HC Deb 05 February 1841 vol 56 cc330-41
Lord J. Russell

rose to propose the vote of thanks, of which he had given notice, to the officers and men engaged in the operations on the coast of Syria. He was quite sure, that in calling upon the House to agree to a vote of thanks to Sir Robert Stopford, Sir Charles Napier, Sir C. Smith, and the other officers and men engaged in the recent operations on the coast of Syria and at Acre, the House would generally allow that the motion was due to those gallant officers and the troops who bad served under them. The service had from the commencement been a very peculiar one. It depended in a great degree on the promptitude with which the orders of the Government were carried into effect, and upon the various operations which were necessary to carry out the general policy of the Government. Whether that policy were rightly or wrongly conceived—whether or not it were expedient to attempt any such operations—whatever the opinion of gentlemen might be with respect to those points, there could be no question that, such being the policy of the Government, and such the orders given by her Majesty, nothing could exceed the skill and effect with which those orders were executed. Sir R. Stopford was in the command of a considerable fleet in the Mediterranean; but at the same time it must be recollected the state of affairs was such—the appearances of the peace of Europe being disturbed were at one time so alarming, that with respect to all his operations, with respect to everything he undertook, as a prudent commander, anxious for the reputation of the navy, and likewise for the success of any measures he might be ordered to effect, he was obliged to consider with the utmost discretion and nicety what might be the ultimate events that would arise out of any oper- ations he should undertake. It was obvious to him, and it would be obvious to the House, that it could not have been sufficient lo undertake these operations, considering he had no enemy to deal with, but the Pasha of Egypt, and that there was no chance of a contingency in which a great European power should send its fleet to the assistance of that Pasha. He was obliged, therefore, not only not to waste or squander his force, which would have been unadvisable in any respect, but he was obliged not to throw away any resources he might have beyond what were necessary to effect the object immediately in view. He said this, because he maintained that whatever might be the gallantry and skill displayed in naval or military operations, the officer in command besides his share, which must be the principal share in directing them, had always besides the duty and the charge inseparable from so responsible a situation, not only to consider immediate operations, but it was his bounden duty to look to the position of the Government and the country and take many considerations, partly military, partly naval, and partly political, into his view. He had said thus much as applying to Sir Robert Stopford, and he thought to Sir Robert Stopford alone. What he had now stated applied to Sir Robert Stopford certainly in the first place, but afterwards to every person engaged in these operations. The treaty in consequence of which these operations were undertaken was signed on the 15th of July. Orders were given by which part of these operations should be undertaken before the ratification took place. Certain warnings were in consequence given by Sir Charles Napier, and about the 9th or 10th of September the fleet on the coast of Syria being made aware that Mehemet A had rejected all propositions made to him, commenced their hostile operations against the forces of the Pasha, which had finally led to his submission. The first operations were directed against Beyrout, which was taken without any carnage; but as it became necessary to subdue the military force of Mehemet Ali under the command of Ibrahim Pasha, part of which occupied Beyrout, it was regarded as a hostile place The consequence of the attack was the entire destruction of the military forts of the place. It then became necessary that a land expedition should be undertaken, and by the command of Admiral Stopford, a Turkish force, consisting of about 6,000 men, to whom were added 1,500 British marines, was landed from the bay. The position taken by this force was not one which could be considered safe for any permanent operation; but Commodore Napier had selected it as one on which no attack could be made, except by troops coming along the shore; but the British ships of war were so placed as to have their guns brought to bear on any force so advancing, and under cover of those the allied forces were intended to advance. The boldness of this attempt formed one of the most remarkable features in the brilliant career of Commodore Napier, under whose immediate command this force was placed. The object was not to land any large army in Syria at first, but a small force was considered necessary in order to encourage the Syrian subjects of the Sultan to take up arms against Mehemet Ali. For that object nothing could be better planned, and nothing could have been more successful in its operation. If that course had not been adopted, it would have been exceedingly rash to expose a comparatively small force to the very large and well appointed army under the command of Ibrahim Pasha—an army estimated by some at 100,000—by others at 120,000, and by none at less than 65,000. It was then ordered by Admiral Stopford that the Egyptian force in Beyrout should be attacked. A movement for that purpose was immediately undertaken, but before it was executed it was discovered that a very large force had occupied the heights above the fort. Here it became necessary to decide at once upon the step to be taken. That decision was instantly made—it was to attack the Egyptian army at once. The attack was made as soon as decided upon, and the force under Ibrahim Pasha, as well as that under Soliman Pasha, were soon obliged to quit the field, leaving a large number of the Egyptian troops prisoners in the hands of the small force under Commodore Napier and General Jochmus. An attack was afterwards made upon Sidon by the combined forces, in which the Archduke Frederick, on board an Austrian frigate, signally distinguished himself. The result of this attack was, that the Egyptian force, unable to withstand the fire of the ships, were obliged to retire, leaving the place in the hands of their assailants. Of the skill and prowess displayed by the officers and men of the allied forces it was impos- sible to speak in terms of too great praise. But the most important operations on the Syrian coast were those before Acre, a place rendered memorable by the prowess displayed by Sir S. Smith in its defence many years ago. It had fallen to us in the close of the last year to accomplish its capture by the same service which had once so distinguished itself in its defence. On the 29th of October orders came out from England directing Admiral Stopford to attack Acre, but of course leaving much to his discretion, as he should consider the attempt practicable. It was, however, but just to say, that that gallant officer had, before the instructions arrived out, considered whether he should not undertake the enterprise. Seven sail-of-the line and some smaller vessels were immediately ordered to take up their position in front of the batteries. The position thus chosen by Sir R. Stopford evinced the knowledge and skill of a man who in various parts of the world had always shown his complete acquaintance with the profession to which he was an ornament, and at the same time displayed the most signal gallantry and daring; the attack was commenced by opening the tire of the ships on two sides of the battery, and in a short time it was found to be most destructive, driving from their guns many of the Egyptian troops, who it must be admitted had displayed the most daring bravery. After the firing had continued for a few hours an explosion of a powder magazine took place in the fort with such destructive effect, that the Egyptian commander, and those under his orders, gave up in despair all thoughts of defending the place any longer, and on the 4th of November the place surrendered to the forces of her Majesty and those of the Sultan. In noticing the capture of Acre, he could not omit the distinguished parts borne in the action by Commodore Napier, by Sir Charles Smith, and the engineers under his command; by Admiral Walker, commanding a Turkish line-of-battle ship, and the aid derived from the small but very effective force belonging to the Emperor of Austria. The consequences of these combined operations were the complete success of all the enterprises undertaken from the arrival of the allied forces in September down to their termination by the capture of Acre, and the entire submission of Mehemet Ali to the treaty of the 15th of July. He would not enter here into the policy of the measures under- taken with respect to Syria, but, whatever that policy might have been, it was impossible that any naval force could have done more than was achieved by the brave men to whose skill and valour those important enterprises were intrusted. He might here observe, that the skill to which modern nations have arrived in the various sciences of navigation, gunnery, and engineering, would be found in time of need utterly useless. They had heard of great attainments in all the arts of civilized warfare, but those had failed, even with every financial means at the disposal of a commander, because he found he had to deal with those of superior minds and energies. Indeed, he was convinced, that if the position of the belligerent parties lately engaged on the Syrian coast had been reversed, and that an Egyptian fleet had had to attack an English fortress, the result would have been different, and the fort would have triumphed in the defeat of the fleet; and why?—because the Egyptians would have found in either case that they had to combat not alone against the material, but also against the moral force, the greater energy of superior skill of men belonging to a nation distinguished as this and other nations of Europe are by superior arts, superior civilization, and enterprise. This was a consideration not to be lost sight of, because it would be lamentable to think that any barbarian by merely cultivating the arts of war, and by having a larger artillery force and a greater number of ships, should be able successfully to compete with any civilized nation. Such, however, he was convinced, never would be the case. On the contrary, he was persuaded that the character and institutions of a nation would always have their weight in the warlike operations in which that nation might be engaged; and as an illustration he might add, that those brave men to whom they were then about to return thanks, distinguished, as they were, by their great personal courage and those daring feats which they had achieved, had shown themselves thus worthy, because they belonged to a nation in which those qualities were always found when needed—a nation which, by its superior institutions, its freedom, its pre-eminence in the arts, had been always ready to produce men to defend its honour and promote its interests, whenever their services were called into action. He did not feel it necessary to add any further on this subject, but would now move, "That the thanks of this House be given to Admiral the hon. Sir Robert Stopford, Knight Grand Cross of the most hon. Military Order of the Bath, for his able and gallant conduct during the operations on the coast of Syria, terminating in the successful and decisive attack on the batteries and fortress of Acre, on the 3rd of November, 1840."

Lord Stanley

said, that standing as he did in that House, he was anxious to state, in a very few words, the grounds on which he cordially seconded the motion of the noble Lord. This was a subject on which no difference of opinion could arise from any political motive. They were not at that time called upon to discuss the bearings of the Syrian question, or to enter into any arguments as to the policy by which her Majesty's Government had been guided in that great question. To do so on such an occasion as the present would be exceedingly embarrassing. All they were called upon to do by the motion of the noble Lord was, to express on the part of that House the exultation they felt at the success which had attended her Majesty's arms, and the gratitude which they and the country were desirous of showing to those brave men, by whose combined exertions, by whose skill and bravery, by whose mental as well as physical powers, the great objects of the expedition had been attained, and an additional triumph afforded to the British arms. The noble Lord, and the members of the Government were alone fully in possession of the nature of the instructions sent out for the guidance of Sir R. Stopford, and the officers under his orders, and they alone could be aware how promptly and energetically those orders had been acted upon. But such was the critical nature of the situation in which that gallant Admiral was placed, so many circumstances might have occurred which would have rendered a modification of, or a total change in, or perhaps a neglect of those instructions necessary, that it required the exercise of the greatest vigilance and promptitude in obeying the orders given, but also great decision, and the highest degree of political prudence in acting for himself, as if no instructions had been sent out. He (Lord Stanley) therefore thought, without having more information on the subject than was already before the House, without knowing anything of the details known only to the Government, that there was no Gentleman at either side of the House, not a man in the country who would refuse, upon general information accessible to all, the praise of prudence combined with vigour, activity, and valour, which had been assigned by the noble Lord opposite to Sir R. Stopford in the late operations on the Syrian coast. On this point he could not see how difference of opinion could exist, and still less could it exist when the question applied to the brave men who had acted under his orders, and who had so ably followed up and seconded his efforts—men who had displayed that almost reckless courage and daring which were the general characteristics of our naval and military forces—men who had achieved a series of operations, ending in one of the most brilliant feats of modern times, and which would render the names of those who directed it illustrious in the history of their country. He ought to apologize for having occupied the attention of the House so long, when he had intended to say only a few words, but he was anxious to state, in the position he occupied, in his own name, and in the name of those with whom he had the honour to act, and to give on that side a proof that on such a question, whatever might be their political differences, whatever might be their internal animosities, whatever occasional discord might arise on other subjects, there could be none on this; and that the British Senate, faithfully representing the mind of the British people, had on a question of this kind but one sentiment—that of rejoicing at every new accession of glory to the British arms, and concurring in the expression of gratitude to those brave men who had so mainly contributed to uphold the honour of the British name.

Lord F. Egerton

wished to take that opportunity of saying a few words to express his entire concurrence in all that had fallen from the noble Lord (John Russell) in praise of the skill and valour of the brave men who had conducted and been engaged in the late operations on the coast of Syria. He hoped he should not be considered as making a captious objection to any expression used by the noble Lord; but there was one passage in the noble Lord's speech on which he would say a word to prevent a misconstruction being put upon it in another place. The noble Lord had spoken of the explosion of a powder magazine in the fortress of Acre, in such a way, that it might lead some to imagine that he looked upon that event as causing in a great measure the surrender of that place. To say that, would certainly not be doing full justice to the gallant men engaged in the attack. He was sure that no one in that House would put that construction on the noble Lord's words, but it was probable that a very wrong construction would be placed upon them elsewhere, which it was his object to prevent in thus noticing. With this view he also wished to state, that when the smoke of that explosion cleared away, the Egyptians returned to their guns, and continued to work them until near sunset, when they were driven away by the increased exertions of the ships. Nothing could well surpass the resolution of those brave men, for brave they certainly were, in standing to their guns until driven from them by the irresistible fire of our men of war. He might subject himself to the charge of exaggeration by comparing the brave men who conducted the siege of Acre with such heroes as Blake, Howe, and Nelson, and others of former times; but the battles of the Nile and Trafalgar could not be well compared with the late brilliant affair of Acre; for there were incidents in the attack on Acre which could not have happened in the battles to which he referred, because at the period of those battles, the use of steam in naval warfare was unknown. As an illustration of the great improvement in naval gunnery of late, he might mention that a line-of-battle ship was ordered to direct her fire against a particular tower, and for this purpose was ordered to fire low, and so well directed was her fire, that the whole broadside was poured into the compass of a few feet. Another incident—the landing of Commodore Napier at Djounie Point—was, he thought, equal to any naval exploit of former days. If the forms of the House, and the practice on such occasions would admit, he should like to see the names of Sir T. Hastings, and of a gentleman who, in politics, belonged to the opposite (the Ministerial) side of the House, but whom he considered as one of the best officers in the service—he meant Sir Samuel J. Pechell, and also that of Sir Howard Douglas, mentioned. The noble Lord concluded by again expressing his cordial approval of the motion.

Mr. Hume

hoped the time would never come when a difference of political opin- ions in this House would ever induce any Gentleman to refuse the just meed of his praise and approbation to those who have merited it by their bravery and good conduct. There was no doubt of this fact, that no men could have behaved better than their seamen and marines on this occasion, and he, as an individual, was anxious to give them all the honour that they deserved. He could not, however, avoid remarking, that he deeply deplored that services so eminent should have been employed as he conceived in such an expedition, and which he conceived was highly injurious to the best interests of the country. He could not, therefore, concur in this vote, without entering his protest against the policy which had been pursued by Ministers on the question of Syria.

Sir H. Hardinge

had no protest to enter against the policy pursued by Her Majesty's Ministers on this question, or any approbation to offer, because that was not the occasion on which its merits could be discussed; and he thought the noble Lord, and those who followed him in the discussion, had acted wisely in abstaining from all political allusions. He believed that the account given by the noble Lord of the operations in Syria was most accurate, and he concurred with him in thinking that no men ever better deserved the thanks of their country than those brave and gallant individuals who had been engaged in those actions. Whatever might be the difficulties of any orders which the navy might receive, such were the resources, such the genius, and such the originality of that branch of our service, that, whether it was afloat or on shore, they always brought their efforts to a successful result. On the present occasion he considered that although the navy had not had the same hard fighting that it had had on former occasions, yet the skill and the science which they displayed were attributes of their superiority of the greatest importance; and he hailed their success with the greatest satisfaction. The noble Lord, in mentioning Admiral Stopford's success, had stated that before he received instructions from home he was fully prepared to attack Acre. Now not only was Admiral Stopford fully prepared, but he had also made up his mind to attack Acre before he received instructions to this effect. He thought it was due to the Gallant Admiral that that point should be clearly understood—that he had not only made preparations to attack Acre, but had positively decided to make the attack before the Vesuvius arrived, bearing the instructions of Lord Palmerston. The noble Lord, in the course of his speech had alluded to a very memorable instance in which our Navy had distinguished itself on that very spot—the defence of Acre by Sir Sydney Smith. He (Sir H. Hardinge) would not draw a parallel between the exploits of Sir Sydney Smith and those of Admiral Stopford. It was impossible to institute a comparison for the cases were dissimilar in all their features. On the one occasion Admiral Stopford destroyed the defences of Acre in three hours; on the other occasion to which the noble Lord had referred, and which occurred about forty years ago, Sir Sydney Smith landed his marines and the crews of his ships, entered into the breach, and in a series of sixty days of open trenches, having sustained nine desperate assaults by the French army—a brave and victorious army led by Buonaparte in person—he effected the safety of the town by repulsing all the efforts made against the fort. The cases were perfectly dissimilar; and therefore he might, without making any invidious comparison with the services of the gallant officers, who were about to receive the thanks of that House, take that opportunity of making a suggestion to the House, which he thought of considerable importance. Sir Sydney Smith had received the thanks of both Houses of Parliament for his exploits at Acre. Lord Spencer declared, in moving the vote of thanks in Parliament, that he had performed an exploit unrivalled in history. Parliament was of the same opinion, for departing from its ordinary usage, it bad passed a vote of thanks to him for his services, though he was only a captain in the navy. If he had been killed in the breach which he so nobly defended, he would have had a monument erected to his memory. The gallant officer had been dead a short time, and he would take this opportunity of suggesting to the House the propriety and justice of erecting a monument to his memory in St. Paul's. It appeared to him that his exploit at Acre was of such a memorable character, that the House were bound in that manner to mark their sense of his services.

Sir De Lacy Evans

concurred fully in the motion, but expressed his regret that the names of some other officers, such as General Jochmus, had not been included in the vote. It would be unnecessary to add anything to the praises given to the brave men engaged on these occasions, as their merits had been borne testimony to by the highest military authority of the age—the Duke of Wellington.

Sir R. H. Inglis

said, he had felt the greatest delight at the success with which it had pleased Almighty God to bless her Majesty's forces, he hoped this Christian people while looking to the instruments, would not forget that it was the hand of God that directed their efforts. He concurred with the noble Lord in the terms in which he had proposed this vote of thanks, the highest honour which this House could pay to any of their fellow-subjects. But he trusted, that the noble Lord would not feel that he had discharged his duty to the subjects of that motion, if high as was the honour proposed he limited his reward to that vote of thanks. It was in the power of her Majesty's Government to confer a pecuniary reward upon these men, but he trusted that, instead of that, there would be conferred upon the gallant commander one of a more enduring character, and one which had been generally bestowed on similar occasions. He trusted he had not unnecessarily obtruded these observations upon the House.

Lord Ingestrie

could not allow the vote to pass without offering his tribute of approval to the conduct of the gallant men whose exploits were now under their consideration. He regretted to find that there was an hon. Member of the House who differed as to the expediency of such a vote, because it was a question on which there could be no party or political feelings whatever. He hoped her Majesty's Government would attend to the hint thrown out by the hon. Baronet near him, of conferring some distinction on the gallant Commander of the Forces in the Mediteranean. There was one officer who in those operations (Colonel Walker) had met with his death, not by the guns of the enemy, but by the climate, and-whose services had been such as to merit the insertion of his name in this vote of thanks. He was an officer of marines, and perhaps it might be some consolation to his family to find such honourable mention made of the corps to which he belonged. The noble Lord concluded with expressing his cordial concurrence in the motion.

Lord J. Russell,

in explanation, said, he had not attributed the fall of Acre to the explosion of the powder magazine. He had mentioned the occurrence as it had been noticed by others, but he did not say the capture of the place was occasioned by it.

Lord F. Egerton

said, he noticed he circumstance to prevent a misconstruction being put upon it elsewhere.

Resolution carried nem. con., as were also the following resolutions:— That the thanks of this House be given to Commodore Sir Charles Napier, Knight Commander of the Most Hon. Military Order of the Bath, and to the several Captains and officers of the fleet employed on that arduous service. That this House doth acknowledge and highly approve the services of the Seamen and Royal Marines serving in the fleet on the coast of Syria. That the thanks of this House be given to Major-General Sir Charles Frederick Smith, and to the officers of the Royal Artillery and engineers who served under his command on the coast of Syria. That this House doth acknowledge and highly approve the services of the detachments of Royal Artillery and of Royal Sappers and Miners in the fleet employed on that important service. That the thanks of this House he given to rear-admiral Baron de Bandeira, and the naval forces of his Majesty the Emperor of Austria under the rear-admiral's command, for their cordial assistance and co-operation in the service on the coast of Syria, and the attack of Acre on the 3rd of November, 1840. That the thanks of this House be given to admiral Sir Baldwin Wake Walker, knight, commander of the most hon. military Order of the Bath, and naval forces of his highness the Sultan, for their gallant assistance and cooperation during the service on the coast of Syria, and the attack of Acre on the 3rd of November, 1840. That Mr. Speaker do communicate the said resolutions to admiral the hon. Sir Robert Stopford; and that he be requested to make known the same to the several officers under his command, and in co-operation with her Majesty's navy in the said service.

Back to
Forward to