ney,

he was certainly the first to put in practice, there is redundant and overwhelming evidence that, on a great variety of occasions, he distinctly and emphatically conceded that merit to Mr Clerk, and continued to the last to express a generous and enthusiastic admiration of the great merit and importance of the discovery. Mr Clerk himself, it will be recollected, says distinctly, in his preface, which was before the world upwards of thirty years, without any contradiction from the friends of Lord RodFrom the best authority, I have been informed, that Lord Rodney himself at all times acknowledged the communi'cation; and, having from the first approved of my system, de'clared, even before he left London, that he would strictly adhere to it in fighting the enemy. And afterwards, Sir George Rodney himself, when he arrived in Britain, made no scruple to ac'knowledge that I had suggested the manœuvre by which he had 'gained the victory of the 12th April, 1782.' From the following very important passage of Mr Playfair's Treatise we may learn upon what authority Mr Clerk made the first allegation, and with how much correctness he followed it up by the second:

Lord Rodney, who had done so much to prove the utility of this system, in conversation never concealed the obligation he felt to the author of it. Before going out to take the command of the fleet in the West Indies, he said one day to Mr Dundas, afterwards Lord Melville, "There is one Clerk, a countryman of yours, who has taught us how to fight, and appears to know more of the matter than any of us. If ever I meet the French fleet, I intend to try his way."

He held the same language after his return. Lord Melville used often to meet him in society, and particularly at the house of Mr Henry Drummond, where he talked very unreservedly of the Naval Tactics, and of the use he had made of the system in his action of the 12th of April. A letter from General Ross states very particularly a conversation of the same kind, at which he was present." It is (says the General) with an equal degree of pleasure and truth, that I now commit to writing what you heard me say in company at your house, to wit, that at the table of the late Sir John Dalling, where I was in the habit of dining often, and meeting Lord Rodney, I heard his lordship distinctly state, that he owed his success in the West Indies to the manœuvre of breaking the line, which he learned from Mr Clerk's book. This honourable and liberal confession of the gallant Admiral, made so deep an impression on me, that I can never forget it; and I am pleased to think that my recollection of the circumstance may be of the smallest use to a man with whom I am not acquainted, but who, in my opinion, has deserved so well of his country."

As a farther evidence of the sentiments of the admiral on a subject where they are of so much weight, I have to quote a very curious and valuable document, a copy of the First Part of the Naval Tactics, with Notes on the margin by Lord Rodney himself, and communicated by him

to the late General Clerk, by whom it was deposited in the family library at Pennicuick. The notes are full of remarks on the justness of Mr Clerk's views, and on the instances wherein his own conduct had been in strict conformity with those views. He replies in one place to a question which Mr Clerk had put, (published after the action in spring 1780,) of which mention has been already made, concerning the conduct of that action. The first signal of the admiral, as we have already seen, was for attacking the rear with his whole force. The French, perceiving this design, wore, and formed on the opposite tack. This made it impossible immediately to obey the admiral's signal, and the next that he made was for every ship to attack her opposite. Mr Clerk's question was, Why did Sir George change his resolution of attacking the rear, and order an attack on the whole line?-Sir George answers to this, That he did not change his intention, but that his fleet disobeyed his signals, and forced him to abandon his plan.

An anecdote which sets a seal on the great and decisive testimony of the noble admiral, is worthy of being remembered; and I am glad to be able to record it on the authority of a noble earl. The present Lord Haddington met Lord Rodney at Spa, in the decline of life, when both his bodily and his mental powers were sinking under the weight of years. The great commander, who had been the bulwark of his country, and the terror of his enemies, lay stretched on his couch, while the memory of his own exploits seemed the only thing that interested his feelings, or afforded a subject for conversation. In this situation, he would often break out in praise of the Naval Tactics, exclaiming, with great earnestness," John Clerk of Eldin for ever!"

Generosity and candour seemed to have been such constituent elements in the mind of this gallant Admiral, that they were among the which longest resisted the influence of decay.'

parts

These latter testimonies, though they seem of late to have been too much forgotten, have been long before the public; but we are now about to refer to others, if possible still more decisive, which have not yet seen the light. The first is a letter from the late John Fordyce, Esq. of Ayton, who was long, if we recollect rightly, Surveyor of Woods and Forests, and who addressed it, in the year 1809, to the late Mr Clerk, who seems then, for the first time, to have heard some rumours of a disposition to rob him of the glory of his great discovery. The following is an exact copy of the whole letter. The original is in the possession of Lord Eldin, Mr Clerk's eldest son.

My good old Friend,

A good many years ago, I think in the year 1786 or 1787, when I was living with my friend Colonel Fullarton, in Berkeley Square, Lord Rodney one day dined with us, and being very communicative, he gave us a very interesting account of his own great actions, which engaged our attention much; the more from his giving You a chief share in the merit.

He declared that he had followed the plans and principles recommended in your Naval Tactics, a work to which he gave the highest praise. I was so much pleased, and so much struck with what he said, that I know I communicated it soon after, either to yourself, or to my worthy and intimate friend, your brother-in-law. If I did so by letter, of which I cannot now be certain, I refer to that letter for a more particular account of what he said; recollecting that he was copious and minute in his details, and I am led now again to mention that conversation from my old friend Adam having lately told me, that some person had represented Lord Rodney as having held a different language, claiming himself the merit of the discovery of that system of attack, which I heard him so explicitly and unequivocally give to you. Indeed I happened on another occasion, and a very remarkable one, to hear this declaration of Lord Rodney's very strongly confirmed by another unquestionable testimony. I happened to be down at Walmer Castle with Mr Pitt at the time of Lord Duncan's great battle on the coast of Holland; Lord and Lady Melville were living with him at the same time. We were sitting drinking a glass of wine, I remember, after dinner, when a man, whose name I do not at present recollect, a smuggler, came rather abruptly into the room and told us, he had just come on shore from his vessel, returning from the coast of Holland, where he had witnessed the great victory gained by Lord Duncan. He described the action, and having mentioned the breaking through the line, Lord Melville took notice of that new instance of the success of your system; and then mentioned Rodney's having often told him, that he had taken that mode of attack from you; and this Lord Melville again told me a few days ago, just before he went to the North, that Lord Rodney had repeatedly mentioned in his hearing-and I know that Lord Melville will most willingly confirm this to yourself, to Adam, or to any other friend who may desire it. Give my best compliments to your family, and believe me, my dear Sir, very sincerely yours,

'Putney Hall, 11th June, 1809.'

'John Clerk, Esq. of Eldin.'

(Signed)

JOHN FORDYCE.'

We can scarcely conceive any thing more decisive than this. But as the matter was then for the first time supposed to have taken an aspect of controversy, application was soon afterwards made to Lord Melville, in consequence of Mr Fordyce's suggestion; and his Lordship in the following year (1810) was kind enough to draw up in his own hand-writing, a Memorial of all he recollected on the subject, which he put into the hands of the Lord Chief Commissioner, for the purpose of being delivered to Mr Clerk's family-and it also is now accordingly in the possession of Lord Eldin. In that paper, Lord Melville, who, it will be recollected, as Treasurer of the Navy, had the best access to all such information, confirms in the fullest manner every thing that is stated by Mr Fordyce; and he transmitted at the same time, the letter from General Ross, a portion of which

we have already copied in our extracts from Mr Playfair's Essay. Indeed, the greater part of the context of that extract is in the very words of Lord Melville's Memorial, which was in the hands of Mr Playfair, when he drew up this statement; and does not therefore require to be here repeated. It states in the most positive and distinct manner, that he had very frequently heard Lord Rodney acknowledge that he had got his first idea of the manœuvre in question from Mr Clerk; and, in particular, that he had so expressed himself, before sailing for the West Indies in 1782; and that, though the subject was often discussed after his return, he never varied from that first statement, or failed to ascribe the merit to the true author. Now, considering that there is not yet before the public any statement or testimony directly to an opposite effect, or importing unequivocally either that Lord Rodney ever claimed the discovery as his own, or denied that it belonged to Mr Clerk, we humbly conceive that the matter can no longer be regarded as doubtful; and cannot but think that few debateable matters have ever occurred, which, after so long a period, could still be confirmed by proofs so conclusive. A great part, however, of the indirect evidence which has been represented as hostile to the claims of Mr Clerk, appears to us, when illustrated by the positive facts which we think we have now established, to constitute the strongest and most extraordinary confirmation of these facts. We must be allowed, therefore, to say a word or two on some of the most remarkable parts of that evidence.

And we must beg our readers' attention, in the first place, to the following remarkable passage in the Memoirs of the late ingenious Mr Cumberland, in which, speaking of a period recently before the termination of the American War, he says

It happened to me to be present, and sitting next to Admiral Rodney, when the thought seemed first to occur to him of breaking the French line, by passing through it in the heat of the action. It was at Lord George Germain's house at Stourland, after dinner, when, having asked a number of questions about the manoeuvring of columns, and the effect of charging with them on a line of infantry, he proceeded to arrange a parcel of cherrystones which he had collected from the table, and forming them as two Fleets drawn up in line, and opposed to each other, he at once arrested our attention, which had not been very generally engaged by his preparatory enquiries, by declaring he was determined so to pierce the enemy's line of battle, (arranging his manœuvre at the same time on the table,) if ever it was in his power to bring them into action. I daresay this passed with some as a mere rhapsody; and all seemed to regard it as a very perilous and doubtful experiment, &c.; and he concluded his process, with swearing he would lay the French admiral's flag at his sovereign's feet, a promise which he actually performed,' &c,

Now, this appears to us to afford a very striking confirmation of Lord Melville's statement of the gallant admiral's intimation to him, about the same period, that Mr Clerk had taught them how to fight the enemy; and that if ever he came up with the French fleet, he was determined to try his way.' Nor does it in the least detract from the value of this confirmation, that in this conversation at Lord George Germain's he did not mention the name of the person by whom the idea had been suggested, or that Mr Cumberland supposed that it had originated at the moment with himself; though, with all deference to his penetration, we must observe, that the whole course of the dialogue, as reported, the preparatory questions as to analogous operations in land war, and the ready exhibition of his own manœuvre with the cherrystones on the table, seem to us to point very clearly to a different conclusion; and to indicate, first, that the notion was not taken up by him at the moment, or on the spot, but had been the subject of previous discussion or reflection; and, second, that it was not the original or cherished offspring of his own genius, but had been recently communicated and recommended to him by some other person, whose authority, upon a new and startling proposition, he was anxious to have confirmed by the testimony of persons of skill in corresponding movements. While he was thus testing the suggestion he had received, and meditating on the future execution of an experiment so interesting in itself, and to him so full of responsibility, it is not at all wonderful that he should not have thought it necessary to bring forward the name of the person to whom he was indebted for the communication, or to embarrass the consultation in which he had engaged the company, by a detail of his conversations with Mr Atkinson, or of the sketches and calculations that had been furnished to him by Mr Clerk.

In the same way, we think that the omission of any direct or specific notice of his having first learned this manœuvre from Mr Clerk, in the Notes with which he had enriched his own copy of the Naval Tactics, affords no ground whatever for inferring that he could not be conscious of any such obligation, or was unwilling to acknowledge it. If there be any thing at all extraordinary in such an omission, as we shall show immediately there is not, it must, we think, to say the least of it, appear still more unaccountable that there should be no hint or intimation in these Notes, of the very astonishing coincidence which must have taken place, if he had not learned the manœuvre from Mr Clerk-that is, if he had actually of himself, discovered, over again, that very startling and extraordinary manœuvre which he found so fully explained, and so anxiously