I would like to offer you compelling evidence that the account of events by Major Crookshank and the capture of the eagle by the Portuguese 12th Cacadores is the correct one.

Firstly, Crookshank´s account was at first hand and within a relatively short time from the actual events. The versions of both John Garland and Sergeant Douglas are either hearsay or at an interval of 30 years. And if General Pakenham, as commander of the 3rd Division had an eagle carried behind him for several days, where did he get it from if not from his own Division?

However, the compelling evidence is contained in the biography of Jerome Pereira de Vasconcelos, who was a Captain in the 12th Cacadores at the time of the battle; according to this “during the Peninsular War he distinguished himself in battle….Salamanca and Arapiles, at which he seized the eagle that served as a trophy to the French flag of the 22nd Regiment. In the assault and withdrawal his battalion suffered such great losses, which had to return to Portugal to be reorganised”.

So here is an independent account, written in Portuguese, by an officer of the 12th Cacadores, Crookshank´s Regiment, which tallies with Crookshank´s own version and specifically referring to the eagle of the 22nd Regiment. The coincidence of the two accounts is too great to be ignored. How much more likely is it that, the capture of a French eagle being a high distinction, the officers of the senior partner in the Anglo-Portuguese army, either purposely or by mistake, in the subsequent days, attributed the capture to one of their own.

I suggest that this evidence is conclusive in showing that Crookshank´s account is genuine.

The source of the Vasconcelos version is the biographical account of his career by Felipe Menendez http://www.geneall.net/P/Forum – Re: Los Voluntarios em Leiria. Jerome Pereira Vasconcelos went on to be a Marshal in the Portuguese army and was made 1st Viscount and Baron de Ponte da Barca.

Major Crookshank was promoted Lieut. Colonel and died 1st September 1838. His full name was Arthur Chichester William Crookshank, his obituary in the Gentleman´s Magazine Volume 165 gives record of a long and distinguished career and the battle of Salamanca in particular “…..at Salamanca, he commanded the 12th battalion of Cacadores which took the eagle of the 22nd Regiment of French Infantry which he had the honour of presenting to Maj General Sir E. Pakenham and he had that day 2 horses shot under him ….”

In my opinion, there is no doubt that Crookshank´s version is the correct one and the final resting place of the 22nd eagle with the Duke of Lancaster´s regiment at Fulwood Barracks is an entirely arbitrary one which does not fit the facts.

“Dr. Clarke is considered justly as the author, having been the person who first suggested the establishment of a Naval Asylum for the Orphans and Children of his Majesty’s Seamen and Marines; and having devoted himself voluntarily and gratuitously to its success during many years. The first idea of this institution he owed to the mutiny at the Nore. Reflecting on all its circumstances, he conceived that some judicious means might be devised which would tend to prevent the recurrence of so awful an event. It occurred to him after much consideration, that if an institution was formed as an Asylum for the Orphans and Children of the King’s Seamen and Marines, and the conduct of the fathers were made an indispensable claim for the admission of the children, it might become almost a pledge for the future loyalty and good behaviour of both parent and son, and prove a measure of sound and most comprehensive policy in its results. The establishment of such an asylum might, he conceived, in the hour of battle tend to animate the sailor, knowing not only that if wounded he had a retreat at Greenwich for himself, but if he fell, his children had an asylum, and the nation became their parent.

This asylum might ensure also to his Majesty’s Navy an annual supply of about 200 sailors, brought up in sentiments of gratitude and fidelity to their king and country; and when scattered throughout the navy, they would not only disseminate by their example, but enforce by their authority, good principles among others, over whom they would most certainly obtain influence and command, from their superior education, which must raise them to stations of rule over the sailors in the various parts of their ships. An opportunity presented itself to carry those views into execution in an extraordinary manner.

A person named Andrew Thompson, formed a scheme for an institution under the title of ” British Endeavour,” the pretended object of which was to bring up the children of paupers for the commercial sea service. He had collected from the Royal Family and others, a sum of nearly £2,000. But some circumstances of a suspicious nature having come to the knowledge of his Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex, he sent for Dr. Clarke, and desired him to inquire into the character of this man, previous to an examination of his conduct in this “British National Endeavour.” The result was, that a public meeting of all subscribers to the “British National Endeavour” was convened by advertisement in the newspapers; and a full investigation having taken place, it was deemed expedient by the princes, noblemen, and gentlemen present at the meeting, to entrust all their concerns to the management of a committee, and deliver over Andrew Thompson to the just hand of the law.

Dr. Clarke, finding this opportunity for carrying into practical effect his long meditated plan, proposed to the gentlemen with whom he acted, the utter extinction of this fraudulent scheme of the “British National Endeavour,” even to its very name, and the adoption of his plan for a Naval Asylum. He no sooner submitted to their consideration his views and objects than his plan was approved, and immediately adopted. A public meeting was consequently convened when the measure was fully resolved on, and a suitable address to the public was drawn up and circulated.
The result was the establishment of the Naval Asylum at Paddington Green in 1801, and this institution soon gave birth to the Military Asylums not only by suggesting the idea of the latter, but by enabling it to commence with thirty soldiers’ children found in the “British National Endeavour,” and kept in the Naval Asylum in conformity to a request from his Royal Highness the Duke of York, until the Military Asylum could receive them. As soon as the plan of the naval asylum for the orphans of his Majesty’s seamen and marines was communicated to the public, donations flowed in from all parts: the army, the navy, public bodies, and private individuals, contributed generously to its support. Lord St. Vincent subscribed one thousand pounds, and signified that he had another at its service if wanted; and the two Messrs Goldsmid, to their honour be it known, threw into its treasury above three thousand pounds. Some objection was taken by Sir Charles Pole in Parliament against the Duke of Cumberland, who had been originally president of the institution, and as. through his means his Majesty had been pleased to fix it on a royal foundation, he graciously continued his Royal Highness in the office of president, although not a naval man. His Majesty also continued Dr. Clarke in the office of auditor of the institution; a situation however which he repeatedly requested permission to resign, but his resignation was refused by the president, and also prevented by the most efficient of his Majesty’s Commissioners.

The objections of Sir Charles Pole against persons on the establishment who were not naval men; led his Majesty’s Government into an extraordinary act; for by the operation. of a clause, proposed expressly by the minister for the purpose in the House, he was deprived of benefices worth £1200 per annum, because, he did not reside upon them. Such residence was physically impossible while as auditor of the asylum, his residence was required there; and on which account expressly he was exempted from all penalty for non-residence on his benefices by an act of Parliament, as well as by a most solemn instrument under his Majesty’s sign manual, which confirmed this official and vested right. Such however was the result of his having directed his time, his thoughts, and his purse during years, to the institution of an asylum for the orphans of seamen and marines.

It is but just however to observe, that the minister had no knowledge of the right vested in Dr. Clarke by such high authorities, and such solemn instruments of public faith; and it is due to the honour of the late Mr. Perceval to add, that when he found the great public and private wrong done to Dr. Clarke, he assured him by letter under his hand, that he should receive adequate compensation from Government. This was in conformity to the opinions of the great law officers of the crown. Unfortunately, however, this virtuous minister fell soon afterwards by the hand of an assassin, and his promise was not fulfilled. We trust that the subject of this memoir will yet receive that justice to which his exertions for the benefit of his country and of society so richly entitle him.”

This was written only a few years after the events, and strongly hints that the RMA was a spin-off from the British National Endeavour School..

What I’m looking for now after some research is some paintings/prints of the RMA back in its day, and some of the ships the regiment travelled on HMS Peggy, HMS Sucess to buy as a present for my mother, so if anyone knows where I can obtain any please let me know.

Kind Regards
Leeann

To avoid inconveniencing early soldiers’ orphans, those admitted to BNE continued there after it became the Naval Asylum!.

On my grandfathers Army Record it states that he was educated at the Royal Chelsea and the Hibernian, he served in two Dragoon Regiments as well as the East Yorkshires and I would love to know how I can find any of his record in the Chelsea Asylum.

Pauline.

Can you give me the missing links please ?

My Gt grandfather was William Lord North who died in 1932 and I am interested in the family’s history.

Also, I see on the small print of an oil portrait of Gen’l Sir John Doyle which was presented to the 87th Foot by Ld North in 1894 a motto saying “Faugh a Ballagh”. I should be interested to know what that means.

Sincerely,
Giles Alington

I have quite a lot of information about Philip de Vaumorel (and his portrait) if any of this would interest you. Do you have any more about him apart from what you have written above ?

best wishes

Philip Stevens

All the census records imply a birth for Samuel c1811 but the RMA entry suggests a date about 1807. Would the RMA records provide a definitive date and is this data available online?

Regards,
Diane Smith

Thanks for the fascinating article – really brought the lives these children must have lived to life.

My GG Grandfather – Patrick Williams and his brother Michael were in RAM from 1849-54.

I know that he left at 16 to volunteer for the 35th Regiment, and have found many mentions of both him and his (naughtier) brother in the disciplinary records at Kew (!) but I can’t find out the circumstances which led to them being placed in the RAM as their parents seem to both have been alive. Any suggestions as to where to look?

Thanks
Charlotte

My gt gt gt grandfather Samuel Winstanley served in the 1st Foot Guards from 1798 and was medically discharged Aug 1816. Although he lived and was on a muster roll for Westminster, I know he went with the regiment to Sicily in 1807.

His eldest son John Thomas attended the RMA between 1810-1816 (so I presume his father’s discharge date was significant). He was placed in the hands of a Hugh Leonard – would this be an employer?

I Know John was born c1803 but have been unable to discover his actual birth date as many of the parish records for St Martin in the Field, Westminster were damaged by water in the Blitz.

Would the RMA records hold John Thomas Winstanley’s birth date and can you help with any further information.

Regards
Diane Smith