||On the 2nd Nov. 1704 the House of Commons voted an address to the Queen
for a bounty to the Seamen and Land Forces who had behaved themselves so
gallantly in the late actions (C.J. XIV, 394). The provision for the naval part of
this bounty was contained in the appropriation clause of the Two Thirds Subsidy
Act (3-4 Anne c. 3) which passed the Commons on the 22 Feb. 1704-5 though it
did not receive the royal assent until the 14th of March following. This naval
bounty included the Marines for their services at Gibraltar.
The earliest Marine Regiment was the Duke of York's Maritime Regiment of Foot
which was instituted by Order in Council of 28 Oct. 1664. On the Duke of York's
accession as James II the Regiment was styled Prince George of Denmark's
Maritime Regiment. It was disbanded 28 Feb. 1688-9, being in reality a garrison
rather than a sea service Regiment.
In its place two Regiments of Marines were established by the Establishment of
31 Jan. 1689-90 to consist of 3000 men each, the First under Arthur, Earl of
Torrington and the Second under Thomas, Earl of Pembroke.
In Dec. 1690 the Marquess of Carmarthen succeeded to the command of the First
Regiment, whilst the command of the Second Regiment passed successively to
Henry Killigrew (1 Jan. 1691), John, Lord Berkeley of Stratton (1 Dec. 1693) and
Sir C. Shovell (1 Mar. 1697). These two old or original Marine Regiments were not
at first involved in the Disbandment of 1697, not being on the Establishment of the
Land Forces. Indeed three other Regiments were temporarily saved from the Disbandment
by being added to them by the order of 31 July 1697. By this order the
Regiments of Col. William Seymour, Col. Edward Dutton Colt and Col. Henry
Mordaunt were put upon the Navy Establishment as new Marine Regiments. A
new Establishment of these three Marine Regiments was signed by the King on the
18th July 1698 to date as from the 1st August 1698 and at the same time by the same
Establishment a fourth additional Regiment was established viz. that of Thomas
Brudenell. (Tr. Cal. XIII p. 394. Treasury Board Papers LV, 2.) This last
Regiment was to incorporate the 2 existing Marine Regiments of Carmarthen and
Shovell which were ordered to be disbanded at the same time. Accordingly the
1st Regiment (Carmarthen's) was broken 8 Sept. 1698 and the 2nd (Shovell's) was
broken 30 Sept. 1698. For the Establishment of their Officers' Half pay see Tr.
Cal. XIII, p. 445.
This new force of 4 Marine Regiments did not continue in existence for even a
twelvemonth. It was regarded by the House of Commons as an effort on the part of
the Administration to save three Foot Regiments from the Disbandment programme
and in the debate in Committee which took place in Feb. 1698-9 on the state of the
Navy a hostile vote was taken on the subject of the Marines. On the 18th of that
month the House voted by 187 to 178 to agree with its Committee that the total
number of men for the Navy should be 15,000 and that these should consist of seamen
only (C.J. XII, p. 518. Lutterell IV, 479, 484). This vote sealed the fate of the four
Marine Regiments. By the Land Tax Act of 9 Wm. III c. 10 the House provided
250,000l. for paying off the Regiments, &c., of Horse, Dragoons, Foot and Marines
disbanded or to be disbanded. The order for the disbandment of the Marines was
issued on the 5 May 1699. The 4 Regiments were to cease to exist as from the 20th
of that month. The list of Half pay for the Reformed Officers of these Regiments
and of the two old Marine Regiments is dated 16 April 1700 and is printed in Tr.
Cal. XV, pp. 320, 452-3.
On the renewed outbreak of war six new Marine Regiments were constituted
under Colonels Henry Holt, Henry Mordaunt, George Villiers, Thomas Saunderson,
Edward Fox and Viscount Shannon, with pay to commence as from 20 April 1702
for the privates though they were not mustered full till the 24th August. A new
Establishment for them was signed on the 25 Dec. 1703 (Treasury Board Papers
XC, No. 63). At the time of the capture of Gibraltar these six Regiments were under
the command of Brigadier William Seymour (as succeeding Mordaunt), Alexander
Lutterell (as succeeding Villiers), Holt, Fox, Saunderson and Shannon, as will be
For the purpose of pay and accountancy the earliest Maritime Regiment of the
Duke of York had been on the Army Establishment but all the subsequent Marine
Regiments were on the Navy Establishment. Their pay was issued to their Agents
by Navy bills imprested on the Navy Treasurer by the Navy Commissioners (see
Wm. III's decision to this effect in Jan. 1690-1 Treasury Cal. IX, p. 986) and either
explicitly or implicitly the Navy estimates included a sum for the Marines (see
Commons Journals XI, pp. 6, 180, 363, 575) or for the half pay Marine Officers after
Quite distinct from the Navy Establishment Marines, from 1702 onwards another
related body makes its appearance. This body was styled generally men for
service on board the Fleet or Regiments for Sea Service and they formed part of the
Establishment of Guards and Garrisons. They were in effect an Expeditionary
or Descent Force as distinct from the line Regiments in Flanders or Spain. From
1702 onwards the Vote for Guards and Garrisons included a sum (usually 87,125l.
10s. 0d.) for a body of 5000 men to serve on board the Fleet (C.J. XIII, p. 715,
XIV, p. 11). The estimates for 1704 specifically provided for 5000 Marines as
part of the Navy vote and for a separate body of 5000 men to serve on board the
Fleet as part of the vote for Guards and Garrisons (25 Nov. 1703). In the
estimates for 1705 the Navy Marines were increased to 8000 and to the 5000 men to
serve on board the Fleet under the Guards and Garrisons vote were added an
additional 5000 at a separate estimate of 98,969l. (C.J. XIV, p. 424, 16 Nov. 1704).
The origin of this curious bifurcation of the Marine Forces as between the Navy
and the Army cannot be explained from the Journals of the House of Commons.
But light is thrown upon it by Luttrell. Under date 28 Jan. 1701-2 he states
that the discourse about town was that 10,000 English Troops and 6000 Dutch were
to be on board the Fleet to make descents upon the French Coasts as they see
convenient (Luttrell V, 135). He adds that it was further rumoured that 2 Marine
Regiments were to be raised, one to be commanded by the Lord Admiral, the other
by the Marquess of Carmarthen.
Five days later on the 2nd Feb. he preserves an entry of proceedings in Committee
of Supply which is not given at all in the Journals of the House. This entry
is as follows :
"Mr. Secretary Vernon moved the House by his Majesty's order for
10,000 Marines, which they immediately took into consideration and
granted the same : whereof 5000 of them are to be taken out of the
40,000 seamen already voted and the other 5000 to be raised : so
that there will be 35,000 seamen and 10,000 marines for this year's
service." Ibid., p. 137.
In the Journals of the House the formal Resolution on the following day
(Feb. 3) upon report from Committee was as follows :
Resolved that 352,000l. be granted to his Majesty for the maintaining
of Guards and Garrisons anno 1702 including 5000 men to serve on
board the Fleet
and that an humble address be presented to his Majesty that he will
be graciously pleased to interpose with his Allies that they may
increase their quotas of Land Forces to be put on board the Fleet
in proportion to the numbers his Majesty shall have on board his
Fleet. (C.J. XIII, p. 715).
The motive for this arrangement was primarily one of economy. The 5000
Land Forces for the Fleet were to cost 87,125l. 10s. 0d. which was to be taken out
of the Vote for Guards and Garrisons.
The cost of the remaining 5000 men was not voted as they were to be similarly
taken out of the Navy Vote which had already passed.
Although therefore this composite "Descent" Force of 10,000 men on board
the Fleet is spoken of in the Treasury Records as if it were one single body it really
represented two separate accounts for two different halves. The Land Force
contingent of 5000 men was charged to the 87,125l. 10s. 0d. part of the Guards and
Garrisons Vote and the Navy Contingent of 5000 men was not provided for separately
by the Treasury. It ran along with and formed part of the Navy Vote and accounts.
The Naval contingent produced the Marine Regiments which began to be raised in
the following April as noted above : whilst the Land Force contingent remained as
a yearly feature of the Guards and Garrisons Establishment from 1702 onwards.
The sequence of these Sea Service Regiments on the Army (Guards and Garrisons)
Establishment (87,125l. 10s. 0d. vote) from 1702 is as follows :
1702 six Regiments new raised.
Col. Thomas Farrington.
Earl of Huntingdon.
Sir Richard Temple.
1703 (87,125l. 10s. 0d. vote).
Robert, Lord Lucas (afterwards Hans Hamilton).
William, Visct. Charlemont.
Arthur, Earl of Donegal.
Ventris Columbine (afterwards James Rivers).
1704 (87,125l. 10s. 0d. vote).
1705 (87,125l. 10s. 0d. vote for 5000 men).
Handasyde as above.
(98,969l. 10s. 0d. Vote for 5000 additional men).
From the point of view of Departmental accountancy this double headed body
of (Navy) Marine Regiments and (Army) Sea Service Regiments presented
formidable difficulties. For the Navy Marines the issue of money as already stated
was made through the Navy Treasurer by warrant from the Lord High Treasurer
to the Navy Commissioners for making forth bills on the Navy Treasurer. In the
case of the Land Force men for sea service the Lord High Treasurer issued moneys
to the Paymaster General of Guards and Garrisons. A further complication arose
from the Disbandment of 1697. The moneys for the disbandment arrears to the
Navy Establishment Marines were issued to the Earl of Ranelagh as Paymaster
General of the Land Forces and he in turn paid money to the Treasurer of the Navy
or clearing the Marine Officers and men. (See one instance in Tr. Cal. XV, p. 240).
On the accession of Anne a separate Paymaster, of Marines was appointed and
from the 10th March 1701-2, Walter Whitfield accompted regularly as the Marines'
Paymaster and accounting officer but only for the Navy Establishment contingent
or Marines proper. His account was fed or put in charge not directly from the
Exchequer but by imprests from the Navy Treasurer. (See Treasury Calendar
XVIII, p. 179).
From the date of the succeeding Marine Establishment of 25 Dec. 1703 the
Marines were put under the control of Prince George of Denmark in accordance
with the Queen's Instructions for the better Government of the Marine Regiments.
But as Prince George was not merely Lord High Admiral but also Generalissimo
of her Majesty's Forces by sea and land the position was as ill defined as before.
The Sea Service Regiments which were on the Establishment of Guards and
Garrisons (such as went to Cadiz in 1702 and to the West Indies in 1703
viz. Donegal's, Charlemont's, Erle's and Hamilton's) continued to be furnished with
subsistence direct from the Paymaster General of Guards and Garrisons. The Lord
Treasurer issued money to the Paymaster General of the Guards and Garrisons and
he in turn paid the subsistence money for the Sea Service Regiments to the
Regimental Agent in London for him to remit by exchange just as was done for the
Independent Companies of Foot in New York or in Barbados or any other
Plantation. (See Ibid., pp. 102, 188, 223, 251).
For the year here in question viz. 1704, the Regiments employed for service at
sea were (in the West Indies) Handasyde's, Livesay's, Whetham's representing
5000 men provided for out of the total vote for Guards and Garrisons and the
Regiments of James Rivers and Lord Lucas (the latter replaced by Lord Paston)
and Col. Heyman Rooke representing the 5000 additional men for sea service
provided for by the special vote out of the 25 per cent. Duty on French Goods.
To this inextricable confusion of accounting there was added the enormous
difficulty of obtaining satisfactory returns of muster rolls. The Marines were
shipped on board the fleet without regard to regimental units. This will be apparent
at a glance from the list of the Marines shipped on board Rooke's fleet which
captured Gibraltar. See below. Furthermore, just as the detachments were
shipped and sent out in driblets, regardless of Company formation, so also they
were brought home in driblets at different times from different parts of the earth
or sea. It was for this reason that the disbandment of the years 1698 and 1699
was so protracted and difficult.
On two occasions the House of Commons had to consider this matter. By clause
51 of the Mutiny Act of 1703 (2-3 Anne c. 17) Parliament empowered the Treasury
under authority of the Queen's sign manual to pay the 10,000 Marines until 25
Dec. 1703 even in the absence of muster rolls ("if destitute of muster rolls ...
such sums as the Treasury Lords shall think reasonable for clearing the said
Regiments and Companies to the said date.")
The second occasion concerned the employment of the Marines in the capture of
Gibraltar and in garrison there. The Act of 4-5 Anne c. 12 (an Act for paying and
clearing several Regiments) had been introduced primarily for providing for the pay
of Lieut. Gen. William Stewart's Regiment of Foot which had been captured in
Portugal at Castello De Vide in June 1704 and Col. John Hill's Regiment of Foot
which had been captured similarly at Portalegre in May 1704 both which Regiments
had been kept prisoners in Spain a twelvemonth or so. But when the bill was
under consideration on the 25th Jan. 1705-6 (C.J. XV, 112) the committee for the
bill was instructed to receive a clause in behalf the Marine Companies which were at
Gibraltar viz. Col. Seymour's, Lord Shannon's, Col. Borr's [Fox's] and Col. Holt's.
Accordingly the Act authorises the Queen to give warrant for paying Holt's
Regiment of Marines from 25 Aug. 1704 to 24 Dec. 1705 because the Regiment or
most of them in 1704 had not been regularly mustered by reason of disputes
arising between the Commanding Officers at Gibraltar and other accidents.
The Marines actually on board Sir George Rooke's squadron which captured
Gibraltar were as follows :
3 April 1704 Marines on board the ships which sailed with Sir George Rooke.
59 men of Major Purcell's Company (Seymour's Regiment) : on board
the Royal Katherine.
52 men of Capt. Kempenfelt's Company (Seymour's Regiment) : on board
59 men of Capt. Bissett's Company (Seymour's Regiment) : on board
48 men of Brigadier Seymour's Company (Seymour's Regiment) : on
board the Antelope.
60 men of Lieut. Col. Rooke's Company (Seymour's Regiment) : on
board the Kent.
15 men of Capt. Hodge's Company ; 11 men of Capt. Adams' Company ;
4 men of Capt. Docton's Company ; 1 man of Capt. Piggott's Company ;
1 man of Capt. Warr's Company ; and 4 men of Capt.
Devereux's Company (Lutterell's Regiment) : on board the Expedition.
40 men of Capt. Morison's Company and 30 men of Capt. Rodney's
Company (Col. Holt's Regiment) : on board the Bedford.
80 men of Capt. Dahlem's and Capt. Wilson's Companies (Holt's
Regiment) : on board the Suffolk.
5 men of Major Lawrence's Company (Holt's Regiment) and 5 men of
Capt. Kemp's Company (Col. Fox's Regiment) : on board the Newport.
34 men of Capt. Wildbore's Company (Col. Fox's Regiment) : on board
87 men of Major Cobham's Company and Capt. Mullins' Company (Col.
Fox's Regiment) : on board the Hampton Court.
16 men of Lieut. Col. Borr's Company (Col. Fox's Regiment) : on board
the Advice ; and 19 men of the same Company : on board the Leopard.
66 men of Col. Brereton's Company (Col. Saunderson's Regiment) : on
board the Eagle.
Marines on board the ships which are to follow Sir George Rooke to Lisbon.
41 men of Capt. Harrison's Company and 39 men of Capt. Henley's
Company (Holt's Regiment) : on the Nassau.
30 men of Major Lawrence's Company (Holt's Regiment) : on the
34 men of Col. Holt's Company and 45 men of Capt. Manley's Company
(Holt's Regiment) : on the Berwick.
52 men of Capt. Lisle's Company (Holt's Regiment) : on the Somerset.
57 men of Capt. Palleser's Company and 50 men of Capt. Buston's
Company (Col. Saunderson's Regiment) : on the Boyne.
43 men of Capt. Ord's Company (Col. Saunderson's Regiment) : on the
53 men of Lieut. Col. Pownall's Company and 56 men of Capt. Bedford's
Company (Col. Saunderson's Regiment) : on the Cambridge.
47 men of Sir William Mansell's Company and 48 men of Capt. Ward's
Company (Col. Saunderson's Regiment) : on the Triton, prize.
45 men of Capt. Docton's Company (Col. Lutterell's Regiment) : on the
55 men of Capt. Tynt's Company (Col. Lutterell's Regiment) : on the
53 men of Col. Lutterell's Company and 57 men of Capt. Blynman's
Company (Col. Lutterell's Regiment) : on the Prince George.
47 men of Major Blakeney's Company (Col. Lutterell's Regiment) : on
46 men of Capt. Webb's Company (Lord Shannon's Regiment) : on the
49 men of Capt. Bradshaw's Company and 34 men of Capt. Thomson's
Company (Lord Shannon's Regiment) : on the Torbay.
43 men of Lieut. Col. Markham's Company and 46 men of Capt. Williams'
Company (Lord Shannon's Regiment) : on the Grafton.
53 men of Capt. Massam's Company and 38 men of Capt. Lennard's
Company (Lord Shannon's Regiment) : on the Devonshire.
52 men of Capt. Carter's Company and 60 men of Capt. Hutton's
Company (Lord Shannon's Regiment) : on the Essex.
58 men of Capt. V. Alphen's Company and 47 men of Capt. Stewart's
Company (in Col. Fox's Regiment) : on the Yarmouth.
30 men of Capt. Kemp's Company (Col. Fox's Regiment) : on the
20 men of Capt. Foulk's Company (Col. Fox's Regiment) : on the Burford.
55 men of Capt. Savill's Company (Brigadier Seymour's Regiment) : on
(Total of Marines gone with Sir George Rooke 696 : total of ditto to
follow him 1493 or in all 2189). State Papers Domestic (Naval) 119,