Colonel Dickson to D.-A.-G. dated 19 May, 1813.

In the middle of May the plan of the campaign was arranged. The army was ordered to move in two columns, the head-quarters to leave Frenada on the 22nd May. One column was to cross the Douro at the mouth of the Coa, and to advance by Miranda de Douro; the other was to go by Ciudad Rodrigo. Lord Wellington was to accompany the latter column, which consisted of Sir Rowland Hill’s corps, the Light Division, Cavalry, &c. The other column, composed of the rest of the army, was under Sir T. Graham; and with it went the pontoon train. It was decided to lay the pontoon bridge across the Douro, near Miranda, and thus unite the two columns; this operation to be followed by the siege of Zamora, which, when concluded, would leave the Ibid. dated Matilla, 25 May, 1813. Allies masters of the Douro. Following the head-quarters, the reader finds that they moved to Ciudad Rodrigo on the 22nd May, to Tamames on the 23rd, and to Matilla, about six leagues from Salamanca, on the 25th. On the way, Lord Wellington inspected the Portuguese Division, commanded by General Silveira, and found the men better equipped than they had ever yet been. The brigades of Artillery with them were commanded by Colonel Tulloh, an officer of the Royal Artillery, whose zeal and ability were repaid by the efficiency of the men under his control. The whole of the reserve Artillery of Lord Wellington’s army, with the exception of the brigade under Captain Cairnes, which was now re-equipped, had gone with the main body, under Sir T. Graham.

Colonel Dickson was now in command of the Artillery, although junior to many in point of regimental rank; and as the way in which he obtained the command is not so generally known in the Regiment as the fact, it seems desirable to state it. While he was at Corilhaa, preparing the reserve Artillery for the coming campaign, Colonel Fisher, who had succeeded to the command of the Artillery after Colonel Robe was disabled at Burgos, but who had not held the command as yet in the field, wrote to him, requesting his attendance at head-quarters without loss of time. On his arrival, he ascertained that a misunderstanding had arisen between Lord Wellington and Colonel Fisher, which had ended in the latter’s requesting permission to resign, and return to England. Lord Wellington inquired of Colonel Dickson whether he was senior to Colonel Waller, who had arrived in Lisbon, and on learning that he was not, he said, “Colonel Dickson, then, will take the command of all the Artillery in the field, both British and Portuguese; and Colonel Waller and General Roza, as commandants of the Artillery of the two nations, will remain at Lisbon for the purpose of forwarding supplies.” He then desired Colonel Fisher to give such explanations of the state of affairs as would enable Colonel Dickson to enter on his charge.

There would seem to have been considerable hastiness and injustice on the part of Lord Wellington in this matter. Colonel Dickson himself, while naturally flattered, could not To D.-A.-G. dated 25 May, 1813. but say, “I am convinced, if Lord Wellington had known Colonel Fisher’s talents and abilities, he would never have allowed any such circumstance to take from him such an officer; and I hope you will forgive my thus presuming to discuss in so particular a manner the merits of a superior, which I am only induced to do in order that you may better know the merits of an officer I love and esteem; and I am sure every man of sense or ability in the Corps of Artillery in the Peninsula will subscribe to what I now state.”

The honour paid to Colonel Dickson was an embarrassing one. Although his Portuguese rank placed him over all officers under the rank of Colonel, many such were senior to him regimentally. This fact demanded great tact from him in the execution of his duty. Fortunately, he met with ready, soldierlike co-operation from all; and one, who had commanded him on service before, in writing to his friends on the subject, expressed the general feeling Letters of Sir A. Frazer, page 101. when he said: “I shall get on very well with Dickson; he was second to me in the South American Expedition, and then obeyed my orders with the implicit readiness which I shall now transfer to his. He is a man of great Ibid. page 106. abilities and quickness, and without fear of any one.” And again: “Colonel Fisher left us the day before yesterday, sincerely regretted by all. I hope Dickson’s reign may be long for the sake of the service, but the times are Ibid. page 110. slippery.” Yet once more: “Dickson showed me yesterday a very sensible, plain letter, which he had written to Colonel Waller, and was just going to send off. Dickson, too, feels himself awkwardly off, but will bear his honours well. There is an open, manly simplicity about Dickson very prepossessing. I hope and trust he will long enjoy the confidence of the Marquis; and this I should desire for the sake of the service, independently of any regard I might have (and I have a very sincere one) for Dickson.”

Colonel Dickson. to D.-A.-G. dated 6 June, 1813.

To return, however, to the movements of the army. On the 26th May the head-quarters moved forward in the direction of Salamanca, on approaching which place columns of the enemy’s infantry were observed, halted at each side of the town, a part of their cavalry being, however, on the left bank of the river to watch the movements of the Allies. As the latter advanced, the cavalry retired across the bridge into Salamanca, but the infantry for a considerable time remained unmoved. In the meantime, Sir Rowland Hill’s Cavalry and Captain Beane’s troop of Horse Artillery were ordered to push for the ford of Santa Martha, a little above the town. As soon as the French saw these troops approach the river, they moved off with their whole force, which included about 2500 infantry, two or three squadrons of cavalry, and three or four guns. General Fane, who was in command of Sir R. Hill’s Cavalry, passed the river in a moment, and came up with the French before they had gone three miles from Salamanca. They were retiring by squares along the Arivalo road, which leads up the Tormes by Aldea Langua; and, on overtaking them, the Horse Artillery opened upon their squares with considerable execution. The pursuit was thus continued for five or six miles, the Horse Artillery cannonading them from every available point. The Artillery fire was interfered with by the repeated interposition of the Cavalry between the guns and the enemy; but was nevertheless very efficient. According to Colonel Dickson,—of 400 killed, wounded, and prisoners, lost by the enemy,—100 were victims to the Artillery fire alone; and the squares were so shaken by it, that, if the regiments moving on the flank had pushed on, the whole force might have been captured. Lord Wellington, however, seeing that the pursuing Cavalry were somewhat exhausted, desisted from further pursuit. The head-quarters halted at Salamanca on the 27th May, and orders were issued for their transfer to the other army, north of the Douro. On the 28th, therefore, the head-quarter staff proceeded to Almeida, and on the 29th to Miranda, crossing the Douro at a ferry near the latter place. Lord Wellington, himself, remained one day later at Salamanca; and on the 29th proceeded the whole distance to Miranda. On the 30th the head-quarters were moved to Carvajales, and on the same evening the Esla was reconnoitred, and preparations made to cross it on the following morning. Small parties of the enemy were seen on the opposite bank with two guns. Early on the morning of the 31st, the Hussar Brigade, Gardiner’s and Webber Smith’s troops of Horse Artillery, and two regiments of Infantry crossed,—upon which the French parties immediately retired. The Infantry found the greatest difficulty in crossing,—the river being both deep and rapid,—and several men were drowned. A pontoon bridge was therefore made in a couple of hours, over which the rest of the army passed, with the exception of the Cavalry, Artillery, and waggons, which forded the river. A special pontoon bridge was made for the 18-pounder brigade, over which it passed with safety. On the 1st June head-quarters proceeded to Zamora, and the army completed the passage of the Esla,—the French evacuating Zamora as the Allies approached.

“Thus,” wrote Colonel Dickson, “we succeeded in our manœuvre of turning the Douro, and getting possession of that river without sustaining the smallest loss. It has been a bold one; but, by his Lordship’s rapidity in moving the army, and transferring himself from one point to the other, I think the French did not succeed in discovering our real intention until it was too late for them to hinder it. Otherwise, we found the Esla such an obstacle, that if they only had had ten or twelve thousand men on that river, the passage of it would have been a serious operation to us, and could not have been effected without either great loss of time or of men, and probably both.”

On the 2nd June, the French abandoned Toro, and Wellington’s head-quarters proceeded there,—remaining over the 3rd, on which day, and on the 4th, the force which had advanced by Salamanca, under Sir R. Hill, crossed the Douro. On the 4th, the army moved forward in three columns,—the right, under Sir R. Hill, in the direction of Valladolid; the centre upon La Mota, and the left under Sir Thomas Graham towards Rio Seco. The head-quarters proceeded to La Mota on the 4th, to Castro Monte on the 5th, and to Ampudia on the 6th; the French abandoning Valladolid, as the Allies advanced, and retiring upon Palencia and Duenas. The armies continued to keep within a day’s march of one another: indeed, when the Allies reached Palencia, on the 7th June, the rear-guard of the enemy was clearly visible from the high ground. On the 12th (the pursuit still going on steadily, and Wellington continuing this, his greatest, march in the most persevering, relentless manner) the French army had reached Monasterio and the neighbourhood of Burgos,—but indicated no sign of discontinuing its retreat. Warned by past experience, Wellington had decided to take no active measures against Burgos, but merely to blockade it with part of the Spanish army, leaving the English troops undiminished. In the meantime, Sir Thomas Graham, with the left column of the army, inclined to his left in the direction of the upper part of the Ebro; with the view, it was believed, of turning or crossing that river. The events of the next few days, however, modified matters very much. On reaching Villa Diego, Lord Wellington ascertained that the Castle of Burgos had been blown up by the French, and was in utter ruins. Sir Richard Fletcher, of the Engineers, accompanied by Colonels Dickson and May, and Major Frazer of the Artillery, penetrated into the place, although the French rear-guard was still close at hand, and brought back the report. Joseph Buonaparte had meditated taking up a position at Burgos, but it having been pronounced unwise, he continued to retire on Vittoria. His army—which was known to be en route for France—was embarrassed with huge convoys of spoils,—and crowds of followers, male and female, who were unwilling to be left in Spain, unprotected by the French troops. Lord Wellington now executed a very brilliant Colonel Dickson to D.-A.-G. dated 19 June, 1813. strategical manœuvre,—the crossing of the Ebro. The route by which he abruptly moved his army was unfrequented and considered impracticable. The descent to the river by the Puente de Arenas was by a very narrow and steep pass, opening into a small but fertile valley, entirely surrounded by high mountains, with the river running through it. The sortie from the valley of Puente de Arenas was by a road running for a considerable distance close to the river, with stupendous rocks overhanging on either side. Had this movement been foreseen, a very small body of the enemy could have impeded the passage of the army. The advantages of this manœuvre were many. The Cust’s ‘Annals of the Wars.’ French communications with the coast were cut off, and a new base was opened for the operations of the Allies. The English fleet entered Santander, and commissariat communication was opened with the coast. Wellington was also in a position to threaten the communications between Vittoria and the Pyrenees, and the French found the English already in rear of their right. An engagement took place between Sir Thomas Graham and the French General, Reille, who had been detached to protect the communications between the French army and their own country; and the Colonel Dickson to D.-A.-G. 19 June, 1813. Light Division—with which Lord Wellington himself was—succeeded in surprising General Mancune’s division on the march,—killing a good many, dispersing one brigade, and capturing an immense quantity of baggage, and 300 prisoners. But these were merely the preliminaries to a battle, which, in its results, was unsurpassed in the whole narrative of the Peninsular War. Writing on the evening of the 19th June, from Subijana de Morillas, three leagues south-west of Vittoria, Colonel Dickson said: “We can see the whole French army on their march to Vittoria;—the column is not more than six or seven miles off. To-morrow we expect to move forward upon Vittoria, which, I think, must lead to something.”

In proceeding to discuss the share of the Royal Artillery at the battle of Vittoria, it has unfortunately to be premised that the most valuable letter on the subject has been mislaid, or lost. In writing to General Macleod after the Dated 23 June, 1813. battle, Colonel Dickson said: “I know Frazer has given you some account of it, so I will not enter into further details at present, except on our own matters.” And in two subsequent letters, he said: “Frazer’s letter will have explained everything.” Now, in the published letters of Sir Augustus Frazer, this letter is not to be found; nor is there much in his allusions to the battle in his other letters to assist the Artilleryman in tracing the services of his Corps. The loss of the letter is, to a certain extent, compensated by details given in subsequent letters from Colonel Dickson, but still remains irreparable.

It would be beyond the province of this work to describe the battle of Vittoria, as a whole. In the pages of the general military historian such a description can be found. In these, the regimental statistics alone need be reproduced. The general plan of the battle is, doubtless, familiar to all:—the plain in front of Vittoria, into which—as into a trap—Joseph Buonaparte poured all his troops and convoys;—the one road available for the retreat of his forces to France, which was menaced—but not with sufficient decision—by Wellington’s left;—the confusion in the space between the French army and the town of Vittoria, where mobs of terrified fugitives were mingled with heaps of vehicles and stores;—the three-handed assault of the Allies, advancing with steadfast purpose from three quarters at once;—the frequent Artillery duels, in which the Artillery on both sides so greatly distinguished themselves;—the grand final effort of the French artillery, Napier. when “more than eighty guns, massed together, pealed with such a horrid uproar, that the hills laboured and shook, and streamed with fire and smoke, amidst which the dark figures of the French gunners were seen, bounding with a frantic energy;” and then the wild rout, the headlong flight of an army leaving its guns and everything behind it;—the shrieks of women, the terror of men, rising so vividly before his mind as he wrote, that Napier exclaimed, “It was the wreck of a nation!” But no such ambitious description is required in detail from the mere regimental historian. What is demanded from him is the narrative, from old records that have never seen the light, of the share taken by his corps on this eventful day.

Official Report to the Master-General, dated 23 June, 1813.

Let the distribution of the various troops and brigades of Artillery at Vittoria first be given. Colonel Dickson was in command, assisted by the following field officers:—

Lieut.-Colonel Hartmann, K.G.A., commanding the reserve Artillery.
Major Carncross, with Sir Rowland Hill’s column.
Major Buckner, with column of 3rd and 7th Divisions.
Major Frazer, commanding the Horse Artillery.

The troops of Royal Horse Artillery were distributed as follows:—

Captain Webber Smith’s, with the Reserve.
Major Ross’s, with Light Division.
Captain Beane’s, with General Fane’s Cavalry.
Major Gardiner’s, with the Hussars.
Captain Ramsay’s, with the Cavalry Division.

The Field Brigades were distributed as follows:—

Major Lawson’s, with 5th Division.
Captain Douglas’s, with 3rd Division.
Captain Maxwell’s, with 2nd Division.
Captain Dubourdieu’s, with 1st Division.
Major Sympher’s (K.G.A.), with 4th Division.
Captain Cairnes’, with 7th Division.
Captain Parker’s, with the Reserve.
Lieut.-Colonel Tulloh, R.A., commanded two Portuguese brigades with Sir R. Hill’s corps, and Major Arriaga commanded the Portuguese Reserve Brigade.
Lieut.-Colonel May acted as Assistant Adjutant-General, and Lieut. Woodyear acted as Brigade-Major. Lieutenants Ord, Harding, and Pascoe, were employed as staff officers by Colonel Dickson.

The number of guns, exclusive of the Spanish, which were brought into action by the Allies at Vittoria was ninety; but the French had considerably more. There happened in this battle, on the 21st June, 1813, what rarely happens;—every brigade of Artillery was brought into action. In his official report, Colonel Dickson said that he had reason to be satisfied with the conduct of the officers and men of the Royal Artillery on this occasion; that their skill and bravery were highly conspicuous, as were their exertions in bringing forward the Artillery through a difficult and intersected Dated 23 June, 1813. country, both during the attack and the pursuit. “In short,” he added, “I can safely assert that artillery could not be better served; and, to the credit of the officers, I have to add that from the beginning of the day to the last moment of the pursuit, it was always to be found where it was wanted.” In his private letter to General Macleod, Colonel Dickson particularised some of the officers who had especially distinguished themselves; and the following extract deserves publication: “I cannot close this letter without mentioning the valuable assistance my friend Frazer afforded during the whole business. I may truly say he flew from one troop to another,—accompanying them into action and attending to their supply, or looking out for roads for them to move. You, who know Frazer so well, can easily anticipate what he would be on such an occasion.”

The massing of the English Artillery was effected at Vittoria to an unprecedented extent, and with most happy results. It might at first be assumed that the admirable use made of this arm on that occasion is a sufficient reply to any insinuations against Lord Wellington’s knowledge of Artillery tactics. Unfortunately for him, a letter has survived which proves, on the best authority, that to accident alone was this artillery display due. “The nature of the country,” wrote Colonel Dickson, “and want of roads, was the means of throwing a large proportion of our Artillery together, away from their divisions, which I availed myself of, and by employing them in masses it had a famous effect. This was adjoining to the great road to Vittoria; and the French brought all the artillery they could to oppose our advance, so that the cannonade on one spot was very vigorous. In none of our Peninsular battles have we ever brought so much cannon into play; and it was so well directed that the French were generally obliged to retire ere the Infantry could get at them. There were few or no instances of the bayonet being used during the day.”

MS. Official Return to D. A. Gen.

Considering the duration of the battle, the casualties among the Artillery were singularly few. They were as follows:—

Staff.—Wounded: Colonel May, and Brigade-Major Woodyear (died of wounds).

Killed. Wounded. Missing.
Royal Horse Artillery 4 36 2
Royal Artillery 8 19 ··
Horses of R. H. A. 28 23 8
Horses of R. A. 15 2 ··
Ibid.

The number of guns captured from the enemy was no less than 151, besides 415 caissons. Of gun ammunition 14,249 rounds were taken, besides 40,668 lbs. of gunpowder and 1,973,400 musket ball-cartridges. The other spoils were countless; and it is difficult to conceive a more complete defeat.

Lord Wellington’s account of the battle contains the following short, but satisfactory, allusion to the services of the To Lord Bathurst dated 22 June, 1813. Artillery:—“The Artillery was most judiciously placed by Lieut.-Colonel Dickson, and was well served; and the army is particularly indebted to that Corps.” During the pursuit of the enemy after the battle, Colonel Dickson kept the Artillery well up,—and was rewarded, as will be seen from Extract from the private Journal of F. S. Larpent, Esq., Judge-Advocate-General to the British forces in the Peninsula. Published by Sir G. Larpent, page 142. the following anecdote:—“In the pursuit after Vittoria, in the bad roads, Lord Wellington saw a French column making a stand, as if to halt for the night. ‘Now Dickson,’ said he, ‘if we had but some Artillery up!’ ‘They are close by, my Lord.’ And in ten minutes, from a hill on the right, Lieut.-Colonel Ross’s Light Division guns began; and away went the French two leagues farther off.” The same author from whom this quotation is made says: “Dickson, though only a Captain in the Royal Regiment of Artillery, now conducts the whole department here, because he makes no difficulties.”

Lord Wellington’s Despatch, dated 24 June, 1813.

During the pursuit, the only remaining guns—two in number—taken away by the French from the field, were captured,—one being disabled by the fire of the Chestnut Troop, and the other being taken within a league of Pampeluna, ‘Memoirs of Sir Hew Ross,’ page 41. in which direction the French had retreated.

The results which followed the battle of Vittoria are summarised by Napier in his description of the campaign, in which that battle was the chief incident. “In this campaign of six weeks,” he wrote, “Wellington, with 100,000 men, marched 600 miles, passed six great rivers, gained one decisive battle, invested two fortresses, and drove 120,000 veteran troops from Spain.” The fortresses referred to were Pampeluna and San Sebastian; and it is now proposed to treat of the double siege of the latter, as an episode of essential importance in the history of the Regiment, and one concerning which Sir Alexander Dickson left much valuable information, yet unpublished. Before doing so, however, there are two incidents which deserve to be mentioned.

In the brevet which followed Vittoria, Majors Frazer and Ross were made Lieut.-Colonels, and 2nd Captain Jenkinson (of the Chestnut Troop) was made Major. Captain Jenkinson’s brevet promotion was the first which had been received by a 2nd Captain of Artillery. In the beginning of the year 1813, the 2nd Captains serving in the Peninsula had memorialised Lord Wellington on the subject. The Sir Henry Torrens to Lord Wellington, 3 March, 1813. memorial having been referred to England, a favourable reply was given, and Captain Jenkinson’s promotion was the first fruits. In addition to the somewhat scanty recognition of the Artillery in this brevet, a boon was granted, which is described in the following extract from a letter written by the Master-General of the Ordnance, Lord Mulgrave, to Dated 16 July, 1813. Colonel Dickson:—“On receipt of your letter, addressed to Major-General Macleod, I did not fail to bring under the consideration of the Prince Regent the very striking and unexampled circumstance of the whole of the British Artillery having been brought into action at the battle of Vittoria, and the whole of the enemy’s Artillery having been captured in the glorious victory which crowned the exertions of the Allies on that ever-memorable occasion. His Royal Highness has been graciously pleased—in consideration of the peculiar circumstances above stated—to mark His Royal Highness’s approbation of the particular and successful activity of the Corps of Royal Artillery under your orders, by granting severally to the officers entrusted with the command of divisions or brigades an allowance for good service in the following proportions:—To the officers commanding divisions, each 10s. per diem; to the officers commanding brigades, each 5s. per diem; and to yourself a similar allowance for good service of 20s. per diem.”

Better, far better, that these words had never been penned, and that the generous thought had died in its conception! For the day was to come when a reference to this precedent after Vittoria should call forth from him under whom the representatives of the Corps had so often and so Vide Appendix A. bravely fought, a letter as cruel and unjust to those of whom it treated, as it was unworthy of him who penned it.

The other incident is one which has become a household word in the Regiment. If there is one name more familiar than another to the Artilleryman, it is that of Norman Ramsay. From public orders and the pages of history his gallantry and professional skill may be learnt; but it is from the pages of private correspondence that one ascertains how lovable he was. He joined the Regiment in 1798, and he fell at Waterloo; and yet in that short space of seventeen years he had gained the love of his brother officers without exception, the devotion of his men, and the admiration of all. A man sans peur et sans reproche, he reminds one of the knights of Arthur, whose pleasure was to “Live pure, speak true, right wrong, follow the king.”
A thorough master of his profession, he earned the respect as well as the love of those whom he commanded: and let all remember that the love of men for their commander must have that element in it to make the gift worth having. The personal qualities of an officer may attract the affection of his men; but if he is deficient in knowledge of his profession, there will be in their love an element approaching pity, which will be fatal to their confidence in the hour of trial. It will be like the love for a child,—pure, warm, and sincere,—but not such as will demand from the soldier, in the day of battle, blind confidence and unhesitating obedience. In Norman Ramsay were combined all the virtues which compel affection, and all the skill which demands respect. But there was more: he possessed that professional enthusiasm, which hallows the dullest tasks, and gilds the severest hardship. His pride in his troop made its men strive to be worthy of his good opinion; and it is in this way that a commander can with certainty generate esprit de corps among his men. Let him but place before them a standard of perfection, even although unattainable, and, in their voluntary efforts to reach it, they will rise far higher, than if driven by order, or goaded by fear of punishment.

Successful in all his aims, Norman Ramsay was yet so fortunate as to escape jealousy. The letters of his brother-officers,—written for private eye alone, but subsequently published,—show this to a singular extent. Sir Alexander Dickson, Sir Augustus Frazer, Sir Hew Ross, Major Cairnes, and others,—all men of different characters and disposition,—rarely wrote without a loving word or kind inquiry about Ramsay. If his troop distinguished itself, they all rejoiced as if it had been their own; if he met with any grief, they longed to share it; and if sorrow came upon themselves, their first instinct was to confide it to him. In October, 1813, a distinguished Artilleryman, Sir Howard Douglas, lost in action a brother whom he deeply loved. Older than Ramsay, one yet finds without surprise that it Sir A. Frazer’s Letters, page 314. was to him he went, “bitterly lamenting his loss.” So also when any of them came within his reach at any time, the letters always speak alike,—as if every one would readily understand the writers’ longings—“I must go and see Ramsay.”

In these pages, later on, the story will have to be told how, in the midst of the din of battle, there seemed to fall a silence like a pall, as he, the brave and much-loved, met with a soldier’s death; but the grief was then that of his friends. The incident now to be told tells of a grief which was his own,—which never quitted him while he lived, and which was said by many who knew him to have led him to court unnecessary exposure on the day in which he died. At Vittoria, Bull’s troop, commanded by Ramsay, had done special service. On the following day, during the pursuit, Published Letters of Sir A. Frazer, page 183. “Lord Wellington spoke to Ramsay as he passed; desired him to take his troop for the night to a village near, adding that if there were orders for the troop in the course of the night, he would send them.” No orders came; but at 6 A.M. an Assistant Quartermaster-General arrived, and ordered him to join the brigade to which he belonged. The troop at once marched, but was shortly afterwards overtaken by a written order from General Murray, the Quartermaster-General Published Letters of Sir A. Frazer, page 186. of the army, directing “Captain Ramsay’s troop to rejoin General Anson’s brigade.” The troop halted, while Ramsay rode on to discover the road; and at this moment Lord Wellington rode up, and called repeatedly for him. “His Lordship,” wrote Sir Augustus Frazer, “then called for Dickson, whose horse being unable at the instant to clear a wide ditch over which we had just passed, I rode up to mention the circumstance to Lord Wellington, who ordered me to put Captain Ramsay in arrest, and to give the command of the troop to Captain Cator. This I accordingly did.... It appears that Lord Wellington had intended that Ramsay’s troop should not have moved that morning till he himself sent orders, and his Lordship declared that he had told Ramsay so. This Ramsay affirms he never heard or understood; and his Lordship’s words, repeated by Ramsay, young Macleod, and a sergeant and corporal, all at hand when his Lordship spoke to Ramsay, are precisely the same, and do not convey such a meaning. I spoke instantly to Lord Fitzroy Somerset on the subject, who, together with every other individual about head-quarters, was, and is, much concerned at the circumstance. Nay, two days afterwards, when the despatches were making out, every friendly suggestion was used by several that Ramsay might be mentioned as he deserved; but I have reason to believe that he is not. There is not, among the many good and gallant officers who are here, one of superior zeal or devotion to the service to Ramsay, who has given repeated proofs of spirit and good conduct. Admitting, contrary to all evidence, that he had mistaken the verbal orders he received, this surely is a venial offence, and one for which long-tried and faithful services should not be forgotten.... Few circumstances have engaged more general attention, or occasioned more regret. It has naturally been expected that after the first moment was over, a deserving officer would, at least, have been released from a situation most galling to a gallant spirit. ... I trust this will soon be the case; but ... I am at a loss to account for the delay in a point so easily settled. In the meanwhile, Ramsay bears up with great fortitude, although he deeply feels.” Writing on the same ‘Memoir of Sir Hew Ross,’ page 46. subject, some weeks later, Sir Hew Ross said: “Norman Ramsay is at present with his troop in this neighbourhood, and we are much together. He is quite well, and bears his unjust treatment, and consequent disappointment, in the manly and proper way that might be expected of him.” For a considerable time he was kept under arrest; and the numerous applications on his behalf, including a very urgent one from Sir Thomas Graham, seemed to have the effect of irritating Lord Wellington. The consciousness of having done an unjust act is rendered more difficult to bear, when the victim has been one for whom affection has been entertained; and it was believed in the army that, as far as his undemonstrative nature would allow, Lord Wellington had a strong liking for Norman Ramsay. There was no doubt of the devotion of the latter for his great chief; and the keen suffering caused by injustice from a person whom one loves must be realised to be fully understood. He was happily released from arrest in time to carry his brave troop through the many actions, with which the war concluded; and he received a brevet promotion for these services; but he was never the same man. At Waterloo, on the morning of the battle, as the Duke rode along the line, he saw Ramsay at the head of his troop for the first time since his arrival in Communicated by Sir J. Bloomfield, R.H.A. Flanders. He accosted him cheerfully as he passed. Ramsay merely bowed his head sadly, until it nearly touched his horse’s mane, but could not speak. In a few hours he was where sorrow and injustice are unknown.

It is necessary now to turn to the siege of San Sebastian. Pampeluna was blockaded and ultimately starved into submission; but stronger measures were adopted with San Sebastian, into which place Marshal Jourdan had thrown a Jones’s ‘Sieges of the Peninsula,’ vol. ii. chap. ii. garrison of between 3000 and 4000 men. On the land side, it was invested by the left wing of the Allied army, under Sir Thomas Graham; and on the sea side it was blockaded by a squadron under Sir George Collyer. On the 4th July, 1813, Lord Wellington wrote as follows to Colonel Dickson: Dated Lanz, 4 July, 1813. “From what I have heard of San Sebastian, I am inclined to form the siege of that place, and I shall be very much obliged to you if you will send an officer to Bilbao to order Colonel Dickson to D.-A.-G. dated 10 July, 1813. the train from thence to Passages.”41 The order was immediately obeyed, and Captain Morrison’s 18-pounder brigade was also directed to proceed to Passages for the same purpose. On the 12th, Lord Wellington reconnoitred San Sebastian, and on the 14th, he departed to join the army on the field, leaving Colonel Dickson to conduct the Artillery part of the siege. Lord Wellington’s operations in the field were at this time of a very delicate nature. The Allied army in the east of Spain had failed, and had raised the siege of Tarragona; while, in his front and on his right, there were menacing French armies. French garrisons in Pampeluna and San Sebastian also weakened his available force, by demanding troops to watch them.

Before entering on the details of the double siege, the following list of artillery officers, who were present, may be interesting.

MS. Returns dated 12 Sept. 1813.

List of Officers of the Royal Artillery employed in the Sieges of St. Sebastian under Lieut.-Colonel Dickson, commanding the Artillery under the Marquis of Wellington.

First
Operation.
Second
Operation.
Lieut.-Colonel May, A. A. General 1 0
Lieut.-Colonel Frazer, R. H. Artillery 1 1
Major Buckner 0 1
Major Dyer 0 1
Major Webber Smith, R. H. Artillery 1 1
Captain Morrison 1 1
Captain Douglas 0 1
Captain Dubourdieu (killed) 1 0
Captain W. Power 1 1
Captain Green 0 1
Captain J. B. Parker 1 1
Captain Deacon 1 1
Captain Dansey 1 0
Captain C. Gordon 0 1
Captain A. Macdonald, R. H. Artillery 1 0
Lieutenant J. W. Johnstone 1 1
Lieutenant Henry Blachley, R. H. Artillery 1 1
Lieutenant R. H. Ord 1 1
Lieutenant W. Brereton, R. H. Artillery 1 0
Lieutenant J. Wood 0 1
Lieutenant Basil Heron 1 1
Lieutenant G. Mainwaring 0 1
Lieutenant R. Hardinge 1 0
Lieutenant R. Harding, R. H. Artillery 1 1
Lieutenant R. F. Phillips 0 1
Lieutenant J. Pascoe 1 1
Lieutenant R. Manners 0 1
Lieutenant W. Dennis 0 1
Lieutenant Hugh Morgan 0 1
Lieutenant C. Shaw 1 1
Lieutenant H. Stanway 1 1
Lieutenant R. Story 1 1
Lieutenant H. Slade 0 1
Lieutenant H. Hough 0 1
Lieutenant F. Monro 1 0
Lieutenant H. Hutchins 0 1
Lieutenant John Bloomfield 1 1
Lieutenant H. Palliser 0 1
Lieutenant T. G. Williams 1 1
Lieutenant A. Macbean 1 1
25 33

Lieut. England’s name also appears in some of the Journals of the First Operation, and in Jones’s ‘Sieges,’ and should be included above.

Total, exclusive of King’s German Artillery, present at St. Sebastian:

First Operation.—Colonel Dickson and 25 officers of the Royal Artillery.
Second Operation.—Colonel Dickson and 33 officers of the Royal Artillery.

Extract from a letter dated Passages de la Calçada, 12 Sept. 1813:

“These officers vied with each other in their endeavours to forward the object in view in the most indefatigable manner.”—Colonel Dickson to General Macleod.

The story of San Sebastian divides itself into three parts,—viz.: the first siege, terminating in an unsuccessful assault; the blockade; and the second and successful siege. The matériel at the disposal of the Artillery at the first siege was inadequate, even when supplemented by field guns, and guns borrowed from the navy; but during the second siege the supply was ample, and the fire most efficient. In sieges, the association of the Artillery with the breach made by them ceases when the assault commences; but this was not so in the second siege of San Sebastian, when the assault would certainly have failed but for the powerful fire maintained by the Artillery over the heads of the assailants. Of this, however, more hereafter.

Colonel Dickson to D. A. G.

San Sebastian is built on a neck of land jutting out into the sea; and the first point which it was necessary to secure on the land side was a place which had been fortified,—the convent of St. Bartholomew. This was taken, after four days’ vigorous cannonade, by assault, on the 17th July, 1813. Colonel Dickson’s Diary; and Jones’s ‘Peninsular Sieges.’ The guns employed against the convent and the adjoining redoubt were placed in the batteries of the left attack, numbered 1 and 2, and were four 18-pounders and two 8-inch howitzers. Before the assault, however, Sir Thomas Graham, who had been left by Lord Wellington in command, Sir Thomas Graham to Colonel Dickson, dated 15 July, 1813. directed as many field guns as possible to be brought into play in support. This was done; and they were found to be of material assistance, and were served with great effect during the assault. The number of rounds expended against the convent and redoubt was 3000: a large Jones’s ‘Sieges.’ quantity of hot shot was employed; and in his despatch announcing the success of the assault, Sir Thomas Graham To Lord Wellington, dated 18 July, 1813. said: “I cannot conclude this report without expressing my perfect satisfaction with all the officers and men of the Royal Artillery, both in the four-gun battery employed for three days against the convent, and on the opposite bank of the river, whence several field-pieces were served with great effect.”

The batteries against the town had been in course of preparation during the bombardment of the convent; and the following tables extracted from Sir A. Dickson’s letters and returns will show at a glance much that would otherwise occupy much space in description. The numbering of the batteries differs from that of the Engineers; but where possible, both have been shown.

The batteries were divided into those of the right and left attacks. Lieut.-Colonel May assisted, during the first siege, under Colonel Dickson; the left or detached attack was under Colonel Hartmann, K.G.A., and the batteries were armed, manned, and superintended as follows:—

RIGHT ATTACK.
No. 1 Battery (No 11 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’) {2 24-pr. guns
{4 8-in. hows.
{Against the Mirador
{and castle,
{and to enfilade
{the land fronts.
No. 2 Battery (No. 12 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’) 2 24-pr. guns {Against defences:
{only used two
{days.
No. 3 Battery (No. 13 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’) 4 24-pr. guns For breaching.
No. 4 Battery (No. 14 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’42) 12 24-pr. guns For breaching.
No. 5 Battery (No. 15 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’) {4 68-pr. {carronades {Against breach,
{and to annoy
{defences.
No. 6 Battery (No. 16 in Jones’s ‘Sieges’) {4 10-inch
{mortars
{Against land front
{and castle.
Total 32 pieces.
Major Webber Smith, R.H.A., was in charge of Nos. 1, 2, and 6 Batteries.
Lieut.-Colonel Frazer, R.H.A., was in charge of Nos. 4 and 5 (the breaching) Batteries.
Major Arriaga, Portuguese Artillery, was in charge of No. 3.
The officers in the various batteries were as follows:—
No. 1 Battery.—Captain Macdonald, and Lieutenants Brereton, Heron, and Williams.
No. 2 Battery.—Captain Deacon and Lieutenant England.
No. 3 Battery.—Captain Rosières and Lieutenant Costa (Portuguese).
No. 4 Battery.—Captains Dubourdieu and Parker, and Lieutenants Hardinge and Bloomfield of the Royal Artillery, and Lieutenants Silva and Judice of the Portuguese Artillery.
No. 5 Battery.—Captain Dansey and Lieutenant Johnstone.
No. 6 Battery.—This was not manned at first.

LEFT ATTACK.
No. 1 Battery 4 18-prs. {Against the convent up to
17 July, 1813.
No. 2 Battery 2 8-inch hows. Ditto. ditto.
No. 3 Battery
No. 4 Battery
6 18-prs.
2 8-inch hows.
{To annoy defences of land
front, and support attack.
Doubtless these included
the guns from Nos. 1 and
2 Batteries.

The officers of the Royal Artillery engaged in the left attack, were

Captain Morrison.
Power.
Lieutenant Shaw.
Oldham.
Story.
Stanway.

The strength of the companies of Artillery before San Sebastian, on the 18th July, 1813, was as follows:—

Captain Morrison’s (18-pr. brigade) 162 of all ranks.
Major Lawson’s 57
Captain Dubourdieu’s 66
Captain Parker’s 68
Detachment 17
Portuguese Artillery 107
Total 476

The ammunition expended during the first siege amounted to 27,719 rounds, and, as the batteries did not open until the 20th July, and the assault took place on the morning of the 25th, the rapidity of fire must have been excessive. In alluding to this, General Jones says: “The expenditure from the breaching battery alone, on the 22nd July, amounted to 350 rounds a gun, expended in about 15 hours of daylight. Such a rate of firing was probably never equalled at any siege, great accuracy of range being at the same time observed.” Captain Dubourdieu of the Royal Artillery was mortally wounded in the batteries on the first day; and the total loss of the Corps and the Portuguese Artillery during the first operation was 12 killed, and 44 wounded.

On the morning of the 24th July, two breaches were deemed quite practicable, but the assault which was first intended to take place on that day was postponed until the 25th at 5 A.M. It completely failed: a certain amount of gallantry was shown by the attacking troops, but there was a feeling of depression among them, which seemed to have arisen from exaggerated ideas of the difficulty of the task. Sir Thomas Graham, while giving due credit for the courage which was shown, and which was proved by the list of casualties, felt that his troops were not in the same mood as those who stormed Badajoz. In a letter to Colonel Dickson To Colonel Dickson, dated 8 p.m. 25 July, 1813. on the night of the assault, he said: “It is evident to me that the troops here never will carry this breach, unless every annoyance but the castle fire (which is not come-at-able at present) be removed.... The approach to the breach is certainly very unfavourable, and does not admit of attempting to feed or renew the attack, as all must go in one narrow column over rough, slippery stones,—and that, with an enfilading and flanking fire, occasioned the complete failure; nor would it have been possible at last to get any other fresh men from the trenches to have advanced.” Further than keeping up a fire which would not interfere with the attacking party, the Artillery had nothing to do with the assault; but Sir Thomas Graham in reporting the failure took the opportunity of referring to their services on the preceding days, in the following gratifying terms:—“The To Lord Wellington, dated 27 July, 1813. conduct, throughout the whole of the operations of the siege hitherto, of the officers and men of the Royal Artillery and Engineers, never was exceeded in indefatigable zeal, activity, and gallantry; and I beg to mention particularly to your Lordship Lieut.-Colonels Dickson, Frazer, and May, and Major Webber Smith, of the Royal Artillery”....