Thomas Mathews

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thomas Mathews (1676-1751) - British admiral, son of Colonel Edward Mathews (d. 1700), and grandson on his mother' side of Sir Thomas Armstrong (1624-1684), who was executed for the Rye House Plot, was born at Llandaff Court, Llandaff. He entered the navy and became lieutenant in 1699, being promoted captain in 1703.

During the short war with Spain (1718-20) he commanded the battleship Kent in the fleet of Sir George Byng (Lord Torrington), participating in the Battle of Cape Passaro in 1718, and from 1722 to 1724 he was in command of a small squadron sent to the East Indies to expel the pirates of the Malabar Coast. He saw no further service till March 1741, when he was appointed to the command in the Mediterranean, and plenipotentiary to the king of Sardinia and the other courts of Italy. It is impossible to understand upon what grounds he was selected. As an admiral he was not distinguished; he was quite destitute of the experience and the tact required for his diplomatic duties; and he was in the worst possible terms with his second in command, Richard Lestock (1679?-1746). Yet the purpose for which he was sent out in his double capacity was not altogether ill performed. In 1742 Mathews sent a small squadron to Naples to compel King Charles III, afterwards king of Spain, to remain neutral. It was commanded by commodore, afterwards admiral, Villiam Martin (1696 7-1756), who refused to enter into negotiations, and gave the king half an hour in which to return an answer.

In June of the same year a squadron of Spanish galleys, which had taken refuge in the Bay of Saint Tropez, was burnt by the fire ships of Mathews' fleet. In the meantime a Spanish squadron of line-of-battleships had taken refuge in Toulon, and was watched by the British fleet from its anchorage at Hyeres. In February 1744 the Spaniards put to sea in company with a French force. Mathews, who had now returned to his flagship, followed, and an engagement took place on the 22nd and 23rd of February.

The battle was highly discreditable to the British fleet, and not very honorable to their opponents, yet it is of the highest importance in the history of the navy. It marked the lowest pitch reached in discipline and igniting and efficiency by the fleet in the 18th Century, and it had a very bad effect in confirming the pedantic system of tactics set up by the old Fighting Instructions. The British fleet followed the enemy in light winds on 21 February, and became scattered. Mathews hoisted the signal to form the line, and then when night fell, to lie to. At that moment Lestock, who commanded in the rear, was at a considerable distance from the body of the fleet, and he ought undoubtedly to have joined his admiral before lying to, but he obeyed the second order, with the result, which it is impossible not to feel that he foresaw and desired, that when morning came he was a long way off the flag of Mathews. The enemy were within striking distance of the van and center of the British fleet, and Mathews attacked their rear. The battle was ill fought, as it had been ill prepared. Lestock never came into action at all. One Spanish line-of-battleship, Poder, was taken, but afterwards burnt. Several of the British captains behaved very badly, and Mathews in a heat of confused anger bore down on the enemy out of his line, while the signal to keep the line was still flying at his mast-head. The French and Spaniards got away, and were not pursued by Mathews, though they were of inferior strength.

Deep indignation was aroused at home by this naval miscarriage, and the battle led to more than twenty courts-martial and a parliamentary inquiry. The evils which had overrun the navy were clearly displayed, and in so far some good was done. It was shown for instance that one of the captains whose ship behaved worst was a man of extreme age who was nearly blind and deaf. One of the captains was so frightened at the prospect of a trial that he deserted on his way home and disappeared into Spain. Mathews resigned and returned home after the battle. In consequence of the parliamentary motion for inquiry, Lestock was brought to trial, and acquitted on the ground that he had obeyed orders. Then Mathews was tried in 1746, and was condemned to be dismissed the service on the ground that he had not only failed to pursue the enemy but had taken his fleet into action in a confused manner. He had in fact not waited till he had his fleet in a line with the enemy before bearing down on them, and he had disordered his own line. To the country at large it appeared strange that the admiral who had actually fought should be condemned, while the admiral who had kept at a distance was acquitted. Mathews looked upon his condemnation as the result of mere party spirit.