Author: Napier, Sir Charles; Law, Edward (Lord Ellenborough); De Lacy Evans, Sir George; England, Sir Richard.
Title: Correspondence with and Relative to Major-General Sir Richard England, K.C. B. , Etc. , Etc. (for Private Circulation Only).
Description: London, 1855. 1855. London, 1855. 1855. Good. - Octavo, 8 inches high by 5 inches wide. Softcover, bound in printed self-wraps. Once likely bound in with other pamphlets, the book is disbound with the cover page and last page detached. 14 pages. The pages are slightly soiled and the pamphlet was folded twice horizontally. Good. Exceedingly RARE. First (only) edition. On December 11, 1854, The Times of London editorialized: "We felt it our duty a few days ago to call attention to the fact that, if disease or wounds were to incapacitate Lord Raglan for continuing his labours in the Crimea, the command of our army would devolve upon Sir Richard England, and we suggested that such a change ought by all means to be provided against.." The Times goes on to forcefully attack England for his actions as commander of the Scinde field force during the Afghan wars in 1842. "In the beginning of the year 1842 Sir Richard England commanded the Scinde field force. It was extremely important to reinforce General Nott at Candahar, where he was in want of men, money, and ammunition. Near the village of Hykulzye, at the foot of the Bolan Pass, General England was encountered by some Asiatic troops, and repulsed with the loss of nearly 100 killed and wounded. It was of the utmost importance that he should advance, or, at any rate, not retreat, for General Nott had written to him that either halting or retiring would have the worst effect throughout Afghanistan, and would be more injurious to his present position than 20,000 of the enemy in the field. But General England did retreat. His troops were eager to renew the attack; Colonel Stacy, the political agent who accompanied him, undertook to storm the position with a hundred, or even eighty men - thrice he begged for permission, and thrice he was refused. General England retired to Quettah, and there began to intrench himself, leaving Nott, the honour of England, and the destinies of India to their fate. The defences before which he retreated were not formidable. They, were thrown up in a few hours, and, when afterwards taken, some of our officers rode over them without knowing where they were. General England wrote that the enemy were a hundred to one stronger than any one expected, though they were fewer than he was informed that they would be. Finally, he strove to throw the blame on the Sepoys, whom he would not allow to renew the attack. 'The seeming unwillingness of England,' says Mr. Kaye, 'to redeem his character by a vigorous movement in advance irritated General Nott more than the disaster itself.'" In this letter to his brother-in-law, A.F.W. Montagu, England describes his actions at that time in great detail and proffers a defense of them. Following his letter of December 28, 1854 from Sebastopol are published letters written in 1842 defending him from Major-General Charles Napier, the Governor General of India Lord Ellenborough and a letter from his Secretary T.H. Maddock. Finally there is an 1855 letter praising England from General Sir George De Lacy Evans. The British army officer General Sir Richard England (1793-1883) was born at Fort Detroit at a time when it was part of Upper Canada. In 1841 he took command of the Bombay Army division and was dispatched to the relief of Colonel Palmer at Ghuznee and General Nott at Kandahar. In 1854 he was placed in command of the 3rd Division in the Crimean war. Good .
Keywords: MILITARY; CORRESPONDENCE WITH AND RELATIVE TO MAJOR-GENERAL SIR RICHARD ENGLAND; AFGHAN WARS; CRIMEAN WAR; SIR CHARLES NAPIER; EDWARD LAW; LORD ELLENBOROUGH; INDIA; A.F.W. MONTAGU; GENERAL SIR RICHARD ENGLAND; GENERAL GEORGE DE LACY EVANS; MAJOR GENERAL W
See more books from our catalog: Military
Title: Correspondence with and Relative to Major-General Sir Richard England, K.C. B. , Etc. , Etc. (for Private Circulation Only).
Description: London, 1855. 1855. London, 1855. 1855. Good. - Octavo, 8 inches high by 5 inches wide. Softcover, bound in printed self-wraps. Once likely bound in with other pamphlets, the book is disbound with the cover page and last page detached. 14 pages. The pages are slightly soiled and the pamphlet was folded twice horizontally. Good. Exceedingly RARE. First (only) edition. On December 11, 1854, The Times of London editorialized: "We felt it our duty a few days ago to call attention to the fact that, if disease or wounds were to incapacitate Lord Raglan for continuing his labours in the Crimea, the command of our army would devolve upon Sir Richard England, and we suggested that such a change ought by all means to be provided against.." The Times goes on to forcefully attack England for his actions as commander of the Scinde field force during the Afghan wars in 1842. "In the beginning of the year 1842 Sir Richard England commanded the Scinde field force. It was extremely important to reinforce General Nott at Candahar, where he was in want of men, money, and ammunition. Near the village of Hykulzye, at the foot of the Bolan Pass, General England was encountered by some Asiatic troops, and repulsed with the loss of nearly 100 killed and wounded. It was of the utmost importance that he should advance, or, at any rate, not retreat, for General Nott had written to him that either halting or retiring would have the worst effect throughout Afghanistan, and would be more injurious to his present position than 20,000 of the enemy in the field. But General England did retreat. His troops were eager to renew the attack; Colonel Stacy, the political agent who accompanied him, undertook to storm the position with a hundred, or even eighty men - thrice he begged for permission, and thrice he was refused. General England retired to Quettah, and there began to intrench himself, leaving Nott, the honour of England, and the destinies of India to their fate. The defences before which he retreated were not formidable. They, were thrown up in a few hours, and, when afterwards taken, some of our officers rode over them without knowing where they were. General England wrote that the enemy were a hundred to one stronger than any one expected, though they were fewer than he was informed that they would be. Finally, he strove to throw the blame on the Sepoys, whom he would not allow to renew the attack. 'The seeming unwillingness of England,' says Mr. Kaye, 'to redeem his character by a vigorous movement in advance irritated General Nott more than the disaster itself.'" In this letter to his brother-in-law, A.F.W. Montagu, England describes his actions at that time in great detail and proffers a defense of them. Following his letter of December 28, 1854 from Sebastopol are published letters written in 1842 defending him from Major-General Charles Napier, the Governor General of India Lord Ellenborough and a letter from his Secretary T.H. Maddock. Finally there is an 1855 letter praising England from General Sir George De Lacy Evans. The British army officer General Sir Richard England (1793-1883) was born at Fort Detroit at a time when it was part of Upper Canada. In 1841 he took command of the Bombay Army division and was dispatched to the relief of Colonel Palmer at Ghuznee and General Nott at Kandahar. In 1854 he was placed in command of the 3rd Division in the Crimean war. Good .
Keywords: MILITARY; CORRESPONDENCE WITH AND RELATIVE TO MAJOR-GENERAL SIR RICHARD ENGLAND; AFGHAN WARS; CRIMEAN WAR; SIR CHARLES NAPIER; EDWARD LAW; LORD ELLENBOROUGH; INDIA; A.F.W. MONTAGU; GENERAL SIR RICHARD ENGLAND; GENERAL GEORGE DE LACY EVANS; MAJOR GENERAL W
Price: US$ 1500.00 Seller: Blue Mountain Books & Manuscripts, Ltd.
- Book number: 99570
- Book number: 99570
See more books from our catalog: Military