Letter
28 April 1807
From – Knightsbridge
Dear Sir,
From the friendship and attention my late dear Father ever experienced from you, I hope you will excuse the liberty I now take of inclosing you a detail of some (crossed out – former transactions) some recurrances which I have extracted from a Diary he had kept for many years, and which indeed passed also under my own observation and knowledge.
I feel it therefore (crossed out – quite) unnecessary to enlarge to you Sir upon his Merit as an old and faithful Servant of the Public. It is with regret that I add it has since come to my knowledge that the disappointment he experienced in this object embittered his last days more than I at the moment believed or could have imagined.
I have stated why since his death I have not hitherto felt much desire to endeavour to pursue this object.(crossed out – but being at the heart of a Banking House every day) but being the first Partner in a Banking House every day increasing in character and stability,and my Eldest son also on the point of leaving Cambridge,and as far (edit – a young man just of Age) can be judged likely of everything I could reasonably hope and wish (edit – likely not to disgrace any situation in life) I confess I feel – – to do justice to my Father’s Merits and Character by soliciting you Sir for the Honor of your friendship and Patronage to humbly recommend this case to his Majesty’s Gracious Notice, (crossed out – and that I hope ) I – –
But being the first Head of a Banking House every day increasing in Character and Stability, and my Eldest son also upon the point of leaving Cambridge, and as far as a Young Man just of Age can be judged if most likely to do credit to any Situation,I confess I feel these points as strong additional reasons for wishing to do justice to my Father’s Memory and Merits, by thus soliciting you Sir, for the honor of your Friendship (crossed out – and Patronage) to humbly recommend this case to his Majesty’s Gracious Notice.
I will only add that from him I inherit a respect and attachment to your Lordship’s Family that whether you are pleased, or not (edit) to honor this application with your (crossed out – support) patronage, will also ever cause me to remain with my sincere wish ( and support at far as my humble endeavour can go) for your permanent and complete triumph in your present noble and arduous situation, and while I trust you will soon find honored, to be, also the Universal wish of the Country.
I am, Dear Sir, Your attached and most obedient humble servant.
W.M.
(edit)
I will only add that from him, I inherit a respect and attachment toward you and your Family that would to my feelings, add a great additional value to (this?) favour by (removing?) it from your hands, but whether you are pleased or not, to honor this application with your Patronage, be assured it will also ever cause me equally to remain with very sincere wish (and support as far as my humble endevour may be able to go) for your permanent and complete Triumph in your present noble and ardous situation and which I trust you will soon find proven to be also the Universal wihs of the Country.
I remain, dear Sir, your attached humble servant. .W.M.
————————————————————————–
File 0398
Draft letter – 1807 ?
Commissioner Marsh on the 21st August 1795 wrote to Lord Spencer, then First Lord of the Admiralty, in consequence of a conversation (crossed out – as) settled between him and Mr.Gambier, then Secretary to the Navy Board, and who gave him to understand his Lordship would expect it, that he was willing to (crossed out – quit) retire upon the usual pension and upon being created a Baronet, (crossed out – and upon the usual pension) saw his Lordship (appointment) a day or two afterwards who received him and was very complimentary upon his long faithful service &c., and assured him that now he knew his mind he might depend he would take an early opportunity of bringing the business forward to Mr.Pitt and settling it.
A short time afterwards (crossed out – however) it having been pointed out to his Lordship thatthe Report of the Commissioners of Account favored a new modelling of the Navy Board,this plan was adopted and two or three new Commissioners appointed, Mr Gambier one, and as the proposal to Mr.Marsh originated in the wish to serve – – – Lord Spencer appeared to cooled upon the business and (crossed out – Mr.Marsh not pushing the same? and dropped till L: Aug – – – (edits) – – -Aug 1798 when Mr.Gambier came to the Office and reported that both Mr.(Nepean?) and his brother the Admiral then one of the Lords had told him the business was settled, and that Mr.Marsh was to Retire upon the Pension and with a Baronetcy andto be succeeded by Mr.Towry.
The news papers also next day state that arrangement. Mr Marsh thought this very singular and extraordinary, as he had no otherwise than as above stated heard a word upon the subject for the last year (18 months) and so (crossed out – the business) it remained for 5 days viz. to until the 7th August when Mr.Marsh attending officially a General Court of Greenwich Hospital, at the Admiralty , Lord Spencer after the Business was over took an opportunity of returning with (cross out – him) Mr.Marsh to his Room and expresing his concern and surprise that the intended arrangement should have appeared in the Papers before he (his Lordship) had had an opportunity of mentioning it to the King.
Mr.Marsh replied that his Lordship could not be more surprised than he had been, never having been honored with the least intimation of the Business,but from Mr.Gambier’s information and the newspapers, but that its getting into the latter was not to be wondered at when his Lordship would please to recollect that one of the Lords of the Admiralty and their Lordship’s Secretary had publickly mentioned the same.
Lord Spencer made some general and evasive answer and the business again rested ’till Mr.Marsh’s last illness when Sir Andrew Hammond having called upon him their conversation turned upon these points. (crossed out – and Mr.Marsh concludes) Sir Andrew upon a review of all circumstances (crossed out – and Mr. ) felt them so strongly as to be induced to review the subject with Lord Spencer (edit – one from Sir Andrew – – to Mr.Marsh after his having seen – – Mr.Marsh’s letter in consequence to his Lordship) and what occasioned the letter herewith.
Had Mr.Marsh lived ’till after the Levee on the following Wednesday it is highly probable this business would in consequence have been (crossed out – settled) honored with his Majesty’s – – dor as Mr.Marsh was personally well known to the King boht through the introduction through the Earl of Egmont and Lord Sandwich and particularly during his Majesty’s (coming?) to the Dockyards, when he had almost the honor of attending his Majesty at an early in the morning (crossed out – when at Portsmouth) and before the other Members of either Board were (stirring?) &c &c.
It should be remarked that in August 1798 and on the Sunday preceeding Lord Spencer’s conversation at the Admiralty with Mr.Marsh, the King had spoken to Mr.Towry on the Service at Windsor and wished him joy of his removal to the Navy Board, and upon Mr.Towry thanking his Majesty and observing that it was not yet (crossed out – done) the case, his Majesty (crossed out – in his usual quick way) replied No No, but it will!!
What induced Lord Spencer therefore to stop this Business apparently of his own wish in this case –
last instance in particular ) Mr.Marsh could never learn or imagine.
About 3 months after his Father’s death Mr. William Marsh saw Sir Andrew Hammond and who mentioned to Lord Spencer his (crossed out – his wish and desire) still hope that his late Father’s earnest wishes might still be brought forward under his Lordships Patronage, but as Mr.Pitt’s administration were then retiring from Office his Lordship told Sir Andrew he did not feel that he could with propriety bring forward the business.
His Majesty’s long illness that immediately followed and Mr.Marsh’s frequent absence from Town on account of Mr.Marsh’s health has prevented him from again attempting to revive the subject.
————————————————————————-
File 0322
Letter
30 November 1807
From – William Marsh, Knightsbridge, London
To – Admiral Lord Gambier.
My dear Lord Gambier,
I am infinitely obliged to you for your kind attention to the case of my friend The Rev. (William?) Gordon, but I observe by the letter from the Transport Board your Lordship was so good as to enclose me (and which I now return) that the Case has been a little misunderstood.
Mr Wolfe was removed from the Chaplaincy of Verdun in November 1805, to the Depot at Givet, in order to attend to the proper Disposition of the Relief afforded to our People at that Depot, from this Country, under the Direction of the Committee at Verdun. It was with difficulty the permission for this removal was obtained from the French Government, and it is not probable they would now permit Mr.Wolfe to return to Verdun, if he was no longer of use at Givet, but the fact is, that the latter Place will always require a Man of Mr.Wolfe’s character and profession, and of course “his Functions have not ceased” because he is Exercising them at Givet, and cannot therefore possibly be of any further Personal use at Verdun, and where it appears, from the enclosed Certificate and Order from Sir Thomas (Lavie?) that the Rev. Wm.Gordon has ever since done the Duty in a most exemplary manner at that Depot consisting of near 1,200 British Subjects, many of them Young Naval Officers and also been particularly active and useful in the Committee Instituted for their Relief.
Under these Circumstances therefore I submit to your Lordship whether Mr.Gordon has not a just Claim for some Remuneration for this Volutary, though laborious, and important Duty, equal to what is allowed to the Rev.Mr.Wolfe, and that both these Depots require the Functions of a respectale Clergyman, for it might as well be said, there being a Chaplain at Portsmouth, none can be allowed at Chatham!
It should indeed appear from Sir Thomas (Lavie’s?) letter to me, which I take the liberty of enclosing to your Lordship, that he submitted this Case to their Lordships, whilst you was absent upon your late most important Commission, though Captain Woodriff, and that he understood their Lordships were pleased to consider SirThomas’s suggestions upon this subject in a favourable light.
I am certain no Man can more quickly and properly appreciate the value of an Examplery Clergyman in such a Society as the Depot at Verdun, than your Lordship, and I will only add that I am sure no Clergyman could be selected for this Station who would do more credit to his profession and Country than my friend Mr.Gordon.
I am always with great attachment and regard, my Lord, Your Lordship’s faithful and obedient humble servant,
William Marsh
P.S. Your Lordship must be fully aware of the increased difficulty and delay in Corresponding with Verdun and my last letter of the 4th of October were brought by Captain Dillon. I would therefore wish to submit to your Lordship whether Captain Sir Thomas Lavie’s Order and Certificate of Mr. Gordon’s having performed this Duty for the last two years might not be deemed by their Lordships as a “Certificate by proper Authority that Mr.Gordon has done the Duty of the Chaplain at Verdun.”
—————————————————————————–
File 0239
Letter – 12 December 1807
From Norfolk Stree,t
Sir,
On behalf of the Rev. William Gordon M.A., Rector of Dunstew in Oxfordshire and now a detained British subject at Verdun we beg leave to state to you for the information of their Lordships that from Nov. 1805 he has voluntarily, and constantly performed all the arduous and various duties of a Clergyman, in the most regular and exemplary manner and to the Universal satisfaction of near 1200 of our fellow subjects of different descriptions at present Prisoners at that Depot.
That we believe this meritorious conduct of Mr Gordon was stated to their Lordships by Captain Sir Thomas Laver and others through Captain Woodriff upon the latters return to England, andwe beg leave to inclose Sir Thomas’s Certificate in Proof of this (Habiment?) and which can be further corroborated by Captain Dillon and all other officers, who may have recently arrived from Verdun.
We therefore with great diference presume to hope their Lordships will be pleased to consider Mr Gordon as entitled to the same remuneration from Nov.1805 and during the period he may continue to officiate, that was allowed to the Rev. Mr Wolfe, and who is now stationed at Givet, and we are therefore to (file 0240) entreat you will please move their Lordships to give an order to this effect.
We are with respect,
Sir Your most obediant and humble servant.
The Honorable W.W.Pole, &c.&c.&c.
Marsh & Creed.
(continues on same page)
Knightsbridge,
12 December 1807
My dear Lord Gambier,
I am sorry that some particular Business in the County has prevented me from attending to my friend the Reverend William Gordon’s Case, since I last had the pleasure of seeing your Lordship – (know?) this rate and application will be made to their Lordships in the usual manner by Messrs Marsh & Creed, enclosing Captain Sir Thomas Lavers (now, hand?) and Certificate to Mr Gordon &c, and at the same time that I thank your Lordship for your past attention to this business, and entreat your (present?) support to the application (if it appears to you as it does to me, namely one of those Cases highly deserving of a suitable reward).
I beg leave to assure your Lordship nothing short of the thorough knowledge of Mr Gordon’s merit, as a man and a Clergyman and conviction that he has and continues to perform essential Service to the Depos at Verdun, could ever have unduced me to mention this Case to you being always with the sincerest attachment and respect, your faithful and obediant servant,
William Marsh
I return your Lordship herewith your Lordship’s the letter from the Transport Board
(next page – File 0241)
Mr Gordon has been particularly unfortunate in his Pecuniary Concerns. He was Tutor to Sir Henry Dashwood’s sons, and who gave him the Living of Dunstew, at that time a very small one being principally open common lands. It has since been enclosed by Act of Parliament and a certain portion of the land allotted the Rectory in lieu of Tithes.
The expense of this enclosing of Mr.Gordon’s Farm, before he could let it to any advantage, has swallowed up three or four years of Rent and burthened him with a Debt of about Seven Hundred Pounds. Mr Gordon was therefore glad about three or four years ago, to accept an offer from Lord (Langstock?) and his sister Mrs Stour to take the Charge of her son, and his Lordship’s Nephew, then about 17, but extremely backward in every branch of Education and to Travel with him until he came of age and for which (there, third?) Parties bound themselves (as far as words could go) that Mr Stour would then settle an Annuity upon Mr Gordon.
They were both detained in France whilst upon their Tour. Mr Stour 2 years ago made his escape and is now in Jamaica, where his greatest Estate is. Mr Gordon’s Bills however, were till lately (6 months ago) regularly paid by Mr Burton & Long for this Annuity. Mr Long is not now Mr Stour’s merchant, and he has so over-drawn his present one that Mr.Gordon’s Bills have been to his infinite distress returned (Probested?) (reprised?) therefore of this just claim, and no Revenue as yet to be got from his Living, poor Gordon’s Case is most undeservingly pitiable.
To this must be added the Mortification of losing the opportunity of being Tutor to the Marquis of Blandford’s sons now at Eton, by this cruel detention in France, and which was kept open for him as long as possible by the Marquis, for as Lady Blandford is Sir Henry Dashwood’s Niece, Mr Gordon merits are well known – – -(next page) – – – in that Noble family.
Mr Gordon’s Character may I think be run by his having voluntarily stepped forward upon the removal of the Rev. Mr Wolfe to Givit to take upon himself the heavy Duty at Verdun; and had not his unexpected and unjust failure of his Income happened, would probably have continued his Functions without making this applicaiton, but I am sure to your Lordship’s just and upright mind, this application will have its due weight.
I ought to have added that I believe Lord Caryfort and Mrs Stour feel this conduct of Mrs Stour’s exceedingly and will do everything in the power of a Mother and Uncle to do, but this is distant and uncertain, and in the meantime fear Mr Gordon is doing a great and beneficial Public Duty, and Starving!!
I am sure I need say no more to your Lordship, indeed I am sorry my intimate knowledge of the caase has led me to trouble your Lordship with the long retail.
Admiralty House. 16 December 1807
(Same page)
Dear Sir,
I have the satisfaction to inform you that an Order has been issued for the payment of Mr.Gordon for the time he does the Duty of Chaplain at Verdun at the Rate what Mr.Wolfe was paid at.
I am, Dear Sir, Your sincere humble servant.
“Gambier”
William Marsh Esq.,
————————————————————————-
File 0277
Letter
To – The Rev.William Gordon, To be sent to Messrs Marsh & Creed.
From – Admiralty Office,
15 December (1807)
Sir,
Messrs Marsh and Creed having, as your agents, applied to my Lord Commissioners of the Admiralty for an allowance to be granted to you, in consideration of your having officiated as a Clergyman to the British prisoners of war, at Verdun, I am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to acquaint you that directions are given to the Transport Board for paying you at the rate of two hundred pounds a year on your producing a Certificate from the Senior Naval Officer, at Verdun, of your having regularly performed the duty.
I am, Sir, Your very humble servant.
John (Samual? Bamue?)
—————————————————————————-
File 0410
Letter
15 December 1807
From – Admiralty Office,
To the Reverend William Gordon, at Messrs Marsh & Creed.
Sir,
Messrs Marsh and Creed having as your Agents applied to my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty for an allowance to be granted to you in consideration of your having Officiated as a Clergyman to the British Prisoners of War at Verdun, I am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to acquaint you that Directions are given to the Transport Board for paying you at the Rate of Two Hundred pounds a year on your prodicing a Certificate from the Senior Naval Officer at Verdun, of your having regularly performed the Duty.
I am, your very humble servant,
John Barrow.
My Dear Gordon,
I was duly favored with your kind letter of the 4th of last October by Captain Dillon, or rather I believe by Mr.Neilson, enclosing one to me from Captain Sir Thomas Lavie and also a (blended?) Order and Certificate from this Gentleman to you, Certifying that you had performed that Duty of Chaplain at Verdun, and also Authorising you to continue the same, as far as his Power went – immediately upon the receipt of the same I waited on Lord Gambier, and who was so kind as to Interest himself so far as to have a letter written to the Transport Board to state the Case, but who in their answer merely stated “That the Rev. Mr Wolde’s Functions had not ceased (the question the Admiralty had asked) but that he was doing Duty at Givet!!
His Lordship was good enough to send me this answer, which you see was completely mistaking your Case and my request, and I therefore thought it better to make at once a Public and usual Application through Messrs Marsh & Creed to the Honorable W.W.Pole, the Secretary, a copy of which dated 12 December you have in the enclosed sheet, together with my private letter a Statement of your Case to Lord Gambier, under the same date, and his Lordship’s obliging answer of the 16th and you have on the other side a Copy of the Order alluded to, Signed by Mr.Barrow, the joint Secretary of the Admiralty.
I have since been at the Transport Office and they would have paid me from November 1805 as far as 1st of July 1807, the date of Sir Thomas Lavie’s Certificate had I had a Power of Attorney from you and could have ascertained the day in November 1805 you commenced your Functions.
Mr McLeay their Secretary therefore told me they would write you to draw for the amount, and accompany the same with a Certificate from the Senior Naval Officer at Verdun that you have Regularly and constantly performed the Duty of Chaplain from – November 1805 to the same day in November 1807 inclusive, and so continue to send a similar Certificate and Draft every succeeding half year.
(file 0417) – I think you had better make your Draft payable to this House or order and send it to us with the Certificate, unless indeed you can get the Cash forit at Verdun, and then you must make it payable tothose who may give you the money for it – before I close this,I shall know and will tell you whether the Property Tax is to be deducted from this £200 per Annum, and if so, how it is to be managed.
I must now beg the favor you will make my compliments and best wishes to SIr Thomas Lavie, with many thanks for his obliging letter accompanying yours of the 4th of October, and as this will be brought you by Mr.Clive, and who probably will be loaded with letters, I hope he will excuse my troubling you to acknowledge and thank him for his few lines to me.
You will perhaps think I have been rather prolix in this detail and copy upon copy of letters to you, but in your situation I consider circumstances of (file 418) – of a trifling nature are of more consequence than more important ones would be were you at liberty in this country.
I hope you will think I have not been Idle in this concern, and that it will afford you some comfort, and I should be equally or more happy if it ever was in my power to help you in your Concern with your friend at Purley!! and indeed you do me but bare justice in believing I should be happy to assist you at all times and upon all occasions.
I conclude you Affairs at Dunster are in good hands. Mr Walker or some such local friend. I have never yet met Captain Dillon, he lives a little way out of Town and calls occasionally at the Salopian Coffee House. I have several times missed him by 5 minutes and he me as we have called upon each other half a dozen times. I wrote him last week of the success of this appointment to the Admiralty, and I had an answer from him to say “he had mentioned you to Lord Gambier.” and that he would call upon me some day this week. You will observe that I took the liberty of mentioning him in our letter to the Admiralty, and possibly he may therefore have been asked what he knew of the Case as to your performance of the Duty &c.
I only brought my Family up from Willes last Wednesday week and till then I was much backwards and forwards, but now I shall make a point of seeing this gentleman and shewing him any civility in my power on your account.
If I cannot gain him such good Claret and Burgandy ashe had at Verdun, you know I can find some good Madeira and old Port, and I heartily wish you could be of the Party to taste them!
They are all well at Kirtling too, and will I think be up in about 10 days more, but as Mr.Clive says he thinks he shall be going about Thursday next, I wrote them so by this Post,and I dare say I shall have a letter or two from Sir Henry and Miss Dashwood for to trouble Mr.Clive with for you.
I hope you will think my memory (secured?) me very correctly in my detail about you in my private letter to Lord Gambier. The copies I send you are written by my son George,for I had not much spare time just then, but they will be plain enough for you to make out I hope.
Our good friends at Chaileys are well and always happy to hear of any thing they think will be (pertaining?) to you, but not more sothan he who is always, My Dear Gordon, most truly yours.
William Marsh
You will observe that the Transport Board in their letter to Sir Thomas Lavie say that your Bills must be approved by himself and Captain Lyall, or the two Senior Officers who may be at Verdun.
I therefore think the shortest way will be for those gentlemen, at the foot of your Bill just to say “We do hereby Certify that the Rev.Mr.Gordon has duly and regularly Performed the Duty of Chaplain to all the Prisoners of War and other British Subjects at this Depot between, such a day, and such a day” “Witness our Hands.”
You will observe my Postscript to Lord Gambier was longer than my letter, but I did not feel I had said a word too much.