YACHTS IN THE SOLENT

“The _Mistletoe_ crept along like a snail, For the wind scarce bellied a single sail; The steamer was going at sixteen knots, For the Queen was dying to see her Scots; And several lubbers of high degree Were on her bridge, but they didn’t see That they’d sealed the helpless _Mistletoe’s_ fate, If they kept their course at such a rate. Oh! the _Mistletoe_ bow!” ‘_Edward the Seventh._’

By the year 1875 the Queen was fairly happy in her family and quite happy in her state relationships; indeed, she was more at peace than she had been for a long time. Then into the midst of her content came a bolt from the blue, at least so it seemed, though the real cause was her royal--royal is not quite the right word, however--appreciation of her dignity, which allowed her to place herself above all law and rule.

When she drove or when she was on the sea she demanded speed, speed, and yet more speed, and she could not conceive the right of any one to stand in her way. In the first years of her reign she rode at a gallop through the roads and parks; on her first visit to Edinburgh her cortège dashed through the streets at a gallop, to the anger of the inhabitants; in 1848 her yacht _Fairy_ was bearing her over the Solent at its greatest speed, when it ran down a boat full of people, four of whom were drowned. Now, twenty-seven years later, the thing occurred again. In the first accident the yacht’s commander was Lord Adolphus Fitzclarence, son of William IV and Dorothy Jordan; in the second Prince Leiningen, son of Victoria’s half-sister Féodore, was the responsible person, his under officer being a Captain Welsh.

During August each year the Solent became the happy sailing ground for little vessels. A Mr. E. S. Heywood, a visitor to Ryde with his wife and her sisters had, with the latter, the two Misses Peel, been for a two days’ cruise on his schooner yacht. A rule of the sea provides that a steamer gives place to a sailing vessel when on the starboard tack, for obvious reasons, and Heywood’s ship, the _Mistletoe_, was keeping steadily but slowly, for there was no wind, on its course, when the Queen’s yacht, the _Alberta_, was seen to be coming towards them at the rate of sixteen or seventeen knots an hour. No one dreamed of an accident, but Prince Leiningen--if he was anything but a mere figurehead--evidently thought the yacht would save itself somehow, and did not attempt to alter his ship’s course until he was within twenty yards of the _Mistletoe_. The latter boat tried, too late, to avert collision, and it was rammed nearly amidships.

Commander Fullerton of the _Alberta_ and some sailors plunged into the sea to save people, but Leiningen at once ordered his vessel to be backed, which caused the _Mistletoe_ to sink in three minutes. He did this, he said, to prevent spars falling upon the _Alberta_, and so even when the accident had happened, lives which might have been saved were lost unnecessarily, for the sinking of the _Mistletoe_ caused the very thing which the thoughtless German wished to avoid, in that it dragged the mainmast and rigging across the _Alberta’s_ bowsprit. These in their fall carried Miss Peel, the master, and Captain Fullerton down with the vessel. Fullerton rose at once, the master was picked up in a drowning state and died in half an hour; Miss Peel’s body was found entangled in the rigging; a dead sailor was also picked up some days later, and two others were injured.

Victoria stood on the bridge of the _Alberta_, wringing her hands, through this dreadful scene, and--as was expressly stated in the papers--giving orders that every effort should be made to save the persons on board! but Captain Fullerton and the sailors who plunged did not wait for orders, royal or otherwise. The reports also laid great stress upon the fact that her Majesty spoke to the Miss Peel who was saved and made constant inquiries after the injured, and that on reaching Gosport she gave orders that no efforts were to be spared on behalf of the sufferers, and every attention was to be paid to their wants. Had she not done so it would have been monstrous, but to report such natural acts was to reduce a tragedy to the limits of the Court Circular.

The _Alberta_ was half an hour late in arriving at Gosport, where anxiety was felt for its safety, so punctual was the Queen, and when it drew up in Clarence Yard it was noted that its bowsprit was carried away and the bows broken. The royal family immediately went to the train, but her Majesty was very anxious and dubious about starting, as she feared that, the train being behind time, some accident might happen. However, she was assured that a late train was always looked for more anxiously than one running punctually, and that every precaution would be taken.[16]

This accident made a great sensation, which recurred for months, revived by Coroners, Admiralty and Parliamentary Inquiries. But the sensation was not so much horror at the accident--accidents had happened before--but horror at the indifference shown publicly by the Queen. Never once was a word or sign allowed to reach her people that she felt sorrow or wished to make reparation. She rode over her subjects and passed on to the north, and papers reported the ordinary, trivial occurrences taking place which were usual at Balmoral. She may have been prostrated with grief, her nerves may have been shaken to pieces; if so, no one heard of it, and she was judged according to what people knew. Her only activity was displayed in trying to save her servants from blame and in endeavouring to fasten the fault upon the victims of the disaster.

There were several coroner’s inquests, but information about one will suffice, though in all attempts were made to suppress free disclosures. Leiningen was called as a witness at the first, and refused to answer a question until he had read aloud a letter he had received from his queen-aunt, which frankly condoled with him in this trouble and expressed her Majesty’s thorough confidence in his ability and carefulness. It was evidently intended to impress coroner and jury in his favour.

Yet he had to admit that the _Alberta_ was going at a speed which was dangerous in so crowded a sea, that it was an unbreakable rule that a steamer must give way to a sailing vessel on the starboard tack, and that had the _Alberta’s_ helm been put to starboard she would have passed at the stern of the _Mistletoe_; also that no order was given to alter the _Alberta’s_ course until she was within fifteen or twenty yards of the yacht. One of the quartermasters declared that the _Alberta_ had got into such a position that she would have run the schooner down in any case.

The commander of the _Victoria and Albert_, which was following the _Alberta_, gave curious evidence. He spoke of “the speed at which the royal yachts are obliged to go,” and on being questioned as to his meaning, replied--

“Her Majesty, having the fastest yachts built for the special purpose of passing to her residence at the Isle of Wight, she is desirous to make the passage as rapidly as possible. The officers conducting the royal yacht were at the same time to take every precaution to ensure the safety of the vessel at the speed at which it may be travelling. It is the wish of her Majesty to travel fast. I do not wish to convey the meaning that royal yachts are to run over everything to oblige others to give way. Every care is taken. They are built fast, and what does the Queen have fast vessels for--surely not to travel at four miles an hour! Sixteen knots is the usual speed, or faster if they can go. It is like a railway train. If a man steps on the line just in front of the train the driver could not prevent an accident.”

Such a statement showed the perversity of reasoning which justified the matter to the royal servants; for the only likeness between the yacht and the train was in the use of steam, the train having no liberty of movement. But beyond that was the absolute belief that if the Queen wished to make the Solent and the bays near Ryde dangerous she had a perfect right to do so.

One juror tried to get a definite opinion from Mr. Heywood, who had been picked up nearly drowned, as to where the blame lay, and turning to the coroner, the latter asked--

“Is it fair for me to say that I think the greatest blame attaches to those on board her Majesty’s yacht?”

The coroner decided that it was unfair.

It was declared in Parliament, in April 1875, that one of the jurors was a friend of Captain Welsh, and the other was so dependent on the dockyard that he did not dare to agree in a verdict hostile to the officers. It was further asserted that an officer called on the coroner and urged the inclusion of these two men on the jury. Whether this was true or not, the two men stood out against the verdict of manslaughter brought in by the other ten, and the jury had to be dismissed. The second jury, knowing what was required, brought it in as accident, adding that the officers of the royal yacht ordered excessive speed, and that their watch was ill kept. On leaving the court at the end of the inquest the officers were mobbed by an excited crowd and had to be given police protection.

The Admiralty Court of Inquiry was held in camera, the only thing known by the public being that Leiningen was pronounced blameless and Welsh was reprimanded. At once the angry people declared Victoria had taken means to protect her nephew. Certainly the relationship had stood him in good stead.

The Queen was injudicious enough to have a letter sent directly after the Gosport verdict to Lord Exeter, President of the Royal Victoria Yacht Club at Cowes, which ran as follows--

“It has appeared in the course of the recent inquiry at Gosport that it is a common practice for private yachts to approach the royal yacht when her Majesty is on board, from motives of loyalty or curiosity. It is evident that such a proceeding must at all times be attended with considerable risks, and in summer, when the Solent is crowded with vessels, such manœuvres are extra dangerous. The Queen has therefore commanded me to request that you will kindly assist her Majesty in making it known to all owners of yachts how earnestly the Queen hopes that this practice, which may lead to lamentable results, should be discontinued.”

This letter further inflamed feeling against the Queen, for it was taken to mean that she blamed Mr. Heywood, though it had been shown that he and his party were at tea in the saloon until there was a cry of danger and were not royalty-hunting. It was also taken to mean that Victoria did not intend to lessen her speed. The members of the club were furious and instructed their secretary to reply that, in the opinion of the club, “the royal yachts in the Solent violated without restraint the ordinary rules of navigation.”

_Punch_ apologized for the Queen’s letter by saying that half of it had been lost, and that in the missing part the Queen had commanded General Ponsonby to remind all officers of her ships to keep a careful look-out, and never under any circumstances to go at excessive speed. Above all, it was to be borne in mind that the maritime rule of the road between steam and sailing vessels admitted of no exception, whatever be the dignity of the flag or the rank of the passenger on board the steamer.

It was stated that Victoria had compensated the widows of the drowned men, and it is impossible not to hope earnestly that it was so, for she had great sympathy with those who lost by death. The newspapers asserted, however, that it was not true, that she had not given a penny, but that it was the Admiralty which had allotted £400 to one and £500 to the other, on condition that these terms were accepted as a full discharge of all claims. Heywood, it was said, had set an example of patience, self-control and personal liberality which put royalty and officialdom to the blush, for he had paid his crew their wages in full and had compensated them for their losses. He received £3000 from the Admiralty, which could not, however, have compensated him for the loss of his schooner. One outspoken paper asked the following questions: “Has the Queen sent Heywood a cheque for the loss of his yacht? Has she given the crew a single sixpence? Has she done what would have been more queenly still, ordered a new yacht for Mr. Heywood? Has she given orders that the speed of her yacht should be lessened? Has she reprimanded her officers? She has done none of these things, but has done what would influence a verdict and has insulted the subject who has been so generously forbearing.”

Very bitter was the feeling against the Queen--a bitterness caused by her resolute silence, by her refusal to acknowledge that she or those about her could be wrong, and the indirect attempt to put blame on other shoulders. It all came back to the old cause of dissension between her and her people, the difference in the point of view concerning what was royal, the difference between the German view and the English, the difference between the sovereign who felt personally above law, and the ideal sovereign who was the proud upholder of law in every way to her people.