Nelson's Lady Hamilton (23 page)

for he regarded them simply in the light of ordinary enemies; being French they owed no allegiance to the Sicilian sovereigns, and were not traitors like the Neapolitan garrisons of Uovo and Nuovo. To them he sent a brief and stern notification that Rear-Admiral Lord Nelson "will not permit them to embark or quit those places. They must surrender themselves to his Majesty's royal mercy."

Ruffo opposed Nelson and resented his superior powers. Nelson wrote to Rear-Admiral Duckworth on the 25th of June: "As you will believe, the cardinal and myself have begun our career by a complete difference of opinion. He will send the rebels to Toulon : I say they shall not go." Sir William Hamilton was in entire agreement with Nelson: writing to Acton the very day that the Foudroyant reached Naples Bay, he spoke of the treaty granted by Ruffo as "shameful," and referred to the armistice of twenty days—which was demanded by the rebels in hope of the appearance of the French fleet—as being absolutely annulled by the mere appearance of the British squadron. Nelson also, it will be remembered, makes this point.

The day after the arrival of the Foudroyant, the 25th of June, Ruffo came on board to confer with the admiral. Sir William Hamilton was present at the interview, as well as Lady Hamilton, who was very useful both to her husband

218 NELSON'S LADY HAMILTON

and to Nelson in interpreting and taking notes. The meeting was stormy and protracted: the cardinal was obstinate, and the admiral not to be moved—for there was iron as well as fire in Nelson. Sir William wrote to Acton after a second interview between the two, that " A little of my phlegm was necessary between the cardinal and Lord Nelson, or all would have been up the very first day, and the cardinal has written to thank me and Lady Hamilton."

Emma was gloriously in the midst of everything—the confidante of a queen, the friend of the greatest seaman of his time. In one of his letters to Acton, Sir William Hamilton writes: "As Lord Nelson is now telling Lady Hamilton what he wishes to say to the queen, you will probably know from the queen more than I do of Lord Nelson's intentions." It would be possible to read into this a hint of pique, were it not for the easy-going nature and unjealous temperament of the British Ambassador, who admired Nelson almost as fervently as did his wife. Emma was in daily communication with Maria Carolina, and the Queen, on her side, wrote constantly and at length. On the 25th of June she writes from Palermo that she has just received Emma's letter, and is sending back the same boat with her reply, wishing "it had wings to reach you sooner." Then she sets forth with considerable precision her ideas as to the treatment of the rebels—she

WITH MINIATURE

GEORGE ROMNEY

is all for justice untempered with mercy: " To treat with such villainous rebels is impossible— it must be put an end to. The sight of the brave English squadron is my hope. . . . The rebel patriots must lay down their arms, and surrender at discretion to the pleasure of the king. Then, in my opinion, an example should be made of some of the leaders of the representatives, and the others should be transported under pain of death if they return into the dominions of the king." There were many women mixed up in the insurrection and shut up in the castles of Uovo and Nuovo, but this Spartan Queen had no special feeling for her own sex: " The females who have distinguished themselves in the revolution to be treated in the same way, and that without pity." She says these things are "not pleasant, but absolutely necessary," and goes on, "Finally, my dear Lady, I recommend Lord Nelson to treat Naples as if it were an Irish town in rebellion similarly placed. ... I recommend to you, therefore, my dear lady, the greatest firmness, vigour, and severity; our future tranquillity and position depend upon it—the faithful people desire it. I solicit frequent news from you, for you cannot conceive the anxiety I feel, and believe me for life your most tenderly attached and grateful friend."

The Queen's temper is sufficiently shown in these extracts from her letter to Emma; but in

•220 NELSON'S LADY HAMILTON

the British Museum there are her notes on the treaty of capitulation with the Neapolitan Jacobins, signed by Ruffo and Captain Foote, before Nelson reached Naples. Her overwrought feelings express themselves in marginal notes opposite the articles of the treaty. To Article One she writes in a kind of breathless rage, "To capitulate with one's rebel subjects, who were without force, without hope of succour either by sea or land! With persons who, after the clemency displayed to them by their king and their father (who promised to pardon them), fought desperately, and are now only brought to terms by fear! I feel it to be dishonourable to treat with rebels ! They ought either to have been attacked in full force, or else left alone till a more favourable opportunity presented itself." Article Two is " a real insult; the rebels address their sovereign on equal terms, and with an air of being his superiors." The Third Article is " so infamous and absurd that it revolts me even to speak of it." She considers the Tenth Article " the culmination of disgrace," and at the foot of the capitulation writes her final exclamation of rage : " This is such an infamous treaty that if by a miracle of Providence some event does not take place which will break and destroy it, I look upon myself as lost and dishonoured. . . ."

But while the Queen stormed in her palace at Palermo, Nelson was acting the part of the

"miracle of Providence." He too considered the treaty " infamous/' and, in spite of Ruffo, insisted that it should be annulled. As the result of his determination, the garrisons of Uovo and Nuovo surrendered unconditionally on the 26th of June—the second day after the British flagship and squadron sailed into the Bay of Naples. By this act Nelson brought down a storm of obloquy on his own head. Both during his lifetime and after his death he has been accused of conduct impossible to him of all men. Southey's denunciation is famous: he calls Nelson's treatment of the Jacobin rebels " A deplorable transaction! a stain upon the memory of Nelson and the honour of England ! To palliate it would be in vain; to justify it would be wicked : there is no alternative . . . but to record the disgraceful story with sorrow and shame."

But, as Professor Knox Laughton says, with magnificent decisiveness and point, "Southey is wrong. There is another alternative. We neither palliate, nor justify, nor record : we deny. The story is a base and venomous falsehood."

As this is a matter that concerns Nelson's professional career, and does not specially affect Emma Hamilton, it is not necessary to go into the lengthy documents bearing upon the question as to whether Nelson was guilty of treacherous conduct to the rebel garrisons. Professor Laugh-ton's denial is emphatic, and in itself will be

222 NELSON'S LADY HAMILTON

sufficient for most students of naval history. Without wandering into a labyrinth of controversy, it is enough for the purpose of the present narrative to say that Nelson had full powers to annul a treaty which Ruffo and Foote had really no authority to make. The rebels in the castles of Uovo and Nuovo were informed that the treaty was annulled, and as it had not begun to take effect, they were not caught unfairly or trapped into a position of military disadvantage; it was simply a restoration of the status quo thirty-six hours before Nelson's arrival in the Bay. By all the laws and usages of war traitors and spies are not entitled to the same treatment as the ordinary man under arms, and with them Nelson would not parley or grant terms; he would accept nothing save unconditional surrender. Of course by so doing he became hated by all the Jacobins of Europe: the facts were darkened to the blackest possible aspect; and it was upon this tissue of misrepresentation that good and patriotic Southey felt compelled to censure the great admiral he admired. But it was not by any public and professional act during the whole of his career as a seaman that Nelson laid himself open to the tongue of the scorner. Achilles had only one vulnerable spot.

In Nelson's conduct at this time it may be admitted that there is a distinct trace of something like fanaticism. To him it was a sacred

crusade to crush the French and all who were tainted by Jacobin ideas. In this age we cannot realize the brooding terror that hung over Europe —to each king and kingdom French armies and French watchwords stood for " red ruin and the breaking up of laws." We now see the new freedom of man that struggled to the light amid the horrors of the Revolution, and through the democratic and military tyranny that followed. To us Ferdinand is not an admirable monarch ; to us there is something pitiable in the shivering remnant of the Neapolitan Jacobins who marched out of the surrendered castles of Nuovo and Uovo. But Nelson, so near to these events, saw them with very different eyes from ours. The whole of his life goes to prove that, fighter though he was, he was not a cruel or vindictive man; indeed, there never lived a more perfect example of the " Happy Warrior "—

" Who, doomed to go in company with pain, And fear, and bloodshed, miserable train ! Turns his necessity to glorious gain ; In face of these doth exercise a power Which is our human nature's highest dower ; Controles them and subdues, transmutes, bereaves Of their bad influence, and their good receives : By objects, which might force the soul to abate Her feeling, rendered more compassionate."

But though compassion was as essential a part of his nature as courage, there was also an iron sternness, a fiery wrath for traitors, deserters, and

224 NELSON'S LADY HAMILTON

cowards. That his conduct in the Bay of Naples made a somewhat terrifying impression upon the Neapolitan populace, rejoiced though they were to see him, is shown by the diary of one De Nicola, who, after writing on the 25th of June that " The English squadron is drawn up facing our harbour, and offers an attractive and magnificent spectacle," reports, on the 29th, " They say the English admiral was in a rage because rebels had been allowed to capitulate when no quarter should have been given them;" while another rumour runs: "That the English admiral has threatened to cut off the prisoners' heads if St. Elmo resists and molests the city." What a glorious opportunity for censurers of Nelson, had that melodramatic rumour been true !

But there was one head Nelson held most completely forfeit, and that was Caracciolo's. Prince Francesco Caracciolo was an admiral—had been chief of the Neapolitan navy—and was a traitor. All the stern teachings of discipline-— and it was no long time since Admiral Byng had been shot " to encourage the others," as Voltaire expressed it—caused Nelson to look upon Caracciolo's crime as beyond the bounds of mercy. Caracciolo had accompanied the royal family in their flight to Palermo six months before, he had been honoured and trusted, and when he besought the King's permission to return to Naples to safeguard his own property, it had been freely granted

him. Once among the Republicans, however, he had gone over to their side, taking it to be the winning side. He had aided the French and fought with them, actually going to the length of firing upon his own flagship, La Minerva. But the tide turned with the coming of the British squadron : he fled to the mountains, was captured, and brought on board the Foudroyant, to meet the stern, accusing eyes of Nelson and Troubridge. In the attempt to rouse undue pity for his fate, Caracciolo has been represented, by a curious inversion of the figures, as a trembling old man of seventy-four; in reality he was forty-seven or forty-eight. But though barely middle-aged, his was already a broken life—broken and ruined by his own act. The relentless hand of Nemesis was upon him as he stood on the deck of the British flagship.

Nelson summoned a court-martial of Neapolitan officers to assemble on board the Foudro-yant for the purpose of trying Caracciolo, who " stands accused of rebellion against his lawful sovereign, and for firing at his colours hoisted on board his frigate, the Minerva" The charge was clear and definite; the only defence Caracciolo attempted was not to deny his own actions (which were not matters of controversy, but of fact), but to attack the character of the Neapolitan King for running away from Naples. Within two hours the verdict of the Neapolitan court-martial was Q

226 NELSON'S LADY HAMILTON

given, and then it became Nelson's stern duty to order the business to its end. To Commodore Count Thurn, who had been president of the court-martial, he wrote—

"Whereas a board of naval officers of his Sicilian Majesty hath been assembled to try Francisco Caracciolo for rebellion against his lawful sovereign, and for firing at his Sicilian Majesty's frigate La Minerva;

" And whereas the said board of naval officers have found the charge of rebellion fully proved against him, and have sentenced the said Caracciolo to suffer death;

"You are hereby required and directed to cause the said sentence of death to be carried into execution upon the said Francisco Caracciolo accordingly, by hanging him at the fore yard-arm of his Sicilian Majesty's frigate La Minerva, under your command, at five o'clock this evening; and to cause him to hang there until sunset, when you will have his body cut down, and thrown into the sea.