"تاريخ البحرية الهندية. (١٦١٣- ١٨٦٣)." [‎٣‎٧‎٧] (٦٢٢/٣٩٦)

HISTORY OF THE INDIAN NAVY.
377
Taylor, also of the Political Department, both of whom, on
the lOth of January, 1858, were made brevet-majors, and re
ceived the C.B., as rewards for their services in Persia. Lieu
tenant Adams received his promotion to the substantive rank of
Commander by the sudden death of Commander Albany Grieve,
on the 17th of January, 1858, two days before Captain Kem-
ball's promotion to brevet rank, and yet the officer who,
immediately after the action at Mohamra, was publicly thanked
by Commodore Young on the quarter-deck of the ' Assaye,' for
having taken that ship within pistol-shot of the northern fort,
the most formidable of all the Persian works, was denied the
C.B., on the pretext that he was only a Lieutenant. We stig
matize this excuse pretext, because Lieutenant Vaughan,
R.N., of the 6 Shannon,' was gazetted C.B for services per
formed during the Mutiny ; true, Lieutenant Vaughan was first
promoted to the rank of Commander, but because the Indian
Navy was a seniority Service, and officers could not receive
promotion for gallantry, was this disadvantage actually to be
used against them as a bar to the honours of the Bath ? Why
did not the Authorities, following their own precedent in the
case of Captains Kemball and Taylor, confer the Order on
Lieutenant Adams on his promotion ? These officers actually
obtained their commissions as captains in February, 1851,
whereas Lieutenant Adams was seven years their senior, his
commission, ranking him with a captain in the Army, bearing
date the 23rd of February, 1844. But what can be said for
the system which actually denied the honours of the Bath to
the Commander of the ' Assaye,' and conferred it on the
officer commanding the Cavalry Brigade at Bushire, who
arrived there after its capture, and never saw a shot fired !
To mark, as it were, the slight as applying generally to
the Service, the C.B. was also denied to Commander Felix
Jones, Chief Political Authority in the Persian Gulf, whose
rank and services alike qualified him for the distinction. What
does the gallant Commander of the Expedition himself say on
these points'? Writing to the Adjutant-General of the Bombay
Army, under date the 11th of January, 1859, Sir James Outram
says:—"I also beg to bring to his Excellency's notice, that two
most deserving officers of the Indian Navy have obtained no
reward, whose services I hope he will agree with me in con
sidering well worthy of recognition. Captain Felix Jones, Resi
dent at Bushire, and Commander G. N. Adams, wdio commanded
the' Assaye' at Mohamra."* The distribution of honours in
# Colonel (now G-eneral tlie Kiglit Hon. Sir Edward) Lugard, wrote as follows
before Commodore Young received the honour of which no shuffling or pretexts
could deprive him :—"As on all such occasions, there are, I regret to say, many
names of most deserving officers omitted, and I would gladly and willingly
divide my share amongst them. John Young and Adams, I.N., ought to have