Upon this occafion, furely, I am called upon to enter my proteft against a claim which fubjects the log books of the King's fhips, that ought to contain, if not always a perfect, yet always a genuine narrative of their tranfactions, when the events are fresh and recent, when they cannot be mistaken, and can hardly be mifreprefented, and which ought never to be altered after the entries have been made and authorized. This is the cafe of the first alteration of the log book.-Another alteration has fince appeared in another log-book! that of the profecutor himself! little differing from the former, except that the person that has actually made it does not appear to justify it; that the witness to it ftates it to have been made foon after the engagement, and that the deftruction of fome leaves, and fubftitution of others, feems to be rather made for the purpose of exculpating another perfon than of criminating me. But whatever the intention was, the thing is equally unjuftifiable in all refpects. It tends equally to destroy all fort of use in thefe kind of records, and to render them highly fallacious, and poffibly highly dangerous. I do not dwell on all the particulars of that unhappy bufinefs! It is painful to me, and the nature of the tranfaction is but too visible. There has always been, and probably will always be, fomething flovenly in these books, and the mafters have thought they have more power over them than is proper. There is, however, a great difference between inaccuracy and malicious defign. There is a difference between the correction or Supply of indifferent matters, and the cancelling of pages, and putting in others omitting, adding to, and varying the most important things for the most important purpoles. It is also proper for me to state two or three facts to the court, in order to place the conduct of my accufer in its proper point of view. I admit that the charges he has exhibited against me are very heinous.-They exprefs mifconduct and negligence; they imply (and fo the court has understood them to imply) cowardice alfo. If I ever committed them at all, it was in his prefence, and in the prefence of a numerous corps of officers, who being called upon by the court, have all unanimously refufed, or I truft will refufe to fix any one charge upon me. I have mentioned before the circumstance of my accufer's filence for months, during which he was called upon by the duty he owed to his country to have flated my misconduct, if any fuch had exifted; and his refufal to do fo is ftrong evidence of itself, that even in his opinion my conduct was liable to no reproach. But this is not all; even fo late as the 5th of October laft, I received a letter from him, dated at fea, conceived in terms of great good will and refpect for me; in which, having occafion to mention fome prizes, which had been taken by the fleet, he confiders that as a fubject of little moment to me, affigning this as a reason, "for I know you had rather meet the French fleet."-That fleet which he fays I fled from! Is this confiftent with the tenor of thofe charges?-Could the man who wrote the one, believe the other?-It is abfolutely impoffible. I cannot produce this letter in evidence; evidence; but when I go out of the court, I will fhew it to any gentleman who is defirous to fee Another thing more, and I have done. Sir Hugh Pallifer thought proper to addrefs the public by a printed newspaper, dated the 4th of November, principally, as it feems, for the fake of afferting that he was not, and infinuating that I was, the cause of the French fleet not being re-attacked in the afternoon of the 27th of July. In that paper he pofitively denies that he received any meffage by Captain Windfor faying a word about renewing the attack, and he calls the contrary affertion a falfe one.-Captain Windfor has been called, and he has proved, that at five o'clock he received from me, and at about half past five he delivered to Sir Hugh Pallifer himfelf, the meage to come with the thips of his divifion into my wake, and that I only waited for him to renew the attack. This account of Captain Windfor has been attempted to be difcredited by the profecutor, who has asked Captain Bazely, and I believe one or two more, whether it was not at a later hour than Captain Windfor named.-I fhall for that reafon call witnesses to confirm Captain Windfor in all the circumstances of his teftimony. I owe it to him, as an honourable man, to fhew that his evidence is correctly true. I will prove that the meffage fent by me, was precifely the meffage delivered by him at the time he fpeaks to, and that it was exactly repeated by him to the vice * See this letter in page 293. admiral,-yet, after his own ears afternoon of a fummer's day, that had heard, at half paft five in the vifion to renew the attack; this genI waited only for him and his di gligent, cowardly, as he now repre. tleman applies to me, ignorant, neviour, and to fupport his character fents me, to certify his good beha. against the malice of his enemies. per, containing many particulars He applies to me to fign a padirectly contrary to the evidence you have, heard upon oath, and which I will alfo fhew to any one +. with one of thofe particulars. That At prefent I have only to do paper (concurring with his attempts in this trial) contains this affertion," that the calling his, "and vice-admiral Sir Robert "Harland's divifions, into my "wake, in the evening, was not "for the purpofe of renewing the "battle at that time, but to be "in readiness for it in the morn"ing." This my accufer had the confidence to tender to me to fign. folutely unfounded; the contrary To fign an affertion of a fact abof which I know to be true, and the contrary of which Captain Windfor has proved, and my accufer knew to be true. How that gentleman felt when I could conceive myself in the this came out I know not; but if fame fituation, I know that it I fhould feel. I cannot wish fo heawould be difficult to exprefs what vy a punishment 10 my worst enemy. the admiral's defence continued to See this paper in page 293. profe profecutor having claimed a right of replying to the defence, the fame was objected to; and the court having withdrawn, upon the queftion, came to a refolution, that the fame was unprecedented, and could not be complied with. On the 11th of February the Court met; when the Judge Ad. vocate read the opinion of the court martial, as follows: At a Court Martial affembled on board his Majelly's thip Britanboard his Majesty's thip Britannia, in Portsmouth fiarbour, the 7th of January, 1779, and held by Adjournment at the Houfe of the Governor of his Majefty's Garrison at Portfmouth, every day afterwards (Sundays excepted) till the 11th of February, 1779, inclufive; PRESENT, Sir Thomas Pye, admiral of the white, Prefident. Matthew Buckle, Efq; vice-admiral of the red; till the clofe of the fixth day, when he became unable any longer to continue his attendance on account of fickness. John Montagu, Efq; vice-admiral of the red. Mariot Arbuthnot, Efq; Robert Roddam, Efq; fear-admirals of the white. Captains Mark Milbank, Francis Samuel Drake, John Moutray, The Court, pursuant to an order of the Lords Commiffioners of the Admiralty, dated the 31st of December, 1778, and directed to Sir Thomas Pye, proceeded to enquire into a charge exhibited by Vice-admiral Sir Hugh Pallifer against the Honourable Admiral Auguftus Keppel, for mifconduct and neglect of duty on the 27th and 28th of July, 1778, in fundry inftances, as mentioned in a paper which accompanied the faid order; and to try him for the fame: And the Court having heard the evidence, and the prifoner's defence, and maturely and feriously confi dered the whole, are of opinion. that the charge is malicious and ill founded; it having appeared that the faid admiral, fo far from of duty on the days therein alludhaving, by mifconduct and neglect ed to, loft opportunity of rendering effential fervice to the ftate, and thereby tarnished the honour of the British navy, behaved as became a judicious, brave, and experienced officer: The Court do therefore unanimously and honourably acquit the faid Admiral Auguftus Keppel of the several articles contained in the charge against him; and he is hereby fully and honourably acquitted accordingly. GEORGE JACKSON, Thomas Pye. Robert Roddam. Mark Milbank. Francis Samuel Drake. Taylor Penny. The The Addrefs of Sir Thomas Pye, Prefident, on delivering the Admiral his fword. Adminal Keppel, It is no fmall pleasure to me to receive the commands of the Court I have the honour to prefide at, that, in delivering you your fword, I am to congratulate you on its being reftored to you with fo much honour; hoping ere long you will be called forth by your Sovereign to draw it once more in the defence of your country. Copies of Letters between the Hon. Admiral Keppel, the Secretary to the Admiralty, the Judge Advocate, and Sir Hugh Pallifer. Admiralty-office, 9 Dec. 1778. Sir Hugh Pallifer, vice-admiral" of the blue fquadron of his Majefty's fleet, having in his letter of this day's date tranfmitted to my Lords Commiffioners of the Admiralty, a charge of mifconduct and neglect of duty against you, on the 27th and 28th of July, 1778, in divers inftances therein mentioned, and defired that a court martial may be held for trying you for the fame; and their Lordships intending that a court martial fhall be held for that purpofe, I have it in command from them to fend you herewith a copy of the faid charge, that you may be preparing for your defence. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your moft obedient, PH. STEPHENS. Honble. Auguftus Keppel, Audley-fquare, Thursday night, Dec. 10, 1778. SIR, The very extraordinary contents of your letter of last night made make any other answer, than a it impoffible for me on a fudden to bare acknowledgment of having received it; but it has not required much time to determine me, in inform you, that I am willing to juftice to my own reputation, to meet a court martial whenever the Board of Admiralty fhall think proper to order me. At the fame time, Sir, I defire you will reprefent to the Lords Commiffioners my utter aftonish ment at the countenance their Lordships have fo far given to this proceeding, as to refolve, on the fame day on which such a charge is exhibited, to order a court martial against the commander in chief of the fleet, on an attack from an inferior officer, under all the very peculiar circumftances in which Sir Hugh Pallifer now stands. I am, Sir, your humble fervant, Ph. Stephens, Efq. A.K. Letter from PH. STEPHENS, Efq; Admiralty-office, 11th Dec. 1778. SIR, I received yesterday afternoon your letter of the 10th inftant, acknowledging the receipt of mine of the 9th, tranfmitting a copy of the charge exhibited against you by Vice-admiral Sir Hugh Pallifer; and this morning I received your letter, dated last night, intimating that you are willing to meet a court martial whenever the Board of Admiralsy fhall think proper proper to order one; and having without lofs of time laid the fame before my Lords Commiffioners of the Admiralty, I am commanded by their Lordships to acquaint you, that they propofe to order a court martial to be affembled on Thurfday the 7th of January next, if you think you shall be ready with your evidence by that time; but if not, their Lordships will order it to be held on a later day. As to the aftonishment you exprefs at the countenance you conceive their Lordships have given to this proceeding, by refolving, on the fame day on which the charge was exhibited, to order a court martial, their Lordships command me to acquaint you, that they know of no inftance in which the Board of Admiralty, upon receiving a specific charge of fuch a nature, figned by an officer of rank ferving under the party accufed, and accompanied with a request for the affembling a court martial thereupon, have delayed coming to a refolution to order one; nor would they have thought themfelves juftified, if they had hefitated to take the neceffary steps for bringing the matter to an early and legal decifion. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient, PH. STEPHENS. Honble. Admiral Keppel, town. Audley-fquare, 16th Dec. 1778. My counfel having informed me, that before they can give the beft advice in their power upon the charge of Sir Hugh Pallifer, it 3 will be neceffary for them to fee the whole of my inftructions and correfpondence with you; and that it may be neceffary to produce the whole or part of them before the court martial, I defire you will acquaint the Lords Commiffioners of the Admiralty therewith. I am, Sir, Your humble fervant, Pb. Stephens, Efq. Mr. A. K. Stephen's letter in answer to Admiralty-office, 18th Dec. 1778. I received, and loft no time in laying before my Lords Com-. miffioners of the Admiralty, your letter of the 16th inftant, refpecting the communication of your inftructions, and correspondence with me, to your counfel, and perhaps to the court martial that is to be affembled for your trial. I was in hopes I fhould have been enabled by this time to have fent you their Lordships anfwer thereto; but as the inftructions to which you allude are of a very fecret nature, and were given in pursuance of his Majesty's commands, fignified by one of his Principal Secretaries of State, it is necessary that their Lordships should receive his Majefty's farther commands, before they can with propriety give you a full answer to your letter. Their Lordships are perfuaded in the mean time you will not communicate those instructions to any perfon whatsoever; and they command me to affure you, that you shall have their farther anfwer |