I am following up my blogs of 6 July and 3 August concerning the McIlhagga clan - McCarley marriage links. In June I wrote to my correspondent to whom I referred on 6 July, suggesting that the Robert McCarley in Charleston in 1824 (see the letter reproduced on 3 August) was the Robert McCarley who married Eliza McIlhagar in 1843 and that perhaps he first emigrated to the US as a single man then returned by 1843 in order to be married in Broughshane. My correspondent remembers seeing those names in the records of the 1st Presbyterian Church so was able to correct this assumption, for when they married on 31 March 1847 both Robert and Eliza were only 19. She also noted that there appears to be no record of children's baptisms with Robert and Eliza as parents, at Broughshane 1st Presbyterian, which raises the possibility that they may have moved elsewhere. Equally of course they may not have been able to have children. The details in the record books are as follows:
Marriage on 31 March 1847 at Broughshane 1st Presbyterian Church;
Robert McCarley, 19 years old, shoemaker of K?nbilly, to
Eliza McIlhagar, 19 years old, spinster, Kinbilly.
Robert's father is also Robert, a farmer of Kinbilly;
Eliza's father is James, also a farmer.
Two facts of interest to our clan are first that James McIlhagar is a farmer in a townland adjacent to the townland of Ballycloghan where a number of our clan lived, and second that Robert McCarley was a shoemaker. Was James related to William McIlhagga of Ballycloghan, and was this possibility emphasised by there being a relationship to a shoemaker family - see my blog of 14 July 2012. My correspondent adds from the McCarley perspective, that surely Robert in Charleston is not married in 1824 otherwise there might have been some enquiry about his family. She thinks he may have been in Charleston at least from 1823 based on the news about the grandparents' deaths and his new nephew Robert. Perhaps he is about 20 and the second son of James. She says she is assuming James's first son is John and is involved with farming and that the trade referred to in the letter is to supplement that. There is no mention of John's children, so perhaps he is not married. In my June reply to my correspondent I next commented on Jenny, which I will take up next time.
Sunday, 8 September 2013
Monday, 12 August 2013
Millikin-McHago
We do not know the name of Helen's parents, though it is possible that we may know that of a sibling or cousin. Helen was probably born in 1692 and a James McHago about 1699. They may both have been born in Ayrshire, Scotland. James was probably from Dalmellington and on 1 May 1745 married a Jean Booll in nearby Kells, Kirkcudbright. It is from James that the version of our clan name, McHago (or McHaggo) could have descnded. We have no certain vital record until the birth of another James, a hundred years later in Ireland, though we can find a Samuel born about 1750 who could be of the same line. We know of him because he witnessed a Quaker Will in New York City on 18 Sep 1777 (proved 18 April 1780). The reference to this can be found on the olivetreegenealogy website.
The Millikin line is a very interesting one, including another Samuel who was killed at the Battle of Antrim Hill in 1798 when he was a member of the Society of United Irishmen. It is interesting to speculate whether he might have fought alongside Andrew McIlhagga from Island Magee, the only one member of our clan known to have been also a member of the United Irishmen. The Millikin line is much more complete than that of McHago, though the McHago line probably does continue through two offspring of James and Margaret who were I think the parents of Ellen (b. 1827) who married Charles Johnson in Virginia, and John (b. 1828) who married Ann Rieley in Virginia (7 Sep 1850).
We know of a further five McHagos, all of whom could have been the offspring of John and Ann, namely Ellen (b. 1850) who married the German C. Frederick Augustine and had a son James on 13 Feb 1877 in Wisconsin, Tom born 1853 in New Jersey, Kate born about 1855 who married Frank Ladham and had a son Thomas (b. 27. Dec) in Vermont, also in 1877, Edward born 1859 and ?Baba in 1865. A 'final' McHago, Michael, appears a generation later on an 1892 Passenger List out of the United Kingdom.
Saturday, 3 August 2013
Letter to South Carolina
I have published a new comment on the blog entry for 4 July 2009. Thank you, Sandra.
Last time I promised the letter to South Carolina. Here it is, with the permission of the Deputy Keeper of Records, Lorraine Bourke, Private Records, PRONI. Its reference number is T3655/1.
Last time I promised the letter to South Carolina. Here it is, with the permission of the Deputy Keeper of Records, Lorraine Bourke, Private Records, PRONI. Its reference number is T3655/1.
To : Robt [Robert?] McCarley
Charlestown [Charleston?] South
Carolina
Newberry Courthouse
[U.S.A.?]
From : James McCarley,
[Knockboy?]
[County Antrim?]
[Ireland?]
5th October 1824
Dear Son
I send you these lines to inform
you that your Grandfather is died
7th Nov 1823 and your Grandmother 1 Mon [one month?]
after your Grandfather left me
and the land I opposed and my own house
that I had before your Uncle Moses was
left 30Å“ & his former possessions his Daughter
Jenny 30Å“ your Uncle Mathews [Matthew?] land
in & my old house in Knockboy together
with your Grandfathers chest & bed
your Uncle Mathew [Matthew?] was left 30Å“ &
your Grandfathers house & his land
your Uncle William was left 1Å“
but it equals him in money I gave
him 7Å“ & Moses 7Å“ & Mathew 7Å“ & 10Å“ that
he got before his death which makes him
equal in money but the land he should
have got was left to Jenny McCarley
at your Grandfathers death [your?] Grandmother
was left 10Å“ & the land & his [clothes?] as
long as she lived but at her death
it was equally divided between I & Moses and
Mathew & Moses children 7Å“ each who
are 5 yrs [years?] & your Uncle Saml [Samuel?]
was left 4Å“ your brother John wants to know whether
he could live better by his trade or Farming
if he was to come
Your brother Stafford has made
a good proficiency in learning
& whether he could better by a Clerk
or Schoolmaster & intends to come
positively again next fall your
sister Jenny is well and is coming
on well and has 2 daughters and a son named
Robert
Corn is from 6/s [shillings?] to 6/s [six shillings?]
8 [pence?] p [per?] cwt [hundredweight?] butter 10/s
[shillings?] & [Carrots?] potatoes [8-?] p [per?]
[bushel?] & pork 50/s [shillings?] p [per?] cwt
[hundredweight?] cotton from 40/s [shillings?] to 200/s
[shillings?] p [per?] [----?] [---?] is married to
Widow Dale and mary Eliza Dale to David McCash
Junior of Knockboy [--?] Thos [Thomas?] Ferguson
is dead and carried out by the Sheriff Saml [Samuel?]
Wilson has bought all that farm and living in it.
We all enjoy a tolerable state of health
and join in love to you I add no more
at present but remain your affectionate
Father till death
James McCarley
Saturday, 6 July 2013
More on the McCarleys
A month ago a lady who was born a McCarley in Ballymena, County Antrim, wrote to me. She has traced her great grandparents to the townland of Ballycloghan, close to Broughshane. I was particularly interested to receive her letter not only because my own great grandparents lived in Ballycloghan but also because at least two McIlhagga's married McCarley's. She had found one of my references to this fact on this blog.
I am hopeful that as she continues her research we will discover more about those two families and the relationships between them. There are already a number of references in the blog, not least to their emigration to Pennsylvania, USA. My hunch is that there are today descendants in the USA though the McIlhagga name has evolved there somewhat, providing us with some of our most interesting variants.
As you might expect, her gggrandfather, like mine, was a Weaver, and indeed his first name was the same as mine, William. She remembers a relative saying that the McCarleys all used to meet up at a place called 'Pursten', which is probably 'Perrystown' in the townland of Ballycloghan.
The name Jenny McCarley is of particular interest, for two reasons. First, there is a Jenny who married John McIlhago and emigrated to the US. Second, there is an extant letter which mentions two Jennys, one possibly the person who emigrated and the other probably her aunt. This letter is on the Irish Emigration Database and can be found at PRONI (The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland). It was written on 5 October 1824 by James McCarley of Knockboy to Robt. McCarley in Charlestown, South Carolina. I will ask PRONI for permission to give the full text of the letter in my next post.
I am hopeful that as she continues her research we will discover more about those two families and the relationships between them. There are already a number of references in the blog, not least to their emigration to Pennsylvania, USA. My hunch is that there are today descendants in the USA though the McIlhagga name has evolved there somewhat, providing us with some of our most interesting variants.
As you might expect, her gggrandfather, like mine, was a Weaver, and indeed his first name was the same as mine, William. She remembers a relative saying that the McCarleys all used to meet up at a place called 'Pursten', which is probably 'Perrystown' in the townland of Ballycloghan.
The name Jenny McCarley is of particular interest, for two reasons. First, there is a Jenny who married John McIlhago and emigrated to the US. Second, there is an extant letter which mentions two Jennys, one possibly the person who emigrated and the other probably her aunt. This letter is on the Irish Emigration Database and can be found at PRONI (The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland). It was written on 5 October 1824 by James McCarley of Knockboy to Robt. McCarley in Charlestown, South Carolina. I will ask PRONI for permission to give the full text of the letter in my next post.
Monday, 17 June 2013
Birthday Honour
I have only very rarely departed from my 'rule' of not referring to clan members who are alive. However, this is one such an occasion. Queen Elizabeth II has two birthdays - her own and an 'official' one, always on a Saturday in June. On that day some of the British Nation's superb pageantry takes place, as it did last Saturday, such as the 'Trooping of the Colour'. Also on Her Majesty's 'official birthday' there are published the names of the people to whom she is granting 'honours'. Mostly these are people who have done significant things in their local community and who have worked to promote charities. This year over a thousand such honours were granted, over a half to women.
Sometimes these people are referred to as the 'unsung heroes' of the nation. I think it is probable that Clan McIlhagga has never had a member so honoured, but from Saturday last this cannot be said, for Dorothy Sheila McIlhagga was granted the British Empire Medal for services to Music and to the Local Community. The citation, published in The London Gazette, specially mentions that she is the Founder of the Oldershaw Singers. The 'Singers' have been, and are, a fine choir in the Wallasey and the Wirral area of the County of Cheshire. For many years this choir has performed at concerts which have raised many thousands of pounds for charity. They are still trained and conducted by Dorothy, a very active retired music teacher now in her 77th year.
Dorothy trained professionally on the piano and organ at the Royal Manchester College of Music under Professor Gordon Green. She taught first in the city of Liverpool and then in Wallasey on the Wirral where she became Head of Music and Fine Arts at Oldershaw Grammar School (first for girls, the a Comprehensive Coeducational School). For many years she has been the organist at a Presbyterian (then United Reformed, then URC-Methodist) Church. In recent years she has also been the Guest Musical Director of St. James' Church of England, New Brighton and has conducted its choir in many English Cathedrals when it has been the visiting choir leading Evensong at holiday times. Our sincere congratulations go to Dorothy who clearly richly deserves her B.E.M.
Saturday, 1 June 2013
Another Scottish Valuation Roll
On 1st April last year ScotlandsPeople published the 1915 Property Valuation Roll on which we found five clan members. These included George MacIlhago at 40 Murano Street, Glasgow, paying between £9/9/- and £17/15/- per annum as a Tenant Occupier. On 29 January this year the 1905 Valuation Roll followed which also included George at 40 Muram Street, Glasgow, I suspect the same address.
ScotlandsPeople as now published the 1895 Valuation Roll which includes just two clan members, one of which is again George, a Watchman, at 45 St. Mungo Street, Glasgow in Glasgow Burgh (Ref: VR102/460/57). The Proprietor is named as Mrs. Margaret Phillips to whom George paid 9 shillings and 5 pence rent.
The second name is one which does not appear on either the 1905 or the 1915 Valuation, that of Henry MacIlhagga who was renting a house at 8 Westbank, Glenboig, New Monkland, Lanark County (Ref: VT107/153/771). He was listed as a Labourer, who paid a rent of £4/11/- per annum. This may have been the Henry McIlhaggo who in 1895 was 24 years of age and who died four years later. This fact could account for the lower rent being for a smaller appartment suited to a single man, and also for no Henry being found in the subsequent 20th Century Valuation Rolls.
ScotlandsPeople as now published the 1895 Valuation Roll which includes just two clan members, one of which is again George, a Watchman, at 45 St. Mungo Street, Glasgow in Glasgow Burgh (Ref: VR102/460/57). The Proprietor is named as Mrs. Margaret Phillips to whom George paid 9 shillings and 5 pence rent.
The second name is one which does not appear on either the 1905 or the 1915 Valuation, that of Henry MacIlhagga who was renting a house at 8 Westbank, Glenboig, New Monkland, Lanark County (Ref: VT107/153/771). He was listed as a Labourer, who paid a rent of £4/11/- per annum. This may have been the Henry McIlhaggo who in 1895 was 24 years of age and who died four years later. This fact could account for the lower rent being for a smaller appartment suited to a single man, and also for no Henry being found in the subsequent 20th Century Valuation Rolls.
Thursday, 2 May 2013
Battle of the Narrow Seas
There is an Internet site for the Hathi Trust which is no less than a Digital Library. Google has there digitised a book held by the University of Michigan called The Battle of the Narrow Seas, A History of the Light Coastal Forces in the Channel and the North Sea, 1939-1945, by Lieutenant-Commander Peter Scott, MBE, DSC & Bar, RNVR. It was published in 1946 by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.
Rarely have we found an instance in which a McIlhagga's exploits are put into context, but this book provides us with such an occasion. The section is entitled Decision by Ramming.
'The Germans found the attentions of our Coastal Forces, during this active summer of 1942, so embarrassing that in August they decided to lay a defensive minefield in mid-Channel with a dual purpose, partly to keep our boats away from their convoy route and partly in order to protect their coast against landings. These mines were laid by E boats and R boats.
The laying was, in itself, a hazardous operation, and led to several brushes with our M.G.Bs., so the enemy tried various methods to catch us off our guard. On the evening of 16th August, for example, they came out some time before dusk, hoping to complete their lay before our night patrols would be likely to be in position. They chose an evening of poor visibility, so that they would not be spotted by aircraft, and they came out in great force - between twenty and thirty of them.
Two of our small gunboats, led by Lt. G.D.K. Richards, R.N., were just setting out when the alarm was raised, and three other M.G.Bs., under the command of Lt. Sidebottom were still in Dover harbour, but preparing for a normal anti-E boat patrol. The message came through just as the crews were getting into their seagoing clothes, and four minutes later the three M.G.Bs. were passing out of harbour on their way to intercept the enemy. Thus, two separate forces were closing in on the German minelaying R boats in mid-Channel. Their combined numerical strength was less than a quarter of the enemy's.
During the preceding week the German minelayers had managed to elude our forces and complete their lay on several occasions. Once, when our boats were about to intercept them, engine trouble combined with a signal error spoiled the chance, and the E boats escaped again. On this account, our boats were all the more determined that this new opportunity should not be lost. They did not know, however, that they were about to fight one of the classic Coastal Force actions of the war.
In the dark automatic guns are very difficult to sight, so that quite a long action can be fought at close range without any decisive result. But on this summer evening the sun had only just set and it was far from dark. It was 9.25 p.m. when Sidebottom's gunboats sighted a line of six ships, about the same size as themselves, steaming across their bows on a south-westerly course. The main enemy force had evidently split, but this part of it still outnumbered, by two to one, the M.G.Bs. that were now sweeping in to attack them.
"We closed them fast", writes Sidebottom, "challenging them with a signal lamp to identify themselves. They did not reply. They were clearly the enemy. When we were within 400 yards of their line they had neither opened fire on us nor increased speed to escape, and as we closed still further we could see that they were R boats, and we knew that their maximum speed were no more than 20 knots. We therefore decided to attack the rear of their line, as they were double our strength, and we thought that by throwing their rear into confusion we should make it difficult for their leader to distinguish friend from foe, and so prevent him from coming to their assistance.
"When separated by no more than one cable, we turned to starboard to steam on a parallel course. Our three boats were now in close order in line ahead, with the enemy also in line ahead, but with greater intervals between his boats, 200 yards to port.
"Just as we manoeuvered into this position to attack, the other force of two gunboats was sighted away to starboard approaching at high speed, and we flashed them an identification signal so that they would know who was who.
"We were now in a perfect position to make our chosen form of attack, and still without any interference from the enemy. It seemed almost uncanny to be allowed to come nearly alongside them without being fired on, but they either mistook us for another of their own units or they hoped we should mistake them for one of our and let them pass. They soon had their doubts resolved. At 9.27 p.m., two minutes after first sighting, I pressed the button. The open-fire signal blared at each gun position and a simultaneous broadside of all weapons swept from our three boats into the last two in the enemy line.
"Their reply was instantaneous, not only from the boats we had engaged, but from every gun which could be brought to bear from up their line. In that light and at that range, neither side could easily miss. The air was filled with bright tracer as though all the neon signs in Picadilly Circus were flying to and fro. Our 2-pounder shells were bursting all over the enemy's hulls, showering sparks like a hammer on an anvil. In a matter of a minute all the guns on our engaged side were out of action after direct hits, and the guns' crews were casualties.
"If the leading boat turned away to disengage, those astern would probably follow her, for the action was too intense for a signal to be passed to them, and the opportunity for them, as yet comparatively undamaged, to finish off the two badly hit enemy vessels would be lost. If she continued as she was, she would be a sitting target and would almost surely be sunk. The other alternative was to turn towards the enemy and try to sink the last boat in his line by ramming. We turned hard a-port and swung out of the line towards our target."
This is Sidebottom's reasoned explanation of a most gallant decision. With nearly all his guns out of action he had one remaining weapon - the stout stem of his ship - and he determined to go in and use it.
"It was only a short distance to cover, but to do so we had to turn at right angles to the enemy line, presenting almost a broadside target to his four leading boats, and we were raked by a concentrated fire. Just before the moment of impact, two shells hit the bridge, bursting and wounding everyone on it. The coxswain collapsed, the wheel spun round, the ship's head swung to port and we passed under the R boat's stern, missing her by a few feet.
"As I was the only one on the bridge still standing, I took the wheel and put it hard to starboard. The boat swung round again, partly helped by the force of the enemy's wash, and her bows crashed into the R boat's port quarter some 20 feet from her stern. My First Lieutenant was thrown across the bridge and stunned by the impact, and the enemy's fire ceased immediately. She heeled well over to starboard, and both boats, locked together, swung to port out of the line. The starboard point-five gunner fired most effectively at the next ahead in the enemy's line, who was already under fire from the other two gunboats.
"Our engines were still running at high speed, keeping our bows forced into the R boat, and as we had too many casualties to make boarding a possibility the only thing to do was to pull our bows out and let the water pour into the large hole we had made, which would, we hoped, sink her. I moved the engine-room telegraphs to stop, but she continued to go ahead; evidently the line had been shot away. An unwounded member of a gun's crew was sent with a message to the engine-room to stop engines. As we slowed, the R boat, whose engines were still running, wrenched herself clear and staggered off into the gathering darkness with smoke billowing out of her."
As soon as the leading boat had turned, with the obvious intention of ramming, the second M.G.B. had moved up into her place and continued to engage the remaining R boats with undiminished vigour. The last of these had been badly damaged in the first few moments of intense fire, but the enemy force was still powerful and the second M.G.B. suffered heavily. Two of the crew were killed and two more were mortally wounded. Her Commanding Officer (Lt. A.D. McIlwraith, R.N.V.R.), her Canadian First Lieutenant (Sub-Lt. L.B. McIlhagga, R.C.N.V.R.), her Navigating Officer and eight of the crew were wounded. But she fought on until the engine-room was hit and she was forced to disengage. As she did so, she struck some underwater wreckage which damaged the rudders and the propeller of the one engine which was still working.
The third gunboat then carried on the fight alone until her guns were put out of action and her Commanding Officer (Lt. N.R. Weekes, R.N.V.R.) was wounded; then she also disengaged.
Rarely have we found an instance in which a McIlhagga's exploits are put into context, but this book provides us with such an occasion. The section is entitled Decision by Ramming.
The laying was, in itself, a hazardous operation, and led to several brushes with our M.G.Bs., so the enemy tried various methods to catch us off our guard. On the evening of 16th August, for example, they came out some time before dusk, hoping to complete their lay before our night patrols would be likely to be in position. They chose an evening of poor visibility, so that they would not be spotted by aircraft, and they came out in great force - between twenty and thirty of them.
Two of our small gunboats, led by Lt. G.D.K. Richards, R.N., were just setting out when the alarm was raised, and three other M.G.Bs., under the command of Lt. Sidebottom were still in Dover harbour, but preparing for a normal anti-E boat patrol. The message came through just as the crews were getting into their seagoing clothes, and four minutes later the three M.G.Bs. were passing out of harbour on their way to intercept the enemy. Thus, two separate forces were closing in on the German minelaying R boats in mid-Channel. Their combined numerical strength was less than a quarter of the enemy's.
During the preceding week the German minelayers had managed to elude our forces and complete their lay on several occasions. Once, when our boats were about to intercept them, engine trouble combined with a signal error spoiled the chance, and the E boats escaped again. On this account, our boats were all the more determined that this new opportunity should not be lost. They did not know, however, that they were about to fight one of the classic Coastal Force actions of the war.
In the dark automatic guns are very difficult to sight, so that quite a long action can be fought at close range without any decisive result. But on this summer evening the sun had only just set and it was far from dark. It was 9.25 p.m. when Sidebottom's gunboats sighted a line of six ships, about the same size as themselves, steaming across their bows on a south-westerly course. The main enemy force had evidently split, but this part of it still outnumbered, by two to one, the M.G.Bs. that were now sweeping in to attack them.
"We closed them fast", writes Sidebottom, "challenging them with a signal lamp to identify themselves. They did not reply. They were clearly the enemy. When we were within 400 yards of their line they had neither opened fire on us nor increased speed to escape, and as we closed still further we could see that they were R boats, and we knew that their maximum speed were no more than 20 knots. We therefore decided to attack the rear of their line, as they were double our strength, and we thought that by throwing their rear into confusion we should make it difficult for their leader to distinguish friend from foe, and so prevent him from coming to their assistance.
"When separated by no more than one cable, we turned to starboard to steam on a parallel course. Our three boats were now in close order in line ahead, with the enemy also in line ahead, but with greater intervals between his boats, 200 yards to port.
"Just as we manoeuvered into this position to attack, the other force of two gunboats was sighted away to starboard approaching at high speed, and we flashed them an identification signal so that they would know who was who.
"We were now in a perfect position to make our chosen form of attack, and still without any interference from the enemy. It seemed almost uncanny to be allowed to come nearly alongside them without being fired on, but they either mistook us for another of their own units or they hoped we should mistake them for one of our and let them pass. They soon had their doubts resolved. At 9.27 p.m., two minutes after first sighting, I pressed the button. The open-fire signal blared at each gun position and a simultaneous broadside of all weapons swept from our three boats into the last two in the enemy line.
"Their reply was instantaneous, not only from the boats we had engaged, but from every gun which could be brought to bear from up their line. In that light and at that range, neither side could easily miss. The air was filled with bright tracer as though all the neon signs in Picadilly Circus were flying to and fro. Our 2-pounder shells were bursting all over the enemy's hulls, showering sparks like a hammer on an anvil. In a matter of a minute all the guns on our engaged side were out of action after direct hits, and the guns' crews were casualties.
"If the leading boat turned away to disengage, those astern would probably follow her, for the action was too intense for a signal to be passed to them, and the opportunity for them, as yet comparatively undamaged, to finish off the two badly hit enemy vessels would be lost. If she continued as she was, she would be a sitting target and would almost surely be sunk. The other alternative was to turn towards the enemy and try to sink the last boat in his line by ramming. We turned hard a-port and swung out of the line towards our target."
This is Sidebottom's reasoned explanation of a most gallant decision. With nearly all his guns out of action he had one remaining weapon - the stout stem of his ship - and he determined to go in and use it.
"It was only a short distance to cover, but to do so we had to turn at right angles to the enemy line, presenting almost a broadside target to his four leading boats, and we were raked by a concentrated fire. Just before the moment of impact, two shells hit the bridge, bursting and wounding everyone on it. The coxswain collapsed, the wheel spun round, the ship's head swung to port and we passed under the R boat's stern, missing her by a few feet.
"As I was the only one on the bridge still standing, I took the wheel and put it hard to starboard. The boat swung round again, partly helped by the force of the enemy's wash, and her bows crashed into the R boat's port quarter some 20 feet from her stern. My First Lieutenant was thrown across the bridge and stunned by the impact, and the enemy's fire ceased immediately. She heeled well over to starboard, and both boats, locked together, swung to port out of the line. The starboard point-five gunner fired most effectively at the next ahead in the enemy's line, who was already under fire from the other two gunboats.
"Our engines were still running at high speed, keeping our bows forced into the R boat, and as we had too many casualties to make boarding a possibility the only thing to do was to pull our bows out and let the water pour into the large hole we had made, which would, we hoped, sink her. I moved the engine-room telegraphs to stop, but she continued to go ahead; evidently the line had been shot away. An unwounded member of a gun's crew was sent with a message to the engine-room to stop engines. As we slowed, the R boat, whose engines were still running, wrenched herself clear and staggered off into the gathering darkness with smoke billowing out of her."
As soon as the leading boat had turned, with the obvious intention of ramming, the second M.G.B. had moved up into her place and continued to engage the remaining R boats with undiminished vigour. The last of these had been badly damaged in the first few moments of intense fire, but the enemy force was still powerful and the second M.G.B. suffered heavily. Two of the crew were killed and two more were mortally wounded. Her Commanding Officer (Lt. A.D. McIlwraith, R.N.V.R.), her Canadian First Lieutenant (Sub-Lt. L.B. McIlhagga, R.C.N.V.R.), her Navigating Officer and eight of the crew were wounded. But she fought on until the engine-room was hit and she was forced to disengage. As she did so, she struck some underwater wreckage which damaged the rudders and the propeller of the one engine which was still working.
The third gunboat then carried on the fight alone until her guns were put out of action and her Commanding Officer (Lt. N.R. Weekes, R.N.V.R.) was wounded; then she also disengaged.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)