A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' WarFortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
History
A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' War
Fortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
Great Britain -- History, Military; Great Britain. Army -- History
a pound and selling it at four shillings;[247] and junior
commissaries were acting as regimental agents and advancing money
to the unhappy officers at exorbitant interest.[248]
[Sidenote: Nov. 5.]
In such a state of affairs Schomberg, rightly or wrongly,
considered himself powerless. William ordered him from time to time
to advance on Dublin; and Harbord, with incredible impertinence,
urged him to march against the enemy.[249] Schomberg answered
William by a plain statement of his condition, and Harbord by a
surly and contemptuous growl. In truth his Dutch and Huguenot
regiments, which alone were well clad and well looked after by
their officers, were the only troops on which he could rely. The
English continued to die like flies. Schomberg wisely endeavoured
to distract their thoughts from their own misery by keeping them
at drill. He found that not one in four had the slightest idea
how to load or fire his musket, while the muskets themselves
fell to pieces in the handling. Pestilence increased, and with
it callousness and insubordination. The men used the corpses of
their comrades to stop the draughts under their tent-walls, and
robbed any man whose appearance promised hope of gain. Nor was this
indiscipline confined to Dundalk. The Enniskilleners, who have
generally been represented as superior to the English, were quite
as fond of plunder, and robbed William Harbord himself, despite
his protestations, in broad daylight.[250] Happily for Schomberg,
James's forces were in as ill condition as his own, so that he
was able to retire into winter quarters from Dundalk without
molestation. Of fourteen thousand men in the camp, upwards of six
thousand had perished.[251]
Gradually and painfully the winter wore away, but without
abatement in the mortality of the troops. Meanwhile the House
of Commons, awaking to the terrible state of things in Ireland,
addressed the King for the arrest of Shales. William replied
that he had already put him under arrest; and the name of Shales
was accordingly constantly before the House in the course of the
next few months, but without any result. He seems to have escaped
scot-free; and indeed there was no lack of men as corrupt as he in
the House of Commons and in all places of trust. William then took
the extraordinary step of asking the House to appoint seven members
to superintend the preparations for the next campaign; but this
it very wisely declined to do. It appointed a Committee, however,
to examine into the expenses of the war,[252] and finally passed
a Mutiny Act with new clauses against false musters and other
abuses--clauses which were as old as King Edward the Sixth, and for
all practical purposes as dead. It was not legislation that was
wanted, but enforcement of existing laws. William, however, appears
early to have abandoned in despair the hope of finding an honest
man in England.
[Sidenote: 1690.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account