text: Index:NTSB-MAR-81-8 MV Testbank and MV Seadaniel accident report.pdf

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Weird Tales/Volume 12/Issue 4/Warning

Warning by Clark Ashton Smith

Hast heard the voices of the fen,

That softly sing a lethal rune

Where reeds have caught the fallen moon—

A song more sweet than conium is,

Or honey-blended cannabis,

To draw the dreaming feet of men

On ways where none goes forth again?

Beneath the closely woven grass,

The coiling syrt, more soft and deep

Than some divan where lovers sleep,

Is fain of all who wander there;

And arms that glimmer, vague and bare,

Beckon within the lone morass

Where only dead things dwell and pass.

Beware! the voices float and fall

Half-heard, and haply sweet to thee

As are the runes of memory

And murmurs of a voice foreknown

In days when love dwelt not alone:

Beware! for where the voices call,

Slow waters weave thy charnel pall.

title: Weird Tales/Volume 12/Issue 4/Warning


text:
Page:NTSB-MAR-81-8 MV Testbank and MV Seadaniel accident report.pdf/2

 TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

NTSB Form 1765.2 (Rev. 9/74)


text:
Page:NTSB-MAR-81-8 MV Testbank and MV Seadaniel accident report.pdf/1

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594

COLLISION OF PANAMANIAN BULK CARRIER M/V SEADANIEL WITH GERMAN CONTAINERSHIP M/V TESTBANK MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET NEAR SHELL BEACH, LOUISIANA JULY 22, 1980

NTSB-MAR-81-8

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT


text:
Page:NTSB-MAR-81-8 MV Testbank and MV Seadaniel accident report.pdf/4

Adopted: June 10, 1981

This accident was investigated jointly by the National Transportation Safety Board and the U.S. Coast Guard. An investigation was held in New Orleans, Louisiana, from July 25, 1980, through August 26, 1980. This report is based on the factual information developed by the investigation. The Safety Board has considered all facts pertinent to the Safety Board's statutory responsibility to determine the cause of probable cause of the accident to make recommendations.

The Safety Board's analysis and recommendations are made independently of the Coast Guard. To inform the public of all Safety Board recommendations and the responses thereto, all such recommendations and responses are published in the Federal Register.

About 2044 c.d.s.t. on July 22, 1980, the upbound Panamanian bulk carrier M/V SEADANIEL, with a Crescent River Port Pilot's Association (CRPPA) pilot aboard, collided with the downbound German containership M/V TESTBANK, also with a CRPPA pilot on board, while meeting in the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet Canal near Shell Beach, Louisiana. The SEADANIEL took an unexpected turn to the left due to an erroneous left rudder response to the pilot's right rudder order and struck the TESTBANK raking down the port side. The damage to the SEADANIEL was light and the damage to the TESTBANK was moderate. There were no deaths or injuries caused by the accident; however, the inhabitants of Shell Beach were temporarily evacuated and the waterway closed for about 3 weeks due to the environmental pollution.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the application of left rudder by the helmsman of the SEADANIEL when the pilot had ordered right rudder. Contributing to this accident was the failure of the ship's officers on the bridge to take any positive action to correct the helmsman's error and the failure of the pilot and master to more closely observe the helmsman's responses to rudder orders in this close quarters situation.


text:
Page:NTSB-MAR-81-8 MV Testbank and MV Seadaniel accident report.pdf/5

 INVESTIGATION

 The Accident

The SEADANIEL—On July 22, 1980, the Panamanian registered bulk carrier M/V SEADANIEL was upbound towards New Orleans, Louisiana, in the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet Canal (MRGO) maneuvering on various courses and speeds following the confines of the channel. The SEADANIEL had last departed the port of Tsam Kong, China, and was partially loaded with a cargo of about 22,000 metric tons of baryite lumps, drawing about 32 feet of water. The SEADANIEL had proceeded directly to the U.S. from China, through the Panama Canal, and had experienced no difficulty during the voyage.

About 1930, in the vicinity of light 78, an Associated Branch pilot, who had piloted the SEADANIEL since about 1355 when it entered U.S. pilot waters, was relieved by a Crescent River Port Pilot's Association pilot. The two pilots discussed various aspects of the vessel's handling characteristics, including its steering and its speeds. The Associated Branch pilot apparently had no problem in communicating with the foreign crew, and, therefore, he did not discuss the language differences. About 1932, after the Associated Branch pilot had departed the SEADANIEL and had boarded the pilot boat, the relieving pilot of the SEADANIEL ordered full ahead maneuvering speed, about 10 mph, at about 80 rpm.

The pilot of the SEADANIEL saw the outbound vessel, "ORKNEY", near light 80 and communicated with the vessel's pilot on VHF radio channel 67 and agreed to a "one-whistle" meeting. After sounding the required one-whistle signal, the vessels safely passed port to port.

Since the MRGO was clear of vessels forward of the SEADANIEL, the pilot ordered the speed increased to full ahead sea speed. The master of the SEADANIEL carried out the order by telephone to the engineroom at 1936. Sea speed for the SEADANIEL is about 100 to 110 rpm and about 12 to 13 mph. The course of the SEADANIEL was about 309º to 310ºt. The pilot discussed the vessel's observed speed of about 11 to 12 mph with the master and concluded the speed loss was due to "the tide… falling." The pilot estimated the current to be about 1 1/2 mph downbound.

The SEADANIEL changed watchstanders about 2000, and the bridge watch then consisted of the master, a helmsman on the wheel, the third mate, and a lookout. The third mate was operating the engine order telegraph and the lookout was stationed on the starboard bridge wing. The helmsman was instructed to repeat the pilot's rudder orders, and the master verified that he generally heard the helmsman repeat back the orders.

The SEADANIEL was navigated to lights 95/96 where the course was altered to 288º. The pilot observed the vessel as "steady" on 288º, but varying between 288º and 289º. About 2030, shortly after steadying on course 288º an while navigating about in midchannel, the pilot saw the navigational lights of an outbound ship, the German containership M/V TESTBANK. Because his office had advised him of the vessel's sailing, the pilot of the SEADANIEL had expected to meet the containership on the transit. Since it was twilight, the navigation lights of both the SEADANIEL and the TESTBANK were


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/140

Rh last-named work it appears his press was ‘Juxta ecclesiam omnium sanctorum’—the indefinite designation of eight London churches.

LETTS, THOMAS (1803–1873), inventor of ‘Letts's Diaries,’ son of John Letts, a London bookbinder, by his wife Susan Spicer, was born at Stockwell, London, in 1803. He was educated at Dr. Crosby's school at Greenwich, and then apprenticed to his father's business. On his father's retirement about 1835 he continued to carry on the business, but devoted himself specially to the manufacture of diaries. Ruled diaries existed long before Letts's time, but he improved them and adapted them to a variety of requirements. By 1839 no less than twenty-eight varieties of the ordinary diary were issued, ranging from foolscap folio, one day to a page, to the small pocket diary of a few inches in size each way. Letts also issued interest tables, medical diaries, office calendars, parliamentary registers and guides, ledgers, log-books, clerical diaries, and washing-books (cf. Brit. Mus. Cat.) The sale gradually increased to several hundred thousands annually, and Letts erected large factories at New Cross. He acquired a property at Chale, Isle of Wight, and in 1864, on the occasion of the Shakespeare tercentenary, he erected a small Doric temple in the neighbouring woods as a memorial to the poet. This is still to be seen from the road above St. Catherine's Point. Letts died at Granville Park, Blackheath, on 8 Aug. 1873, and was buried in Norwood cemetery. He married, first, in 1837 Harriet Cory, by whom he had three sons and a daughter, and on her death Emma Horwood Barry, by whom he had seven children. Shortly after Letts's death the business was turned into a limited liability company, but in 1885 the company went into liquidation, and the entire diary business was purchased by Messrs. Cassell & Co. Thackeray, in his ‘Roundabout Papers,’ No. 18, first published in the ‘Cornhill Magazine’ for January 1862, made ‘Letts's Diary’ the text of a New-year's sermon. He declared his preference for ‘one of your No. 12 diaries, three shillings cloth boards; silk limp, gilt edges, three and six; French morocco, tuck ditto, four and six.’

 LETTSOM, JOHN COAKLEY (1744–1815), physician, was born on 22 Nov. 1744 at Little Vandyke, one of the Virgin Islands, West Indies, of a quaker family of Cheshire origin. When six years old he was sent to England for his education, and came under the notice of Samuel Fothergill [q. v.], the quaker preacher. He was placed at school with Gilbert Thompson, afterwards a physician, whose academy was celebrated among the Society of Friends. In April 1761 he was apprenticed to Abraham Sutcliff, a surgeon and apothecary at Settle, Yorkshire. Here Lettsom acquired a good knowledge of Latin, and became well versed in botany. At the end of five years' apprenticeship he went to London, introduced by Samuel Fothergill to his brother, Dr. John Fothergill [q. v.], the physician. He became a pupil at St. Thomas's Hospital, under Benjamin Cowell the surgeon, with the physicians Russell, Grieve, and especially Mark Akenside, of whose manners in the hospital he has left an amusing description. He also attended the lectures of Dr. Fordyce, but occupied himself chiefly with carefully studying and taking notes of the cases, at that time an unusual practice, and not pursued by any other pupil of the hospital.

In October 1767 he returned to the West Indies to take possession of a small property left him by his father, the most valuable portion of which consisted of fifty slaves, whom Lettsom, though possessed of no other resources, at once emancipated. He then went into practice at Tortola, and in six months made about 2,000l., on the strength of which capital he returned to London to follow in the steps of the great Fothergill. In October 1768 he entered the university of Edinburgh, where he studied under Cullen and Home. After visiting several universities and health resorts on the continent he graduated M.D. at Leyden on 20 June 1769, with a dissertation, ‘Observationes ad vires Theæ pertinentes,’ 4to, Leyden, 1769. In 1770 he became licentiate of the College of Physicians, and commenced practice in the city of London. By his marriage in the same year with the daughter of John Miers he acquired a considerable fortune. Thus favourably launched, his quaker connections and the recommendation of Dr. Fothergill, who was at that time leaving the city, soon brought him a large practice. In 1770 he became F.S.A., and in 1771 F.R.S., and afterwards joined many other medical and scientific societies. For many years his income amounted to several thousands, but his great munificence, and still more his lavish expenditure, kept him in continual pecuniary difficulties, so that (as he himself explains) constant occupation became a necessity, and for nineteen years he never took a holiday. Towards the


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/141

Rh close of his life he was compelled to part with his suburban house, Grove Hill, Camberwell, where he had spent immense sums on a museum, library, and botanical garden. This remarkable mansion was described in ‘Grove Hill, a Poem,’ 4to, 1799 [by the Rev. T. Maurice]; ‘Grove Hill, an Horticultural Sketch,’ 4to, 1804. Shortly before his death he came into a large West Indian fortune bequeathed to him and his grandson by the widow of his son, Pickering Lettsom, but did not live long enough to profit by it.

After forty-five years' incessant occupation in his profession, Lettsom died at his house, Sambrook Court, Basinghall Street, on 1 Nov. 1815, and was buried in the Friends' Burying-ground, Coleman Street, Bunhill Row. Lettsom had a large family. One son, Samuel Fothergill, and two daughters, married respectively to Dr. Philip Elliott and Mr. John Elliott of Pimlico, survived him, and left issue. Several children died before him, including his eldest son, John Miers Lettsom (1771–1799), a physician of promise (Gent. Mag. January 1800), and father of William Nanson Lettsom [see ad fin.]

Lettsom was one of the most successful of the long roll of quaker physicians. He was not a rigid quaker, being, to use his own words, ‘a volatile creole, in his nature and essence changeable,’ but he always attended worship, and retained the quaker dress even in the presence of royalty. He was a man of warm heart, active benevolence, and so much perseverance and practical skill as to secure him a very large practice.

In medical science Lettsom achieved nothing of moment, but he rendered important public services as a philanthropist, taking part in the foundation of several valuable institutions. In 1770 he united with others in founding the General Dispensary in Aldersgate Street, the first of its kind in London, and in 1773 became one of its physicians, when he published an anonymous pamphlet advocating its claims (‘On the Improvement of Medicine in London on the basis of the Public Good,’ 8vo, London, 1773). In the next year he brought out ‘Medical Memoirs of the General Dispensary,’ containing records of cases observed there. He also assisted Dr. Hawes and others in founding the Royal Humane Society, and the establishment of the Royal Sea Bathing Infirmary at Margate was largely due to him. Lettsom's name is, however, chiefly connected with the Medical Society of London, of which he was one of the original founders, and which he enriched by the gift of a freehold house in Bolt Court, Fleet Street, of a considerable library, and by the foundation of a gold medal (called after his patron ‘the Fothergillian’) to be given annually for a medical essay. His own name is still commemorated in the ‘Lettsomian Lectures’ given in the society. In 1812 he became president of the newly founded Philosophical Society of London, and contributed to it several lectures.

In early life Lettsom was a supporter of inoculation for the small-pox, aiding in the foundation of the Society for General Inoculation, and publishing pamphlets on the subject, one of which brought him into a controversy with Henry, baron Dimsdale [q. v.] But when vaccination was introduced he became an ardent advocate in print and otherwise of the new practice, and warmly supported Jenner's claims to public recognition. He took also an active part in promoting the erection of a memorial to John Howard. Another subject in which he interested himself was the introduction of the mangel-wurzel, first brought into notice by Sir Richard Jebb in 1786. Lettsom translated a pamphlet on the subject (‘An Account of the Mangel-Wurzel, or Root of Scarcity,’ from the French of the Abbé de Commerell, 8vo, 1787), grew the seed himself, and imported a large quantity, which he distributed to farmers and others in this country as well as in Europe, America, and the West Indies. The diminution of intemperance, the study of anatomy, the relief of distress, the reform of prisons, the keeping of bees, &c., were other topics which his indefatigable public spirit led him to take up and write about.

Lettsom's literary activity was the more remarkable, because most of his works as well as his private letters were written in his carriage while driving about to see his patients. His multifarious writings may be arranged under three heads: I. Medical and scientific; II. Biographical; III. Popular and philanthropic. Of the first class the following may be mentioned: 1. ‘Reflections on the General Treatment and Cure of Fevers,’ 8vo, 1772. 2. ‘The Natural History of the Tea Tree, with Observations on its Medical Qualities,’ &c., 4to, London, 1772; 2nd edit. 1799. An expansion of his Leyden dissertation, containing an accurate botanical description of the plant, by which Linnæus, in a complimentary letter, allowed himself corrected (, Life, ii. 583). 3. ‘The Naturalist's and Traveller's Companion,’ 8vo, 1773; 3rd edit. 1799. 4. ‘History of the Origin of Medicine, an Oration at the Medical Society,’ 4to, 1778. The notes show much miscellaneous learning. French translation by M. H***, London and Paris, 1787. 5. ‘Hints respecting the Chlorosis of Boarding Schools,’ 8vo, 1795. 6. ‘Observations on the Cow


text:
Barack Obama's Second Inaugural Address

Vice President Biden, Mr. Chief Justice, Members of the United States Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

Each time we gather to inaugurate a president, we bear witness to the enduring strength of our Constitution. We affirm the promise of our democracy. We recall that what binds this nation together is not the colors of our skin or the tenets of our faith or the origins of our names. What makes us exceptional – what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Today we continue a never-ending journey, to bridge the meaning of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they have never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth. The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a Republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed.

For more than two hundred years, we have. Through blood drawn by lash and blood drawn by sword, we learned that no union founded on the principles of liberty and equality could survive half-slave and half-free. We made ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together.

Together, we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce; schools and colleges to train our workers. Together, we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. Together, we resolved that a great nation must care for the vulnerable, and protect its people from life’s worst hazards and misfortune. Through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumbed to the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone. Our celebration of initiative and enterprise; our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility, these are constants in our character.

But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people.

This generation of Americans has been tested by crises that steeled our resolve and proved our resilience. A decade of war is now ending. An economic recovery has begun. America’s possibilities are limitless, for we possess all the qualities that this world without boundaries demands: youth and drive; diversity and openness; an endless capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention. My fellow Americans, we are made for this moment, and we will seize it – so long as we seize it together.

For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it. We believe that America’s prosperity must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class. We know that America thrives when every person can find independence and pride in their work; when the wages of honest labor liberate families from the brink of hardship. We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is an American, she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own.

We understand that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time. We must harness new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, and reach higher. But while the means will change, our purpose endures: a nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American. That is what this moment requires. That is what will give real meaning to our creed.

We, the people, still believe that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity. We must make the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit. But we reject the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future. For we remember the lessons of our past, when twilight years were spent in poverty, and parents of a child with a disability had nowhere to turn. We do not believe that in this country, freedom is reserved for the lucky, or happiness for the few. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us, at any time, may face a job loss, or a sudden illness, or a home swept away in a terrible storm. The commitments we make to each other – through Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security – these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us. They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great.

We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves, but to all posterity. We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.

The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries – we must claim its promise. That is how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure – our forests and waterways; our croplands and snowcapped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared.

We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war. Our brave men and women in uniform, tempered by the flames of battle, are unmatched in skill and courage. Our citizens, seared by the memory of those we have lost, know too well the price that is paid for liberty. The knowledge of their sacrifice will keep us forever vigilant against those who would do us harm. But we are also heirs to those who won the peace and not just the war, who turned sworn enemies into the surest of friends, and we must carry those lessons into this time as well.

We will defend our people and uphold our values through strength of arms and rule of law. We will show the courage to try and resolve our differences with other nations peacefully – not because we are naïve about the dangers we face, but because engagement can more durably lift suspicion and fear. America will remain the anchor of strong alliances in every corner of the globe; and we will renew those institutions that extend our capacity to manage crisis abroad, for no one has a greater stake in a peaceful world than its most powerful nation. We will support democracy from Asia to Africa; from the Americas to the Middle East, because our interests and our conscience compel us to act on behalf of those who long for freedom. And we must be a source of hope to the poor, the sick, the marginalized, the victims of prejudice – not out of mere charity, but because peace in our time requires the constant advance of those principles that our common creed describes: tolerance and opportunity; human dignity and justice.

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths – that all of us are created equal – is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone; to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth.

It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began. For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well. Our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote. Our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity; until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in our workforce rather than expelled from our country. Our journey is not complete until all our children, from the streets of Detroit to the hills of Appalachia to the quiet lanes of Newtown, know that they are cared for, and cherished, and always safe from harm.

That is our generation’s task – to make these words, these rights, these values – of Life, and Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness – real for every American. Being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life; it does not mean we will all define liberty in exactly the same way, or follow the same precise path to happiness. Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government for all time – but it does require us to act in our time.

For now decisions are upon us, and we cannot afford delay. We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate. We must act, knowing that our work will be imperfect. We must act, knowing that today’s victories will be only partial, and that it will be up to those who stand here in four years, and forty years, and four hundred years hence to advance the timeless spirit once conferred to us in a spare Philadelphia hall.

My fellow Americans, the oath I have sworn before you today, like the one recited by others who serve in this Capitol, was an oath to God and country, not party or faction – and we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service. But the words I spoke today are not so different from the oath that is taken each time a soldier signs up for duty, or an immigrant realizes her dream. My oath is not so different from the pledge we all make to the flag that waves above and that fills our hearts with pride.

They are the words of citizens, and they represent our greatest hope. You and I, as citizens, have the power to set this country’s course. You and I, as citizens, have the obligation to shape the debates of our time – not only with the votes we cast, but with the voices we lift in defense of our most ancient values and enduring ideals. Let each of us now embrace, with solemn duty and awesome joy, what is our lasting birthright. With common effort and common purpose, with passion and dedication, let us answer the call of history, and carry into an uncertain future that precious light of freedom.

Thank you, God bless you, and may He forever bless these United States of America.

title: Barack Obama's Second Inaugural Address


text:
Germany's High Seas Fleet in the World War/Chapter 17

Cruiser Action on November 17, 1917
TO obtain information as to British mines and nets outside the belt of mines on the line Horns Reef - Terschelling, so-called test-trips were devised. The object of these test-trips was to ascertain the whereabouts of these barriers, and having done so to find means of circumventing them. Having, as a result of these test-trips, gained a clear idea of the situation of the various barriers (consisting, of belts of mines), the next thing was to determine which of them should be cleared away. Every test-trip group comprised mine-seekers and sweepers with their tackle for finding mines, behind them went torpedo-boats with U-boat "kites," with which to locate nets; these were followed by barrier-breakers, and light cruisers with seaplanes for scouting. Heavy warships protected the test-trip groups on routes that were known to be free of mines.

Such a test-trip had been decided upon for November 17, 1917. LedbyRear-Admiralvon Reuter,the 6th Mine-Sweeper Half-Flotilla, 2nd and 6th Auxiliary Mine-Sweeper Half-Flotillas, the 12th and 14th Torpedo-boat Half-Flotillas, Barrier-Breaking Division IV and the cruisers of Scouting Division II were to search from about the centre of the line Horns Reef - Terschelling in the direction north by west. Ships of Squadron IV, which was on outpost duty, were to be sent to cover the group. Squadron Commander Vice-Admiral Souchon chose for this task the Kaiserin and Kaiser, with the commander of the Kaiserin, Captain Grasshoff, in charge.

Rear-Admiral von Reuter ordered his group to assemble at 7 a.m. at a pre-arranged meeting point. The commander of the Kaiserin reported that at 7 a.m. he would lie west of Heligoland. Airship scouting was impossible, and the cruisers had been unable to take the seaplanes on board in good time because of the thick weather. Of the seaplane stations on land only Borkum was at first able to send out scouts. Towards 8 a.m. the test-trip was assembled at the point of departure, excepting the 2nd and 6th Auxiliary Mine-Sweeping Half-Flotillas.

As the latter could only be a few thousand metres behind, the leader of Scouting. Division II determined to fetch them up with his flagship Königsberg. He had just left his division when it was attacked from the N.W. by guns of large and medium calibre. The western horizon was very misty; the type of attacking ship was very hard to make out at first. In the east it was clearer; probably therefore our own ships showed up distinctly. The wind blew with a force 2 - 3 from the W.N.W.; the sea was slightly rough. The leader of Scouting Division II on board the Königsberg arrived. Scouting Division II, under the command of the senior officer, Captain Hildebrand in the Nürnberg, advanced against the enemy on a N.W. course, so as to protect the mine-sweepers. The torpedo-boats struck out N. and N.W. and put a smoke screen between the enemy and the mine-sweepers. "V45," Lieutenant-Commander Lossman, making use of her favourable position, attacked the enemy at a distance of 40 - 60 hm. The mine-sweepers let go their tackle and steamed away to the east developing smoke-clouds.

With this the most urgent part of their work achieved, the cruisers and torpedo-boats under heavy enemy fire - range about 130 hm. - started on a south-easterly course, developing smoke and steam-clouds which made the screen between the enemy and the mine-sweepers denser. The enemy, with the exception of a few torpedo-boats, turned aside from the mine-sweepers in their way east-ward and followed the more valuable cruisers. Owing to the smoke- and steam-clouds developed by the latter, he was obliged to steer towards the southern wing, that is to the windward, of our cruisers, so as to get a better chance of observation for his guns. These movements which, according to irreproachable observations and bearings, were carried out by hostile cruisers of the "Concord" class with a speed of 33 knots, increased the distance between them and the mine-sweepers. Visibility astern was, of course, very much reduced for our cruisers. The large enemy ships did! not go beyond the windward edge of the smoke screen, as owing to the danger from mines they tried to keep within the limits of the waters through which we had passed. They were, therefore, only visible for a few seconds at a time; it was impossible to get absolutely reliable observations of their composition and strength. No doubt light craft were in advance on the windward side of the large enemy ships, apparently also on the lee side.

All took part in the firing. Our cruisers lay in the midst of well-aimed salvos, of medium and heavy calibre. With great skill they avoided being hit by steering a zigzag course without damaging the effect of their own gun-fire. Our batteries replied energetically and with good results.

At 9.24 a.m. explosions resulting from our gun-fire occurred on two of the hostile battle-cruisers. One of them thereupon sheered off. About the same time our light cruiser Pillau forced an enemy destroyer that she had hit to retire from the fight. The leader of Scouting Squadron II hoped by going at full speed to separate the enemy light craft from the big ships, and so to get a chance to attack the former, but this hope was not fulfilled; the large ships were able to keep pace.

The U-boats of the Auxiliary Mine-Sweeping Flotilla had meanwhile steamed on in the direction E.S.E. At 8.50 a.m. they had a fight with the northern group of enemy destroyers at a range of 90 hm. After three hits had been observed on the destroyers, the enemy sheered off. Our U-boats again came under fire from 9.5 a.m. to 9.30 a.m., apparently from a leading torpedo-boat; after that they were no longer molested and returned to port. Several U-boats noticed that an English destroyer came to a standstill and that another drew alongside of it. This observation was confirmed later on by a seaplane which reported that it had seen one destroyer being towed by another.

The 6th Mine-Sweeping Half-Flotilla had steamed off to the east. It also came into conflict with the northern group of enemy destroyers at a range of 70 to 75 hm.; an advance of 3 destroyers brought the latter to within 10 hm. The English destroyers scored no hits; ours claimed one for certain. At 9.40 a.m. the enemy destroyers retired. Mine-Sweeping Flotilla VI then returned to port without any further molestation from the enemy. It is not clear why the enemy destroyers did not make better use of their superior armament and speed to destroy our weak mine-sweepers completely.

The fight of the cruisers, in loose echelon formation on a south-easterly course, brought them into the neighbourhood of the trawlers and the 2nd and 6th Mine-Sweeping Half-Flotilla, which at the beginning of the conflict had made off to the south-east at full speed.

The cruisers nearest to them, the Nurnberg and the Pillau, threw smoke bombs to protect them, and the 14th Torpedo-Boat Half-Flotilla also helped to envelop the mine-sweepers in smoke. The enemy destroyers, which had already come pretty near, sheered off from the smoke. The mine-sweepers steamed off in an E.S.E. direction and were not molested by the enemy. It is possible that the latter suspected poison gas in the smoke.

At 9.50 A.M. destroyers approached Scouting Division II to make a torpedo attack. Judging by bearings and distances, the attack was doomed to failure from the first. The enemy scored no hits. At the same time Admiral von Reuter ordered our torpedo-boats to attack. The boats advanced to the attack in a running fight, scattered as they were. It was not possible to collect for a closed attack owing to the speed at which the fight moved on. Altogether six torpedoes were fired; no hits were recorded with absolute certainty. At any rate the enemy cruisers turned off sharply for the time being, and in so doing unavoidably afforded our light cruisers a welcome alleviation. The Königsberg and the Frankfurt also fired torpedoes; no result was observed.

At 10.30 a.m. the battleships Kaiserin and Kaiser hove in sight. Admiral von Reuter tried by holding an easterly course to draw the enemy after him through the belts of English and German mines, so as to get him between our battleships and our cruisers. He would then only have been able to get away to the north and the north-west through the belt of mines. If he chose this route in preference to a retreat to the west he was pretty certain to suffer losses by striking mines. The battleships, which owing to the smoke and steam could not overlook the situation clearly, and did not rightly interpret the signals made by the Königsberg, steered on a N.W. course towards the approaching ships in action, unable at first to distinguish friend from foe. Scouting Division II then determined to try to join up with the battleships. The latter meanwhile had opened fire on the light cruisers of the "Concord" class. The Kaiserin quickly got the range, and a hit was observed on the leading cruiser. Thereupon the hostile ships sheered off. When Admiral von Reuter went to turn with the Königsberg and pursue the enemy along a north-west course, he was still under fire, and a shell hit the Königsberg, causing a serious bunker fire.

With this shot the firing suddenly ceased. The action was over. The enemy ran away at full speed to the N.W. In the meantime the Hindenburg and the Moltke, which on receipt of the news that an engagement was in progress had followed the other two battleships, had reached the scene of action; probably their appearance induced the enemy to break off the engagement. Our boats which started in pursuit did not succeed in getting into touch with the enemy again. An advance with Torpedo-Boat Flotilla VII, undertaken the same night, met with no result either. Torpedo-Boat Flotilla II, which had advanced to the Hoofden the night before and was just returning thence to the Bight, could not be sent in chase owing to lack of fuel.

So far as could be ascertained at such a distance and with the smoke that was developed, the following ships were engaged on the enemy side: 4 battle-cruisers (2 "Lion" and 2 "Courageous"), and 6 to 8 light cruisers of the "Concord," "Caroline" and "Arethusa" classes, as well as 16 to 18 destroyers. According to seaplane observations, confirmed by other reports, behind these cruisers and outside the Horns Reef - Terschelling line there were other heavy righting ships - at least one battleship squadron which, however, did not dare to enter the belt of mines, while the enemy cruisers kept in a straight line where our ships had passed and thus obtained some security from that danger.

The following hits were observed from our ships: five on the enemy battle-cruisers, six on the light cruisers, and seven on the destroyers. Our cruisers were hit by two heavy shells, one of which was a 38 cm., and by three 15 cm. It was remarkable what little damage the 38 cm. shell caused in the Königsberg. It passed through all three funnels of the ship, went through the upper deck into a coal bunker - the inner wall of which it burst; there it exploded and caused a fire. The fragments of this shell were picked up and its calibre determined. This proved to us that the English had built a new class of cruiser armed with a 38 cm. gun. The great speed of the ships was extraordinary. So far as the somewhat doubtful observations of our cruisers went, they had only two turrets, one fore and the other aft. The fact that a battle-cruiser felt obliged to sheer off on being hit by one of our light cruisers seems to indicate that its armour cannot have been very strong; probably weakened to allow of the high speed that was aimed at.

The losses on our side were: 21 killed, 10 seriously wounded, and 30 slightly wounded. The only ship that fell a victim to the enemy was the outpost steamer Kedingen which was stationed as a mark-ship at the point of departure of the test-trip. The English directed the fire of their 38 cm. guns on this little boat, so that the crew had to go overboard. She was captured undamaged by the English and carried off.

Our light cruisers amply fulfilled their duty of shielding the mine-sweeping groups and drawing fire upon themselves. Their relative strength, when compared with the enemy, unfortunately made it impossible for them to achieve a greater success, especially as the two battleships came to their support so late. This induced us in subsequent similar undertakings to make the support groups stronger and to send them forward, as far as the mine-fields would permit of such a course. The demands thus made upon the battleships of our outpost section increased considerably. The field of operation of the mine-sweepers extended 180 sea miles to the north and 140 miles to the west of the Jade. Work at such distant points was impossible without strong fighting support.

As a rule one-half of these support ships were placed immediately behind the mine-sweepers, and the remainder about 50 sea miles farther back. On days when air-scouting was possible, only half of the outpost-ships were required, but when air-scouting was limited all the outpost forces took part in the operations. In the neighbourhood of the Amrum Bank an anchorage was made secure from submarine attack and surrounded by nets. Here the support ships for the operations in the north could anchor, and thus avoid the long return journey to the Jade or the necessity of cruising about at night and burning unnecessary fuel. But this anchorage was not ready for use until the summer of 1918.

Holding Up Convoys
While the Fleet was busy with the conquest of the Baltic Islands the light cruisers Brummer and Bremse received orders to make a raid on the traffic route between Lerwick, in the Shetland Islands, and Bergen, the object being to inflict damage on English trade by surface craft as well as by U-boats. In the event of their encountering nothing there they were to push on at their own discretion to the west of the British Isles into the Atlantic, as far as their fuel supply would allow. These two cruisers had joined the Fleet in 1916 and had originally been constructed in German shipyards as mine-layers for the Russian Government; they were distinguished for high speed. Their engines were adapted for coal or oil fuel. They carried a 15-cm. gun. The mine-laying apparatus, with the exception of the dropping-gear, had been removed so as not to hinder the ships on their cruises. While our other light cruisers could accommodate but 120 mines on deck, when they carried them for a special expedition, the Brummer and the Bremse were capable of taking thrice that number. The addition of these two cruisers was a very welcome reinforcement, and made it possible to form two scouting groups of light cruisers (II and IV) with modern ships of approximately the same speed, after the alterations of the other light cruisers had been completed and they had received a 15-cm. gun instead of their 10.5-cm. guns, which were too weak.

It was known that neutral merchant vessels assembled in convoys to travel under the protection of English warships, and therefore they might be regarded as enemy vessels, since they openly claimed English protection so as to benefit the enemy and consequently to injure us. Interruption of this traffic was intended to heighten the effect of the U-boat campaign. Apart from depriving the enemy of the supplies he awaited, it would place him under the necessity of affording better protection to the neutral shipping placed at his service, for which more warships would be required; these, again, would have to be taken from among those occupied in the war on U-boats. We might also anticipate that the success of such attacks would have a terrorising influence.

On putting out to sea the cruisers were delayed for a day, because the mine-sweepers who accompanied them found mines in their path, but at dawn on October 17, 1917, they lay in the middle of the fairway Lerwick - Bergen, and before day broke they encountered a convoy of ten steamers under the protection of two or three warships. At the head of the formation, which was in a double row, was the destroyer Strongbow, and when she recognised our cruisers as enemy ships she advanced smartly to the attack and was sunk after a few shots had been exchanged.

The steamers had stopped when they realised the position they were in, and began to lower boats in which the crews might find safety. A second British destroyer, the Mary Rose, had first made off to the north when the fight began, but changed her mind and returned, after about 20 minutes, to the ships under her protection. She also attacked our cruisers and was sunk after a short fight. The steamers were then sunk as they passed at a short distance, which enabled the shots to be placed on the water line. As two of the steamers had been able to get away in time on noticing the attack, the care of the crews in the boats could be left to them, for our cruisers had to consider their own safety on the long return journey. A further extension of the cruise offered no prospect of success after this incident.

It was to be foreseen that this action would occasion a great outcry among those that had suffered, if only to divert attention from the humiliating fact that German cruisers had appeared in the Northern waters supposed to be completely under English control. If in this starvation war, introduced by the English, the neutrals worked against the German nation and so openly assisted the enemy as to place themselves under the protection of his warships, they must take the consequences of their action. To what an extent they regarded themselves as being on the side of the enemy is shown by the fact that some of these neutral steamers carried guns on the forecastle which they did not hesitate to use.

If England wanted to demand the right to enjoy undisturbed supplies, thanks to the complaisance of the neutrals, or to the pressure brought to bear on them, no one could expect us to look on with folded hands until English sea power had completed its work of destroying our nation by starvation. The counter-measures which this necessitated .must recoil upon England as the originator of this form of warfare.

The effect of such action had to be heightened by a speedy repetition of a similar attack. The next time Torpedo-Boat Flotilla II was chosen, which comprised our biggest and fastest torpedo-boats. A half-flotilla was to attack the convoy traffic near the English coast in the so-called "war channel," while at the same time the other half-flotilla was to go to the Bergen - Lerwick route. Flotilla II (Commander Heinecke), accompanied by the light cruiser Emden (the ship substituted for the one of the same name that Captain von Muller had commanded), left early in the morning of December n, at a speed of 19 knots. The weather was clear, sea smooth. At 4 p.m. the half-flotillas parted at the north-east end of the Dogger Bank, and the Emden remained behind.

The 3rd Half-Flotilla went north, the 4th steered for a point on the English coast 25 sea miles north of Newcastle. At 6 p.m. a wireless message was received that a convoy with destroyers would leave the Firth of Forth for the south between 8 and 11 p.m. On account of this message the leader determined to go up the "war channel" to the north, about as far as Berwick, so as to meet the enemy on this part of the route between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. According to other English wireless messages received, there were in the Firth of Forth 8 British cruisers, in the Tyne some destroyers, and in the Humber 2 destroyers with various guard-boats. This, however, did not hinder the leader of the flotilla from pursuing his purpose. Towards 2.30 p.m. on December 12, 1917, before the flotilla had turned into the "war channel," a steamer of about 3,000 tons was sighted coming at a distance of about 25 nautical miles from the coast;it was sunk by a torpedo. The crew of the steamer took to their boats. As the flotilla approached closer to the coast the beacons they expected to see were not visible, so that they could not find their way between the Fame Islands and the land. To have gone out to sea and so round the islands would have meant missing the convoy, so the half-flotilla turned southwards in the direction of the mouth of the Tyne. Although the course ran only 3 to 4 nautical miles from the coast, nothing was to be seen of the land or any towns. It was very misty near the coast. At 4.45 a.m. a steamer with very great draught came into sight on the port bow; her size was estimated at 5,000 tons. This ship was steering on a southerly course down the "war channel," and was sunk by a torpedo; the crew took to the boats. A quarter of an hour later four small steamers came in sight; obviously they were the convoy boats which had already indicated their presence by wireless messages, and were now on the point of entering Tynemouth. Two of them were destroyed by gunfire, the other two escaped because our torpedo-boats were looking around for larger steamers or destroyers that might be in the neighbourhood. As nothing further was found, the boats started on their return journey at 6 a.m. At 5.15 p.m. they rejoined the Emden, which had waited at sea for the flotilla.

The half-flotilla under Lieutenant-Commander Hans Holbe had continued on a northerly course after separating from the others on the previous day. The farther north they went the worse the weather became. Towards 10 p.m. there was a heavy swell and a strong freshening wind from the south. The next morning, at 4 o'clock, speed had to be reduced first to 15 and then to 12 knots, because heavy seas came up from the north-west. It was impossible to fire a gun or a torpedo. The leader of the half-flotilla had to give up his plan and steered towards Udsire on the Norwegian coast, so as to be able to fix his position and then to try and catch a convoy announced from Drammen. At 7 a.m. he sighted Udsire. As the barometer fell no lower and the seas seemed to be decreasing, he once more turned upon a northerly course, which, however, had to be abandoned again at 11 A.M., because in the sea then running he could only make a speed of 9 knots. The boats, therefore, once more turned south, intending to stay out of sight of land by day and to approach the coast by night, expecting to meet some merchantmen there. In the course of the morning one boat developed a leakage in the condenser. But the commander of the half-flotilla decided to keep the boat with him and reduce the speed of all his boats to 25 knots, preferring this to sending the boat back home alone from such a great distance.

While he was steaming along on a southerly course, at 12.30 p.m. a convoy of six steamers came into sight which was protected by two destroyers and four trawlers. It was going from Lerwick to Norway on an easterly course.

The destroyer Partridge, which was ahead of the formation on the port side, steamed towards our half-flotilla and came under fire at 1 o'clock. The destroyer Pellew, which was on the starboard side, had steamed ahead full speed, and the Partridge joined her.

The British destroyers left the convoy and the four trawlers to their fate; probably with the idea of drawing our boats away from the latter, and of fighting them. The fire of the British destroyers was not very effective. The fight was carried on at a distance of 50 hm. till the Partridge, after a shot in her main steam-pipes, could not continue. She tried to carry on the fight with her torpedoes, but one torpedo stuck in the tube which had been damaged by gunfire; a second torpedo, fired at short range at our boat "V 100," hit, for the shock was distinctly felt in the boat, but it did not explode. While three boats of our half-flotilla took up the fight with the two destroyers, the fourth boat (which could only travel at 25 knots) was sent to destroy the convoy. The destroyer Pellew, pursued by the leader of the half-flotilla, succeeded - thanks to her superior speed - in getting out of sight in a squall of rain, and escaped to the land. Four officers and forty-eight men of the Partridge and the trawlers, which were all sunk, were taken on board as prisoners of war, as well as 23 civilians. Our casualties were three wounded. The convoy consisted of one English, two Swedish, two Norwegian and one Danish merchant steamer. The shipwrecked men of the latter refused to come on board our boats; of the others some consented to come on board, and then the steamers were all sunk. The whole affair was over in three-quarters of an hour. Owing to the high seas, it cost a lot of trouble to get the English on board when they were floating about in the water, having taken refuge on rafts. The half-flotilla then started on its return journey round Skagen, as a weather report announced stormy weather in the North Sea, and so reached Kiel Harbour. This repeated interference with merchant traffic, which had shown the insufficiency of the protection afforded by English convoys, had the desired result, and compelled the employment of stronger forces.

Information obtained by U-boats was to the effect that American ships were pressed into service for this purpose; they were recognisable by their masts. This confirmed statements received from other quarters that the English Fleet was receiving support from the Americans in the War Zone of the North Sea. Thus there was little further prospect of our light craft being able to destroy any more convoys. Stronger forces would have to be employed for this purpose. This led to an expedition of the Fleet in April, 1918.

An Expedition of the Heinecke Torpedo-Boat Flotilla
In February, 1918, Flotilla II was confronted with a new problem, which it solved brilliantly. The Naval Corps in Flanders had sent a request to the commanders of the Fleet begging them to destroy the English light-barrier which had just been instituted between Dover and Calais. In the last months the enemy had, with much expenditure of material, tried to make these Straits impassable for our U-boats. According to the reports of the boats, there were net barriers between Cape Grisnez and Folkestone, and farther south between Boulogne and Dungeness. The nets were guarded by a large number of vessels which, by means of searchlights and magnesium lights, formed a very effective light-barrier all night long. This made it very much more difficult for our U-boats to get through unmolested, and the Straits were actually almost impassable. The forces in Flanders alone were not able to deal a sufficiently effective blow to this Anglo-French barrier to the Channel. For this undertaking the commanders of the Fleet chose the strong boats of the Heinecke Flotilla, which was sent direct from the German Bight without first touching the coast of Flanders, so as to make sure of surprising the enemy.

On the day of the enterprise Flotilla II was to be off Haaks Lightship at 5.30 p.m. and thence proceed in close formation as far as the northern end of the Channel by the Sandettie Bank; there the two half-flotillas were to separate; one led- by the Flotilla Commander was to attack the barrier west of Varne Bank, and the other was to attack east of that point. When the attack was over they were to enter Zeebrugge Harbour, take in a fresh fuel supply, and start the return journey to the German Bight the same night.

Owing to bad weather the enterprise, originally planned for February 7, was postponed to the 13th. In the meanwhile the route the boats were to have followed had been made impracticable by new English mine-fields, and they had to go close by the Frisian Islands, thereby running the risk of being seen early in the evening trom Dutch territory and their advance being reported. Consequently the misty weather on February 13 was not unwelcome. Flotilla II managed to pass along the mine-swept route at Terschelling with the help of the land, without having been able to see any landmarks; but when it arrived off Haaks Lightship it had to give up the attempt because of the fog; the boats would have had to travel at high speed to reach their goal in time, and this was impossible in the foggy weather. The flotilla anchored during the night north of Norderney. The next day, February 14, it started again in very clear weather. So as not to betray his real goal, the Flotilla Commander set out from Helder on a westerly course; when out of sight of land he steered south, and, after darkness had fallen, down the Dutch coast as far as the Schouven Bank. At the Hook of Holland one of the boats had to be sent back to the German Bight owing to defects in the condenser. In the night of the 15th at 12.30 a.m. the two half-flotillas separated according to plan north-east of the Sandettie Bank. The group led by Captain Heinecke was to circumvent the first and more northerly barrier near the English coast, and begin by attacking the southern barrier presumed to be off Dungeness, and then on his return roll up the northern barrier from the Varne Bank to Folkestone. The latter, being a light-barrier, could be seen from far off. On approaching it, it became clear that it consisted of a large number of craft, anchored or moored to buoys, which were placed right across the fairway, not in one line, but in echelon in a broad band. These boats lit up the fairway all the time with searchlights, and from time to lime, about every quarter of an hour, they threw magnesium lights overboard which, floating down the tide for minutes at a time, lit up the vicinity for a distance of two or three miles, so that it was almost as light as day. In and out among these a lot of boats moved without Tights, armed trawlers, submarine chasers and motorboats, to attack any U-boat that might come. At the north-west end of the barrier a searchlight, apparently placed on land between Dover and Folkestone, threw a steady beam of light in the cross Channel direction. In these circumstances it was impossible to get round the barrier, and the Flotilla Commander determined to make a direct attack. He first made for a large boat placed about the middle of the barrier with a specially bright revolving searchlight; this he sank from a distance of 300 m. It was an old cruiser, or a special boat of the "Arabis" type. After this the group first swept round to the north-west and then went more slowly along the barrier in a more or less south-easterly direction. In a short time they sank 13 of these guardships, including a U-boat chaser with the number "1113," a small torpedo-boat and two motor-boats, one of Which had come up in order to fire a torpedo; these were all sunk at close range by gunfire.

The enemy was taken completely by surprise. Several of the boats sounded their sirens, clearly under the impression that they were being attacked in error by their own ships. No warning was given, and a considerable time elapsed after we had opened fire before all lights were put out. This may have been due to the fact that the big ship that was sunk first had been in command of the whole, or else the ships on guard may have been used to hearing gunfire owing to the frequent fights with U-boats. An attempt to take prisoners had to be abandoned, because owing to the swift tide it proved too dangerous for our ships to go alongside the sinking boats that were in part moored to buoys. The whole affair lasted from about 1.30 a.m. till about 2.30 a.m. Owing to the lateness of the hour it was out of the question to attack the other barrier supposed to lie farther south, from which, however, no lights or searchlights were seen, and so the return journey was begun. Meanwhile the other half-flotilla had turned towards the southern end of the barrier, and first made for Cape Grisnez. Again one of the boats developed a leakage in the condenser, but the commander of the half-flotilla could not dismiss the boat and had to reduce the speed of the other boats to that of the defective one. Off Calais the group encountered the first guardship, lying close to the coast, a large, armed trawler, and, taking her by surprise, sank her by gunfire. Steering west, they met a number of other boats which were using searchlights and magnesium lights. In several cases the supply of magnesium lights on the guardships caught fire owing to the shots. In this part of the barrier, too, it was some time before the boats realised that the enemy was among them, and retired to the west. Altogether this torpedo-boat half-flotilla sank twelve armed guardships and two motor-boats.

At 2.40 a.m. the half-flotilla started upon the return journey. At 3.30 A.M. the stern lights of six English destroyers were sighted ahead. Owing to his unfavourable position with regard to the enemy and the reduced speed of the one boat, which left him with only two boats that were quite intact, the commander of the half-flotilla was forced to avoid a fight. He turned off and did not reply to the enemy's signal. The latter at first followed in the wake of the half-flotilla, but after altering his course a few times was lost to view. On making for Zeebrugge the torpedo-boat "G 102" struck a mine about 12 nautical miles from the harbour entrance; two compartments filled with water, but the boat was able to reach the harbour without assistance. Three men were killed through this mishap. These were the only casualties of the expedition.

After replenishing their supply of oil fuel in Zeebrugge the flotilla began its return journey in the evening of the same day and reached home without further incident. The damaged boat was temporarily repaired in Flanders, and followed a few days later. The flotilla's success was due to the completeness of the surprise. Besides the direct damage inflicted on the enemy by the sinking of so many boats that were of value to him, we accomplished our aim of breaking the barrier across the Calais - Dover Straits through which our U-boats were again able to pass for the time being. A scouting trip carried out the following day by the torpedo-boats of the Naval Corps showed that the guard had been completely withdrawn.

The demands made on the skill of the officers commanding these boats were very great, as it was difficult to distinguish things clearly because of the gunfire, and particularly because of the smoke on the water from the magnesium lights. The gun-layers did excellent work in shooting down the fast motor-boats which, owing to their speed, could only be discerned at the last moment, but were always knocked out by the first shot. It was a great help to the expedition to be able to break the return journey by running into Zeebrugge, because otherwise the voyage would have had to be made by daylight, and in that case the English would probably have made an attempt to cut our boats off.

Advance of the Fleet to the Norwegian Coast
When the portion of the Fleet that had been sent east had returned from the conquest of the Baltic Islands, some weeks elapsed before the ships and torpedo-boats had had the damage repaired that they had suffered from mines and from running aground. The winter months brought no change in the activities of the Fleet, which were directed towards supporting the U-boat campaign.

In the spring of 1918, when our army was attacking in the west, English interest was bound to centre in the Channel. Through agents, through the aeroplane service in Flanders, and through following the enemy's wireless messages, we ascertained that he had materially reinforced the warships protecting his transports, and that large ships had been sent to the Channel, and parts of the crews of the Grand Fleet had been sent to reinforce those of the light craft in the Channel. On the other hand, the enemy had carefully improved the convoy traffic between England and Norway since the successful raids of the Brummer and the Bremse, and of the boats of Torpedo-Boat Flotilla II. Our U-boats had learnt that the steamers were assembled there in large convoys, strongly protected by first-class battleships, cruisers and destroyers. A successful attack on such a convoy would not only result in the sinking of much tonnage, but would be a great military success, and would bring welcome relief to the U-boats operating in the Channel and round England, for it would force the English to send more warships to the northern waiters. The convoys could not be touched by light craft. But the battle-cruisers could probably, according to information received, deal with all exigencies likely to arise if they could have the necessary support from the battleship squadrons.

So far as could be made out convoys mostly travelled at the beginning and middle of the week. Consequently Wednesday, April 24, was chosen for the attack. A necessary condition for success was that our intentions should be kept secret. It was enjoined upon the officers in command of the subordinate groups to use their wireless as sparingly as possible during the expedition, which was to extend beyond the Skagerrak up to the Norwegian coast. On the pretext of manoeuvres in the Heligoland Bight all warships at our disposal were assembled on the evening of the 22nd in the Schillig Roads. Here the officers in command of the various groups were informed of our intentions and received their orders. The plan was to attack the convoy with the battle-cruisers, the light cruisers of Scouting Division II, and Torpedo-Boat Flotilla II under the leadership of the officer commanding the Scouting Divisions, Admiral von Hipper, while the remainder of the ships took up a position from which, in case of need, effective support could be given to the cruisers. All other flotillas were to remain with the main body of the Fleet. Torpedb-Boat Flotilla V could not be included, as its radius of action was too small. The commander of this flotilla, Commander von Tyszka, was entrusted with the conduct and protection of the convoy service through the mine-fields south-west and west of Horns Reef.

To ensure safety of progress through the mine-fields in preparation for this enterprise, protective barriers had been placed about 70 sea miles west of Horns Reef, running from north to south. The area between Horns Reef and this protective barrier was to be the starting-point of the expedition. The U-boats that had recently put to sea had received orders to seek opportunities for attack off the Firth of Forth and to report all warships and convoys that were sighted.

On the 23rd at 6 a.m. the various groups put to sea, Admiral von Hipper leading with the Scouting Divisions I and II, with the Second Leader of the torpedo-boats and Torpedo-Boat Flotilla II; following him came the main body of the Fleet in the following order: Scouting Division IV, Squadron III, the Flagship of the Fleet, the First Leader of torpedo-boats, Squadron I, Squadron IV, and with the main body Torpedo Flotillas I, VI, VII and IX. Immediately after they left the Jade a heavy fog descended. As far as List the way was clear; from there it led through enemy mine-fields; to get through these it was necessary for the Fleet to be accompanied by mine-sweepers, and therefore a certain amount of visibility was needful - at least two miles. At first we were able to proceed at 14 knots. But when, at 11.30 a.m., we reached the entrance to the minefield and visibility was only 100 metres, we had to anchor. Half an hour later it cleared up; one could see three to four nautical miles, and the expedition could proceed. The journey through the minefields passed off without a hitch. When darkness fell the boundary had been reached, and the mine-sweepers could be dismissed. The poor visibility had so far favoured the enterprise. The enemy line of submarines on guard round the German Bight seems to have been broken through, if indeed it was occupied at all.

During the night it cleared up; daybreak brought fine, clear weather. At 8 a.m. the Moltke reported to the High Sea Commander: "Grave damage, speed four knots, position about 40 sea miles W.S. W. of Stavanger." All haste was made to reach the scene of the accident; the Strassburg, the foremost ship in the line of advance, was detached to the Moltke, and the battleship Oldenburg made ready to tow. At 10.40 a.m. the Moltke was sighted; soon after von Hipper appeared from the N.W. with his two Scouting Divisions. He had detached the Moltke at 6 a.m. to the main body of the Fleet. At that time she could still do 13 knots. He had not received the message that she was reduced to four knots. When towards 9 a.m. he received the news that the Moltke couldl not move and that the Flagship had not made out the signal - which, however, was a mistake - he decided to go to her assistance himself. He sent no report to the main body of the Fleet owing to the orders that the use of wireless messages should be reduced as much as possible. He had the more reason for this course because when he turned he was already in the northern part of the convoy route, and thanks to the clear weather he could see that for the time being nothing was in sight, and that any approaching convoys would not escape him if he made a fresh advance later. As the Moltke had now been taken charge of by the main body the Admiral received orders to advance again to the north. On this second occasion he searched the convoy track as far as the 60th degree of latitude but sighted nothing.

At about 11.45 a.m. the Moltke was taken in tow by the Oldenburg. The manoeuvre was carried out without a hitch in the shortest possible time. The main body of the Fleet with these two ships then set out on the return journey; their speed was 10 knots. There were two routes open to us; the one led through the Kattegat, the other straight into the German Bight. By choosing the former the Fleet would presumably have avoided a meeting with the English Fleet which had time to come up and oppose us, as we could only go at a slow speed in order not to leave the Moltke in the lurch. But the road through the Kattegat was very roundabout, and in addition the passage through the Belt would have been very difficult for the damaged ship, and in order to protect the tow all our ships would have had to return through the Little Belt. This was undesirable for two reasons, firstly, on account of the Danes, and secondly because it might provoke the English to lay mines in the Kattegat. This latter proceeding might be very unpleasant for our U-boats, and I decided, therefore, to return through the North Sea into the Bight in spite of the possibility of being attacked by superior forces. Meanwhile the following condition of affairs had been discovered on board the Moltke. The inner propeller on the starboard side had been flung off (the ship had four propeller shafts); the turbine had raced, and before the machinery for stopping it could act the training wheel had flown to pieces. Fragments of the wheel had penetrated the discharge pipe of the auxiliary condenser, several steam exhaust pipes, and the deck leading to the main switch-room. The central engine-room and the main switch-room were immediately flooded owing to the damage to the auxiliary condenser, while the wing engine-room made water rapidly. Salt water penetrated into the boilers, and the engines gradually ceased to work. Through a curious chain of circumstances an accident to a propeller, slight enough in itself, had brought the ship completely to a stand, so that it was powerless to move. Two thousand tons of water had flowed into the ship before a diver succeeded at length in closing the valves which controlled the flow of water in and out of the auxiliary condenser. It was not till then that they got the water under control. In the afternoon the port engines were able to run at Half speed; but for the time being there was no guarantee that they would continue to run. The ship would have to be towed right into the Bight, and the highest speed attainable by the tow was 1 1 knots. At this rate of progress we could not reach the belt of mines west of Horns Reef before dawn the next day.

Information received from the Naval Staff at 2 p.m. concerning the times of arrival and departure of convoys indicated that we had not been lucky in our choice of a day to attack them. Apparently the convoys from England to Norway had crossed the North Sea on the 23rd.

At 6.30 p.m. we received a wireless message from a U-boat that eleven enemy cruisers were about 80 miles behind us. But probably the U-boat had mistaken the cruisers that were following us under Admiral von Hipper for those of the enemy.

At 8.50 p.m. the towing cable of the Oldenburg broke, which entailed a delay of an hour. For the night the tow was left at the end of the line. At 11 p.m. Admiral von Hipper had approached to within 30 nautical miles of the main Fleet. At dawn all the ships were together. The enemy was nowhere to be seen. The journey through the belt of mines was accomplished according, to plan. Mine-sweepers met and convoyed the Fleet back in the same manner as on the outward journey. One mine-sweeper, "M 67," struck a mine and sank; most of the crew were saved.

Off List the Moltke was cast loose, and was able to proceed at a speed of 15 knots. About an hour after she had been cast loose, at 7.50 p.m., she was attacked by a submarine 40 nautical miles north of Heligoland and was hit amidships on the port side. She could not avoid the torpedo, but was able to turn towards its course so that it struck at a very acute angle. The injury did not prevent the ship from entering the Jade under her own steam.

Unfortunately the expedition did not meet with the success hoped for. The opportunity of joining issue with our Fleet was not made use of by the enemy, although by the wireless messages which had to be sent owing to the accident to the Moltke he must have known of the presence of our ships. The bringing in of the Moltke under such unfavourable conditions of sea and weather as arose during the night of the return journey was an eminent military achievement, especially the part played by the Oldenburg (Commander, Captain Lohlen) which towed her, and the work done in stopping the leak by the men on board the Moltke deserves great praise.

This expedition was unfortunately the last which the Fleet was able to undertake.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/142

Rh Pock,’ 1st edit. 4to, 1801 (privately printed); 2nd edit. 8vo, 1801. He published also twenty-seven papers in the ‘Memoirs,’ 1792–1805, and the ‘Transactions of the Medical Society of London,’ 1810. The most important observation is that on the effects of alcoholic excess on the nervous system in women, contained in a paper, ‘Some Remarks on the Effects of Lignum Quassiæ Amaræ’ (Memoirs, vol. i.), and repeated in a pamphlet ‘On the Effects of Hard Drinking,’ 4to, 1791. He also wrote in other medical journals, and one paper of no moment in the ‘Philosophical Transactions,’ 1786.

II. His biographical writings were: ‘Life of John Fothergill,’ in his ‘Works’ (edited by Lettsom, 3 vols. 8vo, 1783); one vol. 4to, 1784. The fourth edition of the ‘Memoirs,’ 8vo, 1786, contains also memoirs of William Cuming, George Cleghorn, Alexander Russell, and Peter Collinson. He wrote also memoirs of William Hewson (‘Trans. Med. Soc.’ vol. i. pt. i.), of James Johnstone (ib. vol. i. pt. ii.), and of Edward Jenner (oration at Medical Society, 8 March 1804); obituary notice of Baron Dimsdale (anonymous, in ‘European Magazine,’ August 1802); ‘Recollections of Dr. Rush,’ 8vo, London, 1815.

III. Lettsom was a frequent contributor to the ‘Gentleman's Magazine,’ either in his own name or using a pseudonym, such as ‘One of the Faculty,’ ‘J. C. Mottles,’ &c., and also to the ‘Monthly Ledger,’ a quaker magazine, there also using various signatures. Many of these productions were collected and published with the title ‘Hints designed to Promote Beneficence, Temperance, and Medical Science,’ 3 vols. 8vo, 1801. He carried on a copious correspondence with scientific men and doctors in various parts, much of which is printed in Pettigrew's ‘Life.’ Lettsom's own letters are lively and interesting, containing vivid descriptions of contemporaries.

Of Lettsom's manuscripts the library of the Medical Society contains a quarto volume of his notes of Fordyce's ‘Lectures on Medicine and Materia Medica;’ and another containing notes on the ‘Practice of Physick,’ probably Cullen's lectures at Edinburgh. The Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society possesses six vols. 4to of ‘Materia Medica, imitated after the manner of Dr. Francis Home,’ founded apparently on Home's lectures at Edinburgh, 1768–9.

The Medical Society possesses an interesting oil painting by Medley of its early members, in which Lettsom occupies a prominent place, and another portrait of him in oils. There is an engraved portrait by W. Skelton, 1817, in Pettigrew's ‘Life,’ one by Holloway, ad vivum, in Nichols's ‘Literary Illustrations,’ ii. 657, and another by Holloway in ‘European Magazine,’ December 1876.

Lettsom's eldest grandson, William Nanson Lettsom (1796–1865), man of letters, was son of John Miers Lettsom, M.D., by Rachel, daughter of William Nanson, and was born 4 Feb. 1796. He passed from Eton to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated B.A. in 1818 and M.A. in 1822, and won the prizes for the Latin ode and two epigrams in 1816, and that for the ode again in 1817. Possessed of ample means, he devoted his life to a study of literature, both ancient and modern. He published an able translation of the ‘Nibelungenlied’ with the title ‘The Fall of the Nebelungers; otherwise the book of Kriemhild’ in 1850, and carefully edited from the author's manuscripts William Sidney Walker's ‘Shakespeare's Versification’ (1854) and his ‘Critical Examination of the Text of Shakespeare’ (1860). His friend, Alexander Dyce [q. v.], acknowledged much aid from Lettsom in his preparation of his edition of ‘Shakespeare.’ Lettsom also interested himself in textual criticism of the New Testament. He died on 3 Sept. 1865 at Westbourne Park, Paddington (Gent. Mag. 1865, ii. 790–1).

LEVEN,. [See, first , 1580–1661; and , third , 1660–1728.] LEVENS, PETER (fl. 1587), scholar and medical writer, was born ‘at or near Eske in Yorkshire,’ and proceeded to Oxford in 1552, apparently to Magdalen College. He was admitted B.A. 6 July 1556, was elected probationer-fellow of Magdalen ‘into a Yorkshire place,’ 19 Jan. 1557, and became ‘true and perpetual fellow,’ January 1559. He supplicated for M.A. February 1559–60, but the date of his admission is not known. He subsequently ‘taught a grammar school and practised physic.’ Wood styles him ‘an eminent physician.’

He published: 1. ‘Manipulus Vocabulorum. A Dictionarie of English and Latine wordes, set forthe in suche order, as none heretofore hath ben, the Englishe going before the Latine, necessary not onely for Scholers that want varietie of words, but also for such as use to write in English


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/143

Rh Meetre. Gathered and set forth by P. Levins, Anno 1570. Imprinted at London by Henrie Bynneman, for John Waley.’ The dictionary contains a preface to the reader and a dedicatory letter to ‘the right worshipful M. Stanley,’ treasurer of the mint. It is valuable for the light it throws on the contemporary pronunciation of English words, and has been reprinted by the Camden Society (1867, 4to) and the Early English Text Society (1867, 8vo), under the editorship of Mr. H. B. Wheatley. Mr. Wheatley supplies a preface and alphabetical index to both editions. The value of the dictionary was first pointed out in Mr. A. Way's edition of the ‘Promptorium Parvulorum’ (Camd. Soc.). 2. ‘A right profitable Book for all Diseases, called the Pathway to Health; wherein are most excellent and approved Medicines of great virtue; as also notable Potions and Drinks, and for the distilling of divers Waters, and Making of Oils, and other comfortable Receipts,’ London, 1587, 4to. This has a preface defending the use of the vulgar tongue in a learned work. It became popular, and was reprinted in 1596, 1608, 1632, 1644, 1654, 1664.

 LEVENS, ROBERT (1615–1650), royalist. [See .]

LEVER, ASHTON (1729–1788), collector of the Leverian Museum, eldest son of Sir James Darcy Lever, knight, by his wife, Dorothy, daughter of the Rev. William Ashton, born at Alkrington, near Manchester, on 5 March 1729, was educated at the Manchester grammar school, and matriculated 1 April 1748 at Corpus Christi College, Oxford. After leaving Oxford, and residing for some years at Manchester with his mother, he settled at his seat at Alkrington Hall. From his early years he had a passion for horsemanship, field-sports, archery, and was an ardent collector of very varied objects. At first he collected live birds, and his aviary at Alkrington was then reputed to be the best in the kingdom. About 1760 he purchased at Dunkirk several hogsheads of foreign shells, and for a time his whole attention was taken up with shells and fossils. Stuffed birds next occupied his attention, and ultimately all kinds of natural objects and savage costumes and weapons were added to the collection, which became famous and attracted many visitors. In 1774 he was induced to remove his museum, to which he gave the name of the ‘Holophusikon,’ to London. Taking Leicester House, in Leicester Square, he filled sixteen rooms and various passages and staircases with his curiosities, and advertised that they were to be seen each day from ten to four, ‘admittance 5s. 3d. each person.’ He was a good naturalist, and a man of varied accomplishments, but grew eccentric in dress and manner. Madame d'Arblay has left a curious picture of the grotesque figure he presented when she visited the museum in 1782 (Diary, ed. Barrett, i. 495).

Excessive outlay on the museum impaired his fortune. After it had been valued before a parliamentary committee at 53,000l. it was offered at a moderate sum to the British Museum in 1783, but the museum trustees declined to buy it. In 1788 Lever obtained an act of parliament to dispose of it by a lottery of thirty-six thousand tickets at a guinea each, of which, however, only eight thousand were sold. The museum fell to a Mr. James Parkinson, who exhibited it in a building called the Rotunda, erected for the purpose on the Surrey side of Blackfriars Bridge. Here for some years it was one of the sights of London, but eventually it became neglected, and the owner dispersed it by auction in 1806, the sale occupying sixty-five days, and the lots numbering 7,879. The sale catalogue, compiled by Edward Donovan, fills 410 pages. The collection is also described partially in G. Shaw's ‘Museum Leverianum,’ 1792, 4to, and in A. Ella's ‘Visits to the Leverian Museum’ (intended for children), 12mo. A number of Leverian specimens are yet preserved in Mr. Syer Cuming's collection at Kennington, Surrey.

Lever was high sheriff of Lancashire in 1771, and was knighted at St. James's on 5 June 1778. After the disposal of his museum he retired to Alkrington, and died suddenly at the Bull's Head Inn, Manchester, on 24 Jan. 1788, aged 58. He married in 1746 Frances, daughter of James Bayley of Manchester, but left no children. He was great-uncle to Charles Lever the novelist.

Portraits of Lever appear in the ‘European Magazine,’ 1784, and Baines's ‘Lancashire,’ 1833.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/145

Rh romance of Killarney, owed its existence to a holiday spent in that district; in the next, ‘The Knight of Gwynne,’ 1847, one of his best books, he fell back upon history, and availed himself of contemporary memoirs of the union.

Thackeray visited Lever on his own Irish tour in 1842–3, and dedicated to him his ‘Irish Sketch Book.’ He frankly warned him against his literary tendency to extravagance, and in personal intercourse strongly advised him to quit Dublin for London. Lever, however, preferred the continent. In 1845 he resigned his editorship, and in May was living at Brussels, reduced, he says, to his last fifty pounds, but still apparently driving about with his carriage and pair. After wandering for two years with his family over Germany and Italy, and doing little work except desultory writing for magazines, he settled at Florence in August 1847. There he produced ‘The Martins of Cro' Martin,’ a fine picture of West of Ireland life; ‘Roland Cashel,’ 1850, the materials for which were partly drawn from his continental experience, and which especially illustrates the transition from his earlier to his later style; and ‘The Dodd Family Abroad,’ 1853–4, a picture of English life on the continent in which he appears more in the light of a reflective humourist than previously, and which, he says, was better liked by himself and his intimate friends, and less liked by the public, than any of his books. These works may be said to mark Lever's culmination as a novelist. To the same period belong ‘Tales of the Trains by Tilbury Tramp,’ ‘Diary and Notes of Horace Templeton,’ 1849, ‘Con Cregan,’ 1849 (published anonymously, and welcomed by the press as the production of a formidable competitor), ‘Maurice Tiernay,’ 1852, ‘Sir Jasper Carew,’ 1854, and ‘The Daltons,’ 1852. ‘A Day's Ride,’ published in ‘Household Words,’ and separately in 1863, was so unsuccessful that Dickens adopted the unusual course of announcing beforehand the number with which it would terminate.

In 1857 Lever was appointed British consul at Spezzia, an office which compelled him to live there, but which seems to have been otherwise almost a sinecure. His principal literary performances during his residence were: ‘The Fortunes of Glencore,’ 1857; ‘Davenport Dunn,’ 1859; ‘One of them,’ 1861; ‘Barrington,’ 1862; ‘Tony Butler,’ 1865; ‘A Campaigner at Home,’ 1865; ‘Luttrell of Arran,’ 1865; and ‘Sir Brook Fosbrooke,’ 1866, his own favourite among his novels, but not remarkably popular. ‘Cornelius O'Dowd upon Men, Women, and other things in general,’ 1864, a series of essays, originally appeared in ‘Blackwood,’ and obtained considerably more success than it deserved. It shows the man of experience and observation, but is in general such table-talk as one need not go far to hear, deficient in originality, pregnancy, and point. In 1867 he received the consulship of Trieste from Lord Derby, with the observation, ‘Here is six hundred a year for doing nothing, and you are just the man to do it.’ The increased salary scarcely atoned for the unsuitableness of the post. The climate and society of Trieste were detestable to Lever; his wife, to whom he was tenderly attached, sickened and died. He fell into confirmed bad spirits, though always able to rally under congenial circumstances—able, too, to produce a novel of considerable merit in his last fiction, ‘Lord Kilgobbin’ (1872). His other works of this period were: ‘Gerald Fitzgerald's Continental Gossippings;’ ‘The Bramleighs of Bishop's Folly,’ 1868; ‘That Boy of Norcott's,’ 1869; ‘Paul Gosslett's Confession,’ 1870. He could not, however, shake off his depression, which was partly occasioned by incipient disease of the heart, partly by the fixed idea, which, when his relation to his great contemporaries is considered, cannot but appear most groundless, that he had been unfairly treated in comparison with others, and had been left behind in the race of life. He visited Ireland in 1871, and seemed alternately in very high and very low spirits; after his return to Trieste he failed gradually, and died suddenly there, from failure of the heart's action, on 1 June 1872. He had continued to lose at cards to the last, yet his affairs were in perfect order, and his family was not unprovided for.

A collected edition of his works in thirty-three volumes was issued between 1876 and 1878, and a reprint is now in course of publication. ‘The Commissioner, or De Lunatico Inquirendo,’ 1843, sometimes ascribed to Lever, is by G. P. R. James, although Lever contributed a preface. ‘The Nevilles of Garretstown,’ by the Rev. Mortimer O'Sullivan, is also wrongly associated with Lever's name, together with ‘The Mystic Vial,’ ‘The Heirs of Randolph Abbey,’ and ‘Major O'Connor, by the author of Charles O'Malley.’ ‘The Rent in a Cloud,’ 1869, though included in Lever's collected works, is believed to be by a daughter (cf. Notes and Queries, 7th ser. vi. 111–12).

Lever's novels, says Anthony Trollope in his ‘Autobiography’ (ii. 74–5), ‘are just like his conversation;’ and he adds: ‘Of all the men I have ever encountered, he was the surest fund of drollery. … Rouse him in the middle of the night, and wit would come from him before he was half awake.’ Lever's great misfortune was to be an author without


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/146

Rh sufficient literary vocation. Had his circumstances been easy, he probably would not have written at all. His earliest and most popular writings can hardly rank as literature, though their vigour and gaiety, and the excellent anecdotes and spirited songs with which they are interspersed, will always render them attractive. He is almost destitute of invention or imagination, his personages are generally transcripts from the life, and his incidents stories told at second hand. At a later period in his career he awoke in some measure to the claims of art, and exhibited more proficiency as a writer, with less damage to his character as a humorist, than might have been expected. The transition is marked by ‘Roland Cashel,’ but in ‘Glencore’ he first deliberately attempted analysis of character. His readers lamented the disappearance of his rollicking spendthrifts and daredevil heroes. But his later works exhibit fewer traces of exhaustion and decay than is usual with veteran writers. The effervescence of animal spirits has indeed subsided, but the residue is by no means tame or spiritless, and the loss of energy is largely compensated by greater attention to finish, and to the regularity of construction essential to the novel. Lever's best passages of incident and description in both his early and late novels are very effective; his diffuseness, which seldom amounts to tediousness, may be excused as the result of serial publication. He had so little of the artistic instinct that he could not, he tells us, write otherwise than from month to month.

For his military novels, like ‘Maurice Tiernay’ and ‘Tom Burke’—by many accounted his best work—he derived much information from ‘Victoires, conquêtes, désastres … des Français de 1792 à 1819’ (15 vols. 1835). ‘Tom Burke’ is especially valuable for its portrayal of the enthusiasm excited by Napoleon I, and of the life of the Irish exiles in Paris, which Miles Byrne depicted historically in his ‘Memoirs’ (1863). As a portrayer of Irish character Lever has been greatly overrated. His friend Major Dwyer justly observes that his aboriginal Irishmen are generally of a low class, his heroes and heroines almost invariably English or Anglo-Norman. He has done much to perpetuate current errors as to Irish character, not that the type which he depicts is unreal, but it is far from universal or even general. Instead, therefore, of taking rank as Ireland's chief humorist, he is positively unpopular with Irishmen of strong national feeling, who accuse him of lowering the national character. He has not, however, actually misrepresented anything, and cannot be censured for confining himself to the society which he knew; nor was his talent adapted for the treatment of Irish life in its melancholy and poetical aspects, even if these had been more familiar to him. In his own character he exhibited some admirable and many amiable traits. His failings were chiefly those incidental to the sanguine temperament, of which, alike in its merits and defects, he was a singularly unmixed example.

Lever's characteristic extravagances are cleverly parodied by Bret Harte in his tale by ‘a popular author’ entitled ‘Terence Deuville.’

LEVER, CHRISTOPHER (fl. 1627), protestant writer and poet, was educated at Christ's College, Cambridge, but did not graduate (, Memorials of Cambridge, ii. 39). From the dedications of his various works it appears that though he had taken orders he was unable to obtain a benefice. He wrote: 1. ‘Queene Elizabeth's Teares; or, her resolute bearing the Christian Crosse inflicted on her by the persecuting hands of Steuen Gardner, Bishop of Winchester, in the bloodie time of Queene Marie,’ 4to, London, 1607, a curious but long and dull poem. 2. ‘A Crucifixe; or, a Meditation upon Repentance and the Holie Passion,’ 4to, London, 1607, another poem of the same mediocre quality. Reprinted by the Rev. A. B. Grosart in the ‘Fuller Worthies Library,’ 1870. 3. ‘Heaven and Earth, Religion and Policy; or the maine difference betweene Religion and Policy,’ 8vo [London], 1608. 4. ‘The Holy Pilgrime, leading the way to heaven … In two bookes. Written by C. L.,’ 8vo, London, 1618. 5. ‘The Historie of the Defendors of the Catholique Faith. Discoursing the state of Religion in England,’ &c., 4to, London, 1627. Copies of all these works are in the British Museum.

LEVER, DARCY (1760?–1837), writer on seamanship, born about 1760, was the eldest son of the Rev. John Lever of Buxton in Derbyshire, and nephew of Sir Ashton Lever [q. v.] In January 1770 he was entered in the Manchester school. He afterwards


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 33.djvu/405

Livingstone command already assigned him in Holland (Letters, i. 212). In 1640 he returned to Scotland at the invitation of his countrymen, to take part in the resumption of the war with England, and was appointed lieutenant-general in Leslie's army. Thereupon Charles induced the States-General to cancel the commission he held from them as colonel of a regiment.

But, while accepting office from the covenanters, Livingstone secretly signed Montrose's band, which was drawn up at Cumbernauld in August 1640, just before the army marched for England. The fact was soon discovered, and Montrose was compelled to hand over the original deed to the parliament, who ordered it to be burnt. Meanwhile, Livingstone led the van of the Scottish army across the Tweed, and at the engagement of Newburn on the Tyne he was reported killed (Hist. MSS. Comm. 10th Rep. pt. iv. p. 393). After the Scottish army took possession of Newcastle he returned to Scotland, where he discharged military duties and attended parliament, refusing an offer of continental service on behalf of the queen of Bohemia. When peace with the king was arranged, Lord Almond met Charles I at Gladsmuir, near Haddington, and convoyed him to Holyrood. He was afterwards sent to lead home the army from the Tweed (, Annals, iii. 34, 47).

Charles knew Livingstone's secret leaning towards the royalist claims, and recommended him to the parliament of Scotland for the office of lord high treasurer. Argyll, notwithstanding, as he said, his private friendship for the king's nominee, objected on the ground of his connection with the Cumbernauld band. Almond angrily refused to ‘quit the king's honor done him as long as he had any blood in [his] veynes’ (Nicholas Papers, Camden Soc., i. 51, 54;, Letters, &c. i. 391). But Argyll carried the parliament with him, and Livingstone was rejected.

The ‘incident’ plot, hatched about the same time by the royalists, for the abduction of the covenanting leaders, Hamilton, Argyll, and Lanark, was arranged, according to one of the conspirators, in Almond's house, and Almond was to have taken a leading part in its execution. Almond, however, protested his innocence and requested the fullest investigation, and the charge was afterwards withdrawn (Hist. MSS. Comm. 4th Rep. App. pp. 163–170). The parliament, on Almond's own petition, passed a vote (1 Oct. 1641) approving of his services as lieutenant-general in the late campaign, and relieved him of his commission (, Annals, iii. 87). He declined the offer of a pension, and on 16 Oct. was created by the king Earl of Callander, Baron Livingstone and Almond. In the following year he refused Charles's offer of a high command in the royalist army.

In 1643 the Scots resolved, at the request of the English parliament, to send an army into England under the Earl of Leven. Callander declined an offer of his former post, or of any subordinate commission. But he accepted, as lieutenant-general, the command of the army subsequently raised for the purpose of suppressing Huntly's rising in the north, with the proviso that, in respect of authority, no one should come between him and Leven. He and his forces, however, instead of marching against Huntly, were sent across the border to assist Leven in England, the parliament voting him the sum of 40,000l. Scots (3,333l. 6s. 8d. sterling) in recompense of his services in the former expedition (ib. iii. 172–88, 255). Sir James Turner in his ‘Memoirs’ (pp. 36–8) denounced Callander for taking up arms against the king, on the ground that he had already sworn the ‘deepest oathes in his oune house of Callander, and upon a Lord's day, too, that he would faithfullie serve the king.’ Even after assuming his command, Turner asserts that he ‘did not give over to give me all imagineable assurances that he wold act for the king, and that the greater pouer he was invested with, the more vigourouslie and vigilantlie would he show himselfe active and loyall for his Majestie.’ There can be little doubt that it was only fear of the risk incurred by any other course that led him to support the parliament. But he played the part that he had assumed thoroughly. At Berwick he wrote to the parliament of Scotland to send him some printed covenants (, Annals, iii. 190), and at Penrith he contended that none ought to bear command in the army who had not first taken the covenant (State Papers, Dom. 1644–5, p. 559).

Callander with his army of ten thousand men reduced Morpeth, Hartlepool, and other places, and assisted Leven in the recapture of Newcastle. After Montrose had seized Perth, Callander was sent to Scotland to arrest his progress, but returned to England in 1645, and took part with Leven in that year's campaign (, Memorials, pp. 92, 98, 100;, Letters, ii. 226). Late in 1645 he again returned to Scotland, and left the army apparently on some personal grievance. In December it was stated in parliament that as a condition of his future service he desired the rank of commander-in-chief of all the forces within the country. By invitation of the house he addressed it personally, but his claim was voted exorbitant. Next