A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P R S T U V W X Z

Terre Napoleon

E >> Ernest Scott >> Terre Napoleon




He knew that the French Government had sent out ships having like objects
with his own; he knew that some influential persons in England,
especially the Court of Directors of the East India Company, were uneasy
and suspicious about French designs; and he had been fully instructed by
the Admiralty as to the demeanour he should maintain if he met vessels
flying a hostile flag. But though his duty prescribed that he must not
offer any provocation, he could not forget that when he left Europe Great
Britain and France were still at war, and preparation for extremities was
a measure of mere prudence.

The stranger proved to be "a heavy-looking ship without any top-gallant
masts up." On the Investigator hoisting her colours, Le Geographe "showed
a French ensign, and afterwards an English jack forward, as we did a
white flag." Flinders manoeuvred so as to keep his broadside to the
stranger, "lest the flag of truce should be a deception." But the
demeanour of the French being purely pacific, he had a boat hoisted out
and went on board, Le Geographe having also hove to.

On the French vessel, meanwhile, similar curiosity had been provoked as
to the identity of the ship sailing east. Captain Baudin's men had been
engaged during the morning in harpooning dolphins, which they desired for
the sake of the flesh. Peron, in his narrative, waxes almost hysterically
joyous about the good fortune that brought along a school of these fish
just as the ship's company were almost perishing for want of fresh food.
They appeared, he says, like a gift from Heaven.* (* "Cette peche
heureuse nous parut comme un bienfait du ciel. Alors, en effet, le
terrible scorbut avoit commence ses ravages, et les salaisons pourries et
rongees de vers auxquelles nous etions reduits depuis plusieurs mois
precipitoient chaque jour l'affreux developpement de ce fleau." Voyage de
Decouvertes 1 323.) Unlike the bronzed and healthy crew of the
Investigator, the company on Le Geographe were suffering severely from
scurvy. The virulence of the disease increased daily. They were rejoicing
at the capture of nine large dolphins, which would supply them with a
feast of fresh meat, when the look-out man signalled that a sail was in
sight.* (* Mr. T. Ward, in his Rambles of an Australian Naturalist (1907)
page 153, relates that in 1889 he harpooned a large dolphin, Grampus
gris, in King George's Sound, and that whalers told him that dolphins
were at one time common in the Bight, in schools of two and three
hundred. As to dolphin flesh as food, the reader may like to be reminded
that Hawkins's men, in 1565, found dolphins "of very good colour and
proportion to behold, and no less delicate in taste" (Hakluyt's Voyages
edition of 1904 10 61). So also in 1705 a voyager to Maryland related the
capture of dolphins, "a beautiful fish to see...it is also a good fish to
eat." "Narrative of a Voyage to Maryland," printed from manuscript in
American Historical Review 12 328.)

At first it was considered that the ship was Le Naturaliste, the consort
of Le Geographe, the two vessels having become separated in a storm off
the Tasmanian coast. But as the Investigator steered towards the French
and hoisted her flag, the mistake was corrected.

Flinders took Brown, the naturalist, with him on board, because he was a
good French scholar; but Captain Baudin spoke English "so as to be
understood," and the conversation was therefore conducted for the most
part in that language. Brown was the only person present at the first
interview on the 8th, and at the second on the following morning;* (* "No
person was present at our conversations except Mr. Brown" (Flinders,
Voyage 1 190). Robert Brown was a very celebrated botanist. Humboldt
styled him "botanicorum facile princeps." His Prodromus Florae Novae
Hollandiae is a classic of price.) both taking place in the French
captain's cabin. Peron, in the first volume of the Voyage de Decouvertes,
wrote as though he were present and heard what occurred between the two
commanders. "En nous fournissant tous ces details M. Flinders se montre
d'une grande reserve sur ses operations particulieres," he wrote; and
again: "apres avoir converse plus d'une heure avec nous." But his
testimony in this, as in several other respects, is not reliable. Baudin
wrote no detailed account of the conversations, nor did Brown; but
Flinders related what occurred with the minute care that was habitual
with him. Peron's evidence is at best second-hand, and he supplemented it
with such information as could be elicited by "pumping" the sailors in
Flinders' boat.* (* "Nous apprimes toutefois par quelques-uns de ses
matelots qu'il avoit eu beaucoup a souffrir de ces memes vents de la
partie du Sud qui nous avoient ete si favorables." The boatmen were not
questioned by Peron himself, who at this time could not speak English
(Freycinet, Voyage de Decouvertes 2 Preface page 17). Freycinet admits
that Peron was not present at the interviews, but says that Baudin
related what took place with "more or less exactitude." But as Freycinet
was not present himself either at the interviews or on the ship when
Baudin related what occurred, how could he know that the version of the
commander--at whom, after Baudin's death, he never missed an opportunity
of sneering--was merely "more or less" exact?) Even then he blundered,
for some of the things stated by him were not only contrary to fact, but
could not have been ascertained from Baudin, from Flinders, or from the
sailors.

Peron stated, for example, that Flinders said that he had been
accompanied from England by a second vessel, which had become separated
from him by a violent tempest. There had been no second vessel, and
Flinders could have made no such assertion. Again, Peron wrote that
Flinders said that, hindered by contrary winds, he had not been able to
penetrate behind the islands of St. Peter and St. Francis, in Nuyts
Archipelago. Flinders made no such absurd statement. He had followed the
coast behind those islands with the utmost particularity. His track, with
soundings, is shown on his large chart of the section.* (* On this
statement the Quarterly reviewer of 1810 bluntly wrote: "Now, we will
venture not only to assert that all this is a direct falsehood (for we
have seen both the journal and charts of Captain Flinders, which are
fortunately arrived safe in this country), but also to pledge ourselves
that no such observations are to be found either in Captain Baudin's
journal or in the logbook of the Geographe." Quarterly Review 4 52. It
was a good guess. No such observation is contained in the printed log of
Le Geographe.) Once more, Peron stated that Flinders said that he had
lost a boat and eight men in the same gale as had endangered the French
ships in Bass Strait. Flinders had lost John Thistle, an officer to whom
he was deeply attached, and a crew of eight men off Cape Catastrophe, but
the incident occurred during a sudden squall. Moreover, Thistle and his
companions were drowned on February 21, whilst the storm in the
Strait--as Baudin told Flinders--occurred exactly a month later.

When Flinders got on board Le Geographe, he was received by an officer,
of whom he inquired for the commander. Baudin was pointed out to him, and
conducted him and Brown into the captain's cabin. Flinders then
"requested Baudin to show me his passport from the Admiralty, and when it
was found, and I had perused it, I offered him mine from the French
marine minister, but he put it back without inspection." The incident
serves to remind us that both commanders believed their nations to be at
war at this time. As a matter of fact, just a fortnight before the
meeting in Encounter Bay, diplomacy had patched up the brittle truce
ironically known as the Peace of Amiens (March 25). But neither Flinders
nor Baudin could have known that there was even a prospect of the
cessation of hostilities. Europe, when they last had touch of its
affairs, was still clanging with battle and warlike preparations, and the
red star of the Corsican had not yet reached its zenith. Baudin's
readiness to produce his own passport when "requested"--in a style prompt
if not peremptory, it would seem--and his indifference about that of the
English commander, should be noted as the first of a series of facts
which establish the purely peaceful character of the French expedition.

Baudin talked freely about the work upon which he had been engaged in
Tasmanian waters. Flinders inquired concerning a large island said to lie
in the western entrance of Bass Strait--that is, King Island--but Baudin
"had not seen it and seemed to doubt much of its existence." As a matter
of fact, Le Geographe had sailed quite close to the island, as indicated
on the track-chart showing her course, and that it should have been
missed indicated that the look-out was not very vigilant. Curiously
enough, too, Baudin marked down on his chart, presumably as the result of
this inquiry of Flinders, an island "believed to exist," but he put it in
the wrong place.

An incident that appealed to Flinders' dry sense of humour occurred in
reference to a chart of Bass Strait which Baudin had with him. This chart
was one which had been drawn from George Bass's sketch by Flinders
himself, and incorporated with his own more scientific chart of the north
coast of Tasmania and the adjacent islands. Bass had traversed, in his
whale-boat, the southern coast of Victoria as far as Westernport, but not
being a surveyor he had furnished only a rough outline of the lay of the
shore. Up to this time Baudin had not inquired the name of the commander
of the Investigator, and it was from not knowing to whom he was talking
that he fell into a blunder which the politeness, native to a French
gentleman, would certainly have made him wish to avoid. He began to
criticise the chart, finding great fault with the north side, but
commending the drawing of the south--that is, of northern Tasmania and
the islands near it. "On my pointing out a note upon the chart explaining
that the north side of the Strait was seen only in an open boat by Mr.
Bass, who had no good means of fixing either latitude or longitude, he
appeared surprised, not having before paid attention to it. I told him
that some other and more particular charts of the Strait and its
neighbourhood had since been published, and that if he would keep company
until next morning I would bring him a copy, with a small memoir
belonging to them. This was agreed to, and I returned with Mr. Brown to
the Investigator."

On the following morning Flinders and Brown again visited Le Geographe
with the promised chart. At the conclusion of this second interview,
Baudin requested that, should the Investigator fall in with Le
Naturaliste, Flinders would inform her captain that it was his intention
to sail round to Port Jackson as soon as the bad weather set in. "On my
asking the name of the captain of Le Naturaliste, he bethought himself to
ask mine, and finding it to be the same as the author of the chart which
he had been criticising, expressed not a little surprise, but had the
politeness to congratulate himself on seeing me." In a letter to Banks,
Flinders said that Baudin "expressed some surprise at meeting me, whom he
knew by name."* (* Historical Records of New South Wales 4 755.) He had
the name, of course, upon Flinders' chart of 1799.* (* The new chart
which Flinders gave to Baudin was published after Le Geographe left
Havre. The chart which he had in his possession was the one advertised in
the Moniteur on 8th Vendemiaire, Revolutionary Year 10. (September 30,
1800): "Nouvelle carte du detroit de Basse, situe entre la Nouvelle
Galles Meridionale, a la Nouvelle Hollande, lequel separe ces deux
parties; avec la route du vaisseau qui l'a parcouru et partie de la cote
a l'est de la Nouvelle Hollande, levee par Flinders. Prix deux francs."
This chart had been reproduced by the French Department of Marine from
the one published by Flinders in England in 1799, and several copies of
it had been supplied to Baudin and his officers for the use of the
expedition, though it was also offered for sale. See the Moniteur, 27
Thermidor, Revolutionary Year 11 (August 15, 1803), as to the engraving
of the chart at the French depot for the use of the expedition.)

At the second interview Baudin was more inquisitive than he had been on
the previous day. He had then been more disposed to talk about his own
discoveries in southern Tasmania than to ask questions about the
Investigator's work. "It somewhat surprised me," said Flinders, "that
Captain Baudin made no inquiries concerning my business upon this unknown
coast, but as he seemed more desirous of communicating information I was
happy to receive it." Another of the inaccuracies of Peron is that "M.
Flinders showed a great reserve concerning his particular operations."
There was no need of reserve, and none was shown. But "tact teaches when
to be silent," as Disraeli's Mr. Wilton observed; and an occasion for the
exercise of this virtue is presented when information likely to be
valuable is being given. Reflection, and what his officers had been able
to learn from Flinders' boat crew, however, had stimulated Baudin's
curiosity. On the 9th, therefore, he asked questions. Flinders, so far
from maintaining reserve, readily explained the discoveries he had made,
and furnished Baudin with some useful information for his own voyage. He
described how he had explored the whole of the south coast as far as the
place of meeting;* (* Manuscript Journal.) related how he had obtained
water at Port Lincoln by digging in the clay; pointed out Kangaroo Island
across the water, where an abundance of fresh meat might be procured;
"told him the name I had affixed to the island," in consequence of the
marsupials shot there; and "as proof of the refreshment to be obtained at
the island, pointed to the kangaroo skin caps worn by my boat's crew."
The return made for this courtesy was that upon the Terre Napoleon maps
the name Flinders gave was ignored, and "L'Ile Decres" was scored upon
it, this being done while the true discoverer was pent up in French
custody in an island of the Indian Ocean.

The most interesting statement made by Baudin will be dealt with in the
next chapter. The two commanders conversed on the 8th for about half an
hour, and on the second occasion, when Flinders presented the new chart
of Bass Strait, for a shorter period. Early on the morning of the 9th
they bade each other adieu. Flinders returned to the Investigator, and
the two ships sailed away--the French to retrace the coast already
followed by Flinders, but to find nothing that was new, because he had
left so little to be found; the English to proceed, first to King Island
and Port Phillip, and then through Bass Strait to Port Jackson, where the
two commanders met again.


CHAPTER 3. PORT PHILLIP.

Conflict of evidence between Baudin, Peron, and Freycinet as to whether
the French ships had sighted Port Phillip.
Baudin's statement corroborated by documents.
Examination of Freycinet's statement.
The impossibility of doing what Peron and Freycinet asserted was done.

One statement made by Captain Baudin to Flinders has been reserved for
separate treatment, because it merits careful examination.* (* The more
so as the conflict of evidence to be pointed out seems to have escaped
the notice of writers on Australian history. The contradictions are not
observed in Bonwick's Port Phillip Settlement, in Rusden's Discovery,
Survey, and Settlement of Port Phillip, in Shillinglaw's Historical
Records of Port Phillip, in Labilliere's Early History of Victoria, in
Mr. Gyles Turner's History of the Colony of Victoria, nor in any other
work with which the author is acquainted.)

He gave an account of the storm in Bass Strait which had separated him
from Le Naturaliste on March 21, and went on to say that "having since
had fair winds and fine weather, he had explored the south coast from
Westernport to our place of meeting without finding any river, inlet, or
other shelter which afforded anchorage." In his report to the Admiralty,
dated May 11, 1802, Flinders related what Baudin told him on this point,
in the following terms, which it is worth while to compare with those
used by him in his book, quoted above: "Captain Baudin informed me that
after parting with the Naturaliste in the Strait, in a heavy gale, he had
had fine weather, and had kept the coast close on board from Westernport
to the place of meeting, but that he had found no bay or place where a
vessel could anchor, the coast having but few bights in it, and those
affording nothing to interest." It will be seen that the official report
and the account given to the public twelve years later are in close
agreement. The important fact to be noticed is that Le Geographe had
slipped past Port Phillip without observing the entrance, and that her
captain was at this time entirely ignorant of the existence of the
harbour which has since become the seat of one of the greatest cities in
the southern hemisphere.

Now this statement, which is sufficiently surprising without the
introduction of complicating contradictions, becomes quite mysterious
when compared with the accounts given by Lieutenant Louis de Freycinet
and Francois Peron, the joint authors of the official history of the
French voyage. It is astonishing in itself, because a vessel sent out on
a voyage of exploration would not be expected to overlook so important a
feature as Port Phillip. Here was not a small river with a sandbar over
its mouth, but an extensive area of land-locked sea, with an opening a
mile and a half wide, flanked by rocky head-lands, fronted by usually
turbulent waters, at the head of a deep indentation of the coast. The
entrance to Port Phillip is not, it must be acknowledged, so easy to
perceive from the outside as would appear from a hasty examination of the
map. If the reader will take a good atlas in which there is a map of Port
Phillip, and will hold the plate in a horizontal position sufficiently
below the level of the eye to permit the entrance to be seen ALONG the
page, he will look at it very much as it is regarded from a ship at sea.*
(* A reduced copy of the Admiralty chart of the entrance (1907) is
prefixed to this chapter. The reader can perform the experiment with
that.) It will be noticed that a clear view into the port, except from a
particular angle, is blocked by the land on the eastern side (Point
Nepean) overlapping the tongue of land just inside the port on the
western side (Shortland's Bluff). Not until a vessel stands fairly close
and opposite to the entrance, so that the two lighthouses on the western
side, at Queenscliff, "open out," can the passage be discerned.* (*
Ferguson, Sailing Directions for Port Phillip, 1854--he was
harbour-master at the time--says (page 9): "Vessels having passed Cape
Schanck should keep a good offing in running down towards the entrance
until they open out the lighthouses, WHICH ARE NOT SEEN BEFORE BEARING
NORTH 1/2 EAST OWING TO THE HIGH LAND OF POINT NEPEAN INTERVENING."
Findley, Navigation of the South Pacific Ocean, 1863, has a remark about
the approach to the port from the west: "In approaching Port Phillip from
the westward, the entrance cannot be distinguished until Nepean Point,
the eastern point, bears north-north-east, when Shortland's Bluff, on
which the lighthouses are erected, opens out, and a view of the estuary
is obtained." A Treatise on the Navigation of Port Phillip, by Captain
Evans (a pilot of thirty-six years' experience), has also been
consulted.) Indeed, a pilot of much experience has assured the writer
that ships, whose captains know the port, are sometimes seen "dodging
about" (the phrase is the pilot's) looking for the entrance. Yet it may
be allowed that if Le Geographe had sailed close in, with the shore on
her starboard quarter, and the coast had been examined with care, she
would hardly have missed the port; and, her special business being
exploration, she certainly ought not to have missed it.* (* In Appendix
B, at the end of this chapter, are given quotations from the journals of
Murray and Flinders, in which they record how they first saw the port.)

But although Baudin said he had seen nothing "to interest," both Peron
and Freycinet, in their volumes--published years later, after they had
learnt of the discovery of Port Phillip by Lieutenant John Murray in
January 1802--stated that it was seen from Le Geographe on March 30.
Peron wrote that shortly after daybreak, the ship being in the curve of
the coast called Baie Talleyrand on the Terre Napoleon maps--that is,
between Cape Schanck on the eastern side of Port Phillip heads, and Cape
Roadknight on the western side--the port was seen and its contours were
distinguished from the masthead.* (* The matter is sufficiently important
to justify the quotation of the passages in which Peron and Freycinet
recorded the alleged observation, and these are given at length in
Appendix A to this chapter.) Peron did not say that he saw it himself. He
merely recorded that it was seen. Freycinet did not see it himself
either. He was at this time an officer on Le Naturaliste, and was not on
the Terre Napoleon coasts at all until the following year, when he
penetrated St. Vincent's and Spencer's Gulfs. He, without indicating the
time of day, or stating that the port was merely viewed from aloft,
asserted that the entrance was observed, though the ship did not go
inside.

In the first place, the statements of Peron and Freycinet are not in
agreement. To observe the entrance was one thing; to trace the contours
from the masthead quite another. To do the first was quite possible,
though not, as will be shown, from any part of the route indicated on the
track-chart of Le Geographe. But to distinguish the contours of Port
Phillip from outside, over the peninsula, was not possible.

Here, at all events, is a sharp conflict of evidence. We must endeavour
to elicit the truth.

It is certain that Baudin had no motive for concealing his knowledge, if
he knew of the existence of Port Phillip when he met Flinders. Had his
cue been to prefer claims on account of priority of discovery, he would
have been disposed to make his title clear forthwith. Frankness, too, was
an engaging characteristic of Baudin throughout. He was evidently proud
of what his expedition had already done, and was, as Flinders wrote,
"communicative." Had he discovered a new harbour, he would have spoken
about it jubilantly. Moreover, as Flinders explained to him how he could
obtain fresh water at Port Lincoln, a fellow-navigator would surely have
been glad to reciprocate by indicating the whereabouts of a harbour in
which the Investigator might possibly be glad to take shelter on her
eastern course.

It is also clear that Flinders did not misunderstand Baudin. He was an
extremely exact man, and as he said that he was "particular in detailing
all that passed," we may take it that one with whom precision was
something like a passion would be careful not to misunderstand on so
important a point. Brown, too, was with him, a trained man of science,
who would have been quick to correct his chief in the event of a
misapprehension. Flinders so far relied on Baudin's statement that when,
on April 26, he sighted Port Phillip heads himself, he thought he was off
Westernport, which his friend George Bass had discovered in 1798. "It was
the information of Captain Baudin which induced this supposition," he
wrote.* (* See also the entry in his journal, Appendix B.) It was not
till he bore up and took his bearings that he saw that he could not be at
Westernport; and he then congratulated himself on having made "a new and
useful discovery"--unaware, of course, that Murray had found Port Phillip
in the Lady Nelson in the previous January.

It must be noted in addition that Baudin wrote a letter to Jussieu, the
distinguished French botanist and member of the Institute, nine months
later, in which he gave an account of his voyage up to date.* (* Printed
in the Moniteur, 22 Fructidor, Revolutionary Year 11. (September 9,
1803).) Therein he said not a word about seeing Port Phillip, nor did he
allude to the possibility of there being a harbour between Westernport
and Encounter Bay.

Baudin, then, knew nothing about Port Phillip when he met Flinders on
April 8. But if somebody else saw it from the masthead on March 30, why
was not the fact reported to the commander? Why was he not asked the
question whether so large a bay should be explored? Again, if Le
Geographe did sight Port Phillip, why did she not enter it? Here was a
magnificent chance for discoverers. They were necessarily unaware of
Murray's good fortune in January. As far as their knowledge could have
gone, the port was absolutely new to geography. If we believe Peron and
Freycinet, surely these were the most negligent explorers who ever sailed
the seas.* (* It is true that Cook did not enter Port Jackson when he
discovered and named it on May 6, 1770. But exploration, it must always
be remembered, was not the primary object of the voyage of the Endeavour,
as it was of Le Geographe. Cook, when he achieved the greatest extent of
maritime discovery made at one time by any navigator in history, was
simply on his way homeward from a visit to Tahiti, the primary purpose of
which was to enable astronomers to observe the transit of Venus. Cook,
too, made a record of the latitude and longitude of Port Jackson. No such
entry was made by the French relative to Port Phillip, as will presently
be shown.) But if we believe that Baudin spoke the truth to Flinders--and
the absence of all reference to the port in his letter to Jussieu is
alone sufficient to show that he did--what shall we say of the statements
of Peron and Freycinet, written after Baudin's death, after they had
learnt of Murray's discovery, and when they had set themselves the task
of making the work of the expedition appear as important as possible?

Copyright (c) 2007. famouswriterz.com. All rights reserved.