Glorious First of June

Infobox Military Conflict
conflict=Glorious First of June
partof=the French Revolutionary Wars


caption="Lord Howe's action, or the Glorious First of June" Philippe-Jacques de Loutherbourg, 1795
date=1 June 1794
place=Atlantic Ocean, convert|400|nmi|km west of Ushant [ Although some sources differ from the accepted position of the battle (Smith, p. 82 claims only 50 km from Ushant, which may be a typo), the action was fought approximately convert|400|nmi|km west of Ushant in the Eastern Atlantic. (Padfield, p. 13)]
result= British fleet defeated French fleet, but French convoy got through. Both sides claimed victory.
combatant1=flagicon|UK|1606 Great Britain
combatant2=flagicon|France French Republic
commander1=Lord Howe
commander2=Louis Thomas Villaret de Joyeuse
strength1=25 ships of the line
strength2=26 ships of the line
casualties1=1,200 casualties
casualties2=7 ships lost, approx. 4,000 casualties, 3,000 capturedThe Glorious First of June (also known as the Third Battle of Ushant, and in France as the _fr. "Bataille du 13 prairial an 2" or _fr. "Combat de Prairial") [The battle is generally known in both English and French by its date rather than its geographical location. Naval battles were traditionally known by the closest land feature to the battle or a particularly prominent coastal feature nearby. In the case of the Glorious First of June however, the nearest land was hundreds of miles away and bore no relation to the battle. Thus the date has instead been commonly used to represent the action. The discrepancy between English and French renditions is a result of the different calendars then in use: for Britain the Gregorian calendar and for France the French Revolutionary calendar. The name Third Battle of Ushant follows the nearest landmark tradition and also acknowledges the two previous Battles of Ushant during the American Revolutionary War.] was the first and largest fleet action of the naval conflict between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the First French Republic during the French Revolutionary Wars. The British Channel Fleet under Lord Howe attempted to interdict the passage of a vitally important French grain convoy from the United States, which was protected by the French Atlantic Fleet, commanded by Louis Thomas Villaret de Joyeuse. The two forces clashed in the Atlantic Ocean, some convert|400|nmi|km|0 west of the French island of Ushant.

The action was the culmination of a campaign that had criss-crossed the Bay of Biscay over the previous month. Both sides had captured numerous merchant ships and minor warships and had engaged in two partial, but inconclusive, fleet actions. The aftermath of 1 June 1794 left both fleets shattered and in no condition for further combat. Despite losing seven ships of the line, Villaret bought enough time for the French grain convoy to reach safety. However, he was also forced to withdraw his battle-fleet to port, leaving the British free to conduct a campaign of blockade for the remainder of the war. Both sides claimed victory. The result of the battle was seized upon by the press of both nations as a shining example of the prowess and bravery of their respective navies.

The Glorious First of June demonstrated some of the major problems inherent in the French and British navies at the start of the Revolutionary Wars—both admirals, faced with disobedience from their captains and ill-discipline and poor training among their crews, failed to control their fleets effectively. Both fleets suffered further from a shortage of crewmen and reliable officers.

Background

Since early 1792 France had been at war with three of its neighbours on two fronts, battling Austria and Prussia in the Austrian Netherlands, and the Austrians and Piedmontese in Italy. On 2 January 1793, almost one year into the French Revolutionary War, republican-held forts at Brest in Brittany fired on the British brig HMS "Childers".HMS "Childers" was under the command of Lieutenant Robert Barlow, who later commanded the frigate HMS "Pegasus" at the Glorious First of June. (Tracy, p. 3)] Just weeks later, following the execution of the imprisoned King Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette at the start of the period known as The Terror,Gardiner, p. 9] diplomatic ties between Britain and France were broken. It was not long before France declared war on both Britain and the Dutch Republic, seeking to spread the Revolutionary ethos.

Protected from immediate invasion by the English Channel, Britain prepared for an extensive naval campaign and dispatched troops to the Netherlands for service against the French.Padfield, p. 15] Throughout the remainder of 1793, the British and French navies undertook minor operations in Northern waters, the Mediterranean and the West and East Indies, where both nations maintained colonies. The only major clash was the Siege of Toulon, a confused and bloody affair in which the British force holding the town—alongside Spanish, Sardinian, Austrian and French Royalist troops—had to be evacuated by the Royal Navy to prevent its imminent defeat at the hands of the French Republican army.Tracy, p. 27] The aftermath of this siege was punctuated by recriminations and accusations of cowardice and betrayal among the allies, eventually resulting in Spain switching allegiance with the signing of the Treaty of San Ildefonso two years later.Williams, p. 387] Nevertheless, the siege produced one major success: Sir Sidney Smith, with parties of sailors from the retreating British fleet, accomplished the destruction of substantial French naval stores and shipping in Toulon.Williams, p. 373] More might have been achieved had the Spanish raiding parties that accompanied Smith not been issued with secret orders to stall the destruction of the French fleet.Tracy, p. 53]

The situation in Europe remained volatile into 1794. Off Northern France, the French Atlantic Fleet had mutinied due to errors in provisions and pay. In consequence, the French Navy officer corps suffered greatly from the effects of The Terror, with many experienced sailors being executed, imprisoned or dismissed from the service for perceived disloyalty.James, p. 122] The shortage of provisions was more than a navy problem though; France itself was starving because the social upheavals of the previous year had combined with a harsh winter to ruin the harvest. By this time at war with all her neighbours, France had nowhere to turn for overland imports of fresh provisions. Eventually a solution to the food crisis was agreed by the National Convention: food produced in France's overseas colonies would be concentrated on board a fleet of merchant ships gathered in Chesapeake Bay, and augmented with food and goods purchased from the United States.Tracy, p. 89] During April and May 1794, the merchantmen would convoy the supplies across the Atlantic to Brest, protected by elements of the French Atlantic Fleet.

Fleets

The navies of Britain and France in 1794 were at very different stages of development. Although the British fleet was numerically superior, the French ships were larger, stronger and carried a heavier weight of shot. The largest French ships were three-decker first rates, carrying 110 or even 120 guns, compared with 100 guns on the largest British vessels. However, morale, manning and discipline would also affect naval performance in the spring of 1794.

Royal Navy

Since the Spanish armament of 1790, the British Royal Navy had been at sea in a state of readiness for over three years.James, p. 48] Due to extensive preparations under First Lord of the Admiralty Charles Middleton, the Navy's dockyards were all fully fitted and prepared for conflict, lessons having been learnt from the disasters of the American Revolutionary War ten years earlier. Then, an ill-prepared Royal Navy had taken too long to reach full effectiveness. As a result the Navy had been unable to support the North American campaign, which ended in defeat at the Battle of Yorktown due to lack of supplies.Rodger, p. 429] With British dockyards now readily turning out cannon, shot, sails, provisions and other essential equipment, the only remaining problem was that of manning the several hundred ships on the Navy list.

Gathering sufficient manpower proved problematic, and was never satisfactorily accomplished throughout the entire war. The shortage of seamen was such that the press gangs were forced to take thousands of men with no experience of the sea, and whose training and preparation for naval life would take quite some time. The lack of Royal Marines was even more urgent, and soldiers from the British Army were drafted into the fleet for service at sea. Men of the Queen's Royal Regiment and the 29th Regiment of Foot served aboard Royal Navy ships during the campaign; their descendant regiments still maintain the battle honour "1 June 1794". [http://www.worcestershireregiment.com/wr.php?main=inc/h_glorious_first The Glorious First of June 1794] , "Worcestershire Regiment", Retrieved 23 December 2007 ] [http://www.queensroyalsurreys.org.uk/1661to1966/gloriousfirst/gloriousfirst.html The Glorious First of June 1794] , "Queen's Royal West Surrey Regiment", Retrieved 1 January 2008 ]

Despite these difficulties, the Channel Fleet was possessed of some of the best naval commanders of the age; its commander-in-chief, Richard Howe, 1st Earl Howe, had learned his trade under Sir Edward Hawke and fought at the Battle of Quiberon Bay. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/13963?docPos=2 Howe, Richard] , "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography", Roger Knight, Retrieved 23 December 2007] In the spring of 1794, with the French convoy's arrival in European waters imminent, Howe had dispersed his fleet in three groups. George Montagu, in HMS "Hector", was sent with six ships of the line and two frigates to guard British convoys to the East Indies, West Indies and Newfoundland as far as Cape Finisterre. Peter Rainier, in HMS "Suffolk and commanding six other ships, was to escort the convoys for the rest of their passage. The third force consisted of 26 ships of the line, with several supporting vessels, under Howe's direct command. They were to patrol the Bay of Biscay for the arriving French.James, p. 125]

French Navy

In contrast to their British counterparts, the French Navy was in a state of confusion. Although the quality of the fleet's ships was high, the fleet hierarchy was riven by the same crises that had torn through France since the Revolution five years earlier.Jane, p. 94] Consequently the high standard of ships and ordnance was not matched by that of the available crews, which were largely untrained and inexperienced. With The Terror resulting in the death or dismissal of many senior French sailors and officers, political appointees and conscripts—many of whom had never been to sea at all, let alone in a fighting vessel—filled the Atlantic fleet.Gardiner, p. 16]

The manpower problem was compounded by the supply crisis which was affecting the entire nation, with the fleet going unpaid and largely unfed for months at times.James, p. 58] In August 1793, these problems came to a head in the fleet off Brest, when a lack of provisions resulted in a mutiny among the regular sailors. The crews overruled their officers and brought their ships into harbour in search of food, leaving the French coast undefended.James, p. 59] The National Convention responded instantly by executing a swathe of senior officers and ship's non-commissioned officers. Hundreds more officers and sailors were imprisoned, banished or dismissed from naval service. The effect of such a draconian move was devastating, seriously degrading the fighting ability of the fleet by removing at a stroke many of its most capable personnel. In their places were promoted junior officers, merchant captains and even civilians who expressed sufficient revolutionary zeal, although few of them knew how to fight or control a battle fleet at sea.Padfield, p. 13]

The newly-appointed commander of this troubled fleet was Villaret de Joyeuse; although formerly in a junior position, he proved to possess a high degree of tactical ability.Jane, p. 96] However, Villaret's attempts to mould his new officer corps into an effective fighting unit were continually hampered by another new appointee, a deputy of the National Convention named Jean-Bon Saint-André. Saint-André's job was to report directly to the National Convention on the revolutionary ardour of both the fleet and its admiral. He frequently intervened in strategic planning and tactical operations.James, p. 123] [ Shortly after his arrival, Saint-André proposed issuing a decree ordering that any officer deemed to have shown insufficient zeal in defending his ship in action should be put to death on his return to France, although this highly controversial legislation does not appear to have ever been acted upon. (James p. 123)] Although a thorn in the side of Villaret, Saint-André's dispatches to Paris were published regularly in "Le Moniteur", and did much to popularise the Navy in France.James, p. 124]

The French Atlantic fleet was even more dispersed than the British in the spring of 1794: Rear-Admiral Pierre Vanstabel had been dispatched, with five ships including two of the line, to meet the much-needed French grain convoy off the American eastern seaboard. Rear-Admiral Joseph-Marie Nielly had sailed from Rochefort with five ships of the line and assorted cruising warships to rendezvous with the convoy in the mid-Atlantic. This left Villaret with 25 ships of the line at Brest, to meet the threat posed by the British fleet under Lord Howe.

Convoy

By early spring of 1794, the situation in France was dire. With famine looming after the failure of the harvest and the blockade of French ports and trade, the French government was forced to look overseas for sustenance. Turning to France's colonies in the Americas, and the agricultural might of the United States, the National Convention gave orders for the formation of a large convoy of sailing vessels to gather at Hampton Roads in the Chesapeake Bay, where Admiral Vanstabel would wait for them. According to contemporary historian William James this conglomeration of ships was said to be over 350 strong, although he disputes this figure, citing the number as 117 (in addition to the French warships).James, p. 127]

The convoy had also been augmented by the United States government, in both cargo and shipping, as repayment for French financial, moral and military support during the American Revolution. In supporting the French Revolution in this way, the American government, urged especially by Ambassador Gouverneur Morris, was fulfilling its ten year old debt to France.Williams, p. 381] However, the friendly relationship between the two nations did not long survive the atrocities of The Terror; four years later the two would be at loggerheads in the Quasi War.

May 1794

The French convoy, escorted by Vanstabel, departed America from Virginia on 2 April, and Howe sailed from Portsmouth on 2 May, taking his entire fleet to both escort British convoys to the Western Approaches and intercept the French. Checking that Villaret was still in Brest, Howe spent two weeks searching the Bay of Biscay for the grain convoy, returning to Brest on 18 May to discover that Villaret had sailed the previous day. [It has been suggested that allowing Villaret to escape Brest was part of a deliberate strategy on Howe's part. If Howe could draw Villaret into the open ocean, he could rely on superior training and tactics to destroy the French fleet in battle. If successful, this would eliminate the threat from the French Atlantic Fleet for years to come. (Padfield p. 17)] Returning to sea in search of his opponent, Howe pursued Villaret deep into the Atlantic. Also at sea during this period were the squadrons of Nielly (French) and Montagu (British), both of whom had met with some success; Nielly capturing a number of British merchant ships and Montagu taking several back. Nielly was the first to encounter the grain convoy, deep in the Atlantic in the second week of May. He took it under escort as it moved closer to Europe, while Montagu was searching fruitlessly to the south.James, p. 128]

Despite Howe's pursuit, the main French sortie also found success, running into a Dutch convoy and taking 20 ships from it on Villaret's first day at sea. For the next week Howe continued to follow the French, seizing and burning a trail of French-held Dutch ships and enemy corvettes.Gardiner, p. 27] On 25 May Howe spotted a straggler from Villaret's fleet and gave chase; "Audacieux" led Howe straight to his opponent's location.James, p. 130] Having finally found Villaret, on 28 May Howe attacked, using a flying squadron of his fastest ships to cut off its rearmost vessel "Révolutionnaire". This first rate was at various times engaged with six British ships and took heavy damage, possibly striking her colours late in the action.James, p. 132] As darkness fell the British and French fleets separated, leaving "Révolutionnaire" and her final enemy, HMS "Audacious", still locked in combat behind them. These two ships parted company during the night and eventually returned to their respective home ports.Gardiner, p. 28] By this stage Villaret knew through his patrolling frigates that the grain convoy was close, and deliberately took his fleet to the west, hoping to decoy Howe away from the vital convoy.

Taking the bait, the following day Howe attacked again, but his attempt to split the French fleet in half was unsuccessful when his lead ship, HMS "Caesar", failed to follow orders.James, p. 138] Much damage was done to both fleets but the action was inconclusive, and the two forces again separated without having settled the issue. Howe had however gained an important advantage during the engagement by seizing the weather gage, enabling him to further attack Villaret at a time of his choosing. [The weather gage was a vital advantage in sailing warfare because the ships required wind of the correct volume and direction to conduct offensive operations. When the wind was in the wrong direction, a captain could tack to compensate, but possessing the weather gage meant that a ship could use the wind to attack their opponent directly, without the need for complicated manoeuvre.] Rodger, p. 430] Three French ships were sent back to port with damage, but these losses were offset by reinforcements gained the following day with the arrival of Nielly's detached squadron.Padfield, p. 16] Battle was postponed during the next two days because of thick fog, but when the haze lifted on 1 June 1794, the battle lines were only 6 miles (10 km) apart and Howe was prepared to force a decisive action.

First of June

Although Howe was in a favourable position, Villaret had not been idle during the night. He had attempted, with near success, to distance his ships from the British fleet; when dawn broke at 05:00 he was within a few hours of gaining enough wind to escape over the horizon. Allowing his men to breakfast, Howe took full advantage of his position on the weather gage to close with Villaret, and by 08:12 the British fleet was just four miles (6 km) from the enemy. By this time, Howe's formation was strung out in an organised line parallel to the French, with frigates acting as repeaters for the admiral's commands.Jane, p. 95] The French were likewise in line ahead and the two lines began exchanging long-range gunfire at 09:24, whereupon Howe unleashed his innovative battleplan.James, p. 146]

It was normal in fleet actions of the 18th century for the two lines of battle to pass one another sedately, exchanging fire at long ranges and then wearing away, often without either side losing a ship or taking an enemy.Padfield, p. 18] In contrast, Howe was counting on the professionalism of his captains and crews combined with the advantage of the weather gage to attack the French directly, driving through their line. However, this time he did not plan to manoeuvre in the way he had during the two previous encounters; each ship following in the wake of that in front to create a new line arrowing through his opponent's force (as Rodney had done at the Battle of the Saintes 12 years earlier).Gardiner, p. 31] Instead, Howe ordered each of his ships to turn individually towards the French line, intending to breach it at every point and rake the French ships at both bow and stern. The British captains would then pull up on the leeward side of their opposite numbers, cutting them off from their retreat downwind, and engage them directly, hopefully forcing each to surrender and consequently destroying the French Atlantic Fleet.

British break the line

Within minutes of issuing the signal and turning his flagship HMS "Queen Charlotte", Howe's plan began to falter. Many of the British captains had either misunderstood or ignored the signal and were hanging back in the original line.Padfield, p. 22] Other ships were still struggling with damage from Howe's earlier engagements and could not get into action fast enough. The result was a ragged formation tipped by "Queen Charlotte", that headed unevenly for Villaret's fleet. The French responded by firing on the British ships as they approached, but the lack of training and coordination in the French fleet was obvious; many ships which did obey Howe's order and attacked the French directly arrived in action without significant damage.

Van squadron

Although "Queen Charlotte" pressed on all sail, she was not the first through the enemy line. That distinction belonged to a ship of the van squadron under Admiral Graves—HMS "Defence" under Captain James Gambier, a notoriously dour officer nicknamed "Dismal Jimmy" by his contemporaries.Gardiner, p. 32] "Defence", the seventh ship of the British line, successfully cut the French line between its sixth and seventh ships; "Mucius" and "Tourville". Raking both opponents, "Defence" soon found herself in difficulty due to the failure of those ships behind her to properly follow up.James, p. 158] This left her vulnerable to "Mucius", "Tourville" and the ships following them, with which she began a furious fusillade. However, "Defence" was not the only ship of the van to break the French line; minutes later George Cranfield-Berkeley in HMS "Marlborough" executed Howe's manoeuvre perfectly, raking and then entangling his ship with "Impétueux".Padfield, p. 29] James, p. 157]

In front of "Marlborough" the rest of the van had mixed success. HMS "Bellerophon" and HMS "Leviathan" were both still suffering the effects of their exertions earlier in the week and did not breach the enemy line. Instead they pulled along the near side of "Éole" and "America" respectively and brought them to close gunnery duels. Rear-Admiral Thomas Pasley of "Bellerophon" was an early casualty, losing a leg in the opening exchanges. HMS "Royal Sovereign", Graves's flagship, was less successful due to a miscalculation of distance that resulted in her pulling up too far from the French line and coming under heavy fire from her opponent "Terrible". In the time it took to engage "Terrible" more closely, "Royal Sovereign" suffered a severe pounding and Admiral Graves was badly wounded.

More disturbing to Lord Howe were the actions of HMS "Russell" and HMS "Caesar". "Russell's" captain John Willett Payne was criticised at the time for failing to get to grips with the enemy more closely and allowing her opponent "Téméraire" to badly damage her rigging in the early stages, although later commentators blamed damage received on 29 May for her poor start to the action. There were no such excuses, however, for Captain Anthony Molloy of "Caesar", who totally failed in his duty to engage the enemy. Molloy completely ignored Howe's signal and continued ahead as if the British battleline was following him rather than engaging the French fleet directly.Padfield, p. 24] "Caesar" did participate in a desultory exchange of fire with the leading French ship "Trajan" but her fire had little effect, while "Trajan" inflicted much damage to "Caesar's" rigging and was subsequently able to attack "Bellerophon" as well, roaming unchecked through the melee developing at the head of the line.James, p. 155]

Centre

The centre of the two fleets was divided by two separate squadrons of the British line: the forward division under admirals Benjamin Caldwell and George Bowyer and the rear under Lord Howe. While Howe in "Queen Charlotte" was engaging the French closely, his subordinates in the forward division were less active. Instead of moving in on their opposite numbers directly, the forward division sedately closed with the French in line ahead formation, engaging in a long distance duel which did not prevent their opponents from harassing the embattled "Defence" just ahead of them. Of all the ships in this squadron only HMS "Invincible", under Thomas Pakenham, ranged close to the French lines. "Invincible" was badly damaged by her lone charge but managed to engage the larger "Juste".James, p. 159] HMS "Barfleur" under Bowyer did later enter the action, but Bowyer was not present, having lost a leg in the opening exchanges.

Howe and "Queen Charlotte" led the fleet by example, sailing directly at the French flagship "Montagne". Passing between "Montagne" and the next in line "Vengeur du Peuple", "Queen Charlotte" raked both and hauled up close to "Montagne" to engage in a close-range artillery battle. As she did so, "Queen Charlotte" also became briefly entangled with "Jacobin", and exchanged fire with her too, causing serious damage to both French ships.

To the right of "Queen Charlotte", HMS "Brunswick" had initially struggled to join the action. Labouring behind the flagship, her captain John Harvey received a rebuke from Howe for the delay. Spurred by this signal, Harvey pushed his ship forward and almost outstripped "Queen Charlotte", blocking her view of the eastern half of the French fleet for a time and taking severe damage from French fire as she did so. Harvey hoped to run aboard "Jacobin" and support his admiral directly, but was not fast enough to reach her and so attempted to cut between "Achille" and "Vengeur du Peuple". This manoeuvre failed when "Brunswick's" anchors became entangled in "Vengeur's" rigging. Harvey's master asked if "Vengeur" should be cut loose, to which Harvey replied "No; we have got her and we will keep her". The two ships swung so close to one another that "Brunswick's" crew could not open their gunports and had to fire through the closed lids, the ships battering one another from a distance of just a few feet.James, p. 161]

Behind this combat, other ships of the centre division struck the French line, HMS "Valiant" passing close to "Patriote" which pulled away, her crew suffering from contagion and unable to take their ship into battle.James, p. 165] "Valiant" instead turned her attention on "Achille", which had already been raked by "Queen Charlotte" and "Brunswick", and badly damaged her before pressing on sail to join the embattled van division. HMS "Orion" under John Thomas Duckworth and HMS "Queen" under Admiral Alan Gardner both attacked the same ship, "Queen" suffering severely from the earlier actions in which her masts were badly damaged and her captain John Hutt mortally wounded.Padfield, p. 31] Both ships bore down on the French "Northumberland", which was soon dismasted and left attempting to escape on only the stump of a mast. "Queen" was too slow to engage "Northumberland" as closely as "Orion", and soon fell in with "Jemmappes", both ships battering one another severely.

Rear

Of the British rear ships, only two made a determined effort to break the French line. Admiral Hood's flagship HMS "Royal George" pierced it between "Républicain" and "Sans Pareil", engaging both closely, while HMS "Glory" came through the line behind "Sans Pareil" and threw herself into the melee as well. The rest of the British and French rearguard did not participate in this close combat; HMS "Montagu", with her captain James Montagu killed in the opening exchanges, fought a long range gunnery duel with "Neptune" which damaged neither ship severely.James, p. 167] Next in line, HMS "Ramillies" ignored her opponent completely and sailed west, Captain Henry Harvey seeking "Brunswick", his brother's ship, in the confused action around "Queen Charlotte".James, p. 163]

Three other British ships failed to respond to the signal from Howe, including HMS "Alfred" which engaged the French line at extreme range without noticeable effect, and Captain Charles Cotton in HMS "Majestic" who likewise did little until the action was decided, at which point he took the surrender of several already shattered French ships. Finally HMS "Thunderer" under Albemarle Bertie took no part in the initial action at all, standing well away from the British line and failing to engage the enemy despite the signal for close engagement hanging limply from her mainmast. The French rear ships were no less idle, with "Entreprenant" and "Pelletier" firing at any British ships in range but refusing to close or participate in the melees on either side. The French rear ship "Scipion" did not attempt to join the action either, but could not avoid becoming embroiled in the group around "Royal George" and "Républicain" and suffered severe damage.James, p. 168]

Melee

, had been more successful than "Bellerophon", her gunnery dismasting "America" despite receiving fire from "Eole" and "Trajan" in passing. "Leviathan" only left "America" after a two-hour duel, sailing at 11:50 to join "Queen Charlotte" in the centre.James, p. 156]

"Russell" had not broken the French line and her opponent "Témeraire" got the better of her, knocking away a topmast and escaping to windward with "Trajan" and "Eole". "Russell" then fired on several passing French ships before joining "Leviathan" in attacking the centre of the French line. "Russell's" boats also took the surrender of "America", her crew boarding the vessel to make her a prize (although later replaced by men from "Royal Sovereign").Tracy, p. 98, "Biographical Memoir of Rear-Admiral John Willett Payne"] "Royal Sovereign" lost Admiral Graves to a serious wound and lost her opponent as well, as "Terrible" fell out of the line to windward and joined a growing collection of French ships forming a new line on the far side of the action. Villaret was leading this line in his flagship "Montagne", which had escaped from "Queen Charlotte", and it was "Montagne" which "Royal Sovereign" engaged next, pursuing her close to the new French line accompanied by "Valiant", and beginning a long-range action.

Behind "Royal Sovereign" was "Marlborough", inextricably tangled with "Impétueux". Badly damaged and on the verge of surrender, "Impétueux" was briefly reprieved when "Mucius" appeared through the smoke and collided with both ships.Padfield, p. 33] The three entangled ships continued exchanging fire for some time, all suffering heavy casualties with "Marlborough" and "Impétueux" losing all three of their masts. This combat continued for several hours. Captain Berkeley of "Marlborough" had to retire below with serious wounds, and command fell to Lieutenant John Monkton, who signalled for help from the frigates in reserve. "Marlborough" was rescued by HMS "Aquilon", who towed her out of the line as "Mucius" freed herself and made for the regrouped French fleet to the north. "Impétueux" was in too damaged a state to move at all, and was soon seized by sailors from HMS "Russell".

Dismasted, "Defence" was unable to hold any of her various opponents to a protracted duel, and by 13:00 was threatened by the damaged "Républicain" moving from the east. Although "Républicain" later hauled off to join Villaret to the north, Gambier requested support for his ship from the fleet's frigates and was aided by HMS "Phaeton" under Captain William Bentinck. "Phaeton" was fired on by "Impétueux" as she passed, to which Bentinck responded with several broadsides of his own. "Invincible", the only ship of the forward division of the British centre to engage the enemy closely, became embroiled in the confusion surrounding "Queen Charlotte". "Invincible's" guns drove "Juste" onto the broadside of "Queen Charlotte", where she was forced to surrender to Lieutenant Henry Blackwood in a boat from "Invincible". Among the other ships of the division there were only minor casualties, although HMS "Impregnable" lost several yards and was only brought back into line by the quick reactions of two junior officers, Lieutenant Robert Otway and Midshipman Charles Dashwood. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/20943 Otway, Sir Robert] , "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography", J. K. Laughton, Retrieved 2 January 2008 ]

The conflict between "Queen Charlotte" and "Montagne" was oddly one sided, the French flagship failing to make use of her lower-deck guns and consequently suffering extensive damage and casualties. "Queen Charlotte" in her turn was damaged by fire from nearby ships and was therefore unable to follow when "Montagne" set her remaining sails and slipped to the north to create a new focal point for the survivors of the French fleet.James, p. 149] "Queen Charlotte" also took fire during the engagement from HMS "Gibraltar", under Thomas Mackenzie, which had failed to close with the enemy and instead fired at random into the smoke bank surrounding the flagship. Captain Sir Andrew Snape Douglas was seriously wounded by this fire.Padfield, p. 32] Following "Montagne"'s escape, "Queen Charlotte" engaged "Jacobin" and "Républicain" as they passed, and was successful in forcing the surrender of "Juste". To the east of "Queen Charlotte", "Brunswick" and "Vengeur du Peuple" continued their bitter combat, locked together and firing main broadsides from point blank range. Captain Harvey of "Brunswick" was mortally wounded early in this action by langrage fire from "Vengeur", but refused to quit the deck, ordering more fire into his opponent. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/12525?docPos=3 Harvey, John] , "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography", J. K. Laughton, Retrieved 24 December 2007] "Brunswick" also managed to drive "Achille" off from her far side when the French ship attempted to intervene. "Achille", already damaged, was totally dismasted in the exchange and briefly surrendered, although her crew rescinded this when it became clear "Brunswick" was in no position to take possession. With her colours rehoisted, "Achille" then made what sail she could in an attempt to join Villaret to the north. It was not until 12:45 that the shattered "Vengeur" and "Brunswick" pulled apart, both largely dismasted and very battered. "Brunswick" was only able to return to the British side of the line after being supported by "Ramillies", while "Vengeur" was unable to move at all.Padfield, p. 37] "Ramillies" took "Vengeur's" surrender after a brief cannonade but was unable to board her and instead pursued the fleeing "Achille", which soon surrendered as well.

To the east, "Orion" and "Queen" forced the surrender of both "Northumberland" and "Jemmappes", although "Queen" was unable to secure "Jemmappes" and she had to be abandoned later. "Queen" especially was badly damaged and unable to make the British lines again, wallowing between the newly reformed French fleet and the British battleline along with several other shattered ships.Tracy, p. 99, "Biographical Memoir of Captain James Manderson" (Manderson served as a lieutenant aboard HMS "Queen")] "Royal George" and "Glory" had between them disabled "Scipion" and "Sans Pareil" in a bitter exchange, but were also too badly damaged themselves to take possession. All four ships were among those left drifting in the gap between the fleets.

French recovery

Villaret in "Montagne", having successfully broken contact with the British flagship and slipped away to the north, managed to gather 11 ships of the line around him and formed them up in a reconstituted battle squadron. At 11:30, with the main action drawing to a close, he began a recovery manoeuvre intended to lessen the tactical defeat his fleet had suffered. Aiming his new squadron at the battered "Queen", Villaret's attack created consternation in the British fleet, which was unprepared for a second engagement.Padfield, p. 38] However, discerning Villaret's intention, Howe also pulled his ships together to create a new force. His reformed squadron consisted of "Queen Charlotte", "Royal Sovereign", "Valiant", "Leviathan", "Barfleur" and "Thunderer".James, p. 151] Howe deployed this squadron in defence of "Queen", and the two short lines engaged one another at a distance before Villaret abandoned his manoeuvre and hauled off to collect several of his own dismasted ships that were endeavouring to escape British pursuit.Gardiner, p. 38] Villaret was subsequently joined by the battered "Terrible", which sailed straight through the dispersed British fleet to reach the French lines, and he also recovered the dismasted "Scipion", "Mucius", "Jemmappes" and "Républicain"—all of which lay within reach of the unengaged British ships—before turning eastwards towards France.James, p. 169] Several of these ships had already signified surrender by lowering their flags, only to re-hoist them once out of danger. This was a severe breach of the customs of naval warfare at the time and provoked outrage in the British naval establishment. (Woodman, p. 36)] At this stage of the battle, the septuagenarian Howe retired below and the British consolidation was left to his Captain of the Fleet, Sir Roger Curtis. Curtis was subsequently blamed by some in the Navy for not capturing more of the dismasted French ships, and was also accused of actively dissuading Howe from attempting further pursuit.

In fact, the British fleet was unable to pursue Villaret, having only 11 ships still capable of battle to the French 12, and having numerous dismasted ships and prizes to protect. Retiring and regrouping, the British crews set about making hasty repairs and securing their prizes; seven in total, including the badly damaged "Vengeur du Peuple". "Vengeur" had been holed by cannon firing from "Brunswick" directly through the ship's bottom, and after her surrender no British ship had managed to get men aboard. This left "Vengeur"'s few remaining unwounded crew to attempt to salvage what they could—a task made harder when some of her sailors broke into the spirit room and became drunk. Ultimately the ship's pumps became unmanageable, and "Vengeur" began to sink. Only the timely arrival of boats from the undamaged "Alfred" and HMS "Culloden", as well as the services of the cutter HMS "Rattler", saved any of the "Vengeur's" crew from drowning, these ships taking off nearly 500 sailors between them.Gardiner, p. 33] Lieutenant John Winne of "Rattler" was especially commended for this hazardous work.James, p. 164] By 18:15, "Vengeur" was clearly beyond salvage and only the very worst of the wounded, the dead and the drunk remained aboard. Several sailors are said to have waved the tricolour from the bow of the ship and cried "Vive la Nation, vive la République!" [The arguments surrounding the accounts of the final minutes of "Vengeur du Peuple" have been extensive and bitter. Sources based on French accounts report the story as a patriotic gesture, (Williams, p. 381) mainly arising from an account of the action made to the French National Convention in a celebrated speech by Bertrand Barrère. ( [http://www.bartleby.com/268/7/28.html On the Heroism of "Vengeur's" sailors] , 9 July 1794 "The World's Famous Orations", Retrieved 29 May 2008) Lord Howe however debunks the account entirely, claiming that it never occurred (Tracy, p. 95), a position followed by many British sources (Jane, p. 95). Some interesting light is thrown on this story by Thomas Carlyle, who originally included the legend in his history of the French Revolution. When Admiral John Griffiths – who, as a lieutenant on HMS "Culloden" at the time, had been an eyewitness to the sinking – publically challenged Carlyle's tale, dismissing both Barrère's version of the tale and Carlyle's own poetic license, Carlyle set out to get to the bottom of the story, eventually unearthing the official report of "Vengeur's" captain Renaudin. Carlyle concluded that Barrère had concocted a "cunningly devised fable", and changed his account of the sinking of the Vengeur in subsequent editions. ( [http://carlyleletters.dukejournals.org/cgi/content/full/10/1/lt-18381210-TC-MRI-01# Letter to Mary Rich] , 10 December 1838 "The Carlyle Letters", Retrieved 29 May 2008) William James provides an alternative theory when he suggests that any person who behaved in such a manner on the stricken ship was acting under the influence of alcohol. (James, p. 164). In his "Histoire de la Marine française" Claude Farrère attributes the sinking to failure of the crew to close damaged lower gunports, claims that a good part of the crew evacuated the ship, and describes the patriotic cries as those of wounded men trapped on the sinking ship with no hope of rescue. (Farrère, p. 271)]

Having escaped to the east, Villaret made what sail his battered fleet could muster to return to France, and dispatched his frigates in search of the convoy. Villaret was also hoping for reinforcements; eight ships of the line, commanded by Admiral Pierre-François Cornic, were patrolling near the Ushant headland. Behind him to the west, the British took the whole night to secure their ships and prizes, not setting out to return to Britain until 05:00 on 2 June.

Casualties in the battle are notoriously hard to calculate exactly.French losses have been estimated by various commentators and historians with some variation: N.A.M. Rodger gives 4,200 casualties and 3,300 captured; (Rodger, p. 430) Digby Smith gives 4,270 casualties and 3,254 captured; (Smith, p. 83) Padfield lists 3,500 casualties; (Padfield, p. 39) Gardiner 3,500 casualties and the same number captured. (Gardiner, p. 38) Saint-André gave 3,000 killed and wounded in his official dispatch and James assesses total French killed, wounded and captured as no fewer than 7,000. (James, p. 153) British casualty returns are easier to establish due to surviving records although there are discrepancies here too. The official total was 287 killed and 811 wounded during the campaign, whilst the individual ship totals listed in James do not add up to his eventual total of 1,148, coming in slightly under this figure. (James, p. 152) Most sources agree however that the total casualty figure is approximately 1,200.] With only one exception aboard "Scipion", records made by the French captains of their losses at the time are incomplete. The only immediately available casualty counts are the sketchy reports of Saint-André and the records made by British officers aboard the captured ships, neither of which can be treated as completely reliable.James, p. 153] Most sources accept that French casualties in the campaign numbered approximately 7,000, including around 3,000 captured, but these figures are vague and frequently do not agree with each other on details. [As an example of this, the losses sustained aboard the sinking "Vengeur" have been variously reported as "very low besides the badly wounded", (James, p. 164) 150 survivors, (Gardiner, p. 33) and "over 600 drowned". (Tracy, p. 106)] British casualties are easier to confirm but here too there are some discrepancies; overall British casualties are generally given as around 1,200.

The convoy arrives

With a large portion of his fleet no longer battleworthy, Howe was unable to resume his search for the French convoy in the Bay of Biscay. The Admiralty, though unaware of Howe's specific circumstances, knew a battle had taken place through the arrival of HMS "Audacious" in Portsmouth, and was preparing a second expedition under George Montagu. Montagu had returned to England after his unsuccessful May cruise, and was refitting in Portsmouth when ordered to sea again. His force of ten ships was intended to both cover Howe's withdrawal from Biscay, and find and attack the French grain convoy. Montagu returned to sea on 3 June, and by 8 June was off Ushant searching for signs of either the French or Howe; unknown to him, neither had yet entered European waters. At 15:30 on 8 June Montagu spotted sails, and soon identified them as the enemy. He had located Cornic's squadron, which was also patrolling for the convoy and the returning fleets. Montagu gave chase and drove Cornic into Bertheaume Bay, where he blockaded the French squadron overnight, hoping to bring them to action the following day.James, p. 171] However, on 9 June, Montagu sighted 19 French ships appearing from the west—the remnants of Villaret's fleet. Hastily turning his ships, Montagu sailed south to avoid becoming trapped between two forces which might easily overwhelm him.Williams, p. 382] Villaret and Cornic gave chase for a day before turning east towards the safety of the French ports.

Howe benefited from Montagu's withdrawal, as his own battered fleet passed close to the scene of this stand-off on 10 June, pushing north into the English Channel. With Villaret and Cornic fortuitously pursuing Montagu to the south, Howe was free to pass Ushant without difficulty and arrived off Plymouth on 12 June, joined soon afterwards by Montagu. Villaret had anchored with Cornic in Bertheaume Bay the day before, but Saint-André refused to allow him to enter Brest until the republican attitudes of the town's population had been assessed. On 12 June, the convoy from America finally arrived off France, having lost just one ship in passage during a storm.James, p. 172]

Aftermath

Both Britain and France claimed victory in the battle: Britain by virtue of capturing or sinking seven French ships without losing any of her own and remaining in control of the battle site; France because the vital convoy had passed through the Atlantic unharmed and arrived in France without significant loss. The two fleets were showered by their respective nations with both praise and criticism—the latter particularly directed at those captains not felt to have contributed significantly to the fighting.James, p. 173] The British fleet in Spithead was treated with a Royal visit by King George III and the entire royal household.Tracy, p. 99, "The Biographical memoir of Lord Howe"]

France

In France the revolutionary principles of " _fr. égalité" precluded extensive awards, but Villaret was promoted to vice-admiral and other minor awards were distributed to the admirals of the fleet. In addition the fleet's officers took part in a celebratory parade from Brest to Paris, accompanying the recently arrived food supplies. Opinion in France concerning the battle's outcome was divided; while many celebrated Saint-André's exaggerated accounts of victory in "Le Moniteur", senior naval officers disagreed.James, p. 174] Among the dissenters was the highly experienced but recently dismissed Admiral Kerguelen. Kerguelen was disgusted by Villaret's failure to renew the battle after he had reformed his squadron, and felt that the French fleet could have been successful tactically as well as strategically if only Villaret had made greater efforts to engage the remains of Howe's fleet.James, p. 175] The French Navy had suffered its worst losses in a single day since the Battle of La Hogue in 1692.

Ultimately the revolutionary excesses of the period would prove disastrous for the French Navy. Poor leadership, conflicting and arbitrary orders and the decimation of the experienced seamen in the ranks promoted a negative attitude in the French officer corps. The French battlefleet did not contest British dominance in Northern European waters again, and their raiding operations repeatedly ended in failure at the hands of more confident British squadrons and the unforgiving Atlantic weather. By 1805, when the last great French fleet to take to the sea was crushed at the Battle of Trafalgar, poor training and low investment in the Navy had reduced its efficiency to levels unthinkable 20 years earlier.Padfield, p. 163]

Britain

In Britain, numerous honours were bestowed on the fleet and its commanders. Admiral Howe, already an earl, refused any further elevation, and King George III was dissuaded from making him a Knight of the Garter by one of Howe's political opponents. Vice-Admiral Graves was elevated to the Peerage of Ireland as Baron Graves, while Vice-Admiral Hood was made Viscount Bridport. [The title Viscount Hood was already in use as the title of his cousin, Admiral Samuel Hood, 1st Viscount Hood.] Rear-Admirals Bowyer, Gardner, Pasley and Curtis (the last-named was promoted from Captain on 4 July 1794) were all made baronets, and Bowyer and Pasley also received pensions of £1,000 a year to compensate them for their severe wounds.James, p. 179] All first lieutenants were promoted to commander and numerous other officers were promoted in consequence of their actions. The thanks of parliament were unanimously passed to all who fought at the action and various other gifts and awards were distributed among the fleet. A memorial to Captains John Hutt and John Harvey, both of whom had died of their wounds on 30 June, was raised in Westminster Abbey.

There was, however, a bitter consequence of the awards, rooted in Howe's official dispatch to the Admiralty concerning the battle, which according to some accounts was actually written by Curtis. Howe had appended a list to his report containing the names of officers whom he believed merited special reward for their part in the battle. The list included Vice-Admirals Graves and Hood, Rear-Admirals Bowyer, Gardner and Pasley, Captains Seymour, Pakenham, Cranfield-Berkeley, Gambier, John Harvey, Payne, Henry Harvey, Pringle, Duckworth, Elphinstone, Nichols and Hope. Also mentioned were Lieutenants Monkton and Donnelly.James, p. 181] The list had omitted a number of officers who had served in the battle, and the justice of their omission was a highly controversial issue in the Navy.Tracy, p. 90] Rear-Admiral Caldwell was the sole British flag officer present not to receive a hereditary honour, although he was promoted to Vice-Admiral on 4 July (as were Bowyer and Gardner). After studying the ship's logs and reports of the battle, the Admiralty minted a medal to be awarded to the living captains on the list only (although Captain William Parker of HMS "Audacious" was awarded one as well). The captains excluded from the list were furious, and the furore from this selective commendation lasted years: in 1795 Vice-Admiral Caldwell quit the service in anger as a result, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/4383 Caldwell, Sir Benjamin] , "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography", J. K. Laughton, Retrieved 08 December 2007] while Cuthbert Collingwood, flag captain of "Barfleur", refused all awards for future service until the Glorious First of June medal was presented to him as well. He eventually received it after the Battle of Cape St Vincent in 1797. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/5930?docPos=1 Collingwood, Cuthbert] , "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography", C. H. H. Owen, Retrieved 31 December 2007 ]

Bitterest of all was the whispering campaign directed at Anthony Molloy, captain of HMS "Caesar". Molloy was accused of cowardice by fellow officers for his failure to follow Howe's orders on both 29 May and 1 June. Requesting an official court-martial to clear his name, Molloy's legal bid failed, and although his personal courage was not called into question, his professional ability was.Gardiner, p. 39] Molloy was dismissed from his ship, a punishment which effectively fired him from the Navy.

Of the captured ships, several enjoyed long careers in the Royal Navy, in particular the two 80-gun ships HMS "Sans Pareil" which was decommissioned in 1802 but not broken up until 1842, and HMS "Juste", which was a popular command until her decommissioning in 1802 at the Peace of Amiens.Gardiner, p. 41] Of the four 74-gun prizes, "Achille" and "Northumberland" (both 74s built in the late 1770s) were broken up as unserviceable soon after arrival in Britain, while "Impétueux" was destroyed in a dockyard fire on 24 August 1794 while undergoing repairs. "America", the final prize, was taken into the Royal Navy as HMS "America" but renamed HMS "Impetueux" in July 1795 and remained in service until 1813.Gardiner, p. 40]

Notes

References

*cite book
last = Farrère
first = Claude
authorlink = Claude Farrère
year = 1956
chapter = Chapitre IX: Révolution française
title = Histoire de la Marine française
publisher = Flammarion
location = Paris
id =
*cite book
last = Gardiner
first = Robert
authorlink =
year = 2001
origyear = 1996
chapter = The Glorious First of June
title = Fleet Battle and Blockade: The French Revolutionary War, 1793-1797
publisher = Chatham
location = London
isbn = 1861760183
oclc = 36666951
*cite book
last = James
first = William
authorlink = William James (naval historian)
year = 2002
origyear = 1827
chapter =
title = The Naval History of Great Britain, Volume 1, 1793-1796
publisher = Conway Maritime Press
location = London
isbn = 0851779050
oclc = 165702223
*cite book
last = Jane
first = Fred T.
authorlink = Fred T. Jane
year = 1997
origyear = 1912
chapter =
title = The British Battle-Fleet
publisher = Conway Maritime Press
location = London
isbn = 0851777236
oclc = 163816462
*cite book
last = Padfield
first = Peter
authorlink =
year = 2000
origyear = 1976
chapter =
title = Nelson's War
publisher = Wordsworth Military Library
location = Ware
isbn = 1840222255
oclc = 43500487
*cite book
last = Rodger
first = Nicholas A. M.
authorlink = Nicholas Rodger
year = 2004
chapter =
title = The Command of the Ocean
publisher = Allan Lane
location = London
isbn = 0713994118
oclc = 43500487
*cite book
last = Smith
first = Digby
authorlink =
year = 1998
chapter =
title = The Napoleonic Wars Data Book
publisher = Greenhill Books
location =
isbn = 1853672769
oclc = 231766509
*cite book
last = Tracy
first = Ed. Nicholas
authorlink =
year = 1998
chapter =
title = The Naval Chronicle, Volume 1, 1793-1798
publisher = Chatham
location = London
isbn = 1861760914
oclc = 60158681
*cite book
last = Williams
first = Ed. Henry Smith
authorlink =
year = 1907
chapter =
title = History of France, 1715–1815
publisher = The Times
location =
id =
*cite book
last = Winfield
first = Rif
authorlink =
year = 2008
origyear = 2005
chapter =
title = British Warships in the Age of Sail; 1793 - 1817
publisher = Seaforth Publishing
location = Barnsley
isbn = 9781844157006
oclc = 216617748
*cite book
last = Woodman
first = Richard
authorlink =
year = 2001
chapter =
title = The Sea Warriors
publisher = Constable Publishers
location = London
isbn = 1841191833
oclc = 231895733