The Life of Thomas, Lord Cochrane, Tenth Earl of Dundonald, Vol. II

CHAPTER XXX

THE RUSSIAN WAR. – LORD DUNDONALD'S PROPOSALS TO EMPLOY HIS SECRET PLANS AGAINST CRONSTADT, SEBASTOPOL, AND OTHER STRONGHOLDS. – HIS CORRESPONDENCE THEREUPON WITH SIR JAMES GRAHAM AND LORD PALMERSTON. – THEIR REJECTION. – LORD DUNDONALD'S APPOINTMENT AS REAR-ADMIRAL OF THE UNITED KINGDOM. – PRINCE ALBERT'S INVITATION TO HIM TO BECOME AN ELDER BROTHER OF THE TRINITY HOUSE. – HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH LORD PALMERSTON RESPECTING THE RESTITUTION OF HIS HALF-PAY. – HIS LAST WORK. – HIS DEATH AND BURIAL. – CONCLUSION.

[1851-1860.]

When in June, 1851, he returned to England and surrendered his office as Commander-in-Chief of the North American and West Indian squadron, the Earl of Dundonald was in his seventy-sixth year. That he was still young and vigorous in mind is sufficiently shown by the illustrations of his inventive genius and philanthropic earnestness that have been given in the last chapter. The most striking proof of this, however, so far as he was allowed to prove it, has yet to be given.

Very soon after his return he sought to impress upon Sir James Graham, then First Lord of the Admiralty, under the Earl of Aberdeen's administration, the value of his secret war-plans, and before long a special reason for advocating their adoption arose. Their efficacy had been frequently acknowledged by the highest authorities, but as England was at peace, nothing more than an acknowledgment was made. The outbreak of our war with Russia induced Lord Dundonald to bring them forward again in 1853. At first Sir James Graham declined to entertain the subject. The Government believed that Russia would be easily and promptly defeated by the ordinary means of warfare, and therefore contented itself with them. In this decision Lord Dundonald acquiesced perforce; but, on its appearing that the fight would be harder than had been anticipated, he again claimed a hearing for his proposals, believing that by their acceptance he could not only bring his own career as a British seaman to a glorious termination, but also – a yet dearer object to him – by so doing render inestimable service to his country.

In this spirit he wrote again to Sir James Graham on the 22nd of July, 1854. "Important aggressive enterprises," he said, "being now suspended by Russia, whose armies, on the defensive, may indefinitely prolong the war, and thereby expose our country to perilous consequences, resulting from protracted naval co-operation, I am desirous, through you, respectfully to offer for the consideration of her Majesty's Cabinet Ministers a simple yet effective plan of operations, showing that the maritime defences of Cronstadt, however strong against ordinary means of attack, may be captured, and their red-hot shot and incendiary missiles, prepared for the destruction of our ships, turned on those they protect; a result of paramount importance, now that the forces in the Black Sea have been diverted from the judiciously-contemplated attack on Sebastopol, compared to the success of which any secondary enterprise in the Baltic would prove of very small importance to the successful result of the war. Permit me, therefore, in the event of my plans being approved, unreservedly to offer my services, without command or authority, except over the very limited means of attack, the success whereof cannot fail in its consequences to free and ensure, perhaps for ever, all minor states from Russian dominion. Personal acquaintance with Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Napier and Rear-Admiral Chads warrants my conviction that no feeling of rivalry could exist, save in the zealous performance of the service."

Sir James Graham's reply was complimentary. "You offer for the consideration of her Majesty's Government," he wrote on the 26th of July, "a plan of operations by which the maritime defences of Cronstadt may, in your opinion, be captured; and in the most handsome manner you declare your readiness to direct and superintend the execution of your plan, if it should be adopted. When the great interests at stake are considered, and when the fatal effects of a possible failure are duly regarded, it is apparent that the merits of your plan and the chances of success must be fully investigated and weighed by competent authority. The Cabinet, unaided, can form no judgment in this matter, and the tender of your services is most properly made by you dependent on the previous approval of your plan. The question is a naval one, into which professional considerations must enter largely. Naval officers, therefore, of experience and high character are the judges to whom, in the first instance, this question ought to be submitted. Let me therefore ask you, before I take any further step, whether you are willing, in strict confidence, to lay your whole plan before Sir Bryan Martin, Sir William Parker, and Admiral Berkeley, who, from his place at this Board, is my first naval adviser? If you do not object to this measure, or to any of the naval officers whom I have named, I should be disposed to add Sir John Burgoyne, the head of the Engineers, on whose judgment I place great reliance. I am sure that you will not regard this mode of treating your proposal as inconsistent with the respect which I sincerely entertain for your high professional character, resting on past services of no ordinary merit, which I have never failed to recognise. But my duty on this occasion prescribes caution and deliberate care; and you will do justice to the motives by which this answer to your request is guided."

To this suggestion Lord Dundonald readily acceded, and his secret war-plans were once more referred to a committee of investigation. Nothing, however, was gained by this step. "I have received," wrote Sir James Graham on the 15th of August, "the report of the committee of officers to whom, with your consent, the plan for the attack on Cronstadt was submitted. On the whole, after careful consideration, they have come to the unanimous conclusion that it is inexpedient to try experiments in present circumstances. They do full justice to your lordship, and they expressly state that, if such an enterprise were to be undertaken, it could not be confided to fitter or abler hands than yours; for your professional career has been distinguished by remarkable instances of skill and courage, in all of which you have been the foremost to lead the way, and by your personal heroism you have gained an honourable celebrity in the naval history of this country."

That letter was disappointing to Lord Dundonald; but, as the value of his plans was not disputed, he hoped that he might yet be allowed to put them in execution. "Be pleased," he said in his reply to Sir James Graham, "to accept the sincere assurance of the high estimation in which I hold the kind and favourable expression of your sentiments towards me. It is indeed gratifying to perceive that the experienced admirals to whom you referred the professional consideration of my secret plan have not expressed any doubt of its practicability."

The report of the admirals, however, had as unfavourable an effect as could have resulted had they declared openly against the project. Week followed week without any successful issue to the efforts of the Baltic fleet; and added to Lord Dundonald's chagrin at not being permitted to achieve the desired success, was his distress at finding unmerited blame thrown by the Government, and by nearly all classes of the public, upon a brave and skilful seaman, for not doing what, with the means at his disposal, it was impossible for him to do. Admiral Sir Charles Napier had failed, through no fault of his own, in the project for attacking Cronstadt, a fortress of almost unrivalled strength, and, by reason of the shallow water surrounding it, unapproachable by the heavy line-of-battle ships and frigates which constituted all his force; and during the months of his necessary inactivity, and after his return to England, Lord Dundonald was almost his only defender. "In justice to Admiral Napier, against whom 'the indignant dissatisfaction of the nation' is said to be directed," he wrote in a letter to the "Morning Post," on the 21st of September, "permit me to say that success could not have attended the operations of ships against stone batteries firing red-hot shot, however easily unresisting walls may be leisurely demolished. There is but one means to place these parties on an equal footing, and that I confidentially laid before the Government."

"The unreasoning portion of the public," he wrote to Sir James Graham on the 11th of November, "have made an outcry against old admirals, as if it were essential that they should be able to clear their way with a broadsword. But, my dear Sir James, were it necessary – which it is not – that I should place myself in an arm-chair on the poop, with each leg on a cushion, I will undertake to subdue every insular fortification at Cronstadt within four hours from the commencement of the attack." And Sebastopol, he urged, could be as easily captured, if he were only allowed to put his plans in operation. But it was not allowed. "Nothing new can be attempted at the present moment," answered Sir James Graham. "Winter will put an end to all active operations in the Baltic; and I still venture to hope that at Sebastopol our arms will be triumphant."

Lord Dundonald, though pained, not so much on his own account as in the interests of the nation, at the way in which his offers were treated, persevered in making them. It was now too late in the season to effect anything in the Baltic; but the siege of Sebastopol was being carried on without any immediate prospect of success; and he yearned, with all the ardour that he had displayed half a century before, for an opportunity of rendering success both certain and immediate.

To this end he wrote again to Sir James Graham, and also for the first time to the Earl of Aberdeen, on the 30th of December. "The pertinacious resistance made at Sebastopol, and the possibility of events that may still further disappoint expectation," he said to Sir James, "have induced me to address Lord Aberdeen, saying that 'if it is the opinion of the Cabinet, or of those whom they consult on military affairs, that, failing the early capture of Sebastopol, the British army may be in danger, I offer to the discernment of the Cabinet my still secret plans of attack,' whereby the garrisons would be expelled from the forts or annihilated, in defiance of numerical force, and possession obtained, at least during sufficient time to enable the chief defences to be blown up and the harbour fleet to be destroyed. If you will so far favour me, I should be gratified by having an opportunity of demonstrating to your strong mind, free from professional bias, the fact that combustible ships may be not only placed on a parity with stone forts fitted to fire red-hot shot, but secured from injury more effectually than if incased in iron."

Sir James Graham's answer was, like its forerunners, complimentary, but nothing more. "I can never cease," he wrote, "to do justice to your patriotic desire to serve your country, which is evinced by your desire to encounter, in your own person, the dangers attendant on your experiment, and not to transfer the hazard of the enterprise to others." But to the enterprise itself he would give no sanction. "Your plans," he said, "by my desire were submitted to the consideration of most competent naval and military officers, whose impartial judgment cannot be impugned, and, on the whole, they did not recommend the trial of the experiment which you are anxious to make. Neither Lord Aberdeen nor I can venture to place our individual opinions in opposition to a recorded judgment of the highest authority on a question which is purely professional. I see no advantage, therefore, in renewing the discussion with you at the present moment."

Had the "impartial judgment" by which Sir James Graham held himself bound been adverse to the principle of Lord Dundonald's plans, or declared them to be anything more than "inexpedient in present circumstances," more weight might have been attached to it; although even then he could have pointed to the opposite verdict, given in 1847, by other judges quite as impartial and competent, who, while objecting to part of them on the score of their deadly efficacy, had officially announced their belief in the applicability of another part – the part of which Lord Dundonald now proposed to make most use – and recommended its adoption "when the opportunity of employing it may occur."

He therefore refused to be thwarted in his efforts to render to his country the great service that he considered to be in his power, and Sir Charles Napier's removal from the command of the Baltic fleet, in January, 1855, gave him an opportunity of offering to use that power under conditions that would relieve the Admiralty of all direct responsibility in the event of his failure. "I am much gratified," he said in another letter to Sir James Graham, "to learn that her most gracious Majesty has been pleased to reserve the high dignity of Admiral of the Fleet as a reward for services. Under this impression, permit me to solicit the favour of being allowed to contend for that distinction, not by reference again to opinions, which may prove fallacious, but by actual experimental proof of the safety and facility of assailing fortifications by my secret plans. By them, the damage and loss of life sustained by the allied squadron in their late attack on the fortifications of Sebastopol might have been partly if not wholly averted, and probably a tenfold destruction inflicted on the enemy. If this is admitted – and I do not think it can be disputed – I hope you will allow me to demonstrate the general applicability of these simple, comparatively costless, and in my opinion infallible means of annihilating the power of all kinds of batteries that can be approached to windward within half a mile. These plans have been entertained and pondered over by me during forty years, and now again I offer to explain, to test, and to put them in execution."

Sir James Graham's answer was very terse. "I have had the honour," he wrote on the 23rd of January, "of receiving your lordship's letter, in which you tender your services to take command of the Baltic Fleet. I consider the tender highly honourable to you; but I cannot give any other assurance."

No other assurance would have been of any avail. The Earl of Aberdeen's Cabinet, having lost the confidence of the country, was dissolved almost immediately after that letter was written, to be replaced by an Administration in which Lord Palmerston was Premier, and Sir Charles Wood First Lord of the Admiralty.

To Lord Palmerston the Earl of Dundonald wrote on the 13th of February. "The high position of our country being at stake on the result of the war," he said, "and our long-established naval renown pledged on the successful conduct of affairs in the Baltic, I addressed my kind friend Lord Lansdowne, who has been long conversant with the objects which, by his advice, I now offer to your lordship's notice as First Minister of the Crown, conjointly, if you judge proper, with that of the Cabinet over which you preside." He then briefly described the principle of his secret plan, adding, "I respectfully offer to execute this plan, and answer for its success, against Cronstadt, and against all minor strongholds in the Baltic."

Four weeks elapsed before that letter was answered. In the meanwhile Lord Dundonald, beginning to despair of a satisfactory hearing from any Minister of State, unless he was induced thereto by a popular demand, addressed a petition to the House of Commons, urging the importance of his plans, and praying for "a searching inquiry, to ascertain whether the aforesaid secret plans are capable speedily, certainly, and cheaply to surmount obstacles which our gallant, persevering, and costly armies and fleets have failed to accomplish." His reasons for so doing he explained in a letter addressed to the "Times" on the 10th of March.

"Peace," he there said, "being desirable not only for the interests of our country, but for those of the world at large, and the negotiations now pending being doubtless injuriously influenced by the obstinate resistance of Sebastopol (which could be overcome in a day), and by the impossibility of successfully attacking Cronstadt by naval means (which might be as speedily reduced), I have drawn up a petition to Parliament in order that secrecy and silence on my part, and deficiency of information on that of the public, may no longer prove injurious to the success of our arms. Hostilities having proceeded so far, assuredly it is more expedient to reduce a restless nation to a third- or fourth-rate power, than be ourselves reduced. Let not my motive be mistaken. I have no wish to command a fleet of 100-gun ships, or to attack first-rate fortresses by incased batteries or steam gunboats. That which I desire is, first, secretly to demonstrate to competent persons the efficiency of my plans, and then to obtain authority, during eight or ten days of fine weather, to put them in execution. The means I contemplate are simple, cheap, and safe. They would spare thousands of lives, millions of money, great havoc and uncertainty of results. Their consequences might, and probably would, effect the emancipation of Poland, and give freedom to the usurped territories of Sweden. Those who judge unfavourably of all aged naval commanders assuredly do not reflect that the useful employment of the energies of thousands and tens of thousands of men can best be developed and directed by a mind instructed by long observation matured by reflection; – an advantage to which physical power, that could clear its way by a broadsword, can bear no comparison. My unsupported opinion in regard to a naval enterprise in 1809 proved to be correct. Every other undertaking in the British service, and as Commander-in-Chief in Chili, Peru, Brazil, and Greece, was successful, and so would the protracted and unaccomplished undertaking, so injurious to the result of negotiation, have succeeded, had I possessed sufficient influence to be patiently listened to."

The petition aroused much interest among the public, but was unheeded by the House of Commons, and therefore produced very slight effect on the Ministry. "My published petition," wrote Lord Dundonald to Viscount Palmerston on the 17th of March, "has brought me numerous letters, and, amongst others, a communication, I believe from high authority, that if I do know any means whereby to spare the slaughter that must take place on storming Sebastopol, I ought to make it known. I wish I could impart to your lordship what I feel under the present circumstances, and how anxiously I desire that a speedy decision may succeed the lingering delays that I have so long endured."

A few days after that, chiefly through the assistance of his friend Lord Brougham, Lord Dundonald obtained an interview with Lord Palmerston, at which he further detailed his plans, and urged that they should be promptly employed in hastening a conclusion of the war with Russia. To Lord Palmerston he also wrote again on the 31st of March. "It has occurred to me," he said, "that the supposed inhumanity of my plans may have caused the use of the word 'inexpedient' in the report of the commission appointed in July last by the Admiralty, and may even now influence the decision of the Cabinet. Perhaps another view may have been taken of the consequences of divulging my plans, as regards the security of this kingdom." To these possible objections he urged that no conduct that brought to a speedy termination a war which might otherwise last for years, and be attended by terrible bloodshed in numerous battles, could be called inhuman; and that the most powerful means of averting invasion, and, indeed, all future war, would be the introduction of a method of fighting which, rendering all vigorous defence impossible, would frighten every nation from running the risks of warfare at all.

Those arguments appear to have had some weight; but, after further correspondence, Lord Palmerston's Government, like all the other Governments to which they had been offered, refused to put the plans in execution. Further evidence in their favour was obtained from some eminent scientific men; and it was put beyond dispute that, though they might not have such deadly efficacy as Lord Dundonald anticipated – on which point the critics spoke with hesitation – they could not fail, if properly applied, in producing very important results. But it was all in vain. All that Lord Palmerston would agree to was to have the experiment tried on a small scale at Sebastopol, and by two Engineer officers who were to be instructed in their work by Lord Dundonald. Lord Dundonald consented to the trial, if it was conducted by his son, Captain the Honourable Arthur Cochrane, R.N. But this was not agreed to, and the whole project fell to the ground.

At that result Lord Dundonald was hardly more disappointed than was a large section of the English public. Friends and strangers, soldiers, sailors, newspaper writers, and merchants, wrote to him from London, Edinburgh, Liverpool, Birmingham, Belfast, and all other parts of the kingdom, urging that, if the enterprise was not undertaken by Government, it should be executed by means of a private subscription. "I am perfectly convinced," wrote one, "that you can do all the injury to the Russian fortifications that you say you can do. If miserable jealousy at the Admiralty refuses you the means, take them from those who, like myself, are very proud to be your countrymen. I am not a rich man, but I shall gladly subscribe one hundred pounds to any scheme that you will propose and carry out yourself." "If your lordship will appeal to the country," wrote another, "in less than a week you will receive subscriptions to any amount. You will then be independent of Government routine, and the public will, without further delay, have an opportunity of testing the value of your invention, towards which the eyes of all Europe are anxiously turned at the present juncture."

Those suggestions, and the evidence afforded by them of a widespread sympathy in his efforts to render a last great service to his country, afforded real satisfaction to Lord Dundonald; but their adoption was quite impossible. As a British officer, he could not for a moment think of entering upon a warlike project independently of the State. Therefore he left the work on which his heart was set undone, and soon – though by no means so soon as he could have made it – the Russian war was brought to a conclusion.

Whatever may have been the cause of the rejection of his offer to hasten that conclusion by means of his secret war-plans, the Earl of Dundonald experienced no lack of personal courtesy during the period of the correspondence, or throughout the brief remainder of his life. His closing years were cheered by many acts by which was nearly completed the tardy reparation for former injuries which was begun with his reinstatement in the navy by King William IV., and in which the most gratifying circumstance of all was the restoration of his honours as a Knight of the Bath by her gracious Majesty Queen Victoria.

"The death of Sir Byam Martin, and the promotion of Sir William Gage to the office of Vice-Admiral of the United Kingdom," wrote Sir James Graham on the 23rd of October, 1854, "vacate the appointment of Rear-Admiral. It is an honorary distinction; and your standing in the naval service and your gallant achievements entitle you to this reward. I have taken her Majesty's pleasure, and the Queen has graciously approved my recommendation. I propose, therefore, with your lordship's permission, that you shall be gazetted Rear-Admiral of the United Kingdom." "I accept the proposed honour with gratitude to her Majesty and with thanks to you," answered Lord Dundonald, on the 24th. "Permit me, however, to express a hope that such distinction shall not preclude my further service to the Crown and country, which long and matured consideration on professional subjects assures me I could now perform even more effectually than at an earlier period."

A month later he was honoured by a compliment from one who, kind and gracious in all his acts, had never failed in showing towards him special grace and kindness. "My dear lord," wrote Prince Albert on the 26th of November, "a vacancy has occurred in the list of Honorary Brethren of the Trinity House, by the lamented death of Sir Byam Martin. It has always been customary in that corporation to have the Royal Navy represented amongst the Elder Brethren by one of its most distinguished officers. I therefore write to inquire whether it would be agreeable to you to be elected a member of that body; as I should, in that case, have much pleasure in proposing, as Master of the Corporation, your name for the election of the Elder Brethren. Believe me always, my dear lord, yours truly, – Albert."

"May it please your Royal Highness," Lord Dundonald wrote in reply, on the 27th, "to accept my dutiful and most grateful thanks for the honour your Royal Highness is pleased to confer. I assure your Royal Highness that I shall ever look forward with anxiety to prove my devotion and gratitude to her most gracious Majesty, for signal acts of justice and favour, and to your Royal Highness for this highly-appreciated mark of your consideration."

A token of the estimation in which Lord Dundonald was at length held by all classes of his countrymen may here be recorded. After frequent refusal, on the ground of his age and love of privacy, he consented, in May, 1856, to seek admission to the United Service Club. Its members, thereupon, at once resolved, at the proposal of Vice-Admiral Sir George F. Seymour, which was seconded by Lieutenant-General Sir C. F. Smith, "to invite that highly-distinguished officer, Admiral the Earl of Dundonald, to become an honorary member of the Club, until the time of his lordship's ballot takes place."

In spite of compliments like these, however, it was his earnest desire that, before his life was ended, every shadow which had darkened it might be cleared away, and that he might not pass into the grave without the assurance that he was formally, and in every respect, acquitted of the unjust charges brought against him nearly half a century before. While one single consequence of those charges remained in force, he considered that he was not so acquitted, and with this object he laboured to the last.

"I venture to remind your lordship," he wrote to Lord Palmerston, on the 26th of May, "that the undeviating rectitude of my conduct through a long life has already induced the Crown, in the exercise of its justice, to restore my rank and honours. There yet remains, my dear lord, a gracious and important act to perform, namely, to order my banner to be replaced in King Henry VII.'s Chapel, and to direct the repayment of the fine inflicted by the Court of King's Bench, and the restoration of my half-pay suspended during my removal from the naval service. Unless these be done, I shall descend to my grave with the consciousness, not only that justice has not fully been done to me, but under the painful conviction that its omission will be construed to the injury of my character in the estimation of posterity. Independently of the justice of this claim on its own merits, I venture to express a hope that your lordship will admit that, during my temporary absence from the naval service, my exertions tended materially to promote the interests of our country by opening to commerce the ports of the Pacific and those of all the northern provinces of Brazil."

The appeal was unsuccessful. The part of it having reference to the replacement of Lord Dundonald's banner in Westminster Abbey was considered by Lord Palmerston to be a question with which it was not in his province to deal. "With regard to the fine," he said, "I am afraid that there are no funds out of which it could be repaid, and I should doubt there being any precedent for such a proceeding; and I find, on inquiry, that pay or half-pay has not been granted to any naval officer for any period during which he may have been out of the service." That reply induced Lord Dundonald to write again to Lord Palmerston on the 7th of June. "I submit," he then said, "that, the fine being imposed for an alleged offence of which I was wholly innocent, it ought to be repaid, even if there be no special fund appropriated to such a purpose. The peculiarity of my case may account for there being no precedent for such a proceeding, if none there be. The same peculiarity may distinguish my case from that of all other naval officers to whom no pay or half-pay has been allowed for any period during which they may have been out of the service. I may have been the only naval officer unjustly expelled, and assuredly I have been the only one so expelled after manifesting, by various acts, a truly patriotic zeal for the honour and interest of our country. No other naval officer, after such acts, was ever expelled the service and otherwise punished on mere conjectural evidence, since demonstrated to have been utterly groundless. I submit that instances have occurred of military officers recovering pay or half-pay after unjust expulsion, as in the case of Sir Robert Wilson; and I am not aware of the existence of any cause for a distinction in this respect between the two services. I feel the deepest gratitude and satisfaction that my life has been spared to a period when I may reasonably hope that the portion of justice yet due to me for the erroneous verdict and its injurious consequences will not be withheld. Of that justice, the first instalment, namely, the restoration of my naval rank, was granted by his late Majesty King William, and the second by her present most gracious Majesty, who, on the representation of my noble friend the Marquess of Lansdowne, was pleased to reinstate me in the Order of the Bath. For the third and conclusive portion of justice still remaining due to me, I cannot desist from looking to your lordship."