IAftermath, June 1667.

The account of the Dutch raid in the Medway, from the taking of Sheerness Fort tot the withdrawal on Friday 14 June, as reported in the official London Gazette (Nr. 165 dated ‘Whitehall, June 16’) must certainly rank as a classic of deliberate understatement. It was as follows:

          The Dutch Fleet having the tenth instant in the evening made themselves masters of 
          Sheerness, on the eleventh they advanced up the River Medway, and though with 
          much difficulty, passed by several vessels which had been sunk about Musclebank, 
          which was the narrowest part of it the better to put some stop to them in their 
          passage; and with 22 sail came up upon the Chain. where the Lord General [i.e. 
         Albemarle] was in person with a considerable force to oppose them; but the Enemy, 
          taking advantage of an easterly Wind and the Tide which both served them, pressed 
          on, and though their first ship struck upon the Chain, the second broke through it; and 
          not withstanding a stout resistance in which our Men showed infinite courage, with 
          considerable loss to the enemy, yet they clapped their fireships aboard the 
          “Matthias” and the “Unity”, that lay at anchor as a Guard to the Chain, and upon 
          the “Charles the Fifth” all three of them Dutch ships, that had formerly been taken 
          from them. The same they possest themselves of the “Royal Charles” which was 
          twice fired by our Men, and as often quenched by the Enemy.

	The transom of the "Royal Charles". as it is now displayed at the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

          On Thursday the 13 Instant, About One of the Clock, taking again their advantage of 
          the Wind and the Tide, the advanced with six men-of-war and five Fire-ships and 
          came up towards Upnor-Castle, but were so warmly entertained by Major Scot, who 
          commanded there, and on the other side by Sir Edward Spragg from the Battery at 
          the Shoare, that after very much Dammage received by them in the shattering of their 
          Ships, in sinking several of their Long Boats manned out of them, in the great Number 
          of their Men kill’d and some Prisoners taken, they were at the last forced to retire, 
          having in this attempt spent in vain two of their Fire-Ships which were attempted the 
          “Royall Oake” but were forced off and burnt down without any effect; but a third 
          had its effect, the two others coming also aboard the “Royall James” and the 
         “Loyall London” , which are much injured by the fire but in probability made be 
         again made serviceable, having been sunk before their coming up, and the greater part 
         of them laid under water 

         Since then they have not made any considerable Attempt, and by some Prisoners we 
         have taken we finde that the loss we have received has been hitherto so fully returned 
         upon them, that they can have but little reason to Bragg of their Success, and less 
         encouragement to make any farther Attempts on these parts.
         Part of the Enemies Fleet hath since this Action continued about Muscle-Bank, where 
         on Friday were seen 24 Sail, on Saturday only 14, which ‘tis believed stay there only 
         to get off the “Royall Charles,” which is on shoare.
         [The vessel was almost certainly the “Harderwijck” and not the “Royal Charles” 
         which appeared to have been brought down the river without any serious difficulty]

An even more ludicrous attempt to play down the disaster came from the pen of the Earl of Castlemaine, the cuckolded Husband of one of the mistresses of Charles II. After asserting that the Medway enterprise had cost the Dutch “an infinite number of Men and Ten Ships, according to our estimate although they will not acknowledge so many, the indignant Earl considered the loss of the “Royall Charles” 

          I confess I was troubled when I heard a ship fell into their hands which his Highness     
          [i.e. the Duke of York] once made use of and Had thereby the Honour to wear his 
          Flag but I was soon again satisfied, when I call’d it to mind, that Sampson himself 
          might be taken by surprize, and that this vessel could not choose but have an ill end , 
          seeing it had Cromwell for its Founder.

Though the London Gazette tried to minimize the magnitude of the humiliating reverse which the Nation had just suffered, the panic which gripped London and the home countries as the news of the Dutch advance spread, revealed that what had occurred was not a mere incident in a war, but a disaster which was bound to have momentous consequences.
Clarendon wrote.:

         The Distraction and Consternation was so great in Court and City, as if the Dutch had 
          not been only Masters of the River, but had really landed an Army of one hundred 
          thousand Men…… If the King’s and Duke’s personal composure had not 
          restrained Men from expressing their Fears, there wanted not some who would have 
          advised them to leave the City.

The stages in the panic are vividly related by Pepys in his diary, and his account is corroborated by other contemporary chroniclers. On 11 June Pepys remarked that he was kept up late trying to provide fireships in response to Sit William Coventry’s insistent and despairing demands. Then, wrote Pepys, he went home; he continued:

         Where [I had] a great deal of serious talk with my wife about the sad state we are in, 
         and especially from the beating of drums this night for the train-bands upon pain of 
         death, to appear in arms tomorrow morning, with bullet and powder and money to 
         supply themselves with victuals for the fortnight; which considering the soldiers drawn 
         out to Chatham and elsewhere, looks as if they had a design to ruin the City and give it 
         up to be undone; which; I hear, makes the sober citizens to think very sadly of things.

On 12 June Pepys wrote:

         When I come to Sir W. Coventry’s chamber, I find him abroad; but his clerk, Powell, 
         do tell me that ill news is come to Court, of the Dutch breaking the Chaine at Chatham; 
         which struck me to the heart. And to White Hall to hear the truth of it; and there going 
         up the Park-stairs I did hear some lacquies speaking of sad news come to Court, 
         saying there is hardly anybody in the Court but to look as if he cried.
         Home, where all our hearts do now ake, for the news is true that the Dutch have broke 
         the chaine and burned our ships, and particularly the “Royall Charles”…… And the 
         truth is I do fear so much that the whole Kingdom is undone, that I do this night resolve 
         to study with my father and wife what to do with the little that I have in money by me.

Next day, 13 June, Pepys heard ‘the sad news confirmed’ of the disaster at Chatham, and he wrote:

         In the evening comes Mr Pelling and several others to the office, and tell me that never 
         were people so dejected as they are in the City all over at this day; and do talk most 
         loudly, even treason, as that we are bought and sold, that we are betrayed by the 
         Papists and others about the King……. They look upon us as lost, and remove their 
         families and rich goods in the City.

Pepys concluded a lengthy and dramatic day’s entry in his diary by recording:

         ‘I made my will also this day, and did give all I had equally between my father 
         and wife’

In his entry for the following day, Friday 14 June, Pepys recorded that he had spoken with a Mr Wilson and an employee of Gauden, the Navy’s victualler:

         who are come from Chatham last night, and saw the three ships burnt, they lying all 
         dry, and boats going from the men-of-war to fire them. But that he telles me of worst 
         consequence is, that he himself (I think he said) did hear many Englishmen on board 
         the Dutch ships speaking to one another in English; and that they did cry and say “We 
         did heretofore fight for tickets, now we fight for dollars” and did ask how such and 
         such a one did, and would commend themselves to them; which is a sad 
         consideration.Another informant who had been at Chatham, a Mr Lewes, told Pepys 
         that when the “Royal Charles” was taken some of these renegade English men were 
         heard to say that they had had their tickets countersigned, held them up while saying 
         this to prove it, and then declared that they had now come to have them paid, and 
         intended to have them paid before they left [Because of the lack of ready money and 
         for other reasons it had become customary, when a ship was paid off, to give men 
         certificates from which the wages due them could be reckoned. On presenting these 
         “tickets” the men entitled to be paid in cash, but because of the lack of money delays 
         occurred, and unscrupulous speculators took advantage of the sailor’s necessity to 
         cash the tickets at a discount which sometimes amounted to 5s in the ₤.

Pepys continued sadly:

         Indeed the hearts as well as affections of the seamen are turned away; and in the open 
         streets of Wapping, and up and down, the wives have cried publicly “This comes of 
         your not paying our husbands…..”
         Most people that I speak are in doubt how we shall do to secure our seamen from
         running over to the Dutch; which is a sad but very true consideration at this day.

At the scene of the disaster, Chatham, the spirit prevailing can be gauged from a letter sent on Friday 14 June, by Lord Brouncker and Peter Pett to the Navy Board:

         “So heavy is the hand of God now upon this place,” they wrote “” that we fear it as 
         well as the hand of men now apparently fights against us” and the went on to declare 
          that after the arrival of the Dutch off Gillingham everybody had believed that “The 
         whole navy, dock and stores would have burnt up on Wednesday”

Pepys’ friend and fellow diarist John Evelyn has also left a record of the general feeling of chaos and disaster which spread as news of the Dutch victories became known, On Tuesday 11 June he wrote:

          To Lond: alarmed by the Dutch, who were falling over our Fleete, at Chatham, by a 
          most audicious enterprise, entering the very river with part of their fleete…… This 
          alarme caused me (fearing the ennemie might advernture up the Thames even to Lond, 
          which with ease they might have don, and fired all the vessels in the river too) to send 
          away my best goods, plate etc. from my house to another place; for this alarme was 
          so greate, as put both County and Citty into a panique feare and consternation, such 
          as I hope I shall never see more,; for everybody went flying none knew why or 
          whither.

The state of panic in London was so great that people were ready, on the slenderest evidence, to believe that the Dutch had managed to sail up the Thames to the capital. Thus Evelyn recorded in his diary on Monday 17 June:

         The greatest damage was to England’s pride and someone had to be found to answer 
         for it. The chief culprits were certainly the council who had made the decision to lay up 
         the fleet and rely on the coastal defences (which it was their business to know the state 
         of) Their job now was to find a scapegoat to avert any talk that may be put about 
         them.They acted quickly and on the 17th June Peter Pett was arrested and committed 
         to the Tower of London.

Pett was charged on eight counts. 
--- The first three dealt with his neglect to secure the “Royal Charles”. 
--- The fourth with neglecting to sink the “Sancta Maria” in the place ordered (which was actually the responsibility of the Master Attendant, Captain Brooke)
--- The fifth charge was that he allowed thirty small boats ordered for the defence of the river, to be used in carrying away his and other people’s goods. Pett admitted to this charge in at least one respect He had used to carry away his private collection of model ships, which, he argued, were valuable because of their technical details and on no account should fall into enemy hands. This was the Master Shipwright speaking but as his accusers were non-technical they could not understand nor appreciate his reasoning. 
--- The sixth charge accused him if being responsible for there being only a handful of men in the Dockyard when Albemarle arrived, instead of eight hundred. 
--- The seventh accusation was that he failed to provide tools for building the batteries 
when asked to do so, and 
--- The eighth was that he had supplied deal boards for the battery floors instead of oak.
All these charges were framed upon a report made by the Duke of Albemarle and read in the House of Commons on 31st Oktober. A Parliamentary committee was also set up to enquire into the reason for the lack of fortifications at Sheerness. All this took many months by which time the excitement had died down. After a reasonable lapse of time Pett was released on a 
₤ 5.000 bail and the charges against him dropped. It was obvious to all involved, that, had he been found guilty, then a number of important people in higher places were equally guilty Nevertheless, Pett was deprived of his office and the scapegoat was found.

After the raid it was necessary to clear up the debris of battle. A survey showed that the "Royal James” and the “Loyal London” could be salvaged. Having been scuttled they had burnt down to approximately the lower gun-ports. With half of each hull remaining it was decided to rebuilt them. At this time the facilities were not available at Chatham and it was necessary to move them, one to Deptford and the other to Woolwich. Even this was not accomplished without incident and drama.

In September, when the hulks had been jury-rigged and were ready to start, the crews mutinied and refused to trust themselves “on board two burnt-out wrecks” The Navy Commissioner reported to Whitehall “The “Royal James” and the “Loyal London” being ready to sail, we sent a warrant to Thos. Streton to take charge of the “London”
He came and threw it at us and refused to go, and Robert Sansum who had a warrant for the “James” will not go either. 

Eventually fresh crews were found by drafting sixty seamen from ships just come in from sea and together with thirty-three dockyard ropemakers the remains of the “Royal James” and the “Loyal London” set of for the Thames on the 13th September. The burnt-out shell of the “Loyal London” took nearly three years to rebuilt and cost 
₤ 20,470. King Charles himself came all the way to Depthford to see the launching in June 1670. He had hoped to persuade the City of London to bear some of the cost of rebuilding as they had done when the ship was first launched in June 1666, But this time, the City, impoverished by the Plague, the Great Fire and the war were not so accomodating and Charles, in a fit of temper, put a line through the word “Loyal” and henceforth the ship was known simply as “London”.

Terug naar de vorige pagina