Page images
PDF
EPUB

of Kent enemies among the disaffected: and who perhaps should have been removed altogether from the garrison. These persons were encouraged in expressing their dissatisfaction by some officers, who, preferring a laxity of discipline, manifested a disposition, (highly criminal towards a Commander in Chief,) to act contrary to the general orders of the Duke, and in consequence a mutiny took place on the 24th December 1802. It was immediately quelled by His Royal Highness, and the garrison restored to the most perfect order. A pique between the 25th Regiment and the Royal Scots, (occasioned by the former corps not having assisted the mutineers on the 24th,) produced a tumult on the 26th; but this was speedily terminated by the good conduct of the officers of the 25th Regiment.

The mutiny itself was but the affair of a moment--its consequences as touching the general discipline of the garrison were indeed felt for a short time after, but not a trace of it was visible after ten days. From what has been observed, it will be seen, that it solely originated from the conduct of some officers. Had the Duke of Kent met with the cordial support of all the officers, and not been thwarted by opposition on the part of some, indifference on that of others, and by a repetition of the most culpable conversation at the different messes, as well as on other occasions by officers, in the presence of the non-commissioned officers and men, the disturbance would never have happened.

Excepting the cause already stated, it would be imprudent to hazard an opinion of the occasion of such conduct on the part of any officers. The Duke of Kent never used a rough expression to an officer, or refused one an indulgence which it was in his power with propriety to grant. To please all, is a task of difficulty, not to say impossibility; but as the general orders were the ground of objection by the disaffected, we shall here record the opinion of a veteran soldier, and one of the best officers the British Army ever possessed. The late General Fawcett observed, that "no officer in Gibraltar or any other garrison, who makes the exact and regular performance of all the duties incident to that situation, the primary object of his

attention, which he certainly ought to do, can set up any just and well-founded objections against it. The pains that the Duke of Kent must unavoidably have taken in composing so useful and complete a work, does him infinite honor. It was moreover much wanted, as garrison duty, for want of a more general practice of it in our service, is but very imperfectly understood or attended to amongst us. The Duke of Kent's most meritorious labours therefore, for the benefit and instruction of the army at large, in this important branch of His Ma jesty's service, call for its most grateful and sincere acknowledgments."

Misrepresentations of the disturbances and of the general orders of the Duke of Kent, were sent to this country, and His Royal Highness was recalled, on the ground that “it was desirable the different departments of government at home should have the advantage of some personal communication upon the recent events at Gibraltar."

It must now be evident to the most fastidious, that the conduct of the Duke of Kent, whilst Governor of Gibraltar, was judicious and correct; that his views were directed to the benefit of His Majesty's service, that the shameful condition in which the garrison of Gibraltar was found by His Royal Highness, rendered the adoption of such regulations as he framed, a point of vital importance to its security and preservation, to the welfare of the inhabitants and the soldiers, as well as to the proper and necessary discipline of the latter.

On the 5th September, 1805, His Royal Highness was promoted to the rank of Field Marshal. He has always shewn an anxious disposition to be actively employed, but has not had any command since the latter period.

The recall of the Duke of Kent, at a time when the Duke of York held the office of Commander in Chief, occasioned a very prevailing opinion, that a disaffection existed between them. We are not prepared to state that differences have not arisen between these two illustrious brothers on professional points; but there are sufficient grounds to assert, that for many years they have, to the mutual satisfaction of their real friends, lived on the most cordial terms.

Shortly after the period when charges were exhibited against the Duke of York, it having appeared, that an officer, who had formerly held the situation of Private Secretary to the Duke of Kent, had some acquaintance with the principal female performer in that business, a report was industriously circulated, that the Duke of Kent was concerned in the conspiracy against his brother, and supported his accusers. Although such disgraceful and ridiculous stories only merited contempt, the Duke of Kent immediately sent for Lord Harrington, and the following statement was laid before the public.

Questions put to Captain Dodd, by His Royal Highness the Duke of Kent: and his Answers thereto.

26th July, 1809.

Question. Have I directly or indirectly sanctioned, advised, or encouraged any attacks upon the Duke of York, to your knowledge?

Answer. Never.

T. Dodd.

Question. Have I had to your knowledge any acquaintance or communication with Colonel Wardle, or any of the persons concerned in bringing forward the investigation respecting the Duke of York's conduct, which took place in Parliament, last winter, either directly or indirectly?

Answer. I feel confident that your Royal Highness has no such knowledge or acquaintance. T. Dood.

Question. Have I, to your knowledge, ever had any acquaintance with, or knowledge of Mrs. Clarke, or any communication with her, direct or indirect, upon the subject above named, or any other?

Answer. I am confident your Royal Highness never had.

T. Dodd.

Question. Have I ever expressed to you any sentiment which could induce you to believe that I approved of what was brought forward in Parliament, against the Duke of York; or of any proceeding that would tend to his obloquy or disgrace? Answer. Never! I have heard your Royal Highness lament the business vivâ voce, and you made the same communication to me in writing.

T. Dodd.

Question. Have you ever to your recollection: expressed yourself either by word or in writing, either to Colonel Wardle, or Mrs. Clarke, or to any other person connected with the investigation of the Duke of York's conduct, in any way that could give them reason to suppose that I approved of the measure, or would countenance those concerned in bringing it forward?

Answer. Never; but I have on the contrary expressed myself, that your Royal Highness would have a very different feeling. T. Dodd.

Question. What were my expressions on the subject of the Pamphlets which appeared, passing censure on the conduct of the Duke of York, and others of my family, and holding up my character to praise; and what have been the sentiments which I have uniformly expressed on similar publications, whether in the newspapers or elsewhere?

Answer. I have invariably heard your Royal Highness regret that any person should attempt to do justice to your own character, at the expense of that of the Duke of York, or of any other member of your family.. T. Dodd.

Question. During the ten years you have been my Private Secretary, when in the most confidential moments I have given vent to my wounded feelings, on professional subjects, did you ever hear me express myself inimically to the Duke of York, or that. I entertained an expectation of raising myself, by his fall? Answer. Never! on the contrary, I have frequently heard your Royal Highness express yourself very differently.

T. Dodd. The above questions, written in Colonel Vesey's hand, were all dictated by me, Edward, in presence of Lord Harrington. (Signed) J. A. Vesey.

Harrington.

Having traced the military career of the Duke of Kent, it now becomes our duty to give some account of his Royal Highness's domestic character and habits; to point out the great advantage he has conferred on this country by his large and benevolent views, and by his indefatigable, exertions to amend the condition of the poorer classes.

In his person. His Royal Highness is tall, handsome, and extremely well made. The profile of his countenance, which more resembles that of his august father, than any other member of his family, announces great penetration; he has derived all the advantages to be expected from travelling; his manners and disposition are affable; his address uncommonly easy; his understanding strong; and his speech remarkably correct and clear. In his habits the Duke of Kent is an extraordinary example of regularity and temperance. Since he entered upon his military life, at eighteen years of age, he has invariably risen before day-light, both in summer and winter. He inspects the accounts of his household daily, and in his mode of living is extremely abstemious, never exceeding a glass of wine at dinner, although he frequently sees company. To every species of gaming, his Royal Highness is an open and avowed enemy, and the principal amusement of which he partakes is music. To those who merit his confidence or protection, he is ever a most firm and steady friend: he omits no opportunity in his power of serving them; and such is his strict integrity, that no consideration was ever known to induce His Royal Highness to swerve in the least degree from a promise he had once given, Perhaps this is one of the highest traits in the character of a Prince that can be advanced; and while it reflects lustre and honor on the Duke, it at the same time prevents those miseries and bitter disappointments which so frequently arise from the violation of promises liberally and thoughtlessly bestowed by those in exalted stations.

In his family, the Duke of Kent is a most kind and indulgent master, free from caprice or passion; a proof of which is the attachment of his suite, some of whom have attended him from his first outset in life, and most of them have been known to His Royal Highness for years.

To the poor he is a liberal benefactor, and even under his present embarrassments, which have not been occasioned by improvidence on his part, the Duke of Kent constantly devotes a larger portion of his income, than his friends conceive prudent to himself, towards the relief of private indigence and distress. Of His Royal Highness's charitable exertions, few

« PreviousContinue »