HMS EREBUS found in Canadian Arctic

[David Tremain]

Hussar100, I'd forgotten about the Royal Navy Museum (in Gosport, right?). However, the whole business with the Erebus seems to be an entirely Canadian affair. I'm not even sure whether the Brits have been involved in the discovery at all, or been invited by Canada to participate. Parks Canada seems to have taken it on because the ship is in Canadian waters. I haven't read anything anywhere about offers to repatriate anything found on board. Do the Brits want it back, or even care? Is it technically Canada's to do what it wants with? What's the difference between it and an archeologist excavating stuff in Egypt, say? Regardless of the nationality of the archeologist, the stuff would belong to Egypt. I can't recall seeing anything in any of the British newspapers online. One logical place for stuff to go would probably be the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich. I just hope it doesn't go to the awful Canadian Museum of History (formerly Canadian Museum of Civilization), otherwise known to some of us as "Disney on the Ottawa River".

David

[Lancer 17]

Originally Posted by RCN

That's great Phil - amazing!
Might you consider posting some of the contents of your Great Grandfather's letter?

Bryan

G'day Bryan

Yes thats ok but its just part of a letter to one of his brothers about all sorts of things and lamenting not going to sea. I will have a look and see if theres anything worth posting but one thing came out of this letter that I didnt know was that he only had one eye. That might have given him a slanted view of things !! This matter is also reffered to in a hand writen history done by one of his daughters in about 1932. I will have a look at that one too.

Regards

Phil.

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by David Tremain

Hussar100, I'd forgotten about the Royal Navy Museum (in Gosport, right?). However, the whole business with the Erebus seems to be an entirely Canadian affair. I'm not even sure whether the Brits have been involved in the discovery at all, or been invited by Canada to participate. Parks Canada seems to have taken it on because the ship is in Canadian waters. I haven't read anything anywhere about offers to repatriate anything found on board. Do the Brits want it back, or even care? Is it technically Canada's to do what it wants with? What's the difference between it and an archeologist excavating stuff in Egypt, say? Regardless of the nationality of the archeologist, the stuff would belong to Egypt. I can't recall seeing anything in any of the British newspapers online. One logical place for stuff to go would probably be the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich. I just hope it doesn't go to the awful Canadian Museum of History (formerly Canadian Museum of Civilization), otherwise known to some of us as "Disney on the Ottawa River".

David

In Canadian waters or not she was flying the British flag when she sank so anything which remains belongs to Britain. Fortunately academics seem to be able to work out affable agreements for matters such as this.

[RCN]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

In Canadian waters or not she was flying the British flag when she sank so anything which remains belongs to Britain. Fortunately academics seem to be able to work out affable agreements for matters such as this.

There was no Canada as we know it today in 1850's. At that time we were a British colony. We did not become the Dominion of Canada formally until 1867.

Bryan

[RCN]

Originally Posted by Lancer 17

G'day Bryan

Yes thats ok but its just part of a letter to one of his brothers about all sorts of things and lamenting not going to sea. I will have a look and see if theres anything worth posting but one thing came out of this letter that I didnt know was that he only had one eye. That might have given him a slanted view of things !! This matter is also reffered to in a hand writen history done by one of his daughters in about 1932. I will have a look at that one too.

Regards

Phil.

Thanks Phil, perhaps as your Great Grandfather had sight in only one eye that may have been a factor in his not being selected for the expedition. Perhaps that might be revealed in one of his letters.

Bryan

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by RCN

There was no Canada as we know it today in 1850's. At that time we were a British colony. We did not become the Dominion of Canada formally until 1867.

Bryan

I wasn't aware when writing my comment you would see it that way but let me explain:

AFAIK, regardless of when or where she sank, it matters only what flag she was flying under. As Canada is a British Dominion it simplifies things extensively because of the protocols of the Commonwealth, but even if she had been found in North Korean waters she is still British and the diplomatic niceties have to be observed. That includes attributing all rights, scientific as well as archaeological, to the UK.

Any nonsense from the Canucks and we send in the Redcoats. Got it pal?

(I'll have you know I was a personal friend of Billy Butlin ).

[BWEF]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

I'm supremely pleased about this discovery. I always suspected both ships to be reasonably intact because of the cold water and not withstanding crush damage from the ice. I still harbour (no pun intended) hopes they might raise one or both of them for restoration. Sweden has done so with older ships lifted from the Baltic.

The entire expedition fascinates me. I watched one documentary some years ago where they found the graves of some of the crew and were able to identify the cause of death etc etc from the almost perfectly preserved bodies buried in the permafrost.

Science marches on - here's hoping they find HMS Terror too.

Maybe the Americans could fund an expedition to search for HMS Terror?

HMS Terror was one of the Royal Navy ships that bombarded Baltimore in the War of 1812 and gave rise to one of the US national anthems, "The Star-Spangled Banner".

Some of the "bombs bursting in air" would have been from HMS Terror, unless she was also firing Congreve rockets to provide a "red rockets glare". An earlier HMS Erebus did fire rockets at the battle.

[Guzzman]

Hi all

Just to update everyone re the Royal Naval Museum. This is located in Portsmouth Historic Dockyard (the oldest part of the dockyard). It is now combined with the Royal Marines Museum at Eastney, the Royal Navy Submarine Museum at Gosport, the Fleet Air Arm Museum at Yeovilton and Explosion! The Museum of Naval Ordnance also at Gosport, to form the National Museum of the Royal Navy. Each museum functions separately as an individual part of the National Museum.

Pete

[Jeff Mc William]

Hi Bryan
Many thanks for highlighting this very interesting topic.
Despite the National interests surrounding this amazing discovery, I am sure that any problems will be settled amicably and that Canada will, rightly in my opinion, be the custodians of any future findings that may be made...at least I sincerely hope so.
Moving off in a tangent if I may, and regarding the photo of Franklin's 3 bar Naval General Service Medal which you kindly posted ; I must say I was unaware of this medal and rather surprised..not to say puzzled..at its existence !

The reason being that this medal was not authorised until 1848 and not issued until 1849...and most pointedly was not given posthumously.
Since it is recorded that Sir John died on the 11th June 1847, this issue is an anomaly to say the least, and strictly speaking should never have been allowed although he undoubtedly deserved it.
I can only imagine that this was due to the influence of Lady Franklin (a formidable character by all accounts) who would have argued that her husband was still alive. Given that the Franklin searches were still in progress at the time and indeed were not finally concluded until 1860.. I guess she had every right to make the claim.
The two bars Copenhagen and Trafalgar I think adequately speak for themselves, but the bar 14th Dec Boat Service 1814 is perhaps less well known and commemorates the audacious and daring action by several small boats of the Royal Navy in the capture of five U.S. Warships in broad daylight guarding the harbour of New Orleans in the War of 1814.
It would seem then that Sir John had led a full and active life prior to this, but at 59 years old and in poor health was perhaps not a wise choice to lead the expedition. Regards Jeff

[RCN]

Originally Posted by Jeff Mc William

Hi Bryan

Moving off in a tangent if I may, and regarding the photo of Franklin's 3 bar Naval General Service Medal which you kindly posted ; I must say I was unaware of this medal and rather surprised..not to say puzzled..at its existence !

The reason being that this medal was not authorised until 1848 and not issued until 1849...and most pointedly was not given posthumously.
Since it is recorded that Sir John died on the 11th June 1847, this issue is an anomaly to say the least, and strictly speaking should never have been allowed although he undoubtedly deserved it.
I can only imagine that this was due to the influence of Lady Franklin (a formidable character by all accounts) who would have argued that her husband was still alive. Given that the Franklin searches were still in progress at the time and indeed were not finally concluded until 1860.. I guess she had every right to make the claim.

It would seem then that Sir John had led a full and active life prior to this, but at 59 years old and in poor health was perhaps not a wise choice to lead the expedition. Regards Jeff

I would think that officially speaking Sir John was not seen as being deceased in that time frame you mention Jeff (ie: the application & issuance of the NGS medal). Several searches were mounted to locate the Sir John's expedition & presumably it was thought that Sir John & some(or all) of his crew may have survived. I dont know exactly when(what year) he & his crew were finally presumed deceased by the RN.

I expect Lady Franklin got the application process started in 1847-48 for Sir John's NGS medal & she was, in due course, issued with his medal.

Bryan

[RCN]

Originally Posted by Jeff Mc William

Hi Bryan
Many thanks for highlighting this very interesting topic.



The reason being that this medal was not authorised until 1848 and not issued until 1849...and most pointedly was not given posthumously.
Since it is recorded that Sir John died on the 11th June 1847, this issue is an anomaly to say the least, and strictly speaking should never have been allowed although he undoubtedly deserved it.
Regards Jeff

I visited the CWM (Canadian War Museum) last year & did not see Sir john's NGS medal on display in the section that the NGS medals are normally displayed. They were running a special war of 1812 display at the time. It likely is in storage in one of their storage complexes, which is a shame really as this medal should be on display now what with the discovery of HMS Erebus. What else they may have of Sir John's I cannot say.
Perhaps his NGS medal will go on display again with some of the artifacts that may be recovered from the ship.

Bryan

[RCN]

Originally Posted by Jeff Mc William

Hi Bryan
Many thanks for highlighting this very interesting topic.
Despite the National interests surrounding this amazing discovery, I am sure that any problems will be settled amicably and that Canada will, rightly in my opinion, be the custodians of any future findings that may be made...at least I sincerely hope so.
Regards Jeff

Yes Jeff, I certainly agree with you & I am certain that Canada would co-operate with UK authorities in the discovery process.

& I hope that ,as a result of the discovery, of HMS Terror, that in future a good display will be created & thus these brave men suitably memorialized!

Bryan

[Lancer 17]

Hi Brian

Sorry for being so long coming back to you on this one. I have located the transcription of this letter but have been very busy on other things. I now have some time on a sunny afternoon.

This is probably going to be done in stages as Im a slow typist and it will take some doing.

To set the scene, the letter is writen by my great Great Grandfather George Garland and is dated at Walsal on 26.12.1841 to his brother Richard who was at that time a solicitor in Hereford, he was to go on to be a Church of England vicar and to marry his brother William in Dublin in 1857 proir to his departure for India to fight in the Mutiny. William is my 17th Lancer connection and who rode in and survived the Charge of the Light Brigade in the Crimean War.

The letter reads in part......."Father (Richard 1785 to 1853, Customs and Excise officer) seems very adverse in trying to get the place I so badly want, it cannot be of a fear of not getting it for in that point if all is true that is said of the Franklins he would get it with ease the place that I want is in the Navy it matters not what post it may call so that it is above a common sailor. Midshipman is the place I want in which post I could be taught navigation night and morning and surely I have sence that would learn when it is beat into me if I do not of course I cannot be promoted to - what there is no knowing but certainly I should stand the same chance as others and if I do not rise no highter than Midshipman it will be far better than a filthy painter who has no expectation than having 9 months work out of 12 or been a master and having scarcly any work at all and that done so low in price that he can scacly get anything by it tho I may get 1st rate wages what is it 24/- per week than tally 3 months work that brings in no wages. What do it amount to than I ask is it no better to be where you may expect to be somebody than say where you can be nobody - ( George worked as a painter and grainer in UK proir to migrating to Australia). - The chance father has is Mr Franklins brother stands in the Army list as a General now in command you may know him better by the Hon Sir C Colville GCB, GCH. He likewise bears the Waterloo medal and has been a General ever since the 10.1.1837 his nephew Mr Franklins son who comes in heir to his title and estates stands in the Navy list now in command as Captain Sir JH Franklin who bears the family order of KCK and has remained as such since 20.11 1822- under who I think I should stand an excellent chance he was as father states the most intermit (?) of any of the family to him. Now what is there that he will not write he says I shall have no chance because I have but sight of one eye, (this is my only knowledge of this), now what cause has he for stating that reason no one can see any imperfection and no difference do it make to me in my trade as filthy painter but this that l excell every one in Stourbridge that has been at the trade a great deal longer than l and even John (his second eldest brother who became a Customs and Excise officer) cannot take all its branches through as I can such as graining etc.

I thought that l had got it all on the screen in one go, but no such luck, it locked me out at this point. So I will have another go and see how far I get this time.

Cont.... and he may excell me in glazing yet still l can do glazing and he cannot do graining Do not mention this again or it will be said l want a trumpeter but l cannot help expressing it when things are referred to my eye which l am sure makes not the difference it is thought tho still l want it and most humberly pray for the right to come back l think some time through the kindness of providence it will, no more of this at presant - l cannot rest contended as l am while l may be in a place where l may do well and most likely be of service to my family. I may be in Hereford .....

The letter continues with unrelated family matters.

The letter is very long and wordy and is not good English but thats how its writen. There is another bit in another document writen by Georges daughter in about 1932 which I will look out and add shortly.

George was born at Gloucester in 1822 and had a twin sister Caroline, he migrated to Melbourne Australia in 1852 and married the following year. He and his wife Annie Miskin had 12 children of which 8 survived. Only 3 sons survived, the eldest Richard married and had a daughter Hester, she married but had no children. The second son George Harold (Hal) married but had no children. My grand father Phillip married and had 1 daughter who married but had no children and my father Philip Ronald (Ron). I have 2 daughters but no grand children, my brother Allan has 3 sons and a grand daughter and grandson (Yeh !)

My English family died out at Warrington in 1894. I do not know how George's father knew the Franklin family and letter gives no clue to this friendship. As a customs officer the family moved from town to town and county to county every 2 or 3 years. His first posting was in White Parish near Salisbury, Wiltshire and he ended up in Walsal Cheshire where he died in ....The children were born from Ashton Upthorp in Berkshire to Gloucester, Hereford and Worcester. As I said all over the country.

I hope that you have enjoyed my little tale.

Regards

Phil.

Still a little more to come.