The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)Spears, John Randolph
History
The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)
Spears, John Randolph
United States. Navy -- History; United States. Navy -- History -- Spanish-American War, 1898
“When Porter decided to anchor near shore, in neutral water, he
could not anticipate Hillyar’s deliberate and treacherous breach of
faith. I do not allude to the mere disregard of neutrality. Whatever
international moralists may say, such disregard is a mere question of
expediency. If the benefits to be gained by attacking a hostile ship
in neutral waters are such as to counterbalance the risk of incurring
the enmity of the neutral power, why then the attack ought to be
made. Had Hillyar, when he first made his appearance off Valparaiso,
sailed in with his two ships, the men at quarters and guns out, and
at once attacked Porter, considering the destruction of the _Essex_
as outweighing the insult to Chili, why his behavior would have been
perfectly justifiable. In fact, this is unquestionably what he intended
to do; but he suddenly found himself in such a position that, in
the event of hostilities, _his_ ship would be the captured one, and
he owed his escape purely to Porter’s over-forbearance, under great
provocation. Then he gave his word to Porter that he would not infringe
on the neutrality; and he never dared to break it, until he saw Porter
was disabled and almost helpless! This may seem strong language to
use about a British officer, but it is justly strong. Exactly as
any outsider must consider Warrington’s attack on the British brig
_Nautilus_ in 1815 as a piece of needless cruelty, so any outsider
must consider Hillyar as having most treacherously broken faith with
Porter.”
Fair as this statement must seem to candid minds, there is yet a word
to be said for Captain Hillyar. A fair interpretation of his orders
demanded that he break his faith and attack the ship, and as an
officer accustomed to obey all orders from his superiors, he believed
his obligation to the Admiralty and his country was greater than
his obligation to keep his word. Captain Hillyar believed that his
country demanded that he break faith with Porter, and the proof that
the British nation has ever since approved of his treachery toward an
American is found in the fact that “the naval medal is granted for the
capture” of the _Essex_ (see Allen); that the officer who sailed her
to England was at once promoted, and that every British writer who
has referred to the action has praised Captain Hillyar in the highest
terms, and refers to Captain Porter as James did when he said: “Few,
even in his own country, will venture to speak well of Captain David
Porter.”
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account