Jasper Republican, Volume 1, Number 37, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 28 May 1875 — THE BRITISH SAILOR REVOLT OF 1797. [ARTICLE]

THE BRITISH SAILOR REVOLT OF 1797.

An Interesting Historical Remlnis> eenee. Some historian- has told us that when Peter the Great of Russia paid his visit to King Christian of Denmark he was invited by the Dane to one of his castles which stood on the brink of a deep, wild gorge, into which it was impossible to look without a shudder. While the monarchs were standing on the battlements overlooking the chasm, the conversation turned upon the systems of government they represented and the power they respectively wielded. Finally the Czar asked the Danish monarch if he would like to have an illustration of the unquestioning obedience he exacted from his subjects, and was told that the illustration would not be unwelcome. Thereupon the Czar called to his side an officer attached to his suite, pointed over the battlement into the terrible gulf below, and said: “ Jump!” The officer turned pale, looked wonderingly up at his sovereign, who only waved his hand and repeated, in a more imperious tone: “ Jump! sir, jump!” Without another word the unfortunate man sprang from the wall and was dashed to pieces on the rocks below. This incident is used by the San Francisco Chronicle as a prefr.ee to the narrative of a bold British mutiny which happened some time ago. The Chronicle says: Happily the time is passed when subjects are called upon to attest their fidelity by such sacrifices as this of the Russian officer; yet in the military and naval service of all civilized powers there is exacted almost as servile a compliance with authority, and almost as much selfabnegation, as the faithful but unfortunate attendant of Russia’s great monarch exhibited; and in no service in the world is this subordination more complete than in the British army and navy. The English soldier has long been regarded as a mere machine, servile in obedience and patient under injustice, meekly submitting to many wrongs without offering even a protest against the abuse of authority, Consequently the history of the British army and navy is wonderfully barren of exciting revolts bloody mutinies, or troublesome insubordination. A notable exception, however, is the great mutiny in Admiral Buckner’s fleet in 1797, an event which filled the Kingdom with consternation, threatened the destruction of England’s supremacy on the sea and to overturn the whole fabric of her naval power.

During 9 the year 1796 and the early part pf 1797 the English sailors had been petitioning Parliament for certain reforms in connection with the naval service. The action of the authorities had been tardy, and the petitioners lost patience. The financial embarrassment of the nation led to great irregularities of pay, and still further increased the discontent. Very little attention, however, was paid to the threats of the indignant sailors, and it was thought that the prompt punishment of the boldest growlers would quell the growing discontent. However, one fine day in May, 1797, the British nation was startled by a report that Admiral Buck ner’s fleet off the Note had mutinied, and that twentyfive ships-of-war were in full possession of the mutineers. The movement was so sudden, and success so complete, that for a time the Government was completely paralyzed. There was no force at hand sufficient to quell the revolt, and for several days not even a show of resistance was attempted. Meanwhile the mutineers grew bolder, and proceeded to perfect their organization. For the proper government of the captured fleet a congress was formed composed of two delegates from eaeh man-of-war and one from each gunboat. The affairs of each vessel were controlled by a committee of twelve, chosen by the crew. The congress selected a young sailor from Admiral Buckner’s flag-ship, the Sandwich, for President, and then drew up an addressee the Government, which the deposed Admiral agreed to transmit to the British Admiralty. This document set forth that the petitioners were riot disloyal, but acknowledged then, as ever, their allegiance to the King; that their attitude of apparent hostility wm only an earnest effort on

their part to obtain justice, which being granted they would instantly return to duty, and His Majesty would have no more loyal or faithful The <dforms they asked were aiffWlows: Firet— An increase-of pay and an increase of rations, both of which, they claimed to be inadequate. Second—K more equal division of prize money, giving the common sailor a reasonable share of the spoils of war. Third— A speedy adjustment of all arrears and more prompt payments in the future. JburtA—Liberty to go more frequently on shore when not on duty, and less petty tyranny on shipboard. Ulis paper was laid before the British Admiralty, and a brief note sent in reply stating that no intercourse whatever would be held with them so long as they maintained their present insurgent attitude, and that unconditional submissions must precede negotiations. While all this was transpiring the fleet lay off Bheerness, and the crews were, daily on shore, where they paraded with much show and stirring music, carrying a red flag, the usual hue of insubordination. On the 22d of May, however, troops were sent to Bheerness and, the mutineers were confined to the irvessels. Here they soon grew restless, and, the Government still refusing to enter into any negotiations with them, they resolved to enforce their demands. Accordingly the mutinous fleet was put in fighting trim, Richard Parker, President of the congress, called to the command, when they moved down to the mouth of the Thames, formed in ne across the channel and announced the blockade of London.

Not a British vessel was permitted to enter the city or depart from it, but all attempting it were seized and held in the name of Parker, to whom his followers had given the title of “ Admiralthe foreign vessels were given a pass signed by the insurgent commander, and, thus protected, proceeded on their way. It was not long before the vessels held by Parker were enumerated by hundreds, and the metropolis was in a perfect frenzy of alarm. It was a new sensation for the British capital to be in a state of siege. But the Government was still without the force necessary to compel respect for its authority, it, however, firmly refused to hold any intercourse with the insurgents, leaving them to reflect during the inaction on the terrible nature of the offense, and the attitude of hostility they had assumed against their country, the Parliament and the King. At this time the force of the insurgents was truly formidable, comprising not less than twenty-four ships of war, carrying, in the aggregate, nearly 1,000 guns, manned by fully 15,000 men; and a short time after this they were joined by six frigates from the Texal, which had been sent home by Admiral Duncan for repairs. As soon as they became aware of the reforms their shipmates were struggling for they too hoisted the red flag, and sent their officers on shore with an address demanding similar concessions. The London vessels which were detained soon formed a vast fleet, representing millions upon millions of wealth. No ■violence was done to the property, but the determination was announced to hold the prizes until the Government should accede to their demands. To make sure that none should escape the war vessels were formed into ft hollow square, within which the prizes were taken, and the broadsides of the men-of-war turned upon them. Over 500 ships were thus guarded. Though the Government had not the means at hand to instantly crush out the mutiny, it was not entirely idle. Every buoy at the mouth of the Thames and along the coast was removed, and the insurgent vessels dared scarcely move a league from their anchorage for fear of grounding. This compelled them to inaction and had a most depressing effect upon their spirits. Having nothing to do but reflect, they soon became exceedingly nervous over the situation; they knew that the public opinion, the law, and the power of the nation were against them, and that submission and punishment must inevitably come. Even the boldest commenced to weaken and cast about for some avenue whereby they might return to duty.

The officers, who, though deprived of their arms and all command, had been retained on board their respective ships, were not slow in discovering this feeling and gave it every possible encouragement. The officers of the frigate Clyde were particularly zealous in this and perfected a plot with part of the crew by which the vessel was seized on the 30th of May, the red flagof the insurgents hauled down and the insurgent flefet deserted. The vessel was fired upon and pursued for some distance but finally escaped up the river. A few days after the St. Florenzo was also carried off by a combination of the officers with a portion of the crew and was brought safely up to the London dock. The 4th of. Jqne was the King’s birthday, and the insurgents showed their loyalty by firing salutes and giving repeated cheers for His Majesty. » On the sth of June another vessel withdrew, and on the 6th Lord Northesk came on board the Sandwich, in response to an invitation from the insurgents, and Parker presented him a paper drawn up by the mutineers’ congress, setting forth the grievances and demanding redress. His-Lordship kindly but firmly refused to receive the paper, telling him that he had come hoping to carry back to his Government the news of their submission, but on no account could he treat with men in mutiny against the laws, the country and the King.

The final rejection of all offers of accommodation seems to have destroyed the last hope of the malcontents, and from that time vessel after vessel withdrew without objection and returned to their allegiance. On the 10th of June the hundreds of 4etained merchantmen were allowed to depart, and such a fleet never entered port before by the same tide. From this moment the disintegration was rapid. On the 12th only seven vessels were flying the red flag, and on, the 16th every ship had been restored to the command of its proper officers, and the crews were glad to return to duty. Thus was this most remarkable mutiny inaugurated and maintained for four weeks, almost within sight of the turrets of Windsor, and for the first time in her history was the British metropolis blockaded. Parker returned to his former' position on the Sandwich, but on the 20th of June a file of soldiers from the fort at Sheerness came on board, and the insurgent chief was taken into custody. On the 24th a court-martial was convened, Vice-Admiral Sir Thos. Paisley presiding. Parker conducted his own defense, and acquitted himself with much ability. The line of argument he adopted was that the situation he held was in a measure forced upon him; that he had only consented to assume it in the hope of being able to restrain the men from excesses; that he had so restrained them; owing to his stringent orders not a hundred pounds’ worth of property had been destroyed by the mutineers; had he been disloyal, he said, he might have taken the ships to sea or carried them into the enemies’ ports, for which a dazzling reward had beenoffered. He admitted that technically he might be guilty, but the purity of his purposes ought to furnish some palliation of his offense. But the Government showed that he had formally issued an order assuming command of the insurgent ships, that he had addressed the Government in that capacity, and that as he had gone from ship to ship of the fleet he had been attended by his staff and received with cheers and all honors due to exalted rank, and after a brief deliberation he was sentenced to die at the yard-arm of the Sandwich in presence of the whole fleet.

When his doom was announced he stood up and said: “ I shall submit to your sentence with all due respect, being confident of the innocence of my intentions, and that God will receive me with favor. I sincerely hope that my death may be the means of restoring tranquillity to the navy, and that those men who have been implicated in this business may be restored to their posi* tions and again become serviceable to their country. I wish further to say that the reforms the insurgents, desired are eminently just, though I, with every loyal citizen, regret the mode selected for their accomplishment.” On the morning of the 30th of June the yellow flag, the signal pf death, was hoisted on the Sandwich. The whole fleet was ranged around the death-ship, their crews piped to the forecastle, and at nine o’clock the unhappy prisoner was brought on deck. He was pale but composed, and as he passed his messmates he said: “ Good-by to you, boys. I sincerely hope my death may be deemed a sufficient atonement for you all.” Just before the rope was adjusted he handed to an officer a letter to his wife and his will, conv eying to her some property in Scotland, after which he was hauled up and died almost wjthout a struggle.

But there is a sad romance connected with this tragedy which is more interesting than the tragedy itself. Parker’s young wife resided in Scotland, and when she heard that the Sheemess fleet had mutinied under the lead of Richard Parker she had no doubt that the insurgent chief was her husband, and she instantly departed for London, believing his arrest was certain, and hoping to save him from the vengeance of the law. On her arrival in London she learned that her husband had been tried and condemned. She hastened to a notary, paid a guinea for having a petition for a commutation properly prepared, and sought to present it to the King. She was obliged to give it to a Lord in waiting, who, on learning for what purpose it was intended, coolly advised her not to waste any more time or money in that effort, for no power on earth could save the bold mutineer. She then went with all possible haste to Sheemess, where she learned that her husband was to be hung at nine o’clock the next morning. At an early hour she began to search for means to get onboard the Sandwich,'and it was nearly nine before she succeeded. Then she was not permitted to come within 200 yards, but was near enough to see her husband as he came on deck on his way to execution. She became wild with grief, and, stretching out her hands, cried: “Richard! Richard! Oh, my husband!” and' fell senseless. The doomed man heard the wail, and said to one of the officers: “There is my poor wife from Scotland! Can I see her, if but for one moment?” No reply was made, but the work.of death was hurried forward, and in a few moments the unhappy man was beyond the reach of worldly sorrow. On recovering from her long swoon the poor woman was informed of the sad termination, and also learned that the body had just been sent on shore far burial in the new naval cemetery. She hastened to the cemetery, but found the ceremony over and the gate locked, and she was refused admittance to the inside of the inclosure. Moved to desperation by a rumor that the surgeons would probably carry the body off that night for dissection, she determined to thwart them; she waited around the cemetery until dark, when she climbed over the

wall, and found the new-made grave, which proved exceedingly shallow. She was not long in scraping away the earth which covered the simple coffin, the lid of which was soon removed, and she had the corpse in her amt. Her first intention was simply to stay by the grave and protect it from the threatened desecration, but she now determined to remove the body altogether. Accordingly she communicated her purpose to two or three women whose acquaintance she had formed, and with their help the body was taken from the grave, carried over the wall, put in a cart and started for London. She arrived there at eleven o’clock at night, but having no acquaintances in the city was compelled to take the body to a public-house. After much difficulty she succeeded in getting it to her room and wept over it until morning. But her secret could no longer be kept in such a place, particularly as the news of the exhumation had been brought to the city by the express and was the talk of the town. The fact was soon known and the house was surrounded by an immense crowd anxious to look upon the body of the noted mutineer, whose boldness and sincerity the populace now began to respect. The excitement hourly increased, the populace began to cheer the late mutineer and deride the authorities, when the Lord Mayor called upon Mrs. Parker, who was watching over her dead, and demanded to know what disposition she intended to make of the remains. The poor woman replied that she only wanted to give them a decent burial, and His Lordship promised that all necessary aid would be given to enable her to carry out her wish. All this time the excitement was growing, the streets became impassable, the turbulence increased, and it began to look as if even the dead mutineer might cause bloodshed if not civil war.' But the body was soon buried according to the widow’s wishes, and the crowds dispensed. Mrs. Parker took lip her residence near the place of burial and, for some years, derived a comfortable support from the small property left by her husband. But she was subsequently deprived of that by a decision of the courts, which, for some cause, declared her title invalid. She was therefore thrown upon her own resources; partial blindness soon followed, incapacitating her for work, and she was ultimately compelled to go upon the streets and solicit aid from the charitable. In 1806—-forty years after her heroic struggle for the possession of her husband’s body—a communication in the London Timet called public attention to and a fund of £SOO was quickly raised to render her last years comfortable, the. British monarch, William IV., himself contributing £SO. The brave but unfortunate woman died in 1842.