hm_jollies | From The Formative Years (Reply)

1. The Establishment

One in Five

The rapid reduction in manpower [during the Peace of Amiens] had meant that the Royal Marines entered the new or Napoleonic War with an approved strength of not more that 14,000 out of a total for the Navy as a whole of 60,000 - giving a ratio of marines to sailors of a little less than one in four. by the beginning of 1804 the voted strength of the Navy would have increased to 100,000, of which the Corps' contribution was 22,000 - still giving a ratio of more than one in five. This surprisingly high planned ratio to be reatined throughout the War, presenting the organisation with a Herculean task of recruitment that would never be fully achieved.

A Divisional Structure

The administrative structure available to establish and sustain the expanding Corps of 1803 would have been recognisable, if not identical, to that met by a new recruit joining his Division between the two World Wars of the 20th century and even later.

In 1803 there were three such Divisions, Chatham, Portsmouth and Plymouth, each commanded by a Colonel Commandant, with a Colonel 2nd Commandant as 2iC [second in command], as well as an Adjutant and his Assistant, a Quartermaster, a Barrackmaster, a Deputy Paymaster and a Surgeon. The companies were simply an administrative sub-unit, for each of which there were Paying 'Captains'; to provide the numbers the so-called 'Captains' also included lieutenant-colonels, majors, occasional captain/lieutenants, as well as the Adjutant and the two Commandants. Though the marine who embarked retained his company designation, the Division and its companies remained a drafting pool from which to meet the needs of the fleet. The number actually on a company payroll was therefore variable, depending on the number of ships commissioning or paying off, and there was often a dearth of manpower to meet the routine tasks, guards and the high priority commitment of recruiting.

There was no practical capacity for other operational involvement, and even the task of providing guards for the protection of the vital Dockyards was transferred to the Army on the outbreak of war.

Head Office and the Blue Colonels

The Marine Office, such as it was, mirrored the subordinate position of Corps [sic] as a provider of junior officers (captains and subalterns) for duty afloat. The senior serving officer, the Colonel Commandant in Town, was a staff rather than a command appointment, in years to come he would become known as the Adjutant General. He appears to have found his own accommodation and responded to the Secretary at the Admiralty, from whom his meagre authority derived. Commandants of Divisions, recruiting officers, and officers of all ranks, who chose to do so, could bypass him with apparent impunity, although proposals and letters of request received by the Secretary were, more often than not, referred to him and/or George Villiers, the Corps Paymaster, for comment or recommendation.

In 1803, the Commandant in Town was Lt General Souter Johnstone. His paid rank in the Corps was Colonel and the style of Lt General related to his position in the Army List, for which he received no remuneration nor indeed any direct authority. In 1803 the Secretary to whom he responded was Evan Nepean, Esq.

There were three General Officer appointments in the Corps but these were effectively sinecures, held by senior Naval officers, and had no specified function in the organisation. In 1803, the General was Admiral Alexander, Lord Bridport, and the Lieutenant General was John Jervis, Earl St Vincent, both of whom had been appointed in August 1803 and would still be in post in 1813, thirteen years later. By contrast the Major General, Admiral Alan Lord Gardner, had held his position since June 1794.

in addition, there were three Captains RN holding appointments as Colonels, one to each Division. Sensitive to potential allegations of pluralism or corruption, Earl St Vincent justified such appointments, each of which carried a stipend, by reference to equivalent Army practice. Whilst there is no apparent evidence that any of the senior Naval captains, honoured with colonelcies at this time, either fulfilled the role of a 'Colonel of the Regiment' or even visited their Division, there is no doubt that the appointment gave them a proprietary interest in the Corps, as well as views on its employment. It was also a coveted post, prompting Captain Nelson of the Agamemnon, who heard of his appointment in July 1795 through the media, to write immediately to the First lord of the Admiralty expressing his appreciation:

I have seen in the newspapers that I am appointed one of the Colonels of Marines, an appointment certainly most flattering to me, as it marks to the world an approbation of my conduct. To your Lordship I beg leave to express my gratification.

When promoted to flag rank, the appointment was forfeited, so that my 1803 the Colonels were Captains Sir Edward Pellew bt (later lord Exmouth), William Domett and Sir Thomas Troubridge - all protégés of Earl St Vincent.

The Lion and the Unicorn

If the absence of effective authority gave the rest of the Royal Marine hierarchy something of the appearance of an emasculated unicorn, the long-term involvement of the Lieutenant General, Earl St Vincent, in the affairs of the Corps, whether ashore or afloat, underlined his position at 'Old Lion' - a soubriquet accorded to him by his prime protégé, Vice Admiral Nelson.

'Old Oak' to his monarch and 'Old Jarvie' to many of his seamen, there was nothing remotely cuddly about John Jervis. A leader, disciplinarian, strategist, politician, administrator and a seaman schooled in the harsh environment of the Navy from the age of fourteen, by 1803 he was entering his third year as First Lord of the Admiralty and had become the strong man of that service in succession to Earl Howe - 'Black Dick'.

Unbending in his enforcement of the code of subordination that he deemed essential, he was savage and unmerciful in administering the resultant penalties. As Commander-in-Chief in the Mediterranean, sentence of death passed on mutineers by a court martial that closed after dark on a Saturday had been carried out on Sunday morning, contrary to custom and the religious scruples of many. Also contrary to custom, the crew from which the men came were ordered to carry out the sentence, while armed boats lay off the ship to enforce the order. In a similar case, recommendations to mercy by his protégé, Sir Edward Pellew, in respect of a condemned seaman, on grounds of previous exemplary behaviour, was dismissed with a suggestion that there was little advantage in only making an example of those known to be 'worthless'.

Confident of his own rectitude in the performance of his duty, he rarely had doubts about his decisions. There were, however, contradictions; his own belief was that men should be led not driven, but he proved reluctant to back his contention with any step that might question the established authority of even a tyrannical captain. Likewise he declared the process of pressing men to be 'odious' but, along with most of his contemporaries, lacking the imagination to consider any other way by which to man the fleet, he rigorously enforced its application and the harsh discipline held necessary to convert those so impressed into seamen.

As a politician, he despised other politicians, in particular those Naval officers who were also MPs, describing them disparagingly as the 'Hons'; he disapproved of slavery but was opposed to Wilberforce's emancipation bill, perceiving that the Africans enslaved were better of than those left to the tribal atrocities of their own country and anticipating chaos in the West Indies if they were freed. There were few subjects on which the Earl did not have a view, sometimes as arbitrary as its imposition...

Sir,
You, having thought fit to take to yourself a wife, are to look for no further attentions from your humble servant, J. Jervis.

John Jervis believed that Naval officers should not marry until late in life. Fortunately for the recipient, the Earl had been misinformed and Lieutenant Bayntum persevered under his wing long enough to command a ship at Trafalgar.

Though he did have a sense of humour, it apparently took the form of schoolboy pranks prom a position of prefect - summoning all Chaplains to the Flagship by boat in choppy seas, or sending for his Senior RM Officer, who had no watchkeeping duties, in the middle watch so that he might smell the scent of oranges wafting from the Spanish shore. Jokes against himself were no doubt risky but those of similar schoolboy derivation might amuse; the junior lieutenant, who composed a parody on the Commander-in-Chief and his dictates, based on the Biblical story of 'the Golden Image that Nebuchadnezzar the King had set up', was invited to dinner and unexpectedly provided with a copy of his own work to read aloud over the port; having had his fun, the Earl then sent the young man on three months leave 'to entertain those at home as much as he had been entertained' and with an invitation to dine with him again on his return.

Detachment Duties

The Earl's involvement in every aspect of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines is well documented. He had served afloat with marines throughout his service, but his public pronouncements on their employment first sprung from the role he expected them to play in controlling the mutinous spirit, ignited at Spithead and the Nore and transmitted to the Mediterranean, where he was Commander-in-Chief from 1797 to 1799. of the 'best practices' he then established, some were to survive as long as marines provided detachments ashore. he wrote of his edicts in a letter to Captain (later Admiral) Duckworth...

I assembled all the Captains of Marines on board the Ville de Paris under pretext of informing them about uniformity of dress, in exercise and in economy, but really to give them some sense about keeping a watchful eye, not only upon their own men, but upon the seamen. I directed that the subaltern should visit them at their meals; I exhorted them to keep up the pride and spirit of the detachments; to prevent conversation being carried on in Irish and to call the roll at least twice a day.

He further directed that when punishment was to be administered in a ship, the marines were to parade an officers' guard, with weapons loaded and bayonets fixed. A daily routine was also to be instituted...

1. Guard is to be paraded on the poop every morning at half-past eight o'clock, with all the form and order practised in the best regulated parades; and, after going through the exercise, to descend to the quarter-deck at nine o'clock precisely, where all the accustomed formalities are to be gone through, with respect and decorum due to the occasion - although no colours are allowed - and where there is a band, 'God Save the King' is to be played, while the Guard is under presented arms, and all persons present are required to stand with their hats off till the Guard shoulders. After the commanding officer of the detachment has received his orders from the Captain or commanding sea-officer on the Quarter-deck. the arms are to be lodged and the Guard held in constant readiness for occasional service.
2. No non-commissioned Officer, Marine or Soldier told off for the Guard shall be called upon to perform any of the ordinary duties of the ship. The seamen are fully competent.
{3. Gives a scale of Guards for each rate of man-of-war}
4. A Sergeant or Corporal of the Guard to patrol the ship every half-hour, with two privates.
5. The Guard to continue for three days and the relief to be exempt from duty the day before they mount, to clean their arms, clothes and accoutrements.

Finding some ships' Captains reluctant to comply with his instructions, he ordered the senior officer of Marines in each ship to report to the flagship for a briefing on the uniform procedures to be followed. The briefing was to be carried out by his own senior marine officer, Lt Colonel Flight (a Captain RM referred to by his Army rank), whom he appointed to superintend the business and correct any errors he might find. In a subsequent letter to the Secretary at the Admiralty, enclosing a copy of his orders, the Admiral reports that Lt Colonel Flight had been threatened in the execution of his duty by a newly arrived ship's Captain, from whom I little expected such conduct, and that he had therefore appointed the Colonel as Inspector of Marines for the Fleet.

At the same time he had been examining the leadership of his detachments and believed it to be 'absolutely necessary' to increase the number of non-commissioned officers. His requirement was for four sergeants and a similar number of corporals for the 100 marines that he considered to be the right complement for a ship of 74 guns.

As C-in-C Channel Fleet from 1800 to 1801, he had carried his system with him, adding detailed instructions to meet new problems that arose, such as those during the brief and infrequent visits to Torbay...

When the Squadron is at anchor in Torbay, a Captain of a ship of the line, beginning with the junior, is to command at the watering place at Brixham, taking his Commanding Officer of Marines, two subalterns, one Sergeant, one Corporal and fifteen of the most sober, orderly and attentive Marines in the ship. Five sentinels are to be posted on the most prominent stations, to prevent straggling, or liquor being brought to the boat's crews employed in watering, carrying down fresh beef and other incidental services. The reason of appointing many officers and few soldiers is that the posts may be visited frequently and that the men off duty may be looked after...

The spectre of mutiny and the threat posed by the United Irish persisted, leading to a C-in-C's warning for Captains to be constantly on their guard against machinations of designing men and for changes to be made to the accommodation arrangements... The Marines on board ships are to be berthed on the middle deck and, in ships of two decks, close aft to the gunroom netting, without any seamen between them

The ongoing importance of such precautions was seen to be underlined by events. In December 1801, during the run up to the signing of the Peace of Amiens, 'mutinous designs' aboard the frigate Castor at Port Royal, Jamaica were scotched by the prompt action of the detachment; they were equally effective in the same month aboard Temeraire (98) in Bantry Bay, when seamen, anticipating an early peace and discharge, declined to sail for the West Indies. In October 1802, during the period of peace, seamen of the Gibraltar (80) briefly seized control whilst on passage from Malta with three other ships; unsupported in their actions, the officers and marines regained control and secured the ringleaders; two months later a similar 'incident of insubordination' aboard Excellent (74) in the West Indies was subdued. In each case the relevant Court Martial drew particular attention to the role of the Marines in restoring order.

Ruling the Roost

Successful in his purpose of ensuring their loyalty and support, the Earl showed a reciprocal loyalty to the Corps that did not end with obtaining for them the title 'Royal', Such close contact was rarely comfortable; his approval was coupled with expectations and as First Lord he continued to demonstrate a detailed power of direction over all aspects of the Corps' active and administrative life. Nor was it exempt from his wider enquiries into 'abuses and malpractices' with the Naval Service, its dockyards and victualling yards - a prolonged process that would take up much Parliamentary time throughout the period under review and would in due course lead to the impeachment of Lord Melville, the previous First Lord. Within the Corps the Earl established an audit team of a lieutenant colonel from each Division, led by the Paymaster of Marines, George Villiers Esq - a civil servant of significant status, who held the purse strings, had direct access to him and much of the authority apparently denied to the Commandant in Town or Commandants of Divisions.

The Colonel Commandant at Chatham was Lt General Innes; a founder member of the Marines as part of the Naval Service; having joined in 1755 - two years before Plassey and four years before the capture of Quebec - he was certainly an old soldier. On the 5th June 1802 a Court Martial, made up of four Lieutenant Generals and eight Major Generals, had assembled at Chelsea Hospital to try Lt General Innes on two counts brought by the Secretary to the Admiralty on behalf of their Lordships - 'as considered to be their duty'. First, that he had retained a deserter on his muster list for six weeks after the man's desertion; second that he had discharged a sergeant after 24 years' service without Admiralty authority. The defendant drew attention to his 47 years of service and his concern with being so charged; the company muster list had been presented to him by Lt Colonel Berkeley, signed in good faith and was in no way to his pecuniary advantage; on the second matter, the sergeant had been a deserving case, having assisted in the quelling of 'the mutiny', as had been discussed personally wit Earl St Vincent; on being called, the Earl remembered the conversation but not the particulars. General Innes was acquitted by his peers on both counts, the first charge was dismissed as being 'frivolous & vexatious' and the second brought a straight acquittal. The proceedings were well publicised in the Naval Chronicle. Thus rebuffed, the First Lord smarted and bacam more circumspect in the pursuit of change, though no less determined.

(Appendices are posted here - including numbers of Marines per rate of ship)

Minor error: St Vincent's instructions are duplicated; the original post is here.