History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery Compiled from the Original Records (Complete)
9781465628206
213 pages
Library of Alexandria
Overview
There are many reasons why the Masters-General of the Ordnance must interest the student of the History of the Royal Artillery. In the days before the Regimental organization existed, all Artillery details came under the care and superintendence of the Masters-General; and to a distinguished one of their number does the Regiment owe its formation. The interest becomes deeper and closer after that date; for in addition to the general superintendence which had already existed, the Master-General had now a special interest in the Royal Artillery, in his ex officio capacity as its Colonel. And whatever objections may be urged against the Board of Ordnance, the Royal Artillery, save in one particular, has always had abundant and special reason for regarding it with affection and gratitude. The almost fatherly care, even to the minutest details, which the Board showed to that corps over which their Master presided, was such as to awaken the jealousy of the other arms of the service. Had their government not been of that description which attempts to govern too much, not a word could be said by an Artilleryman, save in deprecation of the day when the Board of Ordnance was abolished. Unfortunately, like a parent who has failed to realize that his children have become men, the Board invariably interfered with the duties of the Artillery under whatever circumstances its officers might be situated. No amount of individual experience, no success, no distance from England, could save unhappy Artillerymen from perpetual worry and incessant legislation. The piteous protests and appeals which meet the student at every turn give some idea of the torture to which the miserable writers had been exposed. The way, also, in which the Board expressed its parental affection was often such as to neutralize its aim. It was rare indeed that any General Officer commanding an army on service made an appointment of however temporary or trivial a nature, which had to come under the approval of the Board, without having it peremptorily cancelled. Even in time of peace, the presence in every garrison of that band of conspirators, known as the Respective Officers—who represented the obstructive Board, and whose opinion carried far more weight than that of the General commanding—was enough to irritate that unhappy officer into detestation of the Honourable Board and all connected with it. It has been declared—and by many well able to judge, including the Duke of Wellington himself—that in many respects the Board of Ordnance was an excellent national institution and a source of economy to the country. It may be admitted that in its civil capacity this was the case, and the recent tendency to revive in the army something like the Civil Branch of the Ordnance proves that this opinion is general. But, if we take a more liberal view than that of mere Artillerymen, we must see that the military division of its duties was only saved from exposure and disgrace by the fact that the bodies of troops over which it had control were generally small and scattered. The command of the Royal Artillery, now that it has attained its present numbers, could not have remained vested in the hands of a Board constituted as the Board of Ordnance was. What General Officer could have hoped to weld the three arms of his division into any homogeneous shape, while one of them could quote special privileges, special orders, and sometimes positive prohibition, from a body to which they owed a very special obedience? The Royal Artillery may indeed have lost in little comforts and perquisites by the abolition of the Board of Ordnance, but in a military point of view, in proficiency, and in popularity, the Regiment has decidedly been a gainer.
