clock next morning, Patterson and Montgomery, just ready to relinquish their hold from cold and exhaustion, were picked up by a pilot-boat and taken on shore at Dunkirk. The other sufferer, Thomson, was found some hours after in the surge, helpless and shivering, clinging to a spar. At once he was conveyed to Mardyck, three miles to the westward of Dunkirk, where he only lived a few days. Of Walter Montgomery nothing further is known. As at the time he was reported to be very ill, and not likely to recover, he probably died at the place where he was given an asylum.[61]

-----

Footnote 61:

‘Morning Chronicle,’ 10th October, 1786, and periodical press
generally. In most of the papers Daniel Thomson is, by mistake, named
Daniel Campbell.

_Fifteen_ bodies were washed ashore between Nieuport and Ostend, on
the 27th and 28th September, and it is not a little remarkable that,
of this small number, no less than _fourteen_ should have been those
of women.—‘General Advertiser.’ ‘Public Advertiser,’ 9th October,
1786.

-----

No information can be obtained relative to the dress of the companies until 1786.[62] _Then_, the uniform was a plain red coat, double-breasted, with two rows of large flat brass buttons down the front, placed at equal distances of two inches apart. The buttons were one inch and a quarter in diameter, and bore the Ordnance device of three guns and three balls. The left breast buttoned over the right at the pit of the chest, from which upwards the coat turned back in the form of lappels. The cuffs and collar were orange-yellow, laced round with narrow red ferreting. The collar was turned over like the common roll collar, and was ornamented with a red rectangular loop at each side. Down the front of the coat to the end of the skirts, narrow yellow ferreting was sewn, as well as upon the inside edges of the skirts, which were very broad, descending to the leggings, and were buttoned back at the bottom to show the white shalloon lining. Small plaited frills about five inches long, were worn at the breast, to the right; and full ruffles at the wrists. Over the black leather stock, a white false collar fell down about an inch. The waistcoat was white cloth, bound with yellow ferreting, and came well down over the abdomen. At the bottom, it was cut so that the angle or corner of each front separated about seven inches. The pocket-holes were slashed; each slash was two inches deep, and bound round. The buttons were small and flat, similar in device to the coat-buttons. The breeches were white, of a texture like kerseymere, and secured below the knee with three small buttons. The leggings were black cloth, reaching to the knee and strapped under the shoe; they buttoned on the outside, and were fastened to a small button above the calf of the leg. The buttons were like those worn on the waistcoat. The hat was cocked, the same as that commonly worn; the cock was in the front, directly over the nose, with a cockade to the right of it supporting a black feather. In other respects it was quite plain. The arms and accoutrements consisted of white leather cross-belts, black cartouch-box with frog, and musket and bayonet.[63] The breast-plate was oval, bearing the Ordnance device: above the balls was the word GIBRALTAR; below the guns SOLDIER-ARTIFICERS. The sergeants had swords, silver-mounted, with a plain guard of one bar only; tassel, white leather. The distinctions with regard to ranks were as follows: the sergeants had clothing of a superior fabric; their breeches and waistcoats were kerseymere; the lace on their coats was gold; they also wore a crimson sash with tassels, under their coats, and laced shoulder-straps. All the other ranks wore linen or cotton ferreting; but the corporals had gold fringed shoulder-knots, and the lance corporals one gold knot on the right shoulder.[64] (Plate I.)

-----

Footnote 62:

I have been informed that previously to 1786, the coat was somewhat
similar in colour, cut, and ornament to that shown in Plate I., but
that the breeches were blue instead of white. The black leggings were
banded above the knee. The working dress consisted of a long duck
frock, and mosquito trowsers with gaiters attached. Everything was
white even to the felt round hat, which at this period had the
military symbols of a yellow band and yellow edge to the brim. Serge
pantaloons were worn in winter.

Footnote 63:

The sergeant-major and sergeants were armed with carbines and
bayonets.

Footnote 64:

This novel way of distinguishing the non-commissioned officers led to
frequent misconception and mistake in the garrison. When dressed with
the bayonet belt only, strangers regarded the corporals as the highest
rank, and lance-corporals the next. Sometimes when taking an excursion
into Spain, sentries have presented arms to them, and guards even have
turned out to pay the compliment due to field officers! This military
blunder continued, with greater or less observance, until the adoption
of chevrons, about 1805.

-----

------------------------------------------------------------------------

‘SOLDIER Plate II.
ARTIFICER Printed by M & N Hanhart.

]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The working-dress was a plain long red jacket in winter, and a linen one in summer, with a single row of large brass buttons, wide apart, down the front. It descended to the hips, opened from the chest upwards to show the shirt, and from that point downwards to show the waistcoat. Convenient to the hand on each side was a huge pocket covered with a broad slash. The collar and cuffs were of yellow cloth, the former turned over or rolled, and at the small of the back were two large buttons. Under the jacket a waistcoat was worn—in summer linen, in winter flannel—of the same cut as the regimental one, but not laced or ferreted. Similar in material were the pantaloons; and to these were attached a pair of black gaiters, of linen or cloth, corresponding with the season. They reached a little above the ankle, and buttoned on the outside. No particular regard was paid to the neck covering. Stocks of leather, or velvet, or silk, or black handkerchiefs, were indiscriminately used. A white hat completed the suit. It was about six inches high, had a straight pole with yellow band of an inch in width, and a broad brim edged with yellow tape or ferreting. Plate II. The description of working-dress worn by the non-commissioned officers has not been ascertained, nor can any record be discovered of the precise uniform dress adopted for the drummers, or of the peculiar badge that distinguished the sergeant-major from other sergeants.

The only complete record that has turned up to research, showing the names of the officers who were attached to the companies since the year 1772, is a return for 1787, by which it seems the following officers did duty with them:—

Captain Robert Pringle, chief engineer.
Captain William Campbell Skinner, died 24th April, 1787.
First Lieutenant, Thomas Skinner.
First Lieutenant, William Kerstiman. Joined 25th May, 1787.
Second Lieutenant, Thomas Smart.
Second Lieutenant, Samuel T. Dickens.
Draughtsman, James Evans.[65]

-----

Footnote 65:

These officers were also present with the corps in 1788; but after
that year until 1797 no record has been discovered.

-----

About this time, it appearing to be of some consequence to cut and form a ditch immediately under the Crillon Battery, situated on the south flank of the King’s, Prince’s, and Queen’s Lines, a strong party was set to work by order of the Chief Engineer. They executed their laborious task in a comparatively short period, which elicited the warmest praises of General O’Hara. To mark his sense of their services, however, in a form more gratifying than words, he gave permission to the companies to pass to the neutral ground, and out of garrison, on Sundays and all holidays without a written pass, or restraint of any kind. With this privilege was also conceded the liberty to appear on such occasions in whatever apparel their fancy suggested, except in their uniform coats. It was not uncommon, therefore, for the non-commissioned officers and the respectable portion of the privates, to stroll about the garrison or ramble into Spain, dressed in black silk or satin breeches, white silk stockings, and silver knee or shoe-buckles, drab beaver hats, and scarlet jackets, tastefully trimmed with white kerseymere.

Governor O’Hara was a constant visitor at the works, and took much interest in their progress. Even as early as the morning gun-fire, he was perambulating the fortifications and batteries, and worming his way among the mechanics. Almost to the last man, he could call each by name, and knew the best artificers too well ever to forget them. Familiar with their zeal and exertions, he regretted sometimes to find that a few men were absent from the works undergoing sentences of confinement to the barracks. This induced the General to relax a little in strictness towards the companies. None of the men would he suffer to be punished for intoxication, or other slight offences committed when off duty or on the works, in order that he might have them all employed. This slackening the reins would, no doubt, be looked upon now-a-days as a monstrous and culpable dereliction, however plausible might be the object intended to be gained by it. To justify or condemn the act is obviously out of place here. It is simply mentioned as a fact; and while it remains a singularity in military jurisprudence, the main point that originated it must not be overlooked, viz., the estimation in which the Governor held the corps for their services in the restoration or improvement of the works of the fortress.[66]

-----

Footnote 66:

This laxity of discipline seems, in time, to have become general among
the troops at the fortress, and the extent to which it was carried
both by officers and men was little short of disgraceful.—‘Wilkie’s
British Colonies considered as Military Posts,’ in ‘United Service
Journal,’ 2, 1840, p, 379.

-----

In enlarging the works of the garrison, the military artificers frequently opened up cavities in the promontory which were mostly of sufficient interest to excite the curiosity of geologists; but one discovered in 1789, by some miners of the corps, while scarping the back of the Rock, attracted, at the time, unusual attention. It was situated about 160 feet from the foot of the cliff, on its eastern side, nearly under the Signal House, and its extent classed it among some of the largest within the area of the fortress. Removing the rank vegetation which had overgrown its mouth, a small chasm was bared, opening into a cave containing several chambers and grottoes, entered by narrow funnel-shaped crevices, some so low and winding that ingress could only be obtained by crawling through the long misty passages on all-fours. Seemingly, the roofs were supported by a number of pillars, which the dripping of ages had congealed into all shapes and sizes and into all degrees of hardness, from patches of soft silvered powder to the bold indurated columnar stalactite. On the floors, at different heights, were stalagmites, some peering up like needles, and others, swollen and grotesque, rose from frothlike cushions of delicate finish, which, “on being rudely touched, dissolved instantly into water.” The hall at the extremity was divided into two oblong recesses, floored by a “deep layer of vegetable earth,” where not a clump of the lowliest weed or a blade of grass was seen to show that vigour was in the earth.[67] Nothing seemed capable of living there but a colony of bats, some flapping about on lazy wing, and others torpid; no process to be active, but the cold one of petrifaction, which, in nature’s own confused method, had elaborated throughout the cavern, columns and pinnacles and cushions, puffs and concretions, some as fleecy as snow, others as crisp as hoar-frost, and others of an opal hue as transparent as crystal. All was rich, beautiful, and sparkling. It was a marvel to adventurers, but unfit for habitation; yet, in later years, this hole of the mountain was possessed by a Spanish goat-herd, who reached his solitude by the same threadlike but dangerous tracks as his goats. There might the recluse have lived till his bones fell among the petrifactions, but he was at length expelled from its gloomy precincts on account of his contraband iniquities.

-----

Footnote 67:

Martin’s British Colonies, 1835, p. 51-53.

-----

1779-1788.

Colonel Debbieg’s proposal for organizing a corps of
artificers—Rejected—Employment of artillerymen on the works at
home—Duke of Richmond’s “Extensive plans of fortification”—Formation
of corps ordered—Singular silence of the House of Commons on the
subject—Mr. Sheridan calls attention to it—Insertion of corps for
first time in the Mutiny Bill—Debate upon it in both Houses of
Parliament.

When Spain declared war with England in June, 1779, Lieutenant-Colonel Hugh Debbieg of the engineers, seems to have been impressed with the necessity of raising a corps of artificers for service in this country. He had made several excursions through Kent and a part of Sussex, no doubt with the object of ascertaining the probabilities that existed for resisting any attempt at invasion. Whether such was his intention or not, these professional tours appear to have assisted his views greatly, in all that was essential to prepare the country to repel aggression. He therefore made large demands for cutting tools; conceiving, as he states, “very extensive ideas of their use in all cases,” and recommended the formation of a corps of artificers. In his letter to General Lord Amherst, of the 30th July, 1779, he wrote: “I must take the liberty of mentioning how very advantageous to the service it would be, if a corps of artificers was to be selected from the army. The present establishment of pioneers to each regiment will prove in no case sufficient or equal to the purpose of advancing an army through such a country as this.”

As if to show that his proposal was no crude idea, nor the dreamy suggestion of some needlessly-alarmed engineer, the Colonel dipped a little into the history of the subject, to claim respect for it on the ground of its antiquity, and pointed out the way in which the measure could be effected. He says, “The great attention of the ancients to this particular was wonderful, and the highest point of perfection in the Roman legion was, that when it made detachments, though ever so small, they carried with them a just proportion of the component parts of its excellent system—artificers of all denominations. Modern armies differ from those of the ancients scarcely in nothing but the arms they use; in all other points, we cannot imitate them too exactly. I am sensible the subject is not new to your lordship, and if it did not strike me as a thing absolutely necessary for the good of His Majesty’s service, particularly at this time, I should not have troubled your lordship thereon.

“It is a most essential part of the soldiers' duty, I allow, to be as expert as possible at covering themselves with earthworks; but then, there is also a necessity for a band of leading men capable of instructing others, and of conducting works with more regularity than has been usually done where I have yet been upon service, as also with greater dispatch.

“I will not presume to point out to your lordship the means of establishing such a corps, nor how far two men per company would go towards making it numerous enough for the purpose from the militia alone; but I will venture to say, had such a body of men been constantly here, these lines (Chatham) would have been nearly completed; and you know what state they are in at present.”

Colonel Debbieg’s attempt to revive an old practice, constituting one of the military glories of the ancients, was certainly worthy of the best attention, involved as England was at the time in a struggle with France and Spain; and it would have been more so, had allusion been made to the beneficial services of the companies at Gibraltar. Omitting this is singular enough, and readily urges the supposition, that their name and duties were scarcely known beyond the scarps of the Rock, even to the engineers themselves. However, Lord Amherst, much as he may have appreciated the represented perfection of the Roman legion in the organization of its detachments, was not by any means disposed to incur the responsibility of reproducing that system in the English army; and on the 11th August following communicated his sentiments on the subject to the Colonel. “Your idea,” writes his lordship, “about forming a corps of artificers from the army, is a very good one, as far as that such a corps would be very desirable; but at a time when it is a material subject of consideration to increase the army by every possible means, the forming such a corps cannot be thought of. In the case of any service happening in this country, the general business of the pioneers must be done by the able-bodied men amongst the peasants of the country.”

His lordship here confesses the desirableness of the measure, but at the same time repudiates it as inexpedient, because the army requires to be increased! No rejoinder or explanation appears to have been made by Colonel Debbieg; and the proposal, somewhat modified, was left to be iterated at a subsequent period by Charles, third Duke of Richmond.

On the appointment of the Shelburne administration in July, 1783, his Grace was nominated Master-General of the Ordnance. Immediately after his installation, he caused the fortifications to be examined, and finding they were in such a state as to need the intervention of the House of Commons to put them in repair and completeness, he demanded large sums of money for the purpose in the Ordnance estimates for 1783.

His Grace’s projects were on a scale of great magnitude, and his estimates were necessarily large; but in order to curtail the amounts as much as possible, and thus win the concurrence of both parties to his plans, he proposed to employ a considerable part of the royal artillery as artificers and labourers in the arsenal at Woolwich, Purfleet, and the outports, giving them only half the wages then paid to civil mechanics for performing similar work, whereby it was computed that a saving of 12,000_l._ to 15,000_l._ a-year would be realized, and that the services of the ordnance being more regularly performed, the regiment would have a body of artificers, always available for active duty in the event of a war, for which they would be much required.[68] There was nothing in this suggestion to excite alarm or particular remark. No new corps was recommended to be raised, but simply the adaptation of means already disposable (which would have to be maintained under any circumstances) to a twofold object, as also to lighten the existing pressure upon the finances of the State. The proposal, being merely incidental to the graver matter with which it stood connected, gave rise to no discussion; and it is presumed, though no specific organization of artificers such as his Grace contemplated took place, that artillery soldiers were employed in great numbers at the different stations mentioned in his Grace’s famous report.

With the change of ministry in April, 1783, the Duke of Richmond quitted his post as Master-General; but resumed it again in the following December on the formation of the Pitt Cabinet. The fortifications continued to be his Grace’s hobby. Yearly he requested large sums for the erection of new works and the repair of old ones. Consequently, public attention was excited to review these apparently exorbitant items of expenditure, and, as may be expected, very little was done towards effecting his Grace’s views. Money was voted for the purpose, but none was expended.