« PreviousContinue »
soldiers with llieir mere bayonets, resist and repulse the enemy in thirteen different attacks, until at length they were fairly borne down and trampled upon, many of them still continuing to fight, under the very legs of the horses and elephants.
The loss of the English in this engagement, amounted to about four thousand Sepoys and six hundred Europeans. Colonel Fletcher was slain on the field, Colonel Bailiie and Captain Baird, together with several officers were made prisoners. They were carried into the presence of Hyder, who received them with the most insolent triumph and ferocious pride.
They were marched to one of Hyder's nearest forts, and there subjected to an imprisonment. CaptainBaird in particular, was chained by the leg to another prisoner — as much of the slaughter in Hyder's army was imputed to the English grenadiers. He remained a prisoner at Seringapatam three years and a half. In March, 1784; he was released, and in July, he joined his regiment, which in 1765 changed its number to the "1st. He received the majority of the 71st, June 5th, 1767 ; and in October obtained leave of absence and visited Britain. He obtained the lieut. colonelcy of the regiment^ Dec. 8th in 1790, and in 1701 returned to India and joined the army under Marquis Cornwallis. He commanded a brigade of Sepoys, and was present at the siege of Seringapatam in 1701 and 1702. In 1793, he commanded a brigade of Europeans and was present at the siege of Pondicherry. In 1705 he was appointed Colonel. In October, 1797, he embarked at Madras with his regiment for Europe. Upon his arrival at the Cape of Good Hope he was appointed Brigadier General, and placed on that staff in command of a brigade. He was promoted to the rank of Major General, June Id, 1798, and removed to the staff in India.' The 1st of February he joined the army forming for the attack of Seringapatam, and commanded a brigade of Europeans. On the 4th of May he commanded the storming party with success.
In 1800 he was removed to the Bengal staff, and commanded a brigade, &c, at Dyrepore.
In 1801 he was appointed to command an intended expedition against Bavaria, but which was sent to Egypt. He landed at Cosier in June, with the army, and joined Lieut. General Sir John Hutchinson's army, a few days before
the surrender of Alexandria. In Mar, 1801, he was appointed Colonel of the 54th regiment; in 1802, he returned across the Desert to India, in command of the Egyptian Indian army. - •
He was removed to the Madras staff in 1803, and commanded a large division of the army forming against the Mahrattas. He marched into the Mysore country, where the commander in chief, Lieut. General Stuart, joined, and afterwards arrived on the banks of the river Jambudra, in command of the line. Major General Wellesley being appointed to the command of tne greater part of the army, this officer proceeded into the Mahratta country, and finding that his services could be of no further use, he obtained permission to return to Britain, where he arrived on the 3d of November.
Sir David Baird received permission to wear the Turkish order of the Crescent, Dec. 31, 1803; he was knighted by patent, dated June 19th, 1804; and was nominated a Knight companion of the Bath, on the 18th of August following. In the same year he was placed on the staff in England ; he was appointed Lieut. General, Oct. 30th, 1805, and commanded an expedition against the Cape of Good Hope. He arrived there the 5th of January, 1806, made good the landing on the 6th, on the 10th the Castle ana town of Capetown surrendered; and on the 16th General Jansens surrendered the colony. In 1807, he was recalled. On the 19th of Jnly he was removed from the colonelcy of the 54th, to that of the 24th, and placed on the foreign staff under General Lord Cathcart. He commanded a division at the siege of Copenhagen, where he was twice slightly wounded, and returned with the army iu November.
In September, 1608, he sailed in command of about 10,000 men for Corunna, where he arrived in the beginning of November and formed a junction with the army under Sir • John Moore. He commanded the first division of that army; and in the battle of Corunna, on the 16th of January, 1809, be lost bis left arm.
As senior officer after Sir John Moore's death, Sir David Baird communicated to Government, the victory of Corunna, and received the thanks of both houses of Parliament.
In testimony of the royal approbation, General Baird was created a Baronet by
Satent dated April 13th, 1809. Sir David laird was promoted to the rank of General, June 4, 1814; was appointed Governor of Kinsale on the death of Gen. Sir Cornelius Cuyler, in 1819, and of Fort George on the death of Gen. Ross, 1827. He was married Aug. 4th, 1810, to Miss Preston Campbell, of Ferntower and Locklane, co. Perth ; but having no issue, is succeeded in the Baronetcy, in pursuance of the patent, by his elder brother Robert Baird, Esq. of Newbyth.
November, 1829.—At Philadelphia, in the 71st year of his age, Bushrod Washington, one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Mr Justice Washington was the son of John A. Washington, Esq.of Westmoreland County, Virginia, who was the next eldest brother of General Washington. His father was a gentleman of strong mind, and possessed the consideration and confidence of all who knew him. He was a delegate in the State Legislature of Virginia, and a magistrate of the County in which he resided. Bushrod Washington, his son, received a part of his classical education in the house of the inflexible patriot Richard Henry Lee, under a private tutor; his studies were continued under his paternal roof, and afterwards at William and Mary's College. At that respectable institution commenced his intimacy and friendship with Chief Justice Marshall, with whom he became afterwards associated in the Supreme Court of the United States; and whose esteem, confidence and respect, he continued to possess, in the fullest extent, to the close of his life.
The invasion of Virginia by Lord Cornwallis, called from their studies, for its defence the gallant youth of the State, and among them Bushrod Washington, who joined a volunteer troop of cavalry, under Colonel John F. Meicer, in the army commanded by Marquis La Fayette. During the whole of the summer he remained in the field, and until Cornwallis had. crossed James river. It was then supposed that the invaders intended to move on South Carolina; the troop was disbanded, and its members returned to their homes. In the following winter he came to Philadelphia, and under the auspices and affectionate care of General Washington, he was placed, as a student at law, in the office of Mr Wilson, a gentleman of great legal learning and high character, and who was afterwards appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United
Slates. After completing his studies, he returned to Virginia and practised his profession in his native county with reputation and success. In 1781, he was chosen a me'mber of the house of delegates of Virginia; and the following year, as one of that body, he assisted in the adoption and ratification of the Coustitution of the United States by the State of Virginia.
From Westmoreland he removed to Alexandria, a wider sphere for the exercise of his talents as an advocate and a jurist; and he went afterwards from thence to Richmond, and there assumed and maintained an equal station with the
fentlemen of that bar; whom to equal, as always been and continues to be conclusive evidence of the highest professional attainments and character.
During his arduous, industrious and extensive practice at the bar in Richmond and throughout the State, Judge Washington undertook to report the decisions of the Supreme Court of Virginia; a work in two volumes, of high authority in the Courts of that State, and in those of the Union.
He was married, in 1785, to Miss Blackburn; but had no children. He was a devoted husband to an affectionate wife; and such was the strength of her conjugal attachment to her deceased husband, that she survived him but three days. His high and just reputation as a lawyer, the purity and integrity of his character, and the confidence and respect of the whole community with whom he lived, induced President Adams, in 1798, to appoint him an associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, to fill the vacancy, which had occurred by the decease of Mr Justice Wilson. He continued to hold that honorable situation, and presided in the Circuit Court of New Jersey and in that of Pennsylvania from April,1803, having been during that year assigned to the Circuit Courts composing the third Circuit, until his death in Nov. 1829, after an illness of nearly two months. He arrived at Philadelphia early in October, on his way to Trenton, to open the Circuit Court, and complained the morning following of being unwell. He nevertheless went to New Jersey, and discharged the public duties with his accustomed energy and ability. As soon as the business was disposed of, he hurried back to Philadelphia, to avail himself of the medical advice of his favorite physician, Dr Chapman. The disorder increased rapidly — and he seemed early impressed with the belief that he should not overcome it. The hope that he would he able to go through the duties of the session of the Circuit Court of the United States for Pennsylvania was rot, however, entirely abandoned, until a week of the term had elapsed. His family fortunately reached him in time to console his concluding hours, and give to the final departure from this world one of the important comforts of which it is susceptible.
Judge Washington was the favorite nephew of President Washington, and the devisee of Mount Vernon; the much loved residence of that venerated patriot. To Judge Washington he also gave his library, and he also bequeathed to him his public and private papers; at the same time appointing him one of his executors. These high and affectionate testimonials of confidence and esteem were ever held in proud possession by him on whom they were bestowed, and by whom they were deserved.
For thirtyone years Judge Washington held the station of Justice of the Supreme Court, with a constantly increasing reputation and usefulness. Few men, indeed, have possessed higher qualifications for the office, either natual or acquired. Few men have left deeper traces in their judicial career, of everything, which a conscientious judge ought to propose for his ambition or his virtue or his glory. His mind was solid, lather than Brilliant; sagacious and searching rather than quick or eager; slow, but not torpid; steady, but not unyielding; comprehensive and at the same time cautious, patient in inquiry, forcible in conception, clear in reasoning. He was, by original temperament, mud, conciliating and candid; and yet was remarkable for an uncompromising firmness. Of him it may be truly said, that the fear of man never fell upon him; it never entered into his thoughts, much less was it seen in his actions. In him the love of justice was the ruling passion, it was the master spring of ail nis conduct. He made it a matter of conscience to discharge every duty with scrupulous fidelity and scrupulous zeal. It mattered not, whether the duty were small or great, witnessed by the world or performed in private; everywhere the same diligence, watchfulness and pervading sense of justice were seen.
There was about him a tenderness of giving offence, and yet a fearlessness of consequences in his official character which it is difficult to portray. It was a rare combination, which added much
to the dignity of the bench, and made justice itself, even when most severe, soften into the moderation of mercy. It gained confidence when it seemed least to seek it. It repressed arrogance by overawing or confounding it.
To say, that as a judge, he was wise, impartial and honest, is but to attribute to him those qualifications, without which the honors of the bench are but the means of public disgrace, or contempt. His honesty was a deep vital principle, not measured out by worldly rules.
His impartiality was a virtue of his nature, disciplined and instructed by constant reflection upon the infirmity and accountability of man. His wisdom was the wisdom of the law, chastened and refined and invigorated by study, guided by experience, dwelling little on theory, but constantly enlarging itself by a close survey of principles.
He was a learned judge. Not in that every day learning, which may be gathered up by a hasty reading of books and cases; but that, which is the result of long, continued, laborious services, and comprehensive studies. He read to learn, and not to quote; to digest and master, and not merely to display. He was not easily satisfied. If he was not as profound as some, he was more exact than most men. But the value of his learning was, that it was the keystone of all his judgments. He indulged not the rash desire to fashion the law to his own views; but to follow out its precepts with a sincere good faith and simplicity.
Hence he possessed the happy faculty of yielding just the proper weight to authority °, neither on the one hand Burrendering himself to the dictates of other Judges, nor on the other hand over-ruling settled doctrines upon his own private notions of policy or justice.
But it is as a man, that those who knew him best, will most love to contemplate him. There was a daily beauty in his life which won every heart. He was benevolent, charitable, affectionate and liberal in the best sense of the terms. He was a Christian, full of religious sensibility and religious humility. Attached to the Episcopal church by education and choice, he was one of its most sincere, but unostentatious friends. He was as free from bigotry as any man; and at the same time that he claimed the right to think for himself, he admitted without reserve the same right in others. He was, therefore, indulgent even to what he deemed errors in doctiine, and abhorred all persecution for conscience' sake. But what made religion most attractive in him, and gave it occasionally even a sublime expression, was its tranquil, cheerful, unobtrusive, meek and gentle character.
There was a mingling of christian graces in him, which showed that the Habit of his thoughts was fashioned for another and a better world.
Qoeen op Portugal.
Jan. 7th, 1830. —At the palace of Queluz, near Lisbon, aged 54, her Majesty Charlotta Joachima, Queen Dowager of Portugal.
She was born April 25th, 1775, the eldest daughter of King Charles the 4th of Spain, by Louisa Maria Theresa, Princess of Parma. She was married Jan. 9th, 1790, to King John the Sixth of Portugal, who died March 10th, 1826.
The activity of ' the old Queen,' in the administration of the government of Portugal, during many years past, is well known. Her character has long been unpopular in England, and her death was announced in the Times newspaper, in the following terms of unmeasured censure. 'The only fact of importance which the Lisbon papers record, and it is enough for one arrival, is the death of the Queen Dowager of Portugal, the mother and adviser of Don Miguel, the fanatic plotter against the peace and freedom of Portugal, and the unrelenting instigator of general persecution and violence. Few persons, in modern times, have enjoyed such extensive means of mischief, on so limited a stage of action, and none have ever exercised them with a more eager instinctof cruelty and vengeance. Reflecting in her last moments on the distracted condition of the Portuguese Monarchy, groaning under usurpation and oppression, with its trade destroyed, its industry paralyzed, and its best subjects in dungeons or in exile, she could leave the world with the proud satisfaction, that its delivery into the hands of despotism and anarchy, was mainly her own work.'
Though for a long time called ' the old Queen,' she was not far advanced in life, when she became the victim of her dissolute habits and ardent passions.
When, shortly before her dissolution, pressed by one of her confidants, to receive the last rites of religion, she replied ' do you imagine I am already at my extremity?' She had previously ordered that Azeveda her physician, should not be allowed to approach her any more, for having given at second hand the same
advice. A few hours before her death she expressed a wish to see Don Miguel, who manifested the utmost indifference to the situation of his mother. Upon being told that he had gone out with the Marquis de Ballas, she is reported to have said ' It appears that Don Miguel takes more interest in the daughter of the Marquis than in me; but he will soon regret the death of his mother.' She retained her faculties and self possession to the last; in proof of which she ordered several letters written by Lord Beresford to be brought to her and consigned to the flames before her eyes. The correspondence of another Englishman under the name of Major Dodswell met with a similar fate. The family of which the Queen was mother, consisted of three sons, and six daughters.
Sib Thomas Lawrence.
Jan. 14th, 1830. — At his house in Russell Square, London, aged 60, Sir Thomas Lawrence, Knight, President of the Royal Academy of England and Knight of the Legion of Honor.
Sir Thomas Lawrence was born at Bristol, April 13,1769. H is father Thomas who had been a supervisor of excise, took possession of the White Lion Inn in Broad street, on the 3d of June following Sir Thomas's birth, Sir Thomas Lawrence's mother was the daughter of a clergyman in Gloucestershire.
Failing in business at Devizes, Mr Lawrence returned to Bath, and for some time owed his own support and that of his family to the talents and industry of his son Thomas, then in his boyhood.
Without favoring circumstances therefore, it may well be ascribed to innate genius that young Lawrence, at a veryearly period of life, manifested a decided talent for the fine arts and particularly for portraiture. His predilections and abilities in this pursuit led to his being placed as a pupil under the care of Mr Hoare, a crayon painter of excellent taste, fancy and feeling. At first he executed likewise in the manner of his instructor, and two of these portraits have been seen of ladies in redjackets—the then unsightly costume of the fashionable of Bath—for which he was paid ten shillings and six pence each; but in their finish they partake of the extreme delicacy of his latest production.
The Hon. John Hamilton, a member of the Abercorn family, contributed greatly towards the cultivation of the young artist's talents, as well by pecuniary encouragement as by affording him access to some very fine scriptural pieces, the productions of the old masters, in his possession. Another of his early patrons was Sir Henry Harpur, a Derbyshire baronet of fortune and liberality, who even went so far as to offer to send the lad to Italy at his own expense; this proposal was declined by the father, on the alleged ground that' Thomas's genius stood in need of no such aid.' The most remarkable incident in the life of young Lawrence, during his residence at Bath, was his receiving the great silver palette from the Society of Arts.
Before Sir Thomas had attained his 17th year, the family removed from Bath to London, and in those days the father used to sell pencil sketches and portraits, the early drawings of his son, for half a guinea each, many of which have since been repurchased by him at a high price.—Lawrence's first appearance as an exhibitor at Somerset House was in 1787; here we find Thomas Lawience at No. 4 Leicester Square, with seven productions.—In 1769 he exhibited no fewer than thirteen pieces, and was evidently advancing rapidly in his profession, he was in 1791 a principal painter in ordinary to the King.
The peace of 1814 was an auspicious era for Lawrence. He received a magnificent commission from his royal patrons, to paint the allied sovereigns, their ministers and the most exalted personages of Europe, including the Pope, Metternich, Blucher, Platoff, &c.
For this purpose he visited Paris, Vienna, Rome and the other principal cities of the continent.—He received the order of Knighthood April 20, 1815.
On the death of Mr West in 1820, Sir Thomas Lawrence was elected to the President's chair in the royal academy. In this high and honorable office, his elegance and suavity of manners, united with a strong impression of his general benevolence and liberality, rendered him eminently popular.
His last public duty at the academy was the delivery of the biennial medals, about a month before his decease.
In 1826 Sir T. Lawrence paid another visit to Paris, for the purpose of painting Charles the Tenth, and was rewarded with the cross of the legion of honor.
His death was unexpected, occurring after a slight illness of five days.
His death was ascertained to have ensued from an extensive and complicated ossification of the vessels of the heart.
Right Hon. George Tiernet.
Jan. 25<A, 1830.—At his house in Saville Row, aged 68, the Rt. Hon. George Tierney, M. P. for Knaresborough.
Mr Tierney was of Irish descent, and was born at Gibraltar, March 20th, 1761. He was educated at Eton, and at Peterhouse, Cambridge, were he took the degree of LL. D. in 1784. His destination in life was the bar, to which he was called, but which from the decease of three brothers, his private fortune enabled him early to relinquish for the more lofty arena of the Senate. Previous, however, to obtaining that object of his ambition, he became an author, by the publication of The real situation of the East India Company considered with respect to their rights and privileges, 17»7.'
The death of Sir Edmund Affleck, the member for Colchester, at the close of 1788, made an opening in the house of Commons, which appeared to Mr Tierney to be suited to his views.
The step was a bold one, for Colchester was a borough famous for the length and vigor of its contests.
Not intimidated, however, Mr Tierney stood for what was termed the popular interest, in opposition to George Jackson, Esq. Both candidates had an equal number of votes, and in consequence there was a double return; but on the 1st of April, 1789, the Committee appointed to try the Election reported that George Tierney Esq. was duly elected. In the following year, however, at the general election, the tables were reversed: Mr Jackson was returned; and, on Mr Tierney's petition, the Committee reported, April 4, 1791, that 'it was frivolous and vexatious.' Mr Tierney published in 1791,' Two letters addressed to the Right Hon. Henry Dundas and the Hon. Henry Hobart, on tne conduct adopted respecting the Colchester Petition.'
Having continued his researches on Indian affairs, in the same year he also published 'A letter to the Rt. Hon. Henry Dundas, on the situation of the East India Company.' To this pamphlet which was anonymous, an able and satisfactory reply was written by Mr George Anderson. Mr Tierney then published, with his name, 'A letter to the Rt. Hon. Henry Dundas, on the statement of the affairs of the East India Company, lately published by George Anderson, Esq.' Mr Tierney, at the general election,