t appeared
that the whole of the four officers mentioned had been brought up in
the French service, and had actually been in the battle of the 12th of
April 1782. When we acquainted them that Sir James Saumarez commanded
a ship in that action, they eagerly inquired the name; and being
informed it was the Russell, Captain Tornquist, who was in the
Northumberland, rising from his chair and seizing Sir James's hand,
exclaimed, "Mon Dieu! Monsieur l'Amiral, nous avons brule le poudre
ensemble; allons boire un coup."

It is impossible to do justice to the scene which followed. The old
Swedish officer's joy at this discovery knew no bounds; they
completely "fought the battle o'er again;" and we found it distinctly
proved that it was the Russell, commanded by Captain Saumarez, which
gallantly engaged several of the enemy's ships for two hours, and at
six, P.M. pushed on to the Ville de Paris. Baron Rosenstien, who was
on board that ship, and Baron Palmquist, who was on board La Couronne
stationed next to her, declared that the Compte de Grasse, who was
then attempting to escape to leeward, would have succeeded had it not
been for the Russell. During our sojourn among the Swedes in that and
another winter, we often heard the history of that memorable battle
repeated; and they never ceased to maintain the circumstance we have
stated, of which we made a memorandum at the time.[5]

[5] See Appendix for this memorandum, and for extracts from the
Russell, Canada, and Barfleur's logs; also Captain White's
reply, and extracts of letters from Sir Lawrence Halsted and
Admiral Gifford, who were in the Canada, and Captain Knight's
letter.

We took leave on that occasion to say to Sir James, that we believed
the credit had been given to another ship; to which he replied, "Yes,
it was; but what Admiral Palmquist and Captain Tornquist has told you,
is true: it _was_ the Russell that engaged the Ville de Paris until
the Barfleur came up." But such was the extreme sensibility of
Saumarez, that he could not persuade himself to correct the error,
from an idea that such an interference might argue a desire to sound
his own praise; and, but for the circumstance we have now related, the
truth might never have come to light.

In answer to a letter from Captain Thomas White, which he sent to Lord
de Saumarez with a copy of his publication, called "Naval
Researches," written in 1836, to defend the gallant Rodney from
certain attac