Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Massue de Ruvigny, Henri de

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1341408Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900, Volume 37 — Massue de Ruvigny, Henri de1894Robert Dunlop

MASSUE DE RUVIGNY, HENRI de, second Marquis de Ruvigny, Earl of Galway (1648–1720), born on 9 April 1648 at his father's house in the Faubourg St. Germain, Paris, was the eldest son of Henri de Massue, marquis de Ruvigny and Raineval, a French general of repute, deputy-general of the Huguenots at the court of Versailles, sometime ambassador at the English court, and uncle of Rachel, wife of Lord William Russell. He entered the army at an early age, and saw service first in Portugal, being present at the siege of the Fort de la Garda. From 1672 to 1675 he served in the war against Germany as aide-de-camp to Marshal Turenne. He obtained the approbation of that general, and after the battle of Eusheim in October 1674 was recommended by him to Louis XIV for the command of the regiment of Cornas. On Turenne's death at Salzburg in 1675 he is said (Le Gendre, Vie de Pierre du Bosc, Épitre Dedicatoire) to have displayed great tact at a critical moment in reconciling the claims of Generals Lorges and Vaubrun to the chief command of the army. His connection with the Russell family furnishing a plausible pretext for the appointment, he was early in 1678 sent by Louis to England to endeavour, by intriguing with the leaders of the opposition, to detach Charles II from the Dutch alliance. The object of his mission was well known to Danby, but Ruvigny showed much address in the management of the business, and by co-operating with Barillon succeeded in arranging a secret understanding between Charles and Louis. In the same year he was chosen to succeed his father as deputy-general of the Huguenots. His election gave great satisfaction to his co-religionists, especially to such as had been inclined to regard his father's conduct as somewhat timid. He laboured zealously, but unsuccessfully, to avert their persecution, and after the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685 he declined Louis's well-meant offer of exceptional treatment for himself; and following the example of his father, who, foreseeing the course of events, had prudently in 1680 obtained letters of naturalisation as an English subject, he accompanied him and his brother, Pierre, lord de la Caillemotte, to England in January 1688, being as a special favour allowed to take with him what personal property he liked.

In July 1689 his father, who had estalished himself at Greenwich, died, and in July 1690 his brother, La Caillemotte, was killed at the battle of the Boyne. The event determined Ruvigny, and lie entered the English service as a major-general of horse, though by doing so he forfeited his fine estates in Champagne and Picardy. He was appointed colonel of the Huguenot cavalry, in succession to the Duke of Schomberg, and in May 1691 he proceeded to Ireland. He joined the army under Ginkell at Mullingar, and at the council of war before Athlone gave his voice in favour of forcing the passage of the Shannon. At the battle of Aughrim, 12 July 1691, he commanded the horse of the second line, consisting of his own corps and the royal (or Oxford) regiment of horse guards, and by his spirited attack at a critical moment contributed largely to the victory of the English arms. During the march on Galway he was stationed at Athenry with General Scravenmore and three thousand horse as a corps of observation. He served at the siege of Limerick, and assisted at the negotiations for its capitulation.

After taking part in the festivities at Dublin, he returned to England in November, but on 27 Feb. 1692 he was appointed, though with no higher title than that of major-general Commander-in-chief of the forces in Ireland. He proceeded thither in March, but much of his time that year was spent in England on military business, chiefly in connection with the abortive expedition against St. Malo, of which he had been appointed second in command. On 25 Nov. he was created Viscount Galway and Baron Portarlington, in recognition of his services at the battle of Aughrim, and shortly afterwards received a grant in custodiam, made absolute 26 June 1696, of the forfeited estates of Sir Patrick Trant, situated chiefly in the Queen's County, and amounting to more than fifty-eight thousand English acres.

In April 1693 he left Ireland to join the army in Flanders, and arrived there in time to command the English and Huguenot horse at the battle of Landen. He displayed conspicuous bravery in covering William's retreat at the bridge of Neerhespen. He was apparently wounded in the action, and it is stated by St.-Simon (Mémoires, ed. 1873, i. 95), who was present at the battle, that he was made prisoner by the French, but immediately liberated in order to avoid the necessity of consigning him to the galleys as a traitor. In November he was appointed, with the rank of lieutenant-general, commander-in-chief of the English auxiliary forces in Piedmont, with credentials as envoy extraordinary to the court of Turin. But, says a contemporary, 'il n'y va qu'à regret et par pure obeissance an Roy' (Hist. MSS. Comm. 7th Rep. p. 215). He left London early in December with a considerable sum of money for the relief of the distressed Vaudois, and proceeding through Switzerland for the purpose of raising recruits, he arrived at Turin in March 1694. His position was a difficult one. An excellent officer, he was no match for Victor Amadeus in diplomacy, and though not without his suspicions as to the intrigues of the duke with France, he was completely deceived by his protestations of loyalty to the alliance, and by the readiness with which at his request he granted religious toleration to the Vaudois. The capture of the fort of S. Giorgio and the meeting of a protestant synod at Viglianoto regulate the morals of the army, in which he sat as an elder, were the chief events of the year. The winter was passed in completing his arrangements for the next year's campaign. According to his instructions he was anxious to co-operate with the fleet by an attack on Marseilles, but was compelled to acquiesce in the siege of Casale. The sudden surrender of that fortress surprised him, but his suspicions were set at rest by the apparent sincerity of the duke in renewing the grand alliance. He grumbled at wasted time and neglected opportunities, but even the pilgrimage of the duke to Loretto did not strike him as particularly mysterious; and it was only in August 1696, when the duke threw off the mask and announced his intention of concluding a treaty with France, that he realised how completely he had been duped. He at once withdrew into the Milanese, and was successful in intercepting the subsidy intended for the duke. During September he took part in the defence of Valenza, but after the recognition of the neutrality of the Italian peninsula on 7 Oct. he retired with the English contingent to Flanders, and on 11 Jan. 1697 returned to England. A present which the Duke of Savoy wished to make him of his portrait set in diamonds he declined. He had already forfeited his estates in France, and shortly before the peace of Ryswick he was deprived by Louis of a considerable sum of money which his father had entrusted to the care of President Harlay.

On 6 Feb. 1697 he was appointed by the king's command lord justice of Ireland ad interim. On 12 May he was advanced to the rank of Earl of Galway, and two days later he was joined with the Marquis of Winchester and Lord Villiers in a commission as lords justices of Ireland; but the latter being occupied as plenipotentiary at Ryswick, and the former being of little importance, the conduct of affairs rested chiefly with him and the lord chancellor, John Methuen [q. v.] On 31 May Galway and the Marquis of Winchester landed at Dublin, and were sworn in on the same day. Galway's government of Ireland from February 1697 to April 1701 marks an important period in the history of that country, for it was during his government that the parliament of England asserted its right to make laws binding on Ireland, and that the first acts of the penal code were passed. As the devoted servant of King William, Galway would have, preferred to steer an even and impartial course, and so far as his personal influence went it was exerted in moderating the violence of political and religious faction. But he was better fitted for the camp than for the council-chamber. His inability to speak English fluently naturally placed him at a disadvantage, and though his bearing was always courteous and conciliatory, his influence in affairs of state was really very small. His devotion to William's interest, his indifference to party politics, his high personal character, his perfect unselfishness, his discretion and tolerant disposition, were the chief reasons that influenced his appointment. For himself he seems to have liked Ireland and the Irish people. During his residence there, and in the intervals of official business, he devoted himself to the improvement of his estates. By the liberal encouragement he offered them to settle on his land he established a flourishing colony of protestant refugees at Portarlington. He also built and endowed two churches, in one of which the liturgy in French was used till the beginning of the nineteenth century, and two schools, which were for a long time the most fashionable in Ireland. He was extremely charitable, and though a protestant of a pronounced type, he was so far unwilling to reap any personal advantage from his religion that he not merely maintained the two grandsons of Lord Clanmalier at Eton, but expressed his intention of resigning their grandfather's estate to them on condition that they conformed to the law by becoming protestants. But in 1700 he was deprived of all his estates by the Act of Resumption. Personally he was not much affected by his loss, but William, who felt keenly for him, I gave him a pension of 1,000l. a year, and made him general of the Dutch forces, and colonel of the blue regiment of foot-guards. In April 1701 he obtained permission to retire from the government of Ireland. In July he accompanied Marlborough to Holland, and, after visiting the king at Loo, he was sent to the elector of Cologne on a diplomatic mission connected with the formation of the grand alliance. On his return to England, upon William's death, he took up his residence at a small house called Rookley, near Winchester, in the neighbourhood of his cousin, Lady Russell. He was troubled with gout, and, feeling himself growing infirm, he was anxious to retire from active employment, but in June 1704 he was appointed, with the rank of general, to succeed the Duke of Schomberg as commander of the English forces in Portugal.

He arrived at Lisbon on 10 Aug. At Almeida he inspected the troops, and, finding the commissariat defective, he opposed an autumn campaign in Spain. His opinion was overruled, but was justified by the speedy retreat of the army from want of provisions. During the winter he was busily occupied in preparations for a new frontier campaign in the spring, and in furnishing the Prince of Hesse with additional forces for the defence of Gibraltar. The campaign of 1705 opened with the invasion of Estremadura. Galway's plan for an immediate attack on Badajoz being rejected, the spring was consumed in the capture of Valenza and Albuquerque. In the autumn Badajoz was attacked, and on 2 Oct. the siege began under his direction, but while superintending the erection of a battery his right hand was shattered by a shot from the fortress. He was compelled to retire, and the command devolved upon Baron Fagel, who raised the siege. Fever and irritation at Fagel's conduct rendered his condition so critical that he was compelled to solicit a pass from Marshal Tessé to proceed to Olivenca. Tessé not only complied with his request, but sent his own physicians to attend on him, and in November he began to recover. In the following spring, 1706, he was anxious to take advantage of Tesse's attempt to recapture Barcelona to advance straight on Madrid. The scheme, though a bold one, was approved by Marlborough and the English ministers, but the Portuguese interposed so many obstacles that it was only by a singular admixture of firmness and address that he accomplished his purpose. Though so weak that he had to be lifted on horseback he drove the Duke of Berwick from the Guadiana to the Henares, wrested from him eight thousand Spanish troops and a hundred pieces of artillery, besides an immense amount of ammunition and provisions, and reduced the fortresses of Alcantara and Ciudad Rodrigo. On 27 June he entered Madrid, and for six weeks maintained his position there. On 6 Aug. he was joined by King Charles at Guadalaxara, but meanwhile reinforcements had reached Berwick, the Spaniards had returned to their allegiance to the Bourbons, and the opportunity created by Gal way had passed away. Finding it impossible to reoccupy Madrid, Galway, after spending a month at Chinchon, determined to fall back on Valencia. The retreat was conducted by him in a masterly fashion, and on 28 Sept. he gained the Valencian frontier without much loss. Perceiving the importance of occupying Madrid, he was anxious to renew the attempt in the following spring. At a council of war on 15 Jan. 1707 his plan, which had already been sanctioned by the English ministry, was approved by a majority of the generals, but King Charles, acting on the sinister advice of Noyelles, refused to adopt it, and shortly afterwards withdrew, with the Dutch and Spanish troops, to Barcelona. Though greatly weakened by this defection, Galway, who had recently been appointed commander-in-chief of all the English forces in Spain, was confirmed in his original intention by expectation of assistance from Lisbon. But feeling it necessary to provide in the first place for the defence of Valencia, he opened the campaign by destroying the French magazines on the Murcian frontier. At Villena he heard that Berwick, expecting to be joined by Orleans, was marching towards Almanza. With the unanimous concurrence of the generals he determined to attack before the junction was effected. Considering his great inferiority, the resolution was a daring one, but an offensive policy had been determined upon, and an offensive policy, all things being considered, was probably the best course that could have been taken. He was compelled to yield the right to the Portuguese, but otherwise his arrangements for the battle were made with care, and in order to strengthen his cavalry he adopted the novel plan of interposing battalions of foot. The battle was lost through the cowardice of the Portuguese cavalry. Galway himself received a sabre wound near his right eye, which, depriving him of sight, obliged him to quit the field. But undismayed by his defeat, and after making what arrangements he could for the defence of Valencia, he retired into Catalonia, in order 'to make up another army,' and within less than five months after his defeat he was able to take the field with 14,600 well-equipped troops. He was unable to avert the fall of Lerida, but his energy had saved the situation. He had long desired to be relieved from his post. He had lost an arm and an eye, and had become partially deaf. In December his wish was complied with, but the English ministers, in order to mark their approbation of his conduct, appointed him envoy extraordinary to the court of Lisbon, and commander-in-chief of the English forces in Portugal. He sailed on 8 Feb. 1708 for Lisbon. During that year the state of his health confined him entirely to his diplomatic duties, but in 1709, though disapproving strongly of Fronteira's determination to attack the Marquis de Bay, he commanded the English contingent at the battle on the Caya. He displayed great personal bravery. His horse was shot under him, and he narrowly escaped capture. But age and his infirmities pressed heavily upon him, and he was glad when he was recalled in the following year.

He returned to England shortly after the accession of Harley and the tories to power. In January 1711 the management of the war in Spain formed the subject of several acrimonious debates in the House of Lords. On 11 Jan. a motion censuring Galway for fighting the battle of Almanza was carried by sixty-four to forty-three, and a subsequent motion, that the Earl of Galway, in yielding the post of her Majesty's troops to the Portuguese in Spain, acted contrary to the honour of the imperial crown of Great Britain,' by sixty-four to forty-four. The votes were a mere party manoeuvre, and cannot be held to affect either the wisdom or unwisdom of Galway's conduct at Almanza. On his return to England he retired to Rookley, and about the same time resigned his colonelcy of the Dutch guards. In 1715 it was felt dvisable, in view of the Jacobite rising, to place the government of Ireland in firm hands. Accordingly on 23 Aug. the Duke of Grafton and Galway were appointed lords justices. They landed at Dublin on 1 Nov., but the parliament, which assembled a few days later, showed itself so distinctly loyal as to remove all anxiety from the government. On 11 Dec. it in a measure repaired the old wrong done to Galway by voting him a military pension of 500l. a year in addition to his civil pension of 1,000l. With the appointment of Lord Townshend as viceroy in January 1716 Galway's term of office came to an end. He returned to England in February, and spent the remainder of his life at Rookley. He died on 3 Sept. 1720, during a visit to his cousin, Lady Russell, at Stratton House, and was buried at Micheldever churchyard on 6 Sept., the grave never closing over a braver and more modest soldier. Galway was unmarried, and the bulk of his property passed by will to Lady Russell. On his death his British titles became extinct, but the marquisate of Ruvigny and Raineval passed to his nephew, Pierre David, one of whose sons came to England, and was a colonel in the royal engineers. It is from him that the present Marquis de Ruvigny and Raineval, and Philip Louis de Ruvigny, count d'Arcis, are descended. The Ruvigny estates in France were conferred by Louis XIV on Cardinal Polignac in 1711.

An admirable mezzotint by Simon, from a picture by De Graves, appeared in 1704. ‘He is,’ wrote Macky about 1700, ‘one of the finest gentlemen in the army, with a head fitted for the cabinet as well as the camp; is very modest, vigilant, and sincere; a man of honour and honesty, without pride or affectation; wears his own hair, is plain in his dress and manners.’

[D. C. A. Agnew's Life of the Earl of Galway, Edinburgh, 1864, and the carefully written memoir in the same author's Protestant Exiles from France, i. 144–219, London, 1871, are the chief sources of information. For special information regarding his career as a Frenchman may be added St.-Simon's Mémoires, ed. Paris, 1873; Haag's La France Protestante, art. ‘Massue;’ Benoit's Hist. de l'Édit de Nantes, iv. 358; Mignet's Négociations relatifs à la Succession d'Espagne, vol. iv. in Collection de Documents Inédits; Copies and Extracts of some Letters written to and from the Earl of Danby in the years 1676, 1677, and 1678, published by his Grace's direction, London, 1710; Duke of Leeds Official Corresp., Additional MS. 28054; Dalrymple's Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland; Savile Correspondence (Camden Society); Temple's Memoirs, p. 321; Burnet's Own Time; Weiss's Hist. des Réfugiés Protestants de France, of which a translation was published at Edinburgh in 1854. For the campaign in Ireland the following may be usefully consulted: G. Story's Impartial History and Continuation of the Wars in Ireland, London, 1693; Dumont de Bostaquet's Mémoires inédits, Paris, 1864, quoted by Macaulay as the Dumont MS.; O'Kelly's Macariæ Excidium (Irish Archæol. Society); An Exact Journal of the Victorious Progress of General Ginkell, London, 1691; R. Kane's Campaigns of William III; Hist. MSS. Comm. 4th Rep. pp. 321, 323, 324. For the campaign in Savoy: Galway's Letters in Cox's Original Correspondence of the Duke of Shrewsbury have been supplemented by Memoirs of the Transactions in Savoy during this War, London, 1697; State Papers, Savoy and Sardinia, No. 31 in the Public Record Office; Addit. MSS. British Museum, 19771, 21494 f. 45, 28879 f. 47. For the period of his government of Ireland: The State Papers, Ireland, in the Public Record Office, are unfortunately very scanty, and have been utilised in Froude's English in Ireland; but Grimblot's Letters of William III and Vernon's Letters illustrative of the Reign of William III furnish additional and confirmatory information. To them may be added Dr. Burridge's Short View of the Present State of Ireland, Dublin, 1708; History of the Ministerial Conduct of the Chief Governors of Ireland from 1688 to 1753, London, 1754; The Case of the Forfeitures in Ireland fairly stated, London, 1700; Jus Regium, or the King's Right to Grant Forfeitures, in Collection of State Tracts published during the reign of William III, ii. 731, the author of which appears to have been Dr. E. Burridge. For matters relating to military appointments and the disbandment of the army Addit. MSS. 9716 and 9718; and for miscellaneous information Addit. MSS. 28053 f. 400, 28218 f. 29, 28881 f. 411, 28882 f. 59, 28883 f. 344, 28885 f. 249; Hist. MSS. Comm. 3rd Rep. p. 193, 7th Rep. p. 806. In regard to his conduct in Spain the Hon. A. Parnell's War of the Succession in Spain is distinctly the most valuable authority; Abel Boyer's Annals of the Reign of Queen Anne supplies impartial and trustworthy contemporary information; An Impartial Enquiry into the Management of the War in Spain, London, 1712 (reprinted in 1726 with a new title-page, ‘The History of the Last War in Spain from 1702 to 1710’), is based on the Annals, and may have been written by Boyer himself; the Godolphin Official Corresp., Addit. MSS. 28056 and 28057, includes many letters from Galway, and some useful information is contained in the Leake Papers, Addit. MSS. 5441 and 5443; Griffet's Recueil de Lettres pour servir à l'Histoire Militaire du Règne de Louis XIV; De Quincey's Histoire Militaire du Règne de Louis le Grand, and H. Reynald's Succession d'Espagne deserve to be consulted; Cobbett's Parliamentary History, vi. 936, furnishes a full account of the debates in the House of Lords on the management of the war. Gleanings more or less valuable are to be found in the Duke of Berwick's Memoirs; Mémoires et Lettres du Comte de Tessé; Marlborough's Letters and Despatches; Kemble's State Papers; Cole's Memoirs; Richard Hill's Diplomatic Corresp.; Private Corresp. of the Duchess of Marlborough; Addit. MSS. 7077 f. 156, 15170 f. 197, 15866 f. 138, 15895 ff. 41, 54, 15916 f. 21, 16467 f. 191, 20966 f. 37, 21136 ff. 45, 59, 22200, 22231 f. 97, 22880 f. 23, 29587 f. 91, 29588 f. 400; Hist. MSS. Comm. 8th Rep., Duke of Marlborough's MSS., 9th Rep. p. 467, 10th Rep. pt. i. p. 521, pt. iv. p. 340, pt. v. pp. 182, 511, 11th Rep. pt. iv. pp. 331–4, pt. v. pp. 297–9, 12th Rep. App. pt. v., Duke of Rutland's MSS. vol. ii. For general information reference should be made to the histories of Burnet, Harris, Kennet, Tindal, Stanhope, Macaulay, and Burton. Luttrell's Diary often supplies information not noted elsewhere. Some personal details are in Lady Russell's Letters and in the works of St. Evremond. For special information on one or two points the writer of the article is indebted to the present Marquis de Ruvigny. Galway's letters are almost entirely in French. The writing is legible and the style agreeable. After the loss of his right hand at Badajoz he employed an amanuensis, but signed his letters with his left hand.]

R. D.