Page:Royal Naval Biography Marshall v4p2.djvu/28

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
commanders.
15

he was in the act of receiving orders from Sir George Collier, when that officer and Captain (now Sir Willoughby T.) Lake, were wounded[1]. In Feb. 1813, he followed Sir Home into the Stirling Castle 74, fitting out for the reception of Earl Moira (afterwards Marquis of Hastings), Governor-General of India, by whom he was highly complimented for his exertions in saving the lives of two seamen, who fell overboard during the voyage to Bengal. From May 1815 until Sept. 1818, on the 9th of which latter month he was made a commander, we find him serving as flag-lieutenant to Sir Home Popham and Sir William J. Hope, in the river Thames and on the Leith station. In 1817, he won the silver bugle given by the royal company of Scottish archers, with whom he did duty, as one of King George IV.’s body guard, during his Majesty’s gracious visit to Scotland.

In 1820, when the spirit of radicalism was raging in the west of Scotland, Commander Deans joined the Edinburgh yeomanry cavalry, of which corps Viscount Melville, then First Lord of the Admiralty, was colonel. On the 30th April, 1827, be obtained the command of the Clio sloop; and on the 12th Nov. following, was tried by a court-martial for having run that vessel on shore, off Coquette Island, on the coast of Northumberland, whereby she lost her rudder and two anchors and cables. The charge was specially grounded on the first article of the fifth section of the new naval instructions, viz.:

“On all occasions, where a ship is in pilot-water, or in the neighbourhood of the land, of rocks, or of shoals, the captain is to take particular care that the hand-lead be kept constantly going, whether the pilot, or the master, thinks this precaution necessary or not; and if it shall appear that a ship has been brought into danger of running on shore, or has been wrecked, by a neglect of this precaution, the captain will be held responsible for it.”

The Court having heard Commander Deans’ narrative, and evidence of all the circumstances, agreed, that the charge of a neglect of this instruction had been proved against Commander Deans; but in consideration of his high character in